Air Force firing officers over B-52 flight

[Parche]

Air Force firing officers over B-52 flight



WASHINGTON (AP) — The Air Force is planning to fire at least five officers for an incident in which nuclear-armed missiles were mistakenly loaded on a B-52 bomber and flown across the U.S. — the worst known violation of nuclear security rules in decades.
Defense Secretary Robert Gates is scheduled to be briefed Friday on the plan to fire the officers and other results of a six-week Air Force probe into the Aug. 30 incident. No one noticed for hours that the weapons were on the bomber, several Defense Department officials said.

One said the investigation found long-established procedures for handling the munitions were not followed and it recommends that five or more officers be relieved of their duties.

All spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak on the record. Two also said parts of the report were still being reviewed by senior Air Force officials, though it was unclear whether any changes in it were planned.

The Air Force said last month that one munitions squadron commander was fired shortly after the August flight and that ground crews and others involved had been temporarily decertified for handling weapons.

In an embarrassing incident that lawmakers called very disturbing, the B-52 mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., with the missiles mounted under one of the bomber's wings.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/2007-10-18-b-52-flight_N.htm
:shrug: :hi:

[hobbit709]

1. I still want to know who ON TOP authorized this?

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. Me too, bad apples we know the drill

[librechik]

2. so--what was the idea? Just a mistake? Did they get orders? Go rogue?

this is very unsatisfactory.

[defendandprotect]

3. Coverup . . .

[malaise]

4. And all now this has not been discussed on MSM n/t

[defendandprotect]

14. I did e-mail KO/Olbermann recently on this subject, but so far NOTHING ---

It's such an astonishing story -- !!!!

It is impossible that this could have happened without someone at the top guiding it ---

I didn't read the whole article -- I'll have to go back to it -- because I don't know if they ever found the missing nukes???

[rzemanfl]

5. Back maybe 20 or 25 years ago I took a book out of the public

library that chronicled accidents involving nuclear weapons going back to the 1950's. When I went to look for it again it was gone and I have never been able to find that book again anywhere. I truly think it was "disappeared."

[DemoTex]

6. In Jon Stewart's best falsetto ..

Scaaaape Goooaaat!

[TomInTib]

9. In your opinion, how likely is it that they would all be under one wing?

Since I don't know nuthin' 'bout no flyin'.

[DemoTex]

11. I know little about B-52s and cruise missiles (actually, I know a lot about cruise missile engines)

I'm just assuming that they hung three cruise missiles on hard points under each wing. But that would be a hell of a lot of drag for a long-haul trip from Barksdale AFB (Shreveport/Bossier City, LA) to Tehran. But, I'm just speculating.

Remember, I saw two B-52s landing Barksdale AFB on 9/5/2007 with F-16 escorts. I was too far away to notice any under-wing stores (and why would I expect any?). I posted here that maybe I saw the nuke cruise missile B-52s. Then another, sharper DUer, pointed out that the transfer in question was on 8/30/2007.

OK. 8/30/2007. Maybe there was another transfer on 9/5/2007. Why the fuck not? What's to stop the likes of, say, Cheney? I've been watching B-52s come in and out of Barksdale since the early 1980s (flying into Shreveport as a corporate pilot, driving back and forth from Dallas to the east coast on I-20 too many times to count), and I have never before seen B-52s with F-16s shadowing them on final approach. Period.

This might well be the scariest story of the entire Bu$h nightmare. I think the surface has only been scratched.

[TomInTib]

12. But wouldn't six on ONE side be quite a drag?

The article definitely said six under one wing.

I remember your post on the F-16 escorts. Is it even SOP for them to practice flanking (escort) exercises over such a populated area? Don't they have remote bases for that sort of thing?

"I think the surface has only been scratched."

I am definitely with you on that point, Mac. For that matter, why should we even begin to assume that this was a solitary occurrence?

[DemoTex]

13. Well, I must invoke FAUX MEWS' slogan: Fair & Balanced

In aircraft loading (a subject that the USAF has excelled), it is called Weight & Balance. Weight is important. Balance is critical (life & death!).

