Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
It's funny.  Laugh.

British Chicken-Warmed Nuke 195

darrellberry writes "During the Cold War, British researchers developed a nuclear landmine, kept operational during cold conditions by packing it full of live chickens. This story has appeared in a few UK media channels this morning. Probably an April Fools', but who knows? The bomb is supposedly on display at the National Archives in Kew, so if you live in London you can go and see for yourselves..." Also a BBC story and an older New Scientist blurb.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

British Chicken-Warmed Nuke

Comments Filter:
  • Not a prank (Score:5, Informative)

    by Space cowboy ( 13680 ) * on Thursday April 01, 2004 @10:39AM (#8736293) Journal

    The BBC are running a separate [bbc.co.uk] 'this is true, honest' story, detailing other unlikely stories alongside... I like the fact that one of our railways cost more than a trip to the moon.

    Only in the UK...

    Simon
  • The Times... (Score:3, Informative)

    by REBloomfield ( 550182 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @10:40AM (#8736300)
    (british broadsheet), is also doing an 'honest guv' type story: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1058550, 00.html
  • Re:Not an April Fool (Score:2, Informative)

    by AndroidCat ( 229562 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @10:48AM (#8736402) Homepage
    Of course, lack of registration makes it hard to see. Try this other site [sjgames.com] for the real story.
  • Re:Why today? (Score:5, Informative)

    by wfberg ( 24378 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @10:53AM (#8736462)
    The civil service has obviously had access to these documents for a while, so why do they have to "announce" these apparently real plans on April 1st and then get all irritable and have to deny repeatedly that its an april fools joke.
    Why didn't they release the story yesterday, or couldn't they have waited until tomorrow?


    It was on BBC news yesterday.
  • by Half-pint HAL ( 718102 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @10:54AM (#8736467)
    Because plutonium is quite expensive, quite rare and quite unstable. You wouldn't want to put plutonium anywhere near a nuclear device for fear of premature ejac^H^H^Hxplosions. HAL.
  • Re:Landmine? (Score:3, Informative)

    by BenBenBen ( 249969 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @11:00AM (#8736521)
    "Landmine" is a bit of a misnomer - these devices were designed to be planted in the ground on the plains of Germany, and detonated by remote control if there ever came a time when the Sovs were in control of that area.

    Currently, Israel deploys nuclear landmines [google.com] and I'd guess they're not alone. Shrub's apparent penchant for tactical nukes would suggest that there's going to be more random nuclear weapons in the future too.

    Personally, I want to see a nuclear Dambuster's bomb, in time for the next world stone skimming contest.

  • Re:Landmine? (Score:3, Informative)

    by Scutter ( 18425 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @11:05AM (#8736568) Journal
    Read the article.

    The seven-ton weapon, codenamed Blue Peacock, was a state-of-the art munition to be buried on the plains of northern Germany during a British retreat and detonated by remote control or timer to destroy advancing Russian forces in the event of the Third World War.
  • by mixtape5 ( 762922 ) <hckymanr@yahoo.com> on Thursday April 01, 2004 @11:06AM (#8736576) Journal
    1)chickens are living organisms, how are they to survive while being barried underground? if they put the chickens down they would put them down at the same time as the bomb...and the chickens can survive through the winter?? They should try to survive any day before a winter day

  • Re:Not a prank (Score:4, Informative)

    by Fnkmaster ( 89084 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @11:29AM (#8736815)
    I think this [google.com] was Google's April Fool's joke this year. I think the 1 gig email story is more likely true (though the details may be wrong, who knows).
  • See you again... (Score:3, Informative)

    by muffen ( 321442 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @11:44AM (#8736975)
  • by timbos ( 710908 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @12:06PM (#8737297)
    Blue Peacock does/did exist. I have the dubious privilege of having touched the only remaining example, housed in the museum collection at AWE [awe.co.uk]. The other is (and I quote the curator here) `lost'!

    It was a `landmine' designed to be set on a timer to ambush the Soviets as they advanced across Europe. It was based on the Blue Danube [awe.co.uk] device that was the UK's first air-delivered nuclear weapon (essentially, they removed the fins).

    The device had up to an 8-day timer, but could also be set off locally --- either by booby trap, incase it was discovered, or a trigger. Amusingly there was a 10 second delay when you operated the trigger, just time to duck and cover :o) The chickens, though? That's clearly a hoax. Apart from anything else, the device was air and water tight.

  • Re:Not a prank (Score:4, Informative)

    by Fishstick ( 150821 ) on Thursday April 01, 2004 @01:32PM (#8738258) Journal
    > bad harvest of the italian spaghetti crop

    Swiss, and it was a bumper crop, not a "bad harvest"

    it ranks #1 on the Top 100 April Fool's Day Hoaxes of All Time [museumofhoaxes.com]

    #1: The Swiss Spaghetti Harvest
    In 1957 the respected BBC news show Panorama announced that thanks to a very mild winter and the virtual elimination of the dreaded spaghetti weevil, Swiss farmers were enjoying a bumper spaghetti crop. It accompanied this announcement with footage of Swiss peasants pulling strands of spaghetti down from trees. Huge numbers of viewers were taken in, and many called up wanting to know how they could grow their own spaghetti trees. To this question, the BBC diplomatically replied that they should "place a sprig of spaghetti in a tin of tomato sauce and hope for the best." Check out the actual broadcast archived on the BBC's website (You need the RealVideo player installed to see it, and it usually loads very slowly).

The difference between reality and unreality is that reality has so little to recommend it. -- Allan Sherman

Working...