With friends like these...
- Thread starter badbob
- Start date
Wildalaska
Moderator
To quote a famous quote:
S**t happens
WildwhereistheambesolAlaska
S**t happens
WildwhereistheambesolAlaska
I wonder what really happened here. I'm racking my brain right now but i'm almost postive you can't detonate a nuc with pressure. I mean i'm sure there is some way some how it could happen but the chances have got to be off the scale in the way of happening. Kinda like my chances of winning the lottery.
Wildalaska
Moderator
Actually, I wasnt trying to be cynical, but rather, point out in my own smarmy fashion that the best laid plans of mice and man arent always enough.
No matter how hard you try, not matter what steps you take, something... anyhting ....will go wrong. Its the nature of random chaos.
WildbeingfatalisticAlaska
Geoff Timm
New member
You have to remember that nuclear weapons decay. The effect of radomly generated neutrons on whatever they hit is just a part of the problem.
I doubt that any nuclear weapon in the facility was fused. The components are kept separately for a very good reason.
The components would be broken down, tested, then reassembled into functional weapons.
Geoff
Who is not very worried about surplus Russian nukes...they are all past maintenance date and probibly beyond function. (And please don't disabuse me of my delusions)
I doubt that any nuclear weapon in the facility was fused. The components are kept separately for a very good reason.
The components would be broken down, tested, then reassembled into functional weapons.
Geoff
Who is not very worried about surplus Russian nukes...they are all past maintenance date and probibly beyond function. (And please don't disabuse me of my delusions)
Things like this you need to analyze what information is there versus what information you are led to believe is there.
The watchdog group was told by someone who probably claimed knowledge of the event. It would have to be the watchdog group claiming these people are experts. Why? Because they are unidentified, so no one else can validate their expertise with regards to the functioning of nukes.
Watch for needles in coin phone booths because my brother's friend's, cousin's mother's neighbor's uncle's nephew's son had one stick him...
Second thought is that it only takes one or two people to write a letter of complaint that exaggerates the evil and greedy business people who are using the poor workers to enrich themselves. (Did someone not get a raise this year?)
I'm not saying this story isn't true or the possible consequences exaggerated, but a critical look at the story says that we don't have nearly enough information to know what's really going on. Imagine some anti-gun person seeing a .45 auto round with the bullet set back into the case and characterizing that as a "near disaster".
The watchdog group characterizes this as a "near miss event" -- conjuring up images of FAA notices of aircraft near miss incidents.
The watchdog group was told by someone who probably claimed knowledge of the event. It would have to be the watchdog group claiming these people are experts. Why? Because they are unidentified, so no one else can validate their expertise with regards to the functioning of nukes.
No information is provided as to what is considered "unsafe pressure". And pressure alone may not be the point as much as WHERE you're putting that pressure.
I see this kind of statement and my first thought is...
Watch for needles in coin phone booths because my brother's friend's, cousin's mother's neighbor's uncle's nephew's son had one stick him...
Second thought is that it only takes one or two people to write a letter of complaint that exaggerates the evil and greedy business people who are using the poor workers to enrich themselves. (Did someone not get a raise this year?)
And how did records show this? There is no information to tie the fine to the specific event in the story. One might assume some records showed the serial number of the warhead, but this is glossed over.
Ahh, the BMX company is lying...see, doesn't that show you this whole thing is true? Notice that there was no indication that the news reporters (if any) tried to ask Swaim about the delays or accuracy of the report. Usually this is done and added to the story, especially when there is a "No Comment".
I'm not saying this story isn't true or the possible consequences exaggerated, but a critical look at the story says that we don't have nearly enough information to know what's really going on. Imagine some anti-gun person seeing a .45 auto round with the bullet set back into the case and characterizing that as a "near disaster".
Insider info
I have nearly 25 years experience working at a DOE nuclear facility, so I have some "insider info" most of you may not be aware of. It does make a difference in a correct evaluation of the information posted in the article.
First of all, pressure applied to a nuclear device can NOT cause a nuclear detonation, but it can cause a criticality. A criticality releases lethal doses of radiation in the local vicinity (inside the room) but it is not in any way comparable to the blast, heat, and radiation of a nuclear bomb.
An very imprecise analogy is to compare a handgrenade and a squadron of heavy bombers dropping 2,000lb bombs. This is very imprecise, and is mentioned to give an idea of the difference in destructive power, not the actual difference, which is orders of magnituted greater.
Also, nuclear weapons are stored in, and worked on in specially constructed bunkers, designed to contain/minimize the effects of an actual nuclear detonation.
Other factors you have to consider about the report. A near miss incident is a classification name for an event. It does not mean the event could actually have happened. It means that one (or more) of the multiple levels of safety boundries was broken. "Near miss" is used to identify all kinds of incidents, from very minor all the way up to serious. The level of incident that can cause a report all the way up to the Federal level is hard for those outside the industry to concieve. An employee who slips on an icy sidewalk, (but doesn't fall), and reports it can generate a near miss accident report. A paper cut must be reported to management (it is an injury), and it gets logged, and a report is generated, and it finds it's way into the plant accident statistics. And failure of the company to do so can result in a fine.
With this kind of ouersight requirements on the little stuff, how do you think the important stuff gets dealt with? Exactly!
Safety boundries are arranged in "rings" like a bullseye target. Each "ring" is a seperate specification/requirement, each one more restrictive than the one outside it. ALL of these rings have to be broken before an event can take place. Applying more pressure than the specs allow to the bomb case could be the equivalent of a hit in the "6" ring. Not a bullseye. Not even close.
Without exact information it cannot be determined, but it could be a situation where (for example) the "safety boundry" was 75lbs pressure, and the techs applied 77lbs. This is more than enough to institute a "stop work" order, begin an investigation, and make a report of a "near miss" occurrance.
Failure of the contractor to make the report within a specified time (possibly even before all the details are known) can result in the DOE issuing a fine to the contractor.
As to the long hours worked by the people at the plant, the contractor must have administrative procedures detailing the maximun numbers of hours employees in certain jobs are allowed to work. This is an industrial safety issue. Just as for airline pilots, truckers, and other jobs with "an impact on public safety" these things must be determined (by industrial safety experts)and policies must be written out. A company may ignore/violate the procedure, but it is in violation of laws when it does.
So, what we have here is a watchdog group, taking info, announcing to the world the info is reliable, and telling all of us how at risk we are because of it.
Now, it could be that are right, or it could be a paperwork violation occurred, which has no real world impact on anything, except that a technical mistake wasn't documented in the approved manner in the approved time frame.
The devil is in the details, and the report didn't give any significant ones. And one of the details they did give is wrong.
"Oversight project investigator Peter Stockton, a former Energy Department official, said the device was a W56 warhead, with a yield of 1,200 kilotons, 100 times the destructive power of the Hiroshima bomb. "
The Hiroshima bomb was approx. 20Kt. 20 kilotons. Equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. I am getting a bit old, but my math says 100x20 is 2000, not 1,200.
There are a lot of parallels to anti-gun propaganda. Take a little bit of actual info not commonly known to the general public, don't explain it properly, and imply a tremendous hazard as a result.
FYI, some nuclear weapons are designed to be detonated by pressure. Pressure to crush the nuclear material tremendously to create the nuclear explosion. BUT the pressure has to be applied exactly evenly, and it has to crush the fissile material completely in nanoseconds, otherwise, no bomb. It took the Manhattan project months to figure out the engineering, and more months to be able to actualy do it so it worked. It was done with precisely shaped explosives completely surrounding the fissle material, all of which had to detonate at the exact same instant. Any amount of pressure/crushing of the bomb case possible with machinery or impact will NOT detonate the bomb. In fact, damage/deformation is one thing that will ensure you cannot detonate the bomb.
There obviously was some kind of procedure violation. It involved a nuclear warhead. Without specific and exact details, all the report really is, is agitprop.
Hope this helps. If you have further questions, just ask.
I have nearly 25 years experience working at a DOE nuclear facility, so I have some "insider info" most of you may not be aware of. It does make a difference in a correct evaluation of the information posted in the article.
First of all, pressure applied to a nuclear device can NOT cause a nuclear detonation, but it can cause a criticality. A criticality releases lethal doses of radiation in the local vicinity (inside the room) but it is not in any way comparable to the blast, heat, and radiation of a nuclear bomb.
An very imprecise analogy is to compare a handgrenade and a squadron of heavy bombers dropping 2,000lb bombs. This is very imprecise, and is mentioned to give an idea of the difference in destructive power, not the actual difference, which is orders of magnituted greater.
Also, nuclear weapons are stored in, and worked on in specially constructed bunkers, designed to contain/minimize the effects of an actual nuclear detonation.
Other factors you have to consider about the report. A near miss incident is a classification name for an event. It does not mean the event could actually have happened. It means that one (or more) of the multiple levels of safety boundries was broken. "Near miss" is used to identify all kinds of incidents, from very minor all the way up to serious. The level of incident that can cause a report all the way up to the Federal level is hard for those outside the industry to concieve. An employee who slips on an icy sidewalk, (but doesn't fall), and reports it can generate a near miss accident report. A paper cut must be reported to management (it is an injury), and it gets logged, and a report is generated, and it finds it's way into the plant accident statistics. And failure of the company to do so can result in a fine.
With this kind of ouersight requirements on the little stuff, how do you think the important stuff gets dealt with? Exactly!
Safety boundries are arranged in "rings" like a bullseye target. Each "ring" is a seperate specification/requirement, each one more restrictive than the one outside it. ALL of these rings have to be broken before an event can take place. Applying more pressure than the specs allow to the bomb case could be the equivalent of a hit in the "6" ring. Not a bullseye. Not even close.
Without exact information it cannot be determined, but it could be a situation where (for example) the "safety boundry" was 75lbs pressure, and the techs applied 77lbs. This is more than enough to institute a "stop work" order, begin an investigation, and make a report of a "near miss" occurrance.
