It seems to me they are using this kind of ordenance to keep collateral damage to a minimum. If you take a look a LOSAT, you know this can be effective weapons, as long as they have a direct hit.

Well, a non-explosive bomb would be effective in taking out opposing units like armor or fighting vehicles, although it likely wouldn't collapse a large structure unless several were dropped. As for use against aircraft, I'm not sure whether a 2000lbs bomb/missile/shell would be able to fire horizontally.

what i meant was in regards to grounded aircraft. My next question would be would it be better to take out a tank with a 2000lb bomb or with a 2000lb weigth. the bomb would deffinetly make a crator and would kill a tank even if it missed by a few feet. what about the solid weapon would it have any advantages over a bomb? ONly one I can think of is that it may prevent a crator and large smoke plumes.

I read one story and they said that they are painted blue. That means they are target range bombs. Often, the military uses inert bombs when they practice. The bombs need to be weighted the same as the genuine article so you would add concrete or some other material. I guess at some point someone said that they could be used to reduce collateral damage. The target range bombs probably also have the capability to accept JDAMS or other guidance systems.

The story on the concrete bombs can be found here. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2919249.stm Extract follows. << These are basically blocks of concrete shaped as bombs and painted blue to identify them as non-explosive if they are discovered still intact after the war. But they will be laser-guided 1,000lb blocks of concrete, capable of destroying a tank or artillery piece, but without causing a devastating explosion that would put civilians at risk and shatter surrounding buildings. Tornado Detachment commander, Group Captain Simon Dobb, said: "We have the option of using these inert bombs. "They still have the guidance and steering methods of other high explosive weapons but the risk of causing civilian casualties is greatly reduced." >>

Don't you just love the British respect for horticulture. Smash the ugly tank in the car park, but please don't ruin the flowerbed.