Largest Non-Nuclear Bomb in world dropped on Afghanistan

Depp

RoboKlopp wrote: »

Yeah, true fair enough. Don't know **** all about how those military calls are made so I won't pretend I do. I just know Trump can make calls himself and bypass a lot of it if he chooses.

Would they make big calls like the recent bombings without his backing? Doubt it

the ones in syria? the difference there is it was technically not an active warzone for the us thats why presidential approval was required, congressional should have been too though not quite sure how they got around that one!

Also he can call for attacks no doubt but as far as I'm aware he shouldn't be allowed to without running it by congress either. I'm fairly sure military top brass have a veto aswel as they have practical knowledge on tactics etc the president will not have.

Beyondgone

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

Widdershins

Beyondgone wrote: »

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

The Pentagon's Brain:The definitive history of DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, by Annie Jacobsen. If you want to scare yourself. Not so much about the protocol, but the weaponry.

Beyondgone

Widdershins wrote: »

The Pentagon's Brain:The definitive history of DARPA, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency, by Annie Jacobsen. If you want to scare yourself.

Britains GCSQ scares me enough. I don't need Darpa in my life. :eek:

Depp

Beyondgone wrote: »

I'm just stunned so many people on Boards know the ins and outs of White House/US Military protocols. We're a knowledgeable bunch.

seemed like it was common knowledge when obama was in office!
I dunno I find that whole end of things interesting!

Gatling

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

He can go a lot bigger.

The US is already using a system to drop 60,000 lb. (30 tonne) loads with GPS guidance.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Precision_Airdrop_System
That's about 100 barrels if you want to compare.


And back in 1974 they dropped a Minuteman ICBM out the back of a C5, and fired it. 86,000 lb Compare to it the "MOAB" is a tiddler.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8b8LLcdBaQc

Safe to say that nothing​ is off limits when it comes to American military ideas

Digital Solitude

Depp wrote: »

Not posting this to call out Digital Solitude but feel its important to clarify that all of these claims have proven to be gigantic exaggerations or just flat out lies.
Again not calling out anyone just the info, which is false. Outside of a mile from the blast other than a slight possibility of shattered glass or knocking stuff over the worst you can expect is hearing a loud bang and for any ear bleeding you would need to be well within a mile.

Honestly I was hoping the bomb was a little more exciting.

I've no problem with being called out as incorrect, as I hope I've shown already on thread and boards in general. My posts were inaccurate, those who know more have corrected me, sound. I want to be informed, not right.

I might fix it when I sober up.

Also, **** ya Depp let me have something.

Was the IS militants count only 16? Disappointing, I was hoping for at least 50 dead animals, is there a full casualty toll?

*kudos to GalwayGuy35 for immediately calling bull****, even if I didn't believe him

Depp

Digital Solitude wrote: »

Honestly I was hoping the bomb was a little more exciting.

I've no problem with being called out as incorrect, as I hope I've shown already on thread and boards in general. My posts were inaccurate, those who know more have corrected me, sound. I want to be informed, not right.

I might fix it when I sober up.

Also, **** ya Depp let me have something.

Was the IS militants count only 16? Disappointing, I was hoping for at least 50 dead animals, is there a full casualty toll?

haha sorry lad nothing personal :D

Also according to afghan officials via al jazeera upwards of 90 isis fighters dead and thats based on bodies found so you can only imagine the number is higher than that. Real value in the attack though is the infrastructure and stockpiles of supplies and equipment they had stockpiled at the base.

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2017/04/afghanistan-scores-isil-fighters-dead-moab-raid-170415071056526.html

ilkhanid

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Nah, mach 3 is normal for tungsten projectiles , but they don't burst into flames. That would be the depleted uranium ones.
"Rods from God" isn't Sci Fi either, just very, very expensive to do.
Forget that, it's not expensive. Spacex could put 4 five tonne tungsten rods in orbit for $63 million , which is about the same price as 4 MOAB's to give an idea of how insanely expensive these weapons are.
IIRC if something is travelling at 3Km/s then it's kinetic energy is same as an equivalent weight of TNT. Faster and it's even more.

That's the weapon that destroyed London in G.I. Joe:Retaliation.
Great film if you like scenes of destruction. Otherwise, not

Pugzilla

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

Pugzilla

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

PREG1967

Pugzilla wrote: »

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated. A strike using multiple bombs like JDAM is far more destructive and effective

how about multiples of the MOAB?

Capt'n Midnight

Pugzilla wrote: »

Significance of this weapon is completely exaggerated

True

The death toll from a bomb blast on a crowded Syrian bus convoy outside Aleppo yesterday has reached at least 112 http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0416/868061-syria-aleppo/


Death toll from 'mother of all bombs' reaches 90 http://www.rte.ie/news/2017/0415/867905-afghanistan/

"The Trump administration made a lot of noise with this bomb, but the general state of play on the ground remains the same: The Taliban continues to wage a formidable and ferocious insurgency. ISIS, by comparison, is a sideshow," Michael Kugelman of the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington told AFP, using an alternative acronym for IS.

