B61 nuclear bomb

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
B61
B-61 bomb.jpg
B61 training unit intended for ground crew. It accurately replicates the shape and size of a "live" B61 (together with its safety/arming mechanisms) but contains only inert materials
TypeNuclear bomb
Service history
Used byUnited States
Production history
DesignerLos Alamos National Laboratory
Designed1963
ManufacturerPantex Plant
Unit cost$28 million (Mod 12)[1]
Produced1968 (full production)
No. built3,155
Variants13
Specifications
Mass715 pounds (324 kg)[2]
Length141.6 inches (3.60 m)[2]
Diameter13.3 inches (34 cm)[2]

Blast yieldBelieved to be either 0.3–340 kt[3] or 0.3–400 kt[4] in the weapon's various mods.

The B61 nuclear bomb is the primary thermonuclear gravity bomb in the United States Enduring Stockpile following the end of the Cold War. It is a low to intermediate-yield strategic and tactical nuclear weapon featuring a two-stage radiation implosion design.[5]

The B61 is of the variable yield ("dial-a-yield" in informal military jargon) design with a yield of 0.3 to 340 kilotons in its various mods. It is a Full Fuzing Option (FUFO) weapon meaning it is equipped with the full range of fuzing and delivery options including air and ground burst fuzing, and free-fall, retarded free-fall and laydown delivery.[2] It has a streamlined casing capable of withstanding supersonic flight speeds, is 11 ft 8 in (3.56 m) long, with a diameter of about 13 inches (33 cm). Basic weight is about 700 pounds (320 kg), although the weights of individual weapons may vary depending on version and fuze/retardation configuration. As of 2020, it is undergoing a 12th modification. According to the Federation of American Scientists in 2012, the roughly 400 B61-12s will cost $28 million apiece.[1]

Development[edit]

A B61 bomb undergoing disassembly.
B61 bomb casing; MAPS Air Museum, North Canton, Ohio.

In 1961 a report was issued indicating Navy and Air Force interest in a lightweight bomb to replace existing weapons, but that both services had considerably different military requirements for such a weapon. However, the report believed that due to advances in technology it was possible for a single weapon to fulfil both requirements. This was followed by a report from Sandia in mid-1962, that believed that a lightweight nuclear bomb with full fuzing option was possible and that such a program could be completed in a short time-span such as by 1965 or 1966.[2]

Development of the weapon that would become the B61 was authorised in December 1962. The justification for the program was that the new weapon would modernise the nuclear arsenal, improve the capability of aircraft and simplify the nuclear weapons inventory by replacing lower-yield versions of the B28 and B43 nuclear bombs. The desired production date was June 1965.[2]

The weapon was designated the TX-61 in January 1963. Due to the short time-scales, it was decided to make maximum use of off-the-shelf components such as those developed for the B57 nuclear bomb. Environmental conditions specified included an indefinite temperature range of −60 °F (−51 °C) to 160 °F (71 °C), shocks of up to 40g, and in flight temperatures of up to 275 °F (135 °C) for up to 40 minutes. Parachute deployment was specified to produce a maximum load of 255 g (2,500 m/s2).[2]

The weapon was designed and built by the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico. Production engineering began in 1965, with the first war-reserve B61-0 weapon accepted by the AEC in December 1966. However production was halted in May 1967 for design modifications to be made before resuming in January 1968.[2] Shot Flintlock Halfbeak in June 1966 may have been a full yield test of the weapon with other tests conducted between 1963 and 1968 at the Nevada Test Site.[6]

During testing, spin motors were added to the weapon to produce a spin of 5 revolutions per second. This was to improve stability and decoupling during high speed delivery. Three alternatives to the weapon were also explored for still-classified reasons. The first alternative was halted due to its similarity to the original TX-61 design, and the Department of Defense was unfavorable to the second option which halted its exploration. The TX-61 design was ordered to "proceed along the lines" of the third alternative in May 1964, though it is unclear what that means.[2]

Total production of all versions was approximately 3,155, of which approximately 540 remain in active service, 415 in inactive service and 520 are awaiting dismantlement as of 2012.[7]

13 versions of the B61 have been designed, known as Mod 0 through Mod 12. Of these, nine have entered production. Each shares the same physics package, with different yield options. The newest variant is the Mod 11, deployed in 1997, which is a ground-penetrating bunker busting weapon. The Russian Continuity of Government facility at Kosvinsky Kamen, finished in early 1996, was designed to resist US earth-penetrating warheads and serves a similar role as the American Cheyenne Mountain Complex.[8][9] The timing of the Kosvinsky completion date is regarded as one explanation for U.S. interest in a new nuclear bunker buster and the declaration of the deployment of the Mod 11 in 1997: Kosvinsky is protected by about 1,000 feet (300 m) of granite.[10]

The B61 unguided bomb should not be confused with the MGM-1 Matador cruise missile, which was originally developed under the bomber designation B-61.

Deployment[edit]

B61 bomb components. The nuclear physics package is contained in the silver cylinder center-left

The B61 has been deployed by a variety of U.S. military aircraft. US aircraft cleared for its use have included the B-1 Lancer, B-2 Spirit, B-52 Stratofortress, F/A-18 Hornet, A-6 Intruder, F-15E Strike Eagle and F-16 Falcon. As part of NATO Nuclear Weapons Sharing British, German and Italian Panavia Tornado aircraft can also carry B61s.[3] The B61 can fit inside the F-22 Raptor's weapons bays and will also be carried by the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II.[11]

B61 tactical variants are deployed with NATO allies in Europe as part of the NATO Nuclear Weapons Sharing Program.[12] About 150 bombs are stored at six bases: Kleine Brogel in Belgium, Büchel Air Base in Germany, Aviano and Ghedi Air Base in Italy, Volkel Air Base in the Netherlands and Incirlik in Turkey.[13] NATO has agreed to vastly improve the capabilities of this force with the increased accuracy of the Mod 12 upgrade and the delivery of the F-35.[14][15] This will, for the first time, add a modest standoff capability to the B61.[16]

Design[edit]

Inert training version of a B61 in an underground Weapons Storage and Security System (WS3) vault at Volkel Air Base, Netherlands. An access panel on the warhead is open, showing the interface for actions such as PAL (safety/arming) and variable yield setting
Internal nuclear components of the B61 bomb. The bomb was assembled at the Burlington AEC Plant and Pantex.

The B61 is a variable yield ("dial-a-yield" colloquially) dual use tactical and strategic bomb equipped with Full Fuzing Option (FUFO)[2] designed for external carriage by high-speed aircraft. It has a streamlined casing capable of withstanding supersonic flight speeds. The original B61-0 weapon was 141.6 inches (3.60 m) long, with a diameter of 13.3 inches (340 mm) and a basic weight of 715 pounds (324 kg)[2] with most later weapons having approximately the same dimensions and weight,[3] except for the Mod 11 version which has a weight of approximately 1,200 pounds (540 kg).[17]

Ground operations[edit]

The B61 is armed by ground-based personnel via an access panel located on the side of the bomb, which opens to reveal 9 dials, 2 sockets and a T-handle which manually triggers the "command disable" function. One of the sockets is a MC4142 "strike enable" plug which must be inserted in order to complete critical circuits in the safety/arming and firing mechanisms. The other socket is the PAL connector located in the top right hand corner of the arming panel, which has 23 pins marked with alphabetic letter codes.[18]

The B61 also features a "command disable" mechanism, which functions as follows: after entering the correct 3-digit numeric code it is then possible to turn a dial to "DI" and pull back a T-shaped handle which comes away in the user's hand. This action releases a spring-loaded firing pin which fires the percussion cap on an MC4246A thermal battery, powering it up. Electrical power from the thermal battery is sufficient to "fry" the internal circuitry of the bomb, destroying critical mechanisms without causing detonation. This makes the bomb incapable of being used. Any B61 which has had the command disable facility used must be returned to Pantex for repair.[18]

Fuzing and delivery[edit]

As part of its full fuzing option capability, the B61 can be set for airburst and groundburst detonation, and freefall, retarded freefall and laydown delivery, the latter two delivery options being achieved through the use of a parachute to slow the weapon down during release from the delivery aircraft.[2] Only the Mod 0 to 10 versions of the B61 are equipped with a parachute retarder (currently a 24-ft (7.3 m) diameter nylon/Kevlar chute). This offers the aircraft a chance to escape the blast in its retarded delivery modes, or allows the weapon to survive impact with the ground in laydown delivery mode. Contact preclusion can also be selected by the pilot. The weapon can be released at speeds up to Mach 2 and altitudes as low as 50 feet (15 m). In one of the weapon's laydown modes, it detonates 31 seconds after weapon release.[19]

The Mod 11 is a hardened penetration bomb with a reinforced casing and a delayed-action fuze, this allows the weapon to penetrate several metres into the ground before detonating, damaging fortified structures further underground. Developed from 1994, the Mod 11 went into service in 1997 replacing the older megaton-yield B53 bomb. About 50 Mod 11 bombs have been produced, their warheads converted from Mod 7 bombs. At present, the primary carrier for the Mod 11 is the B-2 Spirit.[17]

Mods[edit]

The B61 has 13 variants, referred to as Mod 0 through Mod 12.

Mod Status Date Number produced Role Yields PAL type Notes
0 Retired 1968 to 1996[6][3] 500[4] Tactical[20] 10 to 300 kt[4] Cat B[6] First production weapons
1 Retired 1969 to 1990[6] 700[4] Strategic[20] 10 to 340 kt[4] None[6][4]
2 Retired 1975 to 1997[6] 235[4] Tactical[20] 10 to 150 kt[4] Cat D[4]
3 Active 1979 to present[3] 545[4] Tactical[4] 0.3, 1.5, 60, or 170 kt[3] Cat F[4]
4 Active 1979 to present[3] 695[4] Tactical[4] 0.3, 1.5, 10, or 45 kt[3] Cat F[4]
5 Retired 1977 to 1997[6] 265[4] Tactical[21][20] 10 to 150 kt[6] Cat D[4]
6 Never entered production 10-150 kt[4] Cat D[4] Conversion of Mod 0[6]
7 Active 1985 to present[3] 600[4] Strategic Allegedly 4 yield settings, including 10, or 340 kt.[3] Cat D[4] Conversion of Mod 1, conversion completed by April 1990[6]
8 Never entered production 10 to 150 kt[4] Cat D[4] Conversion of Mod 2 and Mod 5[6]
9 Never entered production 10 to 300 kt[4] Cat F[4] Conversion of Mod 0[6]
10 Inactive stockpile 1990 to present[3] 215[4] Tactical 0.3, 5, 10, or 80 kt[3] Cat F[4] Remanufactured from retired Pershing II W85 warheads.[6]
11 Active 1997 to present 50[4] Tactical/Strategic Disputed, either same as Mod 7[3] or 400 kt[4] Cat F[4] Conversion of Mod 7, earth penetrating weapon.[6]
12 In development 2019 onwards 400 to 500 weapons planned Tactical/Strategic[22][23][24] 0.3, 1.5, 10, or 50 kt[4][25] Cat F[4] Conversion of Mod 4[4]

indicates the mod had been converted into another mod or had been dismantled by this date in lieu of a publicly known retirement date.

B61 Mod 3 and 4[edit]

The B61 Mod 3 and 4 bombs do not contain beryllium.[26]

B61 Mod 5[edit]

The B61 Mod 5 bomb contained beryllium. A 1978 dated report on reducing or substituting beryllium in nuclear weapons noted that the B61-5 could probably be replaced by the B61 Mod 3.[26]

B61 Mod 6 and 8[edit]

The B61 Mod 6 and Mod 8 bombs were developed for use by the US Navy beginning in March 1987[27] and cancelled at the end of the Cold War.[4] The weapons weighed 350 kilograms (770 lb), had a length of 3,597 millimetres (141.6 in) and a diameter of 338 millimetres (13.3 in), and were one-point safe, used insensitive high explosives (IHE) in their primary stages and utilized enhanced electrical safety (EES).[28]

The weapons were to be built by converting existing B61-0, -2 and -5 weapons into Mod 6 and 8 weapons and the weapons were to use B61-7 weapon parts where possible.[29] By mass, the largest deviations from the B61-7 were the Acorn assembly, MC4137 TSSG (trajectory sensing signal generator) and the JTA (described as "ballast for WR").[30]

The laydown mode, positions G and H provide a delay of 30 seconds, and in position J a delay of 80 seconds is provided.[31]

Electrical systems[edit]

The weapon's computer was the MC4139 Programmer, of which two are independently used on independent channels, and is identical to the programmer used on the B61-7.[32] The MC3656 Main Battery is identical to the battery used on the B61-7 and is thermally operated, providing 120 seconds of power for the weapon,[33] but initial power is supplied by the MC2238 Pulse Batteries which are activated by the weapon's pullout switches during separation from the aircraft.[34]

The weapon contained two neutron generators for initiation,[35] used a 2400 volt 0.6 μF capacitor for neutron generator firing and a 3300 volt 2.0 μF capacitor for the firing set.[36] If neither the radar fuze or the contact crystals actuated, the weapon would detonate at 120 seconds from arming.[37]

The weapons were to initially use the MC4175 Trajectory Sensing Signal Generators which is identical to the TSSG found in the B61-7, but starting from 1991, the Mod 6 was to get a new MC4137 Trajectory Sensing Signal Generator. The MC4175 stored the arming signal for the trajectory stronglink it its memory, so it featured a pair of rolamite acceleration switches designed to prevent the possibility of the signal being transferred to the stronglink before the rolamites were actuated by the spinning of the weapon in flight.[38] The MC4137 instead is provided the unique signal from the MC4139 Programmer, which stores it in a volatile memory that erases after approximately seven seconds of lost power meaning that without intent from the MC4139 and continuously applied power the MC4137 does not know how to arm the safelink.[39]

Stronglink switches and weaklinks[edit]

IUQS for MC2969 Intent Stronglink Switch

The weapon was to feature a number of weapon stronglinks. Stronglinks are part of the weapon's safety systems and are designed to be robust enough that they can survive abnormal environments long enough for the weapon's weaklinks to fail. This requires weak and stronglinks to be colocated so they are exposed to the same environmental conditions in an accident.[40]

The first stronglink was the MC2969 Intent Stronglink Switch which was also used on the B61-3, -4 and -7, W78, W80 and B83 weapons. The MC2969 was located between exclusion region 1 and 2, and controlled all firing circuit connections between these two regions. It consisted of a 14-pin ceramic-insulated bank of switches that would close upon the receipt of the proper intent unique signal (IUQS) to its electromechanical decoder. Receipt of the wrong signal would lock the MC2969 in the open position until a specific unlock signal was received.[41]

The second stronglink was the MC2935 Trajectory Stronglink Switch of which there were two, one for each channel of the weapon's firing set. Like the MC2969, it mechanically locked if it received the wrong input signals, but unlike the MC2969 it must be manually unlocked which can only be done at the factory.[42] Signals for the MC2935 come from either the two MC4175s or one MC4137 Trajectory Sensing Signal Generators.[35]

A third stronglink existed inside the first exclusion region of the weapon and is involved in weapon arming. The detail of the system are still classified.[43]

W61[edit]

W61 Nuclear Earth Penetrator Warhead

A W61 earth penetrating warhead variant with a yield of 340 kt was developed for the MGM-134 Midgetman small ICBM which was cancelled at the end of the Cold War.[4]

Pits[edit]

A declassified technical report on the automation of pit handling at Pantex indicates that the B61-2 and B61-5 share a common pit design, as do the B61-3, B61-10 and W85. The B61-0 and B61-4 do not share a pit with any other weapon. As the B61-7 was a retrofit of the B61-1 and the B61-11 was a retrofit of the B61-7, they presumably share a common pit.[44]

Cost[edit]

In May 2010 the National Nuclear Security Administration asked Congress for $40 million to redesign the bomb to enable the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II to carry the weapon internally by 2017.[45] This version is designated Mod 12.[46] The four hundred Mod 12 bombs will be used by both tactical aircraft (such as the F-35) and strategic aircraft (such as the B-2) and the Tail Subassembly (TSA) will give them Joint Direct Attack Munition levels of accuracy, allowing the fifty kiloton warhead to have strategic effects from all carrying aircraft.[47] However, refitting the 400 weapons is now expected to cost over $10 billion.[48] The Mod 12 tail assembly contract was awarded to Boeing on November 27, 2012 for $178 million.[49] Boeing will use their experience with the Joint Direct Attack Munition to yield JDAM-equivalent accuracy in a nuclear bomb.[50] This contract is only the first part of the billion-dollar expense of producing and applying the tail kits, over and above the $10 billion cost to refurbish the warheads.[51] The Mod 12 uses an internal guidance system and can glide to its target. On 1 July 2015, the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) conducted the first of three flight tests of the Mod 12 tail kit assembly.[52]

According to the Federation of American Scientists in 2012, the roughly 400 B61-12s will cost $28 million apiece.[1]

Mod 12[edit]

As of 2013 the Pentagon saw the B83 nuclear bomb as a "relic of the Cold War," believing that deploying a megaton-yield gravity bomb, the highest level nuclear weapon left in the U.S. inventory, to Europe is "inconceivable" at this point. It also can only be carried by the B-2 bomber, and integrating it onto additional aircraft would be costly. The Mod 12 upgrade is being pursued as a forward-deployed tactical/strategic nuclear weapon to protect NATO and Asian allies since it can be used from dual-capable fighter aircraft, as well as planned to arm the F-35 and B-21 Raider, and its lower yield options make it more flexible with less collateral effects. Recapitalizing the B61 is hoped to lead to the retirement of the B83, resulting in the elimination of the last megaton-yield U.S. bomb and leave the B61-series as the only U.S. gravity nuclear bomb.[53]

In 2013, the Pentagon and NNSA stated that if B61 refurbishment did not begin by 2019, components in the existing weapons could begin to fail.[54] In 2013 Tom Collina of the Arms Control Association said that the new development could complicate arms control efforts with Russia.[55]

In 2014, Congress slashed funding for the project and called for alternates to be studied.[56] In January 2014, former Air Force Chief of Staff Norton A. Schwartz stated that the Mod 12 nuclear bomb upgrade would have enhanced accuracy and a lower yield with less fallout compared to previous versions of the weapon. Accuracy has not been a guarantee for air-dropped nuclear weapons, so consequently large warheads were needed to effectively impact a target; the Mod 11 nuclear earth-penetrator is accurate to 110–170 meters from the desired detonation location, so it requires a 400-kiloton warhead. The Mod 12 is accurate to 30 meters from a target and only requires a 50-kiloton warhead. Schwartz believes that greater accuracy would both improve the weapon and create a different target set it can be useful against. An example is the higher-yield Mod 11's role of attacking underground bunkers that need a ground burst to create a crater and destroy it through the shockwave. A 50-kiloton yield detonating on the ground produces a crater with a radius of 30–68 meters, depending on the density of the surface, effectively putting the bunker within the circular error probability.[57]

