SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - Nuclear Bunker Buster Bombs againt Iran: Madness

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - Nuclear Bunker Buster Bombs againt Iran: Madness (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=90857)

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by tycho102

A lot of people talk about the MOAB being a fuel-air bomb. I've read a whole bunch of articles that say it's regular a regular GP high-explosive bomb -- rdx, tnt, tritonal, fertilizer, or whatever it is they use these days.

I've never seen one, never worked with one, so I personally don't know. My point is that a FAE isn't remotely effective as a "bunker buster". The blast isn't that directive unless you get it into an enclosed space. It doesn't even really clear out trees very well. It's designed to spread out a shock wave over a large, non-uniform area -- with the intention of causing trauma (burst lungs, eyes, eardrums, internal bleeding, secondary fires and explosions) to animals.

FAE's don't work in a greater size than about 2000 lbs. WHomever says this monster is an FAE is wrong. THe reason is - they can't ignite - no oxygen from the explosion after it reaches a certain size.

-S

Doesnâ€™t it (MOAB) disperse a flammable liquid before a small explosive detonates which causes the gas cloud to combust? :-?

Quote:

Originally Posted by TankHunter

Quote:

Originally Posted by SUBMAN1

Quote:

Originally Posted by tycho102

Doesnâ€™t it (MOAB) disperse a flammable liquid before a small explosive detonates which causes the gas cloud to combust? :-?

No, it is just a big container filled with conventional explosives. As already mentioned, a FAE has size limitations, because making very large clouds that will support combustion is very difficult (and even the current small weapons can only do this when using fuel with extremely wide explosive concentration limits such as ethylene oxide).

Ahem... since I worked on "special weapons" for a number of years, I can speak with authority on the subject. :know:

I wouldn't take too much stock on the article written by self proclaimed nuclear experts in the media.
First, every modern strategic nuclear bomb we had in the inventory was a "bunker buster". On the other hand, Special Forces, SEAL's, and Army and USMC atomic demolition squads also trained with a "mini" bunker buster called the SADM (Special Atomic Demolition Munition)- the so-called backpack nuke.
As for "bunker busting" nukes, we deployed several air dropped bombs in the '50's specifically for the purpose (Mark 8 and Mark 11). Problem is they were gun type and weren't exactly safe from an operational standpoint (they were "armed" with active material just before flight).
There are plans to test a larger bomb than MOAB, it's called MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator). My relatives said the whole freaking neighborhood shook when MOAB went off more than 20 miles away. According to the author of "Jawbreaker", Gary Bernsten, a BLU-82 was dropped on the suspected hideout of bin Laden in Afghanistan (which resulted in the "martydom" of several hundred Al Qaida).
Met several individuals who were involved in the atmospheric test program; several were present at the 18 megaton Castle Bravo shot.

Conventional stuff-

http://fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/dumb/blu-82.htm

Nuclear Weapon Archive-

http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/

Yours, Mike

Well i reckon the world should be shaking in there seats cause us kiwis have just released our new missile: :arrgh!:

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c3...manmissile.jpg

Designed by this fella: :arrgh!: :o

http://i31.photobucket.com/albums/c3...azion/sick.jpg

:arrgh!: :o :rotfl:

Wait a minute, I worked with those guys... :-? :-j :dead:

Yours, Mike