Sailing to the Nord Stream Pipeline on the Q-T.
- Thread starter nolatom
- Start date
EYESAILOR
Super Anarchist
- 3,802
- 2,316
Nobody has blamed Saddam, Maggie Thatcher or Elvis yet . So this must rank as one of the more grounded threads on the topic.
There is nothing mysterious or confusing about this, it is simply physics.
The magnitude of those explosions was measured at aourd 2.1 and 2.3 on the Richter scale, thus blast is estimated at “several hundred kilograms of explosive".
For reference The Beirut explosion created 3.3 magnitude on a Richter scale, and was estimated at “several thousand kilograms of explosive".
I cannot see how “several hundred kilograms of explosive" cannot be handled by divers, if made neutrally buoyant.
Its a large plastic drum sized object each, made to suitable shape of course. On land it requires few people to handle, but underwater its easy especially with a DPV.
And as I said, it could easily be loaded/filled onboard, just in time, for easier handling.
We don't know that yet. Naturally if the explosion came from inside the pipe, that would rule the divers out, yes?
You know for sure, yes?
Sorry, but you misplaced the decimal there. Its more like 1:1.3 ratio, not nothing, but still not multiple times.
Main advantage for semtex here is easy shaping - I think most everyone was trained to shape charges for various uses - breaching, rock blasting, making a hole into a metal wall etc - with the stuff in military service, when I attended.
But otherwise anfo would be a practical choice I think, trivial to source, easy to mix and handle and practical as it floats.
And anfo leaves much less unique chemical signature, as there is trace amounts of diesel and fertilizer in the sea everywhere already, and it would dilute fast.
Plus they're kinda obvious on a side scan sonar.
How would that indicate military job?
I think the opposite, a skilled military unit would know exactly how much is needed, and they could have resources to do a full scale training round to confirm.
What are the common problems and how is this 80 meters that deep?
I have been thinking about this, this cannot be ruled out, but it would make a little sense for them to do this.
Then again, it did not make much sense to pack the parade uniforms for the upcoming Kiev victory parade, but they still did so.
And it did not register as a small earthquake, it registered as an explosion, as it should.
There are the two explosions plus the gas release that follows.
And btw the published seismographs are in Bornholm, which is Denmark, not Sweden.
Maybe semtex was an artifact of them using of the shelf equipment:
www.scopex.fr
essing-sprengtechnik.de
alefahtech.com
www.appliedexplosives.com
Its not exactly very secret technology.
SEMTEX® RAZOR Product Range | Scopex
www.scopex.fr
Linear Cutter - Essing Sprengtechnik GmbH
essing-sprengtechnik.de
Disposal Explosives – Al Efah Technologies
alefahtech.com
CCL [Cutting Charge Linear] – Applied Explosives Technology
www.appliedexplosives.com
Its not exactly very secret technology.
Blue Crab
benthivore
Yes ... but.
And I rather it be FBI than FSB, just saying.
dogwatch
Super Anarchist
And it did not register as a small earthquake, it registered as an explosion, as it should.
How do you tell the difference? This is a question, not a challenge.
I am not expert, but for starters, you can locate the epicenter with TDOA and if it is above the surface of the rock, that tells something.
Also the size of the origin tells something, pinpoint vs linear fault.
Also the energy release speed, frequency content and P/S -wave distribution would give different signature, but I am half guessing here.
There has been ton of research on this to do with detecting covert nuclear testing, the models are pretty advanced.
How can you tell the difference between an explosion and an earthquake on a seismogram? | U.S. Geological Survey
Explosions and earthquakes both release a large amount of energy very quickly, and both can be recorded by seismic instruments. However, because the forces involved in each are very different, the waveforms that each creates look different. Nuclear tests are very near the surface of the earth...
What is the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and what is the role of seismology in monitoring it? | U.S. Geological Survey
On September 10, 1996, the United Nations General Assembly voted 158-3 to approve a treaty prohibiting all nuclear tests. The Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty has been signed by 130 nations - including the United States. President Clinton signed the agreement on September 24, 1996. Seismology is...
Nuclear Bomb or Earthquake? Explosions Reveal the Differences - Eos
A series of controlled chemical detonations in the Nevada desert is helping researchers discern between ground shaking caused by nuclear explosions and earthquakes.
eos.org
LeoV
Super Anarchist
A trench was dug/water blasted in preparation, then bedded with rock, nature covered the rocks slowly with silt/mud whatever, then pipes placed, this buried under mud with a crawler that used water pressure, then a concrete layer was placed on top of it. The calculations took into account the resistance needed if a aircraft carrier started to drag an anchor. The concrete alone could resist that.
Good luck granny.
Good luck granny.
Any source for such extensive digging and concrete pouring?
This is from NSP2 environmental summary:
"In some areas, the offshore installation of the pipelines (especially in shallow waters) require additional stabilisation and/or protection against hydrodynamic loading (e.g. waves, currents), which can be achieved by either trenching the pipelines into the seabed or rock placement. Trenching can be performed either prior to pipeline installation as a pre-cut trench (pre-lay) or after the pipelines have been laid on the seabed (post-lay).
