Let’s Agree to Put an End to the Petty 9/11 Argument’s

page: 18
9
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 04:04 AM
link   
edit on 1/26/2013 by ANOK because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 06:53 AM
link   
Damn it, I have to pace up with three pages of nonsense made up by the usual suspects.
Well, first a rebuttal of all GenRadek posts about his fairy tale of TB=FAE.

GeneralRadek, you have probably researched with the search term "thermobaric piezoelectric".
I have bolded the relevant text parts in this DoD Acquisition program text from 1 July 2003 to November 2004, you posted before, and now added a bit more that you forgot to add, so here is the full text, and some more you forgot :


A03-141 TITLE: Thermobaric Blast Pressure Gauges

TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Sensors

ACQUISITION PROGRAM: PM, Aviation Rocket and Missiles

OBJECTIVE: To develop a fast response pressure transducer that has minimal response to outside stimulus. During Thermobaric explosions, the high heat and light caused by the blast can cause currently available sensors to give false readings. From past experience, we have found that thermal and photo stimulus can greatly impact the data received from these types of transducers. At the present time transducers with external cooling have had some success with the thermal effects but no success with the photoelectric.

DESCRIPTION: Virtually all pressure sensors are sensitive to thermal shock. When heat strikes the diaphragm of a pressure sensor that has crystals contained in an outer housing, the heat can cause an expansion of the case surrounding the internal crystals. Although quartz crystals are not significantly sensitive to thermal shock, the case expansion causes a lessening of the preload force on the crystals, usually causing a negative-signal output. Thermobaric reactions produce high thermal and photoelectric transients rendering present piezoelectric transducer technology inadequate for this application. The temperature ranges in question are from 1400 to 1600 degrees Fahrenheit or 760 to 870 degrees Celsius. These transducers need to be in the range of 50, 100 and 200 psi, with response rates around 1 microsecond. The transducer should exhibit minimal response when exposed to a broadband light source, which produces a radiant intensity of 10 milliwatts over the area of the transducer diaphragm.

PHASE I: Perform a feasibility study to see if a solution to the problem can be found.

PHASE II: After construction of the prototype transducer by the small business, testing at the Thermobaric characterization facility, located on the Redstone Arsenal, will be conducted at no cost.

PHASE III: These types of sensors could be used to quantify many new energetic materials that are being developed for urban warfare and current conflicts. There could also be a use for these sensors in the testing of rocket motors and boosters for both the military and civilian markets.

REFERENCES:
1) Walton, W. Scott. ”Improvement of Air Blast Measurement, ILIR TASK 5”, March 1981 TECOM Project 7-CO-ILO-AP1-001.
2) “ An LTCC Hybrid Pressure Transducer For High Temperature Applications”, Jolymar Gonzalez-Esteves University of Puerto Rico.


KEYWORDS: sensors, energetic materials, transducer, piezoelectric



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 06:57 AM
link   
Isn't that exactly what I gave you as text already, the piezoelectric crystals in a thin metal housing.
A round thin metal box, like in a barometer you have in your house to measure current air pressure, so you can predict loosely the weather by following multiple readings. Up=better weather, down=bad weather coming). Please note the year of first research into this subject....(red text)
This is why I have to be very precise and specific in all my texts, a lot of you can't for the sake of it, understand comprehensive academic texts. Long winding, you call such extensive explanatory texts. The reaction of a simple, untrained mind, I call that.

1. A transducer is an apparatus that transfers something. For example electricity.
In this case the transfer of an electric charge that charges a nano-powdered and air-dried cloud with static electricity. To obtain a close to ideal mixture.
2. A thin film of piezoelectric crystalline structure that has been vaporized and condensed on top and bottom of a rubber or silicone mat, is the solution for their problem brought-up in 2003. Since the substrate must be elastic to solve their problem of being able to measure the charge/pressure coupling-effect.
All this was of course already solved by the military-industrial think-tanks before 9/11/2001 , and this is their way of making black projects white again, so more and white funding can flow to it from Congress. And the now free black funds can be used elsewhere again.
This is the reason why the DoD of all countries option for a black trajectory first, until their spy agencies detect that the opponents have the same knowledge (stolen or developed) :

The Army is undertaking a transformation to better meet small-scale contingencies without compromising major theater war capability.

3. Their proposed problem was a mode to measure the TB blast pressure. So they could develop control systems to regulate the blast energy outcome.
Which blast proceeds AFTER the electrostatic charging of the nano-powdered cloud.
It is also a clever way of hiding the real intention, in this case : if we can measure it, than we can perhaps also regulate it (what comes out, must have got in first)



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:00 AM
link   
And, thus, what is their next research question for their ACQUISITION programs ?
This one, with another hidden meaning.


A03-196 TITLE: Explosive Pulsed Power

TECHNOLOGY AREAS: Weapons

ACQUISITION PROGRAM: PEO-Air & Missile Defense

OBJECTIVE: The objectives of this effort are to develop explosive pulsed power systems that can be used to produce small to medium caliber munitions (40-mm to 155-mm) capable of producing effects in addition to blast and fragmentation.

