Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

CBU-72

The CBU-72/B is a 550-pound (250 kg) unguided, free-fall cluster bomb unit originating from the , consisting of three BLU-73/B (FAE) submunitions housed in an SUU-19/B . Designed for low-altitude, high-speed delivery from via a low-drag body equipped with retarding parachutes, it disperses submunitions that each release an cloud of approximately 75 pounds (34 kg) of , forming a 60-foot (18 m) by 8-foot (2.4 m) high dispersion ignited by an air-burst typically set at 30 feet (9.1 m) above ground. This mechanism generates extreme overpressures reaching 313 , producing a sustained effective against minefields, armored vehicles, unprotected , bunkers, and troop concentrations by flattening structures, consuming oxygen, and inflicting debilitating physiological effects over wide areas. Employed by U.S. forces including during the 1991 , the CBU-72/B exemplified early technology for area-denial and psychological impact through its capacity to create vacuum-like implosions and pressure differentials, though it was retired from service by amid evolving munitions doctrines. Its submunitions' reliance on precise dispersion and ignition highlighted trade-offs in blast radius versus risks inherent to designs, contributing to broader debates on enhanced blast weapons' tactical utility against dispersed or fortified targets.

Development and Design

Origins and Development History

The CBU-72 cluster bomb emerged from U.S. military research into fuel-air explosive (FAE) technologies during the Vietnam War, where the need for munitions capable of generating sustained overpressure waves to neutralize personnel in open areas, dense vegetation, or entrenched positions drove innovation in enhanced-blast weapons. Early FAE concepts focused on dispersing aerosolized fuel clouds that could be ignited to produce devastating blast effects over larger areas than conventional high explosives, with applications including minefield breaching and area denial. The foundational CBU-55/B, employing three BLU-73/B submunitions, underwent operational testing in South Vietnam from 1971 to 1972 to validate these capabilities against real-world targets. The /B dispenser saw deployment in , marking the first combat use of volume-exploding munitions and informing refinements in submunition , dispersal mechanisms, and sequencing to maximize blast radius while minimizing premature failures. Each BLU-73/B submunition, weighing about 100 pounds, utilized or similar volatile fuels dispersed via burst charge, followed by ignition to create a and shockwave effective against soft targets and light cover. Post- evaluations highlighted limitations in delivery accuracy from high-speed , prompting modifications for improved tactical flexibility. The CBU-72/B was developed as a specialized variant of the CBU-55A/B to enable low-altitude, high-velocity drops, incorporating retardation for submunition stabilization and the MK 339 MOD 0 fuze to replace the less suitable FMU-83/B, ensuring reliable arming and dispersal from platforms like fighter-bombers. Retained in the SUU-19/B dispenser, it maintained the three BLU-73/B but prioritized anti-personnel and anti-materiel effects against minefields, troop concentrations, and soft-skinned vehicles through its mechanism. This evolution reflected iterative engineering to balance efficacy with integration constraints, without introducing guidance or elements.

Key Design Features

The CBU-72/B is an unguided, free-fall cluster bomb unit weighing 550 pounds (250 kg), configured as a fuel-air explosive (FAE) dispenser for aerial delivery against area targets. It employs an SUU-19/B dispenser casing that releases submunitions upon activation of a time fuze, typically set for dispersal at a predetermined altitude during descent. This modular dispenser design, common to the CBU series, facilitates compatibility with various aircraft hardpoints and allows for payload customization within standardized US Air Force munitions protocols. Central to its design are three BLU-73/B submunitions, each approximately 100 pounds (45 kg), which function by rupturing to disperse an cloud of mist over the target area before ignition via a secondary burster charge. The mechanism generates a sustained high-pressure and elevated temperatures, optimized for defeating soft-skinned vehicles, personnel in revetments, bunkers, and minefields through and fragmentation rather than direct kinetic impact. Submunitions are stabilized by fins for controlled descent and separation, ensuring patterned coverage over an effective radius determined by release height and velocity, though exact dispersal patterns vary with environmental factors like wind. Unlike conventional high-explosive cluster bombs, the CBU-72/B prioritizes volumetric effects over density, with the fuel-air producing a and vacuum-like phase that enhances lethality in enclosed or semi-enclosed spaces. The employs or similar volatile fuels in a pressurized canister, triggered by a dual-stage insensitive to low-velocity impacts, reducing dud rates compared to earlier prototypes but still susceptible to failure in adverse terrain. This configuration reflects a specialized in cluster munitions toward enhanced blast weapons for countering dispersed or fortified positions, though production and stockpiling ceased by the mid-1990s amid evolving doctrinal shifts.

Technical Specifications

Physical and Deployment Characteristics

The CBU-72/B is an unguided, free-fall cluster bomb unit with a total weight of 550 pounds (250 kg), comprising an SUU-19/B dispenser loaded with three BLU-73/B fuel-air explosive submunitions, each approximately 100 pounds. Its low-drag aerodynamic profile facilitates carriage and release from high-speed, low-altitude fixed-wing attack aircraft, such as those employed in close air support roles. Deployment involves gravity-assisted free-fall following release, with the SUU-19/B opening mid-descent to disperse the submunitions over the target area. The unit employs an MK 339 Mod 0 airburst , set to activate at roughly 30 feet (9.1 meters) above ground level, triggering submunition release and subsequent fuel dispersal for ignition. Each BLU-73/B submunition deploys retarding parachutes to stabilize descent, enabling formation of an aerosol cloud—approximately 60 feet (18 meters) in diameter and 8 feet (2.4 meters) high—prior to detonation. This configuration prioritizes area coverage against clustered targets like minefields or vehicle formations while minimizing aerodynamic interference during carrier aircraft maneuvers.

Submunitions and Warhead Details

The CBU-72/B cluster bomb unit features a composed of three BLU-73/B fuel-air explosive () submunitions, each designed to generate a dispersed aerosol detonation for area denial and blast effects. These submunitions, weighing approximately 100 pounds (45 kg) each, are housed in an SUU-49A/B dispenser that releases them during free-fall deployment from aircraft. The total weighs around 550 pounds (250 kg), with the FAE mechanism relying on the dispersion of a flammable liquid fuel—typically or similar hydrocarbons—into a vapor cloud that is ignited to produce a sustained high-pressure . Each BLU-73/B submunition incorporates retardation for stabilization and controlled descent, ensuring effective dispersal over a targeted area upon release from altitudes up to several thousand feet. The warhead's payload emphasizes blast rather than fragmentation, optimized for neutralizing minefields, soft-skinned vehicles, personnel concentrations, and unarmored formations by creating a lethal radius of up to 30 meters per submunition through the combustion of the fuel-air mixture. Unlike conventional high-explosive warheads, the design leverages atmospheric oxygen for detonation, resulting in a lower-order with prolonged positive-phase duration that enhances effects against enclosed or semi-enclosed targets. Fuzing for the submunitions typically employs impact or proximity mechanisms, such as the MK 339 MOD 0, to initiate fuel dispersal and ignition upon ground contact or at a predetermined height. The BLU-73/B's cylindrical casing, stabilized by fins and , measures roughly 1 meter in length and facilitates a burrowing effect prior to detonation in some configurations, amplifying soil disruption for anti-mine applications. Production and deployment details indicate integration into U.S. inventories primarily for specialized blast roles, with the submunitions' non-self-destructing nature contributing to potential risks post-dispersal.

Operational History

Initial Deployment and Testing

The CBU-72 was developed as a second-generation fuel-air explosive (FAE) cluster bomb unit, serving as an evolution of the employed sporadically during the , with key modifications including a low-drag aerodynamic casing and integrated retardation system to facilitate deployment from high-speed, low-altitude aircraft such as attack jets. This design addressed limitations in earlier dispensers by enabling safer release parameters in dynamic combat environments, though public records provide limited specifics on initial testing phases, which would have followed standard U.S. protocols for munitions validation at ranges like those at . Its initial operational deployment occurred during Operation Desert Storm in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, where U.S. forces utilized the CBU-72 against Iraqi defensive emplacements, particularly minefields and personnel in open trenches, leveraging the submunitions' expansive —approximately 60 feet (18 meters) in —for area denial and obstacle breaching. The weapon's mechanism, dispersing from each of its three BLU-73 submunitions before ignition, proved effective for psychological disruption as well as physical destruction in such scenarios. The CBU-72 remained in U.S. military inventory until its phase-out in 1996.

Use in Major Conflicts

The CBU-72 saw its primary combat deployment by during Operation Desert Storm in the Persian Gulf War, specifically in January and February 1991. Approximately 250 units were dropped against Iraqi armored formations and fortifications, leveraging the fuel-air explosive submunitions to create large vapor clouds for enhanced blast effects over open areas and personnel concentrations. Each BLU-73/B submunition, containing 34 kg of , dispersed a cloud roughly 18 meters in diameter and 2.43 meters thick upon detonation, producing overpressure waves effective against soft targets and lightly protected vehicles. This marked the weapon's most significant operational application, with its specialized area-denial role against minefields and mechanized units aligning with the campaign's emphasis on disrupting advances. No confirmed deployments occurred in later U.S. conflicts, such as the 2003 Iraq invasion, reflecting limited production and eventual withdrawal from service in the 1990s.

Military Effectiveness

Tactical Advantages and Applications

The CBU-72/B cluster bomb unit employs three BLU-73/B (FAE) submunitions, each weighing approximately 100 pounds, dispersed from an SUU-19/B dispenser to cover targeted areas with enhanced blast effects. This configuration allows for the rapid neutralization of dispersed threats over a broader footprint than single unitary munitions, leveraging the FAE mechanism's ability to disperse a aerosol cloud, ignite it, and produce a prolonged shockwave with exceeding 1,000 in confined spaces. The resulting and oxygen-depleting excel against unarmored personnel, light vehicles, and structures, where conventional high- fragments may prove less effective due to limited penetration or dispersion. Tactically, the weapon's primary advantage lies in its efficacy against fortified or concealed positions, such as bunkers and caves, where the propagates through openings and consumes internal oxygen, causing lethal and injuries even to those . It has been designed for applications including the suppression of parked , armored formations lacking heavy reactive armor, and minefields, where the can sympathetically detonate pressure-fused explosives or render areas temporarily impassable. In free-fall deployment from , it supports rapid area denial in fluid conditions, prioritizing volume of effect over pinpoint accuracy to disrupt enemy maneuvers or logistics nodes. Compared to standard fragmentation clusters, the CBU-72/B's submunitions provide a higher probability of incapacitation across open terrain due to the expansive lethal radius—potentially hundreds of meters per submunition—making it suitable for countering troop concentrations or vehicle parks without requiring dense submunition patterns. This capability was integrated into U.S. inventories through the for scenarios demanding against asymmetric or conventional forces emphasizing and . However, its non-guided nature limits employment to visual or pre-planned strikes, optimizing it for high-threat environments where standoff delivery minimizes exposure to air defenses.

Limitations and Performance Analysis

The CBU-72's , free-fall delivery system imposes significant accuracy constraints, as its effectiveness depends on the parent aircraft's release parameters, including altitude, speed, and trajectory, without onboard guidance to correct for wind drift or ballistic errors. This results in a larger (CEP) compared to precision-guided munitions, making it unsuitable for high-value, pinpoint targets and increasing the risk of off-target effects in contested environments. Fuel-air explosive (FAE) submunitions like the BLU-73/B excel in generating sustained waves effective against exposed personnel, light vehicles, minefields, and soft-skinned targets in open terrain, but their performance degrades in adverse conditions such as high winds, which can disrupt dispersion and formation, or in cluttered environments where obstacles prevent optimal mixing with air. The reliance on atmospheric oxygen for also limits utility in enclosed or low-oxygen settings, and the blast's by terrain features reduces lethality beyond a 10-20 meter radius per submunition, necessitating clustered employment for area coverage. With only three submunitions per unit, the CBU-72 provides limited footprint coverage—typically spanning tens of meters rather than hundreds—compared to dispersal-type clusters, constraining its role to tactical suppression rather than saturation denial and requiring higher sortie rates for expansive threats like armored formations. Reliability concerns inherent to legacy FAE systems, including potential fuel degradation over time or mechanical failures in parachute stabilization and ignition sequencing, contribute to unexploded ordnance risks, though the low submunition count minimizes post-strike hazards relative to high-dispersal variants; field data on dud rates remains sparse, but analogous older clusters exhibit 5-10% failure thresholds under operational stresses.

Controversies and Criticisms

Unexploded Ordnance and Post-Conflict Hazards

The CBU-72 cluster bomb unit, which dispenses three BLU-73 fuel-air explosive (FAE) submunitions, carries inherent risks of unexploded ordnance (UXO) due to potential submunition failures during deployment. Each BLU-73 submunition relies on a sequence of fuel dispersion and ignition via an embedded detonator; malfunctions in fuzing, dispersal, or ignition can result in duds that fail to explode on impact. Although specific dud rates for the BLU-73 are not publicly documented in U.S. Department of Defense testing data, comparable cluster submunitions exhibit failure rates of 2% to 6% under lot acceptance and stockpile reliability assessments, implying a low but non-negligible probability of 0 to 0.18 duds per CBU-72 deployment. Unexploded BLU-73 submunitions pose distinct hazards beyond conventional high-explosive duds, primarily from their design involving 75 pounds (34 kg) of aerosol fuel per unit. These include a functional burster charge that may detonate upon physical disturbance, ignition of residual flammable fuel from external sources like or , and over-pressurization leading to rupture from heat or impact. Unlike submunitions with hundreds of small bomblets that scatter widely and contaminate large areas, the CBU-72's limited dispersal of three larger warheads (each approximately 100 pounds) results in more localized UXO threats, often near intended targets such as minefields, bunkers, or vehicle concentrations. In post-conflict settings, such as the Persian Gulf War of 1991 where the CBU-72 was employed against armored formations and fortifications, unexploded submunitions contributed to ongoing hazards, with U.S. records indicating that UXO accounted for 80 documented casualties among coalition forces during clearance operations. FAE-specific remnants exacerbate risks in civilian areas by potentially releasing volatile fuels that heighten fire dangers or secondary blasts during salvage attempts, necessitating specialized protocols like remote or controlled burns to mitigate human health and infrastructure threats. Clearance efforts prioritize identification of parachute-retarded BLU-73 casings, which retain stability features that may delay natural degradation but increase detectability via visual or electronic means.

Debates on Indiscriminate Effects and Alternatives

Critics of fuel-air explosive (FAE) cluster munitions like the CBU-72/B contend that their mechanism—dispersing a fuel aerosol cloud that ignites to produce a prolonged blast wave with high overpressure—results in effects that are inherently difficult to control, potentially violating international humanitarian law principles of distinction and proportionality when employed near civilian populations. The submunitions' wide lethal radius, capable of penetrating enclosed spaces and causing fatalities through oxygen depletion and structural collapse up to 100-200 meters away depending on yield, raises concerns about indiscriminate harm, as the blast does not reliably differentiate between combatants and non-combatants in affected areas. Organizations such as Human Rights Watch have documented similar FAE uses in conflicts, arguing they exacerbate civilian casualties in asymmetric warfare, though specific data on CBU-72/B incidents remains limited due to its infrequent documented deployment. Military analysts and U.S. defense sources counter that clusters like the CBU-72/B are discriminate when targeted at valid military objectives, such as armored concentrations or minefields, where the area-denial effect neutralizes threats that unitary munitions might miss due to dispersion over 200-500 square meters. With only three BLU-73/B submunitions, the system exhibits a lower compared to bomblet-based clusters (e.g., CBU-87 with 202 submunitions), reducing risks, and its free-fall delivery allows for tactical flexibility against fleeting targets. Proponents emphasize empirical battlefield utility in suppressing and soft-skinned vehicles, arguing that outright bans ignore causal factors like dud rates below 5% in modern designs and proper employment doctrine, which prioritize remote areas over urban zones. Debates extend to alternatives, including unitary thermobaric warheads like the BLU-118B, which integrate payloads into precision-guided bombs for reduced via GPS/ targeting, though they sacrifice the CBU-72/B's multi-point coverage against dispersed formations. Other options, such as multiple launch systems with precision submunitions (e.g., M30/M31 GMLRS), offer similar area effects with fuzes to minimize duds, but at higher costs—up to 10 times that of unguided clusters—and logistical demands unsuitable for low-altitude aircraft delivery. U.S. policy evaluations, as outlined in Department of Defense assessments, maintain that no single alternative fully replicates the CBU-72/B's efficiency against personnel-in-cover scenarios without escalating munitions expenditure or vulnerability to air defenses. Non-proliferation advocates, however, prioritize these precision systems to align with pressures, noting that clusters' reliance on unguided dispersion amplifies risks in contested environments.

Legal and Policy Context

U.S. Military Policy

The U.S. () classifies the CBU-72 as a legacy , authorizing its retention and potential use under policies governing submunitions with failure rates exceeding modern reliability thresholds. The foundational policy on , issued via memorandum on June 19, 2008, mandated that all contain submunitions achieving at least 99% reliability (less than 1% rate) for procurements after that date, with a phase-out of non-compliant legacy systems by the end of 2019 to mitigate post-conflict hazards. However, the policy recognized an enduring military requirement for area-target engagement capabilities against massed enemy forces or armored concentrations where unitary precision-guided munitions prove inadequate. A 2017 DoD revision, issued November 28 under the administration, relaxed the 2019 phase-out deadline for legacy munitions like the CBU-72 due to the absence of fully compliant alternatives meeting operational needs across air, ground, and delivery systems. This directive permits commanders to employ such munitions only when no comparable non-cluster options exist, the target represents a clear advantage, and anticipated remains proportionate under . The policy underscores cluster munitions' doctrinal role in U.S. joint operations for suppressing area threats, including the CBU-72's fuel-air submunitions (three BLU-73/B warheads per ) optimized for against soft-skinned vehicles, personnel, or minefields in high-threat environments. Integration of the CBU-72 aligns with broader U.S. munitions doctrine emphasizing combined effects for , as articulated in joint publications, where its low-drag, parachute-retarded design enables low-altitude, high-speed delivery from like the A-10 or F-16. assessments prioritize empirical testing for reliability, though systems like the CBU-72 fall short of the 99% threshold, prompting ongoing evaluations of failure mechanisms such as dispersion inconsistencies or ignition failures in submunitions. Export controls under the further restrict CBU-72 transfers, requiring end-use assurances against indiscriminate application, reflecting policy tensions between capability retention and international pressure from the 2008 , which the U.S. has not ratified.

International Treaties and Non-Proliferation Efforts

The primary international treaty regulating cluster munitions, including dispensers like the CBU-72, is the , adopted on May 30, 2008, during the Diplomatic Conference and entering into force on August 1, 2010. The CCM comprehensively prohibits the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling, retention, and transfer of cluster munitions under any circumstances, while requiring destruction of existing stockpiles and clearance of remnants within specified timelines. As of 2024, more than 110 states are parties, representing over two-thirds of UN member states, with the treaty driven by evidence of civilian casualties from unexploded submunitions in conflicts such as (1960s–1970s) and (2001–2002). The has neither signed nor ratified the CCM, maintaining that cluster munitions provide essential area-denial capabilities against troop concentrations and armored threats where precision-guided alternatives are insufficient or unavailable. Instead, U.S. policy emphasizes technological improvements, as per a 2008 Department of Defense directive requiring new cluster munitions to achieve sub-1% failure rates to mitigate risks, though this does not apply retroactively to legacy systems like earlier CBU variants. This position has enabled ongoing transfers, including dual-purpose improved conventional munitions (DPICM) cluster bombs provided to starting in July 2023, totaling several shipments by 2024 despite opposition from CCM adherents. Non-signatories such as and similarly reject the ban, arguing it undermines legitimate defense needs without addressing asymmetric threats. Non-proliferation advocacy predates the CCM, originating from 1990s campaigns by NGOs like and the International Committee of the Red Cross, which compiled data on over 98% of recorded casualties being civilians post-conflict due to duds. The treaty's implementation includes annual meetings of states parties to monitor compliance, with 24 countries completing stockpile destruction by 2023 (e.g., , , ). However, the absence of major producers and users limits universality; efforts continue via diplomatic pressure and transparency reporting, though no binding mechanisms enforce adherence on non-parties, allowing proliferation through exports from states like the U.S. to allies. For munitions like the CBU-72, which disperses multiple submunitions, the CCM's prohibitions would apply if adopted domestically, but U.S. retention reflects prioritization of operational efficacy over humanitarian restrictions.

References

  1. [1]
    Cbu 72 cluster bomb - CAT-UXO
    This is the American CBU-72, a non-guided, free-fall, 550lb (250kg), Cluster-Bomb-Unit (CBU) dispensing the Fuel-Air-Explosive (FAE) BLU-73 submunition, ...
  2. [2]
    CBU-72/B fuel air explosive cluster bomb - Military Periscope
    The CBU-72/B contains three BLU-73/B fuel air explosive (FAE) submunitions in a SUU-19/B dispenser, and is designed for use against minefields, armored ...
  3. [3]
    Thermobaric weapons on the battlefield - Euro-sd
    Jun 28, 2024 · Thermobaric weapons, sometimes also referred to as 'enhanced blast weapons' or 'vacuum bombs', and their common subset fuel-air explosives (FAE), have been ...
  4. [4]
    [PDF] Fuel Air Explosive (FAE) systems - International Mine Action Standards
    Jul 1, 2013 · The contents of this document have been drawn from a range of open source information, and have been technically validated as far as ...
  5. [5]
    CBU-72 / BLU-73/B Fuel/Air Explosive (FAE) - GlobalSecurity.org
    Jul 7, 2011 · The 550-pound CBU-72 cluster bomb contains three submunitions known as fuel/air explosive (FAE). The submunitions weigh approximately 100 pounds.<|separator|>
  6. [6]
    CAU to CXU - Equipment Listing - Designation-Systems.Net
    Nov 2, 2024 · The CBU-72/B was identical to the CBU-55A/B except for the MK 339 MOD 0 fuze, which replaced the CBU-55A/B's FMU-83/B. CBU-56. No reliable ...
  7. [7]
    F16 - Aggressor
    The 550-pound CBU-72 cluster bomb contains three submunitions known as fuel/air explosive (FAE). The submunitions weigh approximately 100 pounds.
  8. [8]
    BAK to BSU/BSG - Equipment Listing - Designation-Systems.Net
    Nov 2, 2024 · The CBU-55( )/B used the FMU-83/B fuze, while the CBU-72/B used the MK 339 MOD 0 fuze. BLU-73( )/B series warheads were also used in the SLUFAE ...
  9. [9]
    Blu 73 submunition - CAT-UXO
    This is the American BLU-73, a large aerially-dispersed, parachute-retarded and stablsied, High-Explosive-Blast (HE-Blast), Fuel-Air-Explosive (FAE) ...
  10. [10]
    Fuel air explosive (FAE) systems - International Mine Action Standards
    Enhanced Blast Munitions (EBM) and Thermobaric muntions. There is occasionally confusion between FAE systems and other systems with similar effects. The ...Development · Weaponisation · FAE systems · Fuel Air Explosives (FAE) 4
  11. [11]
    Time to Take Stock - Human Rights Watch
    [15] The DoD report cites failure rates of 2 percent to 6 percent for most of the submunitions, based on lot acceptance testing and stockpile reliability ...
  12. [12]
    Cluster Bombs - GlobalSecurity.org
    Dec 20, 2017 · The Cluster Munitions Policy Memo (19 June 2008) directed that after 2018, cluster munitions must not produce >1% UXO; a limit that will not be ...Missing: drawbacks | Show results with:drawbacks
  13. [13]
    Information on U.S. Use of Land Mines in the Persian Gulf War
    Designation: Dispenser and mine, aircraft: CBU 78C/B; Common name: Gator (antipersonnel/antitank) - Navy version; Self-destruct, Yes/No: Yes; LM type ...Missing: adoption | Show results with:adoption
  14. [14]
    What are thermobaric weapons, and does Russia have them in ...
    Mar 9, 2022 · Also known as “vacuum bombs”, they are fearsomely destructive when used indiscriminately | The Economist explains.Missing: BLU- 73
  15. [15]
    Are Thermobaric Weapons Lawful? - Lieber Institute - West Point
    Mar 23, 2022 · Ukraine's ambassador to the United States alleged that Russia “used the vacuum bomb today, which is actually prohibited by the Geneva ...Missing: debate | Show results with:debate
  16. [16]
    Fuel-Air Explosives Backgrounder (Backgrounder, 2/15/2000)
    Feb 15, 2000 · February 2000. On December 27, 1999, Interfax reported Russian forces were using fuel-air explosive bombs in the fighting in Chechnya.Missing: CBU- | Show results with:CBU-
  17. [17]
    Cluster Munitions: What Are They, and Why Is the United States ...
    Jul 10, 2023 · The most common alternative to a cluster munition is a “unitary” warhead that has a single explosive package. As an illustration, a Multiple ...
  18. [18]
    New munitions replace cluster bomb rounds that pose danger to ...
    Officials hope a new artillery warhead that will replace a cluster-bomb round could help eliminate unwanted casualties in the future.
  19. [19]
    2008 Department of Defense (DOD) Policy on Cluster Munitions
    Dec 16, 2024 · U.S. forces simply cannot fight by design or by doctrine without holding out at least the possibility of using cluster munitions. The United ...UN Convention on... · Policy on Cluster Munitions · Revised 2017 DOD Policy on...
  20. [20]
    United States - Landmine and Cluster Munition Monitor
    A second project will attempt to integrate a “Sensor Fuzed Weapon (SFW)” (type not specified) for delivery by the GMLRS missile by 2030. Another program will “ ...<|control11|><|separator|>
  21. [21]
    [PDF] FAE Bombing for Minefield Breaching - DTIC
    The jet- rated Cluster Bomb Unit is the CBU72; its near twin is the CBU55, intended for low speed drops. The CBU72 is certified for use on the AV8B Harrier II, ...
  22. [22]
    Convention on Cluster Munitions. Dublin, 30 May 2008 - UNTC
    The Convention was concluded by the Dublin Diplomatic Conference on Cluster Munitions at Dublin on 30 May 2008. In accordance with its article 15, ...
  23. [23]
    Convention text - The Convention on Cluster Munitions
    The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) prohibits all use, stockpiling, production and transfer of cluster munitions.
  24. [24]
    Convention on Cluster Munitions
    The Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM) prohibits under any circumstances the use, development, production, acquisition, stockpiling and transfer of ...
  25. [25]
    The Convention on Cluster Munitions
    The Convention on Cluster Munitions is an international treaty of more than 100 states. The Convention prohibits all use, production, transfer and stockpiling ...Convention text · States Parties · Convention · Meetings of States Parties
  26. [26]
    2008 Convention on Cluster Munitions - ICRC
    The Convention on Cluster Munitions is a response to the suffering caused by cluster munitions, which have killed and injured many thousands of civilians.<|separator|>
  27. [27]
    Cluster Munitions: Background and Issues for Congress
    Dec 16, 2024 · Cluster munitions are air-dropped or ground-launched weapons that release a number of smaller submunitions intended to kill enemy personnel or destroy vehicles.
  28. [28]
    US Sending Cluster Munitions to Ukraine via Germany
    Jul 30, 2024 · Russia, Ukraine, and the United States have not joined the cluster munitions treaty, which prohibits the weapons. However, 112 countries, ...
  29. [29]
    Cluster Munitions: New Use, Transfers Test International Ban
    Sep 9, 2024 · Bulgaria, Slovakia, and South Africa announced the completion of the destruction of their respective cluster munition stocks in September 2023.