Fighter F-35A will be able to use thermonuclear bombs

In the US Air Force will soon be another carrier nuclear weapons dual purpose. According to The Aviationist, the US military conducted a series of tests of the F-35A Lightning II fighter for the use of the promising B61-12 thermonuclear bomb with a warhead of variable power.

According to the publication, the American F-35A fighter is being prepared for certification as a dual-use fighter capable of carrying both tactical and strategic weapons. Certification itself is scheduled for January 2023. Together with the new software update from the current version of Block 3A to Block 4, F-35A fighters will be able to carry and use B61-12 thermonuclear bombs regularly.

It is reported that the tests of F-35A fighters were carried out by the 461st test squadron at the Edwards Air Force Base in California. During the tests, the fighter performed flights with a prototype of the B61-12 thermonuclear bomb in the internal weapons compartment and carried out its reset. At the same time, it is specified that the test was not attended by combat aircraft, but by prototypes that had previously undergone flight tests as part of a program for the development of aircraft of this type.

It is also specified that the tests themselves started back in 2019, but it became known about them only now.

Development aviation B61-12 bombs have been underway since 2012. The new ammunition received a guidance system and a warhead of variable power. The maximum power of the B61-12 is 50 kilotons.

Comments

[St Petrov]

a nuclear bomb in the 21st century, of course, yes.

[Vitaly gusin]

Quote: s-t Petrov

a nuclear bomb in the 21st century, of course, yes.

CHARACTERISTICS
Charge: - nuclear type - power, kT 0,3, 5, 10 and 50 (varies depending on the tasks)
Guidance system: according to information from GPS satellites
Accuracy of hit, m 1 - 2
Weight, kg 320 Length, mm 3560 Diameter, mm 330

[Vicontas]

And this "pi .. fighter" has already learned to part with its missile and bomb weapons? And then the operators complained sobbing that during the flight his missiles did not want to leave their seats and fly to work! And they whimpered that the software is like a technical means of preventing pregnancy and needs to be darned!

[The leader of the Redskins]

And I thought the dual purpose is:
1) I can fly.
2) I can not fly ...

[siberalt]

But have the F-35 pilots tried to throw hand grenades at the enemy directly from the cockpit? It will be even more vintage, however.

[5-9]

Well, in the USA, the super-duper B-2A for mulyards, too, can get a piece of nuclear from a cast-iron bonsai .... they don’t get used to it

[hydrox]

Quote: siberalt

But have the F-35 pilots tried to throw hand grenades at the enemy directly from the cockpit? It will be even more vintage, however.

They just did not have time to create a two-seater Fushka yet: today's Fushny pilot with two arms and two legs barely holds the device in horizontal flight, and you want to oblige him to equip and throw grenades as well - he’s not an octopus which is chipped with Hephaestus wired armpit

[hydrox]

As soon as this aircraft receives the official status of "carrier of nuclear weapons", how will it at the same moment receive our need for the destruction of these devices in the air, on the ground and underground.
And the fact that he has flying ability for a weak "C" will only increase the number of splashes that he will receive from us within not only direct, but also over-the-horizon visibility (and this is several thousand km in the network with the A-50) - and he can withstand a rare splash ... ...

[ordinary person_2]

A little strategist with a little bomb that can bring a lot of hemorrhoids.

[Wedmak]

Well, imagine for a couple of minutes that this negligence has thrown off its underbomb? And on the enemy side there is also nuclear weapons. Only on rockets. How much will fly back and where?

[ordinary person_2]

I completely agree with you, but they also have missiles with nuclear weapons, which can also fly where necessary, just in this case, this carrier is such a small addition to other nuclear weapons

[Wedmak]

A strange addition, I tell you. It is very suitable for starting a war or destroying / intimidating a country that does not possess nuclear weapons. Just near the border two such airplanes with a pair of bombs each land on the airfield. All ... argument, like that scrap.

[ordinary person_2]

They all said correctly, they have an offensive strategy, and that’s why they increase all kinds of carriers for nuclear weapons.

[hydrox]

Such rockets have been inoperative for a long time, because Russia no longer produces such ancient rocket engines

[Interlocutor]

Only on rockets. How much will fly back and where?

It seems to me - EVERYTHING

[doubovitski]

Quote: ordinary man_2

A little strategist with a little bomb that can bring a lot of hemorrhoids.

This underplane cannot fly from afar. Therefore, it should be located in Europe, and most likely in pshekia. We need to revise our nuclear doctrine, with provision for the first such strike there. Tactical forces in the immediate environment of the borders of Russia. In order not to give our "brothers" the opportunity to do what they dreamed of for three hundred years.

[Wedmak]

Taki have already reviewed something. A blow not only to the advancing, but also to the decision centers. Including preventive and, if necessary, with the help of nuclear weapons.

[hydrox]

As long as the directive on the attack reaches the airfields based on these Fushki, the airfields will already be vitrified and have time to cool.

[knn54]

Non-nuclear powers (Japan, NATO members) receive aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons. And how can this be connected with the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons?

[Wedmak]

How dare you? To doubt the honesty of the light elves from the star-striped country ??? !!! This is democracy in a pure and even enriched form !!! Pairs of such gifts will be enough for any country that does not have nuclear weapons and democracy !!!
Generally nonsense of course. It is impossible to determine what a specific F-35 carries. And if there is a nuclear warhead ... At least a serious provocation.

[hydrox]

Yes, look what is happening in the USA!
This is the disintegration of the state in its purest form, and against this background, from a state that is rapidly becoming a "non-state", one can expect any surprises up to the "madness" of statesmen "who have access to the nuclear button (our happiness that the Clinton witch does not have such an opportunity, otherwise she would definitely use it!).

[Wedmak]

Well, as much as I would like to call it a disintegration, it is only just massive protests so far. No matter how spiteful the blacks are, they have no leader, no idea, except how to rob and get freebies, no plans for "after the robbery."
They will bring a lot of headaches, of course, before the civil war ... well ... it won't come. They are not fighters. As soon as the whites stop kneeling and bring in troops to especially frostbitten "protesters", everything will be over.
Although the alignment is twofold. Here either tolerance wins and one wonders how it will be impossible, or logic and adequacy wins and the black robbers go to jail, and everything returns as it was.
To protect the nuclear button oh how far away. If we have a tar to keep access to the dark 90s.
Do you have versions of the development of decay?

[5-9]

Do you really think that now all F-35s can carry nuclear weapons? To do this, you need specific on-board equipment .... and even the United States has few cast-iron core-bonbs - less than 400 pieces, of which they want to leave 150-250 pieces ....

[Tusv]

Quote: 5-9

Do you really think that now all F-35s can carry nuclear weapons?

Yes easy B-61 is quite

[Zeev zeev]

And this is in no way connected with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty. Otherwise, questions would have arisen in the 1960s, when Tu-16 and Il-28 bombers (carriers of nuclear weapons, both tactical and strategic) appeared in Egypt and Iraq, or in the 1970s, when Tu-22 appeared in Libya and in Syria and Iraq, the MiG-25RB. By the way, the usual F-16 can also carry B61 nuclear bombs of various modifications.

[Tusv]

This is a tornado skillfully. The meeting will be super duper affectionate. The only answer is go somewhere in the region of Greenland train on cats. Otherwise, we will not only land, but also soak. Yes, even an encore, like the same Kondratia

[Kerensky]

Well, that’s logical. Always try to hang everything. He would have a three-barrel 300+ caliber tower, Yes, with tape power!

[evgen1221]

I wonder how far from aviation a person is, and what is the difference between the discharge and delivery of a missile from an ordinary one? The mounts in the belly must be the same, the sight in principle, too. So what was then experienced? If in terms of dimensions it is pumped into the bomb bay then what can netak go? Special cooling, input plug too.

[faridg7]

The software is slightly different. Well, it’s not a pig-iron blank, it’s necessary to execute the start-up algorithm, set the initial trajectory (it’s not a firecracker, to throw it under you)

[evgen1221]

Well, in general, at the program level, is it solvable without a file in place?

[faridg7]

Adoption is generally possible without testing? Any changes in the design, software, RLE, must be accompanied by acceptance tests. This is the law.

[Old26]

Quote: knn54

Non-nuclear powers (Japan, NATO members) receive aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons. And how can this be connected with the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons?

No way. Do not put everything in one pile. The agreement on the non-proliferation of nuclear weapons implies only a ban on the transfer of such weapons to a country that does not have them. Everything else under the contract

Quote: Wedmak

Well, imagine for a couple of minutes that this negligence has thrown off its underbomb? And on the enemy side there is also nuclear weapons. Only on rockets. How much will fly back and where?

And if the enemy does not have missiles available at a given time and in this mset. If the same F-35A will act in the interests of the advancing brigade or division and there is a need
a) destroy the KP regiment / brigade / division of the opposing side?
b) destroy the fuel storage field, the deployment of which has just begun and the commissioning of which will lead to refueling of enemy equipment and an attack on the advancing brigade / division
c) ....... / add your own options /
Even large military formations have a limited number of nuclear missile carriers. Our army usually has an Iskander brigade deployed. Nothing less than the range does not exist anymore (there is no "Moon" or "Point"). How, how will you solve support problems ???

Quote: 5-9

Do you really think that now all F-35s can carry nuclear weapons? To do this, you need specific on-board equipment .... and even the United States has few cast-iron core-bonbs - less than 400 pieces, of which they want to leave 150-250 pieces ....

After replacing or upgrading software - that's it. There is nothing that can distinguish it in size and weight from others. And only B-61-12 is planned to be produced from 400 to 500 pieces. And you are already starting to "cut sturgeon" ...

Quote: evgen1221

I wonder how far from aviation a person is, and what is the difference between the discharge and delivery of a missile from an ordinary one? The mounts in the belly must be the same, the sight in principle, too. So what was then experienced? If in terms of dimensions it is pumped into the bomb bay then what can netak go? Special cooling, input plug too.

they are experiencing due to the fact that, unlike previous modifications, modification 12 is correctable and differs from the previous ones in changes in the tail of the bomb. The ballistic testing of a new product is in progress ...

[Ros 56]

At the same time, it will receive special attention of fighters and air defense systems as the most important target with all the consequences.

[Zeev zeev]

Like any other combat aircraft of NATO countries, since the F-16, Eurofighter Typhoon, and Rafal can carry B61 bombs.

[Ros 56]

They can carry, only who will give them. For such bombs there are more serious cars.

[bk0010]

Well, when writing the next START, all F-35s should be included in the number of nuclear weapons carriers (along with B-52 and B-2).

[Zeev zeev]

The Treaty on the Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms does not apply to carriers of the TACTICAL Vigorous Baton like Iskander and F-16. And for the F-35 too.

[Siberian54]

So they have already left RSMD

[Old26]

Quote: bk0010

Well, when writing the next START, all F-35s should be included in the number of nuclear weapons carriers (along with B-52 and B-2).

I completely agree with you. In addition to the Burevestnik and Poseidon, the new agreement should also include MIG-31K aircraft, SU-30/35 type aircraft, the remnants of MIG-29s, of course SU-24 and SU-34, and certainly TU-22M3 / TU -22M3M. And more (the SU-57 is questionable). So that parity is like parity ...