New Russian superbomb FAB-3000: what it is intended for and what it is capable of

a reply to: Imhere

Afghanistan was a mess in general for everyone. Even for U.S.

There is a reason it is called "The Graveyard of Empires".

en.wikipedia.org...

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

Afghanistan was a mess in general for everyone. Even for U.S.

There is a reason it is called "The Graveyard of Empires".

en.wikipedia.org...

Back on topic.

The comparison I made here originally was directed at industrial structural designs, that were based/built on Soviet design to withstand pressure like in a nuclear conflict scenario etc.

Avdeevka for example, Ukrainian forces utilized industrial concrete plant fortifications that were built by Soviet design to withstand massive amounts of pressure etc.

Avdeevka coke plant was getting pounded for months. Then fabs started showing up more and shockwave pressures got more intense.

Videos released past weeks around on YouTube and social media etc are pretty gnarly showing UA forces going through the shockwave blasts.

Based on comparison, it seems that these new fab-3000’s are much stronger than what was previously experienced.

No one is denying that the recent fab strikes haven’t been showing some devastating results on fortifications sectors/defensive lines etc.

a reply to: Imhere

Well if the topic is war and weapons Afghanistan was a mess for Russia as alldaylong pointed out to you.

No two ways about it really.

As to the "FAB-3000" It's a new bomb with a rather devastating blast radius(900 meters).

Hitting targets with such without being blown out of the sky is apt to be a concern for the Russian bombers by my guess, and that's with mere MANPADS as well as the other NATO surface-to-air missiles the Russian airforce fears.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

Well if the topic is war and weapons Afghanistan was a mess for Russia as alldaylong pointed out to you.

No two ways about it really.

As to the "FAB-3000" It's a new bomb with a rather devastating blast radius(900 meters).

Hitting targets with such without being blown out of the sky is apt to be a concern for the Russian bombers by my guess, and that's with mere MANPADS.

Sure if one is looking to try and throw some deflected 2bit “zinger” when the comparison I made here is on industrial structural designs.

Pound for pound many of the Soviet Industrial structures in Ukraine were built with a higher tolerance to withstand higher pressures than those in Gaza for example

or in Afghanistan or in Tahiti or at the Keebler elf cookie factory complexes etc etc

Regarding these fab-3000, we’ll see. Surely there’s ton of people that will be watching the results going forward.

From news outlets and videos posted on YouTube and social media etc.

There’s many on other fabs etc recently.

a reply to: Imhere

Other people are allowed to make comparisons and fancy bombs aside.

Russia is getting held at bay by what amounts to a bunch of farmers armed with NATO toys.

Pound for pound, they are giving as good as they get.

Good luck with that.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

Other people are allowed to make comparisons and fancy bombs aside.

Russia is getting held at bay by what amounts to a bunch of farmers armed with NATO toys.

Pound for pound, they are giving as good as they get.

Good luck with that.

You think the Ukrainian army is just a bunch of farmers armed with NATO toys?

Not sure where you got that from. But there’s many Ukrainian men and soldiers that are skilled and experienced. Some are and some not. But Ukrainian soldiers overall can go toe to toe with basically anyone

Goodluck with that.

a reply to: Imhere

You think the Ukrainian army is just a bunch of farmers armed with NATO toys?

That are managing to hold at bay the mighty Russian bear noless.

Not sure where you got that from. But there’s many Ukrainian men and soldiers that are skilled and experienced.

No doubt given what they are up against and had to learn fast.

Some are and some not. But Ukrainian soldiers overall can go toe to toe with basically anyone

Yeah, they prove that every day Putin's in a cream puff and his special military operation continues to fail.

Goodluck with that.

With what?

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

With what?

With whatever point you’re trying to defend from others and deflect lol

My original reply made the comparison of the many Soviet industrial structures in Ukraine.. that were designed/made over the decades with a higher tolerance to withstand pressure in a nuclear scenario. than those in Gaza and Afghanistan etc for example.

And the effectiveness being fabs and the topic here being about the newer fab-3000’s etc.

a reply to: Imhere

If you say so. LoL

Not many "industrial structures" stand up to well to modern-day munitions, thats just a fact.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

If you say so. LoL

Not many "industrial structures" stand up to well to modern-day munitions, thats just a fact.

Compared to the Soviet industrial structure complexes in Ukraine correct.

Compared to Gaza or Afghanistan etc as I stated.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Imhere

If you say so. LoL

Not many "industrial structures" stand up to well to modern-day munitions, thats just a fact.

I think his point is soviets built industrial sights with underground bunkers with the intent of being able to survive a nuclear blast. The theory was they would be able to get their industries running quickly after a blast.

People don't realize thermonuclear bombs do not create all the radiation that hydrogen bombs did. Within a couple of weeks radiation will be within safe levels. After about 2 you can leave your shelter for limited trips. The Soviets knew this so they wanted to make sure they could get industries moving again as soon as possible.

a reply to: dragonridr

I don't think i would like to test the premise of the argument dragonridr.

Simply speaking, a hydrogen bomb is the more advanced version of an atomic bomb.

And as far as I'm aware most nuclear warheads in this day of age are of that sort.

As to the yield and radiation they produce, that can vary and depend on the bomb casing.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: dragonridr

I don't think i would like to test the premise of the argument dragonridr.

Simply speaking, a hydrogen bomb is the more advanced version of an atomic bomb.

And as far as I'm aware most nuclear warheads in this day of age are of that sort.

As to the yield and radiation they produce, that can vary and depend on the bomb casing.

We now use fusion bombs alot cleaner then what was dropped on Japan. This is why you hear the phrase nuclear bomb as opposed to hydrogen bomb. An atomic bomb uses either uranium or plutonium and relies on fission, a nuclear reaction in which a nucleus or an atom breaks apart into two pieces. Creates a massive release of energy however nuclear is relatively clean and doesn't produce radiation with a long half life.

I know we are told that radiation will turn the planet into a hellscape but it's not true. The earth would quickly recover. The problem is all the dust it kicks up into the atmosphere blocking out sun light and turning earth into a giant snowball.

If you survive the 1st month radiation can easily be managed and reconstruction can srart.

a reply to: RussianTroll

With the help of Controlled Planning and Correction Modules (UMPC), these huge bombs, called “cast iron” in Russia, and which have been stored in huge quantities in storage warehouses since the Second World War, have become precision weapons against which there is no counteraction.

And recently, the Russian Ministry of Defense announced the start of mass production of FAB-3000 aerial bombs. Russian TV broadcast stories about Sergei Shoigu’s visit to a plant in the Nizhny Novgorod region, which began mass production of FAB 3000, which are equipped with UMPC modules.

Official US Military response to this news and announcement:

[ *chuckle* ]

[ *snore* ]

a reply to: dragonridr

We now use fusion bombs alot cleaner then what was dropped on Japan.

Yes modern-day fusion devices they can even dial the yield on some models.

And salted bombs are most likely a thing.

I know we are told that radiation will turn the planet into a hellscape but it's not true. The earth would quickly recover. The problem is all the dust it kicks up into the atmosphere blocking out sun light and turning earth into a giant snowball.

If you survive the 1st month radiation can easily be managed and reconstruction can srart.

You seem rather confident with the veracity of those claims dragonridr.

Put it this way the northern hemisphere of our planet does not bode well in any sort of full-blown nuclear exchange between superpowers.

As to the outcome and possible ramifications for the Earth, truth is we dont really know what those may be, and it would be a really stupid idea to find out.

a reply to: andy06shake

Yes yields can be dialed now nuclear weapons make huge explosions and vaporize large areas like New York for example. But even after the blast within weeks you could enter the area again. The real threat is all the dust it kicks up when it explodes. Plants would die do to lack of sunlight and we would are starve. As animals would go first then as we have nothing to eat wouldn't be long until we went extinct

a reply to: RussianTroll

but if what you claim is true, the Ukraine war should have been over months ago. Is Vlad afraid to use them? If he's chicken sh!t, what does that say about his ability to lead?
I'm thinking he has many fooled into how great he is, or is not.

a reply to: andy06shake

It's an old bomb design, which I think was designed near the beginning of the cold war. A 'dumb bomb or gravity bomb.

They may have upgraded them so they have maneuvrability but I'm not seeing evidence of it. Even so there's a version of the patriot missile with a ceiling height of 36km so it's not like Ukraine is incapable of shooting down any Russian plane.

The big gaping flaw in the logic here is that bombs fitted to hard points is like running around Russia with a pussy hat, you'll stick out like a sore thumb... It's a brute force weapon which has been used in some various form since 1943.

I'm not trained nor educated in aviation, I'm sure the Ukrainians outside of front lines are not too worried because I wouldn't be. As said before the quality of propaganda on display is for people with an IQ of 60 and as you mentioned specialized weaponry actually does the job in an effective and efficient manner.

a reply to: dragonridr

Well, i think we can both agree.

"Feck that for a game of soldiers"

I think i would be happier to go in the initial blast.

As to the effects of nuclear detonations on the likes of cities and surrounding areas.

You may find this little app/site of interest if you haven't come across the place before.

nuclearsecrecy.com...

originally posted by: dragonridr
We now use fusion bombs alot cleaner then what was dropped on Japan. This is why you hear the phrase nuclear bomb as opposed to hydrogen bomb. An atomic bomb uses either uranium or plutonium and relies on fission, a nuclear reaction in which a nucleus or an atom breaks apart into two pieces. Creates a massive release of energy however nuclear is relatively clean and doesn't produce radiation with a long half life.

I know we are told that radiation will turn the planet into a hellscape but it's not true. The earth would quickly recover. The problem is all the dust it kicks up into the atmosphere blocking out sun light and turning earth into a giant snowball.

If you survive the 1st month radiation can easily be managed and reconstruction can srart.

Much of the bomb type stuff posted by many is inaccurate as the day is long. You have some of the basics, but you miss the mark on others. Both fission and fusion bombs are "nuclear" bombs, and are both referred to as such, as they represent two different types of nuclear reactions, specifically fission (splitting apart of an atoms nucleus) and fusion (joining together of atomic nucleus to form new atoms). BOTH reactions create a huge amount of environmental radiation. The long term danger from either is not from the ionizing radiation given off by the initial blast, but in the creation and dispersion of long half-life radioactive elements such as strontium. A pure fusion reaction converts two hydrogen atoms into a helium atom, and is "clean" in the concept that no radioactive nuclear byproducts are created. However, for a "clean" reaction to occur, such as happens in our sun, massive gravity pressure and huge magnetic fields must initiate the procedure. Modern fusions bombs use a fission bomb to initiate to fusion reaction.

There is no such critter as a "clean nuclear weapon" until some bright-boy figures out how to initiate the fusion reaction in the bomb without the use of fission as the ignition/compressing agent. That is why we don't have fusion reactors for nuclear power instead of currently used and highly dangerous fission reactors.

Now, speaking generally to the crowd, concerning the FAB 3000 bombs... big whoop. It is a roughly 6000lb (6613.86787 lbs) conventional bomb. Stated differently, that's roughly a three ton bomb.

It in no way compares to nukes in any sense of the word. There is NO conventional bomb which is actually equivalent in yield to nukes. The bomb dropped on Nagasaki for instance, code named Fat Man, was a low yield fission bomb which produced a 21kt yield. That means the blast was equivalent to 21,000 TONS of high explosive, not pounds.

Fusion bombs are rated in the megatons which equates to MILLIONS OF TONS of high explosive (TNT to be exact).

To put things into perspective, the highest power current conventional style bombs, or Massive Ordinance Air Blast (MOAB) weapons is around 22,000lbs (NOT tons) of TNT. They are not even a firecracker compared to even the low yield nukes used in WWII.They do not even compare to the tiny tactical nukes which start at a fraction of a kiloton and can range to 50 kilotons. Yes, the bombs the US dropped in Japan are only equivalent to modern medium sized Tactical (or "pony") nukes.