What targets will the most powerful FAB-3000 bombs with UMPC be called upon to hit?

March 21 2024 50

Today, during a visit by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu to a military-industrial complex enterprise in the Nizhny Novgorod region, it was officially announced that serial production of the most powerful high-explosive aircraft bombs in service with the Russian Aerospace Forces (FAB-5000 and FAB-9000 are virtually unusable, because no suitable media available). We are talking about FAB-3000, which were already used during the operation to liberate Mariupol (attacks on Azovstal).

Obviously, given that the enemy has modern air defense systems, the use of these bombs will only be possible in combination with the UMPC (universal planning and correction module) and, probably, with powder accelerators to increase the destruction range. It is known that the practical gliding range of the FAB-1500 turned out to be slightly less than that of the FAB-500. It is obvious that an increase in the mass of aircraft ammunition negatively affects the distance it covers. FAB-3000 will not show miracles in this sense.

The only reasonable carrier for the new-old bomb is the Tu-22M3 long-range bomber. In theory, the FAB-3000 can be used from the strategic missile carriers Tu-160 and Tu-95MS, but this will require upgrading their internal compartments, which is completely unjustified and is unlikely to be implemented. What about the Su-34, you ask? Despite the fact that this front-line bomber can carry a PTB-3000 external fuel tank (the same mass as the FAB-3000), the dimensions of the aerial bomb are unlikely to allow it to be safely placed on any of the suspensions.

The Tu-22M3 has three hardpoints that can withstand the weight of a 3-ton bomb - a central one (ventral) and two wing ones. These are three bombs. Moreover, in theory, “Tushka” will be able to drag away 42 FAB-500 or 8 FAB-1500. It looks much more impressive than three FAB-3000. So what's the deal?

It is obvious that the Russian Aerospace Forces are creating a unique, highly specialized aviation complex of increased power, respectively, for unique purposes. Those that cannot be effectively hit with existing bombs and missiles. After all, there are simply no enemy targets on the line of combat contact on which such powerful ammunition should be used.

However, there are bridges across the Dnieper. And they are still standing.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

Dmitry Volkov

+7

21 March 2024 21: 51

Purely business and an agreement, that’s why the bridges are standing and the embassies are working...
UAZ 452

0

21 March 2024 22: 02

Well, what end is it possible to attach the UMPC to ammunition with such geometry? Or were the laws of aerodynamics canceled by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense? And without the UMPC, which allows the bomb to glide at least 70-100 km, not a single bomber will be able to deliver it to the release point without being guaranteed to be destroyed.
PS If anyone is in the know, explain the meaning of the joke with FAB-5000 and FAB-9000, please. Who came up with the idea of adopting aerospace forces and producing ammunition for which, in principle, there are no (according to the author of the article) suitable carriers?
1. Kristallovich
  
  +7
  
  21 March 2024 22: 28
  Well, what end is it possible to attach the UMPC to ammunition with such geometry? Or were the laws of aerodynamics canceled by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense?
  
  What's wrong with geometry? And the aerodynamic characteristics are improved by using a separate nose fairing, as is done on the FAB-1500.
  
  If anyone is in the know, explain the meaning of the joke with FAB-5000 and FAB-9000, please. Who came up with the idea of adopting aerospace forces and producing ammunition for which, in principle, there are no (according to the author of the article) suitable carriers?
  
  There are no carriers for these bombs now, but once there were. Tu-16, 3M, M-4. In theory, these bombs are also carried by active “strategists”, but with serious re-equipment of the compartments.
  
  In the photo, 3M is dropping a FAB-9000.
  1. UAZ 452
    
    -3
    
    21 March 2024 22: 37
    
    What's wrong with geometry? And the aerodynamic characteristics are improved by using a separate nose fairing, as is done on the FAB-1500.
    
    That is, they resumed the production of free-falling bombs, knowing full well that it is impossible to use them in principle, and they plan to develop UMPCs for them someday later? And if it doesn’t work out (which is more than possible), will the bombs be sent to warehouses where FAB-5000 and FAB-9000 are already gathering dust? What about the state approach? This is our opinion.
    1. Kristallovich
      
      +2
      
      21 March 2024 22: 39
      
      That is, they resumed the production of free-falling bombs, knowing full well that it is impossible to use them in principle, and they plan to develop UMPCs for them someday later?
      
      I believe that the UMPC for the FAB-3000 is already in the process of development, perhaps even being tested.
      1. UAZ 452
        
        -5
        
        21 March 2024 22: 53
        
        About the bombs themselves they write that they are made in as many as three shifts. But if their usefulness depends on components (UMPK), which are still being developed, and the success of these developments is not guaranteed (Armata is a long-suffering example of this), then such a waste of resources is a rather bold decision. Have we resolved all the issues regarding the entire range of actually used ammunition, have we taken up those that MAY BE (but this is not certain) will be useful in the future?
        
        Vasya_33
        
        +1
        
        22 March 2024 05: 42
        
        “Bad news for NATO. <…> Three-ton FAB-3000 aerial bombs went into production. This means that the planning and correction module is ready for them and now the positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be crushed with special power and destructive force,” noted military expert Andrei Klintsevich in his telegram channel.
        
        aerodynamics was explained to you/us above. and commentator Igool in the previous article.
        here the question arises - where did bombs of this caliber go from warehouses, as this same commentator writes about warehouses, since production has started anew?
        
        and than. whether there is a module for them or not - it’s not that important... the main thing is a clear signal to Natya: what awaits them in Ukraine.
        
        Kristallovich
        
        0
        
        22 March 2024 09: 16
        
        About the bombs themselves they write that they are made in as many as three shifts. But if their usefulness depends on components (UMPC), which are still being developed.
        
        The production of UMPCs is much more massive than the bombs themselves.
        
        UAZ 452
        
        -3
        
        22 March 2024 11: 09
        
        The ones that are just being developed? Or are they universal - for both FAB-500 and FAB-3000?
        
        Kristallovich
        
        0
        
        22 March 2024 11: 19
        
        Yes, those same ones.
  2. Lozovik
    
    +1
    
    27 March 2024 13: 23
    
    Quote: Kristallovich
    What's wrong with geometry? And the aerodynamic characteristics are improved by using a separate nose fairing, as is done on the FAB-1500.
    
    The midship section is large, the body length is short, this cannot be corrected with a fairing.
    
    According to the content of the article, the Tu-22M3 carries only two 3000 kg bombs, both in the cargo compartment. For external sling, the maximum caliber is 500 kg.
    1. Kristallovich
      
      0
      
      28 March 2024 09: 06
      
      For external sling, the maximum caliber is 500 kg.
      
      Tell that to the X-22 cruise missile.
      1. Lozovik
        
        +1
        
        28 March 2024 13: 16
        
        X-22 missile, the BD-45K beam holder was created exclusively for it. And the bombs are transported on the MBD3-U9M. As follows from the code, the maximum cargo weight for it is 500 kg.
        
        Kristallovich
        
        0
        
        28 March 2024 13: 18
        
        Today, as you understand, a lot of things are being modernized and adapted to current needs. I see no obstacles to hanging the FAB-3000 under the wings of the Tu-22M3.
        
        Lozovik
        
        +1
        
        28 March 2024 19: 16
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        Today, as you understand, a lot of things are being modernized and adapted to current needs.
        
        This “lot of things” can be modernized with a minimum amount of work. The same Su-34, unlike the Tu-22M3, already knew how to use guided bombs; for the UMPC it was only necessary to modify the SUV.
        
        Quote: Kristallovich
        I see no obstacles to hanging the FAB-3000 under the wings of the Tu-22M3.
        
        Question: how and for what?
        
        Kristallovich
        
        -1
        
        28 March 2024 19: 17
        
        We'll see. The Tu-22M3 is the only reasonable carrier for the FAB-3000, and I believe they will not lift the plane for the sake of one bomb.
2. Dart2027
  
  +4
  
  21 March 2024 22: 46
  
  Quote: UAZ 452
  And without the UMPC, which allows the bomb to glide at least 70-100 km, not a single bomber will be able to deliver it to the release point without being guaranteed to be destroyed.
  
  How do you know that they were not developed?
  1. UAZ 452
    
    0
    
    22 March 2024 11: 13
    
    I only know about the FAB-3000 what they write in the press, in particular in the article discussed here. If they are trumpeting with all their might about the beginning of mass production of a bomb and are silent about the UMPC for it (at the same time, no one is secreting information about the UMPC for the same FAB-500, at least not about the very fact of their existence), it is logical to conclude that they are not yet available nature. Or suggest a different logic?
    1. Dart2027
      
      +1
      
      22 March 2024 17: 59
      
      Quote: UAZ 452
      and are silent about the UMPC for it (at the same time, no one is secreting information about the UMPC for the same FAB-500, at least not about the very fact of their existence)
      
      They were also silent about UMPC by 1500, until the first arrivals began in Avdeevka. Issues with secrecy are such a dark forest that sometimes it is simply impossible to find logic. But based on the direction in which weapons are developing, it can be assumed that, if they do not exist, then at least they are already at the final development stage.
3. kapitan92
  
  +4
  
  21 March 2024 23: 58
  
  Quote: UAZ 452
  If anyone is in the know, explain the meaning of the joke with FAB-5000 and FAB-9000, please. Who came up with the idea of adopting aerospace forces and producing ammunition for which, in principle, there are no (according to the author of the article) suitable carriers?
  
  The FAB-9000M50 and the more advanced FAB-9000M54 were put into service in the early 50s.
  They are not produced now. Considering the shelf life of these bombs, the question arose about their disposal for the benefit of business.
  FAB 9000/54 were used in Afghanistan. So in just 3 months of 1988, TU-16 bombers dropped 289 FAB-9000 M54 bombs. The effectiveness increased when bombs were dropped into small gorges, which literally collapsed from such power.
  There are no carriers left for these heavy bombs. If only we make something from Tu 22m3.
4. lord-palladore-11045
  
  0
  
  22 March 2024 07: 40
  
  Well, what end is it possible to attach the UMPC to ammunition with such geometry? Or were the laws of aerodynamics canceled by order of the Russian Ministry of Defense? And without the UMPC, which allows the bomb to glide at least 70-100 km, not a single bomber will be able to deliver it to the release point without being guaranteed to be destroyed.
  PS If anyone is in the know, explain the meaning of the joke with FAB-5000 and FAB-9000, please. Who came up with the idea of adopting aerospace forces and producing ammunition for which, in principle, there are no (according to the author of the article) suitable carriers?
  
  - in fact, mattress covers also have aerial bombs of similar calibers (Fab-9000), they are dropped from military transport C-130s.
  1. UAZ 452
    
    +1
    
    22 March 2024 11: 15
    
    For this, the enemy’s air defense must initially be absent as a phenomenon (or be suppressed 100%). This condition has nothing to do with the situation in the NWO zone.
    1. lord-palladore-11045
      
      0
      
      22 March 2024 13: 03
      
      That’s right, it never occurred to the “great” West that they would have to fight with Russia, although hysterical screams sound constantly and aggressively.
5. rotkiv04
  
  -1
  
  22 March 2024 22: 47
  
  you can weld a fairing, it seems to me that this is not a problem
JD1979

+7

21 March 2024 22: 44

This is all complete nonsense about bridges. The Americans in Iraq and Yugoslavia calmly destroyed bridges with ordinary axes and bombs. The same Iskander will calmly endure a bridge span and/or support. Therefore, the pitiful bleating about the need to use almost TYAZ does not cause anything but laughter. Especially in the wake of the damaged span of the Crimean Bridge by the same BEC with 300-500 kg of explosives.
1. mvg
  
  -1
  
  21 March 2024 23: 15
  
  The span "dropped" a truck, there were 21 tons of explosives. 300 kg, flying on the Crimean Bridge, only shells will be blown away
  1. JD1979
    
    +2
    
    22 March 2024 00: 12
    
    that is, after the bridge was repaired after the truck, it was dropped again by the BEC and somehow passed you by?
  2. Sergei N
    
    0
    
    22 March 2024 08: 24
    
    Quote: mvg
    The span "dropped" a truck, there were 21 tons of explosives. 300 kg, flying on the Crimean Bridge, only shells will be blown away
    
    1) mvg do you really believe in the truck version?
    2) the Crimean bridge has already been attacked twice. Second time by BEC.
2. boriz
  
  +1
  
  22 March 2024 00: 30
  
  Railway The bridge across the Dnieper in Cherkasy was destroyed on June 26, 2022. And there is still nothing about its restoration. There was a post about this in VO. I reminded you of this post a year ago. https://topwar.ru/198287-nanesen-udar-vysokotochnymi-raketami-po-zheleznodorozhnomu-mostu-cherez-dnepr-v-rajone-cherkass.html
  Maybe they destroyed it on purpose so that everyone would understand. But with us everything is quickly forgotten.
mvg

+3

21 March 2024 23: 17

For this we must thank our “strategists” and “analysts” who, seeing that the Americans were making JDAM modules, invested all their design brains into Hephaestus-24 and sighting modules, which they never mastered. We thought we would bomb the Papuans with bare cast iron.
AC130 Gunship

+1

21 March 2024 23: 40

It will be very difficult for the Su35 to cover the Tu22 in the enemy air defense zone. Large and difficult to maneuver. If the one and a half ton one doesn’t really plan, what to expect from the 3 ton one?
Rusa

-2

22 March 2024 00: 34

I think that the FAB-5000 and FAB-9000 can be launched using a rocket, which will then drop them at the desired altitude for further planning and destruction of enemy targets.
1. lord-palladore-11045
  
  0
  
  22 March 2024 07: 46
  
  I think that the FAB-5000 and FAB-9000 can be launched using a rocket, which will then drop them at the desired altitude for further planning and destruction of enemy targets.
  
  - Well, even build a cosmodrome for this purpose... Not serious!
  1. Rusa
    
    0
    
    22 March 2024 10: 23
    
    The Russian Federation has three cosmodromes, is that not enough for you? In addition, "poplars"
    and “yars” are for samples that do not need a spaceport.
Mongolor

0

22 March 2024 01: 00

Why did they stop producing at all?!
1. Daniel K
  
  +1
  
  22 March 2024 05: 37
  
  They are practically not needed, the small radius of destruction is the scourge of this type of weapon.
  1. Rusa
    
    0
    
    24 March 2024 20: 47
    
    The diameter of the crater during the FAB-3000 explosion is 20 meters.
    Accordingly, the FAB-9000 is several times larger, so such bombs are needed, especially against powerful fortified areas.
Disinfo

0

22 March 2024 03: 59

It was reported that they were working on a UMPK for the FAB-3000 at the same time as the FAB-1500, so we can assume that they have a UMPK for the 3000 if they've decided to start mass producing them. I suspect that they meant that they are mass upgrading the FAB-3000, not producing more.
Daniel K

+5

22 March 2024 05: 36

When we come within bombing distance of the bridges, we will need these bridges, and the crests will blow them up themselves.

The bridges had to be destroyed 2 years ago and bombs are not suitable for this, in order to reach the Dnieper, and not poke around in place.
Daniel K

+3

22 March 2024 05: 39

Quote: JD1979
This is all complete nonsense about bridges. The Americans in Iraq and Yugoslavia calmly destroyed bridges with ordinary axes and bombs. The same Iskander will calmly endure a bridge span and/or support. Therefore, the pitiful bleating about the need to use almost TYAZ does not cause anything but laughter. Especially in the wake of the damaged span of the Crimean Bridge by the same BEC with 300-500 kg of explosives.

Exactly!
Daniel K

+4

22 March 2024 05: 42

Quote: Dmitry Volkov
Purely business and an agreement, that’s why the bridges are standing and the embassies are working...

You forget about unprofessionalism and irresponsibility
Vasya_33

-2

22 March 2024 06: 34

The bridges still haunt everyone. winters permit, ships can transport cargo. No matter what you want to say, the full train was loaded and driven... but they are transporting it, most likely in one or two wagons. The same goes for trucks - they don’t come in a line...

and which of you would raise his hand to blow up, for example, Preobrazhensky?
bridges will be left for later...
1. Vladimir Tuzakov
  
  +4
  
  22 March 2024 10: 50
  
  You don’t understand the importance of logistics in war if you make such statements. Bridges are destroyed first as an opportunity to quickly interrupt enemy logistics. All sorts of barges and ships will slow down logistics by an order of magnitude, which in war is like bleeding the enemy out. For example, the lack of ammunition for the artillery could have been created earlier by preventing timely delivery to the LBS. The maneuver by forces and means - the supply of units and weapons, the rotation would have been disrupted.... Why this was not created is a question for the General Staff of the RF Armed Forces. We did not hear a clear answer, except for an obvious lie about the impossibility of destroying the bridges with the available means. For the use of UMPC on aerial bombs, which the Americans created a decade ago, our Defense Ministry only deigned to create the SVO in the second year (which became a turning point in the SVO - the capture of Avdeevka, etc.)
  1. Vasya_33
    
