Making the news today....

[Johnsond]

1 hour ago, Mike Hill said:

 

It has been in the sea for almost 80 years though. Here at least the clearance divers seem to add more HE to the demolition charge to remind people that the stuff can still be hazardous.  

 

From memory the fuzes on aerial bombs are more hazardous than the main charge. None of the ariel bombs on that ship were fuzed,just the bomb let's ,so what is the chance of sympathetic detonation of all of it?

I guess in an accident with that ship,it's not what gets destroyed I the blast radius that's the problem,it's launching bits of ship and uxo into the surrounding area?

 

In Bergen a ship carrying 12,000 tonn of explosives blew up in town,bits of the ship are still on the hillside.

I get the impression listening to the UXO Supvs on  jobs that, depending on type of explosives in question tbe stability actually can reduce over time. 
Fuse wise for sure most munitions onboard should not be armed but 🤷‍♂️I’ve no idea what’s left onboard. 
Regarding disposal, the trend nowadays is to go for low rather than high order disposal but that doesn’t always happen as the recent incident in Poland shows. 
A common comment I hear is German bombs and fuses are top quality whereas the allied stuff was slightly more “ British Leyland “

'Earthquake' bomb explodes during defusing attempt - BBC News

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

The blast of the WW2 bomb in a canal in Poland was not unexpected and divers were...

 

Edited April 18 by Johnsond

[Mark J]

58 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

Christ Mark I expect a bit more from yourself. 
So you claim the majority of people want the crap you talk of legalised. Ok bud I’ll be in lynemouth on the 16/5 let’s meet and I’ll watch you shoot up on Heroin see how you get on. 

I could score any drug I wanted in a next to no time back home, but I don't. Why do you think that is?

[Mike Hill]

32 minutes ago, Johnsond said:

I get the impression listening to the UXO Supvs on  jobs that, depending on type of explosives in question tbe stability actually can reduce over time. 
Fuse wise for sure most munitions onboard should not be armed but 🤷‍♂️I’ve no idea what’s left onboard. 
Regarding disposal, the trend nowadays is to go for low rather than high order disposal but that doesn’t always happen as the recent incident in Poland shows. 
A common comment I hear is German bombs and fuses are top quality whereas the allied stuff was slightly more “ British Leyland “

'Earthquake' bomb explodes during defusing attempt - BBC News

WWW.BBC.CO.UK

---

The blast of the WW2 bomb in a canal in Poland was not unexpected and divers were...

 

Those bombs were fused at the tail because the nose ,well actually the whole casing was drop forged in order to be armour piercing projectile. Christ only knows how deep into the mud that thing was.

 

There is actually the arse section of a " Tall Boy" in a clients garden over here,you can see where the nuts have been forced into the plate when it went off,the bombers couldn't fly back to the UK with that bomb on board so they had to drop them in order to make it home. The crater is about 2km from her place,the plate might have landed there or someone might have found it.

 

The Richard Montgomery had some of her cargo offloaded after she ran aground,maybe they don't know how much or what was taken off though?

 

The former luftwaffe airfield on Herdla still has the demo charges buried in the runway because its a bird sanctuary now. Strange but true.

[peds]

1 hour ago, Johnsond said:

I’m still waiting for the conclusion of a discussion on a different topic from you and a couple of others, 

 

I couldn't decide whether to post a picture of a tiny violin or a broken record. You poor thing... still waiting?

[Johnsond]

6 minutes ago, peds said:

 

I couldn't decide whether to post a picture of a tiny violin or a broken record. You poor thing... still waiting?

Still playing with words I see. Peds sadly your  credibility is zero bud after your utter failure to back  up your claims/lies. It’s that simple. If you have any more to say take it to the topic where you made your mouth go. Lying is very much like the topic in discussion here once you start it’s hard to stop. 

[peds]

Should have gone with the broken record.

[Welshfred]

17 minutes ago, peds said:

Should have gone with the broken record.

 

I'm sure there'll be another opportunity...

[sime42]

1 hour ago, Johnsond said:

I’m still waiting for the conclusion of a discussion on a different topic from you and a couple of others, so really can’t be arsed to get into this to and fro be honest particularly with those fond of making  up false claims. If a few on here seem to think that making the crap you are on about legal then-quite frankly you are even more stupid than I previously thought. 

 

So you want the three most dangerous drugs by far, the three that cause the actual vast majority of drug related deaths to remain legal, whilst the rest, lots of them far more benign btw, to remain illegal or unregulated. Why? That stance makes no sense.

 

What do you propose we do to tackle the drug problem? That's a genuine, not rhetorical, question.

 

I'm not advocating everything be legalised by the way, I'm just not sure that's the right way to go on this. It's a complex issue for sure, one that requires a nuanced, multifaceted approach. Simplistic, narrow minded thinking, like trying to ban everything we can't yet get a handle on isn't the answer. It's just running away from the problem and trying to pretend it doesnt exist. Worse than that actually, it's abandoning the less fortunate among us, and leaving them to their feat of miserable, untimely deaths. Not a good look.

 

If not legalisation, then at least bringing drugs under under some kind of state control and hence regulation would be a step in the right direction. Leaving the production and supply in the hands of criminals is obviously not going to be beneficial for anyone concerned. Apart from said criminals. First step though is to have a grown up, educated, open minded discussion. You seem to be falling at that first hurdle.

 

 

 

[Johnsond]

58 minutes ago, sime42 said:

 

So you want the three most dangerous drugs by far, the three that cause the actual vast majority of drug related deaths to remain legal, whilst the rest, lots of them far more benign btw, to remain illegal or unregulated. Why? That stance makes no sense.

 

What do you propose we do to tackle the drug problem? That's a genuine, not rhetorical, question.

 

I'm not advocating everything be legalised by the way, I'm just not sure that's the right way to go on this. It's a complex issue for sure, one that requires a nuanced, multifaceted approach. Simplistic, narrow minded thinking, like trying to ban everything we can't yet get a handle on isn't the answer. It's just running away from the problem and trying to pretend it doesnt exist. Worse than that actually, it's abandoning the less fortunate among us, and leaving them to their feat of miserable, untimely deaths. Not a good look.

 

If not legalisation, then at least bringing drugs under under some kind of state control and hence regulation would be a step in the right direction. Leaving the production and supply in the hands of criminals is obviously not going to be beneficial for anyone concerned. Apart from said criminals. First step though is to have a grown up, educated, open minded discussion. You seem to be falling at that first hurdle.

 

 

 

I’m failing am I 42 🤷‍♂️really, please spare me your word games. You like another on here fond of lies have  literally lost all credibility as far as im concerned. Just ignore my posts if you can, I’ve absolutely zero interest or respect for you or your views. 

[Johnsond]

2 hours ago, Mark J said:

I could score any drug I wanted in a next to no time back home, but I don't. Why do you think that is?

Self control Mark and hopefully you are a bit more sensible or not interested in experimenting 🤷‍♂️genuinely why you don’t is your business but making it legal and easy to get will just open up the opportunities for things to go very badly wrong, 🤷‍♂️my opinion bud, Mark do you have kids ? 

 

Edited April 18 by Johnsond