avatar_Chris707

PGM-17 (SM-75) Thor IRBM

Started by Chris707, November 02, 2010, 10:39:51 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Chris707

A short write-up, with a few pics and references:

Thor Missile



Chris

PR19_Kit

Interesting.....

I wonder where they fired the Thors that were based on Johnston Island from? The place is effectively a single runway with hangars either side and that's it!  :o
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

Chris707

Although I haven't watched it all the way through, this declassified documentary http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFYmcwNr_hs&feature=player_embedded#!    shows the Thor pad.

And here's a pic after the Bluegill fireworks display: http://www.jason-stevens.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/johnston-bluegill-burntpad.jpg


PR19_Kit

I did watch it all the way through, it's MIND bending!

They had a Thor missile catch fire and burn out on the pad, including its warhead, which looks as if it's fired clear of the burning missile after some time!!!!

The Thors carried their own instrumentation pods which were launched from the missile before detonation, a sort of 'by its own bootstraps' data collection system. These pods ended up highly radioactive as a result and yet they showed guys in T-shirts and shorts checking them out after they were recovered! I wonder what state of health they're in now.......

There's some interesting support aircraft shown, including various KC-135s with numerous camera ports in the upper fuselage, and what looks like an RB-57D with sampler pods mounted at about 70% span on the leading edge.
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

rickshaw

Service appreciation of the dangers of radioactivity weren't great until the late 1960s, Kit.  I've seen film of Canberra crews who were ordered to fly through the radioactive clouds for sample collection after the Maralinga tests in Austraia who would emerge from their aircraft wearing no protective gear.   The aircraft of course were highly radioactive after their missions.  They were semi-protected inside their aircraft but once out, had none.  They would just saunter around the aircraft and then go off for a shower and a change of clothing.  Their flight suits would be contaminated, as would the aircraft but they'd use them on several missions.
How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

PR19_Kit

Quote from: rickshaw on January 14, 2011, 05:23:03 PM
Service appreciation of the dangers of radioactivity weren't great until the late 1960s, Kit. 

Or perhaps the High Ups did appreciate it but didn't give a damn? Gulf War Syndrome but 40 yrs earlier.....  :banghead:
Kit's Rule 1 ) Any aircraft can be improved by fitting longer wings, and/or a longer fuselage
Kit's Rule 2) The backstory can always be changed to suit the model

...and I'm not a closeted 'Take That' fan, I'm a REAL fan! :)

Regards
Kit

rickshaw

Quote from: PR19_Kit on January 15, 2011, 05:26:44 AM
Quote from: rickshaw on January 14, 2011, 05:23:03 PM
Service appreciation of the dangers of radioactivity weren't great until the late 1960s, Kit. 

Or perhaps the High Ups did appreciate it but didn't give a damn? Gulf War Syndrome but 40 yrs earlier.....  :banghead:

I think everyone was pretty much in the dark.  The scientists were still finding things out - problem was the service chiefs weren't that scientifically minded and so didn't appreciate the risks.  The servicemen were even more ignorant.  Was it deliberate?  To a degree perhaps but I rather suspect it was more due to ignorance than anything else.

How things have changed.  I took part in the last cleanup of Maralinga in the mid-1980s.  I ran the mobile shower unit which was used for decontamination.  We had special briefings on what we could and couldn't do with the people and clothing which was worn during the decontamination effort.  Some of it was pretty impractical but we had to know it for Occ.Health and Safety.  The "Duty of Care" was taken quite seriously after the Royal Commission on the nuclear tests' findings.

How to reduce carbon emissions - Tip #1 - Walk to the Bar for drinks.

NARSES2

I agree with Rickshaw that the casual way contaimination was treated in the 50'60's was more down to ignorance then anything else. Really hope I'm right. In a similar vein it's amazing how people casually serviced radar equipment in the 40/50's, working on the antena whilst it was switched on. A lot of very serious consequences from that. Still happening to some extent in the 70/80's with some R&D by major household electricals manufacturers. A mate of mine who worked in the medical research dept of one of these companies has some quite frightening tales, albeit judged on what we know now.
Do not condemn the judgement of another because it differs from your own. You may both be wrong.

Thiel

My dad has a stack of pictures from when he lived on Greenland during the early seventies.
A number of them shows USAF radar operators at Thule AFB standing in front of their radars while they were running, "because it was warmer there"  :blink: