4 ms·

To reduce cutting edge nuclear weapons tests, at a time when the USA and USSR were neck deep in an arms race and at each other's throats, to a nothingburger abo

To reduce cutting edge nuclear weapons tests, at a time when the USA and USSR were neck deep in an arms race and at each other's throats, to a nothingburger about space radiation is... fantastic. How great is it that today we can live so ignorant of one of the scariest times in human civilization? The everythingburger had to do with the orbital EMP, not the radiation or even the secret tests. If the US had developed an effective way to neutralize Soviet ICBMs with atmospheric detonations, it would have been the end of MAD and would have forced the Soviet Union into all out war in a race to beat the US before a full defense system could be built - at a time when they were first starting to come to the table.

CamperBob2 8y ago
Some good points there with respect to MAD. Perhaps the article should have made the same case you just did, but that lede was deeply buried if it was in there at all. Instead, the reporters treated it as a matter of concern primarily to the newspaper itself.
- archgoon 8y ago
  The focus of the article is less on the importance of the Argus project, and it's place in the Cold War, and more on illustrating how deeply entwined the supposedly independent press was with the Government, and how the press was effectively self censoring itself due to perceived national security concerns. Equally important, however, is noticing that ultimately what caused the New York Times to publish was the recognition that the press is a competitive environment, and, (amusingly, given the MAD overtones of any article about the Cold War), it's game theory that dictates that eventually the press will defect from an embargo due to competitive fears of being scooped.
giardini 8y ago
akiselev says>"it would have been the end of MAD and would have forced the Soviet Union into all out war ..." I don't buy that extrapolation at all because: - We'll never see the "end of MAD" - there's too much uncertainty around large-scale nuclear weapons and - no one, including the Soviet Union, is in a rush to end the world.
dylan604 8y ago
>The everythingburger had to do with the orbital EMP How would an EMP in near space affect an ICBM? Once the warhead has separated, isn't it basically a dumb object on a Newtonian trajectory? Maybe mess up the electronics in the trigger to prevent the critical mass explosion rendering it just a man made meteor? Maybe a MIRV would have some electronics to separate. I can't remember if they separated after re-entry or not.
- haloux 8y ago
  short answer; it depends, but in general we are looking for holes in EM shielding to turn the RVs into paperweights. As a former nuke maintainer, the way I think they would do it would be to launch a titan with a full MIRV payload of W53s or their predecessors out into an area for HAD (high altitude detonation). The understanding is that we were relying on the emp from nuclear blasts to make things drop from the sky. This is also a time when insensitive high exposives were not a thing and simple shock would begin a detonation for most weapons. The emp overloading electronics in either the launch vehicle (depending on altitude) or the reentry vehicle could cause the weapon to detonate (noncriticality, just a simple detonation). Aditionally consider that passing through the EM contaminated zone would likely render the same effects to the launch vehicle. The RV might not even separate and instead just continue into orbit. Lastly, the RV angle and positioning done by the RS (reentry system) is highly dependent on both explosives and electronics. Lots of room for EM to muck with that and cause a poor reentry angle or even an outright spin fault which would lead to detonation on reentry. Regardless, most RVs will not critically detonate unless all flight conditions are met. This means launch, RS positioning, proper spin, etc. Side note : In the service I’ve heard rumors of the Russians having the same doctrine when under attack and defending key government areas, but at lower altitudes and being initiated with Tuplovs and gravity weapons (non rv, aircraft dropped). This inherently implies fratricidal consequences for pilots and civilians.

CamperBob2 8y ago

Some good points there with respect to MAD. Perhaps the article should have made the same case you just did, but that lede was deeply buried if it was in there at all. Instead, the reporters treated it as a matter of concern primarily to the newspaper itself.

archgoon 8y ago
The focus of the article is less on the importance of the Argus project, and it's place in the Cold War, and more on illustrating how deeply entwined the supposedly independent press was with the Government, and how the press was effectively self censoring itself due to perceived national security concerns. Equally important, however, is noticing that ultimately what caused the New York Times to publish was the recognition that the press is a competitive environment, and, (amusingly, given the MAD overtones of any article about the Cold War), it's game theory that dictates that eventually the press will defect from an embargo due to competitive fears of being scooped.

giardini 8y ago

akiselev says>"it would have been the end of MAD and would have forced the Soviet Union into all out war ..." I don't buy that extrapolation at all because: - We'll never see the "end of MAD" - there's too much uncertainty around large-scale nuclear weapons and - no one, including the Soviet Union, is in a rush to end the world.

dylan604 8y ago

>The everythingburger had to do with the orbital EMP How would an EMP in near space affect an ICBM? Once the warhead has separated, isn't it basically a dumb object on a Newtonian trajectory? Maybe mess up the electronics in the trigger to prevent the critical mass explosion rendering it just a man made meteor? Maybe a MIRV would have some electronics to separate. I can't remember if they separated after re-entry or not.

haloux 8y ago
short answer; it depends, but in general we are looking for holes in EM shielding to turn the RVs into paperweights. As a former nuke maintainer, the way I think they would do it would be to launch a titan with a full MIRV payload of W53s or their predecessors out into an area for HAD (high altitude detonation). The understanding is that we were relying on the emp from nuclear blasts to make things drop from the sky. This is also a time when insensitive high exposives were not a thing and simple shock would begin a detonation for most weapons. The emp overloading electronics in either the launch vehicle (depending on altitude) or the reentry vehicle could cause the weapon to detonate (noncriticality, just a simple detonation). Aditionally consider that passing through the EM contaminated zone would likely render the same effects to the launch vehicle. The RV might not even separate and instead just continue into orbit. Lastly, the RV angle and positioning done by the RS (reentry system) is highly dependent on both explosives and electronics. Lots of room for EM to muck with that and cause a poor reentry angle or even an outright spin fault which would lead to detonation on reentry. Regardless, most RVs will not critically detonate unless all flight conditions are met. This means launch, RS positioning, proper spin, etc. Side note : In the service I’ve heard rumors of the Russians having the same doctrine when under attack and defending key government areas, but at lower altitudes and being initiated with Tuplovs and gravity weapons (non rv, aircraft dropped). This inherently implies fratricidal consequences for pilots and civilians.