what kind of bomb is this ? (pic)

[spanone]

gaza



http://news.bbc.co.uk/

[CoffeeCat]

1. Isn't that the thing...

...in "War of the Worlds"?

We suck as a species.

[spanone]

58. that's what i was thinking...

[Motown_Johnny]

81. In "War of the Worlds".....

the invaders are beaten by microbes that they have no immunity against.

I'm not sure how that labels us as a species that sucks. If anything it speaks to the futility of military conquest.

[Muttocracy]

2. poking around BBC site - here's a similar one

[NightWatcher]

3. the "have a nice day" bomb?

it certainly doesnt give me warm fuzzies


and yes, we suck as a species

[GoesTo11]

4. Looks like an atomic bomb to me.

War crime!

[anigbrowl]

74. no it doesn't

I fail to find your post funny

[Muttocracy]

5. and another one:

caption "The Israeli ground operation is being supported by intensive aerial, land and naval bombardment of Gaza."

[spanone]

60. looks like they are setting the ground on fire

[TahitiNut]

77. Willie Pete ... anti-personnel weapon

It's (illegally) used over enemy troop formations. :shrug:

[Incitatus]

6. OMG It's the Flying Spaghetti Monster!

[Muttocracy]

8. I thought that too! except there are multiples - and it's not funny right now :(

[Haole Girl]

7. Cluster bomb?

:shrug:

[Duckhunter935]

19. They will not leave smoke trails from the submunitions

[FogerRox]

20. EDIT see post 19

[ellaydubya]

9. White Phosphorus, I believe

This was on an earlier post.....it causes severe burns, if I remember correctly--Not a nice bomb at all.

[PuraVidaDreamin]

11. Now that WOULD be a major war crime.

Not that what they are doing anyhow isn't

[NightWatcher]

22. we used Willy Pete in Fallujah

[Pavulon]

25. To high for wp burst to do anything.

AA flare, not sure. It is not WP. I have seen those pop.

[Duckhunter935]

35. Doubt AA flare

looks like to many if from aircraft

[Pavulon]

48. Smoke sounds reasonable

never seen it used like that. I have seen it burst set to kill infantry. Was not that high up.

Just a guess.

[Duckhunter935]

24. used as smoke

Smoke Projectiles
Smoke projectiles are used for smoke screens, obscuring smoke, and marking targets for aircraft.

The three types of smoke projectiles areas follows:

(1) Hexachloroethane. Hexachloroethane (HC) smoke (smk) projectiles are available for 105-mm and 155-mm howitzers. They are used for screening, obscuration, spotting, and signaling purposes. The projectile has no casualty-producing effects. This base-ejection projectile is ballistically simailar to the HE projectile. It is fitted with a mechanical time fuze M565 or M577. The round expels smoke canisters that emit smoke for a period of 40 to 90 seconds.

(2) Burster-type white phosphorus. White phosphorus projectiles are available for 105-mm and 155-mm howitzers. They are bursting-tube type projectiles that can be fired with point-detonating (PD) or MTSQ fuzes. The projectile has an incendiary-producing effect and is ballistically similar to the HE projectile. Normally, shell WP is employed for its incendiary effect. The projectile also can be used for screening, spotting, and signaling purposes.

(3) M825 white phosphorus. The M825 WP projectile is an FA-delivered 155-mm base-ejection projectile designed to produce a smoke screen on the ground for a duration of 5 to 15 minutes. It consists of two major components--the projectile carrier and the payload. The projectile carrier delivers the payload to the target. The payload consists of 116 WP-saturated felt wedges. The smoke screen is produced when a predetermined fuze action causes ejection of the payload from the projectile. After ejection, the WP-saturated felt wedges in the payload fall to the ground in an elliptical pattern. Each wedge then becomes a point or source of smoke. The M825 is ballistically similar to the M483A1 (DPICM) family of projectiles.

[Muttocracy]

30. so is white P for smoke toxic in the same way as white P as a chemical weapon? or different thing? n

[Duckhunter935]

36. Not sure

[Pavulon]

37. Not toxic, just burns

so if you throw it to mark something for smoke it is great. If it explodes in a room full of people they burn. It burns in contact with the air and in contact with skin.

I have never seen it used like that but seems reasonable. Seen it pop closer to ground, looked uninviting. However I have never seen something fired from a 155 that looked like a day at the zoo.

[eppur_se_muova]

84. Any *unburned* phosphorous remaining is toxic.

Whether any remains unburned depends on conditions -- the more the WP mixes with air, the less likely any remains unburned. (Just based on general chemical principles, not experience or weapons expertise.) WP used at short range is more likely to lead to toxic exposure, as both vapor and dispersed solid. As long as oxygen is not exhausted, most should burn up.

The fumes, containing P4O6 and P4O10, are also very irritant, but not as insidiously toxic as P4 (WP).

[grantcart]

79. I was going to contest your reply until I saw that you are a duck hunter and assume that you have

personal knowledge from your hunting experience.

(actually your explanation is the most logical on the thread.)

I guess we can stop with the war crimes tribunal. Curious how Israel seems reluctant to use illegal explosives right before CNN cameras.

[alcibiades_mystery]

67. Willy Peter...make me a believer..

[PuraVidaDreamin]

10. was wondering that too.

We just saw it on the news, but don't know

[Warpy]

12. Phosphorus? Some type of cluster bomb?

It looks like something meant to spread fire or smaller explosive devices over a large area.

We suck as a species.

[Muttocracy]

13. does it come from this device?

4 days ago: GAZA CITY, GAZA STRIP - JANUARY 01: Palestinians inspect an unexploded bomb near a destroyed Education Ministry building after an Israeli air strike in Gaza on January 1, 2009. Israeli warplanes attacked government buildings in the Gaza Strip on New Year's Day after Israel and its Islamist Hamas foe both spurned ceasefire calls in a conflict that has killed around 400 Palestinians and injured around 1,600.

[Duckhunter935]

38. No much smaller

And if that is indeed a live unexploded bomb, those guys are NUTS

[Muttocracy]

44. considering the ground could be shaking from other events... yeah! nt

[Blarch]

14. Doesn't look like a bomb.

Looks like anti-missile flares that a helicopter or plane would set off after if launches an attack.

[Muttocracy]

17. can you explain what anti-missile flares are?

I know nothing about weapons, but I always though of the word flare as a marker (like a highway flare for an accident), but not something that actually did damage.

And does what I posted in #5 look like that?

[Duckhunter935]

33. Different types of flares

Some are used to illuminate targets at night and are generally on small parachutes. Others are from aircraft launched in groups to try to confuse the infra red seeker on a surface to air missile. most aircraft will launch these automatically

[Muttocracy]

34. oh, is that why some of the info talks about them AFTER a plane goes over. nt

[Duckhunter935]

49. Good demo just popping a few too many times

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ywPn9Z9x7E
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nMSJF5zFfCE&feature=related

illumination flare
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/luu2.htm

[FogerRox]

41. A Missile using infra red sensors sees the flares and follows the flare

not the helo.

[TahitiNut]

78. Hamas isn't using any heat-seeking G-A missiles.

Further, the missile defense flares are smaller, usually on chutes, and don't have the phosphor trails. That's a Willie Pete artillery air burst.

Here's what it looks like at ground level ...

[Duckhunter935]

15. Smoke Projectiles

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/smoke.htm

Just looks very high to be usefull

[Richard D]

16. Here's an image of a White Phosphorous bomb

and another:



Looks exactly the same as the pictures posted above.

[ellisonz]

23. Actually I'm pretty sure that's a flare.

Fired by artillery...

[Richard D]

27. Off the BBC and electronic intifada site as white Phos.

[malaise]

86. This is evil

and really sad.

[W_HAMILTON]

18. I was wondering that myself.

I saw those things exploding on TV earlier, but wasn't sure if it was bombs from Israel, or missiles fired from Gaza.

They were strange. I've never seen anything like that before. It was almost like fireworks, shooting down to the ground.

I actually thought that they were missiles fired from Gaza, because I figured that Israel would be more careful in targeting civilians, but that seems something that would be impossible with that type of weapon.

[balantz]

21. I googled "white phosphorus bomb pics" and got this:

And this:

[Pavulon]

31. Smoke or AP use

I would assume the shell could be set to pop closer to ground to cook infantry or pop higher for smoke.

I have seen it pop closer to ground that in that picture. It was day time so no big glow.

[SoCalDem]

26. The dreaded Squid-bomb

:shrug:

seriously though, a reporter said they were "flares"...um yeh..right... the IDF knows the power is out so they're being "helpful" & sending some pre-lit flares :eyes:

a different reporter said they were to prevent the copter from being hit with rpgs..

and yet another reporter said they were dropping "ordinance" that spread a "pattern" of smaller pieces ..so they could hit a larger target and possiblty "take" out" hidden rocket launching sites..

take yer pick..could be one, could be more, could be none..

[Statistical]

42. Reporters rarely understand anything military related.

As a guess if you pick the opposite of what the reporters says you will be right more often.

[Statistical]

28. Its a WP or HC smoke munition. Likely fired by 155mm artillery.

Common confused with a cluster bomb. A cluster bomb doesn't have those "streamers". Cluster bombs arm and release the bomblets. Since bomblets are not burning there are no individual smoke "streamers". There is no warning just a crap ton of grenade sized bombs going off at the same time.

A wide dispersal WP or HC smoke munition is designed to cover a large area with smoke. Usually used to conceal troop movements or obscure enemy fields of fire.

The round detonates at the apogee and ignites the individual WP burners. The WP already burning as they fall (notice the "streamers" producing a massive amount of smoke once they hit the ground.

You can see the effect in the lower potion of the picture. Notice how the smoke has descended over the buildings.
Visibility will be close to 0. That is the point. Virtually impossible to mount any kind of defense or movement through an area denied by WP.

While WP can burn that isn't the intention here.
WP produces a lot of smoke, and it burns for long time which both are essential for a smoke screen.
It may not even be WP. I think IDF switched to HC for smoke a long time ago. More smoke and less problems with fires.

[Muttocracy]

32. that sounds like the answer reconciling the ones above. nt

[tabasco]

39. Normal smoke rounds produce a LOT more smoke than WP.

WP is usually used for marking or incendiary, not for smoke.

[Statistical]

47. There is no such thing as "normal smoke"

Smoke is produced by burning HC or WP. Period.

Most nations burn HC (HexaChloroethane-zinc) today because it burns "cooler" and longer.
WP is cheaper so it used more commonly by 3rd world nations.
It almost certainly is HC since Israel uses American munitions.

If it is 155mm artillery shell it is M116B1 which ejects 12 HC burners.

There is no such thing as "normal" smoke.
I mean nobody launches a round full of firewood and ignites it.
Saying "normal smoke" is like saying "normal gun" or "normal tank".

Nobody calls in an arty mission for "normal smoke". You call for smoke and you get whatever the battery has.

The point is a smoke round is either burning HC or WP.
You can't look at the round denotation from 7-10km away and determine if it is HC or WP without timing it.

I spent 20 years in the Army; 12 of them were as a forward observer for 155mm artillery. I know a "little bit" about round recognition.

Anyone saying they know that was WP and the intention was to burn something based on a single photo is "full of crap".

[Duckhunter935]

51. 20 years Air Defense

Moving to Sill later this year

[Statistical]

54. GL. I finished my last 8 in the NG. Got my 20 year letter and was out the door last Nov (n/t)

[tabasco]

66. Friend, I was mortar platoon leader, infantry company commander

and qualified to call in air strikes.

As mortar PL, filled in as battalion FSO.

Don't bleat your know-it-all shit you got from a website to me.

WP smoke doesn't last long, doesn't cover a large area, and is not the preferred round for screening.

WP is used to mark a spot for other observers and to burn shit.

edit: Your statement that WP is some kind of area denial weapon further reveals your cluelessness.

[Statistical]

68. Yup. You know it all.

PL & Infantry Company Commander + your attitude. Yup sounds like most Officers I knew.

The fact that you believe there is "normal" smoke as opposed to "abnormal" smoke shows a lot. :rofl:

I said the round was HC or WP.
There is NO way from 5-7km away and looking at a single photo to determine what is burning.
If you think you can identify HC vs WP from a single photo you are full of crap.

Since we don't know what is burning we don't know why it was used either.
Somehow you know for sure what compound is burning and exactly why/how it was used... sure.

Carry On. Sir. Make sure the troops got plenty of those firewood "normal" smoke rounds.

[CoffeeCat]

73. Ohhhh...military guys arguing about artillery...

...is it getting hot in here?

;)

[tabasco]

90. Boohoohoo.

Somebody got his wittle feewings hurt.

Suffice it to say I fired a lot more fucking rounds than you.

[TahitiNut]

80. You got it right, sir.

I didn't need my entire year in Nam to know the difference. (It was evident in late February.)

Here's what Willie Pete looks like at ground level...

[tabasco]

88. I ain't a sir

I work for a living now.

One of the more informed members of the press surmised they were using it as suppressive fire.

That would be my guess too.

[Duckhunter935]

46. I tend to agree

(1) Hexachloroethane. Hexachloroethane (HC) smoke (smk) projectiles are available for 105-mm and 155-mm howitzers. They are used for screening, obscuration, spotting, and signaling purposes. The projectile has no casualty-producing effects. This base-ejection projectile is ballistically simailar to the HE projectile. It is fitted with a mechanical time fuze M565 or M577. The round expels smoke canisters that emit smoke for a period of 40 to 90 seconds.

[W_HAMILTON]

50. Are they not deadly?

It's hard to tell the scope of it all when you're just watching it on TV, but it looked like they set off little fires when they landed, and they seemed to land pretty indiscriminately. If one of those hits your house, or even yourself, wouldn't you be in trouble?

[Statistical]

53. Well anything in war is deadly.

The goal is not to kill though.
The goal is to obscure.

Think of it this way:
If it is a 155mm artillery and they wanted to cause damage to ground troops....
Rather than drop a M116B1 (smoke) munition they could instead launch from the same artillery a 155mm DPICM round which explodes and drops 88 bomblets about the size of a grenade which explode without warning and are extremely quiet on the way down.

Sure you could use smoke to kill people on the ground and people can die from smoke BUT if your GOAL is to kill ground troops an artillery unit will have many rounds much more suited to the task.

[W_HAMILTON]

59. Well, I was more concerned with the civilians.

Again, the footage I saw was shot from far away, but it looked like the "smoke bombs" were dropping on populated areas. Even if those areas had enemy combatants, I would think that they would also have civilians. That's why I was wondering how they could get away with dropping a bomb like that, if there are civilians in the area that could possibly be harmed.

If you are a civilian and got hit with one of those little bombs, you would probably die, right?

If one of those hit your house, how much damage would it cause?

[Duckhunter935]

63. See post 65

He has more Knowledge of this

[Statistical]

65. I understand...

I wasn't trying to be flippant. Often times civilians do die in war. That is a sad reality.

If one hit you directly it could kill or seriously injure you. It would be like getting hit with a brick falling 100-200ft.
Anything of substantial mass falling from the sky is dangerous.

If it hit your house it wouldn't do much damage unless the burner was severely damage in the fall.
They are designed to impact and stay together otherwise they don't work.
If the burner broke apart on impact it could burn you or ignite the house.
It isn't suppose to. It is suppose to burn in a controlled manner to produce the maximum smoke however anything can happen.

Personally I wouldn't want someone dropping those on my house but I would prefer that to some kind of submunition (DPICM) or artillery scattered minefield or other casualty producing device, or general High Explosive.

Basically what I was trying to get at is smoke (either generated by WP or HC) is likely the "best" (using the term loosely) round you could expect to be on the receiving end. Other rounds will do far more destruction.

[tabasco]

29. It's willie p.

Marking / incendiary round.

Looks like they wanted to set something on fire.

[Muttocracy]

40. caption from Reuters says smoke bomb on these:

14 hours ago: Smoke bombs explode over the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants battled on Gaza City's outskirts on Sunday after Israeli troops and tanks invaded the coastal enclave in the worst fighting in the conflict in decades.



14 hours ago: A smoke bomb explodes over the northern Gaza Strip January 4, 2009. Israeli soldiers and Palestinian militants battled on Gaza City's outskirts on Sunday after Israeli troops and tanks invaded the coastal enclave in the worst fighting in the conflict in decades.



this one however says smoke is rising (um, no)

13 hours ago: Smoke caused by explosions rises over Gaza City, Sunday, Jan. 4, 2009. Israeli ground troops and tanks cut swaths through the Gaza Strip early Sunday, bisecting the coastal territory and surrounding its biggest city as the new phase of a devastating offensive against Hamas gained momentum.

[greguganus]

43. IT'S THE SPAGHETTI MONSTER!!! THE END IS NEAR!!! n/t

[Uzybone]

45. Jelly fish bomb

[babylonsister]

61. Yep. My first thought, too. nt

[Dukkha]

91. more appropriately a Portuguese Man o' War bomb

[danania]

52. Thinkprogress: Reports suggest Israeli forces using cluster bombs in Gaza.»

http://thinkprogress.org/2009/01/04/israel-cluster-bombs/

[Name removed]

56. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Duckhunter935]

62. Possible but reporters and editors

kmow next to nothing on military equipment. after 20 years they still do not get my equipment right. There is a lot of different munitions out there and you can not tell just looking at an explosion

[bertman]

55. My money's on "willie peter". Look at the picture in reply #5. On the left of the pic

are raging fires that may be due to the activation of munitions in the area or just the result of an incendiary weapon igniting every flammable thing within the kill zone.

That is some of the nastiest shit in the world. It should be outlawed, but then, what the fuck good would that do?

We humans are truly monstrous in our quest for dominance.

[Duckhunter935]

57. Hard to tell

But it looks like a large primary or secondary explosion on only one side. All of these picures ar taken prior to the full smoke scree has developed

[anigbrowl]

75. Seems to be consensus

I was looking at these (at night) on CNN the other day and wondering the same thing. Of course, they never have any military analysts on to actually discuss that sort of thing. But They do seem consistent with Wp.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_phosphorus_(weapon)

[Muttocracy]

64. just tuned into CNN.com feed and saw one on video for just a second

http://www.cnn.com/video/flashLive/live.html?stream=stream1

maybe they'll show it again.

[csziggy]

69. Could be an aircraft missile defense system

http://www.sbuv.com/MissileWarning/index.html

http://www.sbuv.com/MissileWarning/index.html

[Parker CA]

70. Looks like someone thinks it is Phosphorus.

Israel is believed to be using controversial white phosphorus shells to screen its assault on the heavily populated Gaza Strip yesterday. The weapon, used by British and US forces in Iraq, can cause horrific burns but is not illegal if used as a smokescreen.

As the Israeli army stormed to the edges of Gaza City and the Palestinian death toll topped 500, the tell-tale shells could be seen spreading tentacles of thick white smoke to cover the troops’ advance. “These explosions are fantastic looking, and produce a great deal of smoke that blinds the enemy so that our forces can move in,” said one Israeli security expert. Burning blobs of phosphorus would cause severe injuries to anyone caught beneath them and force would-be snipers or operators of remote-controlled booby traps to take cover. Israel admitted using white phosphorus during its 2006 war with Lebanon.

The use of the weapon in the Gaza Strip, one of the world’s mostly densely population areas, is likely to ignite yet more controversy over Israel’s offensive, in which more than 2,300 Palestinians have been wounded.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/middle_east/article5447590.ece

[Muttocracy]

72. quote on risk to people being burned in that article:

"The Geneva Treaty of 1980 stipulates that white phosphorus should not be used as a weapon of war in civilian areas, but there is no blanket ban under international law on its use as a smokescreen or for illumination. However, Charles Heyman, a military expert and former major in the British Army, said: “If white phosphorus was deliberately fired at a crowd of people someone would end up in The Hague. White phosphorus is also a terror weapon. The descending blobs of phosphorus will burn when in contact with skin.” "

another matter of collateral damage?

[Amonester]

71. it's a pollution bomb

pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death pollution destruction death pollution illness destruction death pollution lifeless destruction death

can't stand that sh*t no more

[krispos42]

76. Looks like white phosphorus to me

It's used as a smoke-generating agent but can be misused as an anti-personnel/incendiary agent.

In this case it looks like an artillery shell was filled with chunks of WP. Well, not "chunks"; carefully designed and cut pieces, but you get the idea. And in the middle of the pieces of WP is a bursting charge linked to either some kind of timer or a radar or barometric altimeter.

The bursting charge ignites the pieces of WP and scatters them in a shotgun-like pattern. The pieces of WP land on the ground and start burning fiercely, sending up clouds of obscuring smoke for several minutes.



If it bursts on the ground it would send WP shrapnel out. WP self-ignites it the presence of oxygen, so wherever it landed, it would burst into flame.

"Elementary Productions: White Phosphorus"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Oke8GinWDG8

[whatchamacallit]

82. The Jericho?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9I-lKiWs-_o&feature=related

[DaDeacon]

83. Damn you Tony Stark!

Not to make a joke of something as awful as war BUT Just saying...

[Lilith Velkor]

87. That's the first thing I thought of

[eppur_se_muova]

85. see this thread -- Israel rains fire on Gaza with phosphorus shells

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=3673116&mesg_id=3673116

Um OK it's the Times ...

[spanone]

89. is it illegal or just controversial?

just saw post 72...thanks