Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

U.S. Outfitting B-2's with Monster Bunker Buster Bombs -- Iran May Be Target
NewsMax ^ | July 27, 2007 | NewsMax

Posted on 07/26/2007 6:52:46 PM PDT by kddid

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 last
To: Nathan Zachary

“Don’t need explosives with that kind of weight at velocity. The kinetic energy alone will make quite the crater. Most likely they are guided depleted uranium reinforced concrete.”

Nope. Do a Google search on “MOP penetrator testing”.

The MOP is made from a used howitzer barrel, and is roughly 25,000 lb. of casing along with 5,000 lb. of explosive. Apparently it needed to be that big to couple with the tunnel structure for max damage when the explosive goes off.

The kinetic energy is to penetrate, the explosive is to destroy whatever got penetrated. ;-)


81 posted on 07/27/2007 4:20:01 AM PDT by PreciousLiberty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: ASA Vet

I added an extra zero just for effect.


82 posted on 07/27/2007 5:33:26 AM PDT by boomop1 (there you go again)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: kddid
U.S. Outfitting B-2's with Monster Bunker Buster Bombs -- Iran May Be Target (my emphasis)

Either that or Dearborn ;-)

83 posted on 07/27/2007 5:44:51 AM PDT by varon (Allegiance to the constitution, always. Allegiance to a political party, never.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Re: A Moab is just an improved daisy cutter.

True... Film at 11!

But the disparity of the two's dimensions was my point... that you evidently did not get.

Thus, we recap:

Re:

Where did you get this photo and the source that it is one of the 30,000 20.5 feet long MOP as it certainly does not look to be either 20.5 feet long nor large enough to be 30,000 pounds...

Here is a 21,600-pound MOAB... and it is bigger (It is 30 feet long with a diameter of 40.5 inches) than the one you have pictured.

Now, Nathan... you got it?

84 posted on 07/27/2007 6:04:17 AM PDT by Bender2 (A 'Good Yankee' comes down to Texas, then goes back north. A 'Damn Yankee' stays... Damn it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: badpacifist

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1868913/posts


85 posted on 07/27/2007 11:35:58 AM PDT by Gondring (I'll give up my right to die when hell freezes over my dead body!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: bioqubit

Good point! Never thought of it quite like that before. Can we always identify an entrance or exit point from the air (or from orbit)?


86 posted on 07/27/2007 5:50:16 PM PDT by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Nathan Zachary
Not even close. A 100 MT nuke is much smaller.

Since we don't have any, and never did, how would you know?

The largest bomb ever dropped, although not an operational wepons, but rather a test device, was the Soviet Tsar Bomba of 1961, it did have yield of around 100 MT, but was much larger and quite a bit heavier than this bomb.

The largest yield US weapon was the B/MK-41 deployed '61 to '76. It had a 25 MT yield and weighed 10,670 lbs. It was close to the same size, not weight, as the MOP.

This is a photo of the test version, I used it because it has people in the photo for referance.

Since it weighed 10,000 lbs and only yield 25MT. I suspect a 100 MT bomb could be built that would be about the 30,000 lbs of the MOP.

Or did you mean a 100 KT weapon, which indeed can be be very small.

this 30,000 lb thing is a flying hunk of concrete

Not really, most of the weight is not explosive, just as with most "iron bombs", but has 5,300 lbs of explosive filler too. The thing also has to survive the penetration so it can explode, thus it needs a massive structure, which is heavy. The weight also helps the penetration of course.

87 posted on 07/28/2007 3:15:03 PM PDT by El Gato ("The Second Amendment is the RESET button of the United States Constitution." -- Doug McKay)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Dick Bachert

calling cowards is easy. Use them and after its over, their grandchildren will know not to mess with anyone.

In the ME, isn’t that the point.


88 posted on 07/30/2007 9:02:34 PM PDT by edcoil (Reality doesn't say much - doesn't need too)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: kddid

Considering a potential bombing of Iran, leave no Iranian stone unturned.


89 posted on 06/26/2009 7:02:34 AM PDT by Chad_the_Impaler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ...
The company is doing the work under a seven-month, $2.5 million contract awarded June 1 by the Air Force's Aeronautical Systems Center, Wright Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio.
North Korea, not Iran. Never a Muzzie state, not this "president".
90 posted on 06/26/2009 7:28:18 AM PDT by SunkenCiv (https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/__Since Jan 3, 2004__Profile updated Monday, January 12, 2009)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SunkenCiv

That makes more sense ...and the threat is more immediate.


91 posted on 06/26/2009 11:38:02 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (Support Geert Wilders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 90 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-91 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
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

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