Slashdot Mirror
30,000-Lb. Bomb On Fast Track For Deployment
coondoggie writes "Published reports today say the Pentagon is rattling swords in the direction of North Korea and Iran by speeding the development a 20-foot, 30,000-lb bomb known as Massive Ordnance Penetrator. This weapon is intended to annihilate underground bunkers and other hardened sites (read: long-range missile or underground nuke development) up to 200 ft. underground. The Defense Threat Reduction Agency, which has overseen the development of this monster since 2007, says it is designed to be carried aboard B-2 and B-52 bombers and deployed at high altitudes, from which it would strike the ground at speeds well beyond twice the speed of sound to penetrate the below-ground target." Reuters has more specifics on the MOP's chances for deployment by 2010, and the detail that the bomb's load of explosives weighs in at 5,300 lbs.
Though true, what's interesting about this one? I don't mean that entirely as a rhetorical question: it's possible there really is something interesting here. But I haven't seen a good summary.
Is it just, take a normal bomb, make it really really big, and slog through some tedious but mostly straightforward engineering challenges to get the thing to work? Or is there something that, at a conceptual level, is different when you get to bombs of this size?
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
This is really a reinvention and extension of 1940's British technology. Barnes Wallis (of the bouncing "Dam Buster" bomb fame) designed a 5 tonne bomb (Tallboy) in 1943. The larger 10 tonne bomb (Grand Slam) was introduced in early 1945. It was dropped from a Lancaster bomber (by 617 squadron - the Dam Buster squadron) from about 20,000 ft and was close to sonic (320 m/s) when it hit the ground. It was designed as a penetrator, only detonating when well underground. It was used with devastating effect against the German U Boat pens, canals, bridges and viaducts where the "earthquake" effect of a deep explosion undermined foundations. The Grand Slam used 4,144 kg of explosives (Torpex)which is considerably more than the heavier bomb proposed by the US DoD with an earth penetration design depth of 40m. I would imagine that the higher impact speed of the US bomb requires a much stronger casing, but I am surprised at the small ordinance load. It is interesting to note that (as with much British technology) design data for the Grand Slam was shared with the US and a US version was made, but not (as far as I am aware) used in WWII. RobHart
My point is, with this and smart bomb technology at the level America has it, no bunker is safe anymore, not at any depth.
This includes civilian bunkers. If they can get these (and slightly weaker versions of these) to drop in manufacturing price, no need to use Firestorms to kill all civilians from underground bunkers by taking out all the oxygen from the cityblock. This was used in World War 2 when allied bombers destroyed Berlin but this can make it so much easier.
Just dropping these babies here and there randomly in every bombing reminds civilians that they are no longer safe, anywhere.
And it's not just civilian bunkers. I'm sure that just one of these to St. Petersburg (world's deepest metro tunnels for underground trains... And they also go under the rivers there) in Russia could flood the whole metro system with water.
This has an immense geopolitical effect.
Indeed
North Korea is going to have to work even harder to hide their programs--and expose them in the process. Iran can no longer feel safe announcing a nuclear bomb should it develope one. And any country that has, in the past, felt less fear of American military might because of conventional equipment being held in deep bunkers will no longer be as eager to put it to the test.
You really think that any small, poor countries with one or two nuclear weapons that are still in early development stage will care to think "The Americans can bomb everything else here but at least our underground laboratory is safe so it's fine".
Let's face it: This weapon hasn't been developed to destroy single underground research facilities in poor countries. It has been developed to destroy whole underground infrastructure: Water pipes. Large electrical cables. Fiber networks. Metro tunnels. Bunkers - military and civilian. Etc.
With one weapon, America has greatly advanced its interests everywhere the military counts.
I give you that.
But honestly, even if you are right and there is no more sinister meanings behind this weapon... How in hell could USA know where to drop it? Hell, the intelligence so far hasn't been able to tell whether whole countries even have weapons of mass destruction or not. I doubt that were war to occur the biggest problem would be "We know exactly what they have and where, just can't destroy it" in modern times.
While we're at it, also have a look at this Russian thingy. It's thermobaric, and thus very different in its intended use (not a bunker buster, but what you'd use to clear a large network of caves or underground tunnels with surface exits in one sweep), but of the same magnitude of raw power.
Good point, except for one thing: they only LOOK like Vince Lombardi because they were up against Carter and Clinton, who gave them those victories. They only have a few offenses and defenses, and so a decent American "coach" would not let them score off it, or would at least limit their scoring.
Not that I was ever a big fan of Bush, but North Korea is something he got right. Hopefully Obama doesn't screw up the progress we've made over the last few years.
They should write it's power output in terms of sun, in which case it looks really puny next to nuclear. For example, the Tsar Bomba (largest human utilized explosive device, which was detonated at half the possible yield to prevent fallout) actually got into whole number percentages:
"Since 50 Mt is 2.1*10^17 joules, the average power produced during the entire fission-fusion process, lasting around 39 nanoseconds, was about 5.4*10^24 watts or 5.4 yottawatts. This is equivalent to approximately 1.4% of the power output of the Sun.[9]" (Wikipedia).
Ever heard of a kinetic penetrator? It is a type of ammunition used in the main gun of tanks. It contains no explosives, but rather a very dense, arrow-like projectile which uses its high speed (and thus its kinetic energy) for all its destructive power. Kinetic energy weapons are generally weapons that rely solely on their kinetic energy for their destructive power.
Other more sci-fi types of kinetic energy weapons would be rail guns and coil guns.
GP's wrong.
Just as before the beginning of the war, the Japanese were negotiating, and they would have surrendered anyway. Few believed it was possible to resist the allies after Germany fell.
Truman was rash, inexperienced in foreign policy, and desperate to impress the world. So, the decision to assert himself was natural. He also wanted to see the weapon in action, and he was quite pissed by the reaction of Stalin to his super-important message about the bomb, which Stalin just shrugged off.
So, he dropped the bomb.
There are stories that are coming from Burma/Myanmar in which North Korea is helping them to create their own production line. This same country that has done all that it can to hold its citizen back in terms of education, had Russia bring in a 10MW reactor.Burma's explanation for it: Nuclear Medicine. That country is nearly 50 years behind in primary medicine and they are claiming that they want a monster reactor for Nuclear Medicine. Well, nice. Of course, the reactor is being buried in the hillside with Russia and North Korea's help. And apparently, North Korea has been busy helping these ppl. That is why NK absolutely did not want us to board that ship. Apparently W's admin KNEW that Burma was doing this and did nothing about it.
Now, we may be forced down the road to either blow nukes or blow a conventional bomb to destroy these bunkers. Which would you prefer that we do?
What does bother me, is why are we talking disarmament? China is actively building new launch vehicles and there is overwhelming evidence that they have started up new production lines of nuke warhead. They are KNOWN to have at least 600 warheads, but there are some indications that they have over 1000.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
Evelyn Waugh - Letter to His Wife - 31st May 1942
No.3 Commando was very anxious to be chums with Lord Glasgow, so they offered to blow up an old tree stump for him and he was very grateful and said don't spoil the plantation of young trees near it because that is the apple of my eye and they said no of course not we can blow a tree down so it falls on a sixpence and Lord Glasgow said goodness you are clever and he asked them all to luncheon for the great explosion.
So Col. Durnford-Slater DSO said to his subaltern, have you put enough explosive in the tree?. Yes, sir, 75lbs. Is that enough? Yes sir I worked it out by mathematics it is exactly right. Well better put a bit more. Very good sir.
And when Col. D Slater DSO had had his port he sent for the subaltern and said subaltern better put a bit more explosive in that tree. I don't want to disappoint Lord Glasgow. Very good sir.
Then they all went out to see the explosion and Col. DS DSO said you will see that tree fall flat at just the angle where it will hurt no young trees and Lord Glasgow said goodness you are clever.
So soon they lit the fuse and waited for the explosion and presently the tree, instead of falling quietly sideways, rose 50 feet into the air taking with it 1/2 acre of soil and the whole young plantation.
And the subaltern said Sir, I made a mistake, it should have been 7 1/2 not 75. Lord Glasgow was so upset he walked in dead silence back to his castle and when they came to the turn of the drive in sight of his castle what should they find but that every pane of glass in the building was broken.
So Lord Glasgow gave a little cry and ran to hide his emotions in the lavatory and there when he pulled the plug the entire ceiling, loosened by the explosion, fell on his head.
This is quite true.
and it is exactly why you got on iraq and not on other nations. because war is a question of money, not of rights. iraq had the best return on investment.
Inquiring minds want to know.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
This thing is supposed tp go through 60m of 5000psi reinforced concrete, then explode. In a room full of gas centrifuges spinning at over 100K rpm the explosion would be redundant.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
Penetrator? Reminds of me of george carlins bit about bombs being related to sex and that america has a bigger dick policy of shooting our dicks into other countries when we think they have ones bigger than ours.
Honestly though violence only begats violence, one country doesnt want to feel inferior to another so they threaten back and fourth till one gives in or gets blown up.
Is this really how we want to see america seen? A warmongering state? Its shame that is all we good for anymore. We dont make anything, we dont export anything, we dont make big technical or medical advances, all we do is use everything from other countries and then try to police them when we are threatened by them or need to show how powerfull we are.
America is more or less the roman empire right now and we all know how it ended up. Not to mention the sorry shape our country is in, do we really need to be wasting so much money on weapon development, occupying other countries over what a few there did and going into space when americas own people need help?
Actually, a number of ex-Iraqi military officials claimed that Russia flew them out of Iraq and some were moved to Syria.
This claim was made in a book as well as taped interviews with a couple different people. I'm not sure that it's possible to verify the claims, at the time frame it supposedly happened Iraq was supposedly sending aid to Syria due to a damn breaking and a massive flood whcih was an increase in both air and land traffic from Iraq.
Here is another link with a little more detail about the claims but it seems to be just as biased. It has a few more references though.
They used them for psyops in Afghanistan. Had some Taliban holed up in a valley, some spec ops team called for fire support. So the B-1s fly through the valley supersonic while dropping bombs... and hitting everything with its sonic boom. The spec ops dudes said 'I knew that was coming, and I still shit my pants' or something to that affect.
Anyhow, the B1's bombbays are probably too small in one dimension to fit the MOP.