‘omer in on a contingent basis; depending on information which develops
in preceding shots as to the burning properties of 1D,
- SEED: tong term undesirable problemd with Kepard to logistics
om
and readiness, especially if large numbers are to be maintained in the
A.
stockpile, Equipment wouldave to be maintained in readiness forza.
ery EER
rps ‘in one day, caiman have to be kept in storage.
See
Thermdnuclear
Capabilities
et
Se
WR
N 2-< to bo evetleble in deliverable
wer
este
NE
aot
form before Castle.
After the tests the Commission may be faced with the
problem of redesigning for greater efficiency in this heavy (40,000 1b)
weight class.
In the: 25,000 lb class a weaponized version of the present
a hn might be available in about a year, In the 10,000 1b class
ot
a weapon! zed Ftcht be in hand by the end of 1954.
or wee
Livermore is
trying to tit2 MEM into an existing case, For
emX
5
the immediate future, Air Force interest seems to lie in the very heavy
weapons,
In 5-7 years more emphasis on the intermediate and lighter
weights is anticipated.
Dr. Bradbury suggested that the following weight
in pounds, might characterize the weight classes of interest in the next
5-7 years:
40,000, 20,000, 10,000, less than 10,000.
Gen, Fields indicated that the recent trend in the fission weapon
7%,
\
waeegand possibly
M# will certainly have an impact on “the. €0" fission field,
but the character of the effect is hard to foresee at present.
Citing the possibility of SEMMeeeewsJ bombs for anti-aircraft use,
pee
Dr. Rabi asked whether DMA studies the utility of weapons which they are
requested to develop.
Gen. Fields indicated that his Division attempts
Department of Energy
Historian’s Office
ARCHIVES
- Ge
f
-
bo