US & nz tested a tsunami bomb

Discussion in 'War Against Japan' started by kiwi craig, Jan 28, 2013.

Tags:
  1. kiwi craig

    kiwi craig Member

  2. Interesting. I presume from the countries involved these bombs would have been used on Japan. Wouldn't have been much good in land locked Germany. Also, if my memory correct Japan has a few major cities on the coast.
     
  3. arnhem44

    arnhem44 Member

    Impossible to generate enough energy to make an impressive tsunami.

    And so you can read also in the article:
    He explained that while initial testing was positive (as in 'yeah, we CAN make a small wave') , Project Seal was shelved in early 1945.

    Experts concluded it would be necessary to arrange around two million kilograms of explosives about five miles from a shoreline in order to create a successful tsunami bomb.


    And possibly a funnel coast line pointing at the target city...yeah, yeah.

    Dream projects, not feasible.
     
  4. Far easier to drop a bomb from the sky then.
     
  5. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Well, to be fair....

    Experts concluded it would be necessary to arrange around two million kilograms of explosives about five miles from a shoreline in order to create a successful tsunami bomb.


    ...is "only" two kilotons of H.E.....

    ...or of any equivalent explosive yield...! ;)

    Also, while I'd like a decent map to check distances...

    [​IMG]

    ..I've a feeling that most of japan 's continental shelf started MORE than five miles from the actual coast. So the 1968 caveat...

    A 1968 research report sponsored by the US Office of Naval Research addressed this hypothesis of coastal damage due to large explosion-generated waves, and found theoretical and experimental evidence showing it to be relatively inefficient in wave-making potential, with most wave energy dissipated by breaking on the continental shelf before reaching the shore


    ...wouldn't have applied!
     
  6. Vitesse

    Vitesse Senior Member

    This story wasn't exactly news when the Mail nicked it off the Telegraph a month ago.

    'Tsunami bomb' tested off New Zealand coast - Telegraph

    As a reader with the nick "fishspouse" quickly pointed out, the story appeared in the New Zealand Herald in 1999:
    Hardly "buried", when it is listed along with every other public document in the National Archives records, and searchable online.

    The documents were declassified before 1999 and were well publicised at the time.


    All Mr Waru needed was a search engine!


    Tsunami bomb NZ's devastating war secret - National - NZ Herald News
     
  7. kiwi craig

    kiwi craig Member

    The energy required to create a tsunami would have been well beyond the capabilities back the, let alone now.

    "By today's standards the two bombs dropped on a Japan were small -- equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT in the case of the Hiroshima bomb and 20,000 tons in the case of the Nagasaki bomb."
    Hiroshima produced 63TJ of energy, and Nagasaki produced 84TJ.

    To put this into terms I can relate to, The Christchurch earthquake on 22 Feb 2011 was recorded at 6.46 on the Richter scale, and released 309 TJ of energy but due to it's location and depth the was no Tsunami.

    The Japanese quake on 11 Mach 2011, measured 9.01 on the Richter scale produced 2.1 E Joules of at energy creating the massive tsunami.

    To my mind it would take a lot of explosive in the right place to have a minimum effect.
     
  8. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Craig....

    The energy required to create a tsunami would have been well beyond the capabilities back the, let alone now.

    "By today's standards the two bombs dropped on a Japan were small -- equivalent to 15,000 tons of TNT in the case of the Hiroshima bomb and 20,000 tons in the case of the Nagasaki bomb."

    That's @15 kilotons and 20 kilotons' yield respectively...

    Experts concluded it would be necessary to arrange around two million kilograms of explosives about five miles from a shoreline in order to create a successful tsunami bomb.

    ...is "only" two kilotons of H.E.....

    ;)

    And we actually WERE able to produce that kind of blast "conventionally" then...Heligoland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    6.7 kilotons!
     
  9. LRusso216

    LRusso216 Member

  10. Again, I find it quite remarkable they spent time and effort contemplating this tactic when dropping a bomb was always going to be more impactive and far easier to plan. Then again, I imagine this was just one of many propositions that we look back at now and think why bother?
     
  11. phylo_roadking

    phylo_roadking Very Senior Member

    Again, I find it quite remarkable they spent time and effort contemplating this tactic when dropping a bomb was always going to be more impactive and far easier to plan. Then again, I imagine this was just one of many propositions that we look back at now and think why bother?


    Can you think of a better way to clear beach defences for OLYMPIC/CORONET??? ;)

    A few big bombs offshore, sit back and put the kettle on, then wade ashore in peace and comfort...
     

Share This Page