Sea Lightning NATO's New Missile Russia Never Expected to Face

Tech
Tech
37,127
0
Published 2024-07-01
Tensions in Europe are skyrocketing, with Russia and NATO locked in a blistering missile arms race unlike anything we’ve seen before. Hypersonic and supersonic missile technology is being churned out at a blistering pace, leaving old arsenals in the dust.

In a desperate push to seize the upper hand, Germany and Norway have united to craft a seaborne missile that could dominate the oceans in this new era of warfare: the Super Sonic Strike Missile, or 3SM Tyrfing.

This beast rockets past Mach 2, boasting advanced guidance, targeting systems, and the agility to juke enemy defenses at breakneck speeds. The 3SM is set to give NATO an unmatched edge in naval combat.

Compared to relics like the Naval Strike Missile, which maxes out at Mach 0.9 and lacks cutting-edge maneuverability, the 3SM promises to catapult Europe’s naval defenses into the future.

Yet, even this missile might not hold a candle to the fearsome technology Russia claims to have at the ready...
All Comments (21)
  • @joeminenna2783
    If the Zircon is like the other Russian superweapons, it's really only half as good as they say and they only have three of them.
  • @jason1440
    Patriot has already proven able to take down Russias new hypersonic missle.
  • @franciscook5819
    I note that in 1973, the British Sea Dart (anti-air) missile came into service. It was an air breathing ramjet powered mach 3+ missile which could take out supersonic targets, including other missiles. It is, of course, no longer in service. The missile in the video, which has a different task, appears like a retrograde step, in some respects, although I'm sure it will perform well, if it ever enters production. Zircon at Mach 9? The experimental rocket powered X-15 going at mach 6.7 melted several external components, so, given Russia's inability to produce reliable kit and its propensity for flat out lying about the capabilities of its weapons systems (e.g. "the T90 is the best tank in the world") I'd say the claim is total BS. Possibly it reaches mach 5+ maybe even mach 6.
  • @mauricio-wq5lu
    The only thing that matters is who has what actually operational.
  • @BGTats144
    Yeah the zircon isn't a hypersonic missile Ukraine been shooting them down left and right..
  • @bremnersghost948
    Hi Dark Tech, Please do a video on the Pershing 2, The Hypersonic Missile that Terrified the Soviets and brought them to the Treaty Table in the 1980s, yet still seems to be as, if not more accurate than the "Modern" Russian Hypersonics.
  • @EDCandLace
    It's insane when missiles can pull 50+ G. That's is wild!
  • @accobb1553
    Introducing the Laser Missile - Game Over!
  • @Jim-fe2xz
    Ok ok! Show missles radically maneuvering at launch (well below max speed). Where's the videos of them turning in their own length at super or hypersonic speeds? Hmmmm cause they don't exist? It's OK - don't let physics throw cold water on the story.
  • @hukedonfonix1671
    When Germany gets involved in weapons systems, they leave no holds barred.
  • @charharn7011
    It would seem your data is outdated as we now know that the paper tiger Russia's Tsirkon is not a fully capable system as it is vulnerable to the basic Patriot missile defense system.
  • @Forevertrue
    Russia's problem is also numbers. The dreaded Su-57, they only have 17 of them and only about 8 are operational at anyone time. So, they have some pretty formidable stuff but only a few. So you only have to defeat a few.
  • @BMF6889
    In order to fight an extended war with a near peer adversary that has the capability of targeting NATO defense manufacturing, NATO and the US need to begin to build their defense manufacturing deep underground with multiple camouflage entrances and exits to protect against attacks against them and NATO needs to develop multilayer air and missile defenses to protect all of it's strategic infrastructure. NATO needs to allow NATO countries to stockpile prepositioned ammunitions and supplies in deep underground facilities and keep them as secret and defended as possible. With today's technologies, it is difficult to keep bases and supplies secret. But NATO needs to solve those problems. On the other hand, Russia, for example, is heavily dependent on rail and it should be easy for NATO to destroy Russia's rail system.
  • @thebombcat
    It's like you're reading a ChatGPT script with a prompt saying, "How many ways can I say the same thing about "X" - write your own scripts - you say the same thing 6 different ways for like 10 minutes. You don't sound interested in what you're reading - I don't think you are.
  • @charlylucky7508
    IF Russia has "hypersonic" missiles I think they would've used them by now.