Physicist Declassifies Rescued Nuclear Test Films (llnl.gov)

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Physicist Declassifies Rescued Nuclear Test Films (llnl.gov)

Posted by BeauHD on Thursday March 16, 2017 @10:00PM from the nick-of-time dept.

Eloking quotes a report from Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory: The U.S. conducted 210 atmospheric nuclear tests between 1945 and 1962, with multiple cameras capturing each event at around 2,400 frames per second. But in the decades since, around 10,000 of these films sat idle, scattered across the country in high-security vaults. Not only were they gathering dust, the film material itself was slowly decomposing, bringing the data they contained to the brink of being lost forever. For the past five years, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (LLNL) weapon physicist Greg Spriggs and a crack team of film experts, archivists and software developers have been on a mission to hunt down, scan, reanalyze and declassify these decomposing films. The goals are to preserve the films' content before it's lost forever, and provide better data to the post-testing-era scientists who use computer codes to help certify that the aging U.S. nuclear deterrent remains safe, secure and effective. To date, the team has located around 6,500 of the estimated 10,000 films created during atmospheric testing. Around 4,200 films have been scanned, 400 to 500 have been reanalyzed and around 750 have been declassified. An initial set of these declassified films -- tests conducted by LLNL -- were published today in an LLNL YouTube playlist.

62 comments

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

Cool! Pics of progtards on Nov 9, 2016 by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 22:24 · Score: -1

Never thought all those pics of progtard heads exploding on Nov 9, 2016 after HilLIARy! lost would ever see the light of day...
BWAAA HAA AHAAAA!!!!
What this needs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 22:33 · Score: 0

Is a musical montage.
The entire collection is gonna need a montage.
Montage!
1. Re:What this needs by Rei · 2017-03-16 22:59 · Score: 4, Insightful
  
  There's already one for previously-existing nuclear test footage.
  Nuclear weapons explosions always have that strange mix of terrifying and stunningly beautiful.
  
  --
  Aeris Died For Your Sins.
2. Re: What this needs by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 23:47 · Score: 0
  
  Done theatrically to great effect in the '60s:
  https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=s4VlruVG81w
3. Re:What this needs by gatkinso · 2017-03-16 23:53 · Score: 1
  
  And Shatner narrating.... wait a minute....
  
  --
  I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
Nothing to be too excited about by execthis · 2017-03-16 22:38 · Score: -1, Offtopic

I will just say this - the poison dispersed across Earth from all the testing done in the 50's and 60's - which persists to this day - and the detriment to living beings caused by it, is nothing to be excited about.
1. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 23:21 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, but this story is about nuclear test films, not DDT.
2. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 23:48 · Score: 0
  
  The 50 years of post WWII peace and stability in the world that these tests have blessed us with is well worth the 'poison' it generated, which has had minimal measurable impact on the world. In exchange, millions of lives have been saved that would have otherwise been lost in wars.
3. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:01 · Score: 0, Insightful
  
  Something very important is missed in the context however.
  Before nuclear bombs, did people die from cancer? Was there a lower incidence of cancer? No.
  With Chernobyl and Fukushima leaking and irradiating the environment, did they increase the incidents of cancer? Yes.
  The more dangerous thing was never the bombs, per se, but unfettered use of the bombs. The Nuclear reactors were always more dangerous, and much more attractive targets. So 1 nuclear bomb + 1 nuclear reactor = uncontrolled nuclear reaction with an unpredictable result.
  Which is to say, we can have the bombs, or the reactors. Not both. If the crazyballs idiots like Trump and Kim Jung Un decide to launch one, that is the end of civilization. Game over. As much as Putin is dangerous, he's not an unhinged crazyballs idiot like Trump.
4. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by drinkypoo · 2017-03-17 00:12 · Score: 0, Offtopic
  
  The 50 years of post WWII peace and stability in the world that these tests have blessed us with is well worth the 'poison' it generated, which has had minimal measurable impact on the world. In exchange, millions of lives have been saved that would have otherwise been lost in wars.
  The instability of both WWI and WWII was fostered and profited from by the global elite. During WWII American interests sold fuel, Aluminum (straight from Alcoa!) and other war supplies to the Nazis. The Bush family fortune is based upon a corporation that Prescott Bush operated whose purpose was to launder money and funnel it to Hitler's S.S. The corporation was shut down but Prescott was allowed to retain over one million dollars in ill-gotten goods, and the rest is history. We knew the holocaust was occurring but our precious leaders felt that our people had little stomach for another war so soon after WWI and actively profited from the state of affairs instead of intervening. The USA has been at war with someone (whether properly declared or not, we're talking deployments, boots on the ground, shots fired) ever since.
  TL;DR: There has been no era of peace and stability. There have only been proxy wars fought in other countries.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
5. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:13 · Score: 0
  
  The 50 years of post WWII peace and stability in the world that these tests have blessed us with is well worth the 'poison' it generated, which has had minimal measurable impact on the world. In exchange, millions of lives have been saved that would have otherwise been lost in wars.
  Arguing by counterfactuals is no arguing at all.
6. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:23 · Score: -1, Offtopic
  
  Actually it was the European peasants that started the world wars by supporting authoritarian and fascist governments. Everywhere in the world the peasants love authoritarian governments and the wars that go with them. It is most assuredly not the educated elites that start these wars.
7. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:40 · Score: 0
  
  Odd. I thought 2017-1945 was 72, not 50.
8. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Entrope · 2017-03-17 00:42 · Score: 1, Offtopic
  
  Thanks for the alternative-history fiction. Do you have anything to say about the real world?
9. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:51 · Score: 0
  
  The solution to pollution is dilution.
10. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 01:02 · Score: 0
  
  Oh you're so right those peasants SO should've seen it coming...
11. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 02:11 · Score: 0
  
  >There has been no era of peace and stability
  Well to be fair, this is pretty much human history. Peace has happened when groups were unaware of each other or too far away to be intertwined with. No reason to point fingers at the US exclusively. (though it is fashionable to).
12. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by drinkypoo · 2017-03-17 02:16 · Score: 0
  
  Thanks for the alternative-history fiction. Do you have anything to say about the real world?
  Point to the part you don't like and I'll provide a citation. But if you can't find it with google, perhaps Slashdot is not for you, because everything I said above is trivially supported with a search and absolutely none of it is far-out woo-woo conspiracy theorist schlock. You will find references in reputable publications with even the most trivial of invested effort.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
13. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by drinkypoo · 2017-03-17 02:45 · Score: 1
  
  No reason to point fingers at the US exclusively. (though it is fashionable to).
  That's not what that statement was doing. That statement only took issue with giving a technology credit for something it hadn't accomplished. I point fingers at the US because I live here, and thus I have ready access to information about what we've done. If I knew more than a couple of words of German,* maybe I'd be reading their websites and figuring out e.g. who owned the newspapers in Germany when Hitler rose to power, how they covered him and why, etc etc. What's interesting in the USA is questions like did we help fund/equip The Holocaust, did we know an attack was coming to Pearl Harbor, etc etc.
  * Translation tools are amazing but still frustrating
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
14. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Waffle+Iron · 2017-03-17 03:08 · Score: 1
  
  The 50 years of post WWII peace and stability in the world that these tests have blessed us with is well worth the 'poison' it generated, which has had minimal measurable impact on the world. In exchange, millions of lives have been saved that would have otherwise been lost in wars.
  Relying on nuclear weapons to suppress human conflict is like when the National Park Service meticulously suppressed every forest fire.
  Things went great for a while, until unburned fuel built up and got out of hand in a catastrophic conflagration that was far worse than what the sum of all the smaller fires would have been.
15. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Entrope · 2017-03-17 03:23 · Score: 2
  
  Which "American interests" sold those things to Nazis during WW2? Which corporation operated by Prescott Bush were you referring to? If they're not far-out woo-woo theories, why doesn't Bush's Wikipedia page say more about those things than noting that similar claims were debunked long ago?
16. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by dpidcoe · 2017-03-17 04:54 · Score: 1
  
  Wait... did you just put forward the case for having lots more world wars using conventional weapons? Because that's kind of the direction it looks like you're going there.
17. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 05:25 · Score: 0
  
  https://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar
  --I literally copied and pasted your second sentence from operated to bush into google and chose the second response.
18. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by asdfman2000 · 2017-03-17 05:51 · Score: 1
  
  Relying on nuclear weapons to suppress human conflict is like when the National Park Service meticulously suppressed every forest fire.
  
  Things went great for a while, until unburned fuel built up and got out of hand in a catastrophic conflagration that was far worse than what the sum of all the smaller fires would have been.
  Wait... did you just put forward the case for having lots more world wars using conventional weapons? Because that's kind of the direction it looks like you're going there.
  It's ok. Just like regular forest fires, regular world wars with conventional weapons will just clear out all the dead wood! How could we have missed this? Here we've had relative peace and prosperity for 70 years, but now that we know it's propped up with the human equivalent of dead leaves and brush, can we really continue?
  GPP's analogy was bad and he should feel bad.
19. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Waffle+Iron · 2017-03-17 06:06 · Score: 1
  
  No, I'm just pointing out what's probably going to end up happening to those who think that nuclear weapons are some kind of fix for human behavior.
20. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Waffle+Iron · 2017-03-17 06:28 · Score: 1
  
  but now that we know it's propped up with the human equivalent of dead leaves and brush, can we really continue?
  
  We may not continue that long if people like Donald Trump and Kim Jong Un stay true to their nature and start acting like kids playing with Zippo lighters.
  My analogy is spot on. 70 years of fortunate luck (despite multiple very close calls) proves nothing.
21. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 06:30 · Score: 0
  
  1. You single out the Bush family for dealing with Nazis, but carefully omit Joseph Kennedy's role in appeasement.
  2. Nuclear weapons kept those proxy wars and "police actions" from becoming full blown conflicts that engulf entire continents again, due to the unthinkable results of a conventional conflict turning to the use of strategic weapons.
22. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by asdfman2000 · 2017-03-17 09:07 · Score: 1
  
  My analogy is spot on.
  Either it was a bad analogy, or you are seriously saying we need to kill off tens to hundreds of millions of people every couple of decades.
  
  My bad for assuming you weren't a monster.
23. Re:Nothing to be too excited about by Waffle+Iron · 2017-03-17 09:29 · Score: 1
  
  That's not an option. Unlike the park service, we can't put the genie back in the bottle and go back to the old ways, because nukes are already spread all over the world and they're not going away.
  However, if there were no nukes, killing tens of millions every few decades would be preferable to introducing nukes and then eventually killing off most of the human race in a big holocaust every century or two., which is what's almost certainly going to eventually happen now.
24. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 10:34 · Score: 0
  
  Yes, but this story is about nuclear test films, not LSD.
  FTFY.
25. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by Entrope · 2017-03-17 23:58 · Score: 1
  
  Thyssen was not the SS. He grew disillusioned with the Nazis after the Night Of The Long Knives. (He should have seen them for what they were earlier, of course.). The Guardian story is long on innuendo, and utterly lacking in details beyond what is presented in a much more objective way in Prescott Bush's Wikipedia page.
26. Re: Nothing to be too excited about by drinkypoo · 2017-03-18 12:46 · Score: 1
  
  2. Nuclear weapons kept those proxy wars and "police actions" from becoming full blown conflicts that engulf entire continents again,
  That, sir, is a matter of opinion, and not a fact. International wars do not happen without the approval of the power elite — the robber barons of the military-industrial complex, the top echelons of international bankers, and the other usual culprits, because it's not possible to engage in such wars without their complicity. It is equally plausible that nuclear war is simply not in the best interests of these individuals any more than wars on their own soil, which is why we have proxy wars in third-world countries instead. Meanwhile, nothing absolutely precludes sufficient nutters getting their hands on enough equipment and information to actually launch one of these bad boys and kick off a nuclear holocaust that reduces humanity to a bunch of naked apes hiding in caves full of shit and eating mushrooms. Not that I have a plan for making all the nukes go away or anything, any more than I have one for making all the guns go away. That's why I have guns. It doesn't make me think they make the world a better place.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
The RUSSIANS did it! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 22:56 · Score: 0

Don't you fools realize these were all done by RUSSIANS!?!?!?!
The RUSSIANS have taken over!!!!
Nuke 'em by nastyphil · 2017-03-16 23:01 · Score: 1

https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nuk...

--
Dialectician. Archology.
Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-16 23:11 · Score: 0

It's pedantic but the physicist did not declassify them, he petitioned the DoD to declassify them and they did. It's a minor detail but the difference usually results in you moving to Russia to live in exile with your hot stripper^H^H^H^H^H dancer girlfriend. On second thought, maybe he shouldn't have contacted the DoD.
1. Re:Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by rfengr · 2017-03-16 23:59 · Score: 1
  
  Though to be even more pedantic, it was probably the DOE who declassified them.
2. Re:Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:06 · Score: 0
  
  It's pedantic but the physicist did not declassify them, he petitioned the DoD to declassify them and they did. It's a minor detail but the difference usually results in you moving to Russia to live in exile with your hot stripper^H^H^H^H^H dancer girlfriend. On second thought, maybe he shouldn't have contacted the DoD.
  You're right, but it's no victory at all. The really important test films were those done on live animals to see how "humans" would die in a nuclear blast (as if you fucking needed to know that). If people were shown those films, instead of a sanitised film showing only the explosion it would change people's perspective on these awful weapons.
3. Re:Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 01:14 · Score: 0
  
  it would change people's perspective on these awful weapons.
  You say that as if awful and weapons (in context of war) don't always go together. In war, there is not a non-awful weapon.
4. Re:Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 01:32 · Score: 1
  
  (OP) Almost all of the nuclear tests that involved delivery of a "payload" (i.e. not underground) were conducted by the Defense Nuclear Agency (under the Department of Defense). The Atomic Energy Commission technically owned the bomb cores but not the bombs proper which were still under the control of the military, along with the planes that delivered them (that got a little fuzzy after the "pits" could not longer be removed... I think that started with the Mk 6). Granted, several of prototype bombs were not weaponized (Ivy Mike had a small refrigeration plant attached to it) but they were still managed by the DoD. Here's a link to the DNA's Ivy brief (for Ivy Bell's, Ivy Mike, etc.).
  So we're probably both right. The tests were under the DoD/DNA and they definitely would have had to approve release but the DoE/AEC almost certainly had to sign off as well.
5. Re:Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassified by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 05:37 · Score: 0
  
  Ha ha, probably so. I noticed in the video that they did not have RD the classification sticker, which would strictly be a DOE thing.
These pictures... by MrKaos · 2017-03-16 23:23 · Score: 4, Funny

are da bomb!
Literally!

--
My ism, it's full of beliefs.
A crack team? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:12 · Score: 0

A meth team will get at least 30% more work done in the same amount of time.
Somebody set up us the bomb! by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:18 · Score: 0

Make your time
What's for breakfast? by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:33 · Score: 0

Cancer.
Yay by DanJ_UK · 2017-03-17 00:34 · Score: 1

Atom bomb baby baby, atom bomb...

--
- Dan
It was Kennedy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 00:46 · Score: -1

Ahh, the ole Bush helped the Nazis kill jews bit. There is a Jewish Holocaust museum in Florida, and the director knows that story well, BUT he has a bit of information you purposely left out to get the spin you wanted. Let me help clarify your outright deception...
Bush help Germany after WW1, it was a growing economy. Hitler seemed good for Germany UNTIL he tried to get them to start WW2, and he went downhill very quickly after. Once Bush learned how bad Hitler had turned he sold ALL of his German holdings. So while you imply Bush wanted to help Hitler kill Jews, you are lying and you know it. I know you can't help lying because you are a liberal.
Here is where the story gets better. Any guesses on who bought Bush's German holdings AFTER it became obvious how bad Hitler was?
Joe Kennedy
Yep, father of JFK got all his money from Nazis in WW2. JFK inherited his money from his father's Nazi money. The DNC never had a problem with this.
Drinkypoo literally just blamed Bush for the Nazis, which isn't proven by any historical record, while giving a pass to Kennedy who KNEW about what Hitler was doing when he economically supported him because it made him rich.
So we now have...
DNC supported slavery
DNC opposed women vote
DNC supported Nazis
DNC supported segregation
Noticing a pattern here yet?
1. Re:It was Kennedy by drinkypoo · 2017-03-17 02:35 · Score: 2, Interesting
  
  Ahh, the ole Bush helped the Nazis kill jews bit.
  Yes, that old bit, in which it is revealed that Prescott Bush could not possibly have not known what he was doing. In fact, a number of corporations willingly cooperated with the Nazis. Without their assistance, the axis could not have made war effectively. Naturally, every one of these corporations has tried to disclaim responsibility for what their German divisions were up to, but the ongoing relationships between such entities during the war make that difficult. The service contract for the concentration camp management machines was paid straight to IBM's American operations in Armonk, NY, for example.
  It is a fact (simple or not) that American interests willfully and thus traitorously aided the axis for profit. And it is a fact that Prescott Bush was among them.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
2. Re:It was Kennedy by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 02:36 · Score: 0
  
  Maybe, but the other side has plenty of problems too. Lets stop this "us against them" bullshit arguing and realize that both sides suck terribly in their own ways. Forget the parties and think for your self.
Why by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 01:21 · Score: 1

When some own them they are called deterrents when others seek then they are called weapons.
1. Re:Why by k6mfw · 2017-03-17 02:22 · Score: 1
  
  Same reason is when we want to find out activities of other countries we employ intelligence agents. When these other countries do the same to us, we accuse them of using spies.
  
