The US just used a stealth bomber to sink a ship in the Pacific

[@PasleyAviationPhotography]

Quick sink sounds like something a novice would buy at Home Depot.

[@omdavbu]

Unrelated, but QuickSync is a widely used video transcoding feature that most people with a laptop have used before.

[@Jondoe18702]

It’s on isle six next to the rim pac

[@markburton5292]

i bought one of those and now my bathroom is under water elp :P

[@ronaldamesjr.7125]

Lol

[@johndoe7270]

It sounds something people use to make meth lol.

[@wesr228]

As a former sailor, that thing is terror-effing-fying.

[@USS-SNAKE-ISLAND]

I've said from Day One: Chinese aircraft carriers are a waste of money if their intention is to use them against American interests in the Pacific. Who's got more experience at sinking Asian carriers than the US? No one. The US is all alone in its own league.

[@Jonathan.D]

It definitely is! Most anti ship options fly parallel to the sea and from many miles away. That gives time for a possible interception. The quick sink comes in from above and at a high speed. There will be little time to react to it.

[@mathewphoria7228]

right! the onboard footage shows the bomb hitting at 5:02 and by 5:15 the boat is almost completely underwater.

[@MichaelDurant-vz1bb]

Sissy sailor frigging in the rigging

[@papanam4267]

00:11 Scarryyyy, indeed! This thing is a carrier killer! Most incoming threats follow a horizontal or curved trajectory and will fall flat once intercepted. But how do you stop something that’s already falling straight down like an asteroid? You hit it and it breaks up into four pieces that are now continuing through sheer momentum on their vertical course down on the ship. Holey ship!!!

[@GainingDespair]

I am shocked, an actually affordable weapon which isn't 5x the cost of the target.

[@suvidminecrafttutorials4175]

In naval warfare the cost of the target is always significantly higher than the cost of the missile. A 3 million dollar LRASM can sink a 1 billion dollar destroyer. Even if you need to fire 10 missiles and only 1 hits it’s a bargain.

[@ThirdLawPair]

The biggest cost would probably be the operating costs of the B-2. That thing has insane costs per flight hour.

[@Toasty27]

Stealth Bombers are pretty expensive tho

[@mastermariner490]

@@suvidminecrafttutorials4175Imagine using just 1 quick sink,thats a bargain

[@op.par_3035]

i bet the enemy is more shocked, rimpac may actually hault chinese intentions of 2027 taiwan

[@certainthings2000]

And the B-2 Spirit can carry about 16 of those bombs....yikes!!!!

[@briangman3]

Dam they can launch 3 and run, no way they drop just one.

[@c2sartinkprinthub757]

China: "But we only have 3 carriers, not fair"

[@Friendlygiant666]

That's ok. They have a bunch of other ships that can be used as target practice too​@@c2sartinkprinthub757

[@EL_DUDERIN0]

Plop plop, fizz fizz..

[@Keiranful]

That's a carrier strike group gone. 3 B2's and all the CCP has are some new expensive reefs....

[@maotseovich1347]

RIP Tarawa. From hosting Harriers (the first jet to go fighter ace since Vietnam) to being a practice target... :(

[@panpiper]

I remember the Tarawa from her glory days. If I was asked to name an amphibious assault ship, she would be the first to jump into my head. It is sad to see her go.

[@Lndmk227]

Hey, look at it this way: At least she didn't go out as an undignified scrap pile. She got to go down in a blaze of glory and take on new life a home for wildlife. Her original mission may be over, but she has now taken on a whole new, noble purpose.

[@billwill7383]

Don't be sad. She's a reef now. Home to many animals who will love her shelter.

[@baomao7243]

Sometimes you just need to go out in a blaze of glory

[@forresttm]

Tbf. Literally went out with a bang.

[@brettlaw4346]

It is designed to blow under the keel. Just below the waterline would fail to overcome the compartmentalization used by ships to prevent damage from the hull from sinking the ship. A blast under the ship keel breaks the ship in half, simultaneously lifting it and allowing the slap of water refilling the bubble created by the blast to effectively slap the ship apart.

[@diegotrejos5780]

I mean, getting asploded by a thousand kilos of bomb on a closed environment would be a mission kill for all but the biggest ships, why sink the hull if ruining it is enough, sinking is for ships in port.

[@dgthe3]

@@diegotrejos5780 Because a crippled ship can potentially be towed back. Even if the vessel as a whole is not salvageable, many systems and components will be. Send it to the bottom of the ocean and it is of no possible further use to the hostile force.

[@j.f.fisher5318]

The water refilling the massive explosively-formed hole under the ship basically turns the ocean into a gigantic shaped charge warhead directed upward through the ship.

[@ferai147]

It's called super-cavitation btw. The same principle is applied to torpedoes, sea mines, and nuclear mines.

[@Cobra-King3]

The Keel being essentially the Spine of the ship, Breaking that is like Breaking your Spinal Cord, extremely dangerous, as shown when USS Samuel B Roberts(FFG-58) had her keel blown off by an Iranian mine, the incident of which led to the 1-Day War with Iran, Operation Praying Mantis

[@zakwalls7582]

I literally just thought “I wanna see a B2 vs a Chinese navy vessel”, Alex Hollings runs the simulation confirmed

[@longshot7601]

I wouldn't be surprised that the US was transmitting in the clear what was going to happen to make sure that the Chinese were watching. A weapon can't be a deterrent if the enemy doesn't know about it.

[@Jonathan.D]

@@zakwalls7582 This is their way of telling chyna that their fleet can be removed from action without the american fleet entering the first island chain.

[@zakwalls7582]

@@Jonathan.D I just imagine some Air Force general asking if they can make a rapid dragon version after seeing it in action

[@Jonathan.D]

@@zakwalls7582 The new anti carrier torpedoe chyna came up with does not even come close. They tried to say that it created a hundred meter collumn of water but the video shows it was only thirty meters at most. The ship they tested it on was maybe a tenth of the size of a carrier and it still took a while for it to sink.

[@Flightman453]

@@Jonathan.D If you think in such a scenario, any bomber is even getting within 200 miles of China's coast, you're absolutely hilarious. Stealth bombers are not invisible.

[@mikestewart4752]

Quick Sink: It does what it says on the tin™️

[@dh1380]

I see what you did there

[@rileyh4169]

How much water do I use? I'm guessing about 60,000 tons?

[@weyes2wonder]

Learning of these successful weapons tests make me feel much more secure. Thank you Sandboxx!

[@Keekay91]

I just read Iran's new radar detected the f-35. (details unknown) Now I'm thinking. Will it detect the stealth bombers bombs before or after impact? We all know it won't detect anything prior to leaving the bomb bay no matter what kind of radar they're going to use.

[@consortiumexpert]

@@Keekay91 Stop believing their propaganda. When Israel struck close to their nuclear site, they did not see their aircraft.

[@weyes2wonder]

@@Keekay91 Of course the details are "unknown". Do you always belive everything that Satanic regime reports? I wouldn't worry about it Keekay. Besides, there are pretty good chances we have weapons that haven't even been announced yet. You do know that we have stealth missiles, right? Not to mention good intelligence. How do you think Hamas political leader Ismail Haniyeh and Hezbollah commander Fouad Shukur ....were recently sent to their 72 virgin*.....err.....whores?

[@reallyhappenings5597]

Me too

[@imjonny001]

No such thing as propaganda!! Glad your safe!!! I'm safe now too!

[@johnhiggs325]

They could absolutely decimated a naval strike group with just a single B2 sortie. 🤯

[@Flightman453]

You watch too many movies.

[@tedsaylor6016]

Yes, a Chinese one headed for Taiwan. Hence why we're watching this video.

[@johnhiggs325]

@@Flightman453 🤣 IKR But seriously… I’ve been less than a mile from a 500 lbs bombing run. I’ve got a bit of real world experience.

[@PatrolBoat-Riverine-Streetgang]

@@Flightman453 Notice how you couldn't refute what he said? Cope.

[@wedgeantilles8575]

@@PatrolBoat-Riverine-Streetgang Well, you do realize there is a difference if you go for an undefended target without interference and going against a strike group that has aircraft up to interfere with you, that is using counter meassures? But after reading your posting my guess is: No, you don't.

[@Wilhuf1]

It’s a bargain except for the $2.13 Billion stealth bomber.

[@degenerateactual3080]

Just imagine once these weapons are utilized by B-21s instead of B-2s

[@graydi66y]

Getting smoked by something with a radar signature of a hummingbird has got to be embarrassing as hell. Now imagine the radar cross section of a cicada.

[@Chuck_Hooks]

That alone is an argument to build at least 200 B-21s

[@Jondoe18702]

Gonna be fun guessing which jdams came from f16 and which from hummingbirds

[@tfkia356]

Question: If you can land/takeoff a C-130 from an aircraft carrier, can you do the same with a B-21? Based on what we know, they're a little smaller and lighter...

[@JohnJaneson2449]

@@tfkia356 don't need to, because B21 range is insanely far. US supply bases/afbs or friendly airports are enough for B21 to reach anywhere in the world. Also, aircraft carriers take weeks to deploy. B21 can arrive anywhere within hours to 2 days.

[@Mark-BS-YT-name]

Not only B-2 capable. F-18, F-35, B-1, F-15E can all carry a 2000lb JDAM.

[@paultull7406]

But 15 Miles range is Suicide

[@Mark-BS-YT-name]

@paultull7406 Sure, but the flexibility is all the more a concern for adversaries than a problem for the US. Who at the end of the day has a plethora of stealth aircraft delivery systems in it's arsenal.

[@n085fs]

F-14 can certainly carry Mk-84s.

[@Mark-BS-YT-name]

@n085fs 20 years ago, unfortunately.

[@ZER0ZER0SE7EN]

@@Mark-BS-YT-name The B-2 is the only stealth aircraft that can carry this huge non-stealth bomb internally. The enemy can only guess later why their ship is not communicating.

[@ARandomCustodian]

I think he got the effects of the NSM and LRASM mixed up. LRASM has a 1,000 ib warhead while the NSM has a much smaller warhead.

[@gosborg]

I was thinking the same thing.

[@dgthe3]

Aren't there two versions of the LRASM? One trades a couple hundred pounds of explosive for extra fuel? Or am I thinking of something else?

[@camt8804]

@@dgthe3 I think so but the NSM is about 260 lb so much smaller than both.

[@ARandomCustodian]

@@dgthe3 You are probably thinking of the Probably the JASSM. The much longer range non-antiship cruise missile sibling. It has MUCH larger range than the LRASM because it does not require the heavy stuff like the armor penetrator because it does not go after ships and therefore can carry more fuel. Same warhead weight though.

[@kameronjones7139]

​@@dgthe3no there isn't

[@pauld6967]

Don't forget that the Tarawa class was only about 50 feet shorter than W.W. II Essex class aircraft carriers (40-ish if compared to the early Essexes).

[@tonyruland3714]

The Tarawa was the lead ship of the class...she was a little longer than her three sisters. We pulled up to USS Midway, and almost exactly the same size... Midway's flight deck was one level higher, and here ileand was just about one level taller. But, the big difference is in the haul layout. USS Tarawa drafts a lot less, allowing here to operate up against the shoreline. The personal count is way off! At wartime loadout , she was home to just under 500 Navy personnel and 2,500 Marine's. Along with support staff and 4 LCU's ... she would have close to 4,000+ in total!!! Her flight deck was 886' long. Out of all the ships in this class, she was considered as an "experiment " ship. The Navy used the heck out of this ship , the Captain and the Admiral keeped her out of port and on the water, steaming away!!! She was a big key player in the 7th fleet. I will definitely miss this powerful LHA - 1 !!!

[@pauld6967]

@@tonyruland3714 Thanks for the additional information. 😎

[@ShopDog-Garage]

Wow, I was once a Marine on LHA-1! Spent time after the flood on Camp Pendleton living and working on the Tarawa. I am a little sad to see her sunk.

[@Sam2sham]

My dad was a marine on Tarawa during WWII, and it made me a little sad also.

[@srijonmondal8842]

So it means that a Quick sink guided bomb with electronic warfare munitions and aircrafts can be used to quickly takeout a hugely expensive ship... Its like fpv drones and tanks.

[@corsair6]

Navy doesn't play too often with 2000lb GBU...however with the Quicksink kit available, this add's a nice, inexpensive tool to erase a surface target.

[@robertbates6057]

That's the AF. They can be anywhere pretty quick.

[@markenda1]

Imagine using anti-ship missiles along with this capability. While the battle group is busy engaging a surface level attack, a stealth bomber cruises overhead and drops a load of these munitions, one for every ship.

[@Fifthmiracle]

Better yet imagine two C-17 each launching 45 LRASMs each from long-range in a coordinated Rapid Dragon attack.

[@jpmc271]

You mean Fwaming Dwagon? ​@@Fifthmiracle

[@jajssblue]

That's some show of force!

[@mikerice2483]

I will miss the Tarawa, i was on her i 1979 on a west pac deployment , i was golf company 2/3. She was a very nice ship.

[@morefiction3264]

I hope we keep the name. It's a name worth remembering.

[@ytlas3]

@@morefiction3264 The first USS Tarawa CV 40 was an Essex Class Carrier

[@Paul.Douglas]

Yes, sad indeed.

[@TheComputerCowboy]

Good to see the gang back together. Hope that demonstration sends a strong message to our lesser friendly neighbors across the pond.

[@verdebusterAP]

Stealth against ships was always a real nightmare One aircraft uses an anti ship missile for a crippling blow while a second follows through with Quick Sink to finish the job Modern ASM is accurate enough to target specific points on ships A missile to the engine compartment will take all systems off line While striking the bridge is symbolic , the CIC is buried deep in the hull for that reason hence a strike to in the stern has the best chances

[@donchaput8278]

It sounds like in certain situations, kitting dumb bombs when needed may be more efficient cost/logistic wise than having to develop and supply a lot of expensive smart ammunition.

[@Appletank8]

kinda what the jdam system was all about

[@rharris4736]

We're learning this in Ukraine. Russia has zero smart-weapon tech, but they're souping up old-school weaponry that can be mass produced faster. That's the only reason they're still in the fight.

[@erasmus_locke]

Seeing those ships get snapped in half like a stale graham cracker is awesome until you realize a real ship has 1,000 sailors on board and there's no way they escape before the ship goes under

[@ARGONUAT]

Sobering news for the CCP Navy.

[@Chuck_Hooks]

@erasmus_locke Russia says Moskva can handle.

[@ARGONUAT]

@@Chuck_Hooks We would see an all-time speed sinking record for any Russian ship.

[@dianapennepacker6854]

Yeah I thought even a buckled ship would take time. Yet nope. Especially when you realize water sealed doors would be in place during a war footing. No way they can escape. Even the surface of the ship gets rocked, and it flipped the camera. Your best bet would be to on the edge of the ship, on the deck, and get launched into the ocean. What a terrible way to die. Now imagine an amphibious assault on Taiwan with our fleet of stealth aircraft carrying these things. It would be a death sentence, although I am not sure how many bombs we could drop in one hit. Those ships would be packed to the brim with troops. It makes you realize how vulnerable our carriers are too.

[@Shadowboost]

​@@dianapennepacker6854 16 per bomber. Multiply that by 20 and that's tens of thousands of dead sailors and Marines

[@PurpleGuyOfficial85]

Quick note... the NSM does not have an 880 pound warhead, that is the total weight of the missile. The LRASM has a 1000lb warhead if I'm not mistaken.

[@evilfingers4302]

Looking at all those ships lined up reminds me of the pictures and videos of the Pacific Fleet during WW2

[@joewilson5452]

If I'm not mistaken the Tarawa was LHA-1. I was stationed on the Pellilu LHA-5 in 84 and 85. The Pellilu was a Tarawa class LHA. It was about 850 ft long, tallest mast I believe was 210 ft, and the flight deck was about 70 ft off the water. We carried about 30 helicopters, 10 boats, about 500 sailors, and about 1500 Marines when we deployed. Good times. I also worked on the B-2 for 10 years and the B-2 can carry 16 2000 lb bombs in each one of its bomb bay's in a rotary launcher assembly.

