DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**sasquatch999** · 04-01-2006, 02:48 AM

No current or projected plane will carry 700 tonnes, but we have conventional explosives that are many times more powerful per lb than ammonium nitrate pfuel mix. They are also many times more expensive, which is why the amonium nitrate fuel mix is being used in the test. The test is not for the pourposes of testing a bomb; convention shaped explosives are pretty cut and dried. It is to test the cratering and seismic shock effects of large convetional exposives, to see how deeply they can crack bunkers.

04-01-2006, 02:48 AM	#23
sasquatch999 Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 337 Senior Member	No current or projected plane will carry 700 tonnes, but we have conventional explosives that are many times more powerful per lb than ammonium nitrate pfuel mix. They are also many times more expensive, which is why the amonium nitrate fuel mix is being used in the test. The test is not for the pourposes of testing a bomb; convention shaped explosives are pretty cut and dried. It is to test the cratering and seismic shock effects of large convetional exposives, to see how deeply they can crack bunkers.
	Quote