USAF Almost Nuked North Carolina In 1961 – Declassified Document

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

USAF Almost Nuked North Carolina In 1961 – Declassified Document

Posted by Soulskill on Friday September 20, 2013 @10:45AM from the south-carolina-would-be-a-more-understandable-target dept.

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."

20 of 586 comments (clear)

Min score:

Reason:

Sort:

A little drastic but... by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-20 10:48 · Score: 5, Funny

What an improvement for NC that would have been.
1. Re:A little drastic but... by evil_aaronm · 2013-09-20 14:31 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  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.
2. Re:A little drastic but... by unitron · 2013-09-20 22:03 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  I was 9 when this happened also, living about 3 counties Southeast of the crash site, certainly close enough to have seen a very bright light and heard a very loud noise if anything went off.
  The B-52 in question was trying for an emergency landing at Seymour Johnson AFB, where my Dad did his active duty Reserve obligation every summer back then
  Chances are if one of them had gone off it wouldn't have been over Wayne County but "in" it, as in buried in the dirt.
  The one with the parachute wound up with about a foot and half of the nose underground but the other one, falling unimpeded, hit a field near a swampy area, and despite digging down over 40 feet, they still haven't recovered all of it.
  Most of the stuff in this latest release was already known, though.
  http://www.newsargus.com/news/archives/2011/01/23/the_bomb_one_click_from_armageddon/
  http://www.ibiblio.org/bomb/story.html
  http://www.restorationsystems.com/uncategorized/whoops-atomic-bomb-dropped-in-goldsboro-nc-swamp-neuse-huc-02/
  
  --
  I see even classic Slashdot is now pretty much unusable on dial up anymore.
old, really old, news by turkeydance · 2013-09-20 10:49 · Score: 5, Informative

the triple fail-safe worked.
1. Re:old, really old, news by timeOday · 2013-09-20 11:10 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  No, the amazing thing is that the triple fail-safe failed! It was only the 4th and final failsafe that did not fail!
  
  Jones found that of the four safety mechanisms in the Faro bomb, designed to prevent unintended detonation, three failed to operate properly. When the bomb hit the ground, a firing signal was sent to the nuclear core of the device, and it was only that final, highly vulnerable switch that averted calamity.
  
  Egads.
  If you had the choice between a repeat of this, vs. a certain 9/11-scale attack tomorrow, which would you choose?
2. Re:old, really old, news by wonkey_monkey · 2013-09-20 11:20 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  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.
3. Re:old, really old, news by DaveV1.0 · 2013-09-20 11:29 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  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.
4. Re:old, really old, news by snowraver1 · 2013-09-20 11:39 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  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.
5. Re:old, really old, news by Anonymous Coward · 2013-09-20 12:51 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  You can't be serious! Surely this example of crashing in North Carolina is the exact reason why bombs shouldn't explode during crashes.
  
  You'll have to excuse the grandparent post; he inadvertently had a triple safety failure and went full retard.
6. Re:old, really old, news by mysidia · 2013-09-20 13:32 · Score: 5, Funny
  
  Presumably that's why there were four instead of two or three.
  The fourth switch has been since discontinued due to budget cuts.
7. Re:old, really old, news by Pentium100 · 2013-09-20 13:39 · Score: 5, Interesting
  
  If you are using a thermonuclear bomb (and the only reason that a bomber with such a bomb would be over enemy territory is the intent to drop it on some target) then it means that you are prepared to destroy a city or some other large area. If the plane is shot down then it won't reach the intended target, if it is over enemy territory them it may as well detonate the bomb. Also, this way you prevent the enemy from recovering the bomb and using the uranium/plutonium in his own bombs.
  Let's say in WW2 the Japanese managed to shoot down the plane carrying Little Boy. It the bomb detonated over some other city instead of Hiroshima, would that have made a difference? Even if the bomb detonated over an empty field it would still have made an impression. If the plane quietly went down, then maybe the war would not have ended as soon.
  Such large weapons would either be weapons of last resort by the losing side or an attempt to force the enemy to surrender in fear by the winning side. In any case, detonating it anywhere on the enemy territory would be preferable to having it fall to the ground and not go off.
  At least in my opinion.
8. Re: old, really old, news by smpoole7 · 2013-09-20 14:46 · Score: 5, Insightful
  
  > 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.
Re:I wonder who they would have blamed by PPH · 2013-09-20 10:54 · Score: 5, Funny

South Carolina.

--
Have gnu, will travel.
Here's what's new by gman003 · 2013-09-20 11:00 · Score: 5, Informative

The accident has been known about for some time (I first read about it while researching a story I was writing - the protagonist had to build a nuclear bomb, so I was looking for lost and unrecovered nuclear material).
We have also had reports that one of the bombs was nearly armed. These were officially denied by the military, but it was confirmed by several military members.
The new development is that the documentation saying "yeah, that bomb nearly went off" has been declassified. Basically the same deal as the Area 51 thing a while back - everyone knew, but now everyone is "allowed" to know.
One Low-Voltage Switch by Guppy · 2013-09-20 11:03 · Score: 5, Interesting

only one low-voltage switch prevented untold carnage.
Just imagine if there had been a Tin Whisker shorting that switch.
Why were nukes making routine flights inside USA? by JoeyRox · 2013-09-20 11:14 · Score: 5, Funny

Article says:

"The accident happened when a B-52 bomber got into trouble, having embarked from Seymour Johnson Air Force base in Goldsboro for a routine flight along the East Coast."

If carrying A-Bombs across the eastern coast is a routine flight I would love to know what the USAF considers an exceptional flight.
Re:That would have sped up nuclear disarmament by interval1066 · 2013-09-20 11:39 · Score: 5, Insightful

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".'
Re:Yikes! by Artifakt · 2013-09-20 15:14 · Score: 5, Funny

I'd like to know more...

--
Who is John Cabal?
If the bomb did explode, would USA blame USSR? by Taco+Cowboy · 2013-09-20 15:33 · Score: 5, Interesting

Let's say the bomb did explode over NC. Millions died.
A total disaster for the Kennedy administration (it was only his 3rd day as POTUS).
What would the Kennedy administration do ?
Would they admit that the explosion was an accident, or would they place all the blames on the then USSR (sneak attack by them commies)?

--
Muchas Gracias, Señor Edward Snowden !
1. Re:If the bomb did explode, would USA blame USSR? by Hognoxious · 2013-09-20 21:47 · Score: 5, Informative
  
  A fault with the warning system rather than bombs per se, but it makes you think.
  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Man_Who_Saved_the_World
  
  --
  Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."