‘Once the inner wall is breached, it's all over': Mike Pezzullo reveals devastating impact of US strike on Iran's Fordow nuclear facility
Former Home Affairs Secretary Mike Pezzullo has offered a detailed technical breakdown of the United States' recent airstrike on Iran's heavily fortified Fordow nuclear site, revealing how precision-guided bunker-busting bombs were used to penetrate up to 100 metres of rock and concrete.
Speaking to Sky News Australia, Pezzullo explained that seven B-2 stealth bombers — the only aircraft capable of carrying the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) — were deployed in the mission, delivering 14 of the 13.5-tonne bombs designed to destroy deeply buried infrastructure.
Pezzullo explained that the precision-guided munitions were dropped from high altitude, creating either a single deep shaft or multiple entry points to punch through to the vast subterranean chambers housing uranium enrichment centrifuges.
'They just keep firing them in,' he said.
'Precision-guided, so they'll go into the same hole or create multiple shafts. Once the inner wall is breached, it's all over.
'That compressive energy just destroys everything that's got oxygen in it.'
According to Pezzullo, once the MOP reaches the internal halls beneath the mountain, the sheer force of the explosion makes survival or salvage of the facility virtually impossible.
'Well, the speculation and I've got to be careful here because when I was in government, I actually read all the intelligence reports but that is that you're looking at about 60 to 80 metres of protection, and then a 20-metre hall,' he said.
'Once a 2.5-tonne explosive gets into a large hall which has obviously open space and then corridors and ventilation shafts, it's all over at that point.
'In order to ensure that it's a decisive kill, they would have put a number of others in through the same hole until they get through to the cavernous halls where the centrifuges were.'
The B-2s involved in the mission flew east from their base in Missouri, crossing the Atlantic and navigating through the Mediterranean.
Pezzullo said it appeared likely that the UK was notified ahead of the strike, potentially to allow access to its base in Cyprus in case of emergency.
As part of the strike package, fighter jets - possibly including F-22s, F-35s, and electronic attack aircraft - cleared the airspace ahead of the bombers, targeting any Iranian systems that might have posed a threat but principally attacking the deeply buried infrastructure at Fordow.'
A full damage assessment is still underway.
While some attention has turned to whether Australia was briefed or involved, Pezzullo made clear the lack of consultation was not unusual - and likely a result of the US choosing to fly east.
'If they'd gone west, I think we'd be having a very different conversation,' he explained, noting that previous missions involving B-2 bombers over Yemen took a western route that may have required Australian airspace or logistical support.
Pezzullo added that with US military build-up continuing in Northern Australia will eventually need a clearer policy position on how and when it supports allied strikes - not necessarily in executing them, but in providing refuelling, overflight clearance, or basing access.
'I think the government's going to have to come up with a new policy framework to say not only do we concur in the American actions that have taken place, but we were prior notified and we provided support,' he said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
AU Financial Review
an hour ago
- AU Financial Review
Meet the real life Batwing that bombed Iran's nuclear sites
The B-2 Spirit bomber is one of the world's most advanced aircraft and played the starring role in Donald Trump's early Sunday morning air raid on Iran's nuclear sites. The Pentagon revealed seven aircraft were involved in the stunning strike, delivering their bunker-buster bombs to target the underground nuclear enrichment plant at Fordow, in a marathon 37-hour operation.
