Pavel Mayer Profile
Pavel Mayer

@pavel23

Followers
22K
Following
1K
Media
2K
Statuses
26K

Nerd, Entrepreneur, Writer, Mad scientist, Machine teacher, Politician, Former Member of Berlin House of Representatives (Abgeordnetenhaus)

Berlin, Germany
Joined November 2008
Don't wanna be here? Send us removal request.
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
9 years
Falls sich jemand fragt, was ich jetzt nach meiner Zeit als Parlamentarier so mache: Ich arbeite an der Abschaffung der Arbeit.
67
29
576
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
7 days
Für welchen Müll die BZ ihre Redakteure bezahlt ist wahrlich bemerkenswert.
2
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
Sorry I can't give you a better estimate than "possible but unlikely" for the penetration of the bunkers, but you can see my reasoning, and if I made mistakes or you have better or more detailed information, I would like to know about it.
2
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
If I had to assign a probability, I would give it a 30% probability that the bunker has been penetrated or partially collapsed, and a 30% probability the bunker is totally fine. Would Iran admit there were no damages at all? I mean, at some point the truth will come out anyway.
1
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
So if we take the official numbers, 60m in dry sand and 18m in reinforced bunker concrete, and the stone there is harder to penetrate than that, and we add a few meters for the explosion, we might barely scratch the 80m needed.
1
0
5
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
According to my numbers, it is possible with 4 GBU-57 on top of each other to bring destruction to a depth of 80m, but only when everything is in your favor and the weapons performs better than known, but the published number are already over the high end what formulas produce.
1
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
I also can't imagine a bunker designer would put ventilation shafts above the bunker, it is not expensive to put them far to the side, but I have no information where they actually were. It just would be incredible stupid. So where does us leave all that?.
1
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
It is entirely possible that they could have used weak points or areas in the structure, but they also had to get the bombs to where the bunker was, and it is a set of tunnels and not a large square, so even if you go deep enough, you can still miss.
1
0
6
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
I also heard they struck near a ventilation shaft, and if the bunker had a death-star like flaw where you can shoot a bomb down a ventilation shaft, then the Israelis could have done it on their own, and we would not really have 80m of protection.
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
First bomb goes in, detonates 18m under ground, creates a 5m-wide cavity and turns another 5m into loose gravel. Second bomb goes in, adds another 20m. Third bombs goes in, adds another 17m. And the final bomb adds a another 15m of destruction. Adds up to 75m of destruction.
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
So could four bombs in the same spot do the trick? if those four bombs basically stack their destructive power, it would go down to 140m, but that is not how it works; rubble from above has to be penetrated over and over. In reality it would be more like that:.
1
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
The U.S. used 8 bombs on Fordow, and according to satellite images they were grouped at two location, but there are less than 8 holes visible in the ground, it looks like 2 x 3, but it also look like two went through the same hole. Impressive accuracy.
1
0
10
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
Even when you drop one on top of the other, or slightly offset, you might at best double the depth, which would still leave 10m of safety, and a 3rd bomb might do the job under best of circumstances and by using the numbers most advantageous to the attacker.
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
Yes, unreinforced concrete is better for stopping bombs, but to my best knowledge the GBU-57 can not go deeper than 20m in stone, and the explosion can at best punch through another 15m, which leaves us with 35 of 80m required, or 45m or a 15-story building of rock short.
1
0
5
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
Both the numbers I found in Jane's and all my calculations gave a maximum penetration well below 20m in any type of stone, even soft standstone, and I got 18m for reinforced 35MPa concrete, 7m for ordinary unreinforced 30MPa concrete, and 15-16m for limestone-dolostone.
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
According to the US Air Force the GBU-57 can penetrate up to 60m of unspecified material, which would be dry, loose soil or sand. In Fordow we have limestone and dolostone, and none of the models I used made the bomb go deeper than 18m, most calculations yielded less. WTF?.
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
Let's assume the US had the correct plans and hit exactly where intended, and the bunker was at a depth of 80m below surface, and they hit near a ventilation shaft, reducing the hydrodynamic pressure by pushing material into the shaft and achieving maximum penetration depth.
1
0
5
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
. and geometry, whether it is above, below, on the side or on a corner of the cavity, and the shape of the cavity, whether it is flat or rounded, and other factors that can significantly change the outcome. But is it at least possible under the best of circumstances?.
1
0
7
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
A room that is 20-25 m away from the explosion can be deemed safe. This means that the bombs have to explode within 10m distance to a room to cause serious damage in that room. Take all these numbers with a grain of salt, they may vary depending on soil, stone or concrete type. .
1
0
8
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
21 days
So has the Fordow bunker and its content been destroyed? Possibly, but probably not. Here my back-of-the napkin calculations: Exploding 1.5 tons of TNT in hard rock creates a cavity of about 2-3 m radius. It will penetrate into a room that lies within less than 10-15 m radius.
4
3
29
@pavel23
Pavel Mayer
24 days
I guess Trump also wanted to conduct a "Special Military Operation".
1
3
12