How stupid was Cerberus? - Olympus Has Fallen (2013) Discussion

[–] virgiltx 10 years ago

I don't think that destructing the missiles would detonate the warheads, and furthermore, if there were a system to abort a missile attack, that would probably include a step to de-arm the warhead, so that it could not detonate.

There have been plane crashes with nukes on board, and none of them ever detonated.

____________________
The story is king.

reply

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] coldbloodedavenger 10 years ago

Yeah, that's kind of the thing with nukes. They aren't conventional explosives and are immune to 'shock' forces setting them off. Until it's armed and the atomic reaction is started, it's just a hunk of radioactive metal.
Suspension of disbelief and all, yeah, but it definitely took me out of the movie.

reply

[–] benjaminwg 10 years ago

Agreed. The whole existence of Cerberus was a little wonky, the centralizing of its control entirely within the WH was just dumb, and the inaccurate explanation of what would happen if you self-destructed them just made it worse. Dirty bomb, but that's it. Launching the missile and arming the warhead assembly are two completely different things, and trigger mechanisms have various safety mechanisms and stages that must all be activated. Complicated stuff.

The lone guy thing is a cliché, but I think I was able to look past it.

The compromised insider or former insider is a bigger cliché I had problems with. It wasn't necessary for the plot and hard to believe with the history of the USSS.

The very idea of an invasion of the WH by NK is actually not entirely crazy. NK tried that once with a commando team into the south and got up to the mansion. The only reason they were stopped is a sort of Lone Survivor scenario where they let the wood cutters in the forest go. After finally being repelled, one of the commandos made it back across the border with his guts hanging out him and was hailed as a hero by the NK propaganda machine.

The talented hacker thing could have been more played up, but this is before the recent penetration of Sony and widespread knowledge of their hacker cadre.

The last section of the film seemed clunky, but I thought it was surprisingly smart and engaging earlier on considering all the negative reviews. For a moment, I thought maybe NK had been spreading bad press just to prevent people from watching.

reply

[–] the_la_baker 10 years ago

Yeah, that's kind of the thing with nukes. They aren't conventional explosives and are immune to 'shock' forces setting them off.

What? Why do people insist on speaking about things they are completely ignorant about as if they are an expert?
Please enlighten me. What is your motive? Is it the Dunning-Kruger effect?

January 24, 1961: Goldsboro, North Carolina
In one of the closest calls in accidental nuclear detonation history, a single safety switch prevented a 20-megaton Mk39 hydrogen bomb from exploding in North Carolina in January 1961. When a B-52 carrying two of the bombs suffered a fuel leak in the wing, the plane exploded and dropped both bombs earthward. The parachute of one bomb deployed, but the other weapon nearly detonated when five of its six safety devices failed and it broke apart upon impact with the ground.

reply

[–] actionmanrandell 9 years ago

im sure modern warheads are more advanced

reply

[–] the_la_baker 9 years ago

im sure modern warheads are more advanced

They added a few more safeties after that incident, but there is no foolproof safety.

reply

[–] Augustus_Octavian 9 years ago

No, you are the one who is incorrect. In your example, the controls are damaged, nearly leading to a detonation.

Within the context of this movie, the controls are not damaged at all. It would have been a deliberate (non-nuclear) detonation of the warheads.

Most likely scenario is the detonation of the conventional explosives (out of the proper detonation sequence), which would render the warhead inert. Albeit spreading around a lot of the nuclear material.

From a design viewpoint, it would have been stupid to set it to nuclear detonation when you can easily set it to non-nuclear detonation by setting off the conventional explosives.

reply

[–] the_la_baker 8 years ago

You seem very confused. Not only are you wrong, you aren't making sense.

reply

[–] Augustus_Octavian 8 years ago

Modern nuclear warheads do not function similarly to the olden model you cited as examples.

To make it simple for you, technology has advanced since then.

reply

[–] Xcalat3 (3748) 7 years ago

this a stupid movie (but fun) but even here things need to make a little sense which is why this Cerberus nonsense should not have been in the movie.

reply

[–] Airman87 10 years ago

, if there were a system to abort a missile attack, that would probably include a step to de-arm the warhead, so that it could not detonate.

ICBMs automatically arm the nuclear warhead in flight. We have no control over them once they're launched.

