Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: terryr@ogicse.ogi.edu (Terry Rooker)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: Time-lapse PALs on nuclear attack subs
Message-ID: <15585@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Date: 14 Apr 90 04:11:36 GMT
References: <15509@cbnews.ATT.COM>
Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM
Organization: Oregon Graduate Institute (formerly OGC), Beaverton, OR
Lines: 39
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: terryr@ogicse.ogi.edu (Terry Rooker)
In article <15509@cbnews.ATT.COM> GA.CJJ@Forsythe.Stanford.EDU (Clifford Johnson) writes:
>
>I think the system could be designed to make this most difficult,
>so as to assure that it could only happen with the knowledge of many
>crew members some of whom would be involved in inspection/repair/listen
>procedures.  The system could broadcast to the entire crew a FAILURE
>TO RECEIVE after missing even the first 6-hourly (say) signal, and
>the system would have a redundant backup or three, besides being
>simple and robust.  24 hours is a long time to reflect and adjust.
>Supposing that all communications were lost for that period, that
>very circumstance today is de facto authorization to consider
>actual launch -- we wouldn't be in more risk than we are now, I
>propose cutting the risk of accident greatly in the normal
>day-to-day situation.
>
Your system ultimately rests on the same safeguards that are in place
today, the reliability of the entire crew.  That is why the Personnel
Relibility Program is so important.  Since it has the same safeguards,
it may not be worth the extra expense.  Actually those in the know
probably can't talk about it.  Yes much of the technology is in the
public domain, but there are a lot of operations research type studies
that are used to varify the porposed theories.  Much of that
information is not going to be available.  Despite all the
probabilities that would go into such studies, the one area that is
not quantifiable is the human link.  The system relies on the
coordinated action of several individuals to launch even a single
warhead.  A carefully thought out paln, by someone in the know can
circumvent just about any elaborate safeguard you can develop.  It is
easier to keep as many people as possible in the loop, and have them
(and others) watch for strange behavior.  I have heard some really
strange stories about how far the PRP goes to monitor the people that
are in the loop.  It seems to be the best compromise.

-- 
Terry Rooker
terryr@cse.ogi.edu