    0
    
    22 March 2024 11: 38
    
    “A question for the General Staff.” and questions on questions... I don’t argue.
    As for logistics, the hegemon is in no hurry. as one commenter put it here: NATO supplies Ukraine with weapons in homeopathic doses, and even those are not the most modern.
    
    and it’s the same with money... if the West wanted, it would have armed Ukraine to the teeth long ago. Well, judge for yourself - 12 tanks, 30 tanks, 3 clearing vehicles, etc.
    but I’m afraid that after today’s “hydroelectric power plants, thermal power plants,” Taurus and other prodigies will still give.
    1. UAZ 452
      
      +4
      
      22 March 2024 12: 23
      
      So no one there needs an absolute victory for Ukraine. They accurately dose their assistance to ensure the continuation of the mutual grinding of our two peoples, the economic and demographic potential of Russia and Ukraine. It’s good (for them) that both sides are doing this with great enthusiasm and on their own initiative.
      And Ukraine as the unconditional winner in the Northern Military District... Right now the role of the white master’s beloved wife in Eastern Europe belongs to Poland. Do Poles need competition? I'm sure not. The USA and Great Britain remember very well how many problems there were with the USSR, which had become too strong after the victory over the Reich, and how quickly it turned from an ally into a rival. Ukraine has much fewer opportunities, but it is better, as they say, to play it safe.
      So they won’t let Ukraine lose - if the pressure from the Russian Federation intensifies, the volume of assistance from the West will immediately increase. But they won’t be allowed to win, so if the Armed Forces of Ukraine succeed, “unforeseen” difficulties will immediately arise with supplies and financing. And this will continue until both sides of the conflict are completely bled dry.
      There is only one question: why does this seem to suit the elites of both countries? Or is this the same notorious plan according to which everything goes smoothly? Has anyone (and not only in Kyiv) been promised a comfortable alternate airfield for participating in this plan?
      1. Vladimir Tuzakov
        
        +3
        
        22 March 2024 12: 44
        
        Correct remarks, therefore it becomes clear that the Strange Military Operation is essentially a Selective Military Operation to destroy the patriotic Slavs on both sides. Who benefits from the rapid mass extermination of patriotic Slavs?
        
        UAZ 452
        
        +1
        
        22 March 2024 13: 14
        
        I would venture to suggest that for real decision-making centers the goals that you formulated are secondary and insignificant. The true ultimate task is to cheer up old Europe, which has sunk too deeply into its pacifism, complacency, dependency and tolerance. What was needed was a bogeyman, a sense of threat, some evil orcs nearby. I just can’t be sure - everything was initially staged, the plans were laid out in English, and then translated into Russian and Ukrainian before being handed over to the direct performers, or our SVO just happened to turn up so lucky, and they decided to take advantage of the opportunity.
        But in any case, for the beneficiaries of this conflict, its duration and gradual increase in the degree of escalation are important. Therefore, the logistics of both sides do not suffer significantly - ammunition, weapons and human reserves should be able to get to the LBS, and gradually grind against each other, without fail providing a terrible and bloody picture on the TV of the European average person. So that it would never even occur to him to demand an increase in pensions and benefits by cutting military budgets. After all, it is much easier to scare than to convince of something. This is true for them and for us.
        
        Vladimir Tuzakov
        
        -1
        
        22 March 2024 16: 03
        
        Comment. There is also a very important component here - all previously major crises of capitalism were overcome by disengagement and promotion of weapons in states, and then by major wars (WWII, WWII). This is not the course of action that the NWO is timed for and is being extended over time, in order to include weapons programs by many states. And then the consequence is a greater warrior (PRC-USA, RF-NATO, etc.)
depavel

+1

22 March 2024 08: 14

The groveling before the West cannot be taken away. This is “immortal” power.
Flight

0

22 March 2024 15: 09

What targets will the most powerful FAB-3000 bombs with UMPC be called upon to hit?

The important thing here is not who to hit, but who not to hit.
I believe that the list of targets does not include responsible Ukronazis, etc., etc. according to the information list in the Ukrainian government, but exclusively ordinary hard workers who seem to be doing their legitimate work for those named above from the list.