Is this really unexploded ordnance?

CNN.COM ^ | 10-15-01 | me

[finnman69]

I wonder if this is really unexploded ordnance or is this maybe a drop tank? Any experts care to weigh in? The scale of this picture is a little misleading with that figure in the background, but on news footage i saw this weekend this object appeared to be 8' to 10' long.

[gridlock]

The air is very clear and thin there, making distances hard to judge. I'm sure there have been a number of pilots briefed on that very phenomenon over the past few weeks.

[morque2001]

I've been looking all over for that thing! That's the container my condoms come in!

[Cvengr]

Dr. Evil's horrid genetic experiment breeding Mini-Me with Osama bin Laden

Mini-bin-Laden, playing Taliban bingo,.... B-1...F-16...B-52... !

Kidding aside, it's a close call between a 500lb bomb with its fin assembly unattached and a jettisoned fuel tank. The area between the 2 lift points seems like a fill point, but on an Aluminum or fiberglass fuel tank, the tank would display substantially more damage, especially with the corresponding crater.

Pic isn't necessarily doctored, but probably the one selected of many taken for newsworthiness.

In photographing desert terrain, especially rock and gravel, it's very difficult to get depth of field and discern distance by photography. Ridges aren't obvious. The dscerning factor here which I would use is the size of cobble and rock around the crater, the brown like color of the fresher dirt having ben dug up by the cratering, and the Mini-bin-Laden in the background closer to some boulders of different color. There seems to be a slight brown hue distinguishing the crater ridge line from the anomalous photo.

Also note the damage to the bomb/tank in question. Fuze assembly if a bomb is in the nose or the tail, but note the lift point eyes. normally they're in line or parallel to one another. Looks like it took some significant force to dislodge them. The scarring on the nose without a complete collapse rules out Aluminum. Fiberglass tends to fray and display different scarring patterns. Looks like painted steal to me with a rock or jagged edge having ripped open the outer skin on the front lower portion of the bomb. Perhaps some Comp B exposed.

Scarring of bomb also has slight brown tint as the adjacent cratered soil, not similar to background coloration, so it seems the bomb went slick, cratered, maybe pulled out by locals to remove fuze to make safe. Pure conjecture on my part though.

Then again, it makes good PR for other would be third world terrorists to believe we can lob submarines thousands of miles and land them nearby their civilian living quarters. If the photo isn't from a telephoto lens then I considered possibly a Sono Tube Concrete column being sheared and laying there, but the lift points are very distinctive.

Who knows, they say 5000lb bombs are being used, and if the Arab is lifesize adjacent to the bomb, it would look larger than the 2-man Japanese submarines at Pearl Harbor, or about 10 x the size of a 500 lb bomb.

The second photo leaves little doubt its a 500 lb bomb. Also downslope accounts for the Mini-bin-Laden.

[Nita Nupress]

Hey! Sorry I missed you. Haven't been hanging around much lately. This bioterror thing is making a lot more work for me, unfortunately.

On another subject... Did FR change its self-search function or something? Your reply to me on this thread isn't showing up. And now that I think about it, I've been noticing that no one ever answers me anymore!

If it doesn't show up on a self-search, I rarely go back to a thread. I just came back on this one just by chance.

[RedWing9]

Problem? See Nita's post.

Nita, I didn't have a problem, in fact I was using the new "notifier" that makes your machine sound off when a post gets to you (see this link to initiate notification). Also, your reply to me is in my self search. Might be a setting in your IE/Nscape that's prohibiting your self search from showing up correctly.

Does your self search show anything?

[xorch]

I've been noticing that no one ever answers me anymore!

I always answer mentally. Thought you'd like that better.

[rdavis84]

"I've been noticing that no one ever answers me anymore!"

I answer you. But "They" must be intercepting it! :-)

[Nita Nupress]

Does your self search show anything?

Nothing. I'm not showing any replies to me at all on the self-search.

