Comments by "" (@SnakePliskin762) on "After F-16, Russia Crushes All 8 ATACMS Missiles in Recent Strike!" video.

what a load of bs
5
ah the old oreshnilk bs,a missile so inaccurate it hasn't been used again.
2
@fabricosta9488 so basically it's an ICBM,a concept that's been around since the 60s.
2
@chillian321 except the warheads aren't accurate and produce little damage. The cost of it to be produced means it'll be produced in tens per year. Basically it's better just being resigned to be a nuke like originally planned. It's an expensive way of doing very little conventionally the experts &;Russia have found out.
2
most has gone on building munitions factories in the west
1
@kathrynck only according to YT they're small. Defence spending has went through the roof in the last 3 years on them. 3 factories built in the US alone last year. That ordanance was taking up space for the new to come in,for example the ATACMS and Javelins etc.
1
@harmonsalmon7739 still doing a job against Russia.
1
@kathrynck quite a good point. You're forgetting the part about the level of training that has been given which also has a financial cost. In my country 25% of our training areas are now dedicated to training Ukrainians hence why they can make older equipment work so well in smaller numbers against superior numbers and laat so long.
1
who needs to stop a missile with a 6% chance of hitting a house in a CEP of 150m?
1
@kathrynck well the evidence wasn't what the vid looked like,it was actually wider than a CEP of 250m and caused very minimal damage. This was shown on high resolution imagery. This type of weapon has severe drawbacks in accuracy and warhead size hence why the US cancelled it's own Prompt Global Strike when they looked at doing the same. Take into account the cost and the low production per year of these by Russia,it's an expensive way of doing very little.
1
@vanjamenadzer except both sides have ICBMs with nukes dummy,they have done for years. That line if crossed will be suicide for both sides. The point of this conversation is the conventional aspect.
1
@iviciaable unfortunately for you some of us do a bit more research than YT. High resolution imagery afterwards showed little damage on any of the area,basically it was a dud. No buildings levelled,nothing,too inaccurate.36 warheads at a CEP of 150m gave it a 6% of hitting a house sized target! And all of those waheads combined only gave it the destructiver power of a ww2 v2.And this one's CEP was well out of 150m. It was an expensive way of doing nothing.
1
@iviciaable do you want the maths involved or the experts who reviewed all this. 40 tons of rocket to deliver less than 1 ton of explosive power (3.6 million joules compared to 4.4 million for 1 ton of explosive) you can talk all the YT nonsense you want but the facts don't lie.
1
@nolga3569 no it isn't it's been tested against ballistic targets for a long time.
1
@iviciaable I'm not arsed where you think you worked or what you think. I've explained the science,what the resolution images reported after,what the damage assessment was and that this was done by experts not the likes of you with an opinion on YT.If you want all the links and sources i can kindly supply until then go and give your head a shit. They weren't accurate or penetrated anything,you just don't get it do you.
1
@nolga3569 exactly they worked,what targets in Israel have been hit? Please tell
1
course they can.....
1
@javasrevenge7121 I'm not actually do you want links to the experts who've reviewed all this. I'm damn sure their credentials beat yours.
1
@DemiGod.. according to you more like
1
All my information is widely available in a free country to research. Try it
1
@maximusfl3926 complete bs
1
NATO hasn't entered
1