Forget the Tomahawk: This New Missile Be the Navy's Deadliest Weapon - SM-6 Missile
Vložit
- čas přidán 9. 02. 2022
- The Standard Missile-6 also known as RIM-174, is a ship-launched anti-air and anti-surface interceptor missile developed by Raytheon Company and is in current production for the U.S navy. It was designed for extended range anti-air warfare purposes providing capability against fixed and rotary-wing aircraft, unmanned aerial vehicles, anti-ship cruise missiles in flight and terminal ballistic missile defence. Additionally, the supersonic SM-6 is the latest and sexiest version of the Navy’s Standard Missile family, whose primary role is defensive, built to shoot incoming enemy aircraft and missiles out of the sky. What make it stands out compared to the others is that this missile is designed to launch from ships and aircraft without being close to enemy counter fire. This missile is also outfitted with 450 kilograms of blast fragmentation warhead and penetrator. It functions to identify and target a specific ship within a group of vessels. Now imagine SM-6s filling most of the fleet’s missile cells, then planners wouldn’t have to guess what kinds of dangers a ship might face. Whether the threat is a ballistic or cruise missile, a bomber, a warship or an anti-ship battery on land, it doesn’t care where or what its target is, the SM-6 can hit them all!
All content on Military TV is presented for educational purposes.
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv
/ militarytv.channel
defense-tv.com/ - Věda a technologie
SM-6 has 125 kg warhead, not 450 kg. So it's anti-ship capabilities are very moderate.
Keep in mind the kinetic power of just a missile strike, it weights 1,500 LBS
They are making a hypersonic version of the SM6 which will increase kinetic energy and I read they are looking at a bigger warhead.
Exactly…. In the video it mentioned the warhead is even smaller…
@@regizeelement8511 Bruh is that dog again
All u need is one missle to hit somewhat close to any radar dishes on a ship and that ship is combat in affective
2:12 That is not an AMRAAM. That is a guided bomb. Maybe a Paveway II.
That is DEFINITIVELY a Paveway ll
This video was posted 2years ago. I see many guys commented so wrong !!!
1- SM 6, weight 3000lbs, but carries 64kg fragmentation warhead = 141 lbs. It can be used for anti aircraft, ballistic missiles, antiship and surface. $5million USD.
Tomahawk $2 millions usd. Carries 1000 lbs conventional warhead. Or up to 150 kilotons TNT (nukes).
So , this SM- 6 IS VERY PRICEY to that of Tomahawk !!! But both have their own specific usage!!! USA, the best WEAPONS for the FORCE OF GOOD!!! 🇺🇸👍🤩
SM-6: $5 million, small warhead
Tomahawk: $2 million, large warhead
SM-6 will NOT become the standard surface strike missile.
Tomahawk block IV is under 1 million a pop, the Block III C and D were 1.2 million a pop.
Tomahawks are easier to shoot down
@@brianskinner5212by what? Squirrels? Small arms? Tomahawks over land are very difficult to defend against
Well, capability only can be determined in combat, with deep analysis we only assume but cant justify their true capabilities they could actually perform
Good to know the navy has got stuff that we never knew of. Keep China from knowing.
Eh… guess Cwhole of china has no CZcams…. Lol
The thing is, this stuff has been public knowledge for many years now. Its just that Russian/China’s stuff gets all of the media attention, while our own projects tend to fly under the radar. So, China definitely does know of the SM6’s existance
@Regize Element in fact I think CZcams is banned or really.very heavily censored along with Twitter, FB and insta.
If the United States military is publicly acknowledging they have it then they already have something better that is being kept secret.
Thank You
No way this missile can replace the Tomahawk, they have totally different roles and the Tomahawk carries a 500kg warhead with nuclear capability....come on man
Plus the tomahawk has a range of what 1500 miles
SM-6 is an extended range SM-2, is there a reason to keep using SM-2 besides it being cheaper? There is a missile that is even more cheaper while also having the same performance of SM-6 but only as a kinetic kill interceptor. Navy dont have this, maybe they should look ito it.
That would be the SM-3, which is designed for exo-atmospheric IRBM intercepts.
@@dundonrl They already tested it against an ICBM.
Don't forget the Naval Strike Missike. and LRASM. And later, down the road, there's the Prevision Strike Missile with anti-ship seeker. The more arrows in the wuiver, the better.
The Navy is really efficient with naming.
No wasted effort!😂
Very interesting.
Great
Да это же великолепная идея! Наши моряки и стратеги только спасибо скажут за то, что по ним решили пострелять более дорогой и менее мощной ракетой!
Say goodbye to your overhyped hypersonic missiles.😝😝😝😝😝🤤🤤🤤🤤
@@user-ym5bl2vl7c лол, скажи это батареи патриотов в Киеве
It’s the god damn commercial of a weapon of war😮
Mass production might eventually decrease price similar to SM2
You don't mass produce weapons like this. Sure they aren't built by hand, but even if you filled up 50% of all the launchers in the US Navy you'd still only need 4400 of them!
@@dundonrl the $4+M pricetag is only based on the 180 units already delivered, maybe slightly more than that. So even completing the original plan of 1800 would still reduce price, more so with the revised plan of 2300+ units. And there's also the 6 int'l navies mentioned, and additional other nations. That'd eventually put it similar to SM2 price. It could even get lesser due to more ships fielded today & the future, plus the planned deployment as land based defense which didn't happen with SM2
No, it can carry up to 450 kg depending on its intended use
64kg warhead not 450kg, very unwise to compare that to Tomahawk since they are 2 different kind of missile
180 per year? Going to need a lot more than that.....
There are other standard missiles
Sure it can hit a ship, but with that warhead, I don't know if it'll do much damage.
It won't sink a warship but it only needs to permanently disable the enemy ship's combat electronics (that's incredibly vulnerable to any type of shock) and it will be as useful as a warship that's already sunk.
@@legiran9564 It has less range. Id rather use LRASM with Tomahwaks then.
@@johnsilver9338 Those are Offensive weapons. The standard is a close in defense weapon only. If you use the standard that means the enemy managed to sneak in past your offensive detection range which means either your ship's lookout or your intelligence service fucked up.
@@johnsilver9338 they are developing a hypersonic version by increasing the booster size it will have the same booster as the SM3.
It will not only go hypersonic but have greater range
@@Stephen-bq4nq So too the LRASM, it will have an extended range similar to Tomahawk.
Does this out class the S 400? If we put it on a aircraft can it out perform the MBDA meteor or PL15?
Duh this thing is massive. Its like asking what if Chinese put S300 on their fighter? Then they would have like 300 miles range.
It is far too big for an air launched version because it has a large booster attached to it. There was an air launched version of the SM1 but it was used as an anti radiation missile.
@@stc2828 what about the Phoenix on the f14 that was also massive
We can put this on a bomber like b52 or even b1 Lancer but its too big and heavy for aircrafts
Probably there will be a modified version specifically designed for aircraft installment, but performance and the role of the missile might differ from it's ship fired cousin, which in turn might even make an aircraft launched version unnecessary unless it's gonna make a big difference for the Air Force's and Naval Air Force's aircraft loadout for roles such as ballistic missile interception, anti-radiation or high speed land attack operations
This thing is like 10x more expansive than tomahawk…
Of course it is! Our government lets military contractors gouge the fuck out of American Taxpayers instead of doing their fing jobs and putting laws in place to stop the military contractors monopolies on supplying American military equipment. There’s like 5 companies that control everything supplied to our military and it gives them the leverage to charge ridiculous amounts for hardware that could be made for a fractions of the price from elsewhere. This is why our taxes are ridiculous and why our military isn’t twice the size of it is currently. These politicians get paid to keep the status quo’s going but the taxpayers foot the bill. It’s another reason why Americans are fed up with our government officials who don’t EVER DO ANYTHING TO IMPROVE AMERICA OR ITS PEOPLE. OUR MILITARY SHOULD BE TWICE AS BIG AND TWICE AS POWERFUL BUT A SELECT FEW COMPANIES RAPE OUR MILITARY BUDGETS BECAUSE THEY HAVE A MONOPOLY OVER THE MILITARY…. SHAME ON AMERICANS FOR LETTING THESE CORRUPT PEOPLE UNDERMINE AND GOUGE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS CUZ THATS WHOSE PAYING FOR THEIR GREED AND SELFISHNESS!!,!
