Reply to post: Re: AC @YetAnotherLocksmith ... It makes sense, but...

Bomb-disposal robot violently disposes of Dallas cop-killer gunman

Matt Bryant Silver badge

Re: AC @YetAnotherLocksmith ... It makes sense, but...

"......so we will send in a robot with a bomb and detonate it (to kill him), thereby risking the detonation of the bomb we are afraid of. This makes no sense whatsoever." Only because your knowledge of explosives seems to only extend to Saturday morning cartoons. Most such devices have two stages - an initiator, AKA a detonator, and a main charge. The initiator provides a very intense, high-pressure pressure wave to trigger the main charge. The initiator usually has to be at least in contact with if not embedded into the main charge, otherwise the main charge will not explode. In looking for an example that might tie with your limited knowledge, you may have seen pics of mining charges where detonators are pushed into plastic explosives - the same detonator triggered only inches away from the plastic would not trigger the plastic (plastic explosive is so stable you can burn it on a camp fire). The type of explosives that make up main charges are usually chosen because their stability makes for safe handling, otherwise you (allegedly) end up like Abu Hamza al-Masri. When the cops used their small explosive they knew it was very unlikely to be close enough to the main charge of any bomb to cause it to explode. The same pressure wave that would not be triggering any explosives was still of sufficient force to disorient, disable or kill the perp, even through body armour (one of the nasty effects of the pressure waves caused by bombing in WW2 was people could survive the initial blast but have their lungs shredded by the pressure wave, leaving them to drown in their own blood).

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon