US 'bunker-buster' not powerful enough against Iran

[LeGenD]

Watch this video:

Don't get fooled by media sources.

If one does not works, more can be dropped. Simple.

 

[longbrained]

Want to know how long it take for a non-disturbed uranium enrichment process?

Uranium Enrichment Calculator

Now try to do that while working under the uncertainty of bombardment where in order to protect the centrifuges, long processes of shutdown and start up must be obeyed.

The link to your calculator does not work. And your calculations are all BS. Iran can produce enough weapons grade Uranium above 90% enrichment in just few months, that is if it wants to. The trick is to convert Iran's stockpile of Uranium to 20% grade. Converting from the natural Uranium which is 0.7% to 3.5% is very time consuming. From 3.5% to 20% is also time consuming but not as the first one. From 20% to 90% is much easier and can be done in months using the current Iranian centrifuges both in number and model. Iran is currently using 5000 IR-1 model which is an old one and if they increase the numbers or employ newer models of centrifuges they can go weapons grade in weeks if they choose to do so. And if they make several large enrichment plants using sophisticated centrifuges with an already stocked 20% enriched Uranium, they can go to weapons grade of 90% within days. Much like Japan: The 20 Percent Solution - By Olli Heinonen | Foreign Policy

It is good to know that you have accepted that the US bomb myth is actually a bluff. Well, Iranians are very skeptic and I do not think they believed it in the first place. Iranians have faced earthquakes daily somewhere in their country for thousands of years and your bombs little earthquakes are not going to be noticed at all since Iranian engineers had to take bigger earthquakes in their calculations already: IRIS Seismic Monitor

 

[SQ8]

Why?

Why is it so important to have nuclear weapons?

because reportedly the Saudi's have some..
You didn't think it was because of the Israeli's did you?

 

[amalakas]

because reportedly the Saudi's have some..
You didn't think it was because of the Israeli's did you?

And? Aren't you all a bunch of loving people joined by common religion ?

 

[Oldman1]

The video is great.

Well, I don't disagree with you, you're right. All projectiles depend on gravity to fall down on the target as the main source of energy for falling down, the USA could add rocket assistance to the bomb and that would help the bomb to fall down faster and penetrate more because it will create a higher impulse in a certain time interval, but my point is that Iran can take counter-measures easier and cheaper than the USA can build mightier bunker buster bombs. Iran can create a several layer shield to protect its facilities, the first layers will be soft fibers produced by nano-technology like a web that will embrace the bomb and the web will increase the time factor during the impulse and second layers can be high density materials like depleted uranium with heavy layers of plumb and cement surrounding it or other things. Iran is a very mountainous country and is engulfed by mountains all around it, so it naturally has many perfect places to build underground facilities and can protect them well too. If your bombers try to drop more than one or two bombs, they need to spend a higher amount of time on the target and that increases the risk of being hit by Iran's air defense. So There must be a balance. You must do your job quickly and efficiently. You can't drop something on Iranian facilities that won't finish the job and you can't drop enough bombs on Iran while your bombers are being identified and hit by Iranian air defense. I don't underestimate the US air force though, but it's not easy either.

---------- Post added at 05:07 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:05 PM ----------



True, but even if they succeed in damaging all of our centrifuges, we still have thousands more to replace them, just like what happened in the Stuxnet case. We are operating only one fifth of the number of centrifuges we have and we'll keep doing the same to ensure that our enrichment is not going to be stopped forcefully.

This is nothing new to the U.S. Air Force or Navy. They were prepared against the Soviet Union with its most advanced SAM systems in the world as well as large quantities of them. Since the new bunker busters are GPS guided the B2s don't need to loiter around the target. Just fly near the target, release the bombs and get out. The ones that do loiter around are laser guided.

 

[Arian]

This is nothing new to the U.S. Air Force or Navy. They were prepared against the Soviet Union with its most advanced SAM systems in the world as well as large quantities of them. Since the new bunker busters are GPS guided the B2s don't need to loiter around the target. Just fly near the target, release the bombs and get out. The ones that do loiter around are laser guided.

The USA claimed it was prepared against the Soviet Union,We never saw the USA and the Soviet Union in war to judge how much the USA was prepared as it claimed.
As I said before, I don't underestimate the US Air Force, It's a formidable force, but you're ignoring the fact that it doesn't have infinite capabilities. Yes, the US bunker busters are precision guided bombs using GPS, but they do have limits for the range of operation. They can be dropped on the target from a definite distance, surely you can't drop them on Iran if your B2's fly on Iraq for example. I don't know how long that range of operation is, if you tell me how long the range of operation for those GDS guided bunker busters are we can talk about it in a better way.

 

[Hack-Hook]

This is nothing new to the U.S. Air Force or Navy. They were prepared against the Soviet Union with its most advanced SAM systems in the world as well as large quantities of them. Since the new bunker busters are GPS guided the B2s don't need to loiter around the target. Just fly near the target, release the bombs and get out. The ones that do loiter around are laser guided.

well It's claimed that GPS can be fooled or at least mad unusable if it is for a small area

another question if you need two of these bombs to destroy a target you must drop
them at the exact same position because these bombs don't destroy the top layer of
fortification they are designed to detonate deep underground so there will be a small
hole on the ground and a big havoc 30-40 m under ground . this can be done with small
bombs but can it be done with a 14 ton bombs?can you drop both of them at the same
position with the same penetration angle ?

 

[SQ8]

And? Aren't you all a bunch of loving people joined by common religion ?

Common god.. not a common religion apparently.. God will be very angry when we all make it up there..
but that is off the topic .

 

[amalakas]

Common god.. not a common religion apparently.. God will be very angry when we all make it up there..
but that is off the topic .

yet on a different thread other things were argued . nevermind.

 

[VCheng]

well It's claimed that GPS can be fooled or at least mad unusable if it is for a small area

another question if you need two of these bombs to destroy a target you must drop
them at the exact same position because these bombs don't destroy the top layer of
fortification they are designed to detonate deep underground so there will be a small
hole on the ground and a big havoc 30-40 m under ground . this can be done with small
bombs but can it be done with a 14 ton bombs?can you drop both of them at the same
position with the same penetration angle ?

Yes. Reproducibly precisely, in fact.

 

[Awesome]

I do not need to destroy your house to make it unlivable. I just need to make you believe it is unlivable.

Hmmm... Isn't that ummm, yes, you mean you'd "terrorize" them to think so. Who else does that? Hmmmmmmm...

---------- Post added at 06:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

I'm interested to know what fortifications did the Iranians do. Was it like another layer of concrete or something more improvised as they normally do things there...

 

[VCheng]

Hmmm... Isn't that ummm, yes, you mean you'd "terrorize" them to think so. Who else does that? Hmmmmmmm...

---------- Post added at 06:41 PM ---------- Previous post was at 06:40 PM ----------

I'm interested to know what fortifications did the Iranians do. Was it like another layer of concrete or something more improvised as they normally do things there...

Actually, it is much simpler than that. To deny use of underground facilities that are too heavily fortified to be targeted directly, the access points are destroyed, such as entrances, air handling units, power stations etc. That can be just as effective.

 

[Awesome]

Yes. Reproducibly precisely, in fact.

Probably not. Too many variables and more importantly a few unknowns. Would be off now and then.

It might be possible that two shafts side by side might still do the trick. It might mean they create more rubble and block things up further.

If the idea is to destroy whatever's down below, that mission would probably fail.

 

[VCheng]

Probably not. Too many variables and more importantly a few unknowns. Would be off now and then.

It might be possible that two shafts side by side might still do the trick. It might mean they create more rubble and block things up further.

If the idea is to destroy whatever's down below, that mission would probably fail.

You'd be surprised at just how accurately reproducible it is, but let's just say that it works.

 

[Awesome]

Actually, it is much simpler than that. To deny use of underground facilities that are too heavily fortified to be targeted directly, the access points are destroyed, such as entrances, air handling units, power stations etc. That can be just as effective.

Well short of an invasion scenario, if the idea is to just bomb Iran till their nuclear capabilities are diminished piling up some rocks at the entrance won't do it till you don't destroy a hypothetical underground lab.