Flash! Textron Begins CBU-105 Weapon Deliveries To India

[IND151]

These are some 90 Iraqi tanks...





...destroyed by 3 CBU-97 (CBU-105 family; without WCMD guidance kit) dropped by 1 B-52 bomber.

The Jaguars are gonna turn into serious critters with the addition of this new SFW, the
enemy ground forces are in for some serious clobbering, IAF is getting 512 such bombs
with possibilty of follow-on orders.

will Rafael be able to use these bombs?

 

[Skull and Bones]

J10A tests new sub muniton weapons in March

That's dumb gravity bombs. I wonder who's more dumber, the bomb or the corps trying to steer those dumb gravity bombs with a laser designator.

 

[Sergi]

That's dumb gravity bombs. I wonder who's more dumber, the bomb or the corps trying to steer those dumb gravity bombs with a laser designator.

I put my money on the dude

 

[Sergi]

These are some 90 Iraqi tanks...





...destroyed by 3 CBU-97 (CBU-105 family; without WCMD guidance kit) dropped by 1 B-52 bomber.

The Jaguars are gonna turn into serious critters with the addition of this new SFW, the
enemy ground forces are in for some serious clobbering, IAF is getting 512 such bombs
with possibilty of follow-on orders.

Look like these toys were fried in sleep otherwise you won't get that much tanks that much close in battle field.
Still hell of effective thing

 

[somebozo]

These are some 90 Iraqi tanks...





...destroyed by 3 CBU-97 (CBU-105 family; without WCMD guidance kit) dropped by 1 B-52 bomber.

The Jaguars are gonna turn into serious critters with the addition of this new SFW, the
enemy ground forces are in for some serious clobbering, IAF is getting 512 such bombs
with possibilty of follow-on orders.

Ohh boy soo much scrap when we do start trading?

 

[Gessler]

That's dumb gravity bombs. I wonder who's more dumber, the bomb or the corps trying to steer those dumb gravity bombs with a laser designator.

Only china has indigenously developed the technology needed to laser-guide dumb bombs.

and type-052d has developed an indigenous way to publicize such an event.

 

[Gessler]

will Rafael be able to use these bombs?

Ofcourse. Along with "Hammer" AASM.

 

[Sergi]

Ofcourse. Along with "Hammer" AASM.

Are you sure such integration is in place already ???

 

[Gessler]

Ohh boy soo much scrap when we do start trading?

Dont worry soon you'll have your own scrap piling up as soon as they come near the Indian border

 

[Gessler]

Are you sure such integration is in place already ???

No. As of now, Rafale has only French weapons. But we can install them later, just like we prefer
the Israeli Litening-III/G4 LDP over the Damocles XF offer.

The IAF Rafale will be another MKIsed plan, fully customised for our own needs and requirements.

 

[The Great One]

Correct me if i am wrong gessler, but didnt you copy those tank photos and lines from some 'enlightened' dude at IDF

 

[Gessler]

Correct me if i am wrong gessler, but didnt you copy those tank photos and lines from some 'enlightened' dude at IDF

Ofcourse, I got the pics from him and the first lines too.

Only the last para is mine.

 

[sancho]

You mean to say we'll never get to drop that bomb?

Everything has a counterweight in this world. But that does not negate anything's effect completely.

Its true enemies have air defences better than Iraq, but then every offence has a defence! Because enemy
has SAMs, are fighters useless? Bcoz they have MANPADS, are helos useless? Going by that line, no one
can ever shoot down anyone.

No ground-attack jet is brought in until air superiority is secured and major AA/SAM emplacements
have been taken out. I only want to show what this bomb can do if dropped on an Armor column.

We don't have WW2 anymore where the fighters has to drop their bombs in close distance to the target, while beeing vulnerable to air defences. It's nice that you can hit a wide area with this weapon and if the situation is good enough to use it, it will be used, but in modern warfare you don't risk a 50 to 100$ million dollar fighter just to take out some tanks. Today you use weapons not only with high precision, but also with longer ranges, to reduce the risk for the fighter. Remember the attacks of French Rafales with AASM against Libyan tanks from from nearly 60km away? And that was in the early stage of the war, the other fighters entered the war only after heavy cruise missile strikes to take out as many air defences and air bases as possible. Only then you will send in fighters with bombs, or A2G missiles.
That's why I said, the use of this weapon in our case will be much more difficult than it was in Iraq for example.

Well, there are some here that consistently downplay the effectiveness of US weapons.

Lol, it has nothing to do with the effectiveness of the weapon, but with the risks for the fighter, as well as the way more capable opponents and strangely this time we even agree here:

typically strike package will include elements that are tasked with suppression or destruction of enemy air defense. These assets go in first and are always the last to leave enemy airspace, allowing other aircrafts to deliver its munitions and RTB...
...The CBU-105 and all unpropelled air dropped munitions including some guided PGM's are not standoff weapons. Standoff weapons like the Harpoon or the French Exocet allow the user to engage a threat from a safe distance.

To minimize this risk to the users of the CBU-105 the WCMD (Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser) was conceived and made operational. The WCMD is a add on kit to the CBU-105 that allows the pilot to safely engage the target from a stand-off range of between 20 Km-65 km. The WCMD also permits high altitude (40,000 ft) high speed (650 Knots) release of the CBU-105 further reducing the risk to the user.

That's not correct though:

CBU-105 Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD)

...By incorporating Lockheed Martin's Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD) tail kit on SFW, which then redesignated SFW as a CBU-105, the delivery altitude increases up to 40,000 feet and standoff ranges up to 12 miles can be achieved...

CBU-105 Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD)

That are hardly 20Km at max, without WCMD only 9 miles / around 14Km are possible and as you said yourself, to strike a target in such ranges is riskier and requires taking out air defences before that.

 

[DrSomnath999]

@ SANCHO ,DBC (madam) & GESSY DARLING.

U GUYS are making a simple thing more hairy & messy.

Plz dont forget in IRAQ it was used on battalion of tanks which had no air support & SAM defences ,also IRAQI's T72 had some serious armour flaws in it's upper turret.So it was smooth kill

but in this scenario we are going to have a better armoured tank battalion enemies along with proper air support ,but one must use his common sense that any jet is not going alone with cluster bombs on it's wing tips with no air to air weapons or air to ground weapons .
Not to forget that it is going to accompanied by a formation of fighters like one for escort for the jaguars & to take out enemy air defences .

 

[dbc]

That's not correct though:



CBU-105 Wind Corrected Munition Dispenser (WCMD)

That are hardly 20Km at max, without WCMD only 9 miles / around 14Km are possible and as you said yourself, to strike a target in such ranges is riskier and requires taking out air defences before that.

That's correct the WMCD max range under ideal conditions is 20 kilometers. The extended range kit on the other hand increase the range of the munition (CBU-115) to 65 km same as the AASM. But the difference is the AASM must hit the target with precision ideally a CEP of less than 5 meters, the CBU-105 or CBU-115 (ER) on the other hand needs delivery precision of roughly one football field in length. From a pilots perspective the CBU-115 is less risky since the weapons release envelope is much wider than the AASM. This is a pointless discussion since the IAF does not share your point of view and picked the CBU-105 over the extended range CBU-115 obviously yet again you are right and the IAF is wrong.