Which nuclear device considered the use of a living component?
As before I'll provide the answer in a week if no one gets it.
Ok how about the Reactor Gnomes that were supposed to be installed to keep the operators on their toes? You know the ones that you can count on to run their own set of drills during ORSE drills. Oh wait, they did actually install those. Well there went my guess.
No, lawn gnomes won't cut it, there was a living breathing animal that was considered as a component of a nuclear device.
In the Navy I guess NR could have been considered Nuclear gnomes keeping us on our toes but they were not an integral part of the device.
Ok, how about installing one of those really, really, REALLY hard shelled beetles over the trigger device of a nuclear bomb to prevent inadvertant triggering of the bomb?
Quote from: Preciousblue1965 on Feb 04, 2009, 03:29
Ok, how about installing one of those really, really, REALLY hard shelled beetles over the trigger device of a nuclear bomb to prevent inadvertant triggering of the bomb?
This is a historical fact not speculation. Beatles?!?! ::)
The original method for SCRAM, guy with sharp axe?
You guys mean the gremlins that inhabit any plant?
But how about the canary, as in "canary in a coal mine."
Quote from: 93-383 on Feb 04, 2009, 05:17
The original method for SCRAM, guy with sharp axe?
Not what I was looking for but you certainly could make a case for it as a correct answer.
Quote from: NukeLDO on Feb 04, 2009, 06:29
You guys mean the gremlins that inhabit any plant?
But how about the canary, as in "canary in a coal mine."
The canary is a warning device, the animal in this device (also a bird) was intended to ensure it worked properly.
Didn't they have experiments with pigeons in early guided missiles in an onboard guidance system to peck an internal screen of some sort, and thereby guide the missile to its target?
Quote from: Creeker on Feb 04, 2009, 08:28
Didn't they have experiments with pigeons in early guided missiles in an onboard guidance system to peck an internal screen of some sort, and thereby guide the missile to its target?
Nope!
During World War II, Project Pigeon (or Project Orcon, for "organic control") was American behaviorist B. F. Skinner's attempt to develop a pigeon-guided missile.
The control system involved a lens at the front of the missile projecting an image of the target to a screen inside, while a pigeon trained (by operant conditioning) to recognize the target pecked at it. As long as the pecks remained in the center of the screen, the missile would fly straight, but pecks off-center would cause the screen to tilt, which would then, via a connection to the missile's flight controls, cause the missile to change course. Three pigeons were to control the bomb's direction by majority rule.
Although skeptical of the idea, the National Defense Research Committee nevertheless contributed $25,000 to the research. However, Skinner's plans to use pigeons in Pelican missiles was considered too eccentric and impractical; although he had some success with the training, he could not get his idea taken seriously. The program was cancelled on October 8, 1944, because the military believed that "further prosecution of this project would seriously delay others which in the minds of the Division have more immediate promise of combat application."
Project Orcon was revived by the Navy in 1948 and was cancelled in 1953.
I know this isn't what you're looking for, but it's a pretty interesting read nevertheless.
Very interesting but its not a nuclear device.
I read an article in Scientific American many years back about birds and navigation. They put the birds in a cage with an ink pad at the bottom and blotter paper around them in a conical configuration. The largest ink blot on the paper was in the direction of their normal migration. They did this with the sky exposed and under several other conditions to determine how birds navigated. Its interesting that this was done in a practical sense many years before in WWII.
Not to sound naive, but aren't operators considered active components? The diggity answer is that the primary safety device is the operator on watch...
Quote from: adam_grundleger on Feb 06, 2009, 05:47
Not to sound naive, but aren't operators considered active components? The diggity answer is that the primary safety device is the operator on watch...
Again I guess you could make an argument for it, but they aren't part of the device like the pigeons in the guided missiles mentioned earlier. If we followed this logic wouldn't people be considered integral components in the design of a car?
Quote from: Marlin on Feb 06, 2009, 06:32
Again I guess you could make an argument for it, but they aren't part of the device like the pigeons in the guided missiles mentioned earlier. If we followed this logic wouldn't people be considered integral components in the design of a car?
Well if you drove the same car as Fred Flinstone, then most definitely people would be considered integral parts of a car.
They are: hence the controls, seats, safety equipment. I understand that you're looking for something else, though. I'll see what I can come up with.
Quote from: Preciousblue1965 on Feb 06, 2009, 06:57
Well if you drove the same car as Fred Flinstone, then most definitely people would be considered integral parts of a car.
I have seen nuclear plant operators who look like Fred, coincidence? You be the judge!! :) 8) ;)
There were the OMRE (organic moderator reactor experiment) and OMCX (organic moderator criticality experiment), but the moderators tested were organic compounds, not living organisms...
The moderators tested were organic solvents typical of those used in fuel reprocessing.
Organic is not living.
OK, how about the Blue Peacock? British Nuclear landmine with chickens used as a heat source to prevent the mechanism from freezing up in winter. There was a post about it a while back.
Very good!! Right on target.
Blue Peacock—dubbed the "chicken-powered nuclear bomb"—was the codename of a British tactical nuclear weapon project in the 1950s with the goal to store a number of ten-kiloton nuclear mines in Germany, to be placed at target locations on the North German Plain in the event of war. The mines would have been detonated by wire or an eight-day timer. If they were disturbed they were set to explode within ten seconds. The project was developed at the Armament Research and Development Establishment (RARDE) at Fort Halstead in Kent in 1954.
One technical problem was that buried objects—especially during winter—can get very cold, and it was possible the mine would not have worked after some days underground, due to the electronics being too cold to operate properly. Various methods to get around this were studied, such as wrapping the bombs in insulating blankets. One particularly remarkable proposal suggested that live chickens should be included in the mechanism. The chickens would be sealed inside the casing, with a supply of food and water; they would remain alive for a week or so, which was the expected maximum lifetime of the bomb in any case. The body heat given off by the chickens would, it seems, have been sufficient to keep all the relevant components at a working temperature. This proposal was sufficiently outlandish that it was taken as an April Fool's Day joke when the Blue Peacock file was declassified on April 1, 2004. Tom O'Leary, head of education and interpretation at the National Archives, replied to the media that, "It does seem like an April Fool but it most certainly is not. The Civil Service does not do jokes."