3 ms·

Wikipedia confirms it’s designed to survive a 30MT blast 1km away. It was designed when missiles were inaccurate and expensive so the warheads were huge and unl

Wikipedia confirms it’s designed to survive a 30MT blast 1km away. It was designed when missiles were inaccurate and expensive so the warheads were huge and unlikely to hit it directly. Now most of NORAD is at another, completely unsheltered facility because missiles are so accurate that no protection matters. Cheyenne exists mainly for lesser threats than general nuclear exchanges.

srvmshr 4y ago
30MT 1 KM away is probably similar to ~5MT directly overhead by back of the envelope calculation. Sufficiently secure still I would say. None of the published warheads specs are 30MT & even 5MT would be the combined strength of few MIRVs. And note that most warheads are airbursts not ground penetration type. That can make a lot of difference
- idontwantthis 4y ago
  The point is that it's an immobile target with known protections, and missiles are accurate enough to hit it directly as many times as necessary. I'm sure it's specifically targeted by sufficient weapons to destroy it. It could survive a lot, but not enough. And, like I said, the proof is that it doesn't actually handle much of NORAD anymore. NORAD is mostly above ground because any immobile target is hopelessly vulnerable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson_Space_Force_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson_Space_Force_Base This is where NORAD is based now. Also, I read the article wrong, it's 30MT at 2km away.
  - srvmshr 4y ago
    The move to Peterson AFB was not a security measure, but a cost saving measure by the USAF & GAO. Lot of concerns were posted about the same by few Congressman. https://armedservices.house.gov/2008/7/skelton-and-hunter-express-concerns-over-norad-move https://armedservices.house.gov/2008/7/skelton-and-hunter-ex... Plus, THAAD is meant to speed up ABM capabilities over time. Going by experience following this area, one of the reasons why you don't hear much about it is probably because USAF is pretty serious to keep the specifics under cover as long as possible.
namlem 4y ago
I don't think any active Russian missiles have single warheads anywhere near 30MT. Their big ones are about 500kT, which Cheyenne Mountain could probably withstand just fine.
- srvmshr 4y ago
  Yep. Precisely The chances of breaching Cheyenne complex is near zero. Here's why: The mountain face is pure granite atleast a quarter mile thick above the bunker reinforced with steel inside. To breach even 100-odd meters, you need a sufficiently strong impactor on top of your warhead which is made of lead or similar grade material. That drastically reduces the payload of actual weapon. If you choose a cruise missile, none of them have sufficient range & also again weight limited in the neighborhood of 1000kgs. If you really want to bore a hole through with multiple impacts, you would need a dozen warhead hitting the exact same spot. CEP of best missiles are still ~10-100 mtrs in the best case. You can do the math how probable is the event something will breach Cheyenne Mountain complex. To add to another separate comment, NORAD still keeps backup operation alive inside the cave complex (source: Wikipedia). This is in the event a hostile situation disables Peterson AFB.
  - dekhn 4y ago
    I imagine one of the hardest parts of survival here is maintaining the air intakes.

srvmshr 4y ago

30MT 1 KM away is probably similar to ~5MT directly overhead by back of the envelope calculation. Sufficiently secure still I would say. None of the published warheads specs are 30MT & even 5MT would be the combined strength of few MIRVs. And note that most warheads are airbursts not ground penetration type. That can make a lot of difference

idontwantthis 4y ago
The point is that it's an immobile target with known protections, and missiles are accurate enough to hit it directly as many times as necessary. I'm sure it's specifically targeted by sufficient weapons to destroy it. It could survive a lot, but not enough. And, like I said, the proof is that it doesn't actually handle much of NORAD anymore. NORAD is mostly above ground because any immobile target is hopelessly vulnerable. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson_Space_Force_Base https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterson_Space_Force_Base This is where NORAD is based now. Also, I read the article wrong, it's 30MT at 2km away.
- srvmshr 4y ago
  The move to Peterson AFB was not a security measure, but a cost saving measure by the USAF & GAO. Lot of concerns were posted about the same by few Congressman. https://armedservices.house.gov/2008/7/skelton-and-hunter-express-concerns-over-norad-move https://armedservices.house.gov/2008/7/skelton-and-hunter-ex... Plus, THAAD is meant to speed up ABM capabilities over time. Going by experience following this area, one of the reasons why you don't hear much about it is probably because USAF is pretty serious to keep the specifics under cover as long as possible.

namlem 4y ago

I don't think any active Russian missiles have single warheads anywhere near 30MT. Their big ones are about 500kT, which Cheyenne Mountain could probably withstand just fine.

srvmshr 4y ago
Yep. Precisely The chances of breaching Cheyenne complex is near zero. Here's why: The mountain face is pure granite atleast a quarter mile thick above the bunker reinforced with steel inside. To breach even 100-odd meters, you need a sufficiently strong impactor on top of your warhead which is made of lead or similar grade material. That drastically reduces the payload of actual weapon. If you choose a cruise missile, none of them have sufficient range & also again weight limited in the neighborhood of 1000kgs. If you really want to bore a hole through with multiple impacts, you would need a dozen warhead hitting the exact same spot. CEP of best missiles are still ~10-100 mtrs in the best case. You can do the math how probable is the event something will breach Cheyenne Mountain complex. To add to another separate comment, NORAD still keeps backup operation alive inside the cave complex (source: Wikipedia). This is in the event a hostile situation disables Peterson AFB.
- dekhn 4y ago
  I imagine one of the hardest parts of survival here is maintaining the air intakes.