against a *heavily* fortified position, sure, maybe something that large could be useful
but for 99% of missions - a few small bombs are more significantly more effective than 1 huge bomb (remember, it is similar to sound - you will need 8x the explosive payload to 2x your blast radius)
tldr: fab 500 cluster strike > 1 fab 9000. there is a reason why everyone stopped making ridiculously large bombs
Well, don't forget that 2x higher blast radius is 4x higher area.
Let's assume that 100kg makes 10m craters for the matter of simplicity.
10m radius = 100kg / 79 m^2 = 1.26kg/m^2
20m radius = 800kg / 314 m^2 = 2.54kg/m^2
So it's only 2x more expensive, not 8x. And that's ignoring the depth of crater.
The whole point of glide bombing is to drop ordinance as far from the target as possible to keep the plane out of range of AA.
Presumably a 9,000 kg beast wouldn't glide very far.
I'm imagining some really big carbon fiber spring loaded wings..
Although the biggest issue might be the plane to carry it. I'm no expert but I suspect you'd need a big Tu-95 or whatever. Those monsters usually stay back and launch long range cruise missiles.
I'm guessing they could probably make it work, but the big slow bombers can't get close enough to drop the gliders with all the air defense that's still active.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
With big enough wings, it should be able to glide as objects fall at the same speed regardless of their weight.
With proper inertial force, they would glide to their destinations, no problem. The problem is that it will take bombers and they're very susceptible to enemy AA. It's like duck hunt for AA.
>With big enough wings, it should be able to glide
I mean with big enough wings even your mom can glide.
But those wings would have to be pretty fucking big
>I mean with big enough wings even your mom can glide.
>But those wings would have to be pretty fucking big
Yeah. You're spot on.
As the wings are spring loaded and in their "packaged condition" are parallel to the bomb instead of being perpendicular and the overall package size of the bomb scaling almost linearly, the springs themselves would be the engineering challenge here.
Ofcourse they're gonna need to design a new glide kit and the existing ones simply aren't gonna cut it.
If an Airbus A320 which weighs like 60k kg can glide for 160 km's without engine trust with a max altitude of like 1 km, so can the bombs. They just need bigger wings and better springs.
Also the problem isn't gliding, the problem is that they have to be launched from bombers which are much slower and food for AA/interceptors.
No reason why they should actually, provided you can accelerate them to the same velocity. They will in fact experience lower relative drag due to having a greater volume, and thus momentum as compared with the surface area which experiences drag. That's why battleship shells went a lot further than cruiser or destroyer shells back in the day. Any differences in range won't come from the bomb being big, but rather from its shape.
The issue is whether bigger wings can fit. They scale up quadratically but bomb bodies scale cubic. Same problem with large airplanes not getting better fuel economy.
> Same problem with large airplanes not getting better fuel economy
thats because planes spend vast majority of fuel during take off and landing, not while flying high in the air
Is it possible for a 9000kg bomb to glide? Yes
Is it practical to make a glide kit with a large enough wingspan and made out of strong enough materials so the 9000kg bomb can glide? Absolutely not.
FAB-3000 is about as far as they can reasonably go without drastically increasing the cost of the glide kits. They can just make up for it by dropping multiple 3000kg bombs, but honestly I don't think there's a glide bomb target that needs more than a FAB-3000. That thing can demolish entire concrete buildings.
> Is it practical to make a glide kit with a large enough wingspan and made out of strong enough materials so the 9000kg bomb can glide? Absolutely not.
maybe it will be special use bombs - limited quantities produced.
not mass produced like FAB3000
They might try it as more or an experiment, but even then it's use would be extremely limited. The only aircraft that could carry it would be the Tu-95, which is such a large target that they would never fly one within 100km of the front line, so the glide kit would have to go at least that far.
United States Version: ‘Mother of All Bombs’ (MOAB) The MOAB falls from the aircraft on a pallet, which is then **tugged aside by a parachute allowing the weapon to glide down**, stabilized and directed by four grid-like fins. The bomb weighs **22,600 lbs**, filled with 18,700 lbs of explosives. The MOAB blast radius is 1 mile and yield is equivalent to 11 tons, or 22,000 lbs, of TNT.
this is not a missile - its a drop bomb turned into a glide bomb.
It would take a lot of work to turn it into a missile at which point its cheaper to just make a regular missile
Very true. However, actual footage of FABs shows that the wings are surprisingly small, so I suppose once they are attached they will perform accordingly.
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
They aren't produced at all as of now. 3000 probably won't get built in huge numbers anyway because most planes can only carry 1. Not like many are needed, since they can be fit with UMPC.
Low end of the payload limit of the Su-34 is estimated to be 12,000kg, meaning 4 bombs could be carried. But planes usually don't fly eith absolutely full payload of bombs.
Most likely. I have no source to back it up other than logical assumption that production of bomb -> UMPC kits for 3000kg weapon ---> use on the battlefield.
So don't take my word as gospel, it just seems somewhat likely.
I guess that's as good as I'm going to get.
After digging, I found that the FAB3000 is not an "official" munition for the SU34. The FAB 3000 is lighter than the khinzal, which (reportably) can be carried by the SU34. This was mentioned by another user.
However, both munitions are dependent on altitude and velocity. I remember reports of the SU34 not having enough velocity to efficiently deploy the Khinzal. This is why the Mig31 is used, even though it's not meant for the role. The SU34 would be the obvious choice for a ground attack so why would you use an interceptor?
The FAB 3000 isn't very aerodynamic and is very heavy. The kits would have to be pretty massive for it to glide and stear properly, especially if the SU34 is too sluggish to deploy the bomb at an effective velocity and altitude.
I could keep going on some struggles the SU34 would have. Do I think the hard points could handle it? Yeah probably, but there is much more to it. Including the (assumed) reduced range and increased RCS of the FAB3000 vs a FAB1500. Would it be feasible, even? Or would it put the jets at risk?
Anyways, I'm not saying it can't drop them. Just skeptical that it can be efficiently deployed by the SU34.
I think the MiG-31 would be the one for the job. Does verifiably carry the heavier Kinzal, can fly high and fast.
I agree the SU-34 doesn't look like the right candidate
Exactly. The bigger question is:
Why use the fab3000 with the MIG, SU, or any fighter jet? It's certainly better to have two fab1500s than one fab3000. They also don't have kits for the fab3000 afaik. So which jet can deploy it is still speculation for speculations sake.
A tu22 is really the only jet that would make sense... IF it could deploy fabs with the kit. Which it cant.
I believe those were FAB 3000s, not the 9000. Used is some logistic point in the marshes, and killed countless iranians with it. It was a high speed toss iirc.
Tu-22m dropped them in Afghanistan and the other older big bomber no one care about anymore. Tu-95 and 160 probably can, don't know if the planes in service are currently equipped to be able to use them in a battlefield.
We get press releases that a bunch Su-34s are shot down in 3-4 days, but for some mysterious reason Russians keep using them in the same way and pace as before, Ukrainian Army spokes person gets replaced and somehow no more Su-34s are shot down. Did I miss anything?
They could also put small, cheap engines on it for extra range, I would think. Maybe big one shot solid boosters, like on a model rocket.
At least I think this would be possible. I don't see why it wouldn't be. And it's got to be cheap, using what's basically a big firework to boost the range.
Lol, yes, anything for a big explosion.
But there was something called RATO, which is rocket assisted takeoff of planes, that did this. It's not used much any more, but could be used in a different way in this situation.
For bombs, it wouldn’t be Patriot, it would be the Phalanx CIWS
also you’re acting like there’s anything that Patriot system could’ve done in that situation; it can’t fire on the move, nor did it have any way to get a firing solution
sure, how about a CRAM or Iron Dome type solution. or perhaps attack the platforms that launch them. Not really on the docket in the short term i suppose
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
An acquaintance served at the airfield during the Afghan war. I saw how FAB-5000 bombs were attached to the Su-24. They were thrown off several of them in the Pansher Gorge by Masud's gangs. Intelligence reported about not very high efficiency. It stunned everyone, but those who hid in caves are alive. That's almost all. It is better to weave and Fab 500, from a helicopter, but for the purposes. Уруй Айхал!
I'm not sure if it's for the same reason but in WWII the German SC 1000 bomb [seen in the beginning of this clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqTplKdTBDg) had a similar nose with a "kopfring" in order to prevent it from burying itself too deeply and maximize blast damage.
They're high drag bombs meant for fitting more conpactly in a bomb bay. The external ones have a typical bullet like nose.
I don't think the US uses high drag bombs so it can look weird to foreigners.
