This is a hardened aircraft shelter

[Onyx]

It's practically immune to a tomahawk missile, which has low yield and low penetrating capabilities. There are several of these on the Shayrat Airbase.

If they did launch chemical weapons from this base, I guarantee you that all the aircraft stationed there were evacuated or housed in one of these immediately after.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

It's practically immune to a tomahawk missile, which has low yield and low penetrating capabilities.

Depends on what warhead the Tomahawk is carrying. It can carry anything up to a W80 or W84 thermonuclear warhead with an equivalent yield up to 150 kilotons of TNT.

 

[Onyx]

They didn't use nuclear warheads, dumbass.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Was it a bunker buster? If so the shed and the plane are gone.

 

[Onyx]

Was it a bunker buster? If so the shed and the plane are gone.

Again, they didn't use nuclear weapons. At least I hope not.

A nuclear bunker buster would be the only thing capable of cracking one of these open.

 

[Missouri_Mike]

Was it a bunker buster? If so the shed and the plane are gone.

Again, they didn't use nuclear weapons. At least I hope not.

Bunker busters are not nuclear. They are built to penetrate the shed you posted a picture of and blow up after entering the structure.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

They didn't use nuclear warheads, dumbass.

My point was that the Tomahawk is just the delivery device. It is capable of carrying any of a wide range of payloads. Your statement that the shelter pictured in your OP is “practically immune to a tomahawk missile, which has low yield and low penetrating capabilities” is based on a ridiculous assumption about what payload any missiles sent against it might be carrying.

 

[Onyx]

Bunker busters are not nuclear. They are built to penetrate the shed you posted a picture of and blow up after entering the structure.

What is an example of a modern non-nuclear bunker buster capable of destroying an advanced hardened aircraft shelter?

By the way, tomahawk missiles are not bunker busters. That theory is out of the question.

 

[Onyx]

My point was that the Tomahawk is just the delivery device.

No, altering the warhead would change the specs of the missile and launching system.

Tomahawks have a 450kg high explosive warhead.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The WDU-36/B is designed to be used against ships and hard targets on land (such as bunkers and hardened aircraft shelters), though its fragmentation effect also makes it effective against soft targets BGM-109 Tomahawk Naval Cruise Missile | Military-Today.com

 

[mamooth]

Tomahawks are accurate enough to fly into that door, which is not going to stop it.

 

[Onyx]

The WDU-36/B is designed to be used against ships and hard targets on land (such as bunkers and hardened aircraft shelters)

The tomahawk has virtually no penetrating capabilities. It can't break through a hardened aircraft shelter.

 

[Manonthestreet]

The RGM/UGM-109E Tomahawk (Block IV TLAM-E) is the latest member in the Tomahawk missile family. It carries a 1,000lb class unitary warhead for a maximum range of 900nmi. Tomahawk Long-Range Cruise Missile

 

[Lewdog]

 

[OKTexas]

Was it a bunker buster? If so the shed and the plane are gone.

Again, they didn't use nuclear weapons. At least I hope not.

A nuclear bunker buster would be the only thing capable of cracking one of these open.

Wrong, a Tomahawk can fly right in the door which is the weakest part, they carry a 1,000 pound warhead and would do the trick. They know how everything is laid out with satellite images and they can be programed to +/- 3 feet.

 

[Lewdog]

Was it a bunker buster? If so the shed and the plane are gone.

Again, they didn't use nuclear weapons. At least I hope not.

A nuclear bunker buster would be the only thing capable of cracking one of these open.

Wrong, a Tomahawk can fly right in the door which is the weakest part, they carry a 1,000 pound warhead and would do the trick. They know how everything is laid out with satellite images and they can be programed to +/- 3 feet.

Yep and Malcolm Nance is on MSNBC already saying they knew they had 20 of these there that were targets.

 

[Onyx]

Wrong, a Tomahawk can fly right in the door which is the weakest part, they carry a 1,000 pound warhead and would do the trick. They know how everything is laid out with satellite images and they can be programed to +/- 3 feet.

If the door is several feet of reinforced armor, then no. The door would absorb the explosion.

 

[Lewdog]

Malcolm Nance just said that Google Earth is 20-25 years behind the resolution of satellite imagery that the U.S. government has to see of targets on the ground... and said that "Cold War" imagery was better than Google Earth and then said, "That is far as I'll go with that."

 

[DarkFury]

60 rockets coming in with an average flight time of 14 minutes so you are NOT going to have time to hide shit.

 

[Onyx]

60 rockets coming in with an average flight time of 14 minutes so you are NOT going to have time to hide shit.

WTF are you talking about? If this attack was carried out several hundred miles away, then it would of taken several hours.

And if a chemical attack was carried out from this airbase, then they would of hid the aircraft immediately after the attack. It's just common sense.