Failure of the contractor to make the report within a specified time (possibly even before all the details are known) can result in the DOE issuing a fine to the contractor.
As to the long hours worked by the people at the plant, the contractor must have administrative procedures detailing the maximun numbers of hours employees in certain jobs are allowed to work. This is an industrial safety issue. Just as for airline pilots, truckers, and other jobs with "an impact on public safety" these things must be determined (by industrial safety experts)and policies must be written out. A company may ignore/violate the procedure, but it is in violation of laws when it does.
So, what we have here is a watchdog group, taking info, announcing to the world the info is reliable, and telling all of us how at risk we are because of it.
Now, it could be that are right, or it could be a paperwork violation occurred, which has no real world impact on anything, except that a technical mistake wasn't documented in the approved manner in the approved time frame.
The devil is in the details, and the report didn't give any significant ones. And one of the details they did give is wrong.
"Oversight project investigator Peter Stockton, a former Energy Department official, said the device was a W56 warhead, with a yield of 1,200 kilotons, 100 times the destructive power of the Hiroshima bomb. "
The Hiroshima bomb was approx. 20Kt. 20 kilotons. Equivalent to 20,000 tons of TNT. I am getting a bit old, but my math says 100x20 is 2000, not 1,200.
There are a lot of parallels to anti-gun propaganda. Take a little bit of actual info not commonly known to the general public, don't explain it properly, and imply a tremendous hazard as a result.
FYI, some nuclear weapons are designed to be detonated by pressure. Pressure to crush the nuclear material tremendously to create the nuclear explosion. BUT the pressure has to be applied exactly evenly, and it has to crush the fissile material completely in nanoseconds, otherwise, no bomb. It took the Manhattan project months to figure out the engineering, and more months to be able to actualy do it so it worked. It was done with precisely shaped explosives completely surrounding the fissle material, all of which had to detonate at the exact same instant. Any amount of pressure/crushing of the bomb case possible with machinery or impact will NOT detonate the bomb. In fact, damage/deformation is one thing that will ensure you cannot detonate the bomb.
There obviously was some kind of procedure violation. It involved a nuclear warhead. Without specific and exact details, all the report really is, is agitprop.
Hope this helps. If you have further questions, just ask.
Clarification
I don't have any inside info on this particular story, or the Pantex plant for that matter. But I do on the way work is conducted at DOE nuclear facilities. Pantex cannot (by law) do things significantly different from the rest of the DOE complex.
There are organizational procedures (Conduct of Operations) which are in force throughout all DOE nuclear facilities. DOE Order 5480.19, for example.
I wish to be clear, I have no personal knowledge of conditions at the Pantex plant. However, some things are consistant throughout the DOE complex, and all work at all facilities is done under the same general framework.
I have been a fissile material handler for nearly a quarter century, and it is difficult to understand how little the average person understands about this kind of work when it has been such a big part of my life. The realization that commonplace things to me are unknown to most of the rest of you is what led me to post on this matter. Everything I talked about earlier is in the public record. People with agendas can get it, and usually only tell part of what they find out. Hence, disinformation.
If anybody wishes a more detailed explanation of my position, just ask. But in the interest of the forum, it should probably be done privately. If any of the moderators want more of this kind of info on the public forum, I would be happy to continue explanations for everyone.
Things happen, even with nuclear material. 99.99999999999999% of them are nothing to lose any sleep over. And if you are one of those who worry about it, and think this could be as bad as Three Mile Island, or Chernobyl, you need to learn more about it. ALOT MORE.
I don't have any inside info on this particular story, or the Pantex plant for that matter. But I do on the way work is conducted at DOE nuclear facilities. Pantex cannot (by law) do things significantly different from the rest of the DOE complex.
There are organizational procedures (Conduct of Operations) which are in force throughout all DOE nuclear facilities. DOE Order 5480.19, for example.
I wish to be clear, I have no personal knowledge of conditions at the Pantex plant. However, some things are consistant throughout the DOE complex, and all work at all facilities is done under the same general framework.
I have been a fissile material handler for nearly a quarter century, and it is difficult to understand how little the average person understands about this kind of work when it has been such a big part of my life. The realization that commonplace things to me are unknown to most of the rest of you is what led me to post on this matter. Everything I talked about earlier is in the public record. People with agendas can get it, and usually only tell part of what they find out. Hence, disinformation.
If anybody wishes a more detailed explanation of my position, just ask. But in the interest of the forum, it should probably be done privately. If any of the moderators want more of this kind of info on the public forum, I would be happy to continue explanations for everyone.
Things happen, even with nuclear material. 99.99999999999999% of them are nothing to lose any sleep over. And if you are one of those who worry about it, and think this could be as bad as Three Mile Island, or Chernobyl, you need to learn more about it. ALOT MORE.
Thanks 44 AMP, that was enlightening. In my mind's eye, I couldn't see how any pressure applied by machinery could detonate a nuke anyhow. I have read a lot about the Manhattan project and the geometry of the shaped charges used then, and it kind of threw me for a loop when the report mentioned by the OP hinted that an explosion almost occurred because of a machine.