After WW2 with the dawn of the atomic age, bombers were designed with the object of carrying nuclear bombs. As an alternative the only option used - was a load of 1,000 or 500lb bombs.
Yet, why was the use of earth shattering power of the Barnes Wallis bombs not continued with. I think the US in Korea used some, but I can't be certain.
Even in the last decade or so, air forces (RAF & USAF) have been struggling to come up with a weapon system to use against underground bunkers (Iraq) and/or mountain strongholds (Afganistan) - but it was a case of 'been there done that'.
What effect would the 'BW bombs' have say if used in Vietnam!?
Could a surface-to-surface Tallboy based missile have been developed - rather than the glorified V2's that are the high-explosive SSM (Scud's)?
Any thoughts?
Downside - could a 'earthquake bomb' trigger a real Earthquake?