B-52 carried nuclear armed cruise missiles by mistake : US

Quite interesting!

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff11012007.html
http://www.atlanticfreepress.com/content/view/2904/81/

Folks being asked to fall on their swords. Inevitable I guess

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7053898.stm

Great Washington Post Article on this incident.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/22/AR2007092201447.html?

How is Barksdale being used as a “jumping off point for operations in the middle east”? It’s a bomber base with it’s own tanker assets and some A-10’s. The only jumping that would be going on from there would be the deployments of B-52’s the forward base in Diego Garcia. All logistical flights are originating at the major east coast mobility bases (Maguire and Dover).

The weapons were not identified by someone sitting out on the flightline watching bombers land (like I used to do for hours on end). The story came out because of reports made up the chain of command all the way to the president of unaccounted weapons.

Personally if I were sitting in the place I used to watch from and had seen a bomber with ACM’s on board (they’re kinda hard to miss) I would have immediately thought something was up since I know they’re retiring them and that Barksdale aircraft are not normally equipped with them. When the flightline was completely closed down and security swarmed over this unusual aircraft, then I would absolutely know something was doing on.

The issue isn’t the fact that missiles were moved. The problem was they were carrying their warheads when they should not have been and the usual procedures for handling those types of special weapons were not followed. The base recovering the bomber did not have the personnel and security in place awaiting the aircraft to maintain positive control of the weapons. I know Barksdale has ACM ground handling training versions so the weapons troops can maintain proficiency, but everything I’ve read, seen and heard said the actual weapons are not at Barksdale. They were only at Minot. If the need arose for another Desert Storm style 30+ hour mission from Barksdale, they have ALCM-C’s they would use, not ACM’s since there is no conventional warhead option for them. The missiles themselves were being moved to Barksdale for decommissioning, not to be refitted with conventional warheads to be used on some secret strike. The special warheads were to stay at Minot until DOE could transport them to another base for use or decommissioning.

All of the about was put together using my own knowledge, personal experiences and a good dose of common sense untainted by the desire to find conspiracies or hidden agendas around everything in life.

Mind you, they’re planning on not having any AGM-129s in service by next year, maybe they’re planning on using them all on someone, not simply retiring them! :diablo:

Wouldn’t it be interesting if the US launched a cruise missile attack on an enemy, and they accidentally used the nukes? Ooooops….. 😮

Armed B-52

There is another theory:

Wednesday, September 5, 2007
Those five nukes on that B-52 may have something to do with Iran
Staging Nukes for Iran?

By Larry Johnson

Why the hubbub over a B-52 taking off from a B-52 base in Minot, North Dakota and subsequently landing at a B-52 base in Barksdale, Louisiana? That’s like getting excited if you see a postal worker in uniform walking out of a post office. And how does someone watching a B-52 land identify the cruise missiles as nukes? It just does not make sense.

So I called a old friend and retired B-52 pilot and asked him. What he told me offers one compelling case of circumstantial evidence. My buddy, let’s call him Jack D. Ripper, reminded me that the only times you put weapons on a plane is when they are on alert or if you are tasked to move the weapons to a specific site.

Then he told me something I had not heard before.

Barksdale Air Force Base is being used as a jumping off point for Middle East operations. Gee, why would we want cruise missile nukes at Barksdale Air Force Base. Can’t imagine we would need to use them in Iraq. Why would we want to preposition nuclear weapons at a base conducting Middle East operations?

His final point was to observe that someone on the inside obviously leaked the info that the planes were carrying nukes. A B-52 landing at Barksdale is a non-event. A B-52 landing with nukes. That is something else.

Now maybe there is an innocent explanation for this? I can’t think of one. What is certain is that the pilots of this plane did not just make a last minute decision to strap on some nukes and take them for a joy ride. We need some tough questions and clear answers. What the hell is going on? Did someone at Barksdale try to indirectly warn the American people that the Bush Administration is staging nukes for Iran? I don’t know, but it is a question worth asking.

