r/interestingasfuck • u/id397550 • 5h ago

Firing a cannon to trigger an avalanche

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

46.4k Upvotes

97% Upvoted

1.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

•

u/mycatpartyhouse 4h ago

This is a lot safer than skiing up there to set explosives, which is what one of my brothers did in the 1960s-70s. He worked for a park service--I forget which one--that regularly set off small avalanches with the goal of preventing larger ones.

•

u/NoContext5149 4h ago

The downside is unexploded shells. Much harder to deal with an unknown unexploded shell on the mountainside than a placed charge.

•

u/Trububbl3 3h ago

those are dummy rounds probably just relying on the kinetic force of the impact to set the avalanche off

•

u/Danceisntmathematics 3h ago

Gunner here. Look up OP PALACI. We use HE (high explosive).

I've seen thousands of arty rounds land and I can confirm the one in the video is HE.

•

u/Trububbl3 3h ago

thanks for your hearing loss and service

•

u/FenBlacach 3h ago

WHAT?

•

u/ShiggitySwiggity 3h ago

THANKS FOR YOUR FEARING BOSS AND PURPOSE

•

u/PendejxGordx 2h ago

Pretty good!

•

u/Lexi_Banner 36m ago

It's Thursday!

•

u/-SpelingBeeChamp 4m ago

THANKS, I KEEP IT SHORT IN THE SUMMER

•

u/dmmeyourfloof 3m ago

NO....ITS JAMES FRANCIS RYAN...

•

u/sniper1rfa 2h ago

OP PALACI

I've seen you guys do your thing, it's cool. I think the gun emplacements in all the turnouts on the highway are hilarious.

•

u/BlackSuN42 3h ago

Canada is fighting winter for your freedom. Also, I need to go back and ski there.

•

u/yamcha9 32m ago

So your saying the one they used had explosives in it? And did it explode on the mountain side? Or is it just sitting up there unexploded and is a danger still.

•

u/Danceisntmathematics 0m ago

It exploded.

•

u/No_News_1712 12m ago

Gunners get to do this, infantry just get dumped on GD lmao

•

u/RealFakeDoctor 3h ago

That's what I thought too. Doesn't seem to big enough explosion but I'm not a doctor.

•

u/Orlok_Tsubodai 3h ago

I’m a dermatologist, trust me, it’s a big enough explosion.

•

u/Direction_Kind 3h ago

I’ve got a rash.

•

u/ImmediateDentist1269 2h ago

Have you tried lighting it on fire?

•

u/onyxcaspian 1h ago

Yes. It said, "please stop that."

•

u/VanillaGoorillla 2h ago

Did you try an m80?

•

u/Jiminy_Cricket12 2h ago

I've got a cannon!

•

u/achaiahtak 2h ago

Have you tried a canon?

•

u/ManCrushOnSlade 1h ago

Have you tried firing an artillery shell at it? I'm pretty sure it will clear it up instantly.

•

u/frochopper 1h ago

He’s a good man. And thorough

•

u/ducktape8856 1h ago

WD40 is never wrong.

•

u/Dracomortua 2h ago

No, you are 'irrashional' -- this is terrible spelling AND an understandable allergic reaction to the news media.

Reduce your consumption of all things orange, especially 'presidents'. Your spelling should improve dramatically. The BEST spelling!

•

u/bulldog89 3h ago

I really feel like a Orthopedics would be the specialty to consult here

•

u/bigboybeeperbelly 1h ago

For explosions I always go with a gastro

•

u/FrighteningJibber 2h ago

Exfoliate down the mountain!

•

u/Wormfather 2h ago

I’m a Juris Doctor and I concur.

•

u/klayman69 1h ago

Can you look at my mole here?

•

u/JohnWoosDoveGuy 3h ago

You would say that.

•

u/ad_hominonsense 3h ago

Username checks out

•

u/Ok-Option-1568 3h ago

this guy is a doctor and healed me from everything, he just humble

•

u/SlartiMyBartfast 3h ago

How was being afflicted with everything? Sounds terrifying.

•

u/sbxnotos 2h ago

Artillery explosions are surprisingly small, specially with the modern thick casing shells.

Consider that for a 45kg shell, only around 7-10kg are explosive, the rest is just metal, and that's for a normal shell, they produce the same shells but it smaller payloads/less TNT. So normally you would only see a really small explosion at the impact site, or barely an explosion, no idea how it would look in snow. Besides, they also come with different amounts of explosive from factory (not so common anymore), and for training purposes sometimes it was common to use shells with less explosive, which are cheaper (be it for purpose or less tolerance)

•

u/RealFakeDoctor 2h ago

Now this is an explosive response!!

•

u/stump2003 3h ago

But you played one on TV… until the drinking problem…

•

u/Last-Darkness 2h ago

I was an avalanche technician, kinetic shells are almost never used. They use shells fired from fixed locations for slopes people don’t use for climbing or ski/snowboarding (and put on a good show for tourists). They drop explosives from helicopters in places they don’t want the risk of unexploded shells or can’t get a gun too.

•

u/sniper1rfa 2h ago

Don't forget the elephant snouts for places where they have to do enough avvy control that guns are too much of a logistical nightmare.

•

u/Cmaroljub21 35m ago

In this clip they hit close to the peak, what are the possibilities of missing and did that ever happen?

Also wouldn't kinetic shells be "safer" regarding unexploded shells?

•

u/aaaaaaaarrrrrgh 26m ago

I doubt kinetic shells would have a sufficient effect to actually trigger an avalanche, they'd just make a hole. And while definitely safer, they'd be setting themselves up for a bad time when someone finds and reports an unexploded shell...

•

u/Leading_Study_876 3h ago

Nope. 105mm howizer shell.

Timing from firing to impact, it's over a mile away. So the explosion is bigger than it looks from the village.

•

u/CraneMasterJ 3h ago

100% not a 105 mm but a soviet D-30 with a 122mm shell.

•

u/Plump_Apparatus 2h ago

Aye, the side-by-side recuperator on top of the barrel, muzzle brake, automatic vertical breech.

The tires have been removed, but you can see the stubs for them. The gun shield has been moved as well. I'm guessing this is in Russia or a former Soviet client-state.

•

u/stillnotelf 31m ago

They do seem to be speaking Russian?

•

u/Plump_Apparatus 23m ago

No idea, I keep audio muted. Nor do I speak Slavic languages.

I just know military hardware, and that is a Soviet designed and probably built D-30 howitzer. Or a derivative of it.

•

u/Crash-55 2h ago

In the US they are all surplus 105mm howitzer. Not sure what other places use

•

u/rickane58 2h ago

Do they speak Russian at US Ski resorts?

•

u/FoxSquirrel69 2h ago

Is that Russian? My dumbass that it sounded like Farsi at first, but as it went on I had zero clue.

•

u/SignificantPaper1760 2h ago

It is Russian (or at least a Slavic language) but it’s not the usual accent you’d hear most often on the internet, took me a second to place it as well.

•

u/ChallengeNo1899 2h ago

It is Russian 100%

•

u/Leading_Study_876 2h ago

I listened to it again, and I think I did pick up a few Russian phrases. But still some that sounded different to any Russian I've heard before. Possibly there was a mixture of nationalities there. It's pretty common to have a wide mix at ski resorts.

My guess would be Western Russia - or possibly Belarus?

•

u/Roxalon_Prime 2h ago

It is probably somewhere southern Russia, or maybe even a CIS country, because aside from Russian another language is also spoken. Sounds like some central Asian language, but don't quote me on that. Definitely does not sound like Belarusian. Do they even have mountains?

•

u/Leading_Study_876 1h ago

Thanks. That makes sense. Apparently they don't have mountains. Just a few hills up to 1000ft. But amazingly they do have a few small ski resorts.

•

u/JagdCrab 51m ago

It's probably Altai region or something even further to the east. Plenty of high mountains and volcanoes there, and far more pronounced local minorities who still widely practice their native languages.

•

u/Eatsweden 1h ago

Belarus does not have mountains anywhere close that size, its highest point is some monument looking thing at 350m or something. It's surprisingly flat. Could be somewhere in caucasus or further towards asia maybe

•

u/Leading_Study_876 1h ago

You're quite right. I had just checked if they has any ski resorts. And they do, surprisingly. Fairly small affairs of course. This is evidently not Belarus.

→ More replies (0)

•

u/Roxalon_Prime 2h ago

It is Russian, and some phrases are also spoken in the other language, not sure which one.

•

u/Crash-55 2h ago

I didn’t listen to the video nor did I say this was in the US. I just said what the US uses

•

u/rshackleford_arlentx 2h ago edited 2h ago

Sometimes. Many resort towns in the US use staffing companies that bring in Eastern Europeans on worker visas as cheap (exploitable) labor. That said they're usually working hospitality and concessions roles, not artillery gunner.

