Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
1–10 of 98 posts
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#2The title should be updated to reflect that this is from 2015.
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#3The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#4The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
I read some stories about the
this, but nothing definitive. Just what some unnamed source claimed. Nothing to corroborate.
Do you have a story that backs up the claim?
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#5The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
I read some stories about the this, but nothing definitive. Just what some unnamed source claimed. Nothing to corroborate. Do you have a story that backs up the claim?
Here's something I quickly scraped out of a google search:
https://brusselsdiplomatic.com/2017/01/22/trident-accident-p...
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#6The title should be updated to reflect that this is from 2015.
Hmm, I wonder what happened to him...
> The navy described his dossier as “subjective and unsubstantiated” and launched an inquiry that concluded by dismissing his allegations as “factually incorrect or the result of misunderstanding or partial understanding”...He was discharged “on the claim that my sole aim was to discredit their public image”, he says.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jun/17/trident-whis...
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#7The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
I've read a couple of articles, and as I understand it a missile veered off course. During a test. Which is kind of the point of a test.
Oh, except apparently it 'veered' towards the US. And this was before the vote to renew, so naturally people are trying to call it a cover up.
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#8The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
I read some stories about the this, but nothing definitive. Just what some unnamed source claimed. Nothing to corroborate. Do you have a story that backs up the claim?
This is the latest from the BBC over it: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-38714047
Specifically this part describing how May dodged the question multiple times. The 'vote' being the vote by Parliament on whether to renew funding for the Trident system:
Questioned by the BBC's Andrew Marr on Sunday, Prime Minister Theresa May refused four times to say if she had known about the test firing ahead of the vote.
Mrs May said: "I have absolute faith in our Trident missiles. When I made that speech in the House of Commons, what we were talking about was whether or not we should renew our Trident."
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#9The reason this is posted here again is that there was recently a Trident "accident" which May did not disclose to Parliament.
I've read a couple of articles, and as I understand it a missile veered off course. During a test. Which is kind of the point of a test. Oh, except apparently it 'veered' towards the US. And this was before the vote to renew, so naturally people are trying to call it a cover up.
The test had intended to fire the missile towards the Atlantic. After launch, it turned around and flew the other way towards Florida. From the sibling posts's response I made:
According to the Sunday Times, the unarmed Trident II D5 missile was intended to be fired 5,600 miles (9,012 km) from the coast of Florida to a sea target off the west coast of Africa - but veered towards the US.
Re: Trident whistleblower: nuclear 'disaster waiting to happen' (2015)
#10This part was just great:
Just weeks after passing out of training I had a draft for HMS Victorious. My work mates started calling me a terrorist robot because I remembered everything and I have a Northern Ireland accent. This reputation would have undoubtedly made it difficult for me to gather information. I needed to create distance between them, and create a knew persona; I aimed for mixture of dumbness and eagerness to learn for simple curios reasons. Within days of being on patrol I was no longer the terrorist robot, soaking up all the information for terrorist reasons. Playing dumb came easy for me, I've been doing it and been it most of life. It makes people open up and explain a lot more. If someone assumes you know something they might leave that part out of the conversation, meaning you've just lost information which might have been valuable. It also helps with getting out of certain situations. I watched a lot of Columbo when I was a kid.
On a similar armament note, from edge's "2006: What is your dangerous idea?" [0]
> "The idea that we understand plutonium"
> The most dangerous idea I have come across recently is the idea that we understand plutonium. Plutonium is the most complex element in the periodic table. It has six different crystal phases between room temperature and its melting point. It can catch fire spontaneously in the presence of water vapor and if you inhale minuscule amounts you will die of lung cancer. It is the principle element in the "pits" that are the explosive cores of nuclear weapons. In these pits it is alloyed with gallium. No one knows why this works and no one can be sure how stable this alloy is. These pits, in the thousands, are now decades old. What is dangerous is the idea that they have retained their integrity and can be safely stored into the indefinite future.