Air Force may consolidate nuclear control

[ang1sgt]

Gates: Air Force may consolidate nuclear control

By LOLITA C. BALDOR, Associated Press Writer 3 minutes ago

A Pentagon advisory group recommended Friday that the Air Force, which has been embarrassed by a series of nuclear-related mishaps, should consolidate under a single organization the now-divided responsibilities for its nuclear weapons management.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates said the group made a strong argument for that action, but he was not sure how it would be implemented.

"One of the concerns that I had" based on previous revelations about shortcomings in the Air Force's stewardship of its nuclear arsenal "is the lack of unity of command and not having one person or organization accountable for the overall mission," Gates said. "I'm not sure what the right answer is."

Gates spoke at a Pentagon news conference before James Schlesinger, who was secretary of defense in the 1970s, unveiled the recommendations of an advisory panel that he led in a study of the Air Force's nuclear weapons management.

Schlesinger said a central recommendation by his group was that the Air Force convert its existing Air Force Space Command — which now has responsibility for the service's land-based nuclear missiles but not other nuclear weapons — into an organization called Air Force Strategic Command. The new organization would "be held accountable for the efficacy of the nuclear mission."

Under the existing Air Force structure, responsibility for the bombers and fighters that can deliver nuclear weapons is held by Air Combat Command, and Air Mobility Command has responsibility for the refueling aircraft that are used to operate with the nuclear bombers and fighters.

Copies of the Schlesinger report were not immediately available, but he told reporters it concluded that over the years the division of Air Force nuclear responsibility had led to an erosion of control and a lack of proper resourcing for the mission.

Schlesinger, who also is a former CIA director and former secretary of energy, headed the Task Force on Nuclear Weapons Management, established by Gates in June to conduct a broad review triggered by a series of Air Force blunders in its handling of nuclear-related materials.

An internal report released in early June was sharply critical of the Air Force, focusing on the mistaken shipment to Taiwan of four Air Force electrical fuses for ballistic missile warheads.

The findings prompted Gates to sack the top civilian and military leaders of the Air Force, and he also linked the action to another startling blunder: the flight last August of a B-52 bomber that was mistakenly armed with six nuclear-tipped cruise missiles.

BRING BACK THE STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND!

Couldn't be much simpler than that! I know o3Shooter and I agree on this one. What a blunder when they tore it apart the first time in 1992. The Space Command has been a JOKE when it comes to Nuclear Safety and Control. I think these folks need some of us Old Heads as Contractors!

[Billyd]

To err is human, to forgive is NOT SAC policy.

One thing to be said about SAC is that while they would checklist you to death, you couldn't muck it up, because the checklist wouldn't let you. You always knew where you stood. General LeMay must be spinning in his grave to see what they have done to his dream. :eek:

[03_SHOOTER]

Originally Posted by ang1sgt

BRING BACK THE STRATEGIC AIR COMMAND!

Couldn't be much simpler than that! I know o3Shooter and I agree on this one. What a blunder when they tore it apart the first time in 1992. The Space Command has been a JOKE when it comes to Nuclear Safety and Control. I think these folks need some of us Old Heads as Contractors!

Thanks Top! I was just talking to an old buddy of mine that I served with a couple of weeks ago, and we both came to the exact same conclusion. The biggest problem in actually doing it though is that the knowledge base that made it work the first time is all gone now, and from what I've gleaned of our "new kinder and gentler military", dragging a bunch of crusty old guys from the "Old Pharts" Numbered Air Force back in and turning us loose to rebuild it would absolutely give AF Command apoplexy!

For the LIFE of me, I cannot even begin to image exactly how they've managed to have more AWWWW SH*TS in such a short amount of time, when there weren't this many in the entire 46 years that SAC existed. All I DO know is that in the "bad old days" a lot of people would be on perpetual wind sock duty (12 hour shifts) in such exotic destinations as Thule Greenland, Shemya Alaska, Reykjavik Iceland, or Diego Garcia until they RETIRED.

[SAC_Cop]

Originally Posted by Billyd

To err is human, to forgive is NOT SAC policy.

One thing to be said about SAC is that while they would checklist you to death, you couldn't muck it up, because the checklist wouldn't let you. You always knew where you stood. General LeMay must be spinning in his grave to see what they have done to his dream. :eek:

Thats what you get for doing away with SAC, you can't just leave things alone can you!? It's a no brainer, Bring SAC Back! Thanks "ang1sgt" for posting this and "03_SHOOTER" you are so correct, man before the restructuring of the AF MAJCOMs you would get "killed" for misplacing your line badge. I can not even wrap my mind around all these mishaps with nukes, this is NOT LeMay's US Air Force. What a shame...

[TSmitty]

As one assigned to Air Force Space Command, I have to agree it definitely has issues. Now I wasn't around when SAC was, but I've worked with plenty of people and had plenty of supervisors over my years here on the rocket ranch that were, plus everyone here at Grunts I've spoken to that were around during SAC. I just can't see how they let it get to this point. If it's going to be anything like the SAC I've heard and read about, bring it back! Anything that can fix this mess called Space Command needs to happen, and needs to happen now!

[Startingover]

Well from viewing standpoint, its not the first thing that has been a botched idea in the past oh, say History of the working Military, and it certainly is not going to be the last.

From what I have seen, if they do consolodate it, more than none it is going to bring more headaches than relief... and havent we already enough to deal with?

The SAC was a good program, started by a great man. One of the hardest things for the entire world to do it seems it to keep a good thing going. Someone has to come up with something "New", "Easier" or "Modern" to implement and it breaks everything around it to pieces.

[ang1sgt]

Originally Posted by Startingover

Well from viewing standpoint, its not the first thing that has been a botched idea in the past oh, say History of the working Military, and it certainly is not going to be the last.

From what I have seen, if they do consolodate it, more than none it is going to bring more headaches than relief... and havent we already enough to deal with?

The SAC was a good program, started by a great man. One of the hardest things for the entire world to do it seems it to keep a good thing going. Someone has to come up with something "New", "Easier" or "Modern" to implement and it breaks everything around it to pieces.

We're talking NUKES HERE! Nuclear Weapon CONTROL. Two Man Concept, and so many other programs. Talk to some of the OLD Heads around here that have worked NUKES and see what they have to say. You've already seen a taste here. Just because the Cold War is basically past us, doesn't mean you let down your guard when it comes to maintaining and controlling these items. THAT IS the issue . It is one of TRAINING, and one of COMMAND.

[Billyd]

Top has hit the nail on the head. When it comes to "strategic assets" you can not allow ANYONE lone access. Reference my comment about checklists above. Under SAC, if you were caought doing anything with out the checklist, it was your a$$. Checklists were not optional, they were mandatory. I saw more than one crew member lose his/her qualifications because they failed to follow the checklist. I even know of two who received Article 15's for doing things that were not on their checklist.

Control of "strategic assets" is not a game. It is serious business. Each AF installation that handles these assets undergoes an evaluation to see how they comply with the various mandates. Failure used to mean the wing CC left on the same aircraft as the inspection team, not to return.

[Billyd]

Top has hit the nail on the head. When it comes to "strategic assets" you can not allow ANYONE lone access. Reference my comment about checklists above. Under SAC, if you were caought doing anything with out the checklist, it was your a$$. Checklists were not optional, they were mandatory. I saw more than one crew member lose his/her qualifications because they failed to follow the checklist. I even know of two who received Article 15's for doing things that were not on their checklist.

Control of "strategic assets" is not a game. It is serious business. Each AF installation that handles these assets undergoes an evaluation to see how they comply with the various mandates. Failure used to mean the wing CC left on the same aircraft as the inspection team, not to return.

[Brighteous]

If anyone is looking for news articles about this I found a few, and even if SAC is brought back won't the leadership in Space Command just take over?
http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/24/missile.error/
http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapc...ash/index.html
http://www.shreveporttimes.com/apps/...809180354/1060