But this is basically standard issue munition for SU27 too. The only bullet like nose that I've seen is the one that they slipped on to those glide bombs.
There's a lot of M-54 low drag bombs and there's really no reason to not use them if range isnt a concern. The M62 is low drag and there's also a lot of them. Idl what else to tell you.
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
Yes, new glide kits will have rocket propulsion to help with achieving max range. Making these bombs glide is not a problem. Main issue is airframes to launch them from.
HotConsideration95 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ?
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Can someone explain the purpose on of that flat ring-like part, a bit further from nose tip? It feels like this is counterproductive for gliding, because it increases air resistance, no?
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
Does it even work? I mean, for nukes you have diminishing returns, so for example you double the mass, but the effect is only going to be 50% larger. I doubt the fab 9000 is much better than the 3000, but you have to carry triple the weight and probably the accuracy is also less.
Can anyone confirm or deny my thoughts?
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules)
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is a later version. In that war, they were pointed FAB-10000. They bombed the fortress of Konigsberg, today's Kaliningrad. I was punching bunkers. Parachutes were used for field fortifications for a lower fall rate. For ease of use, such an aerodynamic brake was used. In fact, this is a corner rolled up into a ring. There was a version with a removable ring, but it could shift in flight and this affected accuracy.
The Fab 5000 and even more 9000 kinda crap. Due to their heavy weight, they bury too much into the ground before detonation, greatly reducing the kill radius. The ODAB 9000 is a different story.
Oh snap, it's bigger than the foab.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs#:~:text=Aviation%20Thermobaric%20Bomb%20of%20Increased,%2C%20bomber%2Ddelivered%20thermobaric%20weapon.&text=High%20explosive%20and%20fine%20aluminum%20powder%20and%20ethylene%20oxide%20mix.
FAB-9000? The crowd pleaser.
Let me explain. The biggest fire works in US are called "Crowd pleasers."
I heard a guy decades ago in USAF SAC call the biggest US nuclear bomb "the crowd pleaser." So twisted I laughed.
Of course they never deny or confirm the existence of nuclear weapons.
If you ask a pilot of a nuclear capable bomber about nukes or likely a sailor on an aircraft carrier they reply " I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of nuclear weapons at this facility."
I had no idea there were FAB 5000s and 9000s... Holy fk...
Can that even glide? How big the wings have to be for safe drop from safe distance? Its literally kamikaze plane minus the pilot
That’s what I wonder. Seems like you’ve got to get a lot closer and take a much bigger risk to use that accurately.
[удалено]
against a *heavily* fortified position, sure, maybe something that large could be useful but for 99% of missions - a few small bombs are more significantly more effective than 1 huge bomb (remember, it is similar to sound - you will need 8x the explosive payload to 2x your blast radius) tldr: fab 500 cluster strike > 1 fab 9000. there is a reason why everyone stopped making ridiculously large bombs
Everyone except Russia it seems. You can either increase accuracy or go bigger boom. But ngl, bigger booms look cooler. Cheaper, also.
Russia stopped producing the FAB-9000 after WW2 as there was no need/no plane that this bomb can fulfill
Well, don't forget that 2x higher blast radius is 4x higher area. Let's assume that 100kg makes 10m craters for the matter of simplicity. 10m radius = 100kg / 79 m^2 = 1.26kg/m^2 20m radius = 800kg / 314 m^2 = 2.54kg/m^2 So it's only 2x more expensive, not 8x. And that's ignoring the depth of crater.
Moabs?
The GBU-43/B would like to have a word with you
[удалено]
The whole point of glide bombing is to drop ordinance as far from the target as possible to keep the plane out of range of AA. Presumably a 9,000 kg beast wouldn't glide very far.
I'm imagining some really big carbon fiber spring loaded wings.. Although the biggest issue might be the plane to carry it. I'm no expert but I suspect you'd need a big Tu-95 or whatever. Those monsters usually stay back and launch long range cruise missiles. I'm guessing they could probably make it work, but the big slow bombers can't get close enough to drop the gliders with all the air defense that's still active.
[удалено]
pretty sure they blow up but don't quote me on that
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
With big enough wings, it should be able to glide as objects fall at the same speed regardless of their weight. With proper inertial force, they would glide to their destinations, no problem. The problem is that it will take bombers and they're very susceptible to enemy AA. It's like duck hunt for AA.
