
Wanggongchang Explosion - benbreen
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanggongchang_Explosion
======
crazygringo
While the Wikipedia article says "no academic consensus has been reached" it
seems pretty clear from the "possible causes" section that a bolide (meteor
exploding in the air above) is the only explanation listed which seems to fit
the facts.

I'm curious, therefore, why the lack of consensus? Is there any evidence
_inconsistent_ with the bolide hypothesis? Or is there just no positive proof
whatsoever (e.g. some type of meteor residue or other) so it can never be
conclusively demonstrated?

~~~
appleflaxen
> The ground around the immediate vicinity of Wanggongchang Armory, the
> epicenter of the explosion, had sunken for over 2 zhangs (about 6.5 m or 21
> feet), but there was a notable lack of fire damage

it seems a bit improbable that a bolide would _just so happen_ to hit the
armory. Given that bolide events are rare to begin with, the low chance of
hitting a military building is enough to make me skeptical.

I have no idea what contemporary chemical explosives were extant, but if there
were _any_ plausible agent I would favor that instead.

~~~
MawKKe
> it seems a bit improbable that a bolide would just so happen to hit the
> armory. Given that bolide events are rare to begin with, the low chance of
> hitting a military building is enough to make me skeptical.

Well, isn't the probability of hitting the armory identical to that of hitting
anywhere else on the planet?

~~~
ajuc
Yes, and there's a very big number of things in the "anything else" category,
and only very few things in the "armory" category.

On the other hand explosive materials accidents happen where big amounts of
explosive materials are stored, and there's few places in the "anything else
than armory" category so the event is more likely.

------
MeteorMarc
The following resources provide some context about the frequency of high
energy atmospheric meteorite impacts:

[https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/](https://cneos.jpl.nasa.gov/fireballs/)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_meteor_air_bursts](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_meteor_air_bursts)

Edited 14:32 MET

------
darkerside
A combination of meteorite air burst with compounding effects from a
combustion explosion due to ammunition storage seems like it could have
unpredictable effects that could account for some of the strange outcomes seen
here.

~~~
mannykannot
Indeed - a bolide crossing the city from northeast to southwest is by far the
most plausible explanation, though, as the sky was clear, it would surely have
been seen as a fireball, as in Chelyabinsk? Therefore, I would guess that the
"bright streak" was coincident with the initial "roaring rumble", rather than
following it, and the reports are conflating the passage of the fireball with
its final explosion.

If it caused the detonation or deflagration of the armory's gunpowder, that
might account for most of the clouds, including trails of smoke from burning
fragments thrown high into the air (the "messy strands of silk"?)

------
jetzzz
See also 1490 Ch'ing-yang event:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1490_Ch%27ing-
yang_event](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1490_Ch%27ing-yang_event)

------
The_rationalist
See also: [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_artificial_non-
nucle...](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Largest_artificial_non-
nuclear_explosions)

------
11thEarlOfMar
Wonder how it compared to the Tianjin explosion in 2015:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nr6Tlu0EvM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nr6Tlu0EvM)

Wait for the 3rd explosion at 0:50.

~~~
kijin
Wanggongchang is estimated to have been about 10 kilotons, roughly the
equivalent of the Hiroshima nuke. Tunguska was at least 10 megatons. In
comparison, the three explosions at Tianjin add up to a measly 360 tons of TNT
[1].

[1]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Tianjin_explosions](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2015_Tianjin_explosions)

~~~
catalogia
The largest PEPCON explosion was about 1 kiloton: (1m37s)
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGSx54CkWsQ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gGSx54CkWsQ)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PEPCON_disaster)

------
mirimir
Maybe they had learned to make picric acid. One of the early methods involved
nitrating silk. But for that, you need nitric and sulfuric acids.

Nitric acid you can make from sulfuric acid and alkali nitrates. And sulfuric
acid was discovered by Rhazes (Zakariya al-Razi) in ~900 AD. So it's possible.

Or maybe ammonium nitrate. That was known in antiquity, but not as an
explosive. But maybe they discovered that. And indeed, mixtures of ammonium
nitrate, picric acid and anything carbonaceous are decent ~high explosives.

~~~
IAmGraydon
The energy released would have required at least 20,000,000 pounds of high
explosive. There is simply no way they had the resources to manufacture in
those quantities.

~~~
mirimir
True enough, but maybe the reports have been exaggerated.

The Texas City disaster,[0] involved ~2 million kg of ammonium nitrate. But
TFA notes that the facility produced only ~400 kg gunpowder per day. Let alone
ammonium nitrate, if any.

So what, bolide?

0)
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_disaster](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_City_disaster)

~~~
catalogia
Wikipedia puts the TNT equivalency of ammonium nitrate at 2.38 kg of ammonium
nitrate for one kg of TNT. The Texas City explosion had 2,200 tons of ammonium
nitrate present, so my estimate for the potential TNT equivalency of that
explosion is just less than one kiloton. Meaning the Wanggongchang explosion
was 10-20x as big (my math might be a bit off there, but probably not by an
order of magnitude.)

Even the Halifax explosion wasn't nearly as big as the Wanggongchang
explosion. It's hard for me to fathom they had so much explosives there.

------
saagarjha
It’s interesting to see the use of a number of non-standard units of
measurement in describing the event.

------
dmix
> Tianqi Emperor's only remaining heir, the 7-month-old Crown Prince Zhu
> Cijiong (朱慈炅), died from the shock.[1]

How does one die of shock? I'm curious if this is just an old medical
description or possibly the weakness of a 7-month old baby at the time.

~~~
foobar_fighter
Medical shock refers to very low blood pressure which results in poor
oxygenation. It's usually fatal if left untreated. (It can be treated with
oxygen and IV fluids). I would guess, though, that 'shock' is used in this
context to refer to the explosion (as in shock wave).

~~~
grzm
If “the shock” were meant to be interpreted as medical shock, I would expect
the definite article to be omitted. Compare:

 _He died of shock._ (medical condition)

 _He died of the shock._ (single, definitive event, e.g., fright or shock
wave)

Might be reading too much into it, but lends credence to the shock wave
interpretation. Anyone have access to the original text? Might clear it up.

~~~
yorwba
The original source is available on Wikisource:
[https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E9%85%8C%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%97#%...](https://zh.wikisource.org/wiki/%E9%85%8C%E4%B8%AD%E5%BF%97#%E5%8D%B7%E4%B8%89)

 _皇貴妃任娘娘所居之室器物隕落，任娘娘於天啟五年十月初一日所生皇第三子，於是日受驚後遂薨逝_

Translates roughly (with the caveat that my Literary Chinese sucks) as:

 _In the imperial consort Lady Ren 's living quarters, things fell down and
the emperor's third son she had given birth to on the first day of the tenth
month of 1625, having been shocked on that day, subsequently passed away._

The paragraph I took that quote from begins with the description of a dragon
sighting four years earlier, which might give you an idea of how reliable that
source is.

~~~
dmix
Thank you for this. Didn't expect my question to get answered so thoroughly
but at the same time it doesn't answer whether it was the blast shock or
generic medical shock, I'm guessing blast shock given how everything in the
house was rattled.

------
duelingjello
Bolide. The area, scale and dispersion of effects in the descriptions is
incongruent with a point source explosion of black powder.

------
xwdv
Imagine being killed in such an explosion, never really knowing what was
happening as you died.

~~~
jsjohnst
I’m not one of the down-voters, but the death was likely near instant for most
involved.

------
pedrocx486
I know this is a quite off topic but as I was reading this and got to the
"silk strands" clouds, I couldn't stop thinking about Death Stranding and the
"voidout" events in the game.

