33:
210:
429:) to penetrate 6 meters (20 feet) of concrete, and more than 30 metres (98 feet) of earth. The B61 Mod 11, which first entered military service after the Cold war had ended, in January 1997, was specifically developed to allow for bunker penetration, and is speculated to have the ability to destroy hardened targets a few hundred feet beneath the earth.
369:
270:
The main criticisms of nuclear bunker busters regard fallout and nuclear proliferation. The purpose of an earth-penetrating nuclear bunker buster is to reduce the required yield needed to ensure the destruction of the target by coupling the explosion to the ground, yielding a shock wave similar to an
154:
Geologic factors also play a major role in weapon effectiveness and facility survivability. Locating facilities in hard rock may appear to reduce the effectiveness of bunker-buster type weapons by decreasing penetration, but the hard rock also transmits shock forces to a far higher degree than softer
118:
While conventional bunker busters use several methods to penetrate concrete structures, these are for the purpose of destroying the structure directly, and are generally limited in how much of a bunker (or system of bunkers) they can destroy by depth and their relatively low explosive force (compared
142:
Major advancements in the accuracy and precision of nuclear and conventional weapons subsequent to the invention of the missile silo itself have also rendered many "hardening" technologies useless. With modern weapons capable of striking within feet (meters) of their intended targets, a modern "near
138:
Liquid-fueled missiles such as those historically used by Russia are more fragile and easily damaged than solid-fueled missiles such as those used by the United States. The complex fuel storage facilities and equipment needed to fuel missiles for launch and de-fuel them for frequent maintenance add
261:
Another school of thought on nuclear bunker busters is using a light penetrator to travel 15 to 30 meters through shielding, and detonate a nuclear charge there. Such an explosion would generate powerful shock waves, which would be transmitted very effectively through the solid material comprising
126:
The main principles in modern bunker design are largely centered around survivability in nuclear war. As a result of this both
American and Soviet sites reached a state of "super hardening", involving defenses against the effects of a nuclear weapon such as spring- or counterweight-mounted (in the
355:
of a nuclear detonation, therefore limiting the target, and its surroundings, to a fire hazard by reducing the range of thermal radiation with fuzing for subsurface bursts. Professors
Altfeld and Cimbala have suggested that belief in the possibility of nuclear winter has actually made nuclear war
146:
A nuclear bunker buster negates most of the countermeasures involved in the protection of underground bunkers by penetrating the defenses prior to detonating. A relatively low yield may be able to produce seismic forces beyond those of an air burst or even ground burst of a weapon with twice its
307:
Critics also worry that the existence of lower-yield nuclear weapons for relatively limited tactical purposes will lower the threshold for their actual use, thus blurring the sharp line between conventional weapons intended for use and weapons of mass destruction intended only for hypothetical
315:
will inevitably throw up many tons of (newly) radioactive debris, which falls back to the earth as fallout, critics contend that despite their relatively minuscule explosive yield, nuclear bunker busters create more local fallout per kiloton yield. Also, because of the subsurface detonation,
244:
of the concrete in the target, which tends to flow over the projectile. Variation in the speed of the penetrator can either cause it to be vaporized on impact (in the case of traveling too fast), or to not penetrate far enough (in the case of traveling too slowly). An approximation for the
143:
miss" can be much more effective than a "hit" decades ago. A weapon need only cover the silo door with sufficient debris to prevent its immediate opening to render the missile inside useless for its intended mission of rapid strike or counter-strike deployment.
483:
in particular, the United States believed that "vast underground complexes," deeply buried, were protecting opposing forces. Such complexes were not found. While a nuclear penetrator (the "Robust
Nuclear Earth Penetrator", or "RNEP") was never built, the U.S.
436:
and the United States were creating bunkers buried under huge volumes of soil or reinforced concrete in order to withstand the multi-megaton thermonuclear weapons developed in the 1950s and 1960s. Bunker penetration weapons were initially designed within this
464:. The timing of the Kosvinsky completion date is regarded as one explanation for US interest in a new nuclear bunker buster and the declaration of the deployment of the B-61 Mod 11 in 1997. Kosvinsky is protected by about 300 meters (1000 feet) of
331:
was over 100 meters, depending upon the weapon's yield. They contend that it is improbable that penetrators could be made to burrow so deeply. With yields between 0.3 and 340 kilotons, they argue, it is unlikely the blast would be completely contained.
155:
soil types. The difficulties of drilling into and constructing facilities within hard rock also increase construction time and expense, as well as making it more likely construction will be discovered and new sites targeted by foreign militaries.
220:
The primary difficulty facing the designers of such a penetrator is the tremendous heat applied to the penetrator unit when striking the shielding (surface) at hundreds of meters per second. This has partially been solved by using metals such as
200:
While soil is a less dense material, it also does not transmit shock waves as well as concrete. So while a penetrator may actually travel further through soil, its effect may be lessened due to its inability to transmit shock to the target.
303:
B-53. Supporters note that this is one of the reasons nuclear bunker busters should be developed. Critics claim that developing new nuclear weapons sends a proliferating message to non-nuclear powers, undermining non-proliferation efforts.
106:. However, it is unlikely that the explosion would be completely contained underground. As a result, significant amounts of rock and soil would be rendered radioactive and lofted as dust or vapor into the atmosphere, generating significant
192:
When explosive force is applied to concrete, three major fracture regions are usually formed: the initial crater, a crushed aggregate surrounding the crater, and "scabbing" on the surface opposite the crater. Scabbing, also known as
342:
Proponents, however, contend that lower explosive yield devices and subsurface bursts would produce little to no climatic effects in the event of a nuclear war, in contrast to multi-megaton air and surface bursts (that is, if the
339:. Although Congress refused to ratify the CTBT in 1999, and therefore this treaty has no legal force in the US, the US has adhered to the spirit of the treaty by maintaining a moratorium on nuclear testing since 1992.
197:, is the violent separation of a mass of material from the opposite face of a plate or slab subjected to an impact or impulsive loading, without necessarily requiring that the barrier itself be penetrated.
122:
The primary difference between conventional and nuclear bunker busters is that, while the conventional version is meant for one target, the nuclear version can destroy an entire underground bunker system.
386:
weapons were designed to penetrate deeply fortified structures through sheer explosive power. These were not designed to directly penetrate defences, though they could do this (for example, the
217:
Further thinking on the subject envisions a hardened penetrator using kinetic energy to defeat the target's defenses and subsequently deliver a nuclear explosive to the buried target.
737:
171:
structure design has not changed significantly in the last 70 years. The majority of protected concrete structures in the U.S. military are derived from standards set forth in
287:), due to the latter's superior ground penetration. By burying itself into the ground before detonation, a much higher proportion of the explosion energy is transferred to
139:
additional weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Therefore, a similar degree of silo "hardening" does not automatically equate to a similar level of missile "survivability".
398:(cavern) which would undermine foundations of structures above, causing it to collapse, thus negating any possible hardening. The destruction of targets such as the
758:
425:. One of the more effective housings, the GBU-28 used its large mass (2,130 kg or 4,700 lb) and casing (constructed from barrels of surplus 203 mm
528:
Massive
Ordnance Penetrator, a 30,000 pound (14,000 kg) conventional gravity bomb. The USAF's B-2 Spirit bombers can each carry two such weapons.
394:
roofs 4.5 metres (15 feet) thick which were penetrated by two Grand Slams on 27 March 1945), but rather to penetrate under the target and explode leaving a
240:
has demonstrated penetrations of 100 to 150 feet (30 to 46 m) in concrete when traveling at 4,000 ft/s (1,200 m/s). The reason for this is
1235:
536:
Note that with the exception of strictly earth penetrating weapons, others were designed with air burst capability and some were depth charges as well.
1013:
919:
840:
798:
827:
1104:
472:
1264:
935:
410:
rail tunnel about 18 m (59 ft) below, completely blocking it, and showing that these weapons could destroy any hardened or deeply
876:
1346:
662:
727:
511:
485:
1205:
1176:
1133:
449:, as capable of surviving "half a dozen" repeated nuclear strikes of an unspecified yield, one after the other in a "direct hole".
90:
or other below-ground facilities. An underground explosion releases a larger fraction of its energy into the ground, compared to a
970:
232:
Altering the shape of the projectile to incorporate an ogive shape has yielded substantial improvement in penetration ability.