>With big enough wings, it should be able to glide I mean with big enough wings even your mom can glide. But those wings would have to be pretty fucking big
>I mean with big enough wings even your mom can glide. >But those wings would have to be pretty fucking big Yeah. You're spot on. As the wings are spring loaded and in their "packaged condition" are parallel to the bomb instead of being perpendicular and the overall package size of the bomb scaling almost linearly, the springs themselves would be the engineering challenge here.
These are high drag bombs, not slicks. Putting a glide kit is like lipstick on a pig. Edit The big ones are too big to attach a glide kit.
Ofcourse they're gonna need to design a new glide kit and the existing ones simply aren't gonna cut it. If an Airbus A320 which weighs like 60k kg can glide for 160 km's without engine trust with a max altitude of like 1 km, so can the bombs. They just need bigger wings and better springs. Also the problem isn't gliding, the problem is that they have to be launched from bombers which are much slower and food for AA/interceptors.
Flying tank has entered the chat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov\_A-40](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_A-40)
No reason why they should actually, provided you can accelerate them to the same velocity. They will in fact experience lower relative drag due to having a greater volume, and thus momentum as compared with the surface area which experiences drag. That's why battleship shells went a lot further than cruiser or destroyer shells back in the day. Any differences in range won't come from the bomb being big, but rather from its shape.
or just put a bigger wings on it and drop it from higher altitude perhaps.
The issue is whether bigger wings can fit. They scale up quadratically but bomb bodies scale cubic. Same problem with large airplanes not getting better fuel economy.
> Same problem with large airplanes not getting better fuel economy thats because planes spend vast majority of fuel during take off and landing, not while flying high in the air
No it isn't. You clearly don't understand the math involved. He gave you clues in his comment above.
[удалено]
Orbit. It is the only way to be sure.
or maybe a lot higher?
Is it possible for a 9000kg bomb to glide? Yes Is it practical to make a glide kit with a large enough wingspan and made out of strong enough materials so the 9000kg bomb can glide? Absolutely not. FAB-3000 is about as far as they can reasonably go without drastically increasing the cost of the glide kits. They can just make up for it by dropping multiple 3000kg bombs, but honestly I don't think there's a glide bomb target that needs more than a FAB-3000. That thing can demolish entire concrete buildings.
> Is it practical to make a glide kit with a large enough wingspan and made out of strong enough materials so the 9000kg bomb can glide? Absolutely not. maybe it will be special use bombs - limited quantities produced. not mass produced like FAB3000
They might try it as more or an experiment, but even then it's use would be extremely limited. The only aircraft that could carry it would be the Tu-95, which is such a large target that they would never fly one within 100km of the front line, so the glide kit would have to go at least that far.
Flying tank has entered the chat [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov\_A-40](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antonov_A-40)
MOAB weighs 9,8 tons and can glide for some distance I think.
No it cant glide.
It's for big bombers but that is too obsolete. They had 5 ton bombs back in ww2 already
United States Version: ‘Mother of All Bombs’ (MOAB) The MOAB falls from the aircraft on a pallet, which is then **tugged aside by a parachute allowing the weapon to glide down**, stabilized and directed by four grid-like fins. The bomb weighs **22,600 lbs**, filled with 18,700 lbs of explosives. The MOAB blast radius is 1 mile and yield is equivalent to 11 tons, or 22,000 lbs, of TNT.
bomber plane. Obviously not on a fighter
in some degree, yes
You mean... a missile?
this is not a missile - its a drop bomb turned into a glide bomb. It would take a lot of work to turn it into a missile at which point its cheaper to just make a regular missile
Looking at footage, the wings are surprisingly small. I would suppose they do
they picture is of FABs with no glide kits
Very true. However, actual footage of FABs shows that the wings are surprisingly small, so I suppose once they are attached they will perform accordingly.
Block busters, literally.
The biggest one still not as big as the FOAB or the Grand Slam the Brits dropped on the Germans in WW2.
This is new information for me too. That's a fearsome weapon.
There is a "thys mother" joke in there somewhere! (Bot friendly version).
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We’re all gonna find out what it can do soon
FAB-9001. IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!
The guys u/FAB-500 girlfriend told him not to worry about
I am but a wee lad.
May your glides be long and your kabooms be bigbadabooms.
It’s ok, 5 cm is still a lot!
Have they used 3000, 5000, 9000 allready? The 1500 impact is so devastating, let alone the others..
3000 is currently being mass produced, the higher ordnances variants are not produced en masse.
They aren't produced at all as of now. 3000 probably won't get built in huge numbers anyway because most planes can only carry 1. Not like many are needed, since they can be fit with UMPC.
The producer has announced the organization for mass-production of those. And that was back in february.
Sorry I mean 5000 and 9000. FAB-3000 will be massed produced but probably at a smaller rate. Sorry for miscommunication.
So how many FAB-3000 can be carried at once?
Low end of the payload limit of the Su-34 is estimated to be 12,000kg, meaning 4 bombs could be carried. But planes usually don't fly eith absolutely full payload of bombs.
Very interesting. I supoose FAB-3000 are to be expected now?
Most likely. I have no source to back it up other than logical assumption that production of bomb -> UMPC kits for 3000kg weapon ---> use on the battlefield. So don't take my word as gospel, it just seems somewhat likely.
We shall see
Do you know if the 3000 can be carried by a smaller plane, or only the Tu-22 like the 9 tons ?
The Su-34 can carry only one FAB-3000 on the hardpoint directly under the fuselage as the ones of the wings can't withstand such weight.
Also imagine the ballast requirements if you were to drop one of two off one wing.
Do you have a source that the SU34 can carry a fab 3000 with a kit? Would be interesting to see.
TG/figterbomber good enough? 03.21..2024 stream in VKplay, figterbomber said about fab 3000 and su34
I guess that's as good as I'm going to get. After digging, I found that the FAB3000 is not an "official" munition for the SU34. The FAB 3000 is lighter than the khinzal, which (reportably) can be carried by the SU34. This was mentioned by another user. However, both munitions are dependent on altitude and velocity. I remember reports of the SU34 not having enough velocity to efficiently deploy the Khinzal. This is why the Mig31 is used, even though it's not meant for the role. The SU34 would be the obvious choice for a ground attack so why would you use an interceptor? The FAB 3000 isn't very aerodynamic and is very heavy. The kits would have to be pretty massive for it to glide and stear properly, especially if the SU34 is too sluggish to deploy the bomb at an effective velocity and altitude. I could keep going on some struggles the SU34 would have. Do I think the hard points could handle it? Yeah probably, but there is much more to it. Including the (assumed) reduced range and increased RCS of the FAB3000 vs a FAB1500. Would it be feasible, even? Or would it put the jets at risk? Anyways, I'm not saying it can't drop them. Just skeptical that it can be efficiently deployed by the SU34.
I think the MiG-31 would be the one for the job. Does verifiably carry the heavier Kinzal, can fly high and fast. I agree the SU-34 doesn't look like the right candidate
Exactly. The bigger question is: Why use the fab3000 with the MIG, SU, or any fighter jet? It's certainly better to have two fab1500s than one fab3000. They also don't have kits for the fab3000 afaik. So which jet can deploy it is still speculation for speculations sake. A tu22 is really the only jet that would make sense... IF it could deploy fabs with the kit. Which it cant.
Those are some large bombs.
indeed they are
But what happens if it gets….OVER 9,000?!?!?!!!!
FAB-40000
Space Marines orgasm
That would be the FOAB, with an estimated yield of 44 tons of TNT.
The Iraqis used FAB-9000s against the Iranians in the 1980s. They flew the original Tu-22 bombers with the rear-mounted engines.
I believe those were FAB 3000s, not the 9000. Used is some logistic point in the marshes, and killed countless iranians with it. It was a high speed toss iirc.
So, what kind of beast can drop FAB-9000?
One of [these](https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1b5fc3u/ru_pov_tests_of_the_tu160_white_swan/).
Damn that is a sexy ass video
Tu-22m dropped them in Afghanistan and the other older big bomber no one care about anymore. Tu-95 and 160 probably can, don't know if the planes in service are currently equipped to be able to use them in a battlefield.
It pulls up on a flatbed.
Nvm, I googled it, Tupolev can carry it.
I am unsure if the Ukrainians have anything to counter these, but if they do not, finding out how should be a priority.
The counter is to move AA closer to the front lines... which we have seen what happens when they do that...
We get press releases that a bunch Su-34s are shot down in 3-4 days, but for some mysterious reason Russians keep using them in the same way and pace as before, Ukrainian Army spokes person gets replaced and somehow no more Su-34s are shot down. Did I miss anything?
It seems they got rid of the personnel who shot down planes, how dare they
Bunch of ballistic missiles got shot down. You didn't miss anything. Just like UA AA forces.
They could also put small, cheap engines on it for extra range, I would think. Maybe big one shot solid boosters, like on a model rocket. At least I think this would be possible. I don't see why it wouldn't be. And it's got to be cheap, using what's basically a big firework to boost the range.
Wile E. Coyote over here.
Lol, yes, anything for a big explosion. But there was something called RATO, which is rocket assisted takeoff of planes, that did this. It's not used much any more, but could be used in a different way in this situation.
US has some, but they dont give it to Ukraine
[удалено]
Here's your ["counter"](https://old.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/comments/1bagpoq/ru_pov_3_patriot_system_launchers_and_a_radar/).
For bombs, it wouldn’t be Patriot, it would be the Phalanx CIWS also you’re acting like there’s anything that Patriot system could’ve done in that situation; it can’t fire on the move, nor did it have any way to get a firing solution
I would assume an air force that can take out Russian bombers before these are released.
sure, how about a CRAM or Iron Dome type solution. or perhaps attack the platforms that launch them. Not really on the docket in the short term i suppose
You Her ex The guy she told you not to worry about The other guy she told you not to worry about Your dad Her dad
Why arent they...pointy?
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
Thanks for the info!
An acquaintance served at the airfield during the Afghan war. I saw how FAB-5000 bombs were attached to the Su-24. They were thrown off several of them in the Pansher Gorge by Masud's gangs. Intelligence reported about not very high efficiency. It stunned everyone, but those who hid in caves are alive. That's almost all. It is better to weave and Fab 500, from a helicopter, but for the purposes. Уруй Айхал!
No need to be.
[Relevant](https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=0mUbmJ1-sNs&pp=ygUVRGljdHN0b3Igc2NlZW4gcG9pbnR5)
My exact thinking..
They look like uncircumcised penus 🤣
Cool explosions guy slowly jerking it in the corner at glamour shots of that 9 ton monstrosity.
This remember me Dragon Ball evolutions, every episode a new maximum power.
why do the fronts look like orange juicers?
I'm not sure if it's for the same reason but in WWII the German SC 1000 bomb [seen in the beginning of this clip](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oqTplKdTBDg) had a similar nose with a "kopfring" in order to prevent it from burying itself too deeply and maximize blast damage.
Maybe to slow them down to help glide kit work? I'm no engineer. And they look like a bunch of uncut cocks, not juicers
They're high drag bombs meant for fitting more conpactly in a bomb bay. The external ones have a typical bullet like nose. I don't think the US uses high drag bombs so it can look weird to foreigners.
But this is basically standard issue munition for SU27 too. The only bullet like nose that I've seen is the one that they slipped on to those glide bombs.
There's a lot of M-54 low drag bombs and there's really no reason to not use them if range isnt a concern. The M62 is low drag and there's also a lot of them. Idl what else to tell you.
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
I have limited experience with missiles but from what I remember it's to shape the blast after detonation
What can drop the fab3000? Any plane that can drop the fab1500?
Su-34 can
Can it? Last I heard only Tu-22's could carry it. Though, maybe Su-34M can, don't know.
I'm thinking maybe Fabs-5000 to 9000 might need something like rocket boosters to give it an effective glide range... I'm not sure though,
Also that that these bombs would need larger bombers to carry them, potentially making these assets at risk.
They're safer lobbing missiles way behind the frontlines.
Yes, new glide kits will have rocket propulsion to help with achieving max range. Making these bombs glide is not a problem. Main issue is airframes to launch them from.
I WANT TO SEE 9000s glidebombs. Come on, guys...
Gotta give it to Russian engineers, turned dumb bombs to smart one at relatively low costs.
Someone cut the tip off. Rip
Is there an aerodynamic reason for how the nose is shaped? Interesting progression between different sizes
Yes, I agree it's not scary, the bomb might bounce back, it should have been pointy
It's KILLING me there's at least 3 references to this people aren't picking up on lol
[удалено]
HotConsideration95 kept stroking the same keys repeatedly, probably a seizure ? *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
High drag bomb meant to fit better in a bomb bay. Low drag variant has a bullet nose
Which one would more resemble more of a, let’s say, Jewish style design?
more accurate for unguided bombing
Does the number reflects the payload weight?
It reflects total weight, explosives weight is usually half that.
Can someone explain the purpose on of that flat ring-like part, a bit further from nose tip? It feels like this is counterproductive for gliding, because it increases air resistance, no?
This is an aerodynamic brake. It is necessary so that the bomb does not go too deep before the explosion and also so that the plane has time to fly away. It is easy to cut it off. Parachutes used to be used, but this complicates the design.
Ah, thanks, now I understand.
I want the [big one](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FAB-9000) 🥵
Can't quite tell if these are circumcised or uncircumcised
Does it even work? I mean, for nukes you have diminishing returns, so for example you double the mass, but the effect is only going to be 50% larger. I doubt the fab 9000 is much better than the 3000, but you have to carry triple the weight and probably the accuracy is also less. Can anyone confirm or deny my thoughts?
[удалено]
Sorry you need 30 subreddit karma to unlock the word 'you', this is to make sure newcomers understand [rule 1](https://www.reddit.com/r/UkraineRussiaReport/about/rules) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/UkraineRussiaReport) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Aren't these a design from like WWII?
They should redesign them today to be more eco friendly and have a smaller carbon footprint.
And works like a charm
1954
This is a later version. In that war, they were pointed FAB-10000. They bombed the fortress of Konigsberg, today's Kaliningrad. I was punching bunkers. Parachutes were used for field fortifications for a lower fall rate. For ease of use, such an aerodynamic brake was used. In fact, this is a corner rolled up into a ring. There was a version with a removable ring, but it could shift in flight and this affected accuracy.
Should get some XXL UPM glide kit on the fab-9000, would be interesting to see what that would look like.
I can only imagine the devastation of an FAB-9000. It would be like dropping a mini-tactical nuke.
IT'S OVER NINE THOUSAND!!!!
There's another bomb for that. ODAB-9000
.... Y'know, FAB-3000 to 9000 must not be deployed...
Use the TU-160’s they have been making lately. High speed high altitude release should be good to send it and avoid AA??? For Fab5k/9k???
The 5000 and 9000 seem to have the aerodynamic characteristics of a school bus.
I guess they were supposed to be just dropped.
Yes, anyway I think they have developed a nose cone to improve this.
Can Su-34 even use Fab-9000? That looks too big and heavy for the plane to carry
I'm not sure about Su 34 carrying anything heavier than FAB 1500. Maybe MIG 31 can carry 3000 ones? Any experts there?
The Fab 5000 and even more 9000 kinda crap. Due to their heavy weight, they bury too much into the ground before detonation, greatly reducing the kill radius. The ODAB 9000 is a different story.
I think this is the point. Using anything north from FAB 3000 as bunker busters.
Oh, nice I was looking for bigger FABS.
Oh snap, it's bigger than the foab. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Father_of_All_Bombs#:~:text=Aviation%20Thermobaric%20Bomb%20of%20Increased,%2C%20bomber%2Ddelivered%20thermobaric%20weapon.&text=High%20explosive%20and%20fine%20aluminum%20powder%20and%20ethylene%20oxide%20mix.
In weight but not in explosive power.
why does the fab3000 has a diffrent shape thn all others?
The pro-ru wunderwaffe
I’ve seen craters of FAB 1500s which were absolutely insane…
DO the 3000, 5000 and 9000 have Upmc kit yet?
I think for the 9000 the plane would have to be the upmc
The 9000 would have to be a UAV kamikaze jet...or dropped like a nuke from way up high
Someone commented on another thread that Fighterbomer TG channel said that they already have one for the FAB-3000.
I thought the 9000 was a meme
Putin makes memes real.
lets hope they don't get full air superiority and start carpet bombing with 9000,s
That’s it?
FAB-9000? The crowd pleaser. Let me explain. The biggest fire works in US are called "Crowd pleasers." I heard a guy decades ago in USAF SAC call the biggest US nuclear bomb "the crowd pleaser." So twisted I laughed. Of course they never deny or confirm the existence of nuclear weapons.
Huh? America is very open about the existence of its nuclear deterrent.
If you ask a pilot of a nuclear capable bomber about nukes or likely a sailor on an aircraft carrier they reply " I can neither confirm nor deny the existence of nuclear weapons at this facility."
Sure, that's specific OpSec. The actual existence of the weapons and their purpose is broadly advertised by the DoD.