1) When the President speaks to Grady why doesn't he quote the Nuclear Code (CAP881) as a way of confirming who he is, since only he could know this?
2) Knowing that if the plane got though Moscow would be toast, why didn't the Soviets fire a tactical nuke at the plane to wipe it out? In fact if they'd done that when the bombers were in formation they could have taken them all out in one shot?
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
Just for kicks I am going to answer this as if I was one of the two authors of the novel from which Fail-Safe is derived .
q: ...why doesn't he quote the Nuclear Code (CAP881) as a way of confirming who he is?...
a: The simple answer is: nothing anyone says to Turkey One, after a certain point, will be acted upon. In my story THAT is one of their specific orders.
q: ...since only he could know this?
a: He isn't the only one who knows this. Ultimate one knows the codes and destinations, the computer knows, the programmers know, and the other crews know And even if he was the only one who knew...the presidency COULD be compromised.
q: ...why didn't the Soviets fire a tactical nuke at the plane to wipe it out?
a: I wrote that in. Weren't you watching? Late in the story, in fact, the Soves shoot several nukes at Turkey One all at once. But this fails because Grady is one canny tactician and the Vindicator is one hell of a bomber .
q: In fact if they'd done that when the bombers were in formation they could have taken them all out in one shot?
a: You are correct!
"a: The simple answer is: nothing anyone says to Turkey One, after a certain point, will be acted upon. In my story THAT is one of their specific orders."
And that's one of the failings of the story.Anyone who set up such a system would be a lunatic. I KNOW that's the point of the story but even so.....
"a: He isn't the only one who knows this. Ultimate one knows the codes and destinations, the computer knows, the programmers know, and the other crews know And even if he was the only one who knew...the presidency COULD be compromised."
I can't answer this without specialised knowledge but seeing that in the current setup the President is followed round by a guy with the Nuclear Codes chained to him I think the codes themselves must be devised in such a way that no single other person has access to the full code?
"I wrote that in. Weren't you watching? Late in the story, in fact, the Soves shoot several nukes at Turkey One all at once. But this fails because Grady is one canny tactician and the Vindicator is one hell of a bomber . "
I DID watch it yesterday on YouTube but my understanding was that the Soviets only fired conventional missiles at Grady.If the tactical nukes were on the same order as Little Boy I find it erm "laughable" to think that, given the EMP and the shockwave, any plane could avoid them or at the very least the pilot being blinded by the fireball.
Thanks for your reply.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
Okay, still pretending to be one of the authors...
q: Anyone who set up such a system would be a lunatic.
a: Yes. That would in fact be MAD. <---Look that acronym up if you don't get it .
q: I can't answer this without specialised knowledge...
a: No specialized knowledge needed! You asked why not have the President refer to CAP881 to verify his identification. As several people know that code and the target it refers to...reciting it would not prove the president's authenticity. And, once again, even if he were the only one who knew these details, the president himself could be compromised.
q: my understanding was that the Soviets only fired conventional missiles at Grady.
a: Nope, it was nukes.
q: If the tactical nukes were on the same order as Little Boy I find it erm "laughable"...
a: Please don't laugh at me
q: ...to think that, given the EMP and the shockwave, any plane could avoid them...
a: Almost all military electronic equipment is hardened against localized EMP. Territorial EMP would not be a factor as the detonation happened below the Ionosphere. I envisioned the Vindicator is a bad-ass bomber that was capable of riding out an indirect shockwave.
q: ...or at the very least the pilot being blinded by the fireball.
a: You got me there
q: And that's one of the failings of the story.
a: Oh snap. You noticed! ...And how many other failings of my story can you name?
Hi Eric,
Overall, I think this is an excellent movie, although I believe that it is politically slanted to the left.
Good point on the "Go Code." (Actually, it was CAP 811).
I felt The President (Henry Fonda) waited far too long before contacting Russia via the Red Hotline. The instant trouble was detected, the US should have immediately contacted Russia with some contingency plans.
If the decoys could have been wiped off the US screens, then the US could have guided the Russian Military into going after the real planes a lot sooner, possibly before entering Russian Air Space, and not the decoys, provided the Russians would have listened. These same US fighters should have been immediately sent to rendezvous with Group 6, and attack if necessary. I believe the US Military waited too long, and not just in this one area.
As far as Grady's wife is concerned, these planes should have had some type of voice-print analysis with a known sample of the real voice (ie, Col. Grady's wife) so it could be compared to the voice in question. Also, maybe Grady's wife could have given Grady some detailed information about their personal lives that only Col. Grady and his wife would know.
Also, why was it that the civilian defense contractor, Knapp, was the first one to spot the trouble? What was everybody else in this defense complex doing? Sleeping?
Well let's say you are the Soviets. You know that if one plane gets through, Moscow is toast. If you detonate a 20 Megaton warhead in front of the US planes, unless they have mindbending manoeuvering capabilities they have to fly into it and be destroyed.You might lose a few civilians below but Moscow will be safe.
Also regarding the earlier poster remark about the US planes being "hardened" against EMP, the planes would have glass windscreens and as far as I know there is no way glass can be hardened against EMP.
I did not buy the idea of the President being in a room with one guy interpreting - it just didn't make sense.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
Hi Erik,
Thanks for replying.
I was thinking the same thing about only one translator. Why? Possible mistakes during translation.
Not to mention if the interpreter was from NY and had family there he might not want to see them vapourised?
Or the president might want immediate advice and the phone line might go down?
