"Howard Berkowitz" wrote in message
...
In article , "Kevin Brooks"
wrote:


It has been quite a few years since I sat through the very basic
lectures
we
received on the SADM (being in the very last EOBC class to go through
that
phase), but IIRC the PAL was set up such that failure to input the
proper
code would result in the device inerting itself.

From my recollection of open sources, the inerting was of the arming
mechanism, not the actual nuclear components. In other words, to use it,
you'd have to build and reinstall at least an entirely new arming and
firing system, but the physics package was intact.

In contrast, some later PALs were supposed to damage the nuclear
components to a point that they would only be useful as (possibly
contaminated) raw materials. One example cited was that a
neutron-absorbing safety wire or rod, normally retracted from the inside
of the hollow pit during the firing process, could be broken off inside
the pit if the PAL decided there was an unauthorized firing attempt.

I don't know. This has gotten way beyond my actual knowledge, which was
limited to what little they taught us during that couple of days at the ADM
training site, and what little I have read in open sources since then (which
you have totake with a grain of salt, since a couple of the leading sources
could not even agree on the critter's actual weight with and without its
casing). They did not get very specific with the PAL details, as we had no
need to know them, other than to mention that it would render the device
unusable if the code was improperly input (I would presume it gave you X
attempts to get it right). Heck, even the calculations we ran for the depth
of placment were all based upon theoretical/assumed yields--they did not
give out the actual yields except as a rather wide range within which the
actual values fell. The last overseas ADM company drew down while I was
still on active duty, IIRC, quickly followed by the last ADM company
army-wide (which was located at FT Hood, again IIRC). My last active duty
company CO had been assigned to the one in Italy--he never provided any
details, either (understandably) other than to say that the biggest thing he
as a lieutenant did was repetitive inspections and inventories of the
weapons they had custody of (SADM and MADM).

Brooks