2 ms·
If you read the book, you might change your mind about that. It spends a lot of time documenting some really basic deficiencies -- bombs that could detonate if
by timr 12y ago
If you read the book, you might change your mind about that. It spends a lot of time documenting some really basic deficiencies -- bombs that could detonate if overheated or struck by a single projectile, for example. A large number of weapons were made with high explosives that weren't thermostable. Others could detonate if dropped from a few feet. There were many deployed ballistic missiles that were susceptible to lightning strikes. The arming switches in SAC aircraft were, for years, simple open-loop circuits that had a high probability of short-circuiting in an accident.
In fact, most of the book is about the attempts of the weapons labs to make the arsenal safer. Most of those attempts were rebuffed by the military. The SAC's strict policies definitely helped to prevent disaster, but if you read about some of the incidents, it's clear that there was a lot of stupid luck involved, too.
- Retric 12y agoMost of those would probably cause a non nuclear detonation. Still bad, but no where near as dangerous.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- Lagged2Death 12y agoThe author deals with this line of reasoning and finds it wanting.
- JackFr 12y agoTake my comment with a grain of salt, as I have not read the book, but there is no story if there is no danger. If the author concluded that there was no nuclear danger, its likely the book has little more than academic interest, and doesn't get published. You can both be correct and want to sell books but commercial considerations can also direct rhetoric.
- deleted 12y ago[deleted]
- jloughry 12y agoBritish strategic nuclear weapon designs used mechanical safeguards, including thousands of steel ball bearings poured in through a hole in the casing, which made the bomb safe to carry but had to be drained out before use [1]. BLUE PEACOCK, however, used chickens [2]. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Club#Design_features http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violet_Club#Design_features [2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock#Chicken_power http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Peacock#Chicken_power
- blueskin_ 12y agoThe chicken wasn't a safety feature; it was to keep the warhead's electronics warm for a few days when buried in the ground so it would still work when needed.
- arethuza 12y agoUK nukes used to use bicycle locks: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7097101.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7097101.stm "The Bomb is actually armed by inserting a bicycle lock key into the arming switch and turning it through 90 degrees. There is no code which needs to be entered or dual key system to prevent a rogue individual from arming the Bomb." NB To this day the crews of UK Trident submarines can launch their weapons on their own without requiring any codes to be transmitted to activate the weapons.
- andyjohnson0 12y ago"To this day the crews of UK Trident submarines can launch their weapons on their own without requiring any codes to be transmitted to activate the weapons." Isn't this also the case with US Trident submarines? That is, codes transmitted to the vessel are used to authenticate launch instructions, not to enable the missiles to be armed. Otherwise the submarine would be unable to launch in the event that land-based communications systems were destroyed.
- arethuza 12y agoAs far as I know, only the UK Tridents have this interesting arrangement. This link on Permissive Action Links suggests that US Trident submarines need to receive codes to unlock safes before they can launch: "Instead of another party confirming a missile launch as in the case of land-based ICBMs, the set of keys is distributed among the key personnel on the submarine and are kept in safes (each of these crew members has access only to his keys), some of which are locked by combination locks. Nobody on board has the combination to open these safes - the unlock key comes as a part of the launch order from the higher authority." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link