Explosions in Tianjin, China

[rjh01]

I did compare above the explosion with the nuclear blast in Japan in 1945. Others have correctly pointed out that the blast zone is nowhere near as big as the one in Japan. However the Japanese one was in the air, but this one was on the ground. This alone would have reduced the blast area by a lot. On the other hand the Japanese one had no blast crater. This one as shown above had a huge one.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

I did compare above the explosion with the nuclear blast in Japan in 1945. Others have correctly pointed out that the blast zone is nowhere near as big as the one in Japan. However the Japanese one was in the air, but this one was on the ground. This alone would have reduced the blast area by a lot. On the other hand the Japanese one had no blast crater. This one as shown above had a huge one.

There are blast radius diagrams on the net for bomb atomic bombs if you're interested in looking them up. I would say there's no comparing the event in China with the atomic bombs, based on the proximity of survivors to the fireball produced in Tianjin. Elsewhere people are suggesting a similarity in size between the total blast area at Tianjin with the epicenter damage of Nagasaki. I'll wait for the final numbers before getting into that kind of number crunching.

 

[Aepervius]

There are blast radius diagrams on the net for bomb atomic bombs if you're interested in looking them up. I would say there's no comparing the event in China with the atomic bombs, based on the proximity of survivors to the fireball produced in Tianjin. Elsewhere people are suggesting a similarity in size between the total blast area at Tianjin with the epicenter damage of Nagasaki. I'll wait for the final numbers before getting into that kind of number crunching.

http://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/

I did try around, airburst vs groundburst and it seems it does not make that much a difference at low yield, maybe 20% more radius. Crater seem to be 50m (15 kT/Hirishima) 30m (5kt) and 20m (1kT). But the destruction radius is what make the difference though , 15kT : up to 1.25 km, less than 1 kT : lower than 0.5 km.

From the wide photo, my gut feeling is that if you want to compare it to an A bomb, it was probably around 1kT or lower. The destruction does not go up to 500m or so it seems and the crater seem around the lower end (gut feeling because it is difficult to estimate from photo without a good reference visually).

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This time next year we may have good numbers. Or the Chinese could throttle the information and leave us guessing.

 

[gumboot]

I did compare above the explosion with the nuclear blast in Japan in 1945. Others have correctly pointed out that the blast zone is nowhere near as big as the one in Japan. However the Japanese one was in the air, but this one was on the ground. This alone would have reduced the blast area by a lot. On the other hand the Japanese one had no blast crater. This one as shown above had a huge one.

Actually the fact that Atomic Bombs were air-burst reduced the amount of damage done by the blasts (and the radiation, but that's a separate issue). With an air-burst explosion a great deal of the explosive force is directed straight down, whereas if the blast is on the ground much more of it is directed laterally.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Actually the fact that Atomic Bombs were air-burst reduced the amount of damage done by the blasts (and the radiation, but that's a separate issue). With an air-burst explosion a great deal of the explosive force is directed straight down, whereas if the blast is on the ground much more of it is directed laterally.

The atomic bombs were deliberately done as air-bursts to INCREASE damage. The straight-downward and downward-at-angle blast waves were unobstructed by buildings around the epicenter.

 

[Ziggurat]

The atomic bombs were deliberately done as air-bursts to INCREASE damage. The straight-downward and downward-at-angle blast waves were unobstructed by buildings around the epicenter.

Quite correct. Moreover, the blast that came downwards at an angle also bounced off the ground at an angle, creating a secondary shockwave following the first one, further increasing damage.

 

[MRC_Hans]

As a side note, those explosions look like Hollywood, I'd predict that CT forums are buzzing with claims that that is exactly what they are.

No. A very distict difference, even from newsreels is that the time delay between blast and sound is there. Even in newsreels, you may have noticed, they often edit them out.

As for similarity to nukes, aven Hiroshima class, the videos very clearly show the difference. The people taking those videos would have been fried by even a relatively small nuke.

Hans

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Time to dust off The Sum Of All Fears.

 

[foophil]

As a side note, those explosions look like Hollywood, I'd predict that CT forums are buzzing with claims that that is exactly what they are.

Nice video, if not a bit annoying due to their reactions. But folks can be forgiven in times of high stress.

Indeed those do look like classic movie explosions. Fireworks too. Probably due to similar chemicals used if I remember correctly.

ETA - Sad to see all those first responder vehicles at the base of the first explosion. I doubt any of them made it out alive.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

The "dribbling fireballs", for want of a better name, looked particularly interesting.

 

[Elagabalus]

I did compare above the explosion with the nuclear blast in Japan in 1945. Others have correctly pointed out that the blast zone is nowhere near as big as the one in Japan. However the Japanese one was in the air, but this one was on the ground. This alone would have reduced the blast area by a lot. On the other hand the Japanese one had no blast crater. This one as shown above had a huge one.

To calibrate Trinity (the first A-bomb) they blew up 100 tons of TNT in the desert on the ground. You can see it here in this image:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(nuclear_test)#/media/File:Trinity_crater_(annotated)_2.jpg

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_(nuclear_test)

 

[king catfish]

Actually the fact that Atomic Bombs were air-burst reduced the amount of damage done by the blasts (and the radiation, but that's a separate issue). With an air-burst explosion a great deal of the explosive force is directed straight down, whereas if the blast is on the ground much more of it is directed laterally.

As has been pointed out, this is completely incorrect; it is quite the opposite of the truth.

 

[Trebuchet]

Pic of the crater. Woah.

https://i.imgur.com/qc7FPxa.jpg

I'm VERY suspicious about the bona fides of that image. Googling it doesn't show any actual news sources.

 

[DGM]

I'm VERY suspicious about the bona fides of that image. Googling it doesn't show any actual news sources.

I think you're right. This is a picture from CNN. Notice the pond?


http://www.cnn.com/2015/08/15/asia/china-tianjin-explosions/index.html


The image is not fake, just misleading.

 

[DGM]

This is the actual GZ, (circled) I believe.


No crater.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

This is roughly the site of the explosion on Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0410297,117.7369048,1002m/data=!3m1!1e3

No pond...

ETA: Also, in the south-facing image (malicus' post and DGM's second post), you see a crack along the left side of the pond that might indicate the partial collapse of material.

 

[Gawdzilla Sama]

This is roughly the site of the explosion on Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0410297,117.7369048,1002m/data=!3m1!1e3

No pond...

Last update for that area?

 

[Aepervius]

As has been pointed out, this is completely incorrect; it is quite the opposite of the truth.

My understanding is that it is pretty much true for all bomb , air blast do more damage than the same equivalent blast on ground. See mach wedge for reason why.

 

[DGM]

This is roughly the site of the explosion on Google Maps: https://www.google.com/maps/@39.0410297,117.7369048,1002m/data=!3m1!1e3

No pond...

ETA: Also, in the south-facing image (malicus' post and DGM's second post), you see a crack along the left side of the pond that might indicate the partial collapse of material.

Holy crap............ It looks so much like green vegetation around that crater (in first picture).

Thanks for the site placement.