Kinetic Energy Missiles - Future Tank Weaponry

[@LaminarTurbulence]

KEM have a minimum effective range, right? They must need some distance to accelerate.

[@mandernachluca3774]

Yes, that's why, for example, anti air missiles have a problem at short ranges and therefor automatic cannons still play a key role in close area defense, a good example is the CIWS system. However there are probably ways of increasing the accellaeration of the missiles, like reducing weight by using more energy dense explosives and propellant. You could also use a hybrid between a missile and a progectile, similar systems are used to increase the range of artillery shells. There is also a typ of shells called, gyrojet, wich is nothing more than a spin stabalized bullet, filled with solid rocket fuel shot out of a smooth bore barrel (spin stabalization accures due to the rocket nozzels being mounted eccentric at an angle to provide an even torque).

[@vaelophisnyx9873]

@@mandernachluca3774 the problem is they need to be moving several Km/s to actually hit hard enough to warrant their use, which is nearly impossible without a railgun if you dont have 300 meters at least to get to speed.

[@mandernachluca3774]

@@vaelophisnyx9873 I don't understand, since when do missiles or gyrojets need railguns and since when need railguns severals hundret meters to accellerate projectiles to several km/s?

[@admiral_waffles533]

@@mandernachluca3774 Drag. The faster you go, the more drag you get, and the more energy you need to accelerate. Also, if you accelerate too fast, the air acts more or less like a wall, damaging the projectile or whatever launched it.

[@mandernachluca3774]

@@admiral_waffles533 When i am not completely out of the picture, tests with 1 km/s fast projectiles and more have already been successfully conducted. Those railguns where not much longer than 7 or 8 meters. Therefor i don't understand your conclousion, that it would take several hundret meters.

[@risingSisyphus]

Good vid. One nit-pick: am EFP is technically separate from a HEAT warhead. They're both shaped charges but act differently.

[@smokestack3327]

achillesRising, the Knight of Rage thanks

[@Warriorcat49]

With EFP’s, think along the lines of the nuclear manhole cover. The penetrator is a solid projectile rather than a jet of super-plasticized metal.

[@Necrodermis]

@@Warriorcat49 So the EFP round itself is a gun sort of?

[@deathdragon2283]

Necrodermis pretty much.

[@volvo245]

@@Warriorcat49 So nice to see for once someone who didn't use "plasma" or "jet of molten metal" to describe a shaped charge liner.

[@ironwolf2244]

If the Exoskeleton programs being developed currently come through, and are then further enhanced in the future, perhaps a support infantry KEM design could be built in conjunction with said programs. It'd be like a RPG in use initially. But then it could progress to say a three barrel platform. In which case, it'd be used for support against light vehicles as you said.

[@DOSFS]

For infantry, I think normal HEAT warheads are more versatile for the infantry role as they will fought mostly other threat than tank so if Exo-infantry can carry heavy missile most likely they gonna carry normal ATGM than KEM for the most situation.

[@DavidBarkland]

There are also the problems of miniturizaion and recoil. Modern KEMs are huge; regardless of the weight penalty, any soldier carrying one is hauling around a 5-foot metal pole that is getting in the way costantly. Likewise, armored vehicles are protected from the exhust by their armor - infantry needs to get the device away _before_ it ignites or they'll be set on fire. Exo suits can be armored, but only to a point and all that armor adds weight and bulk that further strains the power supply and makes it harder to move around in. These could be migitated by using higher-powered propellants; a smaller missile that just barely stays airborne until it has cleared the infantry and then accelerating to higher velocity - but such higher-powered propellants would also allow HEAT and High Explosive to be far more powrfull and versitile. If the future of the recoilless gun is to fire small rounds so that a soldier can carry dozens of them, I could very well see troops carrying a variety of ammunition into battle.

[@little_lord_tam]

I made a concept for Tandem missiles just for fun. Im writing on a sci fi story and needed more advanced weapons. Your videos are a great help and this time is it nice to see, that my ideas are actually reality. At least this time 😁 Edit : I write in german so my bad english isnt a issue

[@mandernachluca3774]

If you want interesting ideas for bullet propulsion or weapons in general, do an in debt search on artillery weaponry.;D

[@little_lord_tam]

@@mandernachluca3774 thanks for the advice 👍

[@riesenfliegefly7139]

@@little_lord_tam Lol, ich mach das selbe. Obwohl mit schon die meisten Waffensysteme hier bekannt sind.

[@little_lord_tam]

@@riesenfliegefly7139 Ich bin im Moment noch nicht alzu bewandert im Themenbereich der Waffensysteme, weswegen mir solche Videos den Einstieg in die Materie sehr erleichtern. Ich lerne hier oft noch neue Sachen ^^

[@mandernachluca3774]

@@little_lord_tam Zwei Deutsche? Interessant. 😁 Im Bereich der experimentellen Impaktphysik und der Katapulte gibt es auch ein paar Konzepte. Zum Beispiel die Leichtgaskanone oder das EMALS. Theoretisch sind die idealen Beschleunigungssysteme die, die nicht durch die Schallgeschwindigkeit des Arbeitenden Gases begrenzt werden, also alle, die kein arbeitendes Gas nutzen, zum Beispiel Railguns, Coilguns oder Reluktanz- und Induktion- Linearmotoren.

[@amissle2186]

It's funny that KZbin recommended this video now that there is an event with the first kinetic missile in the game.

[@leguman5289]

We could see things like propelled APSFDS, allowing more speed to be injected into it without increasing the initial propellant ignition into the canon, which would require reinforced and longer barrel

[@peltimies2469]

Active defense system. I mean, you can stop worrying about grenades now.

[@tomikexboii5403]

Uh. Have you even watched the video at all?

[@CattoAVRCE]

@@tomikexboii5403 Hes making a Rainbow Six Siege reference i think

[@peltimies2469]

@@tomikexboii5403 its a referenge to a game, dumb dumb.

[@marcusrat4466]

fuck jaeger

[@peltimies2469]

@@marcusrat4466 yeah

[@plasmancer6104]

I’d love to see a ‘everything wrong with warhammer 40k Tau tanks/gunships’ video. While definitely not designed for getting hit, I feel like they are probably one of the more practical hover tank designs around and your vids on railguns and guided missiles would fit the Hammerhead gunship and the Skyray variant

[@ВасилийМорозов-л7х]

As I remember, there was a helicopter-mounted kinetic energy missile for targeting specific terrorists.

[@quentinking4351]

I think the current range limit on the M256 is a digital limitation imposed by laser rangefinder on an Abrams not returning results past 4km--though to be fair, 4km is insanely far, especially in Europe where the Abrams was predicted to fight WW3. New laser-guided beyond line of sight 120mm gun launched missiles are in development. The idea seems to be to give Abrams a kind of (anti-tank) artillery role. The HEAT version has been tested and accepted. The KE version is still under development, as it needs a final booster motor to bring it up to effective velocities at the end of flight.

[@type93thunder]

So basically, it dont go boom, it go zoom

[@jackgamer6307]

The ultimate form of throwing a rock at somebody

[@thenight527]

Love your content. I was wonder if you would like to do a video we're if you were commissioned to design a space fighter and how it would act, as well as what weapons you would equip it with.

[@Am_Yeff]

I love the background music, hail the Omnissiah!

[@Partexedd]

Mechanicus background music? nice

[@SovietBiasM-1]

Saw you in game with the Object 279 and I saved your butt with the IT-1. Hope you enjoy the Obj 279 though!

[@krzosu]

Actually Kinetic based missle would be suspectible to the very same old armor defensive measures any other missle is susppectible for - reactive armor would be quite effective at dealing with this. The same goes for any active defense measure meant to deflect the projectile while its in flight - to force it into different trajectory thus making a miss. and even simple smoke screen would be enough to protect against being target locked - this thing must hit directly or it does no damage so - denying the target lock or disrupting it would be quite effective. Normal missle even it it misses but lands close by might still damage the target to some extend by exploding its payload - KEW systems would be at disadvantage since they lack the explosive warhead to deal damage in that manner.

[@ditzydoo4378]

Very cool video, I've seen the ADATS (Air Defense, Anti Tank System) in firing tests for the Canadian Army's atop their modified M-113 carriers prior to acceptance into their inventory. And I must say it is a frightening thing to behold as the missile comes off the launcher and streaks unerringly to the target. It is another system like the LOSAT you've shown, that works great but Congress wouldn't release funding for it at this time...

[@lorentzcoffin4957]

The omnissiah approves of your music choices

[@jakearmstrong335]

New active protection systems can degrade or sometimes fully stop kinetic energy projectiles. The Russian have a system like this. It fires 22mm ball berings designed to destroy or damage the incoming projectile before it hits the target. It seems to me that armour has often times had the upper hand even if slightly to weaponry designed to destroy it

[@Sovreign071]

Could you do a video on a few different tank-shell variants? Not just size and payload, but the specialized stuff: Sabot rounds, cannister shells, HEAT, etc.

[@ryanyu5974]

who back here when they added the new event tank the LOSAT

[@kellerweskier7214]

i was thinking of what could it replace? well. TOW. but then. TOW got a tom down air burst feature, as that small vid of the T-72 you shown, erupting.

[@pakitxn]

Love watching your videos!

[@MisterAlatristo]

As for a possible topic... how about space battleships overview? How they should look like and which ones that exists in games are reasonable.

[@epicearth0256]

2:30 damn I wish I could hit my target's like that

[@Khorne_of_the_Hill]

I bet they're going to be more popular when HDRMs become more commonplace

[@JohnTrustworthy]

A KEM needs to be stable in order to properly deliver its kinetic enerngy, otherwise if it hits its target at an angle it would bounce. Things such as the wind won't bother it much, but it turns out that the blast wave and shrapnel of a granade is enough to destabilise it for a short period of time before it rights itself.

[@naamadossantossilva4736]

Axy info about KEM effectiveness against bunkers and other fortifications?

[@ultr7712]

I know this is not really related to the type of content you create, but is it possible to see a video or two on the future of small arms technology?

[@kalashboi2198]

So if someone get shot by a KEM round, is it a KEMshot??

[@jlopezleoz0124]

God I love your vids

[@ThomasMurch]

2:44 - Wow, hypervelocity missiles were a real-life weapon? I've only ever heard about them in the sci-fi piloting game G-Police ... I remember firing one for the first time, and the green missile streaked across the screen so fast that I assumed it was a laser beam!

[@MM-zg4wu]

I just discovered your movies. KZbin algoriths are great :-)

[@BogdanNovikov]

Furry, You are remembering me Thorneyed

[@lelandbacon1253]

Can you do a video on wheeled armored vehicles vs tracked (Bradley AFV vs LAV 25

[@little_lord_tam]

Arent Kinetic energy missiles more or less imune to laser based point defence?

[@owenkegg5608]

What's the vehicle we see being used in the beginning and most of the video

[@Fish-kz8xw]

@Spookston, could you make a video about "Nanolaminate" armor.

[@chongchun8979]

Tank round sure is cheap although it only 4km but it still the cheapest ammunition to produce

[@AZA9J6]

2:25 GOTTEEEEEEEEM

[@namanign6312]

WW 3 would be like WM 3 Drone tanks, drones, armor suits, and new rifles. China, Russia, North Korea, Iran.

[@FullSemiAuto357]

I left a like. And a comment.

[@TGNXAR]

Say, Spookston, how would you rate Warhammer 40k's bolt gun, as described in the fluff?

[@RS_Mogli]

So you watched the video of matsimus and wanted to make your own?

[@pliiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii]

Even the Abrahms tanks cant stop regular missiles Can any one show me any tanks resisting a misile attack ?

[@Ake-TL]

So, it’s Physically impossible to reinforce tank top or it’s pointless to do so ?

[@dsdy1205]

It's possible, it would just weigh down the tank too much and slow it down, which makes it easier to hit and hence is counterproductive

[@TGNXAR]

I'm designing a science fiction game/setting, and these videos, along with Isaac Arthur's, are immensely helpful.

[@DavidBarkland]

I agree. They provide a lot of good points about general concepts and how certain aspects will interact.

[@denniswingo2004]

as a guy who's doing the same I'm intresting in seeing what you have made. do you have any accounts you post these on?

[@TGNXAR]

@@denniswingo2004 Most everything is on my PC. It's a physical card game, not a computer game. I'm still doing a lot of development and playtesting. (Playtesting has revealed that I need to rework it. Oy.)

[@SamyH_amSet]

@@TGNXAR are you still working on it or do you have something to show to the public on an account?

[@SamyH_amSet]

@@denniswingo2004 are you still work in progress? Do you have some results you might want to share? Im very interested to see some of that since i do the same

[@litigation_jackson]

"The army was looking for ways to deploy early entry forces, such as paratroopers" me immediately thinking about stuffing airborne into missiles and deploying them that way

[@Able542]

Feet first into hell!

[@dynestis2875]

Orbital drop pods

[@slimelich]

When the us military cant afford something u kno its expensive lol

[@F-Raptor-mq7ph]

lol

[@averagewikipediaenthusiast3088]

@@F-Raptor-mq7ph Says and expensive plane

[@michaeledmunds7266]

It's more that funding was cut due to other priorities at the time. The Army didn't see a pressing need for a brand new anti-tank missile. With the way things are going with Russia currently, the program might be given a second look.

[@renrifle]

The most effectives weapons are still something hitting something else really hard.

[@Able542]

You'z an Ork main too?

[@srthebox4946]

I don’t think thats changing anytime soon

[@d3admaub938]

I mean that’s basically what almost all weapons are in some form or another

[@beefjiggler5665]

Everything wrong with Pacific Rim jaeger designs?

[@MCAroon09]

EVERYTHING

[@TGNXAR]

Realistically? Everything. Stylistically? NOTHING!

[@somethingelse9440]

@@TGNXAR I mean they look cool unless your talking about the new Pacific rim

[@TGNXAR]

@@somethingelse9440 I haven't watched the second one. Or as I like to call it, "The Movie That Is Not Really Pacific Rim."

[@denniswingo2004]

@@somethingelse9440 The new ones suck so much. the weapons are not as adequete and despite being larger they feel small and plasticy

[@GradeAMolvanian]

The latest weapon in man's quest to punch someone as hard as possible.

[@ALV694]

Could you do a vid on 1. Unmanned turrets like the one found in armata 2. What's wrong hl2 combine vehicles 3. What's wrong with Tau vehicles in Dawn of war

[@smokestack3327]

A L i can answer 3 they’re Tau aka space commies

[@ALV694]

@@smokestack3327 sooo, in 40k lore, they are stated to outperform against the imperium, who often times outnumber them. Also their tech is often above the imperium, only below eldar and necron. Plus they aren't really commies as they emphasis caste system which splits society in different sections, the only faction is farsight as they emphasize meritocracy and regardless of past caste designation u can be whatever you want as long u show aptitude, like earth caste being moved to a battlesuit operator.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

@@ALV694 It Tau had MODERN weapons they would MOW the Imperium like a fresh grass...

[@ALV694]

@@WadcaWymiaru umm they do consistently win against the imperium, but the thing is Imperium is freaking massive in size and scale while in comparison the Tau are tiny bcoz of being newcomers. Heck it's not everyday a faction makes a fighter that is dedicated to hunting down warhound Titans and knights (which shows how effecient and logical the Tau are, when it comes to resource allocation and priorities) plus the armor the Tau and guvesa (human defectors) wear are akin if not more advanced than the armor worn by the storm troopers.

[@WadcaWymiaru]

@@ALV694 Meh...if Game Workshop was serious "modern" weapons would absolutely DESTROY the Imperium forces. Doesn't matter how much! Like a frikkin savages vs modern army. And Tau HAVE their own solutions for titans, like aircraft (i read about tiger-shark that did kill it!) Wish Tau had something like hyperdrive like the HALO or Star Wars.

[@clippedwings225]

Perhaps a video on the ADATS and why it isn't used by the U.S?

[@FirehawkSHD]

I assumed its battle doctrine thing? US Army really depends on USAF or USN for air superiority. For anti tank role, the TOW and Javelin really did a good job for its purpose so ADATS not really needed. But its actually cool topic to discuss.

[@clippedwings225]

I'm sure cost was a factor, to have 2 functions shoved into a single missile that still has to have good performance would be expensive too.

[@bwilliamstown]

@@clippedwings225 If Canada could afford ADATS on its meagre defense budget I doubt the cost was the issue for the US military

[@DeathlordSlavik]

It preformed poorly in its tests, also it has been withdrawn from service in Canada which was the only country that used it showing that it wasn't as good as most people think.

[@volatile100]

@Muhammad Abdul American military spending us less than 5% of the gdp, which is lower than lots of other countries, what do you mean huge share

[@askingstuff]

The CKEM program. Manifested as the LOSAT. That and various other derivatives. I’m guessing before watching. Okay I got some things wrong.

[@Kievaer]

5:15 welp, they ended up adding the LOSAT CCVL... play it pls, looks goofy asf

[@kayezero703]

Man this video age.ed well

[@USA0312]

I always love these types of videos you do, great stuff to watch while munching on lunch

[@HEATSEEKR]

WELL WELL WELL

[@wolfiewoo3371]

Is that Mechanicus in the background?! 👀

[@fajniedobrze923]

SPOOKSTON make another LOSAT vid

[@grifter3680]

Normal Brain: Kinetic Energy Missile Big Brain: Kinetic Kill Vehicle GALAXY BRAIN: BIG STICK GO N Y O O M

[@snowcat9308]

Last time I was this early, this joke was still funny.

[@jacquesdeburgo2878]

Been a loooooooooong while

[@gamecubekingdevon3]

Keep in mind that in thoose missiles, the entire missile s body is not the penetrator but an carrier/container for it , and so, is still vulnerable. (Because if an hard-kill's schrapnells manage to hit an KEM, they will probably cause déformation on the KEM's main body, resulting in an drastic change in trajectory. And drastic drift when flying at Hugh velocity often means destruction for a missile or a rocket. APFSDS are less prone to thoose problems since the penetrator IS sent almost alone, he s not carryed by an Big and more fragile external body)

[@TheArklyte]

What's next on the list of realistic weaponry of 21st century? MetalStorm and GyroJet hybrid launch system?

[@clanofwolvesofficial7231]

No views, 5 likes. KZbin must be getting drunk on Corona to defeat the corona

[@almondmilk3014]

WHAT🤣

[@YEAHKINDA]

so basically what you're saying is that kinetic energy missiles are the tank equivalent of launching a bottlerocket at somebody

[@evanbrown2594]

The LOSAT was an interesting concept. The penetration was 6 kg not lbs. I remember reading about how Gen Shinseki used to use a video of the LOSAT being tested against a M1A1HA. The point was to show the vulnerability of heavy tanks to congress and gain support for his concept of a lighter more mobile force.... The missile went through the front of the armor package and out the back of the turret. Most of the turret armor package was bisected apparently. The penetration of the weapons was suspected greater then 850mm RHA. Also the thickness of the long rod was such that systems like heavy ERA, k5 (what was suspected to be the follow up (Kaktus) would have been of limited use.

[@michaelg4919]

Besides the background music I like that you break complex stuff down so its more understandable and pls kep doing these vids because you r my only source for this stuff xD

[@zacharyrhodes8254]

Question, would it have been possible for the light, medium and heavy tank dynamic to have survived, instead of being replaced by the MBT?

[@epion660]

@@Bird9600 I'd argue it's more a matter of technology. If the best technology in each field was more mutually exclusive (couldn't make an armored vehicle fast for example) It could have continued.

[@classifiedad1]

No, since rapidly improving gun and engine technology meant that so-called medium tanks naturally gained bigger guns and heavier armor to the point where it no longer made sense to develop dedicated medium and heavy tanks when one can have the economy and mobility of medium tanks with the armor and firepower of heavy tanks. Indeed, many modern main battle tanks weigh as much as the old heavy tanks, although their armor, mobility, and firepower are vastly superior. As for light tanks? Well, they never really died, did they? Light tanks have occupied the niches where they excel, when situations require a tank with better operational and tactical mobility, even at the expense of heavy armor. Light tanks exploit their lightness to allow them to be cast from planes, landed from boats, traverse inhospitable jungles and mountain heights, and even swim across lakes and rivers. The light design and economical operation makes them attractive to adaptation to other roles, such as APCs and IFVs. Conversely, many APCs and IFVs have been successfully adapted into light tanks, a practice which continues to this day. Light tanks do face stiff competition from more economical armored cars and more versatile IFVs, but their development is still seen as worthwhile by nations who see a need for them.

[@averagewikipediaenthusiast3088]

Light tanks might still survive. They can be used by light infantry like paratroopers as "airborne" tanks

[@classifiedad1]

@Calen Crawford Clearly what's needed is to build Howl's Moving Castle except give it a fuckton more guns and armor.

[@thefuzzyvulpine5945]

I must ask, do projectiles really need warheads anymore? Especially something traveling at, say, Mach 4. The kinetic energy alone would be monstrous.

[@TGNXAR]

I'm wondering what graphene will do for armor systems.

[@thefuzzyvulpine5945]

Using pure carbon as armor? I really don't think that's a good idea.

[@CattoAVRCE]

@@thefuzzyvulpine5945 i think he means using it within composite armour designs. At its most structurally strong i think it would benefit in some way.

[@DavidBarkland]

@@TGNXAR That varies greatly with how large graphene sheats we can make. For the sizes we can make today, the largest difference between a graphene armor plate and an asbestos armor plate is that graphene is far more dangerous. If you can make graphene sheats the size of modern ceramic plates it'd drastically reduce shrapnel since graphene bends instead of fracturing when indirectly struck. If you can make graphene sheats the size of the armor segment, it'd reflect explosives and directed energy very efficiently, but since graphene is very flexible it'd be weak to kinetic weapons; and once again, if graphene breaks it creates a shower of flechettes that are sharpened to a single atom. A much better candidate for primary armor structures is carbon nanotubes, since they are much more rigid and more prone to breaking at single points, leading to less shrapnel than modern armor while taking more energy to break, as well as being rigid enough to serve as plating. There are also many different types of nanotubes with varying characteristics, with different types able to serve either as ablative, shock-absorbtion, or kinetic resistance.

[@thefuzzyvulpine5945]

@@CattoAVRCE Yeah, I'm sure it would be very beneficial as part of a composite... but, in the end, carbon is carbon. Doesn't take much to get it to burn.

[@botondkalocsai5322]

