Overblog Suivre ce blog
Administration Créer mon blog
15 janvier 2016 5 15 /01 /janvier /2016 17:20
A U.S. Air Force Boeing B-52H Stratofortress of the 2d Bomb Wing static display with weapons, at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana (USA), in 2006 - photo USAF

A U.S. Air Force Boeing B-52H Stratofortress of the 2d Bomb Wing static display with weapons, at Barksdale Air Force Base, Louisiana (USA), in 2006 - photo USAF

 

14 janvier 2016 par Aerobuzz.fr

 

Boeing annonce avoir livré à l’US Air Force six lanceurs rotatifs modernisés, utilisables par les B-52H. Ces lanceurs, placés dans la soute à bombe du bombardier, permettaient jusqu’à présent l’emport de missiles de croisière à charge nucléaire ou conventionnelle. Les bombardiers pourront maintenant également emporter en soute jusqu’à huit bombes à guidage GPS (JDAM).

Suite de l’article

Repost 0
7 novembre 2015 6 07 /11 /novembre /2015 17:20
Countermine System (GBU-61) credits: US Navy

Countermine System (GBU-61) credits: US Navy

 

November 2, 2015: Strategy Page

 

The United States has developed a new way to deliver naval mines; by attaching a JDAM glide and satellite navigation kit to naval mines designed to be dropped, like dumb bombs, into shallow water. The JDAM mine can glide 70 kilometers thus avoiding many enemy air defenses. This avoids risking aircraft, which typically have to come down low to drop the air delivered mines. It also means you don’t have to risk your nuclear subs for the delivery of these mines. Subs have long been an effective way to plant mines in enemy waters. The JDAM approach does not eliminate all risk from anti-aircraft systems. China and Russia have modern S-300 systems with ranges of over a hundred miles. But the farther away the attacking aircraft are the less they are at risk. That’s because American aircraft go into combat with EW (electronic warfare aircraft) and EW devices on all aircraft. That provides a lot of protection but it is not 100 percent and the less time you spend in the danger zone the less risk you are exposed to.

 

Meanwhile the United States and its allies have to spend a lot more effort figuring out how to effectively deal with enemy naval mines. The few enemies the West has possess a lot of these mines. Iran has a few thousand naval mines and that is a small arsenal compared to Russia (over 200,000), China (over 100,000) and North Korea (over 50,000). It is generally agreed that all these mines are a serious danger. While often ignored, naval mines are a formidable weapon. But these passive weapons just don't get any respect. The historical record indicates otherwise.

 

Modern naval mines were widely used for the first time over a century ago, during the Russo-Japanese war (1904- 1905). These were contact mines, floating in shallow water and kept in place with an anchor and chain. When the tide was right they would be just below the surface, ready to explode whenever struck by a ship. Some 2,000 of these mines were used to destroy sixteen ships during the Russo-Japanese war. That's one ship lost for every 125 mines used.

 

During World War I (1914-18), modern mine tactics and clearing methods evolved. Thousands of mines were laid to provide defensive barriers against enemy movement in the North Sea. Mines were also used offensively by secretly placing them across known enemy sea routes. More than 1,000 merchant and war ships were lost because of the 230,000 mines used. That's over 200 mines used for every ship lost.

 

During World War II there was a major effort to develop better mine clearing methods to deal with an even larger number of mines. During World War II a total of 2,665 ships were lost or damaged to 100,000 offensive mines. That's one ship for every 37 mines. Some 208,000 mines were used defensively to inhibit enemy movement and tie up his resources.

 

Naval mines achieved several striking successes during World War II. In the Pacific naval mines proved more destructive to the Japanese war effort than the atom bombs. During a 10 week period between April and August 1945, 12,000 mines were delivered to the Japanese coast by American bombers. These destroyed 1,250,000 tons of Japanese shipping (670 ships hit, 431 destroyed). That's 18 mines for each ship hit. The Americans had air superiority, so losses during these 1,500 missions amounted to only 15 planes, most of them accidents. Had these missions been flown against opposition, losses would have been between 30 and 60 aircraft, plus similar losses to their fighter escorts. Either way it was a stunning success for naval mines,

 