John, this is what I've used every since the search features were changed (last year?):

from: "nita nupress" -or to: "nita nupress"

Maybe it's my breath. ;-)

[Ordie 1]

Speaking as a bomb man by trade, I would say a drop tank no fin on back and no marks to identify it. IYAOYAS.

[Nita Nupress]

<< "I answer you. But "They" must be intercepting it! :-)" >>

Oh, aren't YOU the cute one!

Nice hearing from you again. :-)

[Nita Nupress]

I always answer mentally. Thought you'd like that better.

LOL! Well, that depends on what you're going to say to me, I suppose. :-)

[xorch]

I always think nice thoughts.

I've meant to ask if you were at the FR bash in Houston in December '98 that was organized by Bob F, BuffyT, Gracey and others I had the pleasure of meeting including the late Herb Meadows.

I was there with Mr. and Mrs. Te Quest.

[RaceBannon]

These two photos clear it up exactly! I thought it was one of those 5000lb jockeys or something I never saw while in 25 years ago! Now, it DOES look like a fish eye lens, and that guy in the background is down the hill a ways, and only looks smaller than the AUX TANK

[RaceBannon]

Would the burn marks have come from Janet Reno then??

[rdavis84]

Bet there's a Bunch of people that think your reply is blank. Using the "Osama" code I see. ;-)

[RedWing9]

Interesting, Nita's syntax worked for me. I searched using her moniker and mine.

Nita, I suggest you send John Robinson, steveegg, George W. Bush or me (John's the guy, but we are all knowledgeable about the new system) your system information in FReepmail (O/S and browser and their versions of each i.e. Win 95, Netscape 4.75). I really think it might have something to do with your settings and I don't think we should gum up this thread anymore.

My e-addy hasn't changed. You can use that if you'd like.

Talk to you soon.

[Nita Nupress]

Thanks, I'll e-mail you in a day or two. This is a low-priority item and I really can't be here very much anymore anyway. In fact, instead of measuring time by using the traditional terms of "BC" and "AD," I now measure time by putting everything in the perspective of "BT" and "AT" ......

.....Before Tuesday and After Tuesday. [..sigh..]

G'nite!

[Nita Nupress]

Bet there's a Bunch of people that think your reply is blank. Using the "Osama" code I see. ;-)

Let 'em wonder. It took me weeks to figure that out when I was a newbie. I was too embarrassed to ask anyone; I was afraid they would ask me if I was a blonde. LOL! ....... G'nite to you, too!

[Tommyjo]

This image (the one with seemingly “very small Afghan” in the background has caused a fair amount of debate on several aircraft forums. Yes, it is US Navy unexploded ordnance with it being a US Navy JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) of the MK-84 (2,000 pound class).

What was initially confusing was the one photograph taken by AP photographer Enric Marti showing the Afghan at the bottom of the slope in the background. This gave a totally wrong perspective of the “grey object” making it appear many times greater than it actually was. The grey scheme also is misleading and several people jumped on the theory of a jettisoned fuel tank. US Navy bomb bodies are covered with a special grey thermal protection coating to allow them to be stored aboard the carriers. This is designed to extend the cook off time of the weapon. The ultimate giveaway to the identity would have been three yellow painted nosebands, but as you can see the nose section is completely stripped by impact damage.

The second image showing the Afghans standing next to gives a true size comparison of the object. The crucial evidence to the identity of this object is in the video that was filmed by Western journalists allowed into the village. Afghans are shown picking up part of the intact strakes that once surrounded the unexploded MK-84 bomb body. Villagers are also shown handling pieces from the tail fins/guidance kit that was once attached to the flange which can be seen in the photograph looking down on the unexploded bomb. The ultimate giveaway is the stencilling on this tail fin unit found in the debris of the village to the rear of this weapon is the stencil of “USE WITH A. (second letter missing on piece) IMU ONLY.” IMU stands for Inertial Measurement Unit and is part of the guidance unit mounted in the tail fin section of the weapon.

