| Submit your comments on this article |
| -Short Attention Span Theater- |
| B-52 Mistakenly Flies With Nukes Aboard |
| 2007-09-05 |
| I don't know how to categorize this, but it seemed post-worthy. One might even postulate that it wasn't a 'mistake', and that the flight was actually bound for somewhere other than Barksdale - say, Qom or Bushehr - but word leaked and it was called off? Even if that story is not true, it is certainly worth 'leaking', as a signal to certain Muslim leaders. By Michael Hoffman - Staff writer Posted : Wednesday Sep 5, 2007 5:36:22 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. Interesting that we a trashing 400 deliverable nukes while countries like NK & Iran are struggling to build their first lab version. You'd think that little fact ought to make them pucker a little as they try to royally p**s us off. 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.” |
| Posted by:Glenmore |
| #23 We've all been duped, that operation was no accident...they wanted those missiles in Louisiana to load an awaiting submarine, for the upcoming Iranian showdown! Mark my words, they won't confirm that the birds will be back in Minot just as fast as they got to Barksdale! |
| Posted by: smn 2007-09-05 23:57 |
| #22 RWV nails it. Losing track of nuclear devices make careers go kaput. B-52 Mistakenly Flies With Nukes Aboard I'm almost ready for headlines where the word "mistakenly", instead reads "intentionally". |
| Posted by: Zenster 2007-09-05 22:24 |
| #21 Is it just me, or why does it seem like in every major US war since the 1950's a US heavy bomber, usu a B52, finds itself involved in a potentially dangerous nuke accident invol on-board nuke weapons??? ANYHOO, RIAN > Russia to begin [armed?]routine remote-area/peripheral heavy bomber patrols on September 6th. |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2007-09-05 22:00 |
| #20 (Gannett, owners of USA Today among others ....) |
| Posted by: lotp 2007-09-05 20:05 |
| #19 That aroma you smell is several careers turned to toast. Badly burnt toast. That said, remember that the Army Times has been owned for a while by a group that isn't all that supportive of the military. |
| Posted by: lotp 2007-09-05 20:04 |
| #18 Yes, Gorb, but if the terrorists knew about it, and hijacked the B-52, and knew how to launch the weapons, and target them, think of the devestation they could've caused! |
| Posted by: Dan Rather 2007-09-05 18:37 |
| #17 B-52 Mistakenly Flies With Nukes Aboard Man, I hate it when that happens! The risk of the warheads falling into the hands of rogue nations or terrorists was minimal since the weapons never left the United States I doubt that terrorists had anything to do with this or could have taken advantage of it. But this sentence is kind of odd since the terrorists would love nothing more than to both have a nuke and to get it inside the US somehow. If they were to have been able to know about this beforehand, it would have been a scenario made in heaven for them. |
| Posted by: gorb 2007-09-05 16:04 |
| #16 Heads are going to roll! I once witnessed a crew member violate the two man control rule while preflighting a B61 on an F-4. He was immediately decertified and went through hell getting recertified. It was nearly a year before he could participate in nuclear exercises and briefings and his permanent record still had the decertification.....Oh, by the way, the B61 in question was a 'dummy' inert test unit used for training purposes. These guys are toast. |
| Posted by: Total War 2007-09-05 16:02 |
| #15 Jack for you http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wcW_Ygs6hm0 |
| Posted by: Beavis 2007-09-05 16:00 |
| #14 RWV is absolutely correct. BUFFs carrying nukes over the continental USA is about as amazing as an anti-Bush editorial in the NYTs. What do you think they were carrying when we were 24/7/365 running the circle route during the cold war. Are the media so naive as to think we have given up our strategic air capability and just have the crews sitting in alert shacks waiting for a telegram from the POTUS? Geez I think these guys believe Slim Pickens is the pilot. |
| Posted by: Jack is Back! 2007-09-05 15:53 |
| #13 Guys, the problem is not that the nukes were onboard the BUFF, it is that no one knew it until the missiles were downloaded at Barksdale. This is the end of career for the wing commander, the squadron commander, the five officers on the crew (the EW might skate, but I think he is probably toast as well), the maintenance squadron commander, and every yo-yo who got anywhere near this. The cardinal rule of Strategic Command is that you know where your nukes are at ALL times. This degree of carelessness is absolutely totally unforgivable. If the officers and men at Minot charged with the care of nuclear weapons were so incompetent that they did not know that five of their warheads were gone until the phone rang, what is to keep someone from driving one out the back gate. They committed the worst sin imaginable in the Air Force, they were UNPROFESSIONAL. |
| Posted by: RWV 2007-09-05 15:27 |
| #12 I like the idea of this being a 'message' to somebody. Perhaps there was to be a candygram for somebody, but it got scrubbed, as postulated earlier. And altho' not stealthy, there isn't much that could reach a high flying BUFF, and that assumes there would be no fighter or ECM assets on its wing at run in to target time. methinks there is more to this story that meets the eye...... |
| Posted by: USN, Ret. 2007-09-05 13:57 |
| #11 I told you not to leave those things lying around! If you aren't careful you'll poke your eye out! /Mom |
| Posted by: Grumenk Philalzabod0723 2007-09-05 13:21 |
| #10 With all Putin has been up to with new flights and such if I were running the Airforce I'd release a few harmless mistakes to the media. Let Putin realize we're armed, and also scare him with the reminder that when playing with big guns mistakes happen. |
| Posted by: rjschwarz 2007-09-05 13:08 |
| #9 Is that more nukes than a Bear can carry? |
| Posted by: Nimble Spemble 2007-09-05 13:07 |
| #8 Even if we aren't the adolescent with the baseball bat, can't we take advantage of this exercise to cause the adolescent bullies to pause and wonder whether, just maybe, there ARE some adolescents loose in our house? Adolescents with MUCH bigger baseball bats? |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2007-09-05 12:44 |
| #7 They're built to fly with Nukes aboard, big shit, not worth reporting. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2007-09-05 12:06 |
| #6 I don't believe anything coming from "Unnamed sources" anymore from the MSM. Too much blatant lies are passes off as news that way. |
| Posted by: DarthVader 2007-09-05 12:00 |
| #5 according to three officers who asked not to be identified because they were not authorized to discuss the incident. If they're not authorized to discuss it, why are they? Since they've broken the law by doing so, reveal their names, or admit they don't exist. Anonymity delenda est! |
| Posted by: Rob Crawford 2007-09-05 11:40 |
| #4 Interesting that we a trashing 400 deliverable nukes while countries like NK & Iran are struggling to build their first lab version. You'd think that little fact ought to make them pucker a little as they try to royally p**s us off. It's always been about will, not about resources. You can have the biggest scariest monster on the block, but if everyone knows you won't release it, it has no 'deterrent' value and gives a false sense of security and power. Meanwhile the out of control neighbor, with a serious case of arrested adolescent development swinging a baseball bat while the 'authorities' keep passing the buck on getting him/her under control, has a heck of a lot more influence on the hood and how everyone else conducts their daily business. |
| Posted by: Proocpius2k 2007-09-05 11:36 |
| #3 The B-52 was loaded with Advanced Cruise Missiles, part of a Defense Department effort to decommission 400 of the ACMs. Nuttin' says decommissioning like dropping them over Qom or Bushehr to me. An investigation headed by Maj. Gen. Douglas Raaberg Name's too close to rantburg. Is Fred moonlighting again? |
| Posted by: BA 2007-09-05 11:32 |
| #2 Any complaints about precious bodily fluids heard from the CO up at Minot recently? |
| Posted by: tu3031 2007-09-05 11:22 |
| #1 If we were going to hit Qom or Bushehr, it would not be with a B-52. Although a wonderful airplane, it is not stealthy, and would easily be spotted before it arrived. With a B-2, the first indication the Iranians would have that something was nearby was when the bombs went off. |
| Posted by: Rambler 2007-09-05 11:11 |