scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) (01/23/91)
From: scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) Supposedly, Iraq still has many aircraft, SCUD missiles, and one militant dictator holed up in hardened bomb-resistant bunkers. From what the media says, it seems that the Air Force isn't even bothering going after these targets. Is this because we don't posess munitions capable of penetrating or at least shaking up the contents of these bunkers? Is it even possible that some man-made structure is capable of resisting a direct hit from a 2000lb bomb travelling at several hundred knots?! If so, how are such structures made? Wouldn't a direct hit at least damage a fragile airplane inside? Also, I assume most people have seen the video from the F-117A dropping a 2000lb bomb down the elevator shaft of some military HQ building. I was suprised to see (in a later video) that the direct hit merely seemed to blast out the windows. I'm sure the insides of the building were quite tangled up, but why wouldn't a bomb exploding from the INSIDE completely level the structure? I think that they used to call 1000lb bombs in WWII "blockbusters", implying they would destroy all buildings on a single city block (I don't know if this is the literal affect though). One more ... does anyone happen to know the terminal velocity of ballistic bombs? (I would think it's around 600-700kts) How soon would a bomb reach this velocity? /-----------------------------------------------------------------------------\ | Scott Silvey | | | scott@xcf.berkeley.edu | Seen on bumper sticker: "US OUT OF NORTH AMERICA!" | | Flames to /dev/null. | | \-----------------------------------------------------------------------------/
bxr307@csc.anu.edu.au (01/24/91)
From: bxr307@csc.anu.edu.au In article <1991Jan23.033625.1497@cbnews.att.com>, scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) writes: > > > From: scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) > I think that they used to call 1000lb bombs in WWII > "blockbusters", implying they would destroy all buildings on a single city > block (I don't know if this is the literal affect though). Your out by a factor of ten. A 10,000 lb high capacity bomb (thin cased, designed to explode without penetrating deep into the ground) was called the blockbuster. It was designed by Barnes Wallis who believed that bombs had been previously designed to destroy primarily through splinter damage rather than blast. What is really needed for the destruction of the hardened shelters in use by the Iraqis is a new "Tallboy" "Earthquake" bomb in the 22,000 pound class. Again the "Tallboy" was designed by Barnes Wallis. These weapons were remarkably successful against the U-Boat shelters employed by the Germans in WWII to protect their submarines. I would imagine that an aircraft shelter of the type I have seen displayed on the idiot box with only 2m thick roofs would be much easier to crack than the U-Boat pens which had up to 5m thick roofs. If a laser guidance system was mated to such a weapon, its accuracy would be considerably increased and you'd be sure of hitting close to the target. Brian Ross
davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) (01/25/91)
From: davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) bxr307@csc.anu.edu.au writes: | What is really needed for the destruction of the hardened shelters in | use by the Iraqis is a new "Tallboy" "Earthquake" bomb in the 22,000 pound | class. [...] | If a laser guidance system was mated to such a weapon, its accuracy | would be considerably increased and you'd be sure of hitting close to the | target. If you have a weapon with a low angle of attack (ie, close to horizontal), and a laser designator, you can hit the entrances of hardened structures, which are usually less hard. This is particularly true of large entrances, like hanger doors. Then again, our old friend the FAE bomb is more of an area weapon, and can probably be used to knock hanger doors off even if you can't get it right on the doorstep. --dave -- David Collier-Brown, | davecb@Nexus.YorkU.CA | lethe!dave 72 Abitibi Ave., | Willowdale, Ontario, | Even cannibals don't usually eat their CANADA. 416-223-8968 | friends.
dps@otter.hpl.hp.com (Duncan Smith) (01/25/91)
From: dps@otter.hpl.hp.com (Duncan Smith) Just to clear up what seems to be some confusion here - in expression if not in understanding - Barnes Wallis designed two large bombs for 617 squadron: Tallboy - 10000lb (Roughly five tons) Grand Slam - 22000lb (Ten tons) Duncan
smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan) (02/04/91)
From: smpod@venus.lerc.nasa.gov (Stefan)
In article davecb@nexus.yorku.ca (David Collier-Brown) writes...
/ If you have a weapon with a low angle of attack (ie, close to horizontal),
/and a laser designator, you can hit the entrances of hardened structures,
/which are usually less hard.
/ This is particularly true of large entrances, like hanger doors.
The Iraqis have anticipated this method of attack by erecting large reinfored
concrete walls in front of their doors.thos@softway.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) (02/04/91)
From: thos@softway.sw.oz.au (Thomas Cohen) In article <1991Jan23.033625.1497@cbnews.att.com> scott@sting.Berkeley.EDU (Scott Silvey) writes: > >Is this because we don't posess munitions capable of penetrating or at least > shaking up the contents of these bunkers? Is it even possible that some > man-made structure is capable of resisting a direct hit from a 2000lb bomb > travelling at several hundred knots?! If so, how are such structures made? With lots and lots of concrete. For instance, the U boat pens at Brest, had many metres of reinforced concrete as a roof. It needed the 12000 lb 'Tallboy' dropped from a Lancaster at 15000+ ft to penetrate, and these bombs had special steel casings, with thick nose walls, etc. 'Normal' concrete structures are reasonably impervious to thin walled bombs, bunkers all the more so as all these bombs do is provide blast on the outside of the wall. Concrete piercing bombs are more of a problem for them. > level the structure? I think that they used to call 1000lb bombs in WWII > "blockbusters", implying they would destroy all buildings on a single city > block (I don't know if this is the literal affect though). This was the 4000 thin case bomb. In effect a giant sheet steel container stuffed with very near 4000 lbs of explosive. One of these, while not penetrating the ground very far, would go straight through a building and explode in the basement or near to it. And ~4000 lb of explosive makes a very satisfying BANG! In contrast to this city environment bomb, most bombs are designed for some kind of aerodynamic effect and don't carry anywhere near their stated weight in explosive. The 'Tallboy' mentioned earlier had at best half of the 12000 lbs in explosive, but that and its bigger brother the 'Grand Slam' were specially cased bombs. Most bombs are better than that, but few approached the blockbuster, as it didn't even have fins! Just a cylindrical case. -- thos cohen |Softway Pty Ltd "Stopping to pick up passengers would disrupt |ACSnet: thos@softway.oz the timetable" - Alderman Cholerton, on why|UUCP: ...!uunet!softway.oz!thos the council's buses didn't stop for passengers|Internet: thos@softway.oz.au