Jump to content

Talk:B Reactor

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Completion Date

[edit]

B-Reactor was completed in September of 1994
I don't think this is correct but I don't know what the correct date is, this should be checked.
-- unsigned by User:Mtekk at 00:27, 27 July 2005 and vandalized by 12.36.152.153 at 17:22, 26 June 2006

September '44 is correct, Or should be close enough, as that is when the B Reactor was first activated.
(Speaking from a position of some authority, as I toured the B Reactor just this afternoon (6/3/09)). —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Los Alamos

[edit]

Trinity device, tested at Los Alamos in New Mexico, and the Fat Man bomb, later dropped on Nagasaki, Japan, was created in the B, D and F reactors.
First sentence, third paragraph.
Technically, the bomb was detonated in Alamagordo, New Mexico, Alamagordo is a couple hundred miles south of the Los Alamos National Labs. Think about it, are you going to build the mother of all bombs inside the shop building? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.94.13.180 (talk) 03:14, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Well for shops: as a matter of fact, yes. 171.64.75.190 (talk) 01:29, 27 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the Trinity device (the "Gadget"), it was detonated at neither Los Alamos or Alamagordo. The correct location is a region of the White Sands Missile Range known as 'Jornada del Muerto' (see Trinity Test article). Alamagordo is commonly given as the location, but is actually quite some distance from the Trinity Site and is not even the nearest town.
(Speaking from a position of some authority, as I have been to the Trinity Site and lodged in Alamagordo during my visit to the area.) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Belchfire (talk • contribs) 04:42, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the bomb was assembled in the shop, and No the bomb was not detonated in Los Alamos. I'm untying that sentence into something meaningful. --BjKa (talk) 12:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
(Also: it's Alamogordo. Get your facts right before nitpicking.) --BjKa (talk) 12:11, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Further investigation reveals that the shop for assembling the bomb was set up in the McDonald Ranch House, considered part of Trinity Site. --BjKa (talk) 12:20, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

NHL status

[edit]

Anybody notice the Park Service is considering the B Reactor for National Historic Landmark status? Murderbike 20:23, 30 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merger of B Reactor with Hanford Site

[edit]

Don't merge I don't think it's necessary. For precedence, the X-10 Graphite Reactor at Oak Ridge National Laboratory is a separate article. Einbierbitte (talk) 23:55, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The possible merger was also discussed in Good Article discussion in Talk:Hanford Site. doncram (talk) 15:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't merge. B-Reactor is notable enough to merit its own article, which may be expanded in the future. To include this information in Hanford Site would overwhelm the Hanford article, which has a much broader scope and is already sufficiently long. Hanford Site is currently a Featured article candidate. It has been suggested that it would be good to conclude the B-Reactor merge discussion before Hanford gets to FA status, in the interest of stability. Please chime in, and if other editors agree that the merge is not a good idea, we should remove the tag so the FA discussion can go forward. Thanks.Northwesterner1 (talk) 20:11, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't merge. The assertion of notability in this article's first two sentences is very strong. This is not merely "one of many" reactors at the site, but the first of its kind. Worthy of an article of its own, which will hopefully be expanded and better sourced at some time in the not-so-distant future. -Pete (talk) 03:13, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, it was suggested in the Hanford Site discussion that this should maybe be renamed to Hanford B-Reactor. That seems like a good idea to me -- thoughts? -Pete (talk) 03:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Anyway, there seems rough consensus not to merge, and that makes sense to me too as the B reactor is on the US National Register of Historic Places, which to me implies notability in its own right. So I've removed the merge notice. I couldn't find any discussion of the merge at Talk:Hanford Site, which is where the now-removed merge notice took me. Andrewa (talk) 11:37, 7 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move

[edit]

B-Reactor → B Reactor — from the Department of Energy [1] and B Reactor Museum Association [2] websites, there is no hyphen in the name. — — MrDolomite • Talk 12:44, 26 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved on 22:59, August 31, 2008 by User:JPG-GR (talk | contribs) m (moved B-Reactor to B Reactor over redirect: Per request at WP:RM) — MrDolomite • Talk 14:17, 5 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

An historic place

[edit]

This site [[3]] has the news, that this reactor is now an american historic place.Agre22 (talk) 13:37, 26 August 2008 (UTC)agre22[reply]

It already was an "american historic place" but now is even more so. We've already updated the article to include this information. Thanks! Einbierbitte (talk) 15:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Photos

[edit]

There's some better ones here. Murderbike (talk) 06:23, 8 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Spurious sentence fragment in second paragraph

[edit]

The second paragraph has the following sentence fragment:

Approximately 25 mm diameter by 70 mm long</ref> and sealed in aluminum cans went into the tubes

I'd fix it, but I'm not sure what it's supposed to mean. -- Dan Griscom (talk) 01:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Someone fixed it at some point in time: thanks. -- Dan Griscom (talk) 02:40, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Safety Rods are not Control Rods

[edit]

I need to correct this error but am going to wait until I can site the correct source. However, the vertical safety rods were never used as control rods. They were either withdrawn completely during normal operation or completely inserted while the reactor was shut down or dropped in quickly in case of a SCRAM. The actual control rods were located horizontally through the core and the mechanism to move them was located on the left side of the reactor (as seen when facing the face of the reactor). Unlike the safety rods which were all or nothing, the control rods could be inserted / removed by any degree, thus controlling the reactivity in the core and thus the power of the reactor. Ken Clark, Manassas VA USA Kclark1454 (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Interim Safe Storage

[edit]

B Reactor is not in Interim Safe Storage (ISS). Putting a reactor in ISS involves demolishing the wings of the reactor building that contained the air handling equipment, spent fuel storage basin, and the horizontal control rods. The remaining structure is sealed to the extent that it only needs an inspection every 5 years. The C, D, DR, F, and H reactors at Hanford have gone through the ISS process. B Reactor has not gone through the process because of its designation as a historic landmark and it's planned use as a museum. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.185.39.148 (talk) 04:24, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 2 external links on B Reactor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:56, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


First one checks out OK, second one fails for me --BjKa (talk) 13:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on B Reactor. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

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

☒N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

  • 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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:30, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]


I'm getting a 404 on both links (i.e. archive & original) --BjKa (talk) 13:02, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Timeline Table

[edit]

1952 November 1 B Reactor tritium used in first test detonation of a hydrogen bomb at Bikini Atoll
I'm sure there's a confusion here: According to the article Operation Ivy (and many others) "the first successful full-scale test of a hydrogen bomb" took place on the evening of 31 October 1952, on Enewetak Atoll, using Deuterium. No other thermonuclear tests seem to have taken place until March of '53. I'm being bold here, changing the date and putting a link to Castle Bravo which did take place at Bikini and did use Tritium. I'm also including a "citation needed" marker, as this is yet unproven. --BjKa (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just a thought...

[edit]

So, Hanford B produced the Plutonium for the totally unnecessary Nagasaki bomb, and the Tritium leading directly to the first massive fallout disaster. In my book that marks it as a prime site of concentrated evil, comparable only to sites like Guantanamo, Chernobyl, Auschwitz or Verdun. --BjKa (talk) 11:35, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

"first three reactors"

[edit]

The article mentions "B, D, and F reactors" as "the first three reactors". Maybe it is explained in the article Hanford Site (I haven't looked) but I think it could be mentioned here what happened to reactors A, C and E. --BjKa (talk) 12:28/13:07/13:09/13:10, 8 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on B Reactor. 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:

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) 08:26, 13 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:B_Reactor&oldid=1205835805"