NEVER GETS OLD watching them take off from a vertical launch tube !!!!! NEVER GETS OLD !!!

Built the GSE for this 40 years ago at GD, ALCM, SLCM, and GLCM versions, glad it’s still going strong 😊

One of the best cruise missiles to date. Glad it has received maritime strike capability.

@chuckhooks6621

3 жыл бұрын

Just as important is a two-way datalink so that F35s shadowing Chinese ships in stealth mode can feed target data directly to the MSTs. The collaboration between F-35s and MSTs, NSMs, SM-6s etc. will be deadly to any fleet in the world.

@ThatCarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

@@chuckhooks6621 Yeah sadly to many people shit on the F35 without knowing it's capabilities, but just read headlines.

@chuckhooks6621

3 жыл бұрын

@That Car Guy. You and I and a handful of others have a grasp of the revolutionary nature of the F-35. More emphasis is needed on what its sensor suite can do which makes what armament it can carry relatively unimportant. It is its ability to essentially carry the armament of much of an entire battlegroups' missile inventory via two-way datalinks and thus the ability to direct an entire missile war just with its sensors that is revolutionary. Combined with stealth this kind of power is unprecedented. The Japanese get it which is why they are converting their two helicopter carriers into F-35B carriers. I am stoked about the eventual rollout of 18 total USS Wasp and America-class converted F-35B carriers. They will all seamlessly integrate their sensors with the Japanese and British carriers. This kind of flexibility and power is off the chain. I know you get it. Most don't.

@ThatCarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

​@@chuckhooks6621 Ive tried explaining to people about the DAS and how it can see through the aircraft to view ground targets in real time on the helmet visor. It can also do something called pedal turns where it basically spins in a circle and can bomb ground targets and why they keep trying to retire the a-10 for it. The fact it can also track ballistic missiles just goes to show how good the An/APG radars really are. But people sadly read the first negative headline they see and spout it as truth without digging deeper.

@whyjnot420

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThatCarGuy I think the only part of the F-35 that I really have an issue with, is its name. Not a big fan of naming things xxxx II. But this is a non-issue when it comes to the plane itself. Since the earlier days of the cold war America has tried to emphasize expenditure of money instead of lives. This very concept means lots of money can and will be spent..... pissing off some people, but the alternatives have other types of cost associated with them, which we as a people will not bear. Too many people forget this.

The Tomahawk was a million dollar missile when it was first delivered to the navy I the early ‘80’s. At the 30 per month production rate in the mid-‘80s, it came down to about 3/4 million. That’s in in 1985 dollars. So today’s block V missile, especially with its increased capabilities, is a very good buy for the the Navy at about 40% of the cost in today’s dollars as the first Gen weapon.

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

That's because the development cost is shared across so many more missiles now. If the development cost a million, and you only sell one missile... that's a million dollar missile. If you made a million missiles, that's a one dollar missile, ignoring the actual price to manufacture and maintenance of course. Which in itself is cheaper because there's a lot of spare parts for maintenance and the technology has matured with many fixes over the years. New variants are also cheaper to develop because you aren't working from scratch which saves a lot of time and effort. Even though it is a new version, it still share a lot of the development and technical systems with older variants and results in major cost-saving.

@paulscanter5562

3 жыл бұрын

@@neurofiedyamato8763, exactly.

@EGvids1

3 жыл бұрын

You have been taking too many economics classes, take it easy. It is just money.

@peterhineinlegen4672

3 жыл бұрын

@@paulscanter5562 They should've kept building the new destroyers for that same reason. Now those three ships bear the cost of the entire program that would've given us 20 or 30 ships.

@davidodonovan1699

3 жыл бұрын

Good point. Thanks for the information. I didn't know it was one million dollars.💙❤🇺🇲👍🙋‍♂️💚🧡🇮🇪✝️🕊 Best regards and prayers from the Republic of Ireland. God Bless The USA. We love you guys.💙❤🇺🇲✝️🇮🇪💚🧡👍🙋‍♂️

I'm especially impressed with its loitering capabilities! What an awesome evolution in technology.

@stevenlochner4619

3 жыл бұрын

@Bobo Mbutu The missile you refer to does not exist. Russia tried to build it but failed.

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

@@stevenlochner4619 Well it still stands, loitering technology isn't new. US also had such capabilities before the Tomahawk, and so did other countries. From what I am aware of, Israel is the first to come out with a loitering munition in the 80s. At least one that entered service. There probably are older but failed projects before Israel's missile.

@NigelAnudo

3 жыл бұрын

I bet you would be doubly impressed if it was loitering on your neighborhood ready to hit your families home 🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️🤦🏾‍♂️

@moonryan3908

2 жыл бұрын

The Chinese Communist Party is very powerful, as powerful as the American Communist Party and the blacks

@RodWick

2 жыл бұрын

Yet with a limited onboard supply of fuel maybe the term loiter is more marketing than reality.

I’m not an intelligence expert but if I were, I would prohibit the faces of Raytheon employees from being shown on the internet.

@whyjnot420

3 жыл бұрын

Personally I would make it so people thought they had seen the faces when in fact they were just random people, or even composites made for the photo.

@joechang8696

3 жыл бұрын

"this missile made with love and pride by John C, ..., we hope you enjoy the results"

@whyjnot420

3 жыл бұрын

@@user-db9lz2yl7i Only if you killed a large number of them, taking out a couple of key figures on the other hand......

@neurofiedyamato8763

3 жыл бұрын

Weapon development consist a whole host of personnel, not just a couple "key figures" that you can take out. Of course you can do that, but likewise you can secretly sabotage a plant via arson or otherwise. Things like these has happened in the past but it is far from easy. The risk of revealing a spokesperson is not all that big of a deal in the grand scheme. The key personnel working on weapon developments are the engineers and technicians, ones that also exist in the armed service. They don't get much individual recognition, mostly the company does. And as I said, there's many workers too so kind of hard to get rid of all these personnel even if you know who they are. Also if you do capture the engineers, the engineers themselves don't have access to all the data on the weapon system. There's a team of engineers working on each sub-component, once again it isn't a single guy working on this, and no single person understands the entire system thoroughly enough. This isn't just a security factor but simply how the science works. There are so many engineering and scientific fields it is impossible to specialize in everything. Same apply to weapon development. The ones that talk about these systems to the public are program managers, spokesperson, CEO etc. Some of these people have access to all the data but lack actual expertise on the system itself as they aren't the engineers. Capturing the CEO for example is not only high profile but also pointless since he only knows general characteristics. Maybe you can threaten him to give access to the classified documents instead but that then ties into cyber security also. Alternatively, killing the CEO doesn't stop development at all considering he isn't actually the people working on it.

@qaz120120

3 жыл бұрын

Killing people in the dark is a USA/Israel thing. Others don't do that.

Obviously Amazon will be taking a hard look at using these to deliver high end parcels

@badlandskid

3 жыл бұрын

If only they made one to take out porch pirates.

@raymondmejias8071

3 жыл бұрын

😂😂😂

@randomentertainingvideos3545

2 жыл бұрын

@@badlandskid I hope Mark Rober doesn't see this comment.

Glad you are on our side United States of America. Much respect from Canada.

@johnnyreno7200

3 жыл бұрын

From your American cousin...Canada Rocks!

@terryfreeman1018

3 жыл бұрын

We are proud to be your neighbor. And thank you for standing side by side with us. Canadian soldiers are badasses. Put a U.S soldier and Canadian soldier together. Now that's lethal. We stand together.

@barracuda7018

3 жыл бұрын

The border between the two countries is just symbolic, in reality there is no border..

@Calzone808

2 жыл бұрын

Canada has a long history of close co-operation with the CCP. They recently had Chinese police forces train in Canada.

@randomentertainingvideos3545

2 жыл бұрын

@@Calzone808 O_O on second thought...

A must have for any collector

These missiles are being purchased by Australia for their destroyers making Australia the third nation to deploy the missile. Incredible missile with a formidable history and upgrades that keep it relevant. The long range anti-ship mode is important.

@ulrichkristensen4087

2 жыл бұрын

Denmark will also be purchasing for Navy

@jamjardj1974

2 жыл бұрын

I’m glad it remains so relevant that it continues to gain export customers.

@blakeh6250

Жыл бұрын

Was on the first west coast US navy tomahawk test ship in the early 90's..interesting times

@jaredproffitt3720

Жыл бұрын

Their too slow to be viable against another military equivalent to our own, russia and China are way ahead of us in missile technology

@Jordan-du6fu

5 ай бұрын

New Zealand might buy it soon when we get our new frigates which are probably going to be arrowhead 140 frigates.

Can’t imagine whats its like to be on the receiving end of a tomahawk strike.

Great weapons system. It is a tried and true design, with improvements.

@Biden_is_demented

2 жыл бұрын

lol, people getting all proud and giddy, about an overly expensive subsonic cruise missile, in 2021! When Trump used them in Syria, only 2/3 of them managed to hit. That´s an ageing system showing its limitations. I found it hilarious how the commentator painted the built-in energy production as a plus, when the reason it needed more energy is because it is so slow to reach its targets, that it requires extra power to function for the extended time period! Gotta love marketing!

@danbuchner28

2 жыл бұрын

@@Biden_is_demented My old boss worked on the Tomahawk system. It is an incredibly valuable and effective tool in our arsenal!

@7700118910

2 жыл бұрын

@@Biden_is_demented jj Imagine that Trump informed President Putin 15 minutes before the launching of missil so Sirian and Russian army had chance to moved their planes and weapons. Jjj.

@jaredproffitt3720

Жыл бұрын

Except their so slow they can easily be shot down

@Serolfarim1

Жыл бұрын

​@Jared Proffitt Hypersonic hyped missile. Russia could not even shoot down the subsonic Neptune missile that struck the Moskva.

OWESOME JOB MADE IN USA!

@bestamerica

2 жыл бұрын

hi R J... ' better real -- MADE IN AMERICA --

I'd be duck facing too when launching those missiles. Just at the brother so awesome

Behold the flying scrolls with their payloads of fire. Double plus good

@kervwj6622

3 жыл бұрын

Go for the city of China

@1563ckg43

3 жыл бұрын

Revelation 6:12 And I beheld when he had opened the sixth seal, and, lo, There was a great earthquake; The sun became black like sackcloth of hair, and the moon became as blood.

I enjoy the look on those Sailor's faces as they watch the launches up close and personal.

