I heard a story about the first generation of the surface launched RBS15. One of the first firings, if not the first. In the story, the command tent, yes tent, with the guidance and telemetry equipment, was somewhat unfortunately placed, so... when the robot/missile was launched, the backblast "de-tented" the command post. The result was that the missile went on its merry way, out across the Baltic with no guidance. I heard the story from my brother, who did his military service in the coastal defence late 80:s. Have no other source though.
Got a few comments First thing is probably part of the reason why the US never researched supersonic missiles is that we haven't had a need for it. I think around the thing the Soviets were looking into the tech to get around AEGIS protected craft, they fell apart. The US really haven't had a need until recently, so the tech as sorta stagnated. The Naval Strike Missiles was designed as it's replacement, although this is very recent. They're also working on a long range ASM that might work close to how the Tomahawk Anti-Ship missile works, but with some stealth aspects designed into it. Also, about the Harpoon, I could see a system that flies in a direction then uses a time to know when to turn on it's radar cone and start it's search routines. You can hit surface targets with ASMs, Jive Turkey did a mission recently in Command Modern Operations covering an attack using Osa missile boats with SS-N-2 Styx missiles. It probably wouldn't be as efficient of a missile designed for land tagets, but it can do damage. Same for using TLAMs on ships, probably would only be used on moored ships or drydocked ships. The anti-ship ballistic missile that's becoming relevant right now is the "Carrier Killer" that the Chinese are working on. That and nuclear weapons, they were experimented with in the 60s and 70s I believe to see what sort of effects it can have. Two Exocets hit an Oliver Hazard Class frigate, only one detonated. She was damaged really bad, but they were able to save that one. That exocet that sunk the UK DD must have had one killer of a hit. Only got like 25 mintues before I had to go, I'll have to add more later.
Seems like the Exocet DD sinking was indeed from a hit near the waterline, about 2 inches. The fires caused by the missile and the damage done to the water main and some eletrical systems allowed the fired to spread and made it too dangerous to continue fighting. A Frigate towed the ship back before they had a change to see what was left and patch the hole, towed her through a rough sea state which caused her to slowly flood and sink. I remember hearing some cruise missiles which depend on fires caused to help deal damage to ships. About that Bazalt and Vulkan, they had both nuclear and conventional variants, as did the US. That would explain the two numbers. Thankfully, most the nuclear warhead I believe have been decomissioned due to proliferation treaties. A cruise missile is nasty enough, building a nuke to detonate inside a ship, I'll take a pass on that one. That Kitchen is a scary thing, the speed I believe tries to reduce reaction time from detection to about a few seconds. Plus, that type of fuel would be called hypergolic, where the reaction is sustained by mixing them together. NileRed is a channel that shows what some fuels are like, but in very small scale,. That's about it. Otherwise, I know we have the P-700 Granit in DCS. Not sure if I can add anything else right now.
Some additional info: 10:00 Ships are surface targets as well. 12:30 The Mk. III is using a new turbojet, a denser propellant and additional boosters, that's where the range increase comes from. But it should be noted that there is no official range data in the public domain, those are estimates afaik. 16:50 In general, there are three flight phases for a missile in terms of propulsion: boost - sustain - glide. During boost phase the missile accelerates to its maximum speed, during sustain it sustains that speed, during glide phase the motor is out of fuel. Booster/sustainer means it has a boost motor to accelerate *and* a sustainer afterwards. For example, the AIM-120A also has both a booster and a sustainer, but the AIM-120C forgoes the sustainer in favour of a larger booster. 27:35 I suspect the solid fuel stage is a booster, while the turbojet is the sustainer. 42:55 Just as an aside: generally speaking, liquid fuel rockets suck really hard in a military application. The reason being they have to be stored empty and are then fueled prior to launch, which can take literal hours in the case of larger ballistic missiles. In other words, you can't have them on standby and then launch whenever a target presents itself.
In rocketry, a "booster" refers to a fast-burning rocket stage, which has high thrust but low endurance and is generally used only during liftoff and initial climb, while a "sustainer" is a slow-burning stage with less thrust but much longer endurance. I'm guessing it's similar in missiles, though probably not quite as many varieties are used.
The Sea Eagles are long gone from UK service. Not because they are particularly obsolete, just that the examples that had been bought had reached the end of their 'shelf life' and they didn't order new ones. Essentially they bought one big batch in the mid-80's and when those missiles were past their sell by date, just withdrew the whole thing from service. Though even if they had bought replacements, by 2005 there wouldn't have been anything that could fire them. The Buccaneers were long gone, the Tornado GR1B's were converted to regular GR4's and so lost the capability and the Sea Harrier's retirement was accelerated. India still had some, but any remaining examples would have been retired with their Sea Harrier FRS.51's in 2016.
As far as i know, Kh-22 defence against highly defended target is a high altitude nuclear detonation that "blinds" the enemy radars (the Electromagnetic pulse - EMP effect) and then the surface hits on the targets. It also might be series of nuclear detonations from high altitude to low, to keep the blinding effect in place until rest of missiles got through. For the rest of cruise missiles the defense measures can be: frontal armor (against 20 mm CIWS rounds, if I remember correctly), active jamming and simultaneous final approach from different directions. Granit, as the most advanced Soviet made AShM combines all of these measures. Of course, the reason for the difference in design approach of Soviet/Russian anti-ship missiles is the requirement to successfully engage US carrier groups equipped with fighter jets and protected by AEGIS convoy ships. So all the heavy anti-ship missiles are anti-CVBG centered. Alongside them there are also more conventional supersonic missiles, like Alfa and Onix, intended against modern ships with strong air defense, and also cheap and light Harpoon-like subsonic missiles for lightly defended targets, landing ships, export etc. Taiwan is the second adopter of the heavy supersonic anti-ship missile doctrine, I believe, due to the rising Chinese naval capabilities, that include aircraft carriers. The Chinese rely on Soviet/Russian Moskit (onboard the Sovremenniy class DDG), and self developed ballistic AShM to deter the US CVBG threat. Keep up the good work, Cap.
Igor, the reason the Kh-22 was launched at high altitude was to reduce the chances of interception during the cruise phase of its floght. Secondly, in its terminal dive to the target it resches a speed of Mach 5.5 rendering any interception impossible for NATO ships during the Cold War, in fact when NATO saw the specs in 1990 at a Moscow Air Show, they were stunned and deeply disturbed and conceded they were unaware of the Kh-22’s capability and mist likely a swarm of these missiles would have caused serious damage to their Carrier Fleets. Secondly, the Kh-22’s exploding at high-altitude is not their main defence, it simply damages the electronic equipment of NATO ships, except for equipment which still uses vaccuum tubes.
Usually the "boost" and "sustainer" stages of a missile just mean different geometry bore cut within the centre of the rocket motor, to expose more or less fuel to combustion at once. The boost stage of a missile don't necessarily separate - the AIM-120 A/B for example is staged in this manner, and as you can plainly see nothing is jettisoned in flight.
Littoral is coastal waters. So shore based warfare, ie. monitors, gunboats, torpedo boats, corvettes, patrol boats, missile boats etc. Harpoons also don't have VLS which is the main issue with the missile.
Burning it all in a very short time is a common way to use solid fuel rockets, but it's not the only way. I believe you can make the burn slow, and either way there's hybrid rockets that use a fluid oxidizer. I'm guessing somebody has a way to use air as the hybrid's oxidizer. If any of that is what they actually did, I wouldn't know.
Hybrid liquid/solid, gas/solid, and (ramjet) air/solid motors all exist. The latter in particular is notable for being integrated into the MBDA Meteor. As far as I am aware the other two have not been used in missiles, and I suspect are not likely to be because they tend to be more complicated systems.
