# How hard is it to misuse a nuke? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [August 19, 2013, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661 "2013-08-19T21:12:16Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Zapp\_S](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/ee59a6/32.png) [@Zapp\_S](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zapp_S)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/1 "2013-08-19T21:12:16Z")
How much is needed to launch a nuclear weapon, authority wise? Could the president of the USA as a commander-in-chief give an order to nuke say Russia one day and get away with it? Or could the crew of a ballistic missile submarine go renegade one day and use their missiles against someone? How big would the conspiracy have to be to misuse a nuclear weapon like that? How many people would have to be in? How about back during the cold war? ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/2 "2013-08-19T21:42:30Z")
I asked this last fall… > **[When does the POTUS get to nuke somebody?](https://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=667980)** > > In the recent thread concerning our likely response to a nuclear blackmail threat, there were the usual assortment of “nuke them back to the stone age” responses. Trying to avoid the philosophical question of whether or not we should nuke somebody,... main answer: any time the President feels it is necessary and can convince one of the Cabinet Secretaries (most likely Defense) of the need, he can launch. ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/3 "2013-08-19T21:45:58Z")
> [@Zapp\_S](#): > > How many people would have to be in? Two or more at the command end, and at least two delivering the weapon. ---
**Author:** ![Duckster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/duckster/32/1244_2.png) [@Duckster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duckster)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/4 "2013-08-19T21:49:27Z")
> [@](#): > > **On the Risk of an Accidental or Unauthorized Nuclear Detonation** > > This “Abridged” version of RM-2251, which addresses the subject of the risk of accidental or unauthorized nuclear detonation, was first published in 1958. The portions that were not eligible for declassification were excised. Source: [On the Risk of an Accidental or Unauthorized Nuclear Detonation | RAND](http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/RM2251.html) Download PDF: [http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research\_memoranda/2006/RM2251.pdf](http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_memoranda/2006/RM2251.pdf) The above might help for historical analysis. As for today, these two incidents should be disturbing: [ul] [li][http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007\_United\_States\_Air\_Force\_nuclear\_weapons\_incident[/li][li]http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/13/us-usa-missile-inspection-idUSBRE97C11K20130813[/li][/ul]](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_United_States_Air_Force_nuclear_weapons_incident%5B/li%5D%5Bli%5Dhttp://www.reuters.com/article/2013/08/13/us-usa-missile-inspection-idUSBRE97C11K20130813%5B/li%5D%5B/ul%5D) But if you are looking for detailed specifics, those in the know won’t tell you. Former military Dopers with this type of experience probably won’t give you a straight answer here, either. Read up on: > **[Permissive action link](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permissive_Action_Link)** > > A permissive action link (PAL) is an access control security device for nuclear weapons. Its purpose is to prevent unauthorized arming or detonation of a nuclear weapon. > The United States Department of Defense definition is: > A device included in or attached to a nuclear weapon system to preclude arming and/or launching until the insertion of a prescribed discrete code or combination. It may include equipment and cabling external to the weapon or weapon system to activate components within the ... > **[Mutual assured destruction](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_assured_destruction)** > > Mutual assured destruction (MAD) is a doctrine of military strategy and national security policy which posits that a full-scale use of nuclear weapons by an attacker on a nuclear-armed defender with second-strike capabilities would result in the complete annihilation of both the attacker and the defender. It is based on the theory of rational deterrence, which holds that the threat of using strong weapons against the enemy prevents the enemy's use of those same weapons. The strategy is a form Th... [URL=“[http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCvRKp5qtOs](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DCvRKp5qtOs)”] ---
**Author:** ![SHARKBITEATTACK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@SHARKBITEATTACK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SHARKBITEATTACK)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 3:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/5 "2013-08-20T03:34:58Z")
I remember watching the movie Crimson Tide and it said prior to 1996 submarine captains were able to launch nuclear weapons without the presidents authority. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 3:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/6 "2013-08-20T03:39:59Z")
Two words: Plan R ---
**Author:** ![septimus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/septimus/32/410_2.png) [@septimus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/septimus)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/7 "2013-08-20T05:28:19Z")
My understanding is that most large warheads won’t detonate unless they receive a cryptologically secure arming code. The bomb will damage itself if anyone opens it to bypass that arming mechanism. I see **Duckster** has linked to a Wikipedia article mentioning this. The code wasn’t as secure as I thought: > [@](#): > > For the Minuteman ICBM force, the US Air Force’s Strategic Air Command worried that in times of need the codes would not be available, so they quietly decided to set them to 00000000. The missile launch checklists included an item confirming this combination until 1977. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/8 "2013-08-20T05:39:53Z")
The wikpedia article on the UK’s nuclear weapons claims that the Trident missiles on the UK nuclear submarines do not have Permissive Action Locks. " The UK took a decision not to install Trident CCDs or their equivalent on the grounds that an aggressor might be able to wipe out the British chain of command before a launch order had been sent." so in theory if a UK Nuclear submarine commander and XO was to go rogue they could launch weapons. ---
**Author:** ![Gagundathar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a183cd/32.png) [@Gagundathar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gagundathar)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/9 "2013-08-20T05:58:08Z")
**coremelt,** your username and last post are a nice combination. And now I have yet another thing to worry about. Thanks. ☹ ---
**Author:** ![si\_blakely](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@si\_blakely](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/si_blakely)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/10 "2013-08-20T08:47:09Z")
> [@Gagundathar](#): > > And now I have yet another thing to worry about. Thanks. ☹ Don’t worry - the RAF and Royal Navy made sure their bombs were safe - [with bicycle locks](http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7097101.stm). But don’t read this link - [how to open a bike lock with a BIC pen](http://www.wired.com/culture/lifestyle/news/2004/09/64987) :smack: ---
**Author:** ![aNewLeaf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ac91a4/32.png) [@aNewLeaf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aNewLeaf)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/11 "2013-08-20T11:48:45Z")
Re-read that- the bike lock is the arming mechanism. There’s security to get through before you get to do the pen trick. ---
**Author:** ![si\_blakely](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@si\_blakely](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/si_blakely)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 12:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/12 "2013-08-20T12:04:10Z")
> [@aNewLeaf](#): > > Re-read that- the bike lock is the arming mechanism. There’s security to get through before you get to do the pen trick. What - remove two screws with a coin? > [@](#): > > 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. Of course the weapons were guarded and secured - but that doesn’t mean a great deal. That is human factors and physical security - it is not unknown for these things to be circumvented. ---
**Author:** ![SHARKBITEATTACK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@SHARKBITEATTACK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SHARKBITEATTACK)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/13 "2013-08-20T21:26:57Z")
While we’re on it, is there anything that prevents russia/china/Pakistan from selling nukes to hostile countries? ---
**Author:** ![si\_blakely](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d9b06d/32.png) [@si\_blakely](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/si_blakely)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2013, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/14 "2013-08-20T22:19:35Z")
The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is a binding agreement on Russia, China, America, Britain and France to not transfer nuclear weapons technology to other nations. Israel, Pakistan, India and North Korea all have nuclear weapons programmes and viable weapons (unconfirmed in the case of Israel) but are not signatories. South Africa had a viable weapon but voluntarily dismantled it’s own programme. However, Pakistan (at least) treats itself internally as a signatory - the leaking of nuclear technology by a Pakistani scientist was unauthorised and was in response to government mandated restrictions. The non signatory nations know that to transfer a weapon to a third party would invite retaliation, and if such a weapon was used in an attack, the response would be in kind, by the attacked nation or a friendly nuclear power. And losing direct control of such a weapon also makes it possible that such a weapon could end up being deployed against the supplier. Finally, the nonsigs do not actually have the stockpiles or the resources to make weapons to give away - they have few weapons of their own, they will not just give them away. ---
**Author:** ![Slash1972](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slash1972/32/6461_2.png) [@Slash1972](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Slash1972)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2013, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/15 "2013-08-22T01:32:21Z")
> [@aNewLeaf](#): > > Two or more at the command end, and at least two delivering the weapon. Do you happen to have a cite to this information? ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2013, 4:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/16 "2013-08-22T16:48:37Z")