_______
When logic and science aren't on your side, you always lose.

reply

[–] Airman87 10 years ago

It doesn't make sense anyway - if the system was meant to call back the nukes in midair in case of mistake or whatever, why would you want them detonating in the first place?

You can't land or change course of ICBMs.

Once they're launched, that's it. They're multistage and their guidance is stored before launch.

Cerberus was stupid because it's not realistic for two reasons: 1 - We have no control once they launch, 2 - The nuclear warhead doesn't arm until ICBMs are in later portion of flight (they arm automatically), so it's impossible for them to go off in silos.

_______
When logic and science aren't on your side, you always lose.

reply

[–] andrewlloydjones 10 years ago

They never said Cerberus detonated the warhead, it destroys the transport vehicle.
A nuclear warhead is detonated by a surrounding explosion exerting immense pressure on the nuclear material thereby starting a reaction.
The missile body detonating inside a hardened silo is what they were insinuating would cause the warhead to detonate as there would be nowhere for the explosive force to go, so would act on the warhead and cause a nuclear chain reaction.

Yes, they can survive plane crashes and the like as there is no containment on the explosion, if any.

It is similar to a bullet - the gunpowder ignites, causing gas buildup which has nowhere to go, so follows the easiest path, pushing the bullet out of the case and down the barrel.

reply

[–] Halmyre 9 years ago

Except the containment in the huge volume of a silo would not induce enough pressure to detonate the warhead.

reply

[–] Augustus_Octavian 9 years ago

As explained by the above poster, that is not how it works. Not to mention that the detonation sequence must be very precise. You can't just make a random go of it.

reply

[–] samhmd-7489 9 years ago

The worst part wasn't any of that, it was how the password system allowed for multiple attempts.

Most normal password systems lock you out after 3 failed attempts, but here they can re-enter it as many times as they wanted until they got the right one.

reply

[–] gary_overman 8 years ago

The worst part wasn't any of that, it was how the password system allowed for multiple attempts.

Most normal password systems lock you out after 3 failed attempts, but here they can re-enter it as many times as they wanted until they got the right one.

Quite so. Another flaw, I believe, was having all three people with the code in the same room.

reply

[–] mica404 8 years ago

Equally, why do none of these highly secure systems ever have duress codes. The code holders have 2 codes, one to activate it, and a different one should a bunch of terrorists be holding a gun to their heads.

Enter the duress code and the system reacts normally until the last one is entered, at which point the whole system shuts down instead and cannot be restarted.

reply

[–] milstar 8 years ago

Didn they say earlier in the film that Cerberus is self-contained or something like that, that once it's triggered it cannot reverse back. And at the end, what a miracle! there is a button for recall.

reply

[–] MovieChatUser497 (18943) 5 years ago

I was thinking the same thing, you'd think they'd design it so Cerebus could not be activated until the nuke was already launched. And the President telling the other two to give up the code that was also stupid, but nothing was more dumb than the Secretary of Defense reciting the Pledge of Allegiance while being dragged out, LOL I was laughing at that.

reply

[–] Clouseau2 (164) 3 years ago

This part of the movie made me think of the disclaimer in "Dr. Strangelove" where you are assured what happened in the movie would never happen in real life.

First, you don't design the system to detonate if the missiles have not yet been launched yet since that makes no sense.

Second, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff would let the President get tortured to death and give up his code just because a knife was pressed into his neck? I don't think so.

Third, as others have pointed out here, detonating the nukes inside the silos wouldn't cause nuclear explosions. You might get dirty bombs but you don't build missile silos close to population centers. It would be a huge mess but would not kill tens of millions.

Finally (getting off topic now), how does North Korea manage to insert a dozen commandoes into South Korea's security detail?

reply

[–] Clouseau2 (164) 3 years ago

Forgot to mention : you don't build a system like this without being able to turn it off from the outside. This isn't the Doomsday device from Dr. Strangelove. They would have a contingency in case hostiles got a hold of the system and a way to turn it off.

reply

[–] SmilodonKnight77 (1) 3 years ago

Actually, it would kill tens of millions, because every ICBM going off at once, despite being away from population centers, would release enough nuclear debris to cover the entire country!

reply

[–] Clouseau2 (164) 3 years ago

During the nuclear testing literally hundreds of atom bombs were exploded in the atmosphere. And nuclear weapons have gotten less powerful since back then since they are far more accurate today. Since those ICBMs would be detonated in their silos, away from population centers, the amount of fallout would be limited.

reply