IMDb >
Disaster at Silo 7 (1988) (TV)
Watch It
Buy it at Amazon
Rent it at Blockbuster.com
Discuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
BETA
Discuss in Boards More at IMDb Pro Add to My Movies Update Data
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotesOverview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany creditstv scheduleAwards & Reviews
user commentsexternal reviewsnewsgroup reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guiderecommendationsmessage boardPlot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsAmazon.com summarymemorable quotesFun Stuff
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQOther Info
merchandising linksbox office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specslaserdisc detailsDVD detailsliterature listingsNewsDeskPromotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo galleryExternal Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clipsDisaster at Silo 7 (1988) (TV) More at IMDbPro »
| Photos (see all 4 | slideshow) |
Overview
User Rating:
Director:
Writers (WGA):
Release Date:
27 November 1988 (USA)
more
Plot:
During routine maintenance of a liquid-fuelled ICBM, the fuel tank is penetrated by a falling spanner...
more
| add synopsis
Plot Keywords:
Awards:
Nominated for Primetime Emmy.
Another 1 nomination
more
User Comments:
A question for the Titan Experts here.
more (4 total)
Cast
(Cast overview, first billed only)| Ray Baker | ... | Col. Chadwick | |
| Peter Boyle | ... | Gen. Sanger | |
| Patricia Charbonneau | ... | Kathy Fitzgerald | |
| Perry King | ... | Maj. Hicks | |
| Michael O'Keefe | ... | Sgt. Mike Fitzgerald | |
| Joe Spano | ... | Sgt. Swofford | |
| Dennis Weaver | ... | Sheriff Ben Harlen | |
| Joe Urla | ... | Pepper Martinelli | |
| Brent Jennings | ... | A.C. Jones | |
| Christian Clemenson | ... | Col. Brandon | |
| Ken Jenkins | ... | Clarence | |
| Maureen Teefy | ... | Penny Travers | |
| Jack Kehler | ... | Col. Canby | |
| Olivia Burnette | ... | Jennifer Fitzgerald | |
| Justin Burnette | ... | T.J. Fitzgerald |
Additional Details
Parents Guide:
Runtime:
96 min
Country:
Language:
Color:
Aspect Ratio:
1.33 : 1 more
Sound Mix:
Certification:
Filming Locations:
Company:
Fun Stuff
Trivia:
Based on a true story.
more
Soundtrack:
YOU'RE SO EASY TO LOVE
more
FAQ
This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.more (4 total)
Message Boards
Discuss this movie with other users on IMDb message board for Disaster at Silo 7 (1988) (TV)Recommendations
If you enjoyed this title, our database also recommends:
Show more recommendations
|
|
|
|
|
| Fail-Safe | War of the Worlds | The Day the Earth Stood Still | Crimson Tide | Twilight's Last Gleaming |
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
IMDb User Rating:
|
Related Links
| Full cast and crew | Company credits | IMDb Drama section |
| IMDb USA section | Add this title to MyMovies |


We all know that the titan II was a VERY powerful missile, and since it was not too accurate (over 1/2 mile CEP, IIRC) it carried a huge warhead of 9 megatons, to compensate for that error. Such a warhead could easily pretty much decimate any large city in the world.
BUT..According to some stories and articles I have read, the US was SERIOUSLY thinking of putting a 35 megaton warhead on the TII. Maybe some here know::
(1--how close in actuality did this come from being deployed??
(2-- Since the missile could only carry so much weight and the W-53 already weighed in excess of 3 tons, (around 3MT/T Y/W) in order to nearly quadruple the yield, without adding too much weight, this would have required a MUCH higher yield/weight ratio than the W-53 or even the B-41. Calculations show that a Y/W ratio of such a warhead would be in excess of 9MT/T, even if the new warhead would be in excess of 4 tons. How was this going to be done?? Was it going to be a multi-stage secondary w/multiple tertiaries, making it a VERY dirty bomb?(it would seem that it would HAVE to be, in order more than to triple the Y/W ratio).
(3-WHY did the leaders even think that such a powerful warhead was needed in the first place?? Unless it was a response to the Tsar Bomba. After all a 9MT blast is MORE than big enough for ANY practical military purpose, no?? (if it was a penetration blast they needed, increasing the accuracy is a MUCH better method, than simply adding firepower--which is EXACTLY what the MIII and Peacekeeper and Trident II has done.) It is likely that one sub-megaton W-87 or W-88 RV would do MORE damage to a target of 1500 feet in diameter,or a hardened target of 200 feet, with a CEP of 300FT, than a W-53 would have done to the same target,with a CEP of 2500FT or more--WITHOUT destroying everything else for 20 miles around in the process.
And don't worry--NONE of this is 'classified", ALL of what I am talking about is available on ANY site or in any book.