>=20
> On Sep 22, 2013, at 8:05 AM, Mark Hanchey wrote:
>=20
> On 9/21/2013 4:32 PM, enkitec@gmail.com wrote:
>> http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/09/20/north-carolina-atom=
ic-bomb/2845381/
>>=20
>> Mark Jordan
>=20
> It is old news .  While 3 of the 4 safety mechanisms failed it still=20
> would not have gone off because the last switch  is something that has =20
> zero chance of ever contacting by accident, even in an explosion.  I=20
> can't give exact details because of prior knowledge but picture a switch=
=20
> that has to be operated like a combination lock for the switch to close=20
> contacts.
>=20

Old news perhaps  ...... zero chance of contacting by accident.... 0.000% i=
s a reassuring claim.  Mark.... are you saying this switch could not be for=
ced to close by high G forces or by being crushed ?  I guess that is what y=
ou are saying since you say the switch is not vulnerable to an explosion.  =
I keep thinking about the wires that lead to and from this switch...... or =
is everything ( including the detonator ) encased in armor ?
Gus
--=20
http://www.piclist.com/techref/piclist PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.