Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_Lq9j4Wz2QHo6dptTW3-tdIo.html Please click the link to watch our other French Systems videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoxjAFtfDr8wwS6K_51gZ0x.html Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends-Sea videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LqMGUzwZdeFlgQ9LHuY32ZX.html
you all probably dont care but does anybody know a way to log back into an instagram account..? I was dumb lost my account password. I would love any tricks you can offer me.
@Franco Jonas Thanks for your reply. I got to the site through google and Im in the hacking process atm. I see it takes quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
There is a lot of disinformation about the Falklands war. Well known things that gradually were "deleted" from history and transformed into "conspiracy theories". France inactivating the Exocet missiles they sold to Argentina (we all remember the photos of the unexploded missiles stuck to a hole in an british battleship, or England sinking one of their own ships to take photos and video for the british news to represent Argentina as _"a violent power threatening England"_ and moving and unite british people in a war against a _"dangerous enemy"._
@@MultiDrew83 the USS STARK had phalanx ciwis and still was hit by 2 of them in 1987 fired by iranian falcon the missile fly two low to be detected if you actually educated yourself you wouldn't look like a fool because the uss stark was in the video you could have lok it up
about the "itb " land based improvised launchers at the Malvinas/Falklands. theres a rich story about how those engineers managed to make the missile work. "improvising" a computer with parts from damaged airplanes and other things to "emulate" the radar lock required by the mm38 to launch.
they did´t use parts from a plane the used the fire computer of the destroyer to generate signals in port tape dem in a loop on a hi fy equipement and imput the rest using a modifiy test kit. i kno because one of the guys was mi electronic profesor in the merchan scool wen i was a cadet
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_Lq9j4Wz2QHo6dptTW3-tdIo.html Please click the link to watch our other French Systems videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoxjAFtfDr8wwS6K_51gZ0x.html Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends-Sea videos th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LqMGUzwZdeFlgQ9LHuY32ZX.html
The Argentine Air Force had launched Exocet Anti ship Missiles attacks against Then British Royal Navy Warships during the Falkland 🇫🇰 War 1982 and by Etendard Fighter jets and successful sank the British Destroyer HMS Sheffield.
Hey, great vid, but I have to admit: Fritz-X was a high-altitude dropped, then free falling and radio guided bomb. It combined the penetration power of a high dropped bomb with the acuracy of a divebomber, without exposing the divebomber to the mid- and small callibre defense-screen (as you mentioned). Yes, there were glide-bombs AND propelled glide bombs but they were not self steering.
13:17 that was called ITB (instalación de tiro berreta) un inglish "shitty fire station" that actually worked by making the missiles think that they were on a plane.
not on a plane, on a ship. They used a RASIT antipersonal radar for target localization, and after unit conversions, input the coordinates by hand into the fire control console, and off she goes
Perhaps the confusion was caused by the smoke coming from the rear of the Fritz X. The smoke was probably a visual indicator so the operator in the bomber could adjust the flying bomb's course.
indeed... war is not a good thing, but usually gets the most out of ppl. down here it was called ITB (instalacion de tiro berreta, something like improvised shooting instalation). Theres a rich story about how those engineers managed to make the missile work. "improvising" a computer with parts from damaged airplanes and other things to "emulate" the radar lock required by the mm38 to launch.
Argentina is only a consumer of weapons other countries made. Brazil, at least, for example, has a Exocet motor factory (Avibras) where they improved and built their own version, but Argentina? Today, Argentina doesn't even have money for buying defense stock.
The Exocet did not perform quite as advertised in the Falkland War. But it was almost effective enough to win the war for Argentina. Can we get videos on other navy missiles? The Russian and Chinese ones are quite different. A comparison with the Western missiles and the differing tactics would be very interesting.
What do you mean not perform quite as advertised? 4 missiles launched and 2 ships sunk is quite a nice effective ratio. If argentina had received the full delivery of the missiles bought, the british fleet would be in big trouble.
@@Coyote27981 Wiki says there were at least 7 launches. 2 launched against HMS Sheffield, 1 missed and 1 hit but did not detonate. 2 missiles fired at SS Atlantic Conveyor hit and detonated. A missile launched against a battlegroup on 30th of May that did not cause any damage. 2 missiles launched against HMS Glamorgan, one did not acquire the target, the other hit and exploded. So of 7 launches, 4 hits and 3 detonations. I admit the misses were maybe due to firing under unfavorable conditions, undertrained crew, ship defenses and firing from an improvised shore launcher. The missile not detonating is a more serious problem, even if it caused damage. Maybe it was stored improperly. I admit that it might have been much more effective under better conditions, we may never know. This is just the data we have. I also admit Wikipedia is not the most reliable source, so if you dispute any of this I can dig a bit deeper for a better source.
@@nikolatasev4948 the last 3 launches you mention are hardly something representative of the exocet's performance. Those were launched from an improvised mobile land based launcher. And even then under those conditions, 1 in 3 is an excellent hit ratio, considering they hacked a sea launched system and turned it into a land based unit. Not even aerospatiale had such a land based system at the time.
Given the apparent high dud rate accompanied by catastrophic fires, the Exocet may have been designed to only arm the high explosive warhead after too much fuel had been burned to ensure a really big fire on the target ship. I am told that the warhead detonation tends to hurl the remaining rocket fuel back the way the missile came, off of the ship, while a warhead that does not detonate can still burn. In just about every instance where the warhead did not detonate, the struck ship would have been better off if it had, due to the fire damage from the remaining rocket fuel on the missile.
It was not. The delayed-action fuze was only capable of momentary delay, just enough to allow the missile to penetrate deeper into the target. If the warhead did not go off at that point it had malfunctioned.
A thing that likely happened is that the missile weren't correctly taken care off, which could have caused the detonator (or anything else to degrade).
@@randombillyn The USS Stark was hit by two Exocet missiles, but only one detonated. The missile that failed to detonate caused a terrible fire. The missile that did detonate did not start a fire. Contemporary accounts suggest that the Exocet that hit HMS Sheffield failed to detonate, and the resulting fire forced the abandonment of the ship. The severity of the fires suggest that if this was a bug, the manufacturer would have been wise to incorporate it as a feature
@@vincentt2309 Les Exocoetidae ou exocet, appelé usuellement poissons volants sont une famille de poissons marins, la racine du mot est Grec ancien, comme la plupars de mots scientifiques en France !
USS Stark almost skunked if the captain did not order the flood the port side for the ship . Sounds like the missile travels to fast and exploding inside the side .
Exocet is by far the best so far. The Harpoon is much talked about but the only hits that I can find during its operational history are on friendly or neutral forces.
@@AudieHolland A number of Libyan patrol boats were sunk by Harpoons fired from USN A-6 Intruders. The Iranians sunk a couple of Iraqi Osas with Harpoons. The USN sunk an Iraqi frigate with a Harpoon. It's true that a USN Harpoon struck an Indian merchant ship but the missile had no warhead and the merchant ship was in a maritime exclusion zone marked off for missile testing. The Harpoon is largely comparable to the Exocet but it's a little bigger, has a bit more range and is overall somewhat better than the Exocet
Royal Malaysian Navies have several of these babies. Royal Malaysian Air Force should use the excocet for extended power projection in South China Sea.
@@eugenemurray2940 RN didn't caught off guard. They tracked the planes long before it came within range to fire the exocet. They were purposely placed there as BAIT!!🤭 The system failed, the argies did good, flew hign- low , merging , unmerge creating phantom tracks, overwhelming the computer.. had to reset. At Same time unfortunate seaman ship caused 1 vessel to pass thru another ship firing line of sight. Got to give credits where its due..
Yes... But the video doesn't talk about the manual control with optic fibers... When the missile is jammed, you take the manual control... then you guide the missile where you want in the enemy boat...
Why is there no mention of what India did with anti-ship missiles in 1971 war with pakistan. India went one step further with anti-ship missiles than all others had did before?
The main reason Western navies interested in anti-ship missiles was the sinking of INS Eilat in 1967. They had already started work in this field before India's success in 1971. Therefore, it did not affect the development of the Exocet.
There is no and ever has been any code , just a legend . Read the reports from the RN . Even the French said they was no code. If they wear any they would never have any success at the commercial export level
The French government cooperated closely with the United Kingdom to prevent any more Exocet missiles being sold to Argentine, including those on the '2nd hand market.' This caused a shortage of Exocet missiles on the part of the Argentinian forces, preventing more British ships being destroyed. Furthermore, the French gave the British taskforce access to its ports and facilities in West Africa.
@@TheAnikazone Well, rape victims tend to cry due to trauma. And "rape" is the only worthy name for what Argentina, with ordnance from the 40s (Sold by the UK) and warplanes from the 50s (Sold by us) if I may add, did to the "state of the art" Royal Navy. There's a reason Britain is no longer acknowledged beyond it's diplomatic weight when it comes to international power relations. It's not that Argentina killed the United Kingdom as a credible military force, sure, they more precisely found it's rotting corpse, but by God did the United Kingdom made a pathetic show of itself. Honestly I'm almost sad we didn't support Argentina even further. Then again the Soviets could have also picked up the slack.
There are a few anti-sub missiles that could probably, at least theoretically, use their torpedo payload against a ship. SS-N-14 «Silex» is the only one that I know of with that considered in its design though.
@Deplorable_Brian Yeah, there really isn't much of a point to delivering a torpedo by missile to a surface ship. For one thing, the lightweight antisubmarine torpedoes used in such systems typically have much smaller warheads, 100lbs or less, compared to 500-1000lbs on a Mk 48 or other 53cm models. If a missile can carry a, let's say, 500lb torpedo, only a fraction of that weight adds destructive potential. In the same hypothetical missile; a 500lb warhead would be more useful.
No. Silex may sound similar but the anti ship version doesn't drop the torpedo, it simply slams into the target with it. The concept has been investigated (look up UGM-89) but the logistics of making it work are not worth the benefits (which, with the ranges of state of art anti missile systems, are not that great to begin with).
We should all remember the amount of British ships either sunk or badly damaged by this French weapon sold to Argentina during the Falklands war in 1981. I wonder who they would sell it to today?
And what was Argentina able to attack RN ships so easily with French built Exocet Missile, until the UK government forced France to stop selling to Argentina, because the UK decommissioned it's AEW Fairey gannet, and that is why the Sea-king was rushed in to operations with something similar to the new "Crows Best" AEW radar within a bag like structure.
@Peter Mallia: France was not forced by anyone (Certainly not by the UK!) but out of friendship towards a close ally (the UK) to make an embargo on more Exocets and more support to Argentina and prevent any deliveries from other Exocet users.
@@mohamedosman23 but who is the « enemy » of the french military ? Btw France has not had the opportunity to use it against an « enemy » ship but if the opportunity presents itself this missile will be very effective for sure
@@mohamedosman23 it was not used by France. it was used by Argentina, which was an ally of both France and Britain up to the beginning of the falklands war (incidently Maggie Thatcher tried to sell weapons to the Argentinian Junt a week before the war started) and it was used by saddam hussein, an ally of both France and the US (untill Saddam realized the Us for whom he had been waging a nasty war against Iran, had been selling weapons to Iran too, and he had his little revenge). the fact that it sank or nearly destrloyed naval ships from powerful navies such that of the UK or the US is a testimony to the effectiveness of these weapons. it rendered the navy useless...france was not consulted in neither cases..
This missile doesn't seems to be that impressive. It's really boring. Our Indian Navy doesn't prefers it for our naval deck based fighters. Our navalised mig-29ks are armed with kh-31As, and Kh-59mks , and next generation brahmos missiles, that are way better than this so called operated Exocets.
make your planes, your boats, your aircraft carriers etc...before speaking, the Indians still traveled on the backs of elephants 40 years ago!your brahmos is a little kid compared to the French missiles story!
Exercise is a piece of shit mess. Anybody outside of Franz Witte technology star, only country to use the extra sets are the ones that can’t afford the harpoon anti-shit and I saw on your block missiles
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_Lq9j4Wz2QHo6dptTW3-tdIo.html
Please click the link to watch our other French Systems videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoxjAFtfDr8wwS6K_51gZ0x.html
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends-Sea videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LqMGUzwZdeFlgQ9LHuY32ZX.html
you all probably dont care but does anybody know a way to log back into an instagram account..?
I was dumb lost my account password. I would love any tricks you can offer me.
@Jamari Alfred Instablaster =)
@Franco Jonas Thanks for your reply. I got to the site through google and Im in the hacking process atm.
I see it takes quite some time so I will reply here later with my results.
@Franco Jonas It did the trick and I finally got access to my account again. I'm so happy:D
Thank you so much, you really help me out!
@Jamari Alfred No problem =)
I think the Exocet is just infamous for the Falklands War.
Showed how effective the weapon was! Very very dangerous for any naval craft
There is a lot of disinformation about the Falklands war. Well known things that gradually were "deleted" from history and transformed into "conspiracy theories". France inactivating the Exocet missiles they sold to Argentina (we all remember the photos of the unexploded missiles stuck to a hole in an british battleship, or England sinking one of their own ships to take photos and video for the british news to represent Argentina as _"a violent power threatening England"_ and moving and unite british people in a war against a _"dangerous enemy"._
Would a Phalanx be able to take it out quite easily ?? Or would it be able to take out 3 or 4 simultaneously or quick succession ??
@@MultiDrew83 the USS STARK had phalanx ciwis and still was hit by 2 of them in 1987 fired by iranian falcon the missile fly two low to be detected if you actually educated yourself you wouldn't look like a fool because the uss stark was in the video you could have lok it up
@@Supcoop23 Sucks navy sailors' Bell Ends. And the french are famous for being war losers!
@@MultiDrew83 it fly low so the phallanx might struggle to lock it
Just found your channel. I like it a lot.
Those Super Etendards with the Exocet are crazy cool.
English sailors disagree !
@@andreactuel7209 muhahahahahhahahahaa
Royal Navy approved and air Iraqi Business class certified.
Bruh
That joke sunk faster then a previously American cruiser
Every time I wonder about some weapons system, I find a Weapons Detective video of it, and feel at ease that my questions will be answered.
i worked as a naval painter on the shipyard of the Chevalier Paul, a very beautiful ship :)
C'est lequel que j'ai vu à Lorient, en Août dernier ?
best anti ship missile legend the exocet !!! a real good and reliable over speed missile developped by france
which was misused by an insane murderous regime
Build s also in italy, mdma italy
@@zacharyschweter6466 cope harder america
about the "itb " land based improvised launchers at the Malvinas/Falklands. theres a rich story about how those engineers managed to make the missile work. "improvising" a computer with parts from damaged airplanes and other things to "emulate" the radar lock required by the mm38 to launch.
they did´t use parts from a plane the used the fire computer of the destroyer to generate signals in port tape dem in a loop on a hi fy equipement and imput the rest using a modifiy test kit. i kno because one of the guys was mi electronic profesor in the merchan scool wen i was a cadet
This channel makes excellent videos both in terms of content and video footage
That was a true French film. A guy with a cigarette squinting through smoke while working on a missile. Sacre Bleu!
such scene doest exist today, smoking is forbidden size long time
it's been at least 200 year since the last time a french person used "Sacre bleu".
Lol
Mon dieu 😂
Very good movie.
But It has been proven about 10 years ago that the EXOCET that hit the Sheffield did detonate.
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_Lq9j4Wz2QHo6dptTW3-tdIo.html
Please click the link to watch our other French Systems videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LoxjAFtfDr8wwS6K_51gZ0x.html
Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends-Sea videos
th-cam.com/play/PLEMWqyRZP_LqMGUzwZdeFlgQ9LHuY32ZX.html
The Argentine Air Force had launched Exocet Anti ship Missiles attacks against Then British Royal Navy Warships during the Falkland 🇫🇰 War 1982 and by Etendard Fighter jets and successful sank the British Destroyer HMS Sheffield.
Hey, great vid, but I have to admit: Fritz-X was a high-altitude dropped, then free falling and radio guided bomb. It combined the penetration power of a high dropped bomb with the acuracy of a divebomber, without exposing the divebomber to the mid- and small callibre defense-screen (as you mentioned). Yes, there were glide-bombs AND propelled glide bombs but they were not self steering.
13:17 that was called ITB (instalación de tiro berreta) un inglish "shitty fire station" that actually worked by making the missiles think that they were on a plane.
not on a plane, on a ship. They used a RASIT antipersonal radar for target localization, and after unit conversions, input the coordinates by hand into the fire control console, and off she goes
Great video, just a small correction, the Fritz X was not a missile, but a guided bomb. The Hs 293 would be a better example of an anti-ship missile.
Thanks for the correction
Perhaps the confusion was caused by the smoke coming from the rear of the Fritz X.
The smoke was probably a visual indicator so the operator in the bomber could adjust the flying bomb's course.
@@WeaponDetective No problem. Thanks for all the great content.
And it was the Hs298 which sunk the Roma.
The Exocet is the best missile ever ! so powerful, so efficient...a jewel
13:18 Absolute madlads lol
indeed... war is not a good thing, but usually gets the most out of ppl. down here it was called ITB (instalacion de tiro berreta, something like improvised shooting instalation).
Theres a rich story about how those engineers managed to make the missile work. "improvising" a computer with parts from damaged airplanes and other things to "emulate" the radar lock required by the mm38 to launch.
Argentina love it
Argentina is only a consumer of weapons other countries made. Brazil, at least, for example, has a Exocet motor factory (Avibras) where they improved and built their own version, but Argentina? Today, Argentina doesn't even have money for buying defense stock.
The Exocet did not perform quite as advertised in the Falkland War. But it was almost effective enough to win the war for Argentina.
Can we get videos on other navy missiles? The Russian and Chinese ones are quite different. A comparison with the Western missiles and the differing tactics would be very interesting.
What do you mean not perform quite as advertised? 4 missiles launched and 2 ships sunk is quite a nice effective ratio.
If argentina had received the full delivery of the missiles bought, the british fleet would be in big trouble.
@@Coyote27981 Wiki says there were at least 7 launches.
2 launched against HMS Sheffield, 1 missed and 1 hit but did not detonate.
2 missiles fired at SS Atlantic Conveyor hit and detonated.
A missile launched against a battlegroup on 30th of May that did not cause any damage.
2 missiles launched against HMS Glamorgan, one did not acquire the target, the other hit and exploded.
So of 7 launches, 4 hits and 3 detonations. I admit the misses were maybe due to firing under unfavorable conditions, undertrained crew, ship defenses and firing from an improvised shore launcher. The missile not detonating is a more serious problem, even if it caused damage. Maybe it was stored improperly. I admit that it might have been much more effective under better conditions, we may never know. This is just the data we have.
I also admit Wikipedia is not the most reliable source, so if you dispute any of this I can dig a bit deeper for a better source.
@@nikolatasev4948 the last 3 launches you mention are hardly something representative of the exocet's performance. Those were launched from an improvised mobile land based launcher. And even then under those conditions, 1 in 3 is an excellent hit ratio, considering they hacked a sea launched system and turned it into a land based unit. Not even aerospatiale had such a land based system at the time.
@@Coyote27981 Again, my biggest issue is with the missile which hit HMS Sheffield but did not detonate.
@@nikolatasev4948 yeah the brits also,had an issue with it
I was in England in 1982. I can speak about Exocet and Sheffield corvette, and accuracy of the missile.
the Sheffield was a destroyer
Question - The "speed" classes of anti ship missiles are as follows: hyposonic, subsonic, supersonic, & hypersonic ?
Or am I way off?
Thank you.
The warhead on the Sheffield exploded and it was demonstarted in 1992.
Given the apparent high dud rate accompanied by catastrophic fires, the Exocet may have been designed to only arm the high explosive warhead after too much fuel had been burned to ensure a really big fire on the target ship. I am told that the warhead detonation tends to hurl the remaining rocket fuel back the way the missile came, off of the ship, while a warhead that does not detonate can still burn. In just about every instance where the warhead did not detonate, the struck ship would have been better off if it had, due to the fire damage from the remaining rocket fuel on the missile.
You're saying that the fuel does more damage than the warhead?
It was not. The delayed-action fuze was only capable of momentary delay, just enough to allow the missile to penetrate deeper into the target. If the warhead did not go off at that point it had malfunctioned.
A thing that likely happened is that the missile weren't correctly taken care off, which could have caused the detonator (or anything else to degrade).
@@randombillyn The USS Stark was hit by two Exocet missiles, but only one detonated. The missile that failed to detonate caused a terrible fire. The missile that did detonate did not start a fire. Contemporary accounts suggest that the Exocet that hit HMS Sheffield failed to detonate, and the resulting fire forced the abandonment of the ship.
The severity of the fires suggest that if this was a bug, the manufacturer would have been wise to incorporate it as a feature
@@richardbell7678 I agree, I am just trying to guess why the missile is so often not exploding
Great 😊
ἐξώκοιτος-Exocet.
There will be time when plenty of Exocets will be flying and it won't be fun.
exocet-flyihng fish. the first used in war in the falkands island war in 1982. that sunk a royal navy ship.
great videos
EXOCET is one of the very few french word where you have to pronounce the final T. and the letter C must be pronounced like an S.
It’s not even French
@@vincentt2309 but the missile is so we have to prononce it right because
it is not a common name but a proper name, so the pronunciation is important
@@vincentt2309 Les Exocoetidae ou exocet, appelé usuellement poissons volants sont une famille de poissons marins, la racine du mot est Grec ancien, comme la plupars de mots scientifiques en France !
Hi may I ask how did you confirm the speed of MM40 Block3?
Friends from MBDA
Exocet may be old but it has performed better than Harpoon
When 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
*Falklands flashbacks*
USS Stark almost skunked if the captain did not order the flood the port side for the ship . Sounds like the missile travels to fast and exploding inside the side .
Sea wolf missile
Compare exocet missile
Which is better..?
I think you wrote wrong. One of them is air defence missile and other anti-ship.
Exocet is by far the best so far.
The Harpoon is much talked about but the only hits that I can find during its operational history are on friendly or neutral forces.
@@AudieHolland A number of Libyan patrol boats were sunk by Harpoons fired from USN A-6 Intruders. The Iranians sunk a couple of Iraqi Osas with Harpoons. The USN sunk an Iraqi frigate with a Harpoon. It's true that a USN Harpoon struck an Indian merchant ship but the missile had no warhead and the merchant ship was in a maritime exclusion zone marked off for missile testing.
The Harpoon is largely comparable to the Exocet but it's a little bigger, has a bit more range and is overall somewhat better than the Exocet
exocet is way better more reliable and powerful at war to fight the ships
@@egran2150 *Exocet all the way!*
Royal Malaysian Navies have several of these babies. Royal Malaysian Air Force should use the excocet for extended power projection in South China Sea.
Can we mount these on the Ukrainian merchant navy?
NO SUPERSONIC EXOCET MISSILE. TO ADVANCED!
Proven and tested in the Falklands war.
the best
This is a really great weapon. Brits maybe would disagree.
Some Royal Navy Ships were fitted with Exocet...
County Class Destroyers
Type 22 Frigates...
Both served in 1982...
The Exocet was regarded as a friend...
Re IFF system...
That's why HMS Sheffield was caught a little bit off guard..
@@eugenemurray2940 thx
@@eugenemurray2940 iff wasn't there, neither was exocet was there in royal navy during conflict, don't talk like a butthurt
@@eugenemurray2940
RN didn't caught off guard. They tracked the planes long before it came within range to fire the exocet. They were purposely placed there as BAIT!!🤭
The system failed, the argies did good, flew hign- low , merging , unmerge creating phantom tracks, overwhelming the computer.. had to reset.
At Same time unfortunate seaman ship caused 1 vessel to pass thru another ship firing line of sight.
Got to give credits where its due..
These can sink aircraft carriers all day long
We had salvaged exocet missiles in damaged condition before
It should be called "the Royal Hunter"
0:25
And that's a MANSUP missile
Not a Exocet
Can exoset be neutralized by electronic warfare ?
Yes... But the video doesn't talk about the manual control with optic fibers... When the missile is jammed, you take the manual control... then you guide the missile where you want in the enemy boat...
@@JLucMontagnier waw!!! optic fibers from 150 Km ?
@@mariosk5482 no... 70 km...
@@JLucMontagnier No idea how you came up with this. Exocet is autonomous and has no manual control post-launch.
@@becauseiwasinverted5222 I shoot perhaps 10 exocet man...
Turkish atmaca anti ship missile please
Thank you for your interest. We've included the Atmaca on our list. We will also make its video as soon as possible.
@@WeaponDetective bro make a video on bramos missile 🥰🥰
Was Cameroon a Slip of Tongue?.🥳
Why is there no mention of what India did with anti-ship missiles in 1971 war with pakistan. India went one step further with anti-ship missiles than all others had did before?
The main reason Western navies interested in anti-ship missiles was the sinking of INS Eilat in 1967. They had already started work in this field before India's success in 1971. Therefore, it did not affect the development of the Exocet.
The english asked the french for the missile deactivation codes .... If we are looking for an explanation for the non explosion of the heads ... 😁
There is no and ever has been any code , just a legend . Read the reports from the RN . Even the French said they was no code. If they wear any they would never have any success at the commercial export level
Her can going more fast and stealth. InsyaAllah
French technology 👍😍🤩
France spends more to its national defense budget as Russia does nowadays
Exocet is originated from France, the war Falkland, Argentina vs England, England are crying.
We won the war so why would we be crying
The French government cooperated closely with the United Kingdom to prevent any more Exocet missiles being sold to Argentine, including those on the '2nd hand market.' This caused a shortage of Exocet missiles on the part of the Argentinian forces, preventing more British ships being destroyed.
Furthermore, the French gave the British taskforce access to its ports and facilities in West Africa.
@@TheAnikazone Well, rape victims tend to cry due to trauma.
And "rape" is the only worthy name for what Argentina, with ordnance from the 40s (Sold by the UK) and warplanes from the 50s (Sold by us) if I may add, did to the "state of the art" Royal Navy.
There's a reason Britain is no longer acknowledged beyond it's diplomatic weight when it comes to international power relations. It's not that Argentina killed the United Kingdom as a credible military force, sure, they more precisely found it's rotting corpse, but by God did the United Kingdom made a pathetic show of itself.
Honestly I'm almost sad we didn't support Argentina even further. Then again the Soviets could have also picked up the slack.
@@TheAnikazone On ground with professional commandos vs poorly trained average argentine conscripts, but on sea, it was another story ...
@Mich Sky Her commandos, not her navy who payed a high price from argentina planes
USS Liberty
The slayer of HMS Sheffield 😂
usa and Europe number one
Does anyone make an anti-ship missile that fly's to target and then when only a few hundred yards out drops to the water and continues as a torpedo?
There are a few anti-sub missiles that could probably, at least theoretically, use their torpedo payload against a ship. SS-N-14 «Silex» is the only one that I know of with that considered in its design though.
@Deplorable_Brian Yeah, there really isn't much of a point to delivering a torpedo by missile to a surface ship. For one thing, the lightweight antisubmarine torpedoes used in such systems typically have much smaller warheads, 100lbs or less, compared to 500-1000lbs on a Mk 48 or other 53cm models.
If a missile can carry a, let's say, 500lb torpedo, only a fraction of that weight adds destructive potential. In the same hypothetical missile; a 500lb warhead would be more useful.
No. Silex may sound similar but the anti ship version doesn't drop the torpedo, it simply slams into the target with it. The concept has been investigated (look up UGM-89) but the logistics of making it work are not worth the benefits (which, with the ranges of state of art anti missile systems, are not that great to begin with).
Thanks for suggestions, thats cool 😎
Yeah, USA Asroc, french malafon, australian ikara, franco italian milas...
We should all remember the amount of British ships either sunk or badly damaged by this French weapon sold to Argentina during the Falklands war in 1981. I wonder who they would sell it to today?
China?
Ukraine
@@Matt-dd3tl I don’t know how many are left
And what was Argentina able to attack RN ships so easily with French built Exocet Missile, until the UK government forced France to stop selling to Argentina, because the UK decommissioned it's AEW Fairey gannet, and that is why the Sea-king was rushed in to operations with something similar to the new "Crows Best" AEW radar within a bag like structure.
@Peter Mallia: France was not forced by anyone (Certainly not by the UK!) but out of friendship towards a close ally (the UK) to make an embargo on more Exocets and more support to Argentina and prevent any deliveries from other Exocet users.
Seriously? Force France?
It is not rather a help from one ally to another?
uk forced France.hahaha hohoho!! abrutis.
I would have 100000 exocet
Missiles in our arsenal
23 mile range absolutely dog shit in today’s environment
Better systems out there
When you make laugh of french forces don't forget that there weapons have succeeded to destroy an english and an american warship......
And severely damage an english aircraft carrier.
_Malvinas War's unrecognized fact._
@@Lycantros. HAHAHAHA shut up doof brain
@@Brad03 no need for you to call people nasty names.
@@reesebowles6988 HE SAID THAT THEY DAMAGED THE HERMES HAHAHAHA ITS LAUGHABLE
Sucker punches don't count.
For sure the British tasted
I want some 😁😁😂😂😂😂
This french missle took out so many of their allies ships and none of the enemy lol
What ennemies?
@@unknown-vz1xi exocet missle sunk a UK ship and a us ship but no enemy ships
@@mohamedosman23 but who is the « enemy » of the french military ?
Btw France has not had the opportunity to use it against an « enemy » ship but if the opportunity presents itself this missile will be very effective for sure
i guess revenge for mers el kebir
@@mohamedosman23 it was not used by France. it was used by Argentina, which was an ally of both France and Britain up to the beginning of the falklands war (incidently Maggie Thatcher tried to sell weapons to the Argentinian Junt a week before the war started) and it was used by saddam hussein, an ally of both France and the US (untill Saddam realized the Us for whom he had been waging a nasty war against Iran, had been selling weapons to Iran too, and he had his little revenge).
the fact that it sank or nearly destrloyed naval ships from powerful navies such that of the UK or the US is a testimony to the effectiveness of these weapons. it rendered the navy useless...france was not consulted in neither cases..
Somewhat old fashion?
What a funny music on background!?! 😂😂😂
Music: Marche Lorraine. traditional french military music
Now all business jets put ships on full alert.
Some collateral damage could ensue.
Terrorist tactics. Innocents suffer.
Iran Air flight 655
😁👍👽🎱🏆🎮
Sure love me my hentai-ship missiles
Lmfao
US doesn't have this cool missile 😏
french power
This missile doesn't seems to be that impressive.
It's really boring.
Our Indian Navy doesn't prefers it for our naval deck based fighters.
Our navalised mig-29ks are armed with kh-31As, and Kh-59mks , and next generation brahmos missiles, that are way better than this so called operated Exocets.
make your planes, your boats, your aircraft carriers etc...before speaking, the Indians still traveled on the backs of elephants 40 years ago!your brahmos is a little kid compared to the French missiles story!
It's pronounced Exo-set
Exercise is a piece of shit mess. Anybody outside of Franz Witte technology star, only country to use the extra sets are the ones that can’t afford the harpoon anti-shit and I saw on your block missiles
The Germans are again the best !
No
Your program proved that the missile is rubbish.
it's commercial longevity tells another story.
Bless Germany
Hum ...why ?
Germany technology is better forever
Russian and jerman
Much better technology
And that, ladies and gents, was a "TH-cam expert" comment.
During the Falklands war argentina shot 9 German torpedos on a british ship no ones explodes. The exocet did
@@victormenginou6599 The exocet that hit Sheffield didn't explode.
@@loyalist5736 it destroyed it nevermined
Is also italian of production...CANNON s,missil s ,they master s the italians, MDMA ,WASS ,OTO MELARA....
Why did you put Scotlands flag up for Georgia
this flaf is Mike in navy code "M"
And the US also had glide bombs during WWII en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/ASM-N-2_Bat