NEWS: 700 Ton Explosive to Send Mushroom Cloud Over Vegas

The question that's lingering in my mind, is that if this only a conventional-explosives detonation, why would the US need to inform the Russians?

Could this be because Russian satellites would detect the signatures of a nuclear detonation (Gamma, X-Ray, and EM bursts)?

Originally posted by Zaphod58
This is the same region that they spent YEARS setting off MUCH more powerful nuclear tests...

Why would they test-detonate a large conventional explosive in an area that had been previously used for nuclear tests, that is still acknowleged to be contaminated with traces of these tests?

Perhaps it could be so that if anyone were to go investigating with monitoring equipment, any findings could easily be dismissed with the explanation that the blast stirred-up dirt that was still contaminated from the original tests..

Originally posted by Taikonaut
The question that's lingering in my mind, is that if this only a conventional-explosives detonation, why would the US need to inform the Russians?

So they won't think we're conducting a nuke test. Seismic readers will likely pick up the explosion

Could this be because Russian satellites would detect the signatures of a nuclear detonation (Gamma, X-Ray, and EM bursts)?

umm....how does telling them change anything?
It it was a nuke test there's no way we wold have told them or anyone until after the fact.

Why would they test-detonate a large conventional explosive in an area that had been previously used for nuclear tests, that is still acknowleged to be contaminated with traces of these tests?

Perhaps it could be so that if anyone were to go investigating with monitoring equipment, any findings could easily be dismissed with the explanation that the blast stirred-up dirt that was still contaminated from the original tests..

Where else are they going to do it at?
All other sites where they could test something like that have also been used for nuke testing.
No one's allowed in those areas anyway so who would go in there monitoring?

did i ever say it was a nuclear weapon? he asked how NUCLEAR weapon even came into this conversation. i said maybe because its simulating one....hmmm show me where i said it was a nuclear weapon.

plus you said "in no way" is a nuclear weapon. i never said it was a nuclear weapon....why dont you read what im saying this time around. simulates is close to actually being one. thats the point of a simulation, hence the reason why some one brought up nuclear weapon in the thread.

zaphod

Explain how you KNOW that there has benn NO seismic effects over the YEARS of detonations to which you are referring. Just because there are no IMMEDIATE effects does not mean that there are NO effects. Seismic stress takes years if not decades in most cases to build up.

With all of the recent goings-on at Yellowstone, perhaps the smallest of nudges will do the trick...

If anyone knows what area in the test site the bomb will go off, please post. Thank you in advance.

This will be helpful for folks who want to watch, by knowing which area mountain to view from.

Plenty of accessible high points in the area.

Happy bomb watching everyone!!

Get some pictures and post them on here, if you can.

Originally posted by AgentSmith
Get some pictures and post them on here, if you can.

I will, but there will be thousands on the net.

From the Washington Post

The June test will detonate 700 tons of heavy ammonium nitrate-fuel oil emulsion

If I am not mistaken this is what they use to neutralize hazardous bombs, just a lot bigger? With that new nuclear weapons program they started they said that they were going to retire the old nukes. Does anyone else think that is what they will be doing in Nevada? You know, testing to see if they can effectivly destroy and neutralize a nuke?

Originally posted by mrsdudara
You know, testing to see if they can effectivly destroy and neutralize a nuke?

That's what the stated goal of the test is...sorta

(from link on first page)

Tegnelia said the test was part of a U.S. effort to develop weapons capable of destroying deeply-buried bunkers housing nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.

Nuke power is overrated. I would be more concerned with bio-weapons.

Forgot to post this earlier...
This addresses several things

Pentagon Clarifies Nevada Intent

Pentagon Clarifies Nevada Intent
Explosives Test Not 'Nuclear'


Pentagon officials apologized to members of Congress yesterday for generating fears about an unusual military experiment to detonate 700 tons of explosives in the Nevada desert in June, and they said the test was not designed to simulate a low-yield nuclear explosion, even though government budget documents had described it that way.

Officials said the test, code-named Divine Strake, is part of research to "determine the potential for future non-nuclear concepts" -- such as high-energy weapons or the simultaneous use of multiple conventional bombs to destroy deeply buried and fortified military targets. They said the budget documents' references to simulating a nuclear explosion were in error.

The test is scheduled for June 2 about 90 miles northwest of Las Vegas in a high desert valley bounded by mountains in the Energy Department's Nevada Test Site. The test will ignite the equivalent of 593 tons of TNT in a 36-foot-deep hole near a tunnel in order to measure the ground shock and damage created at different levels of depth, according to Tegnelia and an official environmental assessment. The test is aimed at providing tools to better understand how different types of weapons would work against fortified underground targets -- such as military headquarters, biological or chemical weapons stockpiles, and long-range missiles -- that the Pentagon says are proliferating among potential adversaries around the world.

Confusion over whether the test was related to nuclear research was created on Tuesday, when DTRA officials confirmed that Divine Strake was the same as the "tunnel target defeat" test described in 2005 and 2006 budget documents. Those documents said it was designed to "simulate a low yield nuclear weapon ground shock environment," and help the military select "the smallest proper nuclear yield necessary to destroy underground facilities."

On Wednesday, however, Smith said that, although DTRA was not "disavowing" the budget documents, "things change. That has changed and the wording got left in" improperly, she said, meaning the references to "nuclear."

why dont they all their weapon tests alaska...i thought that was kinda the point of owning a remote area...u.s.a is retarted haha

[edit on 7-4-2006 by BirDMan_X]

The term "700 ton" explosive refers to its yield (not actual weight).
As far as the residents of Nevada and their "fears" - all they fear is losing or making money at the casinos. And if they work at a casino, they are most concerned with separating you from your money! Most of them have no idea what happens at the Nevada Test Site nor do they care. I know, I lived there for 10 years and worked at the Test Site.

Originally posted by phale925
The term "700 ton" explosive refers to its yield (not actual weight).

Backwards.
The 700 ton is the actual weight, the yield is 593....

Just ran accross this article.....I'm in the process of reading it, but it speculates that this 700 ton bomb test could be a way a releaving pressure off the yellowstone tectonic plates....says some other uncomforting things.... please take a look....judge for yourself what the heck might be going on???

www.whatdoesitmean.com...

this bomb will use no nuclear explosion

US military officials plan to stage a massive explosion in the Nevada desert in June, igniting a buried 700-ton charge of ammonium nitrate/fuel oil (AN/FO) high explosive primarily to study shockwave effects on deeply buried structures.

source www.janes.com...

I recall a similar event in VietNam in 1968. It was the beginning of the "Tet" holiday and we were supposed to be in a truce, so of course the commies atack. They rocketed Chu Lai Airbase in the early morning hours.

A lucky rocket hit the ammo dump, which held bombs (up to 500 lbs each) for airplanes as well as artillery shells, plastic explosives, TNT in 50 LB. crates, stacked on pallets. We have no idea how many tons of explosives were there, but it was "hundreds."

The resulting explosion resembled a nuclear bomb: it had the initial visible flash of light, like a "bubble of light" expanding outward, then the explosion's shock wave (which knocked down some men who were too shocked to dive for cover (we were a mile away from ground zero, more or less) which raised dust along the ground as it spread outward at hundreds of MPH. Then, as our vision cleared, the mushroom cloud grew and expanded into the sky. It took hours to dissipate.

snake, vietnam 1968

Originally posted by BirDMan_X
why dont they all their weapon tests alaska...i thought that was kinda the point of owning a remote area...u.s.a is retarted haha

[edit on 7-4-2006 by BirDMan_X]

Perhaps the U.S.A. is retarted (restored of their tarts?), but it looks like you may be a bit retarded- that is, unable to keep up with basic education requirements. Please come back after you learn how to spell and how to construct proper sentences so that people can understand what you are saying! You lack basic grammar and spelling abilities - you seem ignorant.

Before you start criticizing others, make sure you are above criticism, or you'll just look like an idiot.

BTW, Alaska is a fragile wilderness area that could not tolerate such incursion. Nevada is largely dead desert area with no fragile endangered species or climate to wipe out. The perfect area for this type of event.

Is there anything in the US "announced" inventory that can lift 700 tons? How about "Black" toys? Imagine what a 700 ton shaped charge could do if dropped from altitude... blimp? Black-Triangle? I saw a 150 ton locomotive fall off a crane in Montreal once - it fell about 4 feet and it cracked reinforced concrete walls 200 feet away - never been in a quake but the ground did shake big time.

Originally posted by sssssssnake

BTW, Alaska is a fragile wilderness area that could not tolerate such incursion. Nevada is largely dead desert area with no fragile endangered species or climate to wipe out. The perfect area for this type of event.

I beg to differ. Why just the other day as I was sitting by the campfire, I thought how my view compared favorably to views I've seen in Alaska. There are wonderful places I can no longer visit, as they are inside a military perimeter. I can remember the carpets of wildflowers of every shade in every color on the desert floor. Dead? Hardly. Besides, Jesus spent lots of time in the desert. Must be good for something besides a giant target.