Talk:Davy Crockett (nuclear device)/Archive 1

Archive 1

Blast radius

what was the blast radius of the warhead? were the operators effectively commiting suicide by launching it only 1.25 miles away? this would be interesting information for interpreting cold war doctrines. Vroman 02:27 8 Jun 2003 (UTC)

A quick calculation with a nuclear effects calculator I have shows that at 1.25 miles the blast damage would range from "Minimum damage to glass panels" at 10 tons to "Lower limit for debris & missle damage" at 250 tons. Negligable thermal radiation damage over entire yield range. I'll have to use another calculator to check radiation damage levels, but I recall reading someplace that at the lowest yield (10 tons) and shortest range (1000 feet) the neutron version of the weapon would kill its launch crew by radiation damage. -- RTC 20:40 9 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Using the circular slide rule effects calculator from "The Effects of Nuclear Weapons", I calculate that even the 250 tons yield at 1.25 miles only gives an initial dose of just under 1 REM which is totally negligable for a single dose. The same calculation for 10 tons at about 1000 feet (so far off the scale of the calculator it is hard to get an estimate though) does indicate initial dose would exceed 1000 REMs and have less than 5% survival rate with prompt medical care.

BTW, this calculation is just based on blast yield, no neutron enhancement, and various other things I have read indicate that the Davy Crockett was a plain fission device, not enhanced in any way, unlike the current article which claims it was a neutron bomb.

-- RTC 21:21 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

As to your original question about blast radius, I can't calculate it exactly as it is off the scale of the circular slide rule. The lowest it goes is 0.03 miles (158.4 feet) for a yield of something like 400 tons. Extrapolating the scale for 250 tons, it comes close to 0.022 miles (116 feet). The minimum range the gun could fire was 1000 feet so at that range the fireball would still be almost 900 feet away. -- RTC 21:39 15 Jun 2003 (UTC)

Removed incorrect description of the warhead as neutron. -- RTC 01:18 28 Jun 2003 (UTC)

One of the smallest?

Is the Davy Crockett one of the smallest neuclear weapons or THE smallest neuclear weapon?

Please sign your contributions/questions with four ~~~~ characters.

The W54 warhead is the lightest US developed fission warhead ever produced in quantity, in terms of mass. There was one slightly smaller (roughly 10 inch instead of W54's 10.75 inch) test warhead fired, but it was not made into a production model, and it's not known if it was lighter or not.

It's possible to build physically smaller weapons, using linear implosion techniques. The various 155mm linear implosion atomic artillery shell models (such as the W-48) were produced in quantity and were 6 inches diameter and about 33 inches long, but that includes the nose fairing and base; the actual warhead is probably no larger than about 6x15 inches. Those artillery warheads are much heavier than the W-54; about 120 pounds instead of about 50.

There is a discussion in the Nuclear Weapon FAQ [1] about minimum diameter versus minimum weight versus minimum fissile material. The W54 is close to an optimal minimum weight design, we think.

Georgewilliamherbert 07:33, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Contradiction on blast radius?

Something's still not right with the blast radius. The article states that it would deliver a "probably fatal" dose of 600 rem at 400 m, yet at 1 km there would likely be "no ill effects". It might not be fatal, but I have a hard time believing the radiation would decrease so quickly as to have no effect (not counting long term things like cancer); unless of course it's not really that bad at 400 m. If it really does dissipate that rapidly, it should be stated as such because it sounds wrong. KarlM 23:57, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

See Nuclear Weapons FAQ: Effects of Nuclear Weapons Specifically sect 5.6.3.3 Prompt Radiation Emission From Nuclear Explosions.

For a 1 kiloton bomb (the W-54 for Davy Crockett is much less), the tenth-range of the prompt radiation exposure is 330 meters. 660 meters past the 600 REM point (i.e., total range of around 1,060 meters) the exposure would be expected to be around 6 REM, which is certainly not fatal. At 730 meters, you'd be down to 60 REM, which is injurious but not likely to kill you (other than via increased cancer risk).

There are two reasons for the rapid fall-off. The first is inverse square law... you get twice as far away, the radiation is spread out over four times the surface area. Secondly, in normal air, the air itself absorbs a lot of the gamma and neutron radiation and forms an effective shielding.

Distance and shielding are everything when it comes to prompt radiation exposure. A couple of feet can be the diference between life and death. See diagram at Louis Slotin. Give Peace A Chance 05:47, 30 May 2006 (UTC)

Dose

The dose the device produces is stated in REM, whereas this might be the most appropriate unit for ionising radiation at the time of manufacture, nowadays it's Sievert. I'm inclined to change this to Sievert, anyone disagree? Barryferguson6 08:27, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Numbers

As reported in Trinity and Beyond, there were 200 of these produced. Is this correct ? And next question, where did they all go ? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 60.242.170.179 (talk) 12:21, 13 January 2008 (UTC)

Use

Was this ever fired in battle?

No, there has never been a nuclear strike after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. --Kizor 09:58, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

"The (fictional) firing of a Davy Crockett appears in the 1965 film The War Game by Peter Watkins, where it is used against Soviet forces in and around West Berlin."

Having just watched the scene in question it is the larger Honest John missile. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.26.185.192 (talk) 19:03, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Nixed. - Eldereft ~(s)talk~ 20:12, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Possible ways to shield against radiation/blast or avoid it

you can mount the rocket on top of an armoured personell vehicle let's say a VAB You can have the crew wearing the highest level of haz-mat suits and be shielded inside the VAB It might work

another thing you can do is take the warhead and burry it a foot or two under a field that is about to be overuned by enemy troops you can attach a remote detonator to it when you see the enemy through you binoculars advancing you detonate it once a good ammount of troops is close enough Dudtz 7/25/05 4:26 EST

Well, yes, you could have them sit in lead boxes and it would probably help, but you'd suffer an opportunity cost of everybody going pretty slow about their day in the face of a threat uncertain to come. As for using nuclear weapons as landmines, I'm pretty sure the UK did design some of them. The problem with them is that it is generally considered bad form to detonate a nuclear weapon on your own soil, much less under or on the ground -- it would generate more than a little nuclear fallout which would blow over your own citizens, towns, and bases. Burying them in the soil of an enemy could work, if you could get over there, but would be a lot of hassle most likely. All together, though, one might question how useful tactical nuclear weapons could ever be, considering how quickly they would likely get to all-out strategic nuclear war. --Fastfission 01:32, 26 July 2005 (UTC)

I have no source handy to back this up, but I remember that along the Fulda Gap (that is, on West-German territory) several dozen key bridges, highways and such were "primed" with special, sealed cavities that were designed to hold these bombs (in a "landmine" function, not as artillery) for days on end in times of high alert. This actually happened several times in the mid-60s (I guess there were also plans to quickly get them there in case of surprise attacks, but I'm not sure about that). This was officially a NATO affair, but under US-Army control in prctice. When news of the plan and the past employment of the bombs filtered through to the German media in the 70s, the West-Germany govt. leaned on NATO to withdraw the plan. ~~üü —Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.211.212.200 (talk) 22:59, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Davy Crockett crews in Germany in early 60s (1962 on) had minimal protective equipment (poncho, shelter half & gas mask) -- they were advised to use a broom to brush the pixie dust off themselves & their vehicles. Strategy after DC use was to button up for a determined period (in the armored vehicles) & then go charging into the blast zone & shoot anyone (bad guys) staggering around, all the while churning up the pixie dust. Since Elvis left Germany in March 1960 he missed all the Davy Crockett stuff (DCs were issued in 1962). MacNamara plan was for 171 DCs to US Army Germany in 1962. FTA of course stood for Fun, Travel & Adventure. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.106.18.161 (talk) 12:13, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Discussion page info

It seems there's more info here in the talk page by far that could be verified and put to use in the article.. I just don't know where to start here. The article is a stub and we have a ton of info here. Cs302b (talk) 00:08, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Injury to operators

Not only does the source listed(3) for the 'A Common Myth' paragraph not say anything about it being a myth that harm would come to the operators, 2 out of the 3 sources listed contradict that statement and in fact suggest that the crew would be exposed to lethal amounts of radiation. I've been told by george that it exists and is widely sourceable when it doesn't exist - atleast 4 times - george, how about checking to see if it actually exist, or after I fact tagged it like you asked me to, actually check it.

I searched all over the 3rd cited source of which you said that myth is explained and it says absolutely nothing, so... what's the deal? Maybe you could paste it here and while your at it explain this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=khyZI3RK2lE

History channel doesn't know what they are talking about then either?

The rest I've taken from the second source, please read it this time.

^ Guntruck.com Davy Crockett page, accessed Oct 20, 2006 http://www.guntruck.com/DavyCrockett.html

Okay - so what does all that mean? With very small battlefield atomic weapons like Davy Crockett the flash effects upon detonation shrink to insignificance - with prompt radiation effects dominating the characteristics of the blast - Davy Crockett isn't a weapon deployed for a spectacularly big bang - which tended to negate its original purpose.

In a Davy Crockett fission explosion, the range for lethal exposure actually extends some distance beyond the blast injury range - which placed the operators in peril. At one setting above its minimum, a 20 ton TNT explosive blast yield for Davy Crockett results in the following types of damage:

The maximum range that exposed troops would experience 3rd degree flash burns from the Blast Center is 90 meters (297 feet) Examples of Significant Radiation Effects:

200 REM causes sterility, and increased cancer risk, temporary immune system suppression. In our example this dosage occurs at a little under 500 meters (1,650 feet) from ground zero.

