PDA

View Full Version : A bit OT, USAF mistakenly loaded Nuclear weapons on a B-52! Massive screw up!



Sergio_101
09-06-2007, 01:31 AM
Unless you have been there you can not begin to understand how
big a screw up this is. It's a massive phuck up.

The security and "fail safe" systems in place make this impossible.

But it happened!

Somehow live nuclear weapons got loaded on a B-52H and flown across country.

WOW!

http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/05/loose.nukes/index.html

Litteraly a hundred people had to have screwed up simutaniusly.

USAF security surrounding nuclear warheads and materials
is so severe that..... this is unimaginable.

And, no, I will not even discuss any details of my training
on how to bevaive on and around allegedly
nuke armed
aircraft.
Even 30+ years later it's best not discussed.
But.....

Heads will roll BIG TIME.

Sergio

ZiegDrakor
09-06-2007, 01:41 AM
I couldnt help but chuckle at the fact that one of my buddies is Missiles shop up in Minot...

ploughman
09-06-2007, 01:45 AM
That's so career ending it's not funny.

ViktorViktor
09-06-2007, 03:44 AM
As they used to say,

'Why not Minot ?'
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

RamsteinUSA
09-06-2007, 04:03 AM
I worked with B52's in SAC and they only loaded Nuke weapons in secured areas. Not on the regular pad. The Nuke were labled Inert for practice. If they were real they did not have the Inert Stencil painted on them. The crews practiced loading these about 3x per month. These exercises are named Claxons. Only those with the proper 'Secret' security clearance can get into these gated secured areas. The B52's then taxi around the area 1 time with the weapons and fuel loaded. The weapons are then unloaded.

While with TAC in Europe I did also see tactical nuke warheads on fighters. These wer e on the 'Hotpad'. These aircraft were launched often and could start and launch in a 5 mintuue window. The aircraft used explosive starter cannisters to spin up the engine without using the portable turbine compressors. The aircraft were launched when over border incursion happened ont he East-West German Border area of Europe. This was a long time ago. Things have changed.

But, The B52 loading procedures probably are the same. It took hundreds of people to enable the Nukes to be loaded and the aircraft to move.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/crackwhip.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-06-2007, 04:19 AM
I think if we knew the true scope of screw-ups with nukes we`d be asking for them to be banned. i`m surprised we haven`t blown ourselves to pieces yet by some accident.

Humans should never have invented such devastating equipment that keeps us all constantly 5 minutes away from instant destruction.

Heliopause
09-06-2007, 04:28 AM
Well mistakes happen...
A couple of days ago in a Dutch newspaper: according to the "Rheinische Post" (German newspaper); on may 2nd 1984 an British atom bomb rolled of a truck on the airfield of Brüggen near the town of Elmpt. During rain the "not so securred" bomb slipped of. 6 military where punished at the time.

Rammjaeger
09-06-2007, 05:50 AM
Originally posted by Sergio_101:
Somehow live nuclear weapons got loaded on a B-52H and flown across country.


Wasn't this a regular occurrence throughout the Cold War? The article says the warheads weren't armed.

Breeze147
09-06-2007, 06:35 AM
As an USAF Security Police veteran, I find this virtually impossible to believe. As someone above said, at least a hundred people would have to simultaneously phuck up. Maybe more.

If this really happened, exactly how far up his *** would the pilot's head have to be?

I say B.S.!!!

carguy_
09-06-2007, 06:52 AM
Well, maybe they had a purpose in transporting the weapons.Maybe the information somehow go out of the closed human circle and spread.A major ####up in procedures would be a good excuse for the press.

Monterey13
09-06-2007, 06:57 AM
As a graduate of the US Navy Nuclear Weapons Procedures Supervisor School, I am also familiar with what is involved here.

No way it happened. Media hype. I say BS also.

I dug this out for the skeptics in here.
http://webpages.charter.net/paytons4/paytons4/nwcert3.jpg

Viper2005_
09-06-2007, 07:28 AM
It's not as though mistakes haven't been made in the past:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents

In relative terms, this was quite a benign event in that nobody died, though a few careers might...

DuxCorvan
09-06-2007, 07:52 AM
Do someone remember this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palomares_H-Bomb_Incident)?

The immense resources that the US Navy used to locate the 4th bomb were initially fruitless. The DSV Alvin had to follow the indications of a local fisherman who accidentally saw the fall of the bomb. The man, called Francisco Simó, was since then known among the locals as "Paco of the Bomb". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-06-2007, 08:18 AM
It`s all very well saying there are a hundred safeguards, a dozen people check it, but all it takes is one error where it matters, then it follows on cos someone `assumes` it`s ok cos someone before will have checked, etc, etc...

Point is, we`re human, we`re faulty, not perfect, we F... up sometimes. That perfect bridge that can never collapse, the perfect ship, plane, computer, space shuttle....

Murphy`s law is always waiting for that ONE time when everyone falls asleep at the same time, proverbially.

Well we have them and we ain`t giving them up because now most everyone else has them, so it`s just a matter of who screws up first...

Hopefully, no one will... forever.

FluffyDucks2
09-06-2007, 08:32 AM
And..."Paco of the bomb" was a shrewd cookie....he (rightfully) claimed the salvage rights which were nominally at the time 1-2% of salvage value of a 2 billion dollar bomb.... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

That Paco guy was a smart cookie lol http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Taylortony
09-06-2007, 08:35 AM
Originally posted by Heliopause:
Well mistakes happen...
A couple of days ago in a Dutch newspaper: according to the "Rheinische Post" (German newspaper); on may 2nd 1984 an British atom bomb rolled of a truck on the airfield of Brüggen near the town of Elmpt. During rain the "not so securred" bomb slipped of. 6 military where punished at the time.

Hmmm I will be still covered by the official secrets act on this, so "No comment"

jimDG
09-06-2007, 08:39 AM
False flag op. Or a False flag op gone wrong.

Taylortony
09-06-2007, 08:40 AM
?

Maj.Kaos
09-06-2007, 09:07 AM
Here's the conspiracy version:
Wag the Dog Part 2.

US tries to secretly deliver nuke to terrorist, to target a reluctant ally in the war against Iraq, or target Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Democratic National Convention, UBI corporate headquarters, etc) to gain more support in the war against terror (or in support of Bush's war of terror, if that's the idea you lean toward), or to try to frame Iran as a real nuclear threat, but someone along the way stumbles across the nuke and unveils the operation (but not it's intention, not yet), so the government concocts this ridiculous story of a screw up on the part of the Air Force.

Someone's career will come to an end, not out of justice, but for the sake of keeping the intent of the operation a secret.

jimDG called it first...helpful reading..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

jimDG
09-06-2007, 09:34 AM
Or, if it's a false flag op not gone wrong, it says "oups, we have nuclear bombers as well", with regards Tu-95s flying over the north sea.
Although, if it was that, it would be a very stupid way to do it.

DuxCorvan
09-06-2007, 09:55 AM
US tries to secretly deliver nuke to terrorist...

Well, surely there are subtler ways to "secretly" deliver a nuke than loading it in a B-52... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

FluffyDucks2
09-06-2007, 10:54 AM
That's the clever part http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

jimDG
09-06-2007, 11:11 AM
Or, it could have something to do with putting pressure on Iran.
But one thing it definitely is, is too ambiguous to serve any real purpose, if on purpose.

alert_1
09-06-2007, 01:34 PM
I woudnt be first tiem when media spread total BS...

ViktorViktor
09-06-2007, 01:54 PM
Well, I'm sure the Soviets also had their share of screw-ups - didn't they ?

nickdanger3
09-06-2007, 02:40 PM
Just for the record, the story was broken by the Military Times. While a subsidiary of Gannett, hardly a left wing, anti-military media outlet.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/09/airforce_nuclear_warhead_070905/

Bo_Nidle
09-06-2007, 02:42 PM
If this is a genuine mistake then it's a bloody scary one and tends to reinforce certain stereotypical preconceptions http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

http://i19.photobucket.com/albums/b194/BoNidle/cletusUSAF.jpg

ploughman
09-06-2007, 02:43 PM
Attack of the 50ft Moron?

Korolov1986
09-06-2007, 03:02 PM
Maybe the USAF is trying to pull a "F-22" again and ask for more B-2s or B-1s to replace B-52s.

Viper2005_
09-06-2007, 03:08 PM
Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
Well, I'm sure the Soviets also had their share of screw-ups - didn't they ?

Doubtless, but then again their news media would have been both less willing and less able to spill the beans.

They had all sorts of "problems" in their space programme which the West didn't learn about for a very long time...

Bremspropeller
09-06-2007, 03:10 PM
So what exactly is the deal about carrying some instant-sunshine eggs around?

They're secured and won't go off even in an event of a crash.

Viper2005_
09-06-2007, 03:19 PM
In theory.

The lesson of history is that sometimes the conventional explosives can explode as a result of crash damage, liberally spreading radioactive material over a rather wide area. This sort of mess is extremely expensive to clear up.

It is also worth pointing out that live weapons have been accidentally fired under exercise conditions due to incorrect switch settings. This is hardly surprising since the whole objective of the training exercise is to train aircrew such that when the excrement hits the fan they set the switches so as to kill people and break their stuff.

Now, nukes are supposed to be harder to accidentally arm than conventional weapons, but if you're accidentally carrying nukes then you're already having a bad day...

pacettid
09-06-2007, 03:39 PM
Originally posted by Monterey13:
As a graduate of the US Navy Nuclear Weapons Procedures Supervisor School, I am also familiar with what is involved here.

No way it happened. Media hype. I say BS also.

I dug this out for the skeptics in here.
http://webpages.charter.net/paytons4/paytons4/nwcert3.jpg

LOL, I have one of these too!

Jasko76
09-06-2007, 03:43 PM
Like Bremspropeller said - what's the big deal? I always presumed they never stopped flying around with nukes. The SAC is still on constant readyness, or isn't it?

DuxCorvan
09-06-2007, 03:48 PM
Hey, they gave a Nuclear Procedures certificate to some kind of smashed grey worm there! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Taylortony
09-06-2007, 03:56 PM
Didn't Homer Simpson get one of those certificates too?

Monterey13
09-06-2007, 04:51 PM
pacettid....check your PM.

Enforcer572005
09-06-2007, 05:21 PM
Oh good God. As has been said (and ignored by most)by several former military types and others who know the subj matter, those things won't go off until a very complicated process occurs. For many yrs, SAC kept nuke armed bombers in the air 24-7. Yeah, there were crashes and incidents, a B-47 even jettisoned one near Florence SC (if I remember correctly) and, despite what the entertainment industry thinks, there was never a danger of one going off. Never. And they were ALCMs that got loaded I think....supposedly.

I tend to think this is some kinda cover for something else, but NOT for some silly Jane Fonda script about the US trying to frame some fanatic country; They save us the trouble.

And there is no way B-1s or B-2s are gonna be put back in production. Genius Rumsfeld put 30 of the B1s in the boneyard, and when it was finally seen how stupid that was, only 17 could be recovered due to using the rest for spare parts.
The production tooling is long gone for both.

There are only about 38 B-52Hs around (or will be soon), because more geniuses decided to mothball the remaining 60 to save money. So much for the new engines.

Clinton scrapped most of the other 250 B-52Gs, and we can't afford another bomber. Might hurt somebody - we don't wanna do that.

Sort of reminds me of MS CFS-2, where the cities wouldnt show bomb damage, and AI bombers only dropped one bomb.


Worrying about nukes accidentally exploding is like worrying about "assault weapons" or "armor piercing bullets" and all the other idiotic fantasies that get hyped for political capitol.

Copperhead311th
09-06-2007, 08:24 PM
Originally posted by Maj.Kaos:
Here's the conspiracy version:
Wag the Dog Part 2.

US tries to secretly deliver nuke to terrorist, to target a reluctant ally in the war against Iraq, or target Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Democratic National Convention, UBI corporate headquarters, etc) to gain more support in the war against terror (or in support of Bush's war of terror, if that's the idea you lean toward), or to try to frame Iran as a real nuclear threat, but someone along the way stumbles across the nuke and unveils the operation (but not it's intention, not yet), so the government concocts this ridiculous story of a screw up on the part of the Air Force.

Someone's career will come to an end, not out of justice, but for the sake of keeping the intent of the operation a secret.

jimDG called it first...helpful reading..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Mot gonna happen. as some of our Retired militray freinds here will tell you thatPlutoium is compleatly tracable and the US militry/CIA?NSA have a very large plutonium sample data base from since the start of the cold war. Even after detonation the trace molicules left behind by the plutonium is tracable. Even to the exact plant & reactor in most cases.

And we're not thr only ones with a data base that extensive. We wuld be outed very quickly if we ried a scheme like that. Altho i am in total favor of one detonating in Iran...ain't gonna happen covertly. there or anywhere else.

jimDG
09-06-2007, 11:23 PM
Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Maj.Kaos:
Here's the conspiracy version:
Wag the Dog Part 2.

US tries to secretly deliver nuke to terrorist, to target a reluctant ally in the war against Iraq, or target Israel, Saudi Arabia, the Democratic National Convention, UBI corporate headquarters, etc) to gain more support in the war against terror (or in support of Bush's war of terror, if that's the idea you lean toward), or to try to frame Iran as a real nuclear threat, but someone along the way stumbles across the nuke and unveils the operation (but not it's intention, not yet), so the government concocts this ridiculous story of a screw up on the part of the Air Force.

Someone's career will come to an end, not out of justice, but for the sake of keeping the intent of the operation a secret.

jimDG called it first...helpful reading..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag

Mot gonna happen. as some of our Retired militray freinds here will tell you thatPlutoium is compleatly tracable and the US militry/CIA?NSA have a very large plutonium sample data base from since the start of the cold war. Even after detonation the trace molicules left behind by the plutonium is tracable. Even to the exact plant & reactor in most cases.

And we're not thr only ones with a data base that extensive. We wuld be outed very quickly if we ried a scheme like that. Altho i am in total favor of one detonating in Iran...ain't gonna happen covertly. there or anywhere else. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hm, that's true, I guess a paranoid feeling got me there.
Which leaves two remaining possibilities:
Deliberate paranoia-inducing screw-up (for those who don't believe that nukes can accidentally get on bombers), or accidental paranoia-inducing screw-up (for those who don't know that nukes don't just go off even if flown on (or dropped from) a bomber) - either way, it shouldn't be happening, and shouldn't have happened.

Sergio_101
09-07-2007, 01:40 AM
Ramstein is largely correct.
But we frequently flew B-52s (G and D models)off with
practice nukes (maybe not always practice).
And, YES it would take a hundred(s of) people
to screw that up.

Truth be known I believe it's a cover up.
The safest way to transport nukes is in or under a B-52H.
But it's illegal under treaty rules.

Someone squealed.

Sergio

ploughman
09-07-2007, 01:50 AM
You know I was thinking that it would have probably been in violation of some treaty or other. Interesting. Wonder what the Russian's'll do now (or maybe yesterday's 8 Bear sortie into the North Atlantic was their response?)

Jasko76
09-07-2007, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
Altho i am in total favor of one detonating in Iran...

No, really? I'd like to see you do that and not start the WWIII.

danjama
09-07-2007, 09:58 AM
Originally posted by Jasko76:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
Altho i am in total favor of one detonating in Iran...

No, really? I'd like to see you do that and not start the WWIII. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

here we go...

SeaFireLIV
09-07-2007, 10:25 AM
Yes, didn`t take long before someone would wish death and destruction on fellow Human beings, cats and dogs too... well, everything in said someone else`s country.

IBTL.

Bo_Nidle
09-07-2007, 03:37 PM
I was a former RAF Policeman and heavily involved in the security and movement of nuclear weapons at bases such as Waddington, Bruggen, and Honington. Without exception the movement of these devices entailed considerable planning and personnel. Nothing moved without the correct paperwork, procedures, two man principle in effect, convoy escort etc.

How these weapons could be accidentally loaded beggars belief. True they cannot detonate without a specific arming system but in the event of a crash they would still present a considerable radiological hazard to say the least.

As no-one apparently knew they had been loaded in the first place the first crews to reach a crash site would have been at extreme risk.

But the biggest question is still how on Earth these could be moved in this fashion with no-one keeping track of them? These are NUKES, not a 9mm automatic or box of blanks! It's kind of difficult to forget to book them back in!!!!

If it is true that no-one knew until after the event then it casts a grave shadow over the state of the US Military's security procedures and should concern us all.

berg417448
09-07-2007, 03:46 PM
Not a nuke but a very large bomb has been unaccounted for before:

http://www.gunnies.pac.com.au/gallery/grand_slam.htm

ploughman
09-07-2007, 04:39 PM
Now I remember when I lived in Savannah there was a story about a lost atom bomb over by Tybee Island or some place that sank so deep in the mud they never could find it.

Taylortony
09-07-2007, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by Bo_Nidle:
I was a former RAF Policeman and heavily involved in the security and movement of nuclear weapons at bases such as Waddington, Bruggen, and Honington. Without exception the movement of these devices entailed considerable planning and personnel. Nothing moved without the correct paperwork, procedures, two man principle in effect, convoy escort etc.

Hmmm Bo, you know my involvement, so I wont say yes or no..... if you want more PM me,, but again wary as not safe....



True they cannot detonate without a specific arming system but in the event of a crash they would still present a considerable radiological hazard to say the least.

Again PM me, do not want to go there or get into specifics over that one.



As no-one apparently knew they had been loaded in the first place the first crews to reach a crash site would have been at extreme risk.
But the biggest question is still how on Earth these could be moved in this fashion with no-one keeping track of them? These are NUKES, not a 9mm automatic or box of blanks! It's kind of difficult to forget to book them back in!!!!.



One would say sabre rattling to enforce a point....... again conjecture on this one, but as we know the procedures, accidental does not ring true...............

Again will not get drawn into the subject even after all these years...... the stuff I did is still relevent...........



If it is true that no-one knew until after the event then it casts a grave shadow over the state of the US Military's security procedures and should concern us all.

Bo_Nidle
09-07-2007, 05:31 PM
Originally posted by berg417448:
Not a nuke but a very large bomb has been unaccounted for before:

http://www.gunnies.pac.com.au/gallery/grand_slam.htm

Scary how these pieces of ordnance can get so casually mislaid. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

There was a story on the news in the UK a few days ago about a factory somewhere in the midlands I think, that had been using a live artillery shell as a doorstop for the last 43 years!!!!

Of a more minor but still potentially lethal nature heres a true tale from a Police station near to where I'm stationed:

About two years ago a gent walked into the enquiry office and says "I found this in my grandads shed. I think you ought to have it". He promptly hands over a live 2 inch mortar round. The enquiry office clerk takes possession of it,very gingerly, and takes it out to the rear yard and puts it in the high-tech "bomb-bin",this being a plastic dustbin (trashcan) filled with sawdust (I'm not kidding!). Army bomb disposal are then called.

A few hours later the bomb disposal guys arrive and go out to the bin. They thrust their hands into the sawdust and have a rummage around for the mortar round. About 5 minutes later they come back in and tell the clerk "We have the mortar round. By the way, do you want us to get rid of that hand grenade while we are at it?" To which they get a horrified "WHAT F***ING HAND GRENADE!!!!!"

It would appear that someone took possession of a live WW2 mills bomb within the last 4 years but forgot to tell anyone!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-07-2007, 05:44 PM
Originally posted by Ploughman:
Now I remember when I lived in Savannah there was a story about a lost atom bomb over by Tybee Island or some place that sank so deep in the mud they never could find it.

Well, I hope that`s one of those tell-tale rumours that get bandied about after a few rounds at the pub.

Last thing I want is some lost atom bomb to be just forgotten about like some lost chewing gum!

berg417448
09-07-2007, 06:00 PM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Ploughman:
Now I remember when I lived in Savannah there was a story about a lost atom bomb over by Tybee Island or some place that sank so deep in the mud they never could find it.

Well, I hope that`s one of those tell-tale rumours that get bandied about after a few rounds at the pub.

Last thing I want is some lost atom bomb to be just forgotten about like some lost chewing gum! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Nope. That story is true.

The Tybee bomb was lost in the sea near Savannah, Georgia in 1958. The bomb was lost when a B-47 collided with a fighter plane. The bomb was never found.

There was a big story in the US last year when they thought they might have finally located the missing bomb but nothing came of it.

SeaFireLIV
09-07-2007, 07:11 PM
If that really is true then I`m flabbergasted. The Human race really are just children who don`t really know what we`re doing. I`m further amazed then that we`ve muddled through this long.

WWSensei
09-07-2007, 07:31 PM
While there are safeguards most posting here don't know what is involved. I spoke to my brother, a former B-52 aircraft electronics crew member and later, after bootstrapping, a Buff pilot. Carrying the bomb casings is done quite often. What didn't happen was that the warheads weren't removed.

In terms of "nuclear incidents" I find an incident where a nuclear warhead is transported from one nuclear weapons equipped US military base, on board a US military aircraft rated to carry nuclear weapons to another US military base rated to house nuclear weapons to be pretty damn low on the "real life risks" factor. Personally, I find the idea of transporting them by convoy or train far more frightening.

It is a treaty violation, and will result in the end of one or more people's careers--and rightfully so, but this isn't like 6 warheads were lost in some remote country or out in the wilderness. I am almost certain the crew realized during the routine in-flight inspection what had happened.

Someone asked about SAC and whether they still fly on alert. No. SAC no longer exists. Back in the early 90s TAC, SAC and MAC were dismantled. Air Combat command was formed and units were formed of multi-type aircraft roles. When I flew with the 86th (just prior to their move to Aviano, IT) we had KC-135s, C-130s, F-16s, F-15s and were a forward deployment for up to 12 B-52s. Routine B-52 flights being on alert were stopped long ago, especially once the Cold War ended.

Zeus-cat
09-07-2007, 09:14 PM
Here is an account of the nuke lost near Savannah. It's still out there - somewhere. The author's opinions are all his own, I just provided the link to substantiate that the story is true.

http://www.fdungan.com/savannah.htm

This isn't the first nuke to be lost either. The USAF dropped one into the sea on January 17, 1966 near Palomares, Spain. That one was recovered by the midget submarine Alvin.

avimimus
09-07-2007, 09:38 PM
So long as they don't accidentally send it area bombing in Afganistan or Iraq it is relatively okay with me...

Still it isn't comforting.

What about that fictional French artillery unit that sent an entire crate of mislabeled nuclear tipped shells at the Algerian's and initially wrote them off as "duds"?

Sergio_101
09-08-2007, 07:58 AM
The US goverment has no official record of
an accidental loading or deployment
of a nuclear device before the aforementioned
Minot incident.

Nukes lost in operational accidents are not unknown.
There have been many!
Officially theyre known as "Broken Arrow" incidents.

Savannah is a lost thermonuclear device with no fusion core.
Therefore it's inert.

Other broken arrows can be found on-line.
There have been aproximately 30 US broken arrows
both Navy and USAF.

Sergio

SeaFireLIV
09-08-2007, 12:37 PM
Originally posted by Sergio_101:
The US goverment has no official record of
an accidental loading or deployment
of a nuclear device before the aforementioned
Minot incident.

Nukes lost in operational accidents are not unknown.
There have been many!
Officially theyre known as "Broken Arrow" incidents.

Savannah is a lost thermonuclear device with no fusion core.
Therefore it's inert.

Sergio

From the account that Zeus-cat has posted up (thanks zeus-cat), it`s still very feasible that this `inert` nuke could eventually arm itself and go off. It`s been in the bloody ground for 50 years!

Some of you may talk like you`re too cool to be affected, but I have no qualms in saying that doesn`t any of this strike you all as insane??

A lost nuke sitting there for over 50 years just waiting to go BOOM one day? and from Sergio`s `cool` response there could be more?



What is it with this human race? We can find ancient archeological artifacts with modern equipment but we can`t make the effort to trace and find an ATOM BOMB????

This world just blinds itself to its own danger.

Unruddybloodybelievable +1!

Monterey13
09-08-2007, 12:49 PM
Seafire, if you actually knew how a warhead worked, to get that BOOM, then you'd understand. Relax.

carguy_
09-08-2007, 12:53 PM
Originally posted by Copperhead311th:
Altho i am in total favor of one detonating in Iran...ain't gonna happen covertly. there or anywhere else.

As long as humanity does not let idiots like you get their hands on such weapons,there`s hope.

Viking-S
09-08-2007, 03:04 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif
True! True!

viking

RamsteinUSA
09-08-2007, 03:50 PM
Yis is a most over rated thread... a bunch of back seat driving arm chair quarterbacks just trolling for anything they can jump on to solidify their politics and twisted reason....
If there were no nukes, they would be speaking a twisted version of Commie/Nazi/Japanese/Chinese...
and getting permission to read or write in the public from some Newz Czar...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif

This story was twisted in the news.... get the facts...

XyZspineZyX
09-08-2007, 04:06 PM
...has anyone stopped to think about how this whole episode proves out the safety of the entire process of the US military arming and detonating a nuclear device?

On one hand you have this big screw-up...and on the other, it proves the safety system worked. They have very specific procedures for arming and detonating a nuke. Since nobody was given the go-ahead to even start the process, what you have here is a very dangerous thing being transported from one place to another, by accident- but in safety

Yeah, it never should have happened. But it did, and the systems that were in place that made sure there was no danger worked. I can't help but feel that's a good thing

danjama
09-08-2007, 08:02 PM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
...has anyone stopped to think about how this whole episode proves out the safety of the entire process of the US military arming and detonating a nuclear device?

On one hand you have this big screw-up...and on the other, it proves the safety system worked. They have very specific procedures for arming and detonating a nuke. Since nobody was given the go-ahead to even start the process, what you have here is a very dangerous thing being transported from one place to another, by accident- but in safety

Yeah, it never should have happened. But it did, and the systems that were in place that made sure there was no danger worked. I can't help but feel that's a good thing

good point m8

Sergio_101
09-08-2007, 09:20 PM
The massive screw up is that the missles appear
to have been issued and loaded without proper authorization.
That in itself is a massive screw up.

A thermonuclear devise is many bombs in one.
Look it as a train wreck of sorts.

A simple capacitor sends a charge to a shaped charge conventional explosive.
Many detenators fire simultaniously collapsing
a plutonium core to a super critical mass.
The resulting fission chain reaction (explosion)
provides the heat and pressure to force lithium, tritium
and deuterium to fuse.
A so called hydrogyn bomb (truth is there is no common hydrogyn used.).

As a result of the fusion of the thermonuclear elements the thing
heats up in a rather spectaculer manner.

Yeild can be anything from 50% from the fission to 5% on the
super huge bombs. (Bigger H Bombs tend to be "cleaner" than small ones).
Estimates are that the biggest H bomb ever detonated, the so called (Soviet) "Tsar Bomba"
was between 50 and 65 megatons. 95%+ of the energy
was from the fusion reaction.

So the Savannah bomb is as inert as a concrete block.

The bomb dropped from the crippled B-36 off the Pacific coast of Canada
was also inert, but had it's conventional explosives in place.
Those were detonated as it fell.

On the other hand the B-52 that crashed in Spain and the one at Thule
in Greenland were carrying fully armed operational devises.

All were recovered or confirmed destroyed in the fire after the crash.

More scary are the vast majority of broken arrows. They are in sunken submarines.
Both Russian(Soviet) and US subs went down with operational warheads.

As i remember the worst and most dangerous broken arrow was an air drop
from another crippled B-47. Although jettisoned it was fully operational.
it had the potential to go boom if hit just right.
Googling that one right now as I do not remember the crash site location.

Sergio

heywooood
09-08-2007, 09:36 PM
this has been the latest in a number of blunders lately WRT our nuclear arsenal and research....

A month or more ago, a Livermore scientist took a vacation to Ireland and with him went a laptop with some most sensitive, highly classified and very dangerous files on its hard drive....that computer was 'stolen' out of his hotel room...

Here is yet another huge mistake by people specifically trusted with the safeguarding and safe handleing of our nuclear technology and our arsenal...actually both of these rediculous occurences were the culmination of a series of blunders and mistakes - leading eventually to some really horrific possibilities.

It has been speculated on before by security professionals that too much familiarity with hazardous objects by the people that work with them or are entrusted to secure them, can and often does lead to slack attitudes and reduced effectiveness.

Pandora needs only a crack in the door and this year we seem bent on simply holding it open for her.

Sergio_101
09-08-2007, 09:57 PM
I can correct myself, it was a B-52G over Goldsboro, NC USA. Not a B-47

http://www.ibiblio.org/bomb/initial.html

Two devises, both 2.5 megaton MK39s were released.
One was destroyed, the other landed by parachute with little damage.

It was a close call, the one that was destroyed nearly went into a full detonation.

Sergio

Viper2005_
09-08-2007, 10:21 PM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
...has anyone stopped to think about how this whole episode proves out the safety of the entire process of the US military arming and detonating a nuclear device?

On one hand you have this big screw-up...and on the other, it proves the safety system worked. They have very specific procedures for arming and detonating a nuke. Since nobody was given the go-ahead to even start the process, what you have here is a very dangerous thing being transported from one place to another, by accident- but in safety

Yeah, it never should have happened. But it did, and the systems that were in place that made sure there was no danger worked. I can't help but feel that's a good thing

So I've got this swiss cheese. It's nice and thick. Which means that despite all the holes in it you can't see all the way through...

If you lost track of your M1, and it was handed in to the police on the other side of the country, would the fact that the kids who found it had no ammunition make you feel much better?

Safety Is No Accident.

Yes, I appreciate that the above analogy touched upon a sensitive subject. However, given the nature of the subject matter I feel that such a reference was justified.

<dons flak jacket & prepares for incoming>


Savannah is a lost thermonuclear device with no fusion core.
Therefore it's inert.

Physically yes, intellectually no.

http://www.hti.umich.edu/u/umhistmath/Lobachevsky.mp3

ViktorViktor
09-09-2007, 01:25 AM
Is there any benefit (money, extortion leverage, destruction potential) in going out and recovering these 'broken arrows' ?

I can imagine that somewhere in the world there are people who are thinking 'Let's go find one of these lost nuclear weapons.'

After reading Sergio's posts, it sounds like some can be set off eventually after recovery?

Vidar_1
09-09-2007, 04:38 AM
Originally posted by ViktorViktor:
Is there any benefit (money, extortion leverage, destruction potential) in going out and recovering these 'broken arrows' ?

I can imagine that somewhere in the world there are people who are thinking 'Let's go find one of these lost nuclear weapons.'

After reading Sergio's posts, it sounds like some can be set off eventually after recovery?

Yep, there are surely people who would like to do that. So even if they do not have WMD yet, they are aspiring to do so, so let's take them out with a pre-emptive strike. That way the world will be a much safer place!

SeaFireLIV
09-09-2007, 05:22 AM
Originally posted by Vidar_1:

Yep, there are surely people who would like to do that. So even if they do not have WMD yet, they are aspiring to do so, so let's take them out with a pre-emptive strike. That way the world will be a much safer place!



Rather than find the nukes you`d rather just blow up the `enemies` who might use them?

Right, so 10 or 20 years later when new `enemies` arrive they can get them instead? and even if you mange to destroy every enemy known to you, the nukes are still there and if they arm and go off, you`ve still lost a few thousand or million innocent people (probably our future children) cos you were too lazy to deal with the source problem ie, finding and safely removing the nuke?

Y`know, those who make the important decisions must have some wisdom, cos if they were as knee-jerk brain-dead reactionery as some posters here, we`d be all be long gone by now.

Perhaps, as carguy says, there`s some hope after all.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2007, 06:42 AM
Originally posted by Viper2005_:

So I've got this swiss cheese. It's nice and thick. Which means that despite all the holes in it you can't see all the way through...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Poor analogy, Viper! I think you're looking at this in an odd way

It's very poor because there are multiple cheeses here, if you follow me. the cheese that represents the transport of non-nuclear warheads was a Swiss.

The second cheese here was a nice thick, solid, good old American Government Cheese, like it or not. There were no holes in the "Safe and Arm" cheese. The nuke was not armed, it was not lost, it was not armed and it was not detonated. So, you must concede that this cheese was sound and had Zero holes, Viper http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Originally posted by Viper2005_:
If you lost track of your M1, and it was handed in to the police on the other side of the country, would the fact that the kids who found it had no ammunition make you feel much better?

Extremely poor example. For two reasons:

1) Now you are questioning one single individual's judgment and actions, over a device that is not capable of mass destruction, and does not require the same safe and arm procedures are a mere firearm

2) You are also assuming that this mere firearm has no secondary features for safety

Imagine this: A rifle has a team of trained individuals who transport it. They are Team 1. All transported rifles are supposed to be unloaded. They put an armed one in a plane by mistake. Team one has failed. They had an important job but they failed

The rifle needs a second trained crew to chamber a round, and then fire it. That's Team 2.

Now team 2 doesn't just go around arming and firing rifles. They need special instructions. Their job is important, just like Team 1's job, but it is even MORE important. Team 1's performance does not hinder or enhance the job Team 2 is responsible for: making sure ANY rifle on their aircraft is treateda s if loaded even though they are not supposed to be, and making sure they are not chambering a round and fired without authorisation. Without that authorisation, they do nothing of the sort at all. Team 2 succeeded. And that's why there are multiple people and multiple but separate responsibilities and compartmentalised actions- to provide security and safety in case of a screw-up

A screw up, for insatnce, like Team 1 putting the loaded rifle on the plane

Your M1 analogy would be great if the same person selected, loaded, armed, and fired the nuke. But that doesn't happen


Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Safety Is No Accident.


Exactly, my friend! What you just saw was one layer of safety, provided by the people responsible for this. Look, if the military of the USA, or ANY other country for that matter, was so perfect as to never ever ever make a single mistake no matter WHAT the weapon or situation, then you wouldn't need these layers of safety, such as having the procedure for loading up a nuke and the procedure for even arming it being the realm of two different groups who get their authorisations from two separate places

But since nobody, and I mean nobody is above making a mistake even a big one, we have these safety devices, and some of them aren't big sexy mechanical things to ooh and ahh over. Some of them are systems of orders and redundant orders and different teams getting those orders that must match

The *whole* purpose of that type of safety device is so that IF a screw-up makes a nuke get loaded, then there is no chance it will be detonated. You are simply choosing to look at the whole and act as if all the same people were responsible for everything. That's a very over-simplified situation. You aren't considering that what you're seeing *is* one of the safety systems working as intended http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The US military thinks that "Safety is no accident", too. That's why THEY are the ones who implemented this safety system you saw in action. They planned it out, and it worked http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Now that is good news

The bad news is that to even see that the system works means there was a screw-up with a nuke! A very serious thing. But there WAS no accident, because of one part of the safety system.

