trc@hou5a.UUCP (10/06/84)
With regard to the old "Mobile MX" plan - couldnt the same benefits be gotten by building a bunch of fake MXes and silos, and having some sort of independent observers verify that only two in ten is real, before carrying them to the silos? Then use double or triple blinds and high security methods to keep *anyone* from knowing exactly where the real missiles go to. Since access to the missiles is almost certainly necessary, maybe cluster eight fakes and two real, far enough apart so that ten blasts would be needed to get them all, but close enough that a single control center can provide access via tunnel. The launch crews would know which is the real missile - but perhaps steps could be taken so that even they cant figure out which above ground target has the real missile under it. Note that the fakes could cost a lot less than the real missiles, and the fake silos somewhat less than the real ones. Its bound to cost a lot less, and be safer than taking one's nukes out for a Sunday drive! Has this been proposed before? If so, why was it rejected? Tom Craver hou5a!trc
woof@hpfcla.UUCP (woof) (11/15/84)
[Re: using fake mx missiles with real ones] > Note that the fakes could cost a lot less than the real missiles, > and the fake silos somewhat less than the real ones. How do we know that our nuclear arsenal isn't a bunch of fakes already? Nobody's going to test them... :-) Steve Wolf [hplabs,ihnp4]!hpfcla!woof