Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

As a result of modernization, it became possible to launch Russian aerial bombs (FAB-250) from the ground.
X ^ | 3/28/24 | MD

Posted on 03/28/2024 8:04:45 PM PDT by hardspunned

As a result of modernization, it became possible to launch Russian aerial bombs from the ground, from the Tornado-S multiple rocket launcher. For this, engineers have developed a special kit consisting of an accelerating jet engine, folding wings and a control module.

(Excerpt) Read more at x.com ...


TOPICS: Military/Veterans
KEYWORDS: hardputinbot; killkillkillforpeace
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last
Holy Cow! Millions of Soviet era dumb aerial bombs (220 lbs of high explosive) are being converted to precision guided, ground launched missiles with a range of 60 miles! This is how the Russians are winning this war spending $70 Billion a year on their military while NATO spends $1.2 Trillion per year. How much MIC profit in $1.2T. How much profit in refurbishing last centuries dumb bombs?
1 posted on 03/28/2024 8:04:45 PM PDT by hardspunned
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: All

220 pounds of explosives is weak. The US SDB is about that and is rarely useful. 500 lbs is standard and that’s for the old MK82, onto which JDAM kits were attached.

As to adding guidance and mild propulsion to what is effectively an artillery shell, no big deal. Been done, by both sides, for years.

Russian tech is often superior, but this is not an example.

Now, what MAY be an example is the sheer availability of raw materials to make FAB3000 and 2000. Lots and lots of pounds of explosives. The US doesn’t have that. For over a year now the media’s obsession with drones has distracted from the reality that they can’t carry enough boomage to matter.


2 posted on 03/28/2024 8:13:12 PM PDT by Owen (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned

We destroyed most of our Cold War weapons as the latest Japanese Corporate Culture says to MINIMIZE INVENTORIES. So we told ourselves they were ‘obsolete’ and will never have a future use, and so all of that storage cost was saved.

Russia, though, is SO BACKWARDS that they weren’t up on Japanese Corporate Culture that they kept everything from the Cold War, being the TOTAL IDIOTS that the are...until now.

By they how’s our decommissioning of A-10’s, F-117s, and God knows what else, going?


3 posted on 03/28/2024 8:14:41 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Who cares about that? How much does Raytheon make warehousing a fifty year old dumb bomb? Let’s keep our “national defense” priorities straight here.


4 posted on 03/28/2024 8:21:02 PM PDT by hardspunned (Former DC GOP globalist stooge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned

“Who cares about that? How much does Raytheon make warehousing a fifty year old dumb bomb? Let’s keep our “national defense” priorities straight here.”

...and the thing is, we COULD have had both - private companies, but paying them to keep facilities, inventory, and skilled workers around for the day that Victoria Nuland’s lifelong dream of going to war against Russia was fulfilled. Yes, it would have added 5 to 10 percent to defense spending, but it was possible. But no, we turned our military industrial base into a skeleton of what it was...and then went on a warmongering rampage.

Really smart.


5 posted on 03/28/2024 8:27:19 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Hopefully well. Those are flying coffins these days against state of the art AA. We need better missiles instead!


6 posted on 03/28/2024 8:34:30 PM PDT by montaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: BobL

Can you just imagine if our military-industrial complex manufactured weapons using Just-In-Time manufacturing techniques? I worked at two different companies that implimented it, and both companies gave up eventually.
Machine breakdowns, raw materials that weren’t delivered “just in time” to be inserted into the manufacturing process, operator unreliability- you name it.
We never would’ve won WWII .


7 posted on 03/28/2024 8:36:30 PM PDT by telescope115 (I NEED MY SPACE!!! 🔭)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: montaine

“Hopefully well. Those are flying coffins these days against state of the art AA. We need better missiles instead!”

Same as we thought about our dumb bombs, right?

Trying to predict the next war or the what we’ll be against is ABSOLUTELY HOPELESS, which is why we keep getting our butts kicked, as clearly spelled out at the beginning of Top Gun (when they talked about how we got our asses kicked in dog fights...because our brass thought that dog fights were also ‘obsolete’ so we stopped training our pilots).

Sorry, but Russia GOT THIS RIGHT, which is that thinking you can figure out the next war is downright STUPID, so you hold on to what you have, and then if you need it, it is there. If not, it is a relatively small cost and you write it off.


8 posted on 03/28/2024 8:41:59 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Owen

An artillery shell holds about 25lbs of explosive. An aerial bomb holds 8 times as much. And the range of this device is about 4x the shell. And it is precision guided, unlike most arty shells. For the discriminating artillery man, what’s not to like?


9 posted on 03/28/2024 8:43:33 PM PDT by montaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned
If Russia is trying to launch FAB-250s from the Tornado-S MLRS launchers that means they must have run out of the 250KG MLRS rocket warheads.

They may think that using up MLRS rockets to lob the FAB-250s is a good stopgap measure, but to me the most interesting question is why they need to do that.

10 posted on 03/28/2024 8:44:16 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: telescope115

“Can you just imagine if our military-industrial complex manufactured weapons using Just-In-Time manufacturing techniques?”

Are you sure they don’t? Seems to me that the SAME IDIOTS that brought us JIT in the civilian world also infest the military world, although, as we’re learning the hard way, JIT only works for fairly level production rates, not for a surge requiring 5 to 10 times production.

As to your comment, you can add labor unions, particularly strikes, should the Democrats win the White House one more time.


11 posted on 03/28/2024 8:45:26 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Owen

Are you aware that most of a bomb’s weight is in the casing, not the explosive filler?


12 posted on 03/28/2024 8:46:21 PM PDT by doorgunner69 (When tyranny becomes law, rebellion becomes duty)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Owen

Yeah right! A 155 artillery shell has 22 lbs of explosive. 1/10 a FAB 250. A precision guided 155 round cost $100,000 per. Raytheon has enough paid lobbyists to cover Congress. They don’t need you out here trying to bamboozle the FR rubes.


13 posted on 03/28/2024 8:46:36 PM PDT by hardspunned (Former DC GOP globalist stooge)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: BobL
Sorry, but Russia GOT THIS RIGHT,

Yep, nothing says success like a 3 day military operation turning into a multi-year war.

Is getting all that Russian armor, ships, and aircraft destroyed part of the plan too?

Did you see the Russian SU-27 that Russia shot down yesterday over Crimea? Was that also part of getting it right?

14 posted on 03/28/2024 8:47:11 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned

How much does a 9M530 booster cost?


15 posted on 03/28/2024 8:48:59 PM PDT by freeandfreezing
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: freeandfreezing

Sorry, but this is an ADULT conversation, take your garbage elsewhere please.


16 posted on 03/28/2024 8:50:30 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BobL

If old, useless tech floats your boat, there’s the whole US Navy. Or the B-52. Or the Minuteman. Or the Abrams tank. Or the F-16.


17 posted on 03/28/2024 8:51:55 PM PDT by montaine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: montaine

“If old, useless tech floats your boat, there’s the whole US Navy. Or the B-52. Or the Minuteman. Or the Abrams tank. Or the F-16.”

My point is that old may very well have a use. Russia used their old tanks behind the lines as artillery, for example. I suspect that some of our WW2 weapons that we scrapped could have helped Ukraine immensely, particularly if they were modernized (at 10% of the cost of brand new weapons).


18 posted on 03/28/2024 8:55:01 PM PDT by BobL (Trump gets my vote, even if I have to write him in; Millions of others will do the same)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: All

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAB-500

The Russians label in kilograms. 2.2 pounds per kilogram. 300 Kg of explosives.

As for guidance, that will use ring laser gyros and linear accelerometers. If you do not understand phase locked loops, then you do not understand guidance.

I have a moment to instruct.

An RLG in basic form directs a laser at a mirrored wedge, splitting the beam to reflect rightwards and leftwards. Not very far away will be diagonal mirrors for the beams, to change their direction back to their original direction, though now offset a small distance. Then another pair of diagonal mirrors to direct the beams, plural, at sensors. The sampling of the laser is at high enough frequency to detect phase change if the device was physically rotated during beam traverse.

Meaning, the sinusoid of the beam will arrive at the receive point at slightly different phase with respect to the other beam. This phase difference is rotation during traverse. A delta theta.

Do this with three devices and you have X, Y and Z rotations, pitch roll and yaw. Then the measure of the linear accelerometer(s) will inform you of acceleration during that sample period, in the direction newly computed by the rotated RLG.

If you did not understand all of that . . . it won’t matter. Nothing typed here matters.


19 posted on 03/28/2024 9:55:32 PM PDT by Owen (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: hardspunned
This sounds like a oneupsmanship and disinfo operation from a pro-invasion telegram site, "Military Theme Z"

First, the Tornado-S already has Russian GLONAS (their GPS) guided MLRS rockets, and have used them in Ukraine since the start of the war. Second, the FAB-250 bomb has the same weight as the Tornado rockets. There is no way to fit more equipment one of these bombs, fit it in front of a booster, give greater range, and stay within the size and weight limits of the Tornado rocket and launcher.

Some pro-Invasion telegram channel puts out a video claiming a new wonder weapon. Does Russia really have or need it, when they already have GLONASS guided MLRS rocket and glide bombs? Sounds fishy.

20 posted on 03/28/2024 11:43:16 PM PDT by Widget Jr (🇺🇦 Слава Україні! 🇺🇦 🛇 CCCP 2.0 🛇)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-31 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson