Building a Bigger Bomb

[BachQ]

Navy Tests High-Powered Electromagnetic Railgun
Thursday, January 31, 2008



DAHLGREN, Va. —  A futuristic weapon getting a trial run by the Navy demonstrated its destructive power at the Naval Surface Warfare Center in Dahlgren.

In the demonstration Thursday, engineers fired the electromagnetic railgun at what they said was a record power level: 10 megajoules.

The previous railgun power-use record was about 9 megajoules of muzzle energy.

Railguns use electromagnetic energy to launch projectiles long distances — more than 200 nautical miles.

Because the railgun uses electricity and not gunpowder to fire projectiles, it eliminates the possibility of explosions on ships.

The Navy hopes the railgun will eventually replace the standard 5-inch gun on its ships. The weapon isn't expected to be deployed until at least 2020.

[A joule is defined as the energy needed to produce one watt of electricity for one second.

The railgun tested Thursday actually has a capacity of 32 megajoules, but the Navy is slowly building up the energy level in a series of tests.

That's a lot of power, but with a new series of electrically-powered ships coming on line, the Navy figures generating capacity will not be a problem.

According to the Navy, the railgun, when fully developed, will be able to launch solid projectiles at Mach 5, or about 3,700 mph.]





From CNN.COM

Russia tests 'dad of all bombs'

MOSCOW, Russia (AP) -- The Russian military has successfully tested what it described as the world's most powerful non-nuclear air-delivered bomb, Russia's state television reported Tuesday.

It was the latest show of Russia's military muscle amid chilly relations with the United States.

Channel One television said the new weapon, nicknamed the "dad of all bombs" is four times more powerful than the U.S. "mother of all bombs."
"The tests have shown that the new air-delivered ordnance is comparable to a nuclear weapon in its efficiency and capability," said Col.-Gen. Alexander Rukshin, a deputy chief of the Russian military's General Staff, said in televised remarks. 

Unlike a nuclear weapon, the bomb doesn't hurt the environment, he added.

The statement reflected the Kremlin's efforts to restore Russia's global clout and rebuild the nation's military might while the ties with Washington have been strained over U.S. criticism of Russia's backsliding on democracy, Moscow's vociferous protests of U.S. missile defense plans, and rifts over global crises.

The U.S. Massive Ordnance Air Blast, nicknamed the Mother Of All Bombs, is a large-yield satellite-guided, air-delivered bomb described as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon in history.

Channel One said that while the Russian bomb contains 7.8 tons of high explosives compared to more than 8 tons of explosives in the U.S. bomb, it's four times more powerful because it uses a new, highly efficient type of explosives that the report didn't identify.

While the U.S. bomb is equivalent to 11 tons of TNT, the Russian one is equivalent to 44 tons of regular explosives. The Russian weapon's blast radius is 990 feet, twice as big as that of the U.S. design, the report said.   Like its U.S. predecessor, first tested in 2003, the Russian bomb is a "thermobaric" weapon that explodes in an intense fireball combined with a devastating blast. It explodes in a terrifying nuclear bomb-like mushroom cloud and wreaks destruction through a massive shock wave created by the air burst and high temperature.

Thermobaric weapons work on the same principle that causes blasts in grain elevators and other dusty places -- clouds of fine particles are highly explosive. Such explosions produce shock waves that can be directed and amplified in enclosed spaces such as buildings, caves or tunnels.

Channel One said that the temperature in the epicenter of the Russian bomb's explosion is twice as high as that of the U.S. bomb.

The report showed the bomb dropped by parachute from a Tu-160 strategic bomber and exploding in a massive fireball. It featured the debris of apartment buildings and armored vehicles at a test range, as well as the scorched ground from a massive blast.

It didn't give the bomb's military name or say when it was tested.

Rukshin said the new bomb would allow the military to "protect the nation's security and confront international terrorism in any situation and any region."

"We have got a relatively cheap ordnance with a high strike power," Yuri Balyko, head of the Defense Ministry's institute in charge of weapons design, told Channel One.

Booming oil prices have allowed Russia to steadily increase military spending in recent years, and the Kremlin has taken a more assertive posture in global affairs.

Last month, President Vladimir Putin said he ordered the resumption of regular patrols of strategic bombers, which were suspended after the 1991 Soviet breakup.

[Harry]

What a madness this is. Wanting to destroy life, instead of giving.

[Josquin des Prez]

Wow, it's the cold war all over again.

[karlhenning]

I wonder what Commander Guy will Decide?

[sound67]

The U.S. Massive Ordnance Air Blast, nicknamed the Mother Of All Bombs, is a large-yield satellite-guided, air-delivered bomb described as the most powerful non-nuclear weapon in history.

THIS I think is the important part.

[BachQ]

The original CNN article includes this link to the exploding bomb:

http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/europe/09/12/russia.bomb.ap/index.html#cnnSTCVideo

[Kullervo]

I actually heard them testing the MOAB here in Florida a few years ago.

[JoshLilly]

I only hope that the fact that such bombs don't have the virtually permanent and global damage of nuclear bombs won't make their owners more likely to use them. One of the deterrents now of nuclear bombs is that if enough are used on the other side of the world, you and yours will die too, even if not one bomb lands on your turf. My boss comes from a background in nuclear physics and was talking about when the U.S.S.R. tested one nuclear bomb how he and his team couldn't even enter their lab due to the heavy contamination of that bomb, just from being outside - in the United States, thousands of miles away! He said bad stuff (various particles) from old tests in the 1950s is still zipping around the earth to this day. While this is horrible, it also (hopefully!) makes people less likely to employ them. A gargantuan classical bomb would apparently not have the same self-damaging punishment for its use.

You drop a nuke on someone, you hurt yourself too. You drop a bunch of nukes on your worst enemy and, even if nobody else drops a single one, you're consigning the entire planet to probable death. But you drop a non-nuclear gigantic bomb on a city and it doesn't kill your own people, just Them. I don't know, maybe they'd still hold back on using such a weapon for the fear of Them using nukes in response.

[head-case]

What a madness this is. Wanting to destroy life, instead of giving.

The Russians should take a page from the Chinese.  The way to hurt the US is to sell us millions upon millions of cheap children's toys saturated with lead paint. 

[BachQ]

I only hope that the fact that such bombs don't have the virtually permanent and global damage of nuclear bombs won't make their owners more likely to use them. One of the deterrents now of nuclear bombs is that if enough are used on the other side of the world, you and yours will die too, even if not one bomb lands on your turf.

That's precisely why these bombs are so frightening: unlike nuclear weapons (which destroy both sides), these bombs destroy only the target, and leave the aggressor unscathed.  No deadly aftermath with 300 year half-lives.  The only deterrent is the imminent retaliation of the target and its allies. 

Given Russia's new-found military might, we know that the Pentagon will ask for, and receive, hundreds of billions of dollars in additional funding to out-blast the Russians and the Chinese ....... and thus the vicious cycle will continue into perpetuity.

[karlhenning]

Ah well, one more unfortunate after-effect of "my way or the highway" . . . .

[Saul]

Russia is broken, that's why it's resorting to these type of tests.
Remember Goliath, how he flexed his muscles  in front of King David.
What King David do?

He took five little stones and threw it up in the air and they landed on Goliath's head.

The powerful don't need to show their power. The weak and broken resort to muscle flexing to hide their true situation and insecurities.

[Lethevich]

Russia is broken, that's why it's resorting to these type of tests.
Remember Goliath, how he flexed his muscles  in front of King David.
What King David do?

He took five little stones and threw it up in the air and they landed on Goliath's head.

The powerful don't need to show their power. The weak and broken resort to muscle flexing to hide their true situation and insecurities.

Hehe, I sort of agree. The recent sabre rattling from Russia is kind of amusing, and yet its population appear swallowing it hook line and sinker

"Look, our bombers are beginning threatening patrols again! Our nation can once again bring terror and oppression to the world!"

You would think that the Russian public would prefer the money being spent to improve their broken healthcare system, or the crippling social problems, but evidently not.

[BachQ]

Apparently, Russia has tons of oil revenue pouring in ....... and now we know where they're spending it .......

[karlhenning]

You would think that the Russian public would prefer the money being spent to improve their broken healthcare system, or the crippling social problems, but evidently not.

And can we judge how the American public would prefer their money spent, by the behavior of the current administration?

[Lethevich]

And can we judge how the American public would prefer their money spent, by the behavior of the current administration?

The public don't like it, though. Technically the majority didn't want him to get a second term, and the support for his military campaigning is very much smaller now. On the other hand, Putin's actions are wildly popular according to any source I've read.

[BachQ]

Technically the majority didn't want him to get a second term,

  That's true!

[karlhenning]

The public don't like it, though. Technically the majority didn't want him to get a second term, and the support for his military campaigning is very much smaller now. On the other hand, Putin's actions are wildly popular according to any source I've read.

I can't speak for your sources.  The word I have from friends in Russia does not bespeak wild popularity.

[Lethevich]

I can't speak for your sources.  The word I have from friends in Russia does not bespeak wild popularity.

I guess we'll have to hope that Putin's replacement isn't so... old school. Although given what a control freak he is, he must be trying to have a hand in approving whoever is next in line...

Edit: BTW, it's easy to be centered on ones own culture in matters like this, so thanks for offering an alternative view - it still annoys me though, no matter how sympathetic the people involved are. IMO the recent and continuing rise in wealth in Russia being spent on threatening things rather than improving the country is inexcusable in... many ways.

[david johnson]

it's an fae (fuel-air explosive).  we've had them since viet nam.  you can't deliver it except by giant transport plane.

dj