Difference between revisions of "Talk:Tomahawk cruise missile"
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
In simple layman's language, I'll try to explain one of the biggest problems (among a myriad of problems) with the ground launched Tomahawk. | In simple layman's language, I'll try to explain one of the biggest problems (among a myriad of problems) with the ground launched Tomahawk. | ||
| − | The Tomahawk was designed for launch aboard [[nuclear]] powered ships & [[submarine]]s. Ukraine has no ships or submarines. The Ground Launched System needs a big electrical power source which has to be hauled on several trucks. While something was developed and possibly even used in combat once or twice against goat herders, its further development was abandoned in the late 1980s because of expense and impracticality. With today's aerial and satellite surveillance, there's no way it can be packed up and moved quickly, even if it ever made it to a launch location without detection. | + | The Tomahawk was designed for launch aboard [[nuclear]] powered ships & [[submarine]]s. Ukraine has no ships or submarines. The Ground Launched System needs a big electrical power source which has to be hauled on several trucks. While something was developed and possibly even used in combat once or twice against goat herders, its further development was abandoned in the late 1980s because of expense and impracticality. With today's aerial and satellite surveillance, there's no way it can be packed up and moved quickly, even if it all the trucks carrying the missiles, launcher, loader, and power source ever made it to a launch location without detection. |
[The air launched system already has the height and speed necessary, so it doesn't need the boast from the ground up]. | [The air launched system already has the height and speed necessary, so it doesn't need the boast from the ground up]. | ||
Revision as of 23:27, October 17, 2025
Stephen Bryen: "Tomahawks originally were dual capable in that they could have nuclear or conventional warheads. Partly as a result of the now-defunct Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) agreement, and also because a cruise missile over Soviet territory would be interpreted as a nuclear strike, the US shelved the nuclear warheads for Tomahawk. There is still confusion about what happened to these warheads: are they still in long term storage or have they been dismantled?"
Likely not dismantled. See Megatons to Megawatts.
In simple layman's language, I'll try to explain one of the biggest problems (among a myriad of problems) with the ground launched Tomahawk.
The Tomahawk was designed for launch aboard nuclear powered ships & submarines. Ukraine has no ships or submarines. The Ground Launched System needs a big electrical power source which has to be hauled on several trucks. While something was developed and possibly even used in combat once or twice against goat herders, its further development was abandoned in the late 1980s because of expense and impracticality. With today's aerial and satellite surveillance, there's no way it can be packed up and moved quickly, even if it all the trucks carrying the missiles, launcher, loader, and power source ever made it to a launch location without detection.
[The air launched system already has the height and speed necessary, so it doesn't need the boast from the ground up].
[The whole "Tomahawks for Ukraine" spiel over the past few months was nothing but another propaganda psyop to keep your eyes off what has really been happening in the Ukraine war.] RobSZelensky Must Go! 19:13, October 17, 2025 (EDT)