Can someone explain the theory behind the design of the so called “bunker buster” bombs - the ones designed to penetrate a significant distance through solid ground before detonating?
Maybe the explosives that the military is currently using are much more stable than I am inclined to believe - I thought that high yield explosives (RDX, TNT, C4, etc.) were detonated by shock. Wouldn’t slamming into the ground constitute such a shock? Especially is the warhead is designed to hit hard enough to penetrate some distance? What are the other tricks?
Someone is going to come along and do a much better job than me at describing this.
Back in the day around 1991 the military had to rush production on ordinance designed to penetrate Iraq’s bunkers.
So, they found some spare howitzer barrels and put explosives in them, sealed them up, put some fins and mounting hardware on them and let em rip. Yes, there was a lot more to this but we’re looking at this at the 10,000 ft level right now.
The theory for bunker busting bombs is to get the explosion as close as possible to the targeted bunker. So, they’re ordinance with a very hard outer casing designed to penetrate the ground and then have a delayed explosion.
The high explosive filler the Army uses for munitions is very stable. It doesn’t detonate on it’s own, for instance, when artillery shells hit their target - there’s a fuze in the nose that ignites a primary explosive material which then causes the base explosive material to detonate.
When there is a problem with the fuze, and you have a “dud” round, the impact of the shell doesn’t detonate the base charge.
So it seems perfectly reasonable that the base charge in a bunker buster would remain stable during the impact. In that case, the fuze is designed to wait for a certain fraction of a second before detonating the primary charge instead of trying to do it instantaneously as with artillery shells and bombs.
