429 tons of explosives detonated

MMAPlayground.com » Off Topic » Off Topic » 429 tons of explosives detonated
Jackelope
11/7/08 2:57:59PM
Haha, check this out.. wait for the 3rd explosion. That's a pretty intense size detonation. The biggest I ever saw when I was in Iraq was about 3 tons loaded into the back of a dump truck as a suicide bomb- and that was enough to blow out all the windows in a mile and a half radius. Imagine what this would do! (Video is taken from about 3 miles away. First two dets are 30 tons each)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bMGHiM6P8zo
Rush
11/7/08 3:19:12PM
Now, imagine the A-bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The size of that was 12.5 kilotons (12,500 tons) of TNT

Then one could expand this to an H-bomb which could be up to 50 megatons (50,000,000 tons) of TNT



Not sure what type of explosive this was, but just the thought of the potential destructive power of nuclear weapons is frightening.
dannyfrank
11/7/08 4:39:37PM
HOLY FISHSTICK!
casey64
11/7/08 5:07:23PM
MMAcca
11/7/08 5:11:22PM
Mmmm.....Fishsticks
We_Todd_Did
11/7/08 5:15:18PM

Posted by Rush

Now, imagine the A-bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The size of that was 12.5 kilotons (12,500 tons) of TNT

Then one could expand this to an H-bomb which could be up to 50 megatons (50,000,000 tons) of TNT



Not sure what type of explosive this was, but just the thought of the potential destructive power of nuclear weapons is frightening.



Correction: OVER 50 megatons

Tsar Bomba

Warning: I actually lost sleep the first time I saw this.
dannyfrank
11/7/08 5:37:42PM

Posted by We_Todd_Did


Posted by Rush

Now, imagine the A-bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The size of that was 12.5 kilotons (12,500 tons) of TNT

Then one could expand this to an H-bomb which could be up to 50 megatons (50,000,000 tons) of TNT



Not sure what type of explosive this was, but just the thought of the potential destructive power of nuclear weapons is frightening.



Correction: OVER 50 megatons

Tsar Bomba

Warning: I actually lost sleep the first time I saw this.



because that is completely necessary
Jackelope
11/7/08 5:54:34PM

Posted by We_Todd_Did


Posted by Rush

Now, imagine the A-bomb that was dropped on Hiroshima. The size of that was 12.5 kilotons (12,500 tons) of TNT

Then one could expand this to an H-bomb which could be up to 50 megatons (50,000,000 tons) of TNT



Not sure what type of explosive this was, but just the thought of the potential destructive power of nuclear weapons is frightening.



Correction: OVER 50 megatons

Tsar Bomba

Warning: I actually lost sleep the first time I saw this.



LOL you guys are talking about stuff from decades ago. 50 megatons aint shit no more.
Rush
11/7/08 6:46:46PM

Posted by Jackelope


LOL you guys are talking about stuff from decades ago. 50 megatons aint shit no more.




So what is the shit these days soldier?
shiz-nitzel
11/7/08 6:55:17PM

Posted by Rush


Posted by Jackelope


LOL you guys are talking about stuff from decades ago. 50 megatons aint shit no more.




So what is the shit these days soldier?



shit that'd make you cry.
Jackelope
11/7/08 7:07:49PM
There is way more stuff than I could ever talk about with any real knowledge. Even though my courses of study and certifications have taken me along roads such as Hazmat, nuclear technology, NBC warfare, WMD's, anti-terror and a slew of other weapons related training.

I'm not saying big bombs are cool and we should nuke everyone, but the conventional air deployed bombs of the 50's have been replaced by the ICBMs of the 60's, which have been replaced by the SLBMs of the 70's and so on and so forth until today. Obviously nuclear fission and fusion are still the most devastating methods of creating energy, a yield like 50 megatons was and still is huge back when we were still testing, but there is so much more that goes into explosives that we've learned since then. Not to mention that even the 50 megaton bomb we speak of now was designed to be 100 megatons until they realized the difficulties of transporting such a bomb. Imagine what we're capable of transporting and building now. Also - by changing a few of the properties of the detonation itself (known as "salting" the bomb) you can lessen the megatonnage, but greatly increase the deadliness of the weapon


Also, 429 tons of explosives was the actual physical weight of the munitions detonated in the video. Not the yield of the explosion itself. - Edit: I would assume. Every time EOD did a detonation they would list the physical weight, never the yield.

Edit 2: Also, I just got to thinking about the LHC and the potential for more damage that could bring into the picture. The matter converted to energy ratio will be absolutely enormous
Rush
11/7/08 7:33:03PM
What the difference between the yield and weight of explosives. I always thought that a 1 kiloton explosive had the equivalent explosive power as 1000 tons of TNT (or whatever the gold standard is).

So are you saying the yield is more like the blast force equivalent?
Jackelope
11/7/08 8:35:06PM
To my understanding that's pretty much what it is. My understanding through the training I've received on the subject comes more from the makeup of munitions, the damage done within certain ranges of munitions, etc. I'm no scientist so I wouldn't want to step knee deep into a puddle of scientific measurement that I don't have a complete understanding of.

I can tell you this, though- different materials have different explosive energy outputs. TNT is pretty much the "gold standard" (as you described) against which everything is measured.
Mitchell740
11/10/08 9:57:47PM

Posted by Jackelope

There is way more stuff than I could ever talk about with any real knowledge. Even though my courses of study and certifications have taken me along roads such as Hazmat, nuclear technology, NBC warfare, WMD's, anti-terror and a slew of other weapons related training.

I'm not saying big bombs are cool and we should nuke everyone, but the conventional air deployed bombs of the 50's have been replaced by the ICBMs of the 60's, which have been replaced by the SLBMs of the 70's and so on and so forth until today. Obviously nuclear fission and fusion are still the most devastating methods of creating energy, a yield like 50 megatons was and still is huge back when we were still testing, but there is so much more that goes into explosives that we've learned since then. Not to mention that even the 50 megaton bomb we speak of now was designed to be 100 megatons until they realized the difficulties of transporting such a bomb. Imagine what we're capable of transporting and building now. Also - by changing a few of the properties of the detonation itself (known as "salting" the bomb) you can lessen the megatonnage, but greatly increase the deadliness of the weapon


Also, 429 tons of explosives was the actual physical weight of the munitions detonated in the video. Not the yield of the explosion itself. - Edit: I would assume. Every time EOD did a detonation they would list the physical weight, never the yield.

Edit 2: Also, I just got to thinking about the LHC and the potential for more damage that could bring into the picture. The matter converted to energy ratio will be absolutely enormous



You know your bombs. Remind me not to piss you off.
The_Metal_Maniac
11/11/08 4:06:54PM
anti-matter
Naturaldisaster
11/12/08 12:22:22AM
nothin to worry about folks, that was just me playin with matches. Things got kinda out of hand after a while
Rush
11/12/08 7:33:17AM

Posted by Naturaldisaster

nothin to worry about folks, that was just me playin with matches. Things got kinda out of hand after a while




blue angels eh?
Naturaldisaster
11/12/08 1:06:30PM

Posted by Rush


Posted by Naturaldisaster

nothin to worry about folks, that was just me playin with matches. Things got kinda out of hand after a while




blue angels eh?



nah red devils lol
Related Topics