Posted on 06/26/2018 1:50:07 PM PDT by Eddie01
The US Air Force is seeking to modify its B-52 Stratofortress heavy bombers to accommodate carrying and delivering the so-called “mother of all bombs,” a creative nickname given to the Massive Ordnance Air Blast (MOAB) weapon, according to a new report.
The bomb made waves last April when a US military plane dropped a GBU-43/B MOAB on an allegedly Daesh-run terrorist camp in Afghanistan. The bomb is regarded as the most powerful non-nuclear bomb in the US weapons arsenal. April 13, 2017, marked the first employment of the bomb in combat.
The Air Force is seeking information from industry regarding "sources that may possess the expertise, capabilities and experience to meet the qualification requirement" to deploy the bombs onto the B-52, one of the oldest pieces of military equipment still used by the US, according to a Request For Information released June 21.
When the weapon was dropped in 2017, air crews simply released the bomb from a cradle within a C-130 cargo plane, letting gravity and Global Positioning System-satellite guidance do the rest of the work.
The Stratofortress planes have "limitations" when it comes to carrying heavy weapons beneath its wings, according to the RFI, which require modifications to carry munitions heavier than 5,000 pounds. B-52s typically carry most of their weapons in an internal weapons bay, but the bay doors are only 28 feet long and the MOAB is 30 feet long.
"When [the current external weapons pylon] was introduced, there wasn't a requirement nor did anyone foresee a need to carry weapons heavier than 5,000 lb," the document noted.
US Air Force Working on Baby ‘Mother of All Bombs’ The new external weapons pylon will need to carry "multiple weapons in the 5,000 to 20,000 lb weight class," the military procurement document says. Each MOAB clocks in right around 20,000 pounds.
As reported by Sputnik News, in the realm of non-nuclear weapons, Russia's "Father of All Bombs," a thermobaric explosive, has a power of 88,000 pounds of TNT, roughly four times the destructive capability of MOAB. MOAB is also a thermobaric weapon, or fuel air explosive, which uses dispersed fuel to create a volatile air mixture that generates a colossal percussive air blast upon detonation.
B-52s can also carry nuclear weapons, which, ironically enough, are much smaller than the MOAB yet thousands of times more powerful. The B53 thermonuclear bomb, which the B-52 could carry two of, only weighed around 8,850 lbs each, according to the Nuclear Weapons Databook.
The B36 could carry WWII era 26,000 lb Grand Slam bombs. Built by Wallis of dambuster fame. B52 should be able to do the same since early nukes were that heavy. B1 as well - they have a longer bomb bay.
Diameter of the MOAB?
I was in the Air Force in the early 60’s, an air-to-air missile guidance specialist (Falcon). While stationed at a SAC base in Northern Maine, the 52’s would come in to land at the beginning of the runway, which was adjacent to the missile shop where I worked. How majestic they were, time-after-time as they landed.
But, since they are so old, and seem to be still be up to the job at hand, I’ve often wondered why they don’t just dig up the old plans, modernize it, and build some more of them.
I guess they have their reasons.
How many ships sink without turning turtle?
I can think of only one. The Titanic.
I believe the ship’s engineers invented counter-flooding on the spot to kept the ship level enough to launch the lifeboats from their davits.
As a result over 700 passengers survived. The engineers didn’t.
If you don’t understand that, you aren’t an engineer. Or a radioman...
Yes. But there important differences.
Grand Slam and Tallboy were very heavy, armour piercing headef, gravity nombs. Unguided but spin stabilized by their tailfins.
MOAB ‘llike the Daisy Cutter is a pallet loaded, parachute stabilized, fuel air aerosol surface nomb. Very, very big surface bomb.
There is rocket propelled earth piercer with terminal guidance for subsurface targets.
I was at Ellsworth during the transition from B52s to B1s.
The B1 is loud, like the F4 and not as agile landing in weather. I was on West Aux alert there when the B1 crashed on landing in Nov. 88.
The best view I had of B52s taking off was in 1978 during the first Global Shield exercise. We just returned from Missile crew alert and went out to the end of the main runway to watch the first exercise MITO launch of bombers and tankers. That was a real experience when everything except the alert birds came blasting down the runway at minimum interval. Gave you a real appreciation for SAC planning and training.
Terrible editing there Cook.
Ping.
Just my thoughts. Three feet shorter and more powerful chemicals.
That’s what I’m thinking. 85% would likely be close enough.
Or use two, just to be sure.
Just reclassify a few C-130s as B-130s and Bob’s your uncle.
Loring? Is the base still there? I was stationed at Pease in the 80s, historical 509th Bomb Wing. All gone now. Great memories! Perfect for a young man not knowing what to do after high school.
Redesign the MOAB to fit into a B-2. That way it’s easier to get up close and personal with assorted mullahs and Russian mercenaries.
BUFF’s are coal powered.
Watched a show about the GS. Fascinating for it’s time.
Yes, Loring...27th Fighter Interceptor Squadron. I think it closed back in the 80’s. It’s now “Loring Business Center”...a shadow of its former self.
I enjoyed it up there, cold and all.
Watched a show about the GS. Fascinating for it’s time.
No, definitely closed. I was station at Caswell AFS, a jog north and east of Loring, north of Limestone, ME, 1975/76.
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.