[@ytlas3]

Tarawa, Belleau Wood, and Peleliu were West Coast LHA's. The Belleau Wood was expended in a SinkEx a number of years ago. I worked all three several times over the years at LBNSY

[@joewilson5452]

@@ytlas3 yeah that's where we were stationed. We shared a pier with the battleship New Jersey I think. I used to have family all over that place. Long Beach, Lakewood, Southgate, Bellflower, Hawthorne etc

[@markbrisec3972]

Mind you B-2 can carry dozens of JDAMs in one swoop, we can imagine it can carry at least a dozen of the largest 2000 pound Quicksinks. Imagine 12 of those coming your way simultaniously... Chinese gatling guns would have to work overtime and still miss a few incoming... This is one of those great out of the box ideas in weapon design that hit the soft spot of affordability, fast production and game changing capabilities. Hey Pentagon guys and gals, we need more of the same...

[@ShadowOppsRC]

As always @Sandboxx "Alex" glad to see the surgery recorvery went well and another great production man!

[@armandoquintana2185]

Imagine being on a ship that gets hit with a 2,000 bomb 😢

[@willythemailboy2]

Technically, you'd be on the ship that got *missed* by a 2,000 pound bomb. Hitting the ship would do less damage that what a Quick Sink actually does, which is go into the water close aboard the ship and detonate under the keel.

[@Cryosxify]

Imagine the terror of the CCP plan when the ship sinks in a few seconds after you get knocked out

[@Flightman453]

@@Cryosxify Cope. Not happening.

[@armandoquintana2185]

@@willythemailboy2 that’s worse because toys be awake while floating to the bottom of the ocean.

[@xavierwilmerng6317]

​@@Flightman453sure it won't... it sounds like you're the one coping. All the US needs to do now is integrate that seeker kit with the Powered JDAM tail kit and they can launch it from dozens of miles farther away.

[@terryfreeman1018]

Alex, Sandboxx is amazing

[@shaymcquaid]

I built a model of the Tarawa in a plastic model club at school in the 5th grade. Sad to see her go like this. o7

[@MinnesotaGuy822]

"There is a time for every purpose under heaven. A time to be born, a time to live, and a time to die." (paraphrase). She lived a good life, served her purpose well.

[@user-plgsz36615]

Alex Thanks 👍

[@ronaldamesjr.7125]

Does anyone else sleep better at night after watching air power? I love being an American!

[@Critt42]

Absolutely

[@danielslocum7169]

Yet we are badgered by 3rd rate powers for decades.

[@orionoregon974]

Don't sleep too soundly, secrets are fleeting. Vigilance never takes a day off

[@tungzauzage977]

Umm this is only the stuff they let you see, honestly if things world wide went arse up I wouldn't be surprised if the US starts doing acts of god on the baddies.

[@nix4644]

@@tungzauzage977 Let's hope so.

[@mrnickbig1]

I am very sorry to hear about the Tarawa. It was FAR MORE than a small aircraft carrier! By itself, it could have easily captured any of the D-Day beaches. It was a full blown amphibious assault ship, capable of doing a combined LAND/SEA/AIR assault by itself. It had high velocity 5" guns. It had all sorts of missile launchers. It had Super Harriers and just about any kind of helo imaginable. It had a large Marine Detachment and, from its well, could launch LCACs and amphibious vehicles. It had powerful RADARs and Radios and Command and Control facilities to coordinate a full scale invasion. I have seen the Tarawa and many similar ships in Yokosuka, and they were awesome.

[@jonathanozment4523]

I was sad to see it also and wonder if we have another similar ship currently decommissioned we could donate to the Philippines to replace/augment the Sierra Madre... Would make a much better base to hold off the CCP/PLAN forces... 🤔

[@SIG_X]

Man can you imagine just sailing and 8 of them bad boys suddenly pop up on radar and completely murder your ship and whatever other ship unlucky enough to be nearby in just seconds

[@vladh5192]

I'm just waiting for the HLC video now... "Ooooh, Rashaaaa..."

[@UnintendedConsequences]

Grampa Buff approves.

[@mattbryan7589]

While Alex is wearing the Kids shirt. I noticed it too

[@rickintexas1584]

I love military technology. Especially American technology.

[@John-jl9de]

Thanks, great report.

[@nichtgenannt3226]

So...the B2 did a one-tap. nice.

[@davidtherwhanger6795]

Just a clarification. That's the USS Tarawa (LHA-1), the lead of the Tarawa Class Assaultship. I served on the USS Nassau (LHA-4). We had a crew complement of around 800 (Navy Personnel), and could carry around 2,000 Marines with tanks, trucks, humvees, and artillery all onboard.

[@pdibbs11]

This is a classic example to some countries of FAFO!!😮

[@Flightman453]

3rd world countries probably

[@RadGuy8541]

What a sad event. I went "afloat" aboard the USS Tarawa LHA-1. Back when I was a grunt Marine in the early 1990's. Great ship, with a great history.

[@DustyGamma]

"Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting op-fowr..."

[@whyjnot420]

_Tarawa_ makes me instantly remember a certain Wing Commander book (End Run) that I loved when I was younger.

[@richardlewis4288]

That’s awesome capability! But they need to rename another ship, Tarawa. Tarawa needs to live on.

[@Saved-by-Zero]

Thanks for this new information for me. I don't see any feedback to anyone on these comments. I would like to talk to you but... I had a prestigious position on the LHA-5. RIMPAC was about the LHA-1

[@unknownuser069]

You all seem to be missing the headline. Two 2000lb JDAM fit inside the F-35 weapons bay, and it can still carry two AMRAAM on inboard station. We already have hundreds of F-35 in service. hundreds more being delivered, and thousands on order. This is an announcement that the US can provide a "surprise upgrade service" converting entire fleets of surface warships to "submarine" on a highly aggressive schedule. Owners of eligible surface warship fleets, all you have to do is ask for it. You'll find out service is complete when your navy stops, drops, and lets it all out. Brown pants are complimentary with this service.

[@DNHarris]

But were you aware there are more airplanes in the ocean than submarines in the sky?

[@jonathanozment4523]

@@DNHarris yes, I was aware of this fact...

[@reallyhappenings5597]

How long have you been out of the closet?

[@GauntletKI]

1:02 that was the first of her class, and should have been a museum ship. For shame.

[@zealman79]

Kiwi here. You're welcome at our contribution of an inflatable dinghy with 4 personnel to that naval exercise (whilst expecting to be rescued in the event of large scale invastion based on that we helped back in WW2) You may send grattitude to the New Zealand government.

[@MinnesotaGuy822]

I sense sarcasm. Is this sarcasm? ;) Everybody knows that if you offer no defense, the aggressors, predators and bullies will leave you alone. /s

[@KpxUrz5745]

Great video. Helps us laymen to appreciate our great military! One of the most awe-inspiring things I've ever seen was the time TWO B-2's flew at fairly low altitude right over my house! It's a sight you never forget.

[@62ericg]

China: spends billions building antiship ballistic missiles to combat us aircraft carriers Us: puts Cold War dumb bombs in a Cold War bomber that one hits aircraft carriers. God I love being American 😂

[@KevinDC5]

as always Alex, great info and I too just enjoy watching the xtest footage! Cheers from Texas!

[@Cartoonman154]

They also had an AC-130 involved with another ship at rimjob.

[@Shadowboost]

They always have multiple aggressors rimjobbing

[@Rob_F8F]

Don't you mean FudgPac 2024 Exercise?

[@jonathanozment4523]

I think you guys may have been watching a different sort of video... 🤔

[@MajorNutsack]

They gave who a WHAT?

[@apolloaero]

Freudian slip much 😂

[@sgt.grinch3299]

I served on the Tarawa and the Peleliu. Sea was great back in the 1980s. Semper Fi.

[@JohnJaneson2449]

🫡

[@tonysu8860]

That's an interesting upgrade to the JADAM. I assume the radar enhancement enabled better accuracy against a moving target, might nullify common air defenses and put a greater load on the performance of CIWS.

[@protectyour2a482]

Literally the Navy’s version of “weekend shooting with the boys”

[@suntzu5836]

RIM-PAC just sounds like something I'm going to AVOID!

[@robertbates6057]

YEAH!

[@c2sartinkprinthub757]

yes sir, its the big mama with wings... even the camera was terrified and jump off the ship.

[@natural8677]

Drones are the future of shipwarfare surely

[@ThirdLawPair]

Drones will have a hard time defending a ship from a B-2 or an F-35

[@rayduncan2406]

@@ThirdLawPair but an unmanned B-21 is a little bit like a drone, from what we hear it looks like every new weapon systems will be unmanned or manned optional, they even unman old F-16s. It's a little scary thinking that a government could wage total war without having to order anybody to do it, and soon the Terminator scenario will be a totally real possibility.

[@Dibbid]

@@rayduncan2406 I'm imagining a Dr Strangelove scenario and all the hilarity that would ensue.

[@natural8677]

@@ThirdLawPair ohh I dont really know much about this stuff but I meant more on the offensive like how Ukraine has been operating. i think it may have changed how any potential Taiwanese straight scenario will play out if theyre smart about it

[@solarissv777]

​@@ThirdLawPairwell, theoretically, a network of small-ish stealthy drones, equipped with electro-oprical and thermal imaging could create a quite significant area denial, even for the stealth planes

[@ralbro6223]

That sure looked like a stationary, stealthless target so I am tremendously impressed by confirmed contact..

[@I-02]

Err... Alex, the AGM-158C has a 1000 lb blast fragmentation warhead. That is greater than the 880 lb Naval Strike Missile warhead.

[@AlexLee-dc2vb]

great news, but i still want more investment in Rapid Dragon

[@erod19969]

The Tarawa footage will probably never be released. IMO

[@klasandersson7522]

Or they will "leak" so that the chinese and ruZZkies will know what´s gonna hit the if they FA! 😎

[@kurtwicklund8901]

I will give you nine to five it will. There is nothing Top Secret about a 2000 lb detonation nor the effects of a broken keel.

[@reallyhappenings5597]

Deterrence requires disclosure.

[@FormerGovernmentHuman]

People think being on the ground in a heavy fire fight with shelling and explosive munitions going off everywhere is terrifying. And yes it is but I would much rather take my chances on the field or on target than chilling on a ship that just sunk entirely in 2 seconds and if you somehow do survive, you sit in the ocean and pray one of your ships is the one to pick you up, if anyone even does.

[@altaccount9203]

Quicksink is a cheap weapon being delivered by the single most expensive aircraft in the US's arsenal potentially from within the detection radius of a CSG. It would also need to be one part of a saturation attack from within the deployment range of an airbase that has a B2 ready. To deploy this against a hostile carrier would be an incredibly risky and well choreographed gambit.

[@johnsilver9338]

Their are longer range versions with 40 nmi JDAM-ER and 300 nmi PJDAM. Or they could 1st disable enemy radars with AGM-88Gs/SiAW or deplete their SAM interceptors with SDB II (StormBreaker)/MACE and/or with decoys.

[@altaccount9203]

@@johnsilver9338 Another asset in a very large, expensive and risky coup de grace. People who know more and get paid more than us have already done these calculations a thousand times before, but damn if it isn't fun! The game of 4d chess that is modern military planning. Moves, counter-moves, counter-counter-moves, political implications logistics. It boggles the mind.

[@johnsilver9338]

@@altaccount9203 On the other hand Chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles like DF-21/YJ-21 are even more expensive. So compared to Chinese and Russian ones, US anti-ship weapons are the cheapest. Even LRASM is cheaper than Indian BrahMos and Russian Kalibr 3M-54K/T anti-ship variant.

[@Nathan-vt1jz]

Woot! New sandbox video!

[@darkhallwayproductions8627]

Hey Alex. Do you see a revitalization of American industry on the horizon similar to the rearmament of the US post Great Depression considering the threat that China may pose with superior numbers?

[@filonin2]

Our military spending is more than that of the next 10 nations combined, most of which are our allies, and you think we need to "re-arm"? Do we need to spend more than the rest of the Earth combined?

[@hazonku]

@@filonin2 YES

[@ThirdLawPair]

For aviation, yes. For shipbuilding, no. We've gutted our shipbuilding infrastructure and workforce, and it is not so easy to replace.

[@papanam4267]

@@filonin2 We spend so much because the weapons are as much as 50 times overpriced. A shoulder launched Stinger missile used to take down Soviet helicopters in Afghanistan used to cost “only” about $8,000 apiece. Ever since President Clinton removed 180,000 contract-reviewer engineers, cost auditors and accountants from the government to “save money”, U.S. manufacturers now do whatever price gouging they want because they can. Stinger missiles now average $65,000 each. That’s the price of a SINGLE more sophisticated long range Tamir missile in Israel’s Iron Dome system. (Israel won’t buy Patriot missiles because those puppies are $2.5 million each.) It’s a big relief to see off the shelf cheap dumb bombs being converted at minimum cost to destroy enemy ships. You just need a $1.2 Billion airplane to deliver it. President Eisenhower was right about the military industrial complex and the banking industry that enables it, thus pitting hapless America into endless wars.

[@CaseyW491]

That JDAM system is brilliant. And if they sink a vessel that size that fast....good god.

Like Obama once aid... *_"Yes; We can"_* The US just showed a lot of nations what they can do to boats. Number isn't tonnage and numbers can be diminished.

[@demunbell]

Awesome stuff!! U.S. combat capabilities are ever increasing by leaps and bounds👍🏿

[@aprince1250]

So, how many of these naval JDAMs can one B-2 carry and how many for the new B-21 raiders? Would be crazy to suddenly see an entire Chinese fleet sunk in a matter of minutes with a massive strike.

[@johnhiggs325]

16. The Raider is just as capable. A naval strike force could be virtually eliminated by one or two heavy stealth bombers.

[@speedracer2336]

Air Force has their own jdams in inventory, been using them for years.

[@aprince1250]

@@johnhiggs325 Thanks for the reply. I agree. With that kind of armament, it wouldn't take many planes to severely cripple or eliminate an enemy fleet. I guess the next question then is what kind of hit rate can we expect with these new naval JDAMs? Hitting a moving ship is one thing but being able to do so below the water line must be a little difficult.

[@aprince1250]

@@speedracer2336 Yes, I know. I assume these tests were never a big priority in the past given our lack of peer/near peer naval opponents. Otherwise, it seems weird that this is suddenly such a big deal.

[@johnhiggs325]

@@aprince1250 🤷🏽. Modern guided weapons can be pretty accurate. Plus, a 1 ton bomb will do incredible damage even if it doesn’t make direct contact with the hull. Through hull fittings and piping will fail. Crew near the hull can be killed from the concussion. Any sensitive electronics can be damaged. Basically, the vessel’s war fighting capability will be reduced dramatically even without a direct hit. These “naval” JDAMS are just modified versions of the ground attack type. The targeting and fusing systems are a bit different, though. I would guess that they would be deployed against a ship in mass, say a volley of two to four, for greater effect as opposed to much more expensive anti ship missiles that are usually deployed one or two at a time.

[@Marty_YouTuber]

HOLY CRAP. This makes me want to join the Air force I really want to see the B-2 Spirit in person.

[@Chuck_Hooks]

In 1983, some B-52s were modified to carry Harpoons for an anti-ship role. So using bombers in an anti-ship role is nothing new.

[@Maria_Erias]

Not to mention all the bombing sorties carried out in the Pacific during WW2 by land-based aircraft targeting Japanese warships and shipping.

[@madeconomist458]

Using bombers is not new, but using guided gravity bombs is a pretty new one that couldn't be done with a B-52. A B-21 fully laden with harpoons would be of limited effectiveness since they are coming from the side, have limited penetration, and are vulnerable to CIWS. A B-21 fully laden with BLU-109s, OTOH, could sink several heavy chinese ships in one pass.

[@streetpartying]

That was the original proof of concept for military planes in general. Back in like 1921 or something, Billy Mitchel (I think?) convinced the navy to let him sink an old ship to show that planes were the future of the military.

[@thedabblingwarlock]

Even older than that. Pre-WWII, or at least pre-official US involvement, I think, they tried to use B-17's to sink a ship.

