The anti-ship cruise missile (ASCM) is perhaps the defining feature of modern naval combat, at least when surface ships are being engaged. More than anything else, tactics, doctrine, force structure, and even warship design are built around this one weapon system. It truly is the naval artillery of the 21st century. One simply cannot understand modern naval warfare without first having a firm grasp on the ASCM. Despite the development of anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBMs) and hypersonics, the anti-ship cruise missile is, and will remain, the dominant arm of modern naval forces well into this century. This guide will explore the origins of this weapon, the way it is employed and the revolutionary impact ASCMs have had upon naval operations and tactics, the impact it had upon warship design and the western, soviet, and soviet successor anti-ship cruise missile design and employment philosophies. It is everything you need to know (and maybe a few things you don’t) about the anti-ship cruise missile.
0:00 Inception
10:40 The Battle Network: a New Kind of Naval Combat
31:54 The Offence Defence Contest
55:56 The Western Sea Skimmers: Harpoon and Exocet
1:18:27 The Soviet Solution: Speed
1:41:23 The Soviet Successors: Russia, India and China
1:51:45 Stealth: Current Generation Western Systems
Some, but not all, of the material referenced in the preparation of this video:
Roy M. Smith. 2010. “USING KILL-CHAIN ANALYSIS TO DEVELOP SURFACE SHIP CONOPS TO DEFEND AGAINST ANTI-SHIP CRUISE MISSILES”, Master’s Thesis, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey.
https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/36699051.pdf
KENNETH P. WERRELL, 1985. “The Evolution of the Cruise Missile”, Library of Congress.
https://media.defense.gov/2017/Apr/07/2001728474/-1/-1/0/B_0006_WERRELL_EVOLUTION_CRUISE_MISSILE.PDF
JOHN STILLION, BRYAN CLARK. 2015. “WHAT IT TAKES TO WIN: SUCCEEDING IN 21ST CENTURY BATTLE NETWORK COMPETITIONS” Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments (CSBA).
https://csbaonline.org/uploads/documents/What-it-Takes-to-Win.pdf
John C. Schulte. 1994. “An Analysis of the Historical Effectiveness of AntiShip Cruise Missiles in Littoral Warfare”. Master’s Thesis. Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/ADB192139.pdf
Matthew J. Wemyss, Maj. 2016. “The Bear’s Den: Russian Anti-Access/Area-Denial in the Maritime Domain”, Master’s Thesis, AIR COMMAND AND STAFF COLLEGE, AIR UNIVERSITY, USAF.
https://apps.dtic.mil/sti/pdfs/AD1031334.pdf
source
34:42 🇺🇦 + Neptun x 2=🖕🇷🇺
The Badgers in Clancy's 'Dance of the Vampires' used AS-5 Kelt missiles as decoys, not the AS-15 Kent, which at the time of the scenario were dedicated nuclear armed ALCMs.
The Soviet cruiser was not heavily armoured it was a light cruiser who's thickest armour was only 3 inches and it was Soviet armour steel a much lower quality than used by the US or UK so only about equivalent to 2 inches of Western armour of the time.
Brother…. when I tell you this is a work of art…. it’s a damn work of art. Wow. Fantastic work. If there isn’t an intelligence agency or two paying you to train their people on this shit – they’re missing out. Lol
You killed it sir….
Thank you for explaining why the harpoon is still in service. I always found it underwhelming compared to its Soviet/Russian counterparts. After the explanation, it makes much more sense why these are still in use today.
My favorite Youtube channel. Awesome work!
Brilliant as always.
Oh the scuttling Bismarck shit found its way into this to
The best way to find a Tu 95 is to listen for it on the SOSUS system .. they so loud you can hear them on the sea floor…
Excellent work!
You and Perun make God tier content, I would love to see you guys do a livestream together.
Great video.
Except satellites don’t exist.
He's Back! Screw youtube for not showing up for 2 days
Note it's HMS Glasgow, not Glascow.
The missile knows where it is at all times.
It’s knows this, because it knows where it isn’t.
Amazing! So great!
Always looking forward to your next video!
You deserve to be a millionaire. Please don't stop doing these!
Great video, but I'm surprised the US Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) was not included. A version of this missile is expected to be fielded in 2023, and eventually integrated with the Zumwalt class destroyers and the Virginia class submarines.
A Fritz x also hit HMS Warspite but she did not sink, although it did cause a lot of damage.
I wouldn't say large gun warships were still effective during the Falklands war, if anything it showed precisely why the major powers abandoned them decades earlier.
Oh yeah! Thank you sir!
Most informative documentary episode about progressing steps of naval forces war ships 🚢 and their weapons firepower,Laser guide, GPS guides…around the world 🌎…thanks for sharing
First off, I love your channel and vids. I'll likely voraciously consume any and all content you choose to release. However, if you would do a completely laid bare exposé on every single bit of info available (and suspected to be likely) on state-of-the-art military submarines (US, France, Britain, and Russia especially), I would sing your praises to any and all that might be a fan. PLEASE. There is a huge and annoyingly persistent dearth of ruthlessly comprehensive and objective information on the topic. Thanks at least for reading this. 🙏🙏🙏
hey mate, a really nice video. i would like to ask if maybee the next video would be over Normal cruise missiles like the tomahawk or so. but for people like me woh like to learn new stuff every day its the perfect videos. Greetings from Switzerland☺😍
16:47 – The Hood was sunk on the 24th of May 1941 and NOT in 1942 as stated.
