Boeing GBU-57 MOP (Massive Ordnance Penetrator)

[Josh_TN]

Maybe the GBU-57 could be given some stand-off capability by attaching a jettisonable rocket-booster (Something off the shelf) to its' tail so it could be launched from the B-52?

Not sure what the point would be? It’s a special use weapon that exists in very small numbers. There is no reason to use some other aircraft, especially since B-21 will also be compatible.

What is the CSRL?

Common Strategic Rotary Launcher

 

[Josh_TN]

@mkellytx
Off topic question, I had read that B-2 could carry CBU-87s. Was that the case (no longer in U.S. service AFAIK) and was the SBRA used for this or some other rack system?

 

[Moose]

Maybe the GBU-57 could be given some stand-off capability by attaching a jettisonable rocket-booster (Something off the shelf) to its' tail so it could be launched from the B-52?



What is the CSRL?

Common Strategic Rotary Launcher

 

[mkellytx]

@mkellytx
Off topic question, I had read that B-2 could carry CBU-87s. Was that the case (no longer in U.S. service AFAIK) and was the SBRA used for this or some other rack system?

I never saw them for the B-2, might be a better question for @Hydroman. Now I did get to play with WCMD's quite a bit on both the Bone and BUFF, but for the time I was in the 419th there wasn't any interest.

 

[NMaude]

You would need a space rocket for that kind of payload.

Not if you also add a suitably sized folding-wing kit like the one used by the JDAM-ER.

 

[mkellytx]

Maybe the GBU-57 could be given some stand-off capability by attaching a jettisonable rocket-booster (Something off the shelf) to its' tail so it could be launched from the B-52?

Sure, with enough time and money. This mission was always premised on the IADS being fully functional and ready to go. We never expected the IADS to be completely degraded the way it actually was.

 

[Sferrin]

No, the Bone and BUFF weren't considered for operational carriage, since neither are expected to survive defended airspace. The reason my old airplane, Balls 50 was used is that the weapon is mounted onto the attach points for the CSRL. Both the BUFF and B-2 use CSRL. They decided to use us first as it was lower risk than one of the handful of B-2s. FWIW worth I worked the test and safety program for MOP before it was GBU-57. I saw that bomb in that picture in that aircraft's bomb bay and physically touched it. Spoke with the crew a few weeks after that photo was taken. Shotgun swore up and down that it felt like any other bomb dropped from the bay.

The flight control system must help with that. Apparently when the B-36 let go with one of the 42,000 pounders (nuke in training or conventional) it would rapidly gain about a thousand feet in altitude. During one of the Broken Arrows, where they lost a Mk17/24 that's how they knew they'd lost the bomb. Apparently the bay doors didn't slow it down much either.

 

[mkellytx]

The flight control system must help with that. Apparently when the B-36 let go with one of the 42,000 pounders (nuke in training or conventional) it would rapidly gain about a thousand feet in altitude. During one of the Broken Arrows, where they lost a Mk17/24 that's how they knew they'd lost the bomb. Apparently the bay doors didn't slow it down much either.

LOL @Sferrin it's a B-52, there is no FLCS. We fully expected the 1,000 ft altitude gain, it didn't happen. Best engineering judgement I can deploy is that since the BUFF's bomb bay is at the CG for the A/C, the drop doesn't cause a trim change, hence not massive altitude diversion.

 

[quellish]

I suppose that there are now very effective means of detecting even tiny amounts of radioactive substances, and it would be very easy for a drone to scan the air over the attacked areas for radiation. The lack of radiation is not credible. And any other explanations about what they might be manufacturing in the bunker would be automatically censored on this forum with the tag "conspiracy theory."

Why would there be any radiation leakage from a centrifuge based enrichment facility? Are you hypothesizing that a significant amount of hex would be released?

 

[NMaude]

Sure, with enough time and money.

Well, for an off-the-shelf rocket-motor there's the Star family for example specifically the Star 30, Star 37 and Star 48 rocket-motors, they all have high-thrust and long burn-times; there also the Orion 38. For more technical details see Northrop-Grumman very lengthy solid rocket-motor product catalogue. The only thing that would need to be designed would be the tail-fins for stability and an adaptor to mate the booster to the GBU-57.

During one of the Broken Arrows, where they lost a Mk17/24 that's how they knew they'd lost the bomb.

It was a Mk-17, the B-36 carrying it IIRC was on its way to the Pantex facility in Texas to be dismantled and recycled (The Mk-17 and Mk-24 bombs were retired that year).

Apparently the bay doors didn't slow it down much either.

They certainly weren't.

 

[Justo Miranda]

Why would there be any radiation leakage from a centrifuge based enrichment facility? Are you hypothesizing that a significant amount of hex would be released?

Frankly, I don't know. And I don't think there are many people who know what's going on. I am assuming that the apocalyptic bombing of a facility that is supposed to be nuclear-related should release a certain amount of radioactive dust into the atmosphere. The current level of our technology allows us to know the shape and size of the planet's core, the composition of the atmosphere of a world located three hundred light-years away, and the subatomic structure and exact age of a grain of dust from a comet from the Oort cloud... and we don't know what happens under a mountain in Iran?

The absence of radiation is concerning for three reasons:

-It would be terrible if the United States had engaged in a war to destroy an empty cave because of an intelligence error.

-The attack has been a success but there is radiation, and they hide it for understandable political reasons.

-What they have destroyed has nothing to do with nuclear physics, but it was so urgent to destroy it that the president has been forced to leave the Canada meeting prematurely, undertaking a series of actions that contradict what he promised his voters, failing to inform democratic institutions, giving oxygen to all his adversaries and to the hostile media.

I apologize for the references to politics, but I can't think of any other logical explanation.

 

[Training_Dummy]

Maybe the GBU-57 could be given some stand-off capability by attaching a jettisonable rocket-booster (Something off the shelf) to its' tail so it could be launched from the B-52

Why BUFF when you can spam MOPs with reusable Falcon 9? Is Elon a latent superpower??

 

[quellish]

Frankly, I don't know. And I don't think there are many people who know what's going on. I am assuming that the apocalyptic bombing of a facility that is supposed to be nuclear-related should release a certain amount of radioactive dust into the atmosphere.

That is an incorrect assumption.

 

[Big_Zukini]

Israel may want it as a last resort.

https://www.ynetnews.com/opinions-analysis/article/h14pxozngx

War with Iran shows why Israel must build strategic air power​

Opinion: Past US refusals to provide a strategic bomber have left Israel without the tools to neutralize Iran’s fortified nuclear sites; Israel must always strive to be able to defend itself, on its own, against any threat in the Middle East​

Michael Oren | 06.19.25 | 22:09

The war with Iran proves once again the importance for Israel to have an American strategic bomber as part of the Israeli Air Force's aircraft arsenal. Twice, in 2013, during my tenure as ambassador in Washington, and later, as a member of Knesset in 2018, I asked the United States to sell us a strategic bomber.

Israel may wish to acquire an NGAD with significantly increased range and payload over the F-35, or a platform with dedicated construction for that like the B-21.
It would also support the US's plan to build more B-21s than B-2s were built.

Of course, a massive SEAD/DEAD operation will be needed when attemping to send one to the target area.

It was conducted days before this operation.

Could you imagine a 30k penetrating warhead attached to an ALBM? Awesome

If using the Silver Sparrow booster, which barely fits on an F-15, one could install a pretty heavy warhead.
The smallest of the Sparrow family, ROCKS, seems like a single stage missile, and has a declared max warhead of 500kg.
Not gonna be a 13 ton warhead though.

 

[NMaude]

Not gonna be a 13 ton warhead though.

If you look in my post upthread I number of off-the-shelf solid rocket-motors with high-thrust and long burn-times that could be used.

 

[Lc89]

But now isn't there the new gbu 72 bunker buster bomb?

 

[NMaude]

But now isn't there the new gbu 72 bunker buster bomb?

Yes but the GBU-72 is only 5,000lb, totally inadequate for attacking a deeply buried facility such as the Fordow site.

 

[Justo Miranda]

That is an incorrect assumption.

I respect your opinion and your experience on these issues; time will tell if there were radioactive leaks or not. It would be excellent news for everyone if the genie has not managed to escape from the bottle and there is no need for another concrete sarcophagus like the one in Chernobyl.

 

[NMaude]

It would be excellent news for everyone if the genie has not managed to escape from the bottle and there is no need for another concrete sarcophagus like the one in Chernobyl.

The Fordow facility is a Uranium-235 enrichment plant NOT a nuclear-reactor, Chernobyl was an active nuclear-reactor that was chock full of acutely radioactive fission-products, U-235 is only mildly radioactive (Most the danger from it is due to its' chemical properties as a heavy-metal, while not anywhere near as toxic as Plutonium it is still very poisonous).

 

[Seragina]

Not if you also add a suitably sized folding-wing kit like the one used by the JDAM-ER.

Well, for an off-the-shelf rocket-motor there's the Star family for example specifically the Star 30, Star 37 and Star 48 rocket-motors, they all have high-thrust and long burn-times; there also the Orion 38. For more technical details see Northrop-Grumman very lengthy solid rocket-motor product catalogue. The only thing that would need to be designed would be the tail-fins for stability and an adaptor to mate the booster to the GBU-57.

It's a penetrator. You want maximum kinetic energy not bleed it for gliding range.

Ok, ignoreing size, stealth and carrier issues and taking the most powerfull from the list
Star-48-8 67.20 kN for 88 s burntime
that's ~0.50312 m/s^2 for ~44.275 m/s=86 kts final on top of B-2's 550 kts at 40000 ft
so roughly ~636/550=1.156_36_ more range. I doubt this matter a lot for range.
Even if applied only for higher dive speed kinetics 1.156^2*60=80.23 only gives you 20 m more penetration.

 

[Forest Green]

If they replaced the chemical explosives in a GBU-57 with a B53 physics package that would make sure of it once and for all.

 

[bobbymike]

If they replaced the chemical explosives in a GBU-57 with a B53 physics package that would make sure of it once and for all.

Is there a B61 version with earth penetration capability? I know there was the RNEP program under Bush II although it didn’t survive into his second term budget wise.

 

[yeetmahboi]

Yes but the GBU-72 is only 5,000lb, totally inadequate for attacking a deeply buried facility such as the Fordow site.

A5K replicates MOP's performance within a far more compact form factor. In the name, 5klbs. Whether or not the program pulled through is up for discussion, with a high performance rocket motor, sturdier aeroshell, MEMS electronics and warhead you could plow through alot of earth.

 

[Josh_TN]

If they replaced the chemical explosives in a GBU-57 with a B53 physics package that would make sure of it once and for all.

Or you could just use a nuclear weapon; it’s not like there are not options.

 

[Josh_TN]

Is there a B61 version with earth penetration capability? I know there was the RNEP program under Bush II although it didn’t survive into his second term budget wise.

B-61 mod 11 for decades. Not super penetrating, but enough to make the energy coupling directly to dirt/rock rather than suffer the air/ground interface. 400kt reportedly, based on the mod 7 or 10 strategic B-61s. Unguided, so very low accuracy.

B-61 mod 12/13 add INS, 30m CEP accuracy. Not know to have any penetrating qualities but 30 CEP with 50/300 kT is going to handle most anything you can imagine.

 

[Josh_TN]

A5K replicates MOP's performance within a far more compact form factor. In the name, 5klbs. Whether or not the program pulled through is up for discussion, with a high performance rocket motor, sturdier aeroshell, MEMS electronics and warhead you could plow through alot of earth.

I think it’s pretty clear there is still a capability gap if GBU -57 was used.

ETA: it’s worth noting there are already several generations of GBU-57, so any improvement to 5000# class weapons was likely made to 30,000 lb class as well.

 

[Desertfox]

Maybe lets NOT use nukes

 

[yeetmahboi]

ETA: it’s worth noting there are already several generations of GBU-57, so any improvement to 5000# class weapons was likely made to 30,000 lb class as well.

This is just circular logic. I can equally declare that the A5K was designed to match the latest specs of the MOP.

We don't know if A5K is even qualified yet for B-2s. But sure as hell one can carry way more of it. Size is a tradeoff and as op Midnight Hammer demonstrated the nav/ark/guidance system has enough precision to put tightly grouped shots into vital areas.

 

[Josh_TN]

This is just circular logic. I can equally declare that the A5K was designed to match the latest specs of the MOP.

We don't know if A5K is even qualified yet for B-2s. But sure as hell one can carry way more of it. Size is a tradeoff and as op Midnight Hammer demonstrated the nav/ark/guidance system has enough precision to put tightly grouped shots into vital areas.

I do not think it is unreasonable to guess that the larger bomb has more penetration for this type of mission, given even remotely the same technology.

 

[yeetmahboi]

I do not think it is unreasonable to guess that the larger bomb has more penetration for this type of mission, given even remotely the same technology.

But one is much older though. And there's only so many things you can put into an depreciating skin suit. Better to explore a new path, start small.

 

[Seragina]

The problem with B61-11 and B53 is that they would blow stuff up more than the possible depth, hence, the fallout is as substantial as an ordinary nuclear attack. So it would be no longer a conventional war anymore.

 

[Sferrin]

The problem with B61-11 and B53 is that they would blow stuff up more than the possible depth, hence, the fallout is as substantial as an ordinary nuclear attack. So it would be no longer a conventional war anymore.

Put Davy Crockett in a MOP casing.

 

[Seragina]

Put Davy Crockett in a MOP casing.

I don't think it's in inventory anymore.
But let's see the football has about 20t vs MOB's 2.423 t that's worth about 3x TNT so 20 vs 7.5.
Yep, works better but we still got a fallout as noted by the dust blowout seen by witnesses.

 

[Josh_TN]

But one is much older though. And there's only so many things you can put into an depreciating skin suit. Better to explore a new path, start small.

We are at the “F” version of the GBU-57 at the least. Compared to the originals, I would not assume it even had the same case composition at this point.

 

[Sferrin]

I don't think it's in inventory anymore.
But let's see the football has about 20t vs MOB's 2.423 t that's worth about 3x TNT so 20 vs 7.5.
Yep, works better but we still got a fallout as noted by the dust blowout seen by witnesses.

Not as much as a 9MT mushroom cloud. There was discussion of small nukes like this, back in the day, for torpedoes to deal with things like Typhoons and Oscars. The thought being, if they were small enough, maybe nobody would notice they were nukes out at sea (and under water).

 

[NMaude]

Put Davy Crockett in a MOP casing.

The Davy Crocketts were retired decades ago and all of their W-54 warheads have long since been dismantled and their non-nuclear components recycled.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Spoke with the crew a few weeks after that photo was taken. Shotgun swore up and down that it felt like any other bomb dropped from the bay.

I was not expecting that, you'd think that even with the bomb bay on your CG, suddenly being 30,000lbs lighter would result in a 500+ ft elevation gain.

 

[NMaude]

you'd think that even with the bomb bay on your CG, suddenly being 30,000lbs lighter would result in a 500+ ft elevation gain.

This! The B-52 is still producing the same amount of lift from its' wing and then all of a sudden its 30,000lb lighter.

 

[Scott Kenny]

Israel may wish to acquire an NGAD with significantly increased range and payload over the F-35, or a platform with dedicated construction for that like the B-21.

Probably FAXX or SCAF, since they're dedicated strike fighters.

Not NGAD, unless the bays happen to be deep and long enough for 5000lb bombs (~21ft long and ~25" deep).

It's a penetrator. You want maximum kinetic energy not bleed it for gliding range.

Ok, ignoreing size, stealth and carrier issues and taking the most powerfull from the list
Star-48-8 67.20 kN for 88 s burntime
that's ~0.50312 m/s^2 for ~44.275 m/s=86 kts final on top of B-2's 550 kts at 40000 ft
so roughly ~636/550=1.156_36_ more range. I doubt this matter a lot for range.
Even if applied only for higher dive speed kinetics 1.156^2*60=80.23 only gives you 20 m more penetration.

Don't punt it horizontally. Let it arc into a nice high altitude, using whatever Pegasus uses for the booster, and drop in from maximum altitude. Pretty sure adding another 40,000ft of drop distance would give better penetration.

The problem with B61-11 and B53 is that they would blow stuff up more than the possible depth, hence, the fallout is as substantial as an ordinary nuclear attack. So it would be no longer a conventional war anymore.

Exactly.

The US really needs a nuke that can penetrate deep enough that nothing makes it back out the impact hole. So a relatively small blast, maybe 5-20kt, detonating some 300m down.

 

[Byeman]

Don't punt it horizontally. Let it arc into a nice high altitude, using whatever Pegasus uses for the booster, and drop in from maximum altitude. Pretty sure adding another 40,000ft of drop distance would give better penetration.

the Pegasus first stage motor weighs more almost 10klb than the bomb and is more than 1/2 longer.