@richduerr4471

3 жыл бұрын

I was one of those back in 1984-1988 looking the same way. When you actually get to shoot a missile (which is so rare) at a target, even if it is a drone for target practice, it is a beautiful thing! You watch your 'bird' fly free and attack your 'threat', sort of like a falconer. In the military you do so much simulation, but when that simulation actually means sending a real rocket into the air, it is pretty awesome! Mine was SeaSparrow anti-missile/aircraft system. When you see it connect and shoot down it's target, there is a sense of euphoria that your system works, because only a live fire exercise proves that. It was a pretty cool thing to do right after graduating from high school. I would not trade my four years in the U.S. Navy for anything. The experience was awesome, not perfect, but a good platform to deal with that weird high school to real world working man world. If you know a confused teen who doesn't know what to do with himself out of high school and doesn't feel ready for college, the Navy is a great way to go. I only did four years, but it was a good buffer for me to figure things out.

0:23 second , an UFO was there to observe the missile.👽

@razony

3 жыл бұрын

Observation vehicle.

@capricorn839

3 жыл бұрын

This shows that we're not alone. We are actually been watched for thousands of years

@bestamerica

2 жыл бұрын

hi A B... ' tomahawk missile cannot hit the UFO at all

The Raytheon Block V UGM-109E and RGM-109E Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles ( TLAM ) are badass! They can be re targeted in flight to a total of 15 different targets. They will have the capability to scan the target area with an electro-optical sensor and the Williams International F107-WR-402 Turbofan Engine can be throttled up and down for different speeds with the top speed being 550 Miles Per Hour like the older models. The new TLAM will have a new 1,000 LB Conventional Joint Mutil Effects Warhead System ( JMEWS ) that will have a hard target penetrating Capability like the BLU-109 and GBU-24 Pave Way II Bombs. The new Tomahawk will have a Jam Resistant GPS as well as TERCOM, DSMAC, and INS navigation equipment. Another interesting feature is using the unburned JP-10 Fuel as a Fuel Air Explosive Thermobaric Bomb along with the conventional warhead, adding more explosive Force to the detonation! These weapons will be awesome and not only is the United States Navy going to operate them aboard our Arleigh Burke Class and Zumwalt Class Aegis Guided Missile Destroyers, Ticonderoga Class Aegis Guided Missile Cruisers, Los Angeles Class and Improved Los Angeles Class, Seawolf, and Virginia Class Nuclear Powered Fast Attack Submarines, and Ohio Class Nuclear Powered Guided Missile Submarines but our ally in the United Kingdom's Royal Navy will operate them from the new Astute Class and older Trafalgar Class Nuclear Powered Fast Attack Submarines! The Royal Canadian Navy is also building a new class of Guided Missile Frigates that will have these TLAMs too! Awesome missiles and definitely a favorite of mine! Tomhawks in the past where also launched from Royal Navy Swiftsure Class Nuclear Powered Fast Attack Submarines, United States Navy Sturgeon Class Nuclear Powered Fast Attack Submarines, the Long Beach Class Nuclear Powered Guided Missile Cruiser USS. Long Beach CGN-9, Virginia Class Nuclear Powered Guided Missile Cruisers, Sprunance Class Destroyers, Kidd Class Guided Missile Destroyers, as well as the four Iowa Class Battleships that where brought back in the 1980s and later again retired that served in World War II!! I love the Versatility of the Tomahawk and it's launch platforms! The Sprunance Class Destroyers had Mk.41 Mod 0 Vertical Launch System Tubes just like the Ticonderoga Class Aegis Guided Missile Cruisers, while some of them had the Mk.143 Armored Box Launchers like the Iowa Class Battleships and Long Beach Class Nuclear Powered Guided Missile Cruiser. The Mk.143 ABL had four missile tubes per launcher and fired them horizontally after being raised to an angle by hydraulic actuators. The Arleigh Burke Class Aegis Guided Missile Destroyers have the newer Mk.41 Mod 1-Mod 5 VLS Launch tubes and so do the Zumwalt Class DDGs! The Royal Navy Swiftsure, Trafalgar, and Astute Class Submarines all fire Tomahawks by their Torpedo Tubes like the United States Navy's old Sturgeon Class Submarines and the older Los Angeles Class and newer Seawolf Class Submarines. The Improved Los Angeles Class and Virginia Class all have 12 Vertical Launch System Tubes towards the bow of the Submarines. The 4 Ohio Class Nuclear Powered Guided Missile Submarines ( SSGNs ) are former SSBNs ( Fleet Ballistic Missile Submarines ) that now carry 154 UGM-109E Tomahawk Land Attack Missiles in the vertical launch system Tubes that used to house the Strategic Trident Nuclear Submarine Launched Ballistic Missiles. They have 24 Tubes but Tubes One and Two are Diving Lockout Trunks for Navy SEAL Teams, SEAL Delivery Vehicle Teams, as well as Marine Raiders and can carry a mounted Dry Deck Shelter on each. Tubes 3-24 the last 22 Tubes have 7 Multiple All Up Round Canisters that have 7 Tomhawks per Tube for a total of 154!!! The largest Payload of TLAMs anywhere! The Air Force used to have a Nuclear tipped Ground Launched Cruise Missile "Glickem" called the BGM-109G Gryphon that was based on the Navy's BGM-109A Tomahawk Land Attack Missile-Nuclear ( TLAM-N ) that Carried a W-80 Nuclear Warhead! The GLCM in the Air Force had the W-84 Nuclear Warhead! These are interesting Missiles with a lot of history and hope they continue using them for years to come as long as there are wars and until the Lord stops all evil!

@Tuglife912

3 жыл бұрын

🇺🇸🇬🇧⚓️🎯

@briank8697

2 жыл бұрын

I used to work for Raytheon on their Radar/CUAS program. Some of their products are fabulous, some are not so fabulous

@hockeylvr1234

Жыл бұрын

Used to work at Williams, cool stuff

@blakeh6250

Жыл бұрын

Was on the first Navy tommahawk test ship in the pacific

@jaredproffitt3720

Жыл бұрын

They are way too slow to be viable against another military equivalent to ours, our missiles are lagging behind China and Russia

It only costs $600,000 to upgrade a block IV Tomahawk to the block V Maritime Strike capability. With over 6,000 Tomahawks in the US Navy’s inventory, they can easily afford to launch volleys of over a dozen MST missiles at each of China’s 32 destroyers. Since the Maritime Strike Tomahawk flies at only 30 feet above the sea surface, due to the curvature of the earth, it can’t be detected by radar until it’s within 15-20 miles. That gives a defending ship only about 90 seconds to detect, track, and launch countermeasures. If there are a dozen of these incoming, a PLA Navy ship just doesn’t stand a chance, especially with it packing a 1,000 pound HE warhead.

@TJ-zc1ws

2 жыл бұрын

But with your theory cant China just launch "volleys" of DF-21 missiles? Or how about their hypersonic missiles? How will US protect carriers from this?

@willymac5036

2 жыл бұрын

@@TJ-zc1ws they could if they had them. China only has about 120 DF-21 missiles in total, and can only build about 10 per year. China will have to be very selective in when and where they choose to fire those DF-21 missiles.

@TJ-zc1ws

2 жыл бұрын

@@willymac5036 Only 120? US has 11 carriers. DF-21 is supposedly accurate and cannot be shot down. So they can launch 10 DF-21 Missiles for each carrier. We're not even counting the hypersonic missiles yet. I think US superiority is coming to an end. China has the resources and manpower to out do the US now. Its only a matter of time.

@willymac5036

2 жыл бұрын

@@TJ-zc1ws You are going to believe what you want to believe, but I assure you the DF-21 does not pose as great of a threat to US carriers as China wants the world to think. First off, China has no way to track US Aircraft Carriers. They might be big, but they are also fast, meaning that within 30 minutes of China FINDING the carrier, it can be anywhere within a 700 square mile radius of where it was first spotted. Within 60 minutes, that grows to over 3,500 square miles. Second, for a missile to hit, it must maintain a missile quality track for the entire time from launch to impact. The US EXCELS at disrupting the chain that is required to maintain that track. Third, even if the missile is launched, every US carrier battle group has several destroyers, each carrying dozens of SM-3 anti ballistic missiles. The newest version, the SM-IIb, so far in testing has shown 100% accuracy. It is designed specifically to take out ballistic missiles like the DF-21. If it gets past the SM-3 missiles (which there is, so far, a 100% chance that it WON’T), each carrier strike group carries HUNDREDS of ESSM and SeaRAM missiles, both of which have an accuracy greater than 95%. And finally Fourth, even if one or two DF-21’s get through the absolute onslaught of missile defense provided by the carrier battle group, the chance that they would actually sink a US Nimitz or Ford class carrier are almost zero. Keep in mind the DF-21 has a 600kg warhead (1322 pounds). Back in 2005 the US Navy performed a SINKEX of one of its decommissioned aircraft carriers, the USS America. This wasn’t even a modern carrier, the USS America was built in 1961, and lacked nearly all of the Kevlar and depleted uranium armor that ALL current US Aircraft carriers possess. For FOUR WEEKS the US Navy hit that ship with everything they had. Anti ship missiles, torpedos, 2000 pound laser guided JDAMs, Harpoons, literally everything in their inventory. They struck that carrier well over 100 times with warheads ranging from 500 to 5000 pounds and it never sank. Finally after over a month of pounding away at that ship, they had to send engineers aboard to specially place charges to scuttle it. And that was a ship with no one on board performing damage control. The US Navy has the BEST damage control of any Navy in the world, just read up on how much damage the USS Enterprise took in WWII without sinking. The Japanese thought they had sunk the USS Enterprise SEVEN TIMES throughout the war, yet she always turned up a few weeks later, repaired and ready to fight. If the DF-21 REALLY posed that great of a threat to US Aircraft Carriers, then the US wouldn’t be sailing them in China’s face, through the Taiwan Strait and all over the South China Sea, well within range of those DF-21’s. That’s because the US Navy knows that if China launches one, or 20, within minutes of liftoff, the US Navy will be tracking it, and will either jam whatever signal is guiding it, or they will simply destroy whatever radar system or satellite that is guiding it, effectively blinding it and making a hit impossible. China talks up their weapons a great deal, but keep in mind that even weapons that are perfected in peacetime tend to disappoint in war. The only way to overcome that is experience. Experience is something the US Navy has a considerable amount of, and the PLA Navy has none of. Again, I know you are going to believe whatever you want to believe, but I assure you the US Navy is not worried about China, or the DF-21.

@C.C_23

2 жыл бұрын

Yes sir well said

Thanks for letting us know, well done!!

You can tell by the crews faces why military service is so much fun. Imagine being the person who gets to push the million dollar button.

Go forward, America! Long live the Nato! Long live freedom! Down with all dictatorships and terrorists all around the world! Best wishes from Germany!

@frankmueller6522

2 жыл бұрын

@Bilal Khattak , I write what I want because we live in a democracy and I am not from the CIA and I am also not a bot!

@randomentertainingvideos3545

2 жыл бұрын

@@frankmueller6522 Don't worry, he's just jealous he doesn't have a job that pays on average 104,777 dollars a year.

@rolandgrz1975

2 жыл бұрын

It's a plutocracy

@randomentertainingvideos3545

2 жыл бұрын

@@rolandgrz1975 You got a problem with a lot of money?

@alexandarvoncarsteinzarovi3723

2 жыл бұрын

Youre not the only one who wished Patton & Rommel went on a crusade to liberate the world of commie cancer,

0:08 lol they are like kids watching fireworks

1:47 NOW THATS A LOT OF DAMAGE

I don't think that missiles at this speed will remain viable forever

I had hoped to live to the day we dont need such things. Appears we are getting closer to destroying ourselves.

That is an amazing weapons system tomahawks missiles are the future of warfare. You would be amazed if you were hear and seeing it launch from a ship of war. total respect to thoses serving in the Navy and all other American armed Force's.

The faces on those I can tell inexperienced sailors is priceless 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂.. you can tell they’ve never seen a missile take off before.. lmaooo

@badlandskid

3 жыл бұрын

😆

@Javservice

3 жыл бұрын

@MichaelArcAngel1028 really bro.. combat vets with like what 20 years old? That’s you logic? Ahahahha don’t make a fool of yourself if you want to come back to my comments make sure you go to school first..

@Javservice

3 жыл бұрын

Now your the one making assumptions here fool. First you don’t know who I’m or if I served or not… who’s the fool now. Cause I ain’t gonna give you any info about me.. You starting to sound like Joe…

@badlandskid

3 жыл бұрын

🍿👀

@johnakinbote7055

3 жыл бұрын

what des your name mean?

Four Ohio class submarines were modified to carry up to 154 Tomahawks each. A massive salvo of 154 Block V Tomahawks will probably overwhelm any carrier battle group.

@jaredproffitt3720

Жыл бұрын

Except these missiles are so slow that they can easily be shot down making them a waste of money

@tvgerbil1984

Жыл бұрын

@@jaredproffitt3720 These Tomahawks for maritime strikes are sea skimming in order to hide below the radar horizon until the terminal phase and a massive salvo of over a hundred sea skimming missiles are a lot to shoot down, especially when they can loiter to wait for others to arrive all at the same time.

@jaredproffitt3720

Жыл бұрын

@@tvgerbil1984 they can still track those missiles man and if one sub fires its entire payload at another ship it will be left useless. Not to mention if it's firing at another Chinese or Russian ship which will also be firing dozens of better missiles in return,

@trentvlak

Жыл бұрын

@@jaredproffitt3720 150 missiles will drain two missile cruisers worth of defensive missiles. A three sub attack will drain an entire carrier group.

@randybaumery5090

Жыл бұрын

​@@jaredproffitt3720 easily shot down? Hahaha. Have you shot any down?

If it could go super, or even hypersonic like the Brahmos for the last few miles, it would be an exponentially more effective ASM.

@mrp8488

3 жыл бұрын

@Bobo Mbutu - Apparently your reading comprehension is low, so I'll try to explain it to you in a way you'll understand. I said if the Tomahawk could go super or hypersonic for the last few miles it would be exponentially more effective ASM, because, this is the important part. It would have several times the kinetic energy during impact. Their, that wasn't too tough to understand, was it?

@mesterneuman5713

3 жыл бұрын

@@mrp8488 Both Russia and China have already deployed hypersonic anti ship missiles.And they also have developed hypersonic glide vehicles,said to travel up to Mach 27.The Russian HGV is said to hold multiple nuclear warheads.

@mrp8488

3 жыл бұрын

@@mesterneuman5713- I'm confused by all the confusion about my original statement. All I said was that the Tomahawk missile would be a lot more effective if it could go super or hypersonic during the last few miles before impact because of the exponential increase in kinetic energy. It would also greatly enhance the chances of getting through enemy defenses, while maintaining the relatively low price tag.

@capricorn839

3 жыл бұрын

Brahmos is untested and could be just a flying junk to bluff potential enemies

@sendohakira3889

2 жыл бұрын

Brahmos is a copy of the Russian P800, But made in India.😂😂😂

Raytheon knows missiles and makes all the right choices including cost ... please keep Tomahawk family alive and well: the Navy has a winner!

Now that’s some stopping power

With this “new bad boy” that has the terrain hugging capabilities (fly unnoticed) we 🇺🇸 can always opt for a preemptive strike in order to confound the enemy.

@Dweller415

3 жыл бұрын

The most effective weapon is the one that never sees combat.

@Jakezillagfw

3 жыл бұрын

@@Dweller415 I would argue it's the weapon only ever used once. I.E. atom bombs.

@mesterneuman5713

3 жыл бұрын

The Taliban have no ships.

@michaelpetrovich5353

3 жыл бұрын

We shall see.

Remember when the Air force/Navy said guns on fighters were a thing of the past battles will only be fought with missiles? (Vietnam) Without missiles what does a U.S. Navy Destroyer have? a single 5" gun and some machine guns...

@r.b.seiple5913

3 жыл бұрын

The Navy tried missile only ships in the late 50's it was called the Leahy Class Destroyer Light Guided Missile or "DLG" ship (later reclassified as a Guided Missle Cruiser "CG"). During the Cuban missle crisis JFK ordered 1 of the Leahy class ships to fire a warning shot across the bow of a Soviet ship trying to run the blockade, when JFK found out that the ship did not have a gun to fire a warning shot he drafted a new law requiring all major USN warships to have a main gun. The Leahy class was redesigned to remove the aft missile launcher and replace it with with a 5" main gun, the redesigned ships beame a new class of ship called the Belknap Class DLG (also later reclassed as "CGs").

@chacdogful

3 жыл бұрын

Hey hey hey, they sometimes have another five inch deck gun in the back. 😂 You have to understand this doesn’t operate alone, but in a group. Has torpedoes and scanning gear. What it was made for…

@sumerbc7409

3 жыл бұрын

@@chacdogful Still no ship killing guns traded for missiles better work or they are doomed.. Russian ships have double deck mounted guns plus fore and aft missile tubes...

@chacdogful

3 жыл бұрын

@@sumerbc7409 those deck guns are out of date friend. They are for land bombardment. Range 25ish miles… You ain’t getting that close baby

@sumerbc7409

3 жыл бұрын

@@chacdogful haha land bombardment? with a little single 5" gun? Deck "GUN" singular. There is only one 5" gun per destroyer. a 5" gun does very little damage to another destroyer IF you can get that close.. If a U.S. destroyer loses it's missile capability it has to retreat and not confront another warship.

I was thinking about a flapless design, by using manoeuvrable weights inside the missile's structure. Possibly also useful for a hypersonic missile design.

I hope Australia has a good supply of Tomahawk cruise missiles.

@rodbutler8069

3 жыл бұрын

Australia is a trusted alliance for the free world and the US in the Pacific that should have all the means available to defend itself. This weapon is one of the ways available to them.

@nathanb8721

3 жыл бұрын

Harpoons and LRASM and SM6 and a hypersonic missile in development with the US no Tomahawks at this stage

What a great military strength America has. God bless America 🇺🇸

There is much less time to react to subsonic sea skimming missile popping up on horizon at 35kms, than a very high flying super fast missile detected very early on at higher altitude.. Not to mention radar clutter due to radar reflection of the waves, and very low IR signature because of no rocket plume. But i will say that AI based passive infrared imaging and autonomous target should be part of the update.

Great video

Thank you so much. Now i know which one to buy☺️

Ground launched MSTs and NSMs are two of anti-ship weapons of choice in the USMCs new island-hopping strategy.

Spiral development seems to be a win for missiles. Tomahawk - Standard missile etc

Great video 👍

Thanks...!

It can carry 5 smaller missiles inside to distract the antimissiles and protect the main one

Im really curious how it will handle its maritime strike capabilities. Compared to the hypersonic missles of Russia and China, this seems like it would be a snack for CWIS and other missile defence.

@chuckhooks6621

3 жыл бұрын

Enemy ships will likely be attacked by SM-6 salvos to distract and degrade their air defenses first followed up quickly by MST attacks. F-35s with their long range sensors operating in stealth mode will be directing the entire missile war.

@johnsilver9338

2 жыл бұрын

Hypersonic missiles has cons too. It cannot stay long enough at lower atmosphere or they'll burn more. Even at supersonic speed. This will make them more vulnerable to IR sensors from satellites and ground interceptors. If it wants to maintain its hypersonic speed, it will have to come from higher altitudes. In order to sea skim, it will have to reduce its speed significantly to subsonic speeds to better hide itself. Missiles with lower RCS have an additional advantage which is what LRASM is best for.

Respect to USA from UK

Thank you for your service

@ucuppsani6767

3 жыл бұрын

War for oil.. No oil no dollar

YES ITS JUST PART OF THE MIX AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS NEXT TIME YOUR FIREING.

Good because the Block lll was the last with anti ship capabilities. That one was far from jammer proof. The Block IV was only capable of hitting land targets. The best part of operations with tomahawks from submarines you don't need a VLS tube it goes straight into the torpedo tube on older diesel electric submarines in NATO. I know our diesel electric submarines want a new version because we still operate the Block lll.

@BalakeHart-nh4xh

7 ай бұрын

Well they had 3 different navigation systems even then..

I remember when this thing flew over my head back in 99

The hits at 1:46 and 1:51 are from a test of the Naval Strike missile (same hit from different perspectives).

GOD bless the USAN!

@jaysartori9032

3 жыл бұрын

@Randal Gardner "Ooop's sorry"!

@dennisbakker5262

3 жыл бұрын

Usa has nothing to do with god.. Maby the devil

@jaysartori9032

3 жыл бұрын

@@dennisbakker5262 "Who says"?

