Doubts about USA Nuke release process.
This is just my opinion based on my work in process control.
I have never yet seen even a simple system that worked the first time it was tested, and to my knowledge we have never launched a nuclear strike using the SIOP. The number of controls and checkpoints that must necessarily have been built into that launch process to prevent an accidental launch would almost certainly prevent an actual (valid) launch.
Having said that I think it’s a minor miracle that we all made it through the period 1978 to 1990 in one piece.
Again, just my two pennerth.
I have never yet seen even a simple system that worked the first time it was tested, and to my knowledge we have never launched a nuclear strike using the SIOP. The number of controls and checkpoints that must necessarily have been built into that launch process to prevent an accidental launch would almost certainly prevent an actual (valid) launch.
Having said that I think it’s a minor miracle that we all made it through the period 1978 to 1990 in one piece.
Again, just my two pennerth.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Germany
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is just my opinion based on my work in process control.
I have never yet seen even a simple system that worked the first time it was tested, and to my knowledge we have never launched a nuclear strike using the SIOP. The number of controls and checkpoints that must necessarily have been built into that launch process to prevent an accidental launch would almost certainly prevent an actual (valid) launch.
Having said that I think it’s a minor miracle that we all made it through the period 1978 to 1990 in one piece.
Again, just my two pennerth.
I have never yet seen even a simple system that worked the first time it was tested, and to my knowledge we have never launched a nuclear strike using the SIOP. The number of controls and checkpoints that must necessarily have been built into that launch process to prevent an accidental launch would almost certainly prevent an actual (valid) launch.
Having said that I think it’s a minor miracle that we all made it through the period 1978 to 1990 in one piece.
Again, just my two pennerth.
Not to mention the Goldsbro Crash, which allegedly saw one Mk39 device activate 3 of 4 arming mechanisms during the crash of its B52. The Mk39 has a yield of 4 Megatons. Would have been interesting to see if a detonation within CONUS would have set a retaliatory strike in motion. Absolutely terrifying.
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Sky
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bet accidentally letting a nuke off in your own back yard would be a tough test for the response plans. I wonder where the Trump, NATO and Russian doctrines ask the simple leadership question "I wonder if the problem's actually me because I've misunderstood the facts"!
Thanks for the update, KenV.
Last time I saw parts of the SIOP was in 1984. I was Plans weenie for our wing at Hill, so we had an annex or two of the SIOP. We did not have a nuclear commitment, but the big plan had stuff that we needed to support the SIOP.
I am fairly confident that we now have a host of nuke options, most of which are not WW3.
I also can comment on a few things from the Cold War days.
I sat alert in N. Dakota with my trusty air defense VooDoo waiting. It had two nuclear Genie rockets ( not missiles, but real rockets that we aimed with the jet and no guidance on the suckers). I was 23 years old, but a fully-qualified pilot. We had no PAL ( permissive action link) and no Unique Signal Generator panel. We did have "two-man" control, as my back seater had to "consent". The F-106 dudes only had the one pilot so if that sucker was launched, there was no two-man stuff ot anything else. Also be aware that the U.S. Navy nuke planes did not have PAL. Not sure about the SLBM's on the subs.
In the Viper, we had a long process to "pre-arm" the nukes and we were always worried that the damned things would not work after we escaped and evaded all the threats and did not get blinded by another guy's nuke. Strange and terrifying times, my friends.
The actual arming process was changed after Goldsboro and the Spanish incident. We had the PAL, and it was coded to the actual bomb, and we had to enter the code after other security procedures. Then we had the USG ( unique signal generator), which was actually a sobriety test. Basically, a sequence of switches/keystrokes that meant you really, really intended to drop/launch the nuke. So that was "pre-arm", not "arming". Each nuke has a profile that must be achieved for it to "arm" or the sucker will not go off. So in my Viper I could not loft a B61 from 5 or 6 miles way like the 'vark could, or do an over-the-shoulder like the Navy A-7's could do. I had to fly over the tgt and have that stupid parachute and also make sure the bomb went up thru a change of altitude and come back down sensing a change and so forth.
Oh well, glad those days are over.
Gums recalls....
Last time I saw parts of the SIOP was in 1984. I was Plans weenie for our wing at Hill, so we had an annex or two of the SIOP. We did not have a nuclear commitment, but the big plan had stuff that we needed to support the SIOP.
I am fairly confident that we now have a host of nuke options, most of which are not WW3.
I also can comment on a few things from the Cold War days.
I sat alert in N. Dakota with my trusty air defense VooDoo waiting. It had two nuclear Genie rockets ( not missiles, but real rockets that we aimed with the jet and no guidance on the suckers). I was 23 years old, but a fully-qualified pilot. We had no PAL ( permissive action link) and no Unique Signal Generator panel. We did have "two-man" control, as my back seater had to "consent". The F-106 dudes only had the one pilot so if that sucker was launched, there was no two-man stuff ot anything else. Also be aware that the U.S. Navy nuke planes did not have PAL. Not sure about the SLBM's on the subs.
In the Viper, we had a long process to "pre-arm" the nukes and we were always worried that the damned things would not work after we escaped and evaded all the threats and did not get blinded by another guy's nuke. Strange and terrifying times, my friends.
The actual arming process was changed after Goldsboro and the Spanish incident. We had the PAL, and it was coded to the actual bomb, and we had to enter the code after other security procedures. Then we had the USG ( unique signal generator), which was actually a sobriety test. Basically, a sequence of switches/keystrokes that meant you really, really intended to drop/launch the nuke. So that was "pre-arm", not "arming". Each nuke has a profile that must be achieved for it to "arm" or the sucker will not go off. So in my Viper I could not loft a B61 from 5 or 6 miles way like the 'vark could, or do an over-the-shoulder like the Navy A-7's could do. I had to fly over the tgt and have that stupid parachute and also make sure the bomb went up thru a change of altitude and come back down sensing a change and so forth.
Oh well, glad those days are over.
Gums recalls....
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: North Up
Posts: 489
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The BBC's Katty Kay writes:
The top nuclear commander in the US says he would resist any "illegal" presidential order to launch a strike.
Air Force Gen John Hyten, said as head of the US Strategic Command he provided advice to a president and expected that a legal alternative would be found.
His comments come just days after US senators discussed a president's authority to launch a nuclear attack.
Some of them expressed concern that President Donald Trump might irresponsibly order such a strike.
Others though said a president must have the authority to act without meddling from lawyers. It was the first such hearing in more than 40 years.
In August, Mr Trump vowed to unleash "fire and fury like the world has never seen" on North Korea if it continued to expand its atomic weapons programme and threaten America.
Last month, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Republican chairman, Senator Bob Corker, accused the president of setting the US "on a path to World War Three".
Speaking at the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada, Gen Hyten said: "We think about these things a lot. When you have this responsibility, how do you not think about it?"
"I provide advice to the president, he will tell me what to do," he said.
"And if it's illegal, guess what's going to happen? I'm going to say: 'Mr President, that's illegal.' And guess what he's going to do? He's going to say, 'What would be legal?' And we'll come up with options, of a mix of capabilities to respond to whatever the situation is, and that's the way it works.
"It's not that complicated," Gen Hyten added.
He also added: "If you execute an unlawful order, you will go to jail. You could go to jail for the rest of your life."
Air Force Gen John Hyten, said as head of the US Strategic Command he provided advice to a president and expected that a legal alternative would be found.
His comments come just days after US senators discussed a president's authority to launch a nuclear attack.
Some of them expressed concern that President Donald Trump might irresponsibly order such a strike.
Others though said a president must have the authority to act without meddling from lawyers. It was the first such hearing in more than 40 years.
In August, Mr Trump vowed to unleash "fire and fury like the world has never seen" on North Korea if it continued to expand its atomic weapons programme and threaten America.
Last month, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee's Republican chairman, Senator Bob Corker, accused the president of setting the US "on a path to World War Three".
Speaking at the Halifax International Security Forum in Canada, Gen Hyten said: "We think about these things a lot. When you have this responsibility, how do you not think about it?"
"I provide advice to the president, he will tell me what to do," he said.
"And if it's illegal, guess what's going to happen? I'm going to say: 'Mr President, that's illegal.' And guess what he's going to do? He's going to say, 'What would be legal?' And we'll come up with options, of a mix of capabilities to respond to whatever the situation is, and that's the way it works.
"It's not that complicated," Gen Hyten added.
He also added: "If you execute an unlawful order, you will go to jail. You could go to jail for the rest of your life."
Thread Starter
Quote:
Gen Hyten said: "We think about these things a lot. When you have this responsibility, how do you not think about it?"
"It's not that complicated," Gen Hyten added.
End Quote.
Sorry, these guys are deluding us or themselves. There is little doubt that, barring some crazy pre-considered no-no's, a proportional Presidential Nuke release command will be actioned against any viable threat that POTUS deems necessary. The obfuscation is possibly to deceive domestic public opinion.
OAP
Gen Hyten said: "We think about these things a lot. When you have this responsibility, how do you not think about it?"
"It's not that complicated," Gen Hyten added.
End Quote.
Sorry, these guys are deluding us or themselves. There is little doubt that, barring some crazy pre-considered no-no's, a proportional Presidential Nuke release command will be actioned against any viable threat that POTUS deems necessary. The obfuscation is possibly to deceive domestic public opinion.
OAP
Not meant as a cheap shot- it remains my genuine opinion that he's really not very clever...
CG
