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.

 

The MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast)

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 10:58 PM
link   
Well, I recently posted a comment talking about the efficiency of the MOAB (Massive Ordnance Air Blast) in battle, and thought it would be a great idea to create a thread delving into more detail about this hidden gem of weaponry.

What is the MOAB?

The MOAB or Massive Ordnance Air Blast Bomb is a bomb developed in 2002 by L. Weimorts Jr for use by United States Military.

The MOAB contains approx 8.48 tonnes of H6 explosive compound at a rate of 1.35 times more powerful than its sister component TNT Trinitrotoluene.

On March 11th 2003 the MOAB made its first walk to Eglin Air Force Base in Florida, where it was tested for the first time using Tritonal as its explosive filler and then again in November of that year.

What made the MOAB special from the rest, laid within the MOABS style of detonation and share power within. With guidance capabilities, the MOAB is typically delivered from air by a C-130 Hercules. On the way down, base has the ability to guide the MOAB with accuracy every time.

Now to the special part, the part that gave the MOAB the title of being the most powerful non-nuclear device. The Detonation! The MOAB’s damage does not come from its explosion, but it comes from the shock wave it releases. The MOAB was designed and intended to detonate above ground rather than penetrate and explode as you often see with a missile. By doing so allows the MOAB’s destructive power to have a much greater range and radius.

Below is a video showing a small scale (fuel air explosive) demonstration of what the shock wave of a MOAB can do to close range targets. Remember, that MOAB has a greater shock wave than the one below.



Bomb Radius Damage caused by the MOAB below, from a 2003 article.


Up to 1,000 yards: Obliterates everything.

Up to 1 mile: Knocks people, tents, light buildings, cars and jeeps over within 1-mile radius.

Up to 1.7 miles: shock wave kills people, causes severe damage to buildings, equipment, blows trucks, tanks off road.

Up to 2 miles: causes deafness.

Up to 5 miles: shakes ground, breaks windows.

Up to 30 miles: 10,000 foot high mushroom cloud visible.

www.globalsecurity.org...


Future Weapons exert of an episode highlighting the MOAB.





In Conclusion:

You may ask, what the MOAB could hold for the future of Weaponry. With 17 units officially built (2 tested) and 15 remaining, we are yet to see its destructive power in the battlefield. Still a young device, we may soon see smaller scale MOAB’s produced in the form of missiles for more efficient use. Until then, we wait and see.


[edit on Apr 12th 2010 by Djarums]




posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:18 PM
link   
this is interesting. i remember reading about this before.

next thing that would be cool is manipulation of electro magetic fields to create shock waves. like a type of magnetic bomb, could be an emp also. but then again that would need crazy technology.

also since america is (supposedly)waning away from nuclear weapons i wonder if this is a alternative and what else could be close to nuke force but not a nuke?

[edit on 10-4-2010 by togetherwestand]



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:32 PM
link   
Russian ATBIP tested in 2007 is reported as being two to four times as destructive as the American MOAB.

Question is, do Russian nanotech thermobarics cause more damage than American H6 heavy bombs?



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:34 PM
link   
That thing was devastating.

Kind of reminds me when Linda Hamilton is obliterated by that nuke while holding on to that fence in Terminator 2.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:35 PM
link   
reply to post by togetherwestand
 


I posted a reply to this thread here: US Moves From Nuclear Arms to Conventional Missiles With Global Reach about the idea that the MOAB could possibly replace the nuke as it has been often gifted the title of most powerful non-nuclear device.

I definitely believe that the design and function of the MOAB is going to play a vital role in the future of weaponry.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 11:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 



The vacuum device yields the equivalent of 44 tons of TNT using 7.8 tons of a new type of high explosive developed with the use of nanotechnology.

en.wikipedia.org...


I am guessing there is a chance that it does. However, we have to decipher what is too much damage. Again, we have seen neither in battle, we have only seen statistics...



posted on Apr, 11 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
It still is technically a weapon of mass destruction. However no radioactivity as far as we know. I guess that would depend on the use of depleted uranium in its casing. Either way it's quite a shoe in the face of an opponent! I remember the first test and remember being underwhelmed until I learned about the pressure wave. Holy Moses!

With such an explosive, it's going to be heavy. I don't think we'll ever see it replace icbm nuclear warheads. But that would just defeat the purpose since an ICBM is pretty much a "last straw" weapon.

It will be interesting to see the application! Dropping on large navy vessels is a no brainer.



posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 05:37 AM
link   
the germans in WW2 developed simelar technology but it never went into full scale production,they used powderd coal dust.
they managed to release a large qwantity into the air so it mixed and became this massive cloud then it was exploded.another crude but effective shock wave bomb.

the shot of the MOAB is poor it should of included various buildings and vehical's and stuff so we could see the effects it had at various distances.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 09:23 AM
link   
FAE's have been around for a while and this is just the next development. During WW2 Germany fired AA rounds loaded with ethylene oxide. On bursiting, the vapor was dispersed and if an aircraft flew through the cloud it was destroyed. One problem with FAE's is size limitation because of diffusion. This means that at a certain size, it's tough to get the fuel to mix with the air properly. What has been done with MOAB and others is to mix an oxidizer in with the fuel. The BLU-82 Daisycutter cleared off LZ's and firebases during the Viet-Nam war. I remember that the BLU-82 used ammonium nitrate and powdered aluminum in an organic binder [polystyrene?].
The MOAB is an updated version of the Daisycutter.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 07:51 PM
link   
reply to post by pteridine
 


MOAB is not an FAE, it is a large blast bomb containing 18,700 pounds of H6, an explosive that is a mixture of RDX, TNT, and aluminum. this explosive is mainly used in depth charges and torpedoes.



posted on Apr, 22 2010 @ 08:07 PM
link   
This weapon does create an impressive blast. In fact, before it has been exploded live, we had to notify the Russians because the heat signature is sufficient to register on their surveillance satellites in a manner that could otherwise be potentially mistaken for that of a small tactical nuclear weapon.

However, the thermobaric weapons, such as the BLU-96, also require notification to our NATO allies and the Russians prior to test explosions, and in most cases, any scenarios for their real-world use. Since we have never used a thermobaric weapon against them, or any associated countries, that remains a theoretic concern.




top topics



 
2

log in

join