In 2014 critics said that a more accurate and less destructive nuclear weapon would make leaders less cautious about deploying it, while Schwartz said it would deter adversaries more because the U.S. would be more willing to use it in situations where necessary. The improved accuracy would make it more effective than the previous Mod 3/4 currently deployed to the continent. F-16 and Panavia Tornado aircraft cannot interface with the new bomb due to electronic differences, but NATO countries buying the F-35 would be able to utilize it.[57] The first flight test for an inert Mod 12 was conducted in 2015, with a second successful test in August 2017.[58][52]

In November 2015, a test of the Mod 12 was conducted where the bomb penetrated underground, showing its potential as a nuclear earth-penetrator. Although ground penetration was not an objective of the Mod 12 upgrade, this could allow it to take up the penetrating mission of the Mod 11, which has no life-extension planned and will expire in the 2030s. Being able to penetrate underground increases its effectiveness against buried targets, as it more efficiently transmits explosive energy through enhanced ground-shock coupling, allowing its max yield of 50 kilotons underground to have the equivalent surface-burst capability of a 750 kt to 1.25 megaton weapon. The Mod 12's increased accuracy and earth-penetration capability allows a lower strike yield to be selected, reducing radioactive fallout risk, potentially making it more attractive to military planners.[59] However the Mod 12 does not have the reinforced structure of the Mod 11 which will be retained in service for the ground penetrating mission.[60]

The Mod 12 Life Extension Program continued in 2018 and on 29 June 2018 two successful non-nuclear system qualification flight tests at Tonopah Test Range were reported.[61] In October 2018, the Mod 12 guided tail-kit assembly received Milestone C approval to enter the production phase; the TKA went through the traditional test program in under 11 months, achieving a 100% success rate for all 31 bomb drops.[62] The B61-12 nuclear bomb completed its successful flight tests with the US Air Force’s F-15E in June 2020. It was dropped from above 25,000ft and was in the air for approximately 55 seconds before hitting the target.[63]

See also[edit]

B61s on a bomb rack

References[edit]

  1. ^ a b c Kristensen, Hans (2013-01-16). "B61-12: NNSA's Gold-Plated Nuclear Bomb Project". Archived from the original on 16 January 2013. Retrieved 2012-07-26.
  2. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l History of the TX-61 Bomb (Report). Sandia National Laboratories. August 1971.
  3. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m "The B61 Bomb". Nuclear weapon archive. 9 January 2007. Archived from the original on 27 February 2009. Retrieved 2018-03-28.
  4. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z aa ab ac ad ae af ag ah ai Kristensen, Hans; Norris, Robert (27 November 2015). "The B61 family of nuclear bombs". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. 70 (3): 79–84. doi:10.1177/0096340214531546. S2CID 146744069.
  5. ^ Sublette, Carey (9 January 2007). "The B61 Bomb". Nuclear Weapon Archive. Archived from the original on 27 February 2009. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  6. ^ a b c d e f g h i j k l m n Norris, Robert; Kristensen, Hans; Handler, Joshua (January 2003). The B61 family of bombs (Report). Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists January/February 2003. pp. 74–76. doi:10.2968/059001020.
  7. ^ "The B61 Life Extension Program" (PDF). Union of Concerned Scientists. May 2013. Archived (PDF) from the original on 16 June 2015. Retrieved 8 July 2017.
  8. ^ "Window on Heartland: Geopolitical notes on Eastern Europe, the Caucasus and Central Asia". February 2012. Archived from the original on April 24, 2013.
  9. ^ Gertz, William ‘Bill’ (April 1, 1997), "Moscow builds bunkers against nuclear attack", The Washington Times, Global security, archived from the original on March 9, 2014, retrieved May 12, 2014.
  10. ^ "Kosvinsky Mountain, Kos'vinskiy Kamen', Gora, MT 59°31'00"N 59°04'00"E, Russia". Global Security. Weapons of mass destruction. Archived from the original on 2014-08-05. Retrieved 2014-05-12.
  11. ^ Grant, Rebecca. "Nukes for NATO." Archived 2010-12-07 at the Wayback Machine Air Force Magazine, July 2010
  12. ^ "The Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists", 26 October 2013
  13. ^ "Eindelijk zwart op wit: er liggen Amerikaanse kernwapens in België" Archived 2019-07-16 at the Wayback Machine
  14. ^ Kristensen, Hans M. "New Report: US and Russian Non-Strategic Nuclear Weapons." Archived 2013-01-30 at the Wayback Machine Federation of American Scientists, 2 May 2012.
  15. ^ Borger, Julian (21 April 2013). "Obama accused of nuclear U-turn as guided weapons plan emerges". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 4 November 2013. Retrieved 11 June 2013.
  16. ^ Kristensen, Hans M. (30 October 2013). "Capabilities of B61-12 Nuclear Bomb Increase Further". Federation of American Scientists. Archived from the original on 2013-11-01. Retrieved 30 October 2013.
  17. ^ a b "the nuclear information project: the B61-11". Nukestrat.com. Archived from the original on 2012-09-10. Retrieved 2012-06-09.
  18. ^ a b "Glenn's Computer Museum-B61 Preflight Controller". Glennsmuseum.com. Archived from the original on 2012-04-25. Retrieved 2012-07-08.
  19. ^ Developing and Producing the B-61. US Department of Energy. 1970s. Event occurs at 11m 56s. Archived from the original on 12 December 2016. Retrieved 10 July 2017.
  20. ^ a b c d Final Development Report for the B61-7 Bomb (Report). Sandia National Laboratories. 1985.
  21. ^ R E Kidder (26 July 1991). Report to Congress: Assessment of the Safety of US Nuclear Weapons and Related Nuclear Test Requirements (PDF) (Report). Lawrence Livermore National Lab.
  22. ^ "B61-12 Life Extension Program" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2017-05-15. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  23. ^ "B61-12: The New Guided Standoff Nuclear Bomb" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on 2017-12-02. Retrieved 2018-02-03.
  24. ^ Weiner, Sarah (2014-01-27). Nuclear Scholars Initiative: A Collection of Papers from the 2013 Nuclear Scholars Initiative. ISBN 9781442227989.
  25. ^ "Video Shows Earth-Penetrating Capability of B61-12 Nuclear Bomb". Archived from the original on 2016-06-30. Retrieved 2016-06-04.
  26. ^ a b Special Task Group Report - Beryllium: Substitute Materials for Be and BeO in Nuclear Weapons Volume II - Impact on United States Department of Energy National Defense Programs of proposed Department of Labor (Occupational Health and Safety Administration) Beryllium Standards (Report). United States Department of Energy. 1 May 1978. Of the LASL devices currently entering stockpile, the B61-3 and B61-4 do not contain beryllium. The B61-5 does, but the B61-3 could probably be substituted for it.
  27. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs (Report). Sandia National Laboratories and Los Alamos National Labs. May 1989. p. 9. SAND88-2986.
  28. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 9.
  29. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 11.
  30. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 16.
  31. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 29.
  32. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 21.
  33. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 26.
  34. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 31.
  35. ^ a b Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 17.
  36. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 36.
  37. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 37.
  38. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 22.
  39. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 48-50.
  40. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 41.
  41. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 18.
  42. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 19, 43.
  43. ^ Interim Development Report for the B61-6,8 Bombs, p. 42-43.
  44. ^ Fahrenholtz, Jill C (September 1997). Development of an Automated Pit Packaging System for Pantex (PDF) (Report). Sandia National Labs. p. 15. doi:10.2172/534478. S2CID 107183716. SAND 97-2163. Archived from the original (PDF) on 2020-02-15. Retrieved 2021-02-09.
  45. ^ "NNSA Seeks $40M for Nuke Refurbishment Study", Global security news wire, May 18, 2010, archived from the original on July 6, 2010, retrieved May 19, 2010.
  46. ^ Norris, Robert S.; Kristensen, Hans M. (2011), "US tactical nuclear weapons in Europe" (PDF), Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, Sage pub, 67 (1): 64–73, doi:10.1177/0096340210393931, S2CID 54186148, archived (PDF) from the original on 2011-06-03, retrieved 2011-01-18.
  47. ^ Kristensen, Hans. "B61 LEP: Increasing NATO Nuclear Capability and Precision Low-Yield Strikes." Archived 2016-09-15 at the Wayback Machine FAS, 15 June 2011.
  48. ^ Kristensen, Hans. "B61-12: NNSA’s Gold-Plated Nuclear Bomb Project." 26 July 2012Archived 2013-01-16 at the Wayback Machine FAS, 26 July 2012.
  49. ^ Boeing to Upgrade B61 Nuclear Free Fall Bomb, Deagel, November 27, 2012, archived from the original on April 6, 2013, retrieved November 28, 2012.
  50. ^ Boeing Receives $178 Million Contract for B61 Tail Kit Assembly, Media room, archived from the original on 2012-12-03, retrieved 2012-12-02.
  51. ^ Kristensen, Hans. "$1 Billion for a Nuclear Bomb Tail." Archived 2013-07-18 at the Wayback Machine FAS, 12 April 2013.
  52. ^ a b US conducts first flight test of guided B61-12 nuclear bomb, Flight global, 10 July 2015, archived from the original on 11 July 2015, retrieved 10 July 2015.
  53. ^ "Cold War Relic", Air force mag, 4 November 2013, archived from the original on 9 November 2013, retrieved 23 January 2014.
  54. ^ Reif, Kingston (2013-10-25). "Pentagon Pushes for Billions to Refurbish Nuclear Bombs". Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists. Archived from the original on October 29, 2013. Retrieved October 25, 2013.
  55. ^ Rabechault, Mathieu (6 November 2013). "US to spend billions 'modernizing' nuclear arsenal". AFP. Archived from the original on 19 November 2013. Retrieved 7 November 2013.
  56. ^ Guarino, Douglas P. (16 January 2014). "Nuclear Security and Omnibus Legislation: What's Up and What's Down". Nuclear Threat Initiative. Global Security Newswire. Archived from the original on 18 January 2014. Retrieved 16 January 2014.
  57. ^ a b "General Confirms Enhanced Targeting Capabilities of B61-12 Nuclear Bomb", Federation of American Scientists, Fas, 23 January 2014, archived from the original on 22 December 2015, retrieved 12 December 2015.
  58. ^ Keck, Zachary (13 July 2015). "America and Russia Test New Tactical Nuclear Missiles". National interest. The National Interest. Retrieved 13 July 2015.
  59. ^ Video Shows Earth-Penetrating Capability of Mod 12 Nuclear Bomb Archived 2016-06-30 at the Wayback Machine - Fas.org, 14 January 2016
  60. ^ Miles, Aaron (18 May 2019). "Is the Air Force Really Testing an 'Earth-Penetrating' Nuclear Bomb?". nationalinterest.org. Center for the National Interest. Archived from the original on 7 June 2019. Retrieved 7 June 2019.
  61. ^ NNSA, Air Force complete successful end-to-end Mod 12 Life Extension Program flight tests at Tonopah Test Range Archived 2018-07-02 at the Wayback Machine GlobalSecurity.org
  62. ^ US Air Force's Mod 12 nuclear bomb new guided tail-kit assembly enters production phase Archived 2018-12-15 at the Wayback Machine. Air Recognition. 10 December 2018.
  63. ^ "B61-12". June 2020.

External links[edit]