The smarter path would be the Powered JSOW with Joint Multi-Effects Warhead System (JMEWS) as well as a variant with the BROACH warhead Ideally they need to make two variants. One for the F-35A/C and a lighter variant for the F-35B both for internal carriage but still retaining the 300 mile range carrying 500lbs plus warhead
I doubt that they can get these numbers.. Small enough to be carried internally, not 2 but 4!!?? Then there's the range and payload that are much greater than the Naval Strike Missile. And all that for 300 000$? No way... F-35 can carry 2 NSMs inside, how do they plan to fit 4 of the longer ranged missiles with the larger warhead (NSM is 250 pounds I think).. Also NSM is around 1 million$... This is unrealistic...
90% of warships on the planet won’t even see the F-35 until it’s already well within bomb drop range, if at all. The U.S. now has a guidance augmentation kit to hit moving targets with the GBU-31, not to mention the smaller munitions like GBU-53 & 54
@@AirRider44 The BROACH warhead is better is because its two stage. One to punch a hole and a second main charge for destruction, If you target the engine, the main charge would likely knock out power and other key systems long enough for a GBU-31 to finish the job with ease
I think your right. It’s pretty easy concept and we have probably hundreds of cargo aircraft that can do the job. Large capacity, long range and stealthy (as far as cargo planes fly all day everyday)
75 pound warhead is not a lot. Full size anti ship missiles have 500, 1000 or even more pounds in explosives alone. It's a realistic size for the F35, but not for a ship killer missile, more of a nuisance missile to destroy some radars and other things mounted to enemy ship decks.
I think they can effect a mission kill against PLAN landing ships. The MACE would definitely sink a large landcraft. Against an amphibious landing force, just slowing teh rate of men and material delivery could doom the operation.
I would agree. I am thinking these would also be used for smaller landing craft ships and for the large numbers of non-Navy Maritime Militia ships the Chinese have. Also, if the new missile and LSRM have a similar RCS signature, enemies will not know which incoming missiles will have a 75lb warhead or a 500lb warhead.
Ideally it would fly at high supersonic 50’ off the ocean surface. With the ability to hide in the ocean wave clutter to look down radar and behind the horizon of conventional radar. They could be carried to within range by the F35 staying outside detection range. Then let it lose on their targets, have it greatly increase speed once it gets within radar detection range giving the target minimal time to respond and counter.
That would be smart. Conserve fuel until it gets within radar range, and then cut in the afterburners. Ideally, you want the ability for one F-35 to pass control to the next F-35, making it more like a fire-and-forget.
Forget it... There's no way this missile will have 300 mile range with the 500 pound warhead and all that for 300 000$..Naval strike missile is 1 million$, has the range of 150 miles, has the 250 pound warhead and the F-35 can fit 2 of them inside weapon bays... These numbers for MACE are impossible without some incredible breakthrough in propulsion..
@@markbrisec3972 It doesn’t have a 500# warhead and doesn’t need a three hundred mile range. The detection range of the F-35 is less than 50 km. To see something beneath 100’ above the horizon it has to be closer than 20 km. So a missile only needs a range of 100 km and a supersonic sprint of say 30 km. Both easily done within the space envelope. The missile then doesn’t need a 500# warhead as the missiles kinetic energy does a majority of the damage. Just like 16” armor piercings battle ship rounds only carried about a 70# bursting charge. They didn’t need much because the kinetic energy of the round did much of the damage. The over the horizon sprint at high supersonic speeds is important because the subsonic Harpoon gives the target almost a minute and a half to react. If it was moving at Mach 5 it would be less than 20 seconds.
Why do people say it’s coated? Lockheed stated themselves it’s baked into the frame. 🤔 R.A.M on the F-35 doesn’t simply wash off its baked not painted.
@@wstavis3135 they bake it on the frame in an oven while the F-22 & F-117 is legit painted on. Yes it’s a huge difference and improvement. The next generation is a form of fabric like carbon fiber and can sustain extreme temperatures. This is all what Lockheed themselves are stating not me 😂😂
@@wstavis3135 yeah the F-22 and F-117 need climate control hangers because of their painted R.A.M coating while F-35’s are chilling on a deck of an Aircraft Carrier 😂🤷🏻 Edited: F-22 R.A.M disintegrates in the Rain that’s why it haves the highest flight hour cost. Ones painted the other is baked. Lockheed Martin themselves. Baked is different then coating The F-35 has a fibermat radar-absorbent material (RAM) baked into the skin, which is more durable, easier to work with, and faster to cure than older RAM coatings; similar coatings are being considered for application on older stealth aircraft such as the F-22.
@@roderickcampbell2105all do respect it’s not sir 😂 Coated paint is completely different from baked fabric coating. Yes this is boarder line rocket science.
The MACE Missile is designed to support the carry of four (4) weapons in an F-35C Lightning II Joint Strike Fighter. The F-35C has a longer bomb bay compared to the F-35B of the USMC. So carry by Marines will be in Beast Mode only.
Localised systems damage. But I expect these to target stuff like radar masts or the bridge. Possibly VLS magazines if small warheads can penetrate that far. These would likely be used in coordinated attacks to soften up target ships to force them to expend stores and suffer battle damage and potentially mission kill them.
Could be intended for the numerous smaller ships that make up the PLAN, like frigates and large patrol boats. Also as we are seeing in Ukraine, the Ukrainians several times have overwhelmed Russian air defenses with a swarm of cheap and expensive missiles.
I looked up the price and those are 2 million for each one. These are expected to cost 300k. Also it looks like they want to be able to mass produce these which might not be capable or too expensive for the NSM. I would also say you said so yourself. Those fit teh A/C model but not the B. They need a common missile that all of them can use.
This is likely the result of the Ukraine war. We have been sending weapons and ammo to Ukraine, which makes for an ideal testing ground for new and existing weapons. You can bet we sent observers there to measure success. The Defense industry has had two years to design new weapons that will be specifically useful against Russian targets, and likely the Chinese knock-offs as well. Much of the Cold War was prep. A lot of untested weapons and systems. The more we send to Ukraine, the more they can test them for us, and quite eagerly.
US Missiles are Energy Limited, in fact ALL US MIL Systems are Energy Limited EXCEPT NUCLEAR PROPUSION. Fighters will Need Smaller-Faster-Longer Range Air/Air, Air/Ground Missiles. AS WELL AS IMPROVED FUELS FOR AIRCRAFT PROPULSION ....FOSSILE DOESN'T CUT-IT ANYMORE!
What was the point of the F-35C if it could not carry anti-ship missiles internally? If the stealth cannot get you closer, use the F/A-18. You would think they would have designed and built the F-35C with inside bays large enough for future requirements. But it is the navy, so.
Initially, some of the Navy brass wasn’t real keen on how the F-35C turned out. There were suggestions, by Navy leadership, to just stick primarily with upgraded Hornets until F/A-XX was ready. But politics and military contractors weren’t gonna let that happen.
The USN is working that They had the powered JSOW at one point but they have opted for a variant of the LRASM/JASSM This I am guessing is their low cost take on the USAF SiAW
The Navy 35c just sneak in remain undetected and use there datalink to mark all the targets for the missle trucks called super Hornet. Who then launch 🚀. Whatever the mission calls for.
I really think whoever makes these videos doesn't speak proper English, and they hire someone for the voice or use a convincing AI. So many weird grammar mistakes.
Are you talking about the f35 b? If i am not wrong there are about 1000 f35s with only 29 crashes that makes it the safest and most reliable jet of the 21 century.
If Russia's supposed to be the second army in the world and stuffs up invadeding Ukraine making them look totally incompetent, what would a weaker China look like failing to take Tiawan :)
In Rory McIlroy, the establishment has its golden boy. McIlroy may be uncomfortable with such a position - he excels at professional golf, not politics - and the R&A could never possibly be seen to favour an Open contender, but glory for the Northern Irishman in St Andrews would have broader meaning. McIlroy represents all that is good about his sport in the face of a model which sees hundreds of millions of guaranteed dollars thrown at players who need not even worry about 36-hole cuts.
“It never feels easy,” said McIlroy. “There’s little parts of the round where it shows you where you’re at with everything mentally and physically. I came through all those little tests today unscathed and I’m really proud of that. So it might have looked easy, but there’s certain parts of the round that are challenging.”
