https://youtu.be/jeaHm8HxAYs video has over 600k views and here are the selling points.
1)"Russians wouldnt know if that HIMARS launcher has GMLRS, has GLSDB or if it had ATACMS"
-I dont think it would even matter since they are use to intercepting GMLRS missiles that are slightly more difficult targets to intercept as supersonic missiles compared to slow glide bombs. If they did identify the HIMARS with reconnaissance it would be a target to artillery, drone or airstrikes in which why should they care what it would carry if it got destroyed? Its either the Russians find and destroy it or use their air defense to intercept whatever it fires.
2)"if you are the russians and have the air defenses pointed at one sector, you might not be looking at every direction once"
-Well this is true Nebo-m has like a 90 degree sector for tracking 1m2 targets at 480kms but the radar also has a 360 degree sector option for tracking 1m2 targets at 400kms and the surface area of these glide bombs for being 4 meters in length with wings looking like 2 meters long seem to have a bigger surface area then 1m2. Modern IADS nowadays allow main radars and control stations to control or slave short range air defenses to use the radar tracking information to intercept these drones no matter what direction. Even if there was no long range air defenses present or takes a long while to move active and passive radars with the launchers and control stations, etc Pantsir and Tor-M2 short range air defenses can move to whatever direction they want immediately and some of them cover more radar coverage then 90 degrees as well.
3)"so you take that ability to glide to a target, and then you attach that rocket engine to the back, and all of a sudden you got range and youve got a little more speed"
-So what is he referencing as in a little more speed is he talking about the GMLRS missiles, or the glide bombs launched from current aircrafts that can carry them? The 80kms achieved by HIMARs is that it's just an engine with a warhead that flies usually in volleys at supersonic speeds to their designated target areas in a ballistic trajectory. The wings on the glide bomb with the supersonic speeds and G-loads of turning would rip the wings apart so he is probably referencing glide bombs from aircrafts in comparison to the ones getting ground launched by HIMARS. The 1st stage engine launches the glide bomb at the highest point of the ballistic trajectory while the wings allow it to glide at 150kms. But the problem is its high in the air and moving very slow, its not like some of the agile drones that are smaller offering less radar reflection then a bigger target for stealth and fly low enough to not be spotted by radars in which current russian small range air defenses already intercept these targets and will make cheap mass produced new short range 1 meter sized missiles to intercept them. The glide bombs are just easier targets to intercept than kamikaze drones.
4)"price is unknown they cost far less than other long range systems like the ATACMS"
- notice they are comparing costs to ATACMS which is 1.7 million dollars but not to costs like the GMLRS missiles. A single GMLRS missile costs 100,000 dollars but the glide bomb itself cost 40,000 dollars not taking account of the cost of the 1st stage missile engines that launches it to trajectory. pantsir missiles intercepting these missiles are far cheaper and the newest quadpacked midget missiles would allow the pantsir to carry from 12 to 48 missiles with the intention of those missiles being made cheaper than the drones they will be intercepting. Even if the U.S. somehow speed runs 2030 to an earlier date beating the Russians using drones that have neural networking before the izdeliye-53 gets used in battle to make EW systems be ineffective against them, the Russians would already have enough quad packed missiles to deal with swarms.
5)"perhaps you might launch your slower weapons 1st, they start coming in from different angles, and then you time your faster moving ballistic GMLRS or ATACMS to come in and everything arrives in at the same time"
-in order to have the option of GMLRS, ATACMS and GLSDB the target has to be 80kms away, in order to have the option of GLSDB and ATACMS to work the target has to be 150kms away and anything passed 150kms only the ATACMs would work. If you pair modern long range air defenses with short range air defenses they will track and engage these targets simultaneously but lets do the other fun long explanation anyways. If there is a Pantsir-SM 80 kms away this air defense would have a radar range of 75kms with a max SAM missile range of 40kms to intercept HIMARS missiles and the speed of these 12 missiles are said to be like 2km/s or mach 6 dealing with aerial targets in which it can deal with 2 HIMARS. However, lets say it is not paired with a long-range air defense system leaving its targeting and engagement to be limited in engaging a smaller number of targets at a time then 12. in order for all 12 missiles to reach the target at the same exact time the subsonic GLSDB will be launched 1st, supersonic GMLRS will be launched 2nd and hypersonic ATACMs will be launched last. the subsonic glide bombs will be hit at the 40km pantsir missile killzone, the supersonic missiles at that range will be engaged next leaving the hypersonic missiles as the last targets. Reason you need to launch at different time intervals is because they have different speeds arriving at the same location, if you launched them all at the same time to the same target the faster speed targets will be engaged 1st before the slower speed targets at a distance.
6)"although it is unclear how many GLSDB the U.S. will deliver, We're taking stuff that is lying around in inventory and putting it together in an innovative way. Excess-surplus bombs and marrying them with rockets that we have lying around. Now we will probably will need to produce more of the rockets to be sure but the good news is we have alot of these GLSDBs its look for the good enough solution"
-If the weapon was considered useful serial production for glide bombs would happen then just using stockpiles and for the rocket engine production what was said was, "probably" in that sentence. That does not sound like enough confidence for a game changer weapon.
Imagine being drafted to NATO to fight in Ukraine and you have brilliant minds like these working for you. I was expecting maybe some western sophisticated shit equivalent to Russia making these kinds of missiles for Ukrainians.
but was Billy drinking when he wrote that shit? 10 in the morning is early to be drunk, unless you're Crooked Hillary or Drunk Nancy (a truly nasty woman)!
