Kernwapens in Nederland

Gestart door Nikehercules, 18/01/2011 | 17:40 uur

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Hennis negeert zorgen Brabant over atoomwapens Volkel

Gooit voorstel voor vertrouwenspersoon in de prullenbak


Bas Paternotte: 01-07-2014

Minister van Defensie Jeanine Hennis (VVD) blijft onvermurwbaar: ze wil de provincie Brabant niet tegemoet komen in de zorgen die heersen over de opslag en het vervoer van atoomwapens op luchtmachtbasis Volkel. De provincie stelde begin vorige maand voor dat een  vertrouwenspersoon onderzoek doet naar de veiligheid van kernwapens op vliegbasis Volkel bij Uden. Die vertrouwenspersoon zou dan vervolgens vertrouwelijk kunnen rapporteren aan de provincie Brabant. SP-Kamerlid Harry van Bommel bevroeg de minister over de kwestie maar de liberale bewindsvrouw blijft onverbiddelijk.

Aan de Tweede Kamer schrijft zij deze week:

"Het kabinet heeft geen reden te twijfelen aan de veiligheid van in Europa aanwezige Amerikaanse kernwapens. Op basis van bondgenootschappelijke afspraken kunnen echter, zoals bekend, geen mededelingen worden gedaan over aantallen en locaties van deze wapens, ook niet aan een vertrouwenspersoon."

Defensie blijft zwijgen

In een ongevraagd advies eind vorig jaar vroeg de Provinciale Omgevingscommissie (POC) zich af of de provincie de risico's van opslag en transport helemaal overziet en welke garanties er zijn om risico's af te dekken. In de POC zitten vertegenwoordigers van gemeenten, bedrijven, milieuorganisaties, boeren en toerismebranche. Vervolgens gaf Brabant minister van Defensie Jeanine Hennis (VVD) een negatief advies over haar veiligheidsplannen met Volkel. Defensie heeft daar niet op gereageerd.

http://politiek.thepostonline.nl/2014/07/01/hennis-negeert-zorgen-brabant-atoomwapens-volkel/

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Tragisch: provincie Brabant blijft opheldering vragen over atoombommen Volkel

Haagse grabbelton: Zorgen over veiligheid - Rijk blijft zwijgen - SP wil duidelijkheid

05-06-2014

De provincie Brabant blijft in haar maag zitten met de atoomwapens die liggen opgeslagen op luchtmachtbasis Volkel. Het provinciebestuur maakt zich met name zorgen over het vervoer van atoomwapens van en naar de basis. Het ministerie van Defensie wil niet in discussie met de provincie omdat met de NAVO-bondgenoten is afgesproken geen mededelingen te doen over atoomwapens in Europa. De provincie wil nu dat een vertrouwenspersoon onderzoek doet naar de veiligheid van kernwapens op vliegbasis Volkel bij Uden. Die vertrouwenspersoon zou vervolgens moeten rapporteren aan de provincie Brabant.

Defensie blijft zwijgen

In een ongevraagd advies eind vorig jaar vroeg de Provinciale Omgevingscommissie (POC) zich af of de provincie de risico's van opslag en transport helemaal overziet en welke garanties er zijn om risico's af te dekken. In de POC zitten vertegenwoordigers van gemeenten, bedrijven, milieuorganisaties, boeren en toerismebranche. Vervolgens gaf Brabant minister van Defensie Jeanine Hennis (VVD) een negatief advies over haar veiligheidsplannen met Volkel. Defensie heeft daar niet op gereageerd.

http://politiek.thepostonline.nl/2014/06/05/tragisch-provincie-brabant-blijft-opheldering-vragen-atoombommen-volkel/
SP wil opheldering

SP-Kamerlid Harry van Bommel laat nu aan ThePostOnline weten dat hij wil dat Hennis de zorgen van de provincie 'eindelijk eens serieus neemt'. Van Bommel heeft Kamervragen gesteld. Hij wil dat Hennis de provincie Brabant tegemoet komt in haar wens voor een vertrouwenspersoon. Ook wil hij weten waarom hara ministeri enog niet heeft gereageerd op het negatieve advies van de provincie Brabant.

