It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


US giant bunker-buster bomb project rushed since Iran's Qom site discovered

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 08:44 AM
Qom wasnt that the place were that huge earthquake was in 2007 or so? maybe HAARP can get the job done

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 09:49 AM

Originally posted by intelgurl

The MOAB is not the weapon being discussed here. MOAB is an airburst weapon (GBU-43) The Massive Ordinance Penetrator is the GBU-57.

Thanks for pointing that out intelgurl .
I`m always getting my M.O.P`s mixed up with my M.O.A,B`s.

The GBU-57A/B MOP is so immense it can only be carried by either a B-52 or a B2a Stealth bomber. The weapon’s explosive power is 10 times greater than its predecessor, the BLU-109. Moreover, the GBU-57A/B MOP is one third heavier than the MOAB dubbed the Mother of All Bombs.

1O time greater explosive power than the M.O.A.B .....

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:00 AM

Originally posted by intelgurl
There seems to be a bit of confusion regarding how a nuclear detonation is detected.

When a nuke is detonated it emits xenon isotopes into the atmosphere.
A dirty bomb, or even a strike on a nuclear facility would not produce xenon isotopes.
These xenon isotopes are sniffed out by the Constant Phoenix WC-135 aircraft which analyzes the particles in the atmosphere.


That's interesting
Also there are the sats that detect the very specific light signature - an incredibly brief bright flash follower by a slower growing flash... I don't know about nowadays but the sats have been up there a long time, they prob have replaced with a better system on the same lines.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:05 AM

Originally posted by mikerussellus
I'm just looking forward to the liberals justifying THIS war as compared to the ones they hated when Bush was president.

a) if Obama does nothing about Iran's WMD programs, you'd be screaming that he's "weak on security"
b) if he does anything at all, you call him a hypocrite
c) a+b shows that the only agenda you have is hate of Obama

I certainly do hope that the war with Iran will never happen, whatever it takes to avoid it. However, the comparison you make with Bush and HIS war is entirely inane: there was not solid evidence of Saddam successfully pursuing a weapons program. The whole thing was based on FALSE pretext. With Iran, the evidence of nuclear and missile technology is plentiful. I can't believe you aren't capable of comprehending this. I guess that's the way some people are.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:19 AM
in WW2 the 22.000lb `grand slam` free fall bomb was used at the Valentin submarine pens in march 27th 1945

of all the 22 ton bombs used against it - only 2 penetrated the 7 meters of reinforced concrete

the USA had this bomb and used it as the M110

so a 22000 lb weapon , freefalling at mach 1 or about can breach 7 meters of concrete or around 40 meters of earth

but suddenly the same thing 60 years later can breach 10 times that?

sorry but its bollocks.

Altering the shape of the projectile to incorporate an ogive shape has yielded substantial results. Rocket sled testing at Eglin Air Force Base has demonstrated penetrations of 100 to 150 feet (46 m) in concrete when traveling at 4,000 ft/s (1,200 m/s). The reason for this is liquefaction of the concrete in the target, which tends to flow over the projectile. Variation in the speed of the penetrator can either cause it to be vaporized on impact (in the case of traveling too fast), or to not penetrate far enough (in the case of traveling too slow). An approximation for the penetration depth is obtained with an impact depth formula derived by Sir Isaac Newton

4000 feet per second is mach 3.5.

the laws of physics are at work here - as nasa has shown.


detecting nuclear weapons:

and all those lovely supporters of those wonderful and clean nuclear bunker busters:

a surface burst nuke is nothing like clean - drop one on iran and india will be going mental for killing there population

[edit on 28/9/09 by Harlequin]

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:39 AM
Disclaimer: I'm a theist but not of the Abrahamic faiths. I have minor biblical scholar and scriptural skills. Also I am not a scientific/legal or medical expert in any field. Beware of my Contagious Memes! & watch out that you don't get cut on my Occams razor.All of this is my personal conjecture and should not be considered the absolute or most definitive state of things as they really are. Use this information at your own risk! I accept no liability if your ideology comes crashing down around you with accompanying consequences.

Explanation: S&F!

1stly the conventional warhead could be replaced with a shaped small nuclear charge that was designed for use in the 1950's Atomic bomb propelled Orion Spaceship. The small davey crocket sized atomic charge [about 0.1kt] was detonated a specific standoff distance [about 40 mtrs] from the ablation plate and due to the bomb being completely wrapped in a depleted uranium tamper except for a small opening covered with a cheap styrofoam thru which the resulting blast was directed and up to 90% of the nuclear explosion could be directed forward! A single explosion would lift a 4000 metric ton spaceship at over 30mtrs/second at some intense G's
If the bunker buster in question could also solidly back fill the hole it drills by its sheer momentum and robust design, then that would create a tamper/plug that would help contain the blast and direct it as well! The book went into minor details of "sputter code" and ablation levels that corroded the ablation plate and these exact codes are still very secret and classified to this day, but the book itself hinted at it being very small and was compensated for by a thin film of oil! Amazingly they totally overlooked the problems of spalling, but that could of been compensated for by a whipple shield!
Still 0.1KT is nothing to be scoffed at and a failed zero yeild PlumBob test that resulted in an 0.3kt explosion inside a underground test shaft launched a 100kg [approx] solid metal manhole cover at over 6 times earths escape velocity a couple of years before sputnik! Imagine just the kinetic kill factor of 100kg moving at about 60km/second as it slams into the target! And even at 1/3rd the speed its still spectacular damage when you crank out the actual numbers!

2ndly I'm sure the Iranians would have pre-empted the use of EMP attacks against their facilities by hardening and shielding them in various ways...a very large farady cage comes to mind!

3rdly the Iranians have easily enuff enriched uranium to make a very dirty and inefficient gun type Atomic weapon as 400Kg of uranium 235 enriched to 20% is a super critical mass and 600Kg of 15% enriched is also a supercritical mass and with nearly 10,000 centrifuges [1/6th full industrial requirement for 80% enrichment [weapons grade] over 40yrs] they apparently have refined a couple of metric tons to between 5% and 10% enriched and of course they can further refine this again and still stay under the LEU 20% enrichment limit!
They have a French supplied nuclear reactor that does require LEU which they wish to self supply and it can get up to 19.5% enriched before it starts breaking IAEC regulations. Plus they have ove 200 tons of UF6 gas stored in deep underground tunnels and if they somehow were able to mine and fully refine the whole countries uranium 235 reserves [500ppm over 100km^2 area] to 100% enriched then they would have just about 1.5 tons and this would produce about 30 littleboy sized bombs!
So whilst standing totally within the Atomic rules for civilian energy they can and already do have the knowhow and resources to do this and could just as easily accelerate any atomic weapons program as the US has done with its bunker busters! Lets NOT push them to have a knee jerk reaction and pre-emptively strike at ourselves as we'll only have ourselves to BLAME!

Personal Disclosure: As an Australian Citizen I am against the pre-emptive use of such weapons by the Australian military and or any of its allies regardless of conventional or nuclear warhead capability or enemy targets! I'm also specifically against its use in Iran regardless of whether they actually have nuclear WMD production capacity and or actual devices! I'm against the total lack of fairness in attitude by Israel,USA and Britain concerning this nuke issues and beyond that their hypocrisy when dealing with Pakistan,India and North Korea on the same exact issues! I might just make a rant on it because it galls me so much! Expect a thread soon!

P.S. The engineering is awesome....pity those smarts aren't put to better use!

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:47 AM
reply to post by OmegaLogos

do you know how difficult it is to enrich uranium from the 5% or so they have it at for fuel to the 85% needed for a viable weapon?

actually any uranium can be used as a viable explosive device -there is proof of ancient natural nuclear reactor

and with enough of a `heap` of uranium and a strong enough netron source , in theory any amount can go critical - but the `any amount` is upwards of a pile of over 1000 tons of natural uranium.....

which is why its enriched to 85% or more - the purer the uranium , the smaller the amount you need.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:18 AM
reply to post by SLAYER69

Haha not one minority in that picture. Just a bunch of war mongering caucasians. How ironic. Probably all a bunch of bible beating republicans too. My uncle is an engineer at Boeing and wears that shoe.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:31 AM
Hooray for the US and it's never-ending quest for 'better killin'."

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:32 AM

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
reply to post by SLAYER69

Haha not one minority in that picture. Just a bunch of war mongering caucasians. How ironic. Probably all a bunch of bible beating republicans too. My uncle is an engineer at Boeing and wears that shoe.

Bottom right, there is one in fatigues.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 11:54 AM
reply to post by Harlequin
Disclaimer: As elsewhere!

Explanation: Did you not read the info I gave above as it can be easily checked to see if I'm a disinfo agent or not....

RE: Critical Mass [wiki] Specifically "The critical mass for lower-grade uranium depends strongly on the grade: with 20% U-235 it is over 400 kg; with 15% U-235, it is well over 600 kg."... :shk:

Personal Disclosure: Yes I do know just how hard it is and they only need 20% and about 1/2 ton to do it and just for your info I offer up these tidbits...

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:21 PM
reply to post by Harlequin

Its very difficult. The US did not build those huge processing plants at Oak Ridge during the Manhattan project because it was easy. I have been taking a hard look at the development of the atomic bomb and the period after as a possible focus of study for whn I get my butt in gear and start in on my masters in History.

All interested should read "Spying on the Bomb" which looks into US intel activites regarding other countries nuclear program with alot of detail about SA and Isreals.

Getting to 5% coul dbe done at a high school. getting to weapons grade is what makes it hard. Otherwise EVERYBODY would have had one by now.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 12:56 PM
reply to post by princeofpeace

Theyve had bunker busters for years. This new version isn't as new as you might think. Got to see the last MOAB's going off down range at eglin AFB, that was 3 years ago. Also back in 91 I had the duty to drop a FAE. If youve never seen a fuel air explosion bomb go off let me give you a hint. Think tactical nuke without the radation. The concussion wave going out flattens everything, its awe inspiring. And Now there building something bigger. And some crazy general will use it. Its like they have a new shinny toy and they can't wait to see how much damage it does. These folk are the real scarry one.

There all WAR WACKY..

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 01:31 PM

Originally posted by FredT
reply to post by Harlequin

Getting to 5% coul dbe done at a high school. getting to weapons grade is what makes it hard. Otherwise EVERYBODY would have had one by now.

That's why they've build about 6000 centrifuges to get to the 93,5 % U235(US standard)weapons grade..And that's apart from the unexplained plutonium found in the facilities...

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 02:09 PM
Since my sole experience is with conventional explosives, I was starting to feel like a dumbass until Omega filled in some of what I was thinking.

Just a small substitution.

Then you don't get all the flash/bang, and any radiation could be blamed on the contents of the bunker that was just destroyed.

Then, you could just shake your finger and repeat, "Bad Iranians! Bad!"

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 03:33 PM
reply to post by Foppezao

takes more than 6000 to make any meaningful production , and unexplained plutonium?

that the IAEA then explained 3 months later:

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 04:44 PM
I think it would be a simple matter to justify a war with Iran. They are developing nuclear capabilities. While they *claim* it is for peaceful purposes, they have no compelling need for nuclear energy, since they are sitting on one of the largest petroleum reserves known. They're hardly starving for energy, are they?

Oh, and they're actively developing missiles and testing them. That is not the behavior of a peaceful country. It is the behavior of a country that is flexing its new-found muscle, hoping to intimidate others.

Attacking Iraq and Afghanistan were far less justified. The "weapons of mass destruction" that Iraq supposedly had were known to be nonexistent. The threat was used to "justify" attacking the country. The US was angry over 9/11, and we had to go kick someone. Iraq was the lucky one to get kicked. They had nothing to do with 9/11, of course. Osama bin Laden and most of the terrorists were Saudis, not Iraqis. But to the US, any old Arab will do (of course, Iraq's population is mostly non-Arab, but the US doesn't bother with such trifles).

As for the US and its "bunker-busters", I wouldn't read too much into that. That's probably just the US hoping to keep all its options open, or perhaps using that implicit threat as leverage for any negotiations with Iran. Sure, the US *might* use these bombs, but it's probably mostly for show.

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 05:37 PM
reply to post by chiron613

a little more research before you post:

iran is a net importer of fuel - they might have a huge reserve of oil - but haven`t got the infrastructure to fraction it down - heck , another hurricane lke katrina and the USA hasn`t got the infrastructure when its blown away!

so yes , iran actually has a need for a nuclear power station - which they`ve built and fueled

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 06:19 PM
reply to post by Harlequin
Disclaimer: As elsewhere!

Explanation: So you seriously didn't read the link. Its talking about 2006 as if that was in the future and that was over 3yrs ago and that exact article goes on to show that only about 200 centrifuges are required to achieve weapons grade enrichment of U235. Even if that was not the case lets do some maths here....

50,000 centrifuges are required to produce 160,000 SWU /year

Irans current known no# of centrifuges is about 8500-10,000 and I'll be using the lower of those 2 values.

So 8,500 centrifuges, which is just over 1/6th the required no# for full production capabilities, can produce approx 26,500 SWU/ yr and as the article shows this is enough to make 6 HEU [WG] bombs in a single year with some room to spare! how olds that article again..over 3yrs! They could have EASILY made 1 bomb a yr since 2006 and could therefor have 3 weaponized devices currently in their possession!

Personal Disclosure: Even a single nuke of anykind is meaningful production.

reply to post by chiron613

Explanation: Its No simple matter to justify immoral and illegal actions of war, especially when one doesn't hold any moral high ground on this issue at all. Yeah TPTB might just con the homefront but goodluck with convincing the rest of the world, allies included! Remember the EPIC FAIL of NOT finding those WMD's in Iraq when it was the basic premise for war! :shk:

As for starving for energy they are severely restricted in the amount of oil refinery infrastructure and this limits the amount they can refine cheaply in house and are forced to import the refined stuff to meet demand. Also the worlds hunger for oil isn't going to go away any time soon and that means that their resource is running out and by the time it does maybe there will be so many more Nuke power plants that their ability to source nuke energy cheaply, to replace the lack of oil that they will eventually have to endure, might have itself dried all up and so they're hopping on literally the last nuke powered stagecoach outa dodge!

Finally isn't Britain, USA and Israel all designing and testing old and new military systems all the time! Let me just focus on the USA's recent actions in this exact same field of play!.....

See Here! [bbc news] [years ago but since 2000]

And Here! [cbs8] [within the past year!]

Personal Disclosure: I'm more than slightly disgusted that this pre-emptive justification rort has begun again!

posted on Sep, 28 2009 @ 10:54 PM
More than likely Iran already has a crude device or two. I mean the tests that the N Koreans carried out weren't just for them. Why were Iranian officials in attendence?

Alos Iran makes (what some would consider) boisterous claims about their retaliation if someone attacks them. Im pretty sure its because they have a "couple up their sleeve" right now but that is not where they intend to stop. I also imagine other "powers" know this and thats why we havent seen a whole lot of "action".

Iran will either become a nuclear power or they will be stopped but it will be at a VERY heavy price.

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in