"It's not called a Hammer but a "Variable speed, multi-directional, heavy duty impact device"  Government procurement $500 each."

One of the great myths, continually perpetuated.  This accusation was leveled at Lockheed, Trident Missile Program.  At the time, at age 26 (1981), I was the Technical Leader of Spares Acquisition Management for the US/UK Fleet Ballistic Missile Strategic Weapon System, which included Trident I.  I researched this "issue" and our acquisition processes, and developed/implemented checks and balances to assure such a thing as a real "$500 hammer" scenario could never actually occur (or would be highly unlikely).

The truth about the hammer in question was that it was gold plated.  Still sound too expensive?  Apparently, gold plating prevents the possibility of electro-static discharge, which is an important issue when working on/around a large, solid-propellant missile.  Unlike liquid propellants, which can be turned on or off, with solid propellants, you light it and it burns till it's gone (even under water).  You definitely don't want sparks flying around!

This was not disclosed to the public, IMO because it opens another question:  Why do you need a hammer (at all) to help put together a supposedly high precision piece of weaponry? (i.e., shouldn't everything be made to fit properly without this brute force aid?).  It was actually used to merely tap a component on the outer shell of the missile into place (after all, if you were really smacking something, the plating would likely come off).  But why open THAT question, especially on a classified program?  Responses would just dig new holes.

This situation was the only time in my career where I was specifically directed "if 60 Minutes comes to your door, you have no comment".

FWIW, and to help undo the myth.  As for that toilet seat - I have no idea! (different program with the AF).

SGE