To: Dark Skies
The need to call it the BMFB...and I won't go into the details of the acronym.
2 posted on
05/06/2006 11:14:01 AM PDT by
JRios1968
(In memoriam...)
To: All
Not sure what the following is supposed to mean. Looks like the author inadvertantlt dropped a portion of a sentence...
That's in contrast to its older brother the MOAB -- the 21,600-pound Massive Ordnance Air Blast -- even though there's tension between America and Iran.
To: Dark Skies
Can we make contributions so our names as sponsors can be on the first one that hits Iran?
4 posted on
05/06/2006 11:16:47 AM PDT by
doug from upland
(Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
To: Dark Skies
"Not only does the weapon have to be accurate, it has to stay intact during its high-impact, high-speed burrow through ground, hillsides, mountainsides or feet of reinforced concrete.
"
===
Sounds about right to be used to hit Iran's underground nuclear facilities.
5 posted on
05/06/2006 11:18:49 AM PDT by
FairOpinion
(Dem Foreign Policy: SURRENDER to our enemies. Real conservatives don't help Dems get elected.)
To: Dark Skies
To: Dark Skies
One could think that a shaped charge (if need be, assembled from small synchronized nukes) with a very heavy cone to provide the penetration jet could fit the bill. What was the penetrating ability of a Big Bertha shell [the closest analog of this MOP]? Something like 150' of concrete, IIRC.
8 posted on
05/06/2006 11:19:58 AM PDT by
GSlob
To: Dark Skies
"First you MOAB the air defenses, then MOP up what's left."
Air Force Guide to good house cleaning.
9 posted on
05/06/2006 11:19:59 AM PDT by
coconutt2000
(NO MORE PEACE FOR OIL!!! DOWN WITH TYRANTS, TERRORISTS, AND TIMIDCRATS!!!! (3-T's For World Peace))
To: Dark Skies
Paging the President of Iran, can you hear me now?
10 posted on
05/06/2006 11:21:38 AM PDT by
HereInTheHeartland
(Never bring a knife to a gun fight, or a Democrat to do serious work...)
To: Dark Skies
Bet that one is going to move the Richter's in DesMoines.
14 posted on
05/06/2006 11:22:34 AM PDT by
mmercier
To: Dark Skies
Definitely a useful device. Definitely won't see that coming!
17 posted on
05/06/2006 11:29:57 AM PDT by
Andy28
(Proud US Army DEP'er, shipping in June. Hooah!)
To: Dark Skies
MOAR (Mother Of All Rodents)
To: Dark Skies
Great site,thanx for the link.
26 posted on
05/06/2006 11:41:54 AM PDT by
Thombo2
To: Dark Skies
I think this ongoing development work has a lot to do with why GWB is trying to keep things cool for a year or two, figuring we have time to take out the Iranian underground facilities with a high degree of success once they perfect the MOP.
If eventual sanctions work on Iran, and they realize we have a very high probability to take out any of their facilities, with little loss or none on our side, they just might cave in on the nuclear enrichment program as well as admitting the IAEA to carefully monitor their future reactor operations to guarantee they will not be able to get any plutonium extracted from the spent fuel rods.
27 posted on
05/06/2006 11:46:09 AM PDT by
Marine_Uncle
(Honor must be earned)
To: Dark Skies
Am I the only one who would like to find out about these after they get used?
To: Dark Skies
Who needs explosives? Just launch from a high enough altitude.
Rods from God
Rods from God are a space-based kinetic energy weapon that has been discussed since the early 1980s.
The system would consist of tandem satellites, one serving as a communications platform, the other carrying a number of tungsten rods, each up to 20 feet in length and 1 foot in diameter. These rods, which could be dropped on a target with as little as 15 minutes notice, would enter the Earth's atmosphere at a speed of 36,000 feet per second - about as fast as a meteor. Upon impact, the rod would be capable of producing all the effects of an earth-penetrating nuclear weapon, without any of the radioactive fallout. This type of weapon relies on kinetic energy, rather than high-explosives, to generate destructive force.
They would conceivably be particularly well adapted to penetrate hardened targets, such as underground nuclear facilities.
There are major difficulties involved. One of them is where to position the rods. They need to be high enough to deliver enough energy upon impact, but not so high that they vaporize in Earth's atmosphere. The other difficulty is the number of satellites that would be required to cover a material portion of the Earth.
To: Dark Skies
The smallest nuke is 100 times as powerful as this bomb. Too bad nukes are radioactive, both literally and politically.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson