Why the US Has No Long Range Air to Air Missiles

Thanks to Bespoke Post for sponsoring this video!
Head to bspk.me/covertcabal and use code CABAL20 to learn more and get 20% off your first box.
For Business Inquiries - [e-mail]
Amazon Prime 30 Free Trial - amzn.to/2AiNfvJ
Microphone I use = amzn.to/2zYFz1D
Video Editor = amzn.to/2JLqX5o
Military Aircraft Models = amzn.to/2A3NPxu
Military Strategy Book = amzn.to/2AaqwST
----------------------------------
Credits:
Footage:
Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation
creativecommons.org/licenses/...
The NATO Channel
Ministry of Defence of Estonia
Department of Defense (US)
"The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
KCNA - North Korea State Media
Music:
BTS Prolog - Kevin MacLeod - incompetech.com
J-20 PL-15 Image
Author: emperornie
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/deed.en
R-33 Missile
Author: Jno
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en
F-15 AN/AWG-9 Radar
Author: BrokenSphere
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en
R-77 Missile
Author: Allocer
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en
R-77 Radar Seeker
Author: Allocer
creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/deed.en

[@jgod1341]

I heard they were developing Orbiting Reconnaissance Global Air to Surface Missiles or ORGASMs.

[@dave_riots]

I doubt it'll be that exciting.

[@slowgoat6089]

@Drew Peacock - Greatest trolls ever

[@R.-.]

AKA Rod from God ?

[@kmech3rd]

The Combined Universal Missile just had its first test shot too.

[@zil1832]

Digressing from the fun names a little bit, but I just want to make people aware, Now they are launching a new type of psychological tactic in social media platform. In an coordinated fashion, "50 Cent Army" is creating bunch of accounts in KZbin with Indian names and is playing a bigoted troll, with singular objective of tarnishing India's image in worldwide platform. Similar things been happening with Taiwan or Japan, you know, the neighboring country they see as potential rival. Like I have been seen with the account "Aarohi Singh". It is frequently seen in CGTN comment section. I have exposed the troll a month ago and now a bunch of videos are lifted from somewhere else and are uploaded into the channel, to appear "authentic". All of its content is uploaded only weeks ago. And it is playing off India against SriLanka or Nepal, or sometimes behaving as "a stupid In dian Troll"! Who is to check if that "John Smith" is really from the UK or that "Aarohi Singh" is really from India? They are exploiting that feature.

[@filipvidinovski7960]

US is currently developing two long-range AAMs: JATM by LM and LREW by Raytheon.

[@KondorDCS]

If it's Raytheon, then you can bet that the cost of one will be of much greater importance then effectiveness.

[@aldrinmilespartosa1578]

@@KondorDCS mass production will solve that

[@w0mblemania]

@@aldrinmilespartosa1578 It's funny how missile costs have still soared even with mass production. Mass production in defense companies only seems to increase the overall company bottom line, rather than reduce unit costs substantially.

[@aldrinmilespartosa1578]

@@w0mblemania source?

[@w0mblemania]

The core problem is that the US government doesn't buy things the way everyone else buys them. It's always easier to pay much higher for something when the money doesn't come out of your own wallet. The military industrial complex is a vast gravy-train, with its own economics. "Mass production" in this complex is not what you think it is.

[@lardthing7417]

It's interesting how a weapon that was just meant to take down large, sluggish opponents, like many other weapons in the past, has such a strategic importance now.

[@Im_TheSaint]

it doesn´t

[@andersbackman3977]

@Fire Starter Nope

[@w0mblemania]

​@Fire Starter There is a big difference between a jet fighter and a Cessna... but good luck with your Hellfire-based air defence system.

[@w0mblemania]

@Fire Starter You seem to like making stupid statements. Either you're ignorant, or a troll. Or both, I guess.

[@lardthing7417]

@Fire Starter correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think you can fit a Phalanx on an F-15

[@Ry_TSG]

Raytheon is making a separate long range missile as well.

[@bigmike9128]

Aim 260?

[@Ry_TSG]

@@bigmike9128 No, Raytheon is working on the Peregrine, which is separate from the AIM-260

[@bigmike9128]

@@Ry_TSG ok thank you

[@Noisy_Cricket]

Also the US has access to the UK Meteor missile if they want it. The USN/USAF tend to prefer domestic missiles though.

[@jeffreyhill1011]

@@Ry_TSG peregrine is the perfect name for such a device

[@nishitdronographer718]

You forgot to Include MBDA Meteor for comparison

[@thefrecklepuny]

Good point.

[@ycplum7062]

Its throttlable ramject allows it to "cruise", saving more energy for terminal maneuvering. It may very well be the future of all AA missiles.

[@HYDRAdude]

This. It's an off the shelf solution that the US can actually get its hand on if it wants to.

[@Gongolongo]

Because we're comparing US to adversaries. Meteor isn't using very much new. China and Russia already have been using ramjet missiles for quite some time.

[@ycplum7062]

@@Gongolongo What solid fuel throttleable ramjet air to air missile is that?

[@ProfessorImbakeXBoomshaka]

All of this seems like a great reason to give Lockheed/Boeing $500 billion We'll get a missile out of it around 2040.

[@trevon5653]

No way. 500bil to start from scratch? Fucking expensive 😂💀

[@MostlyPennyCat]

Or just buy meteor

[@mattfleming86]

Long live the -republic- military industrial complex.

[@jacobbrassard2776]

@Alex Jones We can spend more effectively and even buy other country's hardware if its good and saves us money. The problem is not having a military but spending too much for too little and having a cycle where you keep needing to buy.

[@fuckheinschitt239]

@@jacobbrassard2776 lol why buying other countries hardware when you can build your own plus buying other countries hardware is much expensive.

[@user-qf6yt3id3w]

Even though the US doesn't have long-range AA missiles its allies do. E.g. the MBDA Meteor.

[@francoise4308]

Aim-260 is supposed to surpass the AMRAAM in production by 2026 and almost replace it by 2030. Covert Cabal probably didn't see that.

[@karlhans6678]

I assume the US aircrafts use long range missiles from their Allies?

[@francoise4308]

@@SerinaDeMadrigal No, the PL-21 is still in development. The Pl-15 is currently in service.

[@florian6259]

@@karlhans6678 I actualy think they don't use the meteor at all. I was hoping to hear a few words about it

[@coupledawgsinyamum]

Big missile go woooooshhh

[@jacobtherobertson]

A long range missile from any country struggles to hit my kite at its max range

[@sagardahiya6138]

But it also increases the no escape zone. For eg meteor have 95 percent hit probably at 65km range, and 100km range for 60 percent hit probability. So if there's along range SFDR/dual pulse based missile with crazy ranges like 160-190km for foghter size aircraft, then max range isn't the only factor that would come into play. Imagine being prettt at sure that missile would hit even at 100km range and firing 2-3 missile from max range and reducing chances of ever having to put yourself at risk.

[@peternystrom921]

​@@sagardahiya6138 Is that 95% in real life or how do we now that? When was the Meteor used in battle? How many kills does that missile have vs launches? Seriusly, this statistics on missiles, who knows? in reality, no one knows. There are 100 of weapon systems who after a war actualy was totaly worthless.

[@sagardahiya6138]

@@peternystrom921 we know the noescape zones of other missile in use for many decades based on single pulse solid motor, now we know the hit probability at longer ranges is low because missiles bleed out energy by the time it reaches a target at long range and don't have any fuel or much fuel left to make manuvers to intercept a moving target, now it's common sense that a dual pulse based missile would have longer range for a higher hit probability since it cam fire up the second pulse if it needs more energy after travelling a longer distance. Than there's SFDR- solid fuel ducted ramjet, capable of throttling the amount of oxygen reaching the fuel thus adjusting and cutting off oxygen(and hence thrust) whenever it needs to, it also breaths air and don't need to carry any oxidizer like traditional air to air missile so it cam carry more fuel for the same weight. So any logical person would be able to make out the conclusion that the 60km no escape zone claimed by company (ofcourse in head on chase- that's when those crazy max ranges are quoted for), is probably true. If SFDR wasn't yhat effective countries like russia, USA, China, India, Israel won't be chasing it. As of now there's only 1 sfdr based A to A missile that's meteor.

[@peternystrom921]

@@sagardahiya6138 Good post and respons, but still, how do we know? Say there is a War, and we fire like 2000 Missiles, how many will fail? How many have we shot in a singel day? Week? This is just theory, yes we have seen a few A/A fights with missiles. But not 100s in a singel day/year/years. Im still not convinced.

[@sagardahiya6138]

@@peternystrom921 that's why these newer missiles are such a good investment, even if yu don't have the number superiority in fighter jets or aircraft carriers, you can still be the winner if you have technologically superior missile systems, good missile systems provide a good cost to damage ratio. A very advanced air to air missile based on SFDR would still cost 1/20th of the jet it takes down, and since fights now have been pushed to farther and farther distances, the one having better sensors and more accurate long range missile would have a good chance at winning than someone with a large number of jets. Russia for eg. Is investing so heavily in s400, S500 missile defence systems, because they know they can't match USA, in terms of stealth jets, or aircraft careers that can line up on their shore line. They are investing much more heavily and are even ahead than US in naval attack missiles, which include hypersonic cruise missiles and even faster hypersonic quasi ballistic missiles. If your ammunition in 10 times more likely to strike the enemy than their ammunition, you are better off spending money on ammunition than the gun itself, that's what we call assymetric capabilities, and that's what countries like russia, india and israel are focusing on, because they can't match their adversaries in number of guns itself, so the ammunition better be god damned best in the world.

[@SuperPAC130]

Covert Cabal is low key hinting us to prepare for the apocalypse XP

[@outboundprojectworkshop1270]

It doesn't take Covert Cabal to do that if you pay attention to the right news lmao, not the BS that is on TV. Although Covert is also amazing.

[@TheLiamster]

It’s not “low key”, it’s high key.

[@ilikpatoez]

I don’t think ww3 would be end of civilization just really high death toll and destruction

[@deadspaceissacman]

@Damion C china is producing even more Anti US propaganda, its been for years, remember watching chinese msm and talking about potential war w US as early as 2014

[@sloppydog4831]

Lol. That's true.

[@TheJoeSwanon]

I’m surprised he did not mention the meteor missile

[@mickeyg7219]

Because Meteor isn't used by the US' opponents, and the US can buy Meteor at any time.

[@TheJoeSwanon]

@@mickeyg7219 I know it isn’t an American missile. It’s still One of the most effective revolutionary long-range missiles

[@carwyngriffiths]

@@TheJoeSwanon sadly doesn’t mention European things often

[@abbytran8514]

@@carwyngriffiths Well this video is about the *US*

[@ruhtraeregel]

@@TheJoeSwanon Long range in comparison to western missiles but its range of 200km is less than half the range of the R37 at 400km tops or 500km tops for the Chinese PL21 i believe it is. European fighters are relatively small and china and russia both field huge two engine fighters like the SU35 or MIG31 and PL15s which due to their sheer size can carry larger radars for greater detection range and can carry much heavier larger missiles. Its definitely not revolutionary if the meteor is compared to the R37 or PL21. Its definitely a good missile though and the best fielded by western nations now. We did fall behind in missile tech though and are playing catch up. The AIM260 program is an emergency program thats why its going to be fielded next year.

[@ericb.4358]

Now THIS is the kind of military video I want to see. Narrated by a real person, well organized story and great illustrative videos this video is very professional.

[@smokeypuppy417]

The latest aaram can go a 100 miles, it's not about the missile speed and range, it's about the planes stealth and radar giving updates to the missile going a 100 miles.

[@Accept_Any_Bribe]

Its about everything, every aspect counts. Never let enemy distract you

[@pascojm6816]

What?

[@smokeypuppy417]

@Alex Jones the superhornets, e-18 growlers, and e3 Hawkeye radar planes are good enough already. No naval force can challenge those 3 planes.

[@qiyuxuan9437]

It can fly 100 miles doesn't mean it can hit a maneuvering fighter jet at that range....The Aim 120D has the same rocket motor as C model, so the range shouldn't have much difference.

[@eduwino151]

@Alex Jones America has over 200F35s and over 180f22s in service currently those are more than enough to erase any airforce on the planet

[@wgoulding]

Look, I don't think I'm giving away any secrets when I say that I highly doubt that the PL-15 has a significantly greater kinematic performance compared to the AIM-120D. The US has, for a long time, been the best in the world with solid rocket motors. Both use solid motors, and are roughly the same size. I think the Chinese are either fibbing or cheesing what they give as a range by shooting at a very high altitude, with the aircraft in afterburner and climbing at a high angle to loft it, and the missile flying a ballistic trajectory and measured from launch point to the point where it hits the ground. On the other hand, I'm pretty darn sure the AIM-120D has a larger range than what's publicly disclosed. I really doesn't make sense for the US to let everyone know that if you are a certain distance away from a US plane you can't get hit, and the US is notorious for sandbagging the figures they give out.

[@m0nkEz]

This is a compelling point. The US and PRC simply have different primary roles for their militaries. The US military is much more oriented towards actual, real-world capabilities. The PLA is more of a propaganda tool. That shouldn't necessarily be taken as criticism, btw. They do what they're supposed to do, and, in that regard, I would say they're both effective. That said, I would expect the PLA to increasingly mirror the behaviors of the US military in coming years, as China's ambitions turn outwards.

[@JonnyTKing]

Totally right. CCP lies saying their weapons are better, the US lies saying they’re worse. This channel always goes by the CCP reports on their performance, but everybody knows it’s all bs.

[@protorhinocerator142]

True. The real speed numbers for the SR-71 were hush-hush for decades.

[@Proxymated]

Russia surpassed US in many technologies especially in hypersonic long range missiles, accept and inhale this reality.

[@M4XIMUS135]

@@Proxymated true Russia also beat the US to the first thrust vectoring high off boresight IR missile by about 2 decades, period equivalent to the r73 was the aim-9L or 9M which is a yikes

[@samqureshi7049]

Me: literally a guy that works in f-15s realizing how you have no idea what we have 😭

[@Stivonim]

that's pretty cool, you are a pilot or a ground crew guy? also covert cabal's problem is that he likes to hype stuff up about US losing power cause it gives more views

[@MattH-wg7ou]

Sam, same here, and you're so right. But I suppose its better that way.

[@labcd503]

exactly how i feel he's reading public information without any idea of whats need to know lol

[@soh.timothy]

Cabal made no mention of how far ahead the Americans are with jamming tech. Even if the Russians or Chinese lobbed long range missiles at a B-52, the missiles is very unlikely to reach its target.

[@fire398017]

Yep. I was 2A553. There is NO country on earth with the capability the US has.

[@Hillsidedojo]

Most concise up to date information so far. Thanks

[@Panicscroll69]

Love the content! Keep up the hard work. I really enjoy your channel

[@whitelabrat]

I think you might have been surprised by the R-33 in later versions. It is probably better at small targets than you mentioned here. Hard to tell but it got good upgrades and the platforms had pretty strong guidance radar.

[@MrJonnieray]

When America seems to be lagging when everyone else is bragging I start wondering what the true status of our technology is. I'm guessing that we aren't anywhere near as vulnerable as we seem.

[@jcnt9292]

What’s a more clickbaity title US lagging behind??? Or US making something good? Also the us more open about their military then China and Russia so we can’t see how they are really doing

[@Hypersonik]

The West is waaaaaaaaaaaaay ahead of China/Russia in terms of military technology, make no mistake.

[@Pixel5564]

@@Hypersonik not true lol! one S500 can take out entire american air fleet. china missile can take out all america navy

[@loso2751]

@@Pixel5564 No.

[@mrslushydaminator4974]

Truth is china Is leading tech USA an Russia buy from same supplier only a blind man couldn't see the upgrades come like waves. But chinas tech game is booming we just don't see what they develope Russia supplys there ground an air needs for now but China always handles the code computer side.

[@BW022]

A few things not mentioned... 1. Having 100 or 200 mile range runs into a big issue with identifying targets -- from civilian aircraft, your own, low-priority aircraft, etc. 2. Firing at those distances runs into issues of shooting your own aircraft down. FOF systems give away your location. 3. Keeping your seeker radar on a target that long absolutely gives away your position. 4. It is easy to counter long range missiles using drones or just non-priority targets. 5. It is easier to avoid missiles fired at those ranges. 6. It is easier to jam missiles and radars at those ranges. 7. It is often harder to fire multiple missiles at those ranges, keep your radar on a single target, or have the missiles radar get the wrong target, etc. You could easily have 2-3 missiles all going at the same plane. You may also have to wait until those missiles miss to know whether you need to fire another. 8. Radar guided missiles have not been terribly successful historically. With the size of these, they really don't have the ability to carry 4 to fire at a single target. 9. There are a lot of conflicts where you simply aren't that distance away -- enemy comes in low, you are scrambling to get up (or to altitude), you are patrolling, borders, etc. 10. You start running into coordination and target issues at 100-200 miles. You need somewhat specific conditions where your enemy is that far away and not any closer and you might have a hundred aircraft on your radar such a massive area. This requires a lot of communication, planning, etc. That is a lot of ocean or land under you... any of which could be firing longer range SAM and ship-based missiles at you.

[@1563ckg43]

What’s been in the works in the last 10 years will not be on mainstream You Tube media. Even some of the stuff I turned a wrench on more than 10-12 years ago hasn’t popped up yet.

[@MrJonnieray]

Just as I suspected...I like to reminisce on how incredibly long it was before we knew about STEALTH tech. Generally, the US actually does a pretty good job of playing its hand close to the chest. I remember also that prior to the first Gulf War the big three media outlets were going bananas about how Iraq's Russian tanks had laser sights and they were going to decimate our M1A1's. The harsh reality--for the Iraqi's--was that all their Russian tanks did was hold several of them in one place long enough for our tanks to thrash them before they even knew that they were being engaged.

[@1563ckg43]

@@MrJonnieray It’s always nice to have the bigger stick or the truer bow and arrow. But never forget, that golden BB still can kill. Stealth is so many things going right at one tune. Meaning; pilot error, pilot flying parameters and speed, trained not to do this or that and then you got the pressures of a war or war like situation. Is the stealth skin working, is the electronic war fare and jamming suites working, is every other thing about the plane in top order, maybe he finished a mission and that minor combat damaged something he may or may not have seen, felt, heard, etc. So! So! Much. And nothing is going to beat the human eye in close proximity with no harsh conditions disturbing/distracting them.

[@Proxymated]

Yeah its gonna stay in development shop until its display worthy lol. time to swallow that yankee pride and realize COD was just video game and not really a reference to reality )

[@1563ckg43]

@@Proxymated Believe what you want to. Every swinging d* on all sides change perspectives and regain focus quickly when shots are bouncing around their heads. Nobody gives a shit about what’s on display or not, just as long as it is not marking their position.

[@Proxymated]

@@1563ckg43 your comment literally made no sense at all. wtf are you even talking about? lay off the skooma

[@SubBrief]

Great Video

[@cgilby9925]

The AIM-260 JATM that’s getting tested this year is going to be more or less a Long Range Air-to-Air missile

[@francoise4308]

. The problem with covert cabal is that he trusts Wikipedia statistics for Chinese and Russian long range missiles. The US spends 4x more on R&D than China and Russia combined, and spends 3x more than all OECD nations combined. I don't think Covert Cabal takes that into account.

[@maxtruong187]

@@francoise4308 The problem is that Russia and China bullshit their numbers so the best case is to take what they told and prepare for the worst. Also, more money in R&D doesn't often mean better stuff.

[@orlock20]

@@francoise4308 That is a trick worth noting. Scare the U.s. into making a weapon and then steal the technology. The other countries get all the R&D without the cost.

[@Gongolongo]

Because the AIM-260 has little to no actual development to it. Meanwhile the PL-21 and Meteor are already almost in service. AIM-260 is targeting a 2026 service.

[@cedriceric9730]

@@francoise4308 they still work, what they lack in quality they normally use brute Force The USA has learned to respect that especially with the Russians And recently the Taliban Enemies will find a way Just cause you're the best doesn't make you immune to defeat

[@ogdocvato]

It's always a good day when Covert Cabal releases a new video!

[@robbabcock_]

Great stuff!

[@ssgusa]

An F-15C out of Tyndall AFB recorded the longest kill by missile shot just this past March.

[@hededcdn]

Do elaborate

[@jdjk7]

@@hededcdn That's about the size of what is available. The details were not disclosed for security reasons, but the kill was from an F-15 against a BQM-167 drone in a test environment. The distance was, again, not disclosed for security reasons, but in the press reports it was described as the longest range kill ever made by an Air Force fighter.

[@ruhtraeregel]

@@jdjk7 Russia has multiple confirmed kills of over 200km using the R37 for no losses. Nothing currently in US inventory is capable of going past 180km. It was probably a test of the AIM260 prototype which is an emergency program to counter Russias 400km R37 and Chinas PL21 with 500km range. Problem is for long range missiles you really need a heavyweight fighter like the F15 or SU35 or MIG31 the worlds largest fighter (I know its an interceptor) as a missile truck. Smaller fighters cant carry whats needed, and the US is the only NATO nation with heavyweight fighters and they dont have many. Stealth mitigates somewhat.

[@aotoda486]

Jeez, I read that as "Why the US NO LONGER has AAM's" XD What a shock that was lmao

[@MarkVrem]

It took the US long enough to get the Sidewinder to be accurate at short range. I don't think the USA has the confidence of a long range missile being nothing more than taking up space and weight.

[@trevon5653]

@@MarkVrem bring back nuclear AAM😼 and there won't be a need for accuracy

[@psychohist]

@@MarkVrem The US skepticism of long range missiles traditionally have to do with ROE. If the ROE require visual identification of the target, then a BVR missile isn't of much use. That was the main objection to the Phoenix when it came out.

[@jamesmichael1978]

Renouncing all use of AAM's and only using cannon would give the US a huge edge in big dick energy. More likely they would move to autonomous drones firing laser beams.

[@nickkorkodylas5005]

@@jamesmichael1978 Now that's what I cal big brain time! IMO Fighter aircraft should only have upgraded stinger pods that can shoot down speeding AAMs, like the IRIS-T supposedly can, and just shoot down all incoming missiles until they come into gun range.

[@mattfleming86]

Tracking at range does not seem to be a problem. The main is that the propellant is expended in a short acceleration phase, but the energy required for long range shots os needed in the terminal maneuvering stage. This can be relieved greatly by adding a second stage to burn when the missile gets closer to to target. It would also be amazing in medium range engagements by negating many evasive maneuvers.

[@Tinman3187]

2:57 It's amazing how many people don't realize this about missiles. Just about everyone I've met thinks missile motors continue running for their entire flight and that as long as they can fly faster than their target and their target is inside the magic range bubble it's a guaranteed hit. Good on you.

[@mustafehusen8693]

Exactly not unless it enters space

[@elitewavez4768]

Some do

[@Tinman3187]

@@elitewavez4768 True but a lot don't. Many SAMs max effective range is based on max ballistic range against low and slow targets. On the other hand there are a lot of missiles meant to maneuver under thrust all the way but they are mostly short and medium range AAs that pull really high G's.

[@icecold9511]

Part of the trick is how valuable long range is. Heavy missiles make maneuvering harder, reduce plane range, and uses up maximum weight. You also have to detect, track, and then identify the target or blindly shoot down anything. Range isn't a magic bullet. There is a reason the army uses assault weapons instead of sniper weapons. Effective use range. That is still an issue for air to air combat.

[@icecold9511]

@William Yeager Yeah, but that is a specialty.

[@elrobto1221]

I have forgotten the map at the end! So.... #3 Greetings from Telč in Czech republick.

[@JETZcorp]

Battery life is an extremely underappreciated factor in missile range. Many missiles, including at least some AMRAAM variants, can run out of battery power and go stupid before running out of kinematics in an ideal shot. It's usually not a factor in most shots, but a nice supersonic loft from 50,000ft can absolutely give a bunch of missiles more energy than they have time to use.

[@pixy67_]

Always very interesting stuff

[@blurglide]

I'd like to see multi-stage AAM's. If length is a constraint, you could even use horizontal staging. Add horizontal staging for range, a central sustainer motor, and then a small terminal motor to give it maneuvering capability just before impact.

[@Padtedesco]

Russia has one. The R-37. 300 km range and Hypersonic into its final stage.

[@scottmeehan2422]

Or use a ram jet like the metor

[@lusciouslucius]

interestingly enough i read today about american aam test. its range allegedly was over 100km and it hit the drone target. it was fired from f15 eagle.

[@icecold9511]

100 nm, not km.

[@sagardahiya6138]

Amraam D?

[@icecold9511]

@@sagardahiya6138 latest US amraam missile.

[@terrykeggereis2953]

I like how he said that stealth helps somewhat. Yet in war games with other countries the fights were over before the other side knew anything was there.

[@NDAGR-]

Yo i need 3 videos from you a week. Please

[@historywalrus4851]

Covert cabal releases another quality unbiased video

[@trevon5653]

Fr o enjoy watching his videos wrong or not

[@Rumbler298]

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ Americans in a nutshell: Vid showing US superiority: FACTS Vid showing US inferiority: PROPAGANDAA

[@realityapostasy2158]

@@Rumbler298 don't worry he probably can't even put china on a map

[@themightycat7238]

@ᴡɪɴᴛᴇʀᴍᴜᴛᴇ _ And your just another anti-everything, America is the best country on earth kid.

[@trevon5653]

@@themightycat7238 I mean

[@ab-ve9nm]

Aviationweek has just published an article about an SM-6 like air launched missile in test or development...

[@Pantone2695]

The USN has been tinkering with the idea of SM6 as an AAM for at least the last 4 years and a few days ago, a Super Hornet with an AA version of the SM6 was spotted. That sucker is supposed to have an air to air range of about 400 kilometers.

[@williamhall2386]

I appreciate that the DCS scene was denoted as such :p Interesting info. I suspected that the US does in fact have several plans for a long range missile just nothing has been formally developed, though I suspect our EW/Jamming is more powerful than we know

[@milutinke]

Finnaly a new video 😁

[@ghostwarrior-ni1xb]

man the f-16 will always be one of my fav fighter jet even though its old now

[@facetiousmonkey5322]

Pound 4 pound the best fighter in the world

[@epicmetod]

Its old airframe design, but they still producing NEW planes with newer tech and engines. its like saying newest 737 are old because its started in 1970

[@willswift94]

Nice shot of the load toads at the end!

[@jimepley1210]

Use to be that air force fighter doctrine precluded engaging targets beyond visual range because the IFF systems were so buggy.

[@DeadBaron]

AIM-120D can fly as far as the Phoenix, if not theoretically further, and is very recently entering widespread service. It can fly over 100 miles (as far as we know, likely further) and is more maneuverable than the Phoenix was. IIRC anything that can carry older AIM-120s should be able to carry the D varient, but so far has only been seen on F/A-18s and F-35s

[@mickeyg7219]

The AIM-120D is also used by the F-22, in some ways, it's designed for it. But pretty much all the US jet fighters can fire AIM-120D now (the new record for AIM-120 is achieved by the F-15C), but it's just that they're smaller in number than the older AIM-120C-7, so not all planes carried it, but they have the software updated to use it. It's expected that the USN will completely replaced all its AIM-120C with AIM-120D.

[@kilianconn5091]

At 40,000 feet maybe

[@bernardli9514]

Hangon... if one of the major problems with long range air-to-air missiles is radar guidance, how are the Russians capable of detecting out to 200 miles with their long range missiles? Are their 4th generation fighters equipped with more modern onboard radars or are am I missing a picture here?

[@V-V1875-h]

They have bad radar. Aesa radars are pretty much only on one type of plane in Russia. So if they lock up a plane the US plane will know and will be able to do something about it. Whilst the Chinese have about 17% of their planes equipped with that type of radar

[@zhuravl-m2285]

@@V-V1875-h Russian PESA is more capable than Chinese AESA overall. This was admitted by a retired senior PLAAF officer shortly after Su-35S were acquired from Russia. Chineae radar technology is still very primitive and immature, and will take at least a decade to catch up to Russia Both Chinese and Russian radar technology are far surpassed by that of USA, ofc. Even the radars on F-18E/F and upgraded F-15C are speculated to be more advanced than the ones used on J-20A and J-16, respectively.

[@V-V1875-h]

@@zhuravl-m2285 didn't know that, thanks for the Info

Very interesting topic

[@lughmanwatandust1020]

Great like always☺️

[@cannonfodder4376]

Yet another informative radar. Great work Covert Cabal.

[@xekul]

the AIM120D has comparable range to the AIM54 (phoenix) - certainly not "a fraction of the range" as stated at 4:35

[@zolikoff]

Actual performance is not known though. Stated specs may or may not be accurate, deliberately. From a certain POV it doesn't make sense how the 120D can have a so much greater range despite as stated having the same engine performance, terminal speed and aerodynamics. Perhaps the improvement is in electronics and extended battery life, enabling tracking shots from greater distance, but this only matters for predictable, non-maneuvering targets.

[@zolikoff]

@David Hecht Yes, I understand that, what I'm saying is that I have a suspicion that despite all that, the stated range of the AMRAAM is misleading, in that it doesn't have the required kinematics at that sort of range, so it's probably worse than the Phoenix if you tried using it at such a range. It is designed for mid-range engagements where it can have a kinematics advantage, but it would lose too much energy at long range to maintain it. Besides, for a long-ranged shot it uses the same lofting semi-ballistic trajectory by necessity, that a Phoenix would.

[@Zarathustra-H-]

AIM-120 AMRAAM's are currently being updated to the D version which extends range 50% over the already extended range C version and it is already entering service. Range is classified, but is widely expected to be in excess of 100 miles. The AIM-260 JATM which significantly increases range is under active development, and expected to hit initial operational availability this year, and is expected to overtake the AIM-120 in numbers by 2026. Russia and China have missiles (like the PL-15) that exceed current AIM-120's in range in theory, but they also have much worse guidance systems and are less likely to hit their targets. The low observeability of the F-22 and F-35's, means the launching aircraft can't launch at what they can't get a radar lock on. The fact that the J-20 would have to carry the PL-15 externally means that it would eliminate most (if not all) if its limited stealth capability, and still allow the American planes to detect it before it detects them. They are still unlikely to detect American stealth aircraft at a range where the PL-15 offers an advantage. Also, reports have it that the PL-15 is only deployed in limited numbers, meaning in a conflict with China only initial encounters would have to worry about PL-15's. After that, China would probably be shifting to their older shorter range PL-12's, which have only about half the range of the latest D variant of the AAMRAM's, and are also outraged by the previous C variant. This means that while it is a area of concern, for sure, it is not as bad as this video makes it seem. It is certainly something a carrier group deployed in the south China sea would need to factor into their considerations should shit hit the fan, and missiles start flying, but it is not something that we need to be panicking about.

[@revcane]

its a good day when there is a new upload

[@jamesricker3997]

The US military never releases the exact performance figures of weapons in active service The AARAM is rumored to have a range of over 83 miles

[@ruhtraeregel]

US air force put the aim260 on an emergency rushed status as ordered by congress. They wouldnt launch an emergency rush program for a long range missile if the ones they had were adequate. The AIM120D has less than half the range of modern chinese and russian missiles. Good news is that due to the rush the AIM260 will start being fielded next year, The program was launched specifically with the PL15 in mind.

[@barackeli5859]

This is the only channel that I always wait for new uploads .

[@dopplerhit8374]

Same lol

[@gabrielaldeandradegomes2051]

Amparo ( close to Campinas ) - Sao Paulo - Brazil

[@hosank]

It's probably worth pointing out that US doctrine largely focuses on pilot training (especially true for the navy) which emphasises the ability to counter the longer ranges of chinese or other near-peer opponents when their missiles reach terminal velocity (and have expended energy)

[@ExTofia]

When Every time watch your viedo I feel like ww3 will star soon... But this is best YT channel ever....

[@paladin0654]

Since the AIM-260 is classified, we really don't know who's playing "catch up".

[@stilpa1]

Aim-260 is expected to be somwthing in 2022, so it doesnt even exist yet

[@markgrove2030]

Like the Cabal videos BUT interesting tho they may be, I guess if REALLY accurate we'd be rather stupid to depict. Hopefully the info is misdirection on our part eh? Please??

[@Thetequilashooter1]

Range doesn’t mean shit if the missile’s seeker can’t lock onto a target. A British exchange F-15C fighter pilot couldn’t get a lock onto a F-22, even in visual range. The F-22 flying at 60k feet flying Mach 1.8 in super cruise can launch an Amraam D at long range. Today’s F-22s and 35s can also get closer to the enemy without being detected, and F-15s from outside the kill zone can use the F-22’/35s sensors to home in on the target. They are essentially missile trucks for 5th gen aircraft. Also PESA radars are susceptible to being jammed by AESA radar. The Super Hornets all coming out now have AESA, giving US aircraft a distinct advantage. Plus the long-range missiles in Russia’s and China’s arsenal are all meant for slow-moving and large targets like tankers or ECM aircraft.

[@corvanphoenix]

The US has traditionally had to worry a lot more about friendly fire incidents too. That means more emphasis on WVR capability. BVR is great when there are no friendlies around but not so great when things are more ambiguous.

[@anirudhverma9508]

You also need to consider the fact that for the Navy defending the carriers became the role of AEGIS ships once SM-2 achieved a 95% hit to kill when using shoot shoot look shoot doctrine. And now quad packed ESSM means an adversary must deploy something like 200 ASM to exhaust missile magazines. Now with DDG getting lasers then it's theoretically an unlimited magazine.

[@w8stral]

Yea right... against dumb singular targets.... Let the world know when one can do it against 100 targets simultaneously with ECM.... USA or anyone in the world hasn't even TRIED to do such a test. Everyone is just running around with a blindfold and pretending for the last 5 decades.

[@wgoulding]

@@w8stral You're also forgetting that the ships have ECM too. People love to focus on the shiny, fancy, and exciting things like missiles but many forget about the less glamorous stuff like jammers. Ships are big targets, but they have a lot of power and big antennas, and those give significant advantages in jamming.

[@wgoulding]

@@w8stral But you are right, with all these complicated electronics, the only way we'll figure out what works and what doesn't is an actual conflict.

[@w8stral]

@@wgoulding Not much jamming against multi pixel IR unless you optically blind it with a laser.

[@kwtr1609]

@@w8stral The US destroyers actually have the best ECM capabilities in the world. Just notice SEWIP, SPY-6, SLQ-59, SLQ-62. No airborne jammer is as capable as those.

[@darkguardian1314]

You have to know what you’re shooting at to use beyond visual range weapons.

[@danny5637]

Is it a bird or is it a plane?

[@appa609]

There is no reason to expect AESA to increase maximum range. AESA primarily just increases scan speed and helps make sure you see everything you should be able to see.

[@robertotamesis1783]

That's problem with long range missiles optical scan are not fully developed. I used to work for a company that did data recording , one of the engineer was working on optical recording but he lacked the data templates to identify Friend or Foe that was in the 1990s'.

[@alexs7189]

But if the AMRAAM, in the latest versions, have a range of over 160 km, what the hell are we talking about?

[@SetNode]

That's assuming the conditions are perfect. Conditions are never perfect.

[@mickeyg7219]

@@SetNode Well, the same goes with any missiles. It depends on the speed and altitude of the launch platform and type of target. The >160 km range figure, for example, is very vague in itself, we don't know the method used to get to that number, so we can assume that other missiles are tested differently as well. Who knows? Maybe it could even hit slow, large targets from over 200 km away, but we will never find that out.

[@conductingintomfoolery9163]

@@SetNode same as the Russian and Chinese missiles

[@alexs7189]

@@SetNode But the point is that, only very few nations in the world have missiles with a longer range, the number of missiles with a range greater than AMRAAM can be counted on the fingers of one hand, and often these missiles are only in AWACS anti-aircraft or anti-aircraft function. bombers, not against fighter jets.

[@skyvenrazgriz8226]

Radar and data link will be complimented by drones in future, even if not equiped with a super powerful radar a swarm of stealth spy drones with data link capability and maybe with a passiv IR sensor array might do wonders on both sides and might become a lethal downfall of stealth, as drones can be cheaply massproduced and take on more risky recon...

[@aritakalo8011]

Well in the end both will have forward swarms. When you try to get close enough to spot the core aircraft, way before you are in range of the cor the opposing swarms spot each other on IR and have to engage each other. There drones start shooting out each other to prevent spooking of the core and even probably suicide guardian drones whose job among all the other stuff is to literally dive in front of the incoming missile getting too close to core planes. "pick me, pick me, I'm big and juice, sending out lot of junk decoy EM simulating panicking fighter pilot." It becomes just another layer of attrition. Before it was "who has more planes and missiles to throw at enemy". Now it just also includes "whose protective drone swarm is depleted first". One can have near unlimited drone production capacity, but not all the drones can be in every place all the time. Locally the drones will run out from one side or another eventually. Same cat and mouse, new tech. You send in stealth IR deep recon drone swarm, we send out deep recon drone swarm detection drone swarm and so on.

[@lardthing7417]

Wait: so you're saying that a swarm of *stealthy* drones will negate *stealth?*

[@deadspaceissacman]

Wont that be prone to hacking? Especially knowing china and Russia is constantly trying to bypass US cyber security, with great successes too.

[@Padtedesco]

@@aritakalo8011 Good scenario. That would probably do the trick... And I can see drones trying to penetrate far and deep (uhn) into the core of enemy air defenses.... It would be probably like WWII fleet spooting.

[@hughmungus2760]

considering most combat drones today cost as much if not more than 4th generation fighters, mass producing them cheaply for air to air purposes don't seem possible.

[@Chevymonster203]

My question do we have a way to scramble the missles electronics. I know we have emp weapons.

[@jennyarriola324]

They actually have up until 2006. The AIM 54 Phoenix missile which was retired along with the Tomcat.

[@gustavocarmo2500]

UM salve de São Paulo, Brasil!

[@snowissj]

Budget restraints for the US military is the most ironic thing.

[@wgoulding]

When you look at the military budget of China and factor in all of the things that they don't publish as well as purchasing power (ie. a bolt, bullet, computer chip, hour of engineering work, a soldier's wages, etc. is more expensive in the US) China has a bigger budget by a non-insignificant margin.

[@strelov1520]

fair enough. good review

[@bryonslatten3147]

The F-16V is equipped with the AN/APG-83 active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar which are being retrofitted onto Air National Guard F-16's.

[@augustoliborio9458]

Covert Cabral: Us has no long missile. Aim-120D (With had 110 miles of range): I’m what ????? Seriously, Russian e Chinese long range missiles are designer to kill bigger aircraft not to give air to air advantage over fighter. For example both Russian R-77 an chinese PL-12 which are the missiles that are to counter fighter are less than 100 miles of range.

[@harb1911]

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Novator_KS-172

[@appa609]

Because by the time you're close enough to lock a fighter sized target you're close enough to launch an AMRAAM-D

[@OverG88]

This! If you manage to lock and fire at F-22 or F-35 at max. AMRAAM’s range, then you deserve a kill. AMRAAM’s range is totally enough.

[@shingyanling1856]

Well, it could be due to the 1st gulf war. Despite iraq having a large air force, not much of them participated in air combat. With modern technology, Lrasms and other missiles can be also controlled by other fighters such as f18s to attack ships. The new missile for the apache could fire 32 miles, but in reality the apache was only the firing platform, and the control of the missile was then given to other forces.

[@edenschildren4238]

The Raytheon AIM 54 Phoenix is capable up to 150km and the AIM 260 is currently in development with a effective range of 200km

[@saucejohnson9862]

Last week they tested the AIM-120D and hit a drone 87 miles away, is that not long enough for you?

[@hourbee5535]

Can the meteor by MBDA be integrated into f-15 and f-16?

[@unknownuser069]

Yes, F-15 and F-16 can both fire Meteor, and versions used by foreign Air Forces fire those and other missiles. F-35 also fires other NATO missiles. It is merely that the US does not purchase these missiles for its own use. It could though - and for all we know carriers might have stores of Meteor or other missiles in their armories that no one talks about. I find that very unlikely, but it would be feasible.

[@qiyuxuan9437]

A software update with a compatible pylon should able to do that. Since modern fighter jets mostly uses the same 1553 bus(simlair to usb on computers) to communicate between missile/tpod with the jet onboard computer. But meteor has its own weakness, it dosent fly as fast as solid rocket missiles, and the intake can cause extra drag after it run out of fuel.

[@sublimefermion2205]

@@qiyuxuan9437 While that is true. But traditional missiles use 80% oxidizer and 20% fuel. TDR like Meteor use Ramjet propulsion which derives oxygen from high velocity air. Which in theory will increase its range.

[@unknownuser069]

@Drew Peacock Wikipedia is not exactly authoritative, and it doesn't come close to explaining the full complexity of missile performance. Meteor has some compromises ... it can reach high mach numbers, and it can reach long ranges. HOWEVER, to reach long range it has to throttle down its engine, which suddenly makes it slower, but able to fly longer. I think if it runs full speed from rail to target it can drive itself up to Mach 4+ ... but so much goes into all this. I mean any missile will perform very differently depending on lauch parameters. If it comes off the rails of a Tempest at Mach 2+ and 60000 feet, its going to perform much differently than if it comes off the rails of a Tornado at 550knots at 7000 feet.

[@qiyuxuan9437]

@Drew Peacock Air to air missile spec are classified information, those number on wikipiedia means nothing.

[@blayas5239]

´´Trying to fit long range aam's in the small stealth plane bays results in a yamete kudasai moment`` I believe that the best path for long range AAMs is the adoption of engines with dynamic thrust such as MBDA Meteor, this results in incredible results, not so much for Rmax but MUCH more for PK within Roptimal and NEZ.

[@crankthetank3581]

"A yamete kudasai moment", lmao im not gonna stop using that term now

[@DK-ed7be]

When is the last time US ROE allowed for a beyond visual range identification engagement?

[@Ashitaka-fw1bh]

isn't the Aim series but lockhead the newer air to air missiles coming out if not already out that beat amraams?

[@tringalij]

AIM isn’t a series, is just an acronym (Air Intercept Missile). Like Sparrow is AIM-7, AMRAAM is AIM-120, etc.

[@sirrloin]

It tells you one thing...every other country is planning on being on the defensive if they're facing the America in a war.

[@yzfool6639]

That's all you need to do to win against the US. Just hang on.

