Tornado Busting.

**Bioplasmoid** · 06-11-2008, 10:12 PM

I just read/heard about a tornado killing four people in Iowa.
Obviously this is a small tragedy compared to other tornadoes that US residents suffer from regularly. But it seems terrible all the same. Anyway this got me thinking about the concept of tornado/twister busting, which i read about at some point. Anyway my question is this: Would it be possible to break the main vortex of a tornado by the use of some kind of munition which would create a large shockwave of air capable of basically knocking the tornado out of alignment?

(It might need to be focused into a very narrow directional path to avoid damage to buildings and peoples ears, also.)

Is this a crazy idea? If so, then why?

**Mogura** · 06-12-2008, 02:32 AM

Problems:
*You would have to get the munition to the tornado, which would take time.
*If the shockwave is powerful enough to rip apart a tornado, imagine what it would do to the people and trailer parks on the ground.
*The cost in researching and developing a system would far outweigh the benefits.

Money would be better spent as follows:
*Funding research in meteorology (forecasting)
*Funding research in structural engineering
*Tornado-awareness education in public schools
*Tax credits/vouchers for people living in high risk areas that install safe rooms/storm shelters

**Bioplasmoid** · 06-12-2008, 04:51 AM

Well the USA has a big well funded airforce, and a huge disaster response network from what I can tell. So surely it would be fairly trivial to distribute the technology around the statistically worst areas for tornadoes well in advance, and just scramble local military aircraft to launch the 'package' when required.

As for your second point, that was why I said it would need to be a precisely shaped force. Surely this wouldnt be hard with todays weapons technology resources?

Wouldnt the cost/benefit analysis depend on whether the development cycle was a collaborative effort or only done by one private contractor?

As for your points about better spending of the money, the Tax Credits one seems a great idea. Forecasting is all very well, but I was under the impression that sometimes tornadoes form quickly without a lot of satellite data giving them away. Or is there a lot of advance knowledge every time?

Structural Engineering research can only be a good thing, but how exactly do you propose to pay for poorer neighbourhoods to shift or renovate their dwellings to these higher standards on a statewide scale?

**Mozzes** · 06-12-2008, 05:41 AM

A good friend of mine and I discuss this from time to time. He still hasn't been able to counter 2 logistical points that I bring up: 1) the unpredictability of tornadoes - we're not very good at predicting where they'll spawn and 2)the lifespan of the average tornado is just a couple of minutes - probably not long enough to do anything about anyways.

Also of importance is how strong of a munition? Tornado wind speeds average 150-200 mph and can top out at around 400 mph. Would the detonation of some sort of bomb be able to be controlled in that sort of environment? Tornadoes only kill an average of 80 people per year as it is. A mistake made while employing a "tornado bomb" I could see easily killing more people than that in 1 shot.

**Monte314** · 06-17-2008, 05:56 PM

Interesting notion.

Tornadoes are the result of strong updrafts; it seems these generally arise in two basic ways:

1.) Some tornadoes occur when a large-scale thermal inversion takes place, that is, when a thick layer of cold, wet air slides in over a layer of warm air (the "inverse" of the usual scenario).

Since the cold air is heavier than the warm air, they'd like to switch places. The funnel cloud is a lot like the swirling water in a bathtub drain, with the warm air rushing up the spout.

With a large enough explosion, you could certainly disrupt the funnel, but that will not eliminate the instability: you've still got cold and warm air in the "wrong" places... I would expect another funnel to form, perhaps in another location.

or,

2.) Tornadoes can form without a strong temperature gradient if there is a convergence of air flows at the ground that produces a strong updraft.

It seems to me that this latter kind of tornado might actually be completely stopped by an explosion, if the updraft is disrupted. But I don't know whether this could actually happen or not. It probably depends on what is producing the updraft.

06-11-2008, 10:12 PM	#1
Bioplasmoid Member [16%] MBTI: xNTx Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 669	I just read/heard about a tornado killing four people in Iowa. Obviously this is a small tragedy compared to other tornadoes that US residents suffer from regularly. But it seems terrible all the same. Anyway this got me thinking about the concept of tornado/twister busting, which i read about at some point. Anyway my question is this: Would it be possible to break the main vortex of a tornado by the use of some kind of munition which would create a large shockwave of air capable of basically knocking the tornado out of alignment? (It might need to be focused into a very narrow directional path to avoid damage to buildings and peoples ears, also.) Is this a crazy idea? If so, then why?
Bioplasmoid is offline post a comment

06-12-2008, 02:32 AM	#2
Mogura Core Member [175%] MBTI: INFJ Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 7,031	Problems: You would have to get the munition to the tornado, which would take time. If the shockwave is powerful enough to rip apart a tornado, imagine what it would do to the people and trailer parks on the ground. The cost in researching and developing a system would far outweigh the benefits. Money would be better spent as follows: Funding research in meteorology (forecasting) Funding research in structural engineering Tornado-awareness education in public schools *Tax credits/vouchers for people living in high risk areas that install safe rooms/storm shelters
Mogura is offline post a comment

06-12-2008, 04:51 AM	#3
Bioplasmoid Member [16%] MBTI: xNTx Join Date: May 2008 Posts: 669	Well the USA has a big well funded airforce, and a huge disaster response network from what I can tell. So surely it would be fairly trivial to distribute the technology around the statistically worst areas for tornadoes well in advance, and just scramble local military aircraft to launch the 'package' when required. As for your second point, that was why I said it would need to be a precisely shaped force. Surely this wouldnt be hard with todays weapons technology resources? Wouldnt the cost/benefit analysis depend on whether the development cycle was a collaborative effort or only done by one private contractor? As for your points about better spending of the money, the Tax Credits one seems a great idea. Forecasting is all very well, but I was under the impression that sometimes tornadoes form quickly without a lot of satellite data giving them away. Or is there a lot of advance knowledge every time? Structural Engineering research can only be a good thing, but how exactly do you propose to pay for poorer neighbourhoods to shift or renovate their dwellings to these higher standards on a statewide scale?
Bioplasmoid is offline post a comment

06-12-2008, 05:41 AM	#4
Mozzes Veteran Member [50%] MBTI: xxxx Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 2,008	A good friend of mine and I discuss this from time to time. He still hasn't been able to counter 2 logistical points that I bring up: 1) the unpredictability of tornadoes - we're not very good at predicting where they'll spawn and 2)the lifespan of the average tornado is just a couple of minutes - probably not long enough to do anything about anyways. Also of importance is how strong of a munition? Tornado wind speeds average 150-200 mph and can top out at around 400 mph. Would the detonation of some sort of bomb be able to be controlled in that sort of environment? Tornadoes only kill an average of 80 people per year as it is. A mistake made while employing a "tornado bomb" I could see easily killing more people than that in 1 shot.
Mozzes is offline post a comment

06-17-2008, 05:56 PM	#5
Monte314 Core Member [407%] MBTI: INTJ Join Date: Apr 2008 Posts: 16,307	Interesting notion. Tornadoes are the result of strong updrafts; it seems these generally arise in two basic ways: 1.) Some tornadoes occur when a large-scale thermal inversion takes place, that is, when a thick layer of cold, wet air slides in over a layer of warm air (the "inverse" of the usual scenario). Since the cold air is heavier than the warm air, they'd like to switch places. The funnel cloud is a lot like the swirling water in a bathtub drain, with the warm air rushing up the spout. With a large enough explosion, you could certainly disrupt the funnel, but that will not eliminate the instability: you've still got cold and warm air in the "wrong" places... I would expect another funnel to form, perhaps in another location. or, 2.) Tornadoes can form without a strong temperature gradient if there is a convergence of air flows at the ground that produces a strong updraft. It seems to me that this latter kind of tornado might actually be completely stopped by an explosion, if the updraft is disrupted. But I don't know whether this could actually happen or not. It probably depends on what is producing the updraft.
Monte314 is offline post a comment