Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

CUSWeekendpost101 Flechettes 🇺🇸 Jonathan Wild, founder of Florida based Wild Arms Solutions (Wild Arms Research And Development LLC) is a published author whose research into historical and advanced weapons systems led to creating kinetic CUAS solutions. Current solutions include SPI & SHI SPI – Short-Range Point-defense Interceptor “A compact,... supersonic spin-stabilized rocket that deploys 55 flechettes in a single kinetic strike. The nose cone is blown off to release a dense lethal cloud, delivering an effective 500-yard reach at under $300 per round.” The rockets can be launched from lightweight 4-rocket pod or 16-rocket reloadable launcher. SHI - Swizzlestick Hypervelocity Interceptor “A pure-kinetic rocket that needs no explosives. It delivers velocities above 7,000 FPS for less than $1,000 each, stores simply, and is designed to be fired in rapid volleys from lightweight launch tubes—turning volume fire into a practical, low-cost option against group 1–3 drones.” According to Wild Arms, Gen 3 rockets with an integrated flechette warhead are being designed and manufactured. Below a short clip of SPIshow more

Counter Unmanned Systems

7,677 subscribers

50,262 просмотров • 22 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии Образование Новости и политика

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 15

Фото профиля Counter Unmanned Systems

Counter Unmanned Systems22 дней назад

Wild Arms Solutions

Фото профиля John Boland (JIB)

John Boland (JIB)22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD Wild is the real deal, of a caliber you don't see very often.

Фото профиля 4rge.ai

4rge.ai22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD

Фото профиля Bishop Aerospace

Bishop Aerospace22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD One of my favorite dudes in this space for sure.

Фото профиля Ben 🌻🇺🇸

Ben 🌻🇺🇸22 дней назад

@DylanMalyasov @Wild_Arms_RandD Really cool

Фото профиля HB Cottom

HB Cottom21 дней назад

@actualjib @Wild_Arms_RandD Wild is the man!

Фото профиля Dariusz Janicki

Dariusz Janicki22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD Luftfaust.

Фото профиля Rodger Young

Rodger Young22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD I would have to see terminal ballistics and grouping on the flechette load because historically they have been terrible.

Фото профиля NDFRuki

NDFRuki21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD They invented the fleigerfaust again

Фото профиля Farcaster 🍁

Farcaster 🍁21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD I built something remarkably similar when I was 14 with model rockets, shotgun shells, compression pin to explode and of course, shoulder launched. Couldn't ever get the multiple rocket launcher figured out, tho. That was close to 50 years ago, mind you.

Фото профиля cool guy rick

cool guy rick21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD Since these are unguided it’s hard to see the advantage over something like tungsten shot

Фото профиля MazMorris *⃣

MazMorris *⃣22 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD Launched against the archenemy of the neckbeards - the soda cans.

Фото профиля loveyalotz

loveyalotz21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD If they could get this around the size of a LAW it wouldn't be too hard for 2 or 3 guys a squad to carry one, and in a pinch, I can imagine 4 x 55 flechettes would be pretty nasty fired at personnel ;=;

Фото профиля Hawkin Byrd

Hawkin Byrd21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD Welcome back fliegerfaust

Фото профиля ven0msnake

ven0msnake21 дней назад

@Wild_Arms_RandD What part of "shall not be infringed" do you not understand?

Похожие видео

Denys Shtilierman confirmed the combat use of a rocket-carrying drone by Fire Point 🔹 Denys Shtilierman Denys Shtilierman, Chief Designer and co-owner of Fire Point, told NV that one of the reasons for modifying a kamikaze drone into a rocket carrier was a surplus of Soviet S-5 aviation rockets. Ukrainian aviation frequently used these rockets, particularly from helicopters, but this tactic eventually had to be abandoned due to significant risks to pilots and aircraft. ❗️ In turn, the FP rocket-carrying drone is capable of carrying 8 S-5 rockets, flying at a range of up to 500 km, and launching strikes from a distance of 1.5 to 3 km. Fire Point notes that the targets for these rockets can include: ▪️ enemy logistics, such as trains with oil tankers; ▪️ oil depots; ▪️ oil refineries with a large number of pipes and storage tanks. 🔹 However, the primary mission of the rocket-carrying drone is to counter Russian air defense units. The developers claim that creating the rocket-carrying drone requires almost no additional financial costs or complex engineering solutions. Denys Shtilierman notes that this drone is already a serial production item and can be manufactured in the required quantities. 🔹 Furthermore, Fire Point is working on a version of the rocket-carrying drone that will be capable of launching strikes in automatic mode, without operator intervention, and at significantly greater distances. 📹: NV

Denys Shtilierman confirmed the combat use of a rocket-carrying drone by Fire Point 🔹 Denys Shtilierman Denys Shtilierman, Chief Designer and co-owner of Fire Point, told NV that one of the reasons for modifying a kamikaze drone into a rocket carrier was a surplus of Soviet S-5 aviation rockets. Ukrainian aviation frequently used these rockets, particularly from helicopters, but this tactic eventually had to be abandoned due to significant risks to pilots and aircraft. ❗️ In turn, the FP rocket-carrying drone is capable of carrying 8 S-5 rockets, flying at a range of up to 500 km, and launching strikes from a distance of 1.5 to 3 km. Fire Point notes that the targets for these rockets can include: ▪️ enemy logistics, such as trains with oil tankers; ▪️ oil depots; ▪️ oil refineries with a large number of pipes and storage tanks. 🔹 However, the primary mission of the rocket-carrying drone is to counter Russian air defense units. The developers claim that creating the rocket-carrying drone requires almost no additional financial costs or complex engineering solutions. Denys Shtilierman notes that this drone is already a serial production item and can be manufactured in the required quantities. 🔹 Furthermore, Fire Point is working on a version of the rocket-carrying drone that will be capable of launching strikes in automatic mode, without operator intervention, and at significantly greater distances. 📹: NV

Anton Gerashchenko

15,659 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Russian report: Gulf air defenses face a “million-dollar missile vs. a drone costing a few thousand dollars” dilemma The Russian Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade published a study and analysis concluding that Gulf states’ reliance on long-range U.S. air defense systems against low-cost threats such as attack drones creates a significant gap between the cost of the attack and the cost of interception. The center noted that an Iranian Shahed-136 drone is estimated to cost around $20,000–$50,000 , while a PAC-3 interceptor missile can cost approximately $4 million , making the interception of large-scale drone attacks extremely expensive. The report argues that systems such as Patriot and THAAD were largely designed to counter long-range threats and ballistic missiles, while Gulf states need diversified defensive layers, including short- and medium-range systems to counter drones, cruise missiles, and low-altitude targets. The center proposed strengthening air defenses with Russian systems such as Buk-M3 “Viking” for medium-range defense, Tor for short-range defense, and Pantsir-S1M to protect critical infrastructure from close-range threats. According to the report, combining long-, medium-, and short-range systems could increase the number of engagement channels and reduce the depletion of costly interceptor missiles, particularly around oil refineries, desalination plants, ports, and energy facilities. The Russian center concludes that addressing the cost gap between offensive weapons and interceptors could make large-scale drone attacks less economically viable by building a layered defense system capable of countering threats at a more balanced cost.

Russian report: Gulf air defenses face a “million-dollar missile vs. a drone costing a few thousand dollars” dilemma The Russian Center for Analysis of World Arms Trade published a study and analysis concluding that Gulf states’ reliance on long-range U.S. air defense systems against low-cost threats such as attack drones creates a significant gap between the cost of the attack and the cost of interception. The center noted that an Iranian Shahed-136 drone is estimated to cost around $20,000–$50,000 , while a PAC-3 interceptor missile can cost approximately $4 million , making the interception of large-scale drone attacks extremely expensive. The report argues that systems such as Patriot and THAAD were largely designed to counter long-range threats and ballistic missiles, while Gulf states need diversified defensive layers, including short- and medium-range systems to counter drones, cruise missiles, and low-altitude targets. The center proposed strengthening air defenses with Russian systems such as Buk-M3 “Viking” for medium-range defense, Tor for short-range defense, and Pantsir-S1M to protect critical infrastructure from close-range threats. According to the report, combining long-, medium-, and short-range systems could increase the number of engagement channels and reduce the depletion of costly interceptor missiles, particularly around oil refineries, desalination plants, ports, and energy facilities. The Russian center concludes that addressing the cost gap between offensive weapons and interceptors could make large-scale drone attacks less economically viable by building a layered defense system capable of countering threats at a more balanced cost.

RussiaNews 🇷🇺

13,364 просмотров • 27 дней назад

🚨🇺🇸 In 1980, the United States built an aircraft for a mission that sounded impossible. Land a large military plane inside a stadium in the middle of Tehran. Rescue hostages. Take off again before anyone could respond. The aircraft was a Lockheed C 130 Hercules. The program was called Credible Sport. Engineers transformed the C 130 into something closer to a missile than a transport aircraft. They attached 30 rocket motors across the nose, wings, and fuselage. Some rockets fired downward to slow the aircraft just seconds before touchdown. Others fired forward to bring it to an almost instant stop. More rockets pointed backward to blast the aircraft into the air during takeoff. The goal was extreme short takeoff and landing inside a confined urban stadium with no runway. Pilots trained to descend steeply at night, ignite rockets just above the ground, stop in a few hundred feet, load hostages, then launch out using raw rocket thrust. Everything had to be perfect. One mistimed rocket meant total destruction. During testing, a malfunction caused a crash and exposed how dangerous the concept truly was. The aircraft survived. The idea survived. The mission never happened. Diplomacy freed the hostages before Credible Sport was deployed. But for a brief moment in history, a C 130 was turned into a rocket powered rescue aircraft designed to invade a capital city, land in a stadium, and escape. No aircraft before or since has been built for a mission this extreme.

🚨🇺🇸 In 1980, the United States built an aircraft for a mission that sounded impossible. Land a large military plane inside a stadium in the middle of Tehran. Rescue hostages. Take off again before anyone could respond. The aircraft was a Lockheed C 130 Hercules. The program was called Credible Sport. Engineers transformed the C 130 into something closer to a missile than a transport aircraft. They attached 30 rocket motors across the nose, wings, and fuselage. Some rockets fired downward to slow the aircraft just seconds before touchdown. Others fired forward to bring it to an almost instant stop. More rockets pointed backward to blast the aircraft into the air during takeoff. The goal was extreme short takeoff and landing inside a confined urban stadium with no runway. Pilots trained to descend steeply at night, ignite rockets just above the ground, stop in a few hundred feet, load hostages, then launch out using raw rocket thrust. Everything had to be perfect. One mistimed rocket meant total destruction. During testing, a malfunction caused a crash and exposed how dangerous the concept truly was. The aircraft survived. The idea survived. The mission never happened. Diplomacy freed the hostages before Credible Sport was deployed. But for a brief moment in history, a C 130 was turned into a rocket powered rescue aircraft designed to invade a capital city, land in a stadium, and escape. No aircraft before or since has been built for a mission this extreme.

Defence Index

703,960 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

#Serbia | #BREAKING: Serbian 🇷🇸 company PR-DC introduces the 1st military-certified multicopter IKA-20-M capable of launching 3 aircraft rockets. Belgrade-based 🇷🇸 defence company PR-DC has unveiled a new configuration of its IKA-20-M multirotor combat drone, integrating an ultra-light launcher capable of firing three 57mm aircraft rockets (S-5 / Krušik BR-1-57 / BR-2-57). According to co-founder Miloš Petrašinović, the company completed internal testing of the fiberglass-tube launcher with sliding contacts, entirely designed and manufactured in-house. Trials began with ground launches to measure structural reactions, followed by firings from a ground-mounted launcher and subsequently from a launcher integrated onto the drone in flight. Test results included successful sequential launches from all three tubes in a single sortie, as well as rocket firing during forward flight, demonstrating stable integration and performance. A key feature of the system is the use of standard, unmodified 57mm aircraft rockets. The new launcher is fully compatible with previously produced IKA-20-M platforms, including the variant informally referred to as the "IKA-BOMBARDER." The IKA-20-M can already be configured to carry aerial bombs of various calibers, cargo-release mechanisms and now rocket armament, expanding its operational versatility and combat application spectrum. #Serbia #Defence #Belgrade #Srbija #PRDC #MilitaryNews #DefenceNews Global Defense Insight Umair Aslam Army Recognition #Drone #Missile #missiles #Krušik #drones

#Serbia | #BREAKING: Serbian 🇷🇸 company PR-DC introduces the 1st military-certified multicopter IKA-20-M capable of launching 3 aircraft rockets. Belgrade-based 🇷🇸 defence company PR-DC has unveiled a new configuration of its IKA-20-M multirotor combat drone, integrating an ultra-light launcher capable of firing three 57mm aircraft rockets (S-5 / Krušik BR-1-57 / BR-2-57). According to co-founder Miloš Petrašinović, the company completed internal testing of the fiberglass-tube launcher with sliding contacts, entirely designed and manufactured in-house. Trials began with ground launches to measure structural reactions, followed by firings from a ground-mounted launcher and subsequently from a launcher integrated onto the drone in flight. Test results included successful sequential launches from all three tubes in a single sortie, as well as rocket firing during forward flight, demonstrating stable integration and performance. A key feature of the system is the use of standard, unmodified 57mm aircraft rockets. The new launcher is fully compatible with previously produced IKA-20-M platforms, including the variant informally referred to as the "IKA-BOMBARDER." The IKA-20-M can already be configured to carry aerial bombs of various calibers, cargo-release mechanisms and now rocket armament, expanding its operational versatility and combat application spectrum. #Serbia #Defence #Belgrade #Srbija #PRDC #MilitaryNews #DefenceNews Global Defense Insight Umair Aslam Army Recognition #Drone #Missile #missiles #Krušik #drones

Luka | Дунав Intel

24,489 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Unique footage has emerged showing remote control of interceptor drones. The 190th Training Center of the SBS reportedly used a drone-interceptor to shoot down a Shahed UAV remotely, with the pilot located at a significant distance from the launch site. The system used was LITAVR, developed by FDrones. According to the company, an operator can control the interceptor from hundreds of kilometers away from the launch point. The F7 LITAVR is already a well-known and highly effective system. As a reminder, here are the technical details (this is all open-source information): Development of the system began in autumn 2024. It was successfully tested and officially adopted in summer 2025. Serial production and deliveries to the military started in autumn 2025. Maximum speed: 350 km/h Flight time: up to 15 minutes Equipped with two cameras: daytime and thermal imaging The officially stated tactical range is 36 km, though in practice it can reach up to 60 km and operate at altitudes of up to 9.5 km. The warhead (separately codified) weighs 500 g. Detonation can occur via kinetic impact, self-destruction upon contact with the target, or manual activation by the operator. The system uses inertial guidance without GPS and features automatic terminal guidance (“last mile” / target lock system). At present, it reportedly destroys hundreds of targets per week, including Shaheds, Gerberas, Molniyas, Orlans, Lancets, and others. What is fundamentally new? Until now, mobile air defense fire groups and frontline crews using interceptor drones required a qualified pilot on-site. It has now been successfully demonstrated that a different tactic is possible: pilots can operate from protected, remote locations. The only requirement is internet access at both the control center and the launch site. Ukraine’s defense sector continues to develop innovative solutions. 📹 Oleksii Kopytko/Facebook

