CiRyAR Ran
a
we
4
cp
I"oH
Ines I
11. The second method 1s to compare two shots, one clean
and one conventional,
of approximately the same total yield,
and
show that the fission yield of the clean one is many times less
than the fission yield of the conventional one.
In this method
the fact that the total yields of the two shots are approximately
the same can be determined without obtaining the absolute value
of the total yield of either one.
For example,
using any of the
hydrodynamic methods (fireball photography, time of shock arrival,
or shock intensity)
and placing the instrument station at a fixed
put unknown distance from the zero point where both shots will be
fired, it can easily be determined whether the total yields are
comparable.
le, The comparision of fission yields can be made by either
of two methods.
One is to determine for each shot the distributior
of fission product activity within the stabilized cloud,
This
could be done by aircraft flying through the cloud with the
proper instrumentation but the reliability and credibility are low
Since the cloud development will differ on the two shots and the
cloud penetrations cannot be duplicated,
A better method is to
measure the Lonization of the cloud by means of instrumented
rockets which telemeter their readings to ground stations.
About
i@ rockets per shot launched at 5 to 7 minutes after detonation
{at a time before wind shear sets in) would be sufficient to
obtain good coverage of the distribution in the cloud and should
Give reasonably accurate results.
The ratio of these results
would give the relative fission yields (Appendices "D" and "E"),
13. This second method does not have the credibility or
in which total and fission yields
This method also requires
that yields of both devices be dependable.
Z
>
me obe
RS.
vs
are measured on a single clean shot.
aN,
reliability of the first method,