To those who suggested that it is an F-16 fuel tank are also incorrect. No F-16s are taking part in Enduring Freedom. This object share no fuel tank characteristics such as seams, stand-pipes or any other openings that are clearly visible on external fuel tanks. Neither Tomcat nor Hornet external fuel tanks have this lug positioning. Hornet fuel tanks have clear visible bolted areas down the starboard side. What you can see behind the flattened first lug on the bomb is the fuse well of the ordnance.

Furthermore in the video an Afghan is seen sitting on the 2.000 pound weapon with his feet easily on the ground. No fuel tank is that small from either a Hornet or Tomcat. The second photograph is the clue to the size of this object and a comparison can be made with the size of a MK-84 bomb body minus the tail unit. US Navy China Lake weapons test complex openly publish the size of a Mk-84 JDAM as being 152.46 inches with the tail fin kit being 51.04 inches this leaves the length of the object as being 101.42 inches. The video also shows close ups of the flat area to the rear and the flange for the fitment of the tail fin unit is clearly visible. The distance between the two mounting lugs is 30 inches.

A small debate broke out after this first image link (“very small Afghan in background”) was posted on a Usenet military forum. Some posters immediately jumped on the external jettisoned fuel tank theory due to the colouring and the apparent size of this object.

The following is from post is from a former AV-8 Harrier pilot after viewing a higher resolution copy of the image:

"Hey, thanks for the scan--much better than the original! You know, before seeing that, I was leaning toward drop tank, but with the better resolution you can see the front lug is almost flattened against the body, with no deformation of the body of the object. I can't imagine a thin-skinned drop tank deforming like that, and the bolts at the rear look like the butt end of the standard GP bomb where you bolt on the tail assembly--so GP bomb body now gets my vote."

This reply is from MSgt in the USAF.

"I've got to agree - I saw the broadcast video a few hours ago. Definitely the right size for a 2,000 lb. bomb, missing the rear fin assemblies."

I serve in the RAF on and airbase in England and I've shown the photographs/links and video to the following:

Two RAF Weapons Technicians, an RAF EOD (Explosive Ordnance Disposal) Warrant Officer and a USAF weapons analyst. They all concur that the "object" shown in the photographs and the video are one and the same and it is unexploded ordnance with the fuse well head (behind the first - bent lug) being the giveaway to these guys. (This is what we get up to when we are bored sitting in the rear with the gear!) The other giveaway is the rear of this "object" with the flange showing in detail on the video where the tail kit had once been. They also immediately recognised the JDAM strakes that the villagers were handling. These strakes are intact and they wouldn't be handling them if they had not come off an unexploded weapon.

The target was the cave system surrounding this village in the mountainsides. Villagers also confirmed that journalists who saw tracks leading up to them in the area also confirmed caves. The video also shows the steep mountainsides surrounding this village and the EOD guy I showed the video to puts a theory that the bomb hit its intended target on the mountainside, obviously did not detonate, and careered down the slope ripping off the detachable strakes (left intact) and shredding the tail unit off the weapons rear flange. Also bear in mind that the villagers were trying to recover bodies and may also have unearthed the weapon in their attempts. Pentagon briefed on the Koram strike and detailed the following:

"I think everybody was surprised by the length of the fire afterwards. It went on for 3-1/2 to four hours. And I think it's still speculation on exactly what that was"

2000 pound JDAM with all pieces intact.

This diagram shows all the component assemblies of the JDAM showing the telltale strakes and tail fin unit containing the satellite guidance kit etc.

In summary the colour of the unexploded bomb grey is the giveaway to the service dropping this weapon. US Navy. The F/A-18 Hornet flying off the carriers are delivering these munitions over Afghanistan. Object in photographs/video is an MK-84 (2000 pound) JDAM dropped from an F/A-18 Hornet that failed to detonate on the mountainside – careered down the slope shedding its bolt on stabilizing strakes and its tail fin unit which the villages are seen picking up from the rubble.