A conventional submarine campaign was also waged against Japanese shipping using mines. Comparisons between subs using mines and torpedoes are interesting. A hundred submarines were involved in a campaign that ran for 45 months from December, 1941 to August, 1945. Some 4.8 million tons of enemy shipping was sunk with torpedoes. For every U.S. submarine sailor lost using submarine launched torpedoes, 560 tons of enemy ships were sunk. During the mine campaign 3,500 tons were sunk for each U.S. fatality. On a cost basis the difference was equally stark. Counting the cost of lost mine laying aircraft (B- 29's at $500,000 each) or torpedo armed submarine ($5 million each), we find that each ton of sunk shipping cost six dollars when using mines and fifty-five dollars when using submarines. This data was classified as secret until the 1970s. It indicates that mines might have been more effective than torpedoes, even if the mines were delivered by submarine.

 

The Germans waged a minelaying campaign off the east coast of the United States between 1942 and 1944. Only 317 mines were used, which sank or damaged 11 ships. This was a ratio of 29 mines used for each ship hit. More importantly eight major ports were closed for a total of 40 days. One port, Charleston, South Carolina, was closed for 16 days, tying up not only merchant shipping but the thousands of men, warships, and aircraft dealing with the situation. American submarines also waged a limited mine campaign in the Pacific. For 658 mines used, 54 ships were sunk or damaged (12 mines per ship). No subs were lost. Considerable Japanese resources were tied up dealing with the mines. On the Palau atoll the port was closed by the mines and not reopened until the war ended. Even surface ships were used to lay mines. Three thousand mines were laid by destroyers. Only 12 ships were hit but these were barrier fields, not the ambush type mine fields that a submarine can create by sneaking into an enemy held area.

 

In Korea during the early 1950s, the Soviets provided North Korea with 3,000 mines, many of 1904 vintage. These were used to defend Wonson harbor. It took several weeks for UN forces to clear these, at a loss of a dozen ships hit. Half of these ships were destroyed.

 

During the Vietnam War over 300,000 American naval mines were used, primarily in North Vietnamese rivers. The vast majority were not built as mines but were aerial bombs equipped with magnetic sensors instead of fuzes. These bombs/mines used a small parachute to insure that no damage occurred on landing. In shallow water these makeshift weapons sat on the bottom and performed as well as mines. Haiphong Harbor was actually mined with 11,000 of these "destructors," as the US air force called them, and less than a hundred conventional mines. Haiphong Harbor was shut down completely for months, and it took years to clear out all the American mines. The "destructor" mine design was so successful that it is still in use, using more modern electronics, as the Mk 62 mine. This is one of the mines delivered via JDAM.

 

During the 1991 Gulf War the Iraqis laid over a thousand mines off the Iraqi and Kuwaiti coast. The predominantly American naval forces did not have sufficient mine sweeping resources to deal with this situation and had a helicopter carrier and cruiser hit and damaged while trying to clear the area. This effectively prevented any U.S. amphibious operations, although the Marines were not going to be used for a landing anyway. It took over a month of mine clearing after the fighting ceased to eliminate all the mines. In the meantime, two U.S. warships were damaged by these mines.  In 2003, the Iraqis again tried to use mines, but were hampered by prompt American, British, and Kuwaiti action.

 

In any future war naval mines will again surprise everyone with how effective they are. It is feared that terrorists might get their hands on some bottom mines, but so far, there do not appear to have been any attempts.

 

The only American minesweeper ships are the twelve Avengers. These are 72.3 meter (224 foot) long ships that draw only 4.8 meters (15 feet) of water, enabling them to operate close to shore. The crews are supposed to be trained in navigating such shallow areas. The Avengers are armed with two .50 cal. (12.7mm) machine guns, two 7.62mm machine guns, two 40mm automatic grenade launchers, and have a crew of 84. Most Avengers are stationed in the Persian Gulf, operating out of Bahrain or in the Pacific and based in Sasebo, Japan. The “home port” for the Avengers is San Diego, California.