Unique footage has emerged showing remote control of interceptor drones. The 190th Training Center of the SBS reportedly used a drone-interceptor to shoot down a Shahed UAV remotely, with the pilot located at a significant distance from the launch site. The system used was LITAVR, developed by FDrones. According to the company, an operator can control the interceptor from hundreds of kilometers away from the launch point. The F7 LITAVR is already a well-known and highly effective system. As a reminder, here are the technical details (this is all open-source information): Development of the system began in autumn 2024. It was successfully tested and officially adopted in summer 2025. Serial production and deliveries to the military started in autumn 2025. Maximum speed: 350 km/h Flight time: up to 15 minutes Equipped with two cameras: daytime and thermal imaging The officially stated tactical range is 36 km, though in practice it can reach up to 60 km and operate at altitudes of up to 9.5 km. The warhead (separately codified) weighs 500 g. Detonation can occur via kinetic impact, self-destruction upon contact with the target, or manual activation by the operator. The system uses inertial guidance without GPS and features automatic terminal guidance (“last mile” / target lock system). At present, it reportedly destroys hundreds of targets per week, including Shaheds, Gerberas, Molniyas, Orlans, Lancets, and others. What is fundamentally new? Until now, mobile air defense fire groups and frontline crews using interceptor drones required a qualified pilot on-site. It has now been successfully demonstrated that a different tactic is possible: pilots can operate from protected, remote locations. The only requirement is internet access at both the control center and the launch site. Ukraine’s defense sector continues to develop innovative solutions. 📹 Oleksii Kopytko/Facebook

Anton Gerashchenko

48,684 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

My first interview with Peter Beck, Founder & CEO of Rocket Lab. Rocket Lab is scaling launch cadence faster than SpaceX scaled Falcon 9. 0:44 The biggest bottleneck to increasing launch cadence and mass to orbit 1:25 Growth of new space startups 3:05 Why governments have been ineffective at scaling launch 3:53 Tall Poppy Syndrome 4:38 Starting Rocket Lab without having $100 million 7:24 Scaling Electron vs focusing on Neutron 9:17 Rocket Lab hustle 11:10 Creating a culture of “F*ck it, let’s do it” 11:40 Worst supplier experiences 13:54 Having an engine explode before an important meeting 18:52 Rocket Lab’s first mission to the moon 20:55 Chewing glass and forcing the outcome to be good 22:57 Similarities in how Elon and Peter operate 25:05 Elon time and how to structure timelines 27:13 Designing a culture where everyone runs towards the fire 28:44 Making the Ferrari of rockets — the importance of creating beautiful things 31:20 “You don’t need to equate a price tag to beauty” 32:12 Why Peter hates launch day 34:48 “After a launch failure this place is a morgue” 35:22 Moving forward after a failure 36:40 Transitioning from an R&D organization to scaling rocket production 38:07 Production hell with rockets 39:09 Taking learnings from Electron to Neutron 41:03 Having dinner with Elon 42:00 Keeping the hiring bar extraordinarily high 44:05 “My job is to fix sh*t” 44:56 Rocket Lab’s first NASA launch 45:55 “The great thing about America is anything is possible” 47:40 Coming to Silicon Valley — meeting with Vinod Khosla 51:22 Why he decided to take $RKLB public 54:12 Creating a company that will outlive you 55:41 Turning Rocket Lab into a profitable business 57:23 The best space companies will all build their own rockets 1:00:35 Scaling Neutron 1:01:32 Why they’re using carbon fiber instead of steel 1:02:56 “Going public was a great capital unlock” 1:04:10 The importance of relentless optimism

My first interview with Peter Beck, Founder & CEO of Rocket Lab. Rocket Lab is scaling launch cadence faster than SpaceX scaled Falcon 9. 0:44 The biggest bottleneck to increasing launch cadence and mass to orbit 1:25 Growth of new space startups 3:05 Why governments have been ineffective at scaling launch 3:53 Tall Poppy Syndrome 4:38 Starting Rocket Lab without having $100 million 7:24 Scaling Electron vs focusing on Neutron 9:17 Rocket Lab hustle 11:10 Creating a culture of “Fck it, let’s do it” 11:40 Worst supplier experiences 13:54 Having an engine explode before an important meeting 18:52 Rocket Lab’s first mission to the moon 20:55 Chewing glass and forcing the outcome to be good 22:57 Similarities in how Elon and Peter operate 25:05 Elon time and how to structure timelines 27:13 Designing a culture where everyone runs towards the fire 28:44 Making the Ferrari of rockets — the importance of creating beautiful things 31:20 “You don’t need to equate a price tag to beauty” 32:12 Why Peter hates launch day 34:48 “After a launch failure this place is a morgue” 35:22 Moving forward after a failure 36:40 Transitioning from an R&D organization to scaling rocket production 38:07 Production hell with rockets 39:09 Taking learnings from Electron to Neutron 41:03 Having dinner with Elon 42:00 Keeping the hiring bar extraordinarily high 44:05 “My job is to fix sht” 44:56 Rocket Lab’s first NASA launch 45:55 “The great thing about America is anything is possible” 47:40 Coming to Silicon Valley — meeting with Vinod Khosla 51:22 Why he decided to take $RKLB public 54:12 Creating a company that will outlive you 55:41 Turning Rocket Lab into a profitable business 57:23 The best space companies will all build their own rockets 1:00:35 Scaling Neutron 1:01:32 Why they’re using carbon fiber instead of steel 1:02:56 “Going public was a great capital unlock” 1:04:10 The importance of relentless optimism

Ti Morse

165,782 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Come and hear about the war crimes committed by Hamas. This is an important post, read it all. I mean, beyond the "usual" things they do, like killing Israeli civilians, LGBTQ+ individuals, and opposition figures in Gaza. This war crime is the relentless rocket fire on Israeli civilians. In 2001, Hamas, the Gaza basee terrorist organization, began independently producing and launching rockets into civilian population centers. Since then, especially after Israel fully withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas' rocket fire intensified, and their launch capabilities expanded significantly. Instead of investing in Gaza's infrastructure, Hamas diverted aid funds, equipment provided by the UN and world governments to build rockets with the sole purpose of indiscriminately killing Israeli civilians. They placed launchers and bomb-making facilities within civilian populations and schools. The attached video shows Hamas using sewage pipes and hoses to construct long-range rockets, and an image displays missile depots and launchers inside a mosque and a Gaza youth movement building. Rocket attacks in the early years killed dozens of civilians, with thousands injured despite citizens seeking shelter during rocket alerts. At this point, Israel decided to invest billions in the Iron Dome defense system to protect its citizens. Israel's commitment to protecting all citizens, both Jewish and Arab, contrasts sharply with Hamas. After years of effort, Israel successfully deployed the Iron Dome, boasting a 96% success rate in intercepting rockets aimed at civilian centers. The system identifies and intercepts only those rockets posing a threat to population centers, sparing open areas. Launching such rockets into civilian areas is a war crime, turning launch sites and missile depots into legitimate military targets, even within civilian populations. Imagine the Israeli casualties if Israel hadn't neutralized missile depots or activated the Iron Dome. Now, consider the following data: The cost of producing a Hamas rocket ranges from $100 to several thousand dollars for a more sophisticated one. They use simple materials like cement supplied by the UN, irrigation system pipes, and other basic tools. Israel, on the other hand, invests a significant amount in Iron Dome missiles, with each interceptor costing between $50,000 and $200,000. Israel's annual investment in defense, protecting both its Jewish and Arab citizens, amounts to billions, while Hamas invests billions in developing rockets aimed at killing civilians and in the development of terrorist infrastructure. Since the current conflict began, Hamas has fired over 9,000 rockets at Israel, with over 10% landing within Gaza itself. The Iron Dome intercepted over two thousand rockets, costing nearly $200 million for the entire interceptor supply. Imagine the potential damage if all these rockets hit Israel – thousands of rockets could cause an estimated over a thousand casualties, thousands of injuries, and extensive damage. Hamas' continued rocket fire on Israeli civilians is a war crime. It always has been and always will be. We can no longer turn a blind eye to this. After Hamas carried out a brutal massacre in addition to rocket attacks, we had no other choice. Israel stands on the side of morality and justice. While Hamas fires missiles at civilian populations and commits atrocities against innocent civilians, Israel targets only legitimate military objectives according to international law. Israel uses precision missiles, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, while Hamas fires indiscriminate rockets. