Russian ‘floating bomb’ ship packed with explosives now just 15 miles from two UK towns

a reply to: kwaka

The impression I had reading it was the vessel was a sub

I know Russian subs have a tendancy to sink quite often, but no it's not a sub. It's part of Russias' shadow fleet of ships used to circumvent sanctions.

a reply to: Kurokage

I know Russian subs have a tendancy to sink quite often, but no it's not a sub. It's part of Russias' shadow fleet of ships used to circumvent sanctions.

Thanks for that, don't have to worry about the nuke issue then. Could still make a mess of the port but wont take out a city. The thermobaric bomb will make more of a mess on the surface if properly engaged. Have to spread the fuel out first for max impact.

If Russia that that pissed off with Britton they have other means to assault. Getting sabotaged in a foreign port is more of a risk. Ukraine would have no issues there.

Quite a pickle. How bad is the damage, how feasible to transfer offshore. Looks like a good diplomatic channel to gauge the frenemy level.

a reply to: Kurokage

"I think over the last 77 years the government has thought to itself 'well, the longer we leave it, the safer it gets'.
"It appears if you talk to experts in explosives, that is the opposite of the truth."

Why don't you just evacuate the citizens in the area, and then blow it all up underwater after maybe setting up levees in the more vulnerable areas??? 1400 tons is certainly alot of ordinance, but nukes themselves have not caused tsunamis when detonated underwater, granted it was open ocean.

1400 tons does not compete with this, so maybe yall should just create a plan to blow it up underwater?

a reply to: worldstarcountry

1400 tons does not compete with this, so maybe yall should just create a plan to blow it up underwater?

Maybe that's what Putin has in mind with the 20,000 tonnes of ammonium nitrate....

a reply to: worldstarcountry

but nukes themselves have not caused tsunamis when detonated underwater,

Fukushima? Maybe it was just an earthquake? Could a nuke in the right spot on the ring of fire preempt such events?

At this time I am not informed enough on just what kind of repercussions an underwater nuke will do at what depth. On initial inspection has trouble all over it.

a reply to: kwaka

Russian state TV has threatend Great Britian with a Nuclear tidal wave a few times now...
www.popularmechanics.com...

Poseidon is Putin’s showpiece. First revealed in 2015, this nuclear-powered underwater drone—one of Russia's next-generation nuclear weapons

A succession of news reports have carried wildly disparate accounts of Poseidon’s capabilities. So is this another example of overblown Russian military vaporware or is there something more to it?

I looked up the likely damage from this since it seems fairly small in explosive terms.
LINK

Quite surprising to be honest.

a reply to: SprocketUK

But add in all that ammonium nitrate, in shallow water?

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Yeah, the 20,000 tonnes of ammonium nitrate exploding would be a massive explosion when you compare it to the 2,700 tonnes that exploded in Beruit.

a reply to: Oldcarpy2

Maybe buy shares in a glazer in sheerness?

originally posted by: SprocketUK
I looked up the likely damage from this since it seems fairly small in explosive terms.
LINK

Quite surprising to be honest.

Wonder why they (UK/US/whoever) didn't detonate it immediately after the war, versus letting it be a hazard for 80 years?

Would've better to get it over with in somewhat controlled fashion, versus letting it go unstable over time and be an opportunity for your unfriendlies...

a reply to: SprocketUK

Three masts sticking up above the waves near the coastal town of Sheerness in the UK mark the spot where a deadly wreck has been rusting for almost 80 years

Now it makes sense why the public is finally hearing about it. So all this explosive have been sitting there for that long and was not a problem. I don't see that Russian vessel getting a tow home anytime soon. Unloading has some problems too. Blow it up if there is still something left blowing.

a reply to: kwaka

No. It's been public knowledge since WW2.

originally posted by: gb540

originally posted by: SprocketUK
I looked up the likely damage from this since it seems fairly small in explosive terms.
LINK

Quite surprising to be honest.

Wonder why they (UK/US/whoever) didn't detonate it immediately after the war, versus letting it be a hazard for 80 years?

Would've better to get it over with in somewhat controlled fashion, versus letting it go unstable over time and be an opportunity for your unfriendlies...

Beats me mate

a reply to: Kurokage

What do the salvage and admiralty law say?

Seems to me.

If it's presenting an actual danger.

Send out some sea tugs under escort if need be.

Tow it out of the shipping lanes to a safe distance.

And sink it.

a reply to: andy06shake

I think the Russian MV Ruby is about 15 miles out from the article posted, which is Just outside of British waters, in my opinion they've anchored there for a reason, and after checking is still there as of an hour ago

Territorial sea is a belt of coastal waters extending at most 12 nautical miles (22 km; 14 mi) from the baseline (usually the mean low-water mark) of a coastal state.[6] The territorial sea is sovereign territory, although foreign ships (military and civilian) are allowed innocent passage through it

Russian ‘floating bomb’ ship packed with explosives!Russian ‘floating bomb’ ship packed with explosives!

TextRussian ‘floating bomb’ ship packed with explosives!!

Explosives? Packed with explosives!

Why not just state it as loaded with ammonium nitrate fertilizer?

While you are at it, try calling the Russians and ask them where it is headed and what is up?

There is a lot of childish # going on from both sides

a reply to: visitedbythem

Well, it's been floating around near NATO bases and European ports, before arriving here. It was destined for Malta but they've also refused it entry.

It's an odd place to sit and no where near Malta??

a reply to: SprocketUK

Quite surprising to be honest.

This ship blow up:


As for what to do with this ship is not as expedient:

a reply to: visitedbythem

Ammonium nitrate is highly explosive, as that port in Beirut can testify.

The Coastguard has. It's at anchor waiting to be refueled.