Sky News AU
4 hours ago
- Sky News AU
‘Once the inner wall is breached, it's all over': Mike Pezzullo reveals devastating impact of US strike on Iran's Fordow nuclear facility
Former Home Affairs Secretary Mike Pezzullo has offered a detailed technical breakdown of the United States' recent airstrike on Iran's heavily fortified Fordow nuclear site, revealing how precision-guided bunker-busting bombs were used to penetrate up to 100 metres of rock and concrete. Speaking to Sky News Australia, Pezzullo explained that seven B-2 stealth bombers — the only aircraft capable of carrying the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) — were deployed in the mission, delivering 14 of the 13.5-tonne bombs designed to destroy deeply buried infrastructure. Pezzullo explained that the precision-guided munitions were dropped from high altitude, creating either a single deep shaft or multiple entry points to punch through to the vast subterranean chambers housing uranium enrichment centrifuges. 'They just keep firing them in,' he said. 'Precision-guided, so they'll go into the same hole or create multiple shafts. Once the inner wall is breached, it's all over. 'That compressive energy just destroys everything that's got oxygen in it.' According to Pezzullo, once the MOP reaches the internal halls beneath the mountain, the sheer force of the explosion makes survival or salvage of the facility virtually impossible. 'Well, the speculation and I've got to be careful here because when I was in government, I actually read all the intelligence reports but that is that you're looking at about 60 to 80 metres of protection, and then a 20-metre hall,' he said. 'Once a 2.5-tonne explosive gets into a large hall which has obviously open space and then corridors and ventilation shafts, it's all over at that point. 'In order to ensure that it's a decisive kill, they would have put a number of others in through the same hole until they get through to the cavernous halls where the centrifuges were.' The B-2s involved in the mission flew east from their base in Missouri, crossing the Atlantic and navigating through the Mediterranean. Pezzullo said it appeared likely that the UK was notified ahead of the strike, potentially to allow access to its base in Cyprus in case of emergency. As part of the strike package, fighter jets - possibly including F-22s, F-35s, and electronic attack aircraft - cleared the airspace ahead of the bombers, targeting any Iranian systems that might have posed a threat but principally attacking the deeply buried infrastructure at Fordow.' A full damage assessment is still underway. While some attention has turned to whether Australia was briefed or involved, Pezzullo made clear the lack of consultation was not unusual - and likely a result of the US choosing to fly east. 'If they'd gone west, I think we'd be having a very different conversation,' he explained, noting that previous missions involving B-2 bombers over Yemen took a western route that may have required Australian airspace or logistical support. Pezzullo added that with US military build-up continuing in Northern Australia will eventually need a clearer policy position on how and when it supports allied strikes - not necessarily in executing them, but in providing refuelling, overflight clearance, or basing access. 'I think the government's going to have to come up with a new policy framework to say not only do we concur in the American actions that have taken place, but we were prior notified and we provided support,' he said.
The Advertiser
4 hours ago
- The Advertiser
What is a 'bunker buster'? An expert explains what the US dropped on Iran
Late on Saturday night, local time, the United States carried out strikes against Iranian nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, marking its open participation in the conflict between Iran and Israel. The US says it fired 30 submarine-launched missiles at the sites in Natanz and Isfahan, as well as dropping more than a dozen "bunker buster" bombs at Fordow and Natanz. The kind of bomb in question is the extremely destructive GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, which weighs around 13.5 tonnes. The attacks raise a lot of questions. What are these enormous bombs? Why did the US feel it had to get involved in the conflict? And, going forward, what does it mean for Iran's nuclear ambitions? Bunker busters are weapons designed to destroy heavily protected facilities such as bunkers deep underground, beyond the reach of normal bombs. Bunker busters are designed to bury themselves into the ground before detonating. This allows more of the explosive force to penetrate into the ground, rather than travelling through the air or across the surface. Iran's nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan are built deep underground. Estimates suggest that Fordow for example could be 80m beneath the surface, and capped with layers of reinforced concrete and soil. The bunker buster used in this particular operation is the largest in the US arsenal. Leaving aside nuclear weapons, the MOP is the largest known bunker buster in the world. Weighing some 13.5 tonnes, the MOP is believed to be able to penetrate up to 60 metres below ground in the right conditions. It is not known how many the US possesses, but the numbers are thought to be small (perhaps 20 or so in total). We also don't know exactly how many were used in Iran, though some reports say it was 14. However, it is likely to be a significant portion of the US MOP arsenal. The US is not the only state with bunker-busting weaponry. However, the size of MOP means it requires very specialised bombers to carry and drop it. Only the B2 stealth bomber is currently able to deploy the MOP. Each B2 can carry at most two MOPs at a time. Around seven of America's 19 operational B2s were used in the Iran operation. There has been some consideration whether large transport aircraft such as the C-130 Hercules could be modified to carry and drop the MOP from its rear cargo doors. While this would allow other countries (including Israel) to deploy the MOP, it is for now purely hypothetical. The Trump administration claims Iran may be only a few weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, and that it needed to act now to destroy Iranian nuclear enrichment sites. This claim is notably at odds with published assessments from the US intelligence community. However, Israel lacks bunker-busting weaponry sufficient to damage the deeply buried and fortified enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Only the MOP could do the job (short of using nuclear weapons). Even then, multiple MOPs would have been required to ensure sufficient damage to the underground facilities. The US has claimed that these sites have been utterly destroyed. We cannot conclusively say whether this is true. Iran may also have other, undeclared nuclear sites elsewhere in the country. The US has reportedly reached out to Iran via diplomatic channels to emphasise that this attack was a one-off, not part of a larger project of regime change. It is hard to say what will happen in the next few weeks. Iran may retaliate with large strikes against Israel or against US forces in the region. It could also interrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which would affect a large portion of global oil shipments, with profound economic implications. Alternatively, Iran could capitulate and take steps to demonstrate it is ending its nuclear program. However, capitulation would not necessarily mean the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Perhaps a greater concern is that the attack will reinforce Iran's desire to go nuclear. Without nuclear weapons, Iran was unable to threaten the US enough to deter today's attack. Iran may take lessons from the fate of other states. Ukraine (in)famously surrendered its stockpile of former Soviet nuclear weapons in the early 1990s. Russia has since felt emboldened to annex Crimea in 2014 and launch an ongoing invasion in 2022. Other potential nuclear states, such as Iraq and Gadaffi's regime in Libya, also suffered from military intervention. By contrast, North Korea successfully tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006. Since then there has been no serious consideration of military intervention in North Korea. Iran may yet have the ability to produce useful amounts of weapons-grade uranium. It may now aim to buy itself time to assemble a relatively small nuclear device, similar in scale to the bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Depending on what facilities and resources have survived the US strikes, the attack has likely reinforced that the only way the Iranian regime can guarantee its survival is to possess nuclear weapons. Late on Saturday night, local time, the United States carried out strikes against Iranian nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, marking its open participation in the conflict between Iran and Israel. The US says it fired 30 submarine-launched missiles at the sites in Natanz and Isfahan, as well as dropping more than a dozen "bunker buster" bombs at Fordow and Natanz. The kind of bomb in question is the extremely destructive GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, which weighs around 13.5 tonnes. The attacks raise a lot of questions. What are these enormous bombs? Why did the US feel it had to get involved in the conflict? And, going forward, what does it mean for Iran's nuclear ambitions? Bunker busters are weapons designed to destroy heavily protected facilities such as bunkers deep underground, beyond the reach of normal bombs. Bunker busters are designed to bury themselves into the ground before detonating. This allows more of the explosive force to penetrate into the ground, rather than travelling through the air or across the surface. Iran's nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan are built deep underground. Estimates suggest that Fordow for example could be 80m beneath the surface, and capped with layers of reinforced concrete and soil. The bunker buster used in this particular operation is the largest in the US arsenal. Leaving aside nuclear weapons, the MOP is the largest known bunker buster in the world. Weighing some 13.5 tonnes, the MOP is believed to be able to penetrate up to 60 metres below ground in the right conditions. It is not known how many the US possesses, but the numbers are thought to be small (perhaps 20 or so in total). We also don't know exactly how many were used in Iran, though some reports say it was 14. However, it is likely to be a significant portion of the US MOP arsenal. The US is not the only state with bunker-busting weaponry. However, the size of MOP means it requires very specialised bombers to carry and drop it. Only the B2 stealth bomber is currently able to deploy the MOP. Each B2 can carry at most two MOPs at a time. Around seven of America's 19 operational B2s were used in the Iran operation. There has been some consideration whether large transport aircraft such as the C-130 Hercules could be modified to carry and drop the MOP from its rear cargo doors. While this would allow other countries (including Israel) to deploy the MOP, it is for now purely hypothetical. The Trump administration claims Iran may be only a few weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, and that it needed to act now to destroy Iranian nuclear enrichment sites. This claim is notably at odds with published assessments from the US intelligence community. However, Israel lacks bunker-busting weaponry sufficient to damage the deeply buried and fortified enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Only the MOP could do the job (short of using nuclear weapons). Even then, multiple MOPs would have been required to ensure sufficient damage to the underground facilities. The US has claimed that these sites have been utterly destroyed. We cannot conclusively say whether this is true. Iran may also have other, undeclared nuclear sites elsewhere in the country. The US has reportedly reached out to Iran via diplomatic channels to emphasise that this attack was a one-off, not part of a larger project of regime change. It is hard to say what will happen in the next few weeks. Iran may retaliate with large strikes against Israel or against US forces in the region. It could also interrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which would affect a large portion of global oil shipments, with profound economic implications. Alternatively, Iran could capitulate and take steps to demonstrate it is ending its nuclear program. However, capitulation would not necessarily mean the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Perhaps a greater concern is that the attack will reinforce Iran's desire to go nuclear. Without nuclear weapons, Iran was unable to threaten the US enough to deter today's attack. Iran may take lessons from the fate of other states. Ukraine (in)famously surrendered its stockpile of former Soviet nuclear weapons in the early 1990s. Russia has since felt emboldened to annex Crimea in 2014 and launch an ongoing invasion in 2022. Other potential nuclear states, such as Iraq and Gadaffi's regime in Libya, also suffered from military intervention. By contrast, North Korea successfully tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006. Since then there has been no serious consideration of military intervention in North Korea. Iran may yet have the ability to produce useful amounts of weapons-grade uranium. It may now aim to buy itself time to assemble a relatively small nuclear device, similar in scale to the bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Depending on what facilities and resources have survived the US strikes, the attack has likely reinforced that the only way the Iranian regime can guarantee its survival is to possess nuclear weapons. Late on Saturday night, local time, the United States carried out strikes against Iranian nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, marking its open participation in the conflict between Iran and Israel. The US says it fired 30 submarine-launched missiles at the sites in Natanz and Isfahan, as well as dropping more than a dozen "bunker buster" bombs at Fordow and Natanz. The kind of bomb in question is the extremely destructive GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, which weighs around 13.5 tonnes. The attacks raise a lot of questions. What are these enormous bombs? Why did the US feel it had to get involved in the conflict? And, going forward, what does it mean for Iran's nuclear ambitions? Bunker busters are weapons designed to destroy heavily protected facilities such as bunkers deep underground, beyond the reach of normal bombs. Bunker busters are designed to bury themselves into the ground before detonating. This allows more of the explosive force to penetrate into the ground, rather than travelling through the air or across the surface. Iran's nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan are built deep underground. Estimates suggest that Fordow for example could be 80m beneath the surface, and capped with layers of reinforced concrete and soil. The bunker buster used in this particular operation is the largest in the US arsenal. Leaving aside nuclear weapons, the MOP is the largest known bunker buster in the world. Weighing some 13.5 tonnes, the MOP is believed to be able to penetrate up to 60 metres below ground in the right conditions. It is not known how many the US possesses, but the numbers are thought to be small (perhaps 20 or so in total). We also don't know exactly how many were used in Iran, though some reports say it was 14. However, it is likely to be a significant portion of the US MOP arsenal. The US is not the only state with bunker-busting weaponry. However, the size of MOP means it requires very specialised bombers to carry and drop it. Only the B2 stealth bomber is currently able to deploy the MOP. Each B2 can carry at most two MOPs at a time. Around seven of America's 19 operational B2s were used in the Iran operation. There has been some consideration whether large transport aircraft such as the C-130 Hercules could be modified to carry and drop the MOP from its rear cargo doors. While this would allow other countries (including Israel) to deploy the MOP, it is for now purely hypothetical. The Trump administration claims Iran may be only a few weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, and that it needed to act now to destroy Iranian nuclear enrichment sites. This claim is notably at odds with published assessments from the US intelligence community. However, Israel lacks bunker-busting weaponry sufficient to damage the deeply buried and fortified enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Only the MOP could do the job (short of using nuclear weapons). Even then, multiple MOPs would have been required to ensure sufficient damage to the underground facilities. The US has claimed that these sites have been utterly destroyed. We cannot conclusively say whether this is true. Iran may also have other, undeclared nuclear sites elsewhere in the country. The US has reportedly reached out to Iran via diplomatic channels to emphasise that this attack was a one-off, not part of a larger project of regime change. It is hard to say what will happen in the next few weeks. Iran may retaliate with large strikes against Israel or against US forces in the region. It could also interrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which would affect a large portion of global oil shipments, with profound economic implications. Alternatively, Iran could capitulate and take steps to demonstrate it is ending its nuclear program. However, capitulation would not necessarily mean the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Perhaps a greater concern is that the attack will reinforce Iran's desire to go nuclear. Without nuclear weapons, Iran was unable to threaten the US enough to deter today's attack. Iran may take lessons from the fate of other states. Ukraine (in)famously surrendered its stockpile of former Soviet nuclear weapons in the early 1990s. Russia has since felt emboldened to annex Crimea in 2014 and launch an ongoing invasion in 2022. Other potential nuclear states, such as Iraq and Gadaffi's regime in Libya, also suffered from military intervention. By contrast, North Korea successfully tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006. Since then there has been no serious consideration of military intervention in North Korea. Iran may yet have the ability to produce useful amounts of weapons-grade uranium. It may now aim to buy itself time to assemble a relatively small nuclear device, similar in scale to the bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Depending on what facilities and resources have survived the US strikes, the attack has likely reinforced that the only way the Iranian regime can guarantee its survival is to possess nuclear weapons. Late on Saturday night, local time, the United States carried out strikes against Iranian nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan, marking its open participation in the conflict between Iran and Israel. The US says it fired 30 submarine-launched missiles at the sites in Natanz and Isfahan, as well as dropping more than a dozen "bunker buster" bombs at Fordow and Natanz. The kind of bomb in question is the extremely destructive GBU-57 Massive Ordnance Penetrator, or MOP, which weighs around 13.5 tonnes. The attacks raise a lot of questions. What are these enormous bombs? Why did the US feel it had to get involved in the conflict? And, going forward, what does it mean for Iran's nuclear ambitions? Bunker busters are weapons designed to destroy heavily protected facilities such as bunkers deep underground, beyond the reach of normal bombs. Bunker busters are designed to bury themselves into the ground before detonating. This allows more of the explosive force to penetrate into the ground, rather than travelling through the air or across the surface. Iran's nuclear enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan are built deep underground. Estimates suggest that Fordow for example could be 80m beneath the surface, and capped with layers of reinforced concrete and soil. The bunker buster used in this particular operation is the largest in the US arsenal. Leaving aside nuclear weapons, the MOP is the largest known bunker buster in the world. Weighing some 13.5 tonnes, the MOP is believed to be able to penetrate up to 60 metres below ground in the right conditions. It is not known how many the US possesses, but the numbers are thought to be small (perhaps 20 or so in total). We also don't know exactly how many were used in Iran, though some reports say it was 14. However, it is likely to be a significant portion of the US MOP arsenal. The US is not the only state with bunker-busting weaponry. However, the size of MOP means it requires very specialised bombers to carry and drop it. Only the B2 stealth bomber is currently able to deploy the MOP. Each B2 can carry at most two MOPs at a time. Around seven of America's 19 operational B2s were used in the Iran operation. There has been some consideration whether large transport aircraft such as the C-130 Hercules could be modified to carry and drop the MOP from its rear cargo doors. While this would allow other countries (including Israel) to deploy the MOP, it is for now purely hypothetical. The Trump administration claims Iran may be only a few weeks from possessing a nuclear weapon, and that it needed to act now to destroy Iranian nuclear enrichment sites. This claim is notably at odds with published assessments from the US intelligence community. However, Israel lacks bunker-busting weaponry sufficient to damage the deeply buried and fortified enrichment sites at Fordow, Natanz and Isfahan. Only the MOP could do the job (short of using nuclear weapons). Even then, multiple MOPs would have been required to ensure sufficient damage to the underground facilities. The US has claimed that these sites have been utterly destroyed. We cannot conclusively say whether this is true. Iran may also have other, undeclared nuclear sites elsewhere in the country. The US has reportedly reached out to Iran via diplomatic channels to emphasise that this attack was a one-off, not part of a larger project of regime change. It is hard to say what will happen in the next few weeks. Iran may retaliate with large strikes against Israel or against US forces in the region. It could also interrupt shipping in the Strait of Hormuz, which would affect a large portion of global oil shipments, with profound economic implications. Alternatively, Iran could capitulate and take steps to demonstrate it is ending its nuclear program. However, capitulation would not necessarily mean the end of Iran's nuclear ambitions. Perhaps a greater concern is that the attack will reinforce Iran's desire to go nuclear. Without nuclear weapons, Iran was unable to threaten the US enough to deter today's attack. Iran may take lessons from the fate of other states. Ukraine (in)famously surrendered its stockpile of former Soviet nuclear weapons in the early 1990s. Russia has since felt emboldened to annex Crimea in 2014 and launch an ongoing invasion in 2022. Other potential nuclear states, such as Iraq and Gadaffi's regime in Libya, also suffered from military intervention. By contrast, North Korea successfully tested its first nuclear weapon in 2006. Since then there has been no serious consideration of military intervention in North Korea. Iran may yet have the ability to produce useful amounts of weapons-grade uranium. It may now aim to buy itself time to assemble a relatively small nuclear device, similar in scale to the bombs used in Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Depending on what facilities and resources have survived the US strikes, the attack has likely reinforced that the only way the Iranian regime can guarantee its survival is to possess nuclear weapons.
