Replies

I asked you a simple question, a question which can be answered with a single number, yet you persist in insulting and blaming me. Just answer the question; it's not hard - IF you know the answer and are not embarassed by it (which you seem to be).

Just one number and associated units. That's all I ask. If you can't do that, then there's no reason to spend time reading anything else you so passionately refer me to. If you'll do that, I'll believe that maybe there is something to the material and have a look.

It's just a simple and extremely relevant question which you should have no problem finding the answer to and posting: how much ANFO is required to do the kind of damage seen at OKC?

WELL, NOW,!

The Info you regard as "SO IMPORTANT" is posted on SEVERAL of the MANY Referrals I have given you (More than once)! I find your accusations (absent ANY indication that you studied 'OKC Submariner's' data) IGNORANT & Self-Serving!!

You have Descended to the "Not Worth an Answer" category!

READ the "OKC SUBMARINER" info----THEN " Challenge Me!!"

Doc

...how much ANFO is required to do the kind of damage seen at OKC?
Ask the professionals...Rock Mechanics & Explosives Research Center Explosives Lab < /sarcasm >

With the enactment of the Patriot Act I doubt anyone will answer that question.
"How did you come by that knowledge?" "Who are your friends?"
Look it up for yourself and figure it out.
Home Workshop Explosives

by Uncle Fester
Whew man...almost anything you want to know about is out there.

...how much ANFO is required to do the kind of damage seen at OKC?
A five ton truck at full capacity with 55 gallon drums seems to be the government's answer.
But no one seems to know for sure...
SECTION G: OKLAHOMA CITY BOMBING
C. Weight of the Explosive
We question the basis for Williams' conclusion that the weight of the main charge was approximately 4000 pounds of ANFO.
As discussed in the section on the World Trade Center (see Part Three, Section C, pp. 132-134, supra), Williams' method of determining weight is impressionistic and depends on his VOD estimate, which is itself speculative. As noted in that section, other members of the EU do not routinely estimate the quantity of the explosive from a damage assessment because the placement and confinement of the explosive have a significant effect on the amount of the damage. Nevertheless, we concluded in the Trade Center case that Williams' size estimate of 1,000-1,500 pounds, which he characterized as a ballpark figure, was not, as such, an unreasonable opinion because he offered such a broad range.
With respect to the weight of the explosive, Williams' Oklahoma City report differs from his trial testimony in the Trade Center case in two respects. First, the Oklahoma City report does not offer a broad range but limits the estimate to approximately 4000 pounds of ANFO.

Second, it appears that Williams' opinion was based in part on the recovery of receipts showing that defendant Nichols purchased 4,000 pounds of ammonium nitrate.
No practice runs...nothing?