All sorts of ideas about why the Exocets were so effective, but here’s the Royal Navies Inquiry, declassified in 2017 www.admiraltytrilogy.com/read/BOI_Rpt_HMS_Sheffield_May82.pdf To summarise findings, Some members of the crew were “bored and a little frustrated by inactivity” and the ship was “not fully prepared” for an attack. The anti-air warfare officer had left the ship’s operations room and was having a coffee in the wardroom when the Argentinian navy launched the attack, while his assistant had left “to visit the heads” (relieve himself). The radar on board the ship that could have detected incoming Super Étendard fighter aircraft had been blanked out by a transmission being made to another vessel. When a nearby ship, HMS Glasgow, did spot the approaching aircraft, the principal warfare officer in the Sheffield’s ops room failed to react, “partly through inexperience, but more importantly from inadequacy”. The anti-air warfare officer was recalled to the ops room, but did not believe the Sheffield was within range of Argentina’s Super Étendard aircraft that carried the missiles. When the incoming missiles came into view, officers on the bridge were “mesmerised” by the sight and did not broadcast a warning to the ship’s company. Add to this several ship design issues that made subsequent damage and fire control problematic, and HMS Sheffield sank with the loss of 26 souls. The first RN ship lost in combat since WW2.
not true. harpoon is completely outdated. that's why lrasm is being developed. nothing to do with vls. you could adapt harpoon to vls, it was even adapted to torpedoes tubes... it's so ancient, it predates vls.
@@Runandgun13 not in real life. it's not even on the same league. you are comparing a cruise missile with a lot more range with a small air to ground missile. completely different missions. oudated 70 tech. compare it with a spear 3 missile.
Cap wants to buy a cruise missile engine for his car. LOL. IIRC, Cessna designed a private jet designed to use cruise missile engines as its powerplants. It worked perfectly. Until, that is, someone noticed that a cruise missile's engine lifespan is measured in hours, not years. They eventually swapped it out for a more durable one.
Yes, mostly for the LCS. Kongsberg also entered an agreement with Lockheed Martin to develop a variant of NSM compatible with the F-35, and that would also allowed it to be fired from the Mk 41 VLS.
Correct, guided via Radio link by the bombardier with a small control stick. The only method the bombardier had for locating and aiming the bomb was a flare in the rear of the Fritz-X.
hey cap the s in RBS does stand for system the whole name is robot system 15 wich should translate to missile system 15 :) and if you have questions about swedish weapons in dcs like names and such you just have to ask ;) also we here in sweden just recently regained the capability to launch the rbs 15 from a truck mounted launcher (scania of course ;) ) they launched the first shot in many years during late 2016 (they were mothballed when the coastal artillery branch was shut down)
naval strike missile(NSM) is an impressive NEW over the horizon anti-ship missile with sea skimming and evasive manouvers with Inertial, GPS, terrain-reference navigation, imaging infrared homing and a target database so it knows exactly what its meant to hit. Norway developed it and the US NAVY bought hundreds as an interim over horizon missile for the Littoral Combat Classes of ships(Freedom class, Independence class) and US NAVY so impressed with it theyre considering it or an upgraded version for their upcoming FF(X) Frigate program
If you want to talk about "NEW" you should talk about the JSM, which is a miniaturized NSM to fit into F-35 weapons bays. Currently the only cruise missile available for the F-35. US doesn't often buy foreign missile systems but NSM and Penguin are among the exceptions. NASAMS is sort of a half-exception, using amraams.
@@riskinhos Actually that's not true, subsonic missiles can perform terminal maneuver that make it hard for CIWS to intercept, the faster the missiles, the wider its turn radius, so a highly maneuverable subsonic missiles can offset its lack of speed. Not to mention that most, if not all subsonic missiles are sea-skimmer, that means that without a fleet AWACS, longer-range missile defenses can't really detect it until it's close by due to the curvature of the Earth.
Heard that US is planning to start using launchable pigeons as ASMs due their outstanding searching capability. For more info you can search google for 'pigeonrank' and get extra info about it.
You guys realy need to watch this documentary : Top Secret Weapons Revealed in search of the smart bomb. It’s great! can wait to have a pigeon guided bomb or a bat bomb in DCS!
That missile is not launched by fighters, I can't recall the exact model but it's probably a P-500 or P-1000, which I also forgot the NATO names right now, they are launched from ships. IIRC the heaviest air launched AShM is the AS-4 Kitchen and probably now the Kinzhal...
Sry I have to downvote - too many "idk" and "never heard of ...x" - I don't want to hear that! Do your research, prepare material and have a clear plan /goal on exactly what you want to achieve with the video. Those should be the basics.
Everyone is a gangsta until someone starts throwing not just fridges but the whole kitchens at them.
I heard a story about the first generation of the surface launched RBS15. One of the first firings, if not the first.
In the story, the command tent, yes tent, with the guidance and telemetry equipment, was somewhat unfortunately placed, so...
when the robot/missile was launched, the backblast "de-tented" the command post. The result was that the missile went on
its merry way, out across the Baltic with no guidance.
I heard the story from my brother, who did his military service in the coastal defence late 80:s. Have no other source though.
Got a few comments
First thing is probably part of the reason why the US never researched supersonic missiles is that we haven't had a need for it. I think around the thing the Soviets were looking into the tech to get around AEGIS protected craft, they fell apart. The US really haven't had a need until recently, so the tech as sorta stagnated. The Naval Strike Missiles was designed as it's replacement, although this is very recent. They're also working on a long range ASM that might work close to how the Tomahawk Anti-Ship missile works, but with some stealth aspects designed into it.
Also, about the Harpoon, I could see a system that flies in a direction then uses a time to know when to turn on it's radar cone and start it's search routines.
You can hit surface targets with ASMs, Jive Turkey did a mission recently in Command Modern Operations covering an attack using Osa missile boats with SS-N-2 Styx missiles. It probably wouldn't be as efficient of a missile designed for land tagets, but it can do damage. Same for using TLAMs on ships, probably would only be used on moored ships or drydocked ships.
The anti-ship ballistic missile that's becoming relevant right now is the "Carrier Killer" that the Chinese are working on. That and nuclear weapons, they were experimented with in the 60s and 70s I believe to see what sort of effects it can have.
Two Exocets hit an Oliver Hazard Class frigate, only one detonated. She was damaged really bad, but they were able to save that one. That exocet that sunk the UK DD must have had one killer of a hit.
Only got like 25 mintues before I had to go, I'll have to add more later.
Thanks
Seems like the Exocet DD sinking was indeed from a hit near the waterline, about 2 inches. The fires caused by the missile and the damage done to the water main and some eletrical systems allowed the fired to spread and made it too dangerous to continue fighting. A Frigate towed the ship back before they had a change to see what was left and patch the hole, towed her through a rough sea state which caused her to slowly flood and sink.
I remember hearing some cruise missiles which depend on fires caused to help deal damage to ships.
About that Bazalt and Vulkan, they had both nuclear and conventional variants, as did the US. That would explain the two numbers. Thankfully, most the nuclear warhead I believe have been decomissioned due to proliferation treaties. A cruise missile is nasty enough, building a nuke to detonate inside a ship, I'll take a pass on that one.
That Kitchen is a scary thing, the speed I believe tries to reduce reaction time from detection to about a few seconds. Plus, that type of fuel would be called hypergolic, where the reaction is sustained by mixing them together. NileRed is a channel that shows what some fuels are like, but in very small scale,. That's about it.
Otherwise, I know we have the P-700 Granit in DCS. Not sure if I can add anything else right now.
CEP means Circular Error Probable, in other words, it measures Missile accuraccy in circular area with 50% probability of hit.
And it obviously relates to inertial navigation up to the point the terminal radar homing is activated.
thx
Some additional info:
10:00 Ships are surface targets as well.
12:30 The Mk. III is using a new turbojet, a denser propellant and additional boosters, that's where the range increase comes from. But it should be noted that there is no official range data in the public domain, those are estimates afaik.
16:50 In general, there are three flight phases for a missile in terms of propulsion: boost - sustain - glide. During boost phase the missile accelerates to its maximum speed, during sustain it sustains that speed, during glide phase the motor is out of fuel. Booster/sustainer means it has a boost motor to accelerate *and* a sustainer afterwards. For example, the AIM-120A also has both a booster and a sustainer, but the AIM-120C forgoes the sustainer in favour of a larger booster.
27:35 I suspect the solid fuel stage is a booster, while the turbojet is the sustainer.
42:55 Just as an aside: generally speaking, liquid fuel rockets suck really hard in a military application. The reason being they have to be stored empty and are then fueled prior to launch, which can take literal hours in the case of larger ballistic missiles. In other words, you can't have them on standby and then launch whenever a target presents itself.
Thx Sir
In rocketry, a "booster" refers to a fast-burning rocket stage, which has high thrust but low endurance and is generally used only during liftoff and initial climb, while a "sustainer" is a slow-burning stage with less thrust but much longer endurance. I'm guessing it's similar in missiles, though probably not quite as many varieties are used.
The Sea Eagles are long gone from UK service. Not because they are particularly obsolete, just that the examples that had been bought had reached the end of their 'shelf life' and they didn't order new ones.
Essentially they bought one big batch in the mid-80's and when those missiles were past their sell by date, just withdrew the whole thing from service.
Though even if they had bought replacements, by 2005 there wouldn't have been anything that could fire them.
The Buccaneers were long gone, the Tornado GR1B's were converted to regular GR4's and so lost the capability and the Sea Harrier's retirement was accelerated.
India still had some, but any remaining examples would have been retired with their Sea Harrier FRS.51's in 2016.
As far as i know, Kh-22 defence against highly defended target is a high altitude nuclear detonation that "blinds" the enemy radars (the Electromagnetic pulse - EMP effect) and then the surface hits on the targets. It also might be series of nuclear detonations from high altitude to low, to keep the blinding effect in place until rest of missiles got through.
For the rest of cruise missiles the defense measures can be: frontal armor (against 20 mm CIWS rounds, if I remember correctly), active jamming and simultaneous final approach from different directions. Granit, as the most advanced Soviet made AShM combines all of these measures.
Of course, the reason for the difference in design approach of Soviet/Russian anti-ship missiles is the requirement to successfully engage US carrier groups equipped with fighter jets and protected by AEGIS convoy ships. So all the heavy anti-ship missiles are anti-CVBG centered. Alongside them there are also more conventional supersonic missiles, like Alfa and Onix, intended against modern ships with strong air defense, and also cheap and light Harpoon-like subsonic missiles for lightly defended targets, landing ships, export etc.
Taiwan is the second adopter of the heavy supersonic anti-ship missile doctrine, I believe, due to the rising Chinese naval capabilities, that include aircraft carriers. The Chinese rely on Soviet/Russian Moskit (onboard the Sovremenniy class DDG), and self developed ballistic AShM to deter the US CVBG threat.
Keep up the good work, Cap.
Wouldn’t the EMP “blind” the missiles as well?
@@OWNYOMAMA Nuclear tipped versions are inertially guided, so they do not use radar.
Igor, the reason the Kh-22 was launched at high altitude was to reduce the chances of interception during the cruise phase of its floght. Secondly, in its terminal dive to the target it resches a speed of Mach 5.5 rendering any interception impossible for NATO ships during the Cold War, in fact when NATO saw the specs in 1990 at a Moscow Air Show, they were stunned and deeply disturbed and conceded they were unaware of the Kh-22’s capability and mist likely a swarm of these missiles would have caused serious damage to their Carrier Fleets. Secondly, the Kh-22’s exploding at high-altitude is not their main defence, it simply damages the electronic equipment of NATO ships, except for equipment which still uses vaccuum tubes.
Usually the "boost" and "sustainer" stages of a missile just mean different geometry bore cut within the centre of the rocket motor, to expose more or less fuel to combustion at once. The boost stage of a missile don't necessarily separate - the AIM-120 A/B for example is staged in this manner, and as you can plainly see nothing is jettisoned in flight.
Regarding tomahawk development cost. You must add all that together. Its shared project, different targets. They didn`t start from scratch.
Littoral is coastal waters. So shore based warfare, ie. monitors, gunboats, torpedo boats, corvettes, patrol boats, missile boats etc.
Harpoons also don't have VLS which is the main issue with the missile.
Burning it all in a very short time is a common way to use solid fuel rockets, but it's not the only way.
