This was a treat, My first real engineering job was working on Flight Computer system for the Tacit Rainbow back in 1988. Very secret program, didn't even use that name but a letter and number code. Little side note, We found more information about the program from Aviation Week & Space Technology than from our Security Bulletins.

@Mudpuppyjunior

2 жыл бұрын

Great magazine.

@iLumberjack

2 жыл бұрын

Funny how those compartmentalized programs work. You get just enough information to do your job, but nothing approaching a big picture. "Dad, what's a nuke look like?" "I can't say. You should probably Google it." "But didn't you..." "Knowing what they look like wasn't deemed important to my job." "What was important then?" "Other than the job itself?" "Yeah!" "Easy, you needed a disciplined and thorough lack of curiosity." "What would happen if you asked questions?" "Forms. Lots and lots of filling out forms. Then talking about the forms. Then filling out even more forms." "Oh." "Aren't you curious about the paperwork?" "No, not really." "Good boy."

@shanincoffer6455

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you

@chuckfinley3871

2 жыл бұрын

Lol that’s usually how it goes with these “secret” programs most are hiding in plain sight

@navret1707

2 жыл бұрын

That is why it was called “Aviation Leak and Space Technology”.

Worth noting is that at the time of this weapons development: The reason the Soviets were so terrified of this weapon is due to the intelligence provided by a guy named Adolph Tolkachev. He was a lead designer of Soviet radars and SAMs at Phazotron, and give us arguably the greatest intelligence in Cold War history; detailed information of Soviet radar frequencies and signal processing, including the Crown Jewel "war reserve modes". By the time they caught him it was too late; he gave us everything and it would take years to completely redesign their signal processing. He's worth reading about.

@spearhead30

2 жыл бұрын

You’re on a slightly larger list.

@Make-Asylums-Great-Again

2 жыл бұрын

Good info, I'll put you on my list.

@pagarb

2 жыл бұрын

The Spy Museum has a very interesting one hour long episode by a former CIA analyst about Adolph Tolkachev.

@TheDoorspook11c

2 жыл бұрын

HUMIT saves lives.

@yingnyang2889

2 жыл бұрын

Thank you Taylor C ! Just read up on him. Interestingly, when you piss if someone enough by killing their family members, it tends them to get even.

The first I heard of Tacit Rainbow was in the early 90's. It was among a list of munitions being adapted for use on the M270 MLRS. 30 years ago. It's neat seeing the M270 and it's younger brother HIMARS being still so important in the business of war.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

I recall attending a closed door meeting in Century City where Kent Kresa (then President of Northrop) stated to small audience of management in attendance that Northrop would NOT be selected as PRIME for ground launch version of Tacit Rainbow. The group of management in his office were the lead team putting that proposal together in response to the ground launch variant solicitation. Dr. Larry Golding and Dick Unger were the Managers. Some of the Newbury Park management team took Kresa's words as motivational --in a perceived effort to (motivate)--to get the most innovative, cost effective, solution put into a large proposal out of the group and into the hands of the customer. Unfortunately, I knew what that meant coming from Kent. I was the only manager in the room that did not have to to drive back to Newbury Park that afternoon/evening besides Kent. Northrop was not selected as the Prime Contractor for Ground Launched variant. USAF/USN also cancelled the ENTIRE Air Launched version they were prime contractor for: program was converted to non SAP due to widespread accounting irregularities, substantial loss or compromise of national security defense related data and information, and it's continued propensity failing to complete critical design review phases, system test objectives and project milestones> Then, shortly followed by defunded. Cheers!

Thank you for the information. Was at Korat AB working on EB & RB-66 while watching WW at work. Was TDY from Minot AFB for 6 months in spring 72 when our sqdn. commander got shot down on BAT-21 but SEALs went & got him out. In 1973 took ANALQ-119 pods from my base in UK to Korat for 1st F4 WW successful experiment. That was when SR-71 came. Lots of flat head screws!

Back in the 90's we had a game called Megafortress, based on "Flight of the Old Dog" by Dale Brown. Basically it was an incredibly enhanced B-52 with an enhanced bunch of munitions to go with. It specifically featured the AGM-136 just as you describe it, and feature-accurate (and many other air-launched weapons), and I really enjoyed the (simulated) tactical use of this weapon! That's when I first learned of the AGM-136.

@sonarmb

Жыл бұрын

I loved that game on my Amiga 500….I wish someone would redo it.

@bobdadnaila7708

Жыл бұрын

I remember that book

@JimGonzales-qp7kd

11 ай бұрын

Loved the book and the game!!

@Bill-xx2yh

9 ай бұрын

Tested by video gamers in actual video games, devastating "FUN".. just keep the price down.

@sleat

9 ай бұрын

@@Bill-xx2yh LOL! No IRL military pilot would *ever* touch a "video game" like DCS. Let alone make YT videos of them actually doing it!😂/sarc

Always wondered what happened to the TACIT Rainbow and now I found out. Thank You for letting me know. During my time in the Marines working TACP for 1/5 1975 tob 1987 there were a bunch of new weapons we were instructed on and alot of them were never adopted for various reasons. As a ground controller we had to know about the weapons we were working with and it's capabilities because sometimes we called danger close for friendly troops in enemy contact. We called Air Strikes, Naval Gunfire, Artillery, and Medivacs.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

SEAD- suppression of enemy air defenses was, and still is, a very big deal in war.

Another fascinating ARM was Side-ARM, a modified Sidewinder missile fitted to the Apache, capable of killing SAM search/tracking/guidance radars. Sadly, all of the war stocks were used up in ODS, and there's been no replacement offered.

@kdrapertrucker

8 ай бұрын

Sidearm was converted from Aim-9C sidewinder which was a radar guided version used only by the F-8 Crusader carrier fighter. Put into storage after the F-8 was retired, someone remembered them and suggested they be converted for the Army.

The pilotless drone being wheeled out at 4:30 is the Jindivik (Aboriginal for ‘the hunted one’), an Australian radio-controlled drone developed in 1952.

This appears to be one of the most honest, creditable and informative military hardware info channels on KZread. Thanks Alex, for the professional and studious approach you give to your channel. Keep up the amazing effort!

@richavic4520

Жыл бұрын

Click on captions and see what happens

@omarb8655

Жыл бұрын

more like he doesn't know nothing, these missiles will not get anywhere near defense systems or jet fighters, jet fighters carry missiles that destroy Air 2 Air Missiles, not even a single Russian Jet Fighter that was actually downed in Ukraine other than 1 Su-25 but that doesn't really count as a Jet Fighter, it's more like the A-10 'Warthog' Thunderbolt II, these are too slow of missiles for Russia 25,000+ km missiles speeds that they use with their defenses. They are even upgrading their defenses with 35,000+ km missiles. Also the US sent Ukraine 3000 X AGM-88 HARM and not a single one destroyed any radar or defense or even was able to go to target, they were total garbage. the US haven't made anything since the 1990s that really functions, all is way too expensive and end up being worst than older weapons.

@mdouglas9387

Жыл бұрын

@@omarb8655 You're right Omar, these missiles will not get anywhere near the defense systems or jet fighters. If you were listening, the program was cancelled. Regardless, go ahead and strut your stuff, as many who have, met an unexpected end meeting up with the current defense technology of the United States. Cheers!

@cabriskus4700

Жыл бұрын

@@omarb8655 absolutely dumb aren’t you?

@HesTNTonPMS

6 ай бұрын

@@omarb8655 Omar, Omar, Omar, Omar . . . .He doesn't know nothing? I am not exactly sure what you're even trying to say . If he doesn't know nothing that must mean he knows something right Omar? Or am I the one who's fucked up here? I think you just need to learn how to pay closer attention. But anyway, nobody in the US is sweating a single thing the Russians are fielding to date. Just look at all that junk being destroyed hour by hour in Ukraine. Such unreliable garbage and the Russian dear leader keep throwing life after countless life right into the meat grinder. I can not understand, President Putin is fully aware his men are going to be turned into bologna mist and he just keep donating men to this cause he simply will not win. He can not win because his manpower does not truly believe in the cause. If Russia were being invaded , they would be fighting with their heart and soul in it. But not in Ukraine Omar.

Thanks for covering the AGM-136 A Tacit Rainbow project. I was a USAF project officer in the TR SPO (System Program Office) in 1986-1989.

Outstanding presentation, my friend. I appreciate your honesty and your avoiding the sensationalism which often drives so many of the KZread military presentations. Thank you again for your work and Merry Christmas, my friend!

Thank you for sharing this video. My father was involved in the first drones back in the '70s, and he was in the airforce stationed at Offutt AFB, serving as the Chief of Reconnaissance at SAC Headquarters. There is a display at the Museum showing the Drone he was a part of. He would travel to Point Mugu, California, to test it on many occasions. Thanks again. Felix

@ElectronFieldPulse

2 жыл бұрын

I thought they had drones before the 70's. I thought I read that drones would fly around nuclear tests.

@davidstroup100

2 жыл бұрын

@@ElectronFieldPulse Air launched jet powered reconnaissance drones were used in Vietnam regularly from the mid 1960s until the end of that war. See 'The 99th Strategic Reconnaissance Squadron' by Steve Miller. 2017 ISBN-13: 978-1981613823. My 14 year experience with the "Lighting Bugs" started in the mid '80s.

I was the lead Engineer in developing the system which assembled the Missile, it was fiberglass with aluminum bulkheads all glued together. It is good to finally hear about both the political issues and the technical issues leading up to the program cancellation. I always wonder what happened to the missile assembly equipment we delivered to Northrop.

I appreciate your actual narration as much as the information.

I loved this video. As a USAF veteran, I still managed to learn a few things. Very well researched. Much appreciated

in-depth. keen, and beautifully structured. This video now resides in the anils, of what, all of History will remember.

Really happy to see you cover Tacit Rainbow... Have heard of it but never seen a video covering it like this.

Alex, I truly do enjoy these videos and your voice-overs. You have become my go-to source of this kind of info.

You know there is a saying in the military.. "By the time you know about it we got something way better!"

As an FYI, U.S. Navy was also flying attack drones off of carriers for a brief period during WW II. Would love to see a video about them I wonder how tacit rainbow compares to the Israeli Harpy series of attack drones… Have you ever read books by Dale Brown? There’s a cruise missile in a few of his books that’s just like the one you describe towards the end of the video: AGM-177 Wolverine. Incredibly agile, it can detect and dodge incoming AA fire, be it guns or missiles as well as release chaff and flares. In addition to its own integral warhead, it has 3 payload bays allowing for a multitude of mission profiles to be carried out. The Wild Weasel version carried a mixture of miniature decoys and SFW skeets. It would be preprogrammed with the locations of enemy air defenses, fly over them and release a decoy. When said air defense system turned on its sensors to lock onto the sudden “intruder”, the Wolverine would seed the location with the skeets. When first used in combat in the book “Fatal Terrain”, a handful of Wild Weasel Wolverines blasted a massive gap in China’s air defense network

@alexandermarken7639

2 жыл бұрын

Dale Brown was one of my favourite authors. I myself always thought his idea's would be expensive as all heck but logical and worthwhile.

@TheDoorspook11c

2 жыл бұрын

With processor speed , loiterability, and thermobaric tech, the old school terminally guided submunitions on cruise missiles ,which were deployed ahead of the main warhead, gains new life and legs!

@turkfiles

2 жыл бұрын

Started with Flight of the Old Dog. Still one of my favorites of all time.

@PaulFullilove

2 жыл бұрын

Dale Brown's books were good IMHO. I especially liked the Flight of the Old Dog...

@Mrblueridgeman

2 жыл бұрын

One can see a copy of the Navy WWII attack drone in the museum at China Lake. It’s cutaway with a plexiglass cover to display the technology used. Quite interesting.

I have been involved in the Military Air Power all my life and find this type of content very interesting. Keep up the good work.

Many moons ago when I was serving in the US Navy, I head a guy talking about an anti radiation missile being used in Vietnam which could lock on the the signal from the magnetron instead of the antenna. If memory serves me it was referred to Iron Hand. Apparently it was developed in response to the VC's tactic of using multiple antennas to confuse anti-radiation missiles. It was described to me has having what appeared to be blisters on the lower side of the front of the missle. As the story was related to me, when ever the VC heard "Flying Iron Hand" on the air, they would shut down all their missile sites.

As a USAF ECM systems, Maintainer, Supervisor and Instructor from 1978-1992 You are on the right track with your conclusion. Just because a program is shuttered or disbanded does not mean the knowledge is lost or the improvements do not go on. . That second word in the naming is not just at random either.

My friend Charlie was a weasel pilot. He flew a F-105g. Never shot down. First in last out. 8 mid air refuelings were routine per mission. They fired a lot of harms.

Excellent research, and great content. Fantastic mate! Well reported and presented. Happy holidays!

Really enjoyed this Alex. Great work. Seeing footage of SA-2's, Tor's (SA-15's) and other Russian hardware being hunted by Tacit Rainbow feeds into that entire escalation premise. Range, detection, loiter, stealth, maneuverability etc. in the world of SAM design and employment. Fascinating deep dive. You should get into the type of HARM 88 employment modes like Pre Brief, Equation of Motion etc. Would love to get your treatment on how HARMs are employed in current 4th gen designs.

Fantastic! Alex keep it up .thank you TC

I remember first reading about the AGM136 from a NYT article in 1986. It was definitely ahead of it's time.

Adding an inertial guidance system to these missiles would allow them to REMEMBER the positions of the enemy radars...even if those radars are turned off. Same for targets that are not even emitting emissions in the radar frequencies. Those targets could be "designated" by fighter aircraft in the area, using lasers or even targets picked up using visual references from orbiting satellites. I would be SHOCKED if newer versions of these missiles DID NOT have inertial systems integrated into their operation.

@vertsabre

2 жыл бұрын

Especially if deployed as a fleet with shared communication, triangulation would be pretty trivial then

@nutsackmania

2 жыл бұрын

Main difficulty is getting a fix without two or more networked receivers some distance apart. Triangulation vs homing. Homing you just know it's "over there" but can't ascertain where it is on the coordinate plane. You might be able to use the doppler shift or synthetic aperture technique, but I'd have to think about the theory more. Either way, modern radars pulse and frequency hop and do a bunch of other crazy shit that makes this whole business very challenging. They're also networked with remote launchers etc so you could be shooting a feint antenna. Lots of tactics and tech involved.

@badguy1481

2 жыл бұрын

@@nutsackmania Correct that a "false" antenna COULD be used to misdirect a homing missile....but be that as it may... the missile, with inertial, would only have to "home in" on the beam's prior direction and follow the previous path of the beam until it hit something solid...like the antenna. The enemy have many "false antennas" or "multiple antennas" would just mean MORE homing missiles would have to be deployed against them.

@bennylofgren3208

2 жыл бұрын

@@badguy1481 That would be assuming the units are stationary. They would only need to move the transmitting antenna a few meters after shutting it off for the homing missile to hit the wrong spot and do no damage. This cat-and-mouse game of antiradiation air defense suppression is not as easy as it would seem on the surface.

@badguy1481

2 жыл бұрын

@@bennylofgren3208 But remember it would only take a few minutes for the missile to follow that path established by the radiation before it explodes. How far could that antenna be moved before that explosion? And also the antenna would have to be shut down so the missile could not re-establish a target position. That would mean the targeting bunker or trailer would not be obtaining intel on any incoming strikes from another missile or laser designated manned fighter jet.

When I went to work at Northrop their was a mural with Tacit Rainbow on it and asked what that was. It its the canceled loitering....... In my opinion the problem was that to be effective, the TR would need much more computing power than available at a reasonable cost for a munition. While I was there Northrop developed the BAT missile which used cutting edge sensor and computing to be very effective in tests against armored columns. Of course with the end of the USSR the need to deploy it was gone. Today the sensors and computing power is so much better and drastically less expensive. The concept is still valid for TR, and I would not be surprised if a kit can be put on an existing drone to ferret out enemy radar.

Wonderful breakdown of this weapon!! 👌 thank you, very informative & great insight 👍.

B-58 was the first to launch Satellite Recon- a facet of the Program

A friend of mine worked on the AI for a loitering Tomahawk missile and predator drones for the DOD in the late 90’s. It is pretty insane what it has been able to do since the late 90s and early 2000. He was able to get them to fly a grid hunting for targets of opportunity, being able to automatically recognize vehicle shape, color. Make/model and even license plate number. It could also detect muzzle flash and identify if the vehicle shooting was friend of foe... it would alert the controller of the detection and the controller would authorize the automated strike on the vehicle. During invasions they can clear the tomahawks and drones weapons hot, if they see a target of opportunity with over a certain threshold of probability it can automatically attack without needing approval (like, there is a 98% certainty the tanks it sees are T72s, so it can automatically attack. Pretty crazy stuff.

@agmsmith4079

2 жыл бұрын

@mandellorian ...I really could care less if you believe me or not. Suit yourself.

@ExarchGaming

2 жыл бұрын

@mandellorian of course we can, GPS is extremely accurate we've been using precision munitions for a long ass while now. with a properly lased target we can drop a hell fire 2 through someone's bathroom window. There has been successful AI experiments done going back to the 60s where they taught a computer to distinguish between objects. There is a great video on it that was just released by Veritasium called "Future Computers will be radically different" which details how machine learning was used to distinguish between two given objects. It related to I believe neural nets. It's not beyond the realm of science and reality that at the point 30 years later that it could be used to distinguish between certain models of tank for example.

@snail415

2 жыл бұрын

Thanks. Sincerely, Every near-peer competitor’s nerd teen on KZread.

@agmsmith4079

2 жыл бұрын

@@snail415 ...well it’s 25 year old tech now. I’m sure biden, Feinstein, Pelosi and Hilary sold the plans and the code for the AI to China and Russia years ago anyway.

@ExarchGaming

2 жыл бұрын

@Dalton Black We do, we were working on neural nets as far back as the 60s, and had taught a computer to tell the difference between two images.....wouldn't be hard at all in 60 years to have advanced that to a much greater degree. Especially with the AI and computer learning capabilities on domestic silicon.

Great video. When I was at Texas Instruments in the mid-80s, several colleagues worked on "the other side of the wall" on Tacit Rainbow but I never found out what it was. Most of our work was on the HARM AGM-88 which was originally designed for the Navy to take out a ship's air defenses. If the enemy powered off their radar, the HARM remembered the position and movement of the radar.

@ronunderwood8099

2 жыл бұрын

I was there from 89 to 93.

@Big.Ron1

Жыл бұрын

I was pretty sure the harm could do that. This is all way cool now that I am retired. Especially since they are not shooting at me.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

I used to visit you folks in the Dallas./Ft Worth area working on our TR sensor many times in the 80's.

Well done. Great show. Keep up the good work. T.

loved this, awesome to get a behind the scenes tour of an awesome museum!

I worked on flight test for Northrop durng this timeframe. This was a new design, plastic bird so to speak, hard to see, testing new design and fabrication techniques with difficult fuels for maximum performance. It was designed to be launched form Navy and Air Force B-52 bombers. Flight testing was done with both aircraft on radar SAM targets at NWC China Lake. We were all dissapointed the program was cancelled despite some very good potential.

@rzr2ffe325

2 жыл бұрын

Too expensive? Seems like an awesome capability if they could reign in the costs

@kennethkatz8278

2 жыл бұрын

Hi Ed. I think that we worked together. I was on the Air Force side of TR at Edwards.

I was involved on the propulsion system to a limited degree in the early 1980s. We were shocked when the DoD suddenly dropped the program. It’s actually a genius method of taking out subversive radar systems. I also worked on Tomahawk and ALCM propulsion systems. When I was in the Navy I specialized in A-7E Corsair propulsion and fuel systems. I also worked on Chukkar propulsion systems.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

Williams or P&W I presume. Or employed by the prime?

@privatepilot4064

7 ай бұрын

@@johnruuu “Willies Rocket Shop” Walled Lake, MI

Dude your channel is awesome! Please keep up the great work. 👍

Super Video!!! Thank you for sharing it with us!

It seems to me you could separate the radar transmitter and receiver enough to keep the receiver safe. It would then be possible to have multiple transmitters and just turn on a new one after one was taken out of service.

@evanpilot

2 жыл бұрын

I believe that's how the Russian S-400 missile system works.

@raymondclark1785

2 жыл бұрын

Most modern radars have the antenna mounted away from the magnetron. The old TPS-1 and AWACS had us sitting in Harm's way :(

@ChucksSEADnDEAD

2 жыл бұрын

Even in the early days it was known that there's a difference between SEAD and DEAD. If you want a SAM site to be truly knocked offline you'd need to use bombs and rockets on the equipment, and if necessary use the gun too.

@salec7592

Жыл бұрын

Multiple is less than infinite. In the end, cat also loses its 9th life as well. Passive detection using ambient radiation is the answer, like we are using our eyes (or cameras)to scoop reflected ambient light for detection of objects. And if there is too little light, we launch cheap flares to introduce it to the field. Today, missiles can be remotely operated using data link from detection station with far less power emitted than when they are guided by radar reflection. Radar guided SAM is a concept which deserves to be put to rest.

Really fascinating - thanks for the research. The Tacit Rainbow profile reminds me of the British Aerospace ALARM (Air launched anti-radiation missile), that could be launched direct, or - if the radar turned off - could climb to 8 miles, deploy a parachute and loiter. If the radar turned on again, it would fire a secondary engine and rain down. It was used in the both Gulf wars and Kosovo to some effect.

@Alex-cw3rz

2 жыл бұрын

And we are not sure how well they worked but with the exceptionally embarrasingly poor performance of anti radiation missiles in the yugoslav wars, I don't imagine they were particularly successful

@hphp31416

2 жыл бұрын

@@Alex-cw3rz most arm missiles did not have ins system and were simply flying toward radar emission, if missile do not know where it is't it can not be very effective

@Alex-cw3rz

2 жыл бұрын

@@hphp31416 an "ins system" what's that? Also they weren't flying towards radar emission they were flying blindly due to how yugoslavs and well any modern army since the 70s turns on and off radar as standard (if you don't have a modern system which does that automatically).

@Alex-cw3rz

2 жыл бұрын

@@metanumia are so it won't help in anyway to actually hit the target if they switch off their radar emissions.

@TheTrueAdept

2 жыл бұрын

@@Alex-cw3rz _all_ NATO SEAD/DEAD tactics were exceptionally poor during the Yugoslav Wars, largely because before that point the only top-tier IADS that any NATO nation faced was... Vietnam, and the Soviet instructors literally took notes during that war which then was dissiminated into the Soviet IADS doctrine... which then influenced Yugoslav (and then Serbian) IADS doctrine. Basically, a _non_ kneecapped Soviet IADS (Iraq IADS had the problem of being kneecapped in capability for 'coup proofing') would run rings around NATO SEAD/DEAD doctrine, especially as SPAAGs are becoming capable enough to defend themselves and whatever they're protecting without breaking a sweat. Think SEAD/DEAD operations ending up in a situation that is essentially the US/NATO throwing SEAD/DEAD missiles at immense rates at Russian IADS while the yakkity sax is playing in the background.

Lovely 80’s style marketing photos for such a secret.

Well researched and thought out. Bravo

Those F105's had extremely primitive radar warning equipment and the Vietnamese moved their installations constantly. The Shrike was a very simple anti-radiation missile with a very puny warhead. You can read many first hand accounts. The descriptions of their equipment just floored me. The bravery of pilots in Vietnam was extraordinary. Today might be the time we make Tacit Rainbow a reality. We finally have the guidance and AI technology to make it work. I would not be surprised if something like it is not in development as your video airs.

@BosonCollider

6 ай бұрын

The IAI Harrop is fairly similar and has been around for a long time

I would note that many of the missiles shown on this article are not the TR in flight but rather other flight test missile of a different variety tests in the air.

Some very interesting info. Keep up the great work.

WOW -- BEST EVER KZread info on Military STUFF

Wild weasel pilots were some of the most tightly wound up people I have ever met. I met one at a Society of Old Crows meeting in San Diego while I was demonstrating a fast frequency hopping transceiver prototype. (Jam this, suckers! That was fun to develop,) This would be the early half of the 1970s. He paced around chain smoking and jumping at stray noises. His departure was fun to watch. As soon as he was allowed he hopped into his plane and taxied out to the runway followed by arrowing off the runway almost vertically. On the other hand one of the more laid back former military people I met in the 80s was a Wild Weasel WEO. (And that fast frequency hopping and related experience inspires thoughts of techniques that could render it far less effective. Some of them I've heard of being actively used.) {^_^}

@ryomichael

Жыл бұрын

So...was "Wizardess" ever a nickname used by Hedy Lamarr? lol😁

@Wizardess

Жыл бұрын

@@ryomichael Nope. But I had the pleasure of working on two developmental projects to prove that her ideas worked and could produce a very expensive to jam or intercept backpack radio. That was rather fun. I'd have died to meet her if only to say "It works!" and hear the expected reply, "Of course." Software world has gurus and wizards. Wizards work software magic and cannot explain what they did very well. Gurus are wizards who can explain things. Somehow Wizard did not fit. So I adopted Wizardess. I *may* have come close enough to being able to explain why it works so MAYBE I could get away with Guruess. But, Wizardess has a longer backstory and is more fun. {^_-}

@ryomichael

Жыл бұрын

@@Wizardess Thank you for taking the time for that wonderful reply!😃

You kept mis-labeling the ALCM as AGM-88 when it is in fact an AGM-86B. You did state correctly once that the HARM was the AGM-88. I was a 2M051B in the USAF and was kept busy maintaining the stockpile of AGM-86's (both big boom (B) and little boom (C)).

Thanks for an informative and entertaining video. I am always ready to learn more about new weapons systems. As of today, I am a new subscriber.

Flawless analysis.... Alex

Oh you’ll love the SLAM missile. Predates this and pioneered star tracking and terrain following if I recall correctly. Also had nuclear sub munitions

@dmacpher

2 жыл бұрын

Ha never mind you mentioned pluto

Trained Wild Weasel pilots as part of the training/testing operations within the Nellis complex. What the public sees is easily 20+ years behind capabilities.

Well researched…Well said….WELL DONE !!

Subbed in the first 30 seconds. Can already tell this will be good 👌🏻

Nice job! Trying to catch up while also trying to learn development history. Years ago I saw a missile at the AF Museum called the BDM-6, about which they had no placard. Also, it seems to me the MARD is conceptually related to the "Green Quail" drone/missiles carried for a time by B-52s. Any light you can shed on these or on the Fairchild Blue Goose will be appreciated. Happy New Year to you!

@thomashoran9552

2 жыл бұрын

Why are they so intent on Ukraine they have invisible weapons.

@windborne8795

2 жыл бұрын

@@1abcrr1 Yeah! Like that R.I.N.O Senator from North Carolina for one!

@SilverSergeant

2 жыл бұрын

ADM-20C was the Quail....

@thomashoran9552

2 жыл бұрын

Happy New Year to you. My dad purchased the seats for the C130 he was a buyer for McDonald Douglas years ago.

@martinoamello3017

2 жыл бұрын

@@thomashoran9552 McDonald Douglas...the fast food chain you don't want to even think about ordering from. They only sell massive cluster eating disorders.. Maybe the CIA can pick up on this to open chains around the world with sleeper menus.. lol

Minor error at 9:30; ALCM is the AGM-86

Very good research and well presented, thank you.

This channel is criminally underrated

You should check out what happened to the Silent Eagle and the F-18 internal weapons pod. Or even the Genie nuclear missile.

@donkoh5738

2 жыл бұрын

a proposed *External Pod* for the Super Hornet, not internal. however, imho it offered minimal game-changing capability and was more of a well-intended distraction of engineering & policy deciders and otherwise sucked some decent R&D funds off the budget. Arguably more prudent to just load up with a pair of -88 ER + a perhaps a pair of those passive seeking Aussie-variant JSM as part of a stand-off doctrine?

@Cartoonman154

2 жыл бұрын

@@donkoh5738 it was described by the test pilot as a internal weapons pod.

@hphp31416

2 жыл бұрын

@@Cartoonman154 external weapons pod holding weapons internally

I think you also have to remember that although it sounds good, the turning off radar was not when they saw an anti radiaton missile it was a standard cyclical practice turning on for around ~30 seconds and off for ~30 seconds, this means it's effect will be unnoticeable as it would be constantly getting close then moving away. This not to mention the development of anti drone tech that if you look at it's performance in Syria has been amazingly successful. It would probably cause an increase in non radar AA, spoofing and decoys though to get rid of the annoyance and demoralising nature of them.

Nice vid about a neat historical program. Well done!!

Awsome video!! Fantastic job!

Boeing Australia’s Loyal Wingman could potentially fill such a role. It’ll be interesting how that programme pans out. Also, at 4:30 it looks like an Australian Jindivik 1 target drone being wheeled out. The Jindivik was later exported to the UK and USA.

@Dadecorban

2 жыл бұрын

This already exists. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delilah_(missile) Big oversight. Whoopsy.

The difference in range may be due to the launch altitude. Launch at 30K feet gives you an enormous glide path with minimal engine power. But it makes you an easy target. Launching at operational altitude makes you hard to find, but kills your range. I ran into something similar trying to get good range estimates on the original cruise missiles.

@ImperiumLibertas

Жыл бұрын

These weapons are smart. Like very smart. They talk to each other via data-link. When launched in a swarm one will go high to attract attention and detect signals while the others stay low and fast. When a signal is detected it'll send a batch of the low flying HARMS to the site. This is tech that is very old. I'm sure they have stuff much more complex than this.

Loving that end of the video music. Aldas uses that song for all his F1 videos.

Very well done!

Tacit Rainbow and it's ilke ara a class of weapon that are specifically homing missiles. But what interests me are area-scale EMP explosive devices. These can range from air-dropped free-fall bombs to mortar rounds. It's really hard to find comprehensive technical information on these. Is this a topic you could look into and do a video on?

@726f6f74

2 жыл бұрын

They use nuclear explosion at high altitude to produce electro magnetic pulse. It is not quite environment friendly type of device

@andrerousseau5730

2 жыл бұрын

@@726f6f74 No, no, no. That's not what I am referring to; a nuclear-driven EMP weapon is a completely different class of EMP wespon than one driven by chemical-explosive. The latter used totally different principles.

@726f6f74

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrerousseau5730 ehm, I am not an expert, but I suppose it will not produce any serious damage on a significant area.

@andrerousseau5730

2 жыл бұрын

@@726f6f74 That's their attraction. Even EMP hand granades are supposed to have been developed.

@hphp31416

2 жыл бұрын

@@andrerousseau5730 after first emp observations all military equipment is designed to be resistant to emp

Many versions developed by the Israeli military long ago. Made the Syrian anti-aircraft missiles worse than useless during that Lebanon war. During the syrian war, they made them for only a few hundred dollars each. Any missle launch at a plane would start following the drone instead, taking the missle to any nearby target the Israelis wanted struck.

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

That's brilliant, could make the opponent's missiles its own boomerangs ! Lol 🤣

@haaszd

Жыл бұрын

Yeah it's callesd 'Delilah'

@allogvin9546

Жыл бұрын

@@haaszd is that really it's name? I figured they called it something more colorful & humorous: such as a 'stupid Syrian'

Great video sir I thoroughly enjoyed it.

Well done sir!😀

That's proper clever, especially when you think about the year this was being developed. Even today, this technology is mightily impressive. 🇬🇧🇺🇸✌✌

@stephenwilkinson1254

2 жыл бұрын

( it would be even more clever if it had more than a 40% success rate :)

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

It's clever idea but might be practically feasible only by today with advanced technologies (hardware + software).

Joe Kennedy Jr died in one of the first attempts at an RC drone, using a B17.

Stealth Drone giving false radar signals was my favorite part.

Great video. Merry Christmas

You should do a video about the M25, it was meant to kill troops out in the open with a killer shockwave.

@Make-Asylums-Great-Again

2 жыл бұрын

@@danstrayer111 no, the M25 is a Russian built design that never came to fruition. The US would do thunder runs at low level, this was more of a shock & awe operation. The M25 was meant to annihilate anything out in the open that’s biological.

You like many others have placed a very high price in stealth, the radar technology to track stealth technology has existed for decades, let alone any modern technology that could do so. Rapier, an infra red guided (all be it short range) system was able to track stealth fighters during desert storm, astronomic radar tracks flecks of paint microns thick in orbit over the planet, to be avoided when launching space rockets, therefore any object traveling at speeds over 200mph (the speed of a diving peregrine, the fastest natural object, for extremely short distances) and traveling in what are relatively straight lines, or mostly straight flight lines maintaining relative airspeed, can easily be tracked by radar. The thing that is needed and probably already exists is a software system to track such objects in short bursts, potentially avoiding detection, with the in built ability to determine those that are natural i.e. changing direction and or speed or altitude rapidly, in a short distance and those that are man made i.e. maintaining a relative airspeed, altitude and relative course. I have not kept up with the latest technology to be able to say, but not doubt there are many things being researched, either way 'stealth' as you put it is not the panacea that you and most others place it to be, if the technology to combat it is not already out there it is, or at least should be in development. However nicely researched video Tacit rainbow would not be easy to research even now as it does relate to modern munitions, so well done.

@ScorpionXXXVII

2 жыл бұрын

Great point. I mean our militaries obviously know this too, but stealth will always have its uses as the countries that have access to technology able to track stealth are limited.

@ChucksSEADnDEAD

2 жыл бұрын

There's only one radar station capable of tracking small space debris in Europe and its limit is 2 cm objects. Not microns. It's large and I assume the power consumption is enormous. If an anti-stealth radar is so large and powerful that a continent can only have one, and it can't be packed up in a few hours and moved away then it's going to be hit by a hail of cruise missiles the moment the conflict kicks off. Failing that, the power output makes it a juicy target for ARMs so it will have to be shut down anyway. And now the stealth aircraft has free roam. Stealth pure and simply has physics on its side.

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

Stealth doesn't mean invisibility. It actually is low observability. The essence of its advantage is being able to remain unseen as long as possible, until the last moment when it would be too late for the observer to take any effective response.

A bit more information to add to my first comment. The military personnel only assisted Northrup engineers with simple tasks such as handling (the mear sight of the vehicle was classified at that time), engine tests (more on this later), loading for flight, and flight testing off the squadron's NC-130H (fomally a DC-130H; 65-0979) test bed aircraft. That said, having the access one learns certin capabilities and operational parameters. I personally never witnessed a completely loaded TER configuration, too early in development. We only had one test vehicle at a time. The main wing was a scissor swing wing to be inline with the fuselage for storage and pre-launch purposes. Wing was to deploy soon after launch (part of the software issue I assume). Our test vehicles had the main wing, vertical, and horizontal stabilizers fully deployed. The engine was to be free wheeling in flight and started with a black powder gas grain generator to both ensure proper RPM and ignition of the rather stable fuel at launch. For engine run tests, the start generator was removed (black powder is nasty, and made the engine a one time use). A bottle of compressed hydrogen was used for test spin up, and the fuel supply. This allowed for multiple test on the same engine in order to collect data and proof engine control software parameters. Several test flights were done on our range. I personally hang around the software engineer, due to my fledging interest in computers. I comfortably suspect it was the limited ability of the computer hardware at that point in time that doomed the project. The weapon system concept was a good idea. The missile was to be launched in masses, find a target and home in for a kill. Vietnamese SAM sites learned to switch or intermittently cycle the radars to defeat anti-radiation missles (AGM-45 Shrike and AGM-78s) then in use. This missile was designed to home in on a target, then loiter (fly a circle patern) at the altitude it lost the target's signal. If the target started to illuminate, homing commenced again until either the target is destroyed or weapon ran out of fuel. Swarms of these and their flight duration would technically destroy, or render radar controled AAA batteries (mobile or fixed) ineffective allowing friendly air forces to penetrated the enemy's air defenses. Shame it didn't work. I am sure this issue has been addressed with something even nastier. Done.

Very informative. Gonna subscribe

Of note, the Israelis deployed something like this back in the late 1980s with the Harpy (which is still in use today). Given the level of technology-sharing between the U.S. and Israel, and some odd diplomatic exchanges between the U.S. and the Israelis regarding the Harpy (the U.S. got VERY upset when the Israelis sold it to the Chinese), I would not be surprised at all if the Harpy uses technology originally developed for Tacit Rainbow, despite claims to the contrary. A problem with loitering anti-radiation missiles is that in order to have long loiter times, they generally have to be slow. If the missile is far away from the target radar when it turns on, the engagement could be over, with a friendly aircraft shot down, and the radar turned off before the slow loitering missile gets there. High speed missiles lack loiter time, but they have the speed to more realistically complete engagements before SAMs can complete theirs. The British ALARM attempted to balance the two approaches with a fast missile that could "loiter" via parachute, and then fire another rocket if a radar turned on, but this approach has not caught on, quite possibly due to the complexity of the system. The most recent approach is to equip anti-radiation missiles with additional sensors, so if a radar does turn off, the missile can still guide.

@kennethkatz8278

2 жыл бұрын

I don't think that the US worked with the Israelis on Harpy. The Israelis were entirely capable of developing Harpy on their own.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

@@kennethkatz8278 Kentron sold the DNA (originally called ARD10) of Harpy to IAI. There were some scientists that were US nationals assisting IAI in birthing Harpy. True. Israel is a very capable state in many scientific areas. Some of which lead or feed advanced tech that emerges from it's military industrial complex into full rate production and civilian applications.

@kennethkatz8278

7 ай бұрын

@@johnruuu Interesting!

Thanks for the good work, Alex! According to my sources at the time, the real Achilles Heel of the system was the rudimentary AI used to determine the identity of the primary targets, which had that miserable success rate you highlighted. There is a rumor that a live demonstration of the system resulted in not the destruction of the simulated SAM radar equipment, but rather the loss of several unoccupied Greyhound busses used to transport the big shot observers...

@kennethkatz8278

2 жыл бұрын

The rumor is incorrect. There is no way that humans would have been allowed anywhere near a target during flight testing. That would have been stupid and reckless. Without going into details, the identification and location of targets by the TR seeker worked well.

@johnruuu

7 ай бұрын

@@kennethkatz8278 Correct. It was NOT attributed to anything Texas Instruments and their sensor itself did for the project. And, the DT&E rumor Marc posted is total garbage. There were major issues with the control software: real time processing bottlenecks and interoperability of the sensor data to the overall programmable mission loads and resulting flight controls including terminal phase. That isn't a sensor issue.

Another interesting video. Thanks, you do good work.

Great videos and informative!

I wonder if, some day, these loitering platforms would be able to be ultra low power and be "fueled" by rising high when they sense a loss of charge, being operated by batteries, and have solar panels or wind generation systems that could recharge toe system, so It could return home, or go on another unmanned mission. Having them be propeller driven, and using the wind to turn the engine in reverse, like a generator/alternator, recharge them might be a unique idea for the future

@Dadecorban

2 жыл бұрын

In 50 years? No. The surface area required to provide main power through solar is too high for an aerodynamic object. As far as wind goes, there is no perpetual motion machine, the power curve is too low, at best you could merely extend range. All that being said there is no current drive capable converting electricity into atmospheric thrust before subsonic speeds; all current atmospheric thrust for missile speeds requires propellant to be carried on board. A fusion rocket engine, or a fission pulse engine could propel this object for weeks; fusion rocket engines will be usable in the next 20 years, and a fission pulse engine would pollute its path with large swathes of radiation. In a hundred years, having delved deeply into the nuances of alternative propulsion, aerodynamics, renewable power efficiency at a fundamentally deeper level than what we posses today, and possibly using natural air currents......such a thing may be possible.

@JZ909

2 жыл бұрын

Such a device may already be possible; a solar-powered aircraft has already flown for 26 days continuously. The thing was massive and entirely unsuited to tasks inside any sort of threat environment, but it's conceivable that a smaller solar plane could be built that would be more expendable, or just harder to detect due to its small size. However, the real question is why? Long endurance is great, but at what point are you trading too much performance for that endurance? You're almost certainly going to trade airspeed for it, particularly at low altitude, and you're likely trade a lot of payload too. Is unlimited range/endurance really necessary, or is the 34 hour endurance of the RQ-4 good enough? Or is an hour or so for a strike package to complete a mission good enough? or is 2 minutes for a missile to race to a target good enough? It probably depends on what you're trying to get done. Something on the extreme-range/endurance, low-speed, low-payload end of the spectrum probably has a place in military service, but I doubt a SEAD munition is that place.

@JoeGator23

2 жыл бұрын

@@Dadecorban There are solar panels that have small surface areas and put out loads more power that we can buy as consumers today... they have had them for decades. Same for battery technologies.

@Dadecorban

2 жыл бұрын

@@JoeGator23 No. You are talking about 10-20% efficiency differences, compared to the already low efficiency of existing solar cells which produce relatively low output. We are talking about an aerodynamic device capable of hypersonic speeds, carrying a global strike warhead. The amount of efficiency and peak output required is orders of magnitude different.

@patriot9455

2 жыл бұрын

@hognoxious I heard about those, but they keep quiet about them

We don't have the same issue with political corruption involved with military contractors, our MP's are forbidden to get involved with any companies at all, let alone companies that are military contractors. It's a better system than yours, the US needs to clean this problem up.🇬🇧🇺🇸✌✌

@thelungilife6057

7 ай бұрын

Yeah, it's always better to sell your defence manufacturing companies out to the Americans instead, so your Tory MP's can be shareholders in defence stocks...

As always👍Alex.

Great video very informative and well presented.

The past is interesting but not really misterious. IAI Harop was used heavily by Azerbaijan in their 2020 war with Armenia. Not only destroying radars but many other signal emitting systems, especially jammers. Drones were heavily used in this war and secured a victory for azerbaijan.

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

So the key is not speed (< 450 km/h) but clever hiding and maneuvering.

@batner

2 жыл бұрын

@@tocu9808 I never said that speed is the key.

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

@@batner - Sorry, I didn't mean that at all. Just say some thought of myself. Cheers ! 😉

Enlightening indeed 👏🏿

I worked for Northrop on this program in ~1988. At that time, Northrop was a fucking nightmare. Test after test on Tacit Rainbow failed. Some of the failures was due to the really stupid way the wing was deployed. It was a single swing-wing that rotated 90 degrees after launch. This meant that half the wing was helped by aerodynamic forces and half the wing needed to fight against the aerodynamic forces. The entire thing was just supposed to snap around with a big coil spring, and the end of the spring was in a slot that pulled the wing around and up into place. The problem was that the airflow under a B-52 is very complex, and the whole thing depended on the aerodynamic forces the wing saw at the moment of launch AND the frictional forces on the end of the spring riding in a slot and that spring and that slot had to be made to very close tolerances. Well, guess what? It didn't work every time... There were also plenty of other causes for the failures - electrical problems, engine start failures, communication problems with the B-52, etc, etc. Within a 12 month period, they had 3 major layoffs at the Northrop facility where the Tacit Rainbow project was based. I got the hell out of there as soon as I could.

@tocu9808

2 жыл бұрын

if only were there Mr. Musk on that project. lol 😅

@jashannon

14 күн бұрын

i was laid off there. just a computer jockey though. all the engineers seemed hard working. took a year to get my secret clearance -- i think because my sister had traveled to Cuba lol. keep in mind the DOD greatly reduced the number of B2's ordered at the same exact time, which didn't help the cash flow any. that was at the end of the cold war. I'm not the horses mouth, but the facility might have been new at missiles. having done recon and target drones before this first missile. that might explain part of the problem.

⚓️ Thanks Sanboxx 😎 given the high energy output of radar & the versatility of current satellite technology…. You can be assured sats are observing radar systems everywhere there may be a reason ⚓️

Great video and information.

Two. One is "AWACS" for targeting missiles delivered to theater by aircraft. The same equipment of the later can be carried by GH. The Ryan 147 was a programmable jet drone that became functional in 1959.. and was then used under the name FireBee in Vietnam.

The Wild Weasel mission was assigned for F4E. I flew the Phantom in the early 70's.

@michaelbosisto6259

2 жыл бұрын

A f-4 G wild weasel right?

I was a flight test engineer on the Tacit Rainbow Combined Test Team and was a member of the aircrew that first launched a TR from the B-52. DARPA is mentioned in the video but I don't recall DARPA being involved in the program, at least not in 1986 and subsequent years when I was involved. The program started in the black world, then the existence of the program was declassified but it still was played close to the vest. It was a clever concept but nothing about it was really that exotic (no, I will not go into details). In general, the design was optimized for low cost rather than the most possible capability. TR had its share of problems during flight testing but in general it worked well. The program was planned with an aggressive and "success-oriented" schedule with no margin for error which was a set-up for failure because every little problem became a crisis. What really killed TR was the end of the Cold War. The US DoD budget cratered in the aftermath of the end of the Cold War. The USAF prioritized the B-2, F-22, and C-17, and other programs (particularly those with some problems like TR) no longer could be afforded.

My grandfather helped develop the shrike missile when he was working for the DOD out at China lake. He talked about them using captured Russian radars that they would turn off before the missile would hit them so they didn’t ruin the radar. Cool information in your video.

Hope there already are a video about earliest drone-like systems which was actually used in combat.

The AGM-88 does not need the targeted system to be radiating. The iraqi's used what we called blanking during the 1st gulf war and it did them little good. If the radar is transmitting and gets identified by the Agm-88(which can identify thousands of frequencies almost instantly) it's as good as dead. The Agm-88 style of warhead is designed to "frag" the radar equipment rendering it inoperable and not requiring a direct hit due to the associated equipment required to be in proximity to a radar system also getting damaged (the Aim-9 uses a similar style warhead called annular blast fragmentation). The Agm-88 is definitely older but a super effective weapon and I see it being in the arsenal for many years. You failed to mention the F-16 being used as sead platform as well. Love your videos and keep them coming!

@jamesstreet228

2 жыл бұрын

Are you familiar with the MAULD and MAULD J missiles and Suter technology? It's believed that Suter technology is what the Israelis used to get past Russian SAM systems without being detected in non stealth aircraft.

Awesome research.