DESCRIPTION: The radius of damage and the destructive power of conventional munitions is limited to that of the blast and fragments. The objectives of this effort are to extend the lethal range of munitions, increase the scope of the target set, and enhance destruction capability. A directed energy component, such as high power microwave or ultra wideband signals, can attack sensitive electronics and may have longer lethal ranges than blast waves and fragments. Activated materials, such as aerosols, can enhance conventional munitions by adding a component that can provide new sensor blinding and power system disruption mechanisms to enhance lethal damage to targets. One of the critical technologies that will enable the development of multi-functional munitions by providing sufficient electrical power from a very compact and rugged package is explosive driven pulsed power. Current capacitive and inductive energy storage technologies do not provide sufficient energy or meet the severe mass and volume requirements imposed by the munitions being considered for development.

PHASE I: Identify potential explosive driven pulsed power systems and their associated power conditioning and analyze, design, and conduct proof-of-principle demonstrations to: 1) verify that outputs are predictable and are consistent with predictions, and 2) to assess their suitability for use in a variety of munitions to include packaging and ruggedization.

PHASE II: Design, build, and test enhanced prototype explosive pulsed power systems and/or their critical components and verify their capabilities. Design production process for mass production.


PHASE III DUAL USE APPLICATIONS: Explosive pulsed power systems are being considered for oil and mineral exploration, propulsion systems and electromagnetic launchers, rapid charging of capacitors, magnetized target fusion, and destruction of chemical and biological agents.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:02 AM
link   

REFERENCES:
1) J. Benford and J. Swegle, High Power Microwaves, Artech House, Boston (1992).
2) L. Altgilbers, M. Brown, I. Grishnaev, B. Novac, S. Tkach, Y. Tkach, Magnetocumulative Generators, Springer-Verlag, New York (1999).
3) L. Altgilbers, et al, “Compact Explosive Driven Sources of Microwaves: Test Results”, Megagauss 98 Proceedings, to be published.
4) A. B. Prishchepenko, V. V. Kiseljov, and I. S. Kudimov, “Radio Frequency Weapon at the Future Battlefield”, EUROEM, in Proceedings of EUROEM 94, Bordeaux (1994).
5) A. B. Prishchepenko and V. P. Zhitnikov. “Microwave Ammunitions: SUMM CRIQUE”, in Proceedings of AMREM 96, Albuquerque (1996).
6) A. B. Prishchepenko, “Devices Built Around Permanent Magnets for Generating an Initial Current in Helical Explosive Magnetic Generators”, Instruments and Experimentation Techniques, 38(4), Part 2, pp. 515 – 520 (1995).
[7) A. B. Prishchepenko and M. V. Shchelkachev, “Operating Regime of an Explosive Magnetic Field Compression Generator with a Capacitive Load with a Consideration of Magnetic Flux Losses”, Journal of Applied Mechanics and Technical Physics, 32(6), pp. 848 – 854 (1991).
8) A. A. Barmin and A.B. Prishchepenko, “Compression of a Magnetic Field in a Single Cyrstal by a Strong Converging Ionizing Shock Wave”, in Megagauss Magnetic Field Generation and Pulsed Power Applications (eds. M. Cowan and R. B. Spielman), Nova Science Publ., New York, pp. 35 – 40 (1994).
9) A. B. Prishchepenko, D. V. Tretjakov, and M. V. Shchelkachev. “Energy Balance by Explosive Piezoelectric Generator of Frequency Work”, Electrical Technology, No. 1, pp. 141 - 145 (1997).

10) A. B. Prishchepenko, Electromagnetic Munitions, 96UM0427 Moscow Soldat Udachi, No. 3, pp. 45 – 46 (1996).

KEYWORDS: Pulsed Power, Marx Generators, Magnetocumulative Generators, Magnetic Flux Compression Generators, Ferroelectric Generators, Piezoelectric Generators, Ferromagnetic Generators, Switches, Transformers, and Power Conditioning.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Note please, that all these research results by Slavish professionals have been published BEFORE 9/11/2001.
If you would have listened to my honest advice, you would have found the term "Pulsed Power" already in one of my posts. Try 2005.
I have given you so many clues in my thermobaric posts, and still you can't find all the clues. A pity, for you.

Academic search keywords : Ferro materials, Ferroelectric Generators, magnetic flux compression, piezoelectric generators, thermobaric, pulsed power explosives, etcetera.
I have access to most academic and military sources, do you? Do you have access to all patent sources? I have.

You may visit the Army SBIR website address:
www.aro.army.mil... to get started. This page links to the DoD-wide SBIR proposal submission system, available directly at :
www.dodsbir.net... which will lead you through the preparation and submission of your proposal.

If your proposal is selected for award, the technical abstract and discussion of anticipated benefits will be publicly released on the Internet on the DoD SBIR/STTR web site :
www.acq.osd.mil...

Therefore, do not include proprietary or classified information in these documents. DoD will not accept classified proposals for the SBIR Program. Note also that the DoD web site contains timely information on firm, award, and abstract data for all DoD SBIR Phase I and II awards going back several years.

I hope you understand NOW, that CLASSIFIED or proprietary information will NEVER be inserted in this type of DoD documents.
So you must have additional sources to understand the non-included information, CLASSIFIED information which I possess.
edit on 26/1/13 by LaBTop because: Link wrong.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:52 AM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


You do understand that they are talking about a pressure sensor that could be used to measure pressure during a thermobaric blast, and are not talking about thermobaric bombs themselves right?

How does this work exactly. You make up some random cool sounding tems in an attempt to sound clever, you hook up these terms in google, and just post and hit you get, without having a clue what it is about?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by LaBTop
 


So this is one of your best? Your argument is "I see something I can not explain". At least you are clever enough to not stick any conclusion to it.

You nor me are qualified to interpret seismologic records. No wonder we can not come to any conclusion. We can however give our layman oppinion (aka speculate). so here is mine: its not explosives of any kind because a) they would not have the required energy to cause this while b) remaining unnoticed. So my guess would be that we see the internal collapse.

Note that me pointing out that you are in no way qualified, nor providing any actual relevant analysis, is already enough to throw this argument in the garbage bin. I don't need to provide an alternative explanation. Instead you have to prove that a) it could have been caused by explosives but most of all that b) it could not have been caused by anything else. You haven't done either.
edit on 24-1-2013 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)


I did not stick any conclusion to it? How ignorant can you be to write something like that, when I have explicitly given two, utterly grave for the official theory, conclusions to my seismogram.
1. The whole thing is a falsification, see my 12 to 17 seconds video's delay arguments, or
2. It's the real one, and then it is such massive proof of explosions before the global collapse, you must be quite ignorant to not see that at first glance, or very afraid of your income, since you as a seismologist know what that diagram shows you, but you choose not to oppose the flow, since you saw what "they" can do with one's career.

I don't know you. Do you know me? How do you know then, what qualifications I posses? Blowing WIND again.....


a) they would not have the required energy to cause this while b) remaining unnoticed.


You just proved again:
a) no reading comprehension, or
b) no understanding what Prof Brown, head of the Seismological Department, explained to you.
Remained unnoticed? Are you in a delirious state of mind, or just planted to disturb?
You have been fed with massive evidence that masses of people heard explosions, felt them and ran away for them.


Note that me pointing out

You must be delirious, I gave you the link to 330 posts and threads by me, loaded with seismic evidence.


Instead you have to prove that a) it could have been caused by explosives but most of all that b) it could not have been caused by anything else. You haven't done either.


a.) Professor Brown differs totally with you on that subject. The seismograms of the OKC bombing and subsequent demolition prove it must have been explosives. Do you seriously want to say that thousands of seismograms prove that a double layer effect has NEVER been sighted in OKC in one of those diagrams over 100 years, but only at the OKC bombing those two layer magically turned up?
You still do not understand that academia in the US is tightly controlled by the Military, their biggest funds raiser, and the Mil/Industrial complex, which gives out the rest of their grants.
Ask for those seismograms, on line or directly. You do not get them. Neither do you get the hand held devices N.Y. seismograms from 9/11, which I asked for, and then the guy never posted anymore. I asked a bit deeper off line, and lo and behold, all these hand held seismic evidence is sadly enough lost, say these companies. Good luck by finding just one of those, and there were quite a few....

b) Have you lost contact with reality? What else in a TRULY gravitational collapse could EVER cause such a HUGE pack of peaks, indicating an amount of energy that dwarfs the following (6 seconds later) onset of total collapse of WTC 7. Explained by these frauds at NIST as "must be caused by the snapping of column 79".

And then all OTHER columns and cross beams "snapped" and resulted in much less ENERGY ?
Get lost. Steel columns do not "snap", ever. They give way, deform, bend, shear, but not snap like a twig. Even NIST admits that.

Only huge explosions can deliver the sudden energy that was recorded in the WTC 7 seismogram

Ever asked yourself, why you can not find ONE seismogram of demolition jobs compared to clocked events like when they ignited charges, on line? Neither off line, btw.
Only those of 9/11, in abundance. And they gave no clocked events either, until I gave them their own Cianca timestamped photo...Then they did their utter best to hide and then delete all their previous seismic outsourced research. And came still not even close to the video's time stamped anomalies.
That Cianca photo time stamp must be either corrected by 12 to 17 seconds earlier in time, or the whole WTC 7 seismogram is a falsification, just plain bunk.

I understand your posting technique, fast responses, lots of work for the addressees to debunk it, again and again.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by LaBTop
 


You do understand that they are talking about a pressure sensor that could be used to measure pressure during a thermobaric blast, and are not talking about thermobaric bombs themselves right?

How does this work exactly. You make up some random cool sounding tems in an attempt to sound clever, you hook up these terms in google, and just post and hit you get, without having a clue what it is about?


No, they are talking about Piezoelectric Generators and you know very well what the rest means, or you act dumb.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:20 AM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 



TITLE: Thermobaric Blast Pressure Gauges


Do you understand what a pressure gauge is?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   


reply to post by LaBTop
 

Have you lost contact with reality?


I know someone who has:


Only huge explosions can deliver the sudden energy that was recorded in the WTC 7 seismogram


Except that every single camera (devices that record reality) recording does not show these "huge explosions". So you must have lost contact with reality, as reality is showing us something completely different from what you are saying.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:54 PM
link   
reply to post by -PLB-
 


Dont you know? These were special thermobaric bombs that were specially silenced by water tanks strapped to the explosives, without a soul noticing. That way, big bang, but no noise and lots of steam!



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 02:19 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


LaBTop, all of those things you have posted talk about EMP devices, and gauss-style weaponry. Now you are going waaay off your track from those magical thermobaric bombs.

Also, if you read the link about the Explosive pulsed power systems, it talks about using an aerosol component that can fry out electrical systems by coating it in the electro-conducive material. We are now going into completely different territory from bombs blowing up the WTCs. Yes it is all very interesting technology, but ultimately, has little to no relevance of what we are discussing. You are claiming thermobaric explosives blew up the WTC and they were specially muffled with water tanks attached to the columns and only emitted ultra-low frequency sounds that no one heard orpicked up on cameras right next to the Towers but picked up clearly miles and miles away. But the rub is, that thermobaric is in direct reference to how the device behaves: with high temperatures and massive overpressure. Hence "Thermo" and "Baric". If you cannot decipher the name correctly and instead give them false meanings, then how are we suppose to take it seriously? The "baric" part talks about the pressure effects of the weapon on detonation, NOT something about piezoelectric devices.

I do not deny the use of such materials in weaponry, or the use of such weapons in combat. However, it is incorrect to claim that a thermobaric weapon can be muffled by a water jacket surrounding it, especially since the weapon needs a certain amount of space upon initiation of the detonating process, in order for the "fuel" to be dispensed for optimal detonation. Thermobaric explosives rely on oxygen from the surrounding air. This #1 for the weapon. Covering it up with water tanks kinda defeats the purpose of the device. You can tamp an explosive like TNT or C4 with sandbags or water, but for a thermobaric bomb to work, it needs to be dispersed and expand the "fuel" to mix with the surrounding oxygen. Also, they are unsutable for use underwater (for OBVIOUS reasons). That is why your entire argument falls flat on its face. I'd take more into conventional cutter charges being tamps with water jackets or sandbags being used to direct the blasts, but I doubt it would silence it at all. Explosives are LOUD. And no amount of spinning or pages of runon posts about how these explosives were silenced to dull low freq rumbles.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:48 PM
link   

GenRadek : Thermobaric explosives rely on oxygen from the surrounding air. This #1 for the weapon.


You could not be further from the truth :

www.mineactionstandards.org...



6.2. Enhanced Blast Munitions (EBM) and Thermobaric munitions
There is occasionally confusion between FAE systems and other systems with similar effects. The differences are explained at Annex C.

--snip--

d) some FAE munitions rely on the expulsion of a coiled probe from the munition. This probe is thought to be tipped with a piezo-electric element to trigger the booster charge when it contacts the ground. This ensures initiation at the optimum height.
--snip--
Annex C (Informative) Enhanced Blast and Thermobaric munitions
C.1 Enhanced Blast Munitions (EBM)
In parallel to the development of FAE was the development of Enhanced Blast Munitions (EBM). An EBM is little more than an improved efficiency high explosive, obtained by the addition of metal powders that release energy when they oxidise in the high temperatures of the explosion. The result of these improvements can be significant in terms of energy release, but problems of safely deploying them in weapon systems precludes their use in all but the most limited of circumstances. One known example in operational service is the US Bomb Live Unit (BLU) 82 “Daisy Cutter” which consists of a 15,000 lb bomb filled with an aqueous mixture of ammonium nitrate, aluminium powder and polystyrene soap. It should also be noted that FAE are now beginning to be grouped with EBM by some sources. EBM are not covered in this TNMA, but are known to have been used operationally in Afghanistan, Kuwait/Iraq and Vietnam.

C.2 Thermobaric munitions
The thermobaric weapon works by propelling a warhead that scatters an aerosol explosive on or before impact with the target and then immediately igniting this to create a high-pressure blast wave. The effect is a much more rapidly expanding blast than a conventional explosion.
Compared with a fuel-air explosive, the thermobaric weapon has a much higher expanding concussion effect and lacks the degree of vacuum implosion produced by fuel air weapons. Primarily, this is because fuel air weapons take time to distribute the aerosol explosive widely before ignition. Russia is currently the world leader in thermobaric weapons, and has already used them in action, for example to clearing Mujahideen from caves in Afghanistan and more recently Chechen guerrillas from buildings in Grozny. The Russian RPG-7 thermobaric warhead, fired from a manportable rocket-launcher, is said to produce effects comparable to the detonation 2kg of TNT, while the effects of the Russian RPO-A Shmel rocket-propelled incendiary/blast projectile are reportedly similar to those produced by a 122mm howitzer projectile. Russian variants of this latter weapon include one that combines a thermobaric warhead with a small hollow charge, which is designed to penetrate structures prior to detonation of the main warhead, thus considerably enhancing its effects.


Wikipedia should include the above Mine Action-article to their Thermobaric pages.
As you can see in their discussion page about it :
Talk:Thermobaric weapon
nobody has real insight in what a real thermobaric is. This citation touches the solid part :

1st generation FAEs.
The article as it is to date deals with "newer", "solid" thermobarics. There is barely a mention of (largely obsolete, but still important, at least historically) first generation fuel-air explosives, consisting of a primary HE burster, container of a volatile fuel and a tertiary initiation HE charge.--84.163.103.143 (talk) 03:12, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

I repeat, thermobaric weapon development is for a great part classified information, and does not appear on the Internet.

We can however conclude that GenRadek's opinion is just that, his own lonely opinion. An FAE is not a TB.
PERIOD.

And stop insulting my intelligence by repeating over and over again, that I talked about TB's when I used the argument of water as an explosion sound muffler.
I clearly have always connected that subject to standard HE cutter charges, the L-shaped strips filled with RDX or the likes. Which can be used under water with an immense muffling effect.
I talked about cubic meter water tanks as recoil and muffler objects for TB's their explosive energy. And they were not strapped to them, but placed at least one or more meters away from the TB, logically. But you think not logical, you think directed, towards your own stuck opinion.
You begin to sound as a stuck LP player. I have already answered the same lying muffler crap from you, several times now, the readers will attend you to my posts if they want, in all three threads I posted in lately and which I linked to.
I get really tired of you two, and your childish insults.

And you all still do not realize, that sound-muffling was only intended for the few first charges going off. After that, the immense noise of the following gravitational collapses did effectively mask all other explosion sounds.

It was not such a magical demo job at all. Give me a truck load of TB's (much smaller than you think) and I blow up every high rise you sent me to.
In exactly the same manner as seen on 9/11.
Start to grasp the intention of using TB's : they "pump up a building", then the energy bleeds off quite fast. In the mean time all welds and bolts are broken and crushed and beams are sheared off their seats, standard column lengths are sheared off their underlaying supporting column lengths, etcetera. It's an omni directional force.
edit on 26/1/13 by LaBTop because: It's not Mining but Mine Action ( www.mineaction.org... )



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 07:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-


reply to post by LaBTop
 

Have you lost contact with reality?


I know someone who has:


Only huge explosions can deliver the sudden energy that was recorded in the WTC 7 seismogram


Except that every single camera (devices that record reality) recording does not show these "huge explosions". So you must have lost contact with reality, as reality is showing us something completely different from what you are saying.


Aha, you did not want to view the -BoneZ- video? Nor the other video where you see the black muffler blanket exploding out of the North Tower window? And all the other video's I posted, with all these people who swear they heard all these explosions? Or the Chandler video with the explosion sound at WTC 7's collapse initiation, and then you see WTC 7 collapse, but you heard only that low explosion sound, but no collapse sounds..... So which sound has been the loudest, filmed from 9 blocks away?
I know, it shatters your world view, and thus you MUST ignore them. The ostrich effect.
Who's the delusional one here?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 08:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by -PLB-
reply to post by LaBTop
 


You do understand that they are talking about a pressure sensor that could be used to measure pressure during a thermobaric blast, and are not talking about thermobaric bombs themselves right?

How does this work exactly. You make up some random cool sounding tems in an attempt to sound clever, you hook up these terms in google, and just post and hit you get, without having a clue what it is about?


So you do not understand my bolded REFERENCES. Now we know your level. Who's having no clue here?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 09:45 PM
link   
This is typed over from a book and I posted a shorter version in 2005, this is the extended version :


Project METC Summary Report

The chief difference in METC unit (Multiple Explosives Transitional Container) design over traditional explosive devices moves away from a densely packed explosive core towards a large volume of highly explosive but low-density mass in the form of a gaseous cloud. In the normal bomb all explosive energy comes from a tightly packed core and must drive outward against air pressure and objects it encounters. It rapidly bleeds off energy at the square of the distance as it accumulates a wall of pressure resistance and a mass of heavy debris, which it must continually regather and push along.

The new design starts as a small device but transforms itself through simple means from a dense-core technology to a much larger gaseous-cloud state. Igniting the explosive cloud at any peripheral or central point creates a chain-reaction-like and progressively growing explosive force. As the force of the explosion moves outward, it continues to ignite fresh explosive materials as encountered and gains momentum rather than loosing it. Further, because the gaseous cloud is efficiently mixed explosive materials combined with abundant free-air oxygen, ignition is far more complete and productive - leaving little or no chemical residue or traditional flash evidence (other than a burn signature, which any investigator would presume to be from ordinary fire)on immediately encountered objects. The net result is as if a significantly larger central core device had been detonated, with the complete and even combustion making difficult any aftermath analysis as to the true nature of the explosives used. Finally, the shape of the cloud and the ignition point within the cloud, if properly controlled, provides an extremely easy means to create shaped charge effects despite a relatively free-form original cloud shape.

Termed an electro-hydrodynamic gaseous fuel device (fn1), it produces a three-stage explosion through a process described as a highly focused, a-neutronic (fn2) energy transfer. The first detonation would be a small, low-volume explosion provided by just a few ounces of PETN explosive (fn3). This is placed within a relatively small central core shaft suspended from the top of the bomb container such that it is surrounded by a liquid compound of aqueous ammonium nitrate. The core shaft containing the explosive is itself made up of a compressed and hardened compound of aluminum silicate and N2O4, which starts as a slurry prior to application of a high-pressure baking process. Except for the explosive charge protected from external forces within, these items are all safe from accidental detonation as relatively safe-to-handle materials.

The first explosion's sole function is something akin to shaking a warm soda bottle violently with only a thumb to cover the opening. The relatively small explosion providing three key effects: reduction of the inner core shaft to a micro fine powder; mixture of the resulting powder and aqueous solution under violently induced pressure in order to cause complete chemical absorption; and force- opening the container to support eruption of contents into a gaseous state. The cylindrical bomb casing, which has precut scores or weak points to insure it ruptures in a sawtooth pattern about its middle, splits into two flowered halves which blossom outward from the pressure. The upper half shoots upward as if shot from a cannon, while the lower portion remains cannon-like and in place on its base.

Milliseconds later, a second explosion of a larger quantity of more powerful PDTN (fn4) material is set off at the bottom of the container. Timing is critical in milliseconds as too-long a delay would allow the flash of the explosion to prematurely ignite the gaseous cloud. This detonation must take place before the cloud has been adequately oxygenated and so expanded as to be reactant to the flash, but delayed to the optimum point for final blast effects.

The ideal detonator would likely be some form of barometric sensing device looking for the changes in pressure as the explosion's forced evacuation begins to drop back towards normal levels. Simple electronic timing devices could work adequately but would not allow optimum performance in field application, as the variables of bomb placement relative to large objects/structures and open/confined spaces can impact on timing needs in incalculable ways.

This secondary explosive is housed within its own shaped charge container formed into the bottom of the lower bomb casing. The shape and higher force of the second blast forces the bottom of the casing to separate from its base and fly upward. In this action, it will burst open even wider into its own flower petal shape, providing additional turbulent mixing of the forming cloud with free air. The violent turbulence, in turn, causes portions of the cloud to become highly charged electro statically as it continues to form a huge and turbulent mushroom immediately over ground zero. Explosive potential has now been reached, though optimal performance is dictated by cloud size, shape, and density -- which are again variables effected by the bombs placement and surroundings.

The cloud is made up of a mixture of the Aqueous Ammonium Nitrate with the pulverized aluminum Silicate and N2O4 compound. Once mixed with each other and free-air oxygen under force of the first two detonations, the resulting cloud is extremely explosive in nature, electro statically charged, decidedly cold, and awaiting only an opportunity to detonate. The shape of the cloud itself, due to the nature of the cannonade-like upward flight of the upper casing, and the blunter and delayed action of the lower casing, is somewhat tear shaped - though designs can be made to produce other shapes by nature of the original container's design. This can be a key factor in fixing the shape and focus of the blast effect.

In air burst explosions provided by conventional weapons, the blast effect is minimal due to a rapid bleed of energy in all directions as blast radius increases, with only those items beneath ground zero being subjected to blast exposure. Ground explosions, however, provide a means of deflecting otherwise wasted energy into a more desired radial blast effect. In nuclear technology, the reverse is true. A ground blast wastes energy in vaporizing and throwing up of tremendous quantities of ground materials where an air blast expands to maximum heat and blast effect forces before coming into contact with ground objects -- forming a broader circle of maximum impact. An air burst shock wave travels in air, a light medium, whereas the ground burst starts with solid matter thrown up by the blast - a heavier medium. An angular shock wave in a light medium tends to reflect when striking a solid, immovable plane such as the earth. This re-radiates the energy outward and back upward (fn5), further enhancing the shock wave effects against any encountered ground structures.

If the resulting METC unit cloud can be triggered from the top down, energy transfer drives the explosion downward and takes advantage of the tear-shape cloud. To repeat, as the force of the explosion moves outward from the ignition point, it continues to ignite fresh explosive materials as encountered and the blast gains momentum rather than loosing. By controlling the original ignition point, the blast effect can become highly focused and magnified. Yet, as an air blast, the outermost zone of actual blast damage is somewhat lessened, limiting collateral damage to a given, focused blast perimeter. This is because the focused energy deflects upward instead of radiating away from ground zero parallel to the ground. Only the secondary shock wave effects would have impact on surrounding or secondary structures or objects -- such as blowing out windows, a peculiar trademark of the device (fn5) which may dictate or limit applications should the nature of the device become public and covert application be required without revealing the type of explosives used. In the case of nuclear technology, the secondary shock wave damage is much more significant due to the massive scale of the original explosive force, and so, the effective radius of the bomb is increased dramatically. METC, unless constructed on a much larger scale, need not be so described.

Where traditional military explosives provide detonation velocities of 7,000-8,100 feet per second at the blast point. These bleed off at the square of the distance from the center of ground zero. The METC unit device, in ideal applications, is capable of much higher performance in the [REDACTED] range over a larger ground zero area equal to cloud diameter -- though destructive forces immediately beneath ground zero are notably less than at the edge of the cloud and beyond (fn6). Final velocities can be conceivably higher with optimal environmental placements, bomb design, and timing. These higher velocities provide several magnitudes greater damage potential as destructive capacity can be said to increase at the square of the force applied.

This weapon would be best applied to specific hard targets (fn7) where maximum localized damage was considered more important than broad-based damaged to broader concentrations of soft targets (fn8). Its unique nature defeats normal aftermath analysis and can therefore be applied in covert actions freely, though some effort to misdirect investigations may be required in order to insure that no undue attention is placed on the unique blast characteristics or the absence of traditional flash evidence and chemical residues.

The third and final explosion, which to an observer would be seen as a second explosion due to the mere milliseconds of delay between the first two, is timed to coincide with maximum effectiveness of the expanding cloud. The cloud's expansion rate falls off at the square of the distance from the explosion (fn9). For a devices relatively small in size, a proper cloud of suitable destructive capability could be achieved in a relatively few seconds initial expansion.

Anything within the targeted blast area, is pulverized by the highly focused nature of what would otherwise be viewed as a relatively small blast. The damage effect is not dissimilar to the visual of an explosion under water, where a violent and rapid expansion takes place and then collapses inward on itself. In this case, however, as are no great hydraulic pressures to contend with, the greatest destruction takes place within a focused perimeter, as a normalized shock wave continues on. The collapse and shock waves, relative to the size of the large-volume gaseous bomb - is a remarkably lesser pressure more in keeping with the size of the original compact device.

Timing is provided by a barometric device (fn10) which senses the normalization in pressures as the cloud thins at the base and air rushes back to fill the void - the point where expansion begins to falter against air seeking to rush back into the void created by the first explosions. Remember the under-water explosion visual. The final detonating device, along with timing controls and bomb activation and triggering mechanisms for the entire weapon, is housed in an bomb base which remains in tact on the ground after the first two explosions. Resting on legs of wood, plastic, or Teflon, it is electrically insulated, though there is a ground wire established for the final triggering circuit.

While it contains a battery to operate the initial timing and triggering circuits, it also contains a quartz-crystal-based piezoelectric device (fn10) capable of producing many thousands of volts of electricity when "flexed", a phenomenon which occurs naturally as a result of the downward force of the first and second explosion against the housing. This generates a large and very high-voltage charge which temporarily has no where to go, the crystal becoming its own capacitor. At a given point, the barometric timing device trips, and the charge runs up mono-filament wires attached to the bottom half of the outer casing. As the casing is thrown high into the air, the filaments are spiraled out from spools built into the base using technology and parts borrowed from wire-guided surface missiles. When the circuit is closed, these carry the charge to the cloud to produce the final, devastating explosion.

A design variant can apply the final voltage to bare filaments to create a flash-bulb effect which ignites the explosion simultaneously about a vertical column above ground zero. Alternatively, by use of heavier insulated wires stripped bare at a given point, the ignition can be caused to originate at any point between the base and the high-flying lower casing. Finally, the charge could also be applied either from the base itself for traditional blast effects, or from a peripheral position to the cloud (if calculations of cloud size and shape were adequate) for an unusual laterally-focused blast effect. However, this would be a tougher challenge to figure out and control ignition points and timing, especially since variables such as wind patterns and intensity, and air displacements from nearby structures, would need to be considered. Regardless of the focus method employed, because piezoelectric charges are only high in voltage, but not in amperage, the insulated wires do not fuse, and can carry the voltage in tact to its intended destination for ignition.

This bomb design can be subject to great miniaturization. It is possible to build a bomb the size of a soda pop can (with simplified design components, such as use of blasting caps) for use in any precise target application. It might conceivably even be made to look like an innocent pop can with the pull tab actually triggering the bomb, creating a number of interesting options for delivery and detonation. To bring down an aircraft, for instance, simply leave such a device in the magazine pouch of the seat back and exit the aircraft awaiting a passenger, at some point, to discover it and ask for some ice.

The fingerprint of a small-scale METC device applied in an aircraft or other enclosed environment like floors in a building would be minuscule traces of PDTN but no real traditional signature of explosives at all -- no flash damage, no normal residue levels. There would be mostly fire damage of mysterious origin, and since the blast origin point would be the full size of the cloud (most of the cabin or floor), there would seem no blast point or traditional bomb damage at all -- just as if the aircraft or building "went to pieces". Investigators would be hard pressed to conclude explosives as the means of destruction.

Likewise, the bomb could enjoy great economy of scale as a weapon of mass destruction, conceivably on a nuclear scale, but without traditional radiation problems. This would have significant strategic significance as targets could safely be occupied by troops immediately after attack. Separate studies are under way to deal with the impact of such technology on military planning and foreign policy (fn11).

At this time, construction techniques and quality control requirements remain highly sophisticated and at a level which would defy normal mass production. Unless willing to accept significant performance loss, it requires custom design and construction for any given application. As such, it lends itself to uses perhaps best appreciated by the intelligence apparatus. Therefore, its existence should not become general knowledge within other agencies such as DOD (fn12) unless further studies can find such a move advantageous. However, since the unique characteristics of the bomb could conceivably arouse great curiosity in aftermath investigations, its use as a covert tool should be undertaken with great restraint and reserved for highly selective application.


edit on 26/1/13 by LaBTop because: Typo's.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 07:57 AM
link   
Exploding TB's which form a gaseous cloud, build up the explosive force as the cloud ignites, the greater force being at the outer edges of the cloud -- further away from ignition point(s) -- and the overall downward effect nearer to ignition point(s) would apply lower toppling forces to nearer columns than the more radial forces at the perimeter.

A Nitrate-based bomb (ANFO) or High Explosive bomb (HE) would not have left columns closest to the ignition point(s) standing while knocking down identical columns further away.
Only a TB does that, just as can be seen in the 2001 "Spire" videos from the collapse of the WTC Towers. And in the 1995 OKC bombing photo's of the Murrah building there.

In the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the TB as described above by the author of the, internal-use-only, METC project report, would not be used in the same configuration as in the 1995 OKC bombing, for there was no "sky" in front of the WTC building within which to create a cloud, the bomb was exploded inside the basement. However, with some modification, the device could be triggered in such a way as to release the cloud radially rather than vertically, filling the air space within the basement parking structure in a suitable fashion. The final detonation there, would likely have been peripherally ignited at simultaneous multiple points. A cloud peripheral detonation would cause the pressure to grow progressively as it exploded inward to the center, driving the oxygenated explosive masses tightly together at the center. Where all the massive core columns were standing.

I still have no reasonable explanation why they would have optioned to break those core columns at their deep bottoms during both plane impacts. It does not fit the much later top-down collapses for both the Twin Towers.
Perhaps they tried to cut those columns so deep, in the hope that the plane impacts would really topple both towers. Which didn't happen.
In their Scenario-Two, the top-down collapse initiated by exploding TB's at every third floor, could have been assisted by those already-cut core columns in the basements, taking care of the anticipated problem of those last spires still standing, and then making room in those basements by displacement charges to let those spires glide down into that huge 8 floors deep debris hole.

As experienced in the World Trade Center bombing in 1993, this would create a significant blast force focused both downward and upward. Again, as in Oklahoma in 1995, there would be a pronounced sphere of destruction, as was indeed found in the World Trade Center in 1993, where the blast punched through several layers of concrete floors in both directions. Again, as in Oklahoma, there were no flash burns associated with incomplete combustion of the fuel-oil/fertilizer ANFO combination. Speculation that the van itself had been somehow transformed into the bomb casing, using its doors and windows, and perhaps scores cut into its walls, as directional vents for the expanding cloud, are quite reasonable.

Another design variant of the METC TB bomb accounts for the 2001 WTC-complex triple demolition.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 08:35 AM
link   
Unexploded FAE, looks like an early Chechnya model, with molded explosive casing, brown colored, and with lots of vertical incisions in it to let it flower open at ignition of the center charge that you see stick out to the right, and its loose lid from its first stage cannister. The parachute has opened, but the device malfunctioned. Some people have been extremely lucky that it didn't explode.

files.abovetopsecret.com...



The more recent TB's are much more sophisticated and finely machine-tooled.



posted on Jan, 27 2013 @ 12:53 PM
link   
reply to post by LaBTop
 


You do have an issue with any sorts of explosives in the basement. For starters, the core columns were not severed anywhere in the base of the core. How do I know? You can see the base of the core segments still standing above the piles.Sure they were stubs, but they still remained. Second, people survived in the cores during collapse. If the core columns were severed, then it would not be standing and not have people surviving.





top topics
 
9
<< 15  16  17    19  20 >>

log in

join