Bunker-buster could affect U.S.-Iran relations

Kansas.com ^ | 11/6/2007 | SCOTT CANON

[SunkenCiv]

Bunker-buster could affect U.S.-Iran relations

...but only for about five seconds. Thanks SB.

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

Translation..."We are locked and loaded and ready to sortie, NOW!"

Exactly, he didn't say they couldn't be ready sooner... Just that they could be capable by late 2008. Of course, if they were ready next month, they'd still be capable by late 2008...

[CodeMasterPhilzar]

First, while it may be well within the bomb load (weight) capacity of the airframe, it is not dispersed. The weight (significant) is hanging off a single mount/release point. This may mean re-design of the internal bomb racks, or possible some kind of adapter that lets the weight hang from several hard points.

Second, you have to develop ground handling equipment to get the beast safely loaded into the aircraft.

Third, you have to determine the aerodynamic characteristics of the bomb so that you can predict when/where you need to drop it to guide it to a given point.

Fourth, you need to develop the "control laws" for the guidance system so that it actually hits what it is aimed at. It wouldn't do to have too much - it'd yaw all over the sky - too little and it might not be able to correct. Wrong time constant and it could oscillate... etc. etc.

Fifth, you have to do separation tests with the aircraft at various altitudes, airspeeds, attitudes, etc. You really, really don't want buffeting or some odd aerodynamic effect see-sawing the bomb on release and banging it back into the underside of your aircraft.

Sixth, you have to develop the simulation models to do the initial training for the air crews.

Then you finally have to drop a few of them to verify they work as expected, and give the crews some real-world training. Then you're ready...

[Seadog Bytes]

*grin* ...Thanks Phil!

[jonrick46]

Thanks for the excellent analysis. Hagel is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Such is how a traitor behaves.

[COBOL2Java]

It's years away, but I've always like the "Rods from God" tactic:

[End_Clintonism_Now]

(Ooops!!):

[tanknetter]

I am confident, but not certain of course that the B-2 is outfitted to carry over 30 Mk-83 general purpose 1,000 lbs dumb bombs. If I am correct, then the weight is not an issue.

The issue isn't going to be weight. It's going to be flight characteristics and stress on the airframe when the plane instantly looses 15 tons of weight. The B-2A is fly by wire, so the flight control software will need to be partially rewritten and thoroughly tested.

[Grampa Dave]

Excellent. The hate America Americans in Congress and the MMS are really upset with this new weapon.

[Seadog Bytes]

Only a few noticed. Maybe it’s time to just move on to the ‘testing’ phase...?

[potlatch]

Good graphic Phil. Those ‘fins’ or whatever, make me want to make them ‘spin’, lol.