Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Russia Tests Most Powerful Non-nuke Weapon  
User currently offlineA342 From Germany, joined Jul 2005, 4675 posts, RR: 3
Posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 3 hours ago) and read 2642 times:

Supposedly it is 4 times as strong as the US MOAB. Here we go:

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...lds-most-powerful-vacuum-bomb.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/world...idUSL1155952320070911?pageNumber=2


Exceptions confirm the rule.
12 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlinePADSpot From Germany, joined Jan 2005, 1676 posts, RR: 5
Reply 1, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 2 hours ago) and read 2638 times:

Quoting A342 (Thread starter):
Supposedly it is 4 times as strong as the US MOAB.

Interstingly it is also 4 tons lighter and can be dropped from a strategic bomber such as a Tu-160. In the video it looks somewhat unguided to me.



User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days 1 hour ago) and read 2586 times:

Quoting A342 (Thread starter):
4 tons lighte



Quoting A342 (Thread starter):
4 times as strong



Quoting PADSpot (Reply 1):
In the video it looks somewhat unguided to me.

Interestingly enough it is 4 times less accurate, 4 times uglier, 4 times less likely to work, and 4 times less likely to ever be used again.
(Not slammin you A342 and PADSpot, just the Russians  Wink)

Typical Russian "My stick is biggger than yours but I know not how to use it" IMHO


User currently offlineSAS A340 From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 764 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 2 days ago) and read 2518 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 2):
Interestingly enough it is 4 times less accurate

How do u know?

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 2):
4 times uglier

And ?

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 2):
4 times less likely to work

How do u know?

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 2):
and 4 times less likely to ever be used again.

Hopefully!



It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
User currently offlineKevinSmith From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2500 times:

Quoting SAS A340 (Reply 3):
How do u know?

I don't, I was making a joke. Stereotyping if you will. 4x uglier because it is Russian (Russian things aren't designed with beauty in mind) 4x less accurate because the Russians don't need to be accurate they just need a big enough boom, etc, etc.

[Edited 2007-09-13 01:13:41]

User currently offlineSAS A340 From Sweden, joined Jul 2000, 764 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 2486 times:

Quoting KevinSmith (Reply 4):
Russian things aren't designed with beauty in mind)

In this case i agree with you,but they do some nice looking fighter jets.  Wink

Cheers // Stefan.



It's not what u do,it's how u do it!
User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2411 times:

Sorry, but most Russian claims about their hardware during the cold war were Grade A BS. Remember the "scary" MiG-25?
You first have to get into a position to deliver such a weapon. That's OK, Ivan wasting his money is a good thing.  Smile



Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineOroka From Canada, joined Dec 2006, 906 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

So they shoved a few tons of explosives out of a plane and detonated it a few feet off the ground. Strap a few USAF MOABs together, shove it out of a C-5, then sing some patriaotic American song and watch shiat get bloweded the heck up!

User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29705 posts, RR: 59
Reply 8, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 19 hours ago) and read 2387 times:

This is not the same type of weapon as MOAB. It's role is much closer to the old "Daisy Cutter" (Are any left in inventory?)

It makes a big bang, and arguable is deployed from a more survivable platform then a C-130 but it won't penetrate ground like the MOAB.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineVHNSJ From Australia, joined Jun 2007, 21 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 2367 times:

with a weapon such as this accuracy is not such a big factor as it would pretty much clean up everything within a certain radius

User currently offlineThorny From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 2356 times:

Quoting VHNSJ (Reply 9):
with a weapon such as this accuracy is not such a big factor as it would pretty much clean up everything within a certain radius

So does carpet bombing,


User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29705 posts, RR: 59
Reply 11, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2336 times:

Quoting VHNSJ (Reply 9):
with a weapon such as this accuracy is not such a big factor as it would pretty much clean up everything within a certain radius

That is why I compared it to the old US Daisy Cutter, which was designed to clear out helicopter landing zones.

It was only during Desert Storm that we really got into rocking people's worlds with the things.



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineWvsuperhornet From United States of America, joined Aug 2007, 516 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (6 years 7 months 2 weeks 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 2326 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 11):
That is why I compared it to the old US Daisy Cutter, which was designed to clear out helicopter landing zones.

It was only during Desert Storm that we really got into rocking people's worlds with the things.

It does look like a Daisy Cutter bomb the US uses by the looks of th blasts I doubt its any larger if you can find one of the original video's of the MOAB bomb going off when they first tested it th blast looks considerably smaller on the Russian one.


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic Russia Tests Most Powerful Non-nuke Weapon
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Russia Starting New Patrols With "old" Aircraft. posted Fri Aug 17 2007 18:26:12 by Readytotaxi
Multi $bn US Weapon Deal With Mid-East States posted Sat Jul 28 2007 17:02:46 by Ant72LBA
Dread Weapon System posted Mon Jul 16 2007 20:26:33 by Blackbird
Russia Fires New Ballistic Missile posted Tue May 29 2007 19:13:21 by Beaucaire
When The Weapon Is Just Jet Noise At Low Level posted Wed May 23 2007 00:14:38 by GDB
B-1 Video (In Russia!) posted Sat May 19 2007 04:31:46 by Braud65
Using The Prop As A Weapon (WWII) posted Sat Feb 3 2007 01:01:24 by Sean1234
Russia Engine Embargo Derails JF-17 Sale posted Thu Jan 25 2007 15:27:19 by Lumberton
Russia Receives First Su-34 posted Fri Jan 5 2007 12:56:41 by A342
Boeing Begins Flight Tests Of Laser Gunship posted Sat Oct 14 2006 03:04:08 by AerospaceFan

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format