Russia still lives from the legacy of the Soviet Union, in tanks and research and development. They don't have ABM either and their population is much more concentrated and with less population and cities to hit.
If you live in a city that was targeted by an ICBM with a nuke and that payload was destroyed by one of these systems... you would consider it money well spent.
But the radiation will kill everything and contaminate that area of the planet and the wind will reach lots of more places, i think a better strategy is to poison the air so the poisoned air will go in the desired direction to the enemies
In my family I had a second cousin who was the family superstar. He was in college at age 16 and in 9 years had amassed three PhDs. Two were in physics, particle and high energy and an obscure form of chemistry plus 6 master's degrees. He came to visit when I was in middle school. He was working at that time for a major defense contractor and I managed to coax a little bit of general info from him. The first and most important thing is, we are several generations ahead of the highest technology that we are allowed to know about. When I tried to get any specifics, he didn't give me any bullshit, he said I wouldn't understand, but there are only about a dozen people in the world who could really understand what he was doing. I also know from an unrelated source, Russian, that in the early summer of 1989, the Soviets were told when and where to look and what to look for. They were allowed to observe the test of something that basically gutted them. Shortly thereafter, the USSR started putting up their going out of business clearance sale signs.
@@Meyer-gp7nq Ok, lets spend it all on welfare, BUT... you get an extra big welfare check, IF you take a bath & spend your spare time helping assemble some things which go boom. 😉
Being an American is constantly finding out that your country has some crazy technology with stations in multiple other countries and has spent billions of dollars on it and you never even knew about it.
It is the root of the power of the US and also the reason why Russia decided it can only win by using hybrid warfare with a heavy focus on informational warfare and unfortunately it seems to be working
@Youbetternowatchthis nah, the entire point of informational warfare is making the other sode think you're doing well. Russia is doing worse than the entire west predicted, even the most pessimistic guesses were putting ukraine at losing within 2 or 3 weeks. The single thing russia is doing is spamming comments sections to convince the lowest common denominator in the west that theyre actually winning this 2 day war!
The Israeli systems are designed not to stop all the Iranian missiles though. They are designed to quickly analyze to see if where the trajectory is going to land is a threat, and only then intercept. Israel intercepted most of the potentially dangerous missiles for them, which was the goal.
i would say the most american response. our leadership is beyond poor. I'd wish the government used money to repair the cracks on the sidewalk I keep running into (and other issues concerning america).
@@THUNDERVOLT-og7pr yea, the government takes enough money in taxes from us Americans. They don’t need anymore. They need to stop spending that money overseas & spend it here to help the people and infrastructure instead of
As a former Soldier of the 23rd Gebirgsjägerbrigade (231st Battalion) of the Bundeswehr i prefer this Channel over most others because it focuses on pretty much all the Conflicts going on in the World. Even the ones most of us Westerners don't even hear much about. Also of course as a German and therefor European i also appreciate the continueous Coverage of Ukraine which for a lot of us Europeans is especially important because it is so close. For example. if i'd take my Car and drive to Ukraine right now, it would be about 16 hours, which for Americans i believe is like a casual Drive to another US State. So having a lot of Coverage on Ukraine by an American UA-camr despite what US Media focuses on at the Moment is really appreciated! Keep up the great work! Prost & Cheers from Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps
You don't need to go to Ukraine. You will be one of the priority targets. Your family loves you. Russia is not going to attack Germany, we have resolved all the issues long ago.. no need to stir up the past . So don 't strain yourself. Well, of course, only if your not the smartest authorities don't do stu рid things.
It's a lot closer actually. From the eastern Netherlands to Lviv we took 16 hours. And let me tell you the convoy was going a lot slower than what I would've wanted to drive. Germany - Ukrainian border is 12-14 hours.
I don't get the critics that say these missile defense systems are flawed because they can be overwhelmed. Isn't 10% getting through much better than 100% getting through?
In the 80’s I was stationed on Shemya. I got a tour of the Cobra Dane radar. It was pretty cool. I went on in my military career to work with other highly classified systems. What I learned was, the general public doesn’t find out what we really have until about 20 years after we put it into service, in most cases.
My Dad retired from General Dynamics and can confirm the 20 year premise. There might be unknown laser tech that can neutralize an ICBM. Pew Pew Pew...🖖
My understanding is that the 20 year window has dramatically decreased due to advancements in the private [civilian] domain. For example, there are numerous private aero space startups that have left NASA in the dust in terms of capabilities. NASA can't compete against many of these companies. I'm not implying DARPA or some other government agency does not have advanced technology, what I am saying is it's a different world today. The level of innovation in the public sector is incredible and exponentially growing due to advancements in hardware and software technologies, and the real-time sharing of big data. I bet the government is concerned about this growth and are perhaps spying on these companies to gain insight into their inventions.
There's no defense in the world that is going to be able to stop a full scale nuclear strike. We're talking about 400 missiles coming in all at once. Each one carrying up to 10 warheads that's not even including the submarines.
@taskandpurpose GMD was a fun program to work on. We designed and built all of the HVAC/Humidity systems and controls for the Silos and the Silo interface vaults. I spent a lot of time at Greely, and enjoyed it all…even the -40F days. Was getting ready to build 2 missile fields in Poland and Czechoslovakia when Obama was sworn in and shuttered the program a month later.
Great video! This is what I do for a living and you reported pretty darn fairly and accurately about almost everything involving the current state of US BMD!
One reason that each side had so many warheads during the Cold War was that each silo/base had to be targeted with at least one warhead. So it isn't as simple as saying "you only need 5000 warheads to destroy the world several times over". That would be the case if they were airburst fairly evenly over as many population centers as possible. But most nukes targeted other nukes, which means silos, airbases, and naval bases - the first two of which were often in remote areas.
@@Taskandpurpose Alternatively, you might have millions, billions, heck, even infinity bullets, but that doesn't matter if you only have one gun to load and shoot with.
Bases and nuclear silos were primary targets and cities were secondary targets and would only be targeted if the other side already launched their missiles first.
@@riskinhos Unless you don't want to stop your adversary from retaliating, that is in fact how it works(at least partially. Cities are always targeted, but are a secondary priority to the silos. Missiles don't change targets mid flight).
I read that in declassified nuclear war doctrine most targets were intended to be struck by multiple warheads. Like Moscow being targeted by 16 nuclear warheads at various sites around the city. Figured they had the same plans for us too.
I remember when Ronald Reagan started America's Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system. At the time, i thought how stupid. No way to hit a missile with a missile. They go faster than bullets. Absurd idea. Boy, was I wrong. We can do it. It is done. Amazing.
Reagan then went on to say he made it up, he had the former USSR trying to catch up to a technology that did not exist, it did not exist then and it does not exist now. This helped with the break up of the USSR but it is also why the Russian missile technology is currently 2 generations ahead of the US today.
@@rodpanhard I actually saw a test what appears to have been a Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system test sometime in the late 1980's. I saw two objects appear in space. One I believe was green and the other was red. Each object appeared to have shot a laser at the other one. One shot the other object and it was gone. My brother in law was with me and saw the same thing. He was in special forces in Vietnam and he also concluded that this was an anti missile defense test. Just what I saw take it for what it is worth.
@@rodpanhardRussia may claim to be ahead of America in land based ICBMs, but they have nothing on any of America's cruise missiles. Both nations are ahead in different subsets of land attack missiles.
Not really. The reason for a ban on defenses is that it contradicts the idea of MAD. If one side can launch a nuclear assault and have confidence that they won’t be destroyed by a retaliatory strike, it makes pushing the button easier. Effectively as the number of defenses increase, it lowers the risk of launching nuclear weapons. Therefore making it more likely for a nuclear war to occur.
Remember, too, that many critics are just academics jealous of colleagues who got better funding for research. They just can't get past petty professional jealousies. Yes, if only 10% survived and your country lived on, it would still be worth it.
@@killman369547that's because you have a very simple concept or understanding. Back in the 1960s and 70s we had no hope of intercepting absolutely any incoming ICBM. Currently with our technology we can intercept a good portion of those missiles, in fact enough that a missile strike by North Korea which wouldn't be more than a dozen missiles at the most, is almost guaranteed to not succeed. Now that's just based on the technology that we currently know about, where do you think that technology will be in the next 20 or 30 years😂
@@Wyomingchief the mutually assured destruction doctrine does not work if both sides don't have mutually assured destruction. For better or worse, the billions spent on sketchy intercept systems only encourages adversaries to develop quantities or qualities of weapons to overcome those systems.
@@Adamroable Not if you can make the interceptors cheaper than ICBMS, then overwhelming the system is not feasible. And yes, mutually assured destruction is important....only if superpowers are obedient enough to let rivals be able to destroy their country for the greater good.
@@hamzamahmood9565 I dont get the point tbh. The US can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12miles outside St.Petersburg, just like the Russians can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12 miles outside New York. Nobody gonna intercept their 200 nukes befor they go off.
I work contracts for these satellites. The whole purpose for them being built is to protect us in the event of a nuclear war. They can track hypersonic missiles so well that any land-to-air missile can shoot them out of the sky. I’m no engineer but being in these meetings and listening to them talk about it is fascinating. No other country but the U.S. has been able to build a network like this.
@@anyetitan8410 they're tested all the time by defense companies in accordance with our military. No reason to give a 300 mil contract to a defense company for a product that doesn't work.
This is what I was just saying, the missle defence system is an INCREDIBLE miracle! The fact that this many incoming supersonic projecticles can be knocked out is mind blowing. EDIT: For those who are claiming "they aren't super sonic", Iran shot missles such as "EMADs" which could move at Mach 11, not only is that super sonic, that's HYPERsonic. Anything above Mach 1 is supersonic. Most of Irans munitions were over supersonic speeds but probably not mach 11 speeds, slower drones and missles are much cheaper, which made up the bulk of the hundreds of munitions launched. TL;DR, yes the missle defence system is incredible.
7 місяців тому+17
Hypersonic not supersonic. Well maybe the cruise missiles were supersonic but ballistic missiles travel at hypersonic speeds upon reentry.
@@warrenpeasAlthough they technically aren't hypersonic missiles, because 'hypersonic' in this instance refers to high levels of maneuverability rather than speed.
Come on, Iran told the US the missiles were coming, what direction they would be coming from and they used the oldest slowest ones they had and they did it on the weekend when the US stock market was closed. Iran did everything possible to make the strike symbolic, and deliberately set out not to kill anyone. If it was hypersonic missiles the US defence systems are never stopping them.
You were fairly correct on most of the GMD facts. The 40 interceptors are in Alaska and four are in California. The success rate is now about 50%. That always happens due to many failures at first and fewer as a system matures. You didn't address, at all, that U.S. missile defense is a three tiered system. GMD is the mid-course phase with an assist from the Aegis BMD system. Mid-tier is handled by Aegis and THAAD, and Patriot is the lower tier system. Israel has the Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow 2 systems. They were made in conjunction with the Missile Defense Agency using U.S. tech and joint contractors. I like the fact that you noted the new NGI contract win by LM. These are all very complex systems. State of the art. If we will ever achieve anywhere near complete success, it will be an iterative process. Meaning, you start with little or no capability and advance to an end state that works. Kyiv has also seen success with Patriot shooting down Kinzhals and Iskanders.
What happens if an EMP is used to sabotage these radars all at once? Are there systems to counter an emp attack? The Chinese probably know when and where to strike these systems now.
What? We are way behind in missile and rocketary technology, the avangard moves at Mach 27 and splits into 9 or 10 warheads during reentry we have nothing that'll catch that. If we went to war we'd lose. The table is the only place to win
Damn man you do a hell of a job presenting this kind of info! Been follower of yours since the beginning and you never fail to impress. Thank you for keeping me informed!
If anyone wants an accurate account of how poorly the US ballistic missile defense systems did against Iran's lowest tier ballistic missiles, check out what Scott Ritter, someone significantly more qualified and credible, had to say --- dont listen to this propagandist
@@riskinhosYou are overusing words like "misinformation" without considering intent, and words like "incorrect" without accounting for perspective, nuance, and context. For example, this is a summary video; for it to not cover a piece of information, likely due to time constraints, is not equivalent to misleading the audience.
I hate the mindset of "You can't hope to succeed, so don't try, it just antagonizes our enemies" mindset. I know someone could smash in my front door. Does that mean I shouldn't lock it? I know my car can be hotwired. Does that mean I should leave the windows down and the key in the ignition? I'll sleep better knowing that at least we'd *try* to save ourselves.
So I see that you're not a leftist. Leftist would tell you to leave the keys to your car on the porch, so the criminals won't kick down you door, just let them have the car. It's what the far left Canadian police chief said last month. DEI, we'll let you pass or get the job because of your skin color, so you don't even have to try.
That has always been the position of the Union of "concerned" scientist - an anti-US pro-communism propaganda organization from the beginning. Reagan had the moral desire to protect US civilians without requiring us to threaten the murder millions of Soviet/Russian people if some crazy colonel launched a couple of MIRVed missiles (8-12 warheads each). The UCS response - "you can't guarantee 110% effective protection against an all out attack, therefore it is wasteful to even try, even if you can get to 90% effectiveness". But they were OK with the USSR developing anti-missile defenses...
It's the only way....People wear clothes so everyone isn't running around like uncivilized sexual cavemen...well, not THE only reason....but you get it. Clothing is our personal 1st defense
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
Working for the agency responsible for the subject you were talking about, I can’t tell you what you got right and wrong in the video. You don’t know the half of what technology and current interceptors we use and have. But you are correct on about 2 generation ago technology and strategy.
Always good to hear we have technology we aren’t allow to know exists defending us. If it’s anything as crazy as the anti satellite missile then we are fairly safe.
@@jack727dave5 No, you are not. Intercepting 98% (best case scenario) of the approx. 4.500 (again best case scenario if assuming each incoming ICBM having 3 MIRV on average) nuclear warheads of Russia is not even close of being "fairly safe". If only two percent of the launched ICBMS are succsesful, that means 90 MIRV are inbound the USA, killing at least 9 million people instantly, and another 300 million via starving and fall-out in the aftermath... Its the dangerous and arrogant half-knowledge of incompetent yes men and psychos in military ranks thinking a war with Russia could be won. Maybe you listen to the last 4 mins of the above video again. Then, maybe you and the simpleton op pos(t)er "dshook1568" learns something. Its about time. And all this to safe some basterds FIAT money they printed in exchange for cheap oil and co. Ofc the world is majorly pixxed off.
Short answer: Yes, we can shoot them down. I worked on the Ground Midcourse Defense contract that built the interceptors that shot down ICBMs during the middle phase of an ICBM's trajectory and saw test launches live. They work.
As someone from post-soviet country with experience with Russian and western hardware, i can say one: With Russian weapons, what is declared they are able to do is usually complete nonsence maybe possible at ideal circumstances. With western weapons what is declared is usually far bellow what these weapons are capable at worst circumstances. If west says: We do not have the weapons to shoot down Russian ICBMs what they says is: Our weapons at the worst circumstances are able to intercept only 95% of them 😂😂😂
That's what Ukrainians would say and then they got whipped by those subpar Russian weapons while the US Patriots got smashed.... You don't have to like the truth but you can look up what real experts have to say on the topic.
Well, Ukraine proves you otherwise. Same equipment, different design. Burns just the same. All just a bunch of marketing and non-smart people falling for it. But let's not speculate and look at Iran vs Israel, how's that "Iron Dome" working out? I wonder how many missiles they have left.
Outstanding historical brief on the complicated and difficult task of missile defense. I grew up in the 1950s-60s within just a few miles of four active Nike, later Hercules, missile bases located high up in the Angeles National Forest north of Los Angeles. Even visited a silo on a school field trip. Will never forget the empty coffee cans under the missiles catching drips of unknown liquids. (These missiles were stowed horizontally in their silos and erected to near vertical just prior to launch). My recollection is the Nike/Hercules systems where primarily designed to splash enemy bombers. A kill on a missile would be an unlikely plus. Kinda' reminds me of the first gen Patriot system. Only designed and intended to defeat manned enemy aircraft- yet Patriot managed to ding a number of Scud missiles in Gulf War I.
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
If You people think the US will be reacting to nuclear launch, and not initiating it, you are mistaken. We've all seen what the former president and the people around him are capable of. There are Secret Service and Capitol police wearing the Qanon logo as a badge of honor. And they carry and defend the Football. Also, the US nuclear defense is not as this describes it. They are small, extremely high acceleration SAMs located in certain Baltic, former USSR states. They catch the ICBMs from behind, and create a real mess of where they are launched from. But this will never happen, when SOP is to launch 1/3rd of the entire nuclear arsenal under 60 seconds. And 1/3 of those penetrate the earth and upheave the soil at a magnitude 7.0, obliterating any and all silos and bunkers within a radius of 10km. 1/3 air burst, and blank out half a continent comms and power grid in EMP. And the remaining 1/3 detonate within 5,000'AGL and wipe the slate clean on everything that ever existed within eyesight.
Watching videos of Chuck LaDue and Bill Carpenter developing the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle is such a trip. The Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle seeks out its target using multi-color sensors, a cutting-edge onboard computer and a rocket motor that helps it steer in space. EKV guides to the target and, with pinpoint precision, destroys the threat using nothing more than the force of a massive collision. It moves like a poltergeist.
@@Taskandpurpose I know I'm supposed to be solemn but it amazes me how we went from biplanes dropping flechettes to exoatmospheric kill vehicles in only one hundred years
@Taskandpurpose Cappy, lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems. It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due.
kind of blows my mind anyone would argue against the defense system. It's like saying not to wear body armor because a machine gun will get you. Like... we know. It's to stop rogue bullets. There's no telling if one day a non state actor will launch something at CONUS, especially when you have countries like NK or Iran who might sell devices on the black market, or give them to their proxies. A defense system also gives another choice beyond retaliate
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
Cool Stuff - my Dad was involved in the design of Pave Paws radars in the 1970s - following the Cobra Dane system. I was aboard an Ticonderoga class cruiser during some of the BMD testing - didn't pay too much attention since I hunted subs for a living.
Losing a single large city would be catastrophic, but at the end of the day... the people living in every other city in the entire country will be grateful the system was there.
Wrong. Defense only needs to degrade the enemies attack appreciably. Iron dome did not have 100% success in Israel, but try telling the people of Israel that Iron Dome is a waste of money.
Yeah that's completely wrong and it's not a theory that Any Nation uses to base their defense on. Or for that matter they don't deface their attack strategy on that. A defense doesn't have to be right every single time they just have to be right the majority of the time. Because no country is going to launch an attack with icbms if they know that there's a good possibility that a majority of them are going to be taken out. Because by taking out most of them not even all of them just most of them, you just ensured that whoever you attacked can now retaliate.
The THAAD system is a game changer when it comes to missile detection and then destroying it. There’s a reason why China and Russia were pissed when we put one in Poland and South Korea. It basically detects missile launch’s as they take off them shots sonic powered munitions at it and it covers an area of like 5000 miles.
This was absolutely BRILLIANT. You have an amazing team of researchers. Can’t believe you got all this information from open source. It’s staggering. Congratulations.
There are a variety of missile threats. The GMD you focus on addresses the fastest/longest range ICBM threat - the toughest of all. The western systems for addressing less capable threats - slower and shorter range - are much more successful: US Patriot, THAAD, and SM3; Israeli Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow.
A lot of experts seem really invested in missile defense not working. This is a weird anti-Reagan artifact. And the point about North Korea or Iran is obvious. It certainly seems describing interception success probability as “very low” strains credulity at this point.
President Ronald Reagan was mocked, ridiculed and demonized (mostly by the opposing political party) when he proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) which his domestic enemies derisively and pejoratively referred to as "Star Wars". They claimed it was not feasible or impossible. Turns out Reagan may have been on to something. Many posit that the fall of the USSR may have been caused by a realization on the part of the Soviets that there was no way their economy could sustain the kind or research and development funding required to come even close to closing that technological gap. They essentially surrendered without any shots being fired - at least up to this time. Things could change. Great episode, Chris.
It was mocked legitimately. It was at the time not feasible or possible. Bear in mind that SDI proposed laser and particle weapons that didn't exist and were in no way possible at the time. Only when they switched to the 'brilliant pebbles' approach of orbital missiles was it in any way out of the realm of science fiction. Frankly it only served to heighten tensions in an already precarious time of the Cold War.
@@leeboy26 I mean several of the ideas were in fact possible if reuse was not considered a requirement. Which is exactly what many designs were willing to do. Turns out if you don't care about the satellite surviving a chemical laser with enough power to destroy a missile is pretty easy mind you it will destroy itself but better that then a city.
@@spartanonxy Not to mention the free electron laser, which nobody seems to be talking about. And probably for a very good reason. Not only does it work, it's tunable on the fly, and as long as you have power, it fires. Not aware of any heating issues, but i could very easily be wrong about that. I know there was talk at one point about putting these on aircraft carriers for anti-ship missile defense. Would not surprise me if there isn't research going on about that right now.
@@jeromethiel4323 FEL's do have heating issues. Small scale ones usually don't but it becomes worse as they scale up. But there are a lot of ways to mitigate that. There has been research into FEL based defenses for decades it is just until recently it has been small scale research since there were few threats that other options were not as good or better overall.
Over a decade ago I participated in successfully intercepting an ICBM using an aircraft mounted LASER. DEWs have come a long way since then and ground based LASERS are extremely powerful. This is a continuation of "Star Wars" SDI and will soon be quite capable of intercepting huge numbers of ballistic missiles with negligible cost.
This is what happens when you build a system to defeat everything the enemy MIGHT have, rather than what the enemy actually possesses. ...and really when it comes to building a system to stop missiles capable of annihilating cities and rendering Earth uninhabitable...I approve of this approach.
It's a less spoken about part of defense. NORAD doesn't fuck around and has more eyes and ears than the public knows about because being scared of MAD doesn't work as well when the populace of one side thinks they have a better chance of surviving.
Try flying into the Norfolk naval base. They have the naval AWACS doing circles 24x7. One plane doesn't land until its replacement is on station. It may not be a missile defense, but they don't tell you everything on the base tour.
US has 3 exoatmospheric interceptors. Besides GMD, their is still SM-3 onboard Aegis platforms both on land and sea. Then their is THAAD. After that their is still 2 terminal BMD interceptors with SM-6 and Patriot PAC-3. Only GMD is based on the mainland US, while the others are deployed both locally and overseas. On the other hand both China and Russia don't have a similar system like GMD or SM-3, not even in theory. So in the eventuality a nuclear war starts, US has undoubtedly a better chance of survival.
@@randybobandy9828actually we can create the Interceptor missiles way faster than Russia can create icbms or for that matter China. Don't believe the hype
@@grasshopper8901 UK has made some laser interceptors called Dragonfire but I believe they are short range interceptors and (from what I imagine) it would take a massive amount of energy for long distance interception as well as incredible accuracy. P.s Dragonfire has reported to be able to hit a coin sized target from 1km away - but the exact range and specification is still classified.
So did most of the rest of the United States especially the middle of the country further away from attack from other countries like Russia you can even buy the abandoned missile sites many people have converted them into modern homes and some of the big ones have been turned into condos by rich people selling each condo for a shit ton of money for people to live in Case of nuclear war or other major events that might destroy us
NEWS FLASH: Strategic Defense Initiative > STAR WARS > Space Force We have had ICBM defense for a few years now. Space based, air based, land based, and ground based. Kind of a well known secret
A small nuclear warhead on an intercept missile is a not a bad idea for several reasons. Firstly, it's very effective against bomber formations of the 60s. There is no fallout. The EMP will kill electronics in missiles and bombers. You don't have to hit your target directly, you just need to be in the area.
@@hanrockabrand95true what if the EMP ruins other interceptors electronics or just ruins their targetting even if just for a second it could doom a city.
@speedy01247 The EMP, by itself, could cause trouble for a city below the detonation. Power outage, fried hard drives, communications blackout, just a generally bad time.
When the anti missile system can shoot down 100% of any launch then it can chill. Since missile development hasn`t slowed nor does it look like it will that day will never come. Anti missile systems are not always missiles. My Father spent a portion of his military career building the DEW line.
To be honest, against a falling warhead, only missiles can be an interceptor. Maybe Railguns. Kinetic projectiles have the best results. Russians are using nuclear tipped missiles as interceptors.
As a Filipino, 87% of Philippines support the United States. We always look up at the USA as our closest ally and big brother. So F the haters of the land of the free and home of the brave. and go USA USA 🇺🇸
As a US Citizen, I love our ally’s and appreciate that and would demand that the US assist our ally’s if any country attacks any of our ally’s. I don’t like war due to the casualties, however if you won’t fight for your friends , then what kind of friend are you really then. This list definitely include the Philippines. Thanks again and if it’s up to me we coming if you ever need us!!! We are all stronger as one versus on our own!!
You fell for the propaganda bro. Always remember; pics or it didn't happen, and when you get pics, actually examine them to make sure they back up the claims. Kinzhal is mostly an extremely successful weapon. Very few have been shot down. Fast missiles are inherently harder to defend against because you have to place your defenses much closer to what you want to protect
@@stefthorman8548 I'm disagreeing that the Russian hypersonic missiles "turned out to be garbage". The only one that has actually been used proved to be very effective and hard to shoot down. All the whining about "it's just a ballistic missile it's not a real hypersonic" is just cope. It flies and maneuvers at hypersonic speed and it's hard to shoot down.
@@alexdunphy3716at the end of the day, it's hard to buy what Russia says when Ukraine still lives. Russian propaganda would have us believe they could overrun eastern Europe in a few months, everyone thought Ukraine would fall in two weeks. That didn't happen, it throws all Russian claims into question. At the end of the day reality is different from propaganda. Even if Ukraine loses now, to last 3 years against Russia means Russia severely underperformed. So why would we take their information on their weapons as fact?
Cappy, while you showed many of the US ABM systems, the mixing up of many systems and the oversimplification of both the test record and using criticisms that are decades old, which are repeated endlessly by naysayers, unnecessarily confuses the issues. Scoffers are always academics who have no access to the classified engineering that has been ongoing for decades now. The first issue is that there are SEVERAL programs besides the GMD which was the first system put into practice almost 20 years ago now. The other main ABM program is the sea-based exo-atmospheric interceptor program, the family of SM-3 missiles onboard US and Japanese destroyers and cruisers. These programs have made significant progress since I retired over a decade ago (I was involved in engineering both the GBI EKV and the SM3 Block IIA programs). The MDA will not say anything more than that their interceptors are meant for "rogue" launches from N Korea, but lets just say that there are other targets SM3s in particular have in mind. Aside from these two programs, which should not be judged by tests more than a decade old, there are shorter-range antimissile systems such as THAAD (renamed from Theater High Altitude Air Defense to Terminal High Altitude Air Defense), Patriot PAC-3 and GEM versions, which have been used in Ukraine to intercept Russian Iskander IRBMs, and as you mentioned, Israeli Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 programs.. These last two along with David's Sling Stunner missiles (co-produced by Rafael and Raytheon/RTX) were recently used to intercept almost all the Iranian ballistic missiles headed for Israel. This barely scratches the surface of BMD, of course - the MKV program has also been in development at several contractors for well over a decade.
@@Meyer-gp7nqI mean we've done it in the test environment with the THAD(100%pk) And the Patriots system along with the sm-6 have done it numerous times period and that's just what we know about🎉😂😂
Thanks buddy your videos are above and beyond better then most similar videos . The way you pump out tonssssss of information , but able to keep it light and still find ways to make us laugh even when talking about nukes haha its not an easy job. But you pull it off . Nice work
We didn't shoot down 95 to 99% of the missiles they launched. Out of the 300 of the missiles, half had problems. Either didn't launch or failed after launch. So out of the 150 that made it.....145-148 were shot down. Still impressive.
The thing about missile/rocket technology is that the advances made in R&D can have positive influences or breakthroughs in unexpected places. So its very difficult to say that money is wasted. Part of the reason we have smart phones is the pioneering of this tech during the space race and the miniaturization of electronics in warheads, fuses, and radars. And in turn the space race was born from the development of the V2, itself a ballistic missile.
@@Taskandpurpose Lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems. It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due. The Army & Marines have MOS (Military Occupational Specialty). The Navy has "rates" & NECs (Navy Enlisted Classification). Just as the Army needs its 11B Infantrymen and the Marines need their 0311 Infantrymen, for a Navy surface warship to put ordnance on time, and on target, it is the Fire Controlmen who get it done. FCs saved hundreds of lives in Israel last weekend.
Chris . . . having been PRECOM Crew on USS Ticonderoga (CG-47) we always knew the day was coming when the U.S. Navy would have BMD capability, and it has . . . but limited it is. If you happen to be next to, on or near the ballistic missile target in question there is NO DOUBT we can handle the threat today. However, if that target is inland not near a coast, or a cruise missile ingressed across the coast in a less populated and less surveilled area . . . then protection is 'not so much'. The ICBM arcs at 5,000 mile altitude and it takes the missiles in Fort Greely, AK or Vandenberg, CA to stop them. The SM-3IIB program was canceled because the required liquid fuel to make it work were considered too volatile to bring aboard ship. Now that larger Vertical Launch Cells are considered . . . a solid rocket version may well be in our future. However, IMHO the CONUS region needs Aegis Ashore distributed along the coasts and borders to detect the threat, and missile systems should be at least protecting major population areas. TORCH OUT!
I'm not American. I'm curious why Americans don't seem to appreciate their military dominance. You have radar sites all over the world. Hell, you were able to transport one that was built on an oil rig all the way to Korean waters. That's just insane. You somehow forgot how you became the only true world power.
As an American, I’m very aware of our dominance in almost every military aspect. What I’m scared of these days, is if our leadership would actually let us know if someone fired on us, or would they be able to make a decision in time to deter a threat. It’s not our capabilities, it’s who in control of them. Further more, we’re currently depleting all our Ammo, oil reserves, missiles, and other systems sending them to other countries, and funding wars elsewhere. Our current administration is putting us in a vulnerable situation. We’re nearing a point where we won’t have enough resources to fight a war if it comes down to it.
@@isaacbryan7104look, what you need to do is go into depth into the aid packages that have been sent to Ukraine and Israel, look at what has been sent and what we are holding back. Our trump cards, our Navy and air force are fully intact, not a single fighter jet or ship has been given away. Artillery shells and javelins expire anyways, and those we are building 21 billion dollars of the new package went to industrial expansion to produce more ammunition. We are the world's largest producer of oil(not that we are giving away oil? Gonna need a source for that) Also at the end of the day, Russia and Iran are busy fighting our allies. Russia has lost thousands of vehicles and people fighting Ukraine, not a single currently serving American servicemen has been killed, in turn Russia is bogged down and bleeding. It's a total strategic win, your enemy fights and dies while you don't spend lives only hardware. We are not being left vulnerable because our land enemy (Russia) is stuck fighting Ukraine, our air and sea enemy (China) faces an untouched US Navy and Air force. We will be fine.
Agreed. Also Russians thought they were number 2 in world but now I’m pretty sure they are 3rd after China. So who knows who is who until it’s in play. Even then sometimes Goliath gets taken down.
@@isaacbryan7104 Those countries where you're sending resources to are the ones fighting those wars for you. Also, you're only sending the old stuff which you are going to dispose of anyway. Proxy wars is one of the US' specialties.
@@randybobandy9828funny thing is it's been there for decades and it's been public knowledge for almost as long. If you take your time to do a little research, you would be absolutely floored how far Advanced our defense systems are. We just don't talk about it and brag like Russia
They have contingency plans and run drills for that very reason. The decisions are already made for any scenario, the President just needs to give the order. Plus, it's pretty unlikely anyone is just going to surprise launch nukes completely out of the blue. It'll be after a bunch of escalations.
Humanity would not go extinct from a nuclear war in modern times. Civilization in the northern hemisphere would collapse and there would famines in the southern hemisphere but the southern hemisphere would survive.
Nitpicking: - What do you mean "one of the largest attacks"? Regardless of how you define "ballistic missile", More than a 100 ballistic missiles fired at once is the largest single BM attack (barrage) ever launched at any point in history, even if you consider reports that about half of the launches resulted in mid-air failures (according to reports). According to reports from the IDF spokesperson - there were 9 hits to two IAF bases in the south, which - assuming said failure rate and that no Iranian BM is MIRV capable - is a 85% kill rate for the Israeli "wall" initiative, or better if the failure rate was lower than 50%. - I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but from sources I can find the GBMD sensor system was not involved in intercepting the Iranian missiles, except maybe as a manual (i.e. not integrated) early warning for an attack we knew was about to happen (because the Iranians have specifically said so hours before the launch). Except for a few lower flying BMs that were reportedly intercepted by US forces in Iraq, the interception was done entirely by Israeli assets and specifically the Great Pine EWR whose actual range is classified but believed to be as much as possible 1000km - which should cover nicely almost the entire distance from an Iranian launch site. I once had an air defense soldier brag to me that they can see launches all the way to Iran - I'm assuming he exaggerated but possibly not by much. - The Arrow system that is indeed majority funded by the US, is 100% Israeli development - US contributed only funding, in exchange for being a primary partner for testing and deployment, and (lets face it - probably the primary reason the US was interested in funding the project) having a veto power on Israel exporting it to other countries.
First off they are, second off lasers take time to kill as the beam has to burn through the metal first so it’s tricky making it work for fast moving targets made out of metals like titanium that are designed for hypersonic speeds.
Can a Kevlar vest protect you against an RPG or a 120mm tank round ? No. Can it protect you against 5.56 and 5.45 rounds ? Yes. Is a Kevlar vest useful in protecting you against the threats that you are likely to face ? Yes. Wear the Kevlar vest.
0:30 we just gave Ukraine another 61 Billion in aid and we ONLY spent 100 Billion on our own missile defense since the 50's??? WTF is wrong with this country???
The fact that Israel is a TINY country and the Iranians gave them half a day's warning of the launch, and the entire Western world combined still didn't manage to protect the airfield that was targeted in the first place. Costing them $1,000,000,000 to shoot down $10,000,000 worth of weapons. The odds of them being able to defend the US in the same manor, which is hundreds of times the size of Israel, against much faster weapons with no warning at all is absolutely 0.
Ah. The good old days of being a thermonuclear target again. Brings me back to my grade school days. Some people thought we would evolve beyond that. Maybe, maybe not.
We likely don't use decoys, just as easy to put another warhead in it's place. It's not about stopping all missiles, but 98% such as demo in Israel, it's a great defense just knowing it's working, like MAD. You didn't speak about Aegis. It's a great tested system up to outer space using Standard Missile, new version. These are already operational aboard Aegis Cruisers.
An inflatable radar omni-directional-reflector takes up a few wasted cubic inches and very few kilograms of launch mass of the ICBM warhead MIRV package ... A few dozen to clutter the defense to get most of the 8 real warheads through will cost far less than one warhead in mass
ICBMS are the easy ones but as soon as they release the warheads then the defense system is screwed. The warheads are to small and fast for anything to stop them and are insanely accurate.
At one point North Korea shot a large number of SCUDs into the Sea of Japan. What wasn't reported was that there were 4 Aegis cruisers sitting there, taking turns shooting them down. The US didn't want to talk about this, and obviously, North Korea wasn't going to say anything about this either. What was interesting, however, was that it leaked out that the missiles were much easier to intercept after they passed their apogee. So, on the way down. I think that runs counter to the old "whack them in the boost phase", which is what I grew up with. With the SM-6 largely available, and the air variant (AIM-174) coming into existence, it may be possible that a lot more ballistic missiles are not going to get where they're going.
The other major milestone from the Iranian attack was that SM3 successfully intercepted a missile as well. Also, interceptors are far quicker to make than a new nuke and far cheaper. You have to go through the entire refining process to get a nuclear warhead and that's actually a very extremely expensive and time-consuming process. The Soviets were able to make more so quickly because they already had the ball rolling on production with a large surplus of warhead materials. Once you hit production saturation, interceptors will be far quicker to produce and far cheaper. Especially as the artificial isotopes required for these missiles dry up as supplies of Uranium and Plutonium get harder and harder to find. We have basic chemical compounds for a conventional warhead at much higher levels than nuclear material. If it's a kinetic kill vehicle, then it gets even cheaper.
Maybe they could configure existing platforms and systems to create a more robust network to shoot down incoming threats. They could take a plane like the B1 bomber, load it up with modifieed AIM 120's, give a broad range of interconnectivity, especially with modified F35's
PDS Debt is offering a free debt analysis. It only takes thirty seconds. Get yours at PDSDebt.com/task23
Russia still lives from the legacy of the Soviet Union, in tanks and research and development. They don't have ABM either and their population is much more concentrated and with less population and cities to hit.
@@MisterNi As if he makes video's with you as his sole audience in mind 🤣 only garbage here is you bud.
There's some heavy censorship going on in your comment section, FYI.
Hey, can you point me to the explanation of your "Gumby with a mini gun" shirt I saw you wearing?
@@michalandrejmolnar3715interest points
If you live in a city that was targeted by an ICBM with a nuke and that payload was destroyed by one of these systems... you would consider it money well spent.
Even if you live in an associated economy in a completely different country, it would be money well spent.
But the radiation will kill everything and contaminate that area of the planet and the wind will reach lots of more places, i think a better strategy is to poison the air so the poisoned air will go in the desired direction to the enemies
Grr, no. Military spending bad. We should spend that on welfare where it is needed more (I haven’t had a job in ten years) (this is sarcasm)
In my family I had a second cousin who was the family superstar. He was in college at age 16 and in 9 years had amassed three PhDs. Two were in physics, particle and high energy and an obscure form of chemistry plus 6 master's degrees.
He came to visit when I was in middle school. He was working at that time for a major defense contractor and I managed to coax a little bit of general info from him.
The first and most important thing is, we are several generations ahead of the highest technology that we are allowed to know about.
When I tried to get any specifics, he didn't give me any bullshit, he said I wouldn't understand, but there are only about a dozen people in the world who could really understand what he was doing.
I also know from an unrelated source, Russian, that in the early summer of 1989, the Soviets were told when and where to look and what to look for. They were allowed to observe the test of something that basically gutted them. Shortly thereafter, the USSR started putting up their going out of business clearance sale signs.
@@Meyer-gp7nq Ok, lets spend it all on welfare, BUT... you get an extra big welfare check, IF you take a bath & spend your spare time helping assemble some things which go boom. 😉
Being an American is constantly finding out that your country has some crazy technology with stations in multiple other countries and has spent billions of dollars on it and you never even knew about it.
It is the root of the power of the US and also the reason why Russia decided it can only win by using hybrid warfare with a heavy focus on informational warfare and unfortunately it seems to be working
@Youbetternowatchthis nah, the entire point of informational warfare is making the other sode think you're doing well. Russia is doing worse than the entire west predicted, even the most pessimistic guesses were putting ukraine at losing within 2 or 3 weeks. The single thing russia is doing is spamming comments sections to convince the lowest common denominator in the west that theyre actually winning this 2 day war!
The Israeli systems are designed not to stop all the Iranian missiles though. They are designed to quickly analyze to see if where the trajectory is going to land is a threat, and only then intercept.
Israel intercepted most of the potentially dangerous missiles for them, which was the goal.
You didn't think they was using all that cash to fix our rotten infrastructure didja? Yea me neither.
@@kevinBaconism162 hard to predict. Maybe, maybe not. But I am sure Iran is wondering about the exact same thing right now. As is Russia.
Am I crazy or just American for thinking 100 billion dollars for missile defense isnt enough?
We can afford it - we should spend it.
For defense, 100 billion isn’t half of enough
Nope, not when our budget is $900 billion a year!
i would say the most american response. our leadership is beyond poor. I'd wish the government used money to repair the cracks on the sidewalk I keep running into (and other issues concerning america).
@@THUNDERVOLT-og7pr yea, the government takes enough money in taxes from us Americans. They don’t need anymore. They need to stop spending that money overseas & spend it here to help the people and infrastructure instead of
As a former Soldier of the 23rd Gebirgsjägerbrigade (231st Battalion) of the Bundeswehr i prefer this Channel over most others because it focuses on pretty much all the Conflicts going on in the World. Even the ones most of us Westerners don't even hear much about.
Also of course as a German and therefor European i also appreciate the continueous Coverage of Ukraine which for a lot of us Europeans is especially important because it is so close.
For example. if i'd take my Car and drive to Ukraine right now, it would be about 16 hours, which for Americans i believe is like a casual Drive to another US State.
So having a lot of Coverage on Ukraine by an American UA-camr despite what US Media focuses on at the Moment is really appreciated!
Keep up the great work!
Prost & Cheers from Berchtesgaden in the Bavarian Alps
I completely concur with you
Salut. 🍻
Yeah the internet has its moments for sure! 🇺🇸 🇩🇪
You don't need to go to Ukraine. You will be one of the priority targets. Your family loves you. Russia is not going to attack Germany, we have resolved all the issues long ago.. no need to stir up the past . So don 't strain yourself. Well, of course, only if your not the smartest authorities don't do stu рid things.
It's a lot closer actually. From the eastern Netherlands to Lviv we took 16 hours. And let me tell you the convoy was going a lot slower than what I would've wanted to drive.
Germany - Ukrainian border is 12-14 hours.
I don't get the critics that say these missile defense systems are flawed because they can be overwhelmed. Isn't 10% getting through much better than 100% getting through?
It's a BS argument on its face. All defenses can be overwhelmed by some tactic, depending on the defense.
It’s more like 98% instead of 100% but yes
100 percent vs 9 in 300 attempts
10% nukes
@@omoymunroe6315 even still, could be millions of lives
In the 80’s I was stationed on Shemya. I got a tour of the Cobra Dane radar. It was pretty cool. I went on in my military career to work with other highly classified systems. What I learned was, the general public doesn’t find out what we really have until about 20 years after we put it into service, in most cases.
My Dad retired from General Dynamics and can confirm the 20 year premise. There might be unknown laser tech that can neutralize an ICBM. Pew Pew Pew...🖖
Congrats, Yours is the best organized and presented presentation on the subject.
Lol, another virus 🎉
That’s what I said when everyone was freaking out about China’s hypersonic missile.
My understanding is that the 20 year window has dramatically decreased due to advancements in the private [civilian] domain. For example, there are numerous private aero space startups that have left NASA in the dust in terms of capabilities. NASA can't compete against many of these companies. I'm not implying DARPA or some other government agency does not have advanced technology, what I am saying is it's a different world today. The level of innovation in the public sector is incredible and exponentially growing due to advancements in hardware and software technologies, and the real-time sharing of big data. I bet the government is concerned about this growth and are perhaps spying on these companies to gain insight into their inventions.
So long as nukes are pointed at us we should never take our defenses as acceptable, keep improving cause one failure can literally mean millions dead.
There's no defense in the world that is going to be able to stop a full scale nuclear strike. We're talking about 400 missiles coming in all at once. Each one carrying up to 10 warheads that's not even including the submarines.
You are very right and correct.
Many people here were just making comments without knowing what they were talking about @@killman369547
@@killman369547
Then somebody has to invent something that is capable to
making icbms obsolete should be the top priority
@@killman369547 I don't blame the government for dreaming big when the alternative is a dead country.
@@killman369547there's no defense YET
(FIXED IT FOR YOU)
small correction; Alaska has 40 GBI, Vandenberg is 4. I worked on the Fort Greely Missile field for 12 years.
Thank you for your service
You’re right ! I don’t know how I mixed that up damn , I’ll issue a correction tomorrow thank you for catching that
@taskandpurpose GMD was a fun program to work on. We designed and built all of the HVAC/Humidity systems and controls for the Silos and the Silo interface vaults. I spent a lot of time at Greely, and enjoyed it all…even the -40F days. Was getting ready to build 2 missile fields in Poland and Czechoslovakia when Obama was sworn in and shuttered the program a month later.
Was going to comment the same. You can see and count the silo hatches of the GMD field on Google Earth. Ironically located near Christmas Alaska.
@@Taskandpurpose Is Vanderberg near Vandenberg?
Great video! This is what I do for a living and you reported pretty darn fairly and accurately about almost everything involving the current state of US BMD!
One reason that each side had so many warheads during the Cold War was that each silo/base had to be targeted with at least one warhead. So it isn't as simple as saying "you only need 5000 warheads to destroy the world several times over". That would be the case if they were airburst fairly evenly over as many population centers as possible. But most nukes targeted other nukes, which means silos, airbases, and naval bases - the first two of which were often in remote areas.
Valid AF. People forget you need launchers to match the arsenal stockpile . Iran might have 3,000 miles but only 100-200 launchers
@@Taskandpurpose Alternatively, you might have millions, billions, heck, even infinity bullets, but that doesn't matter if you only have one gun to load and shoot with.
Bases and nuclear silos were primary targets and cities were secondary targets and would only be targeted if the other side already launched their missiles first.
@@riskinhos Unless you don't want to stop your adversary from retaliating, that is in fact how it works(at least partially. Cities are always targeted, but are a secondary priority to the silos. Missiles don't change targets mid flight).
I read that in declassified nuclear war doctrine most targets were intended to be struck by multiple warheads. Like Moscow being targeted by 16 nuclear warheads at various sites around the city. Figured they had the same plans for us too.
I remember when Ronald Reagan started America's Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system.
At the time, i thought how stupid. No way to hit a missile with a missile.
They go faster than bullets.
Absurd idea.
Boy, was I wrong.
We can do it.
It is done.
Amazing.
Reagan then went on to say he made it up, he had the former USSR trying to catch up to a technology that did not exist, it did not exist then and it does not exist now. This helped with the break up of the USSR but it is also why the Russian missile technology is currently 2 generations ahead of the US today.
@@rodpanhard I actually saw a test what appears to have been a Star Wars anti-missile missile defense system test sometime in the late 1980's. I saw two objects appear in space. One I believe was green and the other was red. Each object appeared to have shot a laser at the other one. One shot the other object and it was gone. My brother in law was with me and saw the same thing. He was in special forces in Vietnam and he also concluded that this was an anti missile defense test. Just what I saw take it for what it is worth.
@@tedmetre6933 40 years ago, that technology should be so much better today then.
@@rodpanhardRussia may claim to be ahead of America in land based ICBMs, but they have nothing on any of America's cruise missiles. Both nations are ahead in different subsets of land attack missiles.
@@riskinhos*USSR
Limiting the number of defenses instead of warheads is insane. Screw the treaty, we should have as many interceptors as we want.
Not really. The reason for a ban on defenses is that it contradicts the idea of MAD. If one side can launch a nuclear assault and have confidence that they won’t be destroyed by a retaliatory strike, it makes pushing the button easier.
Effectively as the number of defenses increase, it lowers the risk of launching nuclear weapons. Therefore making it more likely for a nuclear war to occur.
Those are the ones we are allowed to know about, thats all.
Remember, too, that many critics are just academics jealous of colleagues who got better funding for research. They just can't get past petty professional jealousies. Yes, if only 10% survived and your country lived on, it would still be worth it.
The thought was, the more interceptors, the more nukes the other side builds, until each side has hundreds of thousands of nuclear warheads.
@@ZombiePepperoni Leaving oneself defenseless is hardly a totally sane approach, though.
I have never understood those who say even a limited nuclear defense is useless. Thanks for a great look at a very misunderstood topic.
When you have 5900 warheads incoming yes it basically is useless.
@@killman369547that's because you have a very simple concept or understanding. Back in the 1960s and 70s we had no hope of intercepting absolutely any incoming ICBM. Currently with our technology we can intercept a good portion of those missiles, in fact enough that a missile strike by North Korea which wouldn't be more than a dozen missiles at the most, is almost guaranteed to not succeed. Now that's just based on the technology that we currently know about, where do you think that technology will be in the next 20 or 30 years😂
@@Wyomingchief the mutually assured destruction doctrine does not work if both sides don't have mutually assured destruction. For better or worse, the billions spent on sketchy intercept systems only encourages adversaries to develop quantities or qualities of weapons to overcome those systems.
@@Adamroable Not if you can make the interceptors cheaper than ICBMS, then overwhelming the system is not feasible. And yes, mutually assured destruction is important....only if superpowers are obedient enough to let rivals be able to destroy their country for the greater good.
@@hamzamahmood9565 I dont get the point tbh. The US can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12miles outside St.Petersburg, just like the Russians can legally park an SSBN in international waters 12 miles outside New York. Nobody gonna intercept their 200 nukes befor they go off.
bros really put a whole ass radar station on a boat and said "i got an idea! lets PUSH IT to north korea! we can track the launch that way, yea?"
On a oil rig 😂
Yeah, like that's not gonna be gone in the first 10 minutes.
Along with all the satellites.
And the nearest bases.
And fleets.
@@mambapopenhoffer8706 The chinese spambot discovered grammar
@@mambapopenhoffer8706 - It will be. But the signals will have already been sent out. :)
@@carloshenriquezimmer7543 Joseph Stalin profile pic and account made 2 years ago, pretty sure it's a russian bot, lol 😂
I work contracts for these satellites. The whole purpose for them being built is to protect us in the event of a nuclear war. They can track hypersonic missiles so well that any land-to-air missile can shoot them out of the sky. I’m no engineer but being in these meetings and listening to them talk about it is fascinating. No other country but the U.S. has been able to build a network like this.
All talks but never tested. Just like tge abrams tanks.
@@anyetitan8410your comparing tanks to space warfare how cute
Your comprehension is kindergarten
@@anyetitan8410 they're tested all the time by defense companies in accordance with our military. No reason to give a 300 mil contract to a defense company for a product that doesn't work.
@dochudson7284 just like the abrams tanks were tested in Ukraine?
This is what I was just saying, the missle defence system is an INCREDIBLE miracle!
The fact that this many incoming supersonic projecticles can be knocked out is mind blowing.
EDIT: For those who are claiming "they aren't super sonic", Iran shot missles such as "EMADs" which could move at Mach 11, not only is that super sonic, that's HYPERsonic. Anything above Mach 1 is supersonic. Most of Irans munitions were over supersonic speeds but probably not mach 11 speeds, slower drones and missles are much cheaper, which made up the bulk of the hundreds of munitions launched.
TL;DR, yes the missle defence system is incredible.
Hypersonic not supersonic. Well maybe the cruise missiles were supersonic but ballistic missiles travel at hypersonic speeds upon reentry.
@ so irans ballistic missiles were moving at hypersonic speeds when intercepted?
@@warrenpeas Yes.
Well over Mach 5
@@warrenpeasAlthough they technically aren't hypersonic missiles, because 'hypersonic' in this instance refers to high levels of maneuverability rather than speed.
Come on, Iran told the US the missiles were coming, what direction they would be coming from and they used the oldest slowest ones they had and they did it on the weekend when the US stock market was closed. Iran did everything possible to make the strike symbolic, and deliberately set out not to kill anyone. If it was hypersonic missiles the US defence systems are never stopping them.
You were fairly correct on most of the GMD facts. The 40 interceptors are in Alaska and four are in California. The success rate is now about 50%. That always happens due to many failures at first and fewer as a system matures. You didn't address, at all, that U.S. missile defense is a three tiered system. GMD is the mid-course phase with an assist from the Aegis BMD system. Mid-tier is handled by Aegis and THAAD, and Patriot is the lower tier system.
Israel has the Iron Dome, David's Sling and Arrow 2 systems. They were made in conjunction with the Missile Defense Agency using U.S. tech and joint contractors. I like the fact that you noted the new NGI contract win by LM. These are all very complex systems. State of the art. If we will ever achieve anywhere near complete success, it will be an iterative process. Meaning, you start with little or no capability and advance to an end state that works. Kyiv has also seen success with Patriot shooting down Kinzhals and Iskanders.
What happens if an EMP is used to sabotage these radars all at once? Are there systems to counter an emp attack? The Chinese probably know when and where to strike these systems now.
@@JinKazama92 They are nuclear/emp hardened. Too expensive not too. More likely to get struck by a nuclear blast first.
@@JinKazama92shielding from Emp is possible if that is the goal and military assets have that goal
50 percent? Weren’t they 10/10 abiut 7 years ago?
@@villarreal6 No, the proposed reason for cancellation was much lower. Any U.S. DoD component would love 70%.
We've had 44 years of Missile Command to prepare us.
What? We are way behind in missile and rocketary technology, the avangard moves at Mach 27 and splits into 9 or 10 warheads during reentry we have nothing that'll catch that. If we went to war we'd lose. The table is the only place to win
@@kittybrowneye3163 Calm down, killer...I believe he was kidding....Missile Command is a video game from like, Atari days
@@kittybrowneye3163 nuclear war has no winners. its called mutually assured destruction for a reason.
Damn man you do a hell of a job presenting this kind of info! Been follower of yours since the beginning and you never fail to impress. Thank you for keeping me informed!
Thanks 🙏 a ton of the credit goes to the video editors and animators
@@riskinhos please list all the "false & misinformation" in this video
Yeah but he's full of shyt
If anyone wants an accurate account of how poorly the US ballistic missile defense systems did against Iran's lowest tier ballistic missiles, check out what Scott Ritter, someone significantly more qualified and credible, had to say --- dont listen to this propagandist
@@riskinhosYou are overusing words like "misinformation" without considering intent, and words like "incorrect" without accounting for perspective, nuance, and context. For example, this is a summary video; for it to not cover a piece of information, likely due to time constraints, is not equivalent to misleading the audience.
I hate the mindset of "You can't hope to succeed, so don't try, it just antagonizes our enemies" mindset.
I know someone could smash in my front door. Does that mean I shouldn't lock it? I know my car can be hotwired. Does that mean I should leave the windows down and the key in the ignition?
I'll sleep better knowing that at least we'd *try* to save ourselves.
So I see that you're not a leftist. Leftist would tell you to leave the keys to your car on the porch, so the criminals won't kick down you door, just let them have the car. It's what the far left Canadian police chief said last month. DEI, we'll let you pass or get the job because of your skin color, so you don't even have to try.
Right? Better to antagonize your enemies than make it as easy as possible for them.
I had similar thoughts when watching this video. I would rather have it than not.
That has always been the position of the Union of "concerned" scientist - an anti-US pro-communism propaganda organization from the beginning. Reagan had the moral desire to protect US civilians without requiring us to threaten the murder millions of Soviet/Russian people if some crazy colonel launched a couple of MIRVed missiles (8-12 warheads each). The UCS response - "you can't guarantee 110% effective protection against an all out attack, therefore it is wasteful to even try, even if you can get to 90% effectiveness". But they were OK with the USSR developing anti-missile defenses...
It's the only way....People wear clothes so everyone isn't running around like uncivilized sexual cavemen...well, not THE only reason....but you get it. Clothing is our personal 1st defense
You lose when you give up. Ignore the naysayers and keep developing better defense systems.
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
Working for the agency responsible for the subject you were talking about, I can’t tell you what you got right and wrong in the video. You don’t know the half of what technology and current interceptors we use and have. But you are correct on about 2 generation ago technology and strategy.
Always good to hear we have technology we aren’t allow to know exists defending us. If it’s anything as crazy as the anti satellite missile then we are fairly safe.
@@jack727dave5 No, you are not. Intercepting 98% (best case scenario) of the approx. 4.500 (again best case scenario if assuming each incoming ICBM having 3 MIRV on average) nuclear warheads of Russia is not even close of being "fairly safe". If only two percent of the launched ICBMS are succsesful, that means 90 MIRV are inbound the USA, killing at least 9 million people instantly, and another 300 million via starving and fall-out in the aftermath... Its the dangerous and arrogant half-knowledge of incompetent yes men and psychos in military ranks thinking a war with Russia could be won.
Maybe you listen to the last 4 mins of the above video again. Then, maybe you and the simpleton op pos(t)er "dshook1568" learns something. Its about time.
And all this to safe some basterds FIAT money they printed in exchange for cheap oil and co. Ofc the world is majorly pixxed off.
Short answer: Yes, we can shoot them down. I worked on the Ground Midcourse Defense contract that built the interceptors that shot down ICBMs during the middle phase of an ICBM's trajectory and saw test launches live. They work.
Do you know much about the new kill vehicle? Impressive stuff, legit force multiplier.
As someone from post-soviet country with experience with Russian and western hardware, i can say one:
With Russian weapons, what is declared they are able to do is usually complete nonsence maybe possible at ideal circumstances.
With western weapons what is declared is usually far bellow what these weapons are capable at worst circumstances.
If west says: We do not have the weapons to shoot down Russian ICBMs what they says is: Our weapons at the worst circumstances are able to intercept only 95% of them 😂😂😂
The West does their best to hide their true capabilities. Russia/Soviets do their best to make intimidating claims about their true capabilities.
What country are you from?
That's what Ukrainians would say and then they got whipped by those subpar Russian weapons while the US Patriots got smashed....
You don't have to like the truth but you can look up what real experts have to say on the topic.
Well, Ukraine proves you otherwise. Same equipment, different design. Burns just the same. All just a bunch of marketing and non-smart people falling for it.
But let's not speculate and look at Iran vs Israel, how's that "Iron Dome" working out? I wonder how many missiles they have left.
The effectiveness of weapons sent to Ukraine says otherwise.
Outstanding historical brief on the complicated and difficult task of missile defense.
I grew up in the 1950s-60s within just a few miles of four active Nike, later Hercules, missile bases located high up in the Angeles National Forest north of Los Angeles.
Even visited a silo on a school field trip. Will never forget the empty coffee cans under the missiles catching drips of unknown liquids. (These missiles were stowed horizontally in their silos and erected to near vertical just prior to launch).
My recollection is the Nike/Hercules systems where primarily designed to splash enemy bombers. A kill on a missile would be an unlikely plus.
Kinda' reminds me of the first gen Patriot system. Only designed and intended to defeat manned enemy aircraft- yet Patriot managed to ding a number of Scud missiles in Gulf War I.
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
Trust me when there's an all out war, you want your missle defence to be as savvy as possible
Won't make any difference.
@@jb-xc4oh it could make a significant difference
If You people think the US will be reacting to nuclear launch, and not initiating it, you are mistaken.
We've all seen what the former president and the people around him are capable of. There are Secret Service and Capitol police wearing the Qanon logo as a badge of honor. And they carry and defend the Football.
Also, the US nuclear defense is not as this describes it. They are small, extremely high acceleration SAMs located in certain Baltic, former USSR states. They catch the ICBMs from behind, and create a real mess of where they are launched from. But this will never happen, when SOP is to launch 1/3rd of the entire nuclear arsenal under 60 seconds. And 1/3 of those penetrate the earth and upheave the soil at a magnitude 7.0, obliterating any and all silos and bunkers within a radius of 10km. 1/3 air burst, and blank out half a continent comms and power grid in EMP. And the remaining 1/3 detonate within 5,000'AGL and wipe the slate clean on everything that ever existed within eyesight.
@@Triple_J.1 Do you think the Russians haven't planned for any of this.
@@Triple_J.1if the US wanted to initiate a war, Russia would've been wiped after WW2 ended
The video is amazing. And thank you T&P team for making me part of this. Thank a lot
You bet 👍:)
If you haven’t watched "Dr. Strangelove," you should stream that brilliant Cold War black comedy ASAP. Stanley Kubrick directed.
Agreed 👍 one of my favorite movies growing up
We all must protect our precious bodily fluids
This is a little off topic. But i would say people should watch everyone of his movies 😂.
I’ve owned it for years but never watched it. I think right now it would freak me out.
@@pbinnj3250 I doubt it. It's a dark comedy
Watching videos of Chuck LaDue and Bill Carpenter developing the Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle is such a trip. The Exoatmospheric Kill Vehicle seeks out its target using multi-color sensors, a cutting-edge onboard computer and a rocket motor that helps it steer in space. EKV guides to the target and, with pinpoint precision, destroys the threat using nothing more than the force of a massive collision. It moves like a poltergeist.
I was watching some of the test footage of those things from 2008 , absolutely insane gravity defying stuff
@@Taskandpurpose I know I'm supposed to be solemn but it amazes me how we went from biplanes dropping flechettes to exoatmospheric kill vehicles in only one hundred years
You needed to bring in Habitual Linecrosser for this episode. He's the known SME on missile defence.
I’m meeting him at the end of June I’ve heard great things
Lesgooo
@Taskandpurpose Cappy, lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems. It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due.
kind of blows my mind anyone would argue against the defense system. It's like saying not to wear body armor because a machine gun will get you. Like... we know. It's to stop rogue bullets. There's no telling if one day a non state actor will launch something at CONUS, especially when you have countries like NK or Iran who might sell devices on the black market, or give them to their proxies. A defense system also gives another choice beyond retaliate
If the Patriot had not been around, Saudi Arabia, back during Desert Shield, might have suffered more Scud missile hits. If the Israelis had listened to these same critics, the Iron Dome would not be around and so effectively defend Israel.
Remember that most critics are either rival politicians or disgruntled academics jealous of colleagues getting better funding.
One of the best and informative videos ya'll have done . Kudos !!!
I appreciate how this video keeps things "real" and also how we are addressing the challenges which inevitably occur".
Ahh yes. The sea-based x-band radar. For when you get asked how much of the Pacific you want to be able to see and the answer is yes
@@riskinhos
I could never imagine so thoroughly missing the point the way you just did
Sea BASED
@@riskinhosbro forgot about NORAD
@@riskinhos bro forgot about Alaska and Canada. But as a side note this guy is also trolling with some nonsense in other comments as well.
@riskinhos And let me guess Ivan, Russia's Icbm anti missiles are the best right, still using a tactical nuclear warhead to hit a Western Icbm.
Now imagine they make an interceptor missile that takes an incoming missile back to where it came from 😂
Politely requests that it turn around
Achievement unlocked: return to sender
Return to sender in bejing
Return to sender missile
"I'm working on it " --- Uncle Sam. 1966.
By far, the best YT channel on the subject!
New video. I think there are likely some new missiles in service that we just haven’t heard about yet.
Cool Stuff - my Dad was involved in the design of Pave Paws radars in the 1970s - following the Cobra Dane system. I was aboard an Ticonderoga class cruiser during some of the BMD testing - didn't pay too much attention since I hunted subs for a living.
I was a student of David Barash back in 1992! Haven't seen him since those days. I still have his book in my library :o)
THAAD is Based.
THAAD CHAD
his full name is Theodore
Exoatmospheric intercept was based
THAAD is THICC.
@@HavocHerseimno middle or last name😂😂😂 just straight Theodore 😂
The difficult thing about defense is that it needs to succeed every time. An attack only needs to succeed once.
Losing a single large city would be catastrophic, but at the end of the day... the people living in every other city in the entire country will be grateful the system was there.
Wrong.
Defense only needs to degrade the enemies attack appreciably.
Iron dome did not have 100% success in Israel, but try telling the people of Israel that Iron Dome is a waste of money.
If it's a nuke, yes.
If it's a drone like the ones Iran sent, there's a little more fudge factor.
Yeah that's completely wrong and it's not a theory that Any Nation uses to base their defense on. Or for that matter they don't deface their attack strategy on that. A defense doesn't have to be right every single time they just have to be right the majority of the time. Because no country is going to launch an attack with icbms if they know that there's a good possibility that a majority of them are going to be taken out. Because by taking out most of them not even all of them just most of them, you just ensured that whoever you attacked can now retaliate.
hm. If you think you can winn, a pre emptive is usually a good idea.
The THAAD system is a game changer when it comes to missile detection and then destroying it. There’s a reason why China and Russia were pissed when we put one in Poland and South Korea. It basically detects missile launch’s as they take off them shots sonic powered munitions at it and it covers an area of like 5000 miles.
This was absolutely BRILLIANT. You have an amazing team of researchers. Can’t believe you got all this information from open source. It’s staggering. Congratulations.
There are a variety of missile threats. The GMD you focus on addresses the fastest/longest range ICBM threat - the toughest of all. The western systems for addressing less capable threats - slower and shorter range - are much more successful: US Patriot, THAAD, and SM3; Israeli Iron Dome, David's Sling, and Arrow.
We did it guys! Every time he sais "NUCLEAR", instead of "NUCULAR", warms my little heart.
A lot of experts seem really invested in missile defense not working. This is a weird anti-Reagan artifact. And the point about North Korea or Iran is obvious. It certainly seems describing interception success probability as “very low” strains credulity at this point.
President Ronald Reagan was mocked, ridiculed and demonized (mostly by the opposing political party) when he proposed the Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) which his domestic enemies derisively and pejoratively referred to as "Star Wars". They claimed it was not feasible or impossible. Turns out Reagan may have been on to something. Many posit that the fall of the USSR may have been caused by a realization on the part of the Soviets that there was no way their economy could sustain the kind or research and development funding required to come even close to closing that technological gap. They essentially surrendered without any shots being fired - at least up to this time. Things could change.
Great episode, Chris.
So true, they hurling barbs at Reagan mercilously for everything they could think of. Even today we're finding new things that Reagan was right about.
It was mocked legitimately. It was at the time not feasible or possible. Bear in mind that SDI proposed laser and particle weapons that didn't exist and were in no way possible at the time. Only when they switched to the 'brilliant pebbles' approach of orbital missiles was it in any way out of the realm of science fiction. Frankly it only served to heighten tensions in an already precarious time of the Cold War.
@@leeboy26 I mean several of the ideas were in fact possible if reuse was not considered a requirement. Which is exactly what many designs were willing to do. Turns out if you don't care about the satellite surviving a chemical laser with enough power to destroy a missile is pretty easy mind you it will destroy itself but better that then a city.
@@spartanonxy Not to mention the free electron laser, which nobody seems to be talking about. And probably for a very good reason. Not only does it work, it's tunable on the fly, and as long as you have power, it fires. Not aware of any heating issues, but i could very easily be wrong about that.
I know there was talk at one point about putting these on aircraft carriers for anti-ship missile defense. Would not surprise me if there isn't research going on about that right now.
@@jeromethiel4323 FEL's do have heating issues. Small scale ones usually don't but it becomes worse as they scale up. But there are a lot of ways to mitigate that. There has been research into FEL based defenses for decades it is just until recently it has been small scale research since there were few threats that other options were not as good or better overall.
Over a decade ago I participated in successfully intercepting an ICBM using an aircraft mounted LASER. DEWs have come a long way since then and ground based LASERS are extremely powerful. This is a continuation of "Star Wars" SDI and will soon be quite capable of intercepting huge numbers of ballistic missiles with negligible cost.
God bless America 🇺🇸🙏
This is what happens when you build a system to defeat everything the enemy MIGHT have, rather than what the enemy actually possesses.
...and really when it comes to building a system to stop missiles capable of annihilating cities and rendering Earth uninhabitable...I approve of this approach.
Great cover of the topic. Was always extremely concerned about this why we didnt take it seriously but that makes sense.
Didn’t know we had a domestic air defense system
I didn’t know much about it until I started digging into it , it’s a bit of a controversial topic considering people disagree over its usefulness
It's a less spoken about part of defense. NORAD doesn't fuck around and has more eyes and ears than the public knows about because being scared of MAD doesn't work as well when the populace of one side thinks they have a better chance of surviving.
Try flying into the Norfolk naval base. They have the naval AWACS doing circles 24x7. One plane doesn't land until its replacement is on station. It may not be a missile defense, but they don't tell you everything on the base tour.
US has 3 exoatmospheric interceptors. Besides GMD, their is still SM-3 onboard Aegis platforms both on land and sea. Then their is THAAD. After that their is still 2 terminal BMD interceptors with SM-6 and Patriot PAC-3. Only GMD is based on the mainland US, while the others are deployed both locally and overseas. On the other hand both China and Russia don't have a similar system like GMD or SM-3, not even in theory. So in the eventuality a nuclear war starts, US has undoubtedly a better chance of survival.
@@johnsilver9338don't kid yourself the Patriot is based in the Continental us. It is active and can be ready within minutes
“You can create missiles way faster than interceptors.”
We obviously need to fix that.
Lmao how
With the power of the Military Industrial complex. @@randybobandy9828
@@randybobandy9828actually we can create the Interceptor missiles way faster than Russia can create icbms or for that matter China. Don't believe the hype
Maybe we can make interceptor lasers? Shoot down missiles with high-powered wavelengths of light. Nothing we know of can move faster.
@@grasshopper8901 UK has made some laser interceptors called Dragonfire but I believe they are short range interceptors and (from what I imagine) it would take a massive amount of energy for long distance interception as well as incredible accuracy.
P.s Dragonfire has reported to be able to hit a coin sized target from 1km away - but the exact range and specification is still classified.
Beautiful presentation...the presenter is just A1. Congratulations
Alaska use to have missile silos everywhere you can still find old abandoned one out in the woods
So did most of the rest of the United States especially the middle of the country further away from attack from other countries like Russia you can even buy the abandoned missile sites many people have converted them into modern homes and some of the big ones have been turned into condos by rich people selling each condo for a shit ton of money for people to live in Case of nuclear war or other major events that might destroy us
Are they for sale?
@@fusion9619 on government and state land unfortunately
they are everywhere across USA, AZ, NV, NE, TX, all over
Newer ones are better hidden.
When the world goes to heck you'd wish you'd had a semi functioning defence system instead of nothing
Won't make any difference.
@@ejkalegal3145it could. You don’t know. No one really knows
@@Eggcornbean I know.
@@ejkalegal3145As someone from a state fairly low on the target list, the more missiles they are forced to send at important targets the better.
Nothing 😂😂😂🎉
NEWS FLASH:
Strategic Defense Initiative > STAR WARS > Space Force
We have had ICBM defense for a few years now. Space based, air based, land based, and ground based.
Kind of a well known secret
A small nuclear warhead on an intercept missile is a not a bad idea for several reasons. Firstly, it's very effective against bomber formations of the 60s. There is no fallout. The EMP will kill electronics in missiles and bombers. You don't have to hit your target directly, you just need to be in the area.
Yeah, but how far does the EMP travel? Could we end up disabling friendly systems below the intercept?
@@hanrockabrand95true what if the EMP ruins other interceptors electronics or just ruins their targetting even if just for a second it could doom a city.
That was the NIKE system from the 1960s. They have moved beyond that.
@speedy01247 The EMP, by itself, could cause trouble for a city below the detonation. Power outage, fried hard drives, communications blackout, just a generally bad time.
USAF already done that - the Genie missile. Grim Reapers have done several simulations using the nuke-tipped Genie against enemy bomber formations
When the anti missile system can shoot down 100% of any launch then it can chill. Since missile development hasn`t slowed nor does it look like it will that day will never come. Anti missile systems are not always missiles. My Father spent a portion of his military career building the DEW line.
To be honest, against a falling warhead, only missiles can be an interceptor. Maybe Railguns. Kinetic projectiles have the best results. Russians are using nuclear tipped missiles as interceptors.
make it 120%, just to be on the safe side
As a Filipino, 87% of Philippines support the United States. We always look up at the USA as our closest ally and big brother. So F the haters of the land of the free and home of the brave. and go USA USA 🇺🇸
Puppet Country 😂
As a US Citizen, I love our ally’s and appreciate that and would demand that the US assist our ally’s if any country attacks any of our ally’s. I don’t like war due to the casualties, however if you won’t fight for your friends , then what kind of friend are you really then. This list definitely include the Philippines. Thanks again and if it’s up to me we coming if you ever need us!!! We are all stronger as one versus on our own!!
Actually didn't even know phillipines was a country
It also helps that most of Russias weapons like the once vaunted hypersonic missile turned out to be garbage
You fell for the propaganda bro. Always remember; pics or it didn't happen, and when you get pics, actually examine them to make sure they back up the claims. Kinzhal is mostly an extremely successful weapon. Very few have been shot down. Fast missiles are inherently harder to defend against because you have to place your defenses much closer to what you want to protect
@@alexdunphy3716so you basically didn't say anything
@@alexdunphy3716 sure comrade nice try may your murderous owners will give you some worthless rubles for your effort
@@stefthorman8548 I'm disagreeing that the Russian hypersonic missiles "turned out to be garbage". The only one that has actually been used proved to be very effective and hard to shoot down. All the whining about "it's just a ballistic missile it's not a real hypersonic" is just cope. It flies and maneuvers at hypersonic speed and it's hard to shoot down.
@@alexdunphy3716at the end of the day, it's hard to buy what Russia says when Ukraine still lives. Russian propaganda would have us believe they could overrun eastern Europe in a few months, everyone thought Ukraine would fall in two weeks. That didn't happen, it throws all Russian claims into question. At the end of the day reality is different from propaganda. Even if Ukraine loses now, to last 3 years against Russia means Russia severely underperformed. So why would we take their information on their weapons as fact?
Cappy, while you showed many of the US ABM systems, the mixing up of many systems and the oversimplification of both the test record and using criticisms that are decades old, which are repeated endlessly by naysayers, unnecessarily confuses the issues. Scoffers are always academics who have no access to the classified engineering that has been ongoing for decades now. The first issue is that there are SEVERAL programs besides the GMD which was the first system put into practice almost 20 years ago now. The other main ABM program is the sea-based exo-atmospheric interceptor program, the family of SM-3 missiles onboard US and Japanese destroyers and cruisers. These programs have made significant progress since I retired over a decade ago (I was involved in engineering both the GBI EKV and the SM3 Block IIA programs). The MDA will not say anything more than that their interceptors are meant for "rogue" launches from N Korea, but lets just say that there are other targets SM3s in particular have in mind.
Aside from these two programs, which should not be judged by tests more than a decade old, there are shorter-range antimissile systems such as THAAD (renamed from Theater High Altitude Air Defense to Terminal High Altitude Air Defense), Patriot PAC-3 and GEM versions, which have been used in Ukraine to intercept Russian Iskander IRBMs, and as you mentioned, Israeli Arrow 2 and Arrow 3 programs.. These last two along with David's Sling Stunner missiles (co-produced by Rafael and Raytheon/RTX) were recently used to intercept almost all the Iranian ballistic missiles headed for Israel. This barely scratches the surface of BMD, of course - the MKV program has also been in development at several contractors for well over a decade.
Love the t shirt. I think the USA's MD should always be evolving and getting better.
America's been telling the world since the 80s they can shoot shit down in space...why is everyone so surprised now that they've done it in combat?
Yeah, dumb. It is one thing to do something in a test environment, but then again American weapons are better than we tell you so 🤷♂️
@@Meyer-gp7nqI mean we've done it in the test environment with the THAD(100%pk)
And the Patriots system along with the sm-6 have done it numerous times period and that's just what we know about🎉😂😂
Wasn't the f15 the first plane to shoot a missile into space, like over 20 years ago.
Thanks buddy your videos are above and beyond better then most similar videos . The way you pump out tonssssss of information , but able to keep it light and still find ways to make us laugh even when talking about nukes haha its not an easy job. But you pull it off . Nice work
We didn't shoot down 95 to 99% of the missiles they launched. Out of the 300 of the missiles, half had problems. Either didn't launch or failed after launch. So out of the 150 that made it.....145-148 were shot down. Still impressive.
The thing about missile/rocket technology is that the advances made in R&D can have positive influences or breakthroughs in unexpected places. So its very difficult to say that money is wasted. Part of the reason we have smart phones is the pioneering of this tech during the space race and the miniaturization of electronics in warheads, fuses, and radars. And in turn the space race was born from the development of the V2, itself a ballistic missile.
What about Aegis cruisers in the Pacific? Aren't those part of our protection?
Yes ! I wanted to cover the lesser known ICBM systems and detection methods . I’ve covered Aegis a bunch , also THAAD
Recently released SM-3 (Standard Missile) launched from AEGIS cruisers/destroyers can also do mid course interception.
@@Taskandpurpose
Lots of folks know about Navy S.E.A.L.s, or Navy Officer fighter pilots. But very few understand it is actually U.S. Navy Enlisted FIRE CONTROLMEN who operate, maintain, and repair these advanced shipboard radar and missile systems.
