Talk:CRM 114 (device)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] fictitious or real?
Is this device fictitious or real? --Jtir (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] is it "CRM-114" or "CRM114"?
This could be sourced with a screen shot of the device. --Jtir (talk) 22:15, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
- The device is fictional, and is properly "C.R.M. 114" as per the film. No need for a screen shot, IMHO. I've made the changes to the article. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 04:45, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking this. --Jtir (talk) 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Since the device in Red Alert (novel) is called the "CRM 114", I propose renaming the article to match. (replace the hyphen with a space) --Jtir (talk) 17:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for checking this. --Jtir (talk) 12:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] apocryphal instances
Thanks for checking all those alleged sightings of "CRM 114" in Kubrick's films. Since they are not verifiable, they could be removed per WP:V. --Jtir (talk) 12:29, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- These all make claims about "CRM" and, after looking at them, I can see the need for the "apocryphal instances" note.
- Some of these could have been "sourced" from WP, I suppose.
- --Jtir (talk) 12:57, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- How long will it take before this is added to the article as an example of a Dr. Strangelove reference? :-)
- Cannon Room, Building C, Rm. 114
- Harvard Medical School
- --Jtir (talk) 20:53, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] why couldn't the crew be recalled?
The lead seems to be incorrect, but I am not sure of a detail from the film — the crew could not be recalled because the CRM 114 was destroyed by an anti-aircraft missile.
Dr. Strangelove is somewhat vague on this point: "Unable to receive the recall code, due to damage to the plane's radio equipment, ..."
--Jtir (talk) 15:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- A near-miss explosion of a missle does damage to the aircraft, including setting off the explosive destruction device of the CRM 114. With the device destroyed, the crew cannot receive the recall code. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 16:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. I forgot about the self-destruct mechanism in the CRM 114. As I recall, the Pentagon(?), in desperation, tries to send a recall message without the authentication code. Major Kong scoffs: "That's just them Russkies trying to trick us" (approximately). (Apparently, their radio receiver is functional.)
- Doesn't the CRM 114 also appear earlier when the B-52 crew receives the attack(?) order? (I have watched the film several times, but these details are only now coming back to me.) I'm thinking that the article could be expanded to describe more fully the role of the CRM 114 in the plot. --Jtir (talk) 17:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- When the crew receives the attack order, they run through a checklist to prepare for the attack. One item of the checklist is setting the code prefix and then locking it into the C.R.M. 114. That's when we see a closeup of the selector knob on which is printed "C.R.M. 114". They also lock on the self-destruct button. (Although, in retrospect, why the discriminator should need a self-destruct mechanism is far from clear to me.) Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks. The attack order is not authenticated by the CRM 114, but the recall order is. Weird. Maybe the self-destruct mechanism is there to prevent the CRM 114 from falling into enemy hands. --Jtir (talk) 18:40, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- When the crew receives the attack order, they run through a checklist to prepare for the attack. One item of the checklist is setting the code prefix and then locking it into the C.R.M. 114. That's when we see a closeup of the selector knob on which is printed "C.R.M. 114". They also lock on the self-destruct button. (Although, in retrospect, why the discriminator should need a self-destruct mechanism is far from clear to me.) Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:12, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Changing the article's name
You're suggesting changing the name of the article to "CRM 114 (device)", I assume based on the primacy of the reference in the George novel. Two problems I can see:
- Since "CRM 114 (device)" already exists as a redirect page, I don't believe you'll be able to do the move automatically - I think an admin will have to do it.
- If you do the move, make sure to change all the pages that link here, to avoid double redirects. Use the "What links here" link on the left to get a list of them, and go through them one by one and change them manually. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:17, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
- Looks like I'm wrong about "CRM 114 (device)" already being a page. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) (talk / cont) 18:18, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

