In the stone age world, there were always spear vs shield.But in knowledge world, that would not the whole picture.50meter concrete are very expensive,thus suggest a cheap solution.Build 50meter Top Soil with soft texture soil on top of hideout.Let the bomb blast at middle of soft texture soil.Ooop! Soft Texture Soil haven\'t been invent yet! No,You don\'t need to invent, engineering it yourself! It your guy need R&D reference, go to swamp area and start test drop bomb into mud, there you are. The soil mix with, wood chip,fiber soil stabilizer and most important the multiple layer stainless steel mesh.Place SST mesh with appropriate gap to decelerate drop speed and capture. The word is CAPTURE, capture the bomb before it reach hard surface. The bomb fail it not blast at high density surface.
18th November, 2011 @ 5:21 a.m. (California Time)
200 feet of hardened concrete is a lot of penetration power, but what would happen if every 20 feet or so the concrete was covered with a layer of metal? Would multiple barriers such as this negate the effect of this bomb? Even without those layers, would this bomb be able to penetrate the under-mountain complex Iran allegedly has?
18th November, 2011 @ 6:35 a.m. (California Time)
i like army...
my real brother is also in INDIAN NAVY...
Very good jobs...
18th November, 2011 @ 7:24 a.m. (California Time)
Gee, aren\'t we all lucky the United States never attacks or invades another nation without a declaration of war and full international support.
18th November, 2011 @ 8:07 a.m. (California Time)
60 feet of hardened concrete or 200? Which one. The pictures are contradicting the article.
18th November, 2011 @ 8:57 a.m. (California Time)
Gee, aren\'t we all lucky that full international support has stopped Iran and North Korea from attempting to develop nuclear weapons?
18th November, 2011 @ 11:01 a.m. (California Time)
But what use is this for? No sane politician would really want to kill his enemy fellow politicians. He needs them to rule the conquered country, or at least do kill one or two publicly to calm the masses.
18th November, 2011 @ 12:10 p.m. (California Time)
@Tw Tan ,
You are exactly correct I also immediately thought of at least 3-ways to get around this 30K lb MOP, earthen works, metal mesh layers, even cheap lose gravel(tiny stones) layered with cheap metal mesh would render this MOP absolutely ineffective.
The thing about any weapon is understanding how it works what is the strongest link... then with some ingenuity turning that into the weakest link.
Sounds like this is more a wonder waffen... in other words military propaganda to scare the Iranians into submission than an actual feasible weapon, you would have to a modern version of Teslas best kept secrets to undo a \"nuclear power\" like North Korea or Iran.
18th November, 2011 @ 2:32 p.m. (California Time)
ahhh they failed to state the weapon can be armed with a small tactical nuke it does not matter how deep the bunker is and it contains most of the fallout which you would have anyhow if your bombing a nuke site.
18th November, 2011 @ 3:14 p.m. (California Time)
Christian and TW TAN: If it forces you to abandon your bunker and build a new one, it has already worked. Moreover, hardened concrete generally already has the kind of metal reinforcements you are describing in it.
As to the need for this, US forces have already encountered very heavily fortified underground bunkers during the Iraq war and in Afghanistan. Saddam Hussein\'s command bunker was under 60 feet of concrete, and existing munitions did not penetrate it.
18th November, 2011 @ 3:49 p.m. (California Time)
Why don\'t you complain about the actions of countries that support terrorists. You know the people that started it.
re; Christian Kepler
You act like putting a GPS guidance package on a large piece of high-strength alloy wrapped around a little HE with some delay fuses is difficult.
re; Leonard Foster Jr
Most HE can be significantly deformed without either premature detonation, of failing to detonate. But to achieve a nuclear explosion you have to very precisely compress the fissionable material, to be able to after penetrating 200 ft of concrete is a very difficult task.
not an impossible task, but given the development time of this weapon I doubt it has nuclear capability.
18th November, 2011 @ 5:59 p.m. (California Time)
@ Christian Kepler: \"You are exactly correct I also immediately thought of at least 3-ways to get around this 30K lb MOP, earthen works, metal mesh layers, even cheap lose gravel(tiny stones) layered with cheap metal mesh would render this MOP absolutely ineffective. \"
Yeah. I\'m sure no one has ever thought of that before. Do you seriously believe that the designers didn\'t take things like that into account?
A \"wonder waffen\"... Riiiiight. Guess you need to witness the power of even the smallest of these class of bunker busters for yourself. Go watch a test from a couple miles away and then get back to the rest of us.
18th November, 2011 @ 7:14 p.m. (California Time)
ahh, Leonard got it, 7 stoopid replies and the eighth is intelligent,, boom, think I will watch Dr. Strangelove tonight, maybe drink some beer, hmm, yep
18th November, 2011 @ 8:21 p.m. (California Time)
So how many schools can be built for the price of one of these?
oh wait... what would we need schools for...DOHP!
19th November, 2011 @ 5:47 a.m. (California Time)
@ Christian and Tw Tan:
A bullet, which weighs less than a fraction of a pound, generally impacts it\'s target with 2 thousand psi (pounds per square inch). Now turn that pullet into a 30 thousand-pound warhead that has an explosive charge detonated AFTER the initial impact of it\'s kinetic force, which is something about equal to several hundred pounds of raw dynamite. Then take your mixture of soil and mesh metal and get royally f***ed while pathetically attempting to hide under it.
19th November, 2011 @ 2:09 p.m. (California Time)
All you smart guys should go teach the engineers how to build a bunker. I\'m sure they\'ve never thought of these brilliant solutions... Has it occurred to anyone that not all the specifics about this weapon have not been released? There may be other features such as a penetrating warhead or shaped charge that they haven\'t released, not to mention these are accurate enough to be dropped sequentially down the same hole - like the way they use the 5000lb bunker buster already.
20th November, 2011 @ 8:44 a.m. (California Time)
....or you could try hacking into the Iranian\'s security network and detonate all of their nukes without any physical intervention.
20th November, 2011 @ 9:40 a.m. (California Time)
Dear Christian, We should go for soft approach rather than military action,especially the nuclear facility. No one can predict whats the outcome.(Until Fukushima nuclear incident happen ,we only come to realize weakness of LWR,espeacially BWR)
Dear Jon A. generally harden concerete has RC mesh(carbon steel) inside, what I desricbe is stainless steel mesh which purpose to restrain higher temperature and better elongeness.Each mesh layer distance with prorous compound.sst mesh mean for capture and hold compound.Compound means for absorb burst.
Emmm Rolf Hawkins, when anti tank was invent, the counter invention is tank composite armour.Composite Armour is choice because it not buggy.I think dude should go for 100000pound bomb, then we can came back to talk about making cheap 4 by 8 silicon carbide plate
To Kayvon Manian, a bullet will impact a target will 2000(pound per sq inch) but cannot penetrate though 14(millimeter)barrier, YES! the 14mm bullet proof glass. so what to 30000pound. you think same physic apply?
All I suggest is a lower cost Giant Sponge Concept.
And is was recent I learn, air is not the best insulator, but aerogel.Share with yours.
20th November, 2011 @ 10:23 a.m. (California Time)
Soft material such as sand and gravel do dissipate blast energy well, but are less effective against projectile penetration
20th November, 2011 @ 6:06 p.m. (California Time)
Umm, this USAF press release was brought to you by gizmag? Cummon guys. As much as I like blowing stuff up (and hate how terrorism has given it a bad name), I don\'t think the USAF needs this kind of spread from you guys. I am sure Iran is plenty aware of this and similar ordinance. At least post a nice vid of it blowing something up. When I\'ve perfected my fully automatic, motion sensing potato delivery system, I want the same coverage!
21st November, 2011 @ 1:19 a.m. (California Time)
I\'m sure the 43 million Americans who live below the poverty line will applaud this awesome military achievement
21st November, 2011 @ 3:08 a.m. (California Time)
Disappointed and somewhat sickened by the way you have reported this dubious feat of engineering, glorifying an offensive device which is essentially designed to kill our fellow man. Such progress we can all live without! Shame on you, Gizmag.
21st November, 2011 @ 6:27 a.m. (California Time)
As an embedded control engineer with 20 years experience in design and applications... I could teach a high school student how to overcome the \"soft layers\" above the hardened target using COTS devices that cost $0.15ea.
The soft layer defenses suggested above can be overcome with some very simple detonating algorithms that I\'m sure my colleagues already have implemented. Simply measuring speed & deceleration provides the necessary \"fuse\" data to control the detonation regardless of what it impacts. The hardened \"bullet\" with that much kinetic energy would punch through soft ground with little deceleration (relatively). The hardened material is much, much more difficult to penetrate. However, where there is a will, there is a way. Consider the allies low-tech anti-tank weapons used in WWII that stopped the blitzkrieg. Scale that up to the cold war anti-tank high velocity \"plasma\" rounds that went clean through the hardened targets so fast that the vacuum sucked every man inside through the exit 40mm hole in less than 1 second. If you do some quick calculations, this weapon\'s energy is so exponentially beyond those devices... I had to re-do the calculations using 4 different methods before I started to believe the results.
Some food for thought... look at the AZ Meteor Crater (wiki it) for an idea what this kind of kinetic energy can do. The blast cater on that 12,000mph impact has a 1200m diameter and is 170m deep. They had to drill pretty deep to find the nickel/iron core of the meteor AND it struck the earth at ~60deg angle of impact.
Adding layers of steel would of course be effective if the hardened defenses add up to \"enough\"... but then here comes the second one right down the same massive hole 30s later.
I think the US is really trying to be peaceful with these weapons... It is telling Iran to give up its nuke quest, come to the table and peacefully rejoin the world community. Knowing that you can be stopped/exposed at a minimum should cause the Ayatollah to reconsider its choices.
Why else would we tell anyone what weapons we have and what their specific capabilities are?
Personally, I don\'t think you can rationalize with a religious crazy man who believes he can create the fabled Caliphate. We should\'ve just used these tools, disrupted the weapons development and then give them the option to come to the table... or the next strike will be on a softer target, like the leaders themselves. It would save 10s of millions of lives... call them martyrs...
21st November, 2011 @ 9:07 a.m. (California Time)
Gregory - \"60 feet of hardened concrete or 200? Which one. The pictures are contradicting the article. \"
I thought the same until I noticed it\'s 60 METERS, which is approximately 200 feet. . .
21st November, 2011 @ 12:30 p.m. (California Time)
I find it amazing still that after all this time that people just don\'t get it that there are people who really don\'t care who you are or how good your intentions are they just want you and your way of life and your country dead. I gather that the thousands of people who died in 911 and other attacks should be forgotten or the 10\'s of thousands of innocents in the middle east who have been killed or mutilated by bombing them as they were in school or at markets or generally trying to live a peaceful life. These people were not killed by the US or other nations they were killed by extremists who see them as nothing to be concerned about. If you could stop that with one bomb or one bullet would it not be worth it? As Simons Eng says it is just a tool. It doesn\'t have to be used and is most effective when it just sits and gathers dust. It it gets used it has to work as advertised or it is useless.
Technically this is pretty incredible. Penetration of 200 feet of nice \"soft\" concrete or 130 feet of rock. The amount of kinetic energy need to do that is staggering. The head or nose of that penetration must be massive to survive that. The ones they used in Gulf 1 were nothing more than old 8 inch cannon barrels found surplus in the depot.
21st November, 2011 @ 1:40 p.m. (California Time)
Simons Engineering, What is \'some very simple detonating algorithms\'? bunker buster has simple enough concept and you would like to make it more complex!right? .If you belief this won\'t work at all ,Wishing Good Luck will be much nice! The concept are like staple nail to a bunch of paper. you need the staple to touch the surface to work, if there a thick enough of sponge layer between, no way to nail.
The bunker buster efficiency drop the bigger the gap, the blast flux escape.It like you blast rock, drill hole to insert dynamite.It become useless or you need 100time the amount if you blast at surface. remember SST mesh ,better elongation.
21st November, 2011 @ 2:09 p.m. (California Time)
It is amazing how many people here that think that you can catch a speeding bullet with a butterfly net. launch an arrow into a bag of sand, and then into a concrete block and see which will get you farther. Order is important or you will need two arrows.
If you rolled an Iowa class battleship on her side, this bomb would punch in one side and out the other.
21st November, 2011 @ 6:02 p.m. (California Time)
Slowburn,My mind came across thick metal plate at first. What conclude in my mine is what if the bomb tips penetrate though steel, the outcome is whole plate been blast off. Thus metal mesh was to prevent such event. I also note that carbon steel has poor strength vs temperature rise. SST are more difficult to tear off , allow elongetion and tolerate large temperature range. In common sense, concrete are tough and hard enough. But at Marco scale, concrete perform no better than Aerogel in decal scale,a pencil can easy penetrate Aerogel, A 13tonne pencil are unstoppable by any reinforce concrete(carbon steel mesh).Let re-test Let add a layer of plastic on top of Aerogel, test again with pencil. Notice the destruction total different?.Notice force need increase? now place polystyrene on top of Aerogel, a layer of plastic,polystyrene,plastic ,polystyrene,plastic,polystyrene and plastic.Test again with you hand with pencil, punch hardy and how many layer the pencil pass. A thin layer of can
22nd November, 2011 @ 10:25 a.m. (California Time)
Wow. Stupidity is alive and well. IF and that is a BIG IF, you could stop or mess up one of these bombs, what will you do if another came behind it?
22nd November, 2011 @ 11:28 a.m. (California Time)
re; Tw Tan
Granted on a pound for pound basis polystyrene is a better bullet stop than hardened steel but it would have to be extremely thick, it is also extremely flammable. A little white phosphorus and if your burning \"armor\" doesn\'t kill you the little bomb that hits a few minutes later does.
While it might be possible to build a \"soft armor\" bunker that will stop this type of deep penetrator that costs less than the necessary thickness of reinforced concrete, it will just make you more vulnerable to other types of weapons.
23rd November, 2011 @ 10:08 a.m. (California Time)
I believe it is enough to express the idea and concept to reinforce the hideout surface. It is up to the those related to take appropriate step, to build giant sponge, or to abandon the giant bomb, or to abandon hideout and peace talk. Perhaps someone of us may came up a technique to fail all nuclear bomb, who know! let hope!
No point we argue or stir around, if we doesn\'t intend to write something scientific or better concept that we can discuss and to improve our knowledge. With new sciences and invention I hope we build a better world.
23rd November, 2011 @ 12:03 p.m. (California Time)
re; Tw Tan
To build a better world, the first step is to prevent the blood thirsty tyrants from building a worse one.
24th November, 2011 @ 3:40 p.m. (California Time)
My physics book teels me that the speed of any falling body from even the highest possible height, is limited by its aerodynamic drag - the gravity force is the same independent of mass, the drag increases with size (diameter). So this bomb will hit its target with less speed than a smaller bomb.
It\'s kinetic energy will be higher than the smaller bomb due to the high mass - but then again its drag inside the concrete will also be higher doe to the size.
So the whole idea of making a bomb bigger in order to have it penetrate further into the target is wrong.
What one may try is to shatter the target (bunker) with more explosives. This worked in WW2 on the huge german submarine bunkers - but there was only little penetration - not 200 feet.
The whole story is either a hoax or propaganda.
27th November, 2011 @ 2:48 p.m. (California Time)
I wonder how many teacher\'s salaries would be paid by just one of these \"wonders\" that\'re used to kill people, underground, half a world away?
5th January, 2012 @ 11:28 a.m. (California Time)
ok, I think the team at gizmag are living the delirious american dream! First things first, Iran has proven to the international community that it isn't developing a nuclear bomb - and no, the international community does not consitute north america or the european states. Second, China and Russia very recently vetoed another round of sanctions after the dubious old report from the IAEA which rehashed old claims of Iran attempting to build nuclear bombs! Can't you people realise that these claims by washington are exactly the same as they used against Iraq?
6th January, 2012 @ 12:38 p.m. (California Time)
Why would the government allow this weapon to be publicized? Wouldn\'t it be better to keep it secret, so the enemies can be caught unprepared?
6th January, 2012 @ 11:35 p.m. (California Time)
We publicize weapons to provide a deterrent.
8th January, 2012 @ 8:47 a.m. (California Time)
It look like future bomb shelters will be protected with layers of re-enforced concrere interspersed with layers of Kevlar.
30th January, 2012 @ 10:48 a.m. (California Time)
Just put iron spikes... it will destroy the payload before hitting deep
8th February, 2012 @ 12:34 p.m. (California Time)
The M829 anti-tank penetrator used by the Abrams tank is a 24\" long by 1\" in diameter depleted uranium dart. It\'s penetration is classified, but most say 12-16 feet of reinforced concrete. It weighs less that 10 lbs. Impact temperature is over 1 million degrees. It burns its way into the target. Now imagine a 30,000 pound version of that. The article says it has 5000 lbs of explosive. That means probably 25,000 lbs of Depleted Uranium to burn thru the bunker defenses. 25,000 vs 10 lbs. (which will go thru 12 feet plus of Reinforced concrete) Hmmm. You really think your Stainless steel mesh, Kevlar, swamp mud, sponge is going to \"Catch\" it?
\"Iron spikes\" Hmmm. Iron vs 1 million degrees of burning Uranium. Anybody want to make a bet on that?
17th February, 2012 @ 8:46 a.m. (California Time)
As for \"Nuclear Penetrators\".....that would defeat the whole purpose of using it in the first place...to prevent Iran from getting the material necessary to build an Atomic bomb. Most people don\'t know that the nuclear material used in an A-Bomb is reuseable. It can be gathered up from the soil surrounding the underground explosion easily. Might as well just fedex them the material and save the money of B2 Bomber Next-Day air service.
17th February, 2012 @ 12:58 p.m. (California Time)
Right on the money with your first post however you mentioned a nuke detonation would give them the material needed to build an A-Bomb. Modern nuke's won't leave enough fissionable material to be used in another nuke; they are designed with efficiency in mind as the fissionable material is so precious. Not doing so would create unwanted fallout and be wasteful.
However, you are partially correct as there could be enough radioactive material left to create a "dirty" bomb. However not enough to reach criticality and collecting it in either case would also pose a huge technical challenge for Iran.
23rd February, 2012 @ 4:46 a.m. (California Time)
Weapon of mass destruction.....Ain\'t no peace in this world. just say the truth.
Okechukwu D Odinaka
25th February, 2012 @ 5:31 a.m. (California Time)
the GBU 57A/B IS UNSTOPABLE, JUST SECONDS BEFORE IT STRIKES IT IS PRECEDED BY THE EMGU 57. I'M NOT SURE OF THE ACRONYMS SOMTHING TO DO WITH EARTH MOVER? WITH THE PIN POINT BOMBING TECH TODAY THEY CAN STACK THEM WITH 0 PROBLEMS.
7th March, 2012 @ 4:55 p.m. (California Time)
As has been pointed out, not all the 'options' of the weapon have been revealed... take for instance the comment about depleted uranium... if it were, say applied in series? And say only 10 tons of it with 5 tons of fuels pushing it? We realized a long time ago, M.A.D. was just that, so we figured out how to do the next best thing, get to the 'root' of what worries us, information and the intelligence to use it. Notice I refrained from saying, wisely? What we're "seeing" here folks is misdirection, a slight of hand, something to go boom so that the people don't notice just how understated the fact that it's information that is the real killer here. Think about it people, in this age of nanotechnology, the powers that be are fully aware of where the dangers are and/or will be and for you to not take that into account only proves you've already been made a fool of, so, enjoy the show!
21st March, 2012 @ 9:25 a.m. (California Time)
And they say we don't manufacture anything anymore. Looks like more propaganda to me. How's it gonna penetrate with spoilers on the tail? Seems like they'd want it to fall a little faster. LMAO
27th March, 2012 @ 1:46 p.m. (California Time)
I just remember how a 1 kg slug tipped with depleted uranium burnt thru any tank armour and simply blew up the tanks from inside by igniting the tanks ammo.
Scary image, especially for other tanks crews.
If this thing uses alloys that tolerate heat and that don't deform until near melting point and it has a depleted uranium tip that can burn thru reforcement steel, concrete etc.. It will probably do what it says on the tin can.
I don't think it would need to be nuclear as it will probably burst thru with a radio active superheated plasma cloud. the secondary and real explosion will be devastating inside a bunker.. any ammo inside would add to the blast.
Bet all you would see is a few puffs from air vents like when the Iraqi tanks were hit by Apache slugs.
These sort of weapons do a lot of damage but mostly psychological. bit like the long distance bombing run to the Falklands airfield.
It tells the baddies "We see you and you can't hide!"
They don't even need to be deployed if proper PR is used.
3rd April, 2012 @ 5:08 p.m. (California Time)
many of the delusional "Catch" comments here are very funny to read...in it's most simple form...the amount of terminal velocity based on this weight, angle, speed (inertia) would not just displace the earth in the immediate area...it's "Consussive effect" would act like a lateral earthquake compressing everything radiating out as well...so, 200 feet down...the earth displacement would be thousands and thousands of cubic feet (maybe millions) and the outwardly generating concussion wave would crush anything within hundreds or even thousands of feet...the "catch theory" doesn't deal with the fact that so much ground will be opened up by the MASSIVE explosion that the "sunroof" will be completly open waiting for the "rain"...you could even drop one of these badboys followed by smaller bombs to destroy the facility....if it survived the first impact, it would be completely visable...all the ground would be greatly eliminated around the hardened bunker....
Eddy42...the "drag coeffecient" on a bomb this size will be completely negated by sheer velocity...it's acceleration would be nominally different from a smaller bomb and gravity and weight would easily achieve ballistic status...the inertia from something like this (even without an explosion) will cause a minor earthquake...the Drag Coeffecient for a bomb this size (due to the tapered shape) would be extremely low anyway....the air resistance against something this heavy just would not be enough to slow it down...
as for the Nuke question...a battle plan would probably not include an actual direct nuke strike...a cruise missle delivered EMP would eliminate ground and air defenses for many miles in every direction...then the B-2's roll in and drop 2 of these bad boys maybe a second apart...first burrows in and "pops the top"...the second delivers everyone within the vacinity to Allah....the massive overpressure in the area would liquify all the ground/support personnel...after the EMP...nothing electronic would work...doors wouldn't open...they would be trapped mice waiting for the big bad Anaconda...even if the first cleared all the earthen buildup....the scond is likely to go completely through the hardened target and explode UNDERNEATH....and the facility would look like a mushroom cloud...
a "Grand Tour" battle plan would include flights rolling in behind a "walking cascade" of EMP laden Cruise missles...EMP with 50 miles radius...bomber at 200 miles... that means roughly 20 minutes out...without ground radar...and nothing in the air of Iran's would survive...means they just walk accross iran and destroy all nuke sites...and their economy...limited deaths...low radiation...our crews safe...and a country in the need of "A Shitload of Screendoors"....lol
18th April, 2012 @ 10:28 a.m. (California Time)
How many miles per gallon is the prime question.
12th October, 2012 @ 10:42 a.m. (California Time)
re: Tommy.....lol..I was thinking the same thing. I couldn't read any more comments past yours. Pure Ignorance. Gravel and soil and mud??...LMAO. WOW.....Im sure no one ever thought of those solutions. Steel mesh.....lol..yeah..got some downstairs in my french coffee press...I love keyboard warriors and keyboard Einsteins.....if you were as smart as you thought you were I'm guessing you wouldn't be on here commenting on physics, and payloads, and aeronautical advancements that you know nothing about...
26th October, 2012 @ 9:39 a.m. (California Time)
Do you honestly believe that the military is going to tell you top-secret information? I guarantee that this bomb will do a lot better than that and probably has other secrets they aren't saying. These numbers are probably what they need to take these guys out but nobody shows all their cards until they have to. Nobody knew we had stealth helicopters until we killed Osama although they couldn't seem to find those helicopters for Libya. How well do you think hiding out in Afghanistan caves worked? We collapsed mountains and that was with weapons 10 years ago. If I'm Iran or North Korea, I'd be afraid, very afraid.
28th October, 2012 @ 12:57 p.m. (California Time)
One of the major points of having such a weapon is to increase the cost of building protection for the facilities it is intended to destroy to the point where the potential adversary is forced to examine peaceful alternatives or go broke. For a modest nuclear program this would involve further hardening every facility along the supply-chain, and moving critical facilities and personnel to even deeper, more expensive sites. What's more, the weapons don't actually ever have to be fielded in number to provide a deterrent. We just need to convince the potential adversary that we have the ability to produce such weapons, and he will have to build real defenses against it.
4th December, 2012 @ 10:45 a.m. (California Time)
This would have been very useful to US military back in 1999, in the war against Serbia. There are some underground Serbian compounds that they couldn't penetrate. Maybe the war would have been shorter, so we civilians wouldn't suffer so much under the dictatorship and international sanctions.
Andreja Sinadinovic Vijatovic
3rd March, 2013 @ 9:53 a.m. (California Time)