http://politiek.thepostonline.nl/2014/06/05/tragisch-provincie-brabant-blijft-opheldering-vragen-atoombommen-volkel/

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Overhauling the nation's nuclear arsenal: Sandia National Labs achieves B61 milestone

By Kevin Robinson-Avila / Journal Staff Writer
PUBLISHED: Sunday, May 18, 2014

After three years of intense work, Sandia National Laboratories has reached a key milestone in its efforts to modernize the B61 nuclear bomb – one of the oldest and most versatile weapons in the nation's nuclear arsenal.

The bomb modernization program, which aims to extend the B61′s life another 20 years, is one of the biggest endeavors undertaken at Sandia since before the Cold War ended. The government is spending upwards of $8 billion on the project, part of a broad national effort to modernize most of the nation's nuclear military complex during the next decade.

Sandia is working together with Los Alamos National Laboratory and the U.S. Air Force on upgrading the bomb, with the first newly refurbished B61s projected to roll off the assembly line by March 2020. Lab leaders say the project is on schedule and, at least for now, under budget.

Sandia conducted a weeklong wind tunnel test in February to measure the B61′s aerodynamic performance at the speed of sound. That provided the first opportunity to collect comprehensive data on how a newly built tail kit assembly interacts with other components on the bomb, said James Handrock, director of Sandia's nuclear weapons systems engineering. That, in turn, will help push the project closer to a planned, real-flight test next year at the Tonopah Test Range in Nevada.

The new tail kit assembly is important because it adds a guidance system to the bomb, basically converting it from a gravity-dependent dumb bomb into a smart one that can be aimed more precisely at a target.

"We developed the preliminary design ... and the wind tunnel test allowed us to try that out to see what adjustments may still be needed," Handrock told the Journal. "It all has to work smoothly together. We need to make sure the baseline design is what we will use in the upcoming flight tests."

The test provided the performance measurements needed to guide the next stages of design work, he said.

Critics question the cost of the overall modernization plan, which has skyrocketed from an estimated $4 billion in 2010 to at least $8 billion today. They also fear the new tail kit guidance system, along with other modifications, add new capabilities to the weapon, potentially undermining the government's declared policy of simply extending the life of nuclear arms without creating new ones.

A B61-12 model awaits testing in a wind tunnel at the Arnold Engineering Development Center in Tennessee. Sandia National Laboratories completed a full-scale wind tunnel test of the B61-12 recently as part of a life extension program. (Courtesy of the National Nuclear Security Administration)
A B61-12 model awaits testing in a wind tunnel at the Arnold Engineering Development Center in Tennessee. Sandia National Laboratories completed a full-scale wind tunnel test of the B61-12 recently as part of a life extension program. (Courtesy of the National Nuclear Security Administration)

Three warheads

Sandia is working on upgrades to three nuclear warheads: modernization of the B61, modifications to aging components in the W88 missile designed for submarine launch and the ground-launched Mk21 intercontinental cruise missile.

About 1,000 Sandia employees are working on the projects, which together have an estimated annual budget of more than $1.2 billion through the end of this decade, according to Sandia President and Director Paul Hommert.

But the B61 is, by far, the biggest since it involves a complete overhaul of nearly all weapon components. About 600 employees are working on it, and Congress approved $537 million this year for combined work on the project at Sandia and LANL.

"We're modernizing all components of it, including all the electronics and safety mechanisms and different delivery systems," Hommert told the Albuquerque Economic Forum in April. "It's the largest effort of this type in over 30 years."

The project will consolidate four different B61 models developed during the Cold War into a single weapon called the B61-12.

Apart from requalifying and remanufacturing existing components, the project calls for redesign of many parts, such as safety features, plus the addition of new things like the tail kit assembly.

All current B61 models are gravity bombs dropped over targets. They don't have flight-guidance systems that could pinpoint them for greater accuracy once released.

In addition, the bomb could be programmed to carry a lower yield to destroy specific targets, thus reducing radioactive fallout and lowering potential for collateral damage.

Tail kit

The Boeing Co. is building the guided tail kit under contract with the Air Force, and Sandia is working on the overall bomb redesign to integrate it into the weapon.

The wind tunnel test in February allowed engineers to see for the first time how the tail kit interacts with the overall bomb design. That's a critical step before moving to real flights, because engineers must make sure the tail kit contributes smoothly to the bomb's spin motion during freefall.

Spin motion is needed to stabilize the bomb as it glides toward its target. It's controlled by rocket motors and slanted fin tails. But in earlier B61 designs, air plumes from the motors have interfered with fin performance, thus weakening the push, or torque, created by the motors and reducing spin rates.

"We needed to test and characterize that aerodynamic performance with the new tail kit," said Chris O'Gorman, manager of the B61-12 technology basis department.

To conduct the test at full scale, Sandia went to Arnold Air Force Base in Tennessee, which operates the nation's largest wind tunnel capable of producing required acceleration beyond the speed of sound. The new bomb design was tested continuously there for eight days, after three years of preparatory design and engineering work.

About 75 percent of the basic B61 redesign is complete, and the lab expects to reach 95 percent before the first planned test flight in Nevada next year, according to Hommert.

Watchdogs criticize

Still, as modernization moves forward, nuclear watchdog organizations are critical of the project's total costs, and of the redesign plans.

"Its been very contentious," said Hans Kristensen, a nuclear weapons analyst at the Federation of American Scientists in Washington, D.C. "The National Nuclear Security Administration estimated about $4 billion originally in 2010, and then in 2012 that ballooned to $8 billion. The new tail kit assembly alone could cost up to $1.5 billion."

In fact, the U.S. Department of Defense now estimates total B61-12 program costs at $10.4 billion. With about 400 B61 bombs to be refurbished, that's about $25 million per bomb, Kristensen said.

Jeffrey Lewis, nuclear policy analyst at the Monterrey Institute in California, said taxpayers could get a lot more bang for the buck if the NNSA scaled back its "Cadillac approach" to modernization by instead doing some key modifications and not a comprehensive redesign.

"It's like they want to be locked into the most expensive plan," Lewis said. "I'd like to see more compromising solutions."

Given the bomb's substantial redesign, particularly the new guided tail kit, the program might go beyond current federal policy of simply extending the life of existing weapons, Kristensen added.

"This is the first real nuclear weapon bomb program after the Cold War that's adding significant new capabilities," Kristensen said. "It raises the question, is the U.S. back in the nuclear bomb business?"

Advocates, however, say that by consolidating four old B61 models into one newly designed B61-12, the program is cutting modernization costs, while reducing the total number of bombs in the arsenal.

In addition, Hommert said efficient management is helping to cut project expenses, with a projected $120 million in cost savings over the life of the program.

"People thought we couldn't staff the B61-12 program and hold costs down," Hommert said. "But we're managing to stay under budget and on schedule."

http://www.abqjournal.com/402297/news/sandia-national-labs-achieves-b61-milestone.html

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Citaat van: Ros op 27/03/2014 | 13:01 uur
Ze liggen klaar om af te halen........met kalender en gratis kroepoek.

Wat dacht je van Nederland -1, Rusland -1 etc

Eenzijdigheid is leuk, maar ook daar van kan huilen komen.

Ros

Ze liggen klaar om af te halen........met kalender en gratis kroepoek.

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

U.S. Tactical Nuclear Arms Mission Could Shift Among NATO Jets

March 26, 2014


If NATO partners eventually cease to maintain attack aircraft capable of delivering fielded U.S. nuclear bombs, then allied jets could "pick up the load."

Air Force Chief of Staff Gen. Mark Welsh raised that possibility during a congressional hearing earlier this month when asked about contingency planning for a potential future in which some European nations that currently host U.S. nuclear weapons opt to retire -- and not replace -- today's aircraft that are capable of carrying either nuclear or conventional munitions.

Five NATO countries -- Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and Turkey -- are understood to host a net total of fewer than 200 B-61 gravity bombs, though the United States does not formally acknowledge nuclear-basing details.






"As NATO nations -- if they choose not to upgrade their own nuclear aircraft capabilities, then other NATO nations that have those capabilities from an operational perspective will pick up the load," Welsh said during a March 14 appearance before the House Armed Services Committee. "That'll be a NATO policy decision. The U.S. will be part of that discussion. We do have the capacity to pick up the load."

In his remarks, Welsh did not definitively make clear whether the U.S. Air Force or other alliance members would take on the additional aircraft mission responsibility.

Still, the general's comments suggest the Pentagon is planning for its tactical nuclear weapons role in Europe to continue, irrespective of the future air-delivery capability of NATO hosting states. Arms control advocates had previously argued that the United States should withdraw its nonstrategic weapons from the continent if NATO partners do not modernize their dual-capable aircraft.

The Obama administration's 2013 unclassified report to Congress on nuclear-employment guidance states that the U.S. military would "maintain the capability to forward-deploy nuclear weapons with heavy bombers and dual-capable aircraft in support of extended deterrence and assurance of U.S. allies and partners."

Nuclear weapons continue to be a "core component" of NATO's deterrence against aggression in Europe, the alliance stated in its 2012 Deterrence and Defense Posture Review. At the same time, the allies also said they were prepared to consider reductions to the current number of tactical atomic arms assigned to the defense of NATO nations.

Defense Department spokeswoman Cynthia Smith in an e-mail to Global Security Newswire said Welsh's comments were in line with these U.S. and NATO policies.

The Pentagon and Air Force did not respond to separate requests for comment on whether any other countries besides the United States were being considered for possibly taking on a new role in the NATO B-61 air delivery mission.

However, according to issue expert Hans Kristensen, the United States is the only NATO country with the current military capacity to handle the extra burden.

The Air Force has nuclear-capable jets based in Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom that could take on a larger share of the nuclear bombs, said Kristensen, who closely monitors developments in the NATO atomic mission.

"The U.S. certainly has the capacity in its Air Force to pick up the slack," Kristensen, who directs the Federation of American Scientists' Nuclear Information Project, said in a recent phone interview.

At the core of the issue is aging aircraft. All five host nations of the nuclear bombs field either dual-capable F-16 or Tornado strike aircraft slated for retirement in the 2020s.

Some of the countries have said the attack-plane replacements they plan on purchasing would be dual capable, while others have hinted they would allow the nuclear-delivery role to expire along with the aircraft retirements.

Most of the current hosting nations are signed up or in talks to acquire the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, which is intended to include a future version capable of carrying the B-61 nuclear bomb.

"There is one overall trend, which is none of them can afford as much as they wanted," Kristensen said of the NATO partner states' ability to buy the new aircraft.

The Dutch government in January confirmed that some of the Joint Strike Fighters it plans to purchase could have a nuclear role, ignoring a 2012 resolution by its parliament urging that the jets not have a dual capability.

"The Belgians will probably follow the Dutch in whatever they do," in terms of deciding whether to buy new multirole aircraft, Kristensen said. He noted that the Belgian parliament had passed a resolution calling for the withdrawal of U.S. nuclear weapons from the country.

Belgium reportedly is in talks to also purchase the Lockheed Martin-produced F-35 to replace its aging fleet of F-16 jets.

Turkey is planning on replacing its F-16 fighters with F-35s. Some of those new jets are expected to be dual-capable, so that Ankara can maintain its role in NATO's nuclear-deterrence mission, according to Aaron Stein, an associate fellow at the Royal United Services Institute in London.

Italy also is planning to acquire the Joint Strike Fighter, though ongoing budget cuts could mean that Rome reduces its current order of 90 planes.

The Italians have been cutting back their JSF plans for several years -- not just in terms of unit quantity, but also in the amount of training hours their pilots will get on the planes, according to Kristensen.

Of all the NATO nuclear-weapons hosts, Germany has given the strongest indications it will allow its participation in the role to eventually lapse. Berlin is replacing its dual-capable Tornado aircraft with the Eurofighter Typhoon, which is not designed to carry the B-61 bomb.

The German government already has extended the service life of its Tornados until the 2025-to-2030 time frame, Kristensen said.

"Beyond that, it begins to get shaky, because aircraft only fly for so long," he said.

"It is up to each ally to decide what military capabilities they acquire or retain. This includes aircraft which can carry nuclear weapons," a NATO official based at alliance headquarters in Brussels said in a written statement. "We would expect allies who contribute to NATO's nuclear sharing arrangements to inform allies should their contribution change."

The official provided the comments to GSN on condition of not being named.

Some NATO member states in Central and Eastern Europe favor continued deployment of the gravity bombs as a signal to Russia, but it remains unclear how that might affect which nations play a role in the mission. The NATO pro-nuclear contingent is seen to have gotten a boost following Russia's recent annexation of Crimea, which has prompted new concerns about potential further incursions into former Soviet or Warsaw Pact states.

However, Steven Pifer, head of the Brookings Institution's Arms Control and Non-Proliferation Initiative, said there is little chance of these nations taking on the tactical-bomb delivery role.

"I think from NATO's perspective, moving nuclear weapons into a Central European country would be seen as provocative [toward Russia], but also militarily more vulnerable," the onetime U.S. ambassador to Ukraine said to GSN.

If any NATO countries from Eastern Europe were interested in hosting U.S. nuclear bombs, there would be "enormous political obstacles" standing in the way, Kristensen agreed.

NATO leaders know it would be destabilizing to shift deployed U.S. tactical warheads eastward, perhaps even more so in the context of the current sky-high tensions with Russia over its incursion in Ukraine, Pifer suggested.

"I've actually heard a central European representative say half-jokingly, if the German's don't want them, we'll take them," he said.

Moreover, "none of the countries in the western part of NATO would touch this with a 10-foot pole," said Kristensen.

The matter of continuing to deploy U.S. tactical weapons in Europe at all remains considerably controversial.

A growing view in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands is that the nuclear bombs serve little military value and should be withdrawn. Some argue the nuclear arsenals based in France, the United Kingdom and the United States are sufficient for providing deterrence for the entire alliance.

This all makes Washington the most likely NATO member to take up the additional nuclear-delivery responsibility, analysts agreed.

The U.S. military already has fighter wings in Europe with the capability of delivering the B-61 bomb. Nuclear-capable U.S. jets that could be given the mission include F-16 aircraft based at Aviano Air Base in Italy, F-15E jets at Royal Air Force Lakenheath based in the United Kingdom, and F-16s fielded at Spangdahlem Air Base in Germany, according to recent data compiled by Kristensen and fellow FAS nuclear analyst Robert Norris.

The U.S. multirole planes deployed in Europe do not presently have B-61 bombs assigned to them, but that could change, according to the nuclear forces experts.

"It wouldn't be that the U.S. would have to add a wing," Kristensen said. "It could just continue with the wings it already has."


This article was published in Global Security Newswire, which is produced independently by National Journal Group under contract with the Nuclear Threat Initiative. NTI is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group working to reduce global threats from nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/global-security-newswire/u-s-tactical-nuclear-arms-mission-could-shift-among-nato-jets-20140326

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Dutch Nuclear-Arms Base Infiltrated on Eve of Summit

By Diane Barnes
March 25, 2014

Protesters infiltrated a nuclear-arms base in the Netherlands last week, days before leaders gathered to discuss atomic security less than 100 miles away.

Four members of the group "Disarm" entered the country's Volkel air base and photographed the exterior of a building possibly used to hold B-61 nuclear gravity bombs from the United States, the organization indicated in Dutch-language comments quoted by other activists. The installation is one of six bases in five European nations believed to hold such weapons, which Washington fields and maintains for the defense of its regional NATO allies.

The group stated that its members were arrested at 8:30 a.m. last Tuesday and interrogated.

Jeffrey Lewis, a nonproliferation expert at the Monterey Institute for International Studies, said the break-in and several prior incidents "would seem to demonstrate" vulnerabilities noted in a 2008 U.S. Air Force assessment of security at nuclear-arms facilities across Europe.

"This is very similar to a series of intrusions several years ago at Kleine Brogel Air Base by a Belgian peace group," Lewis wrote on Tuesday on the Arms Control Wonk blog.

He added, though, that it is unclear whether a B-61 storage vault is inside the structure photographed during last week's trespassing incident.

Publicly available maps of the facility "mark certain bunkers as having a [B-61] vault, although I don't know why they think they know that," the analyst wrote.

One Dutch-based activist said last week's infiltration was timed to coincide with preparations for the 2014 Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague, Netherlands.

"The activists want to raise awareness for the fact that the [summit] will talk about security of nuclear materials but not those nuclear materials that are used for military purposes," Wilbert van der Zeijden wrote in a blog post for the antinuclear group PAX.

NATO reportedly is poised to spend more than $154 million on security improvements at B-61 storage sites in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany, Italy and Turkey. However, a number of critics have pressed for full withdrawal of the arms.

This article was published in Global Security Newswire, which is produced independently by National Journal Group under contract with the Nuclear Threat Initiative. NTI is a nonprofit, nonpartisan group working to reduce global threats from nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons.

http://www.nationaljournal.com/global-security-newswire/dutch-nuclear-arms-base-infiltrated-on-eve-of-summit-20140325

ridivek

 :devil: :devil: :devil: Ik heb het nog niet eens gehad over de motie van wantrouwen, die volgt op:
'om ... verplichtingen en Navo afspraken ('k kwam niet op de exacte bewoording), kunnen geen uitspraken worden gedaan over de locatie en de specificaties van atoomwapens in Europa of op Nederlands grondgebied.`
Wat door een meerderheid gesteunt wordt, en er een nieuwe MinDef komt.  :devil: :devil: :devil:    

Sorry ik ben in een evil mood.

ridivek

En dat vlak voor NSS2014 in den Haag. Leuk onderwerp voor een kamervraagbrief aan Hennis  :devil:
In het wikileaks document waarin wordt bevestigd dat er Amerikaanse atoombommen in Nederland, België, Duitsland en Italië liggen, staat dat Nederland al jaren probeert om de VS en de NAVO te overtuigen dat de atoombommen uit Europa verwijdert dienen te worden. Nederland heeft Duitsland aan zijn kant gekregen, Belgie wil er ook vanaf maar niet op dezelfde wijze als Nederland en Duitsland.
Mooi item voor het Nederlandse MinDef om dit voor de summit publiekelijk te maken. Geeft zowel de VS/NAVO als Rusland een flinke aanleiding om de atoomwapens te verwijderen/ vernietigen. Het lijkt mij dat Nederland in ieder geval niet de B61-12 upgrade kan toestaan.

Verder zou het kunnen helpen om luchtmacht basis Volkel vanaf 2016 overbodig te verklaren, dat wordt deze staaljager basis namelijk om twee redenen. (Ik bied alvast mijn excuses aan wanneer ik door dit te schrijven iemand tegen zijn schenen trap.)

Er is een Europees project genaamd Single European sky. Dit loopt al enkele jaren. Nederland hoort bij het Fabec Eurocontrol gebied. Eén van de programma's die Fabec uitvoert is CBA-Land/ Central West. Bij dit project worden de Nederlandse en Duitse luchtmacht oefengebieden (boven land) (TRA12 en TRA202/302) verplaatst en samengevoegd tot CBA land (boven de noordzee is een oefengebied genaamd CBA SEA). TRA12 wordt per 2016 opgeheven.
Leeuwarden ligt midden tussen deze twee gebieden (CBA Land en Sea). Volkel ligt 200 km van beide trainingsgebieden verwijderd, ook liggen Volkel, Woensdrecht en Gilze-Rijen (en de Peel) allemaal in Noord Brabant. Voor de spreiding van de luchtmacht over Nederland zou het misschien beter zijn om voormalig vliegbasis Twente weer te openen (als FOB), deze ligt vlak bij CBA land. Of vaker Duitse luchtmachtbasissen en luchthavens / vliegvelden dichter bij CBA-Land/ Sea vaker te gebruiken.

