,,Предвиђено је да бомбе тешке 13,6 тона, носе "Б-2" бомбардери. Бомбе имају уграђен сателитски навигациони ситем.
Стручњаци кажу да су бомбе способне да разнесу бетонске зидове дебеле 18 метара. Те бомбе су шест пута веће од досадашњих бомби којима расположе америчка војска.
Posto nisam kompetentan u ovoj oblasti interesuje me procena koliko u ovome ima istine.
Sta ako su postrijenja 100m ispod zemlje, ako je beton u vise slojeva, ako su protiv mere za ovakve projektile postavljne, nesto tipa reaktivnog oklopa kod tenka i sl.
Sve zavisi koja su postrojenja u pitanju,recimo za nuklearna postrojenja bomba i nemora da probije zaštitu dovoljno je da izazove jače potrese i da ta postrojenja budu oštečena ali to nosi veliki rizik od katastrofe a vjerovatno bi izazvali samo kontra efekat ,Iran ima već dovoljne zalihe materijala za gradnju manjeg broja bombi recimo možda za 5-10 možda i više i dovoljno je da imaju 2-3 tajna manja postrojenja u kojima če nastaviti obagačivati Uran na 90% a oni vjerovatno imaju i više takvih rezervnih postrojenja.
Pentagon Seeks Mightier Bomb vs. Iran
By ADAM ENTOUS And JULIAN E. BARNES
WASHINGTON—Pentagon war planners have concluded that their largest conventional bomb isn't yet capable of destroying Iran's most heavily fortified underground facilities, and are stepping up efforts to make it more powerful, according to U.S. officials briefed on the plan.
The 30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator, was specifically designed to take out the hardened fortifications built by Iran and North Korea to cloak their nuclear programs.
Enlarge Image
Defense Threat Reduction Agency / Associated Press
A crew loaded a 'bunker buster' at the White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico in 2007; the military hopes to make the bomb more powerful.
But initial tests indicated that the bomb, as currently configured, wouldn't be capable of destroying some of Iran's facilities, either because of their depth or because Tehran has added new fortifications to protect them.
Doubts about the MOP's effectiveness prompted the Pentagon this month to secretly submit a request to Congress for funding to enhance the bomb's ability to penetrate deeper into rock, concrete and steel before exploding, the officials said.
The push to boost the power of the MOP is part of stepped-up contingency planning for a possible strike against Iran's nuclear program, say U.S. officials.
The Defense Department has spent about $330 million so far to develop about 20 of the bombs, which are built by Boeing Co. The Pentagon is seeking about $82 million more to make the bomb more effective, according to government officials briefed on the plan.
More
Floating Bases Enhance Capacity For Quick Strikes
Army's Top General Backs Troop Rollback
Some experts question if any kind of conventional explosives are capable of reaching facilities such as those built deep underground in Iran. But U.S. defense officials say they believe the MOP could already do damage sufficient to set back the program.
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta, in an interview with The Wall Street Journal Thursday, acknowledged the bomb's shortcomings against some of Iran's deepest bunkers. He said more development work would be done and that he expected the bomb to be ready to take on the deepest bunkers soon.
"We're still trying to develop them," Mr. Panetta said.
President Barack Obama has made clear that he believes U.S. and international sanctions can curb Iran's nuclear program if they are given more time to work. At the same time, however, Mr. Obama has asked the Pentagon to come up with military options.
In Tuesday's State of the Union address, Mr. Obama said: "Let there be no doubt: America is determined to prevent Iran from getting a nuclear weapon, and I will take no options off the table to achieve that goal." Iran denies it is trying to develop atomic weapons.
The U.S. has sought in recent weeks to tamp down tensions with Iran, but the Pentagon is at the same time pushing ahead with contingency planning.
"The development of this weapon is not intended to send a signal to any one particular country," Pentagon press secretary George Little said. "It's a capability we believe we need in our arsenal and will continue to invest in it."
Officials said the planned improvements to the MOP were meant to overcome shortcomings that emerged in initial testing. They said the new money was meant to ensure the weapon would be more effective against the deepest bunkers, including Iran's Fordow enrichment plant facility, which is buried in a mountain complex surrounded by antiaircraft batteries, making it a particularly difficult target even for the most powerful weapons available to the U.S.
Developing an effective bunker-buster is complicated in part because of the variables, experts say. Penetration varies depending on factors such as soil density and the types of stone and rock shielding the target.
Boeing received a contract in 2009 to fit the weapon on the U.S.'s B-2 Stealth Bomber. The Air Force began receiving the first of the bombs in September, a time of growing tensions with Iran. The Air Force has so far contracted to buy 20 of the bombs, and more deliveries are expected in 2013, after additional tests are made.
