(C) Daily Kos This story was originally published by Daily Kos and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Should the US Give Thermobaric Weapons to Ukraine ? and a POLL [1] ['This Content Is Not Subject To Review Daily Kos Staff Prior To Publication.'] Date: 2023-07-14 Russia has been using thermobaric weapons against Ukraine since the war started. The US has not provided them to Ukraine. Should the US provide them after providing cluster munitions ? Why & Why Not. Plus a poll. Background Thermobaric weapons are also called fuel-air bombs, vacuum bombs, and aerosol bombs. They spray fuel into the air, and ignite the fuel. The fuel-air mixture burns (thus “thermo”) producing a pressure wave that leaves a vacuum in its wake as it travels outward. (“Baric” is for pressure as in a barometer.) It is a tremendously lethal weapon. It sucks the oxygen out of the air as the fuel burns, suffocating people in the vicinity. If they don’t die, then the vacuum it produces tries to pull the lungs out of the body. It causes a hideous death. The pressure wave blows out windows and destroys buildings, as well as killing people. A video of a likely thermobaric missile launched into Kharkiv’s Freedom Square in the early part of the war shows the fuel spray followed by ignition, fireball and destruction. The sequence of events is shown in detail in the Appendix. A screenshot of the fireball is below. Fireball from Likely Thermobaric Missile. Kharkiv’s Freedom Square. The Administration Building is the shadowy square shape in the center left. It was destroyed by the missile. Thermobaric weapons were first conceived in Germany during WWI, and later in WWII. The United States developed these weapons during the Vietnam War era, and used them during the war. Since then, there has been continued development of these weapons. Thermobaric weapons are not banned by the Geneva Convention or International Treaties / Conventions for use against military targets. However, they are banned by the Geneva Convention and possibly other conventions when used against civilian targets. TOS-1 Thermobaric Missiles Being Fired — See Video for More Russia has been using thermobaric weapons in Ukraine since the beginning of the war. They have used them against both civilian and military targets. They are launching them from TOS-1 mobile rocket launchers, which have a range of 500 yards to 6 miles, depending upon the rocket used. Unfortunately, the US and the West don’t have an equivalent platform. The platforms the US has are given in the section on “Reasons Against Providing Thermobaric Weapons to Ukraine.” Ukraine has used Russian thermobaric weapons they have captured. They also have developed their own thermobaric weapon called a RPV-16. It is a shoulder launched rocket with an effective range of 330 yards and a maximum range of 0.6 miles. The author hasn’t seen anything in the news about these weapons since the start of the war, so they may either be not operational, or few in number. Ukraine RPV-16 Thermobaric Rocket in Launcher The US and the West have not provided thermobaric weapons to Ukraine to the best of the author’s knowledge. Given Ukraine’s use of them when they have them, as well as developing their own weapons, it is reasonable to assume that they would use them if provided. Reasons to Provide Thermobaric Weapons to Ukraine Thermobaric weapons have two main advantages over traditional weapons and cluster munitions. The first is that they are very effective against defensive bunkers and trenches. The high temperature burning can suck the oxygen out of them, suffocating the people inside; and set the camouflage over them on fire. Then, the pressure wave can blow this camouflage away, and kill anyone in its path. Finally, the vacuum they produce will kill anyone that didn’t suffocate. The thermobaric weapon doesn’t have to enter the trench, as the cluster bomblets and traditional weapons do, but can explode overhead or nearby and wipe out the soldiers in these defenses. And, it works against pillboxes and bunkers that the cluster bomblets can’t get into (unless lucky). While cluster munitions are better than standard, high explosive artillery shells, they are still not very good against trenches and bunkers. Retired Lt. General Mark Hertling says “They [referring to cluster munitions] can't clear minefields, and they aren't very effective in clearing trench lines.” The second advantage is that after it explodes, troops can move into the area without risk of unexploded munitions, which is a major problem for cluster munitions. This ability is important for advancing offensive units. Although thermobaric weapons are not as good as cluster munitions against armor, they can take out infantry guarding the armor, allowing soldiers armed with anti-tank weapons to destroy the armor. (The purpose of the infantry guarding the armor is to prevent enemy soldiers with anti-tank weapons from attacking the armor.) Thermobaric weapons, like cluster munitions, are excellent weapons against infantry. They can completely eliminate infantry from their blast area. Thermobaric weapons can be used to clear minefields containing mines that are sensitive to their pressure wave. However, they are poor at more deeply buried mines, such as anti-tank mines. Reasons Against Providing Thermobaric Weapons to Ukraine There are five possible reasons for not providing thermobaric weapons to Ukraine. The first is that the US and the West may not have enough of these weapons to provide. The US has three types of thermobaric weapons to provide — a version of the Hellfire missile, a shoulder-fired rocket, and a 40 mm grenade. The US may also have some old thermobaric dumb bombs in storage, but these may not fit the current Ukraine airplanes and, more importantly, there is severe risk of the airplane being shot down trying to drop a dumb bomb. The US does not have a thermobaric weapon for the HIMARS or the MLRS rocket artillery, nor anything equivalent to the Russian TOS-1 rocket artillery. There are no 155mm thermobaric artillery shells. The Hellfire missiles AGM-114N, can be fired from a drone (Predator, Gray Eagle, & Reaper — none of which Ukraine has to the best of the author’s knowledge), helicopters, or from a Stryker vehicle (IM-SHORAD version). This missile has a range of up to 6.8 miles, a little greater than the Russian TOS-1. The shoulder fired rocket — the SMAW-NE — is a short-range weapon. It is fired from the Mk 153 SMAW rocket launcher, and has an effective range of 550 yards and a maximum range of 1 mile. The grenade with a thermobaric explosive is the XM1060, and is fired from several types of grenade launchers. It is not thrown by hand. Its range is 50m to 800m depending upon the grenade launcher used. The author hasn’t found any information about the number of these weapons the US has, so this reason cannot be substantiated. However, the thermobaric Hellfire missile ceased production in 2018. The Stryker IM-SHORAD is new (~2022), and probably few in number. No information was found on the status of the shoulder fired rocket or the thermobaric grenade. The needed information may be secret. Another reason is given by the fifth item below. Based upon the paucity of information about about thermobaric weapons supplied to Ukraine, as well as used by Ukraine, this reason for not supplying them could well be correct. Another explanation is also given by the fifth item below. The second reason is that thermobaric weapons produce grossly inhuman deaths. This reason was suggested by a retired US Major General early in the war, and likely others. However, The US used these weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq. (Early in the Russo-Ukraine war, the US may have feared escalation from providing thermobaric weapons. However, this concern should be long past any reasonable worries.) The third reason, and at this time a likely one, is Biden and the US don’t need more criticism after recently providing cluster munitions to Ukraine. While such criticism is unwarranted, given Russia’s use of these weapons and other actions, it should be expected. The fourth reason is that the US may have choosen to invest in cluster munitions instead of thermobaric weapons. While the author has no information about this, the relative number of these weapons suggests that this is the case — either deliberately or thru an accumulation of small decisions. When looking at the available explosives for the Hellfire missiles, the shoulder-fired rocket and the 40 mm grenade launchers, one finds an array of various types of cluster munitions, but only one type of thermobaric explosive for each platform. And the Hellfire thermobaric missile ceased production in 2018. If this fourth reason is indeed true, then the reason the US hasn’t provided thermobaric weapons to Ukraine is simply because they don’t have them (i.e. reason no. 1). The fifth reason is the opposite of the fourth. While it isn’t a reason against providing these weapons, it is a reason we don’t know about these weapons. Thermobaric weapons have acquired a very bad reputation with human rights groups partly because of their use in urban areas containing civilians, and partly because they cause hideous deaths and injuries. To avoid bad publicity and protests, euphemisms are used when talking about thermobaric weapons. A couple of these euphemisms are “enhanced blast” and “metal augmented charge” (one of the types of fuel in these weapons is a metal powder). (This reason was offered by David Hambling.) The use of euphemisms would also explain the apparent lack of information about the thermobaric weapons that the US and the West have. Thus, we may be providing thermobaric weapons, but calling them something else, or including them in the undisclosed items provided. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Summary Russia has been using thermobaric weapons since the beginning of the Russo-Ukraine War. There have been very few reports of Ukraine using these weapons, and no reports of the US or the West supplying these weapons to Ukraine. Thermobaric weapons are superior at clearing trenches and bunkers compared to other weapons, including cluster munitions. They can clear an area of enemy soldiers without leaving behind unexploded munitions, which is a major problem with cluster munitions. They are very good in built-up areas, such as cities and other urban areas. However, they have shorter ranges, requiring they be used closer to the enemy than artillery. Thermobaric weapons have a bad reputation for the hideous deaths that they cause, and shouldn’t be used when civilians are in the blast area, which limits their use in cities and urban areas. Human rights groups are strongly against their use anywhere. However, there are no treaties or conventions specifically on thermobaric weapons. This diary explores thermobaric weapons, and the reasons for and against their use. It ends with two contradictory possibilities. First, they have not been supplied to Ukraine simply because the US and the West don’t have many of these weapons (although there are other reasons for not supplying them). The second is that they have been supplied to Ukraine, but this supply is either undisclosed and / or these weapons are called by euphemisms instead of their true name. Regardless of this contradiction, a poll asks you, the reader, if you think the US should be supplying thermobaric weapons to Ukranie. Thank you for reading and your vote. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Sources Good overall article about thermobaric weapons. It covers many of the items in this diary. en.wikipedia.org/… Legality of Thermobaric Weapons: West Point — lieber.westpoint.edu/... and and Cambridge Univ. — www.cambridge.org/… Russia’s Use of Thermobaric Weapons: www.forbes.com/… and many other sources Russian TOS-1 Thermobaric Weapons: www.forbes.com/…. en.wikipedia.org/… Video of TOS-1 Firing: commons.wikimedia.org/…. Demonstrates rate of fire and coverage of an area. Ukraine RPV-16: www.militarytoday.com/…. Lt. General Mark Hertling (retired) on Cluster Munitions: www.npr.org/.… Mines and Thermobaric Weapons: Bob Kinch, www.quora.com/… Hellfire Missiles: en.wikipedia.org/... Stryker: breakingdefense.com/... SMAW-NE: WIKIPEDIA — en.wikipedia.org/... XM1060 Grenade: en.wikipedia.org/… David Hambling on Euphemisms: www.quora.com/... Video of Likely Thermobaric Missile Hitting Kharkiv’s Freedom Square and Destroying the Administration Building. Note the large ignition area followed by a fireball. From CCTV Camera. ____ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Appendix — Missile Attack on Kharkiv’s Freedom Square, March 1, 2022 The missile attack on the Administration Building of Kharkiv City, located on their famous Freedom Square, is shown in the screen shots of the CCTV camera recording of this attack. The sequence begins with the missile appearing at the top of the building, followed by the missile appearing at the 4th story window (just barely visible & need to slowly run the video to see a small dark area). After this the missile dispenses its fuel and slightly changes the color of the building. Then, the fuel is ignited, and the explosion and fireball commence. The last picture is at the end of the video, but doesn’t show the destruction of the building. The time of each picture is shown relative to the fuel spray, which is taken as zero. It takes one to two seconds for the major events to occur. [END] --- [1] Url: https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/7/14/2180066/-Should-the-US-Give-Thermobaric-Weapons-to-Ukraine-and-a-POLL Published and (C) by Daily Kos Content appears here under this condition or license: Site content may be used for any purpose without permission unless otherwise specified. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/dailykos/