TSA Planning for Big Blasts

[gun sane]

In addition to the millions of ammo rounds, the airline passenger molesters are buying 1400 pounds of dynamite. Perhaps for data mining....

 

http://www.prepperpodcast.com/tsa-orders-over-half-ton-of-high-powered-explosive/#axzz2vO0iidHp

[RED333]

Maybe it will used for bomb training, as in the crazy kind.

[RobertNashville]

I truly do hate the TSA. Because of them I avoid flying just as much as I possibly can - today I will drive on trips that in previous years I would've flown gladly. That said, I also understand that the country really does need to protect airline travel - there are evil people out there who would gladly use planes to terrorize and kill us.

So boys and girls, what would you propose we have in place of the TSA or, what would you change about the organization to make it more palatable?

The Israelies seem to do a good job but I'm not sure that their methods would garner any less complaints from Americans than the TSA does now.

[TMF]

[quote name="gun sane" post="1122254" timestamp="1394379452"]In addition to the millions of ammo rounds, the airline passenger molesters are buying 1400 pounds of dynamite. Perhaps for data mining.... [url="http://www.prepperpodcast.com/tsa-orders-over-half-ton-of-high-powered-explosive/#axzz2vO0iidHp"]http://www.prepperpodcast.com/tsa-orders-over-half-ton-of-high-powered-explosive/#axzz2vO0iidHp[/url][/quote] 1400 lbs? For the whole TSA? Meh, I've blown more demo in one day. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[nightrunner]

So is this for training exercises or?

Im genuinely curious what they could be using this for

[ArmyBrat61]

So boys and girls, what would you propose we have in place of the TSA or, what would you change about the organization to make it more palatable?

The Israelies seem to do a good job but I'm not sure that their methods would garner any less complaints from Americans than the TSA does now.

 

 

The Israelis use a multi tiered approach to "terrorist" screening. It starts as soon as you arrive at the airport, you are approached,questioned and observed. They are alert to body language that indicates "nervous intent" and technology that actually works when searching for guns,bombs and so forth. I propose the USA uses intelligence (as in smarts) to profile those who could be dangerous. If you are hunting ducks you don't feel up sheep.......just my :2cents:

Edited March 9, 2014 by ArmyBrat61

[RobertNashville]

The Israelis use a multi tiered approach to "terrorist" screening. It starts as soon as you arrive at the airport, you are approached,questioned and observed. They are alert to body language that indicates "nervous intent" and technology that actually works when searching for guns,bombs and so forth. I propose the USA uses intelligence (as in smarts) to profile those who could be dangerous. If you are hunting ducks you don't feel up sheep.......just my :2cents:

well that could never work here. To have people of that quality you would have to require basic intelligence and background checks and I think we all know three quarters of the TSA would never make it! ;)

[Smith]

I truly do hate the TSA. Because of them I avoid flying just as much as I possibly can - today I will drive on trips that in previous years I would've flown gladly. That said, I also understand that the country really does need to protect airline travel - there are evil people out there who would gladly use planes to terrorize and kill us.

So boys and girls, what would you propose we have in place of the TSA or, what would you change about the organization to make it more palatable?

The Israelies seem to do a good job but I'm not sure that their methods would garner any less complaints from Americans than the TSA does now.

Profiling. Profiling was all that was lacking from the old method. TSA doesn't do anything except harass regular folks and make politically correct screening. It's the epitome of the political postilion of doing something while doing nothing.

[Spiffy]

I read where it was for calibrations of bomb sniffers and dogs, hence the specified brand.

[Guest theconstitutionrocks]

I truly do hate the TSA. Because of them I avoid flying just as much as I possibly can - today I will drive on trips that in previous years I would've flown gladly. That said, I also understand that the country really does need to protect airline travel - there are evil people out there who would gladly use planes to terrorize and kill us.

So boys and girls, what would you propose we have in place of the TSA or, what would you change about the organization to make it more palatable?

The Israelies seem to do a good job but I'm not sure that their methods would garner any less complaints from Americans than the TSA does now.

what to change?...easy, stop worry about the knives, blunt objects and even the guns,,,if you find em, great, but those aren't going to destroy an aircraft. You need to concentrate on the stuff that burns or goes boom. Trace detection, density scanning are good tools. FWIW if you are going to cite these as potential threats then, whether we like it or not, AI (Advanced Imagery) is probably the best tool available. What I find incomprehensible however is the lack of MANPAD use against aircraft. They are relatively cheap, easy to get, easy to conceal, and just the use (against which there is no installed defense) much less the success would create havoc and panic. Because you almost never see them used (the ones that are are typically on the African Continent) it obviously raises the question about the credibility  of the cited threat.

[Sam1]

1000 pounds of explosives is minuscule

 

If they were ordering it by like 10 kilotons at a time, then that would concern me a little more. 

[vontar]

Does this mean there will be a shortage of blasting supplies for strip mining increasing the cost of coal?

 

Think about it, they don't want people using coal as it is. 

 

 

Yes, I know 1400 pounds is just a drop in the bucket.

Edited March 10, 2014 by vontar

[leroy]

Sam and vontar are right...... Fourteen hundred pounds of dynamite ain't much, unless your standing on it when it goes off.... I doubt that 1400 lbs. would prime a reasonable blast in a big strip mine.... Leroy Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[TMF]

[quote name="vontar" post="1122468" timestamp="1394412926"]Does this mean there will be a shortage of blasting supplies for strip mining increasing the cost of coal? Think about it, they don't want people using coal as it is. [/quote] No. Explosives are pretty cheap and 1400 lbs isn't much at all. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Guest Lester Weevils]

Sam and vontar are right...... Fourteen hundred pounds of dynamite ain't much, unless your standing on it when it goes off.... I doubt that 1400 lbs. would prime a reasonable blast in a big strip mine....LeroySent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Everybody here probably knows more about strip mines than me, but saw a documentary about strip mining. They were using fertilizer and diesel fuel. They would drill a hundreds of yards dimension grid of post holes in the rock, use a big wheeled special machine to fill each hole with fertilizer/diesel mix, wire em all up, and boom down comes a whole bunch of landscape.

And then next day start digging another grid of postholes. Heavy industry is purt impressive. Edited March 10, 2014 by Lester Weevils

[TMF]

[quote name="Lester Weevils" post="1122766" timestamp="1394475266"]Everybody here probably knows more about strip mines than me, but saw a documentary about strip mining. They were using fertilizer and diesel fuel. They would drill a hundreds of yards dimension grid of post holes in the rock, use a big wheeled special machine to fill each hole with fertilizer/diesel mix, wire em all up, and boom down comes a whole bunch of landscape. And then next day start digging another grid of postholes. Heavy industry is purt impressive.[/quote] The amount of anfo slurry they're hauling around for those shots make 1400 lbs of TNT look like an M80. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[RobertNashville]

The amount of anfo slurry they're hauling around for those shots make 1400 lbs of TNT look like an M80. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Maybe folks are falling victim to Hollywood special effects? At lest of the explosions I've seen in real life they've never been as impressive as what we see in the movies!

 

Folks are so used to seeing gigantic explosions with huge fireballs and such that unless you've actually handled things that go boom (like dynamite) it's probably easy to overestimate the explosive power of a a given amount.

[Guest Lester Weevils]

1400 pounds tnt = not quite three 500 pound bombs? Not that I'd want one going off in my neighborhood. :)

edit: Is the tnt formulation used in bombs more potent than that which is used in dynamite? Edited March 10, 2014 by Lester Weevils

[vontar]

1400 pounds tnt = not quite three 500 pound bombs? Not that I'd want one going off in my neighborhood. :)

edit: Is the tnt formulation used in bombs more potent than that which is used in dynamite?

 

I believe Bomb grade material is going to have a greater effect then just TNT/fertilizer/diesel mix.

 

Great, btw, everyone that has loaded this page has probably been added to another watch list.

[sigmtnman]

I keep reading the title as

 

"TSA Planning for Big Breasts"...

[nightrunner]

If they added me to another watchlist, they had to make another watchlist to put me on.

[TMF]

[quote name="vontar" post="1122880" timestamp="1394493608"]I believe Bomb grade material is going to have a greater effect then just TNT/fertilizer/diesel mix. [/quote] As far as I know, there are many countries who still use TNT in their artillery, so I guess it wouldn't be abnormal if they had it in their aerial bombs. I don't know what we have in ours; probably comp B? Thing is, there isn't "bomb grade material" per se. It depends on what type of bomb you're making and what you're using it for. You can't use C4 to blast craters and move earth. It blows too quick. That's why they use something that explodes slowly, like ammonium nitrate. But you wouldn't use ammonium nitrate to blow a hole in a wall. For that you'd use something that blows quick, like C4. If you used ammonium nitrate it would knock the whole wall down, and probably collapse the room you're in. So it's not as if the different type of explosive material will have a greater "effect" than another, it is a matter of what effect you're looking for. Having seen what 10,000 lbs of anfo will do, I'll tell you that the effect is beyond catastrophic. I've also seen what 50 lbs of anfo will do to a concrete structure versus about 25 lbs of C4. The anfo knocked that sucker down no problem. C4 did not. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[leroy]

What TMF says in the post above^^^^... Explosives can be "engineered" to do different things... Each specific explosive recipe (..or explosive agent like ammonium nitrate, slurry explosives or dynamite...) can be engineered for the best results in doing the task at hand...  That's what the big explosive manufacturers do all the time... They have field application engineers that will help ya plan for what you want to do (...presuming it's legal, that is....).... Examples are quarries, road construction, underwater blasting, open pit mining; etc... etc... . Dynamite comes in differing grades and can be tailored to various construction and excavating related tasks...

 

leroy

[TMF]

The easy way to explain it would be RE factor. Here's some wiki on it. Anfo ain't to far off from TNT. This page has the chart in meters/second, whereas all the charts I've seen we're in ft/sec. You can really see the difference between the detonation velocities when measured in ft/sec. PETN is what is used in detonation cord, which has a much higher RE factor than C4, which is why it is used in breaching charges often, because it blows so quickly that it cuts rather than pushes. Consider that "faster"doesn't equate to "better" all the time; it is only relative for what you're using the bomb for. On 9/11 the explosion you saw was just jet fuel; with an RE factor less than half of that of anfo it still made a big boom. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relative_effectiveness_factor Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Dolomite_supafly]

Take 1,400 pounds and divide it by the number of airports with working dogs. I bet is is such a minuscule amount that you could not blow your nose.

It is likely being divided up for dog training. Likely to be placed in random locations or bags for the dogs to hit on do they don't loose all the time and get complacent. The amounts are going to be so small that it is useless as an explosive.

If you don't let the dogs win every so often they will get burned out and not want to work.