Warning in Hawaii

[Bill Greenwood]

Hawaii has been on edge lately in respect to unlikely but maybe possible missile attack. Yesterday such an air raid warning was issued and specifically said missile attack. There was of course a lot of fear and people were scrambling for anykind of shelter., and knowing the they had only about 20 minutes to find one if the attack was real. A scary part was the alert said, "This is not a drill" . Fortunaly this proved to be a false alarm and no attack was in progress. The language from the original attack on Pearl was so similar, "Air raid Pearl Harbor, this is no drill." That one was all too real.

[rwanttaja]

"This is no drill" is pretty standard terminology, and has been for a long time. Though I believe that in Frank's neck of the woods, the equivalent is "Hey y'all, we ain't s****ing this time."

Back when I was in Aerospace Defense Command, they had "exercise" terms for the standard Defense Conditions ("DEFCONs") to allow drills to occur without actually using the term "DEFON" in any communications. "Fade Out" for DEFCON 5, "Round House" for DEFCON 3, etc. Had similar cases for ADC-specific alert conditions...used a color phrase instead of Red, Yellow, and Green. Would have been nice if the exercise term for ADC Yellow" was "Yellow Snow," but no such luck. Maybe they have "Orange Coif" now.

A while after I got out of the Air Force, I read an article by a civilian who got to tour Cheyenne Mountain or some similar alert center. They saw a sign under "DEFCON" saying "Cocked Pistol."

"'Cocked Pistol'?" they asked the AF Public Affairs Officer escorting them. "Cocked NUCLEAR Pistol????!!!!!"

"I'm sorry," said the PAO, deadpan. "That's classified." And he was exactly correct; the correlation of the exercise terms was classified.

The article went on to say how the world was doomed, DOOMED, because the Air Force was running around with cocked nuclear pistols. In reality, of course, it was an exercise.

I got an especially big kick out of that because of what "Cocked Pistol" meant where where I worked. We were operating early-warning satellites, and the ground system had a combination of automatic and manual detection. When the DEFCON got that high, we'd just settle back and punch the "automatic" button. We were absolved of all responsibilities...no secure voice calls to NORAD, no more logbook entries to be made, no notification of false events, didn't even have to assess what was going on in the displays. Going to "Cocked Pistol" was, essentially, our break time.

Mind you, if the ACTUAL Defense Condition went that high, we would have been roiling radioactive dust. They figured our site would be one of the first targeted.

Ron "It's all fun and games until someone gets hurt" Wanttaja

[Floatsflyer]

There was of course a lot of fear and people were scrambling for anykind of shelter., and knowing the they had only about 20 minutes to find one if the attack was real.

The residents of Hawaii and the thousands of vacationing visitors were indeed fearful for their lives. This was a nightmare scenario that must have been unimaginable for all of them to endure. But "scrambling for any kind of shelter"?? C'mon, unless you're a true believer in those absurd, ludicrous "duck and cover" instructional Defence department films from the 1950's where kids hid under their classroom desks, there is NO shelter from a nuclear attack. And why would you want to survive anyway?

I hope the person that mistakenly did this receives some immediate remedial training.

[rwanttaja]

The residents of Hawaii and the thousands of vacationing visitors were indeed fearful for their lives. This was a nightmare scenario that must have been unimaginable for all of them to endure. But "scrambling for any kind of shelter"?? C'mon, unless you're a true believer in those absurd, ludicrous "duck and cover" instructional Defence department films from the 1950's where kids hid under their classroom desks, there is NO shelter from a nuclear attack.

Actually, the big killer is not going to be blast or radiation, but infrastructure damage. You don't target the politicians, you hit the major road intersections, rail junctions, and power distribution. No food comes in, few people can leave, no fresh water, no sewage. Imagine Houston or Puerto Rico, but EVERYWHERE.

And why would you want to survive anyway?

I hope the person that mistakenly did this receives some immediate remedial training.

I was pretty impressed with the Hawaii director of emergency services (or whatever his title was). He instantly said, "It was my fault." It was a mistake made by one of his employees, but he took the responsibilty.

Ron Wanttaja

[Bill Greenwood]

Floats , I didnt invent the story or its facts, I took it directly from the tv newscast on multiple channels, and there were people scrambling for shelter. The warning said "seek immediate shelter" and the recap on CNN news this morning said "the alert sent people scrambling for shelter". What do you think people did , sit out at the beach or in the open when the heard the warning or stay on the top floor of a high rise? And your idea of not wanting to live after an attack may be your feeling but I think most people very much want to live.
The idea of what is a safe shelter depends on many things like the size of an explosion and the proximity . An explosion at Honalulu might be survivable on the other side of the island or basement on another island
My post had nothing to do with if there are any adequate shelter , thats another question.

[rwanttaja]

Floats , I didnt invent the story or its facts, I took it directly from the tv newscast on multiple channels, and there were people scrambling for shelter. The warning said "seek immediate shelter" and the recap on CNN news this morning said "the alert sent people scrambling for shelter". What do you think people did , sit out at the beach or in the open when the heard the warning or stay on the top floor of a high rise? And your idea of not wanting to live after an attack may be your feeling but I think most people very much want to live.
The idea of what is a safe shelter depends on many things like the size of an explosion and the proximity . An explosion at Honalulu might be survivable on the other side of the island or basement on another island
My post had nothing to do with if there are any adequate shelter , thats another question.

The way I read Floats' response, he wasn't arguing with the news reports that people were scrambling for shelter. I believe his point was that, if an attack came, available shelters wouldn't do people much good. We've come a long way from the '50s, with backyard shelters and buildings designated/stocked as shelters.

Back when I was a CAP cadet in the '60s, we found the stock of Civil Defense supplies in the airport terminal's basement. The lemon drops weren't bad.

Ron "The crackers were stale" Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

BTW, did anyone see the news note that they found a body on the runway at the International airport just about the same time the missile alert came in.

Maybe it wasn't an attack, just a defection attempt....

Ron "Worked 99% of the way" Wanttaja

[rwanttaja]

The idea of what is a safe shelter depends on many things like the size of an explosion and the proximity . An explosion at Honalulu might be survivable on the other side of the island or basement on another island

It's going to depend on a lot of things, such as yield of the weapon, air burst vs. ground burst, exact targeting, but the actual destruction radius is less than most people think. A single strike at Oahu, the other islands will be safe (fallout excepted). Oahu is ~30 miles long, so much of the island wouldn't suffer direct effects. If a ground burst (certainly the simplest trigger, thus more likely for the NK warhead), the topography would restrict the damage even further.

The main problem, as I said earlier, would be destruction of infrastructure. A hit on Honolulu may leave Wheeler AFB intact, but most of the port facilities and civil organization would be gone, all of the fuel storage, and probably much of the available semi-truck transportation. It'd be difficult to get supplies to the island, and difficult to distribute them.

Edit: This reminded me of the LAST time I engaged in a nuclear targeting exercise with some friends (about 40 years ago). We got kicked out of the Pizza Hut.....

Ron Wanttaja

[waltermitty]

Yep, the effects of nuclear warheads are greatly exaggerated. I think the average warhead is something on the order of 40 kt. Anything outside a 5 mi radius wouldn't receive much damage.

[Floatsflyer]

Floats , I didnt invent the story or its facts, I took it directly from the tv newscast on multiple channels, and there were people scrambling for shelter.

And your idea of not wanting to live after an attack may be your feeling but I think most people very much want to live.

Of course the entire planet including me knows you didn't invent the story. Why do you feel the need to defend yourself for something you had nothing to do with?

Yes, not wanting to be alive after nuclear Armageddon is my feeling. With a poisoned atmosphere, nuclear darkness, poisoned food and water supply, what's to live for? You've watched too many unrealistic post-apocalyptic movies of survival. What you should watch is the very realistic, authentic 1960's Cold War film, "Fail Safe."