It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Zaphod58
This is the same region that they spent YEARS setting off MUCH more powerful nuclear 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?
Could this be because Russian satellites would detect the signatures of a nuclear detonation (Gamma, X-Ray, and EM bursts)?
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 AgentSmith
Get some pictures and post them on here, if you can.
The June test will detonate 700 tons of heavy ammonium nitrate-fuel oil emulsion
Originally posted by mrsdudara
You know, testing to see if they can effectivly destroy and neutralize a nuke?
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.
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."
Originally posted by phale925
The term "700 ton" explosive refers to its yield (not actual weight).
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.
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]
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.