Enjoying the video so far but there is a small cock-up – you keep referring to Denmark Strait taking place in 1942, when it was actually 1941.
2 hours, 16 minutes and 21 seconds and not a single ''like, subscribe and comment''. What an amazing video, I enjoyed it very much. Thank you very much.
Cheers bloke Australian accent is great it's refreshing
Favorite channel as of late, keep it up!
Wow, excellent video well worth the 2 hours. Question – how do missiles like the NSM and LRASM communicate in a group without creating a detectable electronic signature?
It defies logic that most anti ship cruise missile analyses do not include the Tomahawk. Designed originally to launch from a sub's torpedo tube, it could also be dropped from aircraft, launched from Vertical launch systems on ships and used as surface to surface missiles by the US Army. Range of the anti ship version was 1200 miles and cruised at ~500 mph. Strategic versions with nuclear warheads had a 3000 mile range because they did not employ a seek flight pattern before finding and killing a ship. Harpoon and LRASM are constantly touted as the missiles we use against ships. The Tomahawk simply was not procured for use as anti ship after the first versions. The propellant batteries and warheads went out of date and the systems were discarded. Harpoon promised supersonic speeds and did not deliver, same with the LRASM under development. Neither missile achieved this so they were no better than Tomahawk without the economy of scale of being used as a torpedo tube launched, air launched, or surface launched weapon. Beltway bandits killed the anti ship Tomahawk, touting competing systems that were more expensive and less effective. The stealth capability of an LRASM supposedly outweighs the Tomahawk's lower cost, but the ability to overwhelm enemy defenses with more missiles should be considered.
You and Perun are my go to entertainment . You Aussies are amazing! please keep it up!
I really enjoyed this, but you may want to look into the YF-12 and AIM 47 Missile BUT TRULY EXCELLENT
Phenomenal information as always. Thanks so much for the effort and hard work in making such high quality videos!
Keep up the good work!
38:45 This is only half true. And it's part of why the AEGIS combat system and SM-2 were so revolutionary in the american air defense complex when it was introduced. Traditionally in US interceptors the missile had to have target illumination the full flight time of the missile from pre launched to impact. This limits your engagement capability to how many illuminators you have on your vessel at a time which was usually no more than 2 on most ships with older SM-1 and Terrier systems.
What the SM-2 and the AEGIS combat system brought to the table was "time shared" engagement of the fire control illuminators. With the the SM-2 only requiring continuous wave illumination to the target in terminal phase. Drastically reducing the amount of time your illuminators are allocated to one missile. And it allows the AEGIS combat system to be constantly firing interceptors in timed intervals to have missiles on the way to the target in midcourse. And also guiding terminal phase missiles for only a few seconds then switch to the next set of targets after impact. This allowed for a massive increase in engagement rate that one ship can handle. And required exponentially more missiles that the soviets had to expend to saturate one ship, let alone a whole CBG with multiple AEGIS ships.
1:34:00 beautiful
I was in the USN during the 1990’s. I’ve worked on several surface to air missile and gun systems and without a doubt I can say they we have no idea how a full scale war against China would go. There are so many variables and conditions that could affect the outcome of every engagement that until we actually have a few battles we just don’t know how effective any of our systems are. Most weapons are completely controlled by computers as things happen far to quick for humans to understand and react to. In peacetime it’s easy but with thousands of missiles, planes, ships, and submarines all trying to sink each other it’s a holy mess.
Shared.
I just stumbled upon your channel today and this is first video I watched. Bloody amazing content man, very impressed. I haven't found anything as in depth as this video. Keep up the high quality work!
File this video under things I didn't know I wanted but glad I found.
correction for 22:38: the area of uncertainty rises quadratically, not exponentially.
IRONIC that Moskva was taken out by her own weapon type essentially…. adds to your arguement I think.
HOW DISPICABLE OF THE ITALIANS ARE THEY PROUD OF THIS DISHONORABLE ACT!!!
At 2:28 (https://youtu.be/ZhY-QLPt0f0?t=148), the newspaper front page headlined "Italy Surrenders", happens to have an article about the wedding of Orson Welles and Rita Hayworth (bottom left), which adds a rather poignant aspect to this story.
Epic vid, thanks mate!
I thoroughly enjoyed the description of the attack of the carrier group by Bears and Backfires. Great video
another awesome brief.
May i suggest a briefing on Naval mine (including air deployed ones like the quickstirke) and also air launched standoff weapons.
This video should be a part of naval officer training. It sets a fine example for documentary youtubers. The viewer is introduced to the world of naval warfare by anti-ship missiles by approaching the subjects through historical anecdotes. The audience is lured to learn about the tactics and usage of naval missiles including some pretty technical stuff!
However, the depth and width of knowknowledge, the amount of theory, examples of probabilistic analysis, all the details, covering US, several European, Russian and Chinese examples…. amazing!
This video would make excellent material for naval officer cadets!
What a great and comprehensive analysis! Thank you!