Come on now, Viper, you haven't been thinking that US soldiers Sailors and Airmen are simply trained, and then blindly trusted to be perfect, have you?? This was no accident that the nuke was never armed- that was one of the safety layers in case of erroneous transport, my friend http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif The people that didn't arm the thing are to be commended for doing their jobs well, just as those who screwed up on the other end need to be dealt with and made, unfortunately, an example of. It's too serious a mistake for a wrist-slap.

But hardly is this the first time a nuke has been flying around the USA. Hell, they used to have a nuclear reactor, running, on a B-36, flying around the country

This whole thing is a serious serious matter. Don;t think that just because I say "Well it was actually safe" that I am treating it lightly

Oh No! It is of dire importance and seriousness, there is almost nothing more serious in fact. But just because somebody says "well, to be honest, there wasn't a risk actually" doesn't mean that that person- me, for example- thinks it's OK to be transporting Nukes willy-nilly hither and yon if some mistakes were made and somebody felt like it! Don't assume that I think this whole thing was OK, because I point out that we were well within the safety margin, and as it was designed

But I'm here to say I'm pretty damned happy that the layer of safety designed to deal with the accidental transport of a live nuke worked as intended! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif It's not simply one chance to make the mistake, the mistake was made, and by coincidence, everything was somehow OK and boy did we get lucky

Now THAT would be terrifying!

Monterey13
09-09-2007, 08:21 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

BfHeFwMe
09-09-2007, 08:48 AM
SAC is dead, there's little emphasis and not so much funding on the nuke end anymore. They've taken a back seat, this proves it once and for all. Russia and China should if anything rest easier.

Frankly life is much better for all with less emphasis on grinding out the perfect nuclear war. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Viper2005_
09-09-2007, 09:09 AM
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiss_Cheese_model

This time the hole didn't go all the way through the cheese because as you say, the cheese is a thick one.

However, I don't see this as a triumph of the safety system, because the entire system intended to prevent nukes from being loaded onto aeroplanes accidentally failed, and something happened which should not have happened, exposing the world to additional risk unnecessarily.

To err is human. I don't see any point in hanging people out to dry for honest mistakes, though that may well happen. But I think that this incident should be very carefully analysed in order that lessons may be learned and improvements made to the system so that in future the holes don't go through as many layers in the cheese.

We're both saying similar things, but our points of view differ.

Vidar_1
09-09-2007, 09:23 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vidar_1:

Yep, there are surely people who would like to do that. So even if they do not have WMD yet, they are aspiring to do so, so let's take them out with a pre-emptive strike. That way the world will be a much safer place!



Rather than find the nukes you`d rather just blow up the `enemies` who might use them?

Right, so 10 or 20 years later when new `enemies` arrive they can get them instead? and even if you mange to destroy every enemy known to you, the nukes are still there and if they arm and go off, you`ve still lost a few thousand or million innocent people (probably our future children) cos you were too lazy to deal with the source problem ie, finding and safely removing the nuke?

Y`know, those who make the important decisions must have some wisdom, cos if they were as knee-jerk brain-dead reactionery as some posters here, we`d be all be long gone by now.

Perhaps, as carguy says, there`s some hope after all. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You are missing the point. The whole idea with the pre-emptive strike is to avoid any future trouble before it even develops. The idea is not as novel as it sounds. Look around you and you will see that this idea is actually shaping the world around us. If the bad guys are taken out then there is no one to develop or steal any WMD and the world will be a safer place for everyone. Surely you see the logic in that?

Vidar_1
09-09-2007, 12:54 PM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Viper2005_:

So I've got this swiss cheese. It's nice and thick. Which means that despite all the holes in it you can't see all the way through...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif Poor analogy, Viper! I think you're looking at this in an odd way

It's very poor because there are multiple cheeses here, if you follow me. the cheese that represents the transport of non-nuclear warheads was a Swiss.

The second cheese here was a nice thick, solid, good old American Government Cheese, like it or not. There were no holes in the "Safe and Arm" cheese. The nuke was not armed, it was not lost, it was not armed and it was not detonated. So, you must concede that this cheese was sound and had Zero holes, Viper http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



Originally posted by Viper2005_:
If you lost track of your M1, and it was handed in to the police on the other side of the country, would the fact that the kids who found it had no ammunition make you feel much better?

Extremely poor example. For two reasons:

1) Now you are questioning one single individual's judgment and actions, over a device that is not capable of mass destruction, and does not require the same safe and arm procedures are a mere firearm

2) You are also assuming that this mere firearm has no secondary features for safety

Imagine this: A rifle has a team of trained individuals who transport it. They are Team 1. All transported rifles are supposed to be unloaded. They put an armed one in a plane by mistake. Team one has failed. They had an important job but they failed

The rifle needs a second trained crew to chamber a round, and then fire it. That's Team 2.

Now team 2 doesn't just go around arming and firing rifles. They need special instructions. Their job is important, just like Team 1's job, but it is even MORE important. Team 1's performance does not hinder or enhance the job Team 2 is responsible for: making sure ANY rifle on their aircraft is treateda s if loaded even though they are not supposed to be, and making sure they are not chambering a round and fired without authorisation. Without that authorisation, they do nothing of the sort at all. Team 2 succeeded. And that's why there are multiple people and multiple but separate responsibilities and compartmentalised actions- to provide security and safety in case of a screw-up

A screw up, for insatnce, like Team 1 putting the loaded rifle on the plane

Your M1 analogy would be great if the same person selected, loaded, armed, and fired the nuke. But that doesn't happen


Originally posted by Viper2005_:
Safety Is No Accident.


Exactly, my friend! What you just saw was one layer of safety, provided by the people responsible for this. Look, if the military of the USA, or ANY other country for that matter, was so perfect as to never ever ever make a single mistake no matter WHAT the weapon or situation, then you wouldn't need these layers of safety, such as having the procedure for loading up a nuke and the procedure for even arming it being the realm of two different groups who get their authorisations from two separate places

But since nobody, and I mean nobody is above making a mistake even a big one, we have these safety devices, and some of them aren't big sexy mechanical things to ooh and ahh over. Some of them are systems of orders and redundant orders and different teams getting those orders that must match

The *whole* purpose of that type of safety device is so that IF a screw-up makes a nuke get loaded, then there is no chance it will be detonated. You are simply choosing to look at the whole and act as if all the same people were responsible for everything. That's a very over-simplified situation. You aren't considering that what you're seeing *is* one of the safety systems working as intended http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The US military thinks that "Safety is no accident", too. That's why THEY are the ones who implemented this safety system you saw in action. They planned it out, and it worked http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Now that is good news

The bad news is that to even see that the system works means there was a screw-up with a nuke! A very serious thing. But there WAS no accident, because of one part of the safety system.

