Here is a chart of the depth of Iran's nuclear facilities based on publicly available information.
Our best bunker buster, the GBU-57 MOP can penetrate sandy soil 60-70 meters deep. It took ~$400 million to develop and I've seen unit cost of $3.5 million to $15 million. I don't know why there is such a big variance on cost per unit. Anyway, the point is they are pretty expensive.
It's pretty obvious that if Iran has nuclear enriching capability above 90% they have moved all that capability to the New-Natanz facility. At 150 meters deep the equipment is probably pretty safe from our best bunker busters even with multiple attacks. And remember it's not 150 meters deep under sand. It's 150 meters deep under reinforced concrete and natural rock.
If this were an easy bunker buster activity like taking out the original or old Natanz facility it would have been done already.
Not only is bunker busting a political challenge for the administration but it's also a technical challenge for our military. I'm not saying the technical challenge cannot be overcome I'm just pointing out that this is a big part of the picture and a big data point in Trump's decision making process. Is bunker busting even practical?
BREAKING CONSPIRACY THEORY: Trump/Musk contretemps was all misdirection to free up Musk to develop next generation bunker buster shaped like a Tesla. You heard it here first.
quote: We probably have not hit Iran with bunker busters yet b/c of the technical challenges.
I'm guessing that AND (not 'or') the Isralis have some sort of alt plan.
Now that plan might be in the the discussion phase of 'will work/will not work' or in the execution phase where we are waiting to see, but I think that is a factor along with the technical issues that lead to the "within 2 weeks".
As I put in another post, I'm betting there's some mountain in remote Utah being demolished by GBU-57's right now.
quote: Just have Tom Cruiseberg get to the elevator, place a bomb in it and send it down to the bottom. It explodes. Problem solved.
My prediction is something close (well, not really) to that.
With Israeli air cover extending out say 200 km, I think they are going to put paratroopers (or elite units) on the ground and, after killing everyone, will demolish it in a way to bring the roof down.
There's several issues here obviously, w/extraction being one of those. You can jump out of a C-130, you can't jump in though. And Israelis typically do not do suicide missions. There is an airstrip close, but can you protect both for the duration of the mission?
quote: They’re so heavy that maybe they’re not guided and that’s the challenge.
They are guided and have military grade GPS guidance units on the back of the bombs.
quote: I read about a tunneling method where you essentially drop successive bombs down the hole created by the earlier ones.
This is how the technical challenge can potentially be overcome.
But it's not that simple.
If if a bunker buster penetrates 60 meters deep (best case scenario hitting sand at 90 degrees and full speed, i.e., max velocity) then detonates, the hole just backfills with earth again and you are back to where you started. With that kind of penetration I doubt much spoil is removed from the first detonation and this is under optimum conditions.
The reality is the bunker buster is not entering at full velocity because there is a horizontal component from the bomber from where it was released. That is a big loss of energy not being directed to it's target below.
The other challenge is geology. We are not dealing with sand here. Apparently the overburden at the New Natanz facility is ~90 meters deep of limestone and dolomite. Below 90 meters is even harder granite.
It's also my understanding that there are no ventilation vents. O2 is produced and CO2 is scrubbed like we do on submarines for areas occupied by humans.
This might be why the Iranians are playing such hardball right now with negotiations. They have a lot of confidence in protecting their facilities.
The Israelis know this so that why they took out the next best thing, Iranian human knowledge. That is, if you can't take out the equipment, take out the people that know how to operated the equipment. Apparently Israel has done this already to some extent.
quote: A few AC130's with some A10's as backups could keep any Iranian ground forces away.
As bad arse as the A10 is the AC130 is far more lethal.
Puffffff!
Agreed. Both are needed. Will literally have to pick off individuals and individual stray vehicles. As well as any helos. It will take a while. Days.
And will have to prevent that airfield from being put out of action by the Iranians to strand them. That would be my first action if I was the IRGC. A truck bomb, shaped, with a suicide driver driving out on the runway to crater it. The Israeli's morale would suffer. I guess you could then Chinook in runway mats.... but damn, that's a lot of runs going a long way from Israel.
The question is: Can Israel alone provide the cover that Puff and the Warthogs would do. Thats the point here... to do it without us.