[david原创翻译]美国空军B-52误装核弹(美国人的反应)

yxchen2200 收藏 2 138
导读:论坛翻译文章

主题:美国空军B-52误装核弹

1楼:Chief Bones

引用:

华盛顿法新社——美国军方在星期三证实,一辆带有6枚核弹头巡航导弹的B-52轰炸机上星期穿越了差不多整个美国。一名匿名的军方官员透露这一误装事件已报告布什,可是核弹头在飞机降落在路易斯安那州的巴克斯代尔空军基地时才被发现。正当美国在讨论关于美国本土的安全警戒是不是太高的时候,空军似乎忘记了最基本的核武器安全措施。。。他们完成了FUBAR(我认为是Fucked Up Beyond Any Recognition)一次混乱不堪的操作,竟然带着现有的核武器在美国大陆上飞,这种处理现有核武器的方法显然违反了军事纪律和标准操作程序。


你们怎么看?是空军忘记了吗?还是由于美国本土安全措施完全改变了,由于伊拉克战争把核武器的贮存、装运和使用的常规程序也完全改变了?显然这是不能容忍的错误,怎么可以带着核武器去做模拟练习?哪怕你只有一丁点的常识,你也能在把这些核武器装卸再装备到B-52上的弹药仓和机翼的时候做一下检查。

凭经验来说……还真有这些个喝醉酒的狗杂种


2楼:Fox

我听说了,很糟糕。那些人和飞行员有着不可推卸的责任。我们大家都会犯错,但是这次也够离谱的。


3楼:the_13th_redneck

事有蹊跷


4楼:tomtom22

引用3楼

是的,实在令人恶心!

有些人玩的时候就精神抖擞了,该换换角色了!


5楼:therise21

老Chief,我想你的标题让人误解了。文章里没有说到装了核弹,只是说装了带有核弹头的巡航导弹。


6楼:phoenix80

那些都是废弃了的核弹……


7楼:tomtom22

引用6楼

废弃的核弹也能爆炸!那个负责军需后勤的军官肯定喝高了。


8楼:phoenix80

引用7楼

可是我听说他们没有给公众任何危险预警。


9楼:Infern0

引用8楼

除非等到核弹掉下来或者飞机失事,以前就发生过……他们有规定不能这么做。


10楼:bulldogg

这个报导看上去有很多误传,冷战的时候有成百上千桩这样的例子。现在我倒要问,是本来B-52就不允许装核弹还是他们可能被装上了核弹。如果没有装核弹,我就不明白为什么那么多人说装了,还有一些人索性不提这件事情,我怀疑这都是以讹传讹。


11楼:the_13th_redneck

就我个人而言我并不知道太多关于核武器在美国被运来运去的消息,我认为用B-52来装核弹并不是个好主意。问题是这是一件事实上被计划安排并透露给某些人知道的阴谋,还是这真的只是一个失误?若真的是失误,那么那些人就可以被撤职了,就算这样做并不能带来什么好处但我们也不希望是核弹。

就像我说的那样…这件事情很可疑。


12楼:Chief Bones

嘿,大伙

问题的关键是,实际上当飞机在美国上空飞行的时候,那些可以使用的核武器能不能被装到弹药仓上或者机翼上……这样的练习在很久以前停止了。核弹头或者核武器的运送是通过海运集装箱然后再用卡车来完成的。事实上在美国只有在特殊地点的停机坪上才能把核武器拆箱、再装载到飞机上,那架飞机将一直停在特种武器仓库的外面并受到24小时监控。

假设,一架飞机要通过一系列的特殊操作再装上假弹而不是真弹,然后才能起飞…那么我们都知道对于所有军火和准军火,真弹和假弹的颜色、标记都是不同的…假弹身上耀眼的蓝色是不可能被误认为是真弹的,反之亦然。我也无法想象这种不可思议的错误是怎么发生的…最新的装运人员也能说出真弹和假弹的不同…他们也应该知道标准操作程序、操作说明书、指导方针等等…毕竟你们是学习了所有的相关知识再通过训练,然后去处理武器的。

这就说明为什么这些装运人员的证词被临时搁置了而导致整个调查结果到现在还没出来。


13楼:the_13th_redneck

有些错误真的很可怕 很可恶,比虚构的小说还荒唐。


14楼:bulldogg

Chief谢谢你对这事件的整理 现在觉得合理了。


15楼:phoenix80

引用9楼

在1950年,一架装有几吨核弹的B-36坠落在加拿大西海岸,但是什么也没发生。这次就难道更危险吗?


