.:SonicBomb:.
    Login or Register
::  Home  ::  Videos  ::  Your Account  ::  Forums  ::  RSS Feed  ::
 
 
::Content::
  • Atomic
  • - Aviation
    - Aircraft
    - Military
    - Explosions
    - WW2
    - Various
    - Hi-Def
    - Photos

    - Wallpaper

    - Nuclear

    - WWI

    - WWII

    Advertisment
    Search
    Custom Search
    User Info
    Welcome, Anonymous
    Nickname
    Password
    (Register)
    Membership:
    Latest: Billvad
    New Today: 1
    New Yesterday: 1
    Overall: 582

    People Online:
    Visitors: 0
    Members: 0
    Total: 0

    sonicbomb.com :: View topic - Next generation US nukes cancelled

    Forum FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    Post new topic Reply to topic  sonicbomb.com Forum Index » U.S. Nuclear Weapons Program
    Author Message
    sonicbomb
    Forum Admin
    Forum Admin


    Joined: Aug 06, 2006
    Posts: 1693
    Location: UK

    PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 10:31 am Reply with quote

    BETTER the devil they know, it seems. The US House of Representatives last week voted to deny any further funding for a programme to design the next-generation nuclear warhead. Money will instead go towards "sustaining and modernising" the nation's existing stockpile of more than 4000 warheads.

    The US National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) had argued that the Reliable Replacement Warhead was needed because it would be safer to stockpile and harder for terrorists to acquire and use. Electronic security features would render it useless in the wrong hands, and it would feature a new breed of explosives for triggering fission, making accidental detonation less of a risk. It would also need less fissile material, making it safer to stockpile. "Today's nuclear weapons were not designed with security and longevity as the top priorities," the NNSA said.
    "Today's weapons were not designed with security and longevity as the top priorities"

    Nevertheless, when the House Armed Services Committee revealed its 2009 Defense Authorization Bill on 15 May, it did not include the $33 million the NNSA had requested for next year.

    Last week, there seemed a chance that this decision would be reversed after Republican Steve Pearce proposed an amendment to include the funding. However, on 23 May, 44 Republicans crossed the floor to vote against the programme with the Democrats, defeating the amendment by 271 votes to 145. The issue now moves to the Senate, which may yet grant the funding.

    Source
    View user's profile Send private message
    Blake
    Tewa (5 mt)


    Joined: Jun 25, 2007
    Posts: 680
    Location: Florida

    PostPosted: Sat Jun 14, 2008 6:07 pm Reply with quote

    33 million? That's all? There's more pork than that in the congressional lunch menu. There's something not right about this, but I can't put my finger on it. Why would the hawks cross the line and act like doves?



    edit:

    Saw this story this morning. Maybe this has something to do with it?
    View user's profile Send private message Yahoo Messenger
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Thu Jun 17, 2010 3:28 am Reply with quote

    The MSNBC link is gone now Sad I could not find the story in the Post archives.

    From what I read in the 2010 NPR, the "smart people" might have a slight desire to consider possibly looking into maybe thinking about the RRW again......or maybe not.

    With regard to the news story, a couple years ago somebody did leak a colored drawing of what the RRW design was supposed to resemble- similar in spirit to the "design info" crayon drawing of the (W-78?) MIRV in the Cox Report and USA Today. I only saw it once on the web as a thumbnail, and could not find it again.

    In addition to "anti-tamper" features, RRW was to utilize insensitive high explosives (IHE) and supposed to be "reliable" without actual testing.

    I am torn on the matter- on one hand, it would be nice to stock a "reliable deterrent" with a design spec less than 25 years old, but on the other hand, lately everything we yanks touch ends up in the crapper.....maybe "just one" little tiny test? Just one?
    View user's profile Send private message
    4mrmissileer
    Baker (23 kt)


    Joined: Sep 16, 2009
    Posts: 33
    Location: US - Catskill Mountains

    PostPosted: Sat Jul 17, 2010 8:32 am Reply with quote

    No other opinions on this topic?

    I think the US needs to agressively develop the RRW as long as we can be guaranteed that it will be as safe, reliable, cost effective, and efficient as possible, so the end result will be that we will NEVER have to use them!

    Relying on old technology as a deterrent is stupid- plain and simple.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Display posts from previous:   
    Post new topic Reply to topic

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum


    Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
    | Privacy Policy || Contact us |

    Page Generation: 0.10 Seconds
    :: In the future we will all be robots ::