Is USAF getting hundreds of thousands of anti-ship guided bombs?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Thanks to Manscaped for sponsoring today's video! Get 20% OFF + Free International Shipping + 2 Free Gifts with promo code "BINKOV20" at mnscpd.com/binkov
This video analyzes recent USAF tests of their JDAM bombs. Now with novel guidance system that will enable them to be used against moving targets, such as ships. Could it all mean that suddenly the entire satellite guided bomb inventory may become dual use weapon inventory, capable of targeting ships? Watch the video to see how it was achieved.
Music by Matija Malatestinic www.malatestini...
Go to / binkov if you want to help support our channel. And enjoy the perks such as get access to our videos with no ads and get early access to various content.
Suggest country pairs you'd like to see in future videos over at our website: www.binkov.com
You can also browse for other Binkov T-Shirts or Binkov merch, via the store at our website, binkov.com/
Subscribe to Binkov's channel for more videos! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow Binkov's news on Facebook! / binkovsbattlegrounds
Follow us on Twitter: / commissarbinkov
Get 20% OFF + Free International Shipping + 2 Free Gifts with promo code "BINKOV20" at mnscpd.com/binkov
These new anti ship bombs could also be used against the Iranian Navy.
Does this mean Binkov shaves?
United States of America vs The America's
This is perfect gift for my eight year old nephew
@@RemberReach USA claps everyone
China: Make swarms of cheap ships!
U.S.: Make more and even cheaper munitions!
China: Makes way better electronic warfare equipment, and better missile countermeasures
America don’t make cheap munition the military industrial complex are the biggest bunch of robbing bastards in the world
@@amacca2085 you didn't watch the video did you? Lol
China don't need super expensive ships to enforce their claims in the East Sea, SCS and Taiwan. The US however needs 100s of billions worth of aircraft carriers to stop China.
@@Diego-lt4wm no they don't. Western electronics are well ahead of China
As the old saying goes: "Quantity has a quality of its own"... There's no doubt we need to develop operational hypersonic missiles. We should also buy more of the recently deployed LRASM anti ship missile which sports incredible capabilities, from the pioneering targeting solutions in a GPS denied environment to capability to plot it's own trajectory that can avoid anti missile systems.
That being said, LRASM cost around 3 million $. Price of the next gen hypersonic missiles will probably be around 10 million a pop. So neither we nor our adversaries will have tens of thousands of these kind of missiles in our inventory. This is where the cheaper guided bombs or smaller missiles come into play. We can have, or quickly ramp up production and have it in a few months, 100 000 of these JDAMs. This is a great weapon system and a true game changer...
Hypersonic missiles are so overrated and I'm getting tired of hearing of them like they're some silver bullet. Probably the most "successful" and well-documented hypersonic missile that is not still in development is the 3M22 Zircon. The surface-to-surface variant is the size of a friggen SCUD missile. It's expensive, ridiculously expensive, and can still be tracked and intercepted. Anything THAT big going THAT fast (when you're going that fast, just the thermal energy alone will show up on radar - the SR-71 could be seen from thermal/electromagnetic spectrum returns further away than the actual airframe itself in many cases), everyone is going to know what you just fired off. And a RIM-161/SM-3 can intercept it at ANY phase, terminal or launch or what have you. SM-2s could also chip in with defense and interception and of course the Phalanx gets a turn. Admittedly, I don't think the Phalanx is going to do anything in that case, but if a very dedicated CIWS operator got everything rolling on the ball with telemetry and everything in advance so the Phalanx didn't have to take time to react and you let the system open up at the very apex of its range... It still probably wouldn't do anything, but you never know.
Seriously, hypersonics are a waste of resources. They are easily seen on radar, capable of being tracked and capable of being intercepted from a longer range due to them being at a higher altitude. Sea-skimmers are still superior when it comes to actual warfare. And there are supersonic sea-skimmers like the P-700... And if you're curious as to the issue there, look at the size of a Harpoon compared to a Granit. It's like comparing a surfboard or a motorcycle to a small bus. Takes more go-go-juice to go faster in thicker atmosphere.
As for the idea that guided bombs hitting ships is revolutionary... It isn't? One of the first guided (MLOS, so "guided" is being used loosely in today's context) missiles, the Fritz X, was developed by the Germans in WW2 and used almost exclusively against ships. When LGBs came about and it was seen how good their accuracy could be, people proposed using them on ships. Hell, a LGB was even used to take out a helicopter in flight before. Plenty of instances of people thinking about it or using it. I don't know why Binkov was acting like this is some gamechanger. It isn't. JDAMs have had INS or other guidance systems that aren't just based on GPS co-ordnance for some time. Any pilot with them on their airframe could just select the target, a ship instead of a moving land vehicle this time, track it and just let it guide itself in.
@@matchesburn the logic behind hypersonics is that you'll need to spend as much if not more money in interceptors to stop them and they kill you faster than your missiles can kill them so they have a chance of escaping.
@@hughmungus2760
That's the point behind *_ANY_* missile interception. And given the fact that hypersonic missiles are much bigger, meaning you can carry and launch fewer of them and they can be tracked and targeted from further away due to their altitude range... Sea-skimmers are still optimal because they're smaller, detected later and you can carry more of them due to them not needing a gigantic fuel tank and engine.
Hypersonic missiles for anti-ship roles just aren't that useful.
Seems like the logical thing to do if you have a surplus of dumb explosive ordnance. Upgrade your inventory to meet with current warfare doctrine as much as possible.
But I feel the US military will probably use such upgrades on less crucial / minimally defended / more vunerable maritime targets like oilers, than waste it's more advanced, more costly ordinance.
I'm ex Air Force and have seen the damage up close from 2,000 pounders... May seem simple but it is a game changer... The damage that weapon could do to a ship, let alone 4-5 coming in at once... Not much is going to be operable even if by some miracle it didn't sink...
Build more better! :)
Former USSR laughing in supersonic missiles with bigger payload
@@destroyerarmor2846 how much does each cost? Also how many are still usable and ready to deploy?
@@gato2 Russia keeps it's missile forces up to date since 1990, China is learning fast. USA prints as much money as it wants so don't talk about cost, USA simply never invested in hypersonic missile because of air power
until the other side use the same method.
Remember everyone, the very first American female four-star general is a MAN, and you are not allowed to say so.
HE is is not the first female general, there was a real woman general in real US army.
@@m.chumakov1033 But is he a first 4-star Level General/Admiral to be a woman
Did anyone actually watch the video before commenting?
Why would they do that? It's the internet, were stupidly is prized and rewarded.
If you watch anything military related on RUclips you will find most will try (and often fail) to sound smart even though alot of their questions or comments where controdicted/answered in the video
Why that’s the beauty and fun of comment section.
U S. logistics capability is it's most formidable weapon
I would actually argue about astounding propaganda and censorship capability to manipulate the data flow being greatest asset.
Question: How many Tanks can the US produce in a months, without a factory ?
How many ships with only 2 Yards ( allready building) that can build big ships.
The US can not even build today a TV or a Smartphone, nearly every weapon System is build in only one factory, from Hand, in Single digit numbers a months.
@Wiegraf no it isn't , people really do hate evil oppressive regimes and USA spares no effort to be seen as the opposite of that ,
Ultimately no matter how long it takes the " good" guys do infact win
Whether or not they are actual good guys
@@donald8066 😂😂 you're wrong there, USA produces elongated Virginia subs like 2 per year , these are fully fledged combat boats which will do a number on any so called enemy😂😂
@@donald8066but the few tanks it has are near invulnerable and they are NOT few.
Those 2k JDAMs could potentially be dropped from max range (15 mi) by the F-35 potentially on all but the most advanced ships, and even on some of the most advanced ships when stand-off jamming is in use. Not to mention sdb-ii, these little terrors can be dropped from 70 miles, well outside of a ships engagement envelope for an F-35, even without jamming, in very large numbers. A saturation attack combining decoys, LRASMs, JSM, Harm missiles, and SDBs followed by a couple 2k JDAMs for a cherry on top. I don’t see a ship surviving this.
The US throwing a Pearl Harbor worth of bombs on Yamato be like:
70 miles? thats more than a harpoon. where did you get that number from?
Also 15 miles is suicidally close for even a stealth fighter, you'd be throwing F35s away at that range.
Goodbye Chinese fleet.
I'm traumatized from imagining Binkov with pubic hair
I love it
The JDAM knows where is it because it knows where it isn't.
This dead meme knows what it is and what it isn't.
Until it flys into a jamming zone, it cannot receive GPS signal. Then, it know neither where it is nor where it isn't.
Other countries :- let's make a stealthy hypersonic missiles with sea skimming capabilities to destroy enemy ships
USA :- carpet bomb the ships baiibeeee!
Chain asked for it, so here we go USA.
*China
@@kurdistanindependance5471 Communist China! :) The good China is Taiwan...
All in all the F15 is still a beautiful plane.
Very underrated plane in the general population
If the US are investing in dropping bombs, they know they can easily jam enemy systems to get that close.
The JDAM knows where it is because it knows where it isin't.
beat me to it.....
Sweet.
How to fight a war without fighting a war. Convince your opposition it would be far too costly to begin a war.
Just get on the radio and tell them about Whinnie the Pooh. All of the crew on the ship will loose their social credit. No social credit means no will to fight.
Jesus fucking Christ , i really hope people understand the scope of this
These bombs are likely not aimed at chinese destroyers, but the small boats of the chinese maritime militia which will likely carry the bulk of PLA troops.
That is the likely target but perhaps more for Taiwan. The US has better missiles for that job.
I am glad some one here can actually think critically
Unarmed requisitioned merchant marine ships, small attack craft, maybe corvettes. Something that isn't well defended but isn't worth a Harpoon or a Tomahawk.
I think guided JDAMs are best to fight slow invasion fleet (if chinese will try to take Taiwan for example), not regular navy vessels like destroyers or frigates. Those will be dealt with harpoons.
Give them to Taiwan
They can't, the tech would no doubt be stolen from them, if it hasn't already been stolen from the Americans. They need a large US presence in taiwan with this tech to deter an invasion
Taiwan are some of the most sneaky people. Silicon Valley had huge taiwanese population during 90s. Today taiwan became the chip manufacturer of the world. And taiwanese magically moved elsewhere....
we'll give them for free.
and detonate when arrived.
literally useless for taiwan because taiwan will have no airforce within the first 36 hours of shooting.
I love your channel No East or West propaganda just straight how it is
He is biased for slavic countries
its very west biased, creator in nato country..
Well I respect your opinions but I have also heard him talking about how inferior us Patriot to Russian S 400 but anyway hope everyone is doing well ✌
No need. The comment section does it for him. ?;- )
Any coming war is going to have a massive cost in men and material in just the first months or weeks even restricting combat to just conventional. WW III may be more like WW I than II.
Most theoretical war testes have shown that there will be a fast and brutal war for like 1-2months but afterwards the frontlines will stabilize and we get a ww1 trench like warfre because every side has wasted most of their modern expensive material.
Afterwards the great powers will probaly consider using their nuclear bombs to make a favourable peace deal
So yeah,you're right. We gonna get a WW1 like war which will probaly end after like 3months
Agree with you in terms of material. Not in men, in the opening rounds. Maybe in the later rounds when sophisticated munitions production can't keep up, and it starts to be feasible to have infantry or light armor attacks.
@@richdobbs6595 I see your thinking but I am pretty sure drone and guided bombs attack will cause massive human casulaties but once the production is slowed down then the offensives rates/ human lifes losses will slow down massively.
Modern warfre is based on fast armoured by air supported attacks and history learned us offensives caused the most casulaties. Once the production has been bombed out/ is to slow to keep up the consummation than they will pretty much sit in their trenches and wait for something
That is over 833 JDAMs bombs available for every Armed Naval Vessel the CCP currently has in operation
Feels like a drone would be the logical launch platform? Swarm of bombs combined with similar torpedoes released at the same time. 3D warfare?
*"Quantity has a quality all its own"* - Joseph Stalin 😂🤣😂
The greater use for this system may be in Taiwan. Not many amphibious assault ships have the full array of air defense systems.
I assume they'd have a large number of destroyers in the fleet if it came to a full scale invasion. And likely aircraft.
I'd like to see comrade Binkov do a video on the U.S. Hammerhead sea mine. That thing could be used to absolutely shut down shipping anywhere they choose . Imagine a fully functional torpedo just sitting on the sea floor silently waiting to hear the sound of an enemy ship or submarine and when it does WHAM dead vessel.
That sounds VERY similar to another concept invented by the Germans, from WW2 no less
It's called a magnetic mine, and it's really easy to counter. In the case of the hammerhead i think it's even easier with today's tech. Just get a small dummy boat that has a device that causes a lot of noise, or strap something that causes a lot of noise to a ship by wire.
@@RazorsharpLT Hammerhead is designed with a control module so specific launch criteria can be giving. It would take little work for the system to differentiate between Chinese subs and cheap decoys and perfectly replicating the signatures of your sub is incredibly difficult. I'm sure the US wouldn't mind China wasting money on decoy subs that cost way more than the weapon they are designed to counter.
@@ZbjetisGod @ZbjetisGod Sure, and the magnetic mines also differentiate between a small tugboat and a large cruiser.
Here's a question - what causes the most "sound" under water? Engines.
Strap a hollow metal tube with an engine in similar scope and you have your decoy. That's a lot harder than a simple sound decoy, but it isn't THAT hard.
If you can get that at the same price as the mine, which has technology to "differentiate" sound with a control module - you already negated all that R&D money the other folks invested
@@ZbjetisGod The Germans thought their own magnetic mine was unbeatable. And to tell you the truth it probably was, were it not for one bomb accidentally falling on the coast of England ripe for research
And creating a countermeasure to that is probably a lot simpler than creating replica subs. I'm no physicist or weapons research expert, so my idea won't work. But there are plenty of other folks working in the field.
The Germans thought "you can't remove the magnetic field that ships create" and the British invented deguassing.
Article in Forbes
"Hammerhead consists of several modules. The mooring module keeps it tethered to the sea bed; the energy module provides power, and the sensing module is a sonar device to detect nearby vessels. Then there is the weapon element, a modified version of the veteran Mark 54 Lightweight homing torpedo. This is a 600-pound weapon with a range of at least six miles widely used by the U.S. Navy and others for anti-submarine operations. (Anti-ship torpedoes are several times larger).
The 'Command, Control, Signal Processing and Decision Making module' will presumably be responsible for deciding whether or not to fire at a specific target. While autonomous weapons are an issue elsewhere, naval mines have always been effectively autonomous.
Significantly, Hammerhead also has a communications module. This will likely be based on an acoustic modem, for communication with nearby submarines, sensors and possibly other Hammerheads. This will make it possible to activate or deactivate Hammerhead after it had been put in position."
Taiwan: breathes heavily.
They could be used to dismantle china's transport ships. For example if they try to invade taiwan.
We're seeing the same thing with artillery and MLRS systems lately (adding guidance and tracking capability to artillery shells and rockets, making them 1000x more accurate and actually capable of pinpoint strikes on par with laser and GPS guided bombs). I'm sure we'll see this same trend (using modern technology to make dumb munitions into smart munitions) with all kinds of weapons in the coming years. Warfare just keeps getting more and more surgical. This is good for civilians in the combat area, but no fun for the hapless soldiers on the receiving end!
its good for the civilians at the battle, bad for the civilians paying taxes outside the battle
@@mrdoot0730 lol! point! however, would you rather give it away to the system dependent masses , or the military??
Cause, you aren't getting it back!!!
Wow! For once the USA is going to be the low cost attackers.
@F*BLM Gps guided stuff are pretty easy to be jammed. You depend from a weak signal from a satellite which is really far away
Would be the perfect weapon to enforce a blockade and sink various ships like radar pickets.
or merchant ships
This seems like the vanguard of a scary new autonomous swarm technology. Autonomous, evasive loitering torpedoes and low-flying UAVs, mini cruise missiles, guided artillery shells. It may be the weapons with more clever programming that decide the battle before its even fought.
Yeah, gotta say, I think one of the most powerful weapons these days could be some sort of torpedo mine, launched silently from a sub or from ships and planes, that just waits until the enemy ships are almost on top of them, then pursues and sinks them. Added benefit of not revealing a subs location.
One word “Taiwan “. Chinese landing craft don’t has air defense guns.....shooting fish in a barrel comes to mind....
but F15 don't land on carrier so probably not
@@Soras_ f15 is just the test platform. Jdams can be deployed on pretty much every us strike aircraft
Yeah, though anywhere around Taiwan, china does have a lot of land based anti air missles.
Sounds like this could be a good way to sink an armada (hundreds) of landing craft. .. Maybe off the coast of Taiwan? ;)
My take. You aren't going after armed warships with this. Requires you to get to close. Also a low cost weapon for going after enemy merchant traffic.
@@icecold9511
Fighting piracy actually was my first thought 👍 ;)
But then more specifics were mentioned and when they showed that F-15 with a shitload of those under its belly..
@@icecold9511 ypu can use a drone can carry this. Landing ships don't have long range defenses. Trading even 10 drones for one small landing ship plus few hundred soldiers is a very favorable trade.
@@xiphoid2011
Simply holding the beach, especially when most Asian nations like Taiwan don't have the depth of territory to combat invasion, give it value.
The initial salvo for the highly guarded invasion fleet would be the LRASM, NSM and Harpoons.......and then for the follow-on supply ships would be guided JDAM, JSOW and SDB.
The fact that it was missing its fuse in the press release could indicate that the seeker is actually just built into the fuse. Sort of like the PGK kits for artillery shells. Instead of a GPS guidance fuse, they could build one with a IR/CCD seeker, something like a AIM-9x, pre-programmed to glide into the area with the JDAM unit, and then in the terminal phase switch over to the seeker head with a list of potential hostile target types to be looking for in that area.
The USAF has unlocked the Guided Penetration Bomb from Ace Combat.
that's funny.
China: **has the most ships**
Usa: **aight bet**
@AAA AAA useless until it starts sinking ships
@A Perpetual Guardsman with a flashlight or you run out of fighters. Might not be so good for morale if you tell pilots they're flying into certain death.
Jesus. If they force an enemy to waste all of the offensive and defensive bombs on intercepting cheap SBDs/Stormbreakers, and JDAMs, then release a JSOW/Longshot or similar weapon that could deploy a swarm of small drones (which is something the USAF has tested) then the target ship doesn't even need to be sunk. It's bridges, propulsion, radar, and guns could be destroyed, and the remaining crew could be left as a burden for the enemy to rescue, or taken as POWs for intel value or political pressure.
...now i wonder where they plan on using them....;)
Well not really...
They plan on using them to defend Taiwan
@@bryanpineda4142 Ya think...what gave it away ;)
The Australians and Koreans worked with Boeing to create a winged JDAM kit. It triples the range so now you're looking at 80+ km.
That is against fixed targets with known coordinates at maximum altitude. This method requires a direct line of sight (radio command) data link to send course corrections and maintain constant radar or visual contact with a target. This would normally be done at short ranges of less than 20km.
@Drew Peacock ruclips.net/video/tlZVvccUAaw/видео.html RUclips keeps blocking some of my replies.
@Drew Peacock No, or at least for not enough distance to be what we think of as sea skimming. The wings in these kits are very simple, they have no control surfaces. They pop out after release and allow the bomb to glide. Even if the JDAM tail fins could put it into a steep dive to pick up speed and then pull out to level, it would still be just gliding - travelling on a downward slope. Keep in mind that a normal JDAM has a subsonic terminal velocity even without the extra drag of the wing kit.
The capability you are looking for requires a missile.
@Drew Peacock A JDAM? Nope. If they have a small RCS it is because they are relatively small compared to the aircraft that drop them. Their construction is not stealthy: basically steel cylinders with sharp metal fins, strakes, etc.
@Drew Peacock They already have such a thing, the JSOW A-1 and C: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AGM-154_Joint_Standoff_Weapon The reason people keep finding new ways to use JDAMs is because they are, in modern military context, dirt cheap. They're just Mk 80 bombs with a guidance kit bolted on. The only way to make a Mk 80 stealthy is to completely encase it in a stealthy shell. Which is basically what the JSOW A-1 is: a stealthy glide body with a Mk 82 bomb inside it as the warhead.
Manscaped is overdoing it man.. Every fucking video
I know. I have RUclips Premium and I’m still not safe.
The comment section will fill with war experts and five star generals
If you want to know the true reason why America doesn't invest in OMG!! HYPERSONIC GUIDED MISSILESS!!!!
This video is the reason why. Because they don't really work, an can't hit anything that doesn't want to.
The USN practices for real kinetic situations, not choreography.
Bro.... ya really think america didn't invest? They did but just kept it quiet😅
we have that tech already, just not mass produced
@@yoyyoy6357 What? Like Cold Fusion? That secret technology that has been around forever but only the military uses it?
Gimmie a break dude.
@@yanmak2363 you're just a bitter third worlder
@@yoyyoy6357 says the guy with 3rd grade reading/comprehension. Who's fault? your mom raised you alone?
@Apsoy Pike Hypersonics can't reliably hit a moving defending target. Otherwise the USN would develop them.
Three-hundred "thousand" bombs 🤣. They don't even need to aim them, the strait of Taiwan would be literally raining JDAMS bombs all over the attacking fleet. Game over before beginning.
Dream on I think Chinese military realise that.
@@cliffa2901 the only victorious confrontation of PLA since 1960 was in Tienanmen square, do you realize that?
@@ilmaio don't forget Kent state University.
How your police treat black people homeless ECT. That was a horrible thing to happen. But look at your own side . Before you start pointing fingers.
@@cliffa2901 the United States doesn't send in the military and run protesters over with tanks and shoot anyone trying to save lives.
The truth is the CCP does not give a shit about the people and would massacre it's own people with military grade hardware in a heart beat again if it means maintaining power.
More like the taiwan straits would be raining shot down F15s. You do realise chinese SAMs outrange Jdams by over 150km right?
Now I'm unsure wether to buy an F16 or a product from Manscaped
This is only effective if the enemy navy is on the offensive like attacking Hawaii, Alaska, US mainland; China and Russia are only concerned with areas close to their borders and could attack using land based ranged weapons while keeping their navies out of the battlespace, using their navies only when the area is clear of potential air attacks from their opponents. Theoretically Taiwan can use this tactic but it will also illicit a response from the mainland and their airstrips would be destroyed preventing them from landing in home base if ever they survive anti aircraft land based defenses basically making it a suicide mission. US and its allies can only use this tactic against targets close to its homeland or weak opponents with navies but with limited air defense capabilities.
No matter what country you are in or what alliance you go for, all men agree to a clean set of balls. Lol. #manscape
I just bought one :)
With radar guided bombs, Just one stealth bomber with glide bombs could knock out an entire fleet !
Added bonus if the glide bombs have cluster ammunition, since modern warships have no armor just one cluster bomb would turn them into Swiss cheese.
With no guidance you'll be shooting blind. Why did you think china developed anti-satellite weapons? Also to even target these ships you'll need to turn on some kind of radar which is going to make you a magnet for missiles, negating any stealth.
this video starts at 01:48
So China has the largest Navy now? US: Ok, more anti-ship bombs :D
That's ok we're taking your satellites out, because we are fighting old school ww11 style.
@@bshaw71 then how are you sure you know the full capability of your adversary…….think through before brag
Only in number of ships, which is irrelevant when the avg ship size is only about 1/3 the size of the avg USN ship
@@thedausthed no it’s 1/30 actually
During Desert Storm an F-15E Strike Eagle scored the first and only air to air kill on a helicopter for the E platform. But it wasn't with a sidewinder. They used a 2,000lb PavewayII JDAM.
I think many of the comments below are missing the point. The primary targets of these would not be the AESA equipped warships with integrated air warfare and long range sams. A large number of combatants, especially the likes of smaller patrol corvettes, mine sweepers, landing craft, missile boats, etc, would only have point defense IR missiles, gatling guns, if anything at all for air. Those would have near zero ability to threaten a high altitide targeting platform in the area. Not to mention the much larger merchant fleet in the case of total conflict. There is no way China or Russia, or another naval power would have anything close to the order of magnitude necessary number of aegis equivalent platforms to defend all those targets, no matter the size of their navy at that point.
I think you have forgotten how good we are at suppressing, ( jamming) those AESA systems....Your forgetting its a strike package, that includes advanced electronic warfare aircraft. Lets not forget stealthy aircraft, B-21 Raider is on the menu!
@@Sean2002FU Not really. The current level of stealth, or support of stand-off jamming platforms won’t work for friendlies within a few NMs of large, powerful sensors. On a related note though, we do need more dedicated tactical jammers, more Growlers, or a new platform. That would pay large dividents with peer opponents in the future.
@@cfl9077I still think we will see a 2-seat EF-35C take over the Growlers role at some point. With the EW suit the standard F-35 currently has, with a few tweaks, it could also fill the BADLY needed Wild Weasel role.
@@FloridaManMatty I very much doubt it. The F-35 doesn’t have the excess space or power to add either a second seat or a tatical jammer Esuite, much less both. Keep in mind that tactical jammers would need to have similar range and aerodynamic performance as the rest of the strike platform, based on current doctrine. The most likely successor of the F-18G would be a version of the naval NGAD program
Where do you get your information from?
A sock puppet.
This also makes it worth the cost to sink a commercial ship. The cost to sink a fleet of tankers goes from $100 million to $100 thousand.
@AAA AAA Why waste millions dollar missile when you could sink the entire Chinese merchant fleet and militia ships with 30k dollars bombs ? this weapon will cut China off the sea route.
@AAA AAA No, I mean in addition to overwhelming a naval warship, it means the US can sink a large commercial fleet without dipping into limited resources for war. If they want to shut down Chinese shipping, for example, they don't reduce stockpiles that would be used for Taiwan's defense. If you think quickly and efficiently eliminating a nation's commercial shipping is useless: China is the world's largest importer of food, the vast majority of it by sea.
@AAA AAA Yeah, but there's a reason the vast majority of material are transported by sea, Sea route are just so much cheaper and efficient.
This would probably be used instead of a more expensive anti-ship missile against commercial shipping, auxillaries, patrol ships, and small / old warships without modern long range SAMs.
But America already has a vast stockpile of anti-shipping missiles. If this gets fitted to the latest F16 then it could be useful to Taiwan.
@@tomx641 That variant does have the radar needed to do this so it's perfectly possible.
Yes, but what happens when we combine small guided munitions with unmanned multispectrum stealth combat aerial vehicles? Low cost small guided munition swarms, no pilots risked, low risk of drone loss with high probability of ship kill...what, what?!
Oh, and useful against other high-risk targets too...like precision peppering of SAM sites along coasts, precision peppering tank formations, even precision peppering against troop formations.
@Drew Peacock IR signature from exhaust heated isn't as much of an issue. I have one design of many in which dispersed inlets and duct ways incorporate elements and dampeners which effectively turns the exhaust into a cold stream output on exit. So, it's less of an issue and more about effective and efficient design incorporated into the overall build of a mechanical system. It's expensive in low-no numbers but mass production easily would make that a non-issue.
Airship, as in reference to like a zeppelin? I could see certain applications in such a thing but not because we are now in an age where speed to action is a universal necessity and designs must incorporate the ability to act and move on par with past designs or faster, otherwise not at all.
However, if your airship reference is in regards to a mainstay to something incorporating a hub-feature. Then yeah, absolutely. And there's people like me out there that are incorporating elements of that into newer designs of aerial vehicles that will be akin to mobile carrier/asset platforms. I'm sure they'll have access to more advanced tech, R&D compartments to or be able to create necessary tech innovations to make such things viable.
@Drew Peacock As far as profiteering goes, yes and no. A nation/state's C&C structure would want the option and create that option to have it. The MIC profiting off of it is a complex issue because that's a question of allocation. If the nation/state's C&C structure wants it, it becomes more so a question of whether or not it'll be budgeted towards a small, large or national R&D/manufacturing apparatus. MIC is typically referenced to the large scale or large defense manufacturers and those typically try to steer projects to itself for gain, logically understandable. However, that's not necessarily the entirety of it as well. There's some things that just are going to be low ticket, can't be inflated, necessary, or of national necessity where large MIC interest can't or won't bother with. This is aside from things that are necessity that MIC will take up by itself to bring to market out of necessity or individual interests' personal reasons. My opinions, of course, so make of it what you will.
Oh, an example of this would be the Camelbak hydration system or the original Magpul mag-pull concept.
JDAMS. I assume that this means that the F-18's of the US Navy/Marine Corps?
Consider me impressed that the US is finding cheap ways to engage its enemies!
They have too we don't have enough resources
@@cri.682 I hear ya but man it's a waste at this point
@@enhancedutility266 Which is why I'm surprised, the US is finally using that cash efficiently!
@@nerobernardino88 it's a creative way to use those bomb's
@@enhancedutility266 the begining of the end
America controls the skies don't you ever forget that 😆
I didn't know manscaped is a satellite guided precision shaver that will surely sink any moving balls!🤣🤣🤣
Last major war it was safest to be in the Navy out of all the military . Lobbing shells 50-80 miles away. Next war however may be the most dangerous to be on a ship
You forgot about submarines. Also dive bombers and torpedo bombers usually attacked ships staging from beyond visual range. Ask the US and British merchantmen if they felt safe in the Atlantic and the Japanese Navy and merchant ships in the Pacific were mostly decimated by air power and the US submarine force. No, definitely not safest to be on a warship or merchant ship during WW2.
@@renmedalla those are compelling arguments. However, statistics disagree with you.
@@renmedalla I think he talked about Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Hundreds of thousands" of any kind of bomb...unless of course you're talking about decades, is a shitload of bombs.
put a stealth coating on a JDAM or make the bomb from harden steel to resist direct impact from a missile (because proximity detonation would probably be useless) and this simple innovation just means that both China and Russia need to invest into ships that can stop the bomb delivery platforms before releasing their payload...This means that they need to increase the military spending, by making bigger/more ships or even carriers which will be straining their economy... Well played US, well played...
Added benefit, the Chinese and Russians are inept at executing effective naval solutions beyond slapping a lot of everything, everywhere!
@John Smith No they don't. Chinese and Russian stealth tech is 30 years behind, and Iran and North Korea can't even spell stealth. Also, no country has millions of any bombs, much less stealth ones. Try again, troll.
@John Smith Well, they are just now introducing fighters (the Su57 and J-20) with inferior stealth tech to that on the F-22, which was first flown in the 1990s, and the B-2, which first flew in 1989, so yeah, I'd say they're well behind in that department. The Chinese can't even get the engines for the J-20 to work, so they've had to resort to making substandard copies of Russian engines which still aren't as good as 1990s US engines. They're not making bad aircraft, but they're definitely behind in some critical areas. Russia makes excellent missiles, and China copies them, but no one knows if the copies are any good. Most importantly, their pilot training and experience lags far behind the US and NATO, and a plane is only as good as its pilots.
And back to your original post, no, China, Russia, Iran, etc. haven't made millions of bombs, and haven't just slapped stealth coatings on to them. Even if they had, stealth depends much more on shaping than on coatings. Just adding a RAM coating won't do much unless the munition itself is shaped to deflect radar waves.
@John Smith No, I'm really not, "laddie." This information is all publicly available.
they will shoot the fighter, not the bomb, once the fighter is dead, the bomb can't see. this isn't WWII, countries use missile because it is silly to try and fly above the enemy and drop a bomb. the JDAM only has a target range of 15 mile, a fighter can be visually lock by IR at a range of 50 mile. the math just doesn't work out.
This means there will be many Chinese ships at the bottom of the ocean if they invade Taiwan.Go USA 🇺🇸 💪🏼💪🏼💪🏼
This means China can nuke USA go China go
yeah because they can launch the aircraft from.... where? look where is the nearest place they can launch the aircraft, and look at DF-21's range
Yea I wouldn't count on that going by how much tech China steals from the US.
@@robertbrown374 They could, and would get exterminated because of it. Even if we didn't retaliate with nuclear weapons, China would be getting Zero outside food shipments or oil. Except from bordering countries, which isn't enough. The New Silk Road is all Fixed Points. doesn't move, and the rail and road networks bridges hubs would all be littered with cluster bombs.
@@robertbrown374 Nuking someone generally is a very bad idea, especially the US.
So its anti shit guided bombs vs anti-air guided bombs vs anti anti guided shit guided bombs vs anti bombs guided bombs......trails off into literally just screaming
So perhaps the future is the past: Yamato-like levels of AAA as a defence
Modern CIWS and SeaRAMs are deadlier.
@@death_parade "Yamato-like levels of AAA" referencing just filling the entire deck with guns and point defense missile systems instead of just a handful
@@hertzwave8001 Go ahead. But truth is that a modern Arleigh Burke Class would fare better than such a ship. If you can shoot down the aircraft itself, you don't need to shoot down the bombs. Genius, I know.
@@death_parade At the max distance no navy would actually be able to engage an F-35 dropping these bombs. The need for greater point defense is undeniable.
I think a lot of things have made it clear that the technology needed to counter this is laser point defense.
THE BOMB KNOWS WHERE IT IS BECAUSE IT KNOWS WHERE IT ISN'T.
Binkov, get us a 20% off code for a JDAM! I want to show my neighbour whos the boss.
Your neighbor probably has a Chinese hypersonic missile in his garage. You’ll have to do a sneak attack and disable his garage door so he can’t deploy it.
@@seamusoreilly804 If you disable your enemy's hand, he cannot launch his hypersonic missle. :D
Think about being able to drop at max range and then beat it, handing off guidance to another stealth platform doing guidance. Wouldn’t even need to loiter.
I'm literally being sold ball care products by a puppet commissar 🤣
😄🎉Everyone, Support The Anglosphere🇺🇲🇬🇧🇦🇺🇨🇦🇳🇿 !!!!!!!!!!!!!🎉
"Anglo"sphere:
official languages: Spanish, Punjabi, Chinese, Chinese, Westron
Would imagine china would attack the US GPS satellite system first.
I doubt they would have the capability. What they could do though, is to release another virus and kill a couple of hundred thousand US inhabitants that way!! The West does seem pretty powerless to defend itself against this sort of attack. May be this is the future of warfare - who's to say?
@@simonpitt8145 russia was able to jam GPS to force vessels to deviate.....they can do that. Blowing up GPS sats with A-sat weapons would lead to nuclear exchange
@@simonpitt8145 Difficulty hitting low flying satellites ? They are not in Synchronous orbit. US has launched satellite killer missiles from jet fighters. I'm sure the Chinese have stolen all the plans.
china demonstrated ASAT capability as far back as 2007. So you can bet they'll use it.
@@kimbo99
Only one problem... most Navigation satellites(be it GPS, GLONASS, Beidou/Compass, or Galileo) are more than 15,000km from Earth.
now the bomb will know where it is
and where it isn't
because it knows where it isn't
a year later - the quicksink system is being showcased
delivered by an old F series strike eagle variant : its.... well the name says it all, breaks the target ship clean in half and sinks it in seconds - granted they are using a smaller less armored target but it looks like this thing detonates right about at sea level from inside the ship
one ordinance, standoff distance, no ship
No sir! it ( by design) hits the water next to the ship and travels under it to maximize the hydrostatic effects of the water on the explosion...just like a torpedo!
LRASM null and voids the more capable surface combatants. The modifications outlined by binkov clean up the rest
LRASM is stupidly expensive!
The bomb is less than $4,000, then add the Quicksink kit
(upgraded JDAM).
LRASM is for the MOSKVA and it's equals. The price of one missile is 4 million.
It's easy to spend other people's money.
Just like WWII, cheap bombs were used to sink ships, aircrafts carriers. Just one or two out of twenty bombs hit the target would damage or sink the sink. Ships are huge and not moving fast, therefore, by knowing the altitude, distance and speed of the aircraft and ship, the bomb can be launch and hit the target with higher degree of accurate. Peoples who study engineering should be very familiar with Projectile Motion Equations.
In a few years the ship builders will develop a rudder.
The fact that they are cheap and easy to make is what is really impressive.
until the other side use the same method.
@@YohannesKristiawan Have to develope the radar arrays and software to make them capable of this. It is some pretty high tech system. The tech will be developed by other countries eventually, but countermeasures, such as lasers and better radar system to track the rain of bombs or the plane targeting the ship, will have also been developed.
@@KnightsWithoutATable china only need to defend the coast. we already have 100km - 500km laser guided artillery. probably enough to overwhelmed any battle ship. we develop swarm drone already. probably swarm jdam would not be that hard to develop (if needed).
@@YohannesKristiawan Battleships aren't a thing anymore and haven't been relevant since WWII. Air power and carriers are what navies use now. Besides, why bother wasting resources attacking China's coastline when simply blockading maritime trade would cause the entire country to not only have the economy crash and be cut off from raw materials but also to have a famine. You don't have enough arable land to feed your population and import a significant portion of your food. Sanctions alone without military action would also be available and highly effective.
@@KnightsWithoutATable war, blocade, is the second thing. the first question is: why need war? taiwan? even US recognize one china (means china is under beijing government & taiwan is under beijing) + area claimed by beijing and taipei are the same (based on both constitution), it means: unfinished civil war.
These days, An attack would be go down like this.
Decoy drones, small Anti-ship missile attack, JDAM's and Small diameter bombs, Swarms of Cheap drones with bombs on them.
A flight of fighters flying few inches over the water firing anti-armor missiles and torpedoes is old-school but it works
This is smart. We need to figure out how to fight China inexpensively.
@AAA AAA first a small cruise missile or drone will blind the ships radars , THEN ....💥💥💥💥😂😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣
@AAA AAA and for that, if the bombs do not work, we have missiles. china also has to deal with cost efficiency.
China used to fight the US "inexpensively", by throwing human waves to the slaughter.
@@gorilladisco9108 Hundreds of thousands of them.
@AAA AAA You watch too many propaganda videos, the strong don't need propaganda.
You could armour such a momb against 20mm bulets or more or drop dumies from pure iron which only rips holes trough the ship an theyre nearly imposible to shoot down
China: we're gonna build more aircraft carriers!
USA: SKY TORPEDOS AWAY!!
I guess we could always practice on illegal fishing boats?
Fill a transport plane(s) with small guided bombs, swamp the target ship, reduce it's ability to respond to bigger bombs. If I can think of a way to make it work, I'm sure someone in the test lab has also. It's easy to say "just shoot the plane down" or "just shoot the bombs themselves" but first you have to 'see' the attacking plane, then you need many thousands of rounds for quick firing guns to intercept all those bombs.
No ship can carry enough ammunition to shoot down all those bombs. The battle then becomes one of numbers i.e. missiles and bullets verses hundreds (thousands?) of small bomb targets. But that would be just one attack of course. Reload the planes and just attack again, eventually any ship will be a sitting duck. This type of attack would be much cheaper than using a submarine to sink even one ship, and safer for the sub crew of course.
> The shepherds flock was threatened by the wolf, so the shepherd got a dog. The dogs’ teeth were not sharper or its bite more vicious than the wolf, but the wolf would rather go hungry than face the dog.
> The free world cannot afford to let the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) take Taiwan. Taiwan is strategically located at the center of the first island chain. It would complete their control of the chain less Japan. It would become yet another island military base and give the CCP a deep-water Pacific port to conceal their nuclear subs threatening the U.S. Japan Knows it would be next, if not targeted at the same time and after that the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia, Vladivostok and eventually the US. The CCP would use Taiwan to cut the trade routes and threaten free countries who do not yield to its will or relinquish territory and resources. Japan would be first. Appeasement “Peace in our time” did not work for Chamberlain it will not work now. [Maybe they should be called the NAZI party, except for the symbols it is hard to tell the difference.]
> The CCP believes it is on the verge of global domination. The Quad Alliance (Australia, India, Japan, United States) and now others is the only organization that could stand up to the CCP. If the Quad+ does nothing other countries will say the Quad+ ether could not or would not stop the CCP and so they cannot. They would have to aqueous to all the CCPs demands and over time lose their sovereignty to the CCP. Eventually the CCP would become so powerful that the free world would have to do so too. This used to be called the domino effect. The CCP would impose its propaganda/censorship/surveillance empire not just to Mongolia, Turkestan, Tibet, Hong Kong and now Taiwan, and later the rest of the world. Free speech would evaporate globally. Democracy would become a distant memory. Concentration camps would proliferate worldwide.
> IT WILL START LIKE THIS: The CCP assumes the Quad+ alliance will help Taiwan. In their version of the NAZI “OPERATION SEA LION” the PLA (People’s Liberation Army) attacks the Quad+ carriers and air force bases with 100s of missiles each preemptively in the belief that a demoralized Quad+ will withdraw or be delayed leaving Taiwan defenseless. In time the Quad+ destroys the PLA navy, the maritime militia, takes the artificial military islands, and closes the Strait of Malacca to the CCP. The Quad+ maintains constant military and economic pressure on the CCPs” Military Industrial Complex” with standoff weapons. The CCP has alienated every country on its border. Sum including Russia would see opportunity and attack China once the PLA has been weekend, for reasons all their own. With their massive numerical advantage invading mainland China is not an option. It would result in massive casualties, lots of collateral damage, risk a nuclear exchange and might become a protracted war with no guarantee of achieving anything more. Regime change might be a little too ambitious. Inflicting casualties on the PLA would only make them stronger as they already have more people than their land will support (1.4 billion, four times the US population and four times the number of mouths to feed with the same amount of land). China is not self-sufficient in oil, coal, natural gas, food, water, iron ore, rare earth ore, agricultural seed, and other things. A war in China’s front yard would in and of itself stop all Chinese trade and maritime poaching operations. The Chinese economy would collapse. A negotiated peace or even a cease fire would not work as the CCP would never honor any deal it made, rearm, and try again. The only thing that would stop the CCP is the inability to attack. Containment would be the order of the day, the decade or longer. There would be no exit strategy. Perpetual war? With all deference to Binkov’s Battlegrounds the object of the exercise would be to protect Taiwan, stop CCP “Lebensraum” (expansionism), keep the international sea lanes open, and eliminate the threat to and theft of resources from other countries, NOT the conquering of China. As tempting as regime change would be that is an extremely ambitious goal requiring an uprising of the Chinese people, who all have Stockholm Syndrome against their CCP masters.
> The CCP is watching the Quad+ reorganize, reprioritize, reequip with new technology, build capability and alliances in the SCS. This might be enough to deter them. An economic war or cold war is a lot less expensive and a lot less bloody than a real one. Maybe the US should dust off the 1941 “Lend-Lease Act” or Canada the “Mutual Aid Act”? What ever happened to “The Arsenal of Democracy”? Does the free world really need to charge Taiwan the full price for the military supplies and equipment they are buying? Should little Taiwan wildly overmatched bear the burden of defending freedom and democracy worldwide? If there is a war, there will be no winners only losers. The only way to really win a war is not to fight one. The CCP has been fighting a cold war with the free world for the last 50 years. I wonder if an arms race might help bankrupt the CCP the same way it did the Soviet Union?
I support China unification and see that as a requirement for world peace. US does not speak for the world.
@@lagrangewei That`s what the Nazis said about Czechoslovakia, before they went on to their next invasion.
Yeah...imagine B-52s flying at 40,000 feet decimating an entire fleet.
the US using cold war soviet naval aviation tactics ? Overwhelming nato shipping with stand off missile swarms ? gosh I miss Harpoon.
Well I hope the PLA is watch this video. Deterrence is what it is all about.
They see this and also know about the hypersonic missiles in dev rn. They're scared.
The PLA is probably banking on their next generation SAMs like the HQ9C with 400km of range to keep any antiship platforms well out of range.
@@hughmungus2760 OK, I would think it would be a good time to have the MAULS do their job here.
A fighter Jet that could destroy an entire Battle Ship. That is a huge game changer.
No, they can’t, ships in that size would shoot down the plane way before they could drop the bomb...
@@MrCastodian ... Excuse me? A battelship? If he means battleship than yes a jet could just destroy it with a full bomb load. Anyways if he is talking about a modern vessel than yes it would get shot down way before it can drop the bomb.
B-52s would love that capability
Maybe for Taiwan versus China. ..?
Exactly what I thought, the longer I listened.
My first thought was fighting piracy.
@@damianm-nordhorn116 My first thought was China and new military ships from china!?Maybe chinese/russia SAM system can be on the list of JDAM!?
If effective would not need 100 thousand as not that many ships needed to neutralize.
Smartest thing I read on internet this week.
Eh, you might need more than one per ship, and certain of our enemies have shown a readiness to produce ships quickly in large numbers. The battlefield could change rapidly. I get that sometimes less is more, but I don't feel this is one of those times.
until the other side use the same method.
China has a navy 3x larger then the US
Well, if they were to drop 240 of the small winged bombs at each ship, that number seems more reasonable
I bet they will at some point be dropped from drones. Very cost effective combination. Cheaper than a missile because you reuse the aircraft part but without the risk of losing a pilot.
Maybe if the miniaturize the AESA radar. but at that point why not just use a drone as a bomb. That's essentially a cruise missile anyways. The drone itself is just as expensive as a cruise missile.
@@Shinobubu but you reuse the drone. It comes back unless lost.
The drone won't get anywhere close it'll be shot out of the sky
@@HaydenLau. why any more so than a missile?.
@@davidfryer9218
Because a missile is much smaller and much faster. If the US can develop hypersonic anti-ship ballistic missiles, much _much_ faster.
Swarming missiles at communist Chinese or Russian targets is the new tactic. I saw a story about crates of missiles that are dropped from transport planes and swarm their targets. Each crate holds 16 missiles and each cargo plane can hold 12 crates. That's 192 missiles per plane and their are many cargo planes already in the arsenal... Also each missile can fly a different course to the target..
pray for the collapse of communism in China to change its regime to Democratic Govt.
Russia is not comunist.
Btw its classical Russian tactic you speak about... They deploy it in Sirya while west havily criticise it as absess of high tec weapons 🙄
@@gutadin5 wow, democatic crussader. nobody need your sh!tty corrupt system.
Yeah I've seen this also. If I had to guess it's true intended purpose is to overwhelm Russian S-400 defenses.
China and Russia have ant-aircraft missiles that can take them out hundreds of miles before they can deploy them. The US was fixated on the Middle East for 20 years. China and Russia had time to do there missiles development leaving the yanks well behind. The s-400 and s-500 have proven to take out any aircraft the US have.
That is a good idea and the service must already be using this technology and ready to take on both China and Russia.
Can't they slap a pattern recognition device on the guidance system? You know, like the one on our smartphones to detect face and change it into cartoon dog? It will be less than $100 addition but shall eliminate the dangerous coordinating requirement with the F-15. All the bomb has to do is to keep the recognized target inside the view lock.
its there already
100$ system to track ship from 20 nautical miles?
Dude you have to be basically on top of a target (relative to standoff munitions) to drop gravity bombs on ships. Useless against modern navies.
Nobody said the JDAMs were going to be first naval strike weapons. That’s why we have JSOWs and JASSMs, not to mention the B-52Hs being Harpoon Missile-capable.
But once the enemy AD Destroyers and Cruisers are dealt with, it’ll be pretty wasteful to use guided missiles for softer targets at sea. Troop Transports, Helicopter Carriers, Amphibious Assault Ships, and Refuelers do not require standoff weapons to be sunk. 2,000-pound bombs hitting them amidships work just fine.
@Drew Peacock Growlers wouldn’t have the endurance to keep-up with B-52s, and the BUFFS have pretty strong EW capabilities of their own. The H models don’t even have Tail Guns anymore. My bet is what they perfect here will be incorporated into the B-21’s opsys. B-2s will be too old for this future anti-naval war soon enough.
@Drew Peacock The B-2s are "too old" because their airframes and low-observable coatings are "tired," plus their software and computers (designed during the Pentium II era) can no longer be upgraded to future standards.
And they have no robust jamming capabilities of their own. EW requires its own officer and the B-2 only seats two aircrew, pilot and co-pilot.
You cannot have Growlers accompany B-52s because they have "short legs," 400 nautical miles without refueling. You'd have to be constantly refueling them just to keep-up with the BUFFs all the way to Weapons Range. At that point the tankers themselves will need refueling, or can be targeted by the enemy's own air cover.
In contrast the B-52 has a combat range of 8,800 miles without aerial refueling. With its robust EW suite and standoff weapons it can do the job of naval strike by itself.
The enemy would need something like their own F-14-type squadrons carrying their own AIM-54-type missiles to go out and meet the bombers before they get into range. But they don't, and they won't know where to send their short-legged fighters to go find the bombers unless they can break through the jamming. They can direct all the radar emissions into our suspected directions all they want, all they'll get back is noise. Plus all those air search radars' emissions will do is give our Wild Weasel guys more juicy targets.
If ya think about it, this is a good counter for the chinese navy militia(aka CCP fishing boats in SCS). There are hundreds and even thousands of them always swarming together at one time. And you can't sink 'em all with expensive bombs.
You cannot sink them because they are unarmed civilian ship, not because there are many of them.
@@joelau2383 actually if they are apart of the military the are fair game according to the laws of war
@@kameronjones7139 The problem is they are not listed in military and you need to proof they are making war action before attack them. Otherwise, you commit war crime.
@@joelau2383 that is completely false the Chinese milita is apart of the Chinese armed forces
@@kameronjones7139 Your claims is meaningless without proofs. As long as China officials don't list them into military, you need individual evidence to proof every single fish boat you sink is playing war action. Otherwise, it is war crime.