Thread 63863069

happening! israel might convert one of its transport plane to a bomer and use gbu‐72 boms to blow up the fordo underground nuclear facility! speaking to /k/! can this actualy work?!

>>63863069 (OP)
Yeah, it would. We here on /k/ have been telling the IDF that for a week. No American participation needed.

>>63863069 (OP)
Oops we accidentally gave them a B-61 Mark 11 oopsies who could have mixed that up.

>>63863069 (OP)
Couldn't one of those be shot down by a MANPADS?

>>63863148
Not at the altitude it would need to be to drop a bunker buster.

>>63863132
>Yeah, it would. We here on /k/ have been telling the IDF that for a week. No American participation needed.
FPBP

>>63863145
B61 is like the one US bomb Israel doesn't need.

>>63863148
Maybe 50 years ago, we have these things called IRCM that blind them pretty effectively.

>>63863148
You want to be at ~30,000 feet for the GBU-57. It needs the velocity from the drop to optimize penetration. So no.

What game is the pic from?
Feels like source engine even though I know Arma3 is traditional.

>>63863166
>>63863181
>>63863185
Is there any other risk from some kind of quick deploying SAM system? Or is that now 2000s Afghanistan level air superiority?

>>63863178
The mod 11 is the bunker buster, it's probably the only one shot that will solve the problem.

>>63863197
There's always risk, but even cargo aircraft have active countermeasures.

>>63863197
Anon Iran has no air defense left. It's ogre, and it's been ogre, for like 5 or 6 days.

>>63863198
Point being that if Israel wants to use nuclear weapons they have their own.

>>63863197
If the Israelis were to do something like this they'd be running continuous sweeps along the flight path to fuck anything remotely resembling AD up.
>>63863069 (OP)
Really? They couldn't even get Arma footage, they're using GTA V?

>>63863213
Depends on if they have a penetrator nuke, I don't know if a 200-400kt surface detonation would actually do it, and the fallout considerations are much worse than for something like an airburst.

>>63863245
On the surface yeah, but detonate one far enough in the tunnel and it'll delete everything living inside and compromise most of the structure.

>>63863251
How do you get it into the tunnel?

>>63863257
With the mark 11 penetrator. It'll make a nice hole in that solid steel gate.

>>63863069 (OP)

Don't Worry

>>63863069 (OP)
WTF is this image from, WARNO? lmao

>>63863069 (OP)
Transport plane? F-15s can carry GBU-72, what are you even talking about

>>63863396
>F-15s can carry GBU-72,
Correct, but OP means GBU-57.

>>63863257
You hit somewhere weaker, like right behind the entrance.

>>63863185
Way lower drop altitude needed to reach terminal velocity. More height above that not useful.
/k/ once again demonstrating lack of the most basic physics knowledge.
Go back to school kid.

>>63863069 (OP)
please fill out the form

>>63864111
Sectional density anon, square-cube law means the altitude to reach terminal velocity is gonna be way higher than you think it is, or rather, terminal velocity is gonna be way higher than you think it is. I doubt you'd need the full 30k ft but 20k ft is entirely plausible.

>>63863210
The more Israelis they kill the better

>>63863069 (OP)
>take launch rails from fighter
>attach them to spars of transport
>steal fighters weapons control systems
It could be done but it wouldn't be fast or easy.

>>63863213
No they don't, if they did they would allow UN nuclear inspectors to keep track of their arsenal like every civilized nuclear power. Hell even the Russians and Chinese allow inspectors, surely you aren't saying Israel is a less trustworthy state than China and Russia.

>>63867188
Anon, sarcasm doesn't suit you.

>>63867180
by which point you are basically bootstrapping a new bomber

>>63867223
Pretty much but you do save years and billions by using an existing airframe.

Please liberate the oppressed Persian women.

>>63867232
>Implying an Iranian woman would show her hair
This only happens in the rich parts of Iran, and those women are not being conscripted ever, trust me.

>>63867238
who said anything about conscripting them? I just want to fuck them

>>63867243
It’s implied in the comic anon is referring to.

Wouldn't this be a perfect application of those "palletized" weapons the US was testing a while ago? I seem to remember a video of them dropping a missile strapped to a pallet out the back of a cargo plane and then it launching from there. If that system works, then any plane with a cargo hatch can be a bomber.

>>63867664
Those were cruise missiles

JASSM-ER/XR

I'm sure it can probably be done with bunker busters too, but it hasn't been developed yet as far as I know.

>>63867684
iirc, they had JDAMs.

>>63867693
Well your picture is JASSMs and it sounds like that's a goal for the program to develop towards, not current capability

> Future development will generalize the system beyond the AGM-158 missile family to include JDAM bombs, sea mines, drones, and other missile systems as well as integrating the launch system into use on other supporting cargo and non-cargo aircraft

>>63863069 (OP)
>gbu‐72 boms to blow up the fordo underground nuclear facility
Too small, the GBU-72 simply can't penetrate deep enough.

The Fordow facility is ~60-80 meters deep, and Iran has apparently shown they can make 30,000PSI concrete, it's unknown if even the GBU-57 (the US's deepest penetrating bunker buster that has only been produced in VERY limited number) can manage to penetrate that deep if they're using hardened concrete.

Supposedly the GBU-57 has a penetration capability of over 60 meters into 5,000 PSI concrete, but if Iran is using 30,000 PSI concrete that would reduce penetration to under 5 meters.

Would be a big egg on face moment if the US decide to strike Fordow with multiple GBU-57's only to leave the facility untouched.

>>63867697
dropping JDAMs is piss easy so it's probably not a major goal; dropping powered cruise missiles off pallets is more complex

in 82 the Argentinians actually did nigger-rigged level bombing of British positions, rolling bombs out the back of their C-130s
dogshit accuracy of course so they didn't do it again

>>63863069 (OP)
Just roll it out the back with a chute. Have the chute detach and activate the GPS while it drops.

>>63867903
>a chute
>GPS
great. you'll now know exactly how far you missed the target by