600 REM is considered a fatal dose - 50% fatality rate. This dosage occurs just inside 400 meters (1,320 feet) from blast center. At the 20 ton TNT yield setting, this would become the minimum distance the operators would want to select for setting the Davy Crockett projectile to detonate.

1000 REM is 100% lethal - perhaps a soldier might make it back to a rear area or Stateside before death. 1000 REM will kill those solders such exposed within two weeks. Why did I say Stateside? This dosage occurs outside 300 meters from blast center - which is also the minimum detonation range (also meaning the shortest detonator timer setting option) of the Davy Crockett. However, the selection of the minimum detonation range when firing the Davy Crockett in this example would spell certain death for the weapon operators - even at this low setting. This is the edge of Davy Crockett's lethal zone. The weapon's operators could be evacuated and transported back Stateside for treatment, but ultimately would perish.

To protect the operators of the Davy Crockett Atomic Battle Group System, the explosive yield would have to be dialed down to shorten the lethal prompt ionizing radiation range enough for their safety. Naturally, doing that decreases the destructive potential of the weapon - defeating the purpose of deploying it in the first place.

Wasn't there a bit that used to be about "Injury to operators"? It should be re-added I think, I specifically came back to this article to research this Ryan4314 21:19, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

THERE WAS NO "DIAL-DOWN" FOR THE EXPLOSIVE YIELD!!!!! The only "dial" has to do with the height of burst . . . see, e.g., http://www.1-33rdar.org/M388.jpg —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 09:00, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

INJURY TO OPERATORS: Of course the Davy Crockett system was potentially dangerous to the health of the operators. Many Army jobs can be extremely hazardous to one's health, especially in time of conflict. Accomplishing the mission can obviously at times put one's health in jeopardy. Davy Crockett operators always wanted the wind to be blowing away from them if it became Davy Crockett time. In any case, the Army issued them brooms in order to brush off the worst of the radiation dust, if that should look like it needed to be done. There were no fancy All-Volunteer Army nuke suits available in the early 1960s (think Oct 1962 Cuban Crisis) . . . just the Field Uniform of the Day if the activity of the day was Fulda Gap camping. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 11:36, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

The Brookings reference describes the W-54 warhead variable yield (which may apply in various applications over time such as SADMs & nuclear land mines), HOWEVER, the Davy Crockett W-54 warhead yield WAS NOT VARIABLE

Here's from the Brookings source referenced in the Article: "The W54 warhead used on the Davy Crockett weighed just 51 pounds and was the smallest and lightest fission bomb (implosion type) ever deployed by the United States, with a variable explosive yield of 0.01 kilotons (equivalent to 10 tons of TNT, or two to four times as powerful as the ammonium nitrate bomb which destroyed the Alfred P. Murrah federal building in Oklahoma City on April 19, 1995), or 0.02 kilotons-1 kiloton. A 58.6 pound variant?the B54?was used in the Special Atomic Demolition Munition (SADM), a nuclear land mine deployed in Europe, South Korea, Guam, and the United States from 1964-1989." The warhead yield on the W-54 used by the Davy Crockett WAS NOT VARIABLE. The only warhead related variables associated with field issued Davy Crocketts were (1) the range (see reference to propellant bags) and (2) the height of burst. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 13:14, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

1965 East German Intel on number of Davy Crockett launchers in US Army Europe (US Seventh Army)

The East Germans knew that Crockett launchers were assigned to U.S. Army maneuver battalions (artillery bns are not maneuver bns). Somehow they came up with the number of 183 as the total number of Crockett launchers in USAREUR (Not USAEUR as some spell it -- tis an acroynm for and as indicated US ARmy EURope). They broke down the subtotal between V Corps (72) & VII Corps (102) . . . but 174 isn't 183 & they showed no other distribution. Even the Corps subtotals have holes in them: V Corps only lists a 2 division total of 63, which is listed as 33 in the 3rd Armored Div & 30 in the 8th Inf Div . . . so, no explanation for the other 9 assigned to V Corps to achieve the 72 total. VII Corps shows 33 D/C launchers in the 4th Armored Div & 30 each in the two infantry Divs, the 3rd & the 24th . . . & that adds up to 93, which is 9 less than the 102. . . . The East Germans must have decided that the Border Cav(s) for both V Corps & VII Corps had 9 Crockett launchers each. . . . and then there's another 9 Crockett differential between the 174 number & the 183 number -- that might reflect the fact that a third Armored Cav Regiment was brought to USAREUR in 1961 as part of the buildup which was influenced in part by the Berlin Crisis (i.e., the issues with the newly built Berlin Wall & the associated controversy). That third Cav regiment was stationed far behind the Border. The East Germans had one set of reality on the number of D/C launchers; then there's the actual reality. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 15:02, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

3d Armored Division units identified as equipped with the Davy Crockett in the early to mid-1960s

One or more Crockett launchers identified as assigned to the following 3d Armored Div maneuver battalions with Fulda Gap mission in Germany:

Buedingen -- 3rd of the 12th Cav (Div Cav)

Kirch Goens

2-36th Inf

3-36th Inf

Friedberg

1-36th Inf

Gelnhausen

1-33d Armor

1-48th Inf

2-48th Inf — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Date that the Davy Crockett in USAREUR was withdrawn from West Germany

Source: "History of the Custody and Deployment of Nuclear Weapons(U): July 1945 through September 1977" "Prepared by Office of the Assistant to the Secretary of Defense (Atomic Energy) February 1978" From Page B-7: Davy Crocketts withdrawn from West Germany: "Aug 67" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 12:48, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

From Department of the Army Field Manual (FM) 23-20: Davy Crockett Weapons System--1964

From Department of the Army Field Manual (FM) 23-20: Davy Crockett Weapons System--1964

Note: 5. f below states that “Davy Crockett fires will be coordinated with other fire support elements through the battalion fire support coordinator (FSCOORD).” In the 3rd Armored Division maneuver battalions in the Fulda Gap those “other fire support elements” included V Corps nuclear artillery (tube and missile).

The following is from Chapter 1 – Introduction, beginning on page 3.

“Section I. GENERAL

“1. Purpose and Scope

“ a. This manual furnishes guidance for commanders in the training and employment of the Davy Crockett section. The basic material applies to nuclear warfare. Where appropriate, modifying guidance for nonactive nuclear and nonnuclear warfare is included.

“ (1) This manual is concerned primarily with system tactics, tactical usage (including procedures required to place the system, less ammunition items, into operation), and command and fire control procedures. Certain other material is included for clarity and better understanding.

" (2) TM 9-1000-209-12 and CRD TM 9-1100-209-14 are primarily concerned with detailed procedures for preparation of system ammunition items for firing, operator maintenance of all system equipment, descriptive material of individual items which make up the system, necessary technical details of functioning of the systems, and administrative instructions concerning storage, transportation, and emergency destruction. . . .

“2. Description

“ a. The Davy Crockett weapons system consists of an XM388 nuclear projectile (fig. 1) and two weapons, the M28 light weapon (fig. 2) and the M29 heavy weapon (fig. 3). Both weapons function in the same manner, use the same fire control equipment, and fire the same supercaliber ammunition. The principal differences between the two are the size, weight, and range. Fire adjustment is accomplished with an attached 20-mm spotting gun for the light weapon or with an attached 37-mm spotting gun for the heavy weapon.

“ b. The light and heavy weapons are open breech, recoilless, smooth bore, low-angle fire, muzzle-loaded weapons.

“ c. The light weapon consists of a 120-mm recoilless gun with an attached 20-mm spotting gun. It can be mounted on a tripod for ground use or by an installation kit on a 1/4-ton truck (fig. 4). The light weapon is normally employed from the 1/4-ton carrier. A fixed propellant and a launching piston, designed for use in this weapon only, are used to propel the supercaliber projectile to the target. The light weapon has the capability of engaging targets at ranges up to 2,000 meters.

“ d. The heavy weapon consists of a 155-mm recoilless gun with an attached 37-mm spotting gun. In armor and mechanized units it is stowed in the M113 (fig. 5) armored personnel carrier (APC). When transported in this manner, it can be fired from the ground mount (tripod) only. In infantry and airborne units the weapon is mounted by means of an installation kit on a 1/4-ton truck (fig. 6) and can be fired from the 1/4-ton truck or from the ground mount. Normally the weapon is employed from the 1/4-ton carrier. A launching piston and one of two fixed propellants, all designed specifically for this weapon, are used to propel the supercaliber projectile to the target. A zone I propellant is normally used for ranges up to 1,900 meters and a zone II propellant from 1,700 to 4,000 meters.

“Section II. Employment

“3. General

“ The material contained in this manual deals with employment in general. For further employment guidance, refer to FM’s (sic) 7-20, FM 17-1, and FM 17-15.

“4. Capabilities and Limitations

“ a. Capabilities.

“ (1) The section is capable of providing direct or indirect organic nuclear fire support for the battalion.

“ (2) The Davy Crockett section will normally be employed in general support, and the battalion commander will retain authority to direct its firing. Elements of the section will not be attached to companies. The section or its individual squads may be employed in a restricted form of direct support. When so employed, the squad(s) fires only on approval of the battalion commander, and it is neither authorized nor required to answer directly the supported unit’s request for fire as is the case with other weapons assigned a direct support mission. However, when in direct support of a company, the Davy Crockett squad(s) will displace so it is in the best position to meet the needs of the supported unit.

“ (3) The section is completely mobile and it is provided with a flexible communication system.

“ (4) The maximum range of the light weapon is 2,000 meters, while that of the heavy weapon is 4,000 meters. These ranges are reliable for the temperate zone.

“ (5) For classified effects, see FM 101-31.

“ b. Limitations.