  --
  mfwright@batnet.com
Bush Did Know by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 02:50 · Score: 0

Yes, Bush DID know. That was my point. When he did know he got out of his German holdings and sold them to Joe Kennedy.
So you are not even attempting to refute my points. Bush helped until Hitler went crazy, then Kennedy jumped on board making millions and millions. You go on a rant about Bush and $1million, and ignore the probably $100 million Kennedy made.
Your arguments are invalid because of this. Now you are willingly lying because I told you the truth and you repeated your lie. You are a horrible person that thinks if a Kennedy gets rich killing jews then it is ok, but if a Bush stops making money because jews are killed he is evil.
I really don't know how people like you live with yourself.
1. Re:Bush Did Know by drinkypoo · 2017-03-17 04:30 · Score: 1
  
  You go on a rant about Bush and $1million, and ignore the probably $100 million Kennedy made.
  If you want an agreement that the Kennedys were also assholes, you've got it. But if you want to imagine that the fact that I didn't mention your favorite bad guys invalidates what I've said, you're long on imagination but short on logic.
  
  --
  "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Let's punch a hole in the ozone layer! by elcor · 2017-03-17 03:56 · Score: 1

That's a lot of atmospheric testing. I wonder how much of that caused the destruction of the ozone layer.
'Answers were off by 30 percent' by Gravis+Zero · 2017-03-17 04:33 · Score: 1

Once Spriggs did complete the first scans and roll his sleeves up for the analysis, he discovered that much of the data published were wrong. All the films would need to be reanalyzed.
"When you go to validate your computer codes, you want to use the best data possible," Spriggs said. "We were finding that some of these answers were off by 20, maybe 30, percent. That's a big number for doing code validation. One of the payoffs of this project is that we're now getting very consistent answers. We've also discovered new things about these detonations that have never been seen before. New correlations are now being used by the nuclear forensics community, for example."
I'm pretty sure that's because the FBI pressured them to publish modified information. In recent years they wanted to cut about a third of one man's book on nuclear physics.

--
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
1. Re: 'Answers were off by 30 percent' by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 10:43 · Score: 0
  
  You really want the Muzzies to learn how to make the bomb?
2. Re:'Answers were off by 30 percent' by DerekLyons · 2017-03-17 15:19 · Score: 1
  
  In recent years they wanted to cut about a third of one man's book on nuclear physics.
  [[Citation Needed]]
I've watched a lot of nuke films... by eepok · 2017-03-17 04:38 · Score: 1

... but a lot of these seem different. I can't help but think that they were held back because of how terrifying the imagery is. Some in particular (https://goo.gl/PviFuq , https://goo.gl/cl1QlR) look like the bomb is creating a sun on Earth which then begins to destroy the Earth. If these videos were available in the 70's, 80's, or 90s, I think nuclear disarmament would have been a much more attainable goal because the severity of the risk would have been even more understood.
Clarification by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 06:36 · Score: 0

Lets summarize your comments...
If you stop helping Germany when they kill millions of Jews, you are evil incarnate.
If you start helping Germany after they start to kill millions of Jews, you aren't worth mentioning.
I see the issue now. You agreed with Hitler and hate anyone that stopped helping him when he began killing Jews. You probably think if Bush kept helping Hitler, that Hitler would have been able to finish the job and that is why he is so evil.
Just another liberal anti-Semite jew hating, minority suppressing, DNC voter. I remember back in the day when anti-Semite liberals tried to hide their views. I guess times have changed and it is now acceptable to applaud what Hitler did as long as you support the DNC. Just like threatening the president and first lady is also now acceptable if you support the DNC.
How things have changed.
1. Re: Clarification by coteriescavenger · 2017-03-17 21:01 · Score: 1
  
  I wish I could mod you up, but that feature is reserved for people who follow the status quo.
2. Re:Clarification by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 21:20 · Score: 0
  
  Lets summarize your comments...
  The only summary needed is that you like to put words into the mouths of other people that they never said, nor meant, and that you are utterly focused on deflecting any hint of wrongdoing away from people you like onto people you don't like, even if people on both "sides" did the actual wrongdoing.
  People with power are often despicable, regardless of what political affiliation they may have, R and D alike.
  I despise *all* people who do bad things. Side isn't a factor.
  And now you'll go back to your partisan ranting as if that will do you, or anyone else, any good, which it, of course, won't. But hey, what do you care, eh?
Re: Physicist Rescued, Dept of Defense Declassifie by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-17 16:01 · Score: 0

What about when the secret weapon is a great pair of tits? I'm sure a few soldiers have been taken down by some 36D's.
Nevada Buster Jangle film by Anonymous Coward · 2017-03-21 16:17 · Score: 0

My father flew in numerous atmospheric nuclear detonations in both the Pacific as well as Nevada. At one time we had his film that was taken but deteriorating of these tests. We transferred these color test observations to VHS and I assume would be still in reasonable viewing if needed for your retention. I could also provide a more historical narrative to his capacity in these tests as well.