Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted: The firebombings of Tokyo left it pretty much destroyed as I recall. We killed more in the Tokyo raid then either of the nuked cities.
|
All of the above.
We needed a undamaged city to show the power of the bomb.
|
Not just to show the power, but it was also important research...they wanted to see how far the damage extended, how much damage was produced.
The designs of the two bombs were different and I believe their burst types were different, again good R&D for the designers....
Afterall, there is only so much info you can glean from a burst over a desert....
|
Both weapons used the same altitude sensing features, a radio beam was projected downwards and when the Yagi antennas recieved a strong enough signal at approx. 2000 feet, the device detonated. Yagi antennas were invented by a Japanese scientist by the way, payback is a bitch!!!!
The Hiroshima bomb was a simple gun-weapon, utilizing U-235, and had a yield of 12 KT - 15 KT. It was not a very efficient weapon but it was very dirty, only about 3% of the U-235 was consumed in fission, the rest was fallout.
The Nagasaki bomb by contrast was a very complex implosion weapon utilizing Pu-239, it had a yield of approx. 20 KT - 22 KT. It was a much more efficient weapon, about 33% of the Pu-239 was consumed in fission.
BTW, the reason the Little Boy wasn't tested like the Fat Man in New Mexico was that the scientists were a 100% confident it would work, gun weapons are very reliable.