Noteworthy Gl auction

[beachbummer]

So, why did theynot get to where the were supposed to . More importantly where is the stuff that was ment to go into them?

Edited

 

[rat4spd]

Reminds me of the good old days of playing with radioactive stuff.

 

[wdbtchr]

Maybe make a pot still? To make alcohol for fuel of course.

 

[davidkroberts]

wow what a monumental waste of resources...... funny, government is one of those things that actually gets stranger and more sickening the more you learn about it

 

[flashooter]

That would make a really cool coffee table base with a glass top!

 

[USAFSS-ColdWarrior]

This is STRICTLY SPECULATION, but MAYBE, just MAYBE these containers were deemed UNNECESSARY when (again, MAYBE) we found out that the Soviet Nuclear Missile Program was largely just a bunch of UNARMED, though POSSIBLY nuclear capable, missiles and that the Soviets didn't really have the nuke capability that they wanted everyone to think they had.

Or, MAYBE, as previously posed..... There's a buttload of weapons grade radioactive material unaccounted for......

Just SPECULATING....

Talk about the SHTF scenario

 

[wreckerman893]

During the cold war we basically put the Soviet Union into bankruptcy trying to keep up with our technology. They spent too much money building weapons and not enough building refrigerators...the peasents finally revolted (so to speak).

I fear the Chinese will do the same to us in the future.

 

[paulfarber]

Having worked on Trident I & II nuclear missiles and seeing them up close (warheads) the first thing that popped into my mind was storage for the actual core. Plutonium IIRC is not highly radioactive.. its a alpha emitter and can be contained with minimal shielding. Not till you reach the critical point does is go boom and give off the much more deadly gamma rays.

When we ran drills on the boat, we were told fissile material would look like talc and count be swept up with a broom and dustpan... bag it and send it aft for storage.... that's if the rocket motor didn't also decide to go boom.. ahh.. drills on the boat...

Whomever gets it is gonna get a deal as scrap stainless at a decent price. Esp since this is not swarf or chips... but would end up crushed as sheet. Bonus $$$ because you would know before hand what alloy it is.. and not have the scrapper jerk you around claiming it has foreign attachments.

 

[Nonotagain]

Whomever gets it is gonna get a deal as scrap stainless at a decent price. Esp since this is not swarf or chips... but would end up crushed as sheet. Bonus $$$ because you would know before hand what alloy it is.. and not have the scrapper jerk you around claiming it has foreign attachments.

Whom ever gets them will need deep pockets as the weight listed was 1,122,000 lbs.

My money says that befoe this aution gets opened that you are going to need a bid deposit of atleast $50,000 going in.

The last stainless steel I scrapped from sheet, I got 80 cents per pound. I get better money for cobalt drill bits and the dealer pays for the shipping.

 

[davidkroberts]

Having worked on Trident I & II nuclear missiles and seeing them up close (warheads) the first thing that popped into my mind was storage for the actual core. Plutonium IIRC is not highly radioactive.. its a alpha emitter and can be contained with minimal shielding. Not till you reach the critical point does is go boom and give off the much more deadly gamma rays.

When we ran drills on the boat, we were told fissile material would look like talc and count be swept up with a broom and dustpan... bag it and send it aft for storage.... that's if the rocket motor didn't also decide to go boom.. ahh.. drills on the boat...

Whomever gets it is gonna get a deal as scrap stainless at a decent price. Esp since this is not swarf or chips... but would end up crushed as sheet. Bonus $$$ because you would know before hand what alloy it is.. and not have the scrapper jerk you around claiming it has foreign attachments.

are you sure they werent just telling you that about the dustpan and put it in a ziplock just to make you feel better about working around the stuff in an environment where you couldnt get away from it.....aka "a boat/submarine"

kinda reminds me of the civil defense ads showing kids getting under a desk when they see the flash and mushroom cloud.

Honestly if it was so unradioactive at that point that a seaman with a ziplock can take care of it that they are devoting a beer keg sized container of stainless steel and polyprolene to store it. Im not all that bright but i remember them telling us about the self-injectors and nerve agent.......

sorry for the rant just me being me........

 

[paulfarber]

If we had a 'Broken Arrow' type event then no, I really don't think that a dust pan or OBA is gonna do much.. but the Military is like that.. train for the worst, hope for the best.

If the explosion is significant enough to breech a missile tube, then its gonna light the propellant, and there is nothing going to stop that.. although there is a drill to jettison a tube.

But you did learn enough, and the Vitrol/Lockheed guys were more than happy to talk about their toys.... and this question came up a lot.

