Behind Ukraine’s Weapons: Storm Shadow, ATACMS, StarStreak Missiles and More | WSJ Equipped 

😅

good job uk sent stock from their own supply so it has full range

Which is why two warships in the far east of Crimea have been destroyed by Storm Shadow. Not to mention a submarine and a ship in the Dry Dock in Sevastapol and the HQ of the Black Sea fleet. @cjjk9142

There's no evidence that the SS sent to Ukraine as range-limited export variants, it's just a flawed assumption that the media have made. There might be an agreement to not use them against Russia directly, but the full range would help them bypass Russian air defences in occupied Ukrainian territory and thus be fair game.

@@jamesthomas4841 I wouldnt call them warships as they were a landing ship and a small landing boat... both super outdated so yeah... gj for clearing low value targets with billion dollar weapons :) The only "high value" target Ukraine managed to clear was the Moskva in the early stages... and that was really pure luck lol plus also a really outdate warship (but a "real" one at least)

@MrArkaneMage Desperate pro Russian nonsense. The landing ships are arguably of greater strategic value than other units of the Black Sea fleet. However you are ignoring the destruction of one attack submarine and a missile carrying corvette both courtesy of Storm Shadow/Scalp.

In today's world whether or not a country is tiny or huge in larger proportion than ever before depends on the scale of its economic power rather than on the population or territory

@@Pootie_Tang interesting comment..... so how does Russia compare to the UK?

​@@ruzziasht349the Russians do have the equivalent of the Storm shadow and even better ones, and in more numbers, so I don't see the excitement about these weapons. If such weapons would determine the battle, then Russia would have won it long ago.

@@truthfiction8408 russia really doesnt have this kind of kit. its biggest problem isnt development its the rampant corruption tech vehicles and fuel all stolen

@@truthfiction8408 HIMARS is nothing special but still did a pretty good job. An upgrade on this and who knows.

Britain is the center of world civilization, thank you, the great British

Thank you for your support, we really appreciate it.

@@Eugenetra7 🇬🇧👍🇺🇦

​@@animationx2894not really. Since WW2 Britain has been a vassal of the US and now can't even maintain it's own culture in the face of an onslaught of immigration. London will be a Muslim stronghold within a decade

@@animationx2894 Every problem in the world right now can be traced to the British

For the problem too is you've got a country that's not built for war that has every other country in NATO supplying their equipment and that's who they're relying on so when you have a country like Ukraine going to the US and pretty much saying you need to give us this and you need to give us that as a US taxpayer it really puts a bad taste in your mouth. It's going to come to a point when The US and the rest of NATO is going to get tired of funding this war and they're just going to pull out all together. Watching videos online You just see soldiers blindly shelling from howitzers not realizing that those shells aren't from an endless stock.

He won't do bro he doesn't even want to be 🇬🇧 MP

Ben is happy as he is many respects from 🇬🇧

It’s a proxy war. Just a money making operation. Anduril is creating AI drone swarms for the U.S. military as the media uses China/ Russia as a funding tool. These defense companies are getting good $$

Easy boy, the goal is not cross the finish line but keep running, while running the money is flooding once you cross the finish line it stops flooding.

I agree, but they are also weighing the risks of that. If Germany decides to send a Taurus missile and it gets intercepted, well now the Russians might be able to counter it much more effectively in the future.

Long Island is a smelly hellhole.

Wait a minute, I've learned from democratic media that this is NOT a NATO-Russia war on Ukrainian territory and that is all Russian propaganda.

The sneaky little devils!

Thanks state department.

ATACMS is launched from the same platform as HIMARs. But being that ATACMS is such a bigger missile the HIMARs launcher can only hold two ATACMS pods where as with HIMARS missiles it can hold six.

Yeah, if the Ukrainians were the ones making the Storm Shadow or gather the intel to acquire targets and trajectories for it, or even making the necessary Su-24 modifications to fire the missile, then I would agree that they are very "enguinous".

What happened to Ukraine naval ?

@@prizefighter8699Russia stole most of it in 2014 when they invaded crimea.

@@prizefighter8699 What bob guy said, and Ukraine intentionally sinking their ship in port to prevent capture when 2022 invasion started.

Ukraine should have implemented the Minsk agreements and declared neutrality.

It's amazing to think of how many Russians have become sunflower seed since this all started. Maybe they should turn against Putin instead.

Yes your right they use them sparingly and very effectively,a small country with modern weaponry can do very well against a super power

US does not care about Ukrainians (maybe Ukrainian mail order brides). US is simply using its money to fight Russia, with Ukrainian blood being shed. It is impossible for US to defeat Russia. Germans, far far superior than US, couldn't defeat Russia. 1 MILLION Germans surrendered to Russia. Same fate awaits US (and Ukrainian mercenaries).

Uhm yeah and it STILL didn´t push the Russians back. RU-vid has become a western propaganda platform, i wonder how many comments here are due to Ai ?

3 day war is western propaganda the Kremlin never said that also they dont recognise Ukraine conflict as war meaning those 3 days are lies

@@cjjk9142good point. The UK is an island too so they don’t have any immediate threats

That is actually not true. The US has approximately thousand ATACMS lift in stock and they are old so the US is not going to use them. Actually they are going to dispose of them. So it is a strange thing that they don’t give them to Ukraine because the cost of disposing them is bigger than sending them to Ukraine, so that must be another answer to why the US is not doing it. This is information according to military inside who is giving this information. The development of a new ATACMS is going on as we are speaking and has been going on for sometime, so there’s no reason for not sending them to Ukraine other than politics and other things we are not informed about.

Sadly the JASSM might be the single least likely conventional weapon to go to Ukraine. They're just too prized by the United States.

​@@narutobroken nightmare for British if cheap North Korean water drones will start to control British water😂

All those systems have been destroyed in Ukraine. EU has been sending more Patriots systems to replace them

Well, the public is already hesitant about sending more, and giving them one big very expensive package is not a very good decision. That's probably why they do it over time.

You are forgetting the training and logistics that go into supporting this equipment. You can't just give someone a new weapon system without training them how to operate and repair it. You also have to give them parts to repair it with and make sure they have the logistics to properly disseminate the parts/systems. All of these things take time. Giving Ukraine weapons without training and a way to repair the equipment would literally do more harm than good.

Its likely that the WEST is just ok for this war to las a decade or so. Imagine if in 2033 Ru and UA are still fighting for Donezk and Kherson.

@@bf5175 When we begin to consider all the work that went into establishing Bandera Summer Camps in Western Ukraine, since 1950. After the US trained the Azov guys the appearance of any actual desire of the remaining Citizens of Western Ukraine to die so Wall Street can produce profits by appropriating more weapons to threaten Russian seems to have diminished as fast as the support for Vietnam Domination after the TET Offensive. In 1967 the understanding that US Treasury funds could not afford a War on Poverty, the US began to withdraw support for that conflict, due to a lack of funds. Today as a group of Government Agencies shuffle cash between their departments and buy Treasury Notes and Bonds to insure some image of positive support for the Federal Reserve Note, the appearance of any real ability to provide the funds to hire the Workers to assemble the Weapons, looks pretty difficult to provide? You do need some form of Fiat Dollar that is supported by some actual form of Value, or you will have a Currency that resembles Deutschmarks in Germany between Wars. All the G-7 Guys appear to be suffering from BRICS hiding their former Colonial Empires from the exploitation that was so simple before 2014. So the Murdoch Rag that at one time did provide some form of information before the Internet began to become the source, will give you reassuring information. I was able to find the Wall Street Journal all over the USA during the 1980's as my travels caused me to seek information to decide where the flow of weapons was headed next in those troubled times. After Rupert bought them out, they were still a conservative media source, but we do need to understand that Rupert gets some income from promoting conflicts that sell weapons. The Media Giant did not get to the current position by simply providing facts.

oh thats definitely what weve been doing. Im not sure if they are scared of upsetting russia or scared of having russia lose or if there are some other sort of motives but weve most definitely been drip feeding aid to ukraine instead of supplying them outright with everything they need and more. With that being said, it makes it seem like the goal is to have ukraine weaken russia without giving ukraine enough to win. Idk but thats what it seems like anyway when we could have flooded ukraine with so much more aid but we have not for some strange reason

Yeah and you should pay more taxes to that 😅😅😅😅 pretty sure it's not good for your pocket but atleast it would be worth it, btw that thing was expensive the us should fund Ukraine like how the funded their own armed forces.

You need to worry about your own safety. Do you really think Russia will forget all the mistakes of England? Boris Johnson is a born Russophobe, calling for the destruction of Russia. I wonder what Grandpa's grudge against Russia is. He doesn't realize that Britain is just an island.

well, it was vencible after all

Far from invincible. Russia's been shooting down storm shadows. They're just more expensive waste of taxpayer money to support a corrupt Ukrainian regime.

No, nobody remembers this because it never happened.

I cant find the nuclear threat from Putin anywhere

"Pepperidge farm remembers". Man, that was so cold I had to crank up the heat.

@@ssaini5028 Russia's position has always been go nuclear if its existence felt threatened. In other words, this war has only two outcomes: Russian wins, or EVERYONE dies. That everyone literally means every single living being, anywhere on the planet, friend or foe

@@ThisNoName Putin only explained the same Nuclear doctrine the west has adopted. Just like the west, if Russias very existence was at stake they would retaliate with its nuclear arsenal (just like the west). Russia has recently changed their defense only nuclear protocols to first strike. Same as the US, again show me where Russia has threaten anyone with Nuclear weapons?

Hey Ivan, did you get your rubbles ?

@@CarpeDiem13xit’s the truth tho. This is either entirely an older video that’s been re-uploaded, or at least parts of it have been recycled.

Yes, Ukraine has already received all these systems

Russia already won. Fak off

Ukraine offensive is in reverse !

dude old warfare was even more brutal.

@@boredape1257 Actually no. Modern warfare is more terrifying. Drones hovering over your head at all times and knowing your position. It can feel hopeless. Old warfare, you have the fog of war, your biggest defense.

@@TemplarX2 he said old warfare was more BRUTAL which is most certainly was, the living conditions and fighting conditions as well as what happens after the battle were barabaric to say the least, sure modern warfare is deadlier but it still was a lot more personal when 80 thousand men are slaughtered by hand on the ancient battlefields

@@gefagnis Modern warfare is more brutal. Have you heard of white phosphorus, claymore mines etc? Getting personal is a more human (maybe not humane) way to fight. The living conditions in the past were not that bad if you were living off your enemy land and loots. In fact, it could be actually exhilarating.

@@TemplarX2 there are counter measures to drones being developed for a squad on the battlefield. It's not all hopeless, Ukraine has already patent a gun that uses signals to destroy drones

Because we can't

True. Reason, primarily the GOP. 2nd reason, I sadly think the US would prefer to draw out the war. With the intent being to weaken Russia militarily & geopolitically. Biden admin would say it's "to avoid escalation". But I'm 99% sure that's just non sense. The US had sent alot (before GOP stopped funding) but it always came a week late, & a dollar short. Always withholding the most impact full types of weaponry. (Cruise missiles, long range fires, F16). If the US had gone all in at the beginning, Ukraine would be in a MUCH better position. The institute for the study of war has repeatedly mentioned this in its analysis. (It's run by widely respected & well known retired Generals & analysts) its a really fascinating organization & website. You should check it out. They also give daily analysis on the tactical & strategic landscape & events in Ukraine.

Finally, the US FINALLY approved ATACMS transfer within days of US military starting to receive the ATACMS replacement- PRSM. But US stockpile of ATACMS is "small" by US standards, which insists on having enough munitions to fight BOTH China & Russia AT THE SAME TIME lol. Basically, they keep ATACMS close by for emotional support munitions stock pile lol.

This was a solid story.

In my opinion this is just a video that scratches the surface of this conflict it’s not really a deep dive if you want to hear deepdives I recommend perun

There are plenty of channels on YT that have this kind of content. Hint: the good ones don't refer to the Russians as "pigs".

The unfortunately thing about well done videos like this is that by the time they're uploaded, they're sever weeks to sever months outdated, as this one showed. Sometimes they include a post-video production note; other times they don't, so if you're staying abreast on the situation in Ukraine on a daily basis, you immediately know this was done weeks to months before ATACMS were provided to Ukraine. And ATACMS were provided to Ukraine before October; some of the known, actual use of ATACMS started around mid October-ish.

@@kiabtoomlauj6249 yeah thought the same but I guess there’s nobody here that wants to discuss Russian tank production numbers for an hour

They did initially publish this over many months, as a series of shorter videos. That's why they talk about Ukraine wanting ATACMS (which Ukraine actually deployed over 2 months ago in October), and why they identify Ben Wallace as UK Secretary of State for Defence (a position he resigned from on August 31, almost 4 months ago).

very good point !

UK healthcare, living cost, housing & heating and emloyment are laughing back 😂😂😂

@@CopemaxxObviously you don’t live in the U.K. 😂😂😂

@@Copemaxx UK is much better than shitrusia. That is fact.

The ability to discuss the funds available to support any further conflicts, is forbidden as well. As the G-7 sinks into economic despair, their former Colonies appear to trade behind a BRICS Wall....

No it's not, underestimating someone in a war is weakness. If someone tells you something is forbidden and you believe them than you're an idiot.

@@davin1287 Who decides what is forbidden in an Economic War?

@@danielhutchinson6604 Very true! Just look at the Chinese hegemony, Russia 🇷🇺 sold out its sovereignty signing the BRICS agreement. The clowns in the state Duma have sold their industries and land to Chinese entities. They even made the Russian duma illegally confiscate EU companies and factories inside Russia 🇷🇺 that then got transferred to China.

I tend to agree, with some qualifications.

We all know that is it, its merely a formality.

@@dayforit1750 I guess the SCOTUS would see it another way >6\3.

You have no idea what that word means😂

Cheap drones work well at attacking isolated infantry and observation. But bigger targets like command centersnand ships require bigger and more expensive missiles.

@@maxg4304 don't project your insecurities onto others pal

Cheap drone to attack civilian infrastructure like powerplant, seems legit

@@cybronichuman Russia 🇷🇺 would have lost the war in 3 days without the West. Wonder where all their weapons come from? Of course the west! Investigative journalists uncovered that over 30 components for their UAV came from the West, the rest was from China. It shows the lack of sophistication when Russia needs to use off-the-shelf components as they are not able to produce them themselves.

A landing/cargo ship....the same one they hit earlier this year and had just finished repairs

😄😄 CNN brainwashed you

If the Russians ever learn the truth about this disastrous war, Putin is toast.

@@gdutfulkbhh7537 Russians are used to Western Capitalists attacking them. They saw this conflict coming 20 years ago. The US has been spending money they do not have to present a unified NATO Attack on Russians. What happens to the last three Administrations when the evidence that the Pentagon has funneled cash to discreeth bank accounts, instead of producing weapons? Where did a few trillion Taxpayer Dollars go? Explain that better than Putin explaining how he is outwitting the Capitalists with their own Greed. Putin may be the most visionary leader since Alexander of Greece took over Babylon. Right?

You read too much propaganda.

Pro Ukraine propaganda Russia is advancing and will keep advancing

They only sent a dozen ATACMs, which was used on the Berdyansk Airfield against helicopters.

@@quinnard9750 kherson and kharkiv disagree

​@@quinnard9750They're advancing to their deaths while the rich Russian elites enjoy their christmas in their warm homes. 2 years, 300,000 casualties and only 17% of Ukraine's territory to show for it. What was the point? Even though Nato is supporting Ukraine, if Russia is struggling this hard in a proxy war against the west while being supported by China, how do they expect to win a full blown war against Nato?

@@TorbisINACTIVE I'm shocked they told you how many they sent.

You have replacement - there is a production line for ATACMS in the US. Moreover, you've found some ATACMS to send to Morocco. I don't see any war going on in Morocco, or even upcoming there.

@@chaoticneutral6729 atacams didn’t have a replacement at the start of this war . The Prisim missile system got fast tracked to 2024 because Ukraine want the long range atacams but because China are our next threat we needed to have the atacams incase China started anything so while this war was ongoing the prisim system was started now that is in place and production is next year USA would send a one for one when a prisim gets made a atacams can get released as we only send old stock to Ukraine and we make new stuff for ourselves. This has been said before not only by me .

@@chaoticneutral6729 they have contracts they need to stand bye . Or you get fines . . We should be sending them in my opinion but I’m only saying why we didn’t . Jake Broe has a RU-vid channel he’s former military and funker530 American combat veteran and many others have mentioned why I’m not saying anything new

Zig, who do you expect to be at war at, and what munitions could be needed.

You can send what you like, but it only justifies reprisal and the line going that much further to ensure Russian security concerns. As Mearsheimer said, you are leading them to destruction.

That's smart.

The export version is restricted, but Ukraine got UK stocks

The export version is restricted, but Ukraine got UK stock

@@suburbia2050 and it's artificially restricted to 155 miles

no the uk has not limited them. this has been debunked

Nor HIMARS... Their own "state of the art" $1Bn S-400 can't even defend itself, twice! Patriot PAC-3 from 1995 annihilated Putins pet project the hypersonic Kinzehl missiles. Every. Single. One.

Yes they have they showed wreckage of the missile on Telegram

@@jj4791 HIMARS wreckage has been shown and confirmed

@@ssaini5028not of intercepted missile. It’s the missile that missed its target

What makes this cruise missile so amazing and different from, lets say, Tomahawk? I tell you one thing. The lower it flies to the target, the harder its to intercept from the ground due to curvature of the earth. Maybe if some kind of airborne radar could detect them better, but for the most part, the low fly path makes them dangerous.

More than 50feet try further

Even 300ft is very close to launcher. It makes no sense

"Just a few weapons" don't push the envelope my guy some of these countries are almost out of ammo with the BILLIONS worth of weapons they've already sent you😭

According to CNN, I bet you still believe Iraq has WMDs

​@@j4genius961 Don't spread bogus. First, even Poland just bought 10x more high tech weaponry in 1 month than was ever delivered to Ukraine in 2 years lol. Second, ammo isn't stockpiled anymore, it's produced based on demand. ammo is reloaded into a weapon, restocked on site, delivered to site, produced as needed. Ukraine can't produce munitions on mass scale since factories are within strike Russian missile range. Second, what was sent to Ukraine is the old scraps that the militaries are scheduled to be replacing anyways, and now the majority of countries are boosting their militaries.

Yep that’s why marinka fell yesterday

@@proxyicarcus So we should see highly advanced new weapons flooding into Ukraine very soon right? Because I've been hearing the old scraps theory since the beginning of this "special military operation".You would think western countries would've ramped up the production by now...Unless they can't

the closer to the earth it is the better. anything that high in the sky is extremely detectable. Russias high end air missiles are extremely capable. Dont under estimate them. the reason SS has been so effective thus far is becuase its beyond detectable until it does its nose dive before impact.

Not when they descend at hypersonic (Mach 5) as in the case of the V2. Closer to the surface is easy to detect from AWACS and easy to deceive as we did in the Falklands War with Exocets. Active array radar with electronic phase shifters (multiple receive anntenna steerable beams) vis a vis F15E AESA is also effective at detecting low flying cruise missiles which are not normally faster than 500mph. Your argument is too subjective. @@ashleygoggs5679

Don’t think we need to break out the old V2 blueprints just yet…🙂

They need to keep being followed

Great song 🎵 that

We didn’t really have anything resembling cluster munitions during WWII. We’d only just developed proximity fusing for our heavy AA guns during WWII and that was VERY hush-hush. Cluster munitions are far more complex.

I remember reading that the Allies dropped a fragmentation munition that exploded roughly five feet from the ground on advancing German troops, resulting in the total breakdown of the attack. Maybe I overstated the point, though.@@grahamstrouse1165

And you think that the NATO countries will be safe let’s not forget one thing Russia owns nuclear power and whatever it is what will do in return the USA will never put Hollywood in danger since if Ukraine receives few weapons it is because NATO together has no more stock Russia is demilitarising them to the bone 🦴

😂😂😂,,you are silly !

I peeped there was a man of culture among us.

Not really, Tomahawk is closer to something like Kalibr. It’s a large, long-range heavy duty cruise missile that’s launched from surface ships and submarines. It’s far too large for air-launch. ATACMs isn’t an exact analogy either, I’ll grant, but it’s closer.

@@grahamstrouse1165 Tomahawk is only 4ft longer than Storm Shadow. Size isn't that much difference. ATACMS also is only a boost-glide. It's nothing like a cruise missile. Not even close.

@@nick4819That’s not insignificant, though. Storm Shadow is pushing the weight limits for most strike aircraft as is. That said, the mass difference between Storm Shadow & Tomahawk isn’t as great as I thought it was (without the Tomhawak’s booster.) I do kinda see your point now. One substantial difference is that Storm Shadow is high-subsonic & most versions of Tomahawk cruise along at roughly the same speed as an airliner. Also the fact that we don’t have any ground or ship-based version of Storm Shadow & every version of Tomahawk I’m aware of is surface launched. I suppose you could sling a few under a B-52. BTW: My understanding is that the USN is reviving the TASM. I just don’t know whether it’s really suited for that kind of job anymore is the thing. Is it going to be getting some kind of high-speed terminal boost phase, countermeasures or something like that? Interceptors are SO much more precise than they were when TASM was taken out of service. I apologize for being rude, btw.

You're saying that disposing of them by helping poison Ukraine is a good thing? That's a reason to send them?

It’s just great to learn that Ukraine is winning ! Let’s keep sending the money and keep this proxy death trap going . At least till the 2024 election! Then .. who cares …

Storm Shadow missiles are already in Russian weapon laboratories

@@efghggdxlmfn33a) that's not how that works b) even if it was Russia couldn't handle them, it'd be more like China c) so what, they're ancient tech.

@@jamesgornall5731In even if I didn't reject your assessment entirely, you're going to have to explain in what way Storm Shadow is poisoning Ukraine.

I've worked firing tow missiles for over 20 years. I cannot imagine what it's like to try to keep a laser spot on a moving and maneuvering airplane. That I got to see to believe.

@@mrgrinch837 Here's the thing....you don't keep a laser spot on the target....the video is wrong. Starstreak and LMM (not Martlet, thats the name of the Royal Navy Wildcat and LMM combination) are laser beam riding. The operator just keeps the target in the sight, the system does the rest. It projects a 'grid' of laser light into the air. The missiles laser seekers actually point backwards to the launcher (so you can't jam them) by referencing this grid they know where they are and move accordingly to intercept. This also means the target will not detect it has been targeted as no laser light is 'painted' on it.

@@mrgrinch837 yeah that launcher weighs like 70 lbs. would be quite difficult to hit something with 70 lbs on your shoulder... imagine trying to aim a 70 lb rifle

how's your economy going "mate"?! lol.

Russia go home in Novorossia.

Gone

The trolls always come out when Russia is suffering badly on the battlefield.

Delusional