@ucuppsani6767

3 жыл бұрын

War n bomb people for oil

@westypoprocks772

3 жыл бұрын

Lol, maybe God would be better off providing for tgw basic needs and well being of the human race so war is no longer a necessity. Lol, J/K, god bless our war machine!

The Tomahawk is indispensable.

@bestamerica

2 жыл бұрын

hi C... ' yeaa that right... american shipyard company must make many more better tomahawk BV missiles

Finally! Something that can at least outrange some potential adversary ASMs. I hope they get these into service ASAP.

Rockets are leaving orbit , missiles are for destroying things. Im happy to see the parachute at end of stage.

Russian cold launch missile system is a work of art!

@patricklewis2745

2 жыл бұрын

Them cold launches are very sexy.

Great news for all of us in NATO. Sad news is that with all the sabre rattling from the usual countries. This beast could well be in use before we know it

Wow. A defense news channel that is not voiced by a text-to-speech app. Crazy.

Enjoyed your video and I gave it a Thumbs Up

Hasn't the Tomahawk always been jam resistant, as it first relied on terrain following and not gps? Or are those obselecent?

@Piddlefoots

2 жыл бұрын

Those models, which we used in the middle east wars, Russia got there hands on a few, copied them, sold to China also, this is literally where they got that tech from, they did not develop it themselves, we, after the middle east, upgraded the platform, multiple times, most of these are not even released to the pubic until years later.

@pixsilvb9638

2 жыл бұрын

@@Piddlefoots well, the US gave China (and Rusdia of course) ...Stealth aircrafts cruise missiles, globalhawk drones, etc. Before that they gave them the Atomic bomb, computers, the B-29, GPS, Space Suttles, etc. Any future plans to keep giving them more technology in the coming years? 🙄

@Piddlefoots

2 жыл бұрын

@@pixsilvb9638 Your definition of gave is strange...

@pixsilvb9638

2 жыл бұрын

@@Piddlefoots Strange but real. Becoming stupid is smthng the US mastered for the last 80 years. Three B-29 landing in Siberia at the end of WWII as a Santa present for old dad Josif; communist nuclear scientists working at los Alamos passing all the atoms secrets on a napkin while grabbing a shake at the local dinner; a complete F-117 blown out the skies of a Serbian farmer. US enemies dont need to hire spies all over the planet. They just need to wait long enough at the bus stop for America to make stupid moves which will get them new hardware every 10 minutes. Stupidity is better than Christmas!! 🌲🍄🌲🍄

@Chironex_Fleckeri

2 жыл бұрын

@@pixsilvb9638 yes Alberto, life is just like an action movie. All the secrets just get downloaded or put in a briefcase. That's how these things work

During the First Gulf War, my wife would go out onto the fantail after watch to see the tomahawks launch. She loved it, especially at night.

@Piddlefoots

2 жыл бұрын

Seriously never gets old does it, watching that raw power fly is AWESOME !

@santyclause8034

2 жыл бұрын

Doomsday backdrop romance seems kinda kitsch.

“The missile knows where it is at all times, it knows this because it knows where it isn’t…”

Imagine having these during the Battle of Thermopylae

Couldn’t a CIWS Gatling hit that?

@chuckhooks6621

3 жыл бұрын

A likely attack strategy would be to salvo SM-6s (anti-ship mode) and attempt to overwhelm a ship's defenses. Then time a couple of MSTs to come in just behind the SM-6 swarm and break the ship in half with them.

@chacdogful

3 жыл бұрын

@@chuckhooks6621 Small turtles passing by know that. 🐢 That was not the question at hand. Have you not been watching the “iron dome” at work? Overwhelming aegis is the terminology you’re looking for there. Btw, that 10% “miss” rate is largely in part to the radars calculating that rockets trajectory and quickly determining it’s not going to fall in a populated place and let’s it through.

@ThatCarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

Yes, this is subsonic missiles issue is the cheapest form of defense(CIWS) could take them down, but since missiles like the Tomahawk fly below the radar horizon and sea skim, the ship wouldn't be able to track it until is passed over the radar horizon, and have little time to react let alone track the missile. It can also maneuver. Missiles would have a harder time to shoot the tomahawk down and a CIWS would actually be the best defense here. Hypersonic missiles can not maneuver in their terminal phase and is why they aren't used on moving targets and only stationary, they are also giant balls of fire any IRST radar let alone AESA radar would see. Their advantages are in first strikes and short range strikes, as long range they lose their advantage as you gain more then enough time to fend them off(I could do the math if you would like) CIWS would never shoot these down, but missiles could. Supersonic missiles are caught in the middle, they can maneuver but not as much as subsonic, and at their speed at sea level they are not as LO/stealth, but move at a faster speed CIWS would have a hard time hitting, as would some radars/missiles as it can also seaskim and is below the radar horizon(depending on speed)

@chuckhooks6621

3 жыл бұрын

@Garrett Poppell. Your question was so simple-minded that I attempted to answer it in a way your mental capacity would allow given its apparent limitations. Yes a CIWS could possibly shoot one down assuming the salvo of SM-6s (anti-ship mode) fails to set the deck on fire or otherwise degrade or destroy the CIWS or ship radars. But that is the point of an early SM-6 salvo, isn't it? To overwhelm, distract or degrade ship defenses to the point that CIWS can't even be used. Sorry I overestimated your intelligence. My bad.

@chacdogful

3 жыл бұрын

@@chuckhooks6621 you are overestimating yours 🤦🏼‍♂️ you know it’s capable of jamming things like the phalanx…. Obviously not. Stop. You are embarrassing yourself. You kids can’t stay on a topic these days. Or don’t know what a topic is it appears. Intelligent people don’t reply like you do. Embarrassed people do. “We’ll you’re obviously stupid” I imagine you saying with baby rattle in hand. 😂 You think they release the data I seek? No. How can they it’s brand new, yet you already know everything about it. Are you CIA? Is this a setup??? 😂 😂 🤫

The two black guys were so amazed at Missile being shot😂!

@1timerod

3 жыл бұрын

Why is that funny mate?

@discopanzer1009

3 жыл бұрын

@@1timerod their reaction was funny tbh

@wowepic2256

3 жыл бұрын

Its a dope looking launch

@mabhodlelajj1195

3 жыл бұрын

@@1timerod it's funny coz it's like they are two little kids amazed by something they never saw before,not millitary personel that supposed to operare those machines..

Nice firework 👏☺️

They can put thousands of buttons or protrusions to not be detected by radars they can have many right angles to avoid or evade radars

@robertchew3473

3 жыл бұрын

⁰

Cracks me up 🤣 that your headline photo shows the missile being displayed on a stand with a red silk skirt. There's something comical about it. Nevertheless love that we have a new tomahawk missile. ❤️

India's hypersonic missile Brahmos is the world's most deadliest supersonic anti ship missile.. 🔥... Together tomahawk and brahmos can take a whole Chinese fleet down 🔥

@whyjnot420

3 жыл бұрын

I wonder how strong the relationship between America and India will become in future years. As an American, I for one fully support a stronger relationship with India, esp. given current affairs over in India's part of the world.

@vanignis

2 жыл бұрын

Brahmoputra+ Moscow=brahmos:) this is export variant Onix

The amount of jobs this thing employs is astronomical.

My first Navy ship USS Merrill DD-976 was the pacific tomahawk missile test ship..back in 80's and 90's..

세계최강 미국 정말 멋진 나라입니다 미국 파이팅~~^^

As Raytheon supported Kamala, will they also paint it with the rainbow flag for the same top dollar?

@MisterSiga

3 жыл бұрын

that would be hilarious , imagine getting taken out by an rainbow missile

@badlandskid

3 жыл бұрын

It only attacks from the rear

gooooood tecnolgy

Nuts. Pound for pound Raytheon is the US best aerospace and defense developer.. maybe in the world

💪💪💪💪💪💪💪🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸

🇺🇲🌏💪🇺🇲👍👌👌

Awesome weapon that keeps on getting better.

Love the look on the 2 young sailors face! They will never forget that! They were so surprised by the power they just witnessed they had that “oh ssssshi war going to be in trouble “ lol

Don't be fooled china's d2 whatevers are simple v-2 rockets with a little guidance compared to these tomahawks.

@ThatCarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

Glad to see someone else here understands hypersonic missiles have no maneuverability in their terminal phase do to the speed they are moving.

@frankvandermaarel5524

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThatCarGuy they don't need maneuverability when you do not have the time to react to an attack.

@ThatCarGuy

3 жыл бұрын

@@frankvandermaarel5524 You have more then enough time... hypersonic missiles are only good for stationary targets and lose there advantage after around 200km. Let's do some math. Using the zircon missile for example. Its top speed is mach 9. Covert to km/s that's about 3km/s. Say your target is 600km away, at 3km/s that will take 3:33 at top speed without taking into account the time it takes to reach max speed. So over 5 minutes to hit its target. Are you really telling me you cant track and try to shoot down the missile let alone move the ship within 5+ minutes?

@frankvandermaarel5524

3 жыл бұрын

@@ThatCarGuy ok good point

@1563ckg43

3 жыл бұрын

@@frankvandermaarel5524 that’s why Link16 communication/plotting can better an intercept or actual firing solution. Besides the AEGIS Systems on the Burke’s and Ticonderoga Boats can Manuel select fire or auto. Select fire, and use cross triangulation plotting for the inbound.

69th

I love America. Long live America❤

Buggs Bunny , Butler says ,, ( Here sir is your Thomas Hawk ) lol

can use 2 or 3 stages or 4 for greater distance or can carry 5 or 6 sub missiles inside

Time to give it a real world test

5:25 Holy cow, wtf is that?! That's fast!

@daliborkovac2284

2 жыл бұрын

A-235 Russian ABM

Your video's are so cool😁🇬🇧👍

Subsonic can be inside supersonic or a lot of smallest subsonic inside

The guys expressions at the beginning is hilarious.

i do think, as seen in the video, the launch procedure includes navy personnel making a swooshing sound at launch.

I was never angry launching a Tomahawk, tired and grumpy...never angered..

One of the best missile it’s accuracy is out of this world.

0:10 - me when I get a new gun

Great Channel. 🇺🇸

Now that's what I'm talking about

Have they fixed the electronic from being jamed on this version?

What does the dash on the head-cone do? The older versions didn’t have that line.

@santyclause8034

2 жыл бұрын

"This side Up"?

05:30 wow there is someone on the deck fifty feet away from the launch.

Tomahawk launcher Armed and ready. Standing by for coordinates. Coordinates received. Warheads in the field.