Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

For general discussion with your fellow Peacekeeper crewdogs, maintainers and cops. Based at: F.E. Warren AFB, WY and operational from 30 Dec 88 to Sep 05. Share your stories and meet up with an old friend.

Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Weapons Loader on Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:20 am

Hopefully this is an INERT question, not like what was spawned by my "Missile Away Timing" Post.
Anthony Spencer, (M)Sgt, USAF
23 AMXS / 74 Aircraft Maintenance Unit
Moody AFB, GA
Weapons Loader
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:18 pm

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Weapons Loader on Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:12 am

Speaking of Dems, my prediction is that they will win, put all the B-1s at one base (Likely Dyess, they already tried closing Ellsworth), shit-can most of the B-52s(probably enough to shut down Barksdale, and keep Minot since it has the ICBM mission), shit-can Missile Defense ($$$ and to appease Russia, so they can build Topol-Ms uncontested), stop F-22 production ($$$), cut F-35 production ($$$), and in return we'll get a new service dress uniform and 10 brand-new jury-rigged tankers after retiring the 319th ARW's KC-135s and closing Grand Forks ($$$).

Speaking of being an officer, I had that thought in my mind right as I enlisted back in '01, and missiles was one of those things that intrigued me. However, I understand a lot of brand-new lieutenants are on the chopping block for Force Shaping, so who's to say I wouldn't have been cast in that lot?

But I love my job now. Besides, I have until I'm 35 to change my mind, don't I?

Delete this post before Hillary sees it.
Anthony Spencer, (M)Sgt, USAF
23 AMXS / 74 Aircraft Maintenance Unit
Moody AFB, GA
Weapons Loader
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:18 pm

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby hockey85 on Thu Jan 31, 2008 4:28 am

I was told by a Peacekeeper missileer at Top Hand that the Peacekeeper was built with Arms reductions in mind, thus it could be used as a bargaining chip. With the end of the Cold War, START II, and the retirement of the Peacekeeper in the "near" future, it was decided not to spend money to upgrade the capsules at Peacekeeper sites at the time Minuteman sites were being upgraded to REACT, since the Peacekeeper would be deactivated soon anyways.

I'm pretty sure it was the same reasoning for not upgrading the Minuteman capsules at Grand Forks to REACT as well, since the 321st was deactivated shortly after the REACT upgrades in 1998.

Cory
PAX ORBIS PER ARMA AERIA
User avatar
hockey85
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:56 pm

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby DeuceDeputy on Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:17 pm

I may have misunderstood this when I first came on line, but my initial EWO instructor was a former PK crewmember and we asked the same question. According to him, the Air Force had ordered the REACT consoles for a PK upgrade (which was supposedly going to be called REACT-C) but they were obviously never installed due to the aforementioned treaties and whatnot.
Mission Operations Crew Commander
Washington, D.C.

REACT-B IQT Class 06-02
Final 564th Alert at T0 on 30 July 2008 #109
DEUCE FOREVER!
Missile Combat Crew Commander Instructor
341st Operations Support Squadron
LFA at A01 on 22 March 2010 #177
User avatar
DeuceDeputy
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 80
Joined: Fri Mar 09, 2007 5:50 am
Location: Washington, DC

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby hockey85 on Thu Jan 31, 2008 11:30 pm

I may have misunderstood as well. I've heard of REACT-C mentioned somewhere before. When I see him again I can talk to him and clarify.

Cory
PAX ORBIS PER ARMA AERIA
User avatar
hockey85
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 983
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 8:56 pm

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Cancellier on Fri Feb 01, 2008 1:19 am

hockey85 wrote:I'm pretty sure it was the same reasoning for not upgrading the Minuteman capsules at Grand Forks to REACT as well, since the 321st was deactivated shortly after the REACT upgrades in 1998.

Cory



Actually we were identified for closure long before that. The decision was made to close a missile wing before the REACT deployment began. They couldn't decide if it was going to be Minot or Grand Forks. GF got the nod and the consoles went to Minot. We actually had several of our crewdogs go TDY to learn react and test it.

Mike
Mike

Deuce 146
321 MW - 1993 - 1997
TOP HAND - 1997 - 2000
PACOM Nuke Guy - 2009
User avatar
Cancellier
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Offutt AFB, NE

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby TDRSS on Tue Oct 06, 2009 1:45 am

WL,

I had heard that the REACT console was originally built for PK Rail Garrison, since its dimensions are "perfect" for a railway car. Still investigating this, but the timing seems right (processor is equivalent to x286 processor, and it came about during the mid-1980s, when rail garrison was being considered)

Get back to you on that one, if I find anything.

Cheers,
TDRSS

Nuclear Alert Tally
------------------------------------
Number of Alerts - 320
Number of Misdemeanors - 350
Number of Felonies - 3
Arrests - None
User avatar
TDRSS
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 72
Joined: Wed May 07, 2008 5:34 pm
Location: Vandenberg AFB, CA

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Cancellier on Tue Oct 06, 2009 2:23 am

Actually I think the latest iteration of the ALCC panels are from PKRG, not the REACT console. REACT is an abomination all it's own...
Mike

Deuce 146
321 MW - 1993 - 1997
TOP HAND - 1997 - 2000
PACOM Nuke Guy - 2009
User avatar
Cancellier
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Offutt AFB, NE

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby FarDeucer on Fri Oct 09, 2009 1:30 am

I'll have to do a search for it again, but at one point I did find a pic of what looked like a REACT console configured for rail garrison. (time to do some snooping)
REACT-B IQT 05-03
564MS Jun 05 - Oct 07
B to A conversion
490MS Nov 07 - May 09
257 days under ground
341OSS/OSB
RIF Feb 2011
FarDeucer
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 1:32 am
Location: Great Falls, MT

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Weapons Loader on Sat Oct 10, 2009 7:09 am

Here are some pictures of the PKRG console mock-up on the DoD Imagery website. I like how the mock-up has the same Multi-Function Display (MFD) screens you'd find in the back of a B-1B.

http://dodimagery.afis.osd.mil/imagery.html#a=search&s=Rail%20Garrison
Anthony Spencer, (M)Sgt, USAF
23 AMXS / 74 Aircraft Maintenance Unit
Moody AFB, GA
Weapons Loader
2 RVs
2 RVs
 
Posts: 65
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2007 10:18 pm

Re: Why didn't the PK receive the REACT console upgrade?

Postby Cancellier on Sat Oct 10, 2009 4:18 pm

Well, that is interesting. If the final console looked like the mockups, it wasn't REACT or ALCS related! I do recognize the VDU that showed up in PK.
Mike

Deuce 146
321 MW - 1993 - 1997
TOP HAND - 1997 - 2000
PACOM Nuke Guy - 2009
User avatar
Cancellier
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 304
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:04 pm
Location: Offutt AFB, NE


Return to Peacekeeper

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron