Comments by "Trevor Crook" (@user-ft2bt9kw7x) on "Royal Marine Reacts To Top 10 Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles in the World | Best ICBM 2023" video.

  1. Trident 2 is obsolete . Ballistic and doesn’t manoeuvre . Predictable path . Advanced air defence can shoot it down . Sarmat ( Russian ) range 18,000 kms . New technology .hypersonic . Unstoppable That clip is old Ballistic missiles only reach hypersonic speed “ outside “ of the atmosphere. Hypersonic like Sarmat and zircon reach that speed “ within” the atmosphere and hit target at full speed , hence the huge kinetic energy they create on impact which has been measured . There is no drag as some misinformed people think Biden admitted that American has no defence against hypersonic missiles . They have never been shot down though there was an unverified claim one had . Which has since been debunked
    6
  2. America is way behind in missile technology
    5
  3.  @chugachuga9242  Sarmat and zircon are way ahead technologically . Who’s your source Walt Disney ..
    3
  4.  @chugachuga9242  So hypersonic missiles are the same as ballistic. .?Why are countries including America spending millions trying to develop them then ?
    2
  5. Because the propaganda is actually based on reality and physics not wishful thinking. The reality is that Russia has better weapons and a better army than America . Americans are butt hurt over that but probably recognise that fact
    2
  6.  @boomman1349  what laws of physics have I got wrong .? One thing is for sure the Russians haven’t got it wrong
    2
  7.  @chugachuga9242  True hypersonic missiles have manoeuvre and are hypersonic “ within “ the atmosphere. Zircon is a hypersonic cruise missile for instance , never leaves the atmosphere . America has no such missiles Patriot never shot down a hypersonic missile. Data showing the alleged downing not released seeing that it never happened I have heard an explanation of how hypersonic glide missiles work . There is no drag it hits target at maximum speed , hence the kinetic energy . If hypersonic missiles work the way you say there would be no advantage in having them
    1
  8.  @chugachuga9242  true hypersonic missiles have manoeuvre and are hypersonic within the atmosphere. Ballistic missiles are hypersonic “ outside “ of the atmosphere only and move in a straight line only Hypersonic missiles are impossible to shoot down . Biden admitted this There is no drag hence the huge kinetic energy when they hit which is measurable
    1
  9.  @chugachuga9242  So hypersonic missiles are pointless seeing that 50 year old ballistic missiles are superior ? So why is America trying to produce one ? That makes no sense. All of your points are at odds with the physics True hypersonic missiles manoeuvre and reach speed “ within “ the atmosphere. Ballistic missiles cannot travel at hypersonic speed within the atmosphere or manoeuvre The kinetic energy when a hypersonic missile hits target is massive indicating it doesn’t slow down as it approaches target as some claim
    1
  10.  @boomman1349  No using physics which has no bias. Hypersonic missiles reach that speed “ within “ the atmosphere. Ballistic missiles cannot . Otherwise no point having them . Russia s500 the only air defence system that can shoot down hypersonic missiles Glide breaker is theory. Comparing a zircon missile to a V2 is beyond absurd
    1
  11.  @boomman1349  Obviously there is no problem with drag otherwise as you say the missiles would break apart . And they don’t
    1
  12.  @lostbutfreesoul  Americans hate being second .But they are not second . More like fourth or fifth lol
    1
  13.  @boomman1349  There is drag normally but the Russians have worked out an answer. It’s called scientific progress
    1
  14.  @boomman1349  If there is drag it would slow the missile down from Mach 9 to Mach 6 ( 4500 mph) a little faster than the tomahawk ( 500 mph
    1
  15.  @boomman1349  With drag the missile slows from Mach 9 to Mach 6 . A little faster than Tomahawk
    1
  16.  @boomman1349  The way around it possibly would be to vary speed throughout the flight . Obviously if hypersonic missiles were not superior they wouldn’t bother them . May as well stick with v2 I would like it explained by an impartial expert The Tomahawk has a top speed of 500 mph . Zircon is a little faster than that
    1
  17.  @boomman1349  the difference is the air defence systems . S400 s500 are light years ahead of anything the west has . America put is money into offensive weapons and the Russians took the much cheaper option of defensive weapons . Ukraine has been a good testing ground for Russian hypersonic missiles . They do work
    1
  18.  @boomman1349  Russia also has short range systems .eg Buk Pantzer and others . The have a multilayered defence The patriot has a success rate of 36% which is abysmal. Many patriots have been destroyed in Ukraine . All of them maybe. Two in Kiev were filmed getting it .The Ukrainians are screaming they need more . Why is that Also ammunition is very expensive and manufacturing limited The s400 uses multiple task radar and missiles by the way including short range. comparing it to binoculars😂😂 . It’s streets ahead of anything the Americans have You know little
    1
  19. V2 was hypersonic only when outside of atmosphere. True hypersonic missiles reach that Speed “ within” the atmosphere. Laughing doesn’t help you . Best get more informed
    1
  20. if your sources are telling you that all the top missiles are American I’m afraid your sources lack validity
    1