Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Huge explosion hits front lines north of Kabul
The Associated Press ^ | 10/30/2001 5:20 am ET | The Associated Press

Posted on 10/30/2001 2:14:26 AM PST by mdittmar

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-206 next last
To: spunkets
Close. It is more accurate to say that the flame front travels faster than the speed of sound in the mixture. This produces a shock wave which acts like a big hammer. This is why detonation or knocking is so bad for car engines.
181 posted on 10/30/2001 10:39:44 AM PST by Doctor Stochastic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 136 | View Replies]

To: Inge_CAV
Could have been a daisy cutter, 15,000 pound Commando Vault. Anybody see a C-130 in the vicinity?
182 posted on 10/30/2001 10:40:01 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve
They are similar to explosives and have in fact some common characteristics BUT, they are not really explosives. The mixture burns instead of explodes. The thing about a fuel/air device is that by dispersing a primed mixture of very fast burning chemicals you imitate a much larger explosive than you actually have. Yes the mixture burns at an incredible rate and you even get the 'boom' of an explosion but you don't get the concussive force of an actual explosive of that size.

There are certain things such as detonation speed, concussive force, ignition characteristics and composition which dictate what is and isn't an explosive. For instance, gun powder burns but doesn't explode. Yet, it has many of the characteristics of explosives under many circumstances.

I'm not trying to criticize but only be accurate. The anti's use a lack of correct information and misinformation against us far to much.

Mike

183 posted on 10/30/2001 10:40:48 AM PST by BCR #226
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: mdittmar

"Any military guys know what would cause that??"

Yeah ... hitting an ammo dump! No tactical nukes were used, no exotic weapons, more than likely just a sympathetic detonation of Taliban Ordnance cause by the bomb blast.

184 posted on 10/30/2001 10:45:19 AM PST by Colt .45
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve
Does anyone know where that footage could be found?

Not the same footage, this has a series of frames from a test drop of a FAE. Good discusion of effects there also.

185 posted on 10/30/2001 10:47:41 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob
The virgin supply in heaven just went way, WAY down.

LOL. However, a minor modification is necessary for accuracy. "The virgin supply in mohammedan "heaven" (aka Hell) just went way, WAY down."

Guess that gives new meaning to the phrase, "really hot girls."

186 posted on 10/30/2001 10:52:25 AM PST by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 130 | View Replies]

To: Cobra64
...those not blown up from the blast, explode from air leaving their lungs to fill the vacuum left by the FAE.

Wondrous mental picture. Mayhaps Rumsfeld has lost his 'sense of humor' for the towel heads.

187 posted on 10/30/2001 10:54:26 AM PST by winstonchurchill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 155 | View Replies]

To: lgjhn
let's take em back to the 7th century

What do you mean, take them back? Far as I can tell, other than weaponry, they are already there. Besides, they'd like being in the 7th century. Send 'em back to the stone age.

188 posted on 10/30/2001 11:07:13 AM PST by El Gato
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 117 | View Replies]

To: 12B
Are you guys sure it was a fuel air bomb? I heard the conventional bomb that resembles a nuke explosion is a bomb they call a "daisy cutter". The thing is so big it has to be dropped from a cargo plane.
189 posted on 10/30/2001 11:11:03 AM PST by jojo the boxing kangaroo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: paulsy
how far were you from 270?

I was on hill 270 for my entire tour of duty. If you're familiar at all with it, you'll remember the 30' tower at the highest point on 270. The top level of that tower was where I.O.S. (Integrated Observation System) was located, which is the instrument that I used as an FO (operational 24/7 ). We, the 2-5 man I.O.S. team, came from HHB DivArty 23rd Inf., in Chu Lai. The Artillery Battery and the Infantry Battalion Tactical Operations Command Center (BTOCC) on 270, were based in Da Nang.This, all added together, consisted of anywhere from 70 to 90 men.

191 posted on 10/30/2001 4:01:11 PM PST by Eagle9
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 171 | View Replies]

To: patriciaruth
Now this might be read by the Taliban. If it's disinformation then leave it, but if your suggested strategy is correct, you should have it pulled.

Yeah, maybe I should change my handle to "randita,the great military strategist"--NOT. Maybe the Taliban watch FNC, too, because if they did, they'd know everything I wrote. Next item on your TO DO list-- call FNC and chastise them for giving our strategy away.

192 posted on 10/30/2001 5:13:41 PM PST by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Ernest_at_the_Beach
If they have someone watching FOXNEWS they have seen the discussion of the importance of controlling the ridges overlooking the low plains at Mazar-al-Sherif (Sp?) from the Retired Air Force General that often discusses war progress with Britt Hume.

Right-O. That's exactly where I got my info from. I believe the man's name is McElnerny or something like that. He's always telestrating on a map. I guess patriciaruth doesn't get out much.

193 posted on 10/30/2001 5:17:09 PM PST by randita
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 176 | View Replies]

To: randita
"randita,the great military strategist"-NOT

Between the two of us I'm sure the Taliban is so confused that our forces will do well for the next few days.
Hoo-yah!

194 posted on 10/30/2001 5:19:35 PM PST by patriciaruth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: El Gato
Thanks, not the same thing. You would be amazed if you saw this FAE! An explosion five hundred feet off the ground, with an obviouse pressure wave hitting the ground. The flame and smoke never came near the ground. Stunning!
195 posted on 10/30/2001 5:27:52 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 185 | View Replies]

To: Born to Conserve
I would love to see about 10 FAE's (or FAB's as I love to call them) detonate on Fox one morning. It would make my cup of coffee taste oh so sweet. But then again, it would scare the living hell out of the "war slut" on CNN, so it would be like bonus time.
196 posted on 10/30/2001 5:34:20 PM PST by Nuke'm Glowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: blaster88
I must respectfully disagree with you. If dropped in the correct zone (valley or on the side of a mountain) the resulting explosion would suck the oxygen out of those caves to a considerable depth. Not to mention the overpressure would detonate most munitions stored in those caves causing some fun secondaries. So yes, it would be extremely effective IMHO, and should be deployed asap to shorten this aspect of the war and end it before the NFC Wildcard games start.
197 posted on 10/30/2001 5:37:50 PM PST by Nuke'm Glowing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 170 | View Replies]

To: BCR #226
Is that so Mr. Knowidall? Than tell me, what is the difference between an explosive, and a high explosive? I suppose the thermonuclear core of a hydrogen bomb is not an explosive because the nuclear material's energy is not released in a chemical reaction triggered by a shock wave as in your percieved definition? Tell you what, you hold a fire cracker and I'll light it, than you tell us if it exploded or just burned really fast.

The fact is that you can EXPLODE a mixture of fuel vapor and air in such a way that it will apply MORE EXPLOSIVE ENERGY to a large area target than you can with several times the amount of high explosive.

High explosives do not contain the energy, pound for pound, that a FAE does. FAEs have the advantage that they only have to contain half the reactants, whereas High explosives have to contain all the reactants. High explosives do release it faster, potentially producing more power, but that advantage is lost very quickly as the shock wave travels away from the explosion.

198 posted on 10/30/2001 5:49:29 PM PST by Born to Conserve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 183 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
Geez don't you guys pay attention? It was a Emeril Bomb. As in - It's a pork fat thing. 2 parts Lard and 1 part hydrogen peroxide. Makes one hell of squeal!

Got to save all of those virgins by not letting the bad guys into heaven!

199 posted on 10/30/2001 6:01:41 PM PST by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 134 | View Replies]

To: 12B
Probably secondaries.
200 posted on 10/30/2001 6:13:32 PM PST by SICSEMPERTYRANNUS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 141-160161-180181-200201-206 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson