Thai - Cambodia Conflict Thai Air Force Denies Link to Bomb Found in Cambodia

[snoop1130]

Picture courtesy of MGR Online

 

In a recent development, the Royal Thai Air Force clarified its position regarding a 2,000-pound MK-84 bomb discovered in Cambodia. The bomb, which was dug up from beneath a residential area, is showing significant signs of age and rust. This has led to questions about its origins and potential connection to Thai military operations.

 

Air Chief Marshal Prapas Sonjaidee, spokesperson for the Thai Air Force, addressed these concerns following a Facebook post by Heng Ratana, Director of the Cambodian Mine Action Centre (CMAA). The post, accompanied by images of the unearthed bomb, sparked widespread speculation.

 

Prapas insisted that the bomb's deteriorated condition is a clear indication it isn’t part of any recent operations. “The rusted state of the bomb suggests that it is not from the Thai Air Force. Our arsenal is well-maintained and devoid of such wear,” he explained.

 

The MK-84 bomb, an aerial device commonly used by Western nations, is approximately 2,000 pounds. However, it’s understood to be far older than initially assumed.

 

Prapas elaborated, “Based on its circumference and length, it appears to be a Western-made bomb. Its depth and horizontal burial position imply it wasn’t dropped from an aircraft recently.”

 

The location and presentation of the bomb raise questions about its history. Rather than being part of a modern military action, it seems more plausible that this is a relic from a past conflict, long forgotten beneath the earth.

 

The discovery comes amidst heightened sensitivity in the region, where past historical tensions have occasionally surfaced. Both nations are keen to maintain a peaceful relationship, so clear communication regarding such discoveries is crucial.

 

While the situation is currently being investigated further, there remains a consistent narrative from the Thai Air Force: there is no involvement in recent activities that resulted in a bomb being present in Cambodian territory.

 

Local residents in Cambodia have expressed concern, given the bomb was located in a residential area. Safety initiatives and further investigations are likely to ramp up, ensuring that any remaining unexploded ordnance can be managed without risk to communities.

 

As of now, the CMAA is likely to continue examining the site and the surrounding area for any potential threats. Cooperation between the Cambodian authorities and international bodies is expected to ensure thorough clearance efforts.

 

The Thai Air Force’s clarification seeks to dispel any misunderstandings, while efforts remain focussed on maintaining regional stability. As the investigation continues, both Thailand and Cambodia aim to navigate the situation diplomatically.

 

In summary, the recently discovered MK-84 bomb in Cambodia is an aged artefact unlikely connected to current Thai Air Force operations. Its unearthing serves as a reminder of the historical remnants that still exist in Southeast Asia, where cooperation and vigilant management are key to peace and safety.

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from The Thaiger 2025-07-31

 

 

[billd766]

If it is obviously old and rusty as claimed it certainly would not have been dropped in the last 2 weeks. It seems to be a leftover from a previous "war" or possibly jettisoned by an aircraft during the Vietnam war. It is has any serial numbers, they may give a clue as to when and where it was manufactured, and where it was shipped from and to.

 

If it is old, it will take a brave and experienced EOD team to make it safe, remove it and destroy it safely.

[hotchilli]

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

If it is obviously old and rusty as claimed it certainly would not have been dropped in the last 2 weeks. It seems to be a leftover from a previous "war" or possibly jettisoned by an aircraft during the Vietnam war. It is has any serial numbers, they may give a clue as to when and where it was manufactured, and where it was shipped from and to.

 

If it is old, it will take a brave and experienced EOD team to make it safe, remove it and destroy it safely.

Maybe it's a dirty bomb ?

[Hummin]

20 hours ago, billd766 said:

If it is obviously old and rusty as claimed it certainly would not have been dropped in the last 2 weeks. It seems to be a leftover from a previous "war" or possibly jettisoned by an aircraft during the Vietnam war. It is has any serial numbers, they may give a clue as to when and where it was manufactured, and where it was shipped from and to.

 

If it is old, it will take a brave and experienced EOD team to make it safe, remove it and destroy it safely.

 

Most likely from when USA bombed the <deleted> out Cambodia, as well Laos

 

The US dropped an estimated 2.75 million tons of bombs on Cambodia between 1965 and 1973. This bombing campaign, primarily during the Vietnam War, involved over 230,000 bombing sorties and targeted more than 113,000 sites. The bombing was part of two major operations: "Operation Menu" and "Operation Freedom Deal"

 

All told, American warplanes dropped more than 2.7 million tons of bombs on more than 113,000 sites in Cambodia, exacting a heavy toll among combatants and civilians alike. More than two million people fled their homes to escape the bombing, ground fighting, and Communist rule. Most ended up in the increasingly crowded Phnom Penh and various provincial cities that the Lon Nol government continued to control

 

https://www.ushmm.org/genocide-prevention/countries/cambodia/war-closes-in

[OneManShow]

Looks like it was buried for decades under ground 🤔🤨

[newbee2022]

No,

Came from heaven obviously

[jacnl2000]

The bomb in the photo cannot be a Mk 84 due to its significantly shorter length. All available visual, historical, and technical evidence strongly supports that it is a U.S. M117 (750-lb general-purpose bomb) — a common Vietnam-era munition used extensively in Cambodia.

 

The bomb is clearly shorter than the CMAC deminer is tall (and likely no longer than ~2 meters, based on body proportions and the visible measuring tape). This is nowhere near the 3.84-meter length of the Mk 84, conclusively ruling it out. It is simply far too short.

Most likely, this is an M117: an older GP dumb bomb design — not a 2,000 lb (940 kg) weapon like the Mk 84, but a 750 lb (340 kg) bomb that better matches both the physical dimensions and the historical context of the region.

 

Better to blow up the scale than the bomb.

[Smokin Joe]

27 minutes ago, jacnl2000 said:

The bomb in the photo cannot be a Mk 84 due to its significantly shorter length. All available visual, historical, and technical evidence strongly supports that it is a U.S. M117 (750-lb general-purpose bomb) — a common Vietnam-era munition used extensively in Cambodia.

 

The bomb is clearly shorter than the CMAC deminer is tall (and likely no longer than ~2 meters, based on body proportions and the visible measuring tape). This is nowhere near the 3.84-meter length of the Mk 84, conclusively ruling it out. It is simply far too short.

Most likely, this is an M117: an older GP dumb bomb design — not a 2,000 lb (940 kg) weapon like the Mk 84, but a 750 lb (340 kg) bomb that better matches both the physical dimensions and the historical context of the region.

 

Better to blow up the scale than the bomb.

 

I can tell you from personal experience that that bomb IS NOT an M117 750lb Bomb. The M117 is short and stubby compared to the Low Drag Mk 80 series bombs.

 

Her is a pic of an M117 bomb that I disposed of in Laos a few years ago.

 

[jacnl2000]

52 minutes ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

I can tell you from personal experience that that bomb IS NOT an M117 750lb Bomb. The M117 is short and stubby compared to the Low Drag Mk 80 series bombs.

 

Her is a pic of an M117 bomb that I disposed of in Laos a few years ago.

 

 

First of all, thank you for sharing your photo — I genuinely appreciate it.

 

If the bomb in your picture really measures about 7 boot-lengths, and those boots were a common size — let’s say EU 44–45 — then the bomb’s length lines up very closely with the M117’s actual length of 206 cm. In that case, I completely agree:

Your photo very likely shows an M117 bomb.

So yes — we’re totally on the same page when it comes to your statement:

“Here is a pic of an M117 bomb that I disposed of in Laos a few years ago.”

---

What’s harder to reconcile is the first statement you made:

“I can tell you from personal experience that that bomb IS NOT an M117 750 lb Bomb.”

That shifts the conversation from handling ordnance in the field — something I absolutely respect — to interpreting a bomb from a photo, which is a different kind of expertise.
Working with bombs directly and identifying them in images are two different challenges.

 

Take the photo from the article, for example. The bomb in that image looks about the length of a person — nowhere near 2 meters. But that’s probably due to lens distortion, especially foreshortening or perspective compression. These effects can really change how large or small an object looks in a photo.

 

So I totally understand your reaction — especially if you’ve worked directly with these weapons. But in this case, I think the issue isn’t about bomb disposal knowledge. It’s more about how easily our eyes can be tricked by the camera, especially when we don’t have a clear reference for scale.

 

 

Now, let’s look at the great photo above — it’s a perfect example of foreshortening in action. Here’s what’s in the image:

• Foreground: A row of M117 bombs, recognizable by their:

  • Long cylindrical bodies

  • Single lifting lugs on top

  • Rounded noses and square tail fins

• Background: T-28 Trojan aircraft, commonly used during the Vietnam War

What makes this image fascinating is how the same type of bomb can appear both too short and too long, depending on where it is in the frame:

• The bombs closest to the camera look big, thick, and dominant — but to some, they may seem shorter than they really are because of the angle and lens distortion.

• The bombs farther away start to look more accurate in shape — longer and sleeker.

• The perspective stretches the row, making the whole scene feel deeper and larger than it is.

This is the paradox of foreshortening:

It can make objects look compressed up close and stretched out in the distance — all in the same photo.

---

That’s why identifying bombs from photos is so tricky. Even experienced EOD professionals can misjudge what they’re seeing if there’s no clear size reference — like a boot, a person, or a measuring stick.

In your original photo, the M117s look shorter than they really are — maybe around 1.5 meters — but we know from technical specs that they’re actually 2.06 meters long.

So again, thank you for sharing your image. It’s a great example of how easily photos can distort reality — and why context, perspective, and reference points matter so much.

[Smokin Joe]

26 minutes ago, jacnl2000 said:

 

First of all, thank you for sharing your photo — I genuinely appreciate it.

 

If the bomb in your picture really measures about 7 boot-lengths, and those boots were a common size — let’s say EU 44–45 — then the bomb’s length lines up very closely with the M117’s actual length of 206 cm. In that case, I completely agree:

Your photo very likely shows an M117 bomb.

So yes — we’re totally on the same page when it comes to your statement:

“Here is a pic of an M117 bomb that I disposed of in Laos a few years ago.”

---

What’s harder to reconcile is the first statement you made:

“I can tell you from personal experience that that bomb IS NOT an M117 750 lb Bomb.”

That shifts the conversation from handling ordnance in the field — something I absolutely respect — to interpreting a bomb from a photo, which is a different kind of expertise.
Working with bombs directly and identifying them in images are two different challenges.

 

Take the photo from the article, for example. The bomb in that image looks about the length of a person — nowhere near 2 meters. But that’s probably due to lens distortion, especially foreshortening or perspective compression. These effects can really change how large or small an object looks in a photo.

 

So I totally understand your reaction — especially if you’ve worked directly with these weapons. But in this case, I think the issue isn’t about bomb disposal knowledge. It’s more about how easily our eyes can be tricked by the camera, especially when we don’t have a clear reference for scale.

 

 

Now, let’s look at the great photo above — it’s a perfect example of foreshortening in action. Here’s what’s in the image:

• Foreground: A row of M117 bombs, recognizable by their:

  • Long cylindrical bodies

  • Single lifting lugs on top

  • Rounded noses and square tail fins

• Background: T-28 Trojan aircraft, commonly used during the Vietnam War

What makes this image fascinating is how the same type of bomb can appear both too short and too long, depending on where it is in the frame:

• The bombs closest to the camera look big, thick, and dominant — but to some, they may seem shorter than they really are because of the angle and lens distortion.

• The bombs farther away start to look more accurate in shape — longer and sleeker.

• The perspective stretches the row, making the whole scene feel deeper and larger than it is.

This is the paradox of foreshortening:

It can make objects look compressed up close and stretched out in the distance — all in the same photo.

---

That’s why identifying bombs from photos is so tricky. Even experienced EOD professionals can misjudge what they’re seeing if there’s no clear size reference — like a boot, a person, or a measuring stick.

In your original photo, the M117s look shorter than they really are — maybe around 1.5 meters — but we know from technical specs that they’re actually 2.06 meters long.

So again, thank you for sharing your image. It’s a great example of how easily photos can distort reality — and why context, perspective, and reference points matter so much.

 

You seem to know a lot about photography but nothing about ordnance. The photo you just posted is of a bunch of Mk 80 series LDGP bombs. They are not M117's, which have a very different shape.

 

And they have two lugs for attaching to the bomb racks, they are not "lifting lugs". 

 

And the type of tail fin is irrelevant as they can use different types of fins.

 

 

[jacnl2000]

9 hours ago, Smokin Joe said:

 

You seem to know a lot about photography but nothing about ordnance. The photo you just posted is of a bunch of Mk 80 series LDGP bombs. They are not M117's, which have a very different shape.

 

And they have two lugs for attaching to the bomb racks, they are not "lifting lugs". 

 

And the type of tail fin is irrelevant as they can use different types of fins.

 

 

 

“Papaah doesn’t know everything,” my boys say.
Don’t worry — I got used to it.
For the family’s sake, I stopped the bickering.

They’re right — and here, that might be a blessing.

 

In Lao, they say:
things you don’t see are still there.
The ground still remembers.

Not being an expert is sometimes the very best position to hold.
Especially when the earth hides what the sky once dropped.

 

The aftermath of ordnance is part of the ordnance too.
In my own professional jargon — in official sign language — it’s called dropshadow.

Its purpose?
To embed the object into the scene.
To stop untold secrets from floating.
What is hidden must still be held in place.

Just like memory.
Just like aftermath.
Just like Laos.

 

UXO in Laos — the aftermath:
🎥 https://youtu.be/TZQdmQM_oAw