[Closed] 40,000lb explosive detonation next to a US aircraft carrier.

They've done bigger...

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=12ZX3r-C2ZE

USS Saratoga is the aircraft carrier that's beam on to the blast.

no mention of all that sacrificial marine life.

no mention of all that sacrificial marine life.

So an entire island nation is lied to, relocated, lied to again, relocated again to a place where they can't live as they did and are dependent on US food supplies and will likely NEVER be repatriated. Another island suffers a similar fate but then has the entire island's radioactive topsoil bulldozed to one end and covered in concrete to allow people to return, but now the concrete is degrading with all the consequences, and other tests spread fallout to neighbouring islands where kids play in the 'snow' before becoming sick... and you're worried about the fish?

Struggling to see the point when its not difficult to model and simulate the physical stresses on the equipment whilst the human operator gets pulped in the process.

So an entire island nation is lied to, relocated, lied to again, relocated again to a place where they can’t live as they did and are dependent on US food supplies and will likely NEVER be repatriated. Another island suffers a similar fate but then has the entire island’s radioactive topsoil bulldozed to one end and covered in concrete to allow people to return, but now the concrete is degrading with all the consequences, and other tests spread fallout to neighbouring islands where kids play in the ‘snow’ before becoming sick

I was referring to the OP's post, modern modeling could have simulated that I'm sure and you know that.

But I guess you just seeking to be argumentative for the sake of it. 🙄 seems to be the STW way for some at the moment.

Struggling to see the point when its not difficult to model and simulate the physical stresses on the equipment whilst the human operator gets pulped in the process.

You can't trust models if you don't occasionally calibrate them against physical tests.

So an entire island nation is lied to, relocated, lied to again, relocated again to a place where they can’t live as they did and are dependent on US food supplies and will likely NEVER be repatriated. Another island suffers a similar fate but then has the entire island’s radioactive topsoil bulldozed to one end and covered in concrete to allow people to return, but now the concrete is degrading with all the consequences, and other tests spread fallout to neighbouring islands where kids play in the ‘snow’ before becoming sick… and you’re worried about the fish?

It's possible to be worried about both and both those things matter.

But I guess you just seeking to to be argumentative for the sake of it.

Apologies, not my intention - at least not this early on a Monday 😀 I've read a fair bit into the treatment of the pacific islanders by the US and it's not something that many folk are aware of - but then you weren't responding to my post so I effectively lit my own fuse. Time for more coffee and reflection.

Struggling to see the point when its not difficult to model

On the ship's structure maybe, but on every piece of stuff that's on it? It could be that every cupboard door at head height swings open, or desks that aren't in the right place start moving about and blocking other stuff, and so on and so on, endlessly. it's not just a test of how well the ship stands up to massive explosions, it's a test of how all the systems and equipment and design of it all does as well.

I've been watching some of this of late(popped up on my YT)

All very interesting, though the one which had no problem was when set against a fleet of the old WW2 destroyers, which were heavily armoured, unlike today's modern battleships.

Gonna be a lot of marine mammals with tinitus. I wonder if there are any whales who didnt hear that?

It's a very useful exercise if you have the money; as above you can model the forces but you can't be 100% sure that the simulations are accurate without real world testing. It also means everything on the ship is tested - even a loose light fitting could fall and smack someone on the head and simulations aren't done to that level.

The Royal Navy and most others don't do this sort of trial due to the cost - it takes a lengthy refit afterwards to fix everything that's shaken loose and check for any serious deformities in the ship's structure. Sometimes local shock trials are done on key equipment sets like engines or combat systems that mimic the expected forces, but mostly shock resilience is demonstrated by designing to the applicable NATO/Defence Standards.

We did a series of firings on a frigate in the Solent many years ago. Looking at what our high speed cameras captured you don't want to be on a ship when it's hit! I can't recall now what the frigate had originally been named but the navy changed it before the firings as not to upset any of it's former crew

Pretty impressive but I do wonder to what extent it’s a PR exercise? I mean they must already have pretty good data on this sort of stuff from the aforementioned nuclear tests.

Useless factoid of the day - did you know that the German cruiser Prinz Eugen (of Bismarck and Hood fame) actually survived the war, and was used by the US in one of their atomic tests. It also survived this but capsized while under tow afterwards. If you go to Kwajalein Atoll on Google earth and follow the perimeter of the atoll you will eventually find the stern still sticking up out of the sea.

100% not a PR exercise, they do this to every 1st of class vessel and it rarely makes the news - it's only because the Ford's are in the news alot for both good and bad reasons. Due to the multitude of issues in commissioning they are often publicised as a white elephant! They also use plenty of tech not used during the nuclear tests like the electromagnetic catapults and munition lifts as well as the nuclear reactors used for propulsion!

I was always surprised how well the ship's withstood the nuclear blasts, of course everyone onboard would either be pulped or die an agonising death from radiation, but most ships above cruiser size actually stayed afloat.

I’ve read a fair bit into the treatment of the pacific islanders by the US and it’s not something that many folk are aware of

I couldn't agree more, especially the shameful role of the Labour Party, and the indisputable racism which was behind it all.

However the BBC article in the OP claims that this particular incident occurred in an unnamed location off the east coast of the United States?

Btw it shouldn't be forgotten that France regularly carried out nuclear tests which it claimed were very safe despite insisting, against strong international objections, to carry them out many thousands of miles away from Metropolitan France.

I can't remember which ship it was that the Royal Navy ordered to sail through the fallout of one explosion for 8 days to see what would happen, needless to say the results were grim. I think the drinking water was contaminated, so all personnel were effected to a greater or lesser extent. I used to speak with a couple of Old boys from the BNTVA (the association of veterans that looks after the interests of servicemen involved in the early nuclear tests); and the lack of recognition is pretty shocking.

Remember the shock trial uses conventional explosives, not nuclear!

when its not difficult to model and simulate the physical stresses on the equipment whilst the human operator gets pulped in the process.

For the nuclear tests it was very much about finding out what the damage would be and to help plan attacks on the soviets and possible counter measures eg spreading ships out.

For this test though its because you cant model everything perfectly. Just think if an awkwardly routed cable got severed and you lost all power?
The US Navy went all out and sank the former USS America in destructive tests since they were getting concerned that all the lessons learnt from WWII were rather old and applied to far smaller carriers.

Very interesting thread! Have read a bit about the difference between Japanese and US carriers in WW2 - one of the main ones being the US approach to damage control, and building in features to allow damaged ships to be saved, unlike the Japanese carriers which were basically floating bombs.

But with the apparent pin-point accuracy of modern weapons, what's the point in testing a near-miss when the most likely outcome of any munitions getting through is a direct hit?

when the most likely outcome of any munitions getting through is a direct hit?

Because pin point accuracy isnt guaranteed plus counter measures such as Phalanx or anti torpedo torpedoes might only manage to destroy the munition at close range.
The ideal test would obviously be to destroy the ship but that might get a few complaints.

isn't that the result of a sea wiz blowing up a closing suicide iranian gun boat bomb

It's the reason the charge is absolutely massive - it simulates a 'hit' from a heavyweight torpedo or underwater mine (noting both are designed to explode underneath the ship) in terms of shock transmitting through the vessel interior but without wrecking the hull.

Above water explosives like an anti ship missile actually transmit much less shock and that isn't really a concern compared to the localised damage they'll do.

I agree with bruneep re. marine life.

its not difficult to model and simulate the physical stresses on the equipment

If it was that easy to simulate, car manufacturers wouldn't be required to do crash tests because they would just be able to submit a simulation of a crash and have the car certified.

If it was that easy to simulate, car manufacturers wouldn’t be required to do crash tests because they would just be able to submit a simulation of a crash and have the car certified.

Exactly. And it *is* difficult to simulate this stuff - or at least to simulate it well. Global and local simulations of something the size of a ship that would be an abolutely enormous undertaking - and the results would still only as good as the input data and the skill of the analysts. You can't beat physical testing.

isn’t that the result of a sea wiz blowing up a closing suicide iranian gun boat bomb

On the you tube link I posted, thats one of the scenarios. Fleet of Iranian gunboats attacking in the Strait of Hormuz.
The idea for such an attack comes from an actual military tactician, who's written books on the subject, and the Iranian revolutionary guard have anywhere up to 5000 of these fast attack boats, called Boghammers.
Basically heading en masse towards the carrier fleet in a swarming attack.
Vid 12 - Can An Iranian Gunboat Fleet Beat A US Carrier Group ?. Only 100 Iranian gunboats used in this roleplay.

I spent a couple of years working out in Alberta, Canada at BATUS / CFB Suffield.

In 1963 (about 50 years before I was there I might add!) the Canadians detonated 500 tons of TNT on the prairie in Operation Snowball.

Circular tracks at the 1 mile, 5 mile, 10 mile and I think up to 25 miles from the explosion were created on which various structures and bits of equipment were placed to test the effects of the blast. These tracks can still be clearly seen on Google Earth:

It's very interesting that US military sabre rattling passes without much comment in the UK media, but if North Korea (a nation which justifiably feels itself under threat from a belligerent foreign power, regardless of its own vile regime) does the same, you can bet there'll be plenty of reasons why this is so terrible.

Perhaps the US should concentrate more on the issues within its own borders, than be worrying so much about trying desperately to maintain its grip on global power. China could turn the US into glass in minutes, there really is no defence against that. The biggest threat to global peace and stability is in fact the US. The fact that China, Russia and nations such as Iran and North Korea have the capability of striking back against the West, is something the US has to take responsibility for; no other nation has caused so much war, death, destruction and misery as the US, in modern history. Yet it can't even solve its own domestic problems. Yay. Go USA.

It’s very interesting that US military sabre rattling passes without much comment in the UK

This is not sabre rattling, it's an engineering test.

no other nation has caused so much war, death, destruction and misery as the US, in modern history.

Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were much worse. Millions upon millions of Eastern Europeans and Asians died because of them. The Blitz and the fighting in France were child's play in comparison. The Soviet Union was also much worse. Yes, the U.S. is often problematic but they are far from the worst behaved country in modern history.

Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were much worse. Millions upon millions of Eastern Europeans and Asians died because of them

So what do you reckon the US's total is up to now ?. Iraq, Afghanistan, then take Operation Condor into account. Installing dictators so nobody is south America has the ability to stand shoulder to shoulder to the US, and of course the Asian pacific, Vietnam, Korea. Or how about Cuba or the Philippines, or Lebanon, or how about Libya. Maybe the annexation of the Hawaiian islands.
Let's not forget Panama.
I mean, what is the total death toll of civilians from all this interference of the US ?. I'd say they've long surpassed the death toll the Nazis inflicted on the world and are fast approaching Soviet statistics.

This is not sabre rattling, it’s an engineering test.

Biblical proportions of naivety on show here today on STW 😯

I mean, what is the total death toll of civilians from all this interference of the US ?. I’d say they’ve long surpassed the death toll the Nazis inflicted on the world and are fast approaching Soviet statistics.

It's probably not anywhere near TBH.  Just the Holocaust alone is well over 6 million, that doesn't include military deaths inflicted on themselves or others. The entire Vietnam war deaths on all sides from mid 50's to mid 70's is about 2.5million I get the point you're making about modern US militarism, and I agree with you with regards to their adventurism and support of coups and what have you, but honestly nothing comes anywhere near as close as WW2 for slaughter, apart from maybe the Taiping Civil War and frankly no-one seems to have ever heard of that one.

This is not sabre rattling, it’s an engineering test.

It's sabre rattling. It's showing off how mighty the US war machine is. Well, trying to, at least. The veil has slipped, somewhat, however.

Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan were much worse. Millions upon millions of Eastern Europeans and Asians died because of them. The Blitz and the fighting in France were child’s play in comparison. The Soviet Union was also much worse. Yes, the U.S. is often problematic but they are far from the worst behaved country in modern history.

By 'modern', I meant in the last 50-60 years or so. So by that metric, they are far and away the very worst nation on Earth for waging terror, war and destruction. That cannot be argued against. I think arguing that simply because less civilians have died as a result of US imperialist belligerence, means the US isn't as 'bad', is like saying one serial killer isn't as bad as another, because they have less victims. The global effect of US warmongering has affected far more people than the 2 world wars combined, in far more countries and regions on Earth. US foreign 'intervention' is still killing and maiming people today, in places like Laos and Cambodia, because of the indiscriminate use of landmines decades ago, weapons banned under international law. US made weapons are used daily in conflicts around the globe. But continue to defend the US if you must; they are, after all, our 'friends'.

By ‘modern’, I meant in the last 50-60 years or so.

If you exclude anything that doesn't suit your purpose, you will always be right. However, if you include the worst bloodbath in history, the U.S. is an order of magnitude better.

That map doesn't include Asia, where 20 or 30 or 40 million people died, it's impossible to know for sure how many, but it was a staggering number.

It's actually testing how well you're equipment stands up to attack rather than testing offensive weapons. In my time at the MOD virtually everything we did and tested was based around the survivability of equipment and personnel. We did test some offensive capabilities but it was only a small part of the work. And in case anyone is any doubt blowing things up and getting paid for it is about as good a job as you can get 😀

The death toll attributed to Chairman Mao and Stalin alone in their communist exploits causes any previous single conflict and the nazi holocaust to pale into insignificance...and it wasn't even war - well not a hot one at least, it was a culture war and evil dictators murdering their own civilians. Staggers me how we all know how evil and bad the far right has been in the past with Nazi Germany but standing up and claiming you're a communist or marxist doesn't attract the same shock and response as if you were to stand up and claim you were a nazi. It should do.

standing up and claiming you’re a communist or marxist doesn’t attract the same shock and response as if you were to stand up and claim you were a nazi.

I don't think it's quite as simple as that. Marxism is a fairly abstract theory about the alienation of workers from the means of production. I'm not a big fan of it, but it did make an important point about how unchecked capitalism was problematic. Lenin and Stalin took that and used it to justify a totalitarian state. It's possible to be a Marxist without being a totalitarian, but communist countries were awful places to live, that's why the communist bloc collapsed. Marxism also inspired socialism, which waters it down a lot so that strategic industries are nationalized but private capital also plays an important role. I'm not a fan of trying to resurrect socialism, but being a socialist is not comparable to the Nazis, Stalinists, or Maoists. Genocide was inherent to Nazism, but not to Marxism/socialism.

wobbliscott
Full Member

Staggers me how we all know how evil and bad the far right has been in the past with Nazi Germany but standing up and claiming you’re a communist or marxist doesn’t attract the same shock and response as if you were to stand up and claim you were a nazi. It should do.

This is, basically, daft. Sorry. The Nazis were a very specific group, if you say you are a nazi you are choosing to identify directly with that.

That is not the case with communism or marxism. Marx died in 1883 when Stalin was 5 ffs so trying to tar all Marxists with the Stalin brush is obviously ridiculous.

Struggling to see the point when its not difficult to model and simulate the physical stresses on the equipment

Having spent the past 15 years at the cutting edge of modelling and simulation I can tell that you’re quite right, it’s not difficult to model, it’s damn near impossible. Non linear analysis of an aircraft carrier subject to supersonic air shockwaves followed by subsurface near-hull detonation - modelling simultaneously the structural dynamics, effects on electrical systems, pipe work, ,unsecured equipment, etc and with enough detail to provide guidance on design repair or methods of operation… Good luck if you think it’s easy!

..It could be that every cupboard door at head height swings open, or desks that aren’t in the right place start moving about and blocking other stuff, and so on and so on, endlessly. it’s not just a test of how well the ship stands up to massive explosions, it’s a test of how all the systems and equipment and design of it all does as well.

Pretty much every thing on a warship is solidly bolted into place. If it's something that has to be moveable, then there'll be some way of locking it in place: "Secured for sea" and "Secured for Action". Cupboards are locked shut, and often have additional bars fitted across for extra security. Office equipment kept to a minimum and all other clobber is locked into drawers and cupboards. There's a conscious effort to keep the ship secured, and anything that is installed or is needed is thought about.

These tests are more to see what happens to all those relatively delicate electrical systems. Relays get banged open, or shut. Actuators and servos get nocked out of alignment... etc etc.

Pretty much every thing on a warship is solidly bolted into place. If it’s something that has to be moveable, then there’ll be some way of locking it in place:

I've filmed a full weight dummy sat in an operators chair cut in half by the desk they were sat at. It doesn't matter how well the desk is bolted down when the entire wall it's fixed to is coming at you. The chair was on castors and the desk had crushed the dummies abdomen to a couple of inches thick before it even began to move.

Have a look at 'bubble pulse' to see the damage an underwater explosion can cause, models are good, and used to work out the best way to set up the test to minimise risk, but as ships are complex structures, it's hard to simulate real world scenarios.

This test will help assist in modifying any weak points and issues, not sure if there are videos, but the US did similar in the 70s or 80s and videoed inside the ship during the test, watching the bulkheads fail shows the forces being applied during this type of event!

Pretty much every thing on a warship is solidly bolted into place

Oh sure, I don't doubt they've done their homework, I think tests like these are designed to reveal those "ah-ha" moments aren't they?

https://youtube.com/shorts/YjAFW_qJr2A?feature=share

. The chair was on castors