Military Review

Uranium enrichment: Iran has managed to master technologies that are not available for the US

37
A recent IAEA quarterly report on the Iranian nuclear issue recently reported that a fortified underground enrichment plant at Fordo received two new advanced centrifuge cascades — each with 174. In total, 3000 centrifuges for uranium enrichment are planned for this facility. The previous IAEA report, published in May, reported that Ford had already installed 1064 centrifuges, of which 696 were operating at full capacity at the time of publication of the document. So transmit Russian news agencies.


However, foreign news agencies, in particular Reuters, referring to the same report by the IAEA, cites a more heartbreaking quote: "The number of centrifuges for uranium enrichment in the Ford complex, located deep in the mountains, increased from 1064 to 2140 pieces."

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad at the Natanz uranium enrichment facility


Perhaps, the IAEA experts themselves are confused in numbers. In any case, they do not prevent politicians and the media from scaring the population with various figures that supposedly show Iran’s desire to build an atomic bomb or a missile warhead. And it was again calculated how many tons of uranium enriched Iran and how many months it will make bombs out of it. But everyone keeps quiet that in centrifuge concentrating plants they do not receive enriched uranium at all. At the outlet there are gaseous uranium hexafluoride. And you can't make a bomb out of gas.

Uranium-containing gas has to be transported to another enterprise. In Iran, uranium hexafluoride deconversion production lines are located at the UCF plant in Isfahan. Deconversion of hexafluoride enriched to 5% is already successfully carried out there. But the result is again not uranium, but uranium dioxide UO2. You can't make a bomb out of him either. But just from it make fuel pellets from which they collect rods for reactors of nuclear power plants. The production of fuel cells is also located in Isfahan at the FMP plant.

To obtain uranium metal, uranium dioxide at a temperature from 430 to 600 degrees is affected by gaseous hydrogen fluoride. The result is, of course, not uranium, but UF4 tetrafluoride. And metal uranium is reduced from it with the help of calcium or magnesium. Whether Iran owns these technologies is unknown. Most likely not.

However, the key technology for obtaining nuclear weapons uranium enrichment to 90% is considered. Without this, all other technologies do not matter. But what matters is the performance of gas centrifuges, technological losses of raw materials, equipment reliability and a whole number of factors that Iran is silent about, the IAEA is silent, intelligence from various countries is silent

Therefore, it makes sense to learn more about the uranium enrichment process. Look at history a question. To try to understand where centrifuges appeared in Iran, what they are. And why Iran has managed to adjust the centrifuge enrichment, and the United States, having spent billions of dollars, could not achieve this. In the United States, government contracts for uranium are enriched in gas diffusion plants, which is many times more expensive.

DISTRIBUTED PRODUCTION

Natural uranium-238 contains all 0,7% of the radioactive isotope uranium-235, and building an atomic bomb requires the content of uranium-235 in 90%. That is why technologies for producing fissile materials are the main stage in the development of atomic weapons.

How can lighter uranium-235 atoms be isolated from uranium-238 mass? After all, the difference between them is only three "atomic ones". There are four main methods of separation (enrichment): magnetic separation, gas diffusion method, centrifugal and laser. The most rational and cheap - centrifugal. Per unit of production, it needs 50 times less electricity than with the gas diffusion enrichment method.

Inside the centrifuge, the rotor rotates at an incredible speed — a glass into which the gas flows. Centrifugal force squeezes the heavier fraction containing uranium-238 to the walls. Lighter molecules uranium-235 going closer to the axis. In addition, a counter-current is created inside the rotor in a special way. Due to this, lighter molecules are collected at the bottom, and heavy at the top. In the glass of the rotor at different depths of the tube is lowered. One by one, the lighter fraction is pumped to the next centrifuge. According to another, depleted uranium hexafluoride is pumped into the “tail” or “dump”, that is, it is withdrawn from the process, pumped into special containers and sent to storage. In essence, this is waste, the radioactivity of which is lower than that of natural uranium.

One of the technological tricks - temperature. Uranium hexafluoride becomes a gas at temperatures above 56,5 degrees. For efficient isotope separation in centrifuges, a certain temperature is maintained. Which one? Information is classified. As well as information about the gas pressure inside the centrifuges.

When the temperature decreases, the hexafluoride liquefies, and then completely "dries up" - it goes into a solid state. Therefore, barrels with "tails" are stored in open areas. After all, here they will never heat up to 56,5 degrees. And even if you pierce a hole in the barrel, the gas from it will not evaporate. In the worst case, some yellow powder will fall out, if someone has enough strength to knock over a container with a volume of 2,5 cube. m

The height of the Russian centrifuge about 1 meter. They are assembled in cascades of 20 pieces. The shop is located in three tiers. In total, the 700 000 centrifuges workshop. The engineer on duty rides along the tiers on a bicycle. Uranium hexafluoride in the process of separation, which politicians and media call enrichment, passes through the entire chain of hundreds of thousands of centrifuges. The rotors of the centrifuges rotate at a speed of 1500 revolutions per second. Yes, yes, one and a half thousand revolutions per second, not a minute. For comparison: the speed of rotation of modern drills is 500, the maximum 600 revolutions per second. At the same time, in Russian factories, rotors revolve continuously for 30 years. Record - over 32 years. Fantastic reliability! MTBF is 0,1%. One failure per 1 thousand centrifuges per year.

Due to super-reliability, we only in 2012 began the replacement of fifth and sixth generation centrifuges with devices of the ninth generation. Because they aren't looking for good from the good. But they have already worked for three decades, it is time to give way to a more productive one. Older centrifuges rotated at subcritical speeds, that is, below the speed at which they could go peddling. But the devices of the ninth generation work on supercritical turns - they pass a dangerous line and continue to work steadily. There is no information about new centrifuges, it is forbidden to photograph them in order not to decipher the dimensions. One can only assume that they have a traditional meter size and rotational speed of the order of 2000 revolutions per second.

Not a single bearing of such speeds can withstand. Therefore, the rotor ends in a needle that rests on a corundum thrust bearing. And the upper part rotates in a constant magnetic field without contacting anything at all. And even with an earthquake, the rotor's beating does not happen with destruction. Verified

For your information: Russian low-enriched uranium for fuel elements of NPP reactors is three times cheaper than what is produced at foreign gas diffusion plants. It's about cost, not about cost.

600 MEGAWATT PER KILOGRAM

When, during the Second World War, the United States embarked on an atomic bomb program, the centrifugal method of isotope separation was chosen as the most promising success method of producing highly enriched uranium. But technological problems could not be overcome. And the Americans, with annoyance, declared centrifugation impossible. And all over the world they thought so, until they comprehended that in the Soviet Union centrifuges spin, and how they spin.

In the United States, when they abandoned the centrifuges, it was decided to use the gas diffusion method to obtain uranium-235. It is based on the property of gas molecules with different specific gravity to diffuse (penetrate) differently through porous partitions (filters). Uranium hexafluoride is driven sequentially through a long cascade of diffusion steps. Smaller molecules of uranium-235 easier seep through the filters, their concentration in the total mass of the gas gradually increases. It is clear that in order to obtain 90% concentration, the number of steps must be calculated in tens and hundreds of thousands.

For the normal course of the process, gas is required throughout the chain to be heated, maintaining a certain level of pressure. And the pump should work at each step. All this requires huge energy costs. How huge? In the first Soviet dividing production, 1 600 kWh of electricity was required to produce 000 kg of enriched uranium of the desired concentration. Pay attention - kilowatt.

Even now, in France, the gas diffusion plant almost completely eats the production of three blocks of a nearby nuclear power plant. The Americans, who allegedly have the entire private industry, had to specially build a state-owned power station in order to feed the gas diffusion plant at a special rate. This power plant is still in state ownership and still uses special tariffs.

In the Soviet Union in 1945, it was decided to build an enterprise for the production of highly enriched uranium. And at the same time to develop the development of the gas diffusion method of isotope separation. In parallel, proceed to the design and manufacture of industrial plants. In addition to all this, it was necessary to create no-new automation systems, instrumentation of a new type, materials resistant to aggressive media, bearings, lubricants, vacuum installations and much more. For all Comrade Stalin gave two years.

The deadlines are unrealistic, and, naturally, in two years the result was close to zero. How can a factory be built if there are no technical documentation yet? How to develop technical documentation, if it is still unknown what equipment will be there? How to design gas diffusion installations, if pressure, temperature of uranium hexafluoride is unknown? Yes, and how to behave this aggressive substance in contact with different metals, also did not know.

All these questions were answered during the operation. In April, 1948 of the year in one of the atomic cities of the Urals earned the first stage of a plant from 256 separation machines. As the chain of cars grows, so did the problems. In particular, bearings were wounded by hundreds, lubricant flowed. Moreover, the work was disorganized by the special groups and their volunteers, who were actively searching for pests.

Aggressive uranium hexafluoride, interacting with the equipment metal, decomposed, uranium compounds were deposited on the internal surfaces of the aggregates. For this reason, it was not possible to obtain the required 90-percentage uranium-235 concentration. Significant losses in the multi-stage separation system did not allow obtaining a concentration above 40 – 55%. New devices were designed, in 1949 year, started to work. But still it was not possible to reach the level of 90%, only on 75%. The first Soviet nuclear bomb therefore was plutonium, like the Americans.

Uranium-235 hexafluoride was sent to another company, where it was brought to the required 90% by magnetic separation. In a magnetic field, lighter and heavier particles deflect in different ways. Due to this separation occurs. The process is slow and expensive. Only in 1951, the first Soviet bomb with a composite plutonium-uranium charge was tested.

Meanwhile, a new plant was being built with more advanced equipment. Corrosion losses were reduced to such an extent that, since November 1953, the plant in the continuous mode began to produce the 90% product. At the same time, the industrial technology of processing uranium hexafluoride into uranium oxide was mastered. Metal uranium was then extracted from it.

Especially for the power plant was built Verkhne-Tagilskaya TPP with a capacity of 600 MW. And in total, the plant consumed 3% of all electricity produced in 1958 in the Soviet Union.

In 1966, the Soviet gas diffusion plants began to be dismantled, and in 1971, they finally eliminated it. Centrifuges replaced filters.

TO THE HISTORY OF THE QUESTION

In the Soviet Union, centrifuges were built back in the 1930s. But here, as in the United States, they were considered unpromising. Relevant studies have closed. But here is one of the paradoxes of Stalin’s Russia. In the fertile Sukhumi, a hundred prisoners of German engineers worked on various problems, including developing a centrifuge. This direction was headed by one of the leaders of Siemens, Dr. Max Steenbeck, the group included a Luftwaffe mechanic and a graduate of the University of Vienna Gernot Zippe.

Students in Isfahan under the leadership of a cleric with prayers express support for Iran’s nuclear program


But the work came to a standstill. The Soviet engineer Viktor Sergeyev, the 31-year-old designer of the Kirov factory engaged in centrifuges, found a way out of the impasse. Because at the party meeting he convinced those present that a centrifuge was promising. And by the decision of the party assembly, and not the Central Committee or Stalin himself, the corresponding developments were started in the design bureau of the plant. Sergeev collaborated with the German prisoners and shared his idea with them. Steenbeck later wrote: “An idea worthy of coming from us! But it never occurred to me. ” A Russian designer came - reliance on the needle and the magnetic field.

In 1958, the first industrial centrifuge production reached its design capacity. A few months later it was decided to gradually transition to this method of uranium separation. Already the first generation of centrifuges consumed electricity in 17 times less than gas diffusion machines.

But at the same time there was a serious flaw - the fluidity of the metal at high speeds. The problem was solved by Academician Iosif Fridliander, under whose leadership a unique alloy B96ц ​​was created, which is several times stronger than weapon steel. Now in the production of centrifuges are increasingly used composite materials.

Max Steenbeck returned to the GDR and became vice-president of the Academy of Sciences. And Gernot Zippe in 1956 year went to the West. There he was surprised to find that no one uses the centrifugal method. He patented a centrifuge and offered it to the Americans. But they have already decided that the idea is utopian. Only after 15 years, when it became known that all uranium enrichment in the USSR was carried out by centrifuges, Zippe's patent was implemented in Europe.

In 1971, the concern URENCO was established, belonging to three European states - Great Britain, the Netherlands and Germany. Concern shares are divided between the countries equally.

The British government controls its third of the shares through Enrichment Holdings Limited. Government of the Netherlands - through the company Ultra-Centrifuge Nederland Limited. The German share of the shares belongs to the company Uranit UK Limited, whose shares, in turn, are equally divided between the firms RWE and E.ON. URENCO is headquartered in the UK. Currently, the concern owns more than 12% of the market for commercial supplies of nuclear fuel for nuclear power plants.

However, if the method of operation of the centrifuge is identical, the URENCO have fundamental design differences. This is explained by the fact that Herr Zippe was familiar only with a prototype made in Sukhumi. If the Soviet centrifuges are only one meter in height, then the European concern began with two meters, and the latest generation of machines grew into columns in 10 meters. But this is not the limit.

The Americans, who have the biggest in the world, built 12 and 15 meters high machines. Only their factory closed, not having time to open, back in 1991. They are modestly silent about the reasons, but they are known - accidents and imperfection of technology. However, in the United States operates a centrifuge plant owned by URENCO. Sells fuel to American nuclear power plants.

Whose centrifuges are better? Long cars are much more productive than small Russian cars. Long run at supercritical speeds. In the 10-meter column below, molecules containing uranium-235 are collected, and at the top, uranium-238. The bottom hexafluoride is pumped to the next centrifuge. Long centrifuges in the process chain is required many times less. But when it comes to the cost of production, maintenance and repair, the numbers are reversed.

PAKISTAN TRACK

Russian uranium for fuel cells of nuclear power reactors is cheaper than foreign ones. Because it takes 40% of the global market. Half of American nuclear power plants operate on Russian uranium. Export orders bring Russia more than 3 billion dollars a year.

But back to Iran. Judging by the photos, here, at the processing plants, two-meter URENCO centrifuges of the first generation are installed. Where are they from Iran? From Pakistan. And where did Pakistan come from? From Urenko, certainly.

The story is well known. A modest citizen of Pakistan, Abdul Kadir Khan, learned in Europe as a metallurgical engineer, defended his doctoral thesis and took a rather high post at URENCO. In 1974, India tested a nuclear device, and in 1975, Dr. Khan returned to his homeland with a suitcase of secrets and became the father of a Pakistani nuclear bomb.

According to some reports, Pakistan managed to buy 3 thousand centrifuges in the concern itself URENCO through dummy companies. Then they began to buy components. One Dutch friend, Khan, knew all the suppliers of URENCO and contributed to the purchases. Valves, pumps, electric motors and other parts from which centrifuges were assembled were purchased. Something gradually began to produce themselves, purchasing the appropriate structural materials.

Since Pakistan is not rich enough to spend tens of billions of dollars on a nuclear weapons production cycle, equipment was also produced for sale. The first buyer was the DPRK. Then Iran’s petrodollars began to flow. There is reason to believe that China, which supplied Iran with uranium hexafluoride and the technologies of its production and deconversion, was also involved.

In 2004, Dr. Khan, after meeting with President Musharraf, spoke on television and publicly repented of selling nuclear technology abroad. Thus he removed from the leadership of Pakistan the blame for the illegal export to Iran and the DPRK. Since then, he has been in comfortable conditions of house arrest. And Iran and the DPRK continue to increase the separation capacity.

What I would like to draw attention to. The IAEA reports constantly state the number of operating and non-operating centrifuges in Iran. From which it can be assumed that machines made in Iran itself, even with the use of imported components, have a lot of technical problems. Perhaps most of them will never work.

At URENCO itself, the first generation of centrifuges also presented an unpleasant surprise to their creators. It was not possible to obtain a concentration of uranium-235 above 60%. It took several years to overcome the problem. What problems Dr. Khan faced in Pakistan, we do not know. But, starting research and production in the 1975 year, Pakistan tested the first uranium bomb only in the 1998 year. Iran is actually only at the beginning of this difficult path.

Uranium is considered highly enriched when the content of the 235 isotope exceeds 20%. Iran is all the time accused that it produces precisely highly enriched 20-percent uranium. But this is not true. Iran receives uranium hexafluoride containing uranium-235 in 19,75% so that even by chance at least a fraction of a percent does not cross the forbidden line. Uranium of precisely this degree of enrichment is used for a research reactor built by the Americans during the Shah regime. But now 30 years, as they stopped supplying him with fuel.

Here, however, there was also a problem. A technological line for deconversion of uranium hexafluoride enriched to 19,75% to uranium oxide was built in Isfahan. But so far it has been tested only for the 5% fraction. Although mounted back in 2011 year. One can only imagine what difficulties Iranian engineers will be facing if it comes to 90-percent weapon-grade uranium.

In May 2012, an anonymous IAEA officer shared with journalists information that at the enrichment plant in Iran, the IAEA inspectors found traces of uranium enriched to 27%. However, in the quarterly report of this international organization there is not a word on this topic. It is also unknown what was meant by the word "footprints". It is possible that it was just a stuffing of negative information in the framework of the information war. Probably, the traces are scraped off particles of uranium, which, in contact with the metal from hexafluoride, turned into tetrafluoride and a donkey in the form of green powder. And turned into a production loss.

Even in advanced production, URENCO losses can reach 10% of the total. At the same time, light uranium-235 enters into a corrosion reaction much more readily than its less mobile fellow 238. How much uranium hexafluoride is lost during enrichment in Iranian centrifuges, one can only guess. But you can vouch that there are considerable losses.

RESULTS AND PROSPECTS

Industrial separation (enrichment) of uranium is carried out in a dozen countries. The reason is the same as that declared by Iran: independence from the import of fuel for reactors of nuclear power plants. This is a question of strategic importance, since we are talking about the state’s energy security. Expenses in this area are no longer considered.

Basically these enterprises belong to URENCO or they buy centrifuges from the concern. Russian machines of the fifth and sixth generation equipped enterprises built in 1990-s in China. Naturally, the inquisitive Chinese dismantled the cog samples and did exactly the same. However, there is a Russian secret in these centrifuges, which is not something that can be reproduced, even understand what it is, no one can. Absolute copies do not work, even if you burst.

All those tons of Iranian enriched uranium, which are scared of a foreign citizen by foreigners, and also domestic media, are actually tons of uranium hexafluoride. Judging by the available data, Iran has so far not even approached the production of uranium metal. And, it seems, is not going to deal with this issue in the near future. Therefore, all calculations, how many bombs Tehran can make of the existing uranium, are meaningless. You cannot make a nuclear explosive device out of hexafluoride, even if it can be brought to 90% uranium-235.

A few years ago, two Russian physicists inspected Iranian nuclear facilities. The mission is classified at the request of the Russian side. But judging by the fact that the leadership and the Foreign Ministry of the Russian Federation do not join the accusations against Iran, Tehran has not detected the danger of creating nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, the United States and Israel constantly threaten Iran with bombing, the country is being harassed with economic sanctions, trying to delay its development in this way. The result is the opposite. Over the 30 years of sanctions, the Islamic Republic has been transformed from a raw material into an industrial one. Here they make their own jet fighters, submarines and a lot of other modern weapons. And they are well aware that only armed potential restrains the aggressor.

When the DPRK conducted an underground nuclear explosion, the tone of negotiations with it changed dramatically. It is not known that the device was blown up. And whether it was a real nuclear explosion or a charge "burned out", since the chain reaction should last for milliseconds, and there are suspicions that it was protracted. That is, the release of radioactive products occurred, but the explosion itself was not.

The same story with intercontinental North Korean missiles. Twice they were launched, and both times it ended in an accident. Obviously, they are not able to fly and hardly ever will be able to. Poor North Korea does not have the appropriate technology, production, personnel, research laboratories. But more than Pyongyang is not threatened with war and bombing. And the whole world sees it. And makes reasonable conclusions.

Brazil announced that it intends to build an atomic submarine. Just so, just in case. Suddenly, tomorrow someone will not like the Brazilian leader and he will wish to replace him?

Egyptian President Mohammed Mursi intends to return to the question of Egypt’s developing its own program of using nuclear energy for peaceful purposes. Mursi made this statement in Beijing, speaking to the leaders of the Egyptian community living in China. In this case, the Egyptian president called nuclear energy "clean energy." The West on this issue is still silent.

Russia has a chance to create a joint venture with Egypt to enrich uranium. Then the chances are sharply increased that the nuclear power plants here will be built according to Russian projects. And we will leave on our conscience conscientious information bombs about the alleged nuclear bombs.
Author:
Originator:
http://nvo.ng.ru/armament/2012-09-14/8_uran.html
37 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Sasha 19871987
    Sasha 19871987 28 September 2012 07: 25 New
    +27
    personally, my solely subjective opinion is that Iran needs a bomb so that it is not crucified like Iraq ... it is needed for defensive purposes, I think the Iranian will not be used for offensive purposes - everyone wants to live, despite the fanaticism of individuals .. .
    1. Director
      Director 28 September 2012 11: 05 New
      +12
      I have the same opinion. Article plus. I really liked the text, everything is very informative.
      1. Rink
        Rink 28 September 2012 18: 26 New
        +4
        +1000! Even I understood everything! :) The author for the information content and style of presentation is a plus! It’s a pity, I can only put one ... I would put a thousand.
    2. wax
      wax 28 September 2012 11: 35 New
      +8
      It is a pity that Iran is far from nuclear weapons, but it can threaten retaliatory "dirty" ammunition. A country with such a history, unlike the United States, has the right to continue to exist and progress, and this right, unfortunately, is not recognized, and this is what Iran has to do as "they."
      1. Santa Fe
        Santa Fe 29 September 2012 20: 10 New
        -2
        Quote: Wax
        A country with such a history, unlike the United States, has the right to continue to exist and progress.

        laughing I look at you directly a degree in history

        Indeed, what right to exist has the country that created the world's first airplane and computer. Skyscraper and bank card. GPS system and incandescent bulb. Space technology for deep space exploration. Television, cellular communications, conveyor, radio telescope - almost everything that determines the appearance of our world. It's amazing that we communicate with you on the network with the Orthodox name Internet.

        And what did Iran give the world except clay tablets and possessed mullahs? The last 2000 years in this territory is a mess and chaos - remember the crowd that torn Griboedov to pieces.
        1. AK-74-1
          AK-74-1 30 September 2012 16: 11 New
          0
          Griboedov as any person, and even more so the ambassador is sorry. This is the first.
          The second one. Wherever the amers would now be if the Angles created the USA in Persia.
          Another thing is that the Angles actively drove the Persians into the Stone Age, which they are still trying to do. And about space and television with communications, you hope for the "red words" said.
          1. Santa Fe
            Santa Fe 30 September 2012 23: 12 New
            +1
            Quote: AK-74-1
            The second one. Where would amers be now if the Angles created the USA in Persia

            USA would be in Persia

            The meaning of the United States is not in North America, but in a free state for everyone where any immigrant can become Igor Sikorsky or Jessica Long (a Russian legless girl abandoned by her parents. She was adopted by an American family, she took three gold medals at the London Olympics)

            Quote: AK-74-1
            Angles actively drove the Persians into the Stone Age

            Another historian. laughing
            Approval sucked out of the finger

            Quote: AK-74-1
            And about space and television with communications, you hope for the "red words" said.

            The founder of television was emigrants from the Russian Empire, Vladimir Zvorykin and David Sarnov, who created the first television network in the United States and solved hundreds of practical tasks for realizing the idea. Alas, these people ceased to be Russian, barely crossed the US border. All their discoveries and works were made in America.

            Concerning Space - probes Pioneer, Voyager, Cassini, who have been working in deep space for decades. Fact: everything we know about the solar system is obtained from NASA
      2. Beck
        Beck 1 October 2012 19: 11 New
        0
        Iran’s military power cannot be compared with either the United States or NATO.

        If a military conflict occurs before Iran has nuclear weapons. That only Iran’s nuclear infrastructure will be bombed.

        If, God forbid, the conflict begins when Iran has nuclear weapons. That country like Iran will cease to exist. The territory of Iran for hundreds of years will be a zone with a high degree of radioactive contamination.

        Iran also needs to understand this.
  2. bask
    bask 28 September 2012 07: 32 New
    +8
    Every state has sovereignty and independence. In the modern world, nuclear weapons cannot be avoided. Examples Iraq Libya, Yugoslavia. Syria would have been occupied long ago if Russia hadn’t had nuclear weapons. Iran could not do without a nuclear bomb.
    1. Rumata
      Rumata 28 September 2012 08: 38 New
      -4
      Quote: bask
      Every state has sovereignty and independence. In the modern world, nuclear weapons cannot be avoided. Examples Iraq Libya, Yugoslavia. Syria would have been occupied long ago if Russia hadn’t had nuclear weapons. Iran could not do without a nuclear bomb.

      Georgia? It is interesting how the war with Georgia would develop if the latter had 60 pieces of nuclear charges and a delivery vehicle ...
      1. Vadivak
        Vadivak 28 September 2012 09: 14 New
        +16
        Quote: Rumata
        It is interesting how the war with Georgia would develop if the latter had 60 pieces of nuclear charges and a delivery vehicle ..


        Or also as it was or would have been destroyed at first these same pieces so 60 nuclear charges and delivery vehicles
        1. Karish
          Karish 28 September 2012 11: 11 New
          -7
          Quote: Vadivak
          Or also as it was or would have been destroyed at first these same pieces so 60 nuclear charges and delivery vehicles

          Comrade Marshall (no offense) and no tales. In the presence of nuclear weapons in Georgia, no one would rock it (especially because of Abkhazia) Would they destroy their charges (some kind of childhood) Does Saakashvili keep them under his pillow? Russia has a missile defense system, if missiles are launched from Georgia (medium range) At least to Krasnodar? Do you consider this option? And if Iran can, why Georgia can not?
          1. wax
            wax 28 September 2012 11: 41 New
            +4
            If Pakistan, Israel can, then why Iran can not. By the way, do you happen to know where and how much nuclear ammunition is stored in the EU countries, except, essno, the countries of the nuclear club?
            1. Beck
              Beck 1 October 2012 19: 22 New
              -1
              Quote: Wax
              If Pakistan, Israel can, then why Iran can not.


              Because Pakistan, India, Israel never, never threatened anyone with destruction, as the Ayatollahs and Ahmadi Nejad threaten.

              Because Pakistan, India, Israel never said that they would establish a world NEW ISLAMIC ORDER, a world NEW HINDAN ORDER, a world NEW JEWISH ORDER. As stated by the Ayatollahs of Iran.

              Ayatollahs, President Ahmadi Nejad, are official representatives of Iran and officially apply to their statements.

              This is not Vanka drunk blurted out.
          2. Ruslan
            Ruslan 28 September 2012 13: 00 New
            +4
            Quote: Karish
            And if Iran can, why Georgia can not?
            If Israel can, then why not Iran? Israel was the first to start a nuclear race in the Middle East, and with US help, wants to remain a monopolist - this is the root of the problem.
            1. Beck
              Beck 1 October 2012 20: 11 New
              -1
              Quote: Wax
              If Pakistan, Israel can, then why Iran can not.


              Suppose Iran is also possible.

              Then. If Iran can, why Kazakhstan can not.

              Then it is possible to Finland, and Latvia, and Poland, and Moldova, and Ukraine, and Georgia, and Mongolia.

              What will be comfortable in Russia? And if the orthodox of Iran will be hard around everyone. Komk need this?
          3. Gendalf
            Gendalf 28 September 2012 15: 12 New
            +3
            Well, to begin with, the phrase "60 nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles" as applied to Georgia is the biggest fairy tale. But suppose that the fairy tale has come true and they all got it. And what's next ?? Do you think that in this case our people would just sit and watch what the Georgians are doing? It would not be enough for Sukashvili to give an order to use nuclear weapons, because anyone understands that the result would be a VERY PAIN blow to Russia and the complete destruction of Georgia as a state ( yes, and probably as a territory)
            1. Karish
              Karish 28 September 2012 15: 24 New
              -1
              Quote: Gendalf
              Do you think that in this case our people would just sit and watch what the Georgians are doing?

              Yes, and you can not doubt it. They would try to solve the problem through the UN, at best. But they wouldn’t unambiguously rock onto a nuclear country

              Quote: Gendalf
              Sukashvili wouldn’t have the spirit to give the order to use nuclear weapons, because anyone understands that the result would be a VERY PAIN blow to Russia, and the complete destruction of Georgia as a state (yes, and probably as a territory)

              I agree, but in Russia we would have thought the same whether it is worth starting from behind Abkhazia.
              1. Yura
                Yura 28 September 2012 18: 51 New
                +1
                Quote: Karish
                but in Russia they would have thought the same thing whether to start from behind Abkhazia.

                If you understood what it was and would not be because of these countries, then you would understand what it was and would be.
            2. Rumata
              Rumata 28 September 2012 15: 39 New
              -5
              Quote: Gendalf
              that the result would be a VERY PAIN blow to Russia

              The fact of the matter is that many here believe that a large territory of Russia will save in the event of Iran moving out of the reels, but in fact the missile defense system will be able to protect Moscow and everything, and 80% of the country's population lives in the central part of Russia. 60 launches from the territory of Georgia would mean not only the destruction of Georgia as a country, but would also drive Russia into the Stone Age. Therefore, if Georgia had nuclear weapons, no one would have touched it, they would have acted differently, bribery, murder, the UN, etc., and that is why Russia should fear nuclear Iran no less than the others, Israel even has a missile defense system ...
              1. smile
                smile 28 September 2012 22: 37 New
                +1
                Rumata
                Yeah, if Georgia had a death star, then the brave Mishiko would go in black, and a half billion Georgians would take over the solar system .... and if the US population was 20 people, they would be the most peaceful country, and if if hair would grow on a swan, then it would not be a swan, but a mammoth .... well, what else is there? Maybe enough of a finger to suck out arguments that we are bad? .... Damn, like children ...
                1. Rumata
                  Rumata 28 September 2012 22: 42 New
                  0
                  Quote: smile
                  Yeah, if Georgia had a death star, then the brave Mishiko would go in black, and a half billion Georgians would take over the solar system .... and if the US population was 20 people, they would be the most peaceful country, and if if hair would grow on a swan, then it would not be a swan, but a mammoth .... well, what else is there? Maybe enough of a finger to suck out arguments that we are bad? .... Damn, like children ...

                  I do not think you are not good. Just such a parallel more clearly explains the attitude of many Israelis to the possibility of nuclear weapons in Iran, and also why Russia should fear it no less than all the others. Caspian, Azeirbajan, etc ...
        2. Rumata
          Rumata 28 September 2012 13: 15 New
          0
          Quote: Vadivak
          Or also as it was or would have been destroyed at first these same pieces so 60 nuclear charges and delivery vehicles

          Everything is so simple, nuclear weapons are useless since before the start of the war it can be taken and destroyed, the US arsenal is not terrible if something happens, keep it up !!
          1. Beck
            Beck 1 October 2012 19: 31 New
            -2
            Nuclear weapons are more of a deterrent.

            If yes. If Georgia would have nuclear weapons. The Kremlin would have to weigh a long time. Destroy Georgia nuclear weapons (5 million people) with the possible destruction of 3 million Russians OR HOW?
      2. wax
        wax 28 September 2012 11: 37 New
        +2
        Similarly: the aggressor would be punished adequately with excess.
        1. Karish
          Karish 28 September 2012 15: 25 New
          0
          Quote: Denzel13
          Even the Americans are smart enough not to give them nuclear weapons. Can you imagine a “man” having just eaten his tie and with a “nuclear button”?

          Exactly to the same extent as the odious Iranian regime led by ayatollahs and a nuclear button.
      3. Denzel13
        Denzel13 28 September 2012 13: 22 New
        +3
        Even the Americans are smart enough not to give them nuclear weapons. Can you imagine a “man” having just eaten his tie and with a “nuclear button”?
        1. Rumata
          Rumata 28 September 2012 15: 45 New
          -3
          Quote: Denzel13
          Even the Americans are smart enough not to give them nuclear weapons. Can you imagine a “man” having just eaten his tie and with a “nuclear button”?

          For me, the ayatollah regime with nuclear weapons is worse than Saakashvili, I just want to convey the idea that Georgia has nuclear weapons. it would have freed Saakashvili’s hands, under the guise of a nuclear shield, he could strengthen the army and solve its territorial claims by hammering a bolt on Russia, its opinion and the army. In Iran, the situation is even more complicated due to the totalitarian system and power in the hands of religious leaders ...
          1. Denzel13
            Denzel13 28 September 2012 21: 08 New
            +2
            Rumata, you simply were not in Abkhazia and Ossetia in 1992 - 2008, therefore, you have similar judgments. Do you know a joke about a monkey with a grenade?
      4. afire
        afire 28 September 2012 14: 45 New
        +1
        that’s why they’re fighting with American money as meat,
        and if they had yao, I’m 99% sure that there would be no conflict at all, since Georgia would be self-sufficient
      5. ivachum
        ivachum 28 September 2012 16: 00 New
        +2
        And no how. These would be TROPHIES !!!!!! soldier But seriously .... with the budget of Georgia - this would not be Georgia, but the state of Georgia.
      6. Nick
        Nick 29 September 2012 00: 17 New
        0
        Quote: Rumata
        It’s interesting how the war with Georgia would develop if the latter had pieces like this 60

        And if South Ossetians had 60 charges then the war with Georgia would not have taken place at all.
  3. crazyrom
    crazyrom 28 September 2012 07: 50 New
    +9
    Quote: article
    Americans who have the biggest in the world

    Since when? Forgotten Mi-12, Mi-26, An-225, Tu-160, the Statue "Motherland Calls" in Volgograd, Submarine Shark, etc. etc.

    Yes, we generally have the largest country!
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 28 September 2012 08: 26 New
      +5
      As I understand it, the article is about some kind of miracle uranium enrichment technology, with which Iran allegedly "wiped its nose" to the Americans. I doubt very much that this has anything to do with reality, because all technologies and equipment for them were bought from the West (from Siemens) and Russia or borrowed from Pakistan, China and Korea (North), which in turn stole these technologies in the “damned West”. As for the allegations that the Iranians A bomb and missiles are needed solely to protect their sovereignty and independence, it is also difficult to agree with them. In any case, no adequate leadership of any sovereign country would threaten that in mandatory order will wipe out another sovereign state from the face of the earth, even if the majority of the population of this state are "vile" Jews. It should be noted that prior to such statements, no one particularly encroached on the sovereignty of Iran, but Iran attempted on the sovereignty of neighboring countries more than once. And not always unsuccessfully. The same Lebanon, for example, has long ago "voluntarily" transferred its independence to the crazy hands of Nasrallah and his comrades, although he claims that this independence is still in the "calloused hands of the Lebanese people." It’s hard to say who is behind the Arab Spring. Some argue that the States are others that Iran. The truth is somewhere in between. For all the "stupidity" of the Americans and their tendency to bring democracy with bayonets to the "underdeveloped" countries, the democratically elected "Muslim brothers" of Egypt or Hamaz are much more dangerous for them than the dictators Mubarak or Arafat with whom they could negotiate for an affordable price.
      And at the heart of all this "rustling" is the desire to gain a monopoly on the production and trade of an oily liquid with an unpleasant odor whose name is oil. And in order to ensure a leading position in the world market for this liquid, Iran is striving with leaps and bounds for nuclear missile weapons that it will swing in all directions, including towards Russia, and not just towards Israel.
      Israel in this regard for Iran is nothing more than a political justification for its far-reaching "market" plans. It is not in vain that the Saudis Sunnis are so afraid of the Shiites of the Iranians that they are ready to cooperate with anyone, including their worst enemies, the Jews, if only they would bomb Iran’s nuclear potential. For what they then will begin to punish them, arranging the next 11 of September. So the East is a delicate matter, and democracy has never smelled there, it doesn’t smell and it will not. They respect only power, money and power. Everything else is from the evil one. Including thin verbal ligature of the eastern bazaar
      1. Stary oper
        Stary oper 28 September 2012 19: 04 New
        +4
        gregor6549, I must give you my due ... You know how subtly and unobtrusively, "including the fine verbal ligature of the oriental bazaar" to draw a conclusion, or rather not a conclusion, but to lead the reader to the conclusion that this is not the United States and comrades spread the theory of "controlled chaos in the Middle East "(because the results were not quite acceptable for them), but some mysterious one. :) Completeness, my dear, their ears there can not be hidden. As for the bombing of Libya by Hezbollah, it’s just no sideways ... About poor and peace-loving Israel (which simply has to urge the United States to start bombing Iran, otherwise it cannot survive), you also subtly put up a word as a poor hussar. :) And they nodded towards Russia, which Iran, allegedly, could also threaten in the future. They only forgot to connect our Azerbaijani friends, whom I see here in many. :) That would still find support. But the essence is this: the author in the article very reasonably shows that Iran is still far from creating an atomic bomb. And all this hysteria of Israel is an occasion to simply bomb Iran in the "Stone Age", since at the moment it is the only real force in the Middle East that opposes the interests of the Jewish state.
    2. alexng
      alexng 28 September 2012 08: 32 New
      +5
      They have the largest in America and by American standards, and Russia (USSR) has the largest in the world. That is the whole difference. They recognized the "Kalash" only when the whole world recognized it and began to poke amers with their nose. The arrogance of the Yankees knows no bounds, so they show off. PR-PR and only PR - this is the political camouflage of the Americans. All attention is wrapped, and ordinary wrapped poop is wrapped. And the Persians are right in doing what they put on the pussies, and they simply live as they see fit for themselves. Amer has been ass itching for a long kick in the ass for a long time. And there you look, an abyss awaits them and a world dump in the backyards.
  4. svs
    svs 28 September 2012 08: 16 New
    +1
    production technologies are not new at all, albeit very complex and very secret, so the Persians can create 90% uranium and a nuclear bomb if they wish, and not the fact that they will take decades to do this.
    In general, Ahmadinejad is constantly toughly trolling Israel and the United States.
    1. gregor6549
      gregor6549 28 September 2012 09: 15 New
      0
      Rzany sources estimate these terms from several months to several years
      And about trolling. At one time, I watched the film "Oleko Dundich." The inscription was engraved on his saber. "Don’t take out without need, don’t put in without glory." So it is with Iran. When someone constantly scares someone without a serious “scarecrow” in their hands, someone can really be scared and brush aside the scarecrow so that the scarecrow and those who wave it will not have the most beautiful memories, And if the frightened side tries to restrain itself as far as possible, realizing what its reaction threatens to everyone, then the frightening one climbs the rampage and bluffs all the time. Even Hitler was smarter in this regard. He, too, often frightened others, but frightened him with solid trump cards, although he could not do without bluffing. And here so far there are more bluffs than trump cards.
      1. Stary oper
        Stary oper 28 September 2012 19: 14 New
        +4
        gregor6549
        So it is with Iran. When someone constantly scares someone without a serious “scarecrow” in their hands, then someone can really be scared and brush aside the scarecrow so that the scarecrow and those who wave it will not have the most beautiful memories, And if the frightened side tries to restrain itself as far as possible, realizing what its reaction threatens to everyone, then the frightening one climbs the rampage and bluffs all the time.

        Yes, this is just a real ode to the patience and political wisdom of the United States and Israel. :) The right way, comrade! :)
        It remains to finish with the slogan: "Long live the peace-loving policies of the USA and Israel, the bearers of democracy and the fighters for the ideals of democracy all over the world! Hurray, comrades!"
        1. gregor6549
          gregor6549 29 September 2012 09: 21 New
          0
          I do not know how true my estimates are, but they are mine, and with what, and with the slogans of the time of the CPSU Cheka, I never sinned what I repent of. He was sinful, oh sinful.
          Further, I had nothing to do with the “peysaty” or the “am”, although I worked and still work with people of various nationalities, including Jews, Americans, Iranians, Lebanese and others. different Swedes. I always evaluated them not by the face and nose shape, but by the mind, hard work of decency, etc. and they basically evaluated me according to the same criteria, although there were deviations. What is clear, you won’t be nice to everyone
          Further, at one time I had the opportunity to travel, if not the whole Middle East, then a significant part of it. He visited the Emirates and Egypt and Israel, and not only in them. And he went not as a tourist, but as a special. on road electronics. Those. had the opportunity not only to view the surroundings from the windows of the tour bus but also to speak with many people of various levels. There he learned to listen and understand this very verbal ligature of the eastern bazaar. And she weaves there at the highest level and without slogans. Again, as elsewhere, the people there are very different, with different views on life and politics and with the most different levels of intelligence. So not everything is so simple there, especially with assessments of the situation, reasons, etc.
          1. Stary oper
            Stary oper 29 September 2012 12: 55 New
            0
            gregor6549.
            So if you noticed, I noted your ability to subtly and unobtrusively submit your opinion. But, you must admit, in your words, although they are in the wrapper of an objective approach, you can see an attempt to soften the policies of the United States and Israel in the Middle East. In any case, I thought so. I understand that in any conflict there is absolutely nothing clean (let's say, a “knight in white”, as well as an absolute villain). Any political conflict is first of all a clash of economic interests, which is then painted in the corresponding colors of religious, ideological, worldview confrontation. But ... In any conflict, there is always someone who first goes from words to deeds. And, basically, this is a militarily stronger side. In any case, at the time the conflict began. Therefore, there is the concept of an aggressor. Therefore, there is the concept of wars of conquest.
            Once again, I want to note that I do not question either your worldly or professional experience, or the ability to formulate and promote your thoughts. I did not agree with the position that you hold in this debate. That's why I allowed myself some sarcasm (I hope that I remained within the bounds of decency?). So then she is a controversy. :)
            I hope you are not offended about this. And the fact that people may have different views on some issue - I think it’s completely normal.
            1. gregor6549
              gregor6549 29 September 2012 19: 28 New
              0
              Eugene, what insults in my years? God forbid. It’s just that I’m used to expressing my opinion, no matter how it runs counter to the generally accepted opinion. And I have no illusions about the politics and politicians of all countries without exception. Each of them defends its national interests, which are nothing more than a combination of selfish interests of the powerful of this world of each country. And here, neither the USA, nor Israel, nor Russia, nor Australia is an exception, no matter what slogans their high-ranking skins operate on. But on the other hand, I never mix the interests of these skins with the interests of normal people in all countries, of which the majority in each country. They are mainly preoccupied with their affairs, that there is work, that there is something to feed the family, that children and grandchildren grow up happy, etc. But they, these people, did not solve anything in this world, they do not decide and will not decide. And therefore, the world is moving towards its logical end. Especially when so many nuclear weapons hang on the wall in a theater named Earth, then at least one of them will ever get banged. Especially if you let some scumbag into him. And then the chain reaction of other guns and .. write letters. Say I'm a pessimist? In no case. I am a realist who knows firsthand what modern weapon systems are, how easily they can work not according to the planned scenario, and what they can turn the normal people mentioned above into. The skins will not be saved either, although they will probably be able to sit for a couple of weeks after VIP bunkers fail in canned food.
              Therefore, I am tired of this endless blizzard about machinations, etc. Each country has the appropriate structures that are obliged to engage in the machinations of the skins of other countries ex officio and receive for this sickly salaries from the money of taxpayers. So let them watch. And let us go about our business and at leisure, together discuss the advantages or disadvantages of some kind of equipment, even if it shoots. And do not sort things out because ... this is the best way to ruin them.
              1. Stary oper
                Stary oper 29 September 2012 21: 51 New
                +1
                gregor6549.
                Here I completely agree with you. People, sadly as it may be, are just pawns in the hands of the "mighty of this world." And, even sincerely participating in protest movements and revolutions, they really just play for another “team” that uses their discontent to achieve their goals.
                In general, I am increasingly thinking about the thought of why the historical path of human development has led us to what we have? Was there a fork in this path that we missed and there would be that other path of humanity that is expensive to progress and a just society? Would the concept of justice change then? And ... And there are a lot of other emerging issues that are clearly not relevant to the subject of this site.
        2. gor
          gor 29 September 2012 18: 29 New
          -1
          it’s not an ode. it’s common sense in it. unlike some, it soberly assesses the situation. and the states have the right to be called a superpower because they have long and persistently achieved it. it will not be better for you if the states collapse and you are not guilty of ..... the states have none. this is your exceptional merit. yes, and besides the fact that you yourself are in .... you and others will chase others to pull
          1. Oleg Rosskiyy
            Oleg Rosskiyy 29 September 2012 21: 03 New
            0
            A voice erupted in Washington's eunuchs or what, life under Uncle Sam’s supervision is not so beautiful as indicated on the advertising packaging, why such a doomed tone? But the fact that we are supposedly in some places, is that you are mistaken, because there is no place for us and there will not be any, you and others like you have already taken it, moreover of your own free will. Congratulations on this achievement.
          2. Oleg Rosskiyy
            Oleg Rosskiyy 29 September 2012 21: 09 New
            0
            gor,
            Why such a doomed tone? What life under the supervision of Uncle Sam is not as sweet and satisfying as on the advertising packaging? About the place where we are supposedly located, so you are mistaken, there is no place for us there, you and others like you have taken it, moreover of your own free will, and we congratulate you from the bottom of our hearts.
          3. Stary oper
            Stary oper 29 September 2012 21: 58 New
            +1
            gor.
            Why are you so embittered? Someone is dragging you somewhere, but you don’t want to ?! Ah, what an evil rapist he is! And if so, then, as folk wisdom says, try to relax and get the most out of the upcoming process ... :)
            1. gor
              gor 29 September 2012 23: 25 New
              -2
              Well, tell me that you are in chocolate)))))))))))))))))))))) you don’t need to threaten anyone. The Lord’s paths are mysterious and you don’t always know what awaits you at the next turn. you are not so happy. as far as I understand, you relaxed and dream about the Chinese))))))))))))))))))
              by the way, I can’t say anything bad about Americans exclusively to my country. I don’t interfere and do not crush. I help and do not require anything in return, and my eyes don’t gouge out in the sense of how much we have done for you. But I can’t say this about your country. how many times have I been called a plasterer even though you never even had one. only you call your wrong plasterers yours, since they are just Russian-speaking people who go to Russia. And they go because you really don't care about your country waiting for the weather from the sea. here they are in demanded from you and therefore find work. and with this attitude to your country do you still dream of some kind of gigemony?)))))))))))) funny and sad at the same time. toothless show-offs. I would look at you as if you voluntarily enlisted in the militia in the case of some real mess
              1. Stary oper
                Stary oper 30 September 2012 11: 02 New
                +1
                gor
                And what, in life there are only two extremes? Either "in chocolate" or in the product of its processing? :) You reason, I'm sorry, like a offended child. By the way, the state of infantility does not depend on age. What do you transfer your personal grievances to questions of economics and politics? Do the Americans help you, as you say? So I'm happy for you. I just want to remind you that in politics there is no selfless help. This is just one form of promoting one’s own interests in another country. And about the "mess" and "militia" ...
                So that’s what I tell you. Usually the loudest scream is that around all the thieves are those who steal themselves. Similarly, those who shout that all the cowards are around.
                1. gor
                  gor 30 September 2012 21: 34 New
                  0
                  actually, it’s not comment that the Americans are cowards for you. but about the United States I just made a comparison. and even if it’s not disinterested, but you are far from them. you just want to let you, and you would be let down from the other 7 skins who treat you well
                  1. Stary oper
                    Stary oper 30 September 2012 22: 35 New
                    0
                    gor.
                    actually, what’s not comment so Americans are cowards

                    It just happens that a certain substitution of concepts occurs when a country's policy is associated with its people. By the way, you also sin by this in your comments. :)
                    1. gor
                      gor 30 September 2012 23: 47 New
                      0
                      Well, tell me something good about yourself about you based on the comments left on this site. As for me there are only a few adequate people. For example, a waf or a car. I also want to note the Israelis. They adequately and succinctly express their opinion
                    2. Beck
                      Beck 1 October 2012 19: 46 New
                      0
                      The old opera.

                      Well, why would a Mullah Nagan if he’s not a bully.

                      After all, Iran’s nuclear weapons are not only the Middle East and Israel. This is the closest, right across the belly, border along the Caspian. Well, in fig Russia, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Iran’s nuclear club. So that he, having jumped to the agreed position of the CIS countries in the Caspian, was extracting oil in five kilometers from the coast of Russia or Azerbaijan? Or did he set ultimatums to Russia, regarding Russia's domestic policy in the North Caucasus, in defense of his co-religionists?

                      Well, why is the mullah Nagan. He would have a mat for prayer.
  5. sergskak
    sergskak 28 September 2012 10: 44 New
    +4
    the inquisitive Chinese took apart the cogs and did exactly the same. However, there is a certain Russian secret in these centrifuges, which no one can reproduce, even understand what it consists of. Absolute copies do not work, even though you crack.
    This place in the article made me very happy. The Chinese can’t sell anything at all without this “no Russian secret”, the bastards are becoming too inquisitive ..
  6. Karish
    Karish 28 September 2012 11: 14 New
    -1
    We hear tales about Iranian technological breakthroughs from weapons to nuclear technology regularly.
    Oranges do not grow on aspen. They could not build the power plant themselves, they still cannot organize oil refining (imported gas), and overtook America in nuclear technology.
    Article full unproven bullshit wassat
    You cannot make a nuclear explosive device from hexafluoride, even if they manage to bring it to 90% of uranium-235.

    Maybe you mean sulfur hexafluoride? Of course it is impossible.
    In the case of nuclear materials, they say uranium hexofluoride.
    In general, if you turn to elementary open sources, you will suddenly find that

    To ensure the "operability" of a nuclear bomb, the content of uranium-235 should not be lower than 80%.

    Learn the mate part and do not confuse the site participants with the tales of grandmother Barbara.
    Dilettana, just a minus per article. Elementary things do not know how to write about something more complicated.
    1. Ruslan
      Ruslan 28 September 2012 13: 05 New
      +1
      Quote: Karish
      We hear tales about Iranian technological breakthroughs from weapons to nuclear technology regularly.
      The next Jewish tales that contradict themselves (why then the Jews shout that they need to bomb Iran?), But contradict because the Jews say what is profitable at the moment and do not care about the facts.
    2. Nick
      Nick 29 September 2012 00: 35 New
      0
      Quote: Karish
      To ensure the "operability" of a nuclear bomb, the content of uranium-235 should not be lower than 80%.