16楼:WNxRogue

引用15楼

那就好象在说,世界上几百个核电站都完好无损就什么事情都没有了。当事故发生的时候,环境就跟以前大不一样了。这是个令人难以忍受的错误,就这么简单。


17楼:Infern0

引用15楼

我真的很困惑你为什么要试图争论这个话题,你要知道各种各样的人都会鄙视你,很有可能还有更糟糕的事情等着你。


18楼:Gator

引用1楼

美国空军在没有授权的情况下是不允许装上核弹并带着它们飞来飞去的,这没有来自国家安全部门的认可,没有总司令的认可,甚至没有空军司令的认可…关于什么条件下才能装上特殊武器带着它执行任务,我会去找一些相关资料来,但是美国国会会把这事情查清楚,肯定很多人要撤职了。


19楼:bulldogg

如果只是飞机失事核弹是不会引爆的,因为有保险装置,但问题是这个事件是违法的。撤职只是政治把戏,这个事件也一样。没有人愿意一起努力做事,开玩笑和肆意抨击比找出真相要简单得多。


20楼:senojekips

已经有几个城市卷入过类似的核武器事件,佛罗伦萨、 南卡罗来纳、Palomares(估计是西班牙的一个城市)等等。大多数情况下,先是被引爆,然后放射性物质蔓延到整个地区。事故处理的成本是十分巨大的,这还不包括陆地上被放射性物质污染的人们。


(美国人的生活看来是越来越不好过,我的一个客户上次来中国跟我说现在的美国有点像文革的中国,以前是绝对言论自由,现在如果你在大街上讲布什的坏话,警察听到了就会来找你麻烦,他也跟我说在911以前他到世界各地做生意那边的人对他都非常友好,总是羡慕的眼光看他,911以后他就要到处担心自己的处境,当地人的眼光也变了。他说他爱克林顿,讨厌布什。他在加拿大边境的小城市到底特律以前只要个把小时,现在要5个小时,因为到处都是安检路障。。。)


以下是原文


Post; Air Force B-52 carries armed Nucs by mistake ...


1F:Chief Bones

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


Excerpt:


WASHINGTON (AFP) — A B-52 bomber flew the length of the United States last week loaded with six nuclear-armed cruise missiles in a major security breach, US military officials said Wednesday.The lapse was reported to President George W. Bush after the nuclear warheads were discovered when the aircraft landed at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, a military official said on condition of anonymity.As the United States carries on a discussion as to how much Homeland Security is too much, the Air Force seems to have forgotten basic Nuclear Weapons Security ... they carried out a FUBAR operation when they transported live Nuclear Weapons over much of the Continental United States thus violating a veritable library of military instructions and SOPs when dealing with live Nuclear Warshots.


What do you think? Has the Air Force lost it? ... has all of the upheaval caused by Homeland Security and the total involvement with the Iraqi War completely derailed the normal security procedures that govern all aspects of the storage/transportation/usage of Nuclear First Strike Warshots?

There is absolutely NO WAY you can mistake a Nuclear Warshot for a practice BDU/Dummy Round IF you even use the slightest bit of common sense examination of the weapons as they are being unpacked from their packing cases and loaded onto a B-52 (or) any other plane capable of carrying them in a bomb bay or on a wing pylon.

I speak from experience and training ... someone really screwed the pooch on this one.


2F:Fox

I've heard about it. Not good. Very inexuseable for the crews and pilots. We all makes mistake. But this one, that's FUBAR, yeah.


3F:the_13th_redneck

Something's real fishy about this one.


4F:tomtom22

Quote:3F

Yeah, it stinks to high heaven!

Somebody screwed up bigtime! Heads should roll!


5F:therise21

Senior Chief, I think the title of the thread is misleading. The article you linked to doesnt say ARMED nukes, it says nuclear armed cruise missiles.


6F:phoenix80

They were obsolete nuclear bombs....


7F:tomtom22

Quote:6F

Obsolete bombs can still go BANG!!

The munitions squadron commander was canned over this.


8F:phoenix80

Quote:7F

The munitions squadron commander was canned over this.

I heard they weren't posing any danger to public though


9F:Infern0

Quote:8F

unless they fell off, or the plane crashed

which has happened in the past....they have these rules for a reason P80


10F:bulldogg

There seems to be a lot of misinformation on this one. The Cold War had hundreds of near misses like this one. Now I have to ask, are B-52s not allowed to carry Nukes or is it that they may have been ARMED. If they were not ARMED I don't understand the furor and various sources are saying they were and others don't mention it and I suspect most of the hoopleheads writing the stories don't know the difference.


11F:the_13th_redneck

Personally I don't know enough about how nuclear weapons are transported within the United States. I didn't think that loading it on a B-52 was one such method.

The main issue here is, was this actually a legitimate mission that was planned and notified to all appropriate individuals or was this truly indeed a mistake? If it was a mistake, heads should roll, even if that thing was carrying a hundred rubber duckies instead of nukes.

Like I said... this story sounds kind of fishy.


12F:Chief Bones

Hey Guys

Where the rubber meets the road on this one, is the fact that operational Nuclear Weapons are NOT carried in a bomb bay or on hardpoint pylons when the aircraft is being flown over the United States ... this practice was stopped many many years ago. Trans-shipment of Nuclear Warheads (or) weapons is via shipping containers and then ONLY in the cargo bays of cargo transport planes. The actual unpacking and loading of nuclear weapons onto a warplane inside the US is ONLY done setting on the tarmac at special sites and then ONLY as a Weapons Handling Excercise - the aircraft remains on the ground and is guarded the entire time that the weapon is outside the Special Weapons Bunkers.

IF ( *BIG IF* ), an aircraft is going to take off as part of a Special Operation, then a 'practice' weapon (or BDU), is used ... NOT A 'HOT' WEAPON. To all ordnance and former ordnance types, you ALL know the difference in the color/marking between a 'hot' weapon and a practice weapon ... the glaring blue color of a practice round can NOT be mistaken for a real weapon (and vice-versa).

How this FUBAR mistake could have happened is beyond me ... the newest member of a loading crew can tell at a glance the difference between hot and practice weapons ... they also should be aware of the SOP/instruction/guidelines ... after all, you learn all of that type of information when you go through the training pipeline prior to ever actually handling ANY real weapons.

That explains why the certification of every member of the loading crew was temporarrily suspended pending the investigations outcome ...


13F:the_13th_redneck

Some mistakes are so terrible and outrageous that it's crazier than fiction.


14F:bulldogg

Thanks Chief for clearing up wherein the mistake lies, now it makes sense.


15F:phoenix80

Quote:9F

Well a B-36 with tons of nukes crashed over the Canadian west coast in 1950 and nothing happened. How could this specific thing be any more dangerous?


16F:WNxRogue

Quote:15F

Thats like saying that because hundreds of nuclear power plants around the world havent melted down, that none will. Accidents happen, and circumstances could be diffrent now than then. It was a grievous mistake. Simple as that.


17F:Infern0

Quote:15F

i really am baffled why you are trying to argue this one chief, some one (or multiple people more likely) cocked up BAAAAAD, and the potential for all kind of bad things to happen is huge.


18F:Gator

Quote:1F

The Air Force is not allowed to just take Nukes and fly them around without authorization, it is against the Law for DHS to authorize it, it is against the Law for the Base Commander to authorize it, it is against the Law for even the Secretary of the Air Force to authorize it.... I'm not going to get into the specifics on this Board of what needs to take place to move a Special Weapon from one place to another, but the United States Congress will get to the bottom of it, and many heads will roll.


19F:bulldogg

The nukes could not have detonated from a crash. They have to be armed etc. But it was a violation of law and therein is the problem.

Heads will roll only because of partisan politics... so be it. No point in trying to work together, sniping and potshotting is far easier than reaching concensus and working for the greater good.


20F:senojekips

There have been a few cockups involving nuclear weapons. Florence, SC, Palomares, etc., in most cases the initiating exlosive detonated, spreading highly radioactive material over a considerable area. The cost of cleaning up these errors was huge, not to mention the danger to persons on the ground.

.

.

.

原文来自http://www.military-quotes.com/forum/air-force-b-52-carries-t43390.html

本文内容为我个人原创作品,申请原创加分

0
回复主贴
聚焦 国际 历史 社会 军事
2条评论
点击加载更多

发表评论

更多精彩内容

热门话题

更多
广告 东风,东风:目标韩国首尔 导弹准备发射

经典聚焦

更多
发帖 向上 向下
广告 关闭