Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by mikeyouse 1289 days ago
The sustainment problem is solved as well - there was the infamous example of the "fogbank" aerogel that we lost capacity to build. It turns out it's easy enough (with an unlimited pile of money) to reverse engineer any component we might need and rebuild capacity. Nuclear weapons aren't "complicated" once you've figured out the science, they're just expensive to engineer.

Since we have maybe 10x more warheads that we need, we can easily salvage any components from decommissioned ones which is actually what's leading to the plutonium storage problems from the article.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fogbank

1 comments

Taking everything in the article at face value (and assuming the substance actually exists and isn't an elaborate disinformation campaign), it took over a decade and $100,000,000 to recreate this single part of the warhead.

I don't know if we can call this a runaway sustainment success story. It's not as though we actually have limitless piles of money to throw at weapons systems.

> $100,000,000

Which still is 0.2% of what one dude paid to run one crappy social network.