Maps show devastating impact of America’s new super-nuke on Russian capital: B61-13 ‘gravity bomb’ has 24 times more power than the one dropped on Hiroshima

Maps have been released showing the destruction that could be unleashed if a new type of nuclear bomb developed by the Biden administration were dropped on the Russian capital.

The Pentagon announced this week that it is developing a new nuclear “gravity bomb” that is 24 times more powerful than the atomic bomb detonated in Hiroshima.

The B61-13 is the 13th variant of the B61 family of ‘gravity bombs’, which fall on their target instead of being guided.

Gravity bombs are unguided, but this new one would have a tail kit that helps with targeting and ensures greater accuracy.

A simulation using Nukemap estimates that a 360-kiloton B61-13 bomb detonating over Moscow would result in hundreds of thousands of casualties, nearly a million injuries and extensive damage to the city stretching for miles around.

Although the exact explosive power of the B61-13 has not yet been revealed, the new bomb is likely to have the same explosive yield as its Cold War predecessor, the B61-7, which is estimated at 360,000 tons and delivers a blast radius of about 35 miles.

If the B61-13 were to fall over Moscow, it would likely cause significant destruction with an estimated 300,000 deaths and 870,000 injuries.

Everything within a half mile radius of the bomb’s detonation site would be vaporized by a fireball, the blast would destroy buildings and probably kill everyone else within a mile radius.

Those within a 2 mile radius of the blast site would also suffer from high levels of radiation, likely killing them within a month. Another 15 percent of survivors would die from cancer later in life.

Those inside buildings would likely fare no better if fires ignite, buildings collapse, and “universal” injuries occur.

The blast would create a huge fireball with a radius of more than four miles hurricane-force winds exceeding 220 degrees Fahrenheit.

Experts believe the fire would also burn for more than six hours, creating a deadly environment covering more than 100 square kilometers — an area about 10 to 15 times larger than what was burned in Hiroshima, according to Make peacea human rights organization.

First of all, the new bomb is intended as a deterrent and at the same time offers ‘additional options’ against specific military targets.

The Pentagon explained that the development of the powerful new weapon is intended to “strengthen deterrence of adversaries and security of allies” by providing President Biden with “additional options against certain tougher, broader-area military targets.”

Assistant Secretary of Defense for Space Policy John Plumb explained the development of building a new bomb, describing it as “reflects a changing security environment and growing threats from potential adversaries.”

“The United States has a responsibility to continue to assess and deploy the capabilities we need to credibly deter and, if necessary, respond to strategic attacks, and to reassure our allies,” he said.

The project essentially places the same B61-7 warhead in a new casing.

Unlike the older model, the new bomb will have modern safety and control features and an improved tail kit to help it fall straight and hit the target.

The earlier warhead was produced from the 1980s to the early 1990s before being discontinued under the George W. Bush administration.

The Obama administration approved development of the B61-12, with the first unit produced in November 2021.

‘The B61-12 program is controversial because of its high price tag. In 2010, the cost was estimated at $4 billion, but the National Nuclear Security Administration’s estimate rose to $8 billion in 2012, and the Defense Department put the cost at $10.4 billion in 2013, according to a report from the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists.

“The new guided tail kit will cost an additional $1.8 billion, and integration into five different aircraft will cost hundreds of millions more.

The B61-12 program is now probably the most expensive nuclear bomb program in American history.

The B61-13 will contain two main assemblies: the bomb assembly and the tail kit guide.

The tail kit is equipped with four maneuverable fins and tail suction.

“The B61-13 would take advantage of the current, established manufacturing capabilities that support the B61-12 and would incorporate the modern safety, security and accuracy features of the B61-12,” the DoD shared in the October announcement.

“The B61-13 could be delivered by modern aircraft, strengthening deterrence of adversaries and assurance of allies and partners by providing the President with additional options against certain tougher, larger-area military targets.

“It would replace some of the B61-7s in the current nuclear stockpile and have a yield comparable to the B61-7, which is higher than the B61-12.”

However, officials noted in the announcement that no specific threats led to the development of B61-13.

The US currently has approximately 3,700 nuclear warheads, of which 1,419 have been deployed.

The US is now pursuing its most ambitious nuclear weapons efforts since World War II.

The country will spend more than $750 billion over the next decade to renew almost every part of its aging nuclear defense, because some systems and components are more than 50 years old.

Last month it emerged that China has amassed at least 500 operational nuclear warheads, which was more than the US previously thought.

In its annual China Military Power Report, the Pentagon said Beijing had accelerated production and expected it to double by the end of the decade.

The revelation was a further blow to relations between the world’s two largest economies, which are already at their lowest point in years.

In addition to China’s nuclear surge, tensions have increased over a range of issues, including Beijing’s aggressiveness toward Taiwan, its military activities in the South China Sea, trade and human rights.

Beijing has committed to a ‘no first use’ nuclear weapons policy, meaning it would never launch a pre-emptive strike.

The US does not adhere to a ‘no first use’ policy and says nuclear weapons would only be used in ‘extreme circumstances’.