Ouch

[USS ALASKA]

Bloomberg.com
October 2, 2009

Boeing Gets $51.9 Million Job For 30,000-Pound Bomb

By Tony Capaccio, Bloomberg News

Boeing Co. has received a $51.9 million contract to make minor modifications to the U.S. Defense Department’s largest bomb so it can be carried on the B-2 stealth bomber, the Pentagon said today.

The Pentagon was to accelerate by three years the deployment of a 30,000-pound bunker buster bomb, a request that reflects growing unease over nuclear threats from Iran and North Korea. The Air Force today put $32.1 million of the money under contract, the Pentagon said. The first bombs will be delivered next year.

The bomb would be the U.S. military’s largest and six times bigger than the 5,000-pound bunker buster that is in the Air Force inventory for use against deeply buried nuclear, biological or chemical sites.

Ashton Carter, undersecretary for acquisition, said in an interview today the weapon has been under development "a long time because around the world the prevalence of deeply buried targets has been a growing concern and people have been looking at solutions."

The bomb is "responsive to an emerging strategic need," Carter said.

The new 20.5-foot-long bomb carries more than 5,300 pounds of explosives and is guided by Global Positioning Satellites, according to a description on the Web site of the Pentagon’s Defense Threat Reduction Agency.

[RF]

And the first target is.......

[Karl Heidenreich]

Osama´s cave...

[RF]

But where is it??????

No I was thinking of those nuclear sites in Iran - I think the Americans would be very foolish to do it, I can certainly imagine the previous president wanting to try it......

[Bgile]

But where is it??????

No I was thinking of those nuclear sites in Iran - I think the Americans would be very foolish to do it, I can certainly imagine the previous president wanting to try it......

I don't think Obama would do it unilaterally, but if the Israelis attack and Iran closes the Strait of Hormuz or attacks US vessels all bets are off.

In any case it's good to have weapons you can use to attack deeply buried facilities.

[RF]

If US citizens or assets do come under unprovoked attack then I think the US is entitled to defend them unilaterally, as any other country should be so entitled.

With Iran, I think that formally the UN should deal with any questions of Iran breaking its international obligations where no other country is actually attacked. If attack is threatened - presumably that would be Israel - then they can defend themselves, as they have in the past.

[USS ALASKA]

San Francisco Chronicle
October 14, 2009
Pg. 6

Pentagon Puts New Mega-Bomb On Fast Track

By Anne Gearan, Associated Press

Washington -- The Pentagon is speeding up delivery of a colossal bomb designed to destroy hidden weapons bunkers buried underground and shielded by 10,000 pounds of reinforced concrete.

Call it Plan B for dealing with Iran, which recently revealed a long-suspected nuclear site deep inside a mountain near the holy city of Qom.

The 15-ton behemoth - called the "massive ordnance penetrator," or MOP - will be the largest non-nuclear bomb in the U.S. arsenal and will carry 5,300 pounds of explosives. The bomb is about 10 times more powerful than the weapon it is designed to replace.

The Pentagon has awarded a nearly $52 million contract to speed up placement of the bomb aboard the B-2 Stealth bomber, and officials say the bomb could be fielded as soon as next summer.

Pentagon officials acknowledge that the new bomb is intended to blow up fortified sites like those used by Iran and North Korea for their nuclear programs, but they deny there is a specific target in mind.

The Obama administration has been careful not to take military action off the table even as it reaches out to Iran with historic talks this month. Tougher sanctions are the immediate backup if diplomacy fails to stop what the West fears is a drive for a nuclear weapon.

The new U.S. bomb would be the culmination of planning begun in the Bush years. The Obama administration's plans to bring the bomb on line more quickly indicate that the weapon is still part of the long-range backup plan.

Of course the Russians say they have a better one...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs

[RF]

Is it up for sale?

[Karl Heidenreich]

Have to be sold with the bomber... Good deal 2 x 1.

[RF]

With Iran, I think that formally the UN should deal with any questions of Iran breaking its international obligations where no other country is actually attacked. If attack is threatened - presumably that would be Israel - then they can defend themselves, as they have in the past.

Now that Iran has announced a stepping up in its nuclear facilities it becomes more likely that Israel or some other country could strike at Iran as a self defence measure.

Rather ironic really, Iran is anti-western but uses western imported technology to build up its armaments and industrial production. Talk of biting the hand that feeds you.....

[hammy]

At 15 tons , that thing is only 50% bigger/heavier than the WW2 British Grand Slam ( 10 tons ), big sister to Tallboy ( 6 tons ), and both designed ( originally ) to do the same thing , bunker-busting .
Clap an advanced guidance system ( Like Paveway ) onto the nose of either of those to "fly" the bomb accurately down to the target and both would work still today , although they would have less "Ooomph" than this beast .

I was very impressed with the colour photos Jose put up on the Tirpitz topic , showing Tallboy explosion craters on the shore nearby . These clearly show that the bombs work as intended , to penetrate deep into the ground and explode creating a "Camouflet" -- a spherical underground chamber -- and in doing so sending a radial outwards shockwave to cave in nearby reinforced concrete structures -- in the same way as a mine or torpedo knocks a hole through into a ship , using the water as tamping for the charge , except here the surrounding rock and earth is doing the tamping for you .
The "lid" over the camouflet is ruptured and collapses into the hole , leaving a characteristically steep sided crater , still very evident in Norway 65 years later .

Why all the fanfares for a fairly straightforward bit of established technology ? I suppose the hard bit is dangling the thing on an aeroplane that wasn't schemed to carry it , so that it doesn't rip away when the G-forces double or treble the apparent weapon weight on the bomb shackles .

Now where did I put me spanners ?

[RF]

Why all the fanfares for a fairly straightforward bit of established technology ?

No doubt its a lot of spin on US bombing capabilities. The real question comes when it is put to the test of having to be delivered......