      Yes you! Dear, who in open sources will post technologies for the production of nuclear weapons. Open sources on this subject write all sorts of nonsense. The critical mass of uranium in various open sources varies from several kg to hundreds.
      And then, what is not lower than 80% ?, logically it can be 90%.
  7. Andrey_K
    Andrey_K 28 September 2012 11: 26 New
    +5
    An interesting technical review - now everything is more or less clear.
    Iran to the atomic bomb as to the moon on foot.
    30 years of reliability at 1500 rpm is something ... and as always the idea came to the mind of a simple engineer.
    One engineer can come up with more than ten academicians.
    If it were not for the STO-shnaya and the KM-mafias in the academies of sciences, which crush everyone who disagrees with these false theories, then our people with an engineering mindset could have come up with something else ...
    1. Rumata
      Rumata 28 September 2012 13: 20 New
      +1
      Quote: Andrey_K
      One engineer can come up with more than ten academicians.

      Scientists create a concept, explain the basic principles, and engineers bring it to life. Without academics, an engineer would not even know what to do and why.
      1. Andrey_K
        Andrey_K 28 September 2012 14: 54 New
        +1
        Doubtful statement.
        Modern industrial achievements are in no way connected with theoretical science; the last one is more likely to interfere than to help.
        For example, metamaterials, flat lenses, optics correction - all this is based on the "obsolete" classic formulas 100 years ago.
        As well as the principles of operation of all modern radars and, in general, everything related to radio.
        Modern ideas (about photons and other dogmas) have nothing to do with these successes and even contradict them.
        (For example, overcoming the diffraction limit, which was previously considered fundamentally insurmountable)
        1. Rumata
          Rumata 28 September 2012 15: 57 New
          +1
          Quote: Andrey_K
          Doubtful statement.
          Modern industrial achievements are in no way connected with theoretical science; the last one is more likely to interfere than to help.

          That is, if scientists did not create a theoretical model of nuclear weapons, would an engineer still construct centrifuges? The internal combustion engine also works on the principle known for hundreds of years. If we take modern materials such as ceramics or polymer composites, scientists create a concept and a theoretical basis, and engineers put it into the industry, how to do it quickly, cheaply, safely and much. At that time, atomic fission was something new and not fully explored, as a parallel can be drawn, for example, new drugs of protein kinases of inhibitors such as Glivec or superconductors in conditions of high (room) temperatures, the engineers here deal with the final product and its application. Engineers do not create something new, they bring to life concepts, theoretical models and developments created and tested by scientists. I’m sure that the same engineer didn’t really understand how the isotopes are separated, why the rotation speed and temperature are exactly the same as they are, and how the gas then turns into metal, without this he created something brilliant, but this does not diminish the merits of physicists and chemists who worked in laboratories 10 years before
          1. Andrey_K
            Andrey_K 28 September 2012 17: 04 New
            +1
            Centrifuges are not related to the nuclear weapons model - to build them you only need to know that 235 is less than 238.
            The centrifuge rotates quickly and there it is necessary to ensure that it does not fall apart - what theoretical physics could help here?
            Can Theory of Relativity? And again, no.

            The internal combustion engine works without any theory - only engineers did it and no physicists stood above the soul.
            New drugs are generally sought through trial and error.
            Superconductors are also looking too much - they test all kinds of compounds for light conduction at different temperatures.
            Science cannot even tell you what substances it is better to look for among which substances, therefore they even look for it with the help of beer, sake and wine of various brands processing.
            (http://lenta.ru/news/2012/03/23/wine/)
            What theory can we talk about here?

            It is engineers who create and invent new things, and physicists only interfere and sometimes harm.
            Let us recall the history of aeronautics, when official science declared vehicles heavier than air impossible and prevented the development of aviation.
            1. Rumata
              Rumata 28 September 2012 17: 54 New
              0
              Quote: Andrey_K
              Centrifuges are not related to the nuclear weapons model - to build them you only need to know that 235 is less than 238.

              Why separate? And why exactly uranium? The engineer was given the task to divide by mass, he created a working centrifuge, and where does the rest?
              Quote: Andrey_K
              New drugs are generally sought through trial and error.

              Everything in modern science is a trial and error method, because everything rests on an experimental model, the problem --- the solution option --- the experiment --- the conclusion and in a circle
              Quote: Andrey_K
              Superconductors are also looking too much - they test all kinds of compounds for light conduction at different temperatures.

              Used by whom? An engineer cooks a house in a portable blast furnace or scientists make models of various compounds and scroll through their simulations, where they calculate everything with the help of QUANTUM physics.
              Quote: Andrey_K
              Science cannot even tell you what substances it is better to look for among which substances, therefore they even look for it with the help of beer, sake and wine of various brands processing.

              Bullshit, if this is not in Russia, or you have not met, does not mean that everyone works on guesswork. Now physicists and chemists are creating a model of the molecule. for example, an abum example, a nanotube with cesium inside, then run through simulations, takes more than one day, which, using derivatives of the same Schrödinger and others, give the result. Then THEORETICS think, Oh, but the overlap with the cesium orbitals is not very much, it will be much better to replace all this with another carbon. The engineer will not even understand what they are talking about.

              Quote: Andrey_K
              Let us recall the history of aeronautics, when official science declared vehicles heavier than air impossible and prevented the development of aviation.

              wassat
              1. Andrey_K
                Andrey_K 28 September 2012 18: 36 New
                +1
                Why separate? And why exactly uranium? The engineer was given the task to divide by mass, he created a working centrifuge, and where does the rest?

                Well, did we talk about centrifuges?
                Everything else was invented by ANOTHER engineer.
                where everything is calculated using, QUANTUM physics

                There is no smell of physics there. Quantum physics staked out discrete statistics (continuous did not give the correct results), but this does not mean that everyone who uses discrete statistics uses quantum physics.
                And here are the explanations why discrete statistics lead to the correct results, and continuous - no, this is the speculation of physicists.
                An engineer may or may not accept these speculations, but he uses what works, what has been discovered experimentally and verified by practice.
                Now physicists and chemists are creating a model of the molecule. for example, an abum example, a nanotube with cesium inside, then run through simulations, takes more than one day, which using derivatives of the same Schrödinger and others produce the result.

                No Schrödinger derivatives (actually the Schrödinger equation) are used here, the model of the molecule is created in something like AutoCAD - and this is all engineering work.
                KM has nothing to do with it.

                wassat

                Another reason to laugh: the collider and the search for the Higgs boson - their vaunted theory could not even predict the mass of a single unknown elementary particle and had to just stupidly sort through all the options, spending a lot of money.
                It is not surprising that they found something there - now they are thinking of how to fit this into theory.
                There you have it, theorists have again harnessed a bunch of engineers to find material for future prizes and awards for a fictional theory.
                1. Rumata
                  Rumata 28 September 2012 22: 22 New
                  +1
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  Well, did we talk about centrifuges?
                  Everything else was invented by ANOTHER engineer.

                  That is, the engineer did everything? Probably Oppenheimer, theoretical physicist, Curie, physicists. or were even Kurchatov engineers? The work of many scientific theorists led to the need for separation by mass, and here the engineers entered. The very process of gas diffusion or electromagnetic separation was invented by theorists, and engineers brought to life. It is so obvious that I don’t understand why this argument is needed.
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  No Schrödinger derivatives (actually the Schrödinger equation)

                  Derivatives of the Schrödinger equation, for example the use of tunneling between hydrogen and a molecule close to it with resonance, which will lead to conductivity, for example, a polymer.
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  An engineer may or may not accept these speculations, but he uses what works, what has been discovered experimentally and verified by practice.

                  Discovered experimentally and poking at guessing are two different things. Theoretical physicists did this, they created models that can work and were tested experimentally and in practice. Or do all of your engineers have excellent physicists, and without much research can determine what will work?
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  a molecule model is created in something like AutoCAD - and this is all engineering work.
                  KM has nothing to do with it.

                  Who creates the molecular model, engineers? You describe super engineers, they can not only find application for DNA-based conductors, for example, they still know that this will work, every engineer is aware of the resonance of nucleotides in DNA ..
                  And what you call "sort of auto cad" is based on KM and the very statistics. Ie KM determines the possible behavior, statistics calculates the most probable, after the simulation for 60-70 hours on a powerful computer, they get the result
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  under a fictional theory.

                  All theories are made-up (but not all made-up), no theory can be proved. Watson and Crick also came up with a DNA model, and then for a long time checked that it works, with the help of crystallography, which theorists also created, for many years, they succeeded. Plank probably, too, for so many years, was looking for confirmation of the theory to "harness the engineers and for the sake of premiums. "
                  There have always been engineers in one way or another, scientific theorists appeared a couple of hundred years ago, and this caused a scientific boom. Doctors treated patients with varying success for a long time until biochemists, microbiologists, and other THEORETICIANS appeared, who spurred the development of medicine to the heights that we see now.
                  I want to see an engineer who will create a cargo for me for an inhibitor that affects a certain gene in certain cells (cancer cells, for example), when laboratories from dozens of doctors of science have been working on this for years, until they find a solution.
                  S
                  Вот как пример http://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A8%D0%B5%D1%85%D1%82%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD,_%D0%94%

                  D0% B0% D0% BD
                  Dan Shechtman, chemist and physicist. Many years ago he created the theory of quasicrystals, for a very long time and contrary to all, he sought confirmation. found, received the Nobel Prize and now engineers are taking it into service, including for metallurgy, in which you say there is nothing new. He's probably an engineer too ...
                  1. Andrey_K
                    Andrey_K 29 September 2012 00: 58 New
                    0
                    Shehman, the only one of all the laureates to receive the prize deservedly - everyone else for all nonsense.
                    In general, I call engineers a more extended group of people.
                    I divide all people of intellectual work into engineers and philologists - an engineer, this is one who, having studied a subject thoroughly, is able to figure out how to use it for something useful.
                    A philologist is one who, having studied thoroughly some language (for example, the language of mathematics), is capable of producing any complex and confusing phrases in this language without violating the syntax of the language.
                    Therefore, anyone who comes up with how to apply knowledge to the benefit is an engineer.
                    And anyone who speaks with language and “explains” retroactively — why everything works for an engineer — is a philologist.
                    Most modern physicists and mathematicians are philologists, and engineers work in production and in laboratories and do something useful (including practical science, they move it).
                    1. Rumata
                      Rumata 29 September 2012 01: 19 New
                      0
                      Quote: Andrey_K
                      In general, I call engineers a more extended group of people.

                      Well then, our argument is meaningless, I just call the engineers those who received the appropriate engineering education. For example, chemists and chemical engineers study different things. For example, in Europe, they have only basic courses in common for the first year and a half, we can also say about biochemists who study biochemical processes in depth and chemistry that allows them to understand or biochemical engineers who are mainly engaged in the food industry, their theoretical base is lower, but applied at the level. In addition, among engineers, leaving for the academic steppe, PhD and post-doctoral is a rarity. You would call both of these specialties engineers. your right.
                2. Nick
                  Nick 29 September 2012 00: 48 New
                  0
                  Quote: Andrey_K
                  There you have it, theorists have again harnessed a bunch of engineers to find material for future prizes and awards for a fictional theory

                  Well, Andrei, you yourself pointed out the usefulness of theorists, their organizing and mobilizing role, so to speak ... If they had not "harnessed a bunch of engineers," the results might not have appeared.
  8. bask
    bask 28 September 2012 13: 03 New
    -2
    I think the Iranians will overcome technical difficulties and create nuclear weapons. And Russia needs help in this. They have given a nuclear, domba, the USA, Pakistan and Israel. And the IAEA is silent and does not check what.
  9. DEMENTIY
    DEMENTIY 28 September 2012 13: 11 New
    +3
    To the author plus huge.
    For a long time with such pleasure I did not read articles on similar topics. hi good
  10. Kapitanyuk
    Kapitanyuk 28 September 2012 13: 38 New
    +3
    I wouldn’t read an article about the nuclear industry in Russia - pride for the Motherland awakens right away! :)

    That would be with space exploration everything was just as chocolate ... :(
  11. v53993
    v53993 28 September 2012 18: 40 New
    +1
    It is more logical for Russia to provide ready-made nuclear weapons without technology transfer. The ammunition, respectively, is blocked for use in the Russian territory. The cries of the Judeo-State party to ignore. They will rattle and shut up faster than we can expect.
    At the same time, Iran will calm down in matters of creating its own enrichment technologies and will concentrate on energy issues.
    1. Volkhov
      Volkhov 28 September 2012 20: 13 New
      0
      Iran is a province of the Reich, it does not need “its” bombs, thousands of charges and carriers of their overlord stand behind it, because Iran is so flaunting politics. Providing a bomb to the Reich is like a Lada of Japan, except perhaps to a museum.
      In the center of the Earth there is a natural bomb, and the mechanism is running, and we need to prepare for this outbreak, and unload the bombs and reactors and pour DM into lead so that they do not overheat at the beginning of the process. Survival is less than 1 percent, so why kill the dead?
      1. v53993
        v53993 28 September 2012 21: 02 New
        +1
        The hint understood. Whatever the child was amusing, if only he would not cry. Well, you need to give your child a rattle toy.
  12. older
    older 28 September 2012 20: 39 New
    0
    Quote: Jura


    If you understood what it was and would not be because of these countries, then you would understand what it was and would be.

    It certainly is nothing, due to the fact that because, but, if such garbage happened, here you are, please
    And for the flood (-), the article is plus-informative and just interesting
    1. v53993
      v53993 28 September 2012 21: 07 New
      0
      Did you understand what you said (wrote)? It seems that you are afraid of yourself.
  13. Takashi
    Takashi 29 September 2012 07: 36 New
    0
    For example, I deduced the pattern:
    if the country possesses nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles, then it is not afraid of it: neither the Hague court, nor the UN, and all the rest are quietly silent (in a rag)
    if the country does not possess nuclear weapons, then democracy is intensely imposed on it (in various versions), its representatives (president, ....) can easily appear before all kinds of obscure international courts (anything can be sanctioned, including arrest)
    --------
    I also want my personal YAB. so that no one sucks.
  14. maxiv1979
    maxiv1979 29 September 2012 09: 29 New
    0
    Quote: Takashi
    For example, I deduced the pattern: if a country has nuclear weapons and delivery vehicles, then it is not afraid of it: neither the Hague court, nor the UN, and all the rest are quietly silent (in a rag), if the country does not have nuclear weapons, then democracy is being intensely imposed on it (in different versions) ), its representatives (president, ....) can easily be brought before all sorts of obscure international courts (anything can be sanctioned, including arrest) -------- I also want my personal YaB. so that no one sucks.


    I don’t need a bomb, I’ll just buy all sorts of deputies and all, why fight? puppets that rule puppets, the very cool) who will decide on the use of nuclear weapons? person) and if this is my person decides to use YOUR nuclear weapons? ...))

    by the way, deputies are freely sold and do not hide this, lobby, his mother))
  15. Afftar
    Afftar 29 September 2012 16: 16 New
    0
    Even multi-letter. I didn’t understand anything, but to the author +
  16. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 30 September 2012 16: 13 New
    0
    The article is good. As Pushkov (formerly of the State Duma Committee on Foreign Affairs) said earlier, the better you have anti-aircraft guns, the longer your democratization will be postponed (in my free statement).
  17. alexdol
    alexdol 30 September 2012 20: 11 New
    0
    Interesting article! If this is the case, as the author wrote, then Iran is very far from creating a bomb! Once again, all the FALSE of the Western world is manifested! What should we do: either help Iran, or take it under protection! This is primarily in our interests. The USA, NATO and Israel are our eternal enemies, but we must also look for allies! Today they must be sought in the EAST! But there was a time when RUSSIA supported the emerging United States.
    I will quote from the book of V.Istarkhov "Blow of the Russian Gods"
    “During the Revolutionary War, at the birth of the American state, Russia sided with the colonists, Russian Empress Catherine the Great rejected the request of the English King George 3 to send 20000 Cossacks to suppress the uprising in the colonies, which helped the colonists survive. For the first time, Russia showed its friendliness towards the USA and further began to help the US during the civil war. " p351
    "Alexander 2 gave the Russian Imperial Navy orders to go to the American ports of New York and San Francisco in support of Lincoln and his government. Russian ships arrived in the USA in September 1863. The Tsar ordered his admirals to be ready to fight ANY HOLD , taking orders from Lincoln. This played a key role in the victory of the North over the South "p. 357.
    Today we have the opportunity to see how the Yankees "thank" RUSSIA for its support at that time !!!
  18. APASUS
    APASUS 30 September 2012 22: 03 New
    -1
    Iran is a fairly closed state, and as regards the nuclear program, it is generally top secret. All calculations and assumptions of the Western media are fortune-telling! Or rather, the planned escalation of the situation! After all, it is necessary to warm up the voter before the war! Enough proven technology, one can recall the "countless deposits of nuclear and chemical weapons in Iraq." Then there is an incomprehensible lowing and justification of military commanders!

    A commission appointed by President George W. Bush, also known as the Silberman-Robb Commission, confirmed in its report the fallacy of US intelligence on weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, which the Bush administration used to justify a military operation in Iraq, RIA Novosti reported.

    “We came to the conclusion that the intelligence community turned out to be completely wrong in almost all of its pre-war conclusions about WMD in Iraq. It was a major intelligence failure,” the commission’s letter to George W. Bush, which accompanies the report, said.