• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image |

      source. The number of toxins in the source will not affect the total transport and 
      diffusion of the source cloud if they all have the same size distribution.
4.   As noted above we have utilized a generic grid, i.e., the x and y axes are in units of 
	kilometers. They do not relate to any geographical reference point.  We have 
	considered the clirnatology of the area and the objectives of the mission and concluded 
	that the optimum strike time, from a dispersion viewpoint, would be when the 
	atmosphere is slightly stable to neutral and the wind speeds in the mixing layer are light 
	(2-4 m/sec; 5-8 levels). The area climatology shows generally  northwesterly flow 
	over the region during the fall and winter months. That is why we chose a transport
 	wind of 315 degrees at the surface veering to 330 degrees at the top of the mixing level. 
	Since this is on a generic grid the plots could be rotated to coincide with any surface 
	wind providing the mixing layer wind did not veer more than in this calculation. The 
	map scale is 1:312,000 for the 50 km map and 1:62,500 for the 10 km enlargements. 
	We can scale the plots to any  map scale.
5.   "Calc #2" has been constructed with the same basic assumptions with the exception of
 	the source physical description.  In this calculation we have assumed a strike on an 
	array of buildings and/or bunkers. The source smoke cloud size differs from 
	"Calc #1 " in that it has a horizontal diameter of 432 meters. The cloud height remains 
	at 493 meters (1617 ft).  All other assumptions are the same as "Calc #1". There is 
	little difference in the two calculations. We feel that this is somewhat artificial but 
	understandable. We believe that the nested calculational grid scale resolution is the key. 
	For expediency the calculational grids were kept the same for both calculations.  A 
	smaller calculational grid scale (not just an enlargement of the picture) would show a 
	difference close in to the source (i.e., larger areas involved). We have included a 
	10 km enlargement of the two calculations for clarification of the ''close in" 
	concentration and deposition areas.
George D. Greenly, Jr., CCM
ARAC Operations Tearn Leader
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory						
									2	

Document Page: First | Prev | Next | All | Image |