Should a decision be made to use the MOP as currently configured, it could cause "a lot of damage" to Iran's underground nuclear facilities but wouldn't necessarily destroy them outright, Mr. Panetta said.
"We're developing it. I think we're pretty close, let's put it that way. But we're still working at it because these things are not easy to be able to make sure that they will do what we want them to."
Mr. Panetta added: "But I'm confident, frankly, that we're going to have that capability and have it soon,"
The decision to ask now for more money to develop the weapon was directly related to efforts by the U.S. military's Central Command to prepare military options against Iran as quickly as possible, according to a person briefed on the request for additional funds.
A senior defense official said the U.S. had other options besides the MOP to set back Iran's nuclear program. "The Massive Ordnance Penetrators are by no means the only capability at our disposal to deal with potential nuclear threats in Iran," the official said.
Another senior U.S. official said the Pentagon could make up for the MOPs' shortcomings by dropping them along with other guided bombs on top of a bunker's entry and exit points—provided the intelligence is available about where they are all located.
Successful strikes on bunker entry and exit points could prevent an enemy from accessing such a site and could cause enough damage to stop or slow enrichment activity there.
"There is a virtue to deepness but you still need to get in and out," the senior U.S. official said.
The Pentagon was particularly concerned about its ability to destroy bunkers built under mountains, such as Iran's Fordow site near the Shiite Muslim holy city of Qom, according to a former senior U.S. official who is an expert on Iran.
The official said some Pentagon war planners believe conventional bombs won't be effective against Fordow and that a tactical nuclear weapon may be the only military option if the goal is to destroy the facility. "Once things go into the mountain, then really you have to have something that takes the mountain off," the official said.
The official said the MOP may be more effective against Iran's main enrichment plant at Natanz but added: "But even that is guesswork."
The Pentagon notified Congress in mid-January that it wants to divert around $82 million to refine the MOP, taking the money from other defense programs. The decision to sidestep the normal budget request process suggests the Pentagon deems the MOP upgrades to be a matter of some urgency.
Mr. Panetta said Iran wasn't the only potential target. "It's not just aimed at Iran. Frankly, it's aimed at any enemy that decides to locate in some kind of impenetrable location. The goal here is to be able to get at any enemy, anywhere," he said
Mr. Panetta and former Defense Secretary Robert Gates have argued that a military strike would at best delay Iran's nuclear development for a few years. Advocates of a strike say such a delay could be decisive by buying time for other efforts to thwart the program.
According to Air Force officials, the 20.5 foot-long MOP carries over 5,300 pounds of explosive material. It is designed to penetrate up to 200 feet underground before exploding. The mountain above the Iranian enrichment site at Fordow is estimated to be at least 200 feet tall.
Israel has large bunker-buster bombs but the U.S. hasn't provided the MOP to any other country.
Pozdrav svima.
Ja ovde samo citam, al eto dodje vreme da postavim par pitanja(nadam se ne mnogo glupih)
-30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator- Koliko blizu necega mora da padne tako nesto da bi ga unistilo(onesposobilo)? U tih 13 t kolko je eksploziva, posto pretpostavljam da je masa uglavnom zbog penetracije? Pitam to iz razloga sto za mnoga postrojenja i bunkere se verovatno zna samo priblizan polozaj prostorija(pretpostavnjam da su u pitanju desetine pa i par stotina metara nepreciznosti, mozda i vise al to vonda nema smisla gadjati:)) Ako sam dobro razumeo te bombe imaju mogucnost da se aktiviraju ili na odredjenoj dubini ili kad ulete u nesto.
i drugo:
-Amerika ce napasti iznenada sa ciljem da u prvom naletu napravi sto vecu stetu. Kolika su njena ogranicenja u tome, jer kad su nas napadali, napali su samo ogranicen broj ciljeva.
Pretpostavljam da u zalivu ima mnogo vise avioncica i brodica nego sto je bilo oko nas 99. Kako u takvom polozaju kao sto je Iran da ne budes zatecen spustenih gaca?Jedno je kad pocne napad i onda znas na cemu si. U trenutki napada dosta vaznih iranskih sistema ce biti po nekim garazam i skladistima, jer ne verujem da ce u vreme mira da ih vuku po poljima i maskiraju.
chitach ::Pozdrav svima.
