from >>>/qresearch/10185296
Cee copied it here. Cee now casts a little bit of doubt on the post, for the following reasons:
This "what we know so far" post, copied from QR, was posted in every QR bread from #13028 thru #13035 within an hour after the explosion occurred.
That's a bot or an Op.
Ops have a purpose.
What is their purpose.
So just be aware, and do not automatically take this post at face value.
I follow the Pirate character.
Pirate posted the article and bolded the line that it resembles a post-nuclear landscape. I assume he posts things for a reason.
Here's another anon's theory.
>>10188554
>Warehouse containing ammonium nitrate is on fire heating it up causing it to fume. This will act as an oxidizer.
>Next there is and explosion (#1) which releases grain dust from the adjacent silos providing fuel to the oxygen rich environment.
>Then there is another explosion (#2) which ignites the mixture.
>The video from the back side is what got me thinking along these lines, where you can see the large dark cloud rise from the silos prior to it igniting and forming a mushroom cloud of vapor.
>The silo would have also directed the explosion like a shape charge and the water would have behave as a water impulse charge amplifying the damage.
I don't know if this analysis bears on the Beirut explosion or not, but capturing it for the sake of completeness, for study.
At least we got them thinking about timestamps, wind speed and direction, type of radiation, lack of correlation from other rad sensors, etc.
>>>/qresearch/10197474
>The blast wind at sea level may exceed one thousand km/h, or ~300 m/s, approaching the speed of sound in air…
>…Ionizing radiation
>About 5% of the energy released in a nuclear air burst is in the form of ionizing radiation: neutrons, gamma rays, alpha particles and electrons moving at speeds up to the speed of light. Gamma rays are high energy electromagnetic radiation; the others are particles that move slower than light. The neutrons result almost exclusively from the fission and fusion reactions, while the initial gamma radiation includes that arising from these reactions as well as that resulting from the decay of short-lived fission products.
>The intensity of initial nuclear radiation decreases rapidly with distance from the point of burst because the radiation spreads over a larger area as it travels away from the explosion (the inverse-square law). It is also reduced by atmospheric absorption and scattering.
>The character of the radiation received at a given location also varies with distance from the explosion.[23] Near the point of the explosion, the neutron intensity is greater than the gamma intensity, but with increasing distance the neutron-gamma ratio decreases. Ultimately, the neutron component of the initial radiation becomes negligible in comparison with the gamma component. The range for significant levels of initial radiation does not increase markedly with weapon yield and, as a result, the initial radiation becomes less of a hazard with increasing yield. With larger weapons, above 50 kt (200 TJ), blast and thermal effects are so much greater in importance that prompt radiation effects can be ignored.
>The neutron radiation serves to transmute the surrounding matter, often rendering it radioactive. When added to the dust of radioactive material released by the bomb itself, a large amount of radioactive material is released into the environment. This form of radioactive contamination is known as nuclear fallout and poses the primary risk of exposure to ionizing radiation for a large nuclear weapon.
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effects_of_nuclear_explosions
>Assuming times are UTC, readings spiked at 14:51. That's one hour and forty three minutes after the explosion. So winds at 27,000 feet were roughly 90 km/h. 90 X 1.75 = roughly 158 kilometers. Distance from Beruit to Pedara, Italy? 1,868.03 km according to gargle maps. Anon does not know if particles could travel all that way at 1,000 km/h. Anon does not know if times are local or UTC. Thinking UTC though. Blast in Beruit happened at 13:08 UTC. That much is known. If time stamps are local time then subtract one hour travle time. UTC-1. However, and this is important to note. Anon has seen many a clock on many pieces of equipment, cameras, VCRs, clock radios, and yes, even personal computers, where the time was not set correctly. All this being said the data is somewhat compelling. Anon agrees other sensors should be lit up like Christmas if not compromised. Which brings me back to the somewhat remote location of this recording station when compared to the others. Make of it what you will.
>2020-08-04 14:41:44, 38
>2020-08-04 14:42:44, 32.5
>2020-08-04 14:43:44, 20.5
>2020-08-04 14:44:44, 29.5
>2020-08-04 14:45:44, 31.5
>2020-08-04 14:46:44, 29
>2020-08-04 14:47:44, 28.5
>2020-08-04 14:48:44, 38.5
>2020-08-04 14:49:44, 53
>2020-08-04 14:50:44, 67.5
>2020-08-04 14:51:44, 545.5
>2020-08-04 14:52:44, 690.5
>2020-08-04 14:53:44, 799
>2020-08-04 14:54:44, 700.5
>2020-08-04 14:55:44, 719.5
>2020-08-04 14:56:44, 697.5
>2020-08-04 14:57:44, 825.5
>2020-08-04 14:58:44, 694.5
>2020-08-04 14:59:44, 523.3
>2020-08-04 15:00:44, 854.5
>2020-08-04 15:01:44, 543.5
>2020-08-04 15:02:44, 575
>2020-08-04 15:03:44, 723
>2020-08-04 15:04:44, 554.5
>2020-08-04 15:05:44, 449.5
>https://radmon.org/UserGraphs/meteopedara/datatoday.csv
>So here are the station coordinates plugged into gargle maps. Looks like a fairly modest Italian Villa. Might be walled, hard to tell. But as you can see the gargle street view car only came within a couple blocks of it. Might be gated area? Like our friends in St. Louis? kek.
And this. In my (limited) experience planefagging, it is uncommon to see a P8 Poseidon other than over the coastal parts of USA, and I do not recall ever seeing multiple P8s doing a task together.
Too bad they did not capture either timestamps or aircraft ID so we could go back and locate these ADSB traces.
3 screencaps from
>>>/qresearch/10197453
https://www.military.com/equipment/p-8a-poseidon
P-8A Poseidon
Armament: Torpedoes, cruise missiles, bombs, mines Propulsion: Two high-bypass CFM56 turbofan engines Airspeed: 490 knots Range: 1,200 nautical miles radius with four hours on station. Crew: Nine
A militarized version of the Boeing 737 commercial aircraft, the P-8A Poseidon is intended to replace the U.S. Navy’s ageing P-3 Orion fleet as the service’s front-line anti-submarine warfare aircraft.
The P-8A has an active multi-static and passive acoustic sensor system, inverse synthetic aperture radar, new electronic support measures system, new electro-optical/infrared sensor and a digital magnetic anomaly detector.
Its nine-person crew includes a dual-pilot cockpit and five mission crew (plus relief pilot and in-flight technician). The P-8A has workstations with universal multi-function displays, and ready accommodation for additional workstations and workload sharing. The Poseidon is armed with an internal five-station weapons bay, four wing pylons, two centerline pylons, all supported by digital stores management allowing for carriage of joint missiles, torpedoes and mines. Boeing was awarded the contract to develop the P-8A on June 14, 2004. The P-8A will be a derivative of a modified Boeing 737-800ERX airliner, bringing together a reliable airframe and high-bypass turbo fan jet engine with a fully connected, state-of-the-art open architecture mission system.
Coupled with next-generation sensors, the P-8A is intended to improve antisubmarine and anti-surface warfare capabilities. The P-8A program went through a preliminary design review in November 2005. The Navy plans to purchase 108 production P-8As. The first aircraft is scheduled to be delivered for flight test in 2009, with IOC planned for 2013.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
https://www.usna.edu/NavalAviation/FixedWingAircraft/P8A_Poseidon.php
P-8A Poseidon
The P-8A Poseidon is a modified Boeing 737-800ERX, bringing together a highly reliable airframe and high-bypass turbo fan jet engine with a fully connected, state-of-the-art open architecture mission system. This combination, coupled with next-generation sensors, will dramatically improve anti-submarine warfare (ASW), and anti-surface warfare (ASuW) capabilities.
Features
Open Mission System Architecture: reconfigurable and expandable system facilitating easier, more affordable upgrades.
Sensors: Active multi-static and passive acoustic sensor system, inverse synthetic aperture/synthetic aperture radar, new electronic support measures system, new electro-optical/infrared sensor, digital magnetic anomaly detector.
Nine-person crew: dual-pilot cockpit, five mission crew (plus relief pilot and in-flight technician). Workstations with universal multi-function displays, ready accommodation for additional workstation, workload sharing.
Lethality: internal five-station weapons bay, four wing pylons, two centerline pylons, all supported by digital stores management allowing for carriage of joint missiles, torpedoes and mines. Search stores: rotary reloadable, pneumatically controlled sonobuoy launcher.
Net Ready: Link-11/Link-16, Internet Protocol, Common Data Link (CDL), FORCEnet compliant.
Performance-based support/logistics with availability a key performance parameter.
Background
The Navy's replacement platform for the P-3C, the P-8A Poseidon, is designed to secure the Navy's future in long-range maritime patrol capability, while transforming how the Navy's maritime patrol and reconnaissance force will man, train, operate and deploy. The P-8A will provide more combat capability from a smaller force and less infrastructure while focusing on worldwide responsiveness and interoperability with traditional manned forces and evolving unmanned sensors.
Boeing was awarded the contract to develop the P-8A on June 14, 2004. The P-8A will be a derivative of a modified Boeing 737-800ERX airliner, bringing together a reliable airframe and high-bypass turbo fan jet engine with a fully connected, state-of-the-art open architecture mission system. Coupled with next-generation sensors, the P-8A will dramatically improve antisubmarine and anti-surface warfare capabilities. The P-8A program went through a preliminary design review in November 2005. The Navy plans to purchase 108 production P-8As. The first aircraft is scheduled to be delivered for flight test in 2009, with IOC planned for 2013.
General Characteristics
Primary Function: Anti-Submarine and Anti-surface Warfare.
Contractor: Boeing IDS
Date Deployed: First squadron is planned for 2013.
Propulsion: Two high-bypass CFM56 turbofan engines
Length: 129.5 feet (39.47 meters).
Height: 42.1 feet (12.83 meters).
Wingspan: 117.2 feet.
Weight: Maximum gross takeoff, 188,200 pounds
Airspeed: 490 knots.
Ceiling: 41,000 ft.
Range: 1,200 nautical miles radius with four hours on station.
Crew: Nine.
Armament: Torpedoes, cruise missiles, bombs, mines
One final thing. The ICAO IDs for these 3 aircraft appear to be:
AE6784
AE67AF
AE1D97
#1 is a real plane, I was able to locate its trace from 2 months ago https://liveuamap.com/en/2020/8-june-black-seacrimea-us-navy-p8-poseidon-ae6784-usaf-rc135w although the label conflating a Rivet Joint with a P8 Poseidon appears to be wrong.
#2 appeared on a table of unknown aircraft dated 7/31/2020 so it's probably a real ICAO# too. https://www.live-military-mode-s.eu/unkown2.php?start=10500
#3 Looks like it's real ICAO# too, appears in a 1/2019 log: AE1D97 160764 — 2019-01-14 20:12:10 EP-3E United States USN |
https://mt-milcom.blogspot.com/2019/01/mode-sads-milcom-intercepts-14-january.html
and if they are currently active on ADSB anywhere in the world, it might be possible to find them and then click history to recover the historical flight tracks. I tried that and was not able to find any of them. Which only means I failed to locate the flight history at this time. Might be possible later, if we catch any of these a/c on ADSB.