Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The H-Bombs in Turkey

newyorker.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 145 posts

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#131

Post by [deleted] »

beachstartup wrote: post #46
vonmoltke wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that is what the author meant, that is what the author should have said. "Equipped to deliver" pretty clearly means no aircraft that can load the bomb. At any rate, southern Russia is easily within range of Incirlik.

i think whether or not a plane can actually get to the target is pretty fair use of 'equipped to deliver'. new york times is not writing for a military audience, 'deliver' in lay person speak means getting it there , as in parcel delivery. i.e. if your truck can only hold 1 gallon of fuel it's not equipped to deliver the package to a destination 1000 miles away. whether you can put the package on the truck does not i…

[deleted]

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#132

Post by BuildTheRobots »

arethuza wrote: post #23
jacquesm wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'0000'.

I think it was actually "00000000" ;-) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link#Develop... Edit: Unless you mean that bike locks that the UK used to secure nukes, these days we just trust our submarine crews not to do anything rash.

I had no idea - thank you :)

>To arm the weapons you just open a panel held by two captive screws - like a battery cover on a radio - using a thumbnail or a coin.

>Inside are the arming switch and a series of dials which you can turn with an Allen key to select high yield or low yield, air burst or groundburst and other parameters.

>The Bomb is actually armed by inserting a bicycle lock key into the arming switch and turning it through 90 degrees. There is no code which needs to be entered or dual key system to prevent a rogue individual from arming the Bomb.

https://web.archive.org/web/20120311235156/http://news.bbc.c...

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=4ad_1227686113&comments=1

I like to believe it's the same bike locks that could be defeated with a ballpoint pen:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kryptonite_lock

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#133

Post by teh_klev »

mikeash wrote: post #26

I'm skeptical that the PALs are as easy to bypass as this article says. It's possible that the arming code includes critical information necessary to properly detonate the bomb, such as timing info for firing the various detonators. Even if it doesn't, the critical PAL hardware is deep inside the bomb, requiring the bomb to be disassembled to get to it, then reassembled afterwards, and that's not quite as easy as swa…

But the problem isn't nuclear detonation, it's about using the weapons as a dirty bomb:

With a few hours and the right tools and training, you could open one of nato’s nuclear-weapons storage vaults, remove a weapon, and bypass the pal inside it. Within seconds, you could place an explosive device on top of a storage vault, destroy the weapon, and release a lethal radioactive cloud.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#134

Post by mikeash »

teh_klev wrote: post #133
mikeash wrote: post #26

I'm skeptical that the PALs are as easy to bypass as this article says. It's possible that the arming code includes critical information necessary to properly detonate the bomb, such as timing info for firing the various detonators. Even if it doesn't, the critical PAL hardware is deep inside the bomb, requiring the bomb to be disassembled to get to it, then reassembled afterwards, and that's not quite as easy as swa…

But the problem isn't nuclear detonation, it's about using the weapons as a dirty bomb: With a few hours and the right tools and training, you could open one of nato’s nuclear-weapons storage vaults, remove a weapon, and bypass the pal inside it. Within seconds, you could place an explosive device on top of a storage vault, destroy the weapon, and release a lethal radioactive cloud.

Those are two separate ideas. You don't need to bypass the PAL if you just want to blow it up conventionally to spread radioactive material around.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#135

Post by lighttower »

the_watcher wrote: post #91
cm3 wrote: post #28

While Turkey has conflicts with some groups who want to grab part of the land or overthrow the government, they are FWIW a useful ally in the region because they have mostly-friendly dealings with UAE, Saudis, Iran, parts of Africa and also Israel. The degree of diplomacy varies, but there aren't many NATO members in that region who are as compatible when it comes to diplomatic ties with the region's powers. Russia,…

Turkey has the same advantages now that caused it to be the arguable center of the Western world for parts of the previous several centuries: it's simply wildly well-placed, geopolitically. Russia needs at least the presence of a relationship given its never-ending pursuit for warm water ports. Europe realizes that, as the sole overland route to the Middle East (and by extension, all of Asia) without going through Ru…

This doesn't explain why you need obsolete nuclear warheads sitting 70km from ISIS. Maybe it's a honeypot?

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#136

Post by lighttower »

Nokinside wrote: post #98
mikeash wrote: post #26

I'm skeptical that the PALs are as easy to bypass as this article says. It's possible that the arming code includes critical information necessary to properly detonate the bomb, such as timing info for firing the various detonators. Even if it doesn't, the critical PAL hardware is deep inside the bomb, requiring the bomb to be disassembled to get to it, then reassembled afterwards, and that's not quite as easy as swa…

B61 bombs have command disable mechanism. It can be rendered permanently unusable just by entering 3-digit code and pulling a handle. It's also possible to encode the required code physically into the explosives by mixing high and slow explosives randomly in each bomb. PAL code is then needed to adjust the timing of the detonators so that detonation front is symmetrical. Even if you bypass all the electronics, it's i…

You can still extract the warhead for use in a dirty bomb

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#137

Post by michaelmrose »

cloakandswagger wrote: post #27
avar wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the US doesn't export its armaments with any sort of remote disabling functionality, who would buy arms like that?

Actually it should be a simple as expiring whatever API key the jets use to communicate back to the US-based control servers. So when it POSTs to a StartEngine endpoint or whatever, it wouldn't start.

If web developers ran wars the world would be a safer place.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#138

Post by DonHopkins »

goodplay wrote: post #51
cloakandswagger wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it should be a simple as expiring whatever API key the jets use to communicate back to the US-based control servers. So when it POSTs to a StartEngine endpoint or whatever, it wouldn't start.

Lol. No government would buy unreliable weapons.

What if they came with an Enhanced PROMIS Contract that guaranteed their reliability and lack of back doors and trojan horses?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inslaw

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#139

Post by mturmon »

mikeash wrote: post #120
mturmon wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm. I don't disagree, but -- it's "standard" only if you've been paying close attention. Because the original "standard" version ("encroaching communists") which I first read in Bobby Kennedy's everywhere-available book Thirteen Days was accepted for decades -- up through the 1980s IIRC. This article ( http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/01/the-real... ) pegs the date where the old standard story was re…

Thanks for the historical perspective. I'm only 35, so I really only saw the "new story." Obviously the phrase "secret agreement" implies that it wasn't known right away, but I didn't realize it became known that recently. Still, being out there for almost two decades, and being incorporated into the plot of a major movie about the crisis, it doesn't seem like it should still be described as "most people don't hear."

In general, it seems like a surprisingly lot of the stuff that was known to be fact, surrounding the Cold War, was not actually true at all. This has only become hazily evident with the drip-drip release of sealed archives.
Post reply on HN