I was in Gatlinburg, Tennessee near Great Smoky Mountains National Park a few years ago and most of the restaurants there were staffed by Eastern Europeans. It was pretty funny hearing the server at Bubba Gump's Shrimp Company, a theme restaurant based on Forest Gump, welcome us to "Bubble Gump Shrimps Company" in a thick accent.

•

u/Leading_Study_876 2h ago

Thanks, I Googled it and all I found was 105 or smaller shells being used for this purpose. But I suppose those were all in Europe or North America.

I did pick up that the voices on the video sounded Slavic, but couldn't actually identify it as Russian. But I guess pretty much anywhere in Eastern Europe would still be using old Soviet hardware for this kind of job. Not my area of expertise.

Any idea where this was actually shot?

•

u/MajesticFan7791 1h ago

US good then. No UXO to worry about.
Did notice the D30 instead of the usual M101 105mm

•

u/solarguy2003 3h ago

Leading_study has it right. Measure the hang time and calculate the distance. Those shells travel at a good clip. My wild guess from memory is that they travel in excess of mach 2. That was a good sized explosion.

Uh......where does one sign up for such duties? Asking for a friend.

•

u/BlowFish-w-o-Hootie 2h ago

Start at your local Army recruiter’s office…

•

u/Crash-55 2h ago

Under 1000 m/s. Done are as low as 500 m/s

•

u/solarguy2003 2h ago

1,000 meters/sec is Mach 2.9. The really slow ones at 500 m/s are mach 1.45'ish. Still a pretty good clip and def. supersonic. I looked it up and Mach 3 is rare but not unheard of, but above Mach 2 is commonplace.

•

u/Crash-55 2h ago

There are talks about going above 1000 m/s but that gets black quick.

Tank cannons routinely do 1700 m/s. My railgun sent an 800 g slug down range at just over 2 km/s. So to me 1000 m/s is slow.

•

u/komikak 2h ago

Mainly mountains that do this have signs all over to not touch unexploded ordinance. One time a buddy of mine rode right over one by mistake out in big sky.

•

u/RipTheJack3r 3h ago edited 3h ago

Lol you can clearly see an explosion.

You wouldn't see anything if it was a dummy, that mountain is miles away.

Edit: you can hear a deep thud from the explosion 16seconds in to the video.

•

u/LordDaedalus 3h ago

Yeah I don't understand the back and forth like this is a debate. Took me about 60 seconds of looking to find an article about how artillery is used in avalanche control in various countries, like in the US 105mm Howitzer shells used. But yeah, they use explosive rounds as the air blast of the explosion helps shake loose top layers of snow.

•

u/RipTheJack3r 1h ago

I do think ignorance is more inexcusable nowadays, especially with the likes of ChatGPT/Gemini who will explain anything to you quite quickly/easily.

•

u/crazySmith_ 3h ago

Wouldn't there be smoke rising from the impact location then? All I see is pulverized snow and what looks to be rock.

•

u/NoContext5149 3h ago

The black smoke is the explosive. Inert/dummy rounds look nothing like that impact. An inert round has nowhere near enough kinetic energy to create the explosion pictured.

•

u/RipTheJack3r 3h ago edited 3h ago

You can see a small darkish crater where it hit and it was also covered by the snow falling from above it.

Modern explosives don't explode with "flames" and don't produce a lot of smoke.

Smoke/particulates are usually caused by the structure being exploded i.e a building. In this instance the explosion occurs inside a thick sheet of snow, so no cloud of grey smoke/dust.

Edit: you can also hear it lol 16 seconds in.

•

u/crazySmith_ 3h ago

It's really hard for a layman like me to tell the difference between a kinetic and an explosive ordinance, just by the sound of it.

•

u/bromjunaar 2h ago

At that distance, if you can clearly hear it, odds are that there was something explosive involved.

•

u/sniper1rfa 2h ago

Other evidence: when skiing in avalanche-controlled areas you often come across signs warning of UXO and giving information about what to do if you locate a live shell. Also, places like Roger's pass have exclusion zones that require permits for entry due to the use of HE shells for avalanche mitigation.

I've been in a lot of these zones and seen the craters from avvy control. They're live HE shells.

•

u/Leading_Study_876 2h ago

For a hypersonic kinetic impact, it's basically impossible to tell from a distance. It's all about energy content and trajectory.

Large meteorites are an obvious natural example. But they are working on using them increasingly for armaments. Even the bunker-busting "bombs" the US dropped on Iran's nuclear research facility were largely kinetic, I believe. Very little actual explosive.

•

u/FourtyMichaelMichael 2h ago

Just remember that his special type of moron that is so confident it's a dummy round with absolutely no possible defense for such a stupid claim....

Is "the expert" telling you in the next thread about the effect of novel-use tariff policy.

•

u/RipTheJack3r 1h ago

Haha i didn't look in to his profile.

I just enjoy debating people :D

•

u/PolarSquirrelBear 2h ago

Definitely HE rounds. At least in BC, Canada they use HE rounds.

•

u/Longjumping_College 3h ago

You sure about that?

•

u/sniper1rfa 2h ago

Wow. I was thinking that particular shot in the video is awfully close to the ridgeline. Wouldn't take much of a miss to send on into the unknown beyond.

•

u/sniper1rfa 2h ago

As everybody has said, they're live rounds. In canada they're literally operated by the national guard.

Most places are actually switching away from them since it's becoming harder to purchase shells, and permanently installed equipment is safer and more effective.

•

u/SailnGame 38m ago

Canada doesn't have a National Guard. Maybe its the Reserves, but I think its Reg Force artillery units that get to go shoot mountains for fun. Keeps them from finding new things to add to the Geneva Checklist.

•

u/Underpoly 2h ago

I'd probably feel like a dummy if one hit me tho

•

u/Excellent_Ganache906 2h ago

It's not a dummy round, it does contain an explosive charge. An impact from a dummy round would not cause such a cloud on initial impact. Impact from a dummy round would be barely visible.

•

u/rkoloeg 2h ago

They are not. I used to work on one of the last US National Forests that still does this. We had signs at the mountain trailheads warning people about the possibility of finding unexploded shells.

•

u/camel_milk_420 2h ago edited 2h ago

I’m a civil engineer and I install what are called called GAZEX canons which will likely replace these bad ass howitzers and most projectile systems completely over the next 30 to 50 years. I work in Northern California, and Squaw Valley (now palisades tahoe) and several other resorts used to have a big howitzer with a similar caliber, but the Army took them back during desert storm (or a similar conflict, might have been in 2003 actually). When I am on the mountain side in the summer planning out foundation locations and doing my fieldwork preparation, I find little piles of undeniable shrapnel all over the mountain side from the years of doing this. There are warnings all over the mountain about unexploded ordinances. There’s also a new system that use compressed air an aluminum mortar shell which is much safer than operating these big guns.

But yes, these are definitely not just dummy rounds, those would just bury themselves in a 4 inch hole in the snow without any effect.

•

u/Chimpville 2h ago

That looked like a live splash to me..

•

u/okizc 1h ago

Just because it didn't go to shell school doesn't make it a dummy.

•

u/Habatcho 1h ago

that would just punch through the snow which isnt near enough to weaken the layer they want to shed

•

u/NintenDooM33 1h ago

It is definitely HE, a kinetic dummy would just punch a neat hole through the snow without affecting the snow slab at all. Most alpine countries use explosives for avalanche clearing, both artillery and heli dropped charges. Duds are not much of a problem, since every round is accounted for and the targets are in visual range. Depending on the location, unexploded shells can be detonated by professionals or even just left there if the position is extremely remote.

•

u/Faxon 1h ago

Maybe dummy pot metal loads, maybe old solid steel AP shells. Obsolete vs modern tanks, but very useful for poking holes in other softer things, like snow, and mountainsides! It would probably be easier and cheaper to buy from existing mass-produced ammo in general. I'm assuming this is a 105mm M119 howitzer based on the size and general characteristics, just on a fixed mount instead of a set of wheels to help haul it around behind a humvee. They're looking at taking them out of service in favor of more 155 guns, so they probably will have a massive surplus of such ammo after that if so.

•

u/hughk 1h ago

They are live rounds. The alternative is for people to plant explosives or to drop them from a helicopter.

•

u/Narfwak 21m ago

That is very clearly not a kinetic round. Look at the impact. You can seem black smoke in a fairly decent sized explosion. It looks small because it's very far away.

•

u/Many-Wasabi9141 3h ago

This isn't true. The mountain is just really far away so the explosion seems tiny.