Powered JDAM

Josh_TN said:
I would think GBU-53s IIR would be a good starting place as well; it is an uncooled unit.
Click to expand...
That's a Raytheon owned system (IP) which I doubt Boeing will either have access to or use. There are plenty of options that they could use including other mature ones. Air Force does not require any seeker to begin with so it's not an immediate consideration.
 
TomS said:
Ah, the eternal fantasy that it is possible to use nuclear weapons without an unacceptable risk of escalation.

Quite frankly, I don't even see the military value in nuclear gravity bombs. They're never going to be used, and if they were, it would be "bouncing the rubble" rather than any operationally meaningful use. Their only function is political -- to pretend that the rest of NATO has some say in the use of nukes in Europe.
Click to expand...
"Escalate to deescalate"

AKA putting 5-10kt underneath one critical bunker as the final warning before the strategic nukes come out to play.
 
The Russians do seem to have an alarming tactical nuclear policy, and it seems to me the US needs to have an easy to deploy counter for such short of strategic exchanges. I think the combination of B-61 mod 12, AGM-86 on its low setting, and - if you absolutely have to make a point in a very timely fashion - W76 mod2, is sufficient to make it clear that the US has tactical options and will use them. I think the B-21 will help expand that capability in a tangible way as well, and soon after the LRSO.
 
No i don't think we can put them on the same level. The capabilitys that Hammer gives are more in line with the JDAM-ER but can get bigger where PJDAM is more like a cruise missile with a modular warhead and guidance compatable to the MK.82 bomb series.
 
Back
Top Bottom