Live data from Hacker News

What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

newyorker.com

81–90 of 381 posts

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#81
post #14

I live in New York City and I felt a small degree of panic when the reports showed up on Twitter. However, my initial instinct was "either the system doesn't work, or someone messed up". If someone started firing missiles at the US, the risk that we'd start shooting them back seems high, and I think NYC would be a city that would get pummeled in retaliation. This is probably true for a lot of major coastal cities, es…

Growing up I got the impression that a fallout shelter was a purpose-specific room deep underground. So every time I saw the "Fallout Shelter" sign on a building, I figured it was built with one of these "secret underground rooms". Think dedicated, locked stairwell that goes a thousand feet underground; after all, that's how it was pictured in my "Way Things Work" book. When we went to the bank, it was something of a…

Looked through the index of my early German (English translated, published around the 1960's, I believe) "The Way Things Work" volumes I and II and didn't see fallout shelters.

It occurred to me though — when did they start calling them "fallout" shelters rather than "bomb" shelters?

I'm guessing (after having read "The Making of the Atomic Bomb") that this would be about when the hydrogen bomb came along.

It was sobering to read how dramatically more powerful the fusion bomb was compared to the first fission bombs. Suddenly the idea of going into a basement shelter to "survive" the blast became laughable. If you were far enough from the blast though your only comfort could come from a shelter from the fallout.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#82
post #59
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, my initial instinct was "either the system doesn't work, or someone messed up". Why? What really surprises me the most is that this seems to be a common thought. Did that happen before? Do you simply misstrust your government so deeply that you can not even assume something important like this is done right? Really if i would get such a message on my phone (not even sure if my country does that) i would de…

Hawaii does not seem like a plausible target for a nuclear missile.

Why not? Until recently it was one of the few places North Korea could reasonably expect to reach.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#83
post #64

It’s interesting how people (anecdotally) don’t seem to have any plan for a nuclear attack, as opposed to, say, an earthquake or a fire. I think there’s a stigma around even considering the possibility. However, it makes sense to at least talk with your family about what you would all do. According to what I’ve read on the gov sites, it’s very survivable for a lot of people if you take key steps: surround yourself wi…

> surround yourself with as much building as you can (the middle floor of a high rise, or a basement three stories deep, etc.) Why would the middle floor of a high rise be better than its ground floor?

Here’s one source: https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/20130726-1622-20490-...

The idea is to get away from an area where particles can collect (like the ground). They seem to be saying that you wouldn’t want to choose a floor with a balcony, for instance.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#84
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> However, my initial instinct was "either the system doesn't work, or someone messed up". Why? What really surprises me the most is that this seems to be a common thought. Did that happen before? Do you simply misstrust your government so deeply that you can not even assume something important like this is done right? Really if i would get such a message on my phone (not even sure if my country does that) i would de…

I felt the same way, but its not because I distrusted the government. The situation didn't feel like one wherein nuclear missiles would start being fired (or any missiles of any kind). There's got to be some sort of build up before a conflict before it can't catch people in shock (hence the rational of actual surprise-attacks). If tomorrow you read that Canada had invaded New York City, would you believe it instantly…

Personally i dont think a attack to the U.S. would be to much of a surprise. But true there is currently no direct tension in that direction. Also as someone else said, Hawaii really is a unlikely target.

I get it now i guess.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#85
post #64

It’s interesting how people (anecdotally) don’t seem to have any plan for a nuclear attack, as opposed to, say, an earthquake or a fire. I think there’s a stigma around even considering the possibility. However, it makes sense to at least talk with your family about what you would all do. According to what I’ve read on the gov sites, it’s very survivable for a lot of people if you take key steps: surround yourself wi…

I think many people consider nuclear war an end of the world event. Working hard to survive just to be left adrift in the ashes of civilization with likely long-term health effects seems counterproductive to some of us.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#86
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You should probably get an MP3 of that song, in case YouTube happens to be down at the time of the nuclear blast. That would suck.

My actual level of preparedness goes up in proportion to geopolitical tension.

But this is PiracHeresy! You wouldnt steel a box of food if its the end of the world. Downloading music is stealing. Looters will be shot!

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#87
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It takes far less to be an effective fallout shelter than you might think. If you look at lethal ranges on H-Bombs you see incredible destruction, but if you're protected for the first 1hour after a blast you can be surprisingly close to the blast and live.

I’m less concerned about the blast than what it would take to keep me alive and reasonably healthy after. I’d like my fallout shelter to include some food and water. Some used to: I distinctly remember boxes and boxes of crackers in some underground shelter as a child.

One way of looking at these shelters is what % of radiation can you avoid for a blast X miles away. 90% and 99% are both easy to reach and would save vast numbers of lives as many decay products have half lives under a minute making them temporary, but significant problems. 99.99% gets really expensive because of longer half lives and the need to better filter air etc.

PS: Further, there is a tradeoff as unless it protects you from x% of radiation protection from the blast is basically pointless.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#88
post #42

If someone did launch a missile, and it were destroyed with a secret weapons system, this is precisely the timeline (alert, not a drill - passage of 30+ mins to write a cover story about shift change, “oh sorry false alarm”) and news articles I would expect to see. The only thing we know is that we won’t ever receive the truth. Can you imagine how much worse it would be if the story were “US anti-missile defense dest…

Who else would likely see the missile besides U.S. military? That's an interesting idea, even if at first blush very unlikely.

Re: What It Felt Like in Hawaii When Warning of an In-Bound Missile Arrived

#90
I saw a high-effort self-post on Reddit that gave a good framework for evaluating what might have happened. I thought it was good enough that I've recopied it here in full hoping that author appreciates reaching a larger audience and that discussion here might be better than that on Reddit. Repeating, I'm not the author of what's written below.

---

A couple of possibilities for what REALLY went down in Hawaii yesterday

I used to work on the Minutemen 3 ICBMs for a high profile company. Can't share too many details for obvious reasons. But I think the "mistake" of an employee accidentally pressed the mass alert button is very unlikely. In fact, I can think of a lot of things way more likely. Here's my two cents, in no particular order:

The threat was real, the missile was shot down

As others on this subreddit have already pointed out, the amount of time it takes an ICBM to travel from Southeast Asia to Hawaii is approximately 20-30 min ( ~10 min to hit ICBM max speed of 7 km/s, ~7200 km, (7200/7)/(60) = ~17 min for total travel time of ~27 min, not accounting for earth's rotation in that time period). The amount of time it took for the false alarm to be sent out was 38 min. Now, the way the US's ABM system works is that they basically launch a giant chunk of metal at the ICBM and hit it really hard. The ABMs have no ordinance or anything, they just destroy the incoming missile through shear impact. However, even though our ABM system is the best in the world, it's still only successful around 50% of the time. So when the incoming threat was discovered, it would still be protocol to alert the intended target of the threat in the event that the ABM systems fail (and whatever other defenses we have that I don't know about). I think it's at least feasible that the threat was real, and the threat was dealt with successfully (and thankfully). The question that tears this theory apart is: why would the US not tell us they shot down an enemy ICBM? The most likely answer I can come up with is that Trump doesn't want war. Maybe he just talks a big game. Or perhaps it's not financially beneficial to start a war when there were no causalities. Whatever it is, it's not that we don't know who launched the missile. When those things take off we pretty much immediately know where it's going and where it came from. So if there was a real threat, the US Gov is for whatever reason not sharing this information with the public. Maybe they don't want to cause panic. I don't know.

The EAS was hacked to provoke reaction from Trump

The EAS has been hacked before, it's possible that it was hacked again. The person or persons who hacked the system either did so for shits and giggles, which is extremely fucked up considering how many people could have died if we had retaliated, or they did so to intentionally cause a retaliation from Trump in order to make him look bad. See, ICBMs function on something called Mutually Assured Destruction. If someone like Russia launches their full force of ICBMs at us, we have that half hour to retaliate. In a situation like that, both countries lose. Using ICBMs against another country with ICBM's is essentially committing suicide. If we had launched missiles towards Southeast Asia, they would then have a chance to retaliate against us. I have hard time believing that any hacker would do this, but then, there are some truly crazy people out there. This could also explain why it took so long for them to send out the second alert, because the system was hacked or down and they needed to regain control or reset it. Also, if one of the employees didn't send the message, they may not have even known about it for several minutes after.

The EAS was commandeered by a disgruntled employee

This is the scenario I find most likely. Trump tends to piss an enormous amount of people off. Perhaps one of the workers manning that operation decided to try and make Trump look bad by sending out a false alert. It certainly is a bit embarrassing to send an entire state into full panic mode on accident. This is going to be a national incident for several days still.

The monitoring system used to look for incoming threats malfunctioned

This happens more often than you would think. The early alert systems are very sensitive. They're a lot better than they used to be, but they've detected false missiles before. I've heard of them being triggered by sunlight reflecting off large pieces of metal. They're sensitive for a reason, I mean better safe than sorry, right? Somehow, yesterday, the conditions were just right to trigger a false alarm. Instead of sharing with everyone how fallible the system really is, the Gov decided to blame it on a careless employee. It would cause a lot less panic.

The "false alert" was staged

In an attempt to distract the MSM from some policy he is currently pursuing, Trump ordered the "fake" threat. Now the news cycles will be dominated day and night by this "mistake" allowing him to pursue his true intentions. Or, alternatively, he wanted to demonstrate to the people that the U.S has an early warning system, although I don't think this is likely as the amount of panic that the alert would have caused (car crashes, heart attacks, etc) would not have been worth it.

The mistake was exactly that; a mistake

Honestly, I have a hard time believing that any operator could accidentally send out a message like that. These guys are trained for months before they are put at that station, and it seems to me like sending out a state wide alert takes more than just one press of a button. Also, the operator would have immediately noticed that the alert went out, and they would have been able to correct it much faster (not the 38 min that is did).

Whatever really happened yesterday, I don't think it was just an errant press of a button. But no matter what the actual cause was, this event was still a tragedy. Why? If there ever is a real threat and people get this message, they are now less likely to believe it, and that means they are less likely to seek shelter or prepare in anyway. Remember guys, don't let this turn into a "the Gov cried wolf" story. If you ever get a notification like this, your first thought should be finding shelter, then questioning.

Good night everyone.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/7qax47/a_couple...

Post reply on HN