Test of steel prototype for border wall showed it could be sawed through

[Excon]

You asked about "Magic Fingers", I supplied information.

:lamo No, I actually I wasn't.
Your failure to answer what I asked of you clearly suggests you know that.

If you think you do, please show us all the instances of det. cord being used to bypass our barrier that is already in place?

My demolitions instructors demonstrated how to do it - but they had to use trees because the cost of the demonstrations would have been prohimitive otherwise.

Non responsive reply.

True, [...]

That is all you had to say, especially as the rest was irrelevant.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

:lamo No, I actually I wasn't.
Your failure to answer what I asked of you clearly suggests you know that.

Please go back and check what was actually written.

Non responsive reply.

Do you know what the term "non-responsive" actually means? You asked for a specific example of something that has not been done. I provided you with an example of a similar thing being done in the past.

Your position is analogous to a safe manufacturer claiming "The safe we will sell you is absolutely impervious to being illegally opened because it has never been illegally opened. Any illegal opening of that safe, voids this warranty ab initio."

That is all you had to say, especially as the rest was irrelevant.

Only to those who don't actually want to deal with practicalities.

 

[Excon]

Please go back and check what was actually written.

:lamo
I am aware of the exchange and of the wording used.
Apparently you do not understand the word "actually" as was used. That is on you.
But way to try and deflect from your "Magic Fingers" absurdity.

You asked for a specific example of something that has not been done

Exactly. That is what I asked for because the fact that it has not been done in all these years after the barrier has been up shows you are arguing nonsense.
And you arguing nonsense is not a reason more of the barrier should not be built.

Do you know what the term "non-responsive" actually means? You asked for a specific example of something that has not been done. I provided you with an example of a similar thing being done in the past.

Stupid irrelevant dishonest spin.
You acknowledging I asked for specific example and knowing that you did not provide one in reply only shows that you know your reply was non-responsive to that which was asked.
What your instructor showed you how to do with trees is irrelevant to it actually be done. It was a non-responsive reply.

Your position is analogous to a safe manufacturer claiming "The safe we will sell you is absolutely impervious to being illegally opened because it has never been illegally opened. Any illegal opening of that safe, voids this warranty ab initio."

Wrong as usual.

Only to those who don't actually want to deal with practicalities.

Wrong as usual. The "True" part was all you needed to say as it was the only thing applicable.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

:lamo
I am aware of the exchange and of the wording used.
Apparently you do not understand the word "actually" as was used. That is on you.
But way to try and deflect from your "Magic Fingers" absurdity.


Exactly. That is what I asked for because the fact that it has not been done in all these years after the barrier has been up shows you are arguing nonsense.
And you arguing nonsense is not a reason more of the barrier should not be built.


Stupid irrelevant dishonest spin.
You acknowledging I asked for specific example and knowing that you did not provide one in reply only shows that you know your reply was non-responsive to that which was asked.
What your instructor showed you how to do with trees is irrelevant to it actually be done. It was a non-responsive reply.



Wrong as usual.



Wrong as usual. The "True" part was all you needed to say as it was the only thing applicable.

I'm going to suggest that you simply go and ask a local demolition (using explosives) contractor if it is possible to cut those types of "pickets" using Detcord.

Possibly you might believe someone if they tell you to your face that it can be done rather than having an anonymous internet poster who does have training in military demolitions tell you that it can be done.

PS - I'd suggest that you be very careful in whom you approach when you are asking questions about whether or not Mr. Trump's picket fence can be toppled using commercially available explosives as asking such a question to the wrong person is likely to attract unwanted government attention.

PPS - As it is rather obvious that I will not be able to convince you that something could possibly be done because you believe that nothing that has ever been done before can be done, I thank you for your time and attention and wish you a good decade.

 

[Excon]

I'm going to suggest that you simply go and ask a local demolition (using explosives) contractor if it is possible to cut those types of "pickets" using Detcord.

:lamo iLOL I Have no need to ask anyone.
You have an obligation to support your assertion which you continually fail to do.

Possibly you might believe someone if they tell you to your face that it can be done rather than having an anonymous internet poster who does have training in military demolitions tell you that it can be done.

PS - I'd suggest that you be very careful in whom you approach when you are asking questions about whether or not Mr. Trump's picket fence can be toppled using commercially available explosives as asking such a question to the wrong person is likely to attract unwanted government attention.

PPS - As it is rather obvious that I will not be able to convince you that something could possibly be done because you believe that nothing that has ever been done before can be done, I thank you for your time and attention and wish you a good decade.

:lamo Your thoughts in this are completely stupid and devoid of any logic.

1. It is not a matter of belief on my part.
You made a claim and it is incumbent upon you to provide support for it.
You have continually failed because you can not show it has been done.

2. Your argumentation is further stupid because it isn't happening, and even if it did happen it wouldn't be in any significant number to make the barrier useless.

The whole thrust of your argumentation is stupidity.

 

[jmotivator]

From NBC News

Test of steel prototype for border wall showed it could be sawed through
​

President Donald Trump has repeatedly advocated for a steel slat design for his border wall, which he described as "absolutely critical to border security" in his Oval Office address to the nation Tuesday. But Department of Homeland Security testing of a steel slat prototype proved it could be cut through with a saw, according to a report by DHS.

A photo exclusively obtained by NBC News shows the results of the test after military and Border Patrol personnel were instructed to attempt to destroy the barriers with common tools.

The Trump administration directed the construction of eight steel and concrete prototype walls that were built in Otay Mesa, California, just across the border from Tijuana, Mexico. Trump inspected the prototypes in March 2018. He has now settled on a steel slat, or steel bollard, design for the proposed border barrier additions. Steel bollard fencing has been used under previous administrations.

However, testing by DHS in late 2017 showed all eight prototypes, including the steel slats, were vulnerable to breaching, according to an internal February 2018 U.S. Customs and Border Protection report.

COMMENT:-

Well, back to the drawing board.
​

How is this news? :roll:

The chain link fence around a prison yard can be cut through, concertina wire can be cut through... the point of these barriers is to make navigating beyond a given point significantly slower than walking across, so patrols are more likely to catch you in the act of cutting through them or climbing over them than they are in catching you sprinting across an unguarded line...

So... how quickly can these walls be breached?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

:lamo iLOL I Have no need to ask anyone.
You have an obligation to support your assertion which you continually fail to do.



:lamo Your thoughts in this are completely stupid and devoid of any logic.

1. It is not a matter of belief on my part.
You made a claim and it is incumbent upon you to provide support for it.
You have continually failed because you can not show it has been done.

2. Your argumentation is further stupid because it isn't happening, and even if it did happen it wouldn't be in any significant number to make the barrier useless.

The whole thrust of your argumentation is stupidity.

You might want to start your research with U. S. ARMY ENGINEER RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT LABORATORIES - FORT BELVOIR, VIRGINIA - Report 1839 - STEEL CUTTING WITH HIGH-EXPLOSIVE CHARGES (December 1965) and go on from there.

The use of "Detcord" is a "field expedient technique" and is NOT on the list of "recommended" techniques, but any experienced Army Engineer SENIOR NCO can show you how it is done. It's just one hell of a lot more dangerous than using properly calculated, shaped, and placed plastic explosives. (It's also one hell of a lot faster.)

Sorry about not posting the entire 179 page manual for you - forum space limitations, you know.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

How is this news? :roll:

The chain link fence around a prison yard can be cut through, concertina wire can be cut through... the point of these barriers is to make navigating beyond a given point significantly slower than walking across, so patrols are more likely to catch you in the act of cutting through them or climbing over them than they are in catching you sprinting across an unguarded line...

So... how quickly can these walls be breached?

That would depend on how big a breach you wanted to create and what method you wanted to use (which includes how long you had to prepare).

Now if you assume that the posts are 9.885" per side and you want to put 10 wraps of Detcord around each one AND that the posts are 9.885" apart, then you would have 41 meters of Detcord for every four posts. That means that you could do SERIOUS damage to 585 posts in one second AFTER all of the Detcord was in place - assuming that you were silly enough to attempt to use a single, continuous, line of Detcord. HOWEVER, if you used pre-cut lengths of Detcord to wrap around the posts, and then used a double ring-main to initiate them all in sequence, it would take around 0.05 minutes (3.2 seconds) from the time of the first detonation until the time of the 585th one. If you used a crew of 20, and it took 10 minutes to prep each post, it would take you approximately 4.9 hours to prep the entire 585 posts. Taking time out to lie doggo to avoid roving patrols, the entire task could easily be accomplished in less than 8 hours (with well rehearsed personnel).

Using plastic explosives you could do it in less time.

Sorry I can't be more specific than that, but as "Excon" has demonstrated I obviously don't have a clue about this subject.

 

[Excon]

You might want to start your research ...

:lamo
I do not have to do any research.
You made a claim you have to support it.

You have been given multiple chances to support your claim and have thus failed.

Secondly you apparently do not understand that your claim is not a reason not to erect barriers. Thus you fail on multiple counts.

Sorry I can't be more specific than that, but as "Excon" has demonstrated I obviously don't have a clue about this subject.

Thus showing why you continually fail and do not have a clue.

 

[SLC]

That would depend on how big a breach you wanted to create and what method you wanted to use (which includes how long you had to prepare).

Now if you assume that the posts are 9.885" per side and you want to put 10 wraps of Detcord around each one AND that the posts are 9.885" apart, then you would have 41 meters of Detcord for every four posts. That means that you could do SERIOUS damage to 585 posts in one second AFTER all of the Detcord was in place - assuming that you were silly enough to attempt to use a single, continuous, line of Detcord. HOWEVER, if you used pre-cut lengths of Detcord to wrap around the posts, and then used a double ring-main to initiate them all in sequence, it would take around 0.05 minutes (3.2 seconds) from the time of the first detonation until the time of the 585th one. If you used a crew of 20, and it took 10 minutes to prep each post, it would take you approximately 4.9 hours to prep the entire 585 posts. Taking time out to lie doggo to avoid roving patrols, the entire task could easily be accomplished in less than 8 hours (with well rehearsed personnel).

Using plastic explosives you could do it in less time.

Sorry I can't be more specific than that, but as "Excon" has demonstrated I obviously don't have a clue about this subject.

You need to put your calculator away. Any wall/fence made by man can be breached by man. The point is to slow illegals down so they can be apprehended. The fence will be backed up by camera and sensors and agents.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

:lamo
I do not have to do any research.
You made a claim you have to support it.

You have been given multiple chances to support your claim and have thus failed.

Secondly you apparently do not understand that your claim is not a reason not to erect barriers. Thus you fail on multiple counts.



Thus showing why you continually fail and do not have a clue.

Since you appear to believe that the only thing that will prove my claim is for me, personally, to knock down a non-existent barrier, I suppose that I have to make a decision between [A] committing an incredibly serious felony or opting out of your silly game.

I think that I'll stick with "Option B".

If you think that that entitles you to "claim that you won" please accept that boost to (what most certainly appears to be) a rather immature and wavering "self-worth" image with my compliments.

 

[Fearandloathing]

will a saudi bone saw work too?

ouch!

 

[JustHanging]

How is this news? :roll:

The chain link fence around a prison yard can be cut through, concertina wire can be cut through... the point of these barriers is to make navigating beyond a given point significantly slower than walking across, so patrols are more likely to catch you in the act of cutting through them or climbing over them than they are in catching you sprinting across an unguarded line...

So... how quickly can these walls be breached?

With a ladder? Judging by the pictures, about 15 seconds.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

You need to put your calculator away. Any wall/fence made by man can be breached by man. The point is to slow illegals down so they can be apprehended. The fence will be backed up by camera and sensors and agents.

I was asked a technical question with respect to demolitions.

I answered the question that I was asked.

If I had been asked "What is the intent of any barrier?" I would have said that it was to slow (and prevent, if possible) the passage of an identified class of objects from one defined point to another defined point.

You might want to consider that, during WWII the Maginot Line was 100% successful in doing exactly that. Unfortunately for the French, the Germans decided to go from A to C rather than from A to B and the Maginot Line was only designed to hinder passage from A to B.

 

[JustHanging]

If you think that that entitles you to "claim that you won" please accept that boost to (what most certainly appears to be) a rather immature and wavering "self-worth" image with my compliments.

Of course they will. Jesus, the base claims victory regardless of how bad the loss. It's what Dear Leader tells them that's important.

 

[Fearandloathing]

And what kind of saw would it take and how long does the cutting take?

Not available and irrelevant.

The POINT is they failed by the department of immigration standards. Not yours.

Or are you a better expert?

 

[Excon]

Since you appear to believe that the only thing that will prove my claim is for me, personally, to knock down a non-existent barrier, I suppose that I have to make a decision between [A] committing an incredibly serious felony or opting out of your silly game.

I think that I'll stick with "Option B".

If you think that that entitles you to "claim that you won" please accept that boost to (what most certainly appears to be) a rather immature and wavering "self-worth" image with my compliments.

1. Don't make claims you can not support. It isn't even this specific. You can't show they are using explosives to breach our barriers. The claim was simply stupid.

2. Your claim was even more stupid as even if you could show the use of explosives to breach the border barrier, it isn't being used in any significant fashion that would negate building the barrier to begin with.

2. Don't make claims that are irrelevant to whether or not a barrier

 

[Bullseye]

Not available and irrelevant.

The POINT is they failed by the department of immigration standards. Not yours.

Or are you a better expert?

Timely response, Fear, only five weeks.

 

[Fearandloathing]

Timely response, Fear, only five weeks.

You got a time limit or something?

Later for you

 

[Bullseye]

You got a time limit or something?

Later for you

Promise?

 

[jmotivator]

That would depend on how big a breach you wanted to create and what method you wanted to use (which includes how long you had to prepare).

Now if you assume that the posts are 9.885" per side and you want to put 10 wraps of Detcord around each one AND that the posts are 9.885" apart, then you would have 41 meters of Detcord for every four posts. That means that you could do SERIOUS damage to 585 posts in one second AFTER all of the Detcord was in place - assuming that you were silly enough to attempt to use a single, continuous, line of Detcord. HOWEVER, if you used pre-cut lengths of Detcord to wrap around the posts, and then used a double ring-main to initiate them all in sequence, it would take around 0.05 minutes (3.2 seconds) from the time of the first detonation until the time of the 585th one. If you used a crew of 20, and it took 10 minutes to prep each post, it would take you approximately 4.9 hours to prep the entire 585 posts. Taking time out to lie doggo to avoid roving patrols, the entire task could easily be accomplished in less than 8 hours (with well rehearsed personnel).

Using plastic explosives you could do it in less time.

Sorry I can't be more specific than that, but as "Excon" has demonstrated I obviously don't have a clue about this subject.

Ah, so the wall wouldn't work because... explosives. :roll:

That is a lot of work and expense for what would ultimately be a single crossing.... and rather risky too since it would alert the patrols.

 

[jmotivator]

With a ladder? Judging by the pictures, about 15 seconds.

So...

1) Acquire a vehicle to ship ladders
2) Drive large vehicle to the border wall
3) Deploy ladder... both sides
4) How many people climb up and over?

15 seconds? Not so much.

Plus, that method becomes increasing more time consuming the larger the crowd of people who will be climbing, their age, and their willingness. Coyotes with children destined for the sex trade couldn't use that method.

But sure, one Circ du Soleil acrobat could cross the ladder no problem so long as someone drove them there with the ladder. :roll:

 

[jmotivator]

Not available and irrelevant.

The POINT is they failed by the department of immigration standards. Not yours.

Or are you a better expert?

I doubt that the Department of Immigration has a requirement that the walls be indestructible....

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

1. Don't make claims you can not support. It isn't even this specific. You can't show they are using explosives to breach our barriers. The claim was simply stupid.

Since I never made any claim that anyone WAS using explosives to breach barriers - only that explosives COULD be used to breach barriers - I can see what your confusion stems from. You were arguing that what I DID NOT say was happening WAS NOT happening while I was arguing that would COULD be done COULD be done.

2. Your claim was even more stupid as even if you could show the use of explosives to breach the border barrier, it isn't being used in any significant fashion that would negate building the barrier to begin with.

I agree, if you totally ignore the facts, almost anything can look stupid.

2. Don't make claims that are irrelevant to whether or not a barrier

Did you know that the point that follows Point 2. is normally Point 3.?

Did you know that "Don't make claims that are irrelevant to whether or not a barrier" doesn't actually express a coherent thought in the English language?

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Ah, so the wall wouldn't work because... explosives. :roll:

That is a lot of work and expense for what would ultimately be a single crossing.... and rather risky too since it would alert the patrols.

No one asked me whether such an action would be "viable" or even "long-term beneficial" and I haven't expressed any opinion on either of those points - either way. I just gave my professional opinion as to whether something COULD be done.

Not only that, but, since I'm not living inside the heads of anyone who MIGHT try to do it, I'm not going to do so - because what someone might think is a really keenly neat-o idea (skateboarding down a mile long 45 degree city street would be one example) I might think is just plain bone-headed stupid.