A Boeing 737 with a max gross weight of 137,500 pounds (I am guessing now .. I used to know by memory) would easily fly at 150,000 pounds, if nothing went wrong .. WEIGHT. That same Boeing would be in big trouble with a Center-of-Gravity that same percentage out of the aft envelope .. BALANCE.

Ergo, I can't see a lateral imbalance of six cruise missiles on a B-52. Unless there was an equal weight on the opposite wing. My guess is that the writer considered the entire wing (both sides) as "one wing".

Damn, I wish I could sketch on this board! I'd draw a picture that would clarify all doubts!

Mac

BTW: Sorry for the delay answering. My main computer downstairs (Windows XP) spun, crashed and burned tonight.

[Selatius]

16. I'm assuming there were bombs on both wings, but the drag isn't an issue.

During Viêtnam, B-52s often carried full payloads of bombs that were mounted both internally in the fuselage and externally on the hard points of the wings to maximize the amount of firepower during carpet bombing runs over the Ho Chi Minh Trail. A single B-52 could go out with roughly a hundred 200lb unguided bombs. If drag was an issue, it was likely rectified with in-flight refueling.

On edit: It's 84 bombs internally, 24 bombs externally on the hard points. The bombs were 500lbs each, not 200, sorry.

[307 MMS]

20. Bombs

I loaded for a year in Thailand. That's 500lbers and 750 lbers. I the bomb bay and outboard on the pylons. Hardpoints? What the hell is that?

[Selatius]

24. Hardpoints roughly translates into place where you can put the bombs, at least how its used nowadays

Typical warplanes like, for example, the Russian Su-30 and the American F-15 have 12 hardpoints for carrying ordnance.

[DemoTex]

31. Cruise missiles, not bombs. Three per wing.

Seems like a cruise missle would create more drag than a 500-bb bomb. On the other hand, the AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile looks very slick - low Cd (drag coefficient) - aerodynamically speaking.




AGM-129A Cruise Missiles Being Secured on a B-52H bomber


AGM-129 Advanced Cruise Missile

[lpbk2713]

7. When are they going to discipline THIS officer?

[RC]

10. These officers and enlisted men are being scapegoated

There is no doubt in my mind the orders came from Vice-President Richard Cheney.

[Sneaky Sailor]

22. Or maybe they are just idiots

Not everything is a conspiracy, Ive been to several AFB and security is rarely a priority.

[warren pease]

15. Found an article with specifics on nuclear weapons handling and security protocols...

This got picked up by rense, which isn't the most reliable source of information imo, but it originated from this guy's website. I can't find the article there anymore, so I went with rense. It's long, but skip to the bottom part where he describes chapter and verse on nuclear weapons security. Full article here.


<snip>
Missteps In The Bunker -
DAMAGE CONTROL?
By Ted Twietmeyer
9-25-7

I cannot express in words how awful a recent Washington Post story about the "lost nuclear weapons" is. This pack of lies can make one's blood boil, and was obviously written by:

A. Authors Warrick and Pincus don't have a remote clue about the actual handling of nuclear weapons

OR

B. The Washington Post article is one big dis-information piece and rates as perhaps the worst piece of propaganda I've ever read in years. I'd like to think for now that Warrick and Pincus aren't part of such a blatant attempt at damage control. In fact, the innumerable inaccuracies are a total insult to any reader with even half a brain still working.

If it wasn't for my respect for the copyright notice of the Washington Post (hard as it may be) it would be prudent reproduce their article in its entirety. If you haven't read this abominable "piece of work yet (and you are not planning to eat today) check it out at the link below.

Be sure to come back and keep reading.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/09/22/AR2007092201447_pf.html
</snip>


Anyone who knows about this stuff, please verify or debunk the accuracy of the protocols he describes.


wp

[Usrename]

17. K&R

How were these missiles moved outside the chain of command?

[C_U_L8R]

18. cough-cough-coverup

[lonestarnot]

19. Something not right about THIS either.

:banghead: :grr:

[Javaman]

21. Here we go with the sacrificial lambs off to mollify the masses...

more than likely, 90% of the nation really hasn't a clue as to the security break that actually took place regarding these nukes. The level of planning that had to go into this "screw up" had to be weeks if not months on the drawing boards to circumnavigate the various levels of military checks rechecks, double checks, security clearances and override of orders to make such a breach happen.

It is now being reported as some sort of situation where "some people" didn't follow orders or didn't follow procedure.

right.

Now think about that for a moment. For the entire time the US has had nukes, has there ever been a breach of this nature before? None that I know of, heard of or read about. Why? because it's virtually impossible. However, it happens now, during a time in our nations history, where our constitution is basically used like toilet paper by the WH and they are scrambling to figure out the next false flag op to start a war with Iran.

If these nukes had gone through, I bet you dollars to donuts that one day, boom, nuke goes off and moron* and dickhead would be all over the news with their "I told you so's" over Iran's supposed "nuke program" and how farther along they were than anyone could have "anticipated".

but they were caught, thank god, this time before they had there mushroom cloud orgasm.

so now some dumb fucks probably charged with the most thinly veiled excuses as the culprits or in fact they are the culprits but the brains will quietly slink back in to the darkness, or in this case, "the darkside".

the mouth breathers of america will breath a collective, "whew, that was close" while those of us, know that this whole cock and bull story they are feeding us is just a small part of the larger puzzle in a chain of events that will get moron* and dickhead the war they want.

remember, there are always back up plans for bombing, but not for cleaning up the mess afterward.

[Javaman]

23. One other thing...

since the air force is now rife with gods christian soldiers, how hard is it to believe that the WH got a few of these chosen few to believe in their crusade to rid the world of Muslims? they spread their false gospel around and a few of these military zealots pop up and do their duty for god, country and moron*.

It's really not that much of a stretch.

[Sneaky Sailor]

26. Yes

you are crazy :)

seriously

[Javaman]

27. Thanks!

seriously.

[warren pease]

28. Crazy?

See the article "Missteps In The Bunker: DAMAGE CONTROL?" linked in post number 15. Scroll down about 3/4 of the way through the piece to the section called "START OF SELECTED EXTRACTS 'Nuclear Surety Tamper Control and Detection Programs Supplement' USAF document."

There you'll find a list of specific nuclear weapons handling, transportation and security protocols that participants in this little "mistake" had to have forgotten, ignored or intentionally violated.

Then check back in and tell us who's crazy and who's naive.

And shouldn't that be "seriesly?"


wp


Edited to add the subtitle of the USAF protocols section.

[spanone]

25. an 'embarrassing incident'???? how about a doomsday incident

[NewYorkerfromMass]

29. Only the President could have armed these nukes

I think one important point missing from all this is that the nukes cannot be "live" until the security code to arm them is transmitted by the POTUS.
The other thing is that, (and a lot of the ex-military on this thread have been conveying this) you cannot simply do this as "an accident", because the procedures for the mere handling of nuclear weapons are so rigorous. There are all kinds of codes and protocol which have to be observed and followed to get them all the way from storage to the wings of the plane.

[rocktivity]

30. DING DING DING! NewYorkerfromMass, you're our grand prize winner!

(A)...lot of the ex-military on this thread have been conveying...(that) you cannot simply do this as "an accident" because the procedures for the mere handling of nuclear weapons are so rigorous...

The closest thing I have to a military background is helping write Army "Be All You Can Be" ads. But I'm supposed to believe that there were THREE accidents: leaving the nukes in the missiles; loading the missiles onto the plane; and flying to the plane to a base that just HAPPENS to be an equipment gateway to the Middle East!

:rofl:
rocknation

[NewYorkerfromMass]

32. But it's hardest to get to the "...loading the missiles onto the plane" part

almost impossible to NOT know that you have a nuke.
Seriously. I wish some air force armaments guys would get on here with this.
There are all kinds of checklists which would confirm these were actual nukes before the things ever left storage.

[earth mom]

33. And what about those suspicious deaths that went along with this story?

Have they disappeared off the face of DU?