alt Hacker News> Which means US servicemen handling extremely dangerous chemical oxidizers under fire
Fueling and oxidizing is automated now. The only risk would be the oxidizer being struck. But that isn’t super different from storing any ammunition.
> wouldn't it be easier to just do the dangerous chemical handling on US soil, on a 9-5 in factory?
No, it’s not. Particularly when you factor into the risk calculation the inevitability of exhausting those stockpiles in a conflict.
Man, this is such a weird hill to stand on.
Are we talking HTP+Kerosene or UDMH+N2O4 here? The article said HTP in which case you have 1% breakdown to water per year which will be an ongoing problem for stockpiles. N2O4 is nastier but more stable when contained.
Either way, you're going from "dangerous chemistry in the plant" to "dangerous chemistry in the plant, through a global logistics network, and in operations". The solid rocket fuel is pretty stable after it's built, just don't light it on fire or drop it too hard. Room temperature oxidizers are terrifying.