"Still, from a strategic standpoint, there is an unsettling takeaway here: The US pulled off a huge shock and awe mission against an enemy that isn't even the top threat to the US in Afghanistan. The Taliban continues to sit pretty."

Capt'n Midnight

PREG1967 wrote: »

how about multiples of the MOAB?

Too expensive at 300 million for 20. Also there's only 20 19 18 left at most.



But this suggests a lower price if you exclude development costs and costs to restart production. So comparable price per Kg as the Daisy Cutter or normal iron bombs.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-moab-bomb-cost-mother-of-all-bombs-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

One MOAB costs about $170,000, an Air Force representative said Friday. The Air Force has not confirmed the development costs associated with the larger weapons system.

Pugzilla

MOAB is like the Tsar Bomba of conventional bombs, not very useful in real life outside of propaganda purposes.

PREG1967

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Too expensive at 300 million for 20. Also there's only 20 19 18 left at most.



But this suggests a lower price if you exclude development costs and costs to restart production. So comparable price per Kg as the Daisy Cutter or normal iron bombs.
http://uk.businessinsider.com/how-much-does-moab-bomb-cost-mother-of-all-bombs-2017-4?r=US&IR=T

surely in an all out war scenario costs are inconsequential and bigger is better

Pugzilla

PREG1967 wrote: »

surely in an all out war scenario costs are inconsequential and bigger is better

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

PREG1967

Pugzilla wrote: »

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

but multiple strikes with a larger bomb will kill more, come on its obvious the only issue is the possible extra cost but that would be negated during mass production, get real

.........

Pugzilla wrote: »

No, multiple strikes with a smaller bomb is far better at killing your enemy.

not if they are underground in caves, every bomb has it's job.

.........

I'd like to see the US test NNEMP as well, but I doubt Afghanistan would be the right theatre to test it in.

Russia have cleverly used Syria as convenient testing ground for their weapons and operations.

PREG1967

......... wrote: »

I'd like to see the US test NNEMP as well, but I doubt Afghanistan would be the right theatre to test it in.

Russia have cleverly used Syria as convenient testing ground for their weapons and operations.

the dogs on the street know that Obama was using electronic warfare plus cyber attacks against NK, hence 88% failure rates on certain missiles, NNEMP is just a larger scale of this electronic warfare and will only be used when war breaks out

.........

PREG1967 wrote: »

the dogs on the street know that Obama was using electronic warfare plus cyber attacks against NK, hence 88% failure rates on certain missiles, NNEMP is just a larger scale of this electronic warfare and will only be used when war breaks out

Obama was a ponce.
There's always a war somewhere for the US, they just have to find the right one to test and improve it in.

Pugzilla

......... wrote: »

not if they are underground in caves, every bomb has it's job.

None of the US strategic bombers can carry a single weapon that big. MOAB has to be thrown out the back of a C-130.

If you want to demoralise your enemy, then just carpet bomb the sh*t out of them. Didn't help in Vietnam though.

Destroying underground targets was never the MOAB's intended purpose. It's the successor to the BLU-82, which was used for clearing forests and psychological warfare. They detonate before they hit the ground, most of the energy goes into the atmosphere.

The "bunker buster" bombs are used for destroying cave complexes. They penetrate through the ground before exploding.

This was a PR stunt.

.........

Pugzilla wrote: »

None of the US strategic bombers can carry a single weapon that big. MOAB has to be thrown out the back of a C-130.

If you want to demoralise your enemy, then just carpet bomb the sh*t out of them. Didn't help in Vietnam though.

Destroying underground targets was never the MOAB's intended purpose. It's the successor to the BLU-82, which was used for clearing forests and psychological warfare. They detonate before they hit the ground, most of the energy goes into the atmosphere.

The "bunker buster" bombs are used for destroying cave complexes. They penetrate through the ground before exploding.

This was a PR stunt.

So ? As I said every bomb has it's job.

Pugzilla

......... wrote: »

So ? As I said every bomb has it's job.

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

.........

Pugzilla wrote: »

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

no, I said it was dropped to deal with their caves, and is imminently well-suited to collapsing cave openings and killing combatants within the local area. The US know a lot more about bombing and weapon selection than you do.

Gatling

Pugzilla wrote: »

You thought it was designed for destroying underground targets.

No it's a thermobaric weapon and creates a massive fireball and a huge vacuum sucking the oxygen out of a enclosed space ,more suited to caves and tunnel complexes than a jdam munition

Samaris

Well, it worked anyway.

Samaris

Depp wrote: »

this is a false narrative...if you think the president actually makes tactical calls like this you're deluded...active warzone so he didnt even have to give approval for the strike to go ahead.

In this specific case, you appear to be correct; http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/afghanistan-commander-not-trump-approved-massive-bomb-strike-reports-say/article/2620294

However, my explanation of the system, in which I did state he was delegating more power to the generals to make these calls, was roughly accurate rather than "deluded", so you could refrain from being rude about it.

Beyondgone

Samaris wrote: »

Well, it worked anyway.

Kims seriously huffy today. His didn't.