Redstate

putting America first.

I am intensely proud of this country.  Somebody in charge out there is using their brain.  (And it's not Harry Reid).

1 Nowhere else in the world would there be such an effort to find two non-nuclear solutions (diplomacy and, that failing, conventional weaponry) to a hostile nuclear issue.  The feasibility of stopping Iran at any point in their development of nuclear technology has just gone way up.

2 Nowhere else in the world would they openly declare the secondary strategy.  Yes, the timing has political and military benefits and offers a sense of comfort, even, to a person like me.  (For instance, most people seem to forget that a mushroom cloud over Iran would travel downwind to India and Pakistan, not to mention a whole host of Iranians that are unhappy with their current government-imposed conditions.) No radioactive fallout, less political fallout.  Much less, considering acceptible political fallout would already be factored into the approval of a retaliatory, or even a pre-emptive strike.

3 Those embracing Islamofascism, I think, will never be able to grasp the concept of an effective, minimally invasive solution.  By virtue of their belief system, it's impossible to accept anything less than the ultimate annihilation of all others.  Here our country has the distinct advantage of beholding far more realistic and far less brutal solutions.

The only questions that remain for me are:

--whether or not "peaceful" Muslims would respect such a noble attempt (which, again we may not be in a position to consider if we wait long enough), and

--whether or not Iran going to put us in a position of actually having to employ such a strike.

One final note:  here's hoping Rice and Straw can help stabilize Iraq in the next short while.  If Iraq galvanizes itself and continues its progress toward a self-sustaining democracy, Iran's hand is weaker.

you might have to go with the Brutal solution.

with the just-published 'Real Security' comic strip...ah...policy statement by the Democrat party.

By making himself a public nuisance and attempting to impede military R&D related to thwarting the nuclear plans of rogue states, it's part and parcel with the revelation (by the NYT) of national secrets about US collection of SIGINT against sworn enemies, then pillorying the Bush administration for conducting wartime SIGINT.

As to the 'Real Security' paper and Reid's rasing a stink over Divine Strake, I know Reid is busy saving our country from the bad guys.  I'm just not sure which part of the Democrat strategy this falls under.  All cites below are from 'Real Security', currently seen at the bottom of my birdcage.

Is it....

(a)21st Century Military -- Ensuring Unparalleled Military Strength and Honoring our Troops?

Rebuild a state-of-the-art military by making the needed investments in equipment and manpower so that we can project power to protect America whereever and whenever necessary.

(b)War on Terror -- Defeating Terrorists and Stopping the Spread of WMD's?

Redouble efforts to stop nuclear weapons development in Iran and North Korea

or

(c)Homeland Security -- Protecting America from Terrorism and Natural Disasters?

Sorry, there's no direct quote in the document that suggests that Homeland Security is an easier job when rogue state Iran has a nuclear bomb-making factory.  They musta forgot to mention that.

For what it's worth,  project code names are assigned randomly. I do think there may well be a need to live fire one of them out in the next 12 - 18 months.

According to an old boss anyway:

"You get more with a gun and a kind word than just a kind word."

The threat of a feasible bombing solution will help Iranian negotiations along.  

I'm not going to defend Harry Reed, but there is a bit more to the fuss than just Harry being Harry.

From the LV Review Journal, Las Vegas; "Talking to reporters at the Pentagon, James Tegnelia, chief of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency, said, "I don't want to sound glib here but it is the first time in Nevada that you'll see a mushroom cloud over Las Vegas since we stopped testing nuclear weapons."

All politics being local, Harry has a lot of folks living in Las Vegas now that are retirees, elderly etc. that have heath issues and a sensitivity to dust and air quality in general. If you've been in Las Vegas lately, you would know that they have a big campaign to cut down on dust coming from construction sites in the city, backed with fines for those that don't comply. Perhaps Harry is responding to his constituents a bit here after the article appeared in the local paper.  

Mr. Tegnelia could have chosen his words a bit more carefully in describing the test and resulting dust plume and Harry could chill out a bit and make his complaints without coming off like a Moon Bat.  

made clearer:

They are simply not going to be serious about it.

Ever.

Perhaps, but given his job, Mr. Tegnelia's remarks may have been designed to get the attention of Tehran, and Reid should be able to figure that out.

Good ol Harry... putting the Dems national security plan into action.

A 12 inch fuse would be about right. Also, testing near Las Vegas is a huge mistake what with the Peoples Republic of San Francisco at its 100 year urban renewal cycle.

it is self-delusional to think that there is actually a diplomatic solution to this problem. We have seen this problem, and the self-delusion that accompanies it, time and time again. Sudetenland mean anything to anyone?

i'm not suggesting that we should go straight to war, but that is where we are going to end up and anyone who actually believes otherwise is fooling themselves.

Well, either way Divine Strake will come in handy.

but the folks with air quality sensitivities are just going to have to get a mask or something. The national security of the entire country cannot be held hostage to some retiree who is concern about his asthma.

This stuff is just Looney Tunes. We have a leader of the Democrats threatening to stop the test because he's in a pique. We have the %$#^$%^ ACLU threatening to stop the test because they don't like it. We have some other $#%$%^$ wackjob claiming that the Nevada Test Range is the ancestral home of some obscure indian tribe and this violates their rights.

This is Looney Tunes.

it is really a benchmark test to get data on pressure waves, shock waves, etc.

A 700 ton conventional "bomb" is simply not a practical weapon; there are no airplanes that could deliver anything like that. The famous daisy-cutter is a fraction of that and it can't be delivered by bomber; it is simply too heavy and bulky; it has to be dropped out the back of a cargo aircraft.

This test is, interstingly, down in the range of low yield nuclear devices. Hmmmm :-)

The Democrats ae really serious about our security.

this is a "feasible bombing solution."

The famous MOAB is 22,00 pounds of which the actual explosives are about 18,750 pound (9 tons) and is something like 30 feet long and 3 1/2 feet in diameter; its so large it has to be delivered by cargo aircraft. It's only 9 tons, imagine how big a 700 ton conventional bomb would have to be. Rhode Island comes to mind :-)

No this is a benchmark test. The weapons boys are definately up to something, but building 700 ton conventional bombs isn't it ;-)

is generated in a random manner, but when you have a need to use a code name within a category can't a program select one of the available names?

Most likely this program involves timed detonations that create a deep destruction "cone" in some manner.  I would guess that use in the field will involve multiple carriers.  If the eventual use involves 700 tons it will not be useful to "fly" it to a target. Remember that our engineers are very skillful at engineering weight out of a device once it's technology is proven.

"Do we have to go though 9/11 again to get your attention? How many more Americans have to die here at home before you people get the idea?"

Harry Reid is upset because... because... because he thinks his constituents want him to be upset; and who knows, maybe his constituents are stupid enough, or more likely narcissistic and self-absorbed enough, to be upset.

We have enviro groups protesting air quality problems resulting from the test. Air quality problems? Air quality problems. What $%^%$%$% rock are these idiots living under?

We have some wackjob lawyer coming forward claiming that the Nevada Test Range actually belongs to some obscure Indian tribe and they object to tests on their land. What????

This is the kind of nonsense that makes me think that my kids futures are in serious, serious trouble. That maybe there is no hope for my country lasting another 50 years.

I can tell you that they will wait for favorable wind conditions to avoid "dusting" a major inhabited area.  I agree with you that the military may have times when a test is absolutely necessary, but in most cases a weather delay is something that can be tolerated.

there is nothing wrong with weather delays and consideration for downrange effects. But the wackjobs don't want weather delays and the like, they want us to stop developing weapons all together.

The maximum gross weight of the shace shuttle is only 120 tons and that takes a whole lot of power to get into orbit. 700 tons is almost 6 times that. The total mass of the ISS in orbit is supposed to be about 410 tons.

I only hope that we can weather this propaganda battle and remain in charge for the next few very critical terms.  Like you, I don't want to see a clever smooth talking democrat come into the picture and carry the middle of the road folk in any election.  I don't believe the democrats have even the normal concern about self preservation.  It is a serious worry.

Is even going around saying this is a violation of the nuclear test ban treaty.

You may have a point about Mr. Tegnelia, but you also may have yet another example of a mid level Civil Servant who put his foot in it, happens you know, can you say Dubai?

Still, old Harry could not help self though it seems, gotta pander to the base don't we?

Let's see, Senior Senator from Nevada who is also the Democratic leader in the Senate has a concern about a test in his State, calls Secretary of Defense, Secretary of Energy (DOE), voices concerns. Senator ether gets answers, or raises Cain on the floor of the Senate.

I guess that's how it used to work but not now that both sides of the isle have a "base" to keep happy the rules seem to have changed...Oh my.

Don't worry about the Moon Bats and their charges, the crack White House communications team will get right on any charges made. OH NO MR. BILL!!

Uh, but, it's not a nuclear weapon.

it probably violates the Treaty of Tordesillas and the Mann Act too.

Maybe the White House communications office will roll out a "Nuclear Expert" to say that very thing....I wonder what Jimmy is doing now days?

but it might produce a 'mushroom cloud" and everyone knows that nuclear weapons produce 'mushroom clouds' so they are lying.

Get with the program :-)

Sometimes I wonder if they care--even in the abstract--about the actual facts of these matters.

I think its obvious from causual inspection that this is a feasibility test for a future tactical nuclear warhead.  The first thing that occurred to me was a bunker buster.  I bet this is pretty obvious to North Korea and Iran as well.

As noted above, 700 tons would require about 100 aircraft to carry - ain't gonna happen.

But its a pretty small nuke - 0.7 kiloton.  

What are these "facts" of which you speak. My mind is made up, do not attempt to confuse me with these "facts."

I am so glad that this "missile" is being described as a torpedo, because that is what it is.  The fact that the Russians have a similar program would indicate that the Iranians have been working with their "allies".  This means (one) less likely that we will ever see a diplomatic solution, and (two) that Iran has advanced navigation equipment as well as a highly advanced torpedo.

This device is not really required to carry a Nuke warhead, because it is not needed to sink a ship or submarine.  But it is a warning to our ships near Iran's shore.  

If the Russians are sharing information of this level of classification, it would seem obvious that nuclear sharing is occurring as well. The time limit for dealing with Iran would seem to be months rather than years.

Can we actually deliver 700 tons of anything all at once?  The cargo capacity of a C-130 is "only" 45,000 lbs -- respectable, but still just 3% of 700 tons.

No, to me this looks like a simulation of a nuclear blast.  We want to know what a nuclear-tipped bunker buster would do to deeply-buried bunkers, but we don't want to actually TEST a real live nuclear weapon right now. (Imagine Dingy Harry's reaction if we did!).

Yes, I would say there is a limit--like June.

typically after a test like this one, data is sorted for weeks and then many times additional tests are suggested.  If I am correct and we are attempting to rig an area with small timed tactical blasts to create an underground wave of some sort, we could be several tests away from the technology.  But I would like to think the June test will provide the necessary insight.

let's see now, do you suppose ... :-)

Or for that matter any of the other treaty obligations not to live test any Nuclear weapons we the United States have entered into in the name of reducing Nuclear Proliferation. If there is a need to do a live fire of Nuclear weapons, I'm all for it, but we should be upfront about doing so.

Very hard to have it both ways after all, "Do as we say, not as we do", or something like that.

Oh I think you're right--but the test will be a step in the right direction.

I seem to remember hearing something about some Trident D-5 SLBMs being retrofitted to carry a conventional warhead.  Think of a smart bomb--a bunker buster, if you will--coming in at 22,000 mph.

Now think of the same amount of conventional explosive needed to duplicate what said conventional warhead at 22,000 mph would do.

It's crazy, but . . . ?  What if 700 tons of TNT were needed to duplicate what this (D-5 with conventional warhead) would actually do a hardened target?  Without actually firing a conventionally-armed D-5?

 looking like meteors -- even a bar of tungsten would create a large crater.  But these war heads would not likely cause a penetrating wave of destruction down into the ground -- especially when the target is a hardened concrete underground facility. Although the velocity would help a "penetrating" war head, velocity alone will not do the trick.  The multiple re-entry system might also be effective in creating a multi-detonation pattern at the target site.  This may assist in reaching deeper into the ground.

What is clear is that the citizens and the government of Iran have no idea the power that these modern weapon systems can inflict.  (Of course, we would also have to have the political will to use them.)  Somehow I believe we would deliver the strike with multiple laser guided tactical nuclear bombs -- rather than the Trident, but this is just my guess.  It has already been mentioned that this would create airborne fallout and result in severe civilian causalities.

trigger a geological event?

I haven't ever looked at the plate tectonics of Iran, let alone their fault lines, but might this be thinking far enough outside the box that somebody is taking a swipe at it?

