[El Gato]

Why waste all that bomb bay space, put a few 100 mega ton nukes in there and be sure you get what you're after.

A This thing is probably about the size a modern 100 MT nuke would be, if we had any.

Actually many 10 or 100 KT nukes would be better. If they too were hardened bunker busters.

[PreciousLiberty]

“Actually many 10 or 100 KT nukes would be better. If they too were hardened bunker busters.”

Here’s what you need to know about the Trident Mk II:

“8 W88 300-475 kiloton MIRVs in a solid-fuel Mk 5 PBV”

That’s from globalsecurity.org...

[Nathan Zachary]

"This thing is probably about the size a modern 100 MT nuke would be, if we had any.

Not even close. A 100 MT nuke is much smaller.

This 30,000 lb thing is a flying hunk of concrete. The reason they work so good, is that they re dropped from Max altitude so kinetic energy is the force of the bomb.
It's like a 30,000 lb comet hitting the earth. No explosive needed! We dropped all kinds of concrete on Iraq.
Smaller ones are called 'low collateral damage bombs', also contain no explosives.

Want nuke specs?
http://nuclearweaponarchive.org/Usa/Tests/index.html

Enjoy