< http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/dshtw.htm >
Posted on 06/16/2009 4:19:07 PM PDT by Fennie
The US Air Force today revealed plans to acquire a small arsenal of a new 13,600kg (30,000lb) penetrator bomb to deploy on Northrop Grumman B-2As in three years.
The USAF's public notice follows several years of testing the Boeing GBU57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP), which is designed to destroy hardened bunkers buried deeply underground.
The USAF plans to begin flight tests on the B-2A starting in June 2011 and reach operational status by June 2012, the USAF notice says. Integrating the MOP requires no changes to the B-2A's operational flight programme, avoiding a potentially costly and time-consuming recertification process.
The USAF's "best estimate" anticipates buying five test and 10 residual MOP bombs. But another five residual bombs could also be purchased, the USAF notice says.
In previous years, lawmakers had rejected the previous Administration's requests to fund a "quick reaction capability" to buy up to 20 MOPs for the B-2A fleet.
But the opposition from Congress appears to have faded, allowing the USAF to move forward with development and procurement of the 15t bunker-buster bombs.
(Excerpt) Read more at flightglobal.com ...
Big BOOM!
Hmmm what upgrades are in the pipe to the B2 to make it a B2-A model ?
Well at least the LSI can build a big bomb!
MOP up
Modify the bomb bay for a MOP?
Give some to Israel and have them run tests in Iran.
I assume these are for destroying the “compounds” of right wing militia in potentially secessionary states?
I wonder it they have orders to go after Levin in his bunker?
Isn’t a daisy cutter 5000 lbs? and this is 6 times greater?
whoa.
lol!
The first model in an aircraft series is the A model. Any future upgrades could result in a B-2B.
I understand your zeal, but if you give advanced military equipment to Israel, somehow the Chinese build a knockoff in a half dozen years.
Why bother? The B-2A is so weather-sensitive, fragile, and expensive that it’ll never be deployed to any hemispehere that contains a bunker that needs busting.
You learn something new everyday. With personal weapons systems it's a little different. A alpha-designator after the model name, would indicate some kind of variant. ie. M16, M16A1, M16a2 or M1911, M1911A1
Let's have a little bit of economy here! (I oppose government waste!)
Look, in a confined space, you don't get much more bang for your buck from sizing up your gross bang level, since you get so much unpleasantness from the initial, entry-level sort of bang, like a 750-pound bomb. One of those going off in an Iranian supersecret weapons lab would pretty well spoil everyone's day already.
So what happens if you take a garden-variety daisy-cutter, suitably accessorized to play an authentic period Jimi Hendrix guitar solo on the way down, screw several segments of a space-shuttle SRB onto its ass end programmed to ignite during descent, and see what that'll penetrate, break, and generally spoil? Bet it wouldn't leave much to MOP up.
The B-2 has been deployed to every bomber base in the USAF inventory. One even crashed off Guam. Birds, I think. The B-2 has been used extensively over Iraq and Afghanistan.
But the stealth bomber’s RAM coating is quite delicate like glass, unlike the Raptor’s durable and robust RAM coating, which can even take acid rain.
The BLU-82 Daisy Cutter is 15,000lbs if I remember correctly. The explosives account for 12,600lbs.
It’s replacement is the GBU-43 MOAB. That’s 22,000lbs with 18,000 of it being explosives. Unlike the unguided Daisy Cutter, the MOAB is GPS guided.
The MOP (GBU-57) is 30,000lbs with a 6,000lb warhead. The previous large bunker buster was the GBU-28 which was about 5,000lbs with a 600lb warhead.
How cheap is it to lose a B-52? During Operation Linebacker II, we lost about 15 of them to low tech SA-2 surface to air missiles.
A B-2 can go in without air superiority before hand. A B-52 can not.
Massive Ordnance Penetrater....
Sounds vulgar.
The MOP is a technology demonstration program funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency [DTRA] to develop a 30,000-pound conventional penetrating weapon that will defeat a specialized set of hard and deeply buried targets. The MOP is designed specifically to attack hardened concrete bunkers and tunnel facilities. Designed to be carried aboard B-2 and B-52 bombers and deployed at high altitudes, the MOP's innovative design features include a Global Positioning System navigation system. The 6 m [20 feet] long MOP features short-span wings and trellis-type tails. The 13,600 kg [30,000 lb] weapon contains a 2,700 kg [6,000 lb] explosive charge [some sources report "more than 5,300 pounds" of explosives]. MOP is designed to go deeper than any nuclear bunker buster and take out 25 percent of the underground and deeply buried targets worldwide. By some reports, it was expected to penetrate as much as 60 meters [200 feet through 5,000 psi reinforced concrete, and 8 meters [25 feet] into 10,000 psi reinforced concrete.