 

The U.S. Navy needs these minesweepers because replacements (minesweeping helicopters and minesweeping versions of the new LCS ship) have been delayed by technical problems. Meanwhile the U.S. has upgraded the sonars on its Avenger class ships. The new AN/SQQ-32(V)4 mine hunting sonar improves the ability of the sonar to spot mines on sea bottoms cluttered with other stuff (natural or manmade). In many parts of the world shallow coastal waters are used as a dumping ground for junk that won’t float ashore. This has been found to help hide bottom mines. The Avengers have also received new engines. The four original diesel engines in each Avenger have never been very reliable. With their new engines the Avengers can still move at up to 27 kilometers an hour. Normally, however, the Avengers move much more slowly (3-4 kilometers an hour) when searching for mines. The Avengers also received improved hydraulics and new mine destruction systems.

 

The upgrade is part of an attempt to deal with delays in the arrival of the LCS class ships, or at least the ones equipped for mine hunting. So for the last decade the navy has been hustling to refurbish its existing Avengers. The 3,000 ton LCS ships are designed for minesweeping (and a lot of other jobs) but the 1,400 ton Avengers specialize in minesweeping. Built mostly of wood and very little iron, the fourteen Avengers entered the fleet between 1987 and 1994, and twelve are still in service. The upgrades enable the surviving Avengers to remain in service at least until 2016 and probably until the end of the decade.

 

The navy also had a dozen smaller Osprey class coastal mine hunters (900 tons displacement, crew of 51), but these were all given away to foreign navies and are to be replaced by the LCS and new minesweeping helicopters.

 

The navy has also equipped helicopters for mine clearing. But the navy is having a very difficult time maintaining its force of 30 MH-53E helicopters. This aircraft are the only ones that can tow a sled containing naval mine detecting gear. This sort of thing is called AMCM (Airborne Mine Countermeasures) and is considered essential in areas, like the Persian Gulf, where the enemy (Iran) might use a lot of naval mines that would have to be cleared quickly in wartime.

 

The MH-53E is an update of the original 1960s era CH-53 and entered service in the early 1980s. Fifty MH-53Es were built and they have been worked hard ever since. That’s why only 30 are left and few of them are fit to fly at any one time. Originally the navy planned to retire the MH-53Es in 2008, but replacements (lighter sleds that could be pulled by smaller and more modern helicopters) did not work out as expected. So retirement was pushed to 2012, then 2017 and currently the navy hopes to keep some MH-53Es operational into the 2020s.

 

Meanwhile efforts continue to develop lighter equipment for the mine hunting task. Some of these projects have had limited success. The AQS-24A mine-hunting system looks like a torpedo with extra fins and attachment. It is lowered into the water and dragged by the helicopter at speeds of up to 34 kilometers an hour. The AQS-24A contains a high resolution sonar that seeks out mines than lay on the sea bottom, waiting for ships to pass over. The bottom mine then detonates if a ship type it was programmed to attack is detected. The U.S. Navy has been using this mine hunting approach since the 1980s. The original sled system went through several major upgrades and is considered very reliable and effective. The MH-53E sled is still able to carry more equipment and sweep a larger area faster.

 

The U.S. Navy has also developed a complementary system, ALMDS (Airborne Laser Mine Detection System). Designed to operate from the MH-60S helicopter, ALMDS uses a Laser Imaging Detection and Ranging blue-green laser to detect, and identify naval mines near the surface. Unlike the AQS-24A, ALMDS operates from the low flying, and smaller, helicopters. Surface mines are either moored (via a chain to the bottom) or floating (a favorite terrorist tactic), and many float just below the surface. The laser works very quickly, and enables the ALMDS equipped helicopter to quickly check out large areas for surface mines. Terrorists have used naval mines before, of the floating variety. Navies tend to use the more sophisticated, expensive and hard-to-get bottom mines (that lie on the bottom, in shallow water).

 

Many of these American mine detecting and clearing systems have had performance problems and work continues to make them more reliable and effective. American allies have also developed new mine detection and clearing tools and some of the new U.S. equipment uses foreign tech. While new mine designs have become more effective, the basic problem is that the many older mine designs are still very dangerous, especially for the unprepared.

Repost 0
30 octobre 2015 5 30 /10 /octobre /2015 12:30
Turkey - Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM)

 

Oct 29, 2015 ASDNews Source : Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA)

 

The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Turkey for Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) and associated equipment, parts and logistical support for an estimated cost of $70 million. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale on October 28, 2015.

 

The Government of Turkey has requested a possible sale of Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) tail kits comprised of 400 GBU-31(V)1 for use with Mk84 bombs, 200 GBU-31(V)3 for use with BLU-109 bombs, 300 GBU-38 for use with Mk82 bombs, 100 GBU-54 Laser JDAM kits for use with Mk82 bombs, 200 BLU-109 Hard Target Penetrator Warheads, and1000 FMU-152A/B fuzes. Non-MDE includes containers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, integration, test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and technical support, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $70 million.

 

Read more

Repost 0
5 juin 2015 5 05 /06 /juin /2015 07:30
JDAM GBU-30 MER

JDAM GBU-30 MER

 

June 4, 2015: Strategy Page

 

Israel recently ordered $1.9 billion worth of smart bombs from the U.S. This order mainly consists of JDAM (22,000 kits for 500, 1,000 and 2,000 pound bombs). Nearly half the JDAMs are for 500 pound bombs. Also included are 1,500 Paveway laser guided bomb kits. These kits are added to an unguided bomb to create a GPS guided JDAM smart bomb. A number of non-kit smart bombs were also ordered including 4,100 SDBs (Small Diameter Bomb) and 3,000 Hellfire missiles. Also included were 250 AMRAAM air-to-air radar guided missiles and sundry test and maintenance equipment for all these smart bombs. This order is for expanding the Israeli Air Force war reserve and meant to cope mainly with a massive rocket attack by Hezbollah in southern Lebanon.

 

In late 2013 the U.S. Department of Defense suddenly increased the number of JDAM smart bomb kits ordered 17 percent (to 212,588). Over 250,000 JDAM kits have been manufactured since 1998 and the U.S. has been the biggest customer followed by Israel. This is all about stocking up for “The Big One.” The U.S. Air Force (along with the navy, marines, and army) are all moving away from using air power against terrorists and irregular troops, towards what they all refer to as “Bombing Beijing” or North Korea or Iran. This is a major change from how American air power has been used for the past two decades. In that time there has been a lot of bombing but not much opposition to the American aircraft. Since GPS smart bombs and targeting pods were introduced in the 1990s, bomber pilots have had their job reduced to that of a bomb-truck driver.

 

The U.S. believes the key air weapon will be smart bombs, especially the JDAM and JSOW (powered JDAM). Thus the heavy orders for JDAM, to build up the war reserve in case there is what the planners call a “major war”.  Meanwhile, the U.S. has built up a huge arsenal of smart bombs. After the invasion of Iraq, the U.S. Air Force ordered a sharp increase in JDAM production, aiming for 5,000 JDAM a month. They ended up needing far less. In 2005, about 30,000 JDAM were ordered. That fell to 11,605 in 2006, and 10,661 in 2007. In 2008, only 5,000 were ordered. But now the orders are over 10,000 a year again. Most of those ordered in the past few years are being put into the war reserve. Only a few thousand a year are actually being used, and this includes those expended during training. The war reserve contains over 100,000 kits, to be used in some unspecified, but big, future conflict. Air warfare planners see the most likely major conflict as one involving China. Despite the dependence on GPS, JDAM has been adapted to resist the jamming and, if that fails there is a backup INS guidance system that, while not as accurate as GPS is accurate enough for most targets.

 

JDAM smart bombs were developed in the 1990s, shortly after the GPS network went live. These weapons entered service in time for the 1999 Kosovo campaign and have been so successful that their use has sharply reduced the number of bombs dropped and the number of sorties required by bombers. The air force generals are still trying to figure out where this is all going. Now the big effort is directed towards using all this new tech to shut down a more feisty and capable opponent like China (or Iran or North Korea, two more feisty but less well equipped foes).

Repost 0
22 mars 2015 7 22 /03 /mars /2015 17:20
F-16C B61 Mod 12 test flight (early 2015) - photo USAF

F-16C B61 Mod 12 test flight (early 2015) - photo USAF

 

March 22, 2015: Strategy Page

 

The U.S. recently successfully tested a JDAM (GPS smart bomb guidance) kit modified to work on a B61 nuclear bomb. The latest version of JDAM includes wings which enable the JDAM equipped bomb to glide up to 70 kilometers. But the main reason for a nuclear JDAM is not enabling the bomber to drop the bomb from a distance but so the B61 ground penetrating version can use a smaller sized explosion to get the same effect as a much larger explosion. Since JDAM lands the bomb within 30 meters of the aiming point a smaller nuclear explosion gets the same effect (on an underground bunker) as the old version that would only land within 150 meters of the aiming point. That means you only need a 30 kiloton nuke to take out a bunker instead of a much larger one of about 150 kilotons. This means less collateral damage and less fallout going into the atmosphere. Yes, even nukes can be ecologically sensitive.

 

The B61 JDAM is, like the B61 itself, hardened to prevent EMP (electromagnetic pulse) from damaging the electronics. Not a lot of adjustment is needed for the JDAM kit as the B61 has a shape similar to that of the non-nuclear bombs JDAMs are normally used on. The air force is spending over $700 million for the five year effort to develop the B61 JDAM kit. This kit will be tested to make sure it works from a B-52, F-15, B-2, F-16, F-35A and the European PA-200 Tornado

 

Meanwhile the $8 billion effort to refurbish the elderly B61 nuclear bombs is proceeding but budget cuts may delay the number to be refurbished (to about 400) and the delivery date (from 2017 to 2020). Getting this refurb into service means that the last American megaton (million tons of TNT equivalent) bomb, the B83 can be retired before it ages out of usefulness. Nuclear weapons have electronic and chemical components that degrade with and either have to be refurbished or retired because of age-related ineffectiveness.

 

The effort to refurbish one of its oldest warhead designs, the B61, began back in 2006. The B61 is a thermonuclear ("H-Bomb") weapon that is available in several versions. The ones being refurbished are those designed for penetrating the earth before going off. Most nuclear bombs with higher yields ones (300-400 kilotons) are detonated in the air rather than allowed to hit or penetrate the ground. Some 3,200 B61s were built since the design went into service in the mid-1960s, and about half of those remain available for use.

 

The refurbed warheads will be good for another two decades. The basic B61 nuclear bomb weighs 320 kg (700 pounds), is 330mm in diameter and 3.56 meters (11.7 feet) long. They are delivered by aircraft as bombs. Back in 2006 about 400 B61s were still stored in Europe and these are not being refurbed. Interestingly, the W80 nuclear weapon used on some two thousand cruise missile warheads are not being refurbished either. Without the refurb all these older warheads will be useless by the end of the decade and that fits in with the continuing arrangements between Russia and the United States to reduce their Cold War era nuclear arsenals.

Repost 0
5 mars 2015 4 05 /03 /mars /2015 12:20
Harriers Go Digital: New technology allows Marine aircraft to expand mission

 

Mar 3, 2015 ASDNews Source : Naval Air Systems Command

 

A  U.S. Marine Corps AV-8B Harrier flew its first mission with the new BRU-70/A Digital Improved Triple Ejector Rack (DITER) in support of the U.S.-led campaign against ISIS in January.

A single aircraft delivered 50 percent of the Laser Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM) used during the insurgent airstrike due to the new rack.

 

Read more

Repost 0
13 octobre 2014 1 13 /10 /octobre /2014 07:20
a GBU-38 JDAM explodes in Iraq

a GBU-38 JDAM explodes in Iraq

 

Oct 13, 2014 by James Drew - war-is-boring

 

New munitions rain down iron fragments

 

The U.S. Air Force is developing a terrifying new weapon to replace cluster bombs. Instead of scattering thousands of tiny bomblets over a target, the service plans to rain down iron fragments … to essentially achieve the same effect. During the opening phase of Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003, the United States and coalition forces dropped thousands of cluster bombs on targets including missile and radar sites, Iraqi aircraft, armored vehicles, artillery batteries and troops. While effective, the cluster bombs often left behind thousands unexploded bomblets that killed many civilians. Responding to international pressure, in 2008 then-Secretary of Defense Robert Gates ordered the services to phase out the procurement of cluster bombs—and stop using them completely after 2018.

 

Read full article

Repost 0
9 juillet 2014 3 09 /07 /juillet /2014 11:35
Singapore - Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) Kits

 

Jul 7, 2014 ASDNews Source : Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA)

 

The State Department has made a determination approving a possible Foreign Military Sale to Singapore for Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) kits and associated equipment, parts, training and logistical support for an estimated cost of $63 million. The Defense Security Cooperation Agency delivered the required certification notifying Congress of this possible sale on July 3, 2014.

 

The Government of Singapore has requested a possible sale of 913 KMU-556B/B Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) kits for Mk-84 2000 lb bombs, 100 FMU-152A/B fuzes, and 300 DSU-40 Precision Laser Guidance Sets. Also included are containers, munition trailers, support equipment, spare and repair parts, test equipment, publications and technical documentation, personnel training and training equipment, U.S. Government and contractor engineering and technical support, and other related elements of logistics support. The estimated cost is $63 million.

 

Read more

Repost 0
8 mai 2013 3 08 /05 /mai /2013 11:35
Flight Tests Set This Year for Australia-Developed Wing Kit for JDAM-ER

May. 7, 2013 By NIGEL PITTAWAY  - Defense news

 

MELBOURNE, AUSTRALIA — While Australia uses a variety of air-launched precision weapons it has not developed any such weapons beyond a wing kit for the GBU-38 Joint Direct Attack Munitions (JDAM), which are used on its F/A-18A/B Hornet and F/A-18F Super Hornet strike fighters.

 

The wing kit is manufactured in Australia and marketed by Boeing.

 

The wing kit was originally developed by Australia’s Defence Science and Technology Organisation (DSTO) in 2006 under a government-funded capability and technology demonstrator program known as Kerkanya, an Aboriginal word for kestrel hawk.

 

Boeing Australia was selected to manufacture and market the product, now called the JDAM-ER, and the Royal Australian Air Force became the first customer in 2011.

 

On March 13, Boeing announced it had selected Ferra Engineering of Brisbane to manufacture the kits on its behalf.

 

“The first wing kits will be used for JDAM-ER flight tests scheduled to be conducted later this year,” said Mike Kelly, minister for defense materiel. “Initial production orders are expected to be completed by 2015 and this program provides potential for further worldwide sales and exports.”

 

JDAM-ER utilizes a strap-on wing kit that pops-out after separation, significantly increasing stand-off range. During trials with two weapons in 2006, both struck within 1.5 meters of their intended target after a 40-kilometer-plus glide.

 

Australia is also the only country in Asia-Pacific other than the United States to use both the Lockheed Martin AGM-158A Joint Air to Surface Strike Missile (JASSM) and Raytheon AGM-154C Joint Stand Off Weapon (JSOW).

 

JASSM was acquired to provide the F/A-18A/B Hornet force with a precision stand-off strike capability between the retirement of the F-111C/AGM-142 combination in December 2010 and introduction of the F-35A, now due later in the decade.

 

Australia also became the first US Ally to operationally test the AGM-154C JSOW, with the successful launch of missile from an RAAF F/A-18F Super Hornet in December 2010. JSOW was acquired with the purchase of the 24 Super Hornets, again as a bridging capability between F-111C retirement and F-35A introduction, as it is a US Navy-standard weapon.

 

The upgraded AGM-154C-1is also being purchased for Australia’s Super Hornets, with final deliveries expected in 2014.

Repost 0
16 avril 2013 2 16 /04 /avril /2013 18:17
Repost 0
13 février 2012 1 13 /02 /février /2012 08:30
IMI’s MPR 500 Warhead Approved for use with JDAM

Photo: IMI

 

February 12, 2012 Tamir Eshel – Defense Update

 

Israel Military Industries Ltd. announced today that the Boeing Company [NYSE:BA] has approved IMI’s 500-pound Multi Purpose Rigid (MPR 500) Bomb as compatible with their Joint Direct Attack Munition (JDAM) guidance kit.

 

The combination of IMI’s MPR 500 with Boeing’s JDAM guidance kit substantially enhances operational flexibility while reducing total ownership costs. With increased penetrating power and reduced collateral damage fragmentation, the MPR 500 was designed to defeat targets more commonly found in today’s fighting areana. By delivering IMI’s focused munition with Boeing’s reliable history of precision guidance, the MPR 500 JDAM system is ideal for gardened targets in dense urban areas or in close proximity to friendly troops.

 

Photo: IMI

 

IMI’s MPR 500 is a combat-proven 500-poud bomb with improved penetration capabilities and gas the same dimensions as a MK-82.

 

The bomb can penetrate more than one meter of reinforced concrete or punch through four 200mm thick walls or floors.
Because of its 500-pound size, MPR 500 enhances aircraft carriage efficiency, increasing the number of targets that can be engaged per sortie.

 

MPR 500 provides concentrated blast effects, utilizing approximately 26,000 controlled fragments. This reduces collateral damage risk within one hundred meters. By creating a straight penetration path through the target, the MPR 500 virtually eliminates the “J Effect”, in which the bomb’s warhead breaks on impact causing it to explode incorrectly.

 

MPR 500 is being displayed by IMI at the Singapore Airshow.

Repost 0

Présentation

  • : RP Defense
  • RP Defense
  • : Web review defence industry - Revue du web industrie de défense - company information - news in France, Europe and elsewhere ...
  • Contact

Recherche

Articles Récents

  • News review for Industry - European Defence Agency
    source European Defence Agency If you want to subscribe to the News Review, or if you want to stop receiving the News review: News4Ind@eda.europa.eu News of the News EDA Study on the Impact of REACH & CLP European Chemical Regulations on the Defence Sector:...
  • Chronique culturelle - 13 Février 2017
    13 février 1960 explosion de la première bombe atomique française 13.02.2017 source JFP 13 février 1692 : massacre du clan Mac Donald dans la Glencoe (Ecosse).Le protestant Guillaume d’Orange ayant mis en fuite le catholique Jacques II, les chefs de clans...
  • Le PGHM et le GAM s’entraînent ensemble au secours en montagne
    Equipement de passage en neige - photo GAM Armée de Terre 07.02.2016 source 27e BIM Le lundi 13 février 2017 se déroulera un entraînement conjoint entre le peloton de gendarmerie de haute montagne (PGHM) et le groupement d’aguerrissement montagne (GAM)...
  • ITW SDBR : général Vincent Desportes, Professeur des Universités associé à Sciences Po Paris, Ancien directeur de l’Ecole de Guerre
    23.01.2017 par Alain Establier - SECURITY DEFENSE Business Review N°164 SDBR : Quel regard portez-vous sur la Défense de la France ? Vincent Desportes* : A l'issue de cette mandature, nous voyons un empilement d'actions réactives, à vocations plus politiciennes...
  • Chronique culturelle 9 Janvier
    Hussards du régiment de Bercheny en 1776 09.01.2017 source JFP 9 janvier 1778 : mort du créateur des régiments de Hussards (Luzancy – près de Meaux). Emigré hongrois et excellent capitaine au service de la France, Ladislas Ignace de Bercheny , obtient...
  • Chronique culturelle 04 Jan.
    Insigne général des Troupes de Forteresse de la Ligne Maginot 04.01.2016 source JFP 4 janvier 1894 : signature de l’alliance franco-russe. Préparée par de nombreuses activités bilatérales dans les années précédentes, une convention militaire secrète est...
  • Chronique culturelle 03 Jan.
    Napoléon en Egypte par Jean-Léon Gérome 03.01.2017 source JFP 3 janvier : Sainte Geneviève, patronne de la gendarmerie. Issue de la noblesse gallo-romaine du IVe siècle, elle convainc les habitants de Lutèce de ne pas livrer leur ville à Attila, roi des...
  • Au Levant, contre Daech avec les Forces Spéciales
    photo Thomas Goisque www.thomasgoisque-photo.com Depuis plus de deux ans, les hommes du C.O.S (Commandement des Opérations Spéciales) sont déployés au Levant et mènent, en toute discrétion, des opérations contre l’Etat islamisque.Au nord de l’Irak, ils...
  • Les blessés en Opérations extérieures ne prennent pas de vacances !
    Source CTSA Pendant la période des fêtes de fin d'années, le nombre de donneurs diminue dangereusement. Le site de Clamart du Centre de transfusion sanguine des armées (CTSA) invite fortement les donneurs des communes proches à profiter des vacances de...
  • Interview SDBR de Gaël-Georges Moullec, Historien
    photo SDBR 20.12.2016 par Alain Establier - « SECURITY DEFENSE Business Review » n°162 SDBR: Comment va la Russie aujourd’hui? Gaël-Georges Moullec * : Il n’y a plus d’ascenseur social dans la Russie d’aujourd’hui, ce qui est un problème moins connu,...

Categories