1. Forum
  2. Usenet
  3. UK.D-I-Y

  • OT: How do you make bombs less bomby?

    From Andy Burns@21:1/5 to All on Wed Jan 22 09:56:06 2025
    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Alan J. Wylie@21:1/5 to Andy Burns on Wed Jan 22 10:36:37 2025
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> writes:

    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    A bubble curtain can help
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_curtain>

    I've suggested this before, when a cave diver was asking about reducing
    the risk of hearing damage during hammer drilling.

    --
    Alan J. Wylie https://www.wylie.me.uk/ mailto:<alan@wylie.me.uk>

    Dance like no-one's watching. / Encrypt like everyone is.
    Security is inversely proportional to convenience

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Spike@21:1/5 to Alan J. Wylie on Wed Jan 22 11:22:19 2025
    Alan J. Wylie <alan@wylie.me.uk> wrote:
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> writes:

    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those
    disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    A bubble curtain can help
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_curtain>

    I've suggested this before, when a cave diver was asking about reducing
    the risk of hearing damage during hammer drilling.

    I take it that hostile actors that blow up underwater pipelines and interconnectors will undertake such measures too?

    And what about sundry noises caused by installing, maintaining, and decommissioning wind farm turbines?

    --
    Spike

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Davey@21:1/5 to Spike on Wed Jan 22 11:32:31 2025
    On 22 Jan 2025 11:22:19 GMT
    Spike <aero.spike@mail.com> wrote:

    Alan J. Wylie <alan@wylie.me.uk> wrote:
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> writes:

    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to
    those disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    A bubble curtain can help
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_curtain>

    I've suggested this before, when a cave diver was asking about
    reducing the risk of hearing damage during hammer drilling.

    I take it that hostile actors that blow up underwater pipelines and interconnectors will undertake such measures too?

    And what about sundry noises caused by installing, maintaining, and decommissioning wind farm turbines?


    Using bomby things? Now there's a thought, pylons too.

    --
    Davey.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Theo@21:1/5 to junk@admac.myzen.co.uk on Wed Jan 22 11:51:29 2025
    alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 09:56, Andy Burns wrote:
    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>


    Another piece of Bull Shit reporting.

    How much more noise does pile driving for a off shore wind turbine
    foundation make compared to the occasional underwater explosion to
    disposal of ordinance.

    No idea but dynamite fishing is a thing - it's the shock wave that causes
    them to burst and float to the surface. Perhaps blowing up a UXB is more
    akin to that, whereas pile driving makes a thump but doesn't create fish killing shockwaves?

    Theo

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From GB@21:1/5 to Alan J. Wylie on Wed Jan 22 12:03:32 2025
    On 22/01/2025 10:36, Alan J. Wylie wrote:
    Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> writes:

    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those
    disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    A bubble curtain can help
    <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bubble_curtain>

    I've suggested this before, when a cave diver was asking about reducing
    the risk of hearing damage during hammer drilling.



    There are many orders of magnitude difference between a drill and an
    explosion. I know the wp article mentions explosions, but it doesn't
    provide any references for that. I'm sceptical that bubbles could make
    any *significant* reduction.

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From alan_m@21:1/5 to Andy Burns on Wed Jan 22 11:16:24 2025
    On 22/01/2025 09:56, Andy Burns wrote:
    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>


    Another piece of Bull Shit reporting.

    How much more noise does pile driving for a off shore wind turbine
    foundation make compared to the occasional underwater explosion to
    disposal of ordinance.

    I have limited experience of clearing (unexploded) ordinance. When
    Maplin airport was proposed I had a summer job detecting ordinance on
    Maplin Sands, including digging down to it. The location has been used
    for a couple of hundred years as a weapons testing range and what can be
    found, sometimes buried very deep, is everything from fused cannon balls
    to 18 inch naval shells. When testing guns or mortar tubes the mutations
    may have been representative dummies with no explosives or fuses. When
    testing the munitions they would have fired live rounds some of which
    failed to explode.

    If an area has to be cleared for deeply buried unexploded ordinance
    prior to driving the foundations for a wind turbine then its going to
    be a very costly business and probably making building a wind farm in
    that location uneconomic. The main problem will be detection and gaining
    access to the munitions rather than disposal.

    The photo in the article shows an underwater explosion but possibly set
    up to give the maximum dramatic impact for the camera. When I was
    working on Maplin sands there was a permanent small military bomb
    disposal team who would identify any suspicious items found and if
    suspected of still being live would (mainly) remove them to the low
    water limit and detonate them during high tide, under water. If the
    press was around the resulting explosion would have produced a
    spectacular water eruption but during routine disposal it was much of a non-event.

    I'm sure that those disposing of unexploded ordinance have been well
    aware of how to minimise the effect for at least 100 years, and
    especially with WWII items on land.

    --
    mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From alan_m@21:1/5 to Theo on Wed Jan 22 12:59:11 2025
    On 22/01/2025 11:51, Theo wrote:
    alan_m <junk@admac.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
    On 22/01/2025 09:56, Andy Burns wrote:
    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those
    disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>


    Another piece of Bull Shit reporting.

    How much more noise does pile driving for a off shore wind turbine
    foundation make compared to the occasional underwater explosion to
    disposal of ordinance.

    No idea but dynamite fishing is a thing - it's the shock wave that causes them to burst and float to the surface. Perhaps blowing up a UXB is more akin to that, whereas pile driving makes a thump but doesn't create fish killing shockwaves?

    Theo


    Dynamite fishing doesn't kill all the fish in a river or all if the sea.
    It will have a limited range. It's not likely all 300,000 unexploded
    munitions are going to be detonated in one go :) In reality it will be a
    very small amount of explosives at a time, assuming that they can
    actually detected and recovered.

    --
    mailto : news {at} admac {dot} myzen {dot} co {dot} uk

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)
  • From Thomas Prufer@21:1/5 to Andy Burns on Thu Jan 23 15:01:59 2025
    On Wed, 22 Jan 2025 09:56:06 +0000, Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> wrote:

    So, how do you make bombs less bomby, without increasing risk to those >disposing of them?

    <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1dgrvww3qeo>

    The Baltic Sea is full of dumped munitions, including poison gas. Currently these are being cleared by hauling them up and burning them. This is facilitated
    by a lot of the stuff having been deliberately dumped, so without detonators. Also, exploding the stuff tends to spread unreacted bits around...

    Thomas Prufer

    --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
    * Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)