> [@si\_blakely](#): > > The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty is a binding agreement on Russia, China, America, Britain and France to not transfer nuclear weapons technology to other nations. In addition to the NPT, it’s not in the _self-interest_ of any nation-state to give nuclear weapons to any other entity. There are at least two valid ways of looking at nukes: weapons so catastrophically deadly they threaten a nation-state’s very existence, and as strategic instruments of political influence: deterrence against attack, entry into the First World club, guarantors of “respect,” tools of hegemony, and so on. In an environment where few nation-states have nukes, no nation-state wants to share (i.e., create conditions that permit peer states to threaten its existence outright), even if they are _currently_ the best of friends. The same is even more true of nonstate actors. Nuclear weapons handling is all about _control_; nobody wants unpredictable, unaccountable entities to possess them. Likewise, few if any nation-states would give up influence, and nuclear status is influence. Say you’re China. If your friendly little neighbor wants favorable trade status with the big bad US, is it better for you long-term to give them nukes, enabling them to pretty much defy your will if they choose, or to keep the weapons to yourself, but _use your influence_ on behalf of your little friend? The second route increases your own status internationally, wins you the gratitude of the smaller state’s current leadership, expands your influence over it and other neighbors, and does not result in any danger of Beijing becoming a national day of mourning instead of your capital. The few instances of apparent international cooperation are limited to states which did **not** at the time have nuclear capability cooperating with other states in an attempt to acquire it: The US and Britain in WWII, and allegedly Israel and South Africa. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2013, 12:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/17 "2013-08-23T00:30:39Z")
> [@coremelt](#): > > The wikpedia article on the UK’s nuclear weapons claims that the Trident missiles on the UK nuclear submarines do not have Permissive Action Locks. " The UK took a decision not to install Trident CCDs or their equivalent on the grounds that an aggressor might be able to wipe out the British chain of command before a launch order had been sent."… This is also believed to be the case with Israeli submarines & nukes. ---
**Author:** ![coremelt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/4491bb/32.png) [@coremelt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coremelt)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2013, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/18 "2013-08-23T01:48:52Z")
> [@Sailboat](#): > > In addition to the NPT, it’s not in the _self-interest_ of any nation-state to give nuclear weapons to any other entity. “give” no, but what about sell. Don’t you think its possible that North Korea would sell Nuclear weapons to other states for hard currency if they could. ---
**Author:** ![outlierrn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/outlierrn/32/3005_2.png) [@outlierrn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/outlierrn)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2013, 2:26am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/19 "2013-08-23T02:26:40Z")
> [@Slash1972](#): > > Do you happen to have a cite to this information? Anecdote earmuffs on/ when I was on an airbase in Germany in the 1980’s we had tactical nukes that could have been flown over the line on F-4s. If memory serves there were 12 safeguards on each weapon, some mechnical (pull the pin), some electronic (enter the code), and some situational (accelerometer confirms the bomb was, ya know, _dropped_ from an appropriate height)/earmuffs > [@](#): > > No-lone zone[edit source] > > A no-lone zone is an area that must be staffed by two or more qualified or cleared individuals. Each individual must be within visual contact with each other and in visual contact with the critical component that requires a no-lone-zone area designation. A no-lone zone may contain a cryptographic component, weapon system hardware under test, a nuclear weapon or active nuclear weapon controls. > > _In the USAF concerning critical weapons, it is a zone in which the presence of a single individual is prohibited. The two-person concept (or policy) is in effect in which two individuals, knowledgeable of the task to be performed, and capable of detecting an incorrect or unauthorized procedure on the part of the other in reference to the task being performed_. [Two-person rule - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-man_rule) That’s how we did it. (italics mine) ---
**Author:** ![SHARKBITEATTACK](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/91b2a8/32.png) [@SHARKBITEATTACK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SHARKBITEATTACK)\ **Post date:** [August 23, 2013, 3:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/how-hard-is-it-to-misuse-a-nuke/666661/20 "2013-08-23T03:24:02Z")
There’s a really good documentary called “Countdown to Zero”. It talks about the threat of nuclear terrorism, various near nuclear accidents, the amount of ICBM’s that are still active and the protocol for strike. Very interesting, really opens your eyes to the fact that were still living in an era where a nuclear strike could happen at a moments notice.