That explosion is way, way too small. It look like to have at most 1kt-2kt. That meteor exploded with 500x that energy.
It should be something like this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvW0N-cFexM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K2fSMJkMK5M 2013/2/17 Harry Veeder <hveeder...@gmail.com> > A comparable nuclear blast > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=paCUhiUxxIw > > Seems the spectators found it thrilling. > > harry > > On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 4:08 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > > Resend with this addition: NASA says meteor was "nuclear-like" in its > > intensity. Maybe they know something. > > > > > http://cosmiclog.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/15/16969092-nuclear-like-in-its-i > > ntensity-russian-meteor-blast-is-the-largest-since-1908?lite > > > > > > > > Ed, > > > > Near the end of the video at 26-27 seconds - where the slow motion > starts - > > a pointed object can be seen barreling into the meteor - following > which, it > > explodes. That object is a little too "perfect" to be believed, but it is > > intriguing if not faked. > > > > This is consistent with an air launched ABM which generally have small > > nuclear warheads (briefcase size). This would account for the rapid > > acceleration of debris following the explosion. An ABM missile developed > in > > the USA called "Sprint" was reported to have achieved 21,000 mph at high > > altitude. That missile had an official speed of mach 10 in the lower > > atmosphere and was nuclear tipped. > > > > Consequently - this high speed is within the realm of "common sense" for > a > > ABM launched from a high altitude interceptor. Plus this region where the > > incident occurred is the most secret and sensitive in all of Russia - it > is > > their Oak Ridge and Hanford. That would explain why an interceptor would > > have been operational at this time. It could have been a precaution > against > > the other, larger meteorite. > > > > BTW, that Sprint missile was early 1990s - twenty years old and yet it > could > > conceivably have "shot down" (nuked) a meteorite in some circumstance - > if > > one is not concerned about the repercussions and radioactivity. > Consequently > > - it is remotely possible the Russians have am ABM which is fast enough > - at > > least when launched at high altitude; and that they would be willing to > use > > it to protect a very sensitive region. > > > > The most likely explanation, of course, is that the video was faked. > > > > But that explanation lacks the drama of a "shoot down" and after all, > there > > was a Military Officer quoted as saying "we shot it down"... within > hours of > > the incident... but that quote was not from Pravda - closer to the > Russian > > equivalent of Fox. > > > > > > From: Edmund Storms > > > > > > What is so unusual about this video? The meteor exploded, > > which sent fragments in all directions, including straight ahead as the > > video shows. As for shooting down an object slowing from 17000 mph in the > > atmosphere, where is the common sense? > > > > Ed > > On Feb 17, 2013, at 7:17 AM, Jones Beene wrote: > > > > > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-octPHs9gcs&feature=player_embedded#t=0s > > <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-octPHs9gcs&feature=player_embedded> > > > > > > NASA failed to mention the surprising activity that > seems to > > show up in this Russian video, in slo-mo. > > > > The video could have been altered - with the addition > of a > > fast moving object that seems to impact with the object to make it > explode > > (at about 27 seconds). > > > > Since the original story of a missile shoot-down came > from > > Russian military, why not give it some credence? > > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ danieldi...@gmail.com
