It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

USAF to test 30,000 lb bunker-buster in 2006

page: 2
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 1 2005 @ 12:24 AM
link   
I'm glad of this...anything that will stop them from developing more nuclear weapons. I hope this is good enough for them. No need to make those bunker busting tactical nukes.


I can think of nothing worse than developing nuclear weapons for actual use instead of MAD.




posted on May, 1 2005 @ 12:25 AM
link   
Erm, no they are not, Tony238.
Saddam had them.
Iran has them.
North Korea has them.
Russia has them.
The US has them.
The list can go on.

Bunkers has been replaced with 'underground facilities.'




seekerof

[edit on 1-5-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 10:48 AM
link   
As seekerof said many countries have underground facilities and if anything in the last 15 years more are being built. This is mainly due to the vulnerability of surface targets to PGM's.

Even a 10kt bunker buster wouldn't destroy the deepest and most heavily hardened structures.

Deeply buried hardened structures are by far the most effective means of protecting critical facilities.



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 10:50 AM
link   
IIRC the London underground command bunkers are now open to the public... even the PM's hardened "crisis room"



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 11:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by rogue1
Even a 10kt bunker buster wouldn't destroy the deepest and most heavily hardened structures.

Deeply buried hardened structures are by far the most effective means of protecting critical facilities.


I just came across this piece from the New York Times..



Bunker-buster bomb plan won't work, study finds
- William J. Broad, New York Times
Thursday, April 28, 2005


The Bush administration's plan to develop a nuclear weapon that could penetrate the earth and destroy underground enemy bunkers while minimizing civilian casualties is flawed, the National Research Council concluded in a report made public Wednesday.

The report said the weapon could not go deep enough to eliminate fallout, as some advocates have asserted, and it estimated that the victims in a nearby city could range from a few hundred to more than a million, depending on factors such as the weather and population density.
www.sfgate.com.../c/a/2005/04/28/MNGM6CGNBO1.DTL&type=printable


Talk about an earthquake!



posted on May, 1 2005 @ 06:31 PM
link   
We all know that fallout will still occur however I think that remote facility's in mountains would have little population around them.
The military is more concerned with taking out the underground facility rather than local civilians nearby.
In order to eliminate fallout the nuke would have to dig more than 600ft in the mountain, with today's technology that is impossible with a nuke or regular missile.



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 03:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
We all know that fallout will still occur however I think that remote facility's in mountains would have little population around them.
The military is more concerned with taking out the underground facility rather than local civilians nearby.


the fallout from chernobyl effected most of europe and was even detected on the east coast.

a bit more than `local population`

[edit on 2-5-2005 by Harlequin]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 06:21 AM
link   
With 30000 lbs and its size it cant be used by B-1 and B-2. Dropping it from rear by c-17 lacks accuracy. How about putting it in B-52? This one maybye could take 2 of them


[edit on 2-5-2005 by Adam_S]



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Adam_S
With 30000 lbs and its size it cant be used by B-1 and B-2. Dropping it from rear by c-17 lacks accuracy. How about putting it in B-52? This one maybye could take 2 of them



Ummm, yes it can be carried by B-1 and B-2 bombers, 30 000lb is well within their bombload specs. the bomb will be long and thin with most of it's weight taken up by ballast



posted on May, 2 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   
What happened to the W-86 earth penetrator developed at LANL in the 70's ?



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
I do not believe that Accuracy or accurate delivery is a issue anymore with the guidance packages that are available and adaptable today for different bombing weapons. The airplane from which they are delivered doesnt seem to be a issue either. The issue is whether the guidance package can lock on to the laser beam or the GPS tracking system and hit its intended target.

Thanks
Orangetom



posted on May, 4 2005 @ 07:54 PM
link   
Westy, you hawk, the simple fact is that ANY type of fission device is a political weapon, not a military one and the US knows it. The only time they'll ever be used is if everything goes to hell in a handbasket. Small piddling backwoods conflicts like Iraq are nothing compared to what would prompt a government release of nuclear weapons. Kiss ass goodbye then.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1   >>

log in

join