I built the MK-12A Reentry Vehicles for the USAF starting in 1973. It was an interesting time. I'm still proud of my work.
@davisc1926
Жыл бұрын
I worked on the MMIII ECS Replacement program as an engineer years ago and it was a fun program to be involved with. Saw a lot of neat stuff!!
@user-uq8yy1mp3d
Жыл бұрын
Ну и что в итоге , заменили?
@johnoliver4739
Ай бұрын
The Minuteman III has had the warhead changed out for the W87 with a yield of 300KT or 475KT..
@frankmccarthy2624
Жыл бұрын
Shouldn’t have scrapped the Peacekeeper
@Elevationem
4 ай бұрын
The LGM-118a Peacekeeper was way too expensive to keep in service. They were the best ICBM’s in the world by far, just overkill for the intended mission.
@philthai99
Жыл бұрын
The Minutemen series of Incontinental Nuclear missiles are the best in the world.
@MM-qp8kt
9 ай бұрын
MX peacekeeper
@thefrenchbaguette919
6 ай бұрын
No they are not the best they aren't bad just old
@Asymmetrical-Saggin
5 ай бұрын
@@thefrenchbaguette919 lol
@Mavve69
5 ай бұрын
Meh, debateable. But they do the job, aka mutually assured destruction.
@Mavve69
5 ай бұрын
@@thefrenchbaguette919 Yeah, but they do the job.
@MissilemanIII
4 ай бұрын
I used to work on the Minuteman III
@Brannee248
Жыл бұрын
For security reasons, they are the defense & resource tools as our good 🖊 writing pens.
@AndrewLambert-wi8et
2 ай бұрын
INDIA FOUND OUT THAT OLD SOLID PROPELLANT TECHNOLOGY HAD PROBLEMS, WHICH MADE THEM DEVELOP A BETTER FUEL.
@Asymmetrical-Saggin
5 ай бұрын
'Only 170kt' Lol do you even realize how destructive that actually is? 'only' 15kt and 20kt yields were the WW2 bombs. Those leveled a square mile each and caused 200k casualties between them. Yeah, i don't want to see what 'only' 170kt does, let alone megatons lol
@dfmayes
5 ай бұрын
Wow, I didn't realize we are relying on 50+ year old technology.
@AndrewLambert-wi8et
2 ай бұрын
HOW MANY OF THE MODERN TYPE OF MINUTEMAN MISSILES DOES THE USA CURRENTLY HAVE IN ITS ARSENAL, IS MY QUESTION? USA ONLY SAYS IT HAS 500 MISSILES.
@SUNNYSTARSCOUT365
Жыл бұрын
Do you have any information about Sentinel ICBM project???
@Brannee248
Жыл бұрын
Nope, we don't want to share with Chinese!!
@Brannee248
Жыл бұрын
😂 are you Chinese? If you are not, oops 🙊, my bad.
@unknown23257
10 ай бұрын
This is from 70 years ago, it is not known what advanced equipment the us army has in 2023 i think they are classified
@ironman7261
4 ай бұрын
The original missile was meant to be carried and launched from a train
@user-ev2yp5ew3k
2 ай бұрын
why are we using missiles from the 60s and 70s?
@danielpetrucci8952
Ай бұрын
Because American Government is woke and weak
@sirlance169
Жыл бұрын
Can we start now 🎉😂
@fhdgdgdy6009
21 күн бұрын
❤
@vincentmontano334
10 ай бұрын
Am I the only person who sees blue ufo headed towards missile in the beginning of launch😮 🛸
@mingkwong9277
3 ай бұрын
Oldie
@bestamerica
9 ай бұрын
' where is a MX. why this video did not show the MX missile... american missile must have a bigger powerful nuclear / TNT... all missiles musts has 3 or 4 fins on the bottom near jetmotors
@jasc4364
Жыл бұрын
Why is there a tendency to lower the power of the ICBMs nukes from the 1Mt range to the 100kt range? Isn’t the goal among others to kill a maximum Russians/Chinese and to inflict as much destruction as possible in Russia/China? Nuclear deterrence needs the highest possible destructive power to be convincing.
@nttiv7725
Жыл бұрын
It isn’t necessary. A 800kt warhead would eradicate any city or military base. Anything else is really just overkill
@rael5469
11 ай бұрын
"Why is there a tendency to lower the power of the ICBMs nukes from the 1Mt range to the 100kt range?" Isn't it done because of treaties we signed?
@rael5469
11 ай бұрын
I think Hiroshima was around 15 to 20 kt. 40 years ago the weapons my bomber carried were 180 kt. Larger weapons just aren't needed.
@hydra70
7 ай бұрын
The high yields of early missiles were to compensate for their poor accuracy. You need multiple megaton yields when your missile is likely to miss its target by a couple of miles. Modern missiles are so accurate that they don't need that yield anymore. They can rely on less powerful warheads that are smaller (allowing more to be carried), lighter (allowing for longer range), and cheaper.
