Non-IT News Thread
-
Boy learns to drive on YouTube for McDonald's joyride
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-39587853 -
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
-
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
-
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
-
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
-
Really, really close in total yield. Hiroshima was the smaller of the two dropped. The MOAB is still smaller. The FOAB that Russia has should be larger than Nagasaki significantly, even though it is still conventional.
-
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
FOAB
I thought the FOAB was only 44-50 tons of TNT. The little boy that was dropped on Nagasaki I believe was 15 Kilotons.
-
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
-
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
FOAB
I thought the FOAB was only 44-50 tons of TNT. The little boy that was dropped on Nagasaki I believe was 15 Kilotons.
Hiroshima was 15KT, Nagasaki was 21KT from what I've seen.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
FOAB
I thought the FOAB was only 44-50 tons of TNT. The little boy that was dropped on Nagasaki I believe was 15 Kilotons.
Hiroshima was 15KT, Nagasaki was 21KT from what I've seen.
That's right. Little boy was Hiroshima and Fat Man was Nagasaki. You're right in both instances.
-
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
FOAB
I thought the FOAB was only 44-50 tons of TNT. The little boy that was dropped on Nagasaki I believe was 15 Kilotons.
Hiroshima was 15KT, Nagasaki was 21KT from what I've seen.
That's right. Little boy was Hiroshima and Fat Man was Nagasaki. You're right in both instances.
I had that reversed too in yield until I researched in 30 minutes ago.
-
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
-
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
Don't these have to be dropped by a C-130?
-
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
Was that in one of the articles? My guess is that a top general was told to deploy it, not that he requested to use it. But those bombs are, TTBOMK, only assigned to the Air Force, so no general could use it except by requesting the Air Force to deploy it.
-
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
Don't these have to be dropped by a C-130?
No, they are designed for that, but it is one of a few potential deployment vehicles.
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
Was that in one of the articles? My guess is that a top general was told to deploy it, not that he requested to use it. But those bombs are, TTBOMK, only assigned to the Air Force, so no general could use it except by requesting the Air Force to deploy it.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-drops-mother-of-all-bombs-in-afghanistan-marking-weapons-first-use/
"General John Nicholson, the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan, needed permission to use the weapon, but it’s unclear how far up the chain of command his request traveled, CBS News’ David Martin reports."
-
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@Kelly said in Non-IT News Thread:
@coliver said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
@travisdh1 said in Non-IT News Thread:
@scottalanmiller said in Non-IT News Thread:
US just dropped the third largest bomb (not including tests of course) ever.
The MOAB?
Yes
Aren't those supposed to be more destructive than the nukes the USA used in WWII? Less radiation, but still.
Not that I'm aware of. They are still conventional, although very powerful. The issue I see here is that this is an airbust bomb against a cave. It's not really what it was designed for. I guess show of force?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GBU-43/B_Massive_Ordnance_Air_Blast
That is the only thing I can think of, but it doesn't really seem effective if your "shock and awe" doesn't really do anything than shake the ground.
Right, there is speculation that this was in reaction to a soldier that was recently killed? But that's only speculation. My guess is a show of force. "We have this and we're not afraid to use it!" mentality.
I work with the government. If a top general had to request the use of this bomb, I find it hard to believe they were able to get it approved and deployed that quickly.
Don't these have to be dropped by a C-130?
No, they are designed for that, but it is one of a few potential deployment vehicles.
Right, it was dropped from an MC-130.
