PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
5,3/10
223
TU PUNTUACIÓN
Añade un argumento en tu idiomaA fuel leak inside an ICBM silo creates a dangerous situation that sends the local military and civilian authorities into a panic.A fuel leak inside an ICBM silo creates a dangerous situation that sends the local military and civilian authorities into a panic.A fuel leak inside an ICBM silo creates a dangerous situation that sends the local military and civilian authorities into a panic.
- Nominado para 1 premio Primetime Emmy
- 2 nominaciones en total
Imágenes
Jace Kent
- Sgt. Frank
- (as Stephen Jace Kent)
Argumento
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesBased on a true story. On September 18, 1980, a Titan II ICBM inside Silo 374-7 of the US Air Force's 308th Strategic Missile Wing, located outside of Damascus, Arkansas, suffered a fuel leak due to a dropped socket wrench which struck and pierced the missile's skin. The missile exploded as two Propellant Transfer System airmen, Sgt. Jeff Kennedy and Sr. Airman David Livingston, were attempting to vent the leaking fuel and potentially save the missile. SrA Livingston died of his injuries. Sgt. Kennedy and twenty other airmen were injured in the blast. The nine-megaton W53 warhead was ejected from the missile and was found outside the complex with minimal damage. Jeff Kennedy was a technical advisor for this film.
- PifiasThe movie takes place at a Titan II missile silo in East Texas, surrounded by desert and scrub brush. For one, East Texas is dense forest, not desert. Second, there were never any Titan II silos in Texas. The actual 1980 incident occurred in Arkansas, and the film was shot at the Titan Missile Museum in Arizona, which is the only fully-intact Titan II complex still in existence.
- ConexionesFeatured in Hollywood Burn (2006)
- Banda sonoraYOU'RE SO EASY TO LOVE
Sung by Cathryn Craig
Reseña destacada
As a former member of the 308th SMW at LRAFB (the real life unit where the actual incident occurred), I found the movie to be lame at best. As is the case with so many "military" movies, it failed to accurately convey any of the realities of military life (they even made serious errors with the uniforms), they over sensationalized basic everyday things and glossed over major issues. Cheesy doesn't even begin to cover it.
Also, contrary to your 5th point, the Peacekeeper was not bigger than the Titan II in any respect. The Titan II was 103' long while the Peacekeeper was a mere 71'6" tall. The Titan II was 10' in diameter while the PK was only 7'7" in diameter. The Titan carried a single (unclassified) 9 Megaton W-53 Warhead while the PK carried a maximum of 10 300 Kiloton W-87 MIRV's (total maximum yield 3 Megatons). All in all, the PK was a fine "kid brother" of the Titan II, but the Titan maintains it's ranking as the #1 largest US ICBM ever fielded.
The point that the gentleman was making was that due to the accuracy of the current systems, as well as a shift in US nuclear policy, we no longer need massive single warheads capable of destroying entire cities in order to take out a single military target. We can now do it with a single much smaller yield MIRV without having to kill 10's or even 100's of thousands of innocent civilians, ergo, his statement was correct in every aspect, so " Bottom line: if there still was a U.S. military need for large, land-based ICBM warheads, there would still be Titan II's on alert today.", we just don't NEED such large WARHEADS any longer.
Also, contrary to your 5th point, the Peacekeeper was not bigger than the Titan II in any respect. The Titan II was 103' long while the Peacekeeper was a mere 71'6" tall. The Titan II was 10' in diameter while the PK was only 7'7" in diameter. The Titan carried a single (unclassified) 9 Megaton W-53 Warhead while the PK carried a maximum of 10 300 Kiloton W-87 MIRV's (total maximum yield 3 Megatons). All in all, the PK was a fine "kid brother" of the Titan II, but the Titan maintains it's ranking as the #1 largest US ICBM ever fielded.
The point that the gentleman was making was that due to the accuracy of the current systems, as well as a shift in US nuclear policy, we no longer need massive single warheads capable of destroying entire cities in order to take out a single military target. We can now do it with a single much smaller yield MIRV without having to kill 10's or even 100's of thousands of innocent civilians, ergo, his statement was correct in every aspect, so " Bottom line: if there still was a U.S. military need for large, land-based ICBM warheads, there would still be Titan II's on alert today.", we just don't NEED such large WARHEADS any longer.
- oshooter
- 14 sept 2007
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
Detalles
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
By what name was Desastre en el silo 7 (1988) officially released in India in English?
Responde