Author Topic: Russia Tests 'World's Most Powerful Non-Nuclear Bomb' (Read 1979 times)

1K3 · « **on:** September 12, 2007, 01:17:50 AM »

yep, NON NUCLEAR.

It is 4x as powerful as the "Mother Of All Bombs"

MOSCOW — The Russian military has successfully tested what it described as the world's most powerful non-nuclear air-delivered bomb, Russia's state television reported Tuesday, the latest show of the nation's military muscle amid chilly relations with the United States.

Rino · « **Reply #1 on:** September 12, 2007, 01:48:08 AM »

Be interesting to see them try to deliver it against US forces. Or do they
intend to gather all their "terrorist" enemies in one spot before dropping it
on them?

Wolfala · « **Reply #2 on:** September 12, 2007, 01:54:09 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rino
Be interesting to see them try to deliver it against US forces. Or do they
intend to gather all their "terrorist" enemies in one spot before dropping it
on them?

mms://wms.leadingauthorities.com/windowsmedia/Berntsen_G384K_Stream.wmv

Early during the Afganistan war in 2001, we did exactly that using BLU-82s. Pretty horrifying.

Here's a little except: http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/darkside/interviews/berntsen.html

Gary Berntsen, a 20-year veteran in the CIA interview:

What don't we know about that war?

First off, I think that [it was] very savage up in Mazar-e-Sharif. The BLU-82s that they used -- they dropped two of them up there to break the front lines. That was pretty savage. ...

What's a BLU-82?

BLU-82 is a daisy cutter, a 15,000-pound device. It's the largest bomb in our inventory shy of a nuclear weapon. ... It's got a long fuse on it so that when it hits the ground, it doesn't fill the crater, and the blast goes way out. It was initially constructed to cut landing zones in jungles. We use two of those up there on the front lines. Just shattered their will. It was pretty savage. ...Similarly, what people don't understand is down in Kandahar, that team that went in there ... literally landed on a leaf in a lily pond full of Taliban and Al Qaeda. These guys entered into an area, and there were thousands of people hunting them. ... You're talking about the band on the run. Holy cow, that was very dangerous. ...

How many of them do you figure you killed?

We didn't do a body count. Of course, we threw a BLU-82 in there as well, which just blows things to bits. You have to go in there with Q-Tips to get samples, literally; that's how devastating that thing is. It just vaporizes things that are close to the center. You're not going to find bodies.The U.S. military, CENTCOM [Central Command], was very generous with air power. ... Really, really pounded them.

rpm · « **Reply #3 on:** September 12, 2007, 02:25:00 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rino
Be interesting to see them try to deliver it against US forces. Or do they
intend to gather all their "terrorist" enemies in one spot before dropping it
on them?

Dear Sergio,
Congradulations! You have won an all expense paid trip to a destination of your choice. The prize may be exchanged for cash.
Be at:
41*, 43' 0" N
44*, 47' 0" E
at exactly 2100 hrs gmt to claim your prize. Can't wait to see you in person!!

Holden McGroin · « **Reply #4 on:** September 12, 2007, 02:34:07 AM »

Can I go too RPM? Can I go too?

culero · « **Reply #5 on:** September 12, 2007, 07:41:04 AM »

Wolfala, thanks for the links to the Berntsen interview. Great stuff there.

I highly recommend that anyone with an interest in the war following 9/11 take a look.

Nilsen · « **Reply #6 on:** September 12, 2007, 07:53:51 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Rino
Be interesting to see them try to deliver it against US forces. Or do they
intend to gather all their "terrorist" enemies in one spot before dropping it
on them?

Same can be said for the MOAB then

culero · « **Reply #7 on:** September 12, 2007, 08:11:56 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Nilsen
Same can be said for the MOAB then

Nilsen, there's actually some record of US success in doing exactly that. For instance, take a look at the links Wolfala posted. Also, given the standard US military doctrine of establishing air superiority first in combat operations (and our record of success in achieving that goal) we would also have no trouble delivering weapons of this nature onto a "conventional" battlefield. I don't know if the same can be said for Russia.

Nilsen · « **Reply #8 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:01:37 AM »

Still same thing. If this latest bomb was american there would be a "hell yeah" and several

, but as long as its russian its allofasudden talk of how it would be deliverd on US forces and how the russians could "gather all their terrorists in one spot"

john9001 · « **Reply #9 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:09:21 AM »

i think the US is going toward smaller/smarter bombs for more bombing precision.

Halo · « **Reply #10 on:** September 12, 2007, 09:50:29 AM »

The most interesting aspect is the claim of new explosive material that delivers four times the punch with less tonnage than the U.S. biggie.

Anything non-nuke with that much power will be especially appealing to terrorists too.

Maverick · « **Reply #11 on:** September 12, 2007, 12:01:33 PM »

Well thank cod it's not a cluster munition. That would be terrible!

Wolfala · « **Reply #12 on:** September 12, 2007, 12:08:46 PM »

The thing that keeps bugging the **** out of me is how its referred to as a Vacuum bomb, or Fuel Air Bomb. You simply CANNOT have a fuel air bomb beyond the 2000 lb class range. There is no burster in existence that will distribute 9 tonnes of explosive material with an oxidizer (oxygen presumably) in a uniform manner, and then after all is said and done detonate the cloud. It is simply a physical impossibility.

What is more likely is a aluminum slurry mix with some oxidizer mixed in uniformly. In the BLU-82's case, its a GSX Slurry with Aluminum. It all depends on how stable you want the explosive to be to be used as a weapon.

expat · « **Reply #13 on:** September 12, 2007, 01:02:05 PM »

Still same thing. If this latest bomb was american there would be a "hell yeah" and several , but as long as its russian its allofasudden talk of how it would be deliverd on US forces and how the russians could "gather all their terrorists in one spot"

You have to admit ...he is correct in what he is saying ....

lasersailor184 · « **Reply #14 on:** September 12, 2007, 01:12:09 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by john9001
i think the US is going toward smaller/smarter bombs for more bombing precision.

I had a friend who argued that this was a bad thing. This creates a distancing from the fear of even associating with bad people.

For example, you have a terrorist roaming the streets of baghdad. American forces spot him, drop a 10 pound smart munition bomb, which promptly takes off his head, and only his head. Not too scary.

But then you have the other method. The terrorist is hiding in a building. We drop a 5k pound bomb, and take out several city blocks. Several city blocks no longer exist for merely being near the guy.

The first situation allows terrorism to exist. The second one goes to the root of the support of terrorism, and will soon exterminate it.