Article

2005-06-18 Home Front: Tech

Nuke, Missing Since 1958, STILL Missing...

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2005-06-18 00:00|| || Front Page|| [11135 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 In other news, General Francisco Franco's condition was reported as "stable"...

Posted by Fred">Fred 2005-06-18 00:36|| 2005-06-18 00:36|| Front Page Top

#2 Rantburg: 1958's Nuke News Today!

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2005-06-18 02:29|| 2005-06-18 02:29|| Front Page Top

#3 The highly enriched uranium (HEU) in this bomb is not radioactive enough to produce detectably elevated radiation rates in a large body of water. Contrary to popular belief, fissionable meterials, HEU and Plutonium, are not in and of themselves intensely radioactice in comparison with fission products that are produced in a fission reaction, something that clearly hasn't happened here.
Seawater itself contains varying amounts of radioactive trace elements, including natural uranium and thorium. If the HEU has leaked, it would probably be easier to detect it chemically.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 09:39|| 2005-06-18 09:39|| Front Page Top

#4 To further illustrate the absurdity of the retired Colonel's contention, seawater is about 3 ppb (parts per billion) uranium. Natural uranium is .70% U-235, the fissionable isotope concentrated to 80% or more in weapons grade HEU. This means that a billion tons of seawater will contain 3 tons of natual uranium and 400 pounds or so of U-235, enough for ten or more atomic bombs. A body of water just 10 feet deep would have to cover only 150 square miles to contain a billion tons of seawater. If it were 100 feet deep, the required area would be just 15 square miles. The ocean contains roughly 500 million cubic miles of seawater, each with a mass of approximately 3.5 billion tons.
Bottom line, there are 35 million tons of U-235 dissolved in the world's oceans.
Beyond that, U-235 would provide only a small fraction of the total radioactivity, measured in curies, that could be found in a given volume of seawater. Thorium, which is nearly as radioactive as natural uranium, is typically 3 times as abundant and other radioactive elements are found in trace amounts, including plutonium (.02 ppb).

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 10:17|| 2005-06-18 10:17|| Front Page Top

#5 Oh, and on the plus side, it is only one of about 250 or so nuclear weapons that are currently missing. Personally, I think they should check under the sofa cushions.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-06-18 11:23|| 2005-06-18 11:23|| Front Page Top

#6 Source?

BTW, during the Cold War, Kremlin inspired pop-culturists liked to represent nuclear control as a hair trigger situation run by the usual stupid and socially inferior types. If this were true, why are we still here?

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:26|| 2005-06-18 11:26|| Front Page Top

#7 Put up or shut up, Anonymous.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:29|| 2005-06-18 11:29|| Front Page Top

#8 Government scientists investigated, taking radiation readings and soil samples Sept. 30 from water in an area the size of four football fields.

But that isn't even the size of a LAKE, to say nothing of a Sound...

Posted by Glains Theash7392 2005-06-18 11:29|| 2005-06-18 11:29|| Front Page Top

#9 That's why they call them "samples" Glains. What is your point?

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:33|| 2005-06-18 11:33|| Front Page Top

#10 What's the use? Hip comedians and cow-college lefties have pronounced all nuclear technology "deadly" if not "murderous," and that's all these fools need.
The anti-nuclear movement was entirely about giving the USSR an advantage in Cold War strategy, but it eventually took on a life of its own as a sacred tenet of the media cult.

Read Marshal McLuhan sometime, eco-wackies. The media don't work for the Reds these days, it's the other way around.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:39|| 2005-06-18 11:39|| Front Page Top

#11 Today, of course, US nuclear weapons are the ultimate barrier to Iran's plans to terrorize the world into submission. For the mullahs and their media symps, scare stories about nuke accidents will help mitigate this.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:48|| 2005-06-18 11:48|| Front Page Top

#12 Keep in mind, Rantburgeoisie, that media-slaves neither "believe" nor "disbelieve" the propaganda they allow themselves to absorb.
They adopt a position simply because it is perceived to enhance conformity to the media culture, without reference to such arcane concepts as "truth" "falsehood" or "consequences."

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 11:57|| 2005-06-18 11:57|| Front Page Top

#13 Yeah, but what if Al-Zark finds it? Huh? Then he could spirit it up the Potomac and ... maybe I'll write a book....

Posted by Bobby 2005-06-18 12:15|| 2005-06-18 12:15|| Front Page Top

#14 Hey Anonymoose -
I had the honor and privlege of serving in the Strategic Air Command during the Cold War, and part of my job - every day - was the care and feeding of nuclear weapons. As part of our training, we got a little bit of information about the semi-legendary 'missing nukes' we'd all heard about from the MSM and the protesters and their assorted friends.
We were told that the US had lost - i.e; destroyed in accidents or physically misplaced - up to that point 29 nuclear weapons. (It later became 30 - the Titan II accident at Damascus, AR in 1980 accounting for that one.) Of those, IIRC 7 or 8 of them were inert weapons, that is, no fissile material was in the weapons at the time. In that condition, they were better doorstops than nuclear weapons. And please allow me to point out that of those 30 weapons, TWENTY-SEVEN were physically destroyed in the accident or scrapped afterwards. That leaves three out there somewhere - the Tybee Island weapon, and 2 USN weapons that are at the far bottom of the Pacific.
Although ALL of those accidents - with the notable exception of the Titan II accident - were classified at the time, they are no longer so.
So please, do me a favor - account for the other 90% or so of the 250 'missing' weapons. I have a feeling that even if you can, they're going to have the letters 'CCCP' on them. The Soviets left at least two missile subs on the bottom, and God alone knows what kind of accidents THEY had.

Mike

Posted by Mike Kozlowski 2005-06-18 13:39|| 2005-06-18 13:39|| Front Page Top

#15 Thanks, Mike.

#13 Bobby

Perhaps the Air Force did find it and they have the place staked out just waiting for Zark or his agents to show up.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 14:05|| 2005-06-18 14:05|| Front Page Top

#16 We might want to start matching diving school enrollments and salvage gear purchases against lists of known terrorists, ANSWER members, and Michael Moore supporters.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 14:14|| 2005-06-18 14:14|| Front Page Top

#17 AC / Mike - Yeah, okay, but you don't have Black Helicopters following you around. Do ya, huh, do ya????

I rest my case. ;-)

Posted by .com 2005-06-18 14:53|| 2005-06-18 14:53|| Front Page Top

#18 Hah, .com!
Mike and I are flying the Black Helicopters.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 15:11|| 2005-06-18 15:11|| Front Page Top

#19 AC - a TRAP! Maybe I can work that into the book!

Posted by Bobby 2005-06-18 15:29|| 2005-06-18 15:29|| Front Page Top

#20 "Mike and I are flying the Black Helicopters."

ROFL!!! You're too fast for me, man, too fast! Lol!

Posted by .com 2005-06-18 15:33|| 2005-06-18 15:33|| Front Page Top

#21 Bobby - Do you need the Admiral Ackbar image to go with the "It's a trap!" quote? Heh.

Just remember the Clancy formula of focusing on 5 or 6 key individuals, for character development and reader symp / identification - must have honorable vulnerabilities or be pure evil, run subplots in parallel, converge in big splash.

Piece o' cake, bro. ;-)

Posted by .com 2005-06-18 15:40|| 2005-06-18 15:40|| Front Page Top

#22 Yes, indeed, most of the 250 or so were Russian. The biggest losses are submarine down. You start with the initial number of missiles, then *multiply* by the number of MIRVs on each. It adds up in a hurry. 92 weapons are known to have been lost at sea, but this is deceptive, as it includes both single nuke weapons and MIRV'ed weapons. Tactical weapons are also included, though the US sometimes classifies inert training weapons as nukes and their loss is considered a "Broken Arrow", even if they're made of concrete. The US doesn't make it a habit of losing them. Again, the Russians win, because they have fired tactical weapons that don't go off, and they can't find them afterwards.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-06-18 19:30|| 2005-06-18 19:30|| Front Page Top

#23 ima not too worried about the lost 240, the martian secret service took most of 'em back in '74. i saw a lot of things during that time. i can speak too much about. Unless maybe somebody will come up nwith some steps for my trailer house

Posted by Half 2005-06-18 20:25|| 2005-06-18 20:25|| Front Page Top

#24 You still haven't cited a source, Anonymous.

"Broken Arrows" at Global Security

Soviet Cold War submarine losses, again from Global Security:The Soviet Navy lost at least five submarines during the Cold War, with another being scuttled at sea following a reactor accident. Since the end of the Cold War, the Russian Navy has lost one submarine.

K-129, a Golf-I class ballistic missile submarine, sank in March or April of 1968 in the northern Pacific Ocean (1390 kms northwest of Oahu harbor). The collapse of the hull was detected by the American SOSUS acoustic system, and in July 1974 parts of the submarine were recovered by US intelligence.
K-27, a November class nuclear submarine, experienced a reactor problem which released radiation contaminating the entire submarine on 24 May 1968. It was finally scuttled (deliberately sunk) in the Kara Sea in 1981.
K-8, a November class nuclear submarine, sank on 08 April 1970 in the Bay of Biscay and 52 people perished [the accident was kept secret till 1991].
K-219, a Yankee class strategic nuclear submarine, sank off Bermuda with 16 ballistic missiles on board on 06 October 1986. Four crewmen were killed. It is rumoured that the fire on the submarine broke out due to collision with a US submarine.
K-429, a Charlie I class submarine, sank on 23 June 1983 in the Savannaya Bay in the Bering Sea. The boat was raised and returned to service. Unluckily, she sank again alongside the jetty on 13 September 1985. The incident led to the loss 16 lives and the imprisonment of the submarine commander.
K-278 (Komsomolets), a Mike class nuclear submarine with a titanium hull, sank on 07 April 1989 south of the Bear island in the Norwegian Sea. A total of 41 crewmen, including the commander, were killed.
K-141 (Kursk), an Oscar II type 949 SSGN) commissioned in 1995, sank on 12 August 2000 in the Barents Sea, presumably due to two explosions in the torpedo tubes.

Of the vessels not raised or salvaged, only K-129 and K-219 carried nuclear missiles, 3 and 16 respectively. K-129's R-13 missiles definitely had single warheads.
K-219's were of the R-27U mirved with 3 warheads each for a total of 48.
The other lost subs may have carried small numbers of nuclear torpedoes, almost certainly fewer than 5 each, and obviously each with just one warhead.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 22:30|| 2005-06-18 22:30|| Front Page Top

#25 "92 weapons are known to have been lost at sea, but this is deceptive, as it includes both single nuke weapons and MIRV'ed weapons."

It does? Weapons are not mirv'ed, missiles are. Do you mean 92 weapons (warheads) or 92 missiles? If "weapons" means "warheads", this is not deceptive, since the count is final. If it means "missiles," say so. You are inviting a false conclusion from the uninformed, double multiplication of the mirv count.

I'm not surprised. Anti-nukers are pathological liars, always have been. I remember a Greenpeace report in the 80s ("Chernobyls at Sea") that listed every submarine sinking since World War 2 as a "nuclear accident" even though the great majority had neither nuclear power nor nuclear weapons.

Posted by Atomic Conspiracy 2005-06-18 22:38|| 2005-06-18 22:38|| Front Page Top

#26 (page 10)Aleksandr Lebed, the former Secretary of the Soviet Security Council: while still operating in his capacity as Secretary of the Russian Security Council, he had conducted a study of the Russian military accounting for its nuclear weapons, specifically suitcase-sized nuclear devices, and had found that the military had lost track of approximately 84 suitcase-sized nuclear bombs, any one of which could kill up to 100,000 people with a capacity of 1 kiloton. In the U.S. television interview subsequent to that meeting, aired on September 7, General Lebed said he now believes the number of missing nuclear weapons to be more than 100...Now, Lebed's allegations have been vehemently denied by the Russian Government...
So, a few here and a few there; after a while they add up.

Posted by Anonymoose 2005-06-19 00:10|| 2005-06-19 00:10|| Front Page Top

00:10 Anonymoose
23:58 Zhang Fei
23:58 BigEd
23:57 CrazyFool
23:45 Zhang Fei
23:43 trailing wife
23:41 Zhang Fei
23:34 trailing wife
23:32 Zhang Fei
23:28 xbalanke
23:28 xbalanke
23:25 trailing wife
23:17 trailing wife
23:16 Frank G
23:16 Bill Nelson
22:58 ed
22:52 phil_b
22:51 JosephMendiola
22:49 Zhang Fei
22:44 Zhang Fei
22:43 JosephMendiola
22:39 trailing wife
22:38 Atomic Conspiracy
22:38 Zhang Fei