Hey Catpealer,
Was this your jet?
Nuclear warheads mistakenly flown on B-52
By Michael Hoffman - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Sep 4, 2007 21:22:50 EDT
A B-52 bomber mistakenly loaded with five nuclear warheads flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D, to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, resulting in an Air Force-wide investigation, according to three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident.
The B-52 was loaded with Advanced Cruise Missiles, part of a Defense Department effort to decommission 400 of the ACMs. But the nuclear warheads should have been removed at Minot before being transported to Barksdale, the officers said. The missiles were mounted onto the pylons of the bomber's wings.
Advanced Cruise Missiles carry a W80-1 warhead with a yield of 5 to 150 kilotons and are specifically designed for delivery by B-52 strategic bombers.
Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Ed Thomas said the transfer was safely conducted and the weapons were in Air Force custody and control at all times.
However, the mistake was not discovered until the B-52 landed at Barskdale, which left the warheads unaccounted for during the approximately 3 1/2 hour flight between the two bases, the officers said.
An investigation headed by Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, director of Air and Space Operations at Air Combat Command Headquarters, was launched immediately to find the cause of the mistake and figure out how it could have been prevented, Thomas said.
Air Force officials wouldn't officially specify whether nuclear weapons were involved, in accordance with long-standing Defense Department policy regarding nuclear munitions, Thomas said. However, the three officers close to the situation did confirm the warheads were nuclear.
Officials at Minot immediately conducted an inventory of its nuclear weapons after the oversight was discovered, and Thomas said he could confirm that all remaining nuclear weapons at Minot are accounted for.
"Air Force standards are very exacting when it comes to munitions handling," he said. "The weapons were always in our custody and there was never a danger to the American public."
At no time was there a risk for a nuclear detonation, even if the B-52 crashed on its way to Barksdale, said Steve Fetter, a former Defense Department official who worked on nuclear weapons policy in 1993-94. A crash could ignite the high explosives associated with the warhead, and possibly cause a leak of the plutonium, but the warheads' elaborate safeguards would prevent a nuclear detonation from occurring, he said.
"The main risk would have been the way the Air Force responded to any problems with the flight because they would have handled it much differently if they would have known nuclear warheads were onboard," he said.
The risk of the warheads falling into the hands of rogue nations or terrorists was minimal since the weapons never left the United States, according to Fetter and Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, an independent research and policy think tank in Washington, D.C.
The crews involved with the mistaken load at the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot have been temporarily decertified from performing their duties involving munitions pending corrective actions or additional training, Thomas said.
Air Combat Command will have a command-wide mission stand down Sept. 14 to review their procedures in response to this oversight, he said.
"The Air Force takes its mission to safeguard weapons seriously," he said. "No effort will be spared to ensure that the matter is thoroughly and completely investigated."
Nuclear warheads mistakenly flown on B-52
By Michael Hoffman - Staff writer
Posted : Tuesday Sep 4, 2007 21:22:50 EDT
A B-52 bomber mistakenly loaded with five nuclear warheads flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D, to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, resulting in an Air Force-wide investigation, according to three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident.
The B-52 was loaded with Advanced Cruise Missiles, part of a Defense Department effort to decommission 400 of the ACMs. But the nuclear warheads should have been removed at Minot before being transported to Barksdale, the officers said. The missiles were mounted onto the pylons of the bomber's wings.
Advanced Cruise Missiles carry a W80-1 warhead with a yield of 5 to 150 kilotons and are specifically designed for delivery by B-52 strategic bombers.
Air Force spokesman Lt. Col. Ed Thomas said the transfer was safely conducted and the weapons were in Air Force custody and control at all times.
However, the mistake was not discovered until the B-52 landed at Barskdale, which left the warheads unaccounted for during the approximately 3 1/2 hour flight between the two bases, the officers said.
An investigation headed by Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg, director of Air and Space Operations at Air Combat Command Headquarters, was launched immediately to find the cause of the mistake and figure out how it could have been prevented, Thomas said.
Air Force officials wouldn't officially specify whether nuclear weapons were involved, in accordance with long-standing Defense Department policy regarding nuclear munitions, Thomas said. However, the three officers close to the situation did confirm the warheads were nuclear.
Officials at Minot immediately conducted an inventory of its nuclear weapons after the oversight was discovered, and Thomas said he could confirm that all remaining nuclear weapons at Minot are accounted for.
"Air Force standards are very exacting when it comes to munitions handling," he said. "The weapons were always in our custody and there was never a danger to the American public."
At no time was there a risk for a nuclear detonation, even if the B-52 crashed on its way to Barksdale, said Steve Fetter, a former Defense Department official who worked on nuclear weapons policy in 1993-94. A crash could ignite the high explosives associated with the warhead, and possibly cause a leak of the plutonium, but the warheads' elaborate safeguards would prevent a nuclear detonation from occurring, he said.
"The main risk would have been the way the Air Force responded to any problems with the flight because they would have handled it much differently if they would have known nuclear warheads were onboard," he said.
The risk of the warheads falling into the hands of rogue nations or terrorists was minimal since the weapons never left the United States, according to Fetter and Michael O'Hanlon, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, an independent research and policy think tank in Washington, D.C.
The crews involved with the mistaken load at the 5th Bomb Wing at Minot have been temporarily decertified from performing their duties involving munitions pending corrective actions or additional training, Thomas said.
Air Combat Command will have a command-wide mission stand down Sept. 14 to review their procedures in response to this oversight, he said.