I believe you can make the burn slow, and either way there's hybrid rockets that use a fluid oxidizer. I'm guessing somebody has a way to use air as the hybrid's oxidizer.
If any of that is what they actually did, I wouldn't know.
Hybrid liquid/solid, gas/solid, and (ramjet) air/solid motors all exist. The latter in particular is notable for being integrated into the MBDA Meteor. As far as I am aware the other two have not been used in missiles, and I suspect are not likely to be because they tend to be more complicated systems.
Convert and publish the docs as PDF, which will compress the size.
Amazing documentation work BTW!
Ah, good idea.
All sorts of ideas about why the Exocets were so effective, but here’s the Royal Navies Inquiry, declassified in 2017 www.admiraltytrilogy.com/read/BOI_Rpt_HMS_Sheffield_May82.pdf To summarise findings, Some members of the crew were “bored and a little frustrated by inactivity” and the ship was “not fully prepared” for an attack.
The anti-air warfare officer had left the ship’s operations room and was having a coffee in the wardroom when the Argentinian navy launched the attack, while his assistant had left “to visit the heads” (relieve himself).
The radar on board the ship that could have detected incoming Super Étendard fighter aircraft had been blanked out by a transmission being made to another vessel.
When a nearby ship, HMS Glasgow, did spot the approaching aircraft, the principal warfare officer in the Sheffield’s ops room failed to react, “partly through inexperience, but more importantly from inadequacy”.
The anti-air warfare officer was recalled to the ops room, but did not believe the Sheffield was within range of Argentina’s Super Étendard aircraft that carried the missiles.
When the incoming missiles came into view, officers on the bridge were “mesmerised” by the sight and did not broadcast a warning to the ship’s company. Add to this several ship design issues that made subsequent damage and fire control problematic, and HMS Sheffield sank with the loss of 26 souls. The first RN ship lost in combat since WW2.
the harpon can't be fired from a vls that is the reason the US develop a new one named AGM-158C LRASM (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile)
cool
not true. harpoon is completely outdated. that's why lrasm is being developed. nothing to do with vls. you could adapt harpoon to vls, it was even adapted to torpedoes tubes... it's so ancient, it predates vls.
@@riskinhos most pilots prefer mavs for anti-shipping.
@@Runandgun13 not in real life. it's not even on the same league. you are comparing a cruise missile with a lot more range with a small air to ground missile. completely different missions. oudated 70 tech. compare it with a spear 3 missile.
@@riskinhos I've heard it multiple times 🤷♂️
Cap wants to buy a cruise missile engine for his car. LOL.
IIRC, Cessna designed a private jet designed to use cruise missile engines as its powerplants. It worked perfectly. Until, that is, someone noticed that a cruise missile's engine lifespan is measured in hours, not years. They eventually swapped it out for a more durable one.
Nice, thanks for the info.
I do!
Kh-22
When you absolutely, positively, got to kill every motherfucker on the sea; accept no substitutes.
Didn't the US Navy order a bunch of the Naval Strike Missile recently?
yep , loads of them
Yea i just commented about it
Yep, there is also a air to air version, the joint strike missile. Japan ordered a bunch for the F35
Yes, mostly for the LCS. Kongsberg also entered an agreement with Lockheed Martin to develop a variant of NSM compatible with the F-35, and that would also allowed it to be fired from the Mk 41 VLS.
The Fritz X is actually a guided glide bomb, right?
Correct, guided via Radio link by the bombardier with a small control stick. The only method the bombardier had for locating and aiming the bomb was a flare in the rear of the Fritz-X.
@@Citizen_Snips1 I believe it was also the first of its kind, correct?
@@dragoonTT Correct as far as i'm aware, for sure the first to enter serial production and see combat.
hey cap the s in RBS does stand for system the whole name is robot system 15 wich should translate to missile system 15 :) and if you have questions about swedish weapons in dcs like names and such you just have to ask ;) also we here in sweden just recently regained the capability to launch the rbs 15 from a truck mounted launcher (scania of course ;) ) they launched the first shot in many years during late 2016 (they were mothballed when the coastal artillery branch was shut down)
thx
naval strike missile(NSM) is an impressive NEW over the horizon anti-ship missile with sea skimming and evasive manouvers with Inertial, GPS, terrain-reference navigation, imaging infrared homing and a target database so it knows exactly what its meant to hit. Norway developed it and the US NAVY bought hundreds as an interim over horizon missile
for the Littoral Combat Classes of ships(Freedom class, Independence class) and US NAVY so impressed with it theyre considering it or an upgraded version for their upcoming FF(X) Frigate program
How can you go over the horizon if the Earth is flat? 🤔🤪
If you want to talk about "NEW" you should talk about the JSM, which is a miniaturized NSM to fit into F-35 weapons bays. Currently the only cruise missile available for the F-35.
US doesn't often buy foreign missile systems but NSM and Penguin are among the exceptions. NASAMS is sort of a half-exception, using amraams.
and its subsonic... vulnerable to tons of countermeasures. plenty of time for ciws and others to take action.
@@riskinhos
Actually that's not true, subsonic missiles can perform terminal maneuver that make it hard for CIWS to intercept, the faster the missiles, the wider its turn radius, so a highly maneuverable subsonic missiles can offset its lack of speed. Not to mention that most, if not all subsonic missiles are sea-skimmer, that means that without a fleet AWACS, longer-range missile defenses can't really detect it until it's close by due to the curvature of the Earth.
Cap I have a videos Idea for you can you do a touching and go on a bomber or on a c130
Cap has already done a video on that, Search GR for "Can you land on other planes"
ruclips.net/video/AZG7dIFcMNU/видео.html
NSM is the best anti ship missile out there in my opinion..There small enough no launched from trucks, planes and ships.
i watched this video, and then thought HOLY SHIT ITS 15:14, TIME TO GET UP, when i realized its just the time of Caps pc ^^
lols
> 3-hour video
>noone would watch it
I beg to differ good sir
yay 1 viewer! x
brahmos is a ramjet shoulda looked at that one
The Sea Skua wasn't designed to sink large ships like cruisers.
rgr
Cap, we NEED JF-17 videos! 🤯
ruclips.net/p/PL3kOAM2N1YJfX0JgLClesrw6SXUrv0isl
Already watched them, need more 😱 😱😱
Heard that US is planning to start using launchable pigeons as ASMs due their outstanding searching capability. For more info you can search google for 'pigeonrank' and get extra info about it.
Hope BRAHMOS comes
Brahmos is NASTY!
brahmos 2 is even better. us is sleeping.
@@riskinhos US is capitalized, JS
You guys realy need to watch this documentary : Top Secret Weapons Revealed in search of the smart bomb. It’s great! can wait to have a pigeon guided bomb or a bat bomb in DCS!
how do you even take off with that missle in the thumbnail? a helicopter carrys you up or something?
lol that would be cool
That missile is not launched by fighters, I can't recall the exact model but it's probably a P-500 or P-1000, which I also forgot the NATO names right now, they are launched from ships.
IIRC the heaviest air launched AShM is the AS-4 Kitchen and probably now the Kinzhal...
How many of your team are actual pilots or otherwise employed in aerospace industries?
hmmm 5% pilots 10% techs etc 85% generic nerds.
@@grimreapers thanks for response
ASM-R
That thumbnail though
Massive Soviet/Russian missiles in comparison to Western missiles.
Shrek: "Do you think maybe [they're] compensating for someting?"
Destroyers famous weak spot their doda lol.
Like a Kamikaze 😉
Sorry... Had to say that
Schweizer Luchs Well Mitsubishi has their own version of the F-16, The mistubishi F2. Yah... 😐
@@GTChucker86 😂
your lack of knowledge is stunning. you know so much about many other stuff that I always expected that you would be an expert in this lol
Nope, pretty much reading it for the first time lol!
you have hypersonic sea skimming maneuverable missiles...
Sry I have to downvote - too many "idk" and "never heard of ...x" - I don't want to hear that! Do your research, prepare material and have a clear plan /goal on exactly what you want to achieve with the video. Those should be the basics.