It boggles the mind.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
Hi Eric,
Got it. Interesting point. I didn't think of the possibility of the interpreter (Larry Hagman) having relatives, etc, in New York. In addition to possible interpreter mistakes, although this may sound a little silly, but I was also worried somewhat about spare parts, ie, an extra telephone and/or headphones in case any of this equipment malfunctions. I'm a bit of a redundancy (back-up) freak.
If you detonate a 20 Megaton warhead in front of the US planes, unless they have mindbending manoeuvering capabilities they have to fly into it and be destroyed.If you will recall in my film that Col. Grady spoofs the nuclear missiles into detonating high above his Vindicator bomber, thus eliminating the need to completely maneuver around the shockwave (though he does believe his crew to be fatally irradiated by the blast anyhow).
about the US planes being "hardened" against EMP, the planes would have glass windscreens and as far as I know there is no way glass can be hardened against EMP.I think you are mistaken about what EMP is. Glass is not affected by EMP at all. EMP is not a synonym for 'nuclear blast'.
"If you will recall in my film that Col. Grady spoofs the nuclear missiles into detonating high above his Vindicator bomber, thus eliminating the need to completely maneuver around the shockwave (though he does believe his crew to be fatally irradiated by the blast anyhow)."
In which case the shockwave, gamma radiation and fireball/light would be spherical so there'd be little escape from it.Apparently the Tsar bomb caused third degree burns at 62 MILES.
"I think you are mistaken about what EMP is. Glass is not affected by EMP at all. EMP is not a synonym for 'nuclear blast'."
EMP is Electro Magnetic Pulse.
Glass will not stop it. Apparently it "flows" just like water so to "harden" something something against you have to seal any holes or cracks where it can get in - that would be quite an achievement on a plane, quite apart from the fact that any external aerial on the plane would feed it directly into the plane.And of course since the nuke is full of wiring it may even render it useless.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
In which case the shockwave, gamma radiation and fireball/light would be spherical so there'd be little escape from it.Yeah, shape and size doesn't make a difference if the detonation happens far enough away. (you will effectively escape from it) And in this case...
... the Tsar bomb......was not an example of a tactical nuclear device.
"So, yeah, back to EMP. So like I said:
Almost all military electronic equipment is hardened against localized EMP.
It's been known about for some time. We've been preparing to fight in that environment since the late 1950's"
So explain to me how Glass, which the Laws Of Physics dictate is not resistant to EMP, can be hardened against it?
And how external radio aerials (for example) can be protected against it?
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
Military manufacturers do not make EMP hardened glass as there is no need to as glass is not effected by EMP. Glass is not a factor here to be concerned about. The question you asked was about EMP theoretically affecting a Vindicator bomber. As a Vindicator bomber would be, in this movie, a piece of standard military equipment, it would be, as a part of naturally approving it for combat, hardened against localized EMP affects of nuclear explosions which it would be subject to as a part of its role as a nuclear bomber.
As for how military electronics are hardened against localized EMP I suggest you ask a military industrial electronic engineer. We are talking about an ADVANCED subject involving shielding and what not, but like I said, they have been doing it for decades now. Manufacturers make big money producing equipment for militaries that can with-stand all sorts of deliberate electronic disruption...much less the by-products of localized nuclear blasts.
Your daughter ate my Toblerone!!!
"Military manufacturers do not make EMP hardened glass as there is no need to as glass is not effected by EMP. Glass is not a factor here to be concerned about."
I'm not talking about the glass itself - I'm talking about the fact that if something has a large area of glass the EMP goes straight through it and can fry the equipment inside.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
But the equipment itself is hardened against the EMP regardless of the presence of glass or not. The internal devices will not be fried either way. Complete military vehicles and equipment are specifically designed to withstand electronic disruptions such as EMP from localized nuclear blast effects. It has long been a necessary part of preparing for combat on the modern battlefield.
Your daughter ate my Toblerone!!!
We are talking about 48 years ago. And if you want to harden military equipment (such as a tank) it has to be done from the outside, i.e no crevices , aerials or windows. It's unrealistic to think you could harden a plane "from the inside out" as there are too many wires and instruments with glass dials.As I said before, any wire acts a transmitter for EMP.
"Knowledge is cheap at any price"
We are talking about 48 years ago.Yep! They knew about EMP even waaayyy back then .
And if you want to harden military equipment (such as a tank) it has to be done from the outside......or just harden the individual electronic devices that need hardening and not the whole vehicle.
Yeah, a lot of what's in the movie requires the suspension of disbelief. They tried to cover some of this in the remake -- if I recall correctly, the president reads the mission code name to try and convince him that he's real.
And yeah, why wouldn't there be any way to recall the bombers? As Prof. Matthau points out, one of the big advantages of a bombed attack is that it gives you a few hours to maybe stop it. So why would you design it so that you can't stop it?
I guess you're supposed to think that the attack plan was designed this way because the military powers that be were too worried that Russian spies could figure out some way to compromise our bombing codes and send back our attacking planes in a nuclear exchange. They must have decided that threat was bigger than the threat in the movie. Yeah, makes no sense, but I've always thought this movie works better if look at it as if it's a nightmare.
I'm less sure about your point about tactical nukes--even now, do we have missiles that could hit a moving target like that? And if you could hit the bomber with a missile containing a nuclear bomb, why not just hit it with a missile containing an ordinary bomb? And your solution doesn't sound all that different from the last-ditch effort the Russians try at the end.