Only post-lay trenching will be carried out in the Danish sector, at an anticipated three sections, spanning a total of 20.5 km. It is conservatively estimated to take 2.6 days in total (62 hours), not including time for relocation. Rock placement will be the main intervention method for free-span correction to achieve pipeline stabilisation. Rock placement will also be used in the areas where NSP2 pipelines cross NSP pipelines and following an above-water tie-in if it is to be performed in Denmark. For cable crossings, a solution with flexible or rigid separation mattresses is envisaged."
It changes the situation dramatically if the pipeline was buried under layer of concrete. But as the Spartans say, if.
LeoV
Super Anarchist
Not concrete pouring, reinforced concrete matting.
Done at the blown up section of Nordstream1 according to the guys from the company that laid them. Nord2 I do not know. The company that placed N1 has its base near me. Have been looking for years at pipes that were from the Nordstream project without knowing. N2 they bailed on for sanctions reasoning. Russian ships laid that one.
Interestingly they are now being transported with help from my neighbor as he is a crane driver. It was overproduction from N1, now going to the scrapyard as nobody is paying storage fees anymore.
Done at the blown up section of Nordstream1 according to the guys from the company that laid them. Nord2 I do not know. The company that placed N1 has its base near me. Have been looking for years at pipes that were from the Nordstream project without knowing. N2 they bailed on for sanctions reasoning. Russian ships laid that one.
Interestingly they are now being transported with help from my neighbor as he is a crane driver. It was overproduction from N1, now going to the scrapyard as nobody is paying storage fees anymore.
Can you point out the aircraft carrier resistant layer of concrete?
Where is it between the marine growth on top and the pipeline on bottom?
Also, the shear line on the pipe is very clear cut, clearly shaped charge of very efficient focusing. Impossible to tell whether it is from inside out or outside in. Even a skilled plasma cutter operator could not achieve such a clean cut, not underwater at least.
Anyone know the type of steel? If it is not stainless, that is a very fresh picture after the event, as there is no rust formed yet.
And yet there are sonar pictures of NSP1 on a report titled:
"Self-burial of large diameter pipelines: the Nord Stream case"
Clearly showing a bare pipeline on bottom, buried only 20-25cm:
"To be noted that the section KP 1162.000-1168.000, for which the burial between 2013 and 2014 is unchanged, presents a burial larger than in the adjacent sections. This was not due to a lowering of the pipeline, being the section less exposed for its orientation to the larger waves action, but to an accumulation of sediments along the pipeline as it is possible to see from cross section at KP 1165.000 (see Figure 8). Hence the real lowering of the pipeline would be approximately 20-25 cm and not 50 cm as deducible from Figure 7. For this area further sediment dynamics and evolution are not expected."
"According to the guys" does not quite cut it as a source, does it?
This is very important detail, as if the pipeline was indeed under concrete armor, it changes everything.
According to official paper titled:
"Nord Stream Environmental Impact Assessment Documentation for Consultation under the Espoo Convention Nord Stream Espoo Report: Key Issue Paper Seabed Intervention: Works and Anchor Handling"
There is no mention of such extensive concrete laying.
It is a thing that surely would be extensively detailed in the environment impact report, yes?
With the public side scan sonar pictures of both pipelines, I kinda find it hard to trust "according to the guys" if no concrete evidence is presented. Pun intended.
LeoV
Super Anarchist
Self-burial of large diameter pipelines: the Nord Stream case
In this paper the outcome from a few years integrity management of the Nord Stream pipelines is described, particularly the development of self-lowering across the German territorial shallow waters.
Whole report not about were the pipes exploded.
the other report a pre construction study.
Actually why did they not blow it up in the German section, much easier.
Or as others stated, blow them up near the shore bases of the pipelines, much much easier.
We will know in a few years. But it was not an easy job by a granny.
In this paper the outcome from a few years integrity management of the Nord Stream pipelines is described, particularly the development of self-lowering across the German territorial shallow waters.
Whole report not about were the pipes exploded.
the other report a pre construction study.
Actually why did they not blow it up in the German section, much easier.
Or as others stated, blow them up near the shore bases of the pipelines, much much easier.
We will know in a few years. But it was not an easy job by a granny.
Yes, but it is an overall environmental study that all the coastal countries approved before the construction. There cannot be major changes after approval, and casting it into concrete would surely constitute such.
Near the German shallow shoreline the pipe is indeed trenched and buried, as you can read in the report - mainly for ice but still way harder to blow.
Chosen location is actually much easier. And if you ever sailed on German coast, you shall draw attention very quickly if you park on one spot for a long time with no obvious reason. They track boats there quite constantly, and harass you over VHF for taking a buyo 10 meters on the wrong side of the reserved exercise area - I have been called on VHF for that.
According to all the evidence so far, it indeed seems very doable for a reasonable fit granny with maybe some paramilitary backgroung/training as a bonus and with a PADI tec ccr 100 certificate - not a very high bar is it?
Budget for the whole operation including all the diving gear is way under 100k usd. No need for a nation state to be involved.
Motive is a question mark, but then again, we still don't know the motive for the book warehouse workers case, so we shall see.