Hiernaast hebben we, geloof ik, nog maar 56 F-16 operationeel. En welke vervanger er ook komt, er zullen niet meer dan 30 a 50 straaljagers komen. Deze kunnen makkelijk op de luchtmachtbasissen: Leeuwarden, Gilze-Rijen, Woensdrecht en de Kooi gestationeerd worden. (En anders is er vast wel wat met Belgie of Duitsland te regelen). Eén Main Oparating Base (Leeuwarden) is genoeg.

Iedereen weet (onofficieel) dat de atoombommen bij Volkel liggen, (waarom is daar anders en Amirikaans bommen squadron [703rd Munitions Support Squadron] gestationeerd). Financieel kan de luchtmacht meer capaciteiten inbrengen (in Nederland en de NAVO) wanneer er één MOB is. Met het afstoten van Volkel, doet Nederland dus afstand van de Atoombommen (wat zo'n beetje iedereen wil, als Rusland ze ook weg doet.). Is er meer budget ruimte voor luchtmacht capaciteiten (meer toestellen & vliegers). Hiernaast drukken de luchtmacht-basissen minder op Noord-Braband en staan de straaljagers dichter bij de trainingsgebieden.

Mooie insteek voor een motie of vragenbrief aan Hennis niet?  :devil:      

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

February 28, 2014

Hans M. Kristensen   

B61-12: First Pictures Show New Military Capability

zie link voor tekst en plaatjes

http://blogs.fas.org/security/2014/02/b61-12pictures/

Ros

Pas ze maar aan.....niet van toepassing op Nederland want wij hebben geen kernwapens liggen  :silent:

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

11 November 2013

The Pentagon has announced it will upgrade old nuclear bombs deployed in Europe to all-purpose missiles with augmented tactical potential, in what many arms watchdogs believe to be the equivalent of developing a new weapon.

The new development contradicts President Obama's vow not to create any new nuclear weapons or enhance old ones to give them new military capabilities. Critics also warn this decision may threaten disarmament negotiations between NATO and Russia, who are to tackle non-strategic nuclear weapons.

Last week, spokespeople of the military, the Pentagon and the Energy Department announced the joint program to redesign B-61 nuclear bombs, which have been the primary nukes in the US arsenal since the end of the Cold War.

The upgraded bomb, called the B61-12, will replace the older types 3, 4, 7 and 10, as well as the bunker-busting B-61-11 and even B-83 strategic nukes, which are 90 times more powerful than the bomb dropped by US warplanes on the Japanese city of Hiroshima.

The re-adjustment of all nukes will be completed by 2024. In Germany alone, up to twenty B-61 nuclear bombs are stored on an airbase in the West German village of Buechel.

New bombs are expected to be deployable by fighter jets like the F-16. German Tornado fighter bombers in Buechel will also be re-equipped to carry the new B-61-12 bombs – but only as analog ballistic glide bombs, dubbed "System 1."

The "System 2" bombs will be a different, more modern type of weapons, essentially digital nuclear precision bombs equipped with state-of-the-art tail kits. The kits are being designed by Boeing, which is to make about 800 "bomb tails" at the total price of $1.6 billion.

The Pentagon pins a lot of hopes on the second system, which is expected to augment military capabilities of its obsolete nukes, including greater precision and higher destructive power. Even the smallest of the existing B-61s will be about four times the size of the Hiroshima bomb and have a destructive power of 50 kilotons of TNT.

The military's revamp plan has already raised criticism among weapons experts both in the US and Europe. They pointed out that the new B-61-12 would be clearly far more than a pure life-extension program.

