The new tomahawk still room in US arsenal.

[Last starfighter]

The reason I feel that this article is relevent is as Pakistan armed forces use a BABUR cruise missile, which some circle's believe is similar to the USA bgm-109 tomahawk cruise missile.

The US Navy has an upgraded Tomahawk: Here’s 5 things you should know
By: David B. Larter   22 hours ago

The destroyer Chafee launches a Block V Tomahawk, the weapon’s newest variant, during a missile exercise. (Ens. Sean Ianno/U.S. Navy)
WASHINGTON – The U.S. Navy test-fired its new Block V Tomahawk from the destroyer Chafee in December, introducing the newest generation of the venerable Tomahawk cruise missile to its arsenal.
The modifications are designed to bring the sub-sonic cruise missile into the era of great power competition. Why is this Tomahawk different from all other Tomahawks, and can this old Cold Warrior keep up in the era of hypersonic missiles?
Here’s five things to know about the Block V:
1. Increased capabilities. Raytheon’s Tomahawk Block V, when fully realized in its Block Va and Block Vb varieties, will be expected to hit surface ships at Tomahawk ranges – in excess of 1,000 miles – with the integration of a new seeker. It also will integrate a new warhead that will have a broader range of capabilities, including greater penetrating power.
Tomahawk’s range is especially important in the Asia-Pacific, where China’s rocket force has extraordinary reach with its DF-26 and DF-21 missiles, with ranges of 2,490 and 1,335 miles respectively, according to the Center for Strategic and International Studies. The missiles are destined not just for the VLS launchers of surface ships but also on attack submarines. Read more here:




The US Navy is moving to put more ship-killer missiles on submarines
US Navy submarines will soon be able to kill ships at a range of 1,000 miles.
By: David Larter
2. More survivable. The first iteration of the Block V upgrades the missile’s communication and navigation systems. This is about making it tougher to counter and detect electronically, said Bryan Clark, a retired submarine officer and senior fellow at The Hudson Institute.
“It has greater electronic hardening to be able to work through jamming more effectively,” Clark said. “The hardening and the electronic countermeasures they’ve put into it make it harder to find and target with radar, and that improves its survivability.
Sign up to get The Drift
Sign up for our weekly newsletter to go deeper into all things Navy with David Larter.
Subscribe
“They’ve incorporated a lot of survivability into Tomahawk over the years, this takes it a step further to make it less susceptible to jamming of its seeker or its communications. But it could, perhaps, also counter enemy radar that might be used to target it and shoot it down.”
In 2017, Raytheon’s Tomahawk program manager told reporters at an event at the missile plant in Tucson, Ariz., that the navigation system upgrades will ensure the missile can strike targets even if GPS is taken down.
3. Subsonic is a feature, not a bug. With all the emphasis on supersonic and hypersonic missiles and with the improvements in air defenses, that might make Tomahawk seem like a fuddy-duddy by comparison.


But there are good reasons to keep producing the Tomahawk, even with its slower speeds.
“The benefit of the sub-sonic missile is range,” Clark said. “Being sub-sonic means its also able to travel at a more fuel-efficient speed. So, the fact that the Tomahawk can travel more than 1,000 miles is a function of the sub-sonic speed. To get that kind of range out of a super-sonic missile you’d need something much larger.”

Sailors on the destroyer Barry train on planning a Tomahawk mission. (U.S. Navy)
4. It’s cheap. Well, relatively so. The missile has been able to stay at the $1 million price range, which is on the low end for missiles. Raytheon’s supersonic SM-6 can reach speeds of Mach 3.5 – with future iterations believed to be capable of reaching hypersonic speeds – but cost more than four times as much per shot and have less range. That’s the Tomahawk’s key differentiator, said Jerry Hendrix, a retired Navy captain and analyst with Telemus Group.
“The key capability of Tomahawk is the cost.” Hendrix said. “It can be purchased in larger quantities and you can afford to lose some to defensive capabilities even as you penetrate. That’s one of the reasons why Tomahawk is going to be in the inventory for a while to come, even as it brings back that longer-range anti-ship capability that we’ve been missing for some time.”
Tom Karako, an expert in missile technology with the Center for Strategic and International Studies, agreed that cost is a big advantage of Tomahawk, especially for low-end missions.


“As long as they can keep them to about a million dollars per shot, the Navy is going to want those all day long,” Karako said. “The next time the President says to the Navy, ‘Hey, go schwack this terrorist training camp,’ they’re going to want Tomahawks.”
5. It’s all in the mix. The key to thinking about a sub-sonic cruise missile is understanding how it fits into a mix of weapons, Karako said. Not everything is going to be hypersonic or even supersonic, nor does it have to be, he argued, but the cost per salvo make it attractive as part of a varied and complex threat to present an adversary.
“The question is, ‘What’s the going to be the mix between hypersonic things and things that are supersonic and subsonic?’,” he said. “That, I think, is the right question. As long as you have standoff, subsonic and supersonic are going to be part of the equation.”
“Even for the high-end fight, I don’t think the hypersonic stuff will fully replace sub-sonic stuff. It might just mean you shoot your sub-sonic stuff earlier, let them fly for a while and everything arrives at the same time as part of how you structure an attack.”

The destroyer Dewey conducts a tomahawk missile flight test while underway in the western Pacific. (MC2 Devin Langer/U.S. Navy)
Clark, the Hudson analyst, agreed that the mix was important, saying that even with the arrival of faster missiles, the Tomahawk has a place.

The combination of the SM-6, which has a surface strike mode, the new 100-plus-mile ranged anti-ship Naval Strike Missile bound for the littoral combat ships and next-generation frigate, and the Block V upgrades on Tomahawk, will give the Navy’s venerable birds a place in the service’s vertical launch system cells for some time to come, Clark said.
“Between Tomahawk Block V, the SM-6 and the NSM, the Navy has a collection of attack weapons that they are happy with,” he said, adding that a long-running effort to develop a next-generation land-attack weapon has lost some of its urgency.
The development of hypersonic missiles could, however, push out the Tomahawk down the road as the technology gets more advanced and of a size compatible with the Navy’s ubiquitous Mark 41 VLS launcher.
“What’s happening in parallel is in the development of hypersonic missile that are a smaller form factor than the boost-glide weapons that are coming to maturity now,” Clark said. “And if they can get it down to being able to fit in [the Mark 41], then that could provide the Navy a next-generation capability that is more survivable and has a shorter time of flight.
“So I think this combination of missiles the Navy has now, combined with the fact that the hypersonic weapons are coming along a little further out, means the Navy is going to stick with what it has potentially even longer than it had originally anticipated.”
It is a well known fact that the USA's main concern remain China and the Soviet Union and these upgrades are in place to try and counter their S-400.
If some major upgrades similar to these can be utilised in our own BABUR then insha'Allah who knows where we can take the cruise missile program

 

[shanlung]

Muricans still wanking themselves silly with BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK

Hoping that will endow their weapon systems fused with Wakanda Vibranium to intimidate all that they finished once Murica put them in their sight and cross hair???



Should have coined up those BLOCK BLOCK BLOCK decades ago

Then below would not have happened and Muricans be winning victories after victories instead of getting threshed and shitting in their pants running away.


Actually Murican Army lost almost all the wars they fought in.


Just remember Murica won only 3 wars since WW2, against Nicaragua, Panama and Grenada.
And even though Murica fought against sheep and goat herders in Afghan and Somalia and Iraq and with fire power 100 to 10,000 times greater, Murica lost and lost and lost.

Murica would not have won WW2 but for Zhukov killing the vast bulk of Werhmacht and miltary machinery
leaving Muricans to take on the German invalids on D Day

DDay operations not even 10% of Operation Bagration.
D Day took on 3 to 4 German Division that consisted of the German invalids send from Russia to R & R. And even so, Muricans and Brits had such a hard and difficult time doing that.

Where Soviet Union destroyed 28 of 34 divisions of Army Group Centre and completely shattered the German front line. It was the biggest defeat in German military history https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Bagration

EVEN WHEN CHINESE GOT JUST SINGLE SHOT BOLT ACTION RIFLES LIKE IN THE KOREAN WAR, THEY CHASED THE FUCKING AMERICANS AND THE 5 EYES AND THE REST OF THE WORLD WITH AMERICA FROM YALU RIVER TO SOUTH OF THE PARALLEL IN UNDER 3 WEEKS WITH THE ANGMOHS SHITTING DOWN THEIR PANTS.


America forgot about WW2 where China with barely any arms from USA and with single shot bolt rifles and swords and bare hands fought and killed 3,000,000 Japanese invaders?

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?

And remember that China in WW2 with single shot bolt rifles and 5 bullets to a rifle were the best armed half of the force. And with swords and bare bodies with explosive strapped to them took on and killed 3,000,000 japanese soldiers.

And USA needed no less than aircraft carriers and battleships and planes and artilleries and automatic rifles to kill 300,000 Japs in the Pacific?

"dare to die corps" http://forlornhopesui.blogspot.com/2015/08/dare-to-die-corps.html

Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks.


The battle involved a Japanese plan to conquer Xuzhou, a major city in the East. However, the Japanese failed to consider the plans of generals Li Zongren and Bai Chongxi, who planned to encircle the Japanese in the town of Tai'erzhuang. The Japanese operation started on 24 March. Overconfidence led the Japanese commanders to overlook the thousands of inconspicuous "farmers" in the area, who were affiliated with Li Zongren and cut communication lines and supplies, diverted streams, and ruined rail lines. By late March, supplies and fuels were being dropped from airplanes to Japanese troops, but the quantities were insufficient.
On 29 March 1938, a small band of Japanese soldiers tunneled under Tai'erzhuang's walls in an attempt to take the city from within. They were caught by the Nationalist defenders and killed. Over the next week, both sides claimed to hold parts of the city and surrounding area, and many were killed in small arms battles.
Finally, the Japanese attacked frontally, failing to consider the greater Chinese numbers. A major encirclement on 6 April, with Chinese reinforcements, preceded a major Japanese defeat and retreat, which the Chinese failed to capitalize upon fully through pursuit due to a lack of mobility.
The Chinese captured 719 Japanese soldiers and large quantities of military supplies, including 31 pieces of artillery, 11 armored cars, 8 armored fighting vehicles, 1,000 machine guns and 10,000 rifles.
A "dare to die corps" was effectively used against Japanese units.
Chinese suicide bomber putting on an explosive vest made out of Model 24 hand grenades to use in an attack on Japanese tanks
Due to lack of anti-armor weaponry, Suicide bombing was also used against the Japanese. Chinese troops strapped explosives like grenade packs or dynamite to their bodies and threw themselves under Japanese tanks to blow them up. Dynamite and grenades were strapped on by Chinese troops who rushed at Japanese tanks and blew themselves up. During one incident at Taierzhuang, Chinese suicide bombers obliterated four Japanese tanks with grenade bundles.
Amid the celebrations of the victory in Hankow and other Chinese cities, Japan tried to deny and ridiculed the reports of the battle for days. It was reported in the world's newspapers, however, and by mid-April had provoked a Cabinet crisis in Tokyo.
The Chinese scored a major victory, the first of the Nationalist alliance in the war. The battle broke the myth of Japanese military invincibility and resulted in an incalculable benefit to Chinese morale.


Japanese learned kamikaze attacks from what the Chinese did to them in China.

And now China weapons are more powerful and reach further and more accurate than that of USA AND ALL HER ALLIES RUNNING DOGS.
And China got much more of those weapons than USA hope to have

Or Korean War where China with single shot bolt action rifles drove USA and all her allies when USA firepower 100 times greater than China and fighting with automatic weapons and artillery and battleships with 16 inch guns .

The military might and strength of USA with heavy artillery and planes and tanks and battleships with 16 inch guns cannot be resisted by China with economy slightly out of stone age and with single shot bolt action rifles. Bolt operated rifles were just one stage above using muzzle loading muskets and black powder.

That Chinese be slaughtered and turned into red pulp should they dare to fight good old Dugout in Korea.

Chinese whacked USA and the UN combined that they had to flee south of the Parallel as demanded by China.Chinese fought with bolt operated rifles against Ma Dueces , automatic weapons and artillery and tanks and planes and chopters and battleships with 16″ guns.

Go read the book by David Halberstam
The Coldest Winter

Look on the front line at 24 Nov 1950 and the front line of 16 Dec 1950.

What was the military edge USA have over a bunch of separate goat herders in Afghan? Do not even need the entire fucking country of Afghan.
10,000 to 1 ?
Or is it the Afghan goat herders have military technology greater than USA??
I finished reading “the Outpost” by Jake Tapper. How a bunch of goat herders in Afghan with AKs and rpgs and IEDs (because they do not have billion dollar industry to make bombs like USA, can only make bombs in backyard on a DIY basis) taking out USA brave men despite they having 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships and billions of dollars backing them and not so good in protecting them.
If USA fought bravely with massive firepower behind them, then what about the goat herders with only AKs and RPGs fighting against USA knowing they fighting against 155 howizters , 120 mm mortars , Ma Deuces, A-10s, properly build bombs, B52s and helicopter gunships , AC-130 Spectre Gunships ?
Even more fucking brave is the least I can say of the Afghans goat herders. Who were untrained knowing only how to herd goats unlike the USA special forces who went through countless hours and weeks and months learning how to kill and kill.
Yet who won? And who left Afghan?
Maybe USA army should consider making their fighting folks do a course in goat herding . As who knows, maybe herding goats might be better to build up fighting skills.

USA got fucked when USA tried that in Afghan . Against a bunch of tribesmen when USA had 1000 the firepower over them. And after a trillion of dollars what have USA got to show in Afghan?
Why did the United States of America fail to win the war in Afghanistan even after 17 years? Why does the lone superpower fail to defeat a group of goat herders?
And in Somalia. A bunch of ex fishermen and part time goat herders with nothing more than AKs and RPGs chased USA out running with tail between legs

What military edge USA got in Iraq over Sadr? 1,000 to 1?
Please dont say Murica won Saddam.
It will be like saying Tokyo won after they did Tora Tora Tora

Or is it Sadr got better and more advanced military technology over USA?
In Iraq losing out to Sadr who had 1000 times less firepower than USA.
Having no more than AKs and rpgs.