Slashdot Mirror
USAF Almost Nuked North Carolina In 1961 – Declassified Document
Freshly Exhumed sends in a story about how close the United States came to accidentally attacking itself with nuclear weapons just a few days after John F. Kennedy took office.
"A secret document, published in declassified form for the first time by the Guardian today, reveals that the U.S. Air Force came dramatically close to detonating an atom bomb over North Carolina that would have been 260 times more powerful than the device that devastated Hiroshima. The document, obtained by the investigative journalist Eric Schlosser under the Freedom of Information Act, gives the first conclusive evidence that the US was narrowly spared a disaster of monumental proportions when two Mark 39 hydrogen bombs were accidentally dropped over Goldsboro, North Carolina on 23 January 1961. The bombs fell to earth after a B-52 bomber broke up in mid-air, and one of the devices behaved precisely as a nuclear weapon was designed to behave in warfare: its parachute opened, its trigger mechanisms engaged, and only one low-voltage switch prevented untold carnage."
FTA: "the final switch that prevented disaster could easily have been shorted by an electrical jolt, leading to a nuclear burst."
or put it another way, a simple switch on a nuclear bomb failed as it fell to earth
No, the switch didn't fail - apparently three of its siblings did, but the fact that this one didn't prevented the unarmed bomb from detonating.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
Sure, if you want to lie about it. The switch didn't fail. The switch worked perfectly. The switch was there to prevent detonation and it prevented detonation.
Your way of looking at it is just a straight out lie.
There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
The point is that of 4 safeguards in place, 3 failed to properly work. That's not concerning?
Copyright 2010. All rights reserved. This comment may not be copied in any way including, but not limited to caching.
The doomsday clock is already triggered. Yes, "triggered", its been ticking back and forth since 1953. The doomsday clock is actually an indicator, not a countdown timer.
Python: 'And then suddenly you have a language which says "we're all stuck with whatever the whiniest coder wants".'
And why shouldn't the bombs go off if the plane goes down?
You can't be serious! Surely this example of crashing in North Carolina is the exact reason why bombs shouldn't explode during crashes. Would you really want an accident during take off or landing to destroy your own airport or carrier? Do you want to take out your own troops on the ground because your plane got shot down before it reached its target?
A plane spends a large percentage of its life flying over its own country or allied territories. Generally you prefer to not bomb those places if you can help it.
You guys are all laughing about this, But when I was in the USAF I was stationed at Beale, Armageddon Air Force Base. They had more B-52s loaded full of bombs ready to carpet-nuke Russia than you could count. Hundreds of B-52s with dozens or maybe even hundreds of H-bombs each, ready to rain nuclear hell on the commies.
I was 9 in 1961, most of you weren't even born. Many of you wouldn't have been if that thing would have gone off. Laugh about that.
I saw a lot of scary shit in the Air Force, and that was forty years ago. I can't imagine the shit they have now, when I was in the AF a computer took a whole building. Go ahead and laugh, we have more than global warming and asteroids to worry about.
Human error could cause our extinction. Laugh away, guys.
Free Martian Whores!
Stand down, soldier. One way or another, we all have to die. Beyond that, at some point, the world / galaxy / universe will end. A sense of humor helps keep things in perspective.
> On a side note it is interesting to note that japan were already under the process of surrender
You're talking to an amateur student of WWII history here. I have to put in my two cents on that one. :)
Your assertion is disputed, even by Japanese historians. Yes, Hirohito had told his people in mid-summer to begin working toward surrender. But the Potsdam declaration for "unconditional surrender" knocked them back. There were many hardliners in the Japanese military who even considered a coup, followed by a scorched-earth policy. Hirohito didn't demand surrender until after the atomic bombings and after the Soviets declared war. You can decide which was the primary cause. I think it was both.
The US dropped the bombs for several reasons. Yes, part of it was that they wanted to see the effect on a city. But another part is something that you don't hear discussed much, and that certainly didn't appear in the patriotic films from that era. The fact is, after years of war, morale was slipping in the US military. There were desertions. Some in the military made it clear -- respectfully but firmly -- that it was time to wrap up the game and head home. So, that was another pressure to use the bombs: to get it over with quickly.
If the hardliners in Japan had held out (and the Allies had no way to know what Hirohito was thinking for certain), Army estimates are that the Allies would have lost around 1,000,000 men if they'd invaded Japan. You can dispute that nowadays, but that was their best estimate. Truman was horrified, and coupled with what I just said -- the threats of desertion and mutiny in the Pacific -- he elected to use the "doomsday weapon.".
We'll never know for sure. But just as wars rarely start because of one simple reason, the same is true of how they end.
Cogito, igitur comedam pizza.
It probably would've been good for his presidential popularity/authority. With it being his third day in office nobody could've blamed him for making the military incompetent, and huge national tragedies (including accidental ones) usually cause Americans to rally around their leaders and vote more powers to their president.
And certainly Kennedy wasn't going to blame the USSR, possibly start a nuclear war, be made a fool of by other countries not seeing evidence for USSR involvement (for example NORAD would not have seen a soviet plane), probably be arrested by a military coup who would rather admit blame than die, etc.
This space intentionally left blank
This was 1961, at the height of nuclear proliferation. The US government was selling uranium-235, in blister packs, out the back door of every nuclear power plant. Radioactive material was the iPhone of its day. Nobody knew enough to be afraid of it, yet. We were a small step away from having millions of plutonium-powered cars driving around.
It's only today that we're hyper-sensitive about the risks of accidents... Back then, we were pretty sure we'd be on the receiving end of 1,000 Soviet ICBMs any old day, so a stray US nuke wasn't such a big deal.
Of course, if one nuke HAD accidentally gone off over over US soil, you have to wonder if the military could own-up to their failure killing tens of thousands of dead Americans, or if it would be called a Russian attack and cause a full-scale retaliation.
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Yes, part of it was that they wanted to see the effect on a city.
That is the part which is inexcusable. If they just wanted to end the war there were plenty of other targets which had military value but fewer civilian casualties, or even just sparsely populated areas that could demonstrate the weapon's power. Instead they went straight for the maximum suffering, maximum casualties, maximum crime against humanity option.
I'm sorry, but there can be no justification for testing nuclear weapons on human beings, even if they are your enemy.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC