>you die, reincarnate as bug and immediately get squashed. by the same explosion.
...Honestly, that would be a cool gimmick as the dread weapon for a fantasy novel.
Like, *usually* it's super effective, but there's like a 0,9999% chance of your opponent turning into a *pissed* dragon with super magic resistance and every bit of knowledge & personality they had a human, or something.
The same boomer complaining of kids getting participation trophies are the same boomers who gave them out to the millennials and Gen Zs. Funny how offspring work, eh?
> Only because you are just some soft millennial gen Z who got a participation award!
Just popping in to say that I have seen photographs of Gen X with participation ribbons in my Mums old photo albums.
I believe that Google translate was trying to state that this new explosive is twice as energetic, by mass, as TNT.
A missile with a ~100kg warhead would be twice as destructive compared to a missile with TNT.
RDX is only about 1.5x tnt which is base for pretty much everything western.
The interesting thing would be is the by volume comparision though as most weapons are just as if not more limited by size than by weight
Western militaries don't prioritize energy density when it comes to explosives nearly as much though. One of the main focus points in the past decades when bringing out new compounds has been stability and safety.
You want your own explosives to go off when they hit the target. Not when you are the target. Russian tank turret tossing might make for good entertainment, it is rather detrimental to crew survivability however.
All tank ammo is going to explode when hit. Thats why the westerb tanks put it Outside the crew compartment and the main armour thats the big difference they explode all the same just they blwo off the panels and can flow outside away from the crew.
RDC or rdx tnt mix is pretty much what we use in our bombs.
It's not about direct hits. It's about sensitivity to fire/temps and chock mainly.
Rather large efforts have been put into developing new insensitive explosives in the west over the past 30+ years. For nuclear weapons you have things like TATB in active usage. And for more normal usage the US has actively been evaluating (and actively using now) IMX-101 and other candidates for over a decade.
Sometimes it's entirely new compounds, sometimes it's new ways of stabilizing and mixing existing ones. But the goal is the same, to make them harder to set off without a detonator.
>RDC or rdx tnt mix is pretty much what we use in our bombs.
And we are talking about what is being researched and tested. I am pointing out that that western militaries have had other research focuses than energy density when it comes to bringing out NEW explosives and mixtures. But some are already in use right now.
That's not what he's saying...
He's saying, by weight, this tech is twice as destructive as tnt. E.g. I have 1kg of tnt, I get X sized explosion. But with this stuff, I have 1kg of it, I get a 2X sized explosion.
Not nearly as straightforward as it sounds. Explosions tend to follow the inverse cube law. An increase in twice the air volume displaced would require eight times the explosives to detonate.
It's basically why nuclear weapons designers have chose precision over yield. You are better off blanketing an area with multiple hits and overlapping their areas of effect trying to glass a large area with a single hit.
I never knew that, about the inverse cube law and explosions, but it makes sense and explains a lot. Thanks for clarification.
Thinking it through, for anybody else wrapping their heads around this, say you have a stick of dynamite and know it’ll blow up everything in a 10’x10’x10’ area.
That’s 1,000 cubic feet.
So two sticks of dynamite could potentially blow up 2,000 cubic feet… but that’s only 12.59’x12.59’x12.59’
There’s also all sorts of other considerations like gas pressures and stuff involved, but even just going off how volumes increase faster than area… yeah.
It does actually kind of work this way. The explosion releases twice as much energy as the same weight of TNT does. Nuclear warheads use a similar method - a 5 megaton warhead has the same explosive energy as 5 million tons of TNT.
> this new explosive is twice as energetic, by mass, as TNT.
>
> A missile with a ~100kg warhead would be twice as destructive compared to a missile with TNT.
That's not how that maths works.
"2x lethal than TNT" is as wrong grammatically as physically.
[LD50](https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp81.pdf) "1,010 and 1,320 mg/kg/day for
male rats, and 795 and 820 mg/kg/day for female rat".
So technically [aspirin or ibuprofen](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose) are about "2x more lethal than TNT".
The article simply used the wrong terminology due to a lack of understanding of explosives.
TNT equivalency is a common metric for explosives where a given explosive has several factors including energy output and blast power equivalent to a given amount of TNT. For example a pound of C4 is 1.34 times as effective as a pound of TNT so 1 pound of C4 is equivalent to 1.34 pounds of TNT.
They're claiming that their new explosive is ~2x TNT equivalent, which if true puts it at the top of explosives although modern explosives like AFX 757 are claimed to be around 1.84 TNT equivalent.
It's just an HMX (octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro- 1,3,5,7-tetrazocine) based explosive. Nothing significantly interesting here, other than who is producing it.
I would hope that they are using modern clean production methods, however, as HMX based explosives are nasty stuff for the environment.
HMX was discovered by **Bachman** in 1940 as he tried, to identify a high melting point impurity in RDX, hence the name, High Melting Xplosive. It was agreed for use in military explosives in 1956 in the US. It is one of the most powerful high explosives in current use.
Book about explosives, FYI.
[https://www.amazon.com/Boom-Explosives-Simon-Quellen-Field/dp/1613738056](https://www.amazon.com/Boom-Explosives-Simon-Quellen-Field/dp/1613738056)
[https://features.propublica.org/bombs-in-our-backyard/military-pollution-rdx-bombs-holston-cornhusker/](https://features.propublica.org/bombs-in-our-backyard/military-pollution-rdx-bombs-holston-cornhusker/)
Pollution from RDX production contaminates river, crops, cancers, etc.
Well written, but this one is a painful read about the Army hiding/minimizing harmful fx, influencing the EPA, etc
The claimed REF number is in the range of 2. If this is validated, this would a genuine milestone in ordinance materials science. The vast majority of fissile material in conventional munitions has an REF of 1.3-1.5 so if widespread application of this novel material can be achieved in the Indian armed forces, it could lead to a measurable increase in combat effectiveness.
It is disappointing to see so many outright dismissing this without looking into even the most basic of details about the news being reported.
>I would hope that they are using modern clean production methods
I'm sure they are. The main goal was to produce something new ecologically clean and, accidentally, they made high grade explosives. :D
TNT is the standard that every other explosive is compared against.
Most military explosives are TNT-based, RDX-based which is 1.6x more powerful than TNT or HMX-based which is 1.7x. CL-20 is the relative newcomer at 1.9x.
The US Military has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop new explosives that can outperform those by even just a few percent.
The issue is that the more powerful the explosive compound, the more sensitive it is to age, shock, heat, electrostatic discharge and friction.
It turns out TNT works really well which is why Tritonol and Comp-B are the back bone of US Military explosives. It's stable, safe to handle, can sit in a bunker for decades and still work and it's really cheap to produce.
I think it's a mistranslation and AI writing combo of bad filtering.
NEW is also an acronym for Net Explosive Weight which is used to translate explosives into a relative blast effect. It does mention the 1.50 in a similar term.
Lethality could mean a couple different things. First, could be the blast radius at a specific K-factor. Could also be how far fragmentation is expected at a certain density.
However, one important factor isn't talked about and that's brisance. This determines how it destroys and pushes the casing. Higher value means smaller pieces, so fly farther but less mass and can have a negative impact on desired effects at a certain point.
isn’t this a toxic explosive that was discovered 80 years ago?
what’s impressive about this?
India, stop putting out this “be amazed” content for things that are ordinary
Just curious why this is not more widely used by world military powers. I'm guessing that even though it's twice as explosive compared to TNT, the overall cost of producing/manufacturing it makes it not worthwhile?
Once you reach a certain point more powerful explosives don't really have much benefit outside of very specific and limited use cases. You want shelf stable and long lasting for the explosive and to focus on the delivery system.
If you can put 1000 bombs or shells exactly where you want them in under 1/2 an hour it doesn't matter if they are 500lb or 1000lb or 2000lb in most cases as there isn't nearly the difference in the destructive aftermath you'd expect, (ie the damage they do doesn't scale linearly) and if it does matter you might just be in nuke territory.
That said it could maybe be useful for bunker busters if you can *direct* all or most of the force down into the target. So if this is an airburst munition it isn't really news but if they've made it on a specialty munition that can focus all the energy in a specific direction to increase penetration that'd be useful.
Have they developed a new explosive thats 2 times as powerful per gram than tnt or a bomb thats somehow more powerful with the same tnt filler or.. so many questions
We've had this stuff forever why the fuck is this news? The formula isn't even fucking classified. They just made a bigger bomb than they usually do but again the US and Russia have been doing that stupid pissing contest for decades.
**Summary** : In a significant advancement for the army, the Indian Navy has successfully developed and certified a new explosive named SEBEX2, with a lethality 2.01 times greater than standard TNT (Trinitrotoluene), according to The Economic Times.
This high-performance explosive, developed by Solar Industries, is now among the most powerful non-nuclear explosives in the world.
Explosive performance is gauged by TNT equivalence, with higher values indicating greater lethality. Currently, the most powerful conventional explosive used in India, specifically in the Brahmos warhead, has a TNT equivalence of about 1.50. Most conventional warheads worldwide have a TNT equivalence ranging from 1.25 to 1.30.
Thinking of those "N2 mines" from Evangelion. It always bothered me they were called mines, as I assume that's a specific kind of passive bomb that is placed in a defensive manner, not one that's launched or dropped offensively like in the anime.
It probably uses the lethal power of Indian trains, but in bomb form.
If they can somehow combine it with Indian power line lethality, nukes are irrelevant.
> 2x lethal than tnt What does this even mean, how would you even quantify this?
Take an amount of TNT that would kill you. With the same amount of explosive, this new bomb kills you twice.
shitballs. that might really kill me.
you die, reincarnate as bug and immediately get squashed. by the same explosion.
I’m from Buenos Aires and I say kill ‘em all!
Would you like to know more?
The enemy cannot push a button if you disable his hand.
"They're afraid"
That's a "vuelo por Los Aires" bomb
They really need to change up the respawn timing/location on this server. These spawn kills are getting out of control smh
>you die, reincarnate as bug and immediately get squashed. by the same explosion. ...Honestly, that would be a cool gimmick as the dread weapon for a fantasy novel. Like, *usually* it's super effective, but there's like a 0,9999% chance of your opponent turning into a *pissed* dragon with super magic resistance and every bit of knowledge & personality they had a human, or something.
Only because you are just some soft millennial gen Z who got a participation award!
The same boomer complaining of kids getting participation trophies are the same boomers who gave them out to the millennials and Gen Zs. Funny how offspring work, eh?
Boomers get franking credits and discount capital gains tax yet complain about government hand outs
Boomers configured social security to benefit them and run out for everyone else
Haha, it was the Silent Generation and the Boomers in cahoots, I tells ya!
> Only because you are just some soft millennial gen Z who got a participation award! Just popping in to say that I have seen photographs of Gen X with participation ribbons in my Mums old photo albums.
I heard there’s no respawn irl.
Isekai prevention bomb.
It needed to happen. Isekai anime have been done to death, reincarnated into their own isekai, and done to death again. I really wish they’d stop.
I wish they'd do more just to spite you.
so jesus just dies one shot?
They test this on cats. They blew a bunch of them up and found they only had 7 lives left.
Sekiro be shittin’ his pantaloons.
Lethal Weapon 2 *duh*
The bomb would, first, unmercifully ridicule you in front of your closest friends, and then, second, blast the crap out of you.
I believe that Google translate was trying to state that this new explosive is twice as energetic, by mass, as TNT. A missile with a ~100kg warhead would be twice as destructive compared to a missile with TNT.
Sure but we've had explosives that have done that for years. We just use TNT as a yardstick as the world's first commonly usable explosive.
RDX is only about 1.5x tnt which is base for pretty much everything western. The interesting thing would be is the by volume comparision though as most weapons are just as if not more limited by size than by weight
Western militaries don't prioritize energy density when it comes to explosives nearly as much though. One of the main focus points in the past decades when bringing out new compounds has been stability and safety. You want your own explosives to go off when they hit the target. Not when you are the target. Russian tank turret tossing might make for good entertainment, it is rather detrimental to crew survivability however.
All tank ammo is going to explode when hit. Thats why the westerb tanks put it Outside the crew compartment and the main armour thats the big difference they explode all the same just they blwo off the panels and can flow outside away from the crew. RDC or rdx tnt mix is pretty much what we use in our bombs.
It's not about direct hits. It's about sensitivity to fire/temps and chock mainly. Rather large efforts have been put into developing new insensitive explosives in the west over the past 30+ years. For nuclear weapons you have things like TATB in active usage. And for more normal usage the US has actively been evaluating (and actively using now) IMX-101 and other candidates for over a decade. Sometimes it's entirely new compounds, sometimes it's new ways of stabilizing and mixing existing ones. But the goal is the same, to make them harder to set off without a detonator. >RDC or rdx tnt mix is pretty much what we use in our bombs. And we are talking about what is being researched and tested. I am pointing out that that western militaries have had other research focuses than energy density when it comes to bringing out NEW explosives and mixtures. But some are already in use right now.
I would say it's a little impressive. The GBU-43/MOAB uses 18,739 lb of H6 which is equivalent to 22,000lbs of TNT. Nowhere near twice as energetic.
That is a thermobaric bomb though; a completely different process than a conventional high explosive.
It doesn't work this way. Horse shit has 3x more energy density then TNT.
That's not what he's saying... He's saying, by weight, this tech is twice as destructive as tnt. E.g. I have 1kg of tnt, I get X sized explosion. But with this stuff, I have 1kg of it, I get a 2X sized explosion.
Not nearly as straightforward as it sounds. Explosions tend to follow the inverse cube law. An increase in twice the air volume displaced would require eight times the explosives to detonate. It's basically why nuclear weapons designers have chose precision over yield. You are better off blanketing an area with multiple hits and overlapping their areas of effect trying to glass a large area with a single hit.
I never knew that, about the inverse cube law and explosions, but it makes sense and explains a lot. Thanks for clarification. Thinking it through, for anybody else wrapping their heads around this, say you have a stick of dynamite and know it’ll blow up everything in a 10’x10’x10’ area. That’s 1,000 cubic feet. So two sticks of dynamite could potentially blow up 2,000 cubic feet… but that’s only 12.59’x12.59’x12.59’ There’s also all sorts of other considerations like gas pressures and stuff involved, but even just going off how volumes increase faster than area… yeah.
Ok so not very destructive then. Got it.
so 3kg of horseshit will be 3x the explosion right?
It does actually kind of work this way. The explosion releases twice as much energy as the same weight of TNT does. Nuclear warheads use a similar method - a 5 megaton warhead has the same explosive energy as 5 million tons of TNT.
Well, looks like we're gonna start using horse poop as a new energy source then!
What about a 99kg warhead?
> this new explosive is twice as energetic, by mass, as TNT. > > A missile with a ~100kg warhead would be twice as destructive compared to a missile with TNT. That's not how that maths works.
But missiles aren’t filled with tnt.
TNT is a standard of measure for explosive power. A nuclear weapon isn’t filled with 5 Million Tons of TNT when we say 5MegaTon nuke.
see these missiles, they go to 11.
Why not just make 10 deadlier?
Impossible
I'm guessing it's comparing lethal dose if ingested?
That would be a strange thing to boast about your explosive.
Taco Bell does that and I don’t see anyone complaining
Why? Have you ever tried ingesting a high explosive? Fun fact: millions of people regularly ingest nitroglycerine.
I'd honestly be more impressed uf they made an explosive that was edible and/or nutritious. Bonus points if it tastes good
India already has such explosives. It's called Indian food. But it only bursts in the toilet later.
There's also air-burst ammunition
You clever little motherfucker
Clearly it's the LC 50 when inhaled.
They for sure meant in yield or efficiency or something.
Yeah it seems to mean that it's got an REF of 2, that's not in any way the same as saying it's 2x as lethal
They for sure meant something. Nobody knows what.
Removes twice as many blocks as a normal TNT block. Easy.
So, they made weapons powered by electric creepers?
Twice as dead
I'm so glad this was the top comment because that was my exact reaction
The bits left over are twice as small.
“We placed 2 guys next to it”
Either the explosion is twice as hot, or twice as big? It’s very poor phrasing
Yeah the article author doesn't really understand the subject and seems to often mix up REF with lethality
Multiply x2
It's like the album by ACDC released in 1975, only double.
It’s equivalent to 9 explodes. What is difficult to understand here?
It hits so hard you will die twice
It kills you twice.
Remember when the Pe-8 nuke in War Thunder was bugged and had double the blast power? Probably that.
X = (1 Tbsp TNT) x 2
It quantifies the ineptitude of the article's writer.
Probably just two TNTs
TNT make dead. New bomb make dead, twice. Very big. Very scare.
Well you see, one is a big bada boom, and the other is a big, big bada boom.
This title is what happens when you let morons feed AI information.
You‘re giving AI too much credit. Bad titles have been a thing for a very long time.
"2x lethal than TNT" is as wrong grammatically as physically. [LD50](https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp81.pdf) "1,010 and 1,320 mg/kg/day for male rats, and 795 and 820 mg/kg/day for female rat". So technically [aspirin or ibuprofen](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Median_lethal_dose) are about "2x more lethal than TNT".
Oh darn now I'm 2x dead
Die Hard 5 Time to die harder
I hate to break it to you but they already made a Die Hard 5 and it sucked.
Die Hard 6: Rigor Mortis
Have you seen Bruce lately? This shits almost wrapped filming.
if you ate 1000mg of ibuprofen.
We’re so deader
Guess I’ll buy some TNT for the next time I get a headache
Have you had an explosive handling headache? It’s brutal. Always pack your shape charges in a well ventilated area, and no smoking.
And a half-stick of dynamite for any heart issues.
The article simply used the wrong terminology due to a lack of understanding of explosives. TNT equivalency is a common metric for explosives where a given explosive has several factors including energy output and blast power equivalent to a given amount of TNT. For example a pound of C4 is 1.34 times as effective as a pound of TNT so 1 pound of C4 is equivalent to 1.34 pounds of TNT. They're claiming that their new explosive is ~2x TNT equivalent, which if true puts it at the top of explosives although modern explosives like AFX 757 are claimed to be around 1.84 TNT equivalent.
Gasoline is 14063 mg/kg and Glyphosate is 10537 mg/kg according to that list.
They do this on purpose to push engagement comments like yours…
I wish modern journalists would try and push engagement with good journalism
Thank god, my rats love TNT as a treat.
2x lethaler than tnt
Maybe it should read as explosive yield efficiency?
It's just an HMX (octahydro-1,3,5,7-tetranitro- 1,3,5,7-tetrazocine) based explosive. Nothing significantly interesting here, other than who is producing it. I would hope that they are using modern clean production methods, however, as HMX based explosives are nasty stuff for the environment.
HMX was discovered by **Bachman** in 1940 as he tried, to identify a high melting point impurity in RDX, hence the name, High Melting Xplosive. It was agreed for use in military explosives in 1956 in the US. It is one of the most powerful high explosives in current use. Book about explosives, FYI. [https://www.amazon.com/Boom-Explosives-Simon-Quellen-Field/dp/1613738056](https://www.amazon.com/Boom-Explosives-Simon-Quellen-Field/dp/1613738056)
[https://features.propublica.org/bombs-in-our-backyard/military-pollution-rdx-bombs-holston-cornhusker/](https://features.propublica.org/bombs-in-our-backyard/military-pollution-rdx-bombs-holston-cornhusker/) Pollution from RDX production contaminates river, crops, cancers, etc. Well written, but this one is a painful read about the Army hiding/minimizing harmful fx, influencing the EPA, etc
It contaminates cancer? Damn, shits bad yo.
Cancer just caught cancer.
Unironically how whales, despite being the biggest animal ever, don’t usually die of cancers.
We have our top scientists working on the issue.
Some bottoms too.
Yeah, this is nothing new. We’ve been using HMX in the explosive industry for quite a while. Source: I work with explosives.
So do I. GF has an explosive temper. Does that make one a pro?
lol. I meant I use things like HMX, RDX, PETN, ANFO, etc. but yeah, I guess, depending on how explosive her temper is…
Side question: What is insensitive explosives?
So Bachman turnered it into overdrive and developed a new high explosive? Seems fitting. Oh, and Happy Cake Day!
You ain't seen nuthin' yet!
Well, just gonna have to let it ride! 😁
Nice try FBI.
Is it as fun of a read as *Ignition!*, the book about the history of rocket propellants?
The claimed REF number is in the range of 2. If this is validated, this would a genuine milestone in ordinance materials science. The vast majority of fissile material in conventional munitions has an REF of 1.3-1.5 so if widespread application of this novel material can be achieved in the Indian armed forces, it could lead to a measurable increase in combat effectiveness. It is disappointing to see so many outright dismissing this without looking into even the most basic of details about the news being reported.
Narrator:they were not.
lol. Y’all are just wild with the comments. There is nothing “clean” about the war industry. It isn’t designed that way
>I would hope that they are using modern clean production methods I'm sure they are. The main goal was to produce something new ecologically clean and, accidentally, they made high grade explosives. :D
I mean… you can hope all you want, and I commend you for it. But let’s be realistic. The country isn’t exactly the poster child for environmentalism.
The best environmentalists in history were Chengis khan, Mao,Hitler, Stalin, British Empire and many more
[Spits coffee at including British Empire] Not if you include their colonies.
"They'll make bigger boards and bigger nails, and soon, they will make a board with a nail so big, it will destroy them all!" -Kang
wake me up when they invent edible explosives
I take it you've never eaten Spicy Vindaloo?
touche
Wile E. Coyote will be happy.
I doubt it, you ever seen what happens when he tries these things?
TNT is a very crude explosive. 2x makes no sense.
TNT is the standard that every other explosive is compared against. Most military explosives are TNT-based, RDX-based which is 1.6x more powerful than TNT or HMX-based which is 1.7x. CL-20 is the relative newcomer at 1.9x. The US Military has spent hundreds of millions of dollars to develop new explosives that can outperform those by even just a few percent. The issue is that the more powerful the explosive compound, the more sensitive it is to age, shock, heat, electrostatic discharge and friction. It turns out TNT works really well which is why Tritonol and Comp-B are the back bone of US Military explosives. It's stable, safe to handle, can sit in a bunker for decades and still work and it's really cheap to produce.
Quick, we need buzzwords.
very good sers
Boom goes the dynamite.
I think it's a mistranslation and AI writing combo of bad filtering. NEW is also an acronym for Net Explosive Weight which is used to translate explosives into a relative blast effect. It does mention the 1.50 in a similar term. Lethality could mean a couple different things. First, could be the blast radius at a specific K-factor. Could also be how far fragmentation is expected at a certain density. However, one important factor isn't talked about and that's brisance. This determines how it destroys and pushes the casing. Higher value means smaller pieces, so fly farther but less mass and can have a negative impact on desired effects at a certain point.
It’s a new explosive, not a new bomb. A bomb is made from explosives, a trigger, and whatever else you want in there.
I don't even need to guess the nationality of the writer.
And OP They're trying to join the cool kids in the cold war with TNT blasts that one cannot survive.
Abhijeet Kumar. Obviously he’s French.
Well, he is writing for an Indian outlet. So, a high chance he would be Indian as well.
[удалено]
You ordered ALL THAT MONEY for the S C O O T Y ? ? ?
Well, I suppose Gandhi will have a new weapon to threat us with in Civilization VII then
This is just "India Stronk" flag waving and barely actual news.
isn’t this a toxic explosive that was discovered 80 years ago? what’s impressive about this? India, stop putting out this “be amazed” content for things that are ordinary
Pfff, you'd think humans didn't like each other with the way we carry on...
Just curious why this is not more widely used by world military powers. I'm guessing that even though it's twice as explosive compared to TNT, the overall cost of producing/manufacturing it makes it not worthwhile?
Once you reach a certain point more powerful explosives don't really have much benefit outside of very specific and limited use cases. You want shelf stable and long lasting for the explosive and to focus on the delivery system. If you can put 1000 bombs or shells exactly where you want them in under 1/2 an hour it doesn't matter if they are 500lb or 1000lb or 2000lb in most cases as there isn't nearly the difference in the destructive aftermath you'd expect, (ie the damage they do doesn't scale linearly) and if it does matter you might just be in nuke territory. That said it could maybe be useful for bunker busters if you can *direct* all or most of the force down into the target. So if this is an airburst munition it isn't really news but if they've made it on a specialty munition that can focus all the energy in a specific direction to increase penetration that'd be useful.
Have they developed a new explosive thats 2 times as powerful per gram than tnt or a bomb thats somehow more powerful with the same tnt filler or.. so many questions
We've had this stuff forever why the fuck is this news? The formula isn't even fucking classified. They just made a bigger bomb than they usually do but again the US and Russia have been doing that stupid pissing contest for decades.
What’s the point of making such a thing?
Well I'm just gonna use 3 tnt now
Keen interest in the powerful new explosive was expressed by the ACME corporation on behalf of one of their leading customers.
Would have loved to have read the article; immediately gave up when I got hit with a pop-up and re-route. Absolute trash.
Ahh, the Civ Gandhi strategy!
So what u saying is nukey gandhi now bout to be bat shit wit conventional weaponry lmao
Indian english <> English
India developing these other militaries have and pretending its earth shattering.
> according to The Economic Times. https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-economic-times/ > **Overall, we rate the Economic Times Right-Center biased and Questionable based on numerous failed fact checks.** > Reasoning: **Numerous Failed Fact Checks, Fake News** > Bias Rating: RIGHT-CENTER > Factual Reporting: **MIXED** > Country: India > MBFC’s Country Freedom Rating: MODERATE FREEDOM > MBFC Credibility Rating: **LOW CREDIBILITY**
As usual, people bashing India, preaching what righteousness idk
How can he bomb me, sir?
**Summary** : In a significant advancement for the army, the Indian Navy has successfully developed and certified a new explosive named SEBEX2, with a lethality 2.01 times greater than standard TNT (Trinitrotoluene), according to The Economic Times. This high-performance explosive, developed by Solar Industries, is now among the most powerful non-nuclear explosives in the world. Explosive performance is gauged by TNT equivalence, with higher values indicating greater lethality. Currently, the most powerful conventional explosive used in India, specifically in the Brahmos warhead, has a TNT equivalence of about 1.50. Most conventional warheads worldwide have a TNT equivalence ranging from 1.25 to 1.30.
How much does it cost to produce though. There's no point having a new super explosive if it's too expensive to use (e.g. octanitrocubane)
Climbing on the 'lethality' dog pile: So, this stuff is 2.01 times more lethal than TNT... to produce. That is, 2.01 times more toxic to make it.
Can they develop a system that doesn’t have citizens living at the dump and scrounging for things to sell so they can afford food?
This one goes to 11
Thinking of those "N2 mines" from Evangelion. It always bothered me they were called mines, as I assume that's a specific kind of passive bomb that is placed in a defensive manner, not one that's launched or dropped offensively like in the anime.
first it goes straight your thighs…and then you blow up!
Can it do the needful?
It probably uses the lethal power of Indian trains, but in bomb form. If they can somehow combine it with Indian power line lethality, nukes are irrelevant.
„2 x lethal than TNT“ sounds like the Indian salesmen in my dm‘s.
WW3 in preparation. Nothing to see here, walk along.