When size matters: UMPC on FAB of increased power

One of the most effective weapon systems used in the area of ​​the Russian Special Military Operation (SVO) in Ukraine is the unified planning and correction modules (UMPC), installed on conventional free-falling high-explosive bombs (FAB).

Weapon this type has existed for quite a long time, in particular, in the USA in 1997, the development of the JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munition) kit was completed, designed for installation on free-falling bombs, consisting of a set of small folding wings that increase the gliding range of the bomb, as well as a tail module , including an inertial and satellite navigation system, drives and control surfaces. The JDAM kit and other similar complexes were previously discussed in the article "The problem of the high cost of precision-guided munitions and ways to solve it".

Installation of JDAM kits on unguided bombs

Initially, Russian UMPCs were designed for aerial bombs weighing 500 kilograms. At the same time, criticism was voiced that first of all it was necessary to develop a UMPC for FAB of smaller “calibers”, for example, FAB-250 weighing 250 kilograms. As an argument, it was suggested that tactical aircraft aviation They will be able to take more smaller caliber FABs with UMPC in one flight and use them against several targets at once.

However, when considering which ammunition the UMPC should be used on, a number of other factors must be taken into account.

UMPC on the FAB-500 aerial bomb

Limiting Factors

The key difference between guided and unguided ammunition, no matter how trivial it may sound, is the presence of a control/guidance system, that is, a certain high-tech module that, in fact, guarantees the necessary guidance accuracy. It is this component that ensures the increased cost and limited quantity of precision-guided ammunition produced.

If we are talking about glide bombs guided by signals from the global satellite navigation system (GLONASS), then their “smart” filling will be comparable in its characteristics, both for ammunition weighing 100 kilograms and for ammunition weighing 9 tons. It is clear that the control rudders and their drives, the power supply and a number of other components will differ, but most importantly, the guidance system, which ensures determination of coordinates from GLONASS signals, will be almost the same everywhere.

“Comet” is an interference-proof GLONASS signal receiver

Thus, we will always have a limited number of UMPCs, regardless of what caliber ammunition they will be installed on. Moreover, it is the number of UMPCs, and not the number of unguided munitions on which they can be installed, that will be the limiting factor.

Another factor is the effectiveness of the attack.

Article “Blow for blow: cluster warheads on long-range precision weapons” we have already said that in most cases, several ammunition provides a larger destruction area with the same mass with one ammunition of greater power, of course, unless we are talking about the destruction of some heavily protected object. For example, the destruction radius of the German AB 250-3 cluster bomb from World War II was ten times greater than the destruction zone of a monoblock bomb weighing 250 kilograms (300 meters versus 30 meters).

There is no doubt that 6 FAB-500 with UMPC in most scenarios will cause more damage to the enemy than 1 FAB-3000 with UMPC. However, there is no doubt that 6 FAB-3000 with UMPC will clearly inflict more damage on the enemy than 6 FAB-500 with UMPC.

Thus, all other things being equal, the feasibility of using UMPC on larger-caliber ammunition is clearly higher than on smaller-caliber ammunition.

From left to right: FAB-500, FAB-1500, FAB-3000, FAB-5000, FAB-9000

So: are we developing UPMK for FAB-9000 and using only them?

No, it won't work that way, because there are other restrictions. For example, in some cases, high-power ammunition can be dangerously redundant, for example, when we want to hit some object in the city center. In this case, the power of the FAB-500 may be quite sufficient, while the FAB-9000 will not only destroy the target, but will also collapse several high-rise residential buildings nearby, which will lead to the unjustified death of civilians - we are not the United States with its allies, who were pulverized cities, and not Ukrainians, who beat even their fellow citizens.

But another factor is much more significant - the limited capabilities of Russian Air Force (Air Force) aircraft to deliver ammunition of one type or another.

FAB-9000

For example, conditionally, in one day the Russian Air Force can deliver to the enemy 20 FAB-9000 or 40 FAB-5000, or 60 FAB-3000, or 1 FAB-360, or 1500 FAB-4, or 080 FAB-500 . Again, the numbers and their relationships are fictitious. It is clear that ammunition such as FAB-11, FAB-160 and FAB-250 can only be used by long-range or strategic aircraft, while, starting with FAB-3000, tactical aircraft are connected, and FAB-5000 can potentially carry more and some promising unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

If we talk about the use of UMPC on FAB-9000, FAB-5000 or FAB-3000, then the range from which these ammunition can be used will be of great importance. It’s one thing - some 50 kilometers, at which a strategic missile-carrying bomber can be easily hit by a long-range anti-aircraft missile system (SAM), such as the American Patriot air defense system, another thing - 150 kilometers - at such a release range the carrier will be much safer .

Ammunition of the FAB-9000, FAB-5000 or FAB-3000 type can be used from long-range and strategic aircraft only if the safety of the carrier in the drop zone is ensured

Will large-caliber aerial bombs appear in the NWO zone?

There is no information yet about the creation of the UMPC for the FAB-9000, but unconfirmed information leaked back in April 5000 that the Russian Armed Forces could use the FAB-3000 in the FAB-2023 in a high-precision version in Ukraine. It can be assumed that this is quite realistic, especially against the backdrop of already reliable information that FAB-1500 with UMPC began to be used in the Northern Military District zone.

Distribution of UMPC between aerial bombs of various calibers

The general logic for distributing a limited number of UMPCs between aviation ammunition will look something like this: first, UMPCs receive ammunition of maximum power, such as FAB-9000, FAB-5000, FAB-3000, which we can use taking into account the above restrictions, then it is the turn of FAB-1500, FAB-500 and FAB-250, up to FAB-100 or even more compact ammunition that can be used even from small UAVs.

Conditional distribution of UMPC between aerial bombs in increasing caliber

Simply put, at first the UMPC must receive ammunition of maximum power, such as, for example, FAB-9000, in the quantity that we can use without risk to the carrier. Then the same logic extends to the next ammunition - FAB-5000, then to FAB-3000 and so on. We will probably run out of UMPCs somewhere on the FAB-500, since the Russian Air Force most likely has more than enough FAB-500s and carriers capable of using them.

Well, then the FAB-250 should not be received at all by the UMPC?

No, probably another factor will play a role here - the amount of ammunition that an aircraft carrier can use in one flight.

Nevertheless, all other things being equal, ammunition of increased power will always be able to inflict more damage on the enemy than ammunition of a smaller caliber, which is logical. This means that if we, conditionally, can spend 50 UMPCs per day, and Air Force aircraft can potentially send 500 ammunition of various strengths to the enemy on the same day, then the feasibility of deploying UMPCs is still seen on ammunition of a larger caliber.

In other words, as we said above, the limiter will not be the number of carriers, but the number of UMPCs.

Conclusions

The use of UMPCs on high-power aerial bombs is a very promising direction in the development of guided aircraft weapons of the Russian Air Force. Equipped with planning and correction modules FAB-9000, FAB-5000, FAB-3000 will be able to lay down huge factory workshops, destroy port facilities, dismantle railway stations, turn warehouses of equipment, ammunition, fuels and lubricants (fuels and lubricants) into dust and much more.

FAB-5000M-54

The main factors limiting the use of UMPC on air bombs such as FAB-9000, FAB-5000, FAB-3000 will be the number of carriers that can use them, as well as the release range, which determines the survival of the carrier aircraft in the face of enemy air defense (air defense).

Comments

[Scientist]

What have I just read? A list of obvious facts?

[coinsam]

Not “obvious” ones, but “known to you” facts. The article is educational in nature and is of interest to those who either/or do not know such facts, or who want to structure previously known but chaotic knowledge.

[Bingo]

Quote: U. Cheny

A list of obvious facts?

Nothing obvious. For example, the author has no idea that in principle no one is eager to use FAB-9000, because it is redundant - even if there are so many of them? There are about 10 fuses - all the explosives in the bomb do not have time to detonate - and an old amusement at the training grounds where such FABs were used is to look for pieces of explosives and kill fish)
The barrel turned out crooked

[Scharnhorst]

What you read leads the inexperienced into the field of sectarianism and astrology (i.e., blind faith or pseudoscience). Let's leave aside the product of gigantomania FAB-9000. Let's consider the FAB-5000NG (weight - 5,4 tons; length - 5,2 m; diameter - 1 m) from the point of view of an air defense target. Even if the carrier manages to drop it without risking entering the zone of destruction of modern air defense (such as the Russian Armed Forces in the Northern Military District), then the projectile itself with added planes for planning and control turns into a training target at the initial stage of preparing air defense calculations. The EPR is at the level of fighters of the Korean War, the flight speed is no more than the speed of the carrier and is unlikely to exceed 800 km/h even at the stage of independent planning, the altitude of the release and flight to the target will not help the object to hide from locator beams either beyond the horizon or in the folds of the terrain. And the threat of defeat by modern means over one’s own line of defense is a prerequisite for a successful counterattack at the tactical level. Thus, even the very presence of such monsters in our arsenal creates a false sense of omnipotence and complacency in the inexperienced layman, which is harmful for the population as a whole.

[JD1979]

The only facts are that the Russian Ministry of Defense finally realized that JDAM is a very effective weapon, unlike SVP-24)) especially if it’s not the Syrian Papuans against you, but someone with air defense and aircraft. And everything else is the result of some psychoactive substances.

[XXTexDemonXX]

These changes are based on the results of the SVO.
AMERS also did their version for a reason. The country's armed forces should fight, not conduct exercises. Such SVOs should always exist. We started with Syria, after Ukraine, there will be others.

[Alien From]

You read how to cram in something that can’t be crammed in...

[Bodipancher]

Considering the high efficiency on FABs 1500 and above, it is more advisable to install more expensive UMPCs or small solid fuel engines, for example from nurses. Yes, the cost of modernization will be higher, but the range and destructive effect will be MUCH higher than with small-caliber bombs. The case when the effect pays for the costs.

[Lozovik]

This doesn't make any sense. For example, on an S-8 rocket with a diameter of 80 mm and a launch weight of 11,5 kg, the engine operates for up to 1,2 s, what impulse can it impart to ammunition with a diameter of 640 mm and a mass of 1500 kg? Not to mention the engine initiator ignition system, which is completely unsuitable for a bomb.

[alexoff]

I would suggest attaching the wings from the UMPC to the Tornado-s rocket, which already has a navigation and control unit. Of course, it is 8 meters long and it will still need to be taught how to take off correctly, but if it opens its wings at the top point of the trajectory and throws away the solid fuel accelerator, then it will fly 300 kilometers. And this is an analogue of the Fab-250 with a bunch of fillers, and cassettes, and volumetric explosion, and penetrating part, etc. are available

[suban76]

It’s not from the Nurses that you need to install it, but from something more powerful. For example, an accelerator from Smerch or a specially created booster of some kind.

[Nikolaevich I]

Another "vain nonsense" by "Mitrofanushki"! first, the UMPC receives ammunition of maximum power, such as FAB-9000, FAB-5000, FAB-3000,

[paul3390]

Why do you have to throw it out of an airplane? Maybe it can be attached as a detachable warhead to some old missiles? Well - or for new but cheap ones? From a rocket, all you need to do is approximately deliver the bomb to the release point... Let's say - a rocket from the S-200. Claimed range 250 km, altitude 27 km, warhead 220 kg. Would you be able to pull it off? Or the same ancient R-17, aka SCAD... But you never thought up many missiles during the Soviet era? This is me, as a flight of morning fantasy..

[Novel_]

Ukrainian maize workers have adapted for this...
And our military, namely the “senior” leadership, are ordinary careerists with the usual idea of ​​the world - the grass is green, the muzzle is shaved, the tarpaulin sparkles, the collar shines, and only in formation and only with a song. Why many new items were not introduced into the army - modern generals answer in the “charter”, i.e. The structure of the Ministry of Defense does not have algorithms for using your products. Any innovation must be assigned to someone, applied somehow, someone responsible, etc. - and for this you need to work, and when should the general rest???
At one “enterprise” with a military background, the chief technologist, when they tried to force him to sign a design document for the production of cooperation components (not core components), issued an order. Its meaning is that the enterprise develops only such products that can be produced by the production facilities of the enterprise. Those. At the enterprise, printed circuit boards are produced for surface mounting, there is no casting, there are no presses... And such a document is not just written and slaves execute it - it gets... to the minds... to the customer’s representative...

[Aviator_]

Ukrainian maize workers have adapted for this...

The Azerbaijanis did this. And it worked quite well against Armenian air defense.

[alexoff]

Well, when the enemy has three toruses and five arrows-10, then it’s not difficult to break such air defense

[wladimirjankov]

Americans, by the way, are already doing this. They attach their DJAM bombs to the engines of decommissioned missiles and off they go.

[Lozovik]

Quote: Andrey Mitrofanov

Will large-caliber aerial bombs appear in the NWO zone?

Today, the largest caliber of bombs from the remaining 3000 kg, they have one carrier - Tu-22M3, it takes 2 pieces. The Tu-95MS is not suitable for using bombs; the Tu-160 in its bomber version only takes 1500 kg. Expensive modification of such valuable and scarce vehicles specifically for large-caliber bombs can hardly be called advisable, since this will negate the main advantage of the UMPC - its relatively low cost.

[Alexander Vorontsov]

All correctly written.

As for large calibers, and in the “if only” format, it’s a pity that the Burlak project on the Tu-160 was not completed.

If you believe the data that was given to the press, then there is a load of up to 30 tons.

The Burlak carrier is being designed by the Raduga design bureau. The mass of this two-stage carrier will be 32 tons, length - 22 m. "Burlak" starts already outside the densest layers of the atmosphere - from a height of 9-11 km or 12-13 km with a fairly high initial speed M = 0,8 or M = 1,7 .200 (depending on the launch height). These conditions ensure the launch of cargo weighing 1000-600 kg (polar orbits) or 800-840 kg (equatorial orbits) into orbits with an altitude of 1100-XNUMX km.

So it would be possible to build bridges and railway hubs without resorting to ballistic missiles.

[Sancho_SP]

Let’s better mentally imagine the simplest cheap delivery drone FAB-9000/5000.
And if you think a little more, then even some kind of engine for one glide bomb.
The same cruise missile engine, additionally installed on a large-caliber glide bomb, will increase the glide range when launched from a maximum altitude to 100-200-300 km. Then it will become a truly strategic weapon.

[Zoer]

Well, why reinvent the wheel again... The cruise missiles you described above have long been invented, implemented and used. The issue of price has not gone away. The price of the engine is half the price of the entire rocket. And it’s easier to shoot down a missile launcher than a UMPC, due to the heat signature and larger size of the former.

[Sancho_SP]

Then, all these are bicycles. The winner is the one who best selects the price/parameter ratio.

[Zoer]

And how many cries there were among the generals, and among the local commentators, that these UMPCs were not needed, that at the drop altitude our planes would be immediately shot down, even 50 km from the LBS.
Well, yes, now everyone is talking about what a wonderful “invention” this is.
In general, everything is as always with us. Until the roast rooster pecks...

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

It is not clear why there is no air explosion. At least, I haven’t come across a single video of such an explosion. A rupture at a height of 5-10 meters will cause much more damage in the field than a simple crater with the release of fragments mainly upward.
Even Vladlen Tatarsky noted in a video from Mariupol that aerial bombs often leave only craters without causing damage at all, even to garages 15 meters from the explosion.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

It is not clear why there is no air explosion. At least, I haven’t come across a single video of such an explosion.

Why not? Eat. Even in Afghanistan, radio fuses were used on the same S-24s. Triggered at a certain distance.

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

I was in Afghanistan, but now I’m not. That's the question. In all videos, land mines are released with an explosion after being buried in the ground, with an effect close to zero.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

I was in Afghanistan, but now I’m not. That's the question. In all videos, land mines are released with an explosion after being buried in the ground, with an effect close to zero.

What's the point of detonating a landmine in the air?

[Sergey Aleksandrovich]

I naively thought that such children’s pictures would be understandable to everyone, but it turns out they are not.

Here is a summary from Wikipedia on two identical shells with and without air detonation.
I hope the difference is visible to the naked eye?

Table of performance characteristics of shots used by the 2A70 gun
Shot index Shot weight, kg Effective affected area, m²
High explosive
3UOF19 __________ 15,8 ________________________________ 360
3UOF19-1 __________ 15,8 ________________________ 600

I wonder if after such pearls, at least someone will take your comments seriously.
Even photos near helicopters will not be able to improve the intellectual level of what is written.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

I naively thought that such children’s pictures would be understandable to everyone, but it turns out they are not.

Here is a summary from Wikipedia on two identical shells with and without air detonation.
I hope the difference is visible to the naked eye?

You are not only naive. Sorry, but only a stupid person would argue on the basis of Wikipedia with someone who studied the action of ASP at the BPSP course and further improved the experience in practice.
So, you are confusing high-explosive and high-explosive fragmentation ammunition. Although it is similar, there is a big difference. With high-explosive fragmentation, the main damaging effect is fragmentation, high-explosive is secondary simply because it is there.
A landmine has a direct high-explosive and blasting effect. The first weakens with increasing distance from the epicenter, the second requires direct contact.
That is why high-explosive batteries require a deceleration on the fuse in order to be able to go deeper into the ground, roll up floors, etc., which makes it possible to collapse earthen fortifications, as well as destroy long-term defensive structures or industrial infrastructure.
Moreover, many high-explosive batteries are equipped with a massive frontal part in order to overcome reinforced concrete floors and runway surfaces.

I wonder if after such pearls, at least someone will take your comments seriously.
Even photos near helicopters will not be able to improve the intellectual level of what is written.

Speaking of intelligence, you should look in the mirror. However, you and Wikipedia are like the monkey with glasses from the famous fable.
That’s why you give away pearls by confusing high-explosive and high-explosive fragmentation ammunition.

[Alexey RA]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

That is why high-explosive batteries require a deceleration on the fuse in order to be able to go deeper into the ground, roll up floors, etc., which makes it possible to collapse earthen fortifications, as well as destroy long-term defensive structures or industrial infrastructure.
Moreover, many high-explosive batteries are equipped with a massive frontal part in order to overcome reinforced concrete floors and runway surfaces.

The quintessence of a penetrating landmine with detonation delay is a camouflage bomb. Budget option - Tallboy, director's design version - Grand Slam (pictured).

[Andriuha077]

The T-12 “Cloudmaker” is the heaviest anti-bunker aerial bomb in history and one of the heaviest aerial bombs in the world in general. Developed by the US Air Force in the late 1940s, the Americans wanted to create a bomb twice as heavy as the Grand Slam.
Mass 20,1 tons
Torpex explosive, about 8000 kg
The first bomb was dropped in 1948 from a specially converted B-29. On January 29, 1949, the B-36 took off for the first time simultaneously with two super-heavy bombs (taking into account the special design of the bomb racks, the total mass of the combat load exceeded 43 tons).

GBU-57 or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) is developed by Boeing. Capable of penetrating the ground to a depth of 61 meters or breaking through up to 19 meters of reinforced concrete.
Developed in 2007 to destroy the underground fortifications of Iran and the DPRK.
Weight: 13 609 kg.
Warhead weight: 2700 kg.
Carrier aircraft: B-2 Spirit, B-21 Raider.

[stankow]

These are not land mines, concrete bombs.
.........................

[bober1982]

Quote: Sergey Alexandrovich

In all videos, land mines are released with an explosion after being buried in the ground, with an effect close to zero.

Not quite so, it is not necessary to bury the bomb in the ground - it all depends on the fuse, what tasks are set - instantaneous detonation, with deceleration, on a trajectory, etc., by the way, what is a radio fuse on the Su-24 is a big question, fantasy.

[vovochkarzhevsky]

By the way, what is a radio fuse on the Su-24 is a big question, a fantasy.

Not the Su-24, but the S-24, this is an aviation-based NAR, if you don’t know. So, the RV-24 radio fuse was developed for it, the principle of operation of which was the same as that of a radio altimeter, with the difference that it did not operate in a wide range, but directly at the target, therefore it was simpler and more power was not required.
Provided detonation at a distance, if I’m not mistaken, 15 to the target (surface). This, together with the fact that the NAR S-24 warhead shell threw fragments in a cone forward, provided good coverage.

[bober1982]

Quote: vovochkarzhevsky

So the RV-24 radio fuse was developed for it,

The standard one was the mechanical contact B-24, and it was used in production to penetrate armor and protected targets.
15 meters - activation over the target (using RV-24), something a bit too much, 2-3 meters, no more

[vovochkarzhevsky]

The standard one was the mechanical contact B-24, and it was used in production to penetrate armor and protected targets.

In 1986-87 we never saw a B-24. Only RV-24.

15 meters - activation over the target (using RV-24), something a bit too much, 2-3 meters, no more

This happened when the RV-24 was just being mastered in the sixties. When at the training ground at a range of 15 meters, the target was not hit very beautifully and it was roughened by 2-3 meters. But Afghan turned out to be not a training ground and returned to the desired 15 meters.

[garri-lin]

Because these are HIGH EXPLOSIVE bombs. Their exposure in open areas is very low.
What you are talking about is different. For these purposes there is ODAB.

[bober1982]

Quote: garri-lin

What you're talking about is different

Non-contact fuses ensure detonation of a bomb at a height of up to 10m - OFAB-100-120, OFAB-250-270, these are very effective a/b in open areas.

[garri-lin]

Have you seen the abbreviation OFAB anywhere in the text??? We are talking about ordinary FABs.
OFAB and even ShL is a standard surface detonation.
And excellent shrapnel impact.

[Zaurbek]

I could be wrong, but only Tu6m22 can take 3 tons, and only Tu9 (which doesn’t exist) can take 16 tons. Due to the size of the bomb bay

[Alexey RA]

Quote: Zaurbek

I could be wrong, but only Tu6m22 can take 3 tons, and only Tu9 (which doesn’t exist) can take 16 tons. Due to the size of the bomb bay

Absolutely.

By 1988, the Tu-16 remained the only aircraft capable of carrying the FAB-9000, and this advantage was finally in demand.

© V. Markovsky. The hot sky of Afghanistan. Part XII. Long-range aviation

[Zaurbek]

F15 EX can take 22 pieces of JDAM corr. 100 kg each.....with individual guidance. And the control can be carried out by the pilot according to AFAR data ... for each ammunition. And taking into account the accuracy, 100 kg can hit a lot of types of targets and they fly up to 100 km

[alexoff]

It’s good for the Americans, they have been riveting jdam for decades and have accumulated tens of thousands of them. And when everything is done during the war and everything is immediately sent from the factory to the front, then 50 pieces a day in terms of 10 years is just a huge arsenal, but in fact it would be two planes taking off, dropping a bunch of 100 kg bombs and that’s it, we’re waiting delivery tomorrow.

[Zaurbek]

It's not about them......I'm talking about the fact that with an accurate hit, large calibers are not particularly needed. 50-250kg will solve 80% of the issues. 1500-3000kg are special ammunition for bridges and dams or anti-bunker systems.

[shikin]

That's it. And the comparison in the article of bombs of different calibers is not entirely correct - they may have different purposes. In terms of area, in general, it can be much more effective not 10 OFAB-100 or 250 with UMPC, but 2-3 RBK-500 with the same module.

[alexoff]

Well, as I understand it, the article says that if there is no big difference in price, then why throw less? Even if we miss a little, we will still reach it. And besides FABs, we don’t have anything larger than 500 kilos; most likely FAB-500s are the most common in warehouses. I’m also not sure that FAB is good against dams or bunkers; for some reason we don’t have anything larger than BETAB-500, but having a three-ton bunker-fighting bunker with wings in stock would definitely be nice.

[Whowhy]

To put any FAB with UMPC into the bomb bay, a lot of things need to be changed there. So it is hardly rational to supply small calibers with UMPCs. And the external sling can accommodate as many small-caliber bombs as medium ones.

[JD1979]

What can we say about the article... It's a fiasco bro! I have never seen greater nonsense. The logic of using precision-guided ammunition and the concept of their creation is completely distorted... as if they have not been used for several decades, there are no statistics or information. It is necessary to invent the “forklift”... although according to the article it seems that the author is just the case when the information did not want to get there, but still missed... and the “fork” was forcibly invented

[Ezekiel 25-17]

It's time for UMPC to put on nukes like the Americans.

[senima56]

FAB-9000 with UMPC - this is “Kuzka’s mother” .... only in a non-nuclear version!

[2sila]

Well, well, at least they didn’t call “specialists” about their “aerodynamics”. Does the author read the comments? Where did the conclusion come from that “Thus, we will always have a limited number of UMPCs”?! There is no reason for this half-conclusion from what was given before in the paragraph. Maybe you forgot to write something? It is clear that such serious weapons will always be in short supply, like everyone else, but what does weight have to do with it?

[Alexey RA]

The main factors limiting the use of UMPC on air bombs such as FAB-9000, FAB-5000, FAB-3000 will be the number of carriers that can use them, as well as the release range, which determines the survival of the carrier aircraft in the face of enemy air defense (air defense).

The use of UMPC on aerial bombs of the FAB-9000 type is limited by one factor - the complete absence of carriers for these munitions. At the time of the last combat use of these bombs in Afghanistan, the only aircraft that could use them was the Tu-16.

[bone1]

Is the author a fan of everything big? - In general, the damage zone of ammunition is inversely proportional to their mass

[agond]

Quote: Andriuha077

GBU-57 or Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) is developed by Boeing. Capable of penetrating the ground to a depth of 61 meters or breaking through up to 19 meters of reinforced concrete.

You don’t have to believe everything, you don’t have to think that 61 m of soil is equivalent to 19 m of reinforced concrete. By the way, the bomb itself has a length of 6,2 m and a diameter of 800 mm. with such dimensions the volume will be about 12 m3, the weight is written 14 tons, that is, it is quite light for its size, this means that it has a light body that cannot be as strong as a heavy thick-walled one, of course we don’t know how it is inside, but the fact is there.

[Andriuha077]

Of course we don’t know how she’s inside

There is hardly any subject of special mystery there. Three cubic meters, a massive core and an accelerator engine.

[Sedoy]

we will always have a limited number of UMPCs

Those. the author wants to say that the Russian Federation is not able to “rivet” the “GLONAS receivers” in the required quantity... :)
Well, let's congratulate ourselves...
As for the “servos with wings”, they are different for FAB-500 and FAB-1500, i.e. simple “scaling for weight” doesn’t work...
The same is true for 3000-9000...
Moreover, at a range of 150 km - you can’t get away with a “glider” here...
The engine needs to be installed...
How to pin to sy...

[abc_alex]

Strange article and strange logic of the author.
First of all, you need to produce what is consumed in maximum quantities at the front. If FAB-500, then for them. If FAB-3000 is for them. Why abstract theorizing if there are requests from the rear service?

[Alexander Soviet Union]

that the Russian Armed Forces may use FAB-5000 in FAB-3000 in a high-precision version in Ukraine, unconfirmed information

The key word is "unconfirmed", i.e. information from observers, military correspondents and other science fiction writers who are not related to the leadership of the Northern Military District. One retired general recently discussed the use of tactical nuclear weapons in all seriousness in the area of ​​the village. Rabotino...

The FAB-9000 will not only destroy the target, but will also collapse several high-rise residential buildings nearby, which will lead to the unjustified death of civilians - we are not the United States and its allies, who razed cities into dust, and not the Ukrainians, who beat even their fellow citizens.

That is why the possibility of using FAB-9000 in Ukraine is extremely negligible.

[Alexander_11]

Is it advisable to risk long-range and strategic aircraft and will we have enough of them, given the meager amount of their production per year? It is much safer and advisable to use an Iskander or caliber. And destroying large buildings has long been no longer the task of aircraft bombs, due to the development of air defense and missile defense and, consequently, the threat to aviation.

[XXTexDemonXX]

For Fab 9000 it is necessary to make a rocket launcher. It’s not a problem to come up with a turbojet engine with a thrust of 9 tons.

[Sergei Viktorovich Korolev]

Just don’t act like a fool about the war with white gloves. And other verbiage. In war, it’s either you or you!!!

[Chetbor]

Let's start with the main thing - who will carry the FAB-9000, Karl... The Tu-95 has been gone for a long time, and even earlier the Tu-16 has sunk into the past (maybe you can ask the PRC for old ones from the museum or to straighten yours from the museum).
That's all who could carry the FAB-9000. They threw us from a Tu-16 into the DRA

[Russian Bear_2]

Heavy bombs with UMPC would be useful for destroying bridges.