Larry C Johnson Bio
Mr. Johnson, who worked previously with the Central Intelligence Agency and U.S. State Department’s Office of Counter Terrorism, is a recognized expert in the fields of terrorism, aviation security, crisis and risk management.

Posted by CRIMES AND CORRUPTION OF THE NEW WORLD ORDER NEWS mparent7777 Marc Parent CCNWON at 2:46 PM

Labels: Iran, military, Nuclear Weapons

Do we know what type of cruise missile was used? I presume, the AGM-129.

computers tend to do inventory checks better then humans

Maybe in some cases, but for the most part the computers do a better job running the numbers and crunching them, however often there needs to be a human in the loop to help with counts.

Some automated systems are real good about counting the tags, but it often takes a human to see the part is there and the right one.

When the power goes out or there is a software glitch it takes a humans to keep things running , microfiches, notepad and pencil.

Damn. Seen nukes and a bunch of procedure stuff. Could never imagine this happening. Wow. That would be a fun investigation board to be on. 😮

Wonder if it is possible for Minot to have scored high on it’s last nuclear surety inspection?:eek:

Refer to my previous post about multiple levels of clearance required. Most of them should involve multiple humans. But atleast one of those clearances should be an automated inventory check. Not saying no human is required. But getting a helping hand from a machine may not be a bad idea.

I hate to admit it but computers tend to do inventory checks better then humans. Better then me in anycase. I have been known to lose track of the number of drinks in my fridge.

You said “take out the human element”. I think they should both normally be in the loop in layers to keep an eye on each other.

Thats not the same thing as takeing the human element out.

I have seen parts systems go down because of an electrical storm, earthquake, rats, power failure, ect… I used to keep a spare set of shoes, so I could climb fences and get into the parts bins in an emergency.

I disagree. There is a Hollyweird movie with Henry Fonda I think you need to wach. The movie is a corny flawed drama, but they use a very good factious scenario that warns you why humans need to stay in the loop for some things.

Refer to my previous post about multiple levels of clearance required. Most of them should involve multiple humans. But atleast one of those clearances should be an automated inventory check. Not saying no human is required. But getting a helping hand from a machine may not be a bad idea.

I hate to admit it but computers tend to do inventory checks better then humans. Better then me in anycase. I have been known to lose track of the number of drinks in my fridge.

Well. yes and no. I do agree that the rule need needs to be adhered to. No question about that.

But some automation may need to be put in place in order to take out the human element and error that you are referring to. Im actually surprised that there isnt a mandatory automated check before inventory is moved/destroyed.

I disagree. There is a Hollyweird movie with Henry Fonda I think you need to wach. The movie is a corny flawed drama, but they use a very good factious scenario that warns you why humans need to stay in the loop for some things. It’s like flying on a commercial plane; I hope a pilot is on board most planes for a long time. Planes don’t have to have a pilot in them now, but for safety I think a human pilot should be on board most planes in case the computer glitches or is hacked.

I disagree. There is a Hollyweird movie with Henry Fonda I think you need to watch. The movie is a corny flawed drama, but they use a very good factious scenario that warns you why humans need to stay in the loop for some things. It’s like flying on a commercial plane; I hope a pilot is on board most planes for a long time. Planes don’t have to have a pilot in them now, but for safety I think a human pilot should be on board most planes in case the computer glitches or is hacked.

Fail-Safe (1964 film)

You never had a blue screen of death, you never needed to reboot, and you never had a virus? You never had something fail on your computer that it took a human to fix?

Humans can be more flexible under some conditions, such as EMP or failures.

I think it needs to be pointed out that the missiles themselves were not armed.
The media reports “nuclear armed cruise missiles”…not the same thing.
In case some of you don’t know…Same words, very different meaning.

I would rather have a bottle in front of me then a frontal lobotomy

It also reminds me of the time the general allegedly asked a soldier shoe his horse, but he thought he said shot.

I think it needs to be pointed out that the missiles themselves were not armed.
The media reports “nuclear armed cruise missiles”…not the same thing.
In case some of you don’t know…Same words, very different meaning.

What they likely need is some *“jerks” to start enforcing the rules and to make sure that things go by the book unless there is real good reason to do otherwise.

People were likely going though the motions.

* To put it politely. Sometimes they are called really bad names and disliked, but often they do it for the good of their own men. Often the command or safety people that are really strict is not being strict because of a power trip, they should do it for safety.

I suspect you meant the same thing as I, but it didn’t sound that way. 😉

Well. yes and no. I do agree that the rule book needs to be adhered to. No question about that.

But some automation may need to be put in place in order to take out the human element and error that you are referring to. Im actually surprised that there isnt a mandatory automated check before inventory is moved/destroyed.

If this is true, then a comprehensive overhaul of the inventory, storage and tracking systems is required. Im still scratching my head as to how this could have happened given the multiple levels of clearance required before they could have been moved from the facility.

I suspect that is exactly the wrong thing to do. I think it was likely a case of complacency and taking shortcuts and taking things for granite. I don’t think the system/book was broke. I bet they didn’t go by the book or PROPER system. I bet it was systemic complacency.

I doubt the system needs to be overhauled, I think they need to start going by the book.

I bet this is a case of “that’s how I was shown how to do it”, instead of going by the book. Or a case of we agreed not to go by the book, much like how the USS forestall conflagration.

What they likely need is some *“jerks” to start enforcing the rules and to make sure that things go by the book unless there is real good reason to do otherwise.

People were likely going though the motions.

* To put it politely. Sometimes they are called really bad names and disliked, but often they do it for the good of their own men. Often the command or safety people that are really strict is not being strict because of a power trip, they should do it for safety.

I suspect you meant the same thing as I, but it didn’t sound that way. 😉

The missiles were being transported in order to get them somewhere to be disposed of as they are being retired. The likely story is that five of the weapons did not have their warheads removed prior to the flight.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/09/marine_nuclear_B52_070904w/

If this is true, then a comprehensive overhaul of the inventory, storage and tracking systems is required. Im still scratching my head as to how this could have happened given the multiple levels of clearance required before they could have been moved from the facility.

Hmmm…… Other than the obvious question of oversight of special weapons, why were 6 being carried and how? 3 on each wing? The crew wouldn’t have taken off if they were all loaded under 1 wing as that’s not a safe configuration for takeoff and they can’t be carried internally.

They don’t specify that only six were carried. And given that these were ACMs, they’d have been carried six under each wing.

The aircrew should have noticed the fact that there were any weapons or ground training simulators loaded to the plane. The crew chief launching the plane should have noticed. Seeing as how ACM’s are only nuclear armed, the only way this could have happened is if EVERYONE thought they were ground trainers. If I’m not mistaken ground trainers are clearly marked as such.

The missiles were being transported in order to get them somewhere to be disposed of as they are being retired. The likely story is that five of the weapons did not have their warheads removed prior to the flight.

http://www.militarytimes.com/news/2007/09/marine_nuclear_B52_070904w/

Hmmm…… Other than the obvious question of oversight of special weapons, why were 6 being carried and how? 3 on each wing? The crew wouldn’t have taken off if they were all loaded under 1 wing as that’s not a safe configuration for takeoff and they can’t be carried internally.

The aircrew should have noticed the fact that there were any weapons or ground training simulators loaded to the plane. The crew chief launching the plane should have noticed. Seeing as how ACM’s are only nuclear armed, the only way this could have happened is if EVERYONE thought they were ground trainers. If I’m not mistaken ground trainers are clearly marked as such.

Whoops!

I guess a few people are getting their PRP clearances revoked during their carpet dances 🙂

I guess PINNACLE-BROKEN ARROW works 🙂