US Navy, Air Force making waves with new weapons at RIMPAC

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 21 гру 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 88

  • @quinlanal-aziz6155
    @quinlanal-aziz6155 4 місяці тому +30

    Air launched SM6 is truly overpowered.

    • @dnate697
      @dnate697 4 місяці тому +1

      No such thing as too much LOL!

  • @FLT247
    @FLT247 4 місяці тому +1

    BOOYAH!!!

  • @scarface829
    @scarface829 4 місяці тому +21

    Our country should have something very special. With all the billions spent. USA🇺🇲

    • @RLRTHREE
      @RLRTHREE 4 місяці тому

      We got stuff the human brain can’t fathom and that causes so much destruction it gets classified as a natural disaster

  • @adamhodgson8851
    @adamhodgson8851 4 місяці тому +19

    USA… USA… USA… USA… 🎉🥳

  • @everypitchcounts4875
    @everypitchcounts4875 4 місяці тому +17

    LRASM can also function in swarm tactics just as a drone swarm would

    • @BroadcastRyan22
      @BroadcastRyan22 4 місяці тому +2

      Very true.

    • @MeanLaQueefa
      @MeanLaQueefa 4 місяці тому

      Will they go to a different target if other LRASM’s have hit the primary target?

    • @apolloaero
      @apolloaero 4 місяці тому +1

      ​@@MeanLaQueefayesz they're supposed to divide targets between themselves and adapt

    • @normadamous
      @normadamous 4 місяці тому +1

      @@everypitchcounts4875 the LRASM seems like such a badazz weapon. The programming in it must be massive. It's a shame it's so expensive, but I guess that is just the way things are nowadays.

    • @Youngclarke21
      @Youngclarke21 4 місяці тому

      Ya, for only 10x the price lol

  • @andrewday3206
    @andrewday3206 4 місяці тому +21

    So Quicksink is a dumb bomb with a JDAM kit and a new seeker.

    • @BroadcastRyan22
      @BroadcastRyan22 4 місяці тому +5

      Basically, yes

    • @dnate697
      @dnate697 4 місяці тому +2

      But you do know what a 2000 Lb. Bomb does to a ship, right?

    • @kameronjones7139
      @kameronjones7139 4 місяці тому

      It also dives under the ship

  • @memesahoy79
    @memesahoy79 4 місяці тому +9

    Looking forward to the sinkX cut

    • @BroadcastRyan22
      @BroadcastRyan22 4 місяці тому +5

      I talked to the media folks at RIMPAC who told me it should be next week. Lots of stuff to compile and scrub of any classified details before sharing

    • @tray3120
      @tray3120 4 місяці тому

      I see a news article that said the b 2 dropped a bomb on the ship

  • @MichaelPenney-b1k
    @MichaelPenney-b1k 3 місяці тому +1

    🔥Canada vs United States Of America vs South America vs Japan Island vs New Zealand vs Australia vs Indonesia vs China vs North Korea vs Russia vs Ukraine vs India vs Sri-Lanka vs Pakistan vs Africa vs Israel vs Rome vs Vatican City vs Iraq vs Saudi Arabia vs Germany vs Royal Family vs England vs France🔥

  • @msytdc1577
    @msytdc1577 4 місяці тому +8

    4:46 The SM-6 has a discarded booster rocket first stage that the AIM-174B does not, so the missile's effective range is probably pretty comparable, depending on the launch platform's kinematic energy at time of launch (the F/A-18 isn't exactly a speed demon, so primarily just altitude).
    If the Navy wanted to they could probably wing mount the entire SM-6, but the almost double weight and with the much higher drag of the short squat booster it likely wasn't worth the trade off in reduced aircraft performance and carrying capacity.
    Perhaps in the future they'll marry the AIM-174B with a first stage booster of the same diameter as the missile itself and call it the AIM-174LR.

    • @rat2244
      @rat2244 4 місяці тому +2

      Great point, would be a nice addition for bigger platforms of the future such as the NGAD.

    • @kameronjones7139
      @kameronjones7139 4 місяці тому

      Launch height matters alot more and the boster doesn't get as high as jet

  • @sam93931
    @sam93931 4 місяці тому +3

    necessary to preserve democracy and freedom, thx for your services you all!

    • @thefpvlife7785
      @thefpvlife7785 4 місяці тому +2

      and to do away with Trump.

    • @sam93931
      @sam93931 4 місяці тому +1

      @@thefpvlife7785 what are you talking about??

  • @DohTheOpinionator
    @DohTheOpinionator 4 місяці тому +2

    Good stuff.

    • @haili3931
      @haili3931 4 місяці тому

      ​ Obviously, if war in the Pacific breaks out, US Aircraft Carriers will certainly involve. Then China will launch DF-21 (Aircraft Carrier Killer) from the mainland to strike those Aircraft Carriers. Then the US military will strike China's mainland where those DF-21 are located, then China will immediately use nuclear weapons to strike US mainland, then nuclear war breaks out. The end result is that Nobody on this planet survives. Please stop dreaming. Nuclear Power can never lose a war, full stop.

  • @stuartyablon7184
    @stuartyablon7184 4 місяці тому +3

    ❤️🇺🇸

  • @P2Feener305
    @P2Feener305 4 місяці тому

    5:11 like the Chinese balloon

  • @cosmicpsyops4529
    @cosmicpsyops4529 4 місяці тому

    It's about time they retired the USS Dibuque. That ship was struggling 16 years ago. 😂

  • @rebeccaaldrich3396
    @rebeccaaldrich3396 4 місяці тому

    Finally some good news. 😅
    I can't wait to hear about the super secret weapons that they have been working on for the last 70 years.

  • @charliekuhns2832
    @charliekuhns2832 4 місяці тому +1

    I thought it was the USS Cleveland

    • @BroadcastRyan22
      @BroadcastRyan22 4 місяці тому +1

      The Cleveland was sunk in another SINKEX during Valiant Shield

  • @namazlur78
    @namazlur78 4 місяці тому

    I think the new weapons did not sink tarawa 😂

  • @levicnall
    @levicnall 4 місяці тому +1

    USA

  • @videodude8137
    @videodude8137 4 місяці тому +1

    No footage available, since no film was used to record this! 😂 All digital. 😅

    • @normadamous
      @normadamous 4 місяці тому +1

      @@videodude8137 "footage " meaning 'feet of film' ? That makes complete sense! I'm almost 60 years old, and never made that connection.

  • @lawrenceralph7481
    @lawrenceralph7481 4 місяці тому +2

    Su vis pacem parabellum

  • @tomcullen8367
    @tomcullen8367 4 місяці тому

    How is quicksink different than a PJDAM? PJDAMs are cheap, 20-30k with 300 mile range. Are we ordering large volumes of quicksink in the budget? Matt Pottinger recommended ordering large quantities of PJDAMs in his book The Boiling Moat. LRASM is way too expensive and is not being ordered in sufficient quantities.

    • @BroadcastRyan22
      @BroadcastRyan22 4 місяці тому +2

      It's basically the same guidance system, different seeking sensor/software

    • @tbe0116
      @tbe0116 4 місяці тому +2

      Best guess, quick sink’s are designed to penetrate a ship and explode near the keel or penetrate completely and explode under the keel. This would break the ship in half and sink it quickly.

    • @johnsilver9338
      @johnsilver9338 4 місяці тому +3

      Quicksink is about giving dual mode seekers to JDAMs for 2000lb GBU-31s so it can better target ships. While PJDAM is about strapping a small jet engine to a JDAM for 500lb Mk 82s to extend its range. Going by Boeing's brochure, they have the baseline PJDAM and also the maritime PJDAM.

  • @chadparsons50
    @chadparsons50 4 місяці тому

    Pride comes before a fall.

    • @MD97531
      @MD97531 4 місяці тому +1

      Pride comes before the CCP collapse

  • @halimtalafuka9946
    @halimtalafuka9946 4 місяці тому +1

    .

  • @eastafrika728
    @eastafrika728 4 місяці тому +1

    I don't think this bothers Russia or China

  • @danielcroslin
    @danielcroslin 4 місяці тому

    i was hoping this channel wasn't too propagandy, but this video proves my hopes wrong

  • @phillipsoltan9913
    @phillipsoltan9913 4 місяці тому

    Right now, RIMPAC is about defending Taiwan. It will take days for the US fleet to get in combat range so Taiwan will be mostly on its own until then. Maybe the B-2s with QuickSink can be deployed fast enough to make a difference but most likely the battle will be over before the US fleet gets there.

  • @domesticcat5069
    @domesticcat5069 4 місяці тому

    🗨️📐

  • @a.d.j.printingtshirtsticke3929
    @a.d.j.printingtshirtsticke3929 4 місяці тому

    .
    ...

  • @EvanAndHell
    @EvanAndHell 4 місяці тому +1

    Support the troops, discard the veterans 🇺🇸

  • @shadowchaser19816
    @shadowchaser19816 4 місяці тому +1

    China is a peace-loving nation. When all ten thousand nations submit under the great power of China, the world will be one and be in peace.

    • @ericsagen5229
      @ericsagen5229 4 місяці тому +7

      😂😂😂 That's funny

    • @og_propagandapdx8592
      @og_propagandapdx8592 4 місяці тому

      I read that in Habitual line crossers “great China voice”

  • @kushking949
    @kushking949 4 місяці тому

    You talk too much and show not enough footage.

  • @silafaupaulmeredith7251
    @silafaupaulmeredith7251 4 місяці тому

    Send them to Ukraine to be tested and also produce enough to last 1 month of conflict with a real enemy not those on Toyota pickups with AK47s

  • @normadamous
    @normadamous 4 місяці тому +1

    I think the Quick Sink is a bit optimistic. You are not likely getting into jdam range of a defended ship.

    • @MrDJAK777
      @MrDJAK777 4 місяці тому +6

      JDAM-er with that fuse/sensor from an f35 would work just fine tho

    • @msytdc1577
      @msytdc1577 4 місяці тому +5

      There are many support vessels, tenders, supply ships, and enlisted commercial vessels that could use sinking that don't all get a destroyer escort. Using a $12mil torpedo to sink a patrol boat isn't the best, and a Hellfire or Brimstone missile isn't going to take down a 20,000 ton RORO carrier hauling tanks. You need something with some boom that doesn't cost a fortune that isn't thrown off by the target moving 150 feet during time of flight, and that doesn't require clear atmospheric conditions and targeting platform using a laser designator.

    • @cruisinguy6024
      @cruisinguy6024 4 місяці тому

      ⁠@@msytdc1577this. 100% this

    • @normadamous
      @normadamous 4 місяці тому +1

      @@msytdc1577 yes, I can see that. I was thinking that a regular jdam would be used for sinking the soft targets. The only novel thing about the quick strike is where it targets and detonates, right? I get that it's more effective than just dropping it anywhere on the ship, though.
      A lot of the hype I've seen about the quick sink is how it is a "game changer " against enemies, but I still don't see it having enough standoff to go against the defended targets. How big of a bomb can fit inside a jsf?

    • @blancpaincollector
      @blancpaincollector 4 місяці тому +2

      The B-2 bomber is the US military’s most sophisticated aircraft. The Air Force says its stealthy characteristics allow it to penetrate heavily defended areas and also fly with a small chance of being detected by radar at high altitudes. That gives the B-2’s sensors the ability to get a view of the battlefield not possible in lower-flying planes. It showed the US military can use one of its most survivable weapons platforms, the B-2 Spirit stealth bomber, to sink a major surface ship with a low-cost guided bomb.

  • @jamesruggeri2695
    @jamesruggeri2695 4 місяці тому +1

    I'm all for combined arms warfare and unifying command and data, but just be careful, if you unify too much under 1 leader and that leader decides to go rogue or makes mistakes, entire armies can be lost. Let's not forget about the Horus Heresy, ego is a dangerous drug.

    • @scepticalbeliever
      @scepticalbeliever 4 місяці тому +1

      Funny reference

    • @alexmacchalatte
      @alexmacchalatte 4 місяці тому

      This is why decentralized control structures such as the Navy’s composite warfare doctrine, is the answer. It sacrifices a little of unity of command but gains in tempo and optimizes span of control. Trying to treat the maritime environment in terms of centralized ground based fires, which everyone wants to constantly do, stratifies the kill chain instead of flattening it. The US Navy decimated an entire country’s naval power in a standard work day, yet, we have those who will tell you the Navy does not know Fires. You have to operate like the medium in which you operate.

  • @pythondre
    @pythondre 4 місяці тому

    Please choose another name then "Rim Pac".

    • @BaBaYaga1999-p7u
      @BaBaYaga1999-p7u 4 місяці тому +3

      Man up dude

    • @pythondre
      @pythondre 4 місяці тому

      @@BaBaYaga1999-p7u Its a great way for our enemies to make fun of us. Like China. RIM is a reaction to China, so don't give our enemies fuel.
      Also I'm way more man than you for a thousand reasons I don't need to list.

    • @scepticalbeliever
      @scepticalbeliever 4 місяці тому +1

      China participated in Rimpac before

    • @Scorpio.1989
      @Scorpio.1989 4 місяці тому

      ok, in 2026 we'll call it the *CCCE* Counter China Combat Exercises

  • @johnd.5601
    @johnd.5601 4 місяці тому +1

    Wow! Those explosions are almost as devastating as the explosion in American homelessness! We might all be living under bridges, but we can sure blow things up!

    • @Jnbsksbsgcvn
      @Jnbsksbsgcvn 4 місяці тому

      agree! Who cares about freedom, democracy and laws? Right? You American should just like the Chinese to surrounded your right in exchange for economic growth! What can possibly go wrong!

    • @BaBaYaga1999-p7u
      @BaBaYaga1999-p7u 4 місяці тому +5

      Grow up.
      Or are you a Putin bot..?

    • @scepticalbeliever
      @scepticalbeliever 4 місяці тому

      If we don't have the military we'll definitely be homeless or dead

  • @halimtalafuka9946
    @halimtalafuka9946 4 місяці тому +1

    .