ICBM missile crews refusing to launch? (possibly apocryphal incident)

[LSLGuy]

Mr. President! We must not allow a glowing wreckage gap!!!

[Ponderoid]

@RealityChuck

I believe The Andromeda Strain mentions the incident, though adds that further study showed that it was married men who were most likely to disobey orders and not press the button.

@Darth_Panda

Just one more argument for allowing gays in the military.

It was Darth Panda’s post that made me realize this was a zombie thread.

[Pantastic]

@Undershaft

I have no idea what it means…I’m sure real SAC missile launch officers were/are not potheads. Just something I never picked up on the first half dozen times I saw that movie.

Actually, there have been issues with SAC missile launch officers and drugs. This link is the latest one I’ve heard of, but it’s documented back to the 1980s.

Dozens of US nuclear missile officers caught up in drug and cheating scandals

[bob_2]

There is a story, oft repeated (so it must be true…) that in times of tension, the commanders of the UK’s nuclear submarines, are expected to listen to BBC4 every day at midnight our time. If it is silent twice at that time, they are to assume that London no longer exists and should act on their own initiative.

[griffin1977]

Interesting article on the subject here. The concolusion the author comes to is:

The former missileers I spoke with told me that they are often asked whether they really would have turned their keys if ordered to do so. (No one has ever actually been put to the test on this point, since no wartime launch order has yet been issued.) All were thoughtful, smart people, well aware of the effects of nuclear weapons. And none had any doubt about what they would do. Based on what I now know about the process of launching an ICBM, I have no trouble imagining how that could be.

The entire launch process is over within a few minutes, during which everyone is busily following complex procedures in which they have drilled and trained to the point of reflex. Every member of the crew has well-defined roles in one checklist and the next, with no provision (or time) for individual preferences. There’s no Launch Checklist Step 4a: “Pause and reflect on the enormity of what happens next”.

[desertmonk]

@Ponderoid

It was Darth Panda’s post that made me realize this was a zombie thread.

Same here.

[lostowl]

@Atomic_Alex

I recall reading once of an incident which allegedly occurred in the late 70’s in the US. Supposedly the powers that be were wondering how many ICBM crews would actually launch if given the order to do so. So to test this out they ran a full scale launch exercise without telling the missilers that it was only an exercise.

In the event (as the story goes) up to a third of the missile crews refused to carry out their orders, not surprisingly causing some concern in the higher ranks.

Any truth to this story? I find it unlikely to say the least but you never know.

I imagine they have a margin of error built into the plans because its unlikely even with strigent selection and training that if it came to the bit every missile crew would actually push the button (turn the key!)

Thanks

i know this is old but in case anyone searching stuff like this i would like to provide an answer.

firstly as to why have not take out the human factor with key if can be safeguarded on tests remotely is because of the obvious hacker reason don’t want someone hacking it remotely and launching it. or hacking it on site because computer flips a switch. so need 2 keys to complete the circuit.

refusing to launch is not that big of a worry to a country like USA because with 7000 nukes and it only takes about 100-200 for mutual assured destruction if 95% of the people refused the 5% launched would be 350 and if just 1% of our nukes launched that would almost cause it.

but even if just 1 of the 7000 launched at a country like Russia or China who knows how they would respond

and if 100% refused to launch then the armed guards in bunker would be ordered to make them launch or kill them and turn the keys themselves because anyone can turn the key with the Presidents nuke code

so if you was wondering launch site refusal is nothing to worry about for the government the real threat is the people around the President that let him operate cough the Secret Service cough

[lostowl]

plus if you don’t launch you better believe you getting kicked out of the bunker when all these top brass show up with tons of food and water to avoid the fallout because every silo is a huge bunker that can withstand a direct nuclear blast and protect you for as many years as you have supplies. all the supplies are left offsite to ensure entrance from the guards. if you guys already had enough food to last 20 years you would never let anyone in

if nuclear holocaust came our Gov is setup to hide itself and a lot of military for up to 20-50 years then come out when safe with a huge force and control the whole world

**mod can you edit this into my post cant edit after 5 minutes

[lostowl]

i would also like to add that North Korea is a very dangerous situation they have <15 nukes listed and they are not going to stop making them. what will they do once they have 100 or 200 nukes? it is much better to handle them and Iran right now when 9/11 happened President Bush named the Axis of Evil. Iraq, Afghanistan, North Korea and Iran its fast becoming time to handle Iran and North Korea. i’m not sure how to handle Iran but for North Korea the only way i see it going down without them using Nukes is if China would take out Kim and put North Korea under China laws. i am sure none of the North Koreans would complain considering they are like slaves now so would gain rights as “Chinese Citizens”

[Weisshund]

For a few reasons, i can not see this actually happening.

1. If you give a fake launch order to see what everyone will do, what do you do about the guy who follows his order and actively arms the missile?
   You now have a fully armed nuclear device in the hole, probably not a good thing to do for kicks and giggles, seems like too many overly serious situations could arise

2. Telling the crew it is a live launch, basically telling them their wives and kids and families and friends are dead, because you are not going to have a live launch unless all things have gone to hell?
   Yea just no, raising that stress level just for a test is not a good idea, If we are launching best odds are it is NOT preemptive, for a whole lot of reasons, no one is going to do that as a lets pretend for giggles with live now armed nukes test.

3. I am pretty sure that the silo crew is going to know if you are bull shitting them, someone is going to notice if their missile does not arm and come to life, it’s more than 2 guys turning a key, so someone will know.

[Canadjun]

@lostowl

plus if you don’t launch you better believe you getting kicked out of the bunker when all these top brass show up with tons of food and water to avoid the fallout because every silo is a huge bunker that can withstand a direct nuclear blast and protect you for as many years as you have supplies. all the supplies are left offsite to ensure entrance from the guards. if you guys already had enough food to last 20 years you would never let anyone in

Cite? Particularly the bit about the silo (or anything else) being able to take a direct nuclear blast.

[carnivorousplant]

@Canadjun

Cite? Particularly the bit about the silo (or anything else) being able to take a direct nuclear blast.

I’ve understood that to be true, but I doubt they could launch after a hit.

[turner]

I remember several years ago something in the news. A launch method has to be valid and authentic, i.e. it has to have the right information and come from the right people. Someone sent a valid message and some of the crews didn’t follow authentication procedures (which would have shown the message was a fake). They “knew” it was fake. They either got an article 15 (non-judicial punishment which essentially ends your career) of a court martial because they didn’t follow orders (technical orders are orders and they say if a message is valid you must authenticate). This apparently happened after I left the field.

[Chronos]

How do the humans protect against hacking? If they’ll follow real orders, then they’ll follow fake orders that have been hacked to make them look real. And if the hackers can’t fake orders that well, then they won’t be able to launch the automated system, either.

And North Korea only has enough fissionable material to make a dozen or so nukes. I’m sure they’d like to make hundreds, but they simply don’t have the ability to do so.

[Quintas]

@williambaskerville

As Defence Secretary, Denis Healey, the retired Labour politician,was a designated alternate at one point. He said in an interview a few years back that if it came to it, and it was his decision, he would never have launched Britain’s nukes. His reasoning was that no matter what had been done to the UK, launching nukes against Russia would have just been slaughtering civilians.

A very reasonable and human thing to admit. But doesn’t the public admission of that thought actually increase the chance of such a scenario happening? MAD and all.

[GIGObuster]

FWIW in the fine documentary “War” with Gwynne Dyer there was an interview with a couple of ICBM missile men. Dyer mentioned an effect that is noticed on many bombardiers, distance does tend to make the men in the silos to be less worried about what will happen to their targets.

They showed Dwyer that they practiced the launch many times in simulators like the one they were showing to Dwyer and pointed out that:

Dwyer: "How would you feel if you ever have to do it for real?

Missileman: “Well, we are trained so highly and with our recurrent training that we take every month in simulators like this is so intensive that if we actually have to do it would be an almost automatic thing, you wouldn’t be thinking about it.”

It looks to me like they do not need to be replaced by machines, their training makes it to be almost like it is.

[GIGObuster]

Darn, please change “Dwyer” with Dyer in the last instances.

[turner]

@Chronos

How do the humans protect against hacking? If they’ll follow real orders, then they’ll follow fake orders that have been hacked to make them look real. And if the hackers can’t fake orders that well, then they won’t be able to launch the automated system, either.

And North Korea only has enough fissionable material to make a dozen or so nukes. I’m sure they’d like to make hundreds, but they simply don’t have the ability to do so.

I can’t tell you, but remember these systems were developed way before computing as we know it and the only thing that changes slower than the Catholic Church is nuclear command and control.

[Elendil_s_Heir]

@lostowl

…refusing to launch is not that big of a worry to a country like USA because with 7000 nukes …

Quite a bit fewer than that these days, but still a lot: Nuclear weapons of the United States - Wikipedia

[Really_Not_All_That_Bright]

@thirdname

That was a really irresponsible thing for him to say. Even he wouldn’t have launched the nukes, he should give the impression he would have. Stating otherwise undermines the credibility of the UK’s nuclear deterrence.

@Quintas

A very reasonable and human thing to admit. But doesn’t the public admission of that thought actually increase the chance of such a scenario happening? MAD and all.

Healey’s exact words were, “I realised I would find it very, very difficult indeed to agree to use a nuclear weapon - and I think most people would.” More importantly, he said this during a BBC interview in 2008, when he was several decades removed from government, let alone having his own finger on the button.