Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Bombing ISIS Island

Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Bombing ISIS Island

Old 12th Sep 2019, 11:30
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 278
Bombing ISIS Island

From the video one can see a number of bombs bursting simultaneously in pairs, as well they might if dropped simultaneously.
That led me to wondering if there is an advantage in detonating bombs in carefully spaced or sequenced patterns to enhance blast effect by simultaneous detonation.
Is this technique used? Artillery do similar tricks with simultaneous arrival of shells, why not the Air Force?

Last edited by meleagertoo; 12th Sep 2019 at 21:20.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2019, 11:31
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Kammbronn
Posts: 1,993
Originally Posted by meleagertoo View Post
Artillery do similar tricks with simultaneous arrival of shells, ...
More by luck than judgement.
diginagain is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2019, 11:34
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: attitude is nominal
Posts: 559
You can time it to hit synchronous. And even "store" rounds in the air and have them hit the same spot together with others that were fired afterwards.
Less Hair is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2019, 13:56
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: waterskiing 2 miles behind the ac...
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by meleagertoo View Post
advantage in detonating bombs in carefully spaced or sequenced patterns to enhance blast effect.
Is this technique used?
The Harrier GR7 Simulated Attack Profile with 500 lb freefall bombs was a pair split into singletons before the target, one flies a short dogleg route and arrives over the target from a different direction (90 degrees out) from the first which dropped at the time on target (TOT), then the second dropped at TOT + 30 seconds (IIRC). This is why you see the importance of time on target hammered into the students in certain tv programmes!

This SAP ensured concentration of force and surprise - all good principles of war!
Training Risky is offline  
Old 12th Sep 2019, 20:34
  #5 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,583
A full fig Vulcan attack, never actually practised had No 1 fly straight through, No 2 45 deg crossing 30 seconds later, No 3 45 deg from the other side. Finally No 4 straight through.

Had it all worked 40 tons in 90 seconds would have been a bit noisy. I haven't looked at the fall out for the following aircraft. The nearest we got was 3 aircraft in trail, 2 mile separation in simulated night over a route in Libya.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 08:24
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 1,098
Actually the spacing over target - for a low level highdrag/ lay down delivery ensured that you werenít fragged by previously employed weapons. 30 seconds or so spacing, when viewed from the ground could be described as anything other than surprise and concentration of force.
orca is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 08:45
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Near the coast
Posts: 1,604
TR

I feel sure you meant to say retarded bombs not free fall for your low level scenario.

Also, I think the OP was asking a subtly different question. I havenít seen the video he alluded to but from the wording I think he is asking if bombs were used in a way such that the blast effects of each weapon could be combined concurrently for extra effect.

Historically (I am certainly not about to discuss any current weapons or tactics) the blast and frag of multiple weapons were just used in the conventional sense. Drop as many as you needed to be sure of destroying the target.

Weapons technology has of course moved on since dumb 500/1000 pounders. Iím sure google can be used for further amplification.

BV
Bob Viking is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 09:58
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 25,412
The video showed detonation of 36 000 kg of ordnance in a very short period of time:

https://www.military.com/video/air-f...bs-isis-island
BEagle is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 10:08
  #9 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Central UK
Posts: 278
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
Also, I think the OP was asking a subtly different question. I havenít seen the video he alluded to but from the wording I think he is asking if bombs were used in a way such that the blast effects of each weapon could be combined concurrently for extra effect.
BV
Exactly that. Is a carefully placed group of simultaneous and converging shock-fronts more effective than the same number of individual shock-fronts over the same area?

From experience of hydrodynamics in a wave tank you'd certainly expect to see localised amplified wave effects.
meleagertoo is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 10:45
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: waterskiing 2 miles behind the ac...
Posts: 7
Originally Posted by Bob Viking View Post
I feel sure you meant to say retarded bombs not free fall for your low level scenario.

Also, I think the OP was asking a subtly different question. I havenít seen the video he alluded to but from the wording I think he is asking if bombs were used in a way such that the blast effects of each weapon could be combined concurrently for extra effect.

Historically (I am certainly not about to discuss any current weapons or tactics) the blast and frag of multiple weapons were just used in the conventional sense. Drop as many as you needed to be sure of destroying the target.

Weapons technology has of course moved on since dumb 500/1000 pounders. Iím sure google can be used for further amplification.

BV
Yes of course K RETs. It has been a long time...

I don't think mass application of bombs has been tried to maximise shockwave effects. The only thing I can think of that is kind of close (but not really) is a certain Tornado-mounted cruise missile, and I'm not going to discuss that here!
Training Risky is offline  
Old 13th Sep 2019, 11:14
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 484
Afaik, there has been lots of work done on hyperbaric weapons, albeit mostly for anti personnel applications.
Whether such effects were achieved in this instance is unknown, but the flat and open nature of the terrain is not helpful.
etudiant is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2019, 08:11
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: R4808E
Posts: 414
Could the USAF not have flown a C-130 over the island and given ISIS a 911 present, a MOAB?
Navy_Adversary is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2019, 09:26
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Nigeria
Age: 52
Posts: 4,468
212man is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2019, 09:32
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 646
I’m not sure using words like “infested” are helping though? Aren’t we supposed to be the good guys?
hunterboy is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2019, 18:04
  #15 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 1,625
Originally Posted by hunterboy View Post
Iím not sure using words like ďinfestedĒ are helping though? Arenít we supposed to be the good guys?
Aaah, now you're thinking. Slick music, sharply edited video, couple of Iraqi brass in shot and a couple of million dollars worth of HE wankfest to keep those munitions stock fully rotated, but strangely little detail of the target, weapons effect and the BDA. You might as well drop there as Tonapah, but let's not pretend it was anything other than a "us.gov" promotional video. A bit like a Staff College firepower demo without the intellect.
Two's in is offline  
Old 14th Sep 2019, 19:05
  #16 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,583
ORAC, 30 seconds apart with 10 second sticks gives just 20 seconds gaps. According to the ground defence commander at Stanley I think 20 seconds would have been nothing.
Pontius Navigator is offline  
Old 15th Sep 2019, 09:23
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 3,822
Surely a job for a single Bone - 84x Mk82s? Or 24x JDAMs in a single delivery?




Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 16th Sep 2019, 13:45
  #18 (permalink)  
I don't own this space under my name. I should have leased it while I still could
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Lincolnshire
Age: 76
Posts: 16,583
What the video did show was the impracticality of short interval laydown attacks on sand. Thinking back, I would have to check my log book for dates, but our tactics may have envisaged a pop up profile so we would have been above the debris zone.
Pontius Navigator is offline  

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.