[@Billswiftgti]

Rafale+Meteor= Turkey welcome to our episode of "Search and Rescue over the Aegean"

[@earthredalert]

For Greece, it is strategically vital to maintain air superiority over the Aegean and its islands, the Aegean is a Greek sea after all. The Turkish land forces are far larger but they still have to cross the Evros river border zone which is highly mined and well defended. I think you may be correct. I don't even think the F35 is particularly well suited to the Aegean theatre and its dogfighting capabilities are questionable v the Rafale.

[@nickkorkodylas5005]

@@earthredalert Erdoghan imprisoning all TRF's veteran pilots for trying to impose their kemalist brand of "regulated" democracy instead of his ottoman one did not help either.

[@kempmt1]

WAIT! I almost forgot a program to replace the Phoenix, called the Advanced Intercept Air to Air Missile (AIAAM), which was later changed to Advanced Air to Air Missile (AAAM). It was Hughes and General Dynamics were in competition, but the program was cancelled due to the end of the Cold War. 4:04-wasn't the Phoenix also supposed to take out the missiles launched by the bombers? 9:42-is this one of the competitors for the AAAM program?

[@kempmt1]

​@David Hecht So, do you recall which of the two missiles would have won, the Hughes model or the one by GD ?

[@kempmt1]

@David Hecht final question: the F-14 can carry six big Phoenix missiles, how many of these other missiles would the Tomcat could carry (hopefully, more than six)?

[@kempmt1]

@David Hecht yeah, I remember about the Sparrow that accidentally shot down the Tomcat that fired it, but I was under the assumption that the AAAM would be smaller or lighter than the Phoenix, with longer range.

[@bensigl3766]

I'm confused. The newest versions of the AIM-120 were long range, I thought. And I was under the impression that the 260 is just a couple years out as well.

[@phil20_20]

😄😄😄 "No long range missles!" - this guy is so funny!

[@danielbaker8487]

He’s incredibly misinformed

[@trevon5653]

But isn't this what the new F15 is for? To be missile carries for the F35

[@unknownuser069]

Yes, it will be firing AIM-120D revisions and AIM-260, plus LREW. AIM-120 production is ending by 2026, which should tell people that the reality of "US missile inferiority" is not exactly what you can figure out by looking at Wikipedia

[@trevon5653]

@@unknownuser069 whats LREW? Never heard of that one

[@unknownuser069]

@@trevon5653 Long Range Engagement Weapon This is the US program for long range missiles. Not a lot is known publicly about it, but what people expect is that it will fit inside F-22/F-35 bays but have performance comparable to R-37 or PL-21 ... neither of which can be carried internally. So Mach 5+, 400km+ range, not much different in size from a AIM-120D. That seems ambitious, but that's the general guesswork around it. I think the compromise will be staging or throttling ... but I rule out nothing at this point.

[@trevon5653]

@@unknownuser069 do you think it'll work? Like being able to make it that small with a larger range

[@unknownuser069]

@@trevon5653 Yeah ... I do. Question is not if it will work, it will. The real questions are: When will it get delivered? What will it cost? What compromises will the engineers have to make? For some small insight as to the last point, I think I made a comment about the Meteor on this video.

[@mr.factoid105]

From what I heard it was also the plan to replace the air fleet with stealth fighters, reducing the need for long range missiles, that didn't happen. putting 2+2 together a bit as I never say a statement in regards to the missiles, just the intent for a full 5th gen fleet.

[@Warpreacher]

That's a nice pool table

[@drawingdead9025]

Aim-120D you say 80 miles? I understood it to be considerably more, like 120+.

[@kwtr1609]

Youre right with the 120mi plus.

[@viktor_v-ughnda_vaudville_476]

Covert cabal has the best military videos on KZbin hands down

[@ravener96]

One thing that could be interestin, although not really viable in the field is a liquid fueled second stage. Most missiles are essentially one stage solid rickets, and in the rocket world thats pretty much the worst you get, even very simple pressure fed rockets get a lot better performance, and staging radically improves the speed you can get to.

[@ravener96]

@@RobertLutece909 for long distance the fuel flow during manouvering isnt as critical, since it will al have been burned before intercept, besides, the thrust vector will always keep pressure on the fuel to the bottom. on dangers, thats obviously an issue, but if it brings significant performance improvements, say double the speed a missile gets to, the window of certain kill gets massive, and the range goes way way up. missiles obey the rocket equation too, which vastly rewards specific impulse over anything else.

[@VectorGhost]

Arent there several missile programs going on? AIM-260 and then there is the LREW, plus peregrine missile?

[@br2266]

before even watching the video, the reason is because we just appear wherever we want and don't need them.

[@andersmalmgren6528]

Meteor is the best though. And can be used with Gripen

[@AircraftFTW]

When our Modern Spam Rams are classified, but people seem to ignore that.

[@jeffkerr7418]

I just watched a video that states an f15c just executed the longest air to air missle strike. Distance not mentioned.

[@Imstrong1815]

because us has milliatry base near everyother country

[@SG003]

Lol

[@pioneeringtech1592]

TRUE

[@killercat1276]

I wish we had more

[@theempirewasright7673]

@@killercat1276 plz no

[@HaydenLau.]

That does not mean US doesn't need long range air to air missiles...

[@ThePolorex]

"F-14s need to be scrambled before the bombers can launch their anti-ship missiles." *laughs in P700 Granit*

[@Grafknar]

Kitchen. Not Shipwreck.

[@provaassemblea8063]

granit? LOL... Granit is an old thing zircon is the new one.... everything you do (as zircon countermeasure) is too late!... and cause it travels (due to the hypersonic speed) in a "plasma cloud" no radar traking.... "does not tr....kaboooom!"....

[@chrisdoe2659]

Interesting timing on this video. The same day this was uploaded, a civilian photographer managed to snap a picture of an F-18 flying with something that looks suspiciously like an SM-6. If true, it could only be a short time before the Navy can handily outrange Russia and China

[@Llyrin]

Well, we HAD the Phoenix, with a range of over 100 mi (100 nmi). Unfortunately, the AIM-54 went out with the F-14. 🙁

[@starsiegeplayer]

Well the F-14 really didn't have a reason to exist without the Phoenix.

[@californiahighwaypatrol577]

@@starsiegeplayer it did it was a way better bomber and fighter then the f 18, in iraq f 18 many times had to use the f14 tarps and latrin pod in order to drop its bombs