Come on now, Viper, you haven't been thinking that US soldiers Sailors and Airmen are simply trained, and then blindly trusted to be perfect, have you?? This was no accident that the nuke was never armed- that was one of the safety layers in case of erroneous transport, my friend http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif The people that didn't arm the thing are to be commended for doing their jobs well, just as those who screwed up on the other end need to be dealt with and made, unfortunately, an example of. It's too serious a mistake for a wrist-slap.

But hardly is this the first time a nuke has been flying around the USA. Hell, they used to have a nuclear reactor, running, on a B-36, flying around the country

This whole thing is a serious serious matter. Don;t think that just because I say "Well it was actually safe" that I am treating it lightly

Oh No! It is of dire importance and seriousness, there is almost nothing more serious in fact. But just because somebody says "well, to be honest, there wasn't a risk actually" doesn't mean that that person- me, for example- thinks it's OK to be transporting Nukes willy-nilly hither and yon if some mistakes were made and somebody felt like it! Don't assume that I think this whole thing was OK, because I point out that we were well within the safety margin, and as it was designed

But I'm here to say I'm pretty damned happy that the layer of safety designed to deal with the accidental transport of a live nuke worked as intended! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif It's not simply one chance to make the mistake, the mistake was made, and by coincidence, everything was somehow OK and boy did we get lucky

Now THAT would be terrifying! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let's continue the M1 analogy. Mr B and his neighbours all got M1's. They are happy with this. They can shoot if they want to and noboby messes with them. They are a small exclusive club. Suddenly the wife of Mister B say's " I know mister S is working on an M1 in his garage, I have not seen it myself but I'm sure because some people on Mr S farm told me this. I also took a picture of the fram house and it really looks suspicious!". The Sheriff is contacted and goes over to Mr S place but finds nothing. The Sheriff tries to convince Mr B to respect the law and drop the issue. Mr B however, thinks the law is for weaklings and says "Are we going to do something or do we have to wait for a smoking M1?". So Mr B, with his keen sense of what is right and wrong decides to settle the thing himself. He goes over to Mr S farm, shoots him and rifles through his farm in search of the M1. He finds nothing. This does not bother mr B who says that Mr S was not a very popular guy anyway so we are better of without him. Some of the guys on mr B's farm thinks he did a good thing since everyone knew that Mr S was a gun nut and that he dreamed of posessing his own M1. That no M1 was ever found does not bother this crowd since Mr S DID aspire to posess an M1 and shooting him DID prevent him from getting an M1 so what's the big deal? Fortunately however, the vast majority of people on Mr B's farm are sensible people and have now seen to it that Mr B's room to manouvre is now severly limited. The sad thing with this story is that the whole neighbouthood is now in unrest and a lot of more people on Mr S farm are angry with the people on Mr B's farm than before Mr S was taken out and people now have to watch their back more closely than ever before......

Friendly_flyer
09-09-2007, 12:59 PM
Originally posted by Vidar_1:
If the bad guys are taken out then there is no one to develop or steal any WMD and the world will be a safer place for everyone. Surely you see the logic in that?

The problem of the pre-emptive strike is that you're likely to tick off someone in the process, making new bad guys who in turn must be dealt with. Any mad little group may hold a grudge against you, but if you take them out before they have "crossed the point of no return", they're actually innocent (at least on most others eyes), and you'll start loosing allies and friends.

XyZspineZyX
09-09-2007, 01:53 PM
Originally posted by Vidar_1:

Let's continue the M1 analogy. Mr B and his neighbours all got M1's. They are happy with this. They can shoot if they want to and noboby messes with them. They are a small exclusive club. Suddenly the wife of Mister B say's " I know mister S is working on an M1 in his garage, I have not seen it myself but I'm sure because some people on Mr S farm told me this. I also took a picture of the fram house and it really looks suspicious!". The Sheriff is contacted and goes over to Mr S place but finds nothing. The Sheriff tries to convince Mr B to respect the law and drop the issue. Mr B however, thinks the law is for weaklings and says "Are we going to do something or do we have to wait for a smoking M1?". So Mr B, with his keen sense of what is right and wrong decides to settle the thing himself. He goes over to Mr S farm, shoots him and rifles through his farm in search of the M1. He finds nothing. This does not bother mr B who says that Mr S was not a very popular guy anyway so we are better of without him. Some of the guys on mr B's farm thinks he did a good thing since everyone knew that Mr S was a gun nut and that he dreamed of posessing his own M1. That no M1 was ever found does not bother this crowd since Mr S DID aspire to posess an M1 and shooting him DID prevent him from getting an M1 so what's the big deal? Fortunately however, the vast majority of people on Mr B's farm are sensible people and have now seen to it that Mr B's room to manouvre is now severly limited. The sad thing with this story is that the whole neighbouthood is now in unrest and a lot of more people on Mr S farm are angry with the people on Mr B's farm than before Mr S was taken out and people now have to watch their back more closely than ever before......

What a bunch of Bull. Take your comments to a political forum, and then you can complain about US military involvement in Iraq to your heart's content

Do not use me in one of your analogies again. It is insulting on several levels, and I am reporting the post as I have no patience for this type of BS anymore. My replies were to Viper, not to you. It is clear to me that this post of yours is nothing but a baiting tactic, good day sir

DuxCorvan
09-09-2007, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by Sergio_101:
As i remember the worst and most dangerous broken arrow was an air drop
from another crippled B-47. Although jettisoned it was fully operational.
it had the potential to go boom if hit just right.
Googling that one right now as I do not remember the crash site location.


Don't know if it's the same you're looking for, but I've found something about a similar incident near Leicestershire, in the UK, in 1964, with the bomb still unrecovered.

gedunkman
09-09-2007, 02:37 PM
they gonna have to cut down 5000 whole complete forests for the amount of paperwork thisn is gonna produce.....screw the nuke issue and the stupid USAF...it gonna really burn the idiot tree huggers hah ha ha ha ha ha

I love a friggen parade!!

S~

Jasko76
09-09-2007, 04:32 PM
Originally posted by Vidar_1:

Let's continue the M1 analogy. Mr B and his neighbours all got M1's. They are happy with this. They can shoot if they want to and noboby messes with them. They are a small exclusive club. Suddenly the wife of Mister B say's " I know mister S is working on an M1 in his garage, I have not seen it myself but I'm sure because some people on Mr S farm told me this. I also took a picture of the fram house and it really looks suspicious!". The Sheriff is contacted and goes over to Mr S place but finds nothing. The Sheriff tries to convince Mr B to respect the law and drop the issue. Mr B however, thinks the law is for weaklings and says "Are we going to do something or do we have to wait for a smoking M1?". So Mr B, with his keen sense of what is right and wrong decides to settle the thing himself. He goes over to Mr S farm, shoots him and rifles through his farm in search of the M1. He finds nothing. This does not bother mr B who says that Mr S was not a very popular guy anyway so we are better of without him. Some of the guys on mr B's farm thinks he did a good thing since everyone knew that Mr S was a gun nut and that he dreamed of posessing his own M1. That no M1 was ever found does not bother this crowd since Mr S DID aspire to posess an M1 and shooting him DID prevent him from getting an M1 so what's the big deal? Fortunately however, the vast majority of people on Mr B's farm are sensible people and have now seen to it that Mr B's room to manouvre is now severly limited. The sad thing with this story is that the whole neighbouthood is now in unrest and a lot of more people on Mr S farm are angry with the people on Mr B's farm than before Mr S was taken out and people now have to watch their back more closely than ever before......

Now this just made me dizzy! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

SeaFireLIV
09-09-2007, 05:55 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:

Don't know if it's the same you're looking for, but I've found something about a similar incident near Leicestershire, in the UK, in 1964, with the bomb still unrecovered.

LOL. this just gets worse with each passing day. 2 days ago I discover for the first time that we`ve lost at least one nuke and the authorities can`t be arsed to find and dig it up, then I hear Dux corven say there may be one lost in Leicestershire!

I live in Leicestershire! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

I think Dux is trying to worry me, since there`s plenty of times when I`ve mentioned I live in leicester, you naughty naughty chap!



Someone`s having a joke at my expense. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

danjama
09-10-2007, 02:57 AM
Someone should drop a bloody nuke on Barking&Dagenham. Just warn me first!

ViktorViktor
09-10-2007, 04:09 AM
So it has been discovered that some nuclear weapons have been accidentally loaded in a bomber and flown around.

I can't help comparing our posts to that glass-of-water question, where people are asked to describe a half-way filled glass of water. Some will say the glass is half-full while others say it is half-empty.

And it seems that this is what is happening in this thread. How's that for an analogy ?
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

OberUberWurst
09-10-2007, 06:19 AM
USA had a nuclear accident on Danish ground in 1968.

Date : January 21, 1968
Cause: Accident caused by in-flight fire
Site : Off Thule Air Force Base, Greenland
Fatalities : 1
Injuries : ?
Aircraft type : Boeing B-52G Stratofortress
Operator : United States Air Force
Tail number : 58-0188
Crew : 7
Survivors : 6
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B-52_crash_at_Thule_Air_Base

List of military nuclear accidents :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_nuclear_accidents

DuxCorvan
09-10-2007, 09:01 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by DuxCorvan:

Don't know if it's the same you're looking for, but I've found something about a similar incident near Leicestershire, in the UK, in 1964, with the bomb still unrecovered.

LOL. this just gets worse with each passing day. 2 days ago I discover for the first time that we`ve lost at least one nuke and the authorities can`t be arsed to find and dig it up, then I hear Dux corven say there may be one lost in Leicestershire!

I live in Leicestershire! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/bigtears.gif

I think Dux is trying to worry me, since there`s plenty of times when I`ve mentioned I live in leicester, you naughty naughty chap!



Someone`s having a joke at my expense. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/mockface.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif
http://www.keywestfishtales.com/images/deep-drop-fishing-2lg.jpg

Korolov1986
09-10-2007, 01:33 PM
See guys, this is a non-issue, especially since it happened in the USA. Like guns, we all keep nukes in our basements and gang bangers keep blowing each other up with nukes smuggled in from Mexico. But that doesn't mean legally owned and purchased nukes should be banned from private ownership; this is just an example of one problem in an otherwise good system. Setting off nukes as a hobby is a lot of fun, and it's too bad those of you who live in countries where nukes are banned can't share the enjoyment. We also see better at night too - things glow in the dark real well.

danjama
09-10-2007, 02:18 PM
Originally posted by Korolov1986:
See guys, this is a non-issue, especially since it happened in the USA. Like guns, we all keep nukes in our basements and gang bangers keep blowing each other up with nukes smuggled in from Mexico. But that doesn't mean legally owned and purchased nukes should be banned from private ownership; this is just an example of one problem in an otherwise good system. Setting off nukes as a hobby is a lot of fun, and it's too bad those of you who live in countries where nukes are banned can't share the enjoyment. We also see better at night too - things glow in the dark real well.

sarcasm is a charm http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/agreepost.gif

Vidar_1
09-11-2007, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by BBB462cid:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Vidar_1:

Let's continue the M1 analogy. Mr B and his neighbours all got M1's. They are happy with this. They can shoot if they want to and noboby messes with them. They are a small exclusive club. Suddenly the wife of Mister B say's " I know mister S is working on an M1 in his garage, I have not seen it myself but I'm sure because some people on Mr S farm told me this. I also took a picture of the fram house and it really looks suspicious!". The Sheriff is contacted and goes over to Mr S place but finds nothing. The Sheriff tries to convince Mr B to respect the law and drop the issue. Mr B however, thinks the law is for weaklings and says "Are we going to do something or do we have to wait for a smoking M1?". So Mr B, with his keen sense of what is right and wrong decides to settle the thing himself. He goes over to Mr S farm, shoots him and rifles through his farm in search of the M1. He finds nothing. This does not bother mr B who says that Mr S was not a very popular guy anyway so we are better of without him. Some of the guys on mr B's farm thinks he did a good thing since everyone knew that Mr S was a gun nut and that he dreamed of posessing his own M1. That no M1 was ever found does not bother this crowd since Mr S DID aspire to posess an M1 and shooting him DID prevent him from getting an M1 so what's the big deal? Fortunately however, the vast majority of people on Mr B's farm are sensible people and have now seen to it that Mr B's room to manouvre is now severly limited. The sad thing with this story is that the whole neighbouthood is now in unrest and a lot of more people on Mr S farm are angry with the people on Mr B's farm than before Mr S was taken out and people now have to watch their back more closely than ever before......

What a bunch of Bull. Take your comments to a political forum, and then you can complain about US military involvement in Iraq to your heart's content

Do not use me in one of your analogies again. It is insulting on several levels, and I am reporting the post as I have no patience for this type of BS anymore. My replies were to Viper, not to you. It is clear to me that this post of yours is nothing but a baiting tactic, good day sir </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If there is any BS in this thread it's emmanating from you. Lecturing about this being a non-political forum. As soon a something comes up that does not fit your redneck views you run of whining to the moderators.

If you are offended by political issues then explain the excerpts below from this post http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/563...421016544#4421016544 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/5631004544?r=4421016544#4421016544) under your old nic Chuck_Older:

"the US didn't go start a colony in Iraq, sponsor it, then begin a policy of what to the Iraqi people were unconsionable actions, against which they revolted, and then the US did not go in to quell a rebellion

The US went there to fight for it's interests. One of the reasons, which people conveniently forget, is that Iraq violated numerous terms of the treaty set up from the First Gulf War. To not act on that would be a policy of Appeasement. I think Chamberlain set the example on that subject

We did not set up a government, we removed one. Iraq has not had it's "freedom" removed by the "US". For one thing the "US" wasn't the only nation there, and for another Iraq really didn't have nuch "freedom" allowed it by it's government, for example, religion was oppresed.

Invading Iraaq and then giving them free elections does not equal setting up a colony, and freedom fighters are fighting the wrong folks if they are fighting the US in Iraq. We don't want to govern Iraq. Most of us want nothing to do with Iraq."

Really, I see no point in actually discussing the issue further with you. However, I have no qualms about unmasking you as the pompous hypocrity you are.

So good day to you yourself "Sir".