The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) itself has admitted that the planned upgrades are not aimed at improving security and avoiding obsolescence, but rather an increase in performance, while Hans Kristensen of the Federation of American Scientists described the new weapons as "all-in-one nuclear bomb on steroids."

However, the loudest were the protests among European governments. Germany has said on numerous occasions it would like to see US nukes removed from its bases, although chances are slim that Washington will heed this plea.

Voice of Russia, ABC News

Read more: http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_11_11/US-to-upgrade-old-nukes-in-Europe-to-all-in-one-bombs-9023/

Lex

Citaat van: jurrien visser op 24/10/2013 | 12:42 uur
Kernwapens blijven voorlopig op Volkel
Dat is op te maken uit een brief die minister Frans Timmermans van Buitenlandse Zaken mede namens minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert van Defensie donderdag aan de Tweede Kamer heeft gestuurd.
De bewuste brief.

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Steun voor zorgen over kernwapenvluchten Volkel

Bewerkt door: redactie − 24/10/13 - bron: ANP

De zorgen in Noord-Brabant over vluchten met kernwapens van en naar vliegbasis Volkel worden gedeeld door een brede adviescommissie van de provincie. In een ongevraagd advies vraagt de Provinciale Omgevingscommissie (POC) zich af of de provincie de risico's van opslag en transport helemaal overziet en welke garanties er zijn om risico's af te dekken. .

Officieel is het een geheim dat Amerikaanse kernwapens op de basis in Volkel liggen. De commissie zegt dat onduidelijkheid over de kernwapenopslag niet afdoet aan de beleving van de gevaren onder bevolking. In de POC zitten vertegenwoordigers van gemeenten, bedrijven, milieuorganisaties, boeren en toerismebranche.

De Brabantse SP-gedeputeerde Johan van den Hout uitte eerder deze maand zijn zorgen over vluchten met kernwapens omdat het arsenaal in Volkel volgens mediaberichten wordt gemoderniseerd. Hij vraagt zich af of hij zinvol en positief kan adviseren over een nieuw milieueffectrapport voor de vliegbasis terwijl hij niet alles mag weten.

Namens omwonenden en gemeenten in de buurt van de vliegbasis wil de gedeputeerde binnenkort een gesprek met minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (Defensie) over hun twijfels en zorgen.

http://www.volkskrant.nl/vk/nl/2686/Binnenland/article/detail/3532421/2013/10/24/Steun-voor-zorgen-over-kernwapenvluchten-Volkel.dhtml

jurrien visser (JuVi op Twitter)

Kernwapens blijven voorlopig op Volkel

Door BNR Webredactie

24 oktober 2013 

Het kabinet blijft streven naar een kernwapenvrije wereld, maar de atoombommen die liggen opgeslagen op vliegbasis Volkel, blijven daar voorlopig gewoon liggen.

Dat is op te maken uit een brief die minister Frans Timmermans van Buitenlandse Zaken mede namens minister Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert van Defensie donderdag aan de Tweede Kamer heeft gestuurd.

Formeel wil de regering niet zeggen of er kernwapens op Nederlandse bodem liggen, maar de oud-premiers Ruud Lubbers en Dries van Agt bevestigden recentelijk de aanwezigheid van de wapens.

Op de Brabantse basis liggen vermoedelijk tussen de 10 en de 20 nucleaire bommen van het type B61. Die moeten in 2017 worden gemoderniseerd. Een meerderheid van de Kamer heeft het Amerikaanse Congres onlangs gevraagd hiervan af te zien.

Nederland streeft naar verwijdering van alle tactische wapens uit heel Europa. Timmermans heeft dit onlangs nog overgebracht aan zijn Amerikaanse ambtgenoot John Kerry. De VS streeft ook naar een reductie, maar het overleg hierover met de Russen kent weinig vooruitgang. Timmermans deelt het Amerikaanse standpunt dat een reductie in Europa alleen mogelijk is als er voortgang in de onderhandeling met de Russen en overeenstemming binnen de NAVO is.

http://www.bnr.nl/nieuws/977572-1310/kernwapens-blijven-voorlopig-op-volkel