Article

2007-03-03 Home Front: WoT

Volunteered to Die to Disarm Rumored Nuke In NYC

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-03-03 08:32|| || Front Page|| [11131 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Even though the rumored nuke appears to be unfounded, it's good to see people were willing to step up. In the immediate aftermath of 9/11, there was alot of uncertainty, yet these guys volunteered. Good on them

Posted by Flolumble Elmuling1667 2007-03-03 08:46|| 2007-03-03 08:46|| Front Page Top

#2 That's the kind of thing that just terrifies our enemies, foreign and domestic; the idea that we might actually take the gloves off and fight them with all we've got. They don't want any part of facing a united nation that has men like these guys defending it.

Posted by mac 2007-03-03 09:00|| 2007-03-03 09:00|| Front Page Top

#3 God bless these men.

Posted by Threreper Grager6182 2007-03-03 09:42|| 2007-03-03 09:42|| Front Page Top

#4 Something they muzzies don't understand or think us fools for but ether way I think Mac is right. Probably scares them.

Americans willing to die to save women and children. Koranimals, willing to die to murder women and children.

Posted by Icerigger 2007-03-03 09:44|| 2007-03-03 09:44|| Front Page Top

#5 This must have been a threat from a 'radiological' bomb, i.e. a quantity of highly radioactive material dispersed by a conventional explosive.

Real fission/fusion bombs aren't particulary radioactive; that would not be a danger to the technician. Also, a real nuke would be quite difficult to defeat - just 'cut the red wire' isn't going to do it.

'Radiological' bombs should not be called 'nuclear' bombs.

Posted by KBK 2007-03-03 10:46|| 2007-03-03 10:46|| Front Page Top

#6 Also, a real nuke would be quite difficult to defeat

I don't know for sure, but Ima guess one of them cement cutters would do nicely.

Posted by Shipman 2007-03-03 11:36|| 2007-03-03 11:36|| Front Page Top

#7 KBK,

Where did you get that from? There is no mention of that in the article as far as I can tell

The intel of the threat was "open" straight nuke or dirty bomb. At the time they didn't know

Posted by Flolumble Elmuling1667 2007-03-03 11:39|| 2007-03-03 11:39|| Front Page Top

#8 So that others may live.

Posted by Chiper Threreger8956 2007-03-03 11:39|| 2007-03-03 11:39|| Front Page Top

#9 Ship, I suspect you're right. Real nukes probably aren't booby trapped, all the effort goes into keeping them from exploding without authorization.

Posted by KBK 2007-03-03 11:41|| 2007-03-03 11:41|| Front Page Top

#10 Cutting it in half with one of those gasoline powered Diamond blade cement saws sounds like a very workable solution, there'd be radioactive dust all around, but no "Boom"

Posted by Redneck Jim 2007-03-03 11:56|| 2007-03-03 11:56|| Front Page Top

#11 When it comes to bomb disposal, I am a huge fan of liquid nitrogen. There are darn few explosives, detonators and timers that can handle being plunged to over -300 degrees Fahrenheit and still work.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-03-03 12:09|| 2007-03-03 12:09|| Front Page Top

#12 Moose - that sounds ingenious. Is that a common practice? Just curious

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-03-03 12:21|| 2007-03-03 12:21|| Front Page Top

#13 I know next to nothing about nukes, but wouldn't it be fairly easy to just peel off or pull the wires on the lens system? Its basically made of something like plastic explosive right? Assuming that you can get to the nuke. I don't know what kind of case those things are in.

Posted by Mike N. 2007-03-03 12:21|| 2007-03-03 12:21|| Front Page Top

#14 If you're really interested in the disposal of nuclear devices, find a copy of the Heinlein short story "The Long Watch". The story may be dated, but the ease of rendering them unable to detonate -- and the fate of the person doing that -- is the same.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2007-03-03 12:26|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2007-03-03 12:26|| Front Page Top

#15 I wonder if any Bill Mahers' or David Lettermans' out there in the Big Apple would have volunteered to save their city, their mansions, their way of life?

Posted by Jack is Back">Jack is Back 2007-03-03 13:15|| 2007-03-03 13:15|| Front Page Top

#16 I just recently watched that movie with Nicole Kidman and George Clooney with the nuke in NYC. Peacemaker I think was the name of the movie.

Yes God bless these guys. Reminds me of Michael Monsoor.
Another thread had me feeling pretty negative, thanks for restoring my faith, listing the strong caliber of Americans will.

Posted by Jan 2007-03-03 13:43|| 2007-03-03 13:43|| Front Page Top

#17 #15 Jack - Now, you don't really wonder that, do you?

Posted by Barbara Skolaut">Barbara Skolaut 2007-03-03 14:17|| http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/page/15bk1/Home_Page.html]">[http://ariellestjohndesigns.com/page/15bk1/Home_Page.html] 2007-03-03 14:17|| Front Page Top

#18 Even cutting into U235 or P239 isn't tremendously hazardous. They aren't very radioactive, and a good dust mask and a coverall should be adequate. Besides, you should be able to disable the nuke without cutting into fissile material.

A radiological bomb is quite another matter.

Posted by KBK 2007-03-03 14:30|| 2007-03-03 14:30|| Front Page Top

#19 "We figured someone might say no," now-retired Inspector Charlie Wells told ABC News reporter Richard Esposito, . . . . "I mean, you couldn't really order a guy," Wells added.

But no one took a step back.

Bomb Squad Lieutenant Jerry Sheehan, Detective First Grade Kevin Barry, Detective First Grade Joe Putkowski and Detective First Grade Dennis Mulchahy all volunteered

Gentlemen, thank you.

Posted by Mike 2007-03-03 14:39|| 2007-03-03 14:39|| Front Page Top

#20 Frank G: I Googled several mentions of it, even that there is a bomb disposal robot with a cryogenic attachment.

Though as a rule, EOD personnel are very taciturn, they are also very pragmatic in how they do things.

If the suspected device is small, they try to blow it in place. Larger devices with fragmentation they try to put in a "wicker basket". No idea about mostly incendiary devices, maybe submerge in water, maybe freeze. But if there is a lot of electronics, they will often try to freeze it.

It just seems to me that you can't go wrong with freezing with nitrogen. If it doesn't outright stop the reaction, it will seriously slow it down, and being an inert gas it also inhibits sparks.

Posted by Anonymoose 2007-03-03 16:28|| 2007-03-03 16:28|| Front Page Top

#21 thx

Posted by Frank G">Frank G 2007-03-03 16:58|| 2007-03-03 16:58|| Front Page Top

23:59 Eric Jablow
23:55 RD
23:53 Shipman
23:43 Shipman
23:38 Shipman
23:37 Jehadi
23:17 Chiper Threreger8956
23:16 DMFD
23:11 Chiper Threreger8956
22:53 Anonymoose
22:52 tu3031
22:49 Nimble Spemble
22:41 Nimble Spemble
22:38 USN, ret.
22:36 whatadeal
22:35 Zhang Fei
22:34 Nimble Spemble
22:32 Zhang Fei
22:31 USN, ret.
22:29 Nimble Spemble
22:28 Frank G
22:26 whatadeal
22:23 whatadeal
22:15 trailing wife