That said, the plutonium is not that big a deal.. Emits alpha particles.. a piece of paper is a suitable shield. Beta is a little more of a concern, but like gamma, not prevalent till critical mass is reached and you start fission.

I lived and worked within 250 ft of a live nuclear reactor for months on end, and have been within 10 feet of multiple warheads on many occasions.. I have less measured and documented exposure than most people (being under water away is a natural filter).

These stainless steel vessels were built more for environmental concerns than radiological ones. It they were not for long term storage they could have used fiberglass or Aluminum cases and been just as safe. The stainless is for rust/water protection and long term storage.

IMUs and EAs were transported in fiberglass cases.

 

[3dAngus]

I don't want to buy anything I have to destroy prior to moving..... period.

It wrings my gut to see all those Hemtt cabs selling at Albany that say, "destruction must be witnessed by government witness". What a friggin waste of money. I could build a great bar seat or two out of those in a mancave.

 

[exbrown]

Here is a link to a document about the "RUSSIAN FISSILE MATERIAL CONTAINER DESIGN"
Information Bridge: DOE Scientific and Technical Information - Sponsored by OSTI

This article states that there were 24,000 of these built, the document is from 1998.

There are also FBO request for additional containers that were awarded. Probably a lot of these will be sold.

 

[11Echo]

Here is a link to a document about the "RUSSIAN FISSILE MATERIAL CONTAINER DESIGN"
Information Bridge: DOE Scientific and Technical Information - Sponsored by OSTI

This article states that there were 24,000 of these built, the document is from 1998.

There are also FBO request for additional containers that were awarded. Probably a lot of these will be sold.

These containers were part of the Nunn-Lugar Act under G HW Bush. The first ones were to have been delivered in early 1994.

The Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program

OVERVIEW​

The Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program of the United States assists the states of the former Soviet Union in controlling and protecting their nuclear weapons, weapons-usable materials, and delivery systems. To aid in the implementation of arms control agreements, CTR also contributes to the dismantling and destruction of a number of nuclear weapons and their associated delivery systems. The CTR program began in 1991. In the 1990s, the US Congress allocated from the defense budget approximately $400 million each year to CTR-related programs, which are administered by the Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Energy (DOE), Department of Commerce, and the Department of State. From 2000-2010, the United States will spend a projected $1 billion per year on the program. Projects of the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program have included strategic offensive arms elimination; nuclear warhead dismantlement; nuclear weapons storage security; chemical weapons destruction; biological weapons proliferation prevention; reactor core conversions; nuclear material protection, control and accounting; export control initiatives; defense conversion; and others. Click here to see details about specific CTR programs in Russia, Ukraine, Kazakhstan, and Belarus, to view a list of CTR accomplishments from the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program website, or to see an August 1997 CTR brochure which summarizes the CTR program.
HISTORY The Cooperative Threat Reduction Program otherwise known as the "Nunn-Lugar" legislation (named for sponsoring Senators Sam Nunn [D-GA] and Richard Lugar [R-IN]) began in 1991 as a piece of US legislation entitled "The Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction Act of 1991" (Public Law 102-228, 12/12/91, Title II Soviet Weapons Destruction), which stemmed from Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev’s request for assistance in dismantling Soviet nuclear weapons, and US President George Bush’s subsequent proposal to assist in the disposition, dismantlement, and destruction of nuclear weapons in the Soviet Union. In the Soviet Nuclear Threat Reduction Act, Congress noted that aid to the Soviet Union and its potential successor states would be in the national security interest of the United States as a means to address the threat of nuclear weapons proliferation. This threat was comprised of three components: 1) substandard materials protection, control, and accounting measures for nuclear weapons and materials; 2) the possibility of smuggling nuclear weapons and/or components; and 3) potential transfer of actual weapons, components, and weapons-related knowledge. With these threats in mind, the Act delineates a two-fold objective: "A) to facilitate on a priority basis the transportation, storage, safeguarding, and destruction of nuclear and other weapons in the Soviet Union, its republics, and any successor states; and B) to assist in the prevention of weapons proliferation." For Fiscal Year 1992, the Act allotted $400 million of transferred Department of Defense funds for this purpose. (For cumulative funding to date see chart below.) In October 1992, an additional $400 million was allocated to establish the Safe and Secure Dismantlement (SSD) Talks under the Former Soviet Union Demilitarization Act.​

 

[coolnick73]

I don't know what all the fuss about wasteful spending is about. The GL page says the government got them for free!

 

[rhinob]

We'd better get Jesse Ventura right on this ASAP!