Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Nuclear Weapons flown over several states!

  1. #1
    Calibroncogrl47 Guest

    Default Nuclear Weapons flown over several states!

    WASHINGTON - A B-52 bomber was mistakenly armed with six nuclear warheads and flown for more than three hours across several states last week, prompting an Air Force investigation and the firing of one commander, Pentagon officials said Wednesday.

    Rep. Ike Skelton, chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, called the mishandling of the weapons “deeply disturbing” and said the committee would press the military for details. Rep. Edward J. Markey, a senior member of the Homeland Security committee, said it was “absolutely inexcusable.”

    “Nothing like this has ever been reported before and we have been assured for decades that it was impossible,” said Markey, D-Mass., co-chair of the House task force on nonproliferation.

    The plane was carrying Advanced Cruise Missiles from Minot Air Force Base, N.D, to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, said the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of a Defense Department policy not to confirm information on nuclear weapons.

    The missiles, which are being decommissioned, were mounted onto pylons on the bomber’s wings and it is unclear why the warheads had not been removed beforehand. Earlier, the Associated Press erroneously reported the bomber was armed with only five warheads.

    Investigation to take weeks

    The Air Combat Command has ordered a command-wide stand down on Sept. 14 to review procedures, officials said. They said there was minimal risk to crews and the public because of safety features designed into the munitions.

    In addition to the munitions squadron commander who was relieved of his duties, crews involved with the mistaken load — including ground crew workers — have been temporarily decertified for handling munitions, one official said.

    The investigation is expected to take several weeks.


    The incident was first reported by Military Times newspaper group.

    “There is no more serious issue than the security and proper handling of nuclear weapons,” Skelton said in a statement Wednesday. “The American people, our friends, and our potential adversaries must be confident that the highest standards are in place when it comes to our nuclear arsenal.”

    Skelton, D-Mo., said his committee will pursue answers on the classified matter “to ensure that the Air Force and the Department of Defense address this particular incident and strengthen controls more generally.”

    That is so freakin scary..

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    3,561

    Default

    I understand your concern, I'm just not sure about the seriousness (or potential) of this being a problem. I guess I'd be more concerned with the nuclear waste on our interstates, highways, and railways a lot more than this. Maybe I should be more concerned though?

    It's definitely an interesting article!

  3. #3
    Calibroncogrl47 Guest

    Default

    What if there was a freak accident and something went wrong with the plane and it crashed..

    Serious damage!!

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Baton Rouge, Louisiana
    Adopted Bronco:
    Champ Bailey
    Posts
    2,309

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Calibroncogrl47 View Post
    What if there was a freak accident and something went wrong with the plane and it crashed..

    Serious damage!!
    You would not have a nuclear explosion in most cases. You would have a problem with radioactive material leaking out however.

    See in order for an explosion to occur you need conventional explosives (Mostly C4 or similar explosives) to go off in a confined area with the radioactive material. The intense pressure will speed up a chain reaction that naturally occurs. C4 will not go off without an electrical charge that changes the chemical makeup of it. So for the most part I would be more worried about the material being spread across the crash site.
    The bronco chemist.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    3,561

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LoyalSoldier View Post
    You would not have a nuclear explosion in most cases. You would have a problem with radioactive material leaking out however.

    See in order for an explosion to occur you need conventional explosives (Mostly C4 or similar explosives) to go off in a confined area with the radioactive material. The intense pressure will speed up a chain reaction that naturally occurs. C4 will not go off without an electrical charge that changes the chemical makeup of it. So for the most part I would be more worried about the material being spread across the crash site.
    I just had a feeling you'd have a little knowledge on this!

  6. #6
    Calibroncogrl47 Guest

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LoyalSoldier View Post
    You would not have a nuclear explosion in most cases. You would have a problem with radioactive material leaking out however.

    See in order for an explosion to occur you need conventional explosives (Mostly C4 or similar explosives) to go off in a confined area with the radioactive material. The intense pressure will speed up a chain reaction that naturally occurs. C4 will not go off without an electrical charge that changes the chemical makeup of it. So for the most part I would be more worried about the material being spread across the crash site.
    Wow..thanks for the info..

Go
Shop AFC Champions and Super Bowl gear at the official online Pro Shop of the Denver Broncos!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
status.broncosforums.com - BroncosForums status updates
Partner with the USA Today Sports Media Group