[@MrPepelongstockings]

We've been using bombers since before WWI... since 1913.

[@baomao7243]

3:39 The sinking of such a large ship with this munition is just incredible. The ship is almost annihilated. Wow.

[@The_ZeroLine]

*_You’re Alex Hollings!_*

[@Jondoe18702]

And that ….. was ……

[@yodaman8015]

@@Jondoe18702 air power

[@Jondoe18702]

❤

[@EL_DUDERIN0]

I suppose that nighttime wouldn't stop the quicksink either since it is radar and thermal. Maybe even work better at night.

[@summitap1]

LRASM has a 1000lbs warhead. NSM is only 260lbs.

[@ilkoderez601]

That black hornet was pimpin dude!

[@EJack2841]

Imagine China trying to calculate crossing the Taiwan Strait now with this cheap One Shot One Kill weapon waiting. For every 💥 is 1000+ souls & $1billion+ lost.... That's a scary variable in your maneuver calculus. Another ☑️ in the "Not Today" column

[@beardoe6874]

Yep, I think that's why the chose an "amphibious assault craft" as a target...

[@imjonny001]

OMG TRUE!!! They would all be sitting still in known coordinates for a strike too!!!! Must be some kind of tarded

[@yobeefjerky42]

@@imjonny001 As we all know, radar guided munitions cannot compensate for a ship's movement through the water, it's actually impossible to do that! Go touch grass.

[@EJack2841]

​@@imjonny001 Not as Du.mb as you bc ships can't sit still in the ocean Dumas....Physics Inherent to hitting ships is hitting an object in constant motion

[@beardoe6874]

@yobeefjerky42 I don't know what your point is but ships move forward and backwards, not really side to side. It's a target that's hundreds of feet long and probably moves at a maximum of about 50 mph. Doing the math in my head, worst case if the target is hauling ass at 50 mph and it's a 500' long ship, if you aim at the bow, you have a six second window to hit before the stern has passed that point. The way electronics work, that is a huge margin of error and easily compensated for by computer guidance because you aim for where the ship will be when it hits, not where it is when you drop the bomb and the bomb constantly corrects all the way to the target. The problem with dumb bombs is that they can't correct for anything after they are dropped so there is a pretty big radius where they may hit. JDAMs fix that with guidance, in this case both radar and GPS. So small hit radius and huge target, the big question I have is why didn't the Navy or Airforce try this 30 years ago?

[@fourthhorseman4531]

Now we just need a nice fleet of B-21 Raiders to carry them.

[@dgthe3]

F35 exists & should be able to carry them. At least the A & C versions. Let the B21s go inland and take out other things. Bridges, air bases, command and control centres, weapons depots, etc.

[@johnsilver9338]

@@dgthe3 B version can carry 1000lb JDAMs.

[@kennethng8346]

The "dumb" bombs that the JDAM is attached to, do they still make them or are these all left over from old wars?

[@perryallan3524]

My understanding is that the USA has maintained the production facilities, although it may have been years since more than any has been produced of the largest of the bombs. It is my understanding that 250 and 500 lb bombs have been produced in relatively recent times as they are the most common bombs used in the world (and the USA exports a lot of things they may not be buying themselves).

[@MM22966]

If you completely shut down a production line, you have a hell of a time getting it re-started. Witness what the navy just went through to start making torpedoes again.

[@perryallan3524]

@@MM22966 It depends if the factory is still producing bombs. If this is the factory that is still producing 250 and 500 Lb bombs, the fact that the larger bombs are shut down is not that big of a deal. They have the staff and active processes to restart producing larger bombs without massive delays. If the factory is shut down with just a minimal maintenance and testing staff then it is a major issue to restart production. In some cases production lines have been maintained in an in-between status. Call it warm standby. I grew up near a US Army Munitions plant maintained like that. They had staff and supplies to be at 10% production in less than a week, ramping up to full production over a month or so as up to 5000 new employees were brought in and trained. This plant was restarted for the Viet Nam war and in my youth I got to see it go from a shutdown facility we drove by routinely to a fully active plant that ran years in just over a month. From having a supply and shipment train go through my town with just a few RR cars about every other month - to full size trains with more RR cars than you could count twice a day. Unfortunately, I don't think the US Military is maintaining many production lines in such a warm standby status. The biggest mistake I believe the US Military made was after the Viet Nam war they spent about a half $Billion modernizing that munitions plant. Gutting out all the WW II equipment and installing new modern equipment. Then in the 1990's they declared it surplus and scrapped it. With the Ukraine War I am sure that they really wished that they had that plant still in standby. By itself it would not have filled all the shortage that Ukraine has had for certain conventional weapons.... but it sure would have filled one of the major holes - the one that it was set up to produce, and one that there is currently a major international shortage of that component which is restricting other companies from ramping up production. You cannot make artillery shells without the gunpowder/accelerant needed to fire the shell. Nor can you make small rockets without the rocket grains for them. That plant produced all of that - and I understand it was the largest such plant in the world for that during WWII and later (It was also restarted for the Korean War). I also understand that virtually all M-16 cartridge ammo during Viet Nam had gunpowder in its cartridges from that plant. It produced at least 2 kinds of gunpowder, a non-gunpowder shell accelerant for artillery rounds, and small rocket grains for multiple small rockets of the era. A base capacity the USA felt they no longer needed on that scale because a large "conventional" war should not occur again - and I am sure now realize just how bad of a mistake that was.

[@dgthe3]

Munitions have a shelf life. This is why so much stuff is getting sent to Ukraine: it costs money to dispose of old bombs and missiles. Its cheaper to send the stuff to Ukraine where it can fulfil its original purpose. So new stuff is needed all the time. I suspect that for things like 2000lb bombs, its small batches done every now and then.

[@JohnJaneson2449]

@@kennethng8346 as per today, the US can produce 20,000 GBU per year. with adjustments that can be 7,000 per 4 months. If we use industrial mobilization like in WW2, we can produce many times more, in the hundreds of thousands.

[@ConnieShearer-g1m]

“Billy” Mitchell would be so proud!

[@JohnJaneson2449]

More like grumpily "I told you so" He has been right in many other things.

[@GrandmaBev64]

Our ships and planes are lining up in the Red Sea outside of China right now. Iran just bombed our base in Lebanon, again! Our soldiers were injured. Chna, Russia, North Korea, and Iran are all dangerous and they are teaming up.

[@maroonmedia2000]

It would be nice to see what wars USA started and was in since world war two You can google it. It's on the internet 😂 Stay home yanks and peace will slowly return to the world

[@blackmatterlives9865]

Red Sea outside of China?? Bro what are you talking about?

[@KainEvans]

Why are they teaming up tho?

[@msylcatac]

​@blackmatterlives9865 it's only a small 6,000 km from China, wouldn't you describe that as "just outside" /s

[@LeviKerrison]

The US should get out of their neighbourhood with US weapons.

[@jasonariola6363]

That was a big explosion

[@TheRogueElement]

I just did a quick sink while watching 🚽 🫡

[@Shadowboost]

I always call out torpedo in the water when I drop the fish out

[@dh1380]

SEND IT

[@JoseVazquez-sq1cj]

Im intrigued to know more about guidance system.

[@JohnJaneson2449]

JDAM uses a combination of guidance systems. The precise technical details are classified.

[@oculosprudentium8486]

Now imagine a stealth bomber loaded with 60 precision glide 1000 bombs that can track themselves to the enemy. That's mean one stealth bomber releasing so many precision glide bombs from 50 miles away, can take out an entire enemy Navy flotilla. It would be even more deadly it was these glide bombs were also quoted with stealth material. The heaviest anti-ship cruise missile has a 1 ton warhead and that can easily wreck any ship in existence. Warships are never built to be fully armored protected like a military tank so a 1000 lb warhead will really be a shipwrecker

[@arbelico2]

Another interesting option is to equip the B-2 and B-21 with HARM or SM-6 missiles (can they be modified for this purpose?) to destroy the ships' radars.

[@gosborg]

I think you could honestly call that game-changing.

[@bobjimenez4464]

Having kids in the U.S. Military makes this a little uncomfortable to watch because the other side probably has similar weapons. Then I remember that my dad and my uncles survived WW2 by the skins of their teeth. Because of this my boys only hear positive words of praise, motivation and courage come out of my mouth.

[@thudthud5423]

I'm not a sailor and have never been one, but I can imagine the heartbreak of seeing the ship you once served on being delegated to be a target for munitions testing.

[@albertreed966]

Ships like the Forrestal sold for a buck to Mexicans to be scrapped ans sold to China, or another adversaryY My own ship was scrappe to the MEXICANS, brownville Texas!

[@jbird976]

I can remember taking part in the amphib portion of this back in the late 90’s onboard the uss anchorage

[@erasmus_locke]

I am once again asking you to talk about the Pye Wacket experimental lenticular-form air-to-air missile developed by the Convair Division of the General Dynamics Corporation in 1957.

[@jayjaylpd5]

I was on the Lpd 5 USS OGDEN. This ship I've seen and have boarded it when a few fellow sailors wanted to give me a tour. Truly massive ship to see destroyed with efficiency off of a JDAM. Dropped from a B2, and fighter jets. There are no stopping these muntions.

[@videre8884]

As Bruce Lee said, wood doesn't fight back. I'd love to see an exercise where the target uses defensive measures, like close range defense and defensive missiles. Sinking something that's dead in the water with one hit is impressive, but sinking something that's fighting back with one hit is even more impressive.

[@rogerwilco5918]

Our stealth bombers are like water, and can't be seen in the air

[@naomined9822]

@@rogerwilco5918white and silver!!

[@willythemailboy2]

The problem there is that most defenses are built around intercepting missiles, with complicated guidance systems in the nose and a relatively thin skinned warhead right behind it. Showering that with shrapnel will likely set off the explosive or ruin its ability to guide itself. A 2000 pound dumb bomb is more than half steel by weight, and shrapnel isn't going to affect that at all. The most an AA missile can do it mess up the seeker on the nose, and that won't affect the bomb's ability to guide itself to the programmed target using the guidance system on the rear. The net effect of hitting one of these would likely be the bomb hitting a few meters off of optimal placement, which will still cause significant damage even if it doesn't give the catastrophic kill an optimally placed detonation would. If it misses short it blows up a few meters from the ship and shakes the hell out of it, causing significant damage to crew and systems aboard. If it misses long, well, no ship is going to appreciate being hit with a 2000 pound bomb.

[@tinatovar7548]

I love the b-2 Spirit thank you for sharing this

[@davidmartin8275]

Was a Plankowner on USS BELLEAU WOOD LHA3, She was used as Target during a RIMPAC Op, She is 2600 fathoms down, Deeper than the Titanic.

[@m_hub3957]

JDAM is GPS guided who thinks enemy ships are going to sit still for a GPS bomb/missile???? give me a fing break