DRDO, PSU and Private Defence Sector News

NeXoft007

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,680
Likes
13,509
Country flag
You're doing a good job for the forces bro. don't get discouraged by rumours about u.
We're all here to support you anytime u need.
Those aren't rumors sadly. When my friends can give accurate info of situation at LoC, provide pics of them posing with senior officers, SF operatives etc, they can't be wrong either on what those few officers thinks about me.
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
Wiki is the worst source for nuanced topic like the use of FAE in bunkers etc - especially when Wiki sources stuff from HRW (a bunch of loonies who excel at the art of lying & exaggerations).

They even took material from the sources & misquoted them. The sources that wiki page states is their sources clearly says that Fuel Air Explosives are good only for unreinforced structures, but the nutjobs changed it to say that it can be used in reinforced structures!!

And you made up nonsense like oxygen requirement for FAE is same as that of humans!


Here's some better material (that bases its arguments on science & facts; and not on some flatulence)

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214914716300927

The actual requirement-performance is quite complex. As I mentioned earlier conventional blast inside structures is very effective in taking down both personnel and the structure due to intense pressure. Thermobaric blasts will destroy personnel due to intense heat and might 'burn' down structures - but not destroy hardened structures due to the blast.

"However, their effects are lethal only within their close vicinity and possess obvious undesirable shortcomings for destroying hardened targets such as caves, tunnels, etc. In order to overcome these shortcomings, great efforts have been spent on the development of new weapons which are able to generate higher blast, higher impulse and capable of using its energy not to destroy corners or walls only, but to travel around them efficiently and collapse the hardened targets"

"The need for advanced thermobaric explosives have become one of the urgent requirements when the aim is focused on destruction of targeted fortified structures, caves and bunkers. "
You have then failed to understand the whole purpose of FAE.

FAE is not something like conventional explosive. Each and every explosive is different in its working principle. Now simply talking, if you are only talking about demolition effect of any FAE, you have to look for fuel used and pressure created by it in its blast zone. For example if we do use Ethylene oxide then it is reported to create a pressure equivalent to 3.2 Megapascal in its detonation zone. Which roughly translates to 30kg/sqcm, and its not a small force. (please refer the PDF)

Now this is all about pressure it creates. But the primary destruction of any FAE is due to the temperature it creates not the pressure. I would like to thank you for that wonderful link which you provided. As you are not comfortable or agree with what Wiki says, lets have a look at few para on Science Direct.

Meanwhile the particles rapidly burn in the surrounding air later in time, thus resulting in an intense fireball and high blast overpressure action.

Although the pressure wave, because of the explosive deflagration, is considerably weaker in comparison to a conventional explosive such as RDX, the fuel can rapidly diffuse into tunnels, caves or bunkers, producing considerably high heat effect for habitants and/or ammunition.

The explosion of an aerosol bomb consumes the oxygen from the surrounding air (the explosive composition usually does not possess its own oxidizer). In contrast to general belief of layman, its deadly effect is not simply due to the lack of oxygen caused but because of barotrauma of the lungs arising from negative pressure wave following the positive pressure phase of the explosion.
Russia was the first country managed to develop such kind of weapons. RPO-A Schmel rocket, infantry flame-thrower tested successfully in 1984, was the first thermobaric weapon which contained a self-deflagrating mixture consisting of magnesium (Mg) and isopropyl nitrate (IPN). This simple thermobaric explosive produced high devastating pressure wave through the Afghanistan caves and tunnel systems, causing huge damages in the subterranean mazes of the region
Now let us see the begining of the para which you quoted...

The shock waves of conventional explosives are localized and substantially decrease while moving away from the explosion center. Thus, the conventional explosives have quite limited effects on fortified individuals, hiding inside bunkers and/or caves, etc.
I think this part about conventional explosive has not been lost to you. Anyway now lets see what is there in next paragraph.

In confined spaces, TBXs can become a source of lethal energy against soft targets . They exhibit a highly pronounced effect as they are able to add to the total impulse within fraction of a millisecond inside a building or up to one second within a tunnel . Because of this, TBXs have received great attention recently. The fuel burning via reaction with the detonation products (after burning using oxygen from the air) raises the temperature of the gaseous product cloud as well, and meantime strengthens the shock wave.
This is all about Thermobaric explosive or FAE. Now lets see how FAE compares with conventional explosive.

There has been a long bygone of studying the blast explosives, reactive metals and associated metal combustion technologies. The achievements of the development of Solid Fuel-Air-Explosive (SFAE) have been demonstrated by a 30–40% increase of internal blast over a conventional explosive.
Now let us see why it is beneficial in confined spaces like tunnel or bunkers.

The burning ball crashes to the barriers or the walls [13,17] and the kinetic energy of the medium in the ball is transferred into potential energy. The residual metal powder present may be ignited to form a new burning region. Of these four types, it is believed that the afterburning begins with the start of the detonation. It does not stop and even gets intense until the detonation processes finish. The fireball and the blast produced in the earlier stages are capable of reaching and turning corners and penetrate areas inaccessible to bomb fragments. Blast waves are intensified when reflected by walls and other surfaces, causing more intense damage effect of TBXs as compared to that of high explosives in confined conditions. The confined condition is important for TBXs. A limited space may be beneficial for the rising of temperature and pressure produced by the reactions. In contrast the temperature and pressure cannot be held or even reduced in the open environment, thus the result of damage decreases and may be inferior to the equally conventional high explosives.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2214914716300927

Now you see the effect of FAE weapons. When I said about using it in bunkers, I didn't mean to bring down the bunker. I meant it to burn out the bunker. But even this burning could bring down a whole bunker by igniting the stored explosive. FAE is not about blowing out, its about burning the target.

Although you have already shown yous distaste to Wiki, but nevertheless let me again quote it here.

A Human Rights Watch report of 1 February 2000[15] quotes a study made by the US Defense Intelligence Agency:

The [blast] kill mechanism against living targets is unique–and unpleasant.... What kills is the pressure wave, and more importantly, the subsequent rarefaction [vacuum], which ruptures the lungs.... If the fuel deflagrates but does not detonate, victims will be severely burned and will probably also inhale the burning fuel. Since the most common FAE fuels, ethylene oxide and propylene oxide, are highly toxic, undetonated FAE should prove as lethal to personnel caught within the cloud as most chemical agents.

According to a U.S. Central Intelligence Agency study,[15] "the effect of an FAE explosion within confined spaces is immense. Those near the ignition point are obliterated. Those at the fringe are likely to suffer many internal, and thus invisible injuries, including burst eardrums and crushed inner ear organs, severe concussions, ruptured lungs and internal organs, and possibly blindness." Another Defense Intelligence Agency document speculates that because the "shock and pressure waves cause minimal damage to brain tissue…it is possible that victims of FAEs are not rendered unconscious by the blast, but instead suffer for several seconds or minutes while they suffocate".[16]
Hope now you see the point.
 

Attachments

Enquirer

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
3,567
Likes
9,357
You have then failed to understand the whole purpose of FAE.
Now this is all about pressure it creates. But the primary destruction of any FAE is due to the temperature it creates not the pressure.
Thank you for quoting my own statements and trying to explain my own statements back to me like I didn't understand what I wrote!

I would like to thank you for that wonderful link which you provided.
You're welcome!

Now let us see why it is beneficial in confined spaces like tunnel or bunkers.
The mechanism described pertains to the new/under-development concept of Solid-Fuel-Air-Explosive (the crux of the entire paper) that hopes to fix the 'undesirable shortcomings' of the Fuel-Air-Explosive!!!!
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
Thank you for quoting my own statements and trying to explain my own statements back to me like I didn't understand what I wrote!
I never said that you didn't understood what you write. I had only clarified my and your perspective. You are talking primarily of blowing up the place which is not a role of FAE. I was talking about burning down the place, which is the primary role of these sort of weapon. Although this burning effect could lead to blow up too provided the secondary means are available.

The mechanism described pertains to the new/under-development concept of Solid-Fuel-Air-Explosive (the crux of the entire paper) that hopes to fix the 'undesirable shortcomings' of the Fuel-Air-Explosive!!!!
The mechanism described is not about new/ under developed concept. Its about the Operational stages and amendments. Let me quote the whole thing.

4. Operational stages and amendments
Blast weapons could have been designed to fill a gap in capability; they are generally used for the attack of “soft” targets including personnel, both in the open and within protective structures. With the increased number and range of these weapons, it is likely that military forces will have widespread use of them in future conflicts.

Thermobaric explosives are generally fuel-rich compositions containing a nitramine (RDX, HMX, etc.), but they are characterized by the energy release occurring over a longer period of time than standard explosives, thereby creating a long-duration pressure. It is generally believed that the thermobaric explosives undergo the following stages upon detonation. In the first stage, an initial shock (or blast) wave from the explosive causes the nitramine to undergo anaerobic detonation (essentially a reduction reaction) occurring within hundreds of microseconds to disperse the fuel particles. The anaerobic combustion of fuel particles occurs in a second stage within hundreds of microseconds [12]. The anaerobic combustion process happens along the detonation shock wave while consuming fuel particles in close proximity to the detonating nitramine. In the third stage (afterburning), the fuel-rich energetic material is subjected to aerobic combustion, which is initiated by the shock-wave-mixing with oxygen of the surrounding air and which lasts several microseconds. The nitramine residues are preferably present in the shock wave and undergoes anaerobic reaction with the fuel particles to propagate the shock wave and increase dispersion of the fuel particles [12].

When the explosion takes place in an airtight environment, the energy release of the afterburning process can be subdivided into four types:

1)
Earlier reports and articles [13–15] suggest that the metal powder in TBXs absorbs heat but does not release energy on the detonation wave front. The reflection of metal powder with the detonation products causes the first kind of afterburning.

2)
The metal and the detonation products react with oxygen of condensed air. Because of the large density gradient, the R-T (Rayleigh–Taylor) instability turbulent flow is considered in order to explain this mixture and burning step [16,17].

3)
The air detonation wave, reflected by the wall of the airtight environment, reacts with the high speed fireballs generated by the above process. Burning by the turbulent flow [18–20] is increased and the boundary temperature of the fireball rises to reignite the mixture of the metal and the detonation products.

4)
The burning ball crashes to the barriers or the walls [13,17] and the kinetic energy of the medium in the ball is transferred into potential energy. The residual metal powder present may be ignited to form a new burning region. Of these four types, it is believed that the afterburning begins with the start of the detonation. It does not stop and even gets intense until the detonation processes finish. The fireball and the blast produced in the earlier stages are capable of reaching and turning corners and penetrate areas inaccessible to bomb fragments. Blast waves are intensified when reflected by walls and other surfaces, causing more intense damage effect of TBXs as compared to that of high explosives in confined conditions. The confined condition is important for TBXs. A limited space may be beneficial for the rising of temperature and pressure produced by the reactions. In contrast the temperature and pressure cannot be held or even reduced in the open environment, thus the result of damage decreases and may be inferior to the equally conventional high explosives.
Please mind the underlined parts. So you see its all about TBX not and its operational effect. The EBX and amendments in its design is covered thereafter.
 

Enquirer

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
3,567
Likes
9,357
I never said that you didn't understood what you write. I had only clarified my and your perspective. You are talking primarily of blowing up the place which is not a role of FAE. I was talking about burning down the place, which is the primary role of these sort of weapon. Although this burning effect could lead to blow up too provided the secondary means are available.



The mechanism described is not about new/ under developed concept. Its about the Operational stages and amendments. Let me quote the whole thing.


Please mind the underlined parts. So you see its all about TBX not and its operational effect. The EBX and amendments in its design is covered thereafter.
I know how discussions go on on this forum - relentless spewing of nonsense....just because one can!!!

I don't wish to indulge in further discussion when you're contorting yourself to support an ill conceived statement!

Just read this in the very introduction of the article....

"...The need for advanced thermobaric explosives have become one of the urgent requirements when the aim is focused on destruction of targeted fortified structures, caves and bunkers. Some highly metal-based systems have been designed to exploit the secondary combustion involved and resulted from active metal particles they contain. Hence sustained overpressure and additional thermal contribution can be achieved..."
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
I know how discussions go on on this forum - relentless spewing of nonsense....just because one can!!!

I don't wish to indulge in further discussion when you're contorting yourself to support an ill conceived statement!

Just read this in the very introduction of the article....

"...The need for advanced thermobaric explosives have become one of the urgent requirements when the aim is focused on destruction of targeted fortified structures, caves and bunkers. Some highly metal-based systems have been designed to exploit the secondary combustion involved and resulted from active metal particles they contain. Hence sustained overpressure and additional thermal contribution can be achieved..."
I loved this part of yours..........
I know how discussions go on on this forum - relentless spewing of nonsense....just because one can!!!
because you are doing exactly the same.

Time and time again you are sticking to your point of blowing up things whereas I have already mentioned that FAE is mainly for burning, not blowing. Examples of that is near at hand.

And as you already said...
I don't wish to indulge in further discussion when you're contorting yourself to support an ill conceived statement!
I too feel the same, because you are too moving in a linear direction in this discussion. Neither you are trying to understand what the other person is trying to say nor I believe you have read what the article is trying to make you understand. You have just got stuck up with one idea and is only seeing tit and bits which is supporting your idea. I could understand your frustration.
 

Enquirer

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
3,567
Likes
9,357
Time and time again you are sticking to your point of blowing up things whereas I have already mentioned that FAE is mainly for burning, not blowing.
Ever paused to think that 'maybe it's not used for blowing stuff because it CAN'T'???

Neither you are trying to understand what the other person is trying to say
I fully understand what you're saying:
You wanted FAE to be used as bunker buster weapon (not sure if you knew at that point that FAE burn more than blast; but after pointing out this fact for you, you somehow seem to fall in love with burning personnel and don't care about destroying the structure itself!)

nor I believe you have read what the article is trying to make you understand
says the guy who proudly presented factually incorrect info from a wikipage that mangled info from another amateurish article! You never bothered to check if Wiki was even quoting the info from its sources correctly!
And somehow, now you're an expert on the article that I presented!
Despite the article clearly mentioning the short comings and the need to redesign the weapon to meet a field requirement, you feel confident that the weapon is great as is to destroy bunkers! Why? because in your infinite rocking & creaking of your arm chair you think others don't notice the loud flatulence!!
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
Ever paused to think that 'maybe it's not used for blowing stuff because it CAN'T'???


I fully understand what you're saying:
You wanted FAE to be used as bunker buster weapon (not sure if you knew at that point that FAE burn more than blast; but after pointing out this fact for you, you somehow seem to fall in love with burning personnel and don't care about destroying the structure itself!)


says the guy who proudly presented factually incorrect info from a wikipage that mangled info from another amateurish article! You never bothered to check if Wiki was even quoting the info from its sources correctly!
And somehow, now you're an expert on the article that I presented!
Despite the article clearly mentioning the short comings and the need to redesign the weapon to meet a field requirement, you feel confident that the weapon is great as is to destroy bunkers! Why? because in your infinite rocking & creaking of your arm chair you think others don't notice the loud flatulence!!
:facepalm: My dear good mate.......... Just read again what I said at first.

Just imagine it in an underground bunker. PCB warheads should be like this in bunker bursting role.
I was talking about mating FAE with PCB WARHEAD............. Now PCB is used for bunker bursting right?
Now let us look what you made out of it ...

How exactly will "Fuel AIR Explosive" work inside a bunker????

The fact is that once an ordnance penetrates a bunker - even a small amount of regular explosive can be devastating; the pressure build up inside the bunker will be astronomical!
And you have further shown your intelligence with this comment.

It was a rhetorical question!
You got the explosions mixed up one for the other!

By definition FAE will need TONNES of oxygen - so much so that it creates a 'vacuum' like conditions in large area around the explosion that's famed to 'suck out' people's lungs even at a distance from the actual explosion!!

Inside a bunker there isn't that much oxygen to ignite ALL of the Fuel that's dispersed into the air (inside the bunker)!! As such I feel it's not an ideal weapons inside a bunker.

On the other hand even a small amount of regular explosive (that doesn't need air) can create so much pressure in the enclosed space that it'll kill every living organism and not to mention demolish the bunker itself!
Then I quoted wiki and specifically underlined a part.

The antipersonnel effect of the blast wave is more severe in foxholes and tunnels, and in enclosed spaces, such as bunkers and caves.
May be you might have missed out my whole comment. If you care (which I am sure you won't) you could check my reply in https://defenceforumindia.com/forum...-news-and-discussion.55/page-189#post-1425293

So now you see who was going where?
 

Enquirer

New Member
Joined
Mar 20, 2018
Messages
3,567
Likes
9,357
I was talking about mating FAE with PCB WARHEAD............. Now PCB is used for bunker bursting right?
Now let us look what you made out of it ...
You do know that PCB stands for Penetration-cum-BLAST, don't you?? Thermobaric and PCB rounds are deemed separate because....because....cmon say it...you can do it....Thermobaric rounds don't have a big blast!!
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
You do know that PCB stands for Penetration-cum-BLAST, don't you?? Thermobaric and PCB rounds are deemed separate because....because....cmon say it...you can do it....Thermobaric rounds don't have a big blast!!
Read clearly..

I was talking about mating FAE with PCB WARHEAD. A warhead could have two different charge, isn't it?
 

Kshithij

DharmaYoddha
New Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2017
Messages
2,242
Likes
1,961
You do know that PCB stands for Penetration-cum-BLAST, don't you?? Thermobaric and PCB rounds are deemed separate because....because....cmon say it...you can do it....Thermobaric rounds don't have a big blast!!
You are right that thermobaric bombs can't be used to blast things. It is more or less like improvised Napalm. But, the idea that it will work extremely well in bunkers and tunnels is true. The problem wth thermobaric bombs being used in bunkers is the problem of delivery.

Read clearly..

I was talking about mating FAE with PCB WARHEAD. A warhead could have two different charge, isn't it?
Mating thermobaric bombs with PCB in tandem mode is very difficult. Most of the explosion of the thermobaric bomb will take outside the bunker in open atmosphere. Bunkers generally have thick concrete and the bunker buster bombs put pressure on the concrete in a shaped manner to make it cave in and get a hole. The process is not instantaneous and the second stage will be ignited before it enters the bunker but at the edge of it. It is not possible to mate two big bombs with each other in tandem manner. The bomb will become overweight making the drop difficult.
 

Chinmoy

New Member
Joined
Aug 12, 2015
Messages
8,930
Likes
23,094
Country flag
Mating thermobaric bombs with PCB in tandem mode is very difficult. Most of the explosion of the thermobaric bomb will take outside the bunker in open atmosphere. Bunkers generally have thick concrete and the bunker buster bombs put pressure on the concrete in a shaped manner to make it cave in and get a hole. The process is not instantaneous and the second stage will be ignited before it enters the bunker but at the edge of it. It is not possible to mate two big bombs with each other in tandem manner. The bomb will become overweight making the drop difficult.
Have a look at these..

SAAW Warhead.JPG

Look at the penetration of PCB warhead.

DbrTjLAXkAAYtgj.jpg


Now blast would occur only after penetration. And mating these two would not be an impossible task. Look at the overall length of 1300 mm or 4 feet is enough to have both charges. Although the conventional explosive charge would get small comparatively.
 

porky_kicker

New Member
Joined
Apr 8, 2016
Messages
6,030
Likes
44,621
Country flag
Those aren't rumors sadly. When my friends can give accurate info of situation at LoC, provide pics of them posing with senior officers, SF operatives etc, they can't be wrong either on what those few officers thinks about me.
What rumours?.....................
 

NeXoft007

New Member
Joined
May 10, 2017
Messages
1,680
Likes
13,509
Country flag
Have a look at these..

View attachment 24580
Look at the penetration of PCB warhead.

View attachment 24581

Now blast would occur only after penetration. And mating these two would not be an impossible task. Look at the overall length of 1300 mm or 4 feet is enough to have both charges. Although the conventional explosive charge would get small comparatively.
This will ensure PAF Fighters will not be able to take off.
 

Steven Rogers

NaPakiRoaster
New Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2017
Messages
1,537
Likes
2,417
Country flag
Can anyone find me the pdf file released by mod, based on projects that will be sanctioned beyond 2020. Which also includes development of IRST, Astra NG missile etc.

Sent from my Aqua Ace II using Tapatalk
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kay

Articles

Top