Did the Russians actually build a "doomsday machine?" (And is it still "ticking?")

This article's from last summer, and I came across it while researching something else...

<snip>

Did the Soviets actually design a variation on a doomsday device and not tell us about it? And could an accidental or terrorist nuclear attack on Putin's Russia (by Chechens, for instance) trigger an antiquated automated dead-hand system and launch missiles capable of killing tens, maybe hundreds, of millions at unknown targets that might include the United States?

Up until Aug. 10 of this year, I would have thought these questions were best consigned to the realm of apocalyptic film fantasy. But on that day I came upon a startling essay in the London Times Literary Supplement. It was a review (titled "Deadly Devices") of a book recently published in the United Kingdom: Doomsday Men: The Real Dr. Strangelove and the Dream of the Superweapon by nuclear-age historian P.D. Smith of University College London. (It will be out in the United States in December.)

The TLS reviewer, Christopher Coker (who is on the faculty of the London School of Economics), asserted that the book demonstrates that "only after the Berlin Wall had been breached and ... the Cold War began to thaw did military analysts realize the Russians had actually built a version of the device. The details of this top-secret Soviet system were first revealed in 1993 by Bruce G. Blair, a former American ICBM launch control officer, now one of the country's foremost experts on Russian arms. Fearing that a sneak attack by American submarine-launched missiles might take Moscow out in 13 minutes, the Soviet leadership had authorized the construction of an automated communication network, reinforced to withstand a nuclear strike. At its heart was a computer system similar to the one in Dr. Strangelove. Its code name was Perimetr. It went fully operational in January 1985. It is still in place."

Wait a minute. Still in place?! How is this possible?

<snip>

Blair's primary recent concern is not the prospect of a deliberate, ideological, Cold War-type nuclear war, but accidental war caused by the continued deadly presence of all-too-easily triggered Cold War arsenals. In four fascinating papers on the subject (all available online, and well worth reading), Blair describes the "launch on warning" bias built into our nuclear command structure, and foresees the possibility of a doomsday that results from our attempt to pre-empt their doomsday plan, all of which might be touched off by accident, mistake, or malfunction on either side.

Blair is not a wild-eyed Cassandra raising unsupported suspicions. Colleagues in his field regard him as a serious and cautious scholar raising real questions. Stephen M. Meyer, an expert on the Russian military at MIT, told the Times that Blair "requires of himself a much higher standard of evidence than many people in the intelligence community."

<snip>

http://www.slate.com/id/2173108/pagenum/all/

Bush has been less than subtle in his desire to nuke Putin.

"I looked the man in the eye. I found him to be very straight forward and trustworthy and we had a very good dialogue.

"I was able to get a sense of his soul.

"He's a man deeply committed to his country and the best interests of his country and I appreciate very much the frank dialogue and that's the beginning of a very constructive relationship," Mr Bush said.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/1392791.stm

But here Bush wants to put his "Missile Defense Shield" on Putin's doorstep. That is most CERTAINLY NOT for use against Iran.

Also, Bush and Cheney have gotten annoyed about Russia and China telling us to stay home- they want to continue the resource wars, and they know that at some point we'll have to have it out with them..."There can be only one," after all.

n/t

How do you say "retro" in Russian?

That how you say "Retro" in Russian...

:evilgrin:

steam driven radio. :)

Reminds me of "The Homer"

Are there any COBOL programmers in the house??? :shrug:

- reinforced to withstand a nuclear strike.

Not exactly rocket science that one. They use valve technology - tubes to you. Valves don't get knocked out as easily as solid state devices. Same applies to their radar systems which apparently Iran uses too.

It's still operational, in fact it has expanded all over the world.

It's called the Internet.

back in the '70s; N. Korean, iirc.

Anyway, USAF examiners were shocked when they got a chance to lift the hood of the feared MiG 25 and found a bunch of vacuum tubes under there.

They are literally orders of magnitude more resistant to the effects of EMP (electromagnetic pulse) than transistor based circuits. So ... these aircraft were far more nuclear theater capable than our birds with more sophisticated electronics. The thing still flew to 90,000 feet and made Mach 3, so the airframe was competitive with our SR-71.

I use 'em in guitar amps.

but I could still repair a valve radio or amplifier without using a circuit diagram if I felt so inclined. I learned all radio and tv theory early sixties on hardwired chassis so it's an age thing. :rofl:

...by ME.

:P

Started with a Fender Champ (5F1) clone a few years ago, and....well, it got worse.

I like your taste in music too - said he who's got 100 or so banjos and due to complete f.u. three Washburn Anniversary parlour guitars too amongst others.

I entered the Navy in 1987 as an Electronics Tech and we spent a few months in school working on equipment that wouldn't have been state of the art in WWII. Tubes everywhere, and patch panels, old teletypes, you name it. I was shocked to find myself working on technology that I hadn't seen in the civilian world except in old pictures. I thought it was pretty lame at the time but it turns out that vacuum tubes are still better for some applications than their solid state counterparts.

513th Fighter Aviation Regiment, Soviet Air Defense Force. Defected to Hakodate Japan in September 1976.

Use of vacuum tubes meant that environmental regulation of the avionics bay could be eliminated, tubes were more resistant to EMP generated by nuclear detonations, and tubes meant the RP-25 radar electronics could handle the transmitter's 600 kilowatt output - impossible for any avionic transistors of the day. The Su-27, which went into design 2 years after the MiG-25, used transistors and not tubes.

these missiles have a limited shelf life and may not ever have worked. So any doomsday scenario also has a limited shelf life.

Perimetr (if it exists) would control launch permission to the existing, currently-manned and currently-maintained ICBMs of the Strategic Rocket Force. These aren't secret missiles in some forgotten, dusty silos somewhere. It just gives the ability to a single watch officer to transmit the go-codes/launch codes to the entire ICBM force at once. Humans in those silos would then initiate launch as trained.

The solid rocket fuel in them simply has a limited shelf life. The nuclear material has a limited shelf life. The older liquid fueled rockets have an even worse shelf life. The US and Russian are using off there rocket supply built in the cold war, not building huge supplies of new ones. It's going to be a issue in the future, as at some point America has to decide if it wants to build a crap load of new pointless ICBMs to replace these things.

I see your point - sorry, I should have gotten that from what you wrote. Both the US and Russia do from time to time fire off ICBM airframes to test the state of the solid motors of that 'lot,' but as you say eventually they're going to hit their expiration date regardless.

;-)

Even when it's built to last and respond automatically, through whatever system, ignition systems and warhead actuation must be constantly maintained.

Now if that were the case, then there may be cause for concern. Either way, it's worth looking into.

had been sold off to terrorist organizations while Bush had all our military and intelligence assets tied up in Iraq.

Astonishingly powerful. This sort of regular stuff is quite enough of a doomsday device in and of itself.

I predict a cakewalk. 3 million casualties, tops...
depending on the breaks.

The solution ist simple Mr. Pretzeldent...

you know how the Premier loves surprises.

But yeah, why would you build a doonsday device and not tell everyone?

the commies use it to control our minds...

...by at least a decade...