"The Air Force takes its mission to safeguard weapons seriously," he said. "No effort will be spared to ensure that the matter is thoroughly and completely investigated."
0
-
I thought Cat just dumped the crappers[}:)][:0]
Don0 -
I will not comment, unlike the three officers.
Edit: What is the source of this report?0 -
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
I will not comment, unlike the three officers.
Edit: What is the source of this report?
Good for you! Loose lips, sink ships....0 -
Could this happen? What if nukes were accidently loaded for training and dropped somewhere on US soil. 0 -
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
???
Your source for this info?
Don0 -
quote:It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
I don't believe this statement is 100% true.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
quote:It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
I don't believe this statement is 100% true.
It's what we're told so that's all I have to go on.0 -
http://www.airforcetimes.com/news/2007/09/marine_nuclear_B52_070904w/
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
How can you explain all the SAC flights back in the 80's and 90's SAC out of Fairchild AFB?0 -
It was a different world back then. It's what I've been told. 0 -
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
If that were true, we committed millions of acts of war during the cold war since we had nuke armed bombers in flight around the clock just outside of soviet airspace for years and decades straight.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nemesisenforcer
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
If that were true, we committed millions of acts of war during the cold war since we had nuke armed bombers in flight around the clock just outside of soviet airspace for years and decades straight.
I've inquired about it I even mentioned the Cold War, and I've been told that it changed with the end of the cold war. I admit, I could be wrong on the matter but I'm just going with what I've been told by everyone here. I have yet to find anything to support my statement.0 -
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It's what we're told so that's all I have to go on.
When I was in the Marine Corps, we were told that the ball on top of the flag pole contained matches and razors to destroy the flag in the event of the base being overrun....and a .45 so you could shoot yourself [xx(]0 -
even in the 70 and 80 we flew weapons in
ferry to strike configuration.
"It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board."
that statement is fiction0 -
I was in Cuba in 1963. My squadron had ordered a jet engine for of are planes.An atomic bomb was on its way to some where about the same time.The jarheads were gaurding the so called top secret box in the main hanger.We had a so called jet engine out side of are so called shop. Yup you guessed it. we had the bomb out side for two or three days while the jarheads were gaurding are jet engine.When the so called jet engine was uncrated didn't look like a jet engine the chit hit the main stator.The jarhead command ran east,west, north, south.[:D][:D][:D] 0 -
quote:I was in Cuba in 1963.
What unit? My father-in-law was there in 1963. Still talks about all the dang land crabs!0 -
Catpealer,
Ever hear a rumor about a bomber base's bomb folks all turning up positive in a drug test?
LOL.....now that was funny.....for a rumor you know.[}:)]
I was the Federal Inmate Escort for the dealer involved in that rumor.[;)]
Buy one of these:
www.nukepills.com/radiation-detector.htm
www.nukalert.com
And tell your Commander you came up with a new policy to wave your key chain over all weapons before flight. LOL!!!!0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rack Ops
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It's what we're told so that's all I have to go on.
When I was in the Marine Corps, we were told that the ball on top of the flag pole contained matches and razors to destroy the flag in the event of the base being overrun....and a .45 so you could shoot yourself [xx(]
Yeah, we still tell that one, only it's 1 rd and directions to find the .45 because it's too big to fit in there.0 -
I don't know specifics of any current treaty restrictions, but what catpealer says may very well be true in the post-Cold War period.
Some here are apparently thinking back to the old days when SAC was still alive. When this command was dissolved about 15 years ago the world of our nuclear alert aircraft changed drastically.
Starting in '61 we kept multiple BUFF's loaded with nukes in the air at all times (CHROME DOME and HARD HEAD missions), but we stopped conducting routine airborne alert missions after '68. Though no longer a matter of routine, it still wasn't unheard of for various types of nuclear armed aircraft to launch and assume holding positions during times of alert.
Logically aircraft are still allowed to fly with nuclear weapons on board. After all, these things aren't created at each location where they're based. However there are undoubtedly restrictions on the types of aircraft allowed to carry them and the condition they can be kept in while airborne. Just because you have a device that's designed to create a nuclear detonation doesn't mean it's always capable. It's not as if those in this story could've been dropped and created a mushroom cloud at the flick of a switch.
What concerns me is how this story ended up on the national news so quickly. Not that it should've been covered up to prevent embarassment, but the release of ANY information about the location or status of nuclear weapons is an operations security issue. Neither confirm nor deny is Rule #1.
Catpealer- I don't envy you. The world around you is probably about to get awfully uptight. Good luck with the new command staff.0 -
In lighter B-52 news a Tornado starting forming yesterday directly over many B-52's deployed in the Pacific but it failed to touch the ground. It made it over half way down from the cloud.....some lucky crew chiefs on GUAM:
http://dragguam.com/dragboard/showthread.php?t=96540 -
So...can we blame what's-her-name on the other shift for this supposed incident?
Somebody has to be blamed.0 -
quote:Originally posted by catpealer111
It is an act of war if a US aircraft flies with nuclear weapons on board.
Against who, exactly?0 -
If flying with nukes is an act of war, since the nukes flew from North Dakota to Louisiana, does this mean that North Dakota is now at war with Louisiana? 0 -
Imagine if they accidentally dropped them munitions onto the test range.....
We'd only have 49 States....lol....wait a minute...that's not really funny at all.
Poop rolls down hill....a lowly E-4 will be in prison over this.0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
24 comments