Sir, thank you for your information. Although it will take some time to understand your professional knowledge, I would like to educate myself and my family. I am a Japanese woman, and recently I took my 11 year old boy to see warships and submarines in Yokosuka, Japan. My son wanted to take pictures with a U.S. serviceman who was walking in the park near by the U.S. base, and when the U.S. serviceman gave my son his U.S. Navy hat, my son was so touched and now he wants to join JSDF. I am still grateful for the kind act of the U.S. serviceman, and I also would like to show my gratitude and respect to all the servicemen and women for their service,
@@M_Jono You may be angry at the generation who did that, but its not fair to take it out on new generations. you literally don't even know where much about them. If countries carried through with ancient blood feuds the entire world would be like the middle east. we are close to it, it seems, but not completely. If your bhuddist, just consider that their souls may actually have been victims of the Japanese who as some great karma reincarnated there for some reason or another to change the path of that nation. If you don't believe in reincarnation that is fine, just thought I would point out you may be hating on people whose souls were literally victims in ww II though and finally got a new chance at life.
@@M_Jono It's good to remember our histories. To be vigilant. But even more, to see what is happening in front of us & happening to people around us now, too. SEAsia is facing a hell-bent aggressive militaristic CCP (China, West Taiwan, take your pick ^^) & Japan of today is very far from Dai Nippon (the Empire of Japan) of 70+ years ago. With respect & Love, from Slovenia, Europe ❤
I like the idea that various platforms are playing hot potato with the missile guidance system. The F-35 doesn't need to carry it, just stealthily get close enough and direct it.
@@olisk-jy9rz I mean, if the f-35 guiding a missile gets it detected, the target is probably more worried about the missile than the plane by that point.
In case it's not clear to some as to why this is beyond cool: According to Ward, the SM6 has a range of 230 miles. However, that is when it's launched from the deck of a ship, on the surface of the water. It's launched with a starting velocity of just about 0 and an altitude of zero, and can climb to 50k feet and beyond to hit a target 230 miles away. A large portion of the rocket propellant is spent on accelerating to match 3, and fighting gravity to get to its 50k+ altitude. Now if you take that same missile, strap it to a Hornet, launch it from an altitude of 40-50k feet, with an initial velocity around Mach 1, then Some of the propellant that would have been spent on acceleration, and most of the propellant that would have been spent fighting gravity to gain altitude, now gets to get used instead, to push the missile out to a MUCH greater range. And considering that we've already been building SM6's for a while that means we get to field this sucker immediately. This is a badass move for the USN. EDIT: one of the responders posted a good point that I wasn't aware of: the SM6 has a Mk 72 first stage booster attached to it when it's launched from a ship. I hadn't realized this. In the case of the AIM 174, the Super Hornet is going to act as its First stage booster. I couldn't find any information on how much speed and altitude the Mk 72 imparts to the SM 6, so I can't really make any conclusions about how much farther an AIM 174 will go vs the SM6. However, it's probably a safe assumption that at a minimum, the hornet will impart close to the same, if not the same, if not slightly more than the Mk 72. And On top of that, the Hornet is an aircraft, which can lug a couple of those suckers out to a distance much farther away from the carrier than the DDGs, which also would contribute to an overall greater defense range.
Right. That’s basically how the Russian kenzil is a hypersonic missile. It’s really just a mid ranged ballistic missile. They strap it to a mig-31 get it going mach 2 at 50,000ft and launch it and then you’ll reach hypersonic speeds as it flys towards the ground. I imagine the same applies with this system. Could probably get close to or reach hypersonic speeds. Not sure though.
@@forfun6273 I'm obviously not an expert on how US missiles are built, so I can't say anything with authority lol, but if you make a few assumptions based on basic physics, I would assume that the rocket motor has a fixed amount of thrust, and so I would assume that mach 3.5 (the reported speed of an SM6) is just the speed at which aerodynamic drag is equal to the rocket motor's thrust. That's oversimplified though. And yeah everything I've heard about Kinzhal is that it's just an air launched Isander.
The ship launched version has an extra first stage rocket booster. So ... we can't conclude much about any advantage that air launch might provide. That said ... it is probably a "wash" as far as overall performance. i.e. What you gain from being "speed and angels" you lose along with that first stage.
I was thinking the same thing when I saw The Grim Reapers "test" SM-6s in DCS. The missile is already supersonic, and at high altitude. Bonus distance awarded!
@@sebastianforbes1 You mean a worthwhile expenditure and investment of my tax dollars. Ridiculously expensive would mean they are not worth it. In this case they totally are. The war in Ukraine has shown that up to now most of our weapons systems have been more than worth it. Remember, if you find yourself in a fair fight you messed up, and the first rule of warfare is to literally overwhelm your enemy with superior force to make them reluctant to even engage you, and if you notice China, Russia, nor North Korea have made good on a single threat of theirs against any NATO country or the US directly despite us being well in their engagement window. Why not you ask? They are afraid of the UNpublished numbers. Remember unlike Russia, China and N. Korea that have all been shown to over inflate their numbers to make them sound intimidating the US undersells the the performance of their stuff. So if this is being publicly put out as 250miles of range you can bet that it will do 275miles easily and maybe up to 300miles in certain situations. So, no, not ridiculously expensive, money well spent. Now, go back to Russia.
He is a lousy reporter and blocked me on tiktok as i teach him technology, All these USA hypersonic programmes have Australian help. HIFIRE and now SCIFIRE joint USA, Australia hypersonic programmes can be found on internet and even have videos on here. Australian Ray Stalker was first to get essence of flight from scramjets, now Australia has world fastest scramjet at mach 12. Australian Ray Stalker invented free piston design hypersonic wind tunnels are the world fastest and sold to a few countries. China claim they have world fastest hypersonic wind tunnel, and now is reported by Chinese it is stolen Australian designs that they modified and now claim it is world fastest. HACM and HAWC hypersonic scramjet missile is joint developed between Australia and USA. so was SM-6 missile. Australian FA18 Super Hornet will test fire a HACM scramjet hypersonic missile during this years RIMPAC 2024...
Another clear, concise report on a topic the mainstream media doesn't cover. These are significant developments on the world stage. Great report, thanks Ward.
How does this air launched missile shoot down a DF21 or DF 26 travelling at a much faster speed? Shouldn't the intercepting missile have a faster soeed to be able to catch up with the enemy missile?
@@colinlee9678 It is not to shoot down that missile, it has longer range than that. Now china have to worry how to defent THIS missile. It is such a game. The longer range missile wins because you can destroy the other's launch pads/stations/vehicles using your weapon before they can shoot at you (due the range advantage)
@@Duke_Romilar_III - You have completely overlooked one of the key roles that an Aircraft carrier plays in a theatre... Aircraft carriers do not attempt to be stealthy and when they show up, they SHOW UP... The reason? Deterrence. A key role for an aircraft carrier is to get to an area and make the enemy think twice about whether or not it wants that fight. The CCP have a bad habit of believing their own bullshit, which makes them dangerous. It they believe they are untouchable and a credible military, then they will act like it and could end up initiating a conflict. If they are humbled, by showing them they are very 'touchable', then they will exercise caution, regarding escalating to a conflict. Leading up to conflict, you absolutely want to broadcast capability, to show that the fight is not worth it. If conflict starts, then you start being secret about new capabilities you develop during it.
I love how Russia and China trumpet their latest weapons and loudy proclaim the supposed capabilities, but the US quietly sticks a massive, prooven missel on a plane during a wargame, lets the defense media go nuts, and doesnt even need to say a thing.
hmm think you'll find the Chinese say next to nothing about their weapons, specs/capabilities etc these are all inferred/manufactured/guesstimated by the various western think tanks, analysts and announced by pentagon spokespeople. China doesn't have any formal allies and so never wants or needs to export its current generation equipment to anyone, therefore no one outside China really knows its actual capabilities with any degree of certainty! Its those guesstimates that has been driving the policy in the last decade when the Pentagon realised the game is a foot and they can't just roam around the western pacific with impunity like the good old days. The Russians on the other hand do like to promote their wares
@@lunchik2689You might want to go brush up on the past 30 years of Chinese defense trade shows like some of us have followed all that time. Doesn't matter though since China doesn't have a maintenance culture, is a top-down hierarchy with dog-and-pony shows, false reporting as the norm. Chances are their missiles have already been stripped of the rocket motor propellant and replaced with foam. If you cut up the propellant and sell it for hot pot fuel in the local market, the local commander can make bank. PLAAF and PLNAF have fighter engines that still spontaneously explode, and a culture under Xi where information is locked down.
@@ImpendingJokerthey never stated what radar it uses, what range it has, how much explosives it carries. All we know for sure is, it's meant to kill carrier and the DoD needs to try and figure out based on photos what the specs are Edit:spelling
The Russians really touted their hypersonic missiles and once in combat Ukraine shoots them down repeatedly with old US patriot system. Makes you wonder just how good the Chinese ones are???
Thanks Ward, for yet another timely video and analysis. Finally some good news for a change!!! I really appreciate the work you put into keeping us updated.
The F-15EX could probably carry those as well, and has a higher performance and load capacity than the Super Bug. Note that two squadrons are scheduled to be based at Kadena. Just a thought....
I think that is the general strategic idea. Both land based and carrier based 4'th generation fighter "missile trucks capability" behind a screen of 5'th generation fighters for targeting relay/data linking. It's about damn time the Navy and Air Force have ( edit -air launched) long range missile capability. Multiple 4-6 ship land based sorties of F15EX's behind an F22 and/or F35 screen and the same for carrier based Super Hornets behind a screen of F35's has to be a nightmare for Chinese mission planners. Would not be surprised if the overall strategic goal is to develop the capability across 4'th generation platforms with Naval air power capability being the first priority on a 'get it done yesterday' tactical priority. Can't happen soon enough. Hopefully the Philippines embraces the benefit and wisdom of U.S. based air power on their soil again. Granted I am a little biased having been stationed at NAS Cubi Point with VA-147 in the early 80's.
Probably, but I think only two of them on stations 2 and 8. The normal AMRAAM wing pylons obviously won't work, neither will the fuselage recesses. It looks like the Super Hornet could load at least four, maybe even six.
I find it hilarious that the US Navy just quietly released this information as if it were routine, when in fact it's very important and any other country probably would have made a massive display of it. Talk about a flex.
@@tritium1998Yeah. They've been trying to develop the technology for the last 20 years.... that results in a lot of models with varying capabilities. None of that is an example of what the US did here. Russia on the other hand did something similar and created the Kinzhal's "hypersonic capabilities".
@@francoisleveille409 The Iranians did mount the MIM-23 HAWK to their F-14s after relations were cut with the US as a temporary stopgap to keep their F-14s armed. You can find several articles on it.
Sandbox News also covered the AIM-174 this week. Don't forget, these are still inert, test weapons, however Alex included a comment by a US military officer in charge of the program that stated that the mating of the rocket body to the base of an SM6 is permanent. The way he put it implied that Navy missile techs weren't going to be taking the rocket bodies off the missile to put another SM6 rocket in a shipboard launcher. These two parts are now one missile in every way. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Rockwell(?) plants were turning out batches of NAIM-174's, not the 174B with blue bands, very soon.
The problem is cost and numbers. Our successive federal governments have been utterly incompetent at procurement. We just don't have the numbers of anything to provide for a credible hedgehog strategy against China. Indonesia, maybe. But not China.
3:52 Just a guess here but maybe they’re referring to front aspect intercepts? That would mean it could function well defending ships but maybe not so well in the role a system like Patriot serves.
The pla already has the pl21 for years now since 2016 which has a comparable range, so surely anybody competent would have thought about conuntermeasures for their own weapons. And the other issue is the production capacity, how is this being adressed?
@davidcheung8595 Other countries have photographed the moon landing sites, including the lander debris and even astronaut foot prints left on the surface. You could look this up yourself but I'm guessing you prefer to stay ignorant.
The wrinkle in this plan is that satellites that can detect carrier groups can be launched by the missile batteries themselves, as they civilian versions of such weigh
Thanks for keeping it simple enough for the average guy to understand. What little knowledge I have of air-launched missiles is what I glean from watching DCS videos, which while often provided by knowledgeable fantasy pilots, remains suspect. Your info is obviously provided in publicly available/allowed snippets, but trustworthy. 👍👍
Ward as always very informative. Thrilled the U.S. Navy is designing and implementing this new technology for use against China. The saving grace might actually be that most things made in China are cheap and break easily, hoping this the case. Better to be prepared.
The Chinese tech is more likely to work. China only makes cheep stuff cause we want to buy cheep stuff. They have no problems making high quality products…
Having been involved in importing products from PRC, I can attest that they can make any level of quality you want to pay for. Now high end military electronics are probably different. Their domestic chip making is behind ours, but since we are buying so much stuff from them, we are essentially funding OUR military and THEIR military!
Did he just conflate the PL-17 with the DF_17??? PL-17 isn't a hypersonic missile, and the PLA has far better tools to deal with surface warships than wasting PL-17s on them.
I would assume these are going to be used a couple of ways: 1)as a stop-gap solution before the AIM-260 arrives and 2)as a way of defeating hypersonic weapons while they are much further away from the carrier group and preferably high in the atmosphere where evasive maneuvers are much more difficult. Some TH-cam personalities are suggesting these may be used offensively against ground targets, which I disagree with. The SM-6 is certainly not stealthy and being a solid rocket fueled motor it won't have enough energy for evasive maneuvers before impact. Also the warhead is rather small compared to real offensive weapons, although it would be big enough to damage a radar suite or other weapons platforms. In all, being these missiles used at RIMPAC were completely inert, they are merely seeing what kind of flight routine would be optimal for this loadout. The standoff distance gained by launching high and fast a couple hundred miles from the carrier would be very substantial.
These are fine against ground/ships. Obviously that's not the primary use case and correct ordinance would be selected per larger ground target. It's wise to have adaptable systems.
While these missiles won't sink a cruiser or destroyer and the ability to hit a ship is questionable, it's still carrying over 400lbs. of explosives. Delivering the equivalent of a 500 lb. bomb from a long standoff could be a valuable capability to static targets like a radar array.
Great analysis Ward, thank you as always. Hope to meet you one day around Pensacola. ( hint-hint) The Blue Angles are supposed to fly with the Thunder Birds for the homecoming show at NAS Pensacola this fall.
at present hypersonic missile capabilities are being blown out of all proportion, they have to slow down considerably in order to hit anything. easy meat for close in weapon systems.
@@jacobbrassard2776 The whole point of hypersonics is that slower missiles can't hit. You can't get constant satellite coverage nor have an ISR asset giving mid course guidance without getting intercepted. So if you send a cruise missile after a ship, the time it takes to reach it is so long the on-board seeker can't possibly scan the entire area of uncertainty. A hypersonic can fly fast enough to minimize the search area and use its on-board sensors to go terminal on the ship.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The current limit of materials science only allows for a hypersonic missile to be that fast during it's launch and mid flight phases, at best. This is when it's moving in a basically straight line. There is no material that you can construct the physical guidance mechanisms out of that will allow it to do final course corrections on a moving target over mach 2-3. It's the same reason why Patriots in Ukraine are able to successfully defend themselves against Russian "hypersonics".
I think that was the idea. The retirement of the F-14 also meant retirement of the AIM-54 and the Navy has never really been happy with the situation as far as I can tell they just didn't have a way to solve it. Until now.
@@ZboeC5The Navy was so happy to rid themselves of the insane costs all those years keeping AIM-54 up, with no returns. Failed every time it was launched by USN. There was a ton of hype around that weapon, and it never materialized in-action for USN. Iranians claim great success with it, but USN experience was opposite of that. Other pilots would rib Tomcat crews about their BLU-54 or Great White Hope.
No it looks like a upgraded AGM-78 that F-4G carried for Anti Radiation missions in the 70s and 80s before the HARM. All of them are differnt versions of the Standard Missile that came out in the 60s.
That takes some loading away from the issue of the destroyer screen having to head back to port for reloading vls tubes. Of the -18 can shoot them from above... Second problem is the catapult launch with that size missile hanging under the wings...
U.S. Airforce: We will spend billions of dollars developing the AIM-260 that is not yet operational. U.S. Navy: What if we just bolted an SM-6 to the Super Hornet lol (This is a joke I know both weapons fill different niches)
The US is terrifying. I think building Hyper-sonic missiles was a strategic mistake on China's part. It forced the US to increase the range of its existing platforms while also building Hyper-sonic weapons of their own. Why is that problematic? Because the US can afford to use them. And because US Hyper-sonic weapons are powered throughout flight (unlike china's which run out of fuel once they've reached their ballistic trajectory).
@@patrioticgunner8034 The Dark Eagle is in the demonstrator phase. As are a host of other programs. Everything China and Russia have are just gliders (the US has had those since the 80s).
China's weapons are unproven and they have no track record of modern warfighting. They are giving the U.S. a good excuse to modernize. The Soviets had virtually no strategic nuclear capability in the Fifties but the mere spector of a threat resulted in massive U.S. defense expenditures.
An AIM-174 won’t be sinking any respectably sized warships either, but it would keep them at bay under threat of a mission kill that renders it combat ineffective and vulnerable to larger shorter-ranged warheads that can send it under.
It's called a "mission kill". You don't have to sink a ship to take it out of the fight. A PL-17 can rain shrapnel down on a US ships delicate antennas, radars, electronics on the mast. This would force it to head back to Guam/Hawaii/San Diego for lengthy repairs. This ship would be out of the fight for the likely duration of the conflict.
Compared to what? For its main task, air to air, it’s 140 lb. Is far better than the AIM-120D’s 44 lbs. warhead. In the air to surface role, it is somewhat small. It won’t sink any surface warship , but it would damage them, perhaps to the point of making them combat ineffective. As for land targets, it depends on the target. It may be able to take out SAM sites, artillery units, or armour, but not hardened bunkers.
Thanks for that interesting overview. I have a lot of personal interest in this subject matter. My son Josh is a Hawkeye NFO , he taught an interservice air battle management class at Nellis on a special assignment with the Air Force, and is about to deploy as the EWO on USS Gettysburg. By odd coincidence, in my youth I was a radar operator on EC-121s.
Im a usmc vet, you have no idea what weapons the us military really has. The only weapons you know of, are the same weapons the us wants china to know of.
At this point I really think there's someone at the Pentagon who absolutely loves the Super Hornet platform and is just thinking of ways (albeit very good ways) to keep them relevant.
The AIM-174's look reminds me far more of a missile you should be intimately familiar with, Ward. Specifically, it reminds me of the AIM-54 Phoenix, which you would have carried.
I don't see how the Pentagon can claim with any confidence that the SM-6 is effective at intercepting an anti-ship hypersonic missile whether air or surface launched. The US Navy doesn't have an anti-ship hypersonic weapon in the same league as the DF-17/27 (or any of its shipborne variants) to test the SM-6 against. Any predictions on intercept rates would be the result of computer modeling, no? Still though, big missile on plane is better than small missile on plane.
With such a large 'black budget', i'd like to believe the powers that be are well equip to deal with this threat and themselves have a weapons which aren't publicly disclosed. Seems impossible for China, Russia and Iran to have hypersonic weapons while the US sit idle with no equivalent
You don't need a weapon, just a test analogue. The Hera test target used retired Pershing II reentry vehicles to fly to altitude on 1st stage, then flip over and fire the second stage pointed towards the ground in what's called a "piledriver trajectory" to cheaply mimic maneuverable reentry vehicles. So in a sense without ever having to design a weapon you can make stuff go hypersonic and maneuverable by just pointing rockets downwards and speed up.
@@Candide1776 laser requires time on target, laser is limited by atmospheric interference (especially such dense and humid places such as... at sea level... on the ocean), laser requires burn through of either control surfaces or electronics to make impactor either break up or miss the target, laser is negated by defensive measures such as rotation, ablative heat shield, elimination of fragile or exposed weak points, multiple impactors, limited time between detection and impact, etc., so, no, lasers are not some sort of panacea, they have limited utility, largely against low intensity threats.
Currently and for the foreseeable future, lasers are not at all meant for hypersonics and would be completely non functional against them. You would need literal double digit megawatt lasers at the minimum for that, which is well into the crazy bonkers alien tech zone.
You overlook a big point. Manned figher jets are increasingly outdated weapons - like the horseback cavalry was a century ago when it first encountered a tank. China, whose so-called "industrial overcapacity" is literally 26X greater than the US, will have tens-of-millions of unmanned super-drones that outmatch manned fighter jets head-to-head. Like how the small Houthis are defeating the aircraft/carriers of the combined US-UK military in the Red Sea today. China is literally a billion times more capable & powerful. So it's no contest. Per the US military, China is also now building 5000 hypersonic missiles per week, a quarter of them nuclear, which is as many total missiles every week as the entire US military force! And US minutemen are 6-decade-old ballistic conventionally-powered 3-megaton missile tech, hugely outclassed by China's new drone nukes that are nuclear-powered 400-megatons travelling at mach 18 (soon to be 888 megaton missiles). The US can't make anything like it and lacks the resources as China banned the export of graphite and key rare metals in which China "the saudia arabia of metals" controls 95% of the world's supply.
You seem to know a lot about Chinese capabilities, 😏 but you know absolutely nothing about USA capabilities. The USA has large natural deposits of graphite that it does not exploit. Instead they have synthetic graphite. 🤔 And what would happen if the USA decided to stop trading with China? 😏 China would be screwed.
Tomcats were badass fighers of their day, but maintaining them with the complicated swing wing mechanisms was never going to last once fly by wire made unstable aerodynamics possible.
Retiring the F14 and the A6 at the same time has to be the stupidest decision ever made in Naval Aviation. I was in the room when the decision was made and I can still say many years later that our Navy and our Country both lost a lot of warfighting capability at that moment. That was warfighting capability that was paid for and in the process of being incrementally and intelligently upgraded and modernized. One who knows understands that the platforms were the best ever designed for strike warfare even up to today. If we had continued to evolve both platforms we would have capability far greater than anything that has been developed to date and at a fraction of what we have spent. That is not idle wording but honest facts. I was in the arena doing it and I know what we had and what we could have. Yes looking back can be tiring but forgetting the past will guarantee a future loss.
The think take had to have a ace up their sleeve to counter hypersonic missles that could be launched from an aircraft in flight. Well here it is. Great as always clear concise info. Keep the videos coming.
Countermeasures..? Possibly, they have some decent solutions when their minds goes to it. But a copy of such? Unreliable quality control leads me to some doubt.
Interesting post, Mooch. Seeing thru open source SM-6's weigh ~3,300#, or 6,600# of bring back aboard the boat in the configuration VFA-192 had at Hickam. That would not allow for all that much gas at max trap. Cheers - Walli
The Super Hornet is a great platform for this new development for the AIM 174, but we missed a more flexible option. A similar sized high subsonic aircraft, optimized for payload and range (ex. F 404 turbofan, but without A/B), could carry several missiles (4-6?) out to 200 + miles from a carrier group and loiter for 1-3 hours providing serious defensive capability. If it could also mount a large radar antenna, it would have massive radar range at altitude, useful for targeting and sharing with other assets. The Grumman A-6F would have filled this niche, complementing the F-18 and F-35. As a bonus, it could serve the same purpose for other "bomb truck" missions.
I love the Standard Missile series. Just thought on the pylon they looked smaller then Aim-54. I guess development in propellant technology making a smaller missile do more.
In late October a Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 Flanker, Soviet-era fighter, was shot down by a long-range air-to-air missile (LRAAM) - the R-37M. This is not the first Ukrainian aircraft to be shot down since Russia’s invasion commenced in February, but it is nevertheless a significant feat for the Russian Air Force because the R-37M took down the Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 from a range of 217km (about 140 miles).
You sound much like service members in my family. 'Thanks' is not enough. But on a lighter note, I hope you're enjoying the heck out of that Hendrix-style cab. You know, I considered getting one. Had a problem figuring out how to get it to the gig. So I went with 4x12 like everyone else. Still, I have to wonder what it would be like to let a Paul just ring in front of one of those beasts. Thanks again for taking such high risks on our behalf, in the service.
This is exactly how information should be presented. Quick, clear, precise, and matter of fact.
Couldn't agree more 👏
For sure
Just the facts. Not hyperbole.
Just the facts! Only the facts! 😎
Lol, except this should've been titled, "who's still the thug now?" Well, on that note, nothing's ever changed
Sir, thank you for your information. Although it will take some time to understand your professional knowledge, I would like to educate myself and my family.
I am a Japanese woman, and recently I took my 11 year old boy to see warships and submarines in Yokosuka, Japan. My son wanted to take pictures with a U.S. serviceman who was walking in the park near by the U.S. base, and when the U.S. serviceman gave my son his U.S. Navy hat, my son was so touched and now he wants to join JSDF. I am still grateful for the kind act of the U.S. serviceman, and I also would like to show my gratitude and respect to all the servicemen and women for their service,
here in SEAsia we still remember what Dai Nippon did to us
@@M_Jono You may be angry at the generation who did that, but its not fair to take it out on new generations. you literally don't even know where much about them.
If countries carried through with ancient blood feuds the entire world would be like the middle east. we are close to it, it seems, but not completely.
If your bhuddist, just consider that their souls may actually have been victims of the Japanese who as some great karma reincarnated there for some reason or another to change the path of that nation. If you don't believe in reincarnation that is fine, just thought I would point out you may be hating on people whose souls were literally victims in ww II though and finally got a new chance at life.
God bless you ma'm and your son. I admire Japan and the Japanese people. I thank God we are friends with each other.
What a kind thing to say here. Thank you for the inspiring words. They are appreciated!
@@M_Jono It's good to remember our histories. To be vigilant. But even more, to see what is happening in front of us & happening to people around us now, too.
SEAsia is facing a hell-bent aggressive militaristic CCP (China, West Taiwan, take your pick ^^) & Japan of today is very far from Dai Nippon (the Empire of Japan) of 70+ years ago.
With respect & Love, from Slovenia, Europe ❤
I like the idea that various platforms are playing hot potato with the missile guidance system. The F-35 doesn't need to carry it, just stealthily get close enough and direct it.
You can't use a radar and be stealthy at the same time.
@@olisk-jy9rz not with that attitude. You'd be surprised what MESA can do.
@@prfwrx2497 It's not attitude, it's called basic laws of physics.
@@prfwrx2497, not to worry. Those of us with strategic sensibilities AND a sense of humor got it.
@@olisk-jy9rz I mean, if the f-35 guiding a missile gets it detected, the target is probably more worried about the missile than the plane by that point.
In case it's not clear to some as to why this is beyond cool:
According to Ward, the SM6 has a range of 230 miles. However, that is when it's launched from the deck of a ship, on the surface of the water. It's launched with a starting velocity of just about 0 and an altitude of zero, and can climb to 50k feet and beyond to hit a target 230 miles away. A large portion of the rocket propellant is spent on accelerating to match 3, and fighting gravity to get to its 50k+ altitude.
Now if you take that same missile, strap it to a Hornet, launch it from an altitude of 40-50k feet, with an initial velocity around Mach 1, then Some of the propellant that would have been spent on acceleration, and most of the propellant that would have been spent fighting gravity to gain altitude, now gets to get used instead, to push the missile out to a MUCH greater range.
And considering that we've already been building SM6's for a while that means we get to field this sucker immediately.
This is a badass move for the USN.
EDIT: one of the responders posted a good point that I wasn't aware of: the SM6 has a Mk 72 first stage booster attached to it when it's launched from a ship. I hadn't realized this. In the case of the AIM 174, the Super Hornet is going to act as its First stage booster. I couldn't find any information on how much speed and altitude the Mk 72 imparts to the SM 6, so I can't really make any conclusions about how much farther an AIM 174 will go vs the SM6. However, it's probably a safe assumption that at a minimum, the hornet will impart close to the same, if not the same, if not slightly more than the Mk 72. And On top of that, the Hornet is an aircraft, which can lug a couple of those suckers out to a distance much farther away from the carrier than the DDGs, which also would contribute to an overall greater defense range.
Right. That’s basically how the Russian kenzil is a hypersonic missile. It’s really just a mid ranged ballistic missile. They strap it to a mig-31 get it going mach 2 at 50,000ft and launch it and then you’ll reach hypersonic speeds as it flys towards the ground. I imagine the same applies with this system. Could probably get close to or reach hypersonic speeds. Not sure though.
@@forfun6273
I'm obviously not an expert on how US missiles are built, so I can't say anything with authority lol, but if you make a few assumptions based on basic physics, I would assume that the rocket motor has a fixed amount of thrust, and so I would assume that mach 3.5 (the reported speed of an SM6) is just the speed at which aerodynamic drag is equal to the rocket motor's thrust. That's oversimplified though.
And yeah everything I've heard about Kinzhal is that it's just an air launched Isander.
The ship launched version has an extra first stage rocket booster.
So ... we can't conclude much about any advantage that air launch might provide.
That said ... it is probably a "wash" as far as overall performance. i.e. What you gain from being "speed and angels" you lose along with that first stage.
Sooo... launched from a high, fast jet, this beastie must travel about 400 miles?
I was thinking the same thing when I saw The Grim Reapers "test" SM-6s in DCS. The missile is already supersonic, and at high altitude. Bonus distance awarded!
One of the best tactical updates I've ever viewed on TH-cam.
Not sure this is the right place to share CUI....
One thing is forsure, when the U.S feels it needs to bridge some sort of tech gap, it overwhelming responds with ridiculously advanced systems.
@@sebastianforbes1 You mean a worthwhile expenditure and investment of my tax dollars. Ridiculously expensive would mean they are not worth it. In this case they totally are. The war in Ukraine has shown that up to now most of our weapons systems have been more than worth it. Remember, if you find yourself in a fair fight you messed up, and the first rule of warfare is to literally overwhelm your enemy with superior force to make them reluctant to even engage you, and if you notice China, Russia, nor North Korea have made good on a single threat of theirs against any NATO country or the US directly despite us being well in their engagement window. Why not you ask? They are afraid of the UNpublished numbers. Remember unlike Russia, China and N. Korea that have all been shown to over inflate their numbers to make them sound intimidating the US undersells the the performance of their stuff. So if this is being publicly put out as 250miles of range you can bet that it will do 275miles easily and maybe up to 300miles in certain situations. So, no, not ridiculously expensive, money well spent. Now, go back to Russia.
@@sebastianforbes1There are no equals to the US, nor comparables, nor 3 levels below the US.
@@sebastianforbes1maybe expensive but freedom isn’t free. Freedom is way better than being owned by the ccp or Russia.
Kinda like they had them already, you know classified tech.
@@sebastianforbes1 freedom isn’t free of course but seriously it is so much better than living under regimes like ccp or russia ever will be.
It took Sandboxx News 22 minutes to explain this. Thanks for the clear, concise report.
He is a lousy reporter and blocked me on tiktok as i teach him technology,
All these USA hypersonic programmes have Australian help. HIFIRE and now SCIFIRE joint USA, Australia hypersonic programmes can be found on internet and even have videos on here.
Australian Ray Stalker was first to get essence of flight from scramjets, now Australia has world fastest scramjet at mach 12.
Australian Ray Stalker invented free piston design hypersonic wind tunnels are the world fastest and sold to a few countries. China claim they have world fastest hypersonic wind tunnel, and now is reported by Chinese it is stolen Australian designs that they modified and now claim it is world fastest.
HACM and HAWC hypersonic scramjet missile is joint developed between Australia and USA. so was SM-6 missile.
Australian FA18 Super Hornet will test fire a HACM scramjet hypersonic missile during this years RIMPAC 2024...
Another clear, concise report on a topic the mainstream media doesn't cover. These are significant developments on the world stage. Great report, thanks Ward.
The plot thickens.
These warmongers are wasting precious resources on arms. Meanwhile, China is harvesting $2 billion dollars every day in exports.
The gizzard chickens.
How does this air launched missile shoot down a DF21 or DF 26 travelling at a much faster speed? Shouldn't the intercepting missile have a faster soeed to be able to catch up with the enemy missile?
@@colinlee9678 It is not to shoot down that missile, it has longer range than that. Now china have to worry how to defent THIS missile. It is such a game. The longer range missile wins because you can destroy the other's launch pads/stations/vehicles using your weapon before they can shoot at you (due the range advantage)
@@MaverickM1
Yanks are the attackers.
China just defending their home turf in their front yard.
That photograph was also no accident.
There’s no point having a stand off weapon if your enemy doesn’t know about it.
Never telegraph anything to an enemy or potential enemy. It should be a surprise.
@@Duke_Romilar_III Except a deterrent. Something like that you want to telegraph to your enemy. Keeps heads cool.
Stand-away photos for Stand-off weapons?
@@Duke_Romilar_IIIdeterrents are only effective if the enemy knows about them
@@Duke_Romilar_III - You have completely overlooked one of the key roles that an Aircraft carrier plays in a theatre...
Aircraft carriers do not attempt to be stealthy and when they show up, they SHOW UP...
The reason?
Deterrence.
A key role for an aircraft carrier is to get to an area and make the enemy think twice about whether or not it wants that fight.
The CCP have a bad habit of believing their own bullshit, which makes them dangerous.
It they believe they are untouchable and a credible military, then they will act like it and could end up initiating a conflict.
If they are humbled, by showing them they are very 'touchable', then they will exercise caution, regarding escalating to a conflict.
Leading up to conflict, you absolutely want to broadcast capability, to show that the fight is not worth it.
If conflict starts, then you start being secret about new capabilities you develop during it.
I love how Russia and China trumpet their latest weapons and loudy proclaim the supposed capabilities, but the US quietly sticks a massive, prooven missel on a plane during a wargame, lets the defense media go nuts, and doesnt even need to say a thing.
hmm think you'll find the Chinese say next to nothing about their weapons, specs/capabilities etc these are all inferred/manufactured/guesstimated by the various western think tanks, analysts and announced by pentagon spokespeople. China doesn't have any formal allies and so never wants or needs to export its current generation equipment to anyone, therefore no one outside China really knows its actual capabilities with any degree of certainty! Its those guesstimates that has been driving the policy in the last decade when the Pentagon realised the game is a foot and they can't just roam around the western pacific with impunity like the good old days. The Russians on the other hand do like to promote their wares
@@lunchik2689 Incorrect. They touted those missiles as carrier killers VERY loudly. Where have you been? Apply cold water to the burned area.
@@lunchik2689You might want to go brush up on the past 30 years of Chinese defense trade shows like some of us have followed all that time.
Doesn't matter though since China doesn't have a maintenance culture, is a top-down hierarchy with dog-and-pony shows, false reporting as the norm.
Chances are their missiles have already been stripped of the rocket motor propellant and replaced with foam. If you cut up the propellant and sell it for hot pot fuel in the local market, the local commander can make bank.
PLAAF and PLNAF have fighter engines that still spontaneously explode, and a culture under Xi where information is locked down.
@@ImpendingJokerthey never stated what radar it uses, what range it has, how much explosives it carries.
All we know for sure is, it's meant to kill carrier and the DoD needs to try and figure out based on photos what the specs are
Edit:spelling
The Russians really touted their hypersonic missiles and once in combat Ukraine shoots them down repeatedly with old US patriot system. Makes you wonder just how good the Chinese ones are???
Thanks great info Mooch!!
Thanks Ward, for yet another timely video and analysis. Finally some good news for a change!!! I really appreciate the work you put into keeping us updated.
"Mr. President, we must not allow a mine shaft gap!"
Look at the Big Board, theyre getting ready to clobber us!
@lfoughtpiranhas…If you don’t get the president of the United States on the phone you will have to answer to the Coca-Cola company.😅
The US is feeling the heat. It is playing the catch-up game. ie it is behind.
Terrific video ! Thanks for posting it.
The best theme song for this would be Krokus - Long Stick Goes Boom
AIM 120 + AIM 54 (Phoenix) = AIM 174
It comes from RIM 174. Not 120+54
It's a cool idea, but the SM-6 original designation is RIM-174.
@@mignik01 i mean in pure concept its similar to the aim-54, but damn its alot better and can be used for antiships
Wait....
.
.
.
.
...yep, the math checks out.
Nice story but it's _basically_
RIM 156A airframe + AIM120C seeker
= RIM174
But this is 174B variant I believe Air2Air with booster removed.
Fantastic information, presented perfectly. Thanks.
I remember a proposal to put Standard Missiles in a B1B and have the F-22 direct the missiles to remote targets.
Love the update!
The F-15EX could probably carry those as well, and has a higher performance and load capacity than the Super Bug.
Note that two squadrons are scheduled to be based at Kadena.
Just a thought....
@@AlanToon-fy4hg Good Idea I wish everyone thought like that. I believe it's going to be like the B-52. Long life.
The US always understates its capabilities publicly, so i would not be surprised if we already had these tested and ready to fly
I think that is the general strategic idea. Both land based and carrier based 4'th generation fighter "missile trucks capability" behind a screen of 5'th generation fighters for targeting relay/data linking. It's about damn time the Navy and Air Force have ( edit -air launched) long range missile capability.
Multiple 4-6 ship land based sorties of F15EX's behind an F22 and/or F35 screen and the same for carrier based Super Hornets behind a screen of F35's has to be a nightmare for Chinese mission planners.
Would not be surprised if the overall strategic goal is to develop the capability across 4'th generation platforms with Naval air power capability being the first priority on a 'get it done yesterday' tactical priority.
Can't happen soon enough. Hopefully the Philippines embraces the benefit and wisdom of U.S. based air power on their soil again.
Granted I am a little biased having been stationed at NAS Cubi Point with VA-147 in the early 80's.
Probably, but I think only two of them on stations 2 and 8. The normal AMRAAM wing pylons obviously won't work, neither will the fuselage recesses. It looks like the Super Hornet could load at least four, maybe even six.
@@kilianortmann9979 plus one on the centerline pylon.
Very concise and informative Mooch. Much more clear info than a similar report seen recently
I find it hilarious that the US Navy just quietly released this information as if it were routine, when in fact it's very important and any other country probably would have made a massive display of it. Talk about a flex.
China has all kinds of missiles and radars whose names aren't made famous.
@@tritium1998sure they do bud.
@@ObiWanShinobi917
Yanks already made it known about the SM carried on jets...
China has it's PL17 and other long-range AAM still in secret...
@@tritium1998Yeah. They've been trying to develop the technology for the last 20 years.... that results in a lot of models with varying capabilities. None of that is an example of what the US did here.
Russia on the other hand did something similar and created the Kinzhal's "hypersonic capabilities".
@@kwonekstrom2138 kinzhal is ballistic, 1980s technology...
Iran used to carry Hawk SAM's on their F14s. This sounds like something similar.
Hawk SAMs ? I suspect you refer to the AIM-54 Phoenix which could go BVR but it is now totally antiquated.
@@francoisleveille409 The Iranians did mount the MIM-23 HAWK to their F-14s after relations were cut with the US as a temporary stopgap to keep their F-14s armed. You can find several articles on it.
@@francoisleveille409 no, they actually mounted old Hawk missiles to their f14s once we quit supplying them with Phoenix missiles and spare parts.
@@Ming-Chan Wow! Necessity is the mother of ... improvisation ?!
@@francoisleveille409 Apply cream to the burned area.
Sandbox News also covered the AIM-174 this week. Don't forget, these are still inert, test weapons, however Alex included a comment by a US military officer in charge of the program that stated that the mating of the rocket body to the base of an SM6 is permanent. The way he put it implied that Navy missile techs weren't going to be taking the rocket bodies off the missile to put another SM6 rocket in a shipboard launcher. These two parts are now one missile in every way. I wouldn't be surprised to hear that Rockwell(?) plants were turning out batches of NAIM-174's, not the 174B with blue bands, very soon.
It’s Raytheon (RTX) making them.
Raytheon.
Aim174 is operational, there are news articles about it. But not surprised tbh, we’ve seen pictures since 2020.
Thanks for keeping us updated SIR...appreciate it man!..👉🏻
The Royal Australian Navy has the SM6.
The Royal Australian Air Force has the F/A-18F and LRASM. Between the SM6 and LRASM I see potential.
The problem is cost and numbers.
Our successive federal governments have been utterly incompetent at procurement.
We just don't have the numbers of anything to provide for a credible hedgehog strategy against China.
Indonesia, maybe. But not China.
Thanks!
I know the info is preliminary but it's nice to hear of a Navy program that appears to be on track and not another management screwup.
Thanks for these excellent briefings of often overlooked but very important updates
Tip of the spear reporting !! Thank you, Ward.
Love your delivery !
Peer/Near Peer security competition is awesome for military tech nerds.
_"awesome for military tech nerds."_ But terrifying for everyone who recognizes how dangerous it is.
@@JimSmithInChiapas2US navy pilots are not "terrified", and perfectly aware of the situation.
@@JimSmithInChiapas2Oh I see you're one of those people who keeps scaremongering in comments to sow division. Got you.
@@JimSmithInChiapas2"it's TERRIFYING"
"Potus bad"
"WW3!!!"
Send my regards to Putler/MTG.
Ide rather my taxpayers be spent on infrastructure and public transportation than my hobby, but thats me/
Keep it coming ward. Love the updates
3:52 Just a guess here but maybe they’re referring to front aspect intercepts? That would mean it could function well defending ships but maybe not so well in the role a system like Patriot serves.
The pla already has the pl21 for years now since 2016 which has a comparable range, so surely anybody competent would have thought about conuntermeasures for their own weapons. And the other issue is the production capacity, how is this being adressed?
Excellent update, thank you.
Never bet against the United States of America in an arms race.
just like they "landed" on the moon 60 years ago.
@davidcheung8595 Other countries have photographed the moon landing sites, including the lander debris and even astronaut foot prints left on the surface. You could look this up yourself but I'm guessing you prefer to stay ignorant.
@@davidcheung8595 Are you an idiot or a troll?
Go ahead. Effing try us. I effing dare you.@@davidcheung8595
true but we must not underestimate the enemy
The Navy has declared that the AIM-174 is OPERATIONAL.
The wrinkle in this plan is that satellites that can detect carrier groups can be launched by the missile batteries themselves, as they civilian versions of such weigh
Thanks for keeping it simple enough for the average guy to understand. What little knowledge I have of air-launched missiles is what I glean from watching DCS videos, which while often provided by knowledgeable fantasy pilots, remains suspect. Your info is obviously provided in publicly available/allowed snippets, but trustworthy. 👍👍
Commander, an excellent sitrep report. As always you are "on the leading age!" Well done!
Petition to call this missile “Phoenix II”
Thanks for not babbling on for an hour for something like this
Ward as always very informative. Thrilled the U.S. Navy is designing and implementing this new technology for use against China. The saving grace might actually be that most things made in China are cheap and break easily, hoping this the case. Better to be prepared.
They're only cheap because that's the only thing Americans can afford. If you go to China they keep the good shit for themselves
The Chinese tech is more likely to work. China only makes cheep stuff cause we want to buy cheep stuff. They have no problems making high quality products…
that might be true, a Coup attempt in Bolivia was stopped because they used Chinese made Military vehicles and it broke down.
Having been involved in importing products from PRC, I can attest that they can make any level of quality you want to pay for. Now high end military electronics are probably different. Their domestic chip making is behind ours, but since we are buying so much stuff from them, we are essentially funding OUR military and THEIR military!
Sure of course .... That Moonlander, what dross all bamboo & elastic bands
Never going anywhere was it eh?
Oh
I shared with my 15 year old son. I am re-assured of his future. Thank you.
Did he just conflate the PL-17 with the DF_17???
PL-17 isn't a hypersonic missile, and the PLA has far better tools to deal with surface warships than wasting PL-17s on them.
He meant to say DF -17. PL-17 is A2A missile. AIM-174 seems like an answer to PL-17.
@@rutstrangle He said PL-17 while showing a mixture of footage from both the PL-17 and the DF-17
Great video, Ward...👍
I won't be surprised in a few years, if we see Hornets packing Patriot PAC-3 under the wings.
Your assessments and summaries are always engaging and delivered with authority. Another great video Sir.
I would assume these are going to be used a couple of ways: 1)as a stop-gap solution before the AIM-260 arrives and 2)as a way of defeating hypersonic weapons while they are much further away from the carrier group and preferably high in the atmosphere where evasive maneuvers are much more difficult.
Some TH-cam personalities are suggesting these may be used offensively against ground targets, which I disagree with. The SM-6 is certainly not stealthy and being a solid rocket fueled motor it won't have enough energy for evasive maneuvers before impact. Also the warhead is rather small compared to real offensive weapons, although it would be big enough to damage a radar suite or other weapons platforms. In all, being these missiles used at RIMPAC were completely inert, they are merely seeing what kind of flight routine would be optimal for this loadout. The standoff distance gained by launching high and fast a couple hundred miles from the carrier would be very substantial.
These are fine against ground/ships. Obviously that's not the primary use case and correct ordinance would be selected per larger ground target.
It's wise to have adaptable systems.
While these missiles won't sink a cruiser or destroyer and the ability to hit a ship is questionable, it's still carrying over 400lbs. of explosives. Delivering the equivalent of a 500 lb. bomb from a long standoff could be a valuable capability to static targets like a radar array.
Great analysis Ward, thank you as always. Hope to meet you one day around Pensacola. ( hint-hint) The Blue Angles are supposed to fly with the Thunder Birds for the homecoming show at NAS Pensacola this fall.
at present hypersonic missile capabilities are being blown out of all proportion, they have to slow down considerably in order to hit anything. easy meat for close in weapon systems.
They still are a good threat. If they come in at the same time the slower anti ship missiles are getting close the defense could be saturated
US just live tested the first conventional and successful air launched hypersonic (not ballistically hypersonic) missle
@@jacobbrassard2776 The whole point of hypersonics is that slower missiles can't hit.
You can't get constant satellite coverage nor have an ISR asset giving mid course guidance without getting intercepted.
So if you send a cruise missile after a ship, the time it takes to reach it is so long the on-board seeker can't possibly scan the entire area of uncertainty.
A hypersonic can fly fast enough to minimize the search area and use its on-board sensors to go terminal on the ship.
@@ChucksSEADnDEAD The current limit of materials science only allows for a hypersonic missile to be that fast during it's launch and mid flight phases, at best. This is when it's moving in a basically straight line. There is no material that you can construct the physical guidance mechanisms out of that will allow it to do final course corrections on a moving target over mach 2-3. It's the same reason why Patriots in Ukraine are able to successfully defend themselves against Russian "hypersonics".
also only been tested against a STATIONARY target in the Gobi Desert
Your information is always top drawer and this is welcome news.
Almost looks like an updated Aim-54
Aim120+aim54=aim174
Coincidence i think not
I think that was the idea. The retirement of the F-14 also meant retirement of the AIM-54 and the Navy has never really been happy with the situation as far as I can tell they just didn't have a way to solve it. Until now.
@@ZboeC5The Navy was so happy to rid themselves of the insane costs all those years keeping AIM-54 up, with no returns. Failed every time it was launched by USN. There was a ton of hype around that weapon, and it never materialized in-action for USN. Iranians claim great success with it, but USN experience was opposite of that. Other pilots would rib Tomcat crews about their BLU-54 or Great White Hope.
@@LRRPFco52 It only works in DCS.
No it looks like a upgraded AGM-78 that F-4G carried for Anti Radiation missions in the 70s and 80s before the HARM. All of them are differnt versions of the Standard Missile that came out in the 60s.
Always enjoy your presentations!
Now the main question : what to name it? I vote for AIM-174 Godzilla
Gojira!
@@flagmichael that was actually my preferred name as it rolls off the tongue better! But I was afraid not everyone would understand
That takes some loading away from the issue of the destroyer screen having to head back to port for reloading vls tubes. Of the -18 can shoot them from above...
Second problem is the catapult launch with that size missile hanging under the wings...
Until anyone other than China sees these work I wouldn’t be to worried about Chinese rockets.
Thanks for the info Ward, sounds very promising!
U.S. Airforce: We will spend billions of dollars developing the AIM-260 that is not yet operational.
U.S. Navy: What if we just bolted an SM-6 to the Super Hornet lol
(This is a joke I know both weapons fill different niches)
Ward Carroll, I like your guitar that is behind your back ❤❤❤
The US is terrifying. I think building Hyper-sonic missiles was a strategic mistake on China's part. It forced the US to increase the range of its existing platforms while also building Hyper-sonic weapons of their own. Why is that problematic? Because the US can afford to use them. And because US Hyper-sonic weapons are powered throughout flight (unlike china's which run out of fuel once they've reached their ballistic trajectory).
Us doesn’t even got hypersonic missilles that made it out of the testing phase 😂
@@patrioticgunner8034 The Dark Eagle is in the demonstrator phase. As are a host of other programs. Everything China and Russia have are just gliders (the US has had those since the 80s).
@@patrioticgunner8034 Keyboard warrior thinks he has a classified intel... lol
These Cats can only carry 2 of these missiles.
Imagine being as ignorant as @@patrioticgunner8034
An air launched SM-6 is a great idea.
Thanks for very clear explanations and highly relevant context as usual.
We're assuming any of China's stuff works or comes close to claims
Better than assuming it doesn't work and is no threat.
Don't everything in house work (made in China even your boxers lmao
China's weapons are unproven and they have no track record of modern warfighting. They are giving the U.S. a good excuse to modernize. The Soviets had virtually no strategic nuclear capability in the Fifties but the mere spector of a threat resulted in massive U.S. defense expenditures.
Short and sweet, thanks as always.
This is a "HELL YEAH!" moment for all our naval fly boys defending the free world and open seas.
What's the end game?
I deployed with the VA-192 SSHWF "Golden Dragons" flying the A-7 Corsair II to MCAS Iwakuni, Japan, in 1985. BZ Mooch!
Lmao there is no way the PL17 would be effective as an anti ship weapon 😂
An AIM-174 won’t be sinking any respectably sized warships either, but it would keep them at bay under threat of a mission kill that renders it combat ineffective and vulnerable to larger shorter-ranged warheads that can send it under.
It's called a "mission kill". You don't have to sink a ship to take it out of the fight. A PL-17 can rain shrapnel down on a US ships delicate antennas, radars, electronics on the mast. This would force it to head back to Guam/Hawaii/San Diego for lengthy repairs. This ship would be out of the fight for the likely duration of the conflict.
That's what I thought when he said that. It makes no sense to use a missile purpose built for air to air as an anti ship weapon its almost comical.
That thing has puny payload
Compared to what? For its main task, air to air, it’s 140 lb. Is far better than the AIM-120D’s 44 lbs. warhead. In the air to surface role, it is somewhat small. It won’t sink any surface warship , but it would damage them, perhaps to the point of making them combat ineffective. As for land targets, it depends on the target. It may be able to take out SAM sites, artillery units, or armour, but not hardened bunkers.
Thanks for that interesting overview. I have a lot of personal interest in this subject matter. My son Josh is a Hawkeye NFO , he taught an interservice air battle management class at Nellis on a special assignment with the Air Force, and is about to deploy as the EWO on USS Gettysburg. By odd coincidence, in my youth I was a radar operator on EC-121s.
Im a usmc vet, you have no idea what weapons the us military really has. The only weapons you know of, are the same weapons the us wants china to know of.
可能以为你是一名炊事员？
The Navy has been in action and shining bright in its engagements
So its basically giving the SH the ability of the Tomcat
Much more than the Tomcat.
At this point I really think there's someone at the Pentagon who absolutely loves the Super Hornet platform and is just thinking of ways (albeit very good ways) to keep them relevant.
I look at Chinese military tech I think “TEMU”
Low cost, large quantities, effective. What more do you ask for
@@AZ-hj8ym Reliable
TOFU
I look at them and think "Made in China"
Yes, they can't compete with the high quality hardware of Boeing!
The AIM-174's look reminds me far more of a missile you should be intimately familiar with, Ward. Specifically, it reminds me of the AIM-54 Phoenix, which you would have carried.
I don't see how the Pentagon can claim with any confidence that the SM-6 is effective at intercepting an anti-ship hypersonic missile whether air or surface launched. The US Navy doesn't have an anti-ship hypersonic weapon in the same league as the DF-17/27 (or any of its shipborne variants) to test the SM-6 against. Any predictions on intercept rates would be the result of computer modeling, no?
Still though, big missile on plane is better than small missile on plane.
I believe Kratos just had a successful launch of a hypersonic test vehicle.
well we don't know what is tested at white sands, UT or A 51 right? not that hard to test fast targets with some maneuver at terminal...
With such a large 'black budget', i'd like to believe the powers that be are well equip to deal with this threat and themselves have a weapons which aren't publicly disclosed. Seems impossible for China, Russia and Iran to have hypersonic weapons while the US sit idle with no equivalent
MDA spends a lot of time and effort testing things
You don't need a weapon, just a test analogue. The Hera test target used retired Pershing II reentry vehicles to fly to altitude on 1st stage, then flip over and fire the second stage pointed towards the ground in what's called a "piledriver trajectory" to cheaply mimic maneuverable reentry vehicles. So in a sense without ever having to design a weapon you can make stuff go hypersonic and maneuverable by just pointing rockets downwards and speed up.
I wish all TH-camrs were this professional.
Hypersonic missiles are fast. High-intensity lasers are faster.
@@Candide1776 laser requires time on target, laser is limited by atmospheric interference (especially such dense and humid places such as... at sea level... on the ocean), laser requires burn through of either control surfaces or electronics to make impactor either break up or miss the target, laser is negated by defensive measures such as rotation, ablative heat shield, elimination of fragile or exposed weak points, multiple impactors, limited time between detection and impact, etc., so, no, lasers are not some sort of panacea, they have limited utility, largely against low intensity threats.
@@msytdc1577 Of course, the lasers are designed with that in mind.
Currently and for the foreseeable future, lasers are not at all meant for hypersonics and would be completely non functional against them. You would need literal double digit megawatt lasers at the minimum for that, which is well into the crazy bonkers alien tech zone.
You overlook a big point. Manned figher jets are increasingly outdated weapons - like the horseback cavalry was a century ago when it first encountered a tank. China, whose so-called "industrial overcapacity" is literally 26X greater than the US, will have tens-of-millions of unmanned super-drones that outmatch manned fighter jets head-to-head. Like how the small Houthis are defeating the aircraft/carriers of the combined US-UK military in the Red Sea today. China is literally a billion times more capable & powerful. So it's no contest.
Per the US military, China is also now building 5000 hypersonic missiles per week, a quarter of them nuclear, which is as many total missiles every week as the entire US military force! And US minutemen are 6-decade-old ballistic conventionally-powered 3-megaton missile tech, hugely outclassed by China's new drone nukes that are nuclear-powered 400-megatons travelling at mach 18 (soon to be 888 megaton missiles). The US can't make anything like it and lacks the resources as China banned the export of graphite and key rare metals in which China "the saudia arabia of metals" controls 95% of the world's supply.
You seem to know a lot about Chinese capabilities, 😏 but you know absolutely nothing about USA capabilities.
The USA has large natural deposits of graphite that it does not exploit. Instead they have synthetic graphite.
🤔 And what would happen if the USA decided to stop trading with China?
😏 China would be screwed.
USN realizing retiring the Tomcat was a mistake
Tomcats were badass fighers of their day, but maintaining them with the complicated swing wing mechanisms was never going to last once fly by wire made unstable aerodynamics possible.
The Tomcat had its time
Retiring the F14 and the A6 at the same time has to be the stupidest decision ever made in Naval Aviation. I was in the room when the decision was made and I can still say many years later that our Navy and our Country both lost a lot of warfighting capability at that moment. That was warfighting capability that was paid for and in the process of being incrementally and intelligently upgraded and modernized. One who knows understands that the platforms were the best ever designed for strike warfare even up to today. If we had continued to evolve both platforms we would have capability far greater than anything that has been developed to date and at a fraction of what we have spent. That is not idle wording but honest facts. I was in the arena doing it and I know what we had and what we could have. Yes looking back can be tiring but forgetting the past will guarantee a future loss.
@@ronlang3435 you do realize that TOMCAT retired in 2006 and INTRUDER was retired in 1997 like 10 years apart and for different reasons.
@@ronlang3435 you do realize that TOMCAT retired in 2006 and INTRUDER was retired in 1997 like 10 years apart and for different reasons.
The think take had to have a ace up their sleeve to counter hypersonic missles that could be launched from an aircraft in flight. Well here it is. Great as always clear concise info. Keep the videos coming.
Odds are China has already obtained the designs and are making their own copies and countermeasures
Little pinks sure are reliable.
@@hourbee5535 I havent seen China copying the SM 3 YET..
Countermeasures..? Possibly, they have some decent solutions when their minds goes to it. But a copy of such? Unreliable quality control leads me to some doubt.
They may copy but like everything else they won't actually work. Just anther paper tiger.
Interesting post, Mooch. Seeing thru open source SM-6's weigh ~3,300#, or 6,600# of bring back aboard the boat in the configuration VFA-192 had at Hickam. That would not allow for all that much gas at max trap. Cheers - Walli
Hi Ward, its about time. 👍
The Super Hornet is a great platform for this new development for the AIM 174, but we missed a more flexible option. A similar sized high subsonic aircraft, optimized for payload and range (ex. F 404 turbofan, but without A/B), could carry several missiles (4-6?) out to 200 + miles from a carrier group and loiter for 1-3 hours providing serious defensive capability. If it could also mount a large radar antenna, it would have massive radar range at altitude, useful for targeting and sharing with other assets. The Grumman A-6F would have filled this niche, complementing the F-18 and F-35. As a bonus, it could serve the same purpose for other "bomb truck" missions.
Imagine a fleet of 1,000 drones in the form of a wall to stop any incoming missles. Or, better yet, to stop a counter attack! 😮
SM6 and aim174 are just reboots of the AAAM Aim-152 from GD/Westinghouse. Good to see that technology didn't go to waste!
Thanks For the analysis, Ward.
I love the Standard Missile series. Just thought on the pylon they looked smaller then Aim-54. I guess development in propellant technology making a smaller missile do more.
Thank you Mr. Carroll 🇺🇸
Thank you again for the great video and information.
In late October a Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 Flanker, Soviet-era fighter, was shot down by a long-range air-to-air missile (LRAAM) - the R-37M. This is not the first Ukrainian aircraft to be shot down since Russia’s invasion commenced in February, but it is nevertheless a significant feat for the Russian Air Force because the R-37M took down the Ukrainian Sukhoi-27 from a range of 217km (about 140 miles).
This is great! Someone with knowledge and experience who can express themselves freely.. THANKS MAN!
Great update, thanks!
Great video Ward. Thanks!
As an AT we tweaked an AWG9 to get a 210 mile contact and a 180 mile kill on a drone.
Excellent work. Thanks Ward.
You sound much like service members in my family. 'Thanks' is not enough. But on a lighter note, I hope you're enjoying the heck out of that Hendrix-style cab. You know, I considered getting one. Had a problem figuring out how to get it to the gig. So I went with 4x12 like everyone else. Still, I have to wonder what it would be like to let a Paul just ring in front of one of those beasts. Thanks again for taking such high risks on our behalf, in the service.
Good brief, Ward! Thanks!