Just to be clear : the TERCOM doesn't use the real heights or altitudes. It uses the height variations along the way to compare with a digital map stored in memory to "guess" if the missile follows the good path to its target. Other interesting fact : for ship-launched tomahawks, it was not uncommon that the missile first reached a pre-programmed GPS waypoint, then used its stored ground maps to fly to its target (ships move, you can't be sure the missile will always start right on a well known place or will fly on a portion of terrain already stored in its memory). So for Gulf War, the paths the missile followed where sometimes really surprising (often a straight line to the GPS waypoint, then the normal preprogrammed turns and trajectory to the target).
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is - whichever is greater - it obtains a difference or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position that it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is is now the position that it wasn't, and if follows that the position that it was is now the position that it isn't. In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation. The variation being the difference between where the missile is and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was. The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified some of the information that the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it know where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice versa. And by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
there's alot of thing he didnt covered, like a software similar to AI. they have it back then, it can scan objects like building, cars, tanks and what not to random target . if they set way point on routes it can fly endless loop until you command it only to attack tanks. when the missiles detect the tanks it will automatically target it. they have this tech over 25 years ago. impressive.
@@emgee0312Yes, the creator of this channel is Korean. At first, I was put off by the computerized voice. There are so many BS channels around posting AI-generated or straight-up stolen "content," so I assumed this was the same kind of stuff. I'm glad I realized this channel is different! They are actually creating informative content. Their animations are excellent, and they seem to be open to constructive criticism when people have pointed out errors or incorrect details in the animations.
I do no know where the author got the some missed by 80 m deviation info, but to date the tomahawk is over 96% mission success meaning it hit the target close enough to destroy it. Better than any other guided missile of any type, although the TOW is close and now the Javelin.
The author said it was before the modifications for guidance were made. Thus after the modifications, the missile became much better, elevating the percentage of successful missions
DSMAC as used in the first Gulf War was a visible light system. Which leads to the question how could the onboard cameras "see" at night. As I heard it explained by a naval officer, the missile actually had a giant flashbulb to light the scene. In my imagination I have this picture of some sleepy Iraqi soldier spotting these flashes, maybe two or three in sequence, and a few seconds later, BOOM. Flare of war indeed.
anyone know where i can get the jet engine for the tomahawk? ( Williams International F107-WR-402 turbofan) the engine would be a perfect fit for my hang glider and has a whopping of 900 pounds of thrust! i could soar through the sky with that baby
Meanwhile it's a "one use only" engine. Most of the time, it has no bearings, only cheap or weak mechanical parts (gears, etc), just a few control wires and electronic sensors (it's often designed to stay full throttle only), limited amounts of lubricant (or even sometimes no lubricant at all, just some kind of "permanent/long life" grease or polymer bearings). For example, on the French Exocet anti-ship missile, lubrication is done by the fuel itself ! The cooling system is often primitive too. Some cruise missile engines only start with an explosive cartridge, also. Your engine would only last 8~12 hours before being worn to a non return point or having it eating its internals XD. Just my assumptions, I was in the French Navy. Tiny engines for our cruise missiles were not meant to be "long life" items. They just had to be able to wait many years in a crate/casing before being intensively used once for a few hours run. (Sorry if my english is crap ^^)
@@fridaycaliforniaa236 im still interested. i could replace the bearings with ceramic bearings and work on the lubrication parts if i have to. i would be a dream come true with a lightweight jet engine mounted on my hang glider especially my sports glider
No. There are thousands and tenthousands of tomahawk systems available. If kalibre there are only a few dozen in store. Much likely no more anymore, because their production depends on western components, Russia won't be able to buy anymore. So jo, they are from a logistics and military point of view, not comparable. One is a real threat to nations. The other one is only a poor chance, to scare people who don't know about military industrial complexes.
There aren't many edible parts of a Tomahawk. I don't think you should try eating one. Tomahawks missiles would make a really cramped house even if you removed things from the inside. I don't think you'd have a good life living in a Tomahawk while also eating a Tomahawk.
that water mark is super annoying, maybe you can make it larger and less transparent, and maybe put it on there like 10 times all over the screen that might help
It would take most people on the planet a life time to earn enough to buy a Tomahawk missile yet the Tomahawk missile exists to be destroyed and destroy life times.
IT EXISTS NOT TO KILL PEOPLE, BUT TO DESTROY THE TERRORISTS AND ENEMIES OF THE FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY (IF THERE'S OIL IN SOME FOREIGN COUNTRY OR IT DONT WANT TO RECOGNIZE USA DOMINATION, THEN ITS AN OPRESSIVE STATE SUPRESSING DEMOCRACY). TOMAHAWK IS LITERALLY BRINGING DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM TO ANOTHER COUNTRIES - MORE TOMAHAWKS = MORE DEMOCRACY AND LESS COMMUNISM
"Attitude" just means the direction that the aircraft is pointing. This is sometimes different from the direction the aircraft is moving, for instance a landing aircraft will have a nose-up attitude even though it is descending.
Why don't they make a stealth version of the tomahawk.. this one is subsonic and shows up on radar even at low altitude and could be shot down.. all they would really have to do is redesign the exterior so the radar waves are deflected away and not back to the operator..
Hypersonic missiles cannot communicate during the last phase of flight because of the comm blackout experienced by the plasma around the object. Just like space shuttles. This means that the missiles has to rely only on inertial guidance, making the accuracy very poor and potential success low considering the limited warhead enclosed. This technology is not mature and will not be for a long time.
So theoretically, it's a unmanned Kamikaze vehicle with more powerful dynamics 🤔 I wonder if the preprogrammed navigation path got leaked, whether the adversary could shot it down with patrolling fighter jets.
I'm not sure I believe tomahawks are cheaper than planes. Much more tonnage of explosives was dropped by planes in the Gulf War than was delivered by tomahawks. That doesn't necessarily prove anything but one of the more expensive aspects of a weapon that flies is the part that flies. With a tomahawk you have to build a new, admittedly small, airframe for every payload you want to launch. A plane is reusable.
i remember how the russians downed them all with an electronic warfare system in syria when the yanks were trying to destroy an airfield. teh few missiles that did break through didn't hit anything substantial.
Pakistan also have this missile and after upgrades it's become more dangerous than USA tomohok ... It's have longer range and can fire form surface,air and sea.. know as Pakistan,s Babur 1, Babur 2 and Babur 3
No it doesn’t, first: Tomahawk is build for relative low speed to not attract to much attention (sonic boom) Second: A missile going supersonic is harder to build Third: She wasn’t designed for this kind of mission. It was prolly build for quantity over speed, so like: If I can bring in one missile fast enough to not be shot down, can I do the same by bringing several in the area for less money? Also. To avoid shootdowns it would have to go hypersonic because of Defense missiles going mach 5 and over
As a rule supersonic missiles have shorter range due to solid fuel engine or larger jet engine that consumes too much fuel increasing the size, weight and needing larger platforms. Russian Granit or Vulcan missiles weigh 7 tons each with 600-1000km range and a massive heat signature seen from space.
@@gromxxx well, if you argue like this, you have to say that the longe the „boost“ is, so to say the acceleration, you achieve speed and with it range. Am I thinking right?
@@mrthunderhawk in order to sustain supersonic speed through the entire flight path of the missile you need to engine to work throughout consuming massive amounts of fuel. Beyond cruise speed the fuel necessary to sustain the flight rises exponentially hence the weight and size of those missiles.
Just to be clear : the TERCOM doesn't use the real heights or altitudes. It uses the height variations along the way to compare with a digital map stored in memory to "guess" if the missile follows the good path to its target.
Other interesting fact : for ship-launched tomahawks, it was not uncommon that the missile first reached a pre-programmed GPS waypoint, then used its stored ground maps to fly to its target (ships move, you can't be sure the missile will always start right on a well known place or will fly on a portion of terrain already stored in its memory). So for Gulf War, the paths the missile followed where sometimes really surprising (often a straight line to the GPS waypoint, then the normal preprogrammed turns and trajectory to the target).
So you’re saying the missile knows where it is because it knows where it isn’t?
The missile knows where it is at all times. It knows this because it knows where it isn't. By subtracting where it is from where it isn't, or where it isn't from where it is - whichever is greater - it obtains a difference or deviation. The guidance subsystem uses deviations to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is to a position where it isn't, and arriving at a position that it wasn't, it now is. Consequently, the position where it is is now the position that it wasn't, and if follows that the position that it was is now the position that it isn't. In the event that the position that it is in is not the position that it wasn't, the system has acquired a variation. The variation being the difference between where the missile is and where it wasn't. If variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too may be corrected by the GEA. However, the missile must also know where it was. The missile guidance computer scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified some of the information that the missile has obtained, it is not sure just where it is. However, it is sure where it isn't, within reason, and it know where it was. It now subtracts where it should be from where it wasn't, or vice versa. And by differentiating this from the algebraic sum of where it shouldn't be and where it was, it is able to obtain the deviation and its variation, which is called error.
there's alot of thing he didnt covered, like a software similar to AI. they have it back then, it can scan objects like building, cars, tanks and what not to random target . if they set way point on routes it can fly endless loop until you command it only to attack tanks. when the missiles detect the tanks it will automatically target it. they have this tech over 25 years ago. impressive.
Great video reminiscent of MIlitary history in a minute
I didn't realize The Bismarck can launch Tomahawk Missile.
This is a great racket, it's really strong, we need it 👍👍👍👍😯
Looking forward to more contents
Contents lol
@@Fr3ddyFazbear87 nogga what
He always said everything with a S on the end
@@Fr3ddyFazbear87 Beacause he gonna be pumping out more of these beautiful videos
@@muhacnt7988 calm down
Why do these military channels always seem to dont know about the existence of „The“
Tarzan not know “the” , tomahawk friend, tomahawk blow up
To save time?
Lol
Criut body boot iron man
Modern jet fighter
Iron man mark 1
TTS script made by non native english speaker probably
@@emgee0312Yes, the creator of this channel is Korean. At first, I was put off by the computerized voice. There are so many BS channels around posting AI-generated or straight-up stolen "content," so I assumed this was the same kind of stuff. I'm glad I realized this channel is different!
They are actually creating informative content. Their animations are excellent, and they seem to be open to constructive criticism when people have pointed out errors or incorrect details in the animations.
I thought the unit cost sounded low so I checked it out, they're actually $2 million per missile.
I like your videos, It is very interesting keep making such kind of videos 👍
Thanks to Texas instruments and Raytheon,. We got the best they is.
So you can destroy the world? Most genocide nation in the world you killed 100
You killed 10000000 indians are you proud american??
I do no know where the author got the some missed by 80 m deviation info, but to date the tomahawk is over 96% mission success meaning it hit the target close enough to destroy it. Better than any other guided missile of any type, although the TOW is close and now the Javelin.
The author said it was before the modifications for guidance were made. Thus after the modifications, the missile became much better, elevating the percentage of successful missions
The Tomahawk has more in common with a fighter jet than either of those missiles.
Pc games like “688i Hunter Killer”, “Sub Command” and “Dangerous Waters” let’s you command the use of Tomahawk missiles.
Great video! Do you do your own 3D work and animations?
You ARE an artist !!
Great, great vídeo !!! 👍🏻👍🏻
Your videos are next level good
1:10, how many Tomahawks were used in Yugoslavian War?
Nice amazing tamahowk
Tactical sling shots are the future
DSMAC as used in the first Gulf War was a visible light system. Which leads to the question how could the onboard cameras "see" at night. As I heard it explained by a naval officer, the missile actually had a giant flashbulb to light the scene. In my imagination I have this picture of some sleepy Iraqi soldier spotting these flashes, maybe two or three in sequence, and a few seconds later, BOOM. Flare of war indeed.
that i didnt know, wouldnt it be better having infrared light?
@@BlueRice Apparently so, as I understand it later updates switched to an infrared based system.
when you know stuff, but cant say stuff 😎😎
very nice ! hope to see more tech about the more style of guide system
The missile knows where it is because it knows where it isn't.
B.S. It knows where it is because it receives GPS.
I knew someone would have commented this.
Take a shot every time the narrator says 'Tomahawk' 🍻
Dude I like your mind
Very good - thank you ! !
🙂😎👍
Top Super Animationen...👍
8:30 I didn't sew you mention Bombing of Serbia in 1999. Over 350 tomahavk were lunched..
anyone know where i can get the jet engine for the tomahawk? ( Williams International F107-WR-402 turbofan) the engine would be a perfect fit for my hang glider and has a whopping of 900 pounds of thrust! i could soar through the sky with that baby
Meanwhile it's a "one use only" engine. Most of the time, it has no bearings, only cheap or weak mechanical parts (gears, etc), just a few control wires and electronic sensors (it's often designed to stay full throttle only), limited amounts of lubricant (or even sometimes no lubricant at all, just some kind of "permanent/long life" grease or polymer bearings). For example, on the French Exocet anti-ship missile, lubrication is done by the fuel itself ! The cooling system is often primitive too. Some cruise missile engines only start with an explosive cartridge, also. Your engine would only last 8~12 hours before being worn to a non return point or having it eating its internals XD.
Just my assumptions, I was in the French Navy. Tiny engines for our cruise missiles were not meant to be "long life" items. They just had to be able to wait many years in a crate/casing before being intensively used once for a few hours run. (Sorry if my english is crap ^^)
@@fridaycaliforniaa236 im still interested. i could replace the bearings with ceramic bearings and work on the lubrication parts if i have to. i would be a dream come true with a lightweight jet engine mounted on my hang glider especially my sports glider
Get an RC jet engine. Those actually last.
@@tianchi4423 ill check it out. don't think there strong enough though.
@@georgieippolito9924 Search for "KINGTECH K450G4+" - 99lbs of thrust, should be more then enough for a hang glider.
Does anyone know the soothing music used in the middle of the video?
Tomahawk It's the best American weapon before drones, but what about Kalibre from Russia? Can we compare to it?
No. There are thousands and tenthousands of tomahawk systems available.
If kalibre there are only a few dozen in store. Much likely no more anymore, because their production depends on western components, Russia won't be able to buy anymore.
So jo, they are from a logistics and military point of view, not comparable.
One is a real threat to nations. The other one is only a poor chance, to scare people who don't know about military industrial complexes.
Brilliant!
Jesus I love this missile ! I fantasize about her !!
what powers the tomahawk? a very small jet engine? with a range 2500 km? what is the fuel?
Engine: Turbofan
Fuel: Turbofan fuel (AV gas)
@@thomasmyers9128 WOW!!!
Thanks!
Russia also has its own tomahawks, it was created as an almost exact copy, only a little simpler and cheaper.
Is that anything like Russia having its own stealth fighter and own 5th-gen tank?
V1: Kid I'm proud of you!
So what's the name of the missile again?????
axe
@@TheMrGREENRay Thought so. Thanks for clearing that up.
A missile knows where it is...
...and where it isn't.
One missile could feed me for the rest of my life and house me
There aren't many edible parts of a Tomahawk. I don't think you should try eating one.
Tomahawks missiles would make a really cramped house even if you removed things from the inside.
I don't think you'd have a good life living in a Tomahawk while also eating a Tomahawk.
He is talking about if he sells one🤣
@@dad-ms8mz yeah he's joking headass
*Let the Sunshine in.*
Wasnt it a tomahawk that struck the pentagon on sept 11 2001?
Yes, however it was full of chemtrail mixture, and altered everybody's perception so they *think* it was a hijacked passenger jet.
that water mark is super annoying, maybe you can make it larger and less transparent, and maybe put it on there like 10 times all over the screen that might help
Middle Easterners watching this: _So, about stopping one from hitting my city?_
can you tell what type of animation software you are using
2:29 It's American missile, why would it divide area into equal 100 meter sectors? Or is 100 meter just a coincidence?
Engineers use metric even in America.
It would take most people on the planet a life time to earn enough to buy a Tomahawk missile yet the Tomahawk missile exists to be destroyed and destroy life times.
About $2M now.
IT EXISTS NOT TO KILL PEOPLE, BUT TO DESTROY THE TERRORISTS AND ENEMIES OF THE FREEDOM AND DEMOCRACY (IF THERE'S OIL IN SOME FOREIGN COUNTRY OR IT DONT WANT TO RECOGNIZE USA DOMINATION, THEN ITS AN OPRESSIVE STATE SUPRESSING DEMOCRACY). TOMAHAWK IS LITERALLY BRINGING DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM TO ANOTHER COUNTRIES - MORE TOMAHAWKS = MORE DEMOCRACY AND LESS COMMUNISM
@@nevajno2741 What rock are you living under?
@@MacksCurley UNDER MURICAN ROCK, BEST ROCK ON THE PLANET 💪
MURICAAA, F... YEEEEEAHH 🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸🦅🦅🦅🗽🗽🗽
Enemies*
Man! The thing can hit you from 1500 miles away...
How much silver is in a Tomahawk missile?
Neden çeviri yapmıyor ?
2:20 ultimate NANI moment
Thank you . ( 2022 / June / 11 )
Tomahawk missiles are also expensive to construct.
6:06 holy shit missiles have an attitude?
"Attitude" just means the direction that the aircraft is pointing. This is sometimes different from the direction the aircraft is moving, for instance a landing aircraft will have a nose-up attitude even though it is descending.
Why don't they make a stealth version of the tomahawk.. this one is subsonic and shows up on radar even at low altitude and could be shot down.. all they would really have to do is redesign the exterior so the radar waves are deflected away and not back to the operator..
Hypersonic missiles cannot communicate during the last phase of flight because of the comm blackout experienced by the plasma around the object. Just like space shuttles. This means that the missiles has to rely only on inertial guidance, making the accuracy very poor and potential success low considering the limited warhead enclosed.
This technology is not mature and will not be for a long time.
So theoretically, it's a unmanned Kamikaze vehicle with more powerful dynamics 🤔 I wonder if the preprogrammed navigation path got leaked, whether the adversary could shot it down with patrolling fighter jets.
Woooow
how blade drone work make video
To fly stably. Always make sure to fly Stably.
I suspect the real solution used it starting at the target and working the solution back to where it it to be launched.
Didn’t know the past tense for strike is stroke…..
I'm not sure I believe tomahawks are cheaper than planes. Much more tonnage of explosives was dropped by planes in the Gulf War than was delivered by tomahawks.
That doesn't necessarily prove anything but one of the more expensive aspects of a weapon that flies is the part that flies.
With a tomahawk you have to build a new, admittedly small, airframe for every payload you want to launch. A plane is reusable.
😛😛😛😛😛❤❤❤❤👍👍👍👍👍👍👍
Нам дуже потрібні такі ракети в бородьбі за свободу!
i remember how the russians downed them all with an electronic warfare system in syria when the yanks were trying to destroy an airfield. teh few missiles that did break through didn't hit anything substantial.
Propaganda lies.
This would be a great video, were it not voiced by this god-awful, overused robo-narrator.
But does Tomahawk Missile know where it is?
The Missile DOES NOT have a IR seeker.
But ballistic missile can hit target very very far like 10000 km that is why icbm are better than other tipe of missile
Why did he say the word Tomahawk so few times??
Cause he get paid everytime he said that.
@@GoodLookingGentlemen *why this missile is so рrasize, that it could hit Рutins asshole in Kremlin*
They was shot down over Syria.
So wonder if a next generation is
under production, with EMP shield
and stealth abillity?
Crumpling your IADS with impunity since 1991....
Looking forward 😃
Very good video but what's up with the narration? Very stiff and some weird grammar choices - like not using "the" half the time where applicable.
The US also invented the cruise missile
I think ill just call it long range suicide drone from now on lmao
Pakistan also have this missile and after upgrades it's become more dangerous than USA tomohok ... It's have longer range and can fire form surface,air and sea.. know as Pakistan,s Babur 1, Babur 2 and Babur 3
'tomohok' Lmao you can't even properly spell it's name.
Your f16 price shown in this vide is inaccurate because real f 16 cost 63 million dollars.
Tomahawk missles are expensive.
Tomahawk missles are fast.
Tomahawk missles are big.
Tomahawk missle.
Tomahawk.....Tomahawk......Oh and um Tomahawk.🤣
stop repeating 3000 time the subject name. it's annoyng
bro why do you only speak singular
$0.57 million per Tomahawk missile
It's not the Gulf War. It is the Persian Gulf war.
Tell about sophisticated Hydrogen bomb W88
Why does it sound like Tomahawk is speaking in the third person like elmo? English.
كل الصواريخ التي اطلقت استخدمت ضد بلاد عربية اسلامية ... لا حول ولا قوة إلا بالله ...
only 20 years late
Mscope makes videos. Mscope make video about missile. Mscope not use word The.
Ok
450kg warhead? Ouch
8:21 Yugoslavia in 1999 (nowaday Serbia territory)
What language was this translated from??
Why is this 40 year old technology so hard to emulate? Why do the Russians, or Ukranians for that matter, not have equivalent tech?
Robot voice..
Count how many times he says tomahawk 😢
Так и не понял ничего.
Nice???
العراق ايكول انة شعلية
Why is the narration so weird? There are so many grammar errors..
AI generation
Although very technologically impressive, leave it to humans to put this much time and $$ into death and destruction
Isn't it awesome!!!
The speed needs to be upgraded to match the rest of the world and has to be able to go around defense system to hit their targets.
No it doesn’t, first:
Tomahawk is build for relative low speed to not attract to much attention (sonic boom)
Second:
A missile going supersonic is harder to build
Third:
She wasn’t designed for this kind of mission. It was prolly build for quantity over speed, so like:
If I can bring in one missile fast enough to not be shot down, can I do the same by bringing several in the area for less money?
Also. To avoid shootdowns it would have to go hypersonic because of Defense missiles going mach 5 and over
As a rule supersonic missiles have shorter range due to solid fuel engine or larger jet engine that consumes too much fuel increasing the size, weight and needing larger platforms. Russian Granit or Vulcan missiles weigh 7 tons each with 600-1000km range and a massive heat signature seen from space.
@@gromxxx well, if you argue like this, you have to say that the longe the „boost“ is, so to say the acceleration, you achieve speed and with it range.
Am I thinking right?
@@mrthunderhawk in order to sustain supersonic speed through the entire flight path of the missile you need to engine to work throughout consuming massive amounts of fuel. Beyond cruise speed the fuel necessary to sustain the flight rises exponentially hence the weight and size of those missiles.