What Is B61-13? US Unveils New Nuclear Gravity Bomb Ahead of Schedule
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
The U.S. has completed the assembly of its new-generation B61-13 nuclear aerial bomb nearly a year ahead of schedule, the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) announced.
The B61-13 is the latest variant of the Cold War-era B61 gravity bomb, featuring a higher maximum yield than its predecessor, the B61-12. Proposed in 2023 during the Biden administration, the upgrade is part of the Pentagon's broader push to modernize the nation's aging nuclear arsenal.
Why It Matters
Secretary of Energy Chris Wright hailed the achievement, saying it signals to Washington's adversaries that the U.S. is ready to confront today's global challenges from a position of strength and security.
What To Know
The B61-13 is a tactical guided bomb designed to destroy hardened, deeply buried military targets. It is part of the B61 series, a key part of the existing U.S. stockpile, designed to be air-dropped and detonated at or near the target.
The bomb can only be delivered by strategic bomber aircraft, with deployment planned from bases within the continental U.S, the DOE said.
Assembly of the first unit of the B61-13 was completed almost a year ahead of target, and less than two years after the program was first announced, making it "one of the most rapidly developed and fielded weapons since the Cold War," the DOE said.
The B61-13 incorporates the safety, security, and accuracy features of the B61-12 but with a higher yield "oriented to the defeat of certain harder and large-area military targets."
"The B61-13 will provide the President with additional nuclear options against certain harder and large-area military targets; separately, the Department of Defense will coordinate with NNSA to complete and implement a comprehensive strategy for the defeat of hard and deeply buried targets," the DOE said.
In 2023, the Pentagon said the weapon would "strengthen deterrence of adversaries and assurance of allies and partners by providing the President with additional options against certain harder and large-area military targets."
The B61-13 would have an explosive yield comparable to the B61-7 variant, which has maximum yield of 360 kilotons—more than 22 times the explosive force of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima during Word War II. However, it still falls short of the nation's most powerful nuclear weapon, the 1.2-megaton B83, Newsweek previously reported.
Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said in a statement that modernizing America's nuclear stockpile "is essential to delivering President Trump's peace through strength agenda."
"The remarkable speed of the B61-13's production is a testament to the ingenuity of our scientists and engineers and the urgency we face to fortify deterrence in a volatile new age," he added.
What People Are Saying
Representative Ronny Jackson, a Texas Republican, said on X (formerly Twitter): "It's a privilege to represent Amarillo, home to the Pantex Plant, in Congress.
"Under President Trump, we're strengthening America's nuclear arsenal. I'm glad the B61-13 Life Extension Program is ahead of schedule—despite the Biden administration's attempt to cut hundreds of millions of dollars in funding for Pantex!
"Thanks to Energy Secretary Chris Wright for helping stamp the first production unit!"
U.S. Secretary of Energy Chris Wright said on X: "It was my honor today to stamp the first completed B61-13 unit at the @PantexPlant! This achievement signals to our adversaries and allies alike that the U.S. is prepared to meet the challenges of today's environment from a position of strength and security."
The DOE's National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) said on X: "NNSA has completed the First Production Unit of the B61-13 nuclear gravity bomb @PantexPlant. This is a major accomplishment for stockpile modernization. Thanks to the entire NNSA team who worked to achieve this milestone nearly a year ahead of schedule."
What Happens Next
The DOE's NNSA is working on six other warhead modernization programs "to ensure the reliability and effectiveness of the nuclear stockpile."
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
San Francisco leaders blast Trump for trying to erase gay rights icon Harvey Milk's name from ship
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — Leaders in San Francisco are blasting the Trump administration for stripping the name of gay rights activist Harvey Milk from a U.S. naval ship, and especially during Pride Month, when people gather to celebrate the LGBTQ+ community. Milk is a revered figure in San Francisco history, a former city supervisor and gay rights advocate who was fatally shot along with Mayor George Moscone in 1978 by disgruntled former supervisor Dan White. Just last month, California marked what would have been Milk's 95th birthday with proclamations heralding his authenticity, kindness and calls for unity. He served for four years in the Navy during the Korean War, before he was forced out for being gay. Milk later moved to San Francisco, where he became one of the first out gay politicians in the world with his election to the Board of Supervisors in 1977. Cleve Jones, a close friend and LGBTQ+ activist, dismissed the renaming as an attempt by the Trump administration to distract the American public from far more serious concerns, including the ongoing war in Gaza and looming cuts to Medicaid and Social Security. "Yes, this is cruel and petty and stupid, and yes, it's an insult to my community," Jones said. 'I would be willing to wager a considerable sum that American families sitting around that proverbial kitchen table this evening are not going to be talking about how much safer they feel now that Harvey's name is going to be taken off that ship.' The Pentagon has not confirmed news of the renaming, a highly rare move, but unnamed officials say the change was laid out in an internal memo. It is in keeping with attempts by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and the broader Trump administration to purge all programs, policies, books and social media mentions of references to diversity, equity and inclusion. A new name has not yet been selected for the USNS Harvey Milk. Milk's nephew, Stuart Milk, said in a phone call Wednesday that he and the Harvey Milk Foundation have reached out to the Pentagon, which confirmed there is a proposed name change on the table. 'And our hope is that the recommendation is put aside, but if it's not, it will be a rallying cry not just for our community but for all minority communities,' said Stuart Milk, who is executive chair of the foundation, adding that his uncle always said that gay rights, and those of other marginalized communities, required constant vigilance. 'So I don't think he'd be surprised," Milk said, 'but he'd be calling on us to remain vigilant, to stay active.' Elected officials, including former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and California Gov. Gavin Newsom, called the move a shameful attempt to erase the contributions of LGBTQ+ people and an insult to fundamental American values of honoring veterans and those who worked to build a better country. Pelosi and Newsom are both San Francisco Democrats. Newsom took aim at Hegseth, calling the attempt 'A cowardly act from a man desperate to distract us from his inability to lead the Pentagon" on the social platform X. The USNS Harvey Milk was named in 2016 by then-Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who said at the time that the John Lewis-class of oilers would be named after leaders who fought for civil and human rights. Sean Penn portrayed Milk in an Oscar-winning 2008 movie depicting his audacious rise in politics and his death by a supervisor who cast the sole "no" vote on his legislation banning discrimination based on sexual orientation. While the renaming attempt is rare, the Biden administration also changed the names of two Navy ships in 2023 as part of the effort to remove Confederate names from U.S. military installations.
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal judge delivers one-two punch to Trump in Abrego Garcia case
A federal judge granted a request Wednesday from more than a dozen major news outlets and publishers to unseal certain records in the case of Kilmar Armando Abrego Garcia, the Salvadorian migrant and alleged MS-13 member who was deported from Maryland to El Salvador in March in what administration officials have acknowledged was an administrative error. Separately on Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis granted a request from Abrego Garcia's legal team to file a motion for sanctions against the Trump administration. That filing is due June 11, she said in an order. The one-two punch from Xinis could give plaintiffs new ammo to pursue more formal punishments against the Trump administration if officials are found to have been acting in bad faith or knowingly defying court orders. It will also give new access to media outlets covering the case. Xinis agreed to grant in part a request from a group of 14 major media outlets and publishers – including Fox News, NBC News, CBS News, New York Times, the Washington Post and NPR – who filed a motion to unseal records in the Abrego Garcia case, citing concerns over the lack of public access, as well as over government efforts, or lack thereof, to facilitate his return to the U.S. Judge Presses Trump Doj On Abrego Garcia Deportation; Answers Leave Courtroom In Stunned Silence In her order, Xinis agreed with the contention of the news outlets – referred to jointly as the "Press Movants" – that the public "enjoys a presumptive right to access court records, overcome only when outweighed by competing interests." Read On The Fox News App As such, Xinis ordered the Trump administration to unseal a handful of documents that have so far been filed under seal, as part of a protracted legal battle over the status of Abrego Garcia. Xinis also ordered them to unseal a transcript from an April 30 hearing in his case. "The right to public access of court records remains critical to promoting 'trustworthiness of the judicial process, to curb judicial abuses, and to provide the public with a more complete understanding of the judicial system, including a better perception of fairness,'" she said Wednesday. The order comes amid a months-long court fight over the status of Abrego Garcia, who remains in El Salvador. Xinis in April ordered the Trump administration to comply with an expedited discovery schedule to determine whether they were complying with the directive to return Abrego Garcia to the U.S., which was upheld by the Supreme Court earlier this year. Since then, she has struggled to ascertain the status of Abrego Garcia, or efforts made to return him to the U.S. Trump's Remarks Could Come Back To Bite Him In Abrego Garcia Deportation Battle Trump officials, for their part, have repeatedly alleged that Abrego Garcia is a member of the MS-13 gang, though any formal ties remain unproven. Lawyers for the government and Abrego Garcia's attorneys have sparred with Xinis in court over what exactly it means to "facilitate" his return – a months-long fight that Xinis most recently described as beating a "frustrated and dead horse." Xinis previously took aim at what she deemed to be the lack of information submitted to the court as part of an expedited discovery process she ordered last month, describing the government submissions as "vague, evasive and incomplete" responses, and which she said demonstrated "willful and bad faith refusal to comply with discovery obligations." The order is the latest development in the ongoing feud between Trump officials and the courts over the use of the Alien Enemies Act, a 1798 wartime immigration law used earlier this year to quickly deport migrants from the U.S. Click To Get The Fox News App To date, the Trump administration has not knowingly complied with any court orders to return migrants who were removed and sent to El Salvador in the early wave of deportation flights, despite earlier court orders from Xinis, Judge James Boasberg of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and others. It is unclear whether Xinis plans to begin contempt proceedings against the administration, though the federal judge in D.C. said earlier this year that he had found probable cause to do article source: Federal judge delivers one-two punch to Trump in Abrego Garcia case
Yahoo
25 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What Trump Revoking Emergency Abortion Guidance Means for Care
