Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watmath!att!cbnews!military
From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: B-52 bombings
Message-ID: <1990Sep13.012247.16679@cbnews.att.com>
Date: 13 Sep 90 01:22:47 GMT
References: <1990Aug24.034016.305@cbnews.att.com> <1990Sep2.060557.2162@cbnews.att.com> <1990Sep12.014632.28474@cbnews.att.com>
Sender: military@cbnews.att.com (William B. Thacker)
Organization: U of Toronto Zoology
Lines: 18
Approved: military@att.att.com



From: henry@zoo.toronto.edu (Henry Spencer)
>From: cognos!geovision!pt@dciem (Paul Tomblin)
>... I.E., can we deliver a 10 ton
>earthquake bomb with that precision.  I doubt that we have anything like the
>Grand Slam available in this era of Nukes, but if we did, could we lift it? 

Easily.  Aircraft in general have gotten bigger since WWII, and the advent
of turbine engines has done amazing things.  Many modern *fighters* have
payloads comparable to those of WWII heavy bombers.  Max bombload for a
B-52 is something like 40 tons, although there are some restrictions
on how that's distributed (in particular, I don't think it can be all
in one piece).  I don't have numbers handy, but long odds the bigger
tactical aircraft could haul a 10-tonner.
-- 
TCP/IP: handling tomorrow's loads today| Henry Spencer at U of Toronto Zoology
OSI: handling yesterday's loads someday|  henry@zoo.toronto.edu   utzoo!henry