I'm just using my imagination, absolutely no facts.

of nuclear weapons are difficult to understand and the ongoing effects are almost always overstated. In the case of Nagasaki, some 22,000 died on the day and an additional 17,000 within the next four months. All of the deaths are attributable to blast and proximate exposure to direct radiation within 1 km or so. Yet there was a POW camp of some 24 Australians a mere 1.5 km from ground zero and every one of them survived the blast and most lived healthy lives into old age.

Intensive long term observation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki survivors has not revealed any deaths attributable to exposure to fallout. This latter situation seems to be borne out be the long term damage from the massive reactor failure at Chernobyl; the dire predictions of massive long term health effects from downstream fallout do not seem to be borne out by fact.

These are the things that people are not told and are certainly not taught in our schools. It will be worth bearing these things in mind when the first "dirty" bomb is used somewhere. The actual short and long term damage will be virtually nil; you will stand a better chance of being harmed by radiation from dental x-rays or traveling in an airplane too often. Yet, due to a complete and utter lack of exposure to the truth the psychological impact will be almost incalculable.

that a conventional warhead that can be delivered by a Trident could cause any significant such effect.

For the life of me I do not understand why anyone is even considering retrofitting conventional warheads for any kind of ICBM, other than having an excuse to keep the boats active in the fleet by "inventing" a new role for them.

The code is assigned without the program having choice. Each organization gets a two letter group (in this case DI, so the all projects in this org would have a starting word like divine, diamond, etc) but other than that, it's just a random assignment.

If we could transport 700 tons of anything by missile or aircraft we'd all be taking hovershoes to work.  

What is feasible is an air-dropped nuclear weapon that can penetrate deep into the earth to provide 700 tons worth of explosive power.  I presume that's what they're really testing without using real nukes.

But no one's got the courage to ask him.

serious about this, are you?

The D-5 really doesn't have a very big payload because it was designed to carry nukes.

In the context of the story, a sub-kiloton nuke might initiate an avalanche but it certainly isn't going to move tectonic plates.

1. This line of weapons testing is for the next generation deep earth penetrator (bunker buster).
   
   
2. 700tons is the effective explosive yield being used in the simulation, not the weapon's weight.  the actual yield of the final weapon might be the same or greater.  
   
   
3. the conventional charge that's being used is designed to collect underground shockwave data and confirm simulation formula and values. Underground shockwave simulation involves more complex fluid dynamics than air burst.  They probably have an underground structure nearby to collect field data.
   
   
4. I would guess that the eventual weapon would be nuclear, since size and weight make it easier to deliver.
   
   
5. Modern bunker buster development began with the GBU-28 in Desert Storm (8" gun barrel, laser designator, conventional explosive).
   
   
6. Mushroom clouds are not unique to nuclear weapons. The BLU-82 or "daisy cutter" produced large mushroom clouds during Desert Storm. Sand and/or loose soil will enhance the effect.
   
   
7. Regarding air quality for nearby residents: I recall having a sore throat for almost a month after Sept 11 2001 - that cement/burnt wire taste that stuck to the back of your throat. I used to work in lower Manhattan - so no sympathy from me - suck it up. cost of freedom. etc    

for that excellent comment.

We have some ability to tune these effects now as well. I imagine we could make much cleaner (or much dirtier) nukes now.

I think the risk is greatly overblown... How many tactical nukes would we have to set off to yield even 1/2 the fallout that Chernobyl did? I don't know, but I'm thinking it is a very big number.

Dirty bombs aren't on my list of things to be worried about... they are greatly overrated. You'd need a huge explosive to get any dispersion of the radioactive elements. The explosive component would do much more damage than the rad component. The biggest thing the rad components would do is make the bomb extremely easy to detect. It would be a foolish thing to build if you were a terrorist. The only thing as overrated as dirty bombs is anthrax.

I think you've been watching too many Hollywood movies. They seem to do this a lot in the movies, but I think it's pretty hard to move tectonic plates IRL.

on all points.

The problem however is that the press has hyped the 'dirty' bomb to the point where if one ever goes off people will panic and the target area will be abandoned for a century. No amount of cleanup will ever convince people to go back, when in fact cleanup would accomplished by the next heavy rainstorm.

you simply take the nuclear powered drill/crawler and drill down into the mantle and carefully place several naqueda-enhanced nuclear weapons ;-)

but it wasn't as powereful as his roundhouse kick.

The pre-approval draft Environmental Assessment for the Divine Strake test can be found at
http://tinyurl.com/q2xvp.

This document expands on what Old Crow has written. Apparently, this is not a weapons test, but an effects test.

Basically, ~700 lbs of ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO) explosive would be placed in a 32' radius, 35' deep hole (filling about 2/3 of it), with a couple hundred pounds of C-4 used as a detonator. Existing tunnels will be instrumented in order to determine the effect of the explosive on the tunnels; the results will be used to validate computer codes which simulate explosive propagation.

Comments about weight are also germane. A bomb of 700 tons does not appear practical. For comparison, the cargo capacity of a C-5A is approximately 95 tons; of a Boeing 747, approximately 120 tons.

It's been good to see that the discussion here has generally been serious and considered. Thanks, all!

is the explosive force of the weapon, not the actual weight.

A 10-megaton thermonuclear warhead fits right on top of an ICBM- no problem.

I suspect you knew that.

and I let my imagination get away from me.

Besides, 700 tons, to me at least, would seem to be an awfully big kinetic weapon, let alone it being able to explode.

It may have had something to do with compliance with nuclear-weapons reduction treaties.  Rather than scrap the Tridents, someone came up with the idea of having a smart bomb come in at 22,000 mph.  

..."The 100 Year Harvest for the Joy and Rebirth of the Workers' Collective"...only without the missile launcher parades--Dykes on Bikes instead.

...but the crafty mullahs caught us red-handed after Operation Tsunami.

misunderstand, I have no problem with keeping the missile boats in the fleet. I think America has often made a serious mistake by demobilizing and disarming on the spur of the moment and regretting the decision down the road.

are just as relevant and necessary today as they were 25 years ago, just for different reasons.

then Reid reverted back to his usual:  weak and stupid.

With China looming on the horizon. They will certainly build a huge arsenal.

We could just dial a gate in close proximity to a black hole and we'd have plenty of time to deal with Iran.

I suppose I could loan you mine if you promise to wash it before you bring it back. Those black holes leave such a mess.

a 700 ton kinetic weapon coming blasing down on what used to be the Natanz facility at 25,000 MPH. Can you spell 'hole in the ground large enough to swallow Delaware (and even Biden).'

at least the Dems have taken the first step in 'framing' the issue.

If they actually had any principles they wouldn't have to spend so much time 'framing' their values.

Another reason to test this thing.

Biden's head would come in handy for plugging up the hole.

...if those can be classified as "conventional".

otherwise we get all that Gaia-goo leaking out.

I want to meet the engineer who can make a gas centrifuge work when it's wrapped in basalt.

From the first line of the linked article:

The Pentagon plans to detonate 700 tons of conventional high explosives

and then later

The agency said the test will involve detonating 700 tons of the Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil, or ANFO,

Now, I'm not sure what the equivalent amount of TNT would be -- I think properly detonated ANFO is more powerful for the same weight than TNT.  But, the explosive power equivalent to anything from 0.7 kilotons of TNT to 10 kilotons of TNT would be easily created by a very very small nuke, which would not require heavy lift capability to deliver.

Which is why I still think this looks like a simulation for a nuclear-tipped bunker buster, and not a test of a useful bomb design that weighs more than 30 C-130s can deliver.

You say "700tons is the effective explosive yield being used in the simulation, not the weapon's weight.  the actual yield of the final weapon might be the same or greater."

But the linked article says

The Pentagon plans to detonate 700 tons of conventional high explosives

and

The agency said the test will involve detonating 700 tons of the Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil, or ANFO,

So either you're wrong, or the article's wrong and your infomation comes from another source.  Share, please?

this is a data gathering exercise not a weapon. We already know a lot about the effects of small nuclear munitions but this is probably designed to capture more data about the ground pressure wave effects you'd need for building a ground penetrator/bunker buster.

A Colonel I once served under regaled us back in 1982 or so with a story about testing a fuel-air device in South Vietnam.  The office-desk-sized device was sling-loaded into the jungle by CH47, set down, and detonated, and reporters watching the video paled (he said) to see a mushroom-shaped  cloud rising over the jungle. No way for them to know; not all that many people have even seen films of a nuke going off, let alone been there.

Cortland

The agency said the test will involve detonating 700 tons of the Ammonium Nitrate-Fuel Oil, or ANFO, a commonly used agent in commercial blasting operations.

Officials said the test's primary purpose is to examine ground shock effects on deeply buried tunnel structures, and the explosion will take place above an existing structure.

A data collection test using conventional explosives.

I blew right by that on my first scan.