4 ms·

I thought the use of Permissive Action Link prevented this in the US, for example

evgen 9y ago
Nope, naval nukes to not use PALs. Assuming a boat at a defcon level such that the keys are out of the safe you would need the captain and xo to agree and launch (assuming tacit agreement from weapons officer, comm, and most of the rest of the boat who could all in theory simply overpower someone trying to launch without valid orders or sabotage the necessary systems to prevent launch.)
- scrumper 9y ago
  I don't believe what you have written is true in the case of the US Navy, which parent was asking about. US SSBNs do indeed have PALs. You are correct if you're talking about Britain: Royal Navy SSBN captains are able to launch missiles independent of government orders and there are no PALs involved in the UK nuclear deterrent (which is entirely submarine based). This is the most authoritative source I can find right now; it's not a subject where it's easy to find a ton of verifiable information: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/trident-what-are-the-facts/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/trident-what-are-the-facts/ EDIT: For interest, the justification in Britain for leaving "full operational control" in the hands of submarine commanders is that the UK government is likely to be vaporized almost immediately after a hostile launch, there being such a short flight time from many hostile nations to the UK. The USA has more time to react, and a number of scares helped to swing political opinion in favor of mandatory PALs for submarines. Now, I have heard that there is in fact a way for a US SSBN crew to launch independently in the event of a verified destruction of the chain of command on shore, but as that verification is ultimately down to the command crew's judgement, it renders the PAL moot. This I could only find Quora answers about so take it with a pinch.
  - evgen 9y ago
    Aren't the only PALs on a US SSBN the launch keys? I realize that the devices themselves have anti-tamper PAL components, but once the safe is opened and the keys are out I was under the impression that the captain and xo could launch without any additional outside input. Happy to be wrong, but to the best of my (very limited) knowledge there is no need for an external authentication code to launch a sub nuke.
    - scrumper 9y ago
      There's a code lock - the PAL - on US Tridents, not just the launch keys. Anecdotally and non-authoritatively I've heard that there are offline backup codes in a safe accessible to the command crew (which is the mechanism I refer to above). "Last strike" is arguably a necessary component of a submarine deterrent since it means even a surprise decapitation strike carries the risk of a retaliation. It's certainly why the UK delegates launch authority to the captain (again, after a procedural verification of the destruction of the chain of command). God, this stuff is frightening.

Nope, naval nukes to not use PALs. Assuming a boat at a defcon level such that the keys are out of the safe you would need the captain and xo to agree and launch (assuming tacit agreement from weapons officer, comm, and most of the rest of the boat who could all in theory simply overpower someone trying to launch without valid orders or sabotage the necessary systems to prevent launch.)

scrumper 9y ago
I don't believe what you have written is true in the case of the US Navy, which parent was asking about. US SSBNs do indeed have PALs. You are correct if you're talking about Britain: Royal Navy SSBN captains are able to launch missiles independent of government orders and there are no PALs involved in the UK nuclear deterrent (which is entirely submarine based). This is the most authoritative source I can find right now; it's not a subject where it's easy to find a ton of verifiable information: https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/trident-what-are-the-facts/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/trident-what-are-the-facts/ EDIT: For interest, the justification in Britain for leaving "full operational control" in the hands of submarine commanders is that the UK government is likely to be vaporized almost immediately after a hostile launch, there being such a short flight time from many hostile nations to the UK. The USA has more time to react, and a number of scares helped to swing political opinion in favor of mandatory PALs for submarines. Now, I have heard that there is in fact a way for a US SSBN crew to launch independently in the event of a verified destruction of the chain of command on shore, but as that verification is ultimately down to the command crew's judgement, it renders the PAL moot. This I could only find Quora answers about so take it with a pinch.
- evgen 9y ago
  Aren't the only PALs on a US SSBN the launch keys? I realize that the devices themselves have anti-tamper PAL components, but once the safe is opened and the keys are out I was under the impression that the captain and xo could launch without any additional outside input. Happy to be wrong, but to the best of my (very limited) knowledge there is no need for an external authentication code to launch a sub nuke.
  - scrumper 9y ago
    There's a code lock - the PAL - on US Tridents, not just the launch keys. Anecdotally and non-authoritatively I've heard that there are offline backup codes in a safe accessible to the command crew (which is the mechanism I refer to above). "Last strike" is arguably a necessary component of a submarine deterrent since it means even a surprise decapitation strike carries the risk of a retaliation. It's certainly why the UK delegates launch authority to the captain (again, after a procedural verification of the destruction of the chain of command). God, this stuff is frightening.