This video was quite informative for me, I've never thought that Kinetic Kill Vehicles are viable weapons in dense atmosphere. In space KKV-s are literally the perfect high-penetration missile weapon because their destructivity (which is measured by the kinetic energy) directly proportional to their difficulty to to elimination (which is very well represented by its velocities after boost phase and its armour). Meanwhile in any other missile weapon that doesn't produce its destructive yield primarily from its propulsion system, the higher yield, the easier to eliminate (by hard-kill systems). This is because the higher yield, the heavier warhead, which obivously deteriorates the post-boost phase velocities. Thus KKV-s are the fastest missile weapons in their mass category due to the fact that the whole thing is practically a propulsion system. Another advantage is that one can calibrate the weapon to the target's hard kill system's and its evasive capability. One can build a heavily armoured but slower KKV or a lightly armoured but fast KKV. In a sense armour on the KKV doesn't necessary hamper the missile survivability but rather gives a useful alternative. The reason why KKV-s are shine in space but struggle in atmosphere is obviously air drag. Airdrag due to its velocity square scaling brutally dissipates the KKV-s "bread and butter", its kinetic energy. One must have to keep KKV at low speed while trying to minimise air drag, far beneath hypervelocites. So forget about hypervelocity ~10 km/s KKV-s that are viable in space. The only way to increase its yield without increase its velocity is to increase its mass, without increasing the air drag (practically increas its overall density). Of course this mass increase can be done by putting on armour on the KKV. However, due to low velocites the KKV needs to carry a penetrator for effective armour piercing. In space, on really hypervelocity KKV-s such thing aren't needed because the armour and the KKV evaporates. Clever engineers may be able to build impactors that are also act as armour. Another problem why KKV struggles in the atmosphere is the employable propulsion systems. In space apart from chemical rocket one can take advantage of lower thrust, higher delta-V propulsions such as nuclear thermal rocket, in more exotic case, different types of ion propulsion, due to the lack of dissipation (air drag) and long distances, which is not available on the earth's atmosphere. Nevertheless I can imagine that one can take advantage of the chemical reactivity of our atmosphere. Some resourceful engineer may be able to create a KKV that is mainly propelled by a ramjet or scramjet engine and at the beginning of the boost phase a rocket engine accelerates the KKV to the operational velocities of the ramjet.

[@revolverDOOMGUY]

I belive that in a decade even kinetic energy based weapon will be defeated or at least hindered by active protection systems, and the only reliable way to defeat these systems will be volume of fier, basically depleting the amount of APS charges, but at that point your enemy's position would be revealed and you would have the option to simply change position. The russian afganit APS already does that according to the russian army, but who knows. APS are a game changer, to the point that a tank might actually return to his role of alpha predator of ground battles. Of course someone would invent the next step in offensive weapons, but tanks could become immune to RPGs and ATGMs in the forseeable future. The next step is creating direct energy weapons capable of defeating anti-air missiles, put them on planes and make the fighter jet the alpha predator of air combat again.

[@inquisitorthomasdefinitely536]

revolverDOOMGUY I think if we were able to create Direct Energy weapons it would be a massive change depending on what we are firing if it’s plasma then it might stay the same if it’s a laser then a lot of Ballistics would be changed to them one of the mane Reasons would be for Accuracy a laser I more than likely one be more accurate than a tank shell for a number of reasons e.g it won’t be affected by wind or gravity since a laser has no mass might even have a longer range ammunition also might be a factor since all it would need for ammo is just energy

[@revolverDOOMGUY]

@@inquisitorthomasdefinitely536 Direct energy weapons will be mass developed as a point defence weapon to defeat missiles, in fact many big companies are developing them in order to put them on 6th gen jets in order to make them immune to things like the rusian S400, because every Nato army right now relies on total air superiority, and systems like these really ruin those strategies.

[@inquisitorthomasdefinitely536]

revolverDOOMGUY I was on about further ahead when we have the capacity to use Direct Energy weapons for more than just point defence

[@revolverDOOMGUY]

@@inquisitorthomasdefinitely536 In that case they will replace every direct fier weapon we have. In particualr anithing supposed to shoot down flying objects, heavy machineguns and infanry weapons. As far as anti vehicles go, i think lasers are not that useful againist heat dissipating armor, not for a long time at least. Reading your name i think you are a warhammer 40k fan? So yeah, lasguns will be a thing one da. But i've always found the 40k idea of las weapons a bit strange, like the fact that there is a multi las and a las cannon... Why? Just make the las cannon shoot a less powerful ray continuously for anti infantry use. Also, why do las weapons have recoil? Lasers are radiations with no mass, why does it produce recoil then? Why are lasers so inaccurate? I know warhammer 40k has a LOT of strange things, like the fact that we mastered space travel but we can't have programmable rounds for autocannons or active protection systems for tanks, but still that is phisics!

[@inquisitorthomasdefinitely536]

revolverDOOMGUY yea I am a 40k fan there are different versions for lasguns depending what there designed to kill (also missing is usually because of human error and Recoil you attribute to not knowing a lasgun would not have any) a lascannon is usually for tanks las gun is weaker for Infantry to use as a basic rifle also you got grades up from these the biggest being Lance gun that they put in warships in space multi lass is just twin Barrelled as for your question for Programmable stuff a lot of that has Simply been lost to history also the Imperium dose not allow the use of AI of any kind now you may make a argument that the see to Automatic turrets and you would be semi right the Turret is Automatic but it’s actually a human brain controlling it and not remotely there will probably be a human brain inside the turret inQuestion or a machine spirit which is like a AI yet it isn’t basically every machine has a machine spirit the more complex the machine the smarter the spirit in question however it’s incapable of doing anything other than what it was created to do (quick note a happy machine spirit should let you push a machine to run longer than it has any right too angry machine spirit the tech breaks more often)

[@lukeskywalket2894]

Can you do a video on the “rods from god”?

[@roger5555ful]

It's called kinetic orital bombardment

[@dsdy1205]

An orbital lance by any other name is just as deadly

[@pandagamer-hg5be]

Kurt 104 so... they are kob-ey's

[@williamharding1517]

If this were a test you would fail. You are only about 50% correct on any point. Your description of the HVM/KEM missile being a beam rider is just flat wrong! That is not how it works. You're also wrong as far as most of your comments about the penetrator. As far as live fire, same again because the missile was fired off both the Bradley and the HMMWV versions. The same applies to just about everything else you say. How do I know? I know because I worked on the program in several of its incarnations and I wrote the control software for the Bradley weapon head. Your video does look slick, it's just a shame that it's full of a lot of misinformation.

[@SmallStormFinatic]

well then give some corrections or anything constructive.

[@oleksandrshymanskyi1129]

KZbin algorithm was spot on as never before by recommending this video right now :D

[@marcus7564]

One think I'm interested in is the cost-effectiveness of non-top of the line weapon systems such as infantry anti-tank systems. I live in New Zealand and I seriously question some of our weapon appropriation philosophises. For example we have the Javelin where each missile cost about $174,000 USD. So using anti-tank as an example how much more value do you get from this top of the line system compared to cheaper or older systems? The justification our Army uses for top of the line equipment is our troops need to best just in case but the reality is we have not engaged tanks since Italy 1945 and it is very unlikely we will ever be in a position of engaging latest generation tanks without allied support (unless ww3). The second issue with their argument is that it can justify anything. If we need the best just in case then we out to have latest gen combined arms and a navy strong enough to prevent invasion. Their argument is ridiculous, weapons systems should be about value for money given the likelihood competing systems advantages and disadvantages will have an impact on the battlefield. If NZ troops engage tanks they are much more likely to be developing nations older T-50s or T-80s than updated M1 or T-14s.

[@nottoday3817]

Actually, unless you go bust some poor blokes house, no third world country would come and invade you. Frankly speaking, unless New Zeeland suddenly finds massive deposits of a strategc resource, there is no reason to invade that country. It has no strategic position, it's at the end of the world (almost literally) so the supply chain needed to support an invasion would be monstrous and it has perfect geography to for defensive warfare. Soo, if one wants to literally invade NZ, it has to be a great power, with a big fleet and large land force to spare. Then, of course, for defensive warfare, you don't need top-notch equipment. I mean, folks in vietnam used holes in the ground with bamboo spikes and shit (literally shit) to kill US soldiers. The 'just in case thing' applies to another context. NZ is a 'strategically important ally' of the US, so just in case the US desires to blackmail your gouvernment into sending troops into one of their adventures in God knows what poor country, In this case, Javellin is quite important for standardisation among troops, which is an extreme advantage for logistical chains. And it can be used much better when attacking targets. That's for general weapons appropriation. As for the missile itself, well, Javelling has 2 main advantages for its latest variants: 1. It has fire and forget capability, which means that you can shoot the missile and run away, quite a great addition for a defender. 2. It can launch top-attack missiles, which can strike at the roof of the turret and engine cover, making it excellent against tanks. Does it justify its cost? Well, hopefully it would never be put to such a test.

[@marcus7564]

@@nottoday3817 it would be more the engagement of 1-2 tanks in places like Iraq and Afghanistan or Iraq as part of coalition operations. NZ forces at this time are never going to get surprised by real armoured formations. We would know if an enemy had these and UK or US assets would be brought in.

[@marcus7564]

@Muhammad Abdul yea, the threat of invasion is almost nil. As a retired head of the Army once mentioned, we have the largest moat in the world. However, our forces do engage overseas in operations on the low end of the conflict spectrum. Given this reality my suspicion is we can invest in less cheaper systems (such as anti air and anti tank, or naval weaponry). One example from other countries is Brazil's Super Tucano ground attack aircraft. Its no F-35 but it does not need to be for the anti-insurgency missions its used for in South America.

[@jakeybaby8888]

This aged like an Obj. 279 coupon

[@ousou78]

Priceless?

[@bradleybroekman7915]

Took inspiration from this they did

[@dounce5926]

Please post more videos like these. Its honestly really interesting to watch lmao

[@Muddybagclean]

Jesus Loves You All

[@WalrusJones185]

A fun note is that there is a sci-fi setting that does use KEM's, just heavily modified ones. In battletech, LRM's are KEM's which do explode after their kinetic penetration is exhausted, but don't carry explosives as a separate mass from the other materials, instead, the lore is just that they have explosives that are insensitive enough to be included as a part of carbide like sintered materials, so the can have explosive mass with a minimal hit to Kinetic penetration, but can still explode somewhat violently when their impact subsides. Technically, this isn't typically described as the armor defeating effect (Some models are described to have a secondary chemical shaped charge warhead, but the universal feature is that the initial impact is a Kinetic penetration effect,) but instead as a secondary effect that allows them to be multi-purpose and useable in a infantry-support role, or to weaken armor that the missile can't defeat (Which within the century of their invention, armor was made to counter them, in an incredibly long line of armor upgrades that result in the unbelievable armor used in the era's of the setting that have rules for players to play them.) Of course, this setting basically has their weapons be universally described as inheriting from not-yet used in real service military projects from the setting, like the XM-274 you use as an example in the raven cannon video thumbnail (Even following the logic of of the XM-274's sale pitch of several shot bursts with high penetration ammo to try and beat armor that is simply to strong to beat in one hit.) While the practicality of this settings primary units is questionable (Even the Classic Battletech mechanics makes the deployment of mechs uncannily difficult due to their tendency to fall down and kill the pilots, for example,) their weapons are basically a massive mishmash of future weapon projects waiting to be revived like KEM's and RAVEN autocannons, along side giant exaggerations of the current material sciences trends to justify why every future weapon system has been unshelved to try and beat modern armor (insensitive explosive projects being continued until they grow so advanced that explosives can be sintered into armor piercing grade penetrators, allowing all munitions to be wired to explode if the designer wills it.) Of course, there is still handwaving regarding too many standard sci-fi tropes, and even more in the later years of the setting that start acting more like a nuke filled apocalyptic dark fantasy in all its walks of its life.

[@daholl8942]

anyone else rewatching this now that the losat has been added?

[@sauce5321]

I wonder if someone’s thought of firing like 100 cheap shitty missiles at one target, helping negate any sort of active defense and just pummeling it to death

[@1228carlito]

Just look at the Hind-24 or Russian rocket launchers

[@KristopherSleege]

This has aged perfectly @Spookston

[@samiamrg7]

Could you do a review of Red Alert 3’s tanks? There are some interesting and silly features much like Tiberium War’s tanks. For example, both the Allied and Empire of the Rising Sun tanks have 3 treads, but on top of that the Empire’s tank is amphibious and flips it’s tracks over when going from land to sea and vice-versa.

[@groucho1080p]

BOOOOM

[@joeslouie489]

*K.E.M STRIKE INBOUND*

[@dsdy1205]

It's quite possible to convert a KEM for anti-infantry use. You'd simply have a splitting charge inside the warhead that fragments the warhead at a predetermined point. The round would behave like canister shot once the charge went off.

[@ShadowFox0324]

Spookston, What interested you/got you into wanting to cover the topic your channel does?

[@nooblangpoo]

damn so that m8 was the one they presented in Armored Warfare. too bad it was paywalled to hell. edit: m8 not m113

[@namelessking8905]

The Griffin 120 light tank also use these, but can shoot it from its 120mm gun. Also I got the Griffin 120 and M8 for free. I unlocked the campaign thru gold I earned while playing the game normally.

[@thegamingzilla6269]

I remember seeing something about a LEO 1A with a cherry picker crane mounted with a TOW launcher, would be nice to see what that was all about

[@HJDore]

Challenger 1 also had plans drawn up for this.

[@miterkat]

3 years ago spookston talked about the LOSAT, now its an event vehicle quite the time has passed

[@HEATSEEKR]

The Bradley or the last one with the 12 missiles would be pretty cool to have in war thunderm

[@RaDeus87]

I imagine that a missile going 5km/s that suddenly self-destructed would make for a pretty devastating anti-infantry weapon. Just smash the penetrator with some explosives and the fragments will easily fuck up a building or a convoy if you hit it from the front. It would basically be a modern version of the shrapnel shell from the 1800s, only with enough sonic booms to scare the shit outa the enemy 😅

[@zachsrandoms9500]

To be honest with you,it would be great if such tanks like the LOSAT are being used in the artillery force so that they can be assisting tools of destruction if artillery tanks and cannons aren't enough.

[@hydroxideblue9367]

Hey Spook, does the CRV-7 or CRV-7PG count as a KEM when using its Tungsten Flechette or Rod?

[@w8stral]

CKEM's previous iteration(not LOSAT as you stated) had a massive failure in front of the eggs and braids. It went straight up to about 800 ft just like it was supposed to, but then turned 180 and went straight back down into the launch vehicle, obliterating it... Needless to say, the program got the axe... CKEM was a tiny program to work out the "problem", but after the first demonstration that quickly got buried for political reasons, the program did not go anywhere as funding for Iraq etc took over. PS: Lets just say everyone's stated range for CKEM is WAY too short. Its pop up maneuver was to avoid terrain, allow spec ops to lase targets for it, etc. Also was intended as area defense against helos/aircraft and to effectively get rid of the Javelin as well as the Javelin is in effect too heavy to carry.

[@fiasco7P]

0:50 WTF !? kill the barrel then the tank.!!!