British Tornados droping concrete weapons?

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
Sea Skimmer
Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
Posts: 37389
Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
Location: Passchendaele City, HAB
Contact:

Post by Sea Skimmer » 2003-04-05 05:57pm

Pu-239 wrote:
You mean 100lbs of explosive dropped a couple meters away from a tank won't damage it? (Yes I think a bomblet can't carry that much, so lets call it a superbomblet. Might be big enough not to require dispenser). Anything that can damage a tank with a near miss is likely to cause collateral damage, which is against the whole point anyways. :? .

Then again, IR sensors can be made small enough to put on stinger missiles, so maybe they can be put on a rocket/bomb, to guide it after GPS has got the rocket/bomb close enough.

Great, this is getting as bloated and large as conventional munitions. Ok screw this idea.
Actually lets call that a bomb, as 100 pounds of explosives is about that capacity of the Mk81. To call such a thing a submuntion or bomblet is ridiculous, and you'd be using the same pylon space as a GBU-12, which is the normal weapon for tank plinking. As for adding GPS, look at Small Diameter Bomb. Its however not intended for attacking armor, but rather hardened bunkers that must currently be hit with 2000 pound BLU-109's.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... ns/sdb.htm
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956

Post Reply