Our Government and Politicians continue to Let Military Contractors keep a Monopoly on supplying military Hardware and Services and technology to our Military and Country which undermines our Nation and Costs American Taxpayers Huge Debt and Sums of Money. These Politicians SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES TO CALL THEMSELVES AMERICANS WHEN They knowingly Let Our Military Be RAPED BY A SELECT FEW MILITARY SUPPLIERS WHICH TAKES AWAY FROM OUR SECURITY AND OUR FAMILIES. OUR MILITARY SHOULD BE TWICE THE SIZE AS IT IS BUT THE ELITE POLITICAL STATE LETS THESE PEOPLE CHARGE UPSURD AMOUNTS OF MONEY FOR PARTS BECAUSE THEY ARE THE ONLY SUPPLIERS OUT THERE BECAUSE THEY HAVE LET COMPANIES MONOPOLIZE THESE SECURITY SECTOR’S. SOMETHING THAT SHOULD COST TEN DOLLARS THEY CHARGE TEN THOUSAND AND IF THE MILITARY DOESNT PAY IT THEY PUT OUR FAMILY MEMBERS AT RISK AND THEY SHOULD ALL BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE AND SHOT FOR TREASON!!
THEY SCREW AMERICA AND OUR LEADERS GET PAID TO TURN A BLIND EYE AND THEY ALL SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES AND BE CAST INTO THE LIGHT SO EVERY AMERICAN KNOWS WHO IS ULTIMATELY UNDERMINING AMERICA!,! SHAMEFUL DISGUSTING GREEDY SO CALLED AMERICANS THAT ONLY CARE ABOUT THEIR SELF. NOT REAL AMERICANS AT ALL!!
I came here to get information on the Ranger USV a drone ship that uses the system.
gonna need a lot more than a few hundred thousand of these, let a lone a few hundred lol. gosh if conflict broke out those things would be depleted in less than 5 minutes and game over.
SM6 and SM3 Ship Missiles can Shoot Down ICBM.s. I think it was SM-3 that intercepted an ICBM over Hawaii - ICBM was launched out of Kwajalein island.
Those warheads not gonna do much against warships
Can it show down hypersonic missile M
Yes it can
Так стоп, 1 см стоит как 5 томагавков? Вот это космос
I’m sure we have a lot of things not know yet
Not only does the SM-6 have a "small" warhead as Naval surface targets go, it's FOUR TIMES more expensive than Tomahawk.
People also think the tomahawk is inferior because it's slow and ignore the fact it was designed to be that way. It flys below long range radar, can maneuver around objects and It's hard to pick up with thermal satellites.
Generals don't fight naval battles, and before I retired that's exactly what I did.@@TYRONE_SHOELACES
This is why war is business
There's more in sm6 than meets the eye.😄
If this claim is true that is a fantastic missile that is great for all in one Mach 3.5 is not bad that's fast enough and can do it all great for fighting war's brilliant 🙏✌️
Dod has the highest military spending in the world but still no hypersonic weapon being developed
Yeah there is for the airforce and navy
"No hypersonic weapons being developed"
Their testing out and designing hypersonic missiles.
The lockheed martin is making AGM 183A, Darpa is making HAWC, and Lockheed Martin's Dark Eagle Hypersonic missiles.
America already has Hypersonic air to air missile such as phoenix.
So now they for surface to surface, air to surface, and water to surface I guess.
Yeah we are lmfao. Hypersonic is more effective in propaganda on YT than it is in combat. Russian tech stills sucks. There's a video of one of those getting stuck in a street and dudding out. Russian ground forces are being stopped by man portable launchers. Imagine if there were F35s, Reaper Drones, Apache over there. That's just a taste as well. The US military doctrine is and has been designed around defeating two global powers at once. Currently, if this is what Russian forces fight like, we can probably handle a few Russias.
you might wanna quote it "hypersonic cruise missile"
ICMBS are hypersonic missiles capable of going up to Mach 23+
The Americans Amry will get theirs next year dude....Things are coming into place...this isn't 2016....
Wow that is cost effective look Russia and China make great weapons but to be a superpower it's not about biggest boom or the farthest it's about having enough cost effective we can be in the War for long time 1missile and not to worry about target that is a awesome platform
Completely different missiles for different purposes.