Abortion-rights activists rally for reproductive rights and emergency abortion care outside the U.S. Supreme Court as it hears arguments in a case that deals with whether Idaho's near-total abortion ban conflicts with the federal Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act, in Washington, D.C., on April 24, 2024. Credit - Saul Loeb—AFP/Getty Images The Trump Administration has added to the confusion surrounding the U.S.'s shifting patchwork of abortion laws by rescinding Biden-era guidance that directed hospitals to provide abortions in emergency situations, even in states where abortion is restricted. The decision, announced on Tuesday, does not change the federal law that was at the heart of the Biden Administration's guidance: the Emergency Medical Treatment and Labor Act (EMTALA), which requires hospitals that receive Medicare funding—which is most of them—to provide stabilizing treatment to patients experiencing medical emergencies or transfer them to a hospital that can. The Trump Administration's Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) said in a press release that it 'will continue to enforce EMTALA, which protects all individuals who present to a hospital emergency department seeking examination or treatment, including for identified emergency medical conditions that place the health of a pregnant woman or her unborn child in serious jeopardy.' But the agency also said that it 'will work to rectify any perceived legal confusion and instability created by the former administration's actions.' Doctors and abortion-rights advocates, however, said they feared that the Administration's move will amplify confusion over whether doctors can provide critical care, thereby putting lives at risk. Dr. Jamila Perritt—an ob-gyn in Washington, D.C., and the president and CEO of Physicians for Reproductive Health—said in a press release that rescinding the Biden-era guidance would force "providers like me to choose between caring for someone in their time of need and turning my back on them to comply with cruel and dangerous laws.' 'This action sends a clear message: the lives and health of pregnant people are not worth protecting,' Perritt said. The Biden Administration issued the guidance after the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in 2022, reminding hospitals of their 'obligations' under EMTALA, as state laws restricting or banning abortion began going into effect. 'Any state actions against a physician who provides an abortion in order to stabilize an emergency medical condition in a pregnant individual presenting to the hospital would be preempted by the federal EMTALA statute due to the direct conflict with the 'stabilized' provision of the statute,' the guidance stressed. 'Moreover, EMTALA contains a whistleblower provision that prevents retaliation by the hospital against any hospital employee or physician who refuses to transfer a patient with an emergency medical condition that has not been stabilized by the initial hospital, such as a patient with an emergent ectopic pregnancy, or a patient with an incomplete medical abortion.' The guidance also said that physicians' fear of violating state laws prohibiting abortion could not be used as the basis for transferring a patient. 'When a direct conflict occurs between EMTALA and a state law, EMTALA must be followed,' the guidance stated. EMTALA remains in place despite the change in the guidance. The Trump Administration did not explicitly advise hospitals that they could deny patients abortions in emergency situations. CMS did specify in the memo announcing the revocation that the Department of Health and Human Services may not enforce the interpretation in the Biden Administration's guidance that EMTALA preempts Texas' near-total abortion ban, pointing to court rulings that have temporarily blocked the guidance in the state. But abortion-rights advocates sharply criticized the Trump Administration's move, saying it endangers the lives of pregnant people. 'The Trump Administration would rather women die in emergency rooms than receive life-saving abortions,' Nancy Northup, president and CEO of the Center for Reproductive Rights, said in a press release. 'In pulling back guidance, this administration is feeding the fear and confusion that already exists at hospitals in every state where abortion is banned. Hospitals need more guidance right now, not less.' 'We're making our health care professionals have to operate in a gray area when their work really needs to be clear,' says Monica Simpson, executive director of SisterSong, a reproductive justice collective. 'They're in the business of providing life-saving care to people on a daily basis, and they don't need to be put in a position where their decision making is compromised.' When that confusion happens, she says, 'people die.' Simpson says that, for states that have banned or restricted abortion, like her home state of Georgia, rescinding the Biden-era guidance is 'just going to make things worse.' 'It's making it incredibly scary for the American people and pregnant folks who would need access to emergency services,' Simpson says. 'People's lives are at stake.' Anti-abortion groups, meanwhile, celebrated the move. 'The Trump administration has delivered another win for life and truth – stopping Biden's attack on emergency care for both pregnant moms and their unborn children,' Susan B. Anthony Pro-Life America President Marjorie Dannenfelser said in a press release. She accused Democrats of creating confusion about people's access to care in medical emergencies, including miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies. 'In situations where every minute counts, their lies lead to delayed care and put women in needless, unacceptable danger,' she said. More than a dozen states have banned abortion in almost all cases or after six weeks of pregnancy, before many people even know they're pregnant. There have been many reports of pregnant people experiencing complications being turned away from hospitals in states that have banned abortion. Previously, the Biden Administration had sued Idaho over its near-total abortion ban, saying that the state's restrictions conflicted with EMTALA. In March, the Trump Administration dropped the lawsuit. Contact us at letters@
