Now that's a BOMB !
Unless I am mistaken, all B-2 ordnance is internally carried.
I find it hard to credit that any air-launched weapon could penetrate 200' of concrete and still be in a fit state to detonate, unless it was tipped with a thermal lance.
30,000 lbs is impressive. I remember an exchange visit with 8th SOS at Hurlbert Field, when they gave us a look at the 15,000 lb MOAB (Mother of all Bombs) (Daisy Cutter ?) which they dropped in both Vietnam and GW1 I believe. That was some size of bomb, I assume this is twice as massive.
Smudge
Smudge
Correction time.
MOAB is NOT Daisy Cutter. Daisy Cutter was BLU-82. 15,000 pound bomb.
Delivered from either a C-130 or an MC-130 transport aircraft.
The BLU-82 was retired in 2008 and replaced with the more powerful MOAB aka GBU-43, a 22, 500 pound bomb.
There is some rumor that the Russians have developed a large bomb like this, non-nuclear, that they claim is about four times more powerful than MOAB. Not sure what they call it, most likely
Blotdachitouttayovksy
MOAB is NOT Daisy Cutter. Daisy Cutter was BLU-82. 15,000 pound bomb.
Delivered from either a C-130 or an MC-130 transport aircraft.
The BLU-82 was retired in 2008 and replaced with the more powerful MOAB aka GBU-43, a 22, 500 pound bomb.
There is some rumor that the Russians have developed a large bomb like this, non-nuclear, that they claim is about four times more powerful than MOAB. Not sure what they call it, most likely
Blotdachitouttayovksy
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 28th Oct 2013 at 20:33.
Carried by what aircraft?
EDIT: I looked it up. Lancaster.
Way to go RAF!
EDIT: I looked it up. Lancaster.
Way to go RAF!
Last edited by Lonewolf_50; 28th Oct 2013 at 20:37.
Suspicion breeds confidence
Grand Slam was not as effective as you might think against hardened targets as it had a tendency to break up. 6 tons of Torpex still makes quite a mess tho.
In fact both Tallboy and Grand Slam were designed to go down the side of concrete structures to cause an earthquake effect to break the foundations. In the case of plain ground look at the pictures of the Saumer Tunnel. One at either end and one by accident in the middle.
Originally Posted by mad_jock
I don't know why the MIL-STD 709C ammunition colour code chart is freely available on the internet.
Suspicion breeds confidence
I recommend a very good book called "A hell of a bomb". Complete history of both. Also recommend reading the history of the bunker called Valentin.
Last edited by Navaleye; 28th Oct 2013 at 21:27.
Actually fellas, thread drift, but in a geeky kind of way, that Economist article about ultra high performance concrete is very interesting.
Have a look at the Ductal website - amazing house and structures built with the stuff - ductility approaching steel.
You learn something everyday.
Have a look at the Ductal website - amazing house and structures built with the stuff - ductility approaching steel.
You learn something everyday.
Suspicion breeds confidence
A quick check up says it was the Tallboy that was the most the most effective against hardened targets. Grand Slam was an extension of the original idea but neither were designed to defeat 20+ feet of reinforced concrete with a bomb trap on top. The light case relative to its weight/speed worked against it. I doubt the 200 feet claim for the US weapon and note this is not an official claim.
I have been on the roof of the Uboat pens at Brest and seen what a Tallboy can do and you would be astonished.
I have been on the roof of the Uboat pens at Brest and seen what a Tallboy can do and you would be astonished.
I doubt the 200 feet claim for the US weapon and note this is not an official claim.
)
I remember reading recently about a German bomb disposal team dealing with an unexploded 22,000 pounder. I suppose the only real difference between that and a 250 pounder when you have your stethoscope on the casing is that your mates are standing further back.