“ (1) Position disclosing feature of the backblast, projectile, and launching piston requires frequent displacement.

“ (2) Security and safety requirements for ammunition handling.

“ (3) Necessity of obtaining mask and backblast clearance.

“ (4) Limited crew portability.

“ (5) Coordination, control, safety criteria, and warning necessary for nuclear fires.

“ (6) Ammunition allocation and resupply.

“5. Fundamentals of Employment

“ a. Davy Crockett supplements the fire support available to the battalion commander.

“ b. In order to take maximum advantage of its range, Davy Crockett weapons must be employed well forward.

“ c. Davy Crockett fires should be observed fires.

“ d. During active nuclear wartime conditions, the allocation of Davy Crockett nuclear ammunition with authority to expend will be retained by the battalion commander.

“ e. Davy Crockett weapons are normally fired using indirect fire techniques similar to those used with mortars.

“ f. Davy Crockett fires will be coordinated with other fire support elements through the battalion fire support coordinator (FSCOORD).

“ g. A decision to use Davy Crockett is based on normal considerations of target acquisition and selection such as size and type of target, allocation of ammunition, desired effects, responsiveness to request, ranges of weapons involved, proximity of friendly forces, and availability of other weapons.

“ h. Fire planning is continuous.

“ i. Fire mission authentication systems, commander’s safety criteria, and warning systems will be established by the commander concerned.

“ j. Davy Crockett units must be placed with or near friendly units for security.

“6. Targets and Types of Fire

“ a. Targets.

“ (1) There are no specific rules for selection of Davy Crockett targets. Targets are considered in their relationship to the commander’s plan, other available fire support means, size and type of target, range to target, desired effects, and allocation of ammunition. Generally, targets which are vulnerable to the effects of the weapon and whose destruction or neutralization are critical to the commander’s plan are selected.

“ (2) Type targets include—

“ (a) Massed personnel of platoon or larger size.

“ (b) Mortar, artillery, and missile launching positions.

“ (c) Groups of vehicles

“ (d) Command posts or logistical installations of battalion or larger size units.

“ (e) Fortified positions.

“ b. Types of Fire. Davy Crockett squads are prepared to deliver destruction and neutralization fires.

“7. Reconnaissance, Selection, and Occupation of Firing Positions

“ a. The primary consideration in selection of firing positions is the capability of delivering accurate and timely fire for the supported unit.

“ b. Position disclosing features of the backblast and enemy counterfire capability in locating the weapon by the distinctive trajectories of its launching piston and supercaliber projectile will necessitate frequent shifting of position. In addition to the primary position, alternate and supplementary positions must habitually be reconnoitered and selected. If time pemits, these positions, and routes between them, will be prepared.

“ c. Desirable features of a good position include—

“ (1) Mask and backblast clearance.

“ (2) Defilade for weapon and crew.

“ (3) Concealment from ground and air observation.

“ (4) Concealed routes to rear and flanks for rapid shifting of position.

“ (5) Free of materials contributing to the backblast cloud.

“ (6) Near friendly units for security.

“ (7) Hard stand nearby for vehicles. The heavy squad APC is placed on the flank of the weapon to be used as a position for the crew during firing of the supercaliber projectile and to furnish protection from artillery and mortar fires.

“ (8) A piston impact area clear of friendly troops.

“ d. Squad leaders must be prepared to recommend position areas from which they can provide the desired fire support. Continuous reconnaissance is necessary to locate good positions. Squad leaders pick the exact location of the weapon within the area designated by the mortar/Davy Crockett platoon leader or the supported unit commander.

“ e. Since Davy Crockett sites will be prime targets for enemy weapons, special precautions are required. Positions may be occupied only long enough to adjust on targets. The weapon and crew then move to a covered and concealed are until a fire mission is requested. In open terrain, the primary position may be selected but not immediately occupied if enemy air is active. Firing data is prepared as completely as possible prior to adjustment. The squads do not occupy positions close together. This dispersion insures that one concentration of enemy fires does not destroy more than one squad.

“ f. In areas where terrain restricts movement and the weapon must remain in one position for an extended period, it may be necessary to construct a protective wall on each side of the weapon and dig emplacements for the ammunition and crew. An alternate solution is to dig emplacements for the disassembled weapon and its ammunition near the foxholes of the crew members.” — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.218.248 (talk) 12:50, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

M29 only . . . Zero focus on M28

See near the bottom of the page: http://www.1-33rdar.org/jchorazy12.htm —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.247.204 (talk) 09:40, 14 June 2010 (UTC)

Here's a graphic of an M29 in the Fulda Gap: http://www.1-33rdar.org/DCsInUSAREUR.JPG . . . Note: the nuclear warhead convoys would likely head toward the GDP field positions (where the Davy Crockett launchers were set up and waiting) at some point between the USAREUR equivalent of DEFCON 3 and DEFCON 2. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.242.69 (talk) 15:46, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Mk-54 vs W-54

Just reverted a minor edit by [User:144.136.188.172] which changed Mk-54 back to W-54.

According to all my sources, while the general family of weapons is the W-54 (sometimes W54, usually with the dash) as the general design, per normal US nuclear weapons naming system, the two Army variants used in the SADM and Davy Crockett were both Mk-54 names.

The two Mk-54s were W-54 family weapons, yes. But they were distinct; the W-54 in the Falcon missile had a fixed 250 T yield; the Mk-54 in the Davey Crockett was either variable 10 or 20 T yield, or two minor variants of 10 and 20 T yield (sources are slightly contradictory); and the Mk-54 in the SADM was variable 10 T to 1 kT.

Calling the Davy Crockett warhead a W-54 is accurate but not precise. The Mk-54 versions (either two or three) were variants or members of the W-54 family. But they were distinct different models.

Georgewilliamherbert 08:44, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

There is no mention of a "Dial-a-Yield" for the Davy Crockett in either edition of FM 23-20 (December 1961; January 1964). The Hi/Low Switch on the warhead is explained as a Height of Burst switch. At some point the Davy Crockett was considered a transitional weapon. Shortly after visiting a Davy Crockett display on his June 25, 1963 stop at Fliegerhorst Kaserne, Hanau, Germany, President Kennedy told SECDEF McNamara to expedite the phase-out of the Davy Crockett. Although by 1965 the 155 mm nuclear artillery shell was in production, the Davy Crocketts remained with U.S. Army, Europe in Germany until August, 1967. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.146.201.152 (talk) 08:13, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

From FM 23-20, Chapter 2, Section II “M29 (Heavy Weapon)”

From FM 23-20, Chapter 2, Section II “M29 (Heavy Weapon)”

“The M29 heavy weapon system (fig. 3) consists of: 155-mm recoilless gun M64E2, 37-mm spotting gun XM77E1, 155-mm gun tripod mount M121, and sight unit.”

“M64E2 Recoilless Gun: The M64E2 recoilless gun (fig. 12) is similar in shape and characteristics to the 120-mm recoilless gun M63 (which is part of the M28 Light Weapon). Carrying handles and trunnions are semipermanent attachments to the gun. The gun is made of high strength steel and consists of two major items, the barrel and the chamber and nozzle (breech). The two components are threaded and assembled by the manufacturer.”

“[M121] Recoilless Gun Tripod Mount: General. The M121 tripod mount consists of a tripod assembly (lower portion) and a carriage assembly (upper portion).”

“Technical Data for M29 (Heavy Weapon) [includes]: Overall weight of the heavy weapon to include gun, spotting gun, tripod mount, sight unit, and telescope mount holder: 377 pounds. Range: (1) Maximum 4,000 meters (temperate zone only). (2) With propellant M76, M94, (zone I), 540-1,900 meters. (3) With propellant M77, (zone II), 1,700-4,000 meters (temperate zone only).”

From Section III “Ammunition”:

”The Davy Crockett weapons system utilizes the 279-mm nuclear projectile XM388 . . . [T]he heavy system (M29) employs the M2 launching piston to propel the 279-mm projectile. To launch the piston and projectile, the heavy system uses three fixed propellant charges, M76 and M94 (zone I), and M77 (zone II).”

“279-MM Nuclear Projectile XM388: This projectile (fig. 1) is a fin-stabilized, low-drag projectile with a nuclear warhead, and it is designed for use with either system (i.e., the M28 light weapon and the M29 heavy weapon). It has a front case section and a rear body section.” [Note: In addition to the two dimple motor points, the side of the projectile also has the Hi/Lo Switch & the ARM/SAFE Switch. The Timer Setting Dial is located at the rear end of the rear body section. The Hi/Lo Switch determines the Height of Burst.]

“Launching Pistons M2, M5, and M5E1: The M2 launching piston (fig. 19) is used with the heavy weapon system [M29]. The M5 and M5E1 launching pistons are used with the [M28] light weapon system. The components of the M2 launching piston [for the heavy weapon M29] are the same as those for the M5 and M5E1 pistons (for the light weapon M28) except for size and weight. The launching piston consists of the adapter which allows for the attachment of the supercaliber projectile [M388], the main cylinder, and the cap end. Within the cap end is a strainer which allows expanding gases to enter the launching piston, but prevents pieces of burning propellant from damaging the supercaliber projectile [M388]. Near the cap end are three obturator rings which prevent gas blow-by in the gun tube at the time of firing.”

“Functioning of Ammunition Components: To launch the supercaliber projectile, the ring marked ‘Pull to fire,’ (located in the firing mechanism) is pulled. This releases the stab firing pin in the fuze lighter and activates the detonator which ignites the low energy detonating cord. The cord ignites the propelling charge. The burning gases of the charge expand within the chamber and cause an extremely high pressure. These gases exert equal pressure in all directions within the chamber. The pressure, which causes a conventional weapon to recoil, escapes to the rear through the open nozzle, thus making the weapon recoilless. The pressure against the cap end of the piston forces the piston (to which the supercaliber projectile is attached) from the barrel. At the same time, some gases pass into the piston through the strainer in the cap end. These gases build up to a pressure of 800 pounds per square inch. This pressure is exerted on the base of the projectile and causes the projectile to separate from the launching piston by breaking the two shear pins (in the well of the projectile base) which attach the projectile to the launching piston. This occurs 10 to 13 feet from the muzzle of the heavy weapon and four to five feet from the muzzle of the light weapon.”

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Davy Crockett (nuclear device). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080709011829/http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/davyc.aspx to http://www.brookings.edu/projects/archive/nucweapons/davyc.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:00, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Selectable yield statement seems wrong

It says: "selectable yield of 10 or 20 tons". This conflicts with the W54 article that says "selectable yield of between 10 and 250 tons" Joema 06:28, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

User:Georgewilliamherbert just changed that recently, so you might want to ask him. -User:Lommer | ^talk 06:36, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

The Mk-54 used in the Davey Crockett was slightly different than the W54. They're both the same basic design, but the yields on the Mk-54 were 10 or 20 tons. The Mk-54 in the SADM had variable yield from 10 t to 1 kt. The W-54 warhead in the AIM-26A Falcon missile was fixed at 250 t yield. The Wiki entries for these models are all slightly off and I haven't finished fixing them, but eventually will get them right. The basic W-54 design was test fired at yields from 10 tons all the way up to 6 kt (development testing only); the hard part was getting the yield consistent at the low end, and ensuring single point safety. See for example List of all US Nuclear Weapons from the Nuclear Weapons FAQ, or Chuck Hansen's materials. Georgewilliamherbert 08:43, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the response and for being so thorough. Your attention to detail is appreciated. Joema 13:01, 2 January 2006 (UTC)

The Davy Crocketts did not have a "DIAL-A-YIELD" switch (No mention of such a switch in either the December 1961 or January 1964 editions of the Davy Crockett FM 23-30). The Hi/Low switch on the warhead was a height of burst selection switch . . . see, e.g., http://www.1-33rdar.org/M388.jpg

No. No 54 system ever had adjustable yield. There were no user adjustable parts in any variants. There were different yields, but that wasn't adjustable. Mk.54 0/1/2/3 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1004:B10C:E84:7D1B:85E2:2A70:C389 (talk) 07:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

"close to the minimum"

" close to the minimum practical size and yield for a fission warhead"

This is probably not unreasonable, as it is the de facto minimum so far realised, but it still needs attribution, and a qualification based on estimates on the actual minimum possible.

• the minimum size is easier to estimate, and depends on the material;
• much smaller sizes would be possible with Californium or what not, but this is in no way "practical". Plutonium may have a critical mass as low as 7kg, but this is also not practical[2]
• using Uranium, the minimum unreflected critical mass seems to be close to 16 kg, which would substantiate the claim of 23kg being close to the minimum;
• however, there seem to be various approachse to reflected fission with much smaller critical masses, possibly as small as 6kg(?) for U-233[3]; in this case, 23kg would be still be several times as much as the theoretical minimum
• According to nuclearweaponarchive.org, Little Boy used 80% enriched Uranium "with a corresponding WC reflected critical mass of 26.5 kg". It is possible that the "practical minimum" refers to practically feasible ratios of enrichment, pushed down from 26.5 to 23 kg, but this would need specific attribution, based on actual data.
• I do not think there is any minimum yield at all; if you use 1.0 critical masses, the yield will be zero, and you can dial to any desired yield by using sligthly-above critical mass. Nwfaq 4.1 is interested in maximum yield, but it cites a low yield of "80 kg" (i.e. 0.00008 kt) for 1.05 critical masses of 80% enriched Uranium. You can probably make your yield as small as you like, the only obstacle will be cost (23 kg of enriched Uranium is insanely expensive and you aren't going to use it for the yield of 80 kg of TNT)

Our main problem here is that the critical mass page is very poorly referenced, mostly based on dead links or random websites. The data at nuclearweaponarchive.org was apparently compiled in 1999, clearly by very knowledgeable people, but it doesn't cite its sources so while "trustworthy" for bootstrapping literature research it isn't really quotable on its own. --dab (𒁳) 11:29, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Davy Crockett (nuclear device). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20061027175600/http://www.guntruck.com/DavyCrockett.html to http://www.guntruck.com/DavyCrockett.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:18, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Popular Culture

I've taken the liberty of removing the Popular Culture section. It is too short to warrant its inclusion. Besides, not every Wikipedia article needs a Popular Culture section. I will reprint the deleted portion here for anyone who wishes to add the information without creating a new section:

• In the video game Metal Gear Solid 3: Snake Eater, Yevgeny Volgin fires a Davy Crockett.
• In the video game Metal Gear Solid: Portable Ops, Lt. Cunningham threatens to fire a Soviet-made version of the Davy Crockett.

Thank you. JDCAce (talk) 19:05, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

• In the video game Fallout 3. The player has access to the Fatman launcher, which appears similar to the Davy Crockett. 24.96.44.208 (talk) 19:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC)

  Also in Fallout: New Vegas and Fallout 4. --User123o987name (talk) 17:15, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

U-233

Article currently reads in part The theoretical minimum critical mass for 233U is close to 16 kg. Neither of the sources given support the idea that Uranium-233 was used in this weapon, and I am skeptical. But it's very interesting if true. Andrewa (talk) 20:57, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

False information added

I went to check the sources in the "Concerns and potential problems" section to find that "Project Management of the Davy Crockett Weapons System" did not support any of the claims made. I would like to encourage others to check the rest of the article for any other fabrications that might have found their way into the article.Kylesenior (talk) 10:12, 23 May 2021 (UTC)

1957 date, "bad design" and "inaccurate"

The AEC/DoE document describing the history of the Mk54 warhead notes that the warhead program began from the Mk51 program, and the Mk51 history document states that the program began in 1958, not 1957 as described by Army Historical Foundation. What it does say is that in 1957 a study was conducted that suggested a weapon like Davy Crockett be developed. It further goes on that say in 1958 that there was no warhead that current existed that fit the role but that it was now technically feasible to develop one.

Obviously this contradicts the timeline given by the Army Historical Foundation whose page on the weapon does not include citations.

Similarly is the continuous claims that the weapon was unaerodynamic and badly designed. However, Brigadier General Alvin Cowan, Assistant Division Commander of 3rd Armored Division in 1969 commended the technical design of the weapon. You should note this was after the weapon was retired and he had no stake in it. He also explains it was retired due to cost and strategic risk reasons. Reading between the lines the cost issue sounds like the security requirements for the weapon were very high given he mentions the weapon was not deployed with troops after 1961. Such a forward deployed weapon likely needed a lot of security troops which would have undermined its mobility and usefulness.

Speaking purely from my own engineering experience, the warhead shape is not unaerodynamic for a subsonic projectile. At subsonic speeds most drag comes from turbulence which in most projectiles comes from the flat base of the projectile. The Mk54 and Mk51 history documents actually discusses the warhead shape and its aerodynamics. Obviously my own personal experience is not applicable to citations, but I am throwing it out there.

There's also no evidence the weapon was inaccurate. Besides Gen Cowan praising the weapon's technical design, Project Management of the Davy Crockett Weapons System specifies a CEP of 50 yards on page 24.Kylesenior (talk) 06:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 25 January 2021 and 7 May 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tjsport19, Dylanmellgren.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:06, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Please

Add it to THE list. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.254.241.25 (talk) 16:13, 29 January 2022 (UTC)

Davy Crockett state of the art

Because some people are apparently fools, here is the exact quote praising the weapon's technical design:

I think I can answer. Davy Crockett was brought into the inventory and was actually used the last time, I guess, in the Berlin crisis of 1961. The problems with Davy Crockett were twofold: (1) Since it was essentially а platoon weapon, command and control was а problem, and there apparently was great fear that some sergeant would start а nuclear war; (2) the resources that the Army had to provide to actually keep Davy Crockett in the field were а higher price than the net worth of the weapon at that particular time. In fairness to this weapon, it did represent а significant advance in the technical state of the art, both from the design and the production viewpoint, and I think the laboratory responsible for the design and production deserves а great deal of credit. It is unfortunate that we were not able to fit it into our command and control and manpower system more effectively. I think it was а little bit ahead of its time.

— Gen. Cowan, Proceedings of the Tactical Nuclear Weapons Symposium, page 173

Emphasis mine. Kylesenior (talk) 04:48, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

As a former gun crew member with 3rd Armored Division, I would point out that the warhead had a "fail-safe" mechanism. - a 7 digit combination lock, middle digit "0" over the arming mechanism. We were split into 2 teams, and each team having access to only half the combination. The combination would only be available once the president released the weapons and we would receive a message to decode for the combination. We only had one warhead and it was stored in separate ammo dump from non-nuclear munitions. Additionally, attempting to remove the combination lock by force would have seriously damaged the fiberglass outer shell of the warhead. We were told that the reason the weapon was being phased out was because of disarmament talks. As for accuracy, we were always able to get direct hits on the target during annual test firings. Besides, as we used to say, "almost only counts in horseshoes, hand grenades and atom bombs." 2600:1702:4A40:870:97:7CB:F347:D05E (talk) 18:26, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

"Davy Crockett (nuclear device" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Davy Crockett (nuclear device has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 April 9 § Davy Crockett (nuclear device until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:47, 9 April 2024 (UTC)