The Game-Changing Submarine Launched Cruise Missile - Overview
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 08. 2024
- Thanks to Battle Warship: Naval Empire for sponsoring this video.
Support me by using the Labor Day promo code "CovertCabal" on Battle Warship!
Click bit.ly/CovertCabal to download. Android and IOS are available.
We started a Podcast - Tac Ops - / tacops - or find it on any typical podcast location
For Business Inquires - gregr1251@gmail.com
If you'd like to help support me continue to create videos, you can do so here...
Patreon (Monthly) - / covertcabal
PayPayl (One Time Donations) - www.paypal.me/...
Discord - / discord
Names at the end are of supporters at Silver Level on Patreon, and $10 or more through PayPal
If you would like to have your name kept private, feel free to send me an email, or contact me through Patreon
Amazon Prime 30 Free Trial - amzn.to/2AiNfvJ
Microphone I use = amzn.to/2zYFz1D
Video Editor = amzn.to/2JLqX5o
Military Aircraft Models = amzn.to/2A3NPxu
Military Strategy Book = amzn.to/2AaqwST
----------------------------------
Credits:
Footage:
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
creativecommon...
The NATO Channel
Ministry of Defence of Estonia
Department of Defense (US)
"The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
KCNA - North Korea State Media
Music:
BTS Prolog - Kevin MacLeod - incompetech.com
VLS Graphic
Author: AdmiralHood
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/
Not gonna lie, when I served on a carrier, I generally felt I was on the worlds biggest and most juicy target, especially for subs.
True, especially since the Russian navy has a dedicated submarine designed to do just that!
Would a carrier group be able to counter e.g. 200 anti ship (sub hypersonic) missiles?
@@TheCJUN nothing can counter hypersonic missles
@@TheCJUN counter 200? not really. hypersonic missiles are quite hard to counter. so if 200 of them coming at the same time...a few of them are likely to penetrate. but CVNs are tough targets also, they will not be sunk easily, not even for hypersonic missiles.
@@TheCJUN This is actually the way targeting works for CSGs. The risk of one or two very expensive, even hypersonic, missiles causing enough damage to impair the group or outright sink a capital ship? Approaching zero.
Spam 200 C802 land based ASMs? CIWS and other anti-missile defenses only have so much ammo, the ship only has so much chaff, and those systems can only track so many targets. Low cost, volume based threats are significantly more dangerous and have more of an impact on doctrine and tactics that near peer cutting edge tech, half of which is propaganda in the first place. "Quantity has a quality all its own."
I get so excited when I see a new Covert Cabbage video.
Collaborative Collage
Covered cabbage
Covert ninja secret groups of people videos on shit that excites me. Truth.
monch
Overtly excited
Do a video on the offensive capabilities of Antarctica
Weaponised emperor penguins and stealthy seals.
I know you're joking, but I wish my nation, Australia, would go further in defending our slice of Antarctica.
@@grubbybum3614: From whom?
@@deusexaethera Japanese whalers, Chinese bases - which are a prelude to mineral extraction... Also Russia, which is ridiculous, because Australia doesn't interfere in their arctic claims, and they're not anywhere near the Antarctic.
@Charles Yuditsky: Because people are doing...what, exactly, on Antarctica? Besides melting the ice, which can't be stopped through military force anyway. Reply with plausible allegations only; no conspiracy theories allowed.
As a veteran. It's an adequately efficient first strike asset. But even all of the Ohio class submarines couldn't make a dent in any nation's first defence lines. It's like a sniper gun. Not an asset of total war or domination.
Yet. You best believe subs will be built en masse if fire support gets added to their mission profile. Why build a big "shoot me" frigate when you can build a sub and stick it full of missiles?
Remains to be seen if that's a winning move, or cost effective.
That's what the Trident D-5s are for. One Boomer can carry up to 192 nuclear warheads and it's not likely to be launching any Harpoons and give up it's position. On the other hand 4 of the 18 boomers as you probably know are tomahawk carriers with 154 each.
Your theme music iis the soundtrack to WWWIII.
World War What 3?
@@unfortunateson5016 Hahaha! Can you tell I'm an IT guy? Freudian slip there.
Who would have ever guessed that Greg would be awarded the Women's World War Indoor India International theme song spot. A huge honor.
@@unfortunateson5016 Maybe it is world wide web 3...third generation of internet
@@andie_pants Who in 2020 types www in their browsing??
We LOVE your channel bro! Keep doing your thing we’lle stay tuned in! - Love from SD
San diego? South dakota?
@@MateusOliveira-cs6nx SD card?
@@MateusOliveira-cs6nx Standard Definition?
alls i know is hip hop
I know right
Tf is SD
Keep it up! Your channel is inarguably the best in military tech and tactics channels
But anti-submarine warfare is one of the most secretive operations in the military so most are just guesswork:)
I feel submarine detection is the holy grail of military R&D right now.
Detecting submarines is not exacly easy
I see you posting on all the same military pages I follow.
@@Joe_Friday so your a troll😂
@@flexoi2361 i was in the sub force and they are many ways to detect them.
radar - snorkeling masts can be detected
sonar - nuclear subs make a lot of sound vs aip
magnetic - mad if no degaused
gravity disturbance (local)
under water hydrodynamic disturbance
detecting emissions from the reactor in the water
heat from the reactor in shallow water via planes and satellites
radio detection / triangulation of radio mast when in use
satellite overflight can see boats in shallow water
synthetic aperture radar - will easily pick up masts poking above the water
rarely used but can work: water pressure displacement of a ship in proximity
and that is not even taking into account passive sonar and sea floor mounted hydrophones
"Regulus could reliably strike within 4.5 kilometers of the target."
That's a strange definition of "reliable", even for a nuclear weapon.
As long as that was the norm at that time; it wad reliable.
Early guidance , that's not bad when slinging nukes around.
It was written to mean mechanically reliable more than accurately reliable. I can see who it could go both ways.
@michael wittmann: Irrelevant since the word used here was "reliable".
A 4.5 km Circular Error Probability in targeting was good enough at the time. Large CEP’s weren’t an issue when they were armed with a megaton yield warhead to compensate
Yay another video on cruise missiles :D
best channel on my youtube i'm literally watching and watching again your videos that i've watched a year or two ago
I think that once a submarine launches a missile, it gives away its location. The enemy gets to know the approximate probability of the region where the missile is coming from. So they can send their ASW helicopters/P8s to counter them. That being said if a sub is using its carrier group as a shield then it might get impossible to neutralize such a threat. The only way to stop such an incident from taking place is being offensive. Giving enemy a chance to sneak up on your shores 400-500 km is not good. Atleast 1000km detterence has to be maintained in sea. This is exactly what China is doing in South China Sea. India should also do this in Indian Ocean. I guess Russia maintains its naval supremacy in Baltic and black sea? US navy is no doubt always in aggressor mode because they know they can't afford an attack on their carrier group for sake of their troops morale. A single hit whether deadly or not, can drown the morale of forces. They'll no longer feel safe.
I don't think china is having 1000km of a buffer zone since allied carrier groups and now even indian carriers are patrolling that region and it wouldn't be possible unless china wants a war with all of it's supply ships being cut off, similarly although India has more leeway since Indian Ocean is bigger but nevertheless having that much buffer is not possible
One of the reasons submarines use _cruise_ missiles is because those can change their course after launch, disguising their launch location.
Why do subs launch missiles vertically? With the tech to launch cruise missiles out of torpedo tubes, isn't it better because you can reload them?
@@grubbybum3614: Shortest possible path to the surface. A sub unavoidably gives away its location to local ships when the air bubbles from the torpedo/missile launcher reach the surface, so to maintain the element of surprise as long as possible it's best for the missile to reach the surface at the same time as the bubbles.
@@indragarg2857 india ? hahahahha
Your intro animation shows the earth spining the wrong way.
Somebody pointed that out a month ago.
The Sun rises in the East.
Do a video on Submarine Launched Hypersonic Cruise Missiles.
Incredible how the submarine remains such an outstanding weapons platform.
Fact: TLAMs are a nightmare for defense.
In the US, the most common form is vertical launch. All subs after the earlier Los Angeles class subs have VLS. Fast attack boats don’t typically carry many, if any torpedo tube launched missiles anymore.
"A single submarine like an Oscar 2 or a converted Ohio-class boat can wreck havoc."
*"WREAK* havoc". (pronounced "reek".) Not "wreck havoc". "Wreak" is an antiquated version of "work" or "create". A single submarine can *create* havoc.
BONUS FACT: The past tense of "wreak" isn't "wreaked", it's "wrought", as in "wrought iron", aka "worked iron", which is pounded into shape with a hammer.
“wreck” is a word too. you should try looking that up before you comment
@@Kelvin-zq5od: Oh for fuck's sake. I know "wreck" is a word. But it's not the _correct_ word for the expression he used. The expression is "wreak havoc", not "wreck havoc". If you're wondering why I didn't _say_ I know "wreck" is a word in my original post, it's because I underestimated the stupidity of whoever might try to argue with me. Congratulations on succeeding in lowering my expectations of CZcams commenters even further.
@@Kelvin-zq5od He's right, it's the *REEK* (wreak) havoc, not *REC* (wreck) havoc.
@@Kelvin-zq5od it's the wrong word though, perhaps you should have looked up the expression first?
Your deffo a virgin
I always thought a deployed launch package would be a great combat modifier. As a ship or submarine could deploy a package of one to three torpedoes or missiles pre-programmed to strike a target or programmed on the fly to hit other surface vessels or enemy land based targets. The ship/sub moves miles away before the system fires, keeping it very safe from retaliation, provides the enemy with no signature to shoot at or counter fire. It could also be used as a area denial weapon or to stop a pursuing fleet. Maybe even used with drones to detect an enemy fleet.
Please do a video on how they launch them the mechanics of it is quite amazing.
It’s wreak havoc, not wreck havoc.
Really? good to know
But no one likes smelly havoc.
The future Husky class submarine should be a game changer. Projected at roughly two third or half the size of most subs. It would be armed with at least 16 vertically launched missiles (Kaliber, Onyx and Zircon) and around forty multi-purpose torpedoes. Easy and cheap to build, at more than 35 knots submerged, with 90 days endurance, it should be used for escort missions, shadowing SSBNs and some SSGNs. A Carrier Killer version is also planned.
How quiet would it be?
Great video but I think ASW will see breakthroughs over the next decade due to autonomous military vehicle fleets
Yeah he mentioned the difficulty of patrolling a very large area of ocean with ASW aircraft and ships which is true with current systems, but UUVs and UAVs could change all that
@@bluemountain4181 open oceans are huge and you need powerful sensors to spot them even if close. UAV and UUV will help but I don't think it's a game changer.
The sea hunter could be a legit game changer. They have been quiet about it lately. Hoping more OSINT comes out about it.
@@davidhouseman4328 We had over 50,000 active jets after WW2 at one point. The US has quite the treasury and China as the enemy. I would not put it past us that we have the entire ocean monitored. You can use active sonar on autonomous vehicles because there is no risk of losing human life if the craft is targeted for its active radar array.
@@ericmoreno1337 Whether you like him or not, Trump passed a military budget with the largest R&D budget in history - this is being done
*Brazil is building its own nuclear subs armed with this kinda weaponry. 2 nuclear propelled subs with in-house built reactors will be deployed 2028 by the Brazilian Navy, even the fuel is made and supplied by a Brazilian state company called INB (Brazilian Nuclear Industries).*
That's a lot of babies.
Make a video on ASW
THAT IS A SWEET IDEA... I WILL ADD IT TO THE LIST
I have always wondered why the militaries of the world haven't started thinking about deploying their weaponry in the same manner as strike packages have and still are used by aircraft. In other words, fore a barrage of missiles - some of which have ECM, some of which launch chaff and decoys in front of the armed missiles which can then penetrate the now confused, disoriented and (in some cases) reloading defences.
Hey man, good content as always!
The problem is no matter how advanced the US subs are, they always use the slow Tomahawk, it mean it the only sub-launched cruise missile the US has and its subsonic. All the MANY Russian SLCM are supersonic.
I really appreciate your videos covert cobal.
thank you very much for sharing them. and so much must go into making them.
best by far.. much love from Australia 🇦🇺
Best modern war update channel on the tube
Battle Warship reminds me of Naval Ops: Warship Gunner or Naval Ops: Commander.
I hope there are Superships.
There are many :)
commenting for the algorithm
Responding for the algorithm.
Hear! Hear!
Could you make a video of the composotion and capabilities of the PLA navy? As they now have the largest navy in the world according to the DoD but I dont think they're a true blue water navy yet
Some of the analytics DoD published, made 0 sense, either the person in charge is incompetent, or it's intentionally misleading.
czcams.com/video/ZIiqND1avo4/video.html
good sponser game
You should cover the recent news of a new base being built in Alaska, our first Deepwater port and the shifting of 150 jets to the new base
*India with Bhramos*
Oh yeah it's all coming together
No k series
4:10 correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that horizontally launched submarine cruise missiles ignite underwater.
More videos please. Love your channel
Bro your channel is awesome
The prefiltration of the Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile (ESSM) and especially the "quad-pack" version carried on the Aegis capable ships in the US Navy is a direct response to the capabilities of the anti ship cruise missiles out there. That and the fielding of the SEARAM system. Until directed energy weapons (like lasers) are more capable, do not need "dwell time" on target and can function in mist/fog, the guided missile will remain the most effective way to engage a cruise missile...
Thanks very much...Once again...!
Get some!
But how are communications conducted between sub and the rest of the force? I always thought subs were mostly cut off from the world. How do they receive target locations for these missiles and/or guide them after launch?
Hell yeah bro get those sponsors!
You overestimate AShM capabilities or rather penalties. Submarines are often detected due to launch signatures. This is why it is dangerous for submarine as much as it is for the fleet to launch these missiles while nearby. When you are close, it is best to use torpedoes. AShM are rather long range anti ship weapon when submarine has ample time to retreat after launch.
"Launched from underwater, the submarine remains hidden". Yeah, except for the massive smoke trail and giant thundering missile. Very well hidden indeed.
Presumably, modern sub-launched missiles are dropped off, the sub leaves, and then the missile self-launches like an hour later...
I like that, as he is talking about the Russian slbm it's heading towards a aircraft carrier lol
:20 checks map. “Nope! Why doncha try again there bud” from MN residents
Love your analysis and Great information
HEY! The planet is rotating in the wrong direction at the start of this video. How accurate is the rest?
Haha yes I know. I wish I could change it but I no longer have the plug-in used to create the effect.
Maybe you can pretend its a view from a satellite or spacecraft in orbit.
Covert Cabal Naaa. I’ll just pretend the Sun comes up in the West from now on. Besides, people tell me the Earth is flat anyway. Lol
Well I just spent the last 2 hours getting out my old computer, finding the original project file, messing around to get the plug-in to work, and making the earth spin the correct way. All for you! Haha
Next video it will have the corrected intro.
Covert Cabal So, the Earth is round and the Sun does raise in the East. Science restored. Hallelujah
So be it. Threaten no more. To secure peace, is to prepare for war.
2:13 is anyone else like "wait...Thunderbird 2?"
Upload more please I love your videos
For this old warrior, solid mahogany.
I'm guessing some PvtMajor stepped on the Tomahawk? 04:34
TOPIC ABOUT MODERN RADAR
And now we have hypersonic missiles
I'd like to add that there are four SSGN Cruise Missile Submarine nuclear propelled subs of the Ohio-class. Tomahawk Block IV missile is an all weather surface- and submarine-launched precision strike stand-off weapon. Tomahawk is designed for long range precision strikes against high value targets and heavily defended targets and it has a maximum range of 1 000 miles, or 1 609 km to be metrically precise. But the long range comes to a price, it travels in sub-sonic speed - 890 km/h.
The American surface fleet phased out TLAM-A, the nuclear version of Tomahawk, a number of years ago. The American surface fleet is thus without nuclear weapons, as is the British surface fleet. At least some Tomahawk missiles can loiter in the air in hope that something will reveal itself within the missile's parameters during the missile's flight time over disputed areas where they have established a threat from air defence systems against own missions with aircrafts, or something else they need to suppress. Cruise missiles are usually propelled by turbojet engines.
Today, all Tomahawk missiles in the US surface combat fleet have conventional warheads either in the form of a single combat part (TLAM-C, TLAM-E) or with sub-combat parts (TLAM-D).
The surface fleet should consider adding nuclear warheads due to the CCP threat, so that they can contribute to the nuclear deterrent against not only the CCP's navy, but more urgently, a huge number of land targets and mobile launchers.
China is also doubling its nuclear arsenal, further surpassing the capabilities of its neighbours.
@@soccom8341576 The SSGNs are conversions of the Ohio class SSBN class, of which we have 14 of them. Each SSBN has 24 Trident missiles, and the missiles each have 12 MIRVs. This means the US Navy has 288 475kt warheads per sub. Some are stationed elsewhere and some are in port, so lots say 5 Ohios are in the area when the order to launch is given. That's 1440 nukes headed right for Chinese cities and military facilities. For context, China has around 350 total nukes.
I think the Navy is fine.