Ja ovde samo citam, al eto dodje vreme da postavim par pitanja(nadam se ne mnogo glupih)
-30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator- Koliko blizu necega mora da padne tako nesto da bi ga unistilo(onesposobilo)? U tih 13 t kolko je eksploziva, posto pretpostavljam da je masa uglavnom zbog penetracije? Pitam to iz razloga sto za mnoga postrojenja i bunkere se verovatno zna samo priblizan polozaj prostorija(pretpostavnjam da su u pitanju desetine pa i par stotina metara nepreciznosti, mozda i vise al to vonda nema smisla gadjati:)) Ako sam dobro razumeo te bombe imaju mogucnost da se aktiviraju ili na odredjenoj dubini ili kad ulete u nesto.
i drugo:
-Amerika ce napasti iznenada sa ciljem da u prvom naletu napravi sto vecu stetu. Kolika su njena ogranicenja u tome, jer kad su nas napadali, napali su samo ogranicen broj ciljeva.
Pretpostavljam da u zalivu ima mnogo vise avioncica i brodica nego sto je bilo oko nas 99. Kako u takvom polozaju kao sto je Iran da ne budes zatecen spustenih gaca?Jedno je kad pocne napad i onda znas na cemu si. U trenutki napada dosta vaznih iranskih sistema ce biti po nekim garazam i skladistima, jer ne verujem da ce u vreme mira da ih vuku po poljima i maskiraju.
Amerika će biti izuzetno ograničena prilikom udara na Iran, to je velika zemlja, ima razudjene vojne kapacitete, dosta nepristupačnih predela.
Za razliku od Iraka, Sirije i ostalih nije diktatura u punom smislu, imaju oni izbore i slično.
No SAD neće same ući u sukob. Izrael će gotovo sigurno učestvovati ali čak ni učešće Iraka nije isključeno.
Jedina nada im je da pokušaju kao u Libiji i Siriji da oragnizuju neke pobunjenike pa da zajedno pokušaju da svrgnu vlast. Medjutim sve je to na dugačkom štapu i jako nesigurno.
chitach ::Pozdrav svima.
Ja ovde samo citam, al eto dodje vreme da postavim par pitanja(nadam se ne mnogo glupih)
-30,000-pound "bunker-buster" bomb, known as the Massive Ordnance Penetrator- Koliko blizu necega mora da padne tako nesto da bi ga unistilo(onesposobilo)? U tih 13 t kolko je eksploziva, posto pretpostavljam da je masa uglavnom zbog penetracije? Pitam to iz razloga sto za mnoga postrojenja i bunkere se verovatno zna samo priblizan polozaj prostorija(pretpostavnjam da su u pitanju desetine pa i par stotina metara nepreciznosti, mozda i vise al to vonda nema smisla gadjati:)) Ako sam dobro razumeo te bombe imaju mogucnost da se aktiviraju ili na odredjenoj dubini ili kad ulete u nesto.
i drugo:
-Amerika ce napasti iznenada sa ciljem da u prvom naletu napravi sto vecu stetu. Kolika su njena ogranicenja u tome, jer kad su nas napadali, napali su samo ogranicen broj ciljeva.
Pretpostavljam da u zalivu ima mnogo vise avioncica i brodica nego sto je bilo oko nas 99. Kako u takvom polozaju kao sto je Iran da ne budes zatecen spustenih gaca?Jedno je kad pocne napad i onda znas na cemu si. U trenutki napada dosta vaznih iranskih sistema ce biti po nekim garazam i skladistima, jer ne verujem da ce u vreme mira da ih vuku po poljima i maskiraju.
- U piranju je bomba za unistavanje bunkera, imas i posebnu temu o njoj, Amerika razvila super bombu od 13 tona , citat sa teme "Bomba ima precnik 80 cm duzinu 6.2 m i masu 13 600 kg od cega 2 700 kg otpada na eksplozivno punjenje.".
E sad sta moze da uradi, u slucaju preciznog pogotka ili male greske, gde bi pritisak pri eksploziji probio infrastrukturu bunkera steta bi bila 105%.
Moze da se izabere dubina na kojoj ce da explodira, to se radi sa zadrskom i moze da omasi koji metar mozda i vise ukoliko se lose proceni materijal kroz koji prodire. Najefikasnija je ako ima direktni pogodak i ako detonira kada prepozna da je prodrla u prostoriju, ali i to ima mane sta ako probije neku tanju stenu ili dodatnu zastitu od betona na povrsini i sledeci lako penetrirajuci sloj prepozna kao ulazak u prostoriju. Po meni najbolji ucinak bi imala ako detonira tek kad se zaustavi, pa ako je probila prostorije i prosla kroz pod, ili se zaustavila u svodnoj konstrukciji, detonacija bi imala zadovoljavajuci ucinak.
