"Father of All Bombs" (FOAB)

Could this be used in Syria? I mean to test it and see how it does.

par far wrote:Could this be used in Syria? I mean to test it and see how it does.

I doubt that, but i would hope so. Would surely send the biggest message possible to anyone trying to play mercenary for the USrael mafia and the Mafia itself aswell.

Werewolf wrote:

par far wrote:Could this be used in Syria? I mean to test it and see how it does.

I doubt that, but i would hope so. Would surely send the biggest message possible to anyone trying to play mercenary for the USrael mafia and the Mafia itself aswell.

All Russia needs is to locate a high-value target of sufficient size and significance, and whose destruction with a SERIOUSLY OVERSIZED blast will deliver a proportionally oversized PR payload   The sight of a Tu-160 turning the false Caliph al-Bahgdadis palace into a heap of smoldering concrete will really spoil the day of his head-chopping takfiri shit-bags.. and their backers in Riyadh and Washington.

Big_Gazza wrote:

Werewolf wrote:

par far wrote:Could this be used in Syria? I mean to test it and see how it does.

I doubt that, but i would hope so. Would surely send the biggest message possible to anyone trying to play mercenary for the USrael mafia and the Mafia itself aswell.

All Russia needs is to locate a high-value target of sufficient size and significance, and whose destruction with a SERIOUSLY OVERSIZED blast will deliver a proportionally oversized PR payload   The sight of a Tu-160 turning the false Caliph al-Bahgdadis palace into a heap of smoldering concrete will really spoil the day of his head-chopping takfiri shit-bags...

I thought of something like Clausewitz said, to direct your enemies movements so you can act accordingly with precision.

Create a situation for all terrorists so they have only one way to concentrate, be it by a tactical retreat from SAA so the terrorists see it as some gain and are pulking in that retreated area and than FOAB the US paychecks out of them or bomb them so they retreat only in one direction and FOAB them back to the oval office. I hope that will be such a blow to their entire moral that those terrorists will flee back to Saudi crap of Arabia, Qatar, turkey, Kuwait and all the other crap controlled regimes and US puppets.

GarryB wrote:Wonder if they will find a test target for FOAB?

Would be great to see. In reality just how available is that weapon?

OminousSpudd wrote:

GarryB wrote:Wonder if they will find a test target for FOAB?

Would be great to see. In reality just how available is that weapon?

Nobody knows even the figures of that are quite secretive. The problem is needs to be delivered but should be much cheaper than any iskander with thermobaric warhead.

Werewolf wrote:

OminousSpudd wrote:

GarryB wrote:Wonder if they will find a test target for FOAB?

Would be great to see. In reality just how available is that weapon?

Nobody knows even the figures of that are quite secretive. The problem is needs to be delivered but should be much cheaper than any iskander with thermobaric warhead.

Thanks, I assumed it was something like that.

Given the gigantic PR war Russia is waging, I'd say if the FOAB is in deployable numbers then we'll see it used. Fingers crossed, but boy would it be a sight. Would be a fantastic demo of Russia's thermobaric prowess as well.

FOAB

There is a new cruise missile in development to make use of the length of the weapons bays of the Tu-160 = 11,28m.

Hole wrote:
FOAB

There is a new cruise missile in development to make use of the length of the weapons bays of the Tu-160 = 11,28m.

FOAB is overdue for a modernization.

To guided glidebomb?

Hole wrote:To guided glidebomb?

Yes, in affect but a few other things as well. Glide wings, inertial guidance+GLONASS, the rear portion encompasses 1/3 the length of the bomb with the support structure struts and parachute, if it could be removed in favor of a slow-burning rocket motor to add some stand off range (ideally 150-300km at low subsonic speed), or a longer warhead case. The warhead portion could easily be 33% longer, add that to the existing 44 ton explosive yield which would translate to a 60 ton yield. With the longer warhead case they could develop a version that splits in to 3 different glide munitions with explosive yields of 20 tons each, which hit targets with a triangular pattern that is spread out at the very edge of each munitions blast radius, giving it a much larger blast radius in total than from a single large munition.

There's also been reports back in 2015-16 that material scientists made breakthroughs in the developments of explosive all around (from HE-Frag to Thermobaric) that significantly improved there yield.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Hole wrote:To guided glidebomb?

Yes, in affect but a few other things as well. Glide wings, inertial guidance+GLONASS, the rear portion encompasses 1/3 the length of the bomb with the support structure struts and parachute, if it could be removed in favor of a slow-burning rocket motor to add some stand off range (ideally 150-300km at low subsonic speed), or a longer warhead case. The warhead portion could easily be 33% longer, add that to the existing 44 ton explosive yield which would translate to a 60 ton yield. With the longer warhead case they could develop a version that splits in to 3 different glide munitions with explosive yields of 20 tons each, which hit targets with a triangular pattern that is spread out at the very edge of each munitions blast radius, giving it a much larger blast radius in total than from a single large munition.  

There's also been reports back in 2015-16 that material scientists made breakthroughs in the developments of explosive all around (from HE-Frag to Thermobaric) that significantly improved there yield.

I bet it is nano-emulsions. The same nano-particle chemistry gains seen in dry fuels can be applied to liquid fuels as well. Thermobaric explosives create
a fuel aersosol which is detonated giving a large explosion. But the average size of the aerosol particles is much larger than 100 nm and more like tens of
microns at best and even rain or drizzle sized drops that are just huge and act as bulk materials. Adding nano-particle accelerants would increase the
rate of combustion of these fuel aerosol drops. Anything that increases the rate of combustion increases the force of the detonation which is the
objective.

kvs wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Hole wrote:To guided glidebomb?

Yes, in affect but a few other things as well. Glide wings, inertial guidance+GLONASS, the rear portion encompasses 1/3 the length of the bomb with the support structure struts and parachute, if it could be removed in favor of a slow-burning rocket motor to add some stand off range (ideally 150-300km at low subsonic speed), or a longer warhead case. The warhead portion could easily be 33% longer, add that to the existing 44 ton explosive yield which would translate to a 60 ton yield. With the longer warhead case they could develop a version that splits in to 3 different glide munitions with explosive yields of 20 tons each, which hit targets with a triangular pattern that is spread out at the very edge of each munitions blast radius, giving it a much larger blast radius in total than from a single large munition.  

There's also been reports back in 2015-16 that material scientists made breakthroughs in the developments of explosive all around (from HE-Frag to Thermobaric) that significantly improved there yield.

I bet it is nano-emulsions.  The same nano-particle chemistry gains seen in dry fuels can be applied to liquid fuels as well.   Thermobaric explosives create
a fuel aersosol which is detonated giving a large explosion.   But the average size of the aerosol particles is much larger than 100 nm and more like tens of
microns at best and even rain or drizzle sized drops that are just huge and act as bulk materials.   Adding nano-particle accelerants would increase the
rate of combustion of these fuel aerosol drops.   Anything that increases the rate of combustion increases the force of the detonation which is the
objective.

I wonder if they could apply microwave ignition to increase the rate of combustion.

magnumcromagnon wrote:

kvs wrote:

magnumcromagnon wrote:

Hole wrote:To guided glidebomb?

Yes, in affect but a few other things as well. Glide wings, inertial guidance+GLONASS, the rear portion encompasses 1/3 the length of the bomb with the support structure struts and parachute, if it could be removed in favor of a slow-burning rocket motor to add some stand off range (ideally 150-300km at low subsonic speed), or a longer warhead case. The warhead portion could easily be 33% longer, add that to the existing 44 ton explosive yield which would translate to a 60 ton yield. With the longer warhead case they could develop a version that splits in to 3 different glide munitions with explosive yields of 20 tons each, which hit targets with a triangular pattern that is spread out at the very edge of each munitions blast radius, giving it a much larger blast radius in total than from a single large munition.  

There's also been reports back in 2015-16 that material scientists made breakthroughs in the developments of explosive all around (from HE-Frag to Thermobaric) that significantly improved there yield.

I bet it is nano-emulsions.  The same nano-particle chemistry gains seen in dry fuels can be applied to liquid fuels as well.   Thermobaric explosives create
a fuel aersosol which is detonated giving a large explosion.   But the average size of the aerosol particles is much larger than 100 nm and more like tens of
microns at best and even rain or drizzle sized drops that are just huge and act as bulk materials.   Adding nano-particle accelerants would increase the
rate of combustion of these fuel aerosol drops.   Anything that increases the rate of combustion increases the force of the detonation which is the
objective.

I wonder if they could apply microwave ignition to increase the rate of combustion.

I was thinking about that, but they would have to produce a microwave detonation that covers most of the aerosol cloud.   I do not
think there is any benefit igniting only a small part of the fuel aerosol volume.