Talk:GBU-57A/B MOP

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008[edit]

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --199.253.177.254 (talk) 13:31, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is an update released by the DoD on 8 Feb 2011 via http://www.defense.gov/Contracts from U.S. Department of Defense Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs): Boeing Company of St Louis, Mo., was awarded a contract modification not-to-exceed $15,150,000 for additional Massive Ordnance Penetrator Integration to include flight test support, three (3) additional test assets, an alternative/modified fuse design and sixteen (16) fuses. At this time $5,984,488 has been obligated. AAC/EBDK/EBDJ – MOP Tiger Team at Eglin Air Force base, Fla. is the contracting activity. (FA8681-09-C-0280, P00016) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 138.88.163.46 (talk) 13:06, 9 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May be a mistake?[edit]

Hello, on wp.fr, after the translation of this article some people noticed something that looks impossible. It's this part: Penetration:

200 ft (61 m) of 5,000 psi (34 MPa) reinforced concrete

26 ft (7.9 m) of 10,000 psi (69 MPa) reinforced concrete

According to this figures, the harder the concrete is, the easier it is to penetrate it.

I don't think you're reading this right. Regardless of the accuracy of the data i.e. is the 200 ft datum the actual number, the two values simply state that the penetration is greater with concrete of lower comppressive strength. And btw, five thousand psi concrete is not particularly hard. Clearly when doubling the concrete's comppressive strength, the penetration is greatly reduced. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.233.12 (talk) 22:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Though I know that a material can be hard BUT fragile, as the glass for example, I think it's a mistake (not 200 ft but 20 ft).

I was a civil engineer, for me it's unbelievable to penetrate 200 ft of this REINFORCED concrete. REINFORCED means with a lot of steel bars. Thank you for taking time to read this. Joël Deshaies. --85.170.172.37 (talk) 10:09, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

These numbers come, in part, from Global Security, which comments on them "these number seem suspiciously high and may in fact be first in feet, not meters". -- Finlay McWalterჷTalk 15:00, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The way I read this, it can penetrate 61 m of concrete rated to withstand 34 MPa of pressure, and only 7.9 m of concrete rated for 69 MPa of pressure. That is, assuming my understanding about grading of concrete is correct. So a doubling of compression strength reduces penetration by a factor of ten (roughly), which does not seem too insane.

File:USAF MOP test release crop.jpg Nominated for Deletion[edit]

An image used in this article, File:USAF MOP test release crop.jpg, has been nominated for deletion at Wikimedia Commons in the following category: Deletion requests November 2011
What should I do?

Don't panic; a discussion will now take place over on Commons about whether to remove the file. This gives you an opportunity to contest the deletion, although please review Commons guidelines before doing so.

  • If the image is non-free then you may need to upload it to Wikipedia (Commons does not allow fair use)
  • If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale then it cannot be uploaded or used.

This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 20:28, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Dead links[edit]

The links to dtra.mil and Jane's Defence do not lead to anything relevant to this article.--23.119.204.117 (talk) 22:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Cost[edit]

Where is the cost information? FixMacs (talk) 06:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Massive Ordnance Penetrator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 00:58, 14 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Massive Ordnance Penetrator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:34, 5 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified (January 2018)[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Massive Ordnance Penetrator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:17, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Title Change for Consistency[edit]

I recommend that the title of this page be changed to be in line with the format of other pages of US/Western Explosive Ordnance.

For instance - GBU-43/B MOAB, and GBU-53/B StormBreaker etc. and also so for MOP Disambiguation list, it would be listed.

The Massive Ordnance Penetrator, has a real designation of GBU-57A/B.

I suggest that the page name be changed to 'GBU-57A/B MOP', or 'GBU-57A/B Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)' with a listing under KarmaKangaroo (talk) 07:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 21 December 2022[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 00:22, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Massive Ordnance Penetrator → GBU-57A/B MOP – To be constient with page names of other Explosive Ordnance/Bombs on wikipedia, and to add this page to the ~MOP~ disambiguation page for easier finding KarmaKangaroo (talk) 08:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC) — Relisting. echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  • I recommend that the title of this page be changed to be in line with the format of other pages of US/Western Explosive Ordnance. For instance - GBU-43/B MOAB, and GBU-53/B StormBreaker etc. as well as adding to MOP Disambiguation list, so that it can be found better. The Massive Ordnance Penetrator, has a real designation of GBU-57A/B. | KarmaKangaroo (talk) 08:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Relisting comment: To allow for more discussion on KarmaKangaroo's proposal. echidnaLives - talk - edits 01:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:GBU-57A/B_MOP&oldid=1200753010"