I was watching the Superman cartoon today and it seemed like every building in Metropolis had a self destruct device. How come nothing in the real world can self destruct? It seems like a useful thing to have to me. Is there any structure that is reguraly built with the capability to self destruct? And if self destruction devices actually exists how do they work? Are they just big bunches of explosives heaped around the building somewhere?
Most people who build things want them to last a really long time.
I find it really unlikely anyones going to design a building with built-in autodestruct. Aside from the obviuos stated above, what would happen it it engaged by accident? These days the chances terrorists using it would be huge. That aside what would be the advantages aside form rapid demolition in 50-100 years when the original designer wouldn’t care about the expense.
Of course their are various other devices like suitcases and safes that have ‘self-destruct’ devices desigend to flood the interor with acid or dyes to destroy documents, but that’s not quite the same.
What about top secret military buildings? Or am I just trying to escape reality a little too hard?
I can think of plenty of things with built-in self-destruct mechanisms.
- Military equipment (i.e. cryptography equipment). Routinely includes self-destruct charges to prevent them from falling into the hands of an enemy.
- Automobiles. Sure, “planned obsolescence” isn’t like an explosion, but cars self-destruct just the same, only slower.
- Viruses (the biological type). The virus must self-destruct in order to release more virus phages.
- Microsoft Windows.
Do large Navy ships or subs contain self destruct devices to prevent capture and allowing the enemy to study our technology?
It might be said that most 4th of July fireworks contain a self-destruct mechanism, though the mechanism itself is rather obvious, and therefore their inclusion here rather trite. Perhaps fireworks would more correctly be referred to as “self-destruct devices,” where the ability to self-destruct is not merely a handy feature of the device, but the very and entire purpose of the device.
I have often heard (but cannot provide evidence) that many bridges and tunnels in Central Europe (for example on the German border, in Switzerland) were designed to be blown up easily in the event of a land war. Anyone have the straight dope on this one?
Substantial bridges in Germany were indeed built with the facility to be destroyed in case of war. But this usually took the form of a well-planned chamber in which you could place explosives, rather than the thing being wired the whole time with a big red button under a bush or something. I don’t know if they have to do this anymore.
Nope. But they do come equipped with big honkin’ sledge hammers to allow the sailors to smash the crypto gear into tiny unrecognizable bits.
TheGoat, BEHOLD!!! I self-destruct before your very eyes!!!
Astro lights another smoke, and cracks another beer…
BTW: here in Korea, all of the highways that lead from north to south are booby-trapped! Imagine a pedestian overpass with the top loaded with many tons of rock… all major highways have them! If the north should invade again, these overpasses can be blown, and the highway is blocked…
Astro, who lives about 20 minutes (by tank) from the DMZ, is glad!! 
*on second thought… Astro is NOT so glad! Why can’t the tanks roll AROUND the blockage??? 
Astro begins to pack his things…*
back home in Denmark in the bad old Cold War days, plans & procedures were in place to blow bridges, phone exchanges, police stations etc. in case of invasion. Explosives were allotted and placed in depots, the plans covered which truck would drop off what explosives where, the procedures were rehearsed and well-known - IOW, the logistical side was entirely covered. The task of setting, arming and eventually firing the charges was often in the hands of Home Guard units.
The bridges were built as Moonshine describes it - I’ve been part of more than one exercise where a bridge was rigged with mock explosives and the procedure for arming, disarming and firing the charges were practiced.
As for buildings, there were plans in place with the exact placement of charges, how the detonation system was to be assembled etc.
Incidentally, this is one of the very few tasks where there’s actually paperwork, complete with signatures etc., in the field - probably to find out after the war who exactly was responsible for blowing up a multi-million bridge without due cause.
S. Norman
NASA’s rockets used to have self destruct capability. In case they don’t go straight up, go off course, or turn around and start coming back down. They’ve had to use it quite a few times (even lost a real expensive satellite once). I don’t know if the space shuttle rockets have the same capability, but I wouldn’t imagine they’d want to self-destruct anything with people in it.
I would invite any fans of the 1950s TV series starring the “real” (although, not the first) Superman, George Reeves, to set their VCRs this weekend. TVLAND will air a 48-hour marathon starting at 6:00 AM Sat.
More about things that Self Destruct.
The space shuttle does have self-destruct capability built into it in case it goes off course during the climb to orbit. We don’t want that thing crashing into downtown Miami at Mach 10, right? I don’t know the specifics, but I don’t think they actually have a ton of explosives on board or anything. Too much wasted weight.
The decision to destroy the shuttle falls to the range safety officers. They sit in a little room with the two-key arrangement like ICBM silos so somebody can’t just spill their coffee and accidentally destroy the shuttle. One of the traditions before a flight is that the commander personally goes and shakes hands with the range safety guys before each flight as if to say “Do what you gotta do”.
Standard practice in most navies to prevent imminent capture is to open all watertight bulkheads and seacocks (valves that let in seawater) to flood the ship, causing it to sink. Explosives and/or fires have been used to acheive the same result, historically, but this is not preferred due to the risk to the escaping crew and the uncertain effectiveness compared to intentional flooding.
It’s also a tradition before each post to make sure your sentences don’t contain repeated words or phrases before each post.