the comparrison is deeply flawed.  A metric tonne is a unit of mass, a 
ton is a unit of force.  Someone screwed up significantly when we went 
metric.  It should have been Newtons or Kilo-Newtons for measuring weight.

Ian. 

ChrisAtUpw@....... wrote:

> In a message dated 31/03/2006, jpopelish@........ writes:
>
>     Is anyone planning on trying to capture this bump?
>     http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,92910,00.html
>
> >>    the spectacle of detonating a 700-ton (635-metric ton) explosive 
> in the Nevada desert
>  
>     It might be helpful if the weights were correctly defined. There 
> are metric tonnes, short tons and long tons, but there is no such 
> animal as a 'metric ton'.
>  
> >>    James Tegnelia, head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, a 
> Pentagon unit that is working on technical aspects of how to destroy 
> deeply buried enemy weapons.
>  
>     There are already quite a few nuclear ground burst depressions at 
> various test sites, which James could measure; Enewetak in the 
> Marshall Islands, for instance.
>     If James had read up the history of WW II, he might have heard 
> about deep penetration 'Earthquake' bombs for destroying underground 
> sites. This is the only effective way that was found to destroy a 
> deeply buried installation. There are deep bunkers in Europe which 
> were destroyed this way in WW II, but which could be studied. How 
> about the installations in Iraq?
>     I would be interested to know how the military intend to detonate 
> this amount of AN/FO? What about the toxic by-products? Check which 
> way the wind is blowing on the 2nd....
>  
>     Regards,
>  
>     Chris Chapman




  
  


the comparrison is deeply flawed.  A metric tonne is a unit of mass, a
ton is a unit of force.  Someone screwed up significantly when we went
metric.  It should have been Newtons or Kilo-Newtons for measuring
weight.



Ian.  



ChrisAtUpw@....... wrote:


  
  
  
  

  
In a message dated 31/03/2006, jpopelish@........ writes:
  
Is anyone planning on trying to capture this bump?

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/0,13319,92910,00.html
  
>>    the spectacle of detonating a 700-ton (635-metric
ton) explosive in the Nevada desert
  
 
  
    It might be helpful if the weights were correctly defined.
There are metric tonnes, short tons and long tons, but there is no such
animal as a 'metric ton'.
  
 
  
>>    James Tegnelia, head of the Defense Threat Reduction
Agency, a Pentagon unit that is working on technical aspects of how to
destroy deeply buried enemy weapons. 
  
 
  
    There are already quite a few nuclear ground burst
depressions at various test sites, which James could measure; Enewetak
in the Marshall Islands, for instance.
  
    If James had read up the history of WW II, he might have
heard about deep penetration 'Earthquake' bombs for destroying
underground sites. This is the only effective way that was found to
destroy a deeply buried installation. There are deep bunkers in Europe
which were destroyed this way in WW II, but which could be studied. How
about the installations in Iraq?
  
    I would be interested to know how the military intend to
detonate this amount of AN/FO? What about the toxic by-products? Check
which way the wind is blowing on the 2nd....
  
 
  
    Regards,
  
 
  
    Chris Chapman