Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!att!cbnews!cbnews!military From: ames!ames!claris!portal!cup.portal.com!mmm@uunet.UU.NET Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Fuel-Air Explosives Message-ID: <1991Jan21.035620.3877@cbnews.att.com> Date: 21 Jan 91 03:56:20 GMT Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker) Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 8 Approved: military@att.att.com From: WRT the effectiveness of an explosion in air vs. the "Blockbuster", it has been my understanding that what knocks down buildings is not so much the initial blast, but the rush of air into the vacuum created following a blast, in which case an explosion in air would probably be preferable. Can anyone confirm/refute the vacuum theory?