General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsOklahoma tornado was stronger than Hiroshima bomb
http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Latest-News-Wires/2013/0521/Oklahoma-tornado-was-stronger-than-Hiroshima-bomb-How/(page)/2Oklahoma tornado was stronger than Hiroshima bomb: How?
When the conditions are exactly right and they were, for the tornado that devastated Oklahoma City yesterday a tornado can unleash more power than the nuclear bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
By Seth Borenstein, Associated Press / May 21, 2013
<snip>
But when the ideal conditions do occur, watch out. The power of nature beats out anything man can create.
"Everything was ready for explosive development yesterday," said Colorado State University meteorology professor Russ Schumacher, who was in Oklahoma launching airborne devices that measured the energy, moisture and wind speeds on Monday. "It all just unleashed on that one area."
<snip>
Several meteorologists contacted by The Associated Press used real time measurements, some made by Schumacher, to calculate the energy released during the storm's 40-minute life span. Their estimates ranged from 8 times to more than 600 times the power of the Hiroshima bomb, with more experts at the high end. Their calculations were based on energy measured in the air and then multiplied over the size and duration of the storm.
An EF5 tornado has the most violent winds on Earth, more powerful than a hurricane. The strongest winds ever measured were the 302 mph reading, measured by radar, during the EF5 tornado that struck Moore on May 3, 1999, according to Jeff Masters, meteorology director at the Weather Underground.
.. more..
mnhtnbb
(31,377 posts)woodsprite
(11,908 posts)LuvNewcastle
(16,843 posts)The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was certainly more concentrated; the bomb was a fraction of the size of the tornado. Also, the size of the affected area seemed to be greater in Hiroshima than in Moore. From the photos I've seen, it appears that the destruction was worse in Hiroshima, too.
https://www.google.com/search?q=Hiroshima+pictures&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=JgOdUYDkC4TY9ATYioD4CA&ved=0CDEQsAQ&biw=1366&bih=649#tbm=isch&q=hiroshima+explosion&revid=762700370&sa=X&ei=MQOdUcK-LpHS9ATHhIAo&ved=0CJQBEIMW&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&bvm=bv.46751780,d.eWU&fp=c95defcf1f4ebc9c&biw=1366&bih=649
bananas
(27,509 posts)KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)They didn't 'win the war' and were actually far less destructive than the incidiary bombing raids done on Japan.
The myth that technological innovation win wars will never die.
Dash87
(3,220 posts)Weren't nukes more of a psychological attack?
KurtNYC
(14,549 posts)prior, (not military targets) so they could measure the destructive power of the new weapon.
Yes, fire bombings were much more destructive. I recently saw graffiti in Dresden Germany. It said simply: "All War is Terror"
bananas
(27,509 posts)They weren't "more of a psychological attack",
we were mass-producing nuclear weapons in factories,
we were preparing to destroy every city in both Japan and Germany.
Eventually we created enough nukes to destroy every city in the Soviet Union several times over, it was called "overkill".
And the Soviet Union made enough nukes to destroy every city in NATO several times.
That's why it was called mutual "ASSURED" destruction - there was enough overkill that mutual destruction was ASSURED.
You can't do that with firebombing.
Bigmack
(8,020 posts)Hiroshima was a toy bomb compared to now. The bomb dropped on Hiroshima was an atomic bomb, not a nuclear bomb, as stated in the OP. Big diff. Kilotons vs. megatons.
And...
Hiroshima was not an act of nature. Humans did it on purpose.
Lady Freedom Returns
(14,120 posts)The ground shaking, the destruction, yeah good comparison.