It is the Fire Controlmen who actually locate, track, and destroy enemy hostile missiles. FCs don't get their due.
The Army & Marines have MOS (Military Occupational Specialty).
The Navy has "rates" & NECs (Navy Enlisted Classification).
Just as the Army needs its 11B Infantrymen and the Marines need their 0311 Infantrymen,
for a Navy surface warship to put ordnance on time, and on target, it is the Fire Controlmen who get it done.
FCs saved hundreds of lives in Israel last weekend.
Chris I like your work so much I went out and maxed out all my credit cards just so that I could go to your sponsor😂😂😂
I was just thinking about credit card sponsorship
Just gonna say, @Taskandpurpose , always enjoy your channel, thank you for the effort you invest
Chris . . . having been PRECOM Crew on USS Ticonderoga (CG-47) we always knew the day was coming when the U.S. Navy would have BMD capability, and it has . . . but limited it is. If you happen to be next to, on or near the ballistic missile target in question there is NO DOUBT we can handle the threat today. However, if that target is inland not near a coast, or a cruise missile ingressed across the coast in a less populated and less surveilled area . . . then protection is 'not so much'. The ICBM arcs at 5,000 mile altitude and it takes the missiles in Fort Greely, AK or Vandenberg, CA to stop them. The SM-3IIB program was canceled because the required liquid fuel to make it work were considered too volatile to bring aboard ship. Now that larger Vertical Launch Cells are considered . . . a solid rocket version may well be in our future.
However, IMHO the CONUS region needs Aegis Ashore distributed along the coasts and borders to detect the threat, and missile systems should be at least protecting major population areas.
TORCH OUT!
I'm not American. I'm curious why Americans don't seem to appreciate their military dominance. You have radar sites all over the world. Hell, you were able to transport one that was built on an oil rig all the way to Korean waters. That's just insane. You somehow forgot how you became the only true world power.
As an American, I’m very aware of our dominance in almost every military aspect. What I’m scared of these days, is if our leadership would actually let us know if someone fired on us, or would they be able to make a decision in time to deter a threat. It’s not our capabilities, it’s who in control of them.
Further more, we’re currently depleting all our Ammo, oil reserves, missiles, and other systems sending them to other countries, and funding wars elsewhere. Our current administration is putting us in a vulnerable situation. We’re nearing a point where we won’t have enough resources to fight a war if it comes down to it.
@@isaacbryan7104look, what you need to do is go into depth into the aid packages that have been sent to Ukraine and Israel, look at what has been sent and what we are holding back. Our trump cards, our Navy and air force are fully intact, not a single fighter jet or ship has been given away.
Artillery shells and javelins expire anyways, and those we are building 21 billion dollars of the new package went to industrial expansion to produce more ammunition. We are the world's largest producer of oil(not that we are giving away oil? Gonna need a source for that)
Also at the end of the day, Russia and Iran are busy fighting our allies. Russia has lost thousands of vehicles and people fighting Ukraine, not a single currently serving American servicemen has been killed, in turn Russia is bogged down and bleeding. It's a total strategic win, your enemy fights and dies while you don't spend lives only hardware. We are not being left vulnerable because our land enemy (Russia) is stuck fighting Ukraine, our air and sea enemy (China) faces an untouched US Navy and Air force. We will be fine.
Agreed. Also Russians thought they were number 2 in world but now I’m pretty sure they are 3rd after China. So who knows who is who until it’s in play. Even then sometimes Goliath gets taken down.
Because the Pentagon is corrupt and so is 75% of Gov. Officials in the 🇺🇸
@@isaacbryan7104 Those countries where you're sending resources to are the ones fighting those wars for you. Also, you're only sending the old stuff which you are going to dispose of anyway. Proxy wars is one of the US' specialties.
Great videos, thanks!
Thanks for watching
@@Taskandpurpose are you deleting super thanks??
That site in south Turkey is still active and has been upgraded over the years....was stationed there in '78-'79.
US defense tech is always better than we thought 😂
Apparently... I didn't realize how advanced our radar and tracking systems really were. That 95ft tall massive building radar in Alaska is insane.
no it is WAY BETTER THAN WE ARE ALLOWED TO KNOW...
@@randybobandy9828funny thing is it's been there for decades and it's been public knowledge for almost as long. If you take your time to do a little research, you would be absolutely floored how far Advanced our defense systems are. We just don't talk about it and brag like Russia
US always sucked an now we know.
I hope to puit it to the test. That would be proof.
@@carloshenriquezimmer7543 There's probably things in area 51 that are much greater than we can imagine.
So upon alert of an incoming threat, the president needs to make a decision in about 15-20 minutes on whether or not humanity goes extinct.
Gulp.
Significantly less. Try 5-6 minutes.
They have contingency plans and run drills for that very reason. The decisions are already made for any scenario, the President just needs to give the order. Plus, it's pretty unlikely anyone is just going to surprise launch nukes completely out of the blue. It'll be after a bunch of escalations.
Joe Biden takes 20 minutes to decide what flavor of ice cream to eat.
Humanity would be extinct no matter his decision.
Humanity would not go extinct from a nuclear war in modern times. Civilization in the northern hemisphere would collapse and there would famines in the southern hemisphere but the southern hemisphere would survive.
good up to date video.
Thank you.
Nitpicking:
- What do you mean "one of the largest attacks"? Regardless of how you define "ballistic missile", More than a 100 ballistic missiles fired at once is the largest single BM attack (barrage) ever launched at any point in history, even if you consider reports that about half of the launches resulted in mid-air failures (according to reports). According to reports from the IDF spokesperson - there were 9 hits to two IAF bases in the south, which - assuming said failure rate and that no Iranian BM is MIRV capable - is a 85% kill rate for the Israeli "wall" initiative, or better if the failure rate was lower than 50%.
- I'm not sure where you're getting your information, but from sources I can find the GBMD sensor system was not involved in intercepting the Iranian missiles, except maybe as a manual (i.e. not integrated) early warning for an attack we knew was about to happen (because the Iranians have specifically said so hours before the launch). Except for a few lower flying BMs that were reportedly intercepted by US forces in Iraq, the interception was done entirely by Israeli assets and specifically the Great Pine EWR whose actual range is classified but believed to be as much as possible 1000km - which should cover nicely almost the entire distance from an Iranian launch site. I once had an air defense soldier brag to me that they can see launches all the way to Iran - I'm assuming he exaggerated but possibly not by much.
- The Arrow system that is indeed majority funded by the US, is 100% Israeli development - US contributed only funding, in exchange for being a primary partner for testing and deployment, and (lets face it - probably the primary reason the US was interested in funding the project) having a veto power on Israel exporting it to other countries.
Buddy Israel is the USA and the USA is Israel
LASERS. KEEP DUMPING THE ENTIRE BUDGET INTO LASERS LMAO. DON'T STOP.
I've been saying this for years!!! The US needs to leapfrog technologies just like we've done in the past with smart bombs and stealth.
First off they are, second off lasers take time to kill as the beam has to burn through the metal first so it’s tricky making it work for fast moving targets made out of metals like titanium that are designed for hypersonic speeds.
Super interesting! Thanks for sharing.
Can a Kevlar vest protect you against an RPG or a 120mm tank round ? No.
Can it protect you against 5.56 and 5.45 rounds ? Yes.
Is a Kevlar vest useful in protecting you against the threats that you are likely to face ? Yes.
Wear the Kevlar vest.
Can't protect you from ICBM.
0:30 we just gave Ukraine another 61 Billion in aid and we ONLY spent 100 Billion on our own missile defense since the 50's??? WTF is wrong with this country???
you need to invent force fields
Interesting and well researched, thank you!
The fact that Israel is a TINY country and the Iranians gave them half a day's warning of the launch, and the entire Western world combined still didn't manage to protect the airfield that was targeted in the first place. Costing them $1,000,000,000 to shoot down $10,000,000 worth of weapons. The odds of them being able to defend the US in the same manor, which is hundreds of times the size of Israel, against much faster weapons with no warning at all is absolutely 0.
Great content as allways! congrats! keep up with the good work!
Ah. The good old days of being a thermonuclear target again. Brings me back to my grade school days. Some people thought we would evolve beyond that. Maybe, maybe not.
We likely don't use decoys, just as easy to put another warhead in it's place. It's not about stopping all missiles, but 98% such as demo in Israel, it's a great defense just knowing it's working, like MAD. You didn't speak about Aegis. It's a great tested system up to outer space using Standard Missile, new version. These are already operational aboard Aegis Cruisers.
An inflatable radar omni-directional-reflector takes up a few wasted cubic inches and very few kilograms of launch mass of the ICBM warhead MIRV package ... A few dozen to clutter the defense to get most of the 8 real warheads through will cost far less than one warhead in mass
US missile defense systems will work closer to advertised than Russian or Chinese icbm threats.
Yooooo I was working on the one in Saudi. That's wild. Almost got a BSM for fixing the satcom link. That's crazy.
As a LMT and RTX shareholder, I wholeheartedly approve the purchase of new interceptors. 😊
Thanks Dreamy Narrator Man!
What happened, in Dnipro? Last time I commented on this video I made some assumptions. Those seem to be correct now.
it is nice that after 2013 the success rate of interception by the interceptors got substantially better
Good report.
Thank you.
ICBMS are the easy ones but as soon as they release the warheads then the defense system is screwed. The warheads are to small and fast for anything to stop them and are insanely accurate.
Excellent work.
At one point North Korea shot a large number of SCUDs into the Sea of Japan. What wasn't reported was that there were 4 Aegis cruisers sitting there, taking turns shooting them down. The US didn't want to talk about this, and obviously, North Korea wasn't going to say anything about this either. What was interesting, however, was that it leaked out that the missiles were much easier to intercept after they passed their apogee. So, on the way down. I think that runs counter to the old "whack them in the boost phase", which is what I grew up with.
With the SM-6 largely available, and the air variant (AIM-174) coming into existence, it may be possible that a lot more ballistic missiles are not going to get where they're going.
The other major milestone from the Iranian attack was that SM3 successfully intercepted a missile as well. Also, interceptors are far quicker to make than a new nuke and far cheaper. You have to go through the entire refining process to get a nuclear warhead and that's actually a very extremely expensive and time-consuming process. The Soviets were able to make more so quickly because they already had the ball rolling on production with a large surplus of warhead materials. Once you hit production saturation, interceptors will be far quicker to produce and far cheaper. Especially as the artificial isotopes required for these missiles dry up as supplies of Uranium and Plutonium get harder and harder to find. We have basic chemical compounds for a conventional warhead at much higher levels than nuclear material. If it's a kinetic kill vehicle, then it gets even cheaper.
Maybe they could configure existing platforms and systems to create a more robust network to shoot down incoming threats. They could take a plane like the B1 bomber, load it up with modifieed AIM 120's, give a broad range of interconnectivity, especially with modified F35's