On 31 March 2006 Dr. James A. Tegnelia, the director of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency told American Forces Press Service [AFPS] that the MOP is a test article meant to understand the design principles on which a country might build a weapon to counter hard targets. "We are not in the process to convince anybody to field a large earth penetrator," he said. But the FY 2008 Global War on Terror Amendment of October 2007 stated [page 44-45] that "The Department requests $5.3 billion to procure equipment to replenish that consumed during combat and support operations in the theater. ... The Replenishment category also includes $0.3 billion for the development of specific technologies to improve the survivability of U.S. personnel and equipment. This includes funding for the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) for use on the B-2 bomber... " On 23 October 2007, John M. Donnelly reported in Congressional Quarterly that the request includes "$88 million to modify B-2 bombers so they can drop a Massive Ordnance Penetrator" and that White House stated the request for money to modify bombers was in response to "an urgent operational need from theater commanders."
---------------
Weight, total 13,600 kg [slightly less than 30,000 pounds]
Weight, explosive 2,700 kg [6,000 lb] "over 5,300 pounds"
Length 6 m / 20.5 feet long
Diameter 31.5-inch diameter
Control short-span wings and trellis-type tail
Penetration 60 meters [200 feet] through 5,000 psi reinforced concrete
40 meters [125 feet] through moderately hard rock
8 meters [25 feet] through 10,000 psi reinforced concrete
Contractors Boeing, Northrop Grumman
Sponsors Air Force Research Laboratory's Munitions Directorate
Defense Threat Reduction Agency.
---------------
More info at the link.
“Any future upgrades could result in a B-2B.”
Never. Obama is going to make sure there is never any B2B. He is furiously working on G2B. That’s marxism for ya.
Oh... sorry. Thought you were talking about Business to Business.
The “porkchop” is already considered the B-2A.
“Isn’t a daisy cutter 5000 lbs? and this is 6 times greater?”
The BLU-82 Commando Vault AKA “Daisy Cutter” is an unguided 15,000 pound bomb dropped from the back of a MC-130.
Oh my! That’s going ruin somebody’s day.
lol
How cheap is it to lose a B-52? I don’t dare try to put a price on the lives of the pilots and crew, but would ask that you please do the math for me - isn’t one B-2 more expensive to build than all the B-52s that were ever built?
In the USAF system the first production model in an aircraft series normally has no letter for the model... the second model get the "A"
http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=2551
The article itself stated the B-2A is a new model begin flight tests in June 2011 and reach operational status by June 2012...
The USAF plans to begin flight tests on the B-2A starting in June 2011 and reach operational status by June 2012
The B-2 model begin flight tests in 1989 and reach operational status in 1993
http://www.af.mil/information/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=82
Actually, you zoomed right into what I was getting at. The crew. You’re probably right about the cost of the machines.
Use the right tool for the job. The B-52 and B-2 are not interchangeable.
Thanks.
First production model of any aircraft type has the “A” designator under the current MDS (Mission, Design, Series) designation system.
A prototype test and evaluation aircraft would have a “Y” designator before the model type such as the YF-16 for example. When the F-16 was accepted into service, the designation was changed from YF-16 to F-16A.
http://www.designation-systems.net/usmilav/aircraft.html
“(5) Series Letter: Variants of a basic aircraft type are designated by a suffix letter. The first model always receives suffix “A” and subsequent series letters are to be assigned in strict sequence (omitting “I” and “O” to avoid confusion with numerals “1” and “0”). The series letter is actually a mandatory component of a conforming MDS, and therefore “plain” designations like “F-16” always designate the general type of aircraft and never a specific model.”
AIR FORCE JOINT INSTRUCTION 16-401:
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/dod/docs/16-401.htm#page1
“A2.7. Series (Required). Identifies the production model of a particular design number and later models representing major modifications that significantly alter the aerospace vehicle systems components or change the logistics support of the vehicle. Consecutive series symbols, starting with “A”, appear to the immediate right of the design number.”
As far as I can tell, the B-2 is (and always has been) referred to (technically) as the B-2A.
There have been some modifications, such as the changing of the internals of the bomb bay to accommodate ‘bunker busters’, yet it is still called the B-2A.
The reference to the ‘new’ B-2A is made mainly in regards to it being ‘qualified’ with the new ‘modifications’.
When they make minor changes to the design, the block number changes. The current B-2 fleet is up to the Block 30 standard.
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.