Possible Nuclear Accident
Peter G-W wrote
The B-52H wasn't flying to a scrapyard. It was a movement of AGM-129s from Minot to Barksdale after retirement of this type of missile.
2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
But there again we are dealing with a country that delivered one of its B52s to the scrapyard with a nuclear weapon accidentally left on board.
2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Last edited by TEEEJ; 21st Sep 2013 at 16:50.
Peter G-W wrote
Quote:
The B-52H wasn't flying to a scrapyard. It was a movement of AGM-129s from Minot to Barksdale after reitrement of this type of missile.
2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote:
But there again we are dealing with a country that delivered one of its B52s to the scrapyard with a nuclear weapon accidentally left on board.
2007 United States Air Force nuclear weapons incident - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
YS
Per Ardua ad Astraeus
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 18,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone must know! We have a fair bit of 'big bang' experience here, I think. How many of you would have the weapon armed 'ready to drop' over the eastern seaboard?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Another B52 release over the US occurred which is written up
and which explains the weapon state in the US.
I think the explosive component detonated but not the nuclear
but when I last read it it was explained quite well. I'll try to find
the article.
and which explains the weapon state in the US.
I think the explosive component detonated but not the nuclear
but when I last read it it was explained quite well. I'll try to find
the article.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
BOAC, I can't speak for SAC SOPs but there were several essential positional checks.
After take-off the system would be checked. Then once passing a Go Line, after the execution order, further switching would take place which essentially checked the electrical systems but the weapon would remain in a safe state should it need to be dropped over a friendly or neutral territory.
The final switching would enable the system to go bang in the event it had to be dropped away from the target area but only once it would land in enemy territory.
I would need to check Peter Hennessey's book to see if he names these positions.
After take-off the system would be checked. Then once passing a Go Line, after the execution order, further switching would take place which essentially checked the electrical systems but the weapon would remain in a safe state should it need to be dropped over a friendly or neutral territory.
The final switching would enable the system to go bang in the event it had to be dropped away from the target area but only once it would land in enemy territory.
I would need to check Peter Hennessey's book to see if he names these positions.
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
The final switching would enable the system to go bang in the event it had to be dropped away from the target area but only once it would land in enemy territory.
Project Dominic. See page 18, para IV(b).
The big trick with lovely big bombs is making them go bang. A lot of things need to happen in the right sequence and at the right time. Dropping one on the ground without ensuring all those things are properly set up and enabled doesn't make them go bang. You can end up with a lot of nasty radioactive material scattered over the countryside, but you don't tend to get a big bang. Amazing the there were so many "incidents", but not one of them detonated successfully.
So it didn't become a bucket of sunshine because a 1cent switch failed............now who are those people who complain about DOD going out to the lowest bidder.
Course if North Carolina had gone up with a bucket of sunshine would that have increased or decreased the US average IQ ?...............time to run and hide with that one.
Course if North Carolina had gone up with a bucket of sunshine would that have increased or decreased the US average IQ ?...............time to run and hide with that one.
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
ORAC, nothing as sophisticated as that for the RAF. All the safety locks removed and the system set for Live. The remaining security and safety was simply the bomb doors and the bomb firing switch.
The bomb doors could be opened manually by either pilot or if set to Auto by the bombing system under the control of the nav rad. The release could be initiated by either pilot, or either nav once the bomb doors were open. Or the bombing system could do it itself. Touch of the Dr Strangegloves there.
I pointed out to a gp capt once that it was possible to set the aircraft on an automatic bomb run about 20 minutes out from the target and for the crew to jump out at that point. He was not amused, but it was certainly feasible. For some targets it would have been possible to bail out over neutral territory.
The bomb doors could be opened manually by either pilot or if set to Auto by the bombing system under the control of the nav rad. The release could be initiated by either pilot, or either nav once the bomb doors were open. Or the bombing system could do it itself. Touch of the Dr Strangegloves there.
I pointed out to a gp capt once that it was possible to set the aircraft on an automatic bomb run about 20 minutes out from the target and for the crew to jump out at that point. He was not amused, but it was certainly feasible. For some targets it would have been possible to bail out over neutral territory.
The Minot incident was a dreadful series of procedural failures, but has nothing to do with accidental release or the doomsday rogue nuclear explosion that some here seem to be seeking. Sorry, guys, it was quite simply an appalling screw-up, but nowhere was about to be vapourized as a result.
There's a lot of people ready to jump on the outrage bus over anything to do with the nuclear deterent.
There's a lot of people ready to jump on the outrage bus over anything to do with the nuclear deterent.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can end up with a lot of nasty radioactive material scattered over the countryside, but you don't tend to get a big bang."
And even then on one incident when the explosives go off, the incident in the U
didn't cover that much ground as the DoD only needed to purchase a small area.
Can't remember which one it was but it is not a large area at all.
And even then on one incident when the explosives go off, the incident in the U
didn't cover that much ground as the DoD only needed to purchase a small area.
Can't remember which one it was but it is not a large area at all.
Racedo......for sure if that bomb had gone off down Goldsboro way it would have turned the state solidly Republican without any doubt.
So yes....in a way the State's average IQ would have increased.
So yes....in a way the State's average IQ would have increased.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Perth - Western Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 1,805
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's get the whole deal in perspective.
1. Journalists write books with frightening exaggerations of scenarios and events, so they can sell lots of books and make lots of money.
2. There have been, what? - a couple of dozen nukes lost in air accidents. None actually detonated, as far as the nuclear fission event goes. The HE did in a couple of cases.
Compare that number to the number of nukes that have been dismantled in the last, say, 35 yrs. Probably something in the order of 75,000 nukes (the last reasonably accurate disassembly total, was 50,000 in 1996).
The dismantling of pre-1979 nukes is fraught with risk due to the basic instability and easily-detonated nature of the HE - as compared to the more stable IHE of the post-1979-build nukes.
3. There is a far greater threat of a nuclear accident, in the thousands of nukes being transported by ROAD, annually in the U.S. - as compared to the few hundred transported by air annually.
4. There is a far greater threat of a nuclear accident in the official DISMANTLING of a nuke - which is carried out thousands of times a year at Pantex.
5. The U.S. has intensive supervision and control of nuke dismantling - at enormous cost (possibly now well North of a cost of $1B annually).
Not so in many other nuclear-weapons-owning countries - where nuke dismantling is being carried out - of which we have very little knowledge of their processes and safety regimes.
6. The journo who wrote the book about the NC incident would be better advised to write a book about the potential catastrophe that awaits from another Chernobyl-style incident occurring from a Russian nuke incident that is probably less than one cheap switch away from happening.
But then again - he wouldn't have access to any de-classified info to feed on, would he?
Pantex: Dismantling the Bomb
A 200 page, 20 yr-old document that goes into nuke dismantling and constituents recovery, along with planning strategies, in huge detail ..
http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1993/9320/9320.PDF
1. Journalists write books with frightening exaggerations of scenarios and events, so they can sell lots of books and make lots of money.
2. There have been, what? - a couple of dozen nukes lost in air accidents. None actually detonated, as far as the nuclear fission event goes. The HE did in a couple of cases.
Compare that number to the number of nukes that have been dismantled in the last, say, 35 yrs. Probably something in the order of 75,000 nukes (the last reasonably accurate disassembly total, was 50,000 in 1996).
The dismantling of pre-1979 nukes is fraught with risk due to the basic instability and easily-detonated nature of the HE - as compared to the more stable IHE of the post-1979-build nukes.
3. There is a far greater threat of a nuclear accident, in the thousands of nukes being transported by ROAD, annually in the U.S. - as compared to the few hundred transported by air annually.
4. There is a far greater threat of a nuclear accident in the official DISMANTLING of a nuke - which is carried out thousands of times a year at Pantex.
5. The U.S. has intensive supervision and control of nuke dismantling - at enormous cost (possibly now well North of a cost of $1B annually).
Not so in many other nuclear-weapons-owning countries - where nuke dismantling is being carried out - of which we have very little knowledge of their processes and safety regimes.
6. The journo who wrote the book about the NC incident would be better advised to write a book about the potential catastrophe that awaits from another Chernobyl-style incident occurring from a Russian nuke incident that is probably less than one cheap switch away from happening.
But then again - he wouldn't have access to any de-classified info to feed on, would he? Pantex: Dismantling the Bomb
A 200 page, 20 yr-old document that goes into nuke dismantling and constituents recovery, along with planning strategies, in huge detail ..
http://www.princeton.edu/~ota/disk1/1993/9320/9320.PDF
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by onetrack
5. The U.S. has intensive supervision and control of nuke dismantling - at enormous cost (possibly now well North of a cost of $1B annually).
Not so in many other nuclear-weapons-owning countries - where nuke dismantling is being carried out - of which we have very little knowledge of their processes and safety regimes.
Not so in many other nuclear-weapons-owning countries - where nuke dismantling is being carried out - of which we have very little knowledge of their processes and safety regimes.
Thus, at least in regards to the former Soviet weapons and States, we do have detailed and intimate knowledge of their processes and safety regimes.
The Wikipedia entry on Violet Club (which I assume is accurate) makes for chilling reading. A system of ball bearings to safe a nuclear weapon!
It seems remarkable that there were no accidental detonations.
It seems remarkable that there were no accidental detonations.