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

31–40 of 145 posts

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#31

Post by sdenton4 »

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…

Command and Control lays out the internal fight over Pals; the military wanted easy access and reliable bombs, and the Pals added complexity, reduce ease of access in an emergency, and so on. So the parts of the military less concerned with safety were arguing for more promising designs. I believe the early Pals could be over ridden with a screwdriver. But yeah, I don't know about these particular ones.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#32

Post by jacquesm »

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.

Ah, thank you. Some faulty bits in my memory caused an early nul termination.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#33

Post by cm3 »

dorfsmay wrote: post #11
venomsnake wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How long will they hold in case of an ally betrayal? In the unlikely event of having crazy Islamist dictator with imperial ambitions as the God Emperor of Turkey?

Aren't most/all airplanes, missiles, etc... operated by the Turkish military from the U.S.? Doesn't the U.S. have the capability to disable them remotely?

I'd have to look it up online, but while they used to import jet fighters from the US, Turkey builds similar F?? fighters and also drones like the Heron and other tools. But as a NATO member, I don't think they'd have a problem getting gear from third parties.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#34

Post by dsfyu404ed »

jacquesm wrote: post #14
showerst wrote: post #4

While still concerning, they really buried a key detail: "About two thousand U.S. military personnel remain stationed there."

Turkey has the largest standing army in the region. 600K or so. Those 2000 troops wouldn't last long enough to get the weapons out.

I think you're vastly underestimating 1st world intelligence capabilities. By the time anyone is brainstorming how exactly they want to take the base the big players in NATO already have guys sitting in jets idling on the taxiway, an aircraft carrier is taking a hard turn into the wind and an aide is popping popcorn and cracking a beer so Mr. Putin can enjoy the spectacle.

When nukes are involved things get taken very seriously. Nobody wants to be the guy who thought it would all blow over and got it wrong.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#35

Post by elchief »

jacquesm wrote: post #14
showerst wrote: post #4

While still concerning, they really buried a key detail: "About two thousand U.S. military personnel remain stationed there."

Turkey has the largest standing army in the region. 600K or so. Those 2000 troops wouldn't last long enough to get the weapons out.

If only they had some bombs to defend themselves with...

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#36

Post by rtkwe »

valarauca1 wrote: post #10
arethuza wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Out of interest, at what time is the PAL (presumably a code?) entered in one of these bombs? Is it done in flight or before the weapons are loaded?

I don't know to be honest. To speculate the B61 is a dumb bomb. And most photo's of the casing show no plug/contact point for electronics. I'm assuming at take off. When the neutron reflector's distance is set, and the barometric pressure for denotation height is calibrated.

It wouldn't have to have a port. The US has had radio programmed artillery shells for a long time so using the same tech to set and arm bombs isn't a stretch.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#37

Post by dsfyu404ed »

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.

You're joking, right?

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#38

Post by jacquesm »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #34
jacquesm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Turkey has the largest standing army in the region. 600K or so. Those 2000 troops wouldn't last long enough to get the weapons out.

I think you're vastly underestimating 1st world intelligence capabilities. By the time anyone is brainstorming how exactly they want to take the base the big players in NATO already have guys sitting in jets idling on the taxiway, an aircraft carrier is taking a hard turn into the wind and an aide is popping popcorn and cracking a beer so Mr. Putin can enjoy the spectacle. When nukes are involved things get taken ver…

Then how come they are still there?

If what you write is true they should have had clear warning about that coup attempt. It might have succeeded.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#39

Post by mikeash »

dekhn wrote: post #29

One thing most people don't hear in the traditional American story about the Cuban Missle Crisis is that we put our weapons close to Russia (in Turkey) before they put any weapons close to us.

Really? I thought that Kennedy's secret agreement to trade the Jupiter missiles in Turkey for the Soviet missiles in Cuba was the standard ending to the story.

Re: The H-Bombs in Turkey

#40

Post by sdenton4 »

vonmoltke wrote: post #25
idlewords wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can load the bomb onto a Toyota Hilux; it doesn't mean it's equipped to deliver it.

The Toyota Hilux isn't an aircraft. The B61 is an air-dropped dumb bomb. Any aircraft that can load it and drop it in the air can deliver it. If you didn't care about accuracy you could roll the thing out the back of a C-130 and successfully deliver it. The point is, there is no equipment required to deliver the B61 other than a standard weapons rack with any air-to-ground aircraft has. The only A/G aircraft I am awa…

I was under the impression that many nuclear bombs had arming mechanisms that required special electronics in the plane. Is that not true for the b61?
Post reply on HN