I was recently aboard a military training facility that is used for a variety of training techniques, like close-quarters battle (CQB) and explosive breaching. On one of the breaching lanes I saw something interesting: a puck lock breached with high explosives. Puck locks do not have a visible hasp. They are one of the most mechanically secure padlock designs available. Since everyone loves explosives, I thought this would be an interesting pictorial post: puck locks vs high explosives.
PUCK LOCKS VS HIGH EXPLOSIVES
The lock secured grated window bars, and the hasp had been welded to the bars and window frame. The one pictured below had not yet been breached and was completely intact. The lock is a Master 627o mounted in a Master 770 hasp. Though I strongly recommend AGAINST Master locks generally, the mechanical ability of this model (and ones like it) against forced entry is sound.
This one had. The explosives were placed along the natural opening of the window. The results are fairly dramatic: the hasp has been completely destroyed. It was sheared fairly neatly, and the steel is shattered. Notice, however, that the lock itself still holds. This is a testament to the durabilty and strength of the puck-style padlock.
The portion of the hasp that was welded to the grate is missing. The grated window covering was only slightly warped by the explosive energy. This is indicative of an appropriate amount of exposives being used, per breaching convention. With half of the hasp missing, one would probably not want to be inside that room when the breach went off.
I hope you enjoyed seeing puck locks vs high explosives! Stay tuned – next Friday I will offer my list of threat-model based padlock recommendations. Though it is doubtful any of them will stand up to an attack like this, an attack like this probably isn’t in anyone’s realistic threat model.
If you enjoyed this article and would like exclusive content, sign up for the Operational-Security Newsletter.