@AntonyAvila-kn6gp
5 ай бұрын
🇺🇸🥷🎃🤑
@joedoe2702
Жыл бұрын
Shooting in harvester machine it s a lot of fun and waste of ammo 😂
@enriqueortiz2259
Жыл бұрын
RS28 Sarmat 🇷🇺🇲🇽👊🏻
@georgehilario3544
Жыл бұрын
As a Mexican delegate we do not claim this anti American Mexican , such ignorance only exists because of lack of education
@shalitharukmal8268
Жыл бұрын
we are waiting Mexico join to BRICS Union 🥰❤️
@samnigam3451
Жыл бұрын
Not so fast Hang on my country India 🇮🇳 is working on 12-15000 km range ICBM named Surya 😂 but currently things have been kept secret
@johannjimenez2850
Жыл бұрын
the US now is working Their new ICBM to replace these Old but Upgraded many Times Minute Man III., also the US now developed already Their 3 Kinds of Hypersonic Missiles, new Laser Weapons, 6th Gen. Unmanned Fighter Jets, new Stealth Submarine, new Stealth Bomber, new Stealth Aircraft, etc. 😅😂
@johannjimenez2850
Жыл бұрын
why many Mexicans wanna live in the US? if Mexico wanna join BRICS., then why many Mexican wanna go inside in the US? go and lived in Russia, China, India, etc. not in the US 😅😂
@VioletSilence
Жыл бұрын
Wow, interesting! Still severely outclassed by Soviet/Russian ICBMs but, in all honesty, it's irrelevant since Minuteman III can still destroy a large city or military base in one hit.
@VioletSilence
Жыл бұрын
@@edwardbit8225 R-36M/M2 Voevoda, RS-24 Yars, R-29RMU Sineva (sub-launched), RS-28 Sarmat, even 90's rustbucket Topol-M - all those have 100% reliability, pinpoint accuracy and superheavies (Voevoda & Sarmat) can be launched under direct nuke hit on launch silo. What the fuck you're even talking about, broski.
@VioletSilence
Жыл бұрын
@@edwardbit8225 Wait, you actually believe what you're saying? 🤣
@jasc4364
Жыл бұрын
@@VioletSilence Russian troll, go play elsewhere.
@VioletSilence
Жыл бұрын
@@jasc4364 Make me.
@ms3862
Жыл бұрын
@@VioletSilenceyes russian missiles are so accurate and well maintained like their 20 thousand tanks
@SUNNYSTARSCOUT365
Жыл бұрын
Now Russian's ICBMs are the best in the world
@deslow7411
Жыл бұрын
Ye, but we all know Russia. Big words, little proof. They also have T-14 armata the most stealthy tank ever produced. It has never been spotted on the battlefield.
@juanfermin8173
Жыл бұрын
yeah maybe half of them are working considering how Russians keep their weapons.
@thpass
Жыл бұрын
@@deslow7411 @Sunny Starscout Russia and the former Soviet Union have a long history of paper tiger military propaganda. During the cold war it was a combination of inaccurate info /agit prop which served 2 purposes ; 1) to build up the Soviet Union as a global threat and provide deterrence in Europe and 2) Fuel the need for the burgeoning U.S. military industrial complex during the Carter-Reagan era when it was widely believed we were behind in numbers and strength. If you want a more accurate picture of their actual technological ability at the time you can look to the North Korea missile tests for field proof- not impressive. As for Russia's capabilities today- we have more accurate intelligence data that provides estimates of their higher ICBM numbers but as for their "advanced technological" capabilities- it is all a grey area of half truths and propaganda(again).
@janvandeven906
Жыл бұрын
Worst in the world you mean
@MrRoninGT
Жыл бұрын
@@janvandeven906 Proof?
@sirlance169
Жыл бұрын
Hiroshima 11kiloton nakisaki 17 kilotON now think 100MEGATON🎉 u care to see russia??
@UltimateTViptv
Жыл бұрын
The russians designed a 100 MT bomb but never built it. nothing about the design was even revolutionary all they did was just stack it. which is something any one with thermo nukes can do. Second its was a proof of concept designed never ment to be deployed cause of the size of it couldnt even fit on a airplane. Let alone a rocket. Impractical and expensive. its more practical to make smaller worheads to hit strategic targets vs One big bomb. Nuclear weapons in a nutshell are just for defense and a deterent only.
@ShimrraJamaane
Ай бұрын
A 100MT device is impossible to deliver to the target. The plane would be shot down and it's too heavy to be carried by ICBM.
@taufikputra7232
Жыл бұрын
Fatah, new hipersonic misile Iran more powerful 😅
@ms3862
Жыл бұрын
I spilt my milk when I saw this BS
@josefortin184
10 ай бұрын
😂😂😂
@ronaldpatrias417
7 ай бұрын
Nothing you stone age clowns do is worth anything...
@dannypipewrench533
6 ай бұрын
I assume that means hypersonic cruise missile. Ballistic missiles are superior to cruise missiles for this application.
@user-zd3lw1eu9c
Жыл бұрын
Το θέμα είναι να μην έχουμε πυρηνικό πόλεμο τότε πάμε χαμένοι όλοι.
Пікірлер: 115