N. Korea: Rebuilding, Rumors Robust 5 Weeks After N.Korea Blast(Ryongchon Explosion)

Reuters via Yahoo! News ^ | 05/27/04 | Paul Eckert and John Ruwitch

[TigerLikesRooster]

Ping!

[bert]

What happened?
The Predator knows.

[bitt]

you mean the flying Predator, or is that a secret code? The satellite images before/after told us a lot but i can't believe the US doesn't have a constant eye on this country...

[gandalftb]

Posted by gandalftb to cooldog On News/Activism 05/18/2004 9:25:19 PM PDT #47 of 52

The damage came from a high velocity propagation wave created by an at-grade detonation rather than an above-grade ignition/explosion. See the deep longitudinal cratering and non-radial E-W expansion of damage. Also no charring or evidence of thermal radiation that would accompany a fuel-air (kerosene) or boiling liquid-vapor explosion (propane). A weapons grade detonation is so fast it can pass by rigid-enough structures and the pressure wave causes damage around the away-side of the structure as seen on the east side of the large building 200 yards ENE of the detonation.

Rocket propellants do all this. If the propellant was idiotically stacked together tightly in one or two cars a hard jostle or spark or heat could easily start a chain reaction detonation that would "choose" the path of least resistance: the sides of the railroad car. Looking at the N-S alignments of the railroad cars this would cause an E-W propagation wave as shown by the photos. Explosives have stabilizers that prevent detonation from low speed compression.

On News/Activism 05/19/2004 9:14:37 AM PDT #15 of 15

Munitions and propellant accidents usually occur due to mistakes in transfer and stowing. The environment becomes unexpectantly extreme, heat, mechanical shock, etc. Solid rocket propellant is also very prone to poor mixing where volatiles "pocket" and internal heating occurs. Haste may have made waste in this case.

Subsequent casualty reports show lots of shrapnel type injuries and no burn cases, further indicating a high velocity detonation from munitions or propellant.

The latest N.Korean excuse has the explosion occuring when electrical power connections were being made. If that's true, munitions would only burn, we've already discounted a hydrocarbon-based fuel explosion, that leaves rocket propellant which is unstable and easily spark or heat ignited.

[TigerLikesRooster]

Re #5

Someone also brought up Ethylene Oxide(allegedly an ingredient of Fuel Air Explosive) as a candidate. What is your take on this?

[gandalftb]

Any fuel-air explosion is by definition an air burst without containment. This will always cause radial damage which didn't happen here. There is a longitudinal crater and damage pattern of roughly length to width of 10:1 indicating substantial containment on 2 sides.

Ethylene Oxide needs a very quick dispersal to get densities below its Upper Explosive Limit and a carefully timed ignition to get it to explode rather than just burn, hard to do accidently.

[Boot Hill]

Because of previous commitments of my time, this has got to be a very short reply.

• "See the deep longitudinal cratering and non-radial E-W expansion of damage."

There is no photo evidence of longitudinal catering until after the tractors began filling in the crater, i.e., the shape was created by the tractors. Nor would one expect longitudinal cratering simply because the explosive was stored in a railway car, i.e., oblong bombs don't create oblong craters.

Moreover, examination of the before and after satellite photos of the event, reveal that the explosion likely took place in a nearby warehouse, not in the railway cars.

• "Rocket propellants do all this."

There is near-zero chance that this event was due to a detonation of rocket propellants. Solid rocket propellants are extremely immune from this kind of event (violent detonation). Recall the explosion of the hydrogen-oxygen tanks on the Shuttle Columbia in January of 1986. The video revealed that this very violent explosion completely enveloped the SRB's (Solid Rocket Booster), yet they continued to burn normally, as they flew off in uncontrolled directions.

Moreover, if this event had been caused by missiles, there would me no need for the great secrecy surrounding the event, since North Korea and the rest of the world are quite aware of its accomplishments in that field.

• "Explosives have stabilizers that prevent detonation from low speed compression."

That is incorrect. If you disagree, please cite an authority for your contention.

• "Ethylene Oxide needs a very quick dispersal to get densities below its Upper Explosive Limit "

That is incorrect. Ethylene Oxide is nearly unique for a combustible gas, in not having such and upper explosive limit. "Physical data: Explosion limits: (no upper limit - burns in its own atmosphere)"

When I get back this evening, I'll respond to your replies.

--Boot Hill

[DuncanWaring]

Recall the explosion of the hydrogen-oxygen tanks on the Shuttle Columbia in January of 1986. The video revealed that this very violent explosion completely enveloped the SRB's (Solid Rocket Booster), yet they continued to burn normally, as they flew off in uncontrolled directions.

I'm not sure this is relevant.

I would think the Columbia "explosion" could better be characterized as a rapid mixing / non-explosive burning of the hydrogen and oxygen after structural disintegration of the airframe.

Even if this did approach the detonation velocities of an "explosion", remember the SRBs are encased in a very strong steel jacket.

(Well, OK, yeah, "strong except when exposed to burning SRB fuel").

IANAPENDIPOOTV

(I am not a pyrotechnic expert nor do I play one on televison).

[bert]

My guess is that the CIA wanted to watch the dirty deed..... and did.

[gandalftb]

The photos were taken five days after the explosion and show no equipment, no dirt piles, no grading marks, nothing. An aid worker on site 8 days later reported that 3 city buses would fit end to end in the crater. The damage zone is elliptical.

Columbia's SRBs were designed to be treated roughly, be recovered and reused, there is no relevance here to uncontained propellant being shipped on a train. I didn't say that propellant did all this damage but that propellant does this sort of damage. It's my theory, that's all, what's yours?

The secrecy was needed to protect N.Korea's exaggerated national pride and to remove evidence of what happened.

I should have been more careful to say that explosive munitions have many different stabilizing methods for transport such as cellulose additives, slurry media, and cushioned packaging. What's your point?

My point in discounting an air burst is that the damage is not radial. Period.

If you want to talk about fuel-air explosives, fine. The MSDS is technically wrong, Ethylene Oxide has no Upper Flammability Limit. If you keep reading the MSDS you will see that Ethylene Oxide, just like pyroxylene plastics, "burns in its own atmosphere" that again is technically incorrect, it auto-combusts with an ignition source. But that is key, it burns, maybe very rapidly but it just burns. To create a supersonic propogation wave - weaponable explosion - you have to disperse the liquid to a vapor state, mix it with air, ignite it and allow the propogation wave's (atmospheric) compression to ignite the expanded, air-mixed vapor. If you keep reading the MSDS it states under "Stability....Forms explosive mixtures with air."

I see no point to all of this, as I am certain this was not an air burst event, unless your goal was to try and trip me up by picking away at minor points. I would rather see you offer your theory as to what happened.

[COEXERJ145]

Just one little detail, it was the Challenger that exploded in 1986. We lost Columbia on February 1, 2003.

[Boot Hill]

"Well, OK, yeah, strong except when exposed to burning SRB fuel."

ROTFLMAO! Yup, there was that one minor little problem!

--Boot Hill

[Boot Hill]

"Just one little detail, it was the Challenger that exploded in 1986."

Thanks for setting the record straight. I noticed that "aw shucks" after I posted it and knew that I was going to get deservedly creamed for it!

--Boot Hill

[gandalftb]

Good post. Your posted 4/27 photos show grading marks that the 4/25 photos don't because they were obviously doing finish grading for 2 days. Of course they were going to fill in the craters, now we know. The point here is what is the shape of the crater?

Look at the Gerald Bourke photo of 4/25, 4th down on the left, clearly a longitudinal crater. This was no air burst of any kind, not with that degree of excavation, no way, no how. The 3rd down right side photo shows steel cabin roof ruptured and blown ...upward... The same photo clearly shows rails and cars at the epicenter. The explosion originated in a railroad car on a siding track.

Look at all the cars and dirt at the epicenter, no sooting or charring. This was not a hydrocarbon fuel explosion.

In sum: Very deep, longitudinal crater, tangent to and centered on a railroad car, no charring or soot anywhere, a 1000 meter long elliptical blast zone with damage behind rigid structures. I stand by my theory that this was a very high-velocity ground level detonation caused by either detonator compounds similar to lead azide or mercury fulminate, or more likely, solid rocket propellant.

Thanks for the photo link, very helpful in sorting this out.

[Boot Hill]

"Look at the Gerald Bourke photo of 4/25,"

Not sure what you're referring to, can you provide a link?

--Boot Hill

[gandalftb]

Here goes:

http://www.humanitarianinfo.org/DPRK/mediacentre/photo%20gallery/Ryongchon/WFP_25April2004/Ryongchon25April_page1_WFP.asp

Its the same HDRC website you posted to, go to the photo gallery dated 4/25 Ryongchon County. Another aid worker, Gerald Bourke has his photos of the damage posted there.

You were right they have been very busy grading and filling early on, I couldn't see that from the aerial photo I first saw, until you posted these others that are much more informative.

[Boot Hill]

"..until you posted these others that are much more informative."

Yeah, they were informative all right, but that first darn picture is 4 MB and takes forever to load. My mistake for posting at 3am. I sent an abuse report in to the AM's asking them to insert a very much smaller img src tag that I provided them or, in the alternative, to just delete the URL from the existing tag. Sorry about screwing up the thread loading time like that.

Give me a chance to absorb the information you sent me and I'll reply.

--Boot Hill

[Boot Hill]

(AM: Thank you very much for deleting my post #13!)

gandalftb:   "The photos were taken five days after the explosion and show no equipment, no dirt piles, no grading marks, nothing."

Here is a picture taken just two days after the Ryongchon event by ECHO relief worker David Hill. Notice the earth moving equipment, the piles of dirt and fresh grading marks.   (source)

(No caption)  

Here are a couple of Reuters photo, also taken just two days after the event. In the first photo, notice the fresh dirt and tractor marks, on the left. The fill dirt on the left is the "bridge" of fill that created the two apparent craters in the satellite photo that follows these two. In the second of these two photos, notice the earth moving equipment, in addition to what was noted in the first.   (source)

"Rescuers pass by a large crater caused by Thursday's catastrophic
  explosion at the railway station in Ryongchon, North Korea, Saturday."

 

"Survivors and rescuers search through the rubbles after a catastrophic
  explosion at the railway station in Ryongchon, North Korea."

 

Here is a satellite photo taken five days after the Ryongchon event. It shows abundant earthmoving equipment, dirt piles and tractor marks. Notice how much of the fill work has been completed by 5 days after the event.   (source)

"Close-up of the crater. scraping activity is visible as are two probable pieces of North Korean earth
  moving equipment (source: DigitalGlobe 27 April 2004)"

Is that enough evidence for you, or do you require more?

(NOTE:   For the sake of others freepers trying to follow this thread, I asked AM to delete post #13 and then reposted the contents here with a much easier to load photo #1.)

--Boot Hill