Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Discussion in 'World Armed Forces' started by tphuang, Mar 24, 2006.

  1. Vlad Plasmius
    Offline

    Vlad Plasmius Junior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    487
    Likes Received:
    1
    Russian reveals unmanned stealth bomber:

    Source: Voice of America

    This page has a few pictures of the bomber.

    http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1885488/posts
     
  2. FriedRiceNSpice
    Offline

    FriedRiceNSpice Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    327
    http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5jixX4YqeeXCrWvmEEv9JMABhXmVw

    How useful do you guys think such a weapon will be? Would it be a tactical weapon for use on enemy troops, or used on enemy airfields, command structure, industry, or resources? What kind of utility does big bombs have today?

    Personally, my gut feeling is that this bad boy will do some serious damage to anyone unfortunate enough to face it.
     
  3. Pointblank
    Offline

    Pointblank Senior Member

    Joined:
    Oct 2, 2006
    Messages:
    1,775
    Likes Received:
    2
    It is a limited use weapon. The only platform that can carry the MOAB in USAF service isn't a bomber: it's a cargo plane, the C-130 Herc. It is useful for clearing swaths of land for landing zones or for use as a psychological weapon. 2000lb and smaller bombers are more useful, accurate, and when used in large groups, can be more effective than just 1 big bomb.
     
  4. FriedRiceNSpice
    Offline

    FriedRiceNSpice Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,698
    Likes Received:
    327
    Ah I kind of suspected that; so this is more of a propaganda weapon used to boost the image of the Russian military than a weapon of any practable use. Using cargo planes to drop on enemy group armies does not seem like an operation with a high rate of sucess.
     
  5. Violet Oboe
    Offline

    Violet Oboe Junior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2006
    Messages:
    458
    Likes Received:
    1
    Guys please...! :mad:
    A Tu-160 ´Blackjack´is a strategic supersonic bomber quite similar to USAF's B-1B and certainly no cargo plane...:confused: (...so dismissing this ´russian baby´ as an unwieldy or even undeliverable weapon would be premature.:D).

    Nevertheless the most astonishing fact is the extremely high power of the explosive employed in this new russian bomb. MOAB uses a fairly conventional explosive but if the data given in the article is correct this would imply that the new russian ordnance is 5 times (expl.power/volume) more powerful than TNT!

    Publicly known are only explosives (ostensibly in R&D stage) with ratios of 2.6-2.8 ´TNT powers´ and these substances have yet to be produced on an industrial scale (...obviously they have been produced albeit covertly!:D). Although the russian feat does not necessarily indicate that a ratio of 5 was actually reached (other means of ´boosting the bang´may also have been used), Russia may have indeed made a major breakthrough in explosives technology. :coffee:

    (...just wondering what that stuff would be?:D)
     
    #125 Violet Oboe, Sep 12, 2007
    Last edited: Sep 12, 2007
  6. Neutral Zone
    Offline

    Neutral Zone Junior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2006
    Messages:
    218
    Likes Received:
    33
    What's perhaps more significant here is that the Blackjack is being used in a role other than as an ALCM launch platform, which has been it's primary use up to now. It's an awesome aircraft and is theoretically capable of carrying up to 88,000 pounds of conventional bombs. Which is bad news if you're on the receiving end of it!
     
  7. coolieno99
    Offline

    coolieno99 Junior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2005
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    32
    the Russian MOAB weighs about 8 tons. About the same size and weight as the American MOAB. But the explosion core temperature of the Russian MOAB is about twice as high as the American MOAB, thus generating about 4 times the explosive power (Law of Thermodynamic).
    The max. payload of Tu-160 is 40 tons. So it can carried about 5 of these MOABs.
     
  8. DarkEminence
    Offline

    DarkEminence New Member

    Joined:
    May 19, 2006
    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    They both use different ways to destroy.

    The MOAB is a conventional explosive, while the Father of All Bombs is a Fuel Air explosive (in the video, there is a nice picture of the expanding exploding fuel exploding within the shock wave here http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUVctHXwotg).

    Likewise, for comparison the MOAB http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=5938002605435501105

    I still agree it is an astounding weapon and frankly I think it is the start of a new trend of weapons. But, we cannot compare explosives used because they are different weapons.
     
    #128 DarkEminence, Sep 13, 2007
    Last edited: Sep 13, 2007
  9. TerraN_EmpirE
    Offline

    TerraN_EmpirE Tyrant King

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    12,397
    Likes Received:
    10,729
    the TU 160 is not similar to the B1b it's what the B1b should have been it packs a bigger load then the B52. It's more like the B1b looks like the Tu 160

    this raises the question... When will The US pull out the grandmother of all bombs? and who is going to make the uncle bob of all bombs?
     
  10. IDonT
    Offline

    IDonT Senior Member
    VIP Professional

    Joined:
    Aug 29, 2005
    Messages:
    1,091
    Likes Received:
    0
    The trend for the US bombs is towards penetration capability and precision. Some US bombs don't even have explosives, they rely on pure kinetic energy to destroy their target, such a bridge.

    I highly doubt the Tu 140 can carry 5 of these bombs. Its not a question of weight but a question of size. I think that bomb was huge.
     
Loading...

Share This Page