Yeah its warhead is very powerful against air targets and even ground vehicles but i doubt that it can be an effective anti ship missile
Yeah
The only ships now to have armour are aircraft carriers. A single hit would mess up the delicate electronic s of any warship. Not to mention crew which are now less in number to off set the cost over the life time of modern ships
@@mattkerr3508 yes it will and thats great but its better to sink the ship with one or 3 missile rather than letting it fight another day
@@miku_hoshino it's as good as sunk as repairs will take months if not years. By that point the war is over
@@mattkerr3508 yeah true
Do you listen to your videos and or pay attention to what it shows? You are talking about a missle and show video of bombs. You talk about ships that use the SM6 as carriers, but in reality carriers don't use them.
MK = ‘Mark’
USA 🇺🇸
그냥 대함 방어 미사일이야
They should make it fly at mach 4 ! .. ? Because the faster it's up there the sooner the threat is delt with ! . the better the better. ! . the second defence system should be another behind it ! . in case if the first one misses although missing a target is not a word sorta speak ?! Lol.
Who are the nation's reaching out to buy?
Japan/Korea their Ageis systems use the Standard Missiles
Australia buying sm-6 block 1 and sm-2. I think Canada and UK too for the type 26 frigate classes.
This video appears mostly as advertisement rather information video
Certain death from the sea !
Sm6 phong ko: va tan cong tau : 2trong 1qua dinh
Jingjonglinglong
5 milion US Dollar every missile 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Translate please
Why do you let China knows your capabilities??!?😮😮😮
👍😎🍺🍩🚀,
The one problem with the US arms is: they are always CRAZY EXPENSIVE while Russia has nothing but build some incredible toys + some other unmatched toys too .. with smaller budget
Very often Russia develops products but does not field them due to their expense. But yes high capable cutting edge products are pricy but the USN as a corporate memory of going into conflicts woefully behind their adversities
This comment didnt age well
@@Dog.soldier1950 bullshit
Кому вот этот бред нужен, а ?
America and Allies 🙂
Tomahawk is too old....US navy must demolished this missile....
Indonesia subtitle please 🙏🏼🙏🏼
a hypersonic nuclear missile is a carrier breaker. our adversaries can do this now, and they don't care about the environment. take out a couple of destroyers while you're at it and you've won that conflict. how does sm-6 change that math?
Because the SM6 can shoot down nuclear missiles, as it was designed to do. It is an anti ballistic missile defense weapon with SOME anti ship capabilities.
Good grief, you guys don’t know a thing.
S 75 is better than this 👍🏻
Better than S-400?
@@redblueyankee8343 better than s500 m
S-400 costs 500 million vs 3 billion for THAAD (Lockheed Martin). The experts I read say S-400 is better (S-500 soon to deploy). Our ally Turkey is buying S-400, so is India. Sounds like we are being out competed on cost and capability. We are spending a ton on defense but apparently not getting value. How can the defense industry be held to account?
experts? who are these experts? the s-400 and s-500 have never been tested in battle as far as I know. THAAD as far as i know, has a 90% success rate.
@@SouthernHadoken THAAD is useless, like Huts shows to the Saudi Arabia.
THAAD failed to destroy 80% of targets lmao
@@pharaon6718 Even if that is true, a 20% success rate is still better than a zero percent success rate.
@@SouthernHadoken Nah still S400 is better
@@pharaon6718 Patriot failed in Saudi not THAAD.
THAAD was recently used in combat for the first time and it was successful to intercept a houthi ballistic missile
not enough to stop zircon... where zircon can zig zag first while maintaining speed in march 9
Too much watching propaganda.
@@iam3336 Of course... I'm waiting for the big event... WW3
@@extracuap no hypersonic weapon can zig-zag, do you know how much stress and gs that missile would experience? I would ve ripped apart and melted into molten lava.
@@BorntoYeet confirm.... confirm... special ship killer... zig zag... and in the animation don't have to touch the ship.... explodes in the air with nukes
@@extracuap Ok, meet C-HGB, HAWC and HALO and then you realize that Zircon is a trash or maybe still a propaganda missile
Huge waste of money..wtf end the monarchy!
What monarchy? Britain didn't even n ordered it
Monarchy is over queen is gone
Tomahawk has a range of a thousand miles and has a large warhead
Sm-6 is way over priced