The Missile that Obliterates Cope

[@janissaryone1906]

It should be emphasized the Javelin is valuable not just in an antitank role but the command unit with its' infrared zoom optics is invaluable for recon and target discrimination. Much of the cost of the Javelin is in the reusable command unit and it's been stated by many soldiers that even without the missile, its' contribution to the battlefield situational awareness and target acquisition is game changing.

[@nekopop8159]

They should take that targeting system technology from the Javelin and put it in a small device camera for easy carry and head wear.

[@atakorkut5110]

@@nekopop8159 with the coming of 5nm chips I think now they can make all that much smaller

[@namenandern5531]

@@atakorkut5110 you don't want to outsource the chips in your weapon system, especially not to a potential warzone of the future

[@xxxlonewolf49]

Truth

[@atakorkut5110]

@@namenandern5531 I am very much in agreement with you my friend.

[@The_CrackedPot_Christian]

Putting aside the grim nature of war, that NLAW is pretty neat to fire the explosive downwards from a horizontal trajectory.

[@surq0784]

@The Bear Yup! The TOW does exactly this with tandem charges.

[@whatdoesntkillyoumakesyous6707]

@The Bear The warhead and guidance from the Bill is what they use on the NLAW today

[@scruffy7760]

The BILL system was the first in the world to be a top attack missile

[@TheOriginalFaxon]

All it took to get the explosive to fire downward, was placing the shaping cone oriented facing downwards, and making the projectile large enough to fit the necessary explosive charge in it. In this instance, my understanding is they actually built it with the ability to rotate when you're setting it up to fire, rather than just building it with two shaped charges. The Javelin uses a similar setup, but with two shaped charges both facing forwards, since it can orient the rocket for top-down attack while in flight, with the first one being meant to penetrate reactive armor, while the 2nd (primary) charge behind it penetrates the armor itself. Against a target without reactive armor, this just increases its penetration potential further as well

[@slobodanmitic1354]

Swedish BILL was the first to do that 40 years ago.

[@verdebusterAP]

The Javelin and NLAW together are lethal combo

[@AlbertZonneveld]

I like the Stugna-P as well in this war. Effective with a lot of range

[@ezragoldberg3132]

@@AlbertZonneveld who thought that we would be seeing Stugna-P's downing Russian Helicopters in this conflict?

[@littleshopofelectrons4014]

The Iranians could completely reverse engineer a Javelin and still not be able to make one. This is because many of the components are state-of-the-art semiconductors such as CPUs and FPGAs. These are unavailable to Iran because of sanctions and they don't have any means to produce them. This is also true to a lesser extent for the Stinger. Russia has the same problem with their own high tech weapons. They rely on modern semiconductors which must be imported. These are now sanctioned devices.

[@fjb4932]

LSoE, Sanctions are for the law abiding. Where there's a profit to be made, there's a way around Sanctions. It's all a matter of $$$$ ...

[@Rob_F8F]

@@fjb4932 Sure. But parties willing to violate sanctions will charge much higher price. In addition, any buyer that suddenly increases their purchasing volume from the manufacturer will come under scrutiny. If caught, they could be banned from purchasing more, which would put them out of business. Full proof? No. But much more controls in place.

[@AlbertZonneveld]

The javelin is from the nineties. Semiconductors from the nineties are not state-of-the-art anymore.

[@swedhgemoni8092]

@@AlbertZonneveld Indeed. And as far as semiconductors go, the ch*nese could whip up their own answer quick enough. Americuckwans are really full of shit claims like the original commentator.

[@bighands69]

Even if there was no sanctions and they had access to the chips they simply could not build the system in mass numbers. What they would produce simply would be nowhere near a Javelin or NLAW.

[@Tommy1977777]

I've fired the javelin many times. Fantastic weapon.

[@campbellenious9163]

Can't have a drone to every squad on the battlefield you can have an NLAW though

[@Tommy1977777]

@@campbellenious9163 the NLAW is fine but if I'm a Grunt squaring off against a tank I'd like as much of an advantage as I can get. Hoping my target won't change behavior after I fire is the kind of thinking that gets people killed. Remember: there's a reason the NLAW is so cheap.

[@campbellenious9163]

@@Tommy1977777 I apologies this was intended for another comment, where someone said why don't we use drones to take out tanks over NLAW/Javelins. I don't know how I replied to your comment, my bad sir. The NLAW does serve its own purpose well, but I agree the Javelin is superior.

[@timmurphy5541]

@@Tommy1977777 The way to understand it is that you are less likely to be able to have a javelin at all. These things have to be supplied all over the frontline and for every javelin there will be 10 nlaws. You might love the javelin but if you don't get given one.....

[@Tommy1977777]

@@timmurphy5541 I get that. But the javelin is far more likely to hit. The NLAW might be a great replacement for something like the AT4 but as a weapon for dedicated armor "hunter-killer team" it cannot be beaten. Moreover, I liken the javelin use to something akin to issuing stingers to the Mujahideen in Afghanistan. Hitting accurately every time with a javelin reduces the need for 10 NLAWs for every one javelin. I can agree to a kind of "filtration" method whereby the NLAWs whittle down the force and the javelin acts as cleanup crew.

[@silverismoney]

Awesome video. Loved every minute. Cost of munitions is very important especially in war when you need large numbers. But fire and forget is also valuable. More videos like this on munitions!

[@Gryronaut]

Well done for slowing down the narrative speed. Sounds much better.

[@stalkinghawk9244]

While I agree that the CLU of the javelin can be reused thus reducing the cost per shot down to 80k (as far as I know). It also means that up to 250k are locked in to one position and one firing team. The Javelin is great, but complementary having 8-10 Nlaws going around nicely spread out is also very effective and important. High tech is only usefull if its actually present.

[@gregparrott]

The claimed cost of the Javelin, as stated here is up to $250k. While Wik claims this, several other sources claim it is $178k, for both the reusable 'Command Launch Unit (CLU) and one missile. In these other sources, the cost for each subsequent missile used with the CLU is $78k. I'm not sure if this wide discrepancy may be between different versions, or the result of modernization So, while still quite expensive, the PER UNIT cost of firing the Javelin may be $80k per missile, with a one time cost of $160k

[@wolfhunter8608]

The missile is shown the target, and therefore knows where it will be, because it knows where it is, and where it won’t be. It subtracts where it is from where it won’t be, leaving it with where it will be.

[@spotricb3224]

Underrated comment! “The missile knows where it is all times”

[@flingborg]

The Britts and Swedes have som other interesting weapon systems together.

[@dewlittle1211]

It does indeed destroy cope. But it also causes a great deal of seething.

[@genericalfishtycoon3853]

This was the comment I wanted to see.

[@alepepperoni2563]

NLAW-Pilled

[@surq0784]

Missiles, no matter the complexity, will always be faster to produce than armoured vehicles and tanks.

[@amvkarthik]

Not without rare earth elements.

[@Elrond_Hubbard_1]

@@amvkarthik Well yes, rare Earth elements are used in electronic and computing devices, so that goes for any modern equipment, including tanks. But also smart phones and Nintendo switches and half the stuff in your house probably. I'm not sure what you're suggesting, maybe that one side controls all the rare Earth elements and denies it to the other? Maybe then you could bust out some of those old World War 2 tanks. I don't think they would need any rare Earth metals.

[@righty5890]

@@Elrond_Hubbard_1 Depends on which WW2 tanks but yeah if im not picky most of them didnt use as much rare metals as modern tanks

[@Maddog-xc2zv]

@@righty5890 well, sit and wait: soon russia will be using the spares they have from wwII. once thing must be true: they should be rare; good targets, nonetheless...

[@Maddog-xc2zv]

@Baltazar Razatlab maybe because we all live in an ever evolving world, just saying...

[@Tommy1977777]

Hard to see a small Infantryman a few hundred meters away. Especially since it is fire and forget.

[@FISHH00KS]

LoL you won't last long............

[@TheGrace020]

The badass Launcher 💪

[@grast5150]

Ground breaking sure, but the good old fashioned, TOW II while does put the operator at risk, it is the most effective anti-tank system out there at any range. Remember, there is no radar, no heat seaking, no predictions. It is just an operator which can bring the warhead to the tank and active protection does not defeat the TOW warhead. It is basically death on a wire.

[@bighands69]

It is nowhere near as good and mobile as NLAW or Javelin.

[@kenosabi]

Not remotely better then a Javalin and you literally explained why while claiming the exact opposite. Lol.

[@deltonlomatai2309]

The longer range of the Javelin is great but comes at a cost. Being able to fire from greater than 2K increases survivability from counter fire. Conserving Javelins for long range fire is probably the way to go. The Ukrainians are starting pull out older recoiless antitank weapons. I wonder if that is to conserve the number of Javelins they have.

[@eduwino151]

Russians are sending ancient T 62s no need to waste javelins on those

[@whereswaldo5740]

They’re selling them.

[@snapdragon6601]

The Stugna-P has also been performing well and it was reported recently that TOW anti-tank missiles are on the way to Ukraine too. It's not a good time to be Russian tank crew.

[@kalle5548]

Considering that the NLAW is part Swedish its probably development to work well in more forested areas were javelin might struggle or not be a benefit I don't really know, just guessing, but yeah on open fields and in deserts javelin is probably the way to go

[@baneofbanes]

@@whereswaldo5740 no

[@scottkrater2131]

So that's how Rome conquered such a huge empire. I heard all the Roman soldiers carried a short sword and a javelin in battle.

[@edwalker598]

2 javelins

[@icecold9511]

Pilum actually. A javelin is a different weapon.

[@jb76489]

@@icecold9511 did you hear that? That’s the sound of the joke flying over your head

[@icecold9511]

@@jb76489 Oh, I got the joke. I. Just a history 🤓 too.

[@LentPanic7]

@@jb76489 He should thank the gods it was a joke and not a javelin that flew over his head.

[@drmarkintexas-400]

Thank you for sharing

[@micahthezilla9432]

The missile knows where it is at all times because it knows where it isn't

[@-joe-davidson]

I would hate to be inside of a tank this day and age.

[@therapon9019]

Not the Abrams. Them pretty beasts are untouchable.

[@mikepatrona472]

Mostly everything will be remote controlled soon. Then it will be irl chess

[@Oxide21]

You mean russian tanks? Western tanks are much better protected

[@Benson_aka_devils_advocate_88]

Tanks are useless without supporting infantry. That's Russia's biggest issue, they use their armored vehicles as if they're made of adamantium plated armor. If used in a combined arms manner, where each facet supports those around them, you're more likely to be injured on foot than in an armored vehicle. The only difference is that when a vehicle is compromised those inside are going to be having a really bad day.

[@-joe-davidson]

@@mikepatrona472 That's the only way I would want to be a tank operator these days. From a bunker, with a remote.

[@michealoflaherty1265]

I have read reports that many Ukrainian troops prefer the NLAW to the Javelin because of it's simplicity and user friendliness.

[@andyd2960]

I don't doubt it. I trained with the javelin. It does require a bit of training and experience to truly take advantage of it. The nlaw has the advantage of simplicity for quick training as well as the price tag. It's also a one piece unit quicker to deploy.

[@bighands69]

Every weapon requires experience. Even an NLAW will require experience. Javelin is a much wider use platform.

[@Movetheproduct]

Yes NLAW is superior because of it's simplicity.

[@andyd2960]

@@bighands69 well I would hope that they at least ran through some training. Unfortunately these guys don't have the time to really get up to speed on the javelin. I did train with it and can't remember all of the controls off the top of my head. Even still, I just can't imagine these guys with training being able to deploy one faster than the nlaw. That time is important when the tank is just as interested in you as you are them. Luckily I never needed such a weapon. The smaw was more than enough. With similar comparison to the at-4.

[@bighands69]

@@andyd2960 They will get systems operations experience but their real experience will be on the battle field.

[@cal593]

Of course the British would name a rocket designed to hit weak spots out of nowhere "in-laws"

[@Hardbass2021]

I like the title of this video. Pretty fitting for the missile that is being discussed about.

[@John_Redcorn_]

$250K is for the whole Javelin unit, not the missile itself. The launcher is reusable

[@thetruthhurts7675]

$249,000 for the CLU which is reusable for the Javelin, whilst each missile depending on variant the Javelin costs $240,000 per missile. "US$216,717 (G-model missile only, FY2021) US$240,000 (missile only, export cost, FY2019) US$249,700 (Lightweight CLU only, FY2021)" The NLAW costs $30,000 to $40,000 per full system. 50,000 Javelins have been produced to date whilst 26,000 of the newer NLAWs have been built. They are actually ideal when (strangely for two systems made in two seperate countries with no input from the other) used in tandem together as they cover one another, Javelin at a distance, NLAW close in. There is even a video on KZbin of an NLAW being used from a second floor window against a Russian tank in Ukraine. Supposedly it shouldn't be armed at this short distance, however there are no Russian occupants of the receiving tank to ask if it worked!!

[@tomeng9520]

NLAW: NEXT-GENERATION LIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON The next-generation light anti-tank weapon (NLAW) is the first missile system for non-experts and can strike out tanks with a single shot as it strikes from above. The weapon weighs 12.5 kilos and depending on which year model it is, the fired missile reaches 600-800 meters. It can be fired in tight spaces. Price per piece $ 35,000. Developed by Saab Bofors Dynamics in Sweden and manufactured in the UK. The American missile weapon Javelin is twice as heavy as the NLAW at 24.3 kilos, and reaches 2500 old one to 4000 meters new one. In 2002, a single Javelin command launch unit cost $ 126,000, and each missile cost around $ 78,000 (equivalent to $ 112,000 in 2020). Thats $ 238,000 do you get it now ?!

[@EdwardSnortin]

@@thetruthhurts7675 It didn't work, the distance was too short and the warhead didn't even explode.

[@flamingsmore5904]

@@thetruthhurts7675 yep, Britain uses them like that. We use the javelin and NLAW in tandem.

[@lemonhead1442]

@@thetruthhurts7675That video you’re talking about the missile was never armed it was too short of range the tank crew even posted a video after being hit nothing happened to the tank or crew other than some ringing ears

[@davidmcneil2296]

I completely understand why the ‘Javelin Glitch’ in Call of Duty Mw2 was so devastating back in the day.

[@heinedenmark]

We(Denmark) have decided to buy Carl Gustav M4, with the Aimpoint FCS13-RE Fire Control System instead. Much more flexible. For platoons. Spike LR2 on company level.

[@jb76489]

The Carl-Gustav and the Javelin are not at all in the same class. You may as well say a cargo plane is better than a fighter because it’s “much more flexible”

[@heinedenmark]

@@jb76489 I'm talking about the NLAW. We use Spike LR2 in the same role as Javelin. Longer range and more flexible than the Javelin, since it can lock on a target after launch and change target during flight.

[@jb76489]

@@heinedenmark it also is much less portable, needs to be launched from a helicopter for meaningfully longer range, it’s heavier and you should be displacing after firing, that’s the whole point of fire and forget

[@DriveVibeAuto]

I became a seasoned LAW operator during my last deployment under Operation Metro. Thing is lethal indoors, especially in a subway!

[@jay1st1st]

Could you make a video about the programmable ammo from BOFORS, like the air burst system and the others ??

[@up4open763]

If you're in a city, close range, the RPG is cheaper yet, and will do plenty.

[@ArmedSpaghet]

Better, just a guy holding his groceries will stop a tank. (Cough)

[@genericalfishtycoon3853]

When the enemy can no longer cope, I Sneed.

[@AbuHajarAlBugatti]

Sneed's Blow & Go

[@Mrgunsngear]

Thanks

[@garystinnett8321]

Man I love these channels!

[@ChrisDeAnna]

5:43 when the graphics don't finish loading

[@XA1985]

Quarter of a million for javelin? Where do you get your info? Last I heard it cost 100k

[@paktahn]

that is most likely just the missile cost the launcher is more expensive than the ammo for it but is reusable

[@XA1985]

The turret is always a sweet spot to attack

[@garryharrington8255]

thease dont seem to be on ebay.. can you send the ebay link please

[@bricology]

New drinking game: every time the "Dark Tech" narrator says "Moreover...", take drink. You'll be sloshed in _no_ time.

[@YouTube_user3333]

So from all these videos prices are roughly NLAW $25k (single use) JAVELIN $250k (comes with 1 round) JAVELIN missile $80k

[@flamingsmore5904]

Yeah both are cost effective depending on what you need, or in the UK’s case, we just use both of them in tandem.

[@dogsnads5634]

Current Javelin missile cost is actually c$200k for the new production G variant.

[@YouTube_user3333]

@@dogsnads5634 a succession of video I’ve watched, they never state what variant it is. They all give roughly the same figures in regards to prices. These would all be in USD too, I’d assume.

[@legendofthepeach]

Also javelin isn’t an American only weapon UK has been using their own Javelins for probably 2 decades now. NLAW just supplements this, handy having a few in each vehicle. Punch holes in compounds and just fire a few off in fight. Most anti tank weapons been used way more as antipersonnel

[@flamingsmore5904]

Yeah, the NLAW is provided at a section level, while the Javelin used at a bigger level to target enemy tanks and armoured vehicles.

[@HKim0072]

Always thought it was weird to have different manufactures of similar equipment. And, now we are seeing the benefits. Having a wide manufacturing base is much better in wartime / conflicts. You could argue that the US is hampered by the consolidation of defense contractors over time.

[@petter5721]

Nine countries uses the NLAW today.

[@mrspaceman2764]

A solution that completely decouples the sight from the launcher seems like the most effective option. Why not keep the launcher miles away from the sight and completely unmanned? Maybe there's already an asset like this.

[@DEATH-THE-GOAT]

About the NLAW _"You can fire down 45 degrees and can shoot from inside a building, from a basement or from the second floor of a building out of the range of most tanks."_

[@abialo2010]

can you do a video on the original law missile?

[@j0nixrag0]

is dark seas another one of your channel?

[@AFITgrad86]

The NLAW's business end looks like a serious sub-woofer ... 🤣 Wait for the kboom ...

[@mrspaceman2764]

US Military: "Does it kill the target?" Other Militaries: "how much does it cost?"

[@Sophocles13]

So I thought the NLAW got most of it's cost savings from it's simplified guidance package. Wouldn't it become much more effective without adding much cost by adding a tandem charge?

[@tomeng9520]

NLAW: NEXT-GENERATION LIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON The next-generation light anti-tank weapon (NLAW) is the first missile system for non-experts and can strike out tanks with a single shot as it strikes from above. The weapon weighs 12.5 kilos and depending on which year model it is, the fired missile reaches 600-800 meters. It can be fired in tight spaces. Price per piece $ 35,000. Developed by Saab Bofors Dynamics in Sweden and manufactured in the UK. The American missile weapon Javelin is twice as heavy as the NLAW at 24.3 kilos, and reaches 2500 old one to 4000 meters new one. In 2002, a single Javelin command launch unit cost $ 126,000, and each missile cost around $ 78,000 (equivalent to $ 112,000 in 2020). Thats $ 238,000 do you get it now ?!

[@dogsnads5634]

One of the requirements was that it could hit tanks in defilade i.e. hull down positions. Which is near impossible to do with older systems. You could remove some complexity from it, but you'd lose the ability to engage moving targets easily at range. At that point you might as well just build an larger calibre AT4...

[@utiwutiw4048]

What about the french mmp and ukr stugna ?

[@dennissalisbury496]

Equip your army with NLAWS on dirt bikes and keep them moving.

[@Basement_crusader]

Absolutely A+ title work

[@thebarkingmouse]

The wiki is incorrect. Look it up on James or Global Security or nammo. The entire launch system including one missile and a clu is approximately $176,000, the individual missiles are approximately $80,000. Per james, Global Security and nammo.

[@Rob_F8F]

It's Jane's, not James.

[@paktahn]

@@Rob_F8F that was most likely from before pedo pete took office and cause a massive amount of inflation with his retarded sanctions that hurt the west more and his backward domestic policy now it probably is 250k for a full package

[@Rob_F8F]

@@paktahn Be careful, even good Russians working the Social Media are being conscripted and sent to fight in Ukraine. Stay in your apartment. There are draft officers outside of many apartment buildings looking to men to mobilize.

[@iMentu]

Am I the only one who read the title as, "The Missile that Obliterates Corpses?"

[@slavikk6712]

Clickbait title? I’m over here waiting for someone to shoot a javelin at cops

[@ArmedSpaghet]

Shoot half a million dollars of 1 missile at a cop car? Nah just a 10 dollar grenade can do that 😂

[@slavikk6712]

@@ArmedSpaghet I just seen that it says cope not cops lol 😂

[@mrstealyoblocks4473]

Got to fire some NLAW in Ukraine as Foreign Legion. They are not to be messed with. VERY formidable weapon. Literally designed to destroy Russian tanks.

[@tenkloosterherman]

Any tank.

[@kantemirovskaya1lightninga30]

I would note that regularly trained wire guided atgm teoops could hit moving targets and trained heavily to do so. The us army no longer has dedicated anti tank grunts anymore though…goals changed and now prefer a pickup and shoot with little training model… but ncreaing cost sgnificantpy as opposed to the former model of highly trained infantry that are dedicated anti-tankers, knowing weak spots in armor of nearly every vehicle that’s out there, etc. These troops were deadly at their task, but at least in the US they have been done away with in favor of easy to shoot guns. It’s only natural the cost is going to be astronomical for such weapons.

[@JohnJ469]

Perhaps because of the rise of asymmetric warfare? Shooting at pick ups and vans covered in welded on plates is more likely than shooting at nation produced AFVs. Just a thought.

[@tenkloosterherman]

Javelin and NLAW are cheaper and more effective than a dedicated anti-tank soldier.

[@Yuki_Ika7]

excellent title!

[@snarevox]

demolition ranch bought an at4 tube and made a beer bong out of it

[@tomeng9520]

NLAW: NEXT-GENERATION LIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON The next-generation light anti-tank weapon (NLAW) is the first missile system for non-experts and can strike out tanks with a single shot as it strikes from above. The weapon weighs 12.5 kilos and depending on which year model it is, the fired missile reaches 600-800 meters. It can be fired in tight spaces. Price per piece $ 35,000. Developed by Saab Bofors Dynamics in Sweden and manufactured in the UK. The American missile weapon Javelin is twice as heavy as the NLAW at 24.3 kilos, and reaches 2500 old one to 4000 meters new one. In 2002, a single Javelin command launch unit cost $ 126,000, and each missile cost around $ 78,000 (equivalent to $ 112,000 in 2020). Thats $ 238,000 do you get it now ?!

[@terrybennett5321]

Hey the blue prints are for a brake calliper and fuel pump , 😅

[@TheReidmeister96]

Here's what they meant by 'joining forces' in the beginning: U.S.: "Guys! Check it out! We created the most awesome state-of-the-art shoulder fired anti-tank weapon... Its just really f*ckin expensive. We dont have enough.... Can you also buy me dinner?" Sweden and Britain: "Dont worry bro, we'll make cheaper, more cost-effective clones, so we can make more of them and fill in the gaps!"

[@DocFripouille]

Should I point out that we do NOT see the result of a hit at all? We constantly demonstrations of "dead" targets but no data about the damage that was inflicted on any target we saw in the video.

[@Mortablunt]

Exactly! It took me six months of the war to finally see a confirmed javelin strike and after nine months I’ve seen a mere three javelin strikes and only one of those strikes resulted in a kill. One of the vehicles that survived was a BMP-1. Plain the missiles don’t work and this is being mirrored by the fact that they are showing up much less in captured weapons stashes; they simply aren’t being sent because they’re ineffective.

[@tyjax5119]

I wish they would make a reusable variant of the NLAW. DEAR SANTA…

[@jme36053]

Both NLAW and the US FGM-172 SRAW (Predator) are unguided. The launcher obtains a ballistic solution that is downloaded into the projectile to predict a target intercept point. An IMU is used together with control surfaces to ensure the weapon remains on course in varying environmental conditions. It’s use at short ranges enhances the likelihood of success. A “smart” weapon, yes, but clearly not guided.

[@tenkloosterherman]

And?

[@revolverDOOMGUY]

Dude, Non Credible Defence is going to have a party over that name!

[@nickf4333]

in-laws are highly dangerous

[@NeuroDeviant421]

We need a video on the new QuickSink munition.

[@andrewhendricks4629]

Great content always love watching dark tech

[@erasmus_locke]

Javelin = Bugatti Chiron Nlaw = Ford Mustang RPG-7 = tractor

[@exsappermadman25055]

"This video is not available in Russia"......

[@kger4643]

What is Cope? Is it supposed to be Hope?

[@ArmedSpaghet]

Cope - coping with something such as a loss. Orcs are coping bc they are shit at war.

[@andreyhempburn]

What army does the soldier in the thumbnail belong to? His gear and camo looks very swiss, yet we don't have NLAW's

[@rojavabashur6455]

Sweden.

[@andreyhempburn]

@@rojavabashur6455 Thanks, this was driving me cracy, lol

[@prjndigo]

Javelin isn't top-attack, it's plunging attack and aims below/beside the edge of russian style tank turrets.

[@maxstr]

What does cope mean?

[@jameswhite153]

it's a reference to r/noncredible defence.

[@remcovanvliet3018]

Hey! You don't sound like you're in a hurry anymore. Well done!

[@McRizzle23]

Top comments more 0 80 x speeds playback

[@redrooster303]

As someone who is British I find it strange that I know of about 80% of American weapons systems but only know about 30% of British ones.

[@rajpawar9343]

But thumbnail looked like this launcher fires subwoofer. So are they going to blow tanks using Subwoofers?

[@shipofthesun]

Or, you could just get some commercial drones and drop old mines on tanks. Apparently.

[@triadwarfare]

Not 100% effective though. Strong winds can affect the drop of the shell, so skill and luck plays a role on how effective drone-dropped bombs are. Still, having all options available to you is better than only having one option. The enemy will just invest in more drone countermeasures if they see you overreliant on drones. After Russia pulled their forces from Kyiv and consolidated them in the Donbass region, Russia was gaining ground thanks to their artillery. Ukraine could not compete with them, but because they noticed their overreliance on artillery, that's why they were sent HIMARS and it destroyed the one advantage Russia has as artillery relies on huge stockpiles of ammunition.

[@OjsMatte]

@@triadwarfare How about... Guided tank mines dropped from drones =D

[@shipofthesun]

Apologies. I'm amused that $3000 drones with old Russian ordinance and 3D printed fins are turreting $1,000,000 Russian tanks of any sort, even the super-duper new ones(this is the point my ex would lean in and say "he thinks he's being funny"). Ukraine has been kicking ass with the tools they have, and have scavenged, and the better the tool they, etc. Hack the planet! It's getting close to the point where the U.S. is going to get out the F-15s, which is my way of saying "get out the big scary toys!" M-1 tanks decimating T-34s, AC-130s flying up and down supply lines, striking terror and inflicting biblical levels of smiting down(I wouldn't want to be within a hundred miles of one, ever), F-22s taking out Putin's special bridge, say goodbye to the Black Sea fleet, rods from the Gods destroying the Kremlin, and F-15s enjoying air ownership, these are a few of my favorite things. And if we wanted to we could push them all the way back to Moscow. Notice Putin hasn't been throwing nukes around as much lately? Someone got in his ear and told him what an insane idea that was, and if he wanted Russia to exist in the future he'd shut up.

[@parthasdasgupta]

If there is a direct hit then any missile will create a problem for the tank

[@theimmortal4718]

I guarantee that SAAB will come out with their top attack laser guided 84mm round for the Carl Gustaf this year. That's going to compliment forces that use that system, like the US. Dropping a rocket assisted, laser guided, top attack 5 pound warhead from more than a kilometer would be very useful on everything that's not a tank and save the Javelins and NLAWS for the toughest of armor.

[@dogsnads5634]

Thing is...a laser guided top attack round won't be much cheaper than NLAW is already. Cheapest PGM's you'll find are APKWS, PGK, SDB1 and JDAM. None get lower priced than $30,000 minimum. And they are produced in colossal quantities to reach that price.

[@theimmortal4718]

@@dogsnads5634 From what I've read, current laser guided missiles like the kornet or Stugna cost about 20k/rd. SAAB claims they can produce the Guided Multipurpose Munition for less than 10K.

[@martinh9099]

Why show Boris Johnson in the video? He was nothing to do with NLAW's development, in fact the whole developmemt of NLAW took place under the Labour Govt in the UK

[@brian2312]

I dont know where you got your pricing but they’re both incorrect. The American Javelin is around $70,000 a missile while the Clue (firing computer) is around $240,000. The Clue can be reused over and over agin firing approximately 5 missiles on a single disposable battery that can be used in radios. So it’s readily available. The price of the missiles have gone down over the last two decades of use due to the manufacturing advancements. The British version was under bid and is costing nearly €10,000 per round. In short, the Javelin is more expensive, but far superior in nearly every variable. Both rounds take the same amount of time to construct. Tho they are separate facilities on opposites side of the Atlantic Ocean, both are built in just one location by different defense contractors. Logistically they face the same issues when it comes to some pieces and shipping. The British military, amongst several other nato nations, all buy Lockheed Martin’s Javelin system with some software and power supply differences between what the American military receives and what others get. Oh, and the Javelin is designed to take down slow moving or hovering helicopters and stationary or slow moving watercraft with its direct attack mode versus the top attack mode for heavily armored ground vehicles.

[@Statueshop297]

The British and other countries use both weapons as they complement each other. NLAW is light, easy to use, shorter range weapon. Javelin is heavier but has longer range. Different systems for different targets.

[@Clonefiles]

We will be back again to get that back

[@markchapman2585]

Going deer hunting on a weekend this would be perfect

[@Proteus6684]

If you are in ukraine and watching this video, there are a lot of errors in detail. I love this channel but I was an NLAW and Javelin operator and there are details mistaken here which are vital to success. Small details make all the difference.

[@amentco8445]

why would anyone in the middle of a battle be watching "this missile destrays cope" as a tutorial on the use of their weapon? Are you slow?

[@tenkloosterherman]

Nag, nag, nag.

[@digger105337]

Obliterates " Cope" ????? Thought it was a mental health weapon.

[@sergioalcantar3290]

Who is Cope again?

[@seed_of_the_woman]

sorry, what is cope?

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

The overhead metal frames installed on Russian tanks were dubbed the "cope cages". Cope comes from "coping mechanism", trying to tell yourself a lie to avoid facing reality.

[@seed_of_the_woman]

@@ChucksSEADnDEAD: that’s harsh… thanks.

[@Zoom_1012]

Wow! I didn’t know the Javelin is $250,000 per missile. 🌴☀️🌴

[@FastEddy1959]

It’s not. That’s the cost for the missile with its reusable launcher.

[@JohnJ469]

@@FastEddy1959 Any idea as to the cost of the reload missiles?

[@YouTube_user3333]

@@JohnJ469 I heard it’s $80,000 per missile. Launcher comes with missile for $250k. So the launcher’s are about $170k.

[@JohnJ469]

@@KZbin_user3333 Thanks. considering the price of a tank or other AFV that's cheap.

[@tomeng9520]

NLAW: NEXT-GENERATION LIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON The next-generation light anti-tank weapon (NLAW) is the first missile system for non-experts and can strike out tanks with a single shot as it strikes from above. The weapon weighs 12.5 kilos and depending on which year model it is, the fired missile reaches 600-800 meters. It can be fired in tight spaces. Price per piece $ 35,000. Developed by Saab Bofors Dynamics in Sweden and manufactured in the UK. The American missile weapon Javelin is twice as heavy as the NLAW at 24.3 kilos, and reaches 2500 old one to 4000 meters new one. In 2002, a single Javelin command launch unit cost $ 126,000, and each missile cost around $ 78,000 (equivalent to $ 112,000 in 2020). Thats $ 238,000 do you get it now ?!

[@rickjames18]

According to recent news a couple javelins were captured by the Russians in Ukraine. Those javelins have become part of the drone deal that Russia made with Iran and it looks like Iran is going to try to reverse engineer the javelin not sure about the NLAW. It also looks like a US stinger system was also sent to Iran but I have no clue if the Iranians can really reverse engineer it since the process is quite difficult and expensive for most countries.

[@MuhammadIsmail-in6vf]

depends on the labor costs mostly, plus iran has money for the projects but not luxuries of people.

[@FerricWolf]

Given the number of stingers floating around in the middle east, I'm sure they could have got one very easily without Russia. Maybe it's a more modern version or something.

[@RedAndYellacuddlyFella]

from what I've read it was a shipment of US and UK weaponry bound for Ukrainian troops that was taken by the Russians, so quite a few of these weapons to reverse engineer

[@whatdoesntkillyoumakesyous6707]

Lol Javelin have more than 200 semi conductors included,good luck copying or reverse engineering that And i guess its the same with other western weapons You need alot of washing machines then

[@jeffk464]

Yeah, Iran is getting pretty decent at reverse engineering these types of systems. Can they make an F22 competitor nope, but they can make these.

[@entrippyZ]

I think the solution to the cost of the javelin is to include a second ammo type, higher yield "dumb" rockets that explode on impact. If the tank is a mile away, yeah shoot the $240,000 rocket. But if the tank is 2 blocks away and hasn't noticed you, I'd say take a moment to put the dumb rocket in. That or carry an m-203

[@goldenbadger8247]

obliterares Cope or Cost?

[@joshdoe7288]

Pretty sure he’s referring to cope cages

[@timothystrawn1844]

Maybe he’s talking about chewing Tobacco

[@baneofbanes]

Russian cope can’t stop it.

[@TheGelatinousSnake]

Predictions: If conflict is protracted and enemy tanks skimp on armor, javelin might switch to a cheaper single warhead. If conflict evolves and tanks become better armored, upgraded heavy NLAW may be in order.

[@augustkasemaa3290]

Some call it the cope cage killer

[@mattkelly2004]

All countries are under NATO umbrella so why not get everyone from javelin and everyone from NLAW together and make our boys and girls a system that works to perfection at a minimal cost??

[@baneofbanes]

Because there’s a reason things have a cost.

[@someopinionateddirt6561]

Sometimes the compromise solution makes no one happy. Better to have two specialist systems for different use cases.

[@greendogg83]

These weapon systems are not the same, despite what ill informed media and KZbin channel videos of this nature seem to think, they are more or less useful in different situations for some of but not all of the same tasks, which is why any military that has access to them, such as the UK or Sweden, or now also Ukraine, fields both of them for their relative strengths in the given situation, stop getting butthurt over which one is or isn't your favorite, it is ridiculous

[@gregparrott]

The stock photography often gets kind of hokey, such as ar 3:20, where a small model car and a model SUV are shown, along with one drawing of what appears to be a brake master cylinder, and another drawing (left), showing what is pretty clearly a brake caliper. On a separate note, the video's title is "The Missile that Obliterates Cope" What is 'Cope'?

[@winstoncrane7803]

I would like to see a video on the rods from God project.

[@clusterfer]

I remember the time I lost all cope...

[@Sion_Revan]

Thumbnail: Smile for the camera!