700:
1356:
897:, UK: Ministry of Defence, (6 July "Mimoyecques V-Weapon Site" photograph shows clearly the camouflet effect), archived from
892:
999:
489:
352:
336:
320:
781:
460:, finished in early 1996, was designed to resist US earth-penetrating warheads and serves a similar role as the American
173:
1307:
The B61-based "Robust
Nuclear Earth Penetrator:" Clever retrofit or headway towards fourth-generation nuclear weapons?
701:
The B61-based “Robust
Nuclear Earth Penetrator:” Clever retrofit or headway towards fourth-generation nuclear weapons?
518:
1089:
83:
to deliver a nuclear warhead to an underground target. These weapons would be used to destroy hardened, underground
151:
than many bunker systems are designed to combat by detonating at or near the bunker's depth, rather than above it.
360:
and others, because it has inspired the development of more accurate, and lower explosive yield, nuclear weapons.
461:
351:, which would result from partially buried warheads, would limit or completely obstruct the range of the burning
311:
Local fallout from any nuclear detonation is increased with proximity to the ground. While a megaton-class yield
1341:
453:
411:
328:
299:. Moreover, the globally dispersed fallout of an underground B-61 Mod 11 would likely be less than that of a
1030:
682:
403:
387:
1351:
1017:
913:
844:
802:
476:
432:
While penetrations of 20–100 feet (6.1–30.5 m) were sufficient for some shallow targets, both the
127:
case of the R-36) control capsules and thick concrete walls (3 to 4 feet (0.91 to 1.22 m) for the
1320:
830:
by
Fredric Solomon, Robert Q. Marston, Institute of Medicine (U.S.), National Academies, 1986, p. 106
574:
556:
504:
414:
installation. Modern targeting techniques allied with multiple strikes could perform a similar task.
237:
99:
1112:
1169:
Nuclear Weapon
Initiatives: Low-yield R&D, Advanced Concepts, Earth Penetrators, Test Readiness
546:
540:
103:
335:
Critics further state that the testing of new nuclear weapons would be prohibited by the proposed
1310:
941:
672:
503:
administration removed its request for funding of the weapon in
October 2005. Additionally, then
457:
225:(the metal with the highest melting point), and altering the shape of the projectile (such as an
870:
1053:
406:
was the first operational use of the
Tallboy. One bored through a hillside and exploded in the
17:
1260:
1201:
1172:
752:
613:
36:
1252:
1231:
1221:
1054:"Global Security.org Kosvinsky Mountain, Kos'vinskiy Kamen', Gora, MT 59°31'00"N 59°04'00"E"
1039:
667:
625:
619:
609:
598:
592:
586:
580:
568:
493:
418:
391:
372:
324:
296:
280:
272:
128:
657:
562:
550:
446:
383:
107:
98:
explosion at or above the surface, and so can destroy an underground target using a lower
32:
1139:
1014:"WINDOW ON HEARTLAND Geopolitical notes on Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia"
1324:
964:
677:
500:
442:
344:
276:
76:
64:
1335:
651:
507:
312:
300:
292:
288:
91:
68:
1275:
712:
1288:
1067:
433:
379:
308:
deterrence, and increasing the risk of escalation to higher-yield nuclear weapons.
250:
246:
241:
898:
177:, published in 1946 (US Army Corps of Engineers). Various augmentations, such as
147:
yield. Additionally, the weapon has the ability to impart more severe horizontal
635:
233:
510:
announced funding for the nuclear bunker-buster has been dropped from the U.S.
1034:
772:
399:
357:
148:
40:
39:
remaining after underground nuclear (test) explosions at the north end of the
604:
Mod 11 (1997–present): earth penetrating, laydown delivery, and ground burst
480:
395:
348:
95:
209:
1161:, The Physical Security and Stockpile Directorate, Defense Nuclear Agency
1081:
438:
426:
222:
168:
84:
80:
1315:
488:
was allotted budget to develop it, and tests were conducted by the U.S.
733:
465:
284:
985:
368:
525:
422:
407:
135:. These systems were designed to survive a near miss of 20 megatons.
87:
44:
1246:
1256:
71:. The non-nuclear component of the weapon is designed to penetrate
1225:
226:
208:
194:
186:
182:
178:
132:
1000:"Secret Bases Russia Yamantau Mountain Complex Beloretsk, Russia"
713:"Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons By Robert W. Nelson"
189:, have made concrete less vulnerable, but far from impenetrable.
521:
speculated in 2005 that work might continue under another name.
445:, was regarded in the 1990s by Maryland Republican congressman,
72:
729:
Intervention und Kernwaffen – Zur neuen Nukleardoktrin der USA
641:
Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator (cancelled): earth penetrating
631:
327:, the depth required to contain fallout from an average-yield
517:
While the project for the RNEP seems to be in fact canceled,
471:
The weapon was revisited after the Cold War during the 2001
1198:
U.S. Nuclear Weapons: Changes In Policy And Force Structure
986:"Yamantau Whats going on in the Yamantau mountain complex?"
858:
A Nuclear Winter's Tale: Science and Politics in the 1980s
816:
A Nuclear Winter's Tale: Science and Politics in the 1980s
316:
radioactive debris may contaminate the local groundwater.
417:
Development continued, with weapons such as the nuclear
283:
could attack similar targets with much lower yield (400
271:
earthquake. For example, the United States retired the
1248:
Effects of Nuclear Earth-Penetrator and Other Weapons
601:(1968–present): laydown delivery and ground burst
628:(1983–present): laydown delivery and ground burst
441:context. One likely Soviet Union/Russian target,
102:. This in turn could lead to a reduced amount of
131:launch control capsule) heavily reinforced with
1031:"Moscow builds bunkers against nuclear attack"
583:(1961–1990): laydown delivery and ground burst
571:(1958–1991): laydown delivery and ground burst
1309:, Independent Scientific Research Institute,
1289:"Low-Yield Earth-Penetrating Nuclear Weapons"
577:(1958–1962) laydown delivery and ground burst
364:Targets and the development of bunker busters
8:
1234:; Wright, David; Nelson, Robert (May 2005),
1159:Penetration Resistance of Concrete: A Review
774:Comprehensive Nuclear Test Ban Treaty (CTBT)
514:'s 2006 budget at the department's request.
894:RAF Bomber Command Campaign Diary July 1944
524:A more recent development (c. 2012) is the
492:. The RNEP was to use the 1.2 megaton
421:, and conventional thermobaric weapons and
1287:Nelson, Robert W (January–February 2001),
940:(report to Congress), Rice, archived from
757:: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (
257:Combination penetrator-explosive munitions
1314:
1200:, Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated,
841:"A Nuclear Winter's Tale - the MIT Press"
799:"A Nuclear Winter's Tale - the MIT Press"
1167:Ernest, Jonathan V; et al. (2005),
1105:"Bush Admin. Drops 'Bunker-Buster' Plan"
726:Harald MĂĽller, Stephanie Sonius (2006),
367:
31:
875:, United Kingdom: Ministry of Defence,
828:The Medical implications of nuclear war
693:
1251:, The National Academies Press, 2005,
750:
356:more likely, contrary to the views of
323:advocacy group points out that at the
262:the shielding (see "scabbing" above).
245:penetration depth is obtained with an
973:from the original on 27 February 2009
922:from the original on 26 February 2014
915:RAF Bomber Command Saumur Tunnel Raid
879:from the original on 26 February 2014
7:
1103:Hebert, H. Josef (25 October 2005),
787:from the original on 25 October 2011
378:As early as 1944, the Barnes Wallis
1274:Hambling, David (7 November 2002),
1240:, US: Union of Concerned Scientists
1224:list of all US nuclear warheads at
937:The Conduct of the Persian Gulf War
872:RAF Bomber Command Grand Slam raids
663:Underground nuclear weapons testing
1276:"Bunker-busters set to go nuclear"
1111:, Associated Press, archived from
1092:from the original on 24 April 2014
1082:"US cancels bunker bomb programme"
25:
1293:Federation of American Scientists
740:from the original on 19 July 2011
532:Notable US nuclear bunker busters
174:Fundamentals of Protective Design
1305:Gsponer, Andre (31 March 2007),
1135:US dumps bunker-buster – or not?
27:Earth-penetrating nuclear weapon
266:Policy and criticism of fallout
67:equivalent of the conventional
18:Robust Nuclear Earth Penetrator
1190:, National Bureau of Standards
638:(cancelled): earth penetrating
616:(cancelled): earth penetrating
559:(1956–1960): earth penetrating
553:(cancelled): earth penetrating
543:(1952–1957): earth penetrating
164:Penetration by explosive force
1:
622:(cancelled): laydown delivery
595:(1963–1993): laydown delivery
589:(1962–1997): laydown delivery
565:(1958–1965): laydown delivery
490:Air Force Research Laboratory
347:hypothesis proves accurate).
337:Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty
321:Union of Concerned Scientists
473:U.S. invasion of Afghanistan
918:, UK: Ministry of Defence,
654:(conventional, non-nuclear)
1373:
1347:Anti-fortification weapons
969:, Nuclear weapon archive,
1237:Earth Penetrating Weapons
1188:Barrier Penetration Tests
479:. During the campaign in
462:Cheyenne Mountain Complex
295:produced from the B-53's
1226:nuclearweaponarchive.org
1138:, Jane's, archived from
963:"The B61 (Mk-61) Bomb",
860:, Lawrence Badash, p.242
818:, Lawrence Badash, p.235
519:Jane's Information Group
454:continuity of government
329:underground nuclear test
57:earth-penetrating weapon
683:List of nuclear weapons
475:, and again during the
388:Valentin submarine pens
275:, with a yield of nine
375:
214:
48:
1357:Nuclear weapon design
1196:Woolf, Amy F (2005),
780:, MIIS, 10 May 2012,
477:2003 invasion of Iraq
371:
291:when compared to the
212:
119:to nuclear weapons).
53:nuclear bunker buster
35:
1070:. 21 September 2006.
575:Mark 39 nuclear bomb
557:Mark 11 nuclear bomb
512:Department of Energy
349:Lower fuzing heights
247:impact depth formula
238:Eglin Air Force Base
159:Methods of operation
1325:2005physics..10052G
1171:, Nova Publishers,
1088:, 26 October 2005,
541:Mark 8 nuclear bomb
205:Hardened penetrator
104:radioactive fallout
55:, also known as an
1157:Clifton, James R,
1142:on 22 October 2007
1115:on 27 October 2005
944:on 2 February 2007
673:Thermobaric weapon
458:Kosvinsky Mountain
376:
215:
49:
37:Subsidence craters
1266:978-0-309-09673-7
1232:Gronlund, Lisbeth
1020:on 24 April 2013.
614:MGM-134 Midgetman
496:physics package.
16:(Redirected from
1364:
1327:
1318:
1300:
1282:
1269:
1241:
1210:
1191:
1181:
1162:
1145:
1143:
1130:
1124:
1123:
1122:
1120:
1100:
1094:
1093:
1078:
1072:
1071:
1064:
1058:
1057:
1050:
1044:
1040:Washington Times
1028:
1022:
1021:
1016:. Archived from
1010:
1004:
1003:
996:
990:
989:
982:
976:
974:
960:
954:
952:
951:
949:
931:
925:
923:
909:
903:
902:
888:
882:
880:
867:
861:
856:
854:
852:
843:. Archived from
837:
831:
825:
819:
814:
812:
810:
801:. Archived from
795:
789:
788:
786:
779:
769:
763:
762:
756:
748:
747:
745:
723:
717:
716:
709:
703:
698:
668:Nuclear strategy
626:B83 nuclear bomb
620:B77 nuclear bomb
599:B61 nuclear bomb
593:B57 nuclear bomb
587:B53 nuclear bomb
581:B43 nuclear bomb
569:B28 nuclear bomb
392:ferrous concrete
373:B61 nuclear bomb
325:Nevada Test Site
297:laydown delivery
251:Sir Isaac Newton
21:
1372:
1371:
1367:
1366:
1365:
1363:
1362:
1361:
1342:Nuclear warfare
1332:
1331:
1316:physics/0510052
1304:
1286:
1273:
1267:
1245:
1230:
1218:
1208:
1195:
1185:
1179:
1166:
1156:
1153:
1148:
1132:
1131:
1127:
1118:
1116:
1102:
1101:
1097:
1080:
1079:
1075:
1066:
1065:
1061:
1052:
1051:
1047:
1029:
1025:
1012:
1011:
1007:
998:
997:
993:
984:
983:
979:
962:
961:
957:
947:
945:
933:
932:
928:
911:
910:
906:
890:
889:
885:
869:
868:
864:
850:
848:
847:on 6 April 2012
839:
838:
834:
826:
822:
808:
806:
805:on 6 April 2012
797:
796:
792:
784:
777:
771:
770:
766:
749:
743:
741:
725:
724:
720:
711:
710:
706:
699:
695:
691:
658:Earthquake bomb
648:
563:Mk 105 Hotpoint
551:SSM-N-8 Regulus
534:
447:Roscoe Bartlett
382:and subsequent
366:
268:
259:
207:
166:
161:
116:
100:explosive yield
28:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
1370:
1368:
1360:
1359:
1354:
1349:
1344:
1334:
1333:
1330:
1329:
1302:
1284:
1271:
1265:
1257:10.17226/11282
1243:
1228:
1217:
1216:External links
1214:
1213:
1212:
1206:
1193:
1183:
1177:
1164:
1152:
1149:
1147:
1146:
1125:
1095:
1073:
1059:
1045:
1043:, 1 April 1997
1023:
1005:
991:
977:
955:
926:
904:
901:on 14 May 2005
883:
862:
832:
820:
790:
764:
718:
704:
692:
690:
687:
686:
685:
680:
678:Nuclear weapon
675:
670:
665:
660:
655:
647:
644:
643:
642:
639:
629:
623:
617:
607:
606:
605:
596:
590:
584:
578:
572:
566:
560:
554:
544:
533:
530:
443:Mount Yamantau
365:
362:
345:nuclear winter
279:, because the
267:
264:
258:
255:
213:A secant ogive
206:
203:
165:
162:
160:
157:
129:Minuteman ICBM
115:
114:Base principle
112:
26:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1369:
1358:
1355:
1353:
1352:Nuclear bombs
1350:
1348:
1345:
1343:
1340:
1339:
1337:
1326:
1322:
1317:
1312:
1308:
1303:
1298:
1294:
1290:
1285:
1281:
1280:New Scientist
1277:
1272:
1268:
1262:
1258:
1254:
1250:
1249:
1244:
1239:
1238:
1233:
1229:
1227:
1223:
1222:Allbombs.html
1220:
1219:
1215:
1209:
1207:1-59454-234-1
1203:
1199:
1194:
1189:
1184:
1180:
1178:1-59454-203-1
1174:
1170:
1165:
1160:
1155:
1154:
1150:
1141:
1137:
1136:
1129:
1126:
1114:
1110:
1106:
1099:
1096:
1091:
1087:
1083:
1077:
1074:
1069:
1063:
1060:
1055:
1049:
1046:
1042:
1041:
1036:
1032:
1027:
1024:
1019:
1015:
1009:
1006:
1001:
995:
992:
987:
981:
978:
972:
968:
967:
959:
956:
943:
939:
938:
930:
927:
921:
917:
916:
908:
905:
900:
896:
895:
891:"July 1944",
887:
884:
878:
874:
873:
866:
863:
859:
846:
842:
836:
833:
829:
824:
821:
817:
804:
800:
794:
791:
783:
776:
775:
768:
765:
760:
754:
739:
735:
732:(in German),
731:
730:
722:
719:
714:
708:
705:
702:
697:
694:
688:
684:
681:
679:
676:
674:
671:
669:
666:
664:
661:
659:
656:
653:
652:Bunker buster
650:
649:
645:
640:
637:
633:
630:
627:
624:
621:
618:
615:
611:
608:
603:
602:
600:
597:
594:
591:
588:
585:
582:
579:
576:
573:
570:
567:
564:
561:
558:
555:
552:
548:
545:
542:
539:
538:
537:
531:
529:
527:
522:
520:
515:
513:
509:
508:Pete Domenici
506:
502:
497:
495:
491:
487:
482:
478:
474:
469:
467:
463:
459:
455:
450:
448:
444:
440:
435:
430:
428:
424:
420:
415:
413:
409:
405:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
374:
370:
363:
361:
359:
354:
350:
346:
340:
338:
333:
330:
326:
322:
317:
314:
313:surface burst
309:
305:
302:
301:surface burst
298:
294:
293:surface burst
290:
289:seismic shock
286:
282:
278:
274:
265:
263:
256:
254:
252:
248:
243:
239:
235:
230:
228:
224:
218:
211:
204:
202:
198:
196:
190:
188:
184:
180:
176:
175:
170:
163:
158:
156:
152:
150:
144:
140:
136:
134:
130:
124:
120:
113:
111:
109:
105:
101:
97:
93:
92:surface burst
89:
86:
82:
78:
74:
70:
69:bunker buster
66:
62:
58:
54:
46:
42:
38:
34:
30:
19:
1306:
1296:
1292:
1279:
1247:
1236:
1197:
1187:
1168:
1158:
1140:the original
1134:
1128:
1117:, retrieved
1113:the original
1108:
1098:
1085:
1076:
1062:
1048:
1038:
1026:
1018:the original
1008:
994:
980:
965:
958:
946:, retrieved
942:the original
936:
929:
914:
907:
899:the original
893:
886:
871:
865:
857:
849:. Retrieved
845:the original
835:
823:
815:
807:. Retrieved
803:the original
793:
773:
767:
742:, retrieved
728:
721:
707:
696:
535:
523:
516:
505:U.S. Senator
498:
470:
456:facility at
452:The Russian
451:
434:Soviet Union
431:
416:
380:Tallboy bomb
377:
353:thermal rays
341:
334:
318:
310:
306:
273:B-53 warhead
269:
260:
242:liquefaction
231:
219:
216:
199:
191:
172:
167:
153:
145:
141:
137:
125:
121:
117:
60:
56:
52:
50:
29:
1186:Moore, RT,
1109:Yahoo! News
966:USA weapons
744:15 February
636:Pershing II
404:Mimoyecques
281:B-61 Mod 11
249:derived by
236:testing at
234:Rocket sled
149:shock waves
1336:Categories
1151:References
1035:Bill Gertz
948:14 January
934:"GBU-28",
912:"Saumur",
400:V3 battery
384:Grand Slam
358:Carl Sagan
63:), is the
41:Yucca Flat
689:Citations
481:Tora Bora
427:howitzers
412:excavated
396:camouflet
96:air burst
47:test site
1090:archived
971:archived
920:archived
877:archived
782:archived
753:citation
738:archived
646:See also
439:Cold War
285:kilotons
277:megatons
223:tungsten
195:spalling
169:Concrete
85:military
81:concrete
1321:Bibcode
1119:6 March
466:granite
108:fallout
88:bunkers
65:nuclear
1263:
1204:
1175:
1068:"RNEP"
851:12 May
809:12 May
526:GBU-57
423:GBU-28
408:Saumur
185:, and
183:fibers
45:Nevada
1311:arXiv
1033:, by
785:(PDF)
778:(PDF)
227:ogive
187:rebar
179:glass
133:rebar
79:, or
1261:ISBN
1202:ISBN
1173:ISBN
1121:2014
950:2006
853:2014
811:2014
759:link
746:2008
634:for
612:for
549:for
501:Bush
499:The
390:had
319:The
77:rock
73:soil
1299:(1)
1253:doi
1086:BBC
632:W86
610:W61
494:B83
486:DOE
419:B61
402:at
229:).
94:or
61:EPW
1338::
1319:,
1297:54
1295:,
1291:,
1278:,
1259:,
1107:,
1084:,
1037:,
755:}}
751:{{
736:,
734:DE
547:W8
468:.
253:.
181:,
110:.
75:,
51:A
43:,
1328:.
1323::
1313::
1301:/
1283:.
1270:.
1255::
1242:.
1211:.
1192:.
1182:.
1163:.
1144:.
1056:.
1002:.
988:.
975:.
953:.
924:.
881:.
855:.
813:.
761:)
715:.
59:(
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