Surface Navies will become obsolete, if they aren’t already. Since an anti ship missile has a 1000 mile range, there is almost no place on land that can’t target a ship at sea.
Please make a video about Greece And Turkey.
New video 😍, about time 👌🏻😅
Sorry about that, the last month or so I've been busy packing, moving, and getting settled in my new place.
Cruise missiles actually scare me. Whatever the launch platform.
From Galveston to Chicago... scary
Why? Cruise missiles are the most accurate kind of missiles and are the least likely to kill bystanders such as yourself. There are old news reports from Desert Storm 1 about cruise missiles flying down the street, turning the corner, and hitting a specific building.
Tom Cruise actually scares me, what ever the movie. You can't tell me he didn't sell his soul to the devil.
@@deusexaethera Well I never said I was a bystander 😅🇹🇷
What are the implications for a remake of "The Hunt for Red October?"
Clancy is gone though... But what about Larry Bond?
@@alwayscurious3357 We interviewed Larry Bond on our Podcast Channel Tac Ops. He seems to be the best bet. I just bought his latest book Arctic Gambit but not enough time to read yet.
@@ericmoreno1337 Nice. Always wanted to read their current works. Wondering how their thrillers would look like in this era
Don't give Hollywood more bad ideas... leave it how it was. Don't ruin a great film by remaking it...
Do you think advancements in submarine weapon technology will eventually make surface fleets obselete, or at least relatively ineffective (and less competitive price/reward wise) compared to submarines?
When it comes to fighting ships, nothing can beat the submarine. During the 80s the Royal Navy genuinely considered foregoing a surface fleet and build nothing but submarines because when it comes to sinking ships nothing can beat a sub. The reason surface ships are still used is because there are certain tasks a submarine simply can't do.
As an example, being able to stick an airfield anywhere in the ocean (aircraft carrier), can allow you to conduct air missions when you don't have any land based air bases nearby.
@@Sir_Budginton That might have been the case in the past, but I could imagine a future where planes have little use in warfare due to being outclassed by practically all missiles. In such a case the only need for vehicles such as carriers could be in rescue missions or in transporting ground based vehicles (which I think will be replaced later than air based units due to ground based warfare being a lot more complicated).
Maybe mine layers and mine sweepers would still have a use in actual warfare, but for the rest, I don't see any scenario other than offering support or resources (be it in the form of food and water or in ground units) to islands or other sea connected nations which couldn't be fulfilled by submarines and their by then surely impressive missile armament.
ASW technology is also advancing though, for example through UAVs and UUVs which could be relatively small and cheap, deployed in large numbers and scan a large area of the ocean for submarines.
Unlike surface ships submarines can't use defensive systems such as interceptor missiles, point defence guns and lasers.
@@bluemountain4181 They really don't need them though. If they don't want to get hit, they just have to get deep and go silent.
@@bobtank6318 A UUV would be able to go as deep or deeper than a crewed submarine, and if they were equipped with active methods of detection like sonar then they could detect a submarine even if it was silent
Video starts at 1:47
Is it possible to identify which country launched the cruise missile??
If not, it is very terrifying.
Fun fact: The Improved Los Angeles (688i), Seawolf and Virginia classes of US attack submarine all have vertical launch capability for Tomahawk and Harpoon cruise missiles. While the US Navy hasn't had much in the way of equivalents to the Soviet Oscar class until recently with the refits of some Ohio class ballistic missile submarines, it should be noted that the US arsenal is still very formidable in this regard simply because the vast majority of the 50 or so fast attack submarines can also launch cruise missiles.
Covert cabal I hope you make a video about A2-AD
These are the biggest threats in modern military era,sonar is not as detectable as radar,which makes subs harder to detect.
ok, so the sub can launch the missile from a 1000km. how do the sub know where the carrier is? how does it keep track on a moving target without exposing it self? how does the cruse missile deals with the AWACS looking from above to detect it? it feels like its overly simplifying a very tricky issue here.
They probably wouldn't launch it at max range, but carriers make a lot of underwater noise, so subs can track them from a pretty long range.
@@bobtank6318 no. A sub cant guid a missile using passive sonar. Deffentl not arnges of more then 50km.
@@punicwars2 Yes it can. If it can detect a ship using passive sonar, it can track it, and once it has a good enough solution, all they have to do is plug a bearing and range into the missile and launch. The missile will fly out to that point, turn on its radar, and then guide itself into the ship. The sub doesn't even have to surface.
Of course, sonar has a limited range, so I don't think subs will launching at max range unless they have something else targeting for them. I agree with you that there is no way a sub is gonna detect something at 1000km.
A india vs china video is needed.
Make a video of d.a.s system
South Korea is progressing relatively fast in this capability.
I was curious so you guys working about possible outcomes of what's going on in Belarus. as an Americans it's one of those countries you just never hear about and most likely no little about
Nice game. I might try it.
Can we have a video of why Russian Pantsir air defence system failed to Turkey's UAVs in Libya and Syria?
America was first already in 1917:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hewitt-Sperry_Automatic_Airplane
And further:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kettering_Bug
Hypersonic missiles and drones are the future, subs and planes are just delivery of these!
Subs and planes have always been delivery systems.
US, Russia.... China and the front line of European countries are on top of the best in this field of subs missiles
This is why we may never see a large scale conflict between 2 large nations like in ww2 ever again. And if we did, the large scale movement of manpower would be extremely risky.
Do a video about hypersonic missiles?
Brahmos js best in its Category
I think that to dislike a video you should have to write a small explanation on why you dislike the video... Too many dislikes on too many good videos. Keep on keeping on man, F the haters.
Thanks! Yea I have no problem someone disliking it, or disagreeing with me. I like to hear from them because I could be wrong. And if I'm wrong, I want to know so I can learn and not make the same mistake again!
Some dislikes are usually because people don't like the built in advertisement though. My thought process is a built in ad is better than youtube ads, cause you can quickly fast forward through it.
This is a serious question: I hadn’t realized it, but I haven’t had a single one of your videos show up in my feed, in well over a year. And I’ve always really enjoyed viewing all of them. Truly. And I thought I was subscribed. But apparently not, but I am now. So, to my question. Have you grown a beard in the last year or so? I know that sounds silly. But you sound slightly different, to my ears, at least. And I thought you sounded as if, perhaps you’d grown a beard. Just wanted to ask. You may have had one the entire time tho? I would t know either way tho.
plz make a video for Turkey
Isn't the main disadvantage of SLCMs their rocket plumes which give away the location of their host submarines to everyone in the neighborhood? Once a sub "plumes" they're basically dead.
Very true for the submarine itself, not for the missiles necessarily. And you gotta be decently close to see the plume. But the missiles are still on their way at that point despite the submarine now being in danger. But thats always an issue. If a sniper fires a shot, he risks giving away his position. Same with a tank, artillery, stealth aircraft, etc
They probably make sure no enemy ships are nearby before launching.
@@theralfinator yea that makes sense. You don't want to fire your missiles just to be chased down and sunk 20 mins later
Jai Shree Ram 🙏🌺🙏
Since when did post apocalyptic worlds involve high tech weapons and aircraft carriers? Sounds more like a future sci-fi dystopia.
if it's like the submarine in On the Beach, it works
remnants of high tech forces are post-apocalyptic
@@FirstLast-uz6eq except all those things require extensive Infrastructure and expertise- things that I thought post apocalyptic societies generally did not have.
@@James-cb7nb True
1:15 "STRATEGY"
Why do I feel like I've seen this video before? Weird case of deja-vu?
So U boats can turn tide of war in ww3
A single modern submarine is a huge threat to any fleet. There was actually a time during the 80s where the Royal Navy genuinely considered using nothing but submarines. They didn't as there are certain tasks submarines simply can't do, but when it comes to fighting other ships the only true threat to a submarine is another submarine.
video starts at 1:47
Still waiting for your video on India vs China
I wonder how much time it takes to a converted Ohio SSGN to launch all its 154 missiles (how much of them at the same time?).
Actually your first defense is to build a Submarine dedicated to killing other Submarines.
*Enough of Ammunition buildup for the last 7 decades. Time to light up the skies and let the world stage be set on Fire. - Bring on WW III*
Does anyone have a list of channels similar in quality to this
yes but that is highly classified
There is Binkov. Ive talked to him a few times, he's good. Slightly different style but very good.
I'm working on making more videos as well. Hopefully 2 a week. The past month or so has been hectic as I just moved, so I got behind.
Thanks for watching!
@@CovertCabal lol you move a lot looks like, are you ex military?
Why does radar not work underwater?
0:19 go Mongolia
So you can park submarine under sea at very near of your enemy country and launch nukes. Air defense will fail when it see missile launched from so close.