The conventional bombs are the non-nuclear ones. They use a exotermic chemical reaction to obtain a sudden release of great amount of energy. In such weapons, nuclear fission and fussion are not significant source of energy, and radiocativity is not used as part of its offensive power.
Regards,
Mario/Brazil
About 20 kilotons of TNT. Assuming an average conventional bomb of the period weighed 200 pounds, one atomic bomb was equivalent to 200,000 conventional bombs.
the majority of homes and buildings in Japan at that time were constructed of wood and wood products. Incendiary bombs could do more damage than conventional H.E. bombs. The bombing campaign was an attempt to sway the Japanese population into demanding the emperor end the hostilities.
so called "dirty bombs" cannot be built and stockpiled like nuclear weapons can. they must be assembled shortly before use. a "dirty bomb" is simply a conventional bomb wrapped in radioactive waste, the detonation of the conventional bomb scatters the radioactive waste thus making it "dirty". the problem with making a "dirty bomb" is that radiation from the radioactive waste will almost certainly kill anyone involved in the assembly of the bomb. countries are very unlikely to seriously consider making such bombs, only terrorist groups are likely to attempt it.
the planes were the bombs and the terrorist wore fake bombs as a while on the plane
a stick of bombs
Yes, early bombs were conventional artillery shells, but by the end of the war customized bombs were in production.
Magnesium, white phosphorus, and jellied gasoline (napalm) are the typical fuels in conventional incendiary bombs. They are not used in conventional high explosive bombs or in nuclear bombs.
Conventional bombs - with chemical explosives.
About 20 kilotons of TNT. Assuming an average conventional bomb of the period weighed 200 pounds, one atomic bomb was equivalent to 200,000 conventional bombs.
conventional explosive and incendiary bombs. also poison gas bombs.
no, they were conventional terrorist bombs.
Conventional.
Several orders of magnitude more damage than conventional bombs, and that is only considering the blast and fire damage.
Because they are more destructive than conventional explosives.
You can't, it is always generated. However "clean" fusion bombs can be designed that reduce the fallout compared to a conventional fusion bomb of the same yield to about 5%. However the cost to build these "clean" bombs is significantly higher per megaton of yield than conventional fusion bombs.
Extremely. Hydrogen bombs are far more powerful than conventional atomic bombs. One could easily destroy an entire city.
I have no intention of dropping nuclear bombs on Iran. As far as national governments go, it seems that if there will be any military strike on Iran, it will be with conventional weapons.