U WWII englezi su imali ako se nevaram bombu od 7t ili punjenu sa 7t eksploziva, radjena je u ogranicenim kolicinama i bombarderi koji su je nosili ako je nisu odbacili morali su da slete sa njom, ali to je za drugu temu. E sada ako me secanje dobro sluzi mislim da su sa njom gadjali neki most u nemackoj i ako je ona pala na 100-300m od mosta, most je bio porusen od potresa koji je izazvala. Tako da ovom bombom da pogode i na 1km od podzemnog postrojenja sa centrifugama ili reaktorom, postrojenje bi bilo toliko osteceno da bi jedino sto mogu iranci bilo da ga plombiraju betonom, jer bi potres pokidao instalacije i potpuno kontaminirao objekat. Nezaboravi da je ovih danasnjih skoto 3t eksploziva sigurno jace od 7t iz WWII.
- Ti ko da nisi bio u Srbiji 99. a mozda i nisi jer si iz Rusije, nije bilo nikakvog ogranicenja u prvom naletu su gadjali sve moguce i nemoguce vojne ciljeve, posle par dana su krenuli da gadjaju i sve privredne ciljeve. I gotovo svaki cilj su gadjali vise puta. Gotovo da nema vojnog i bitnog industrijskog objekta koji nije razoren. Da je rat potrajao jos 1-2 meseca, verovatno bi piloti dobili odresene ruke da mogu da bacaju bombe po svom nahodjenju jer su pre okoncanja bombardovanja ostali bez rentabilnih ciljeva, ali o tome u nekim drugim temama kada se bude moglo ozbiljno analizirati bez prepucavanja.
Kazes u zalivu vise avioncica, pa mozda su imali vise avioncica u vijetnamu i u ratu sa severnom korejom. Nas su krenuli napadati sa oko 500, a do kraja su imali raspolozivih preko 1000 aviona, zasto su morali da poduplaju broj aviona, a da pritom napadaju sve manje ciljeva ko ce ga znati, vremenom ce mnogi privatni snimci zapadnih penzionisanih pilota se pojaviti na netu.
Jedno je sigurno, Iran je na daleko visem nivou sto se tice tehnike od nas 99., takodje kvantitet je na njihovoj strani. Dubina teritorije je ogromna, pa im avioni nebi padali po okolnim zemljama ako bi napali po dubini. Glavni problem je kako poceti rat i uci u iznurivanje a da pritom nemas prevelike gubitke, Iran nemogu gaziti, prvih par meseci bi bili iznurivanje iranske vojske da trosi ubs i gubi moral. Ako nemas okupatora narodu dosadi rat posle mesec dana ili se navikne na njega ako ga ne pritisnes dovoljno. Model za to jos nije razradjen i zato jos nema napada. Jer je precizni udar nemoguc.
Mnogo si BRE postavio pitanja, mogao bi na tome da napisem doktorat
Izrael ako bude učestvovao to če biti na drugom frontu tj.moguče je da krenu u kampanju u Libanu kako bi neutralisali jednu od poluga Iranske asimetr. doktrine i kapacitete Hezbolaha koji bi odgovorio masovnim napadom na Izrael u slučaju napada na Iran.
Što se tiče ostali Arapski susjeda pogtovo Iraka ulaska skoro sigurno u direktan sukob neće biti jer bi to dovelo do pada režima u tim zemljama,pogotovo u zemljama kao što su Irak i Bahrein gdje su šiti većina,u Bahrenu su Saudijci u zadnji čas spasili režim ulaskom sa tenkovima i vojskom.
Neke zemlje če ustupiti svoj VAP i to je to,Irak če vjerovatno pokušati izostaviti iz sukoba zbog pro Američke vlade koja bi sigurno pala i vjerovatno bi Irak ušao u gradjanski rat, i sada se jedva održava mir .
Sa S-200 i modifikacijama Iran se obezbedio da USA nemoze da ih napadne iz svoje indijsko okeanske baze dijega, jer tankeri u vazduhu bi bili u dometu. Za napad sa zapada Sirija lovi tankere. A Avganistan je propao, svoje avio baze tamo nebi mogli da odrzavaju i snabdevaju u slucaju rata sa Iranom.
Nece ovde biti rata nikada, mozda samo ako je to ekonomski neophodno, jer Iran vise nije meta koja se moze gaziti avionima.
Mogu da uniste Iransko vazduhoplovstvo. Ali nemogu da osiguraju sigurne napade ni na 50% teritorije, jer bi pvo bila isuvise jaka i posle par meseci udara.
Tano ::Sa S-200 i modifikacijama Iran se obezbedio da USA nemoze da ih napadne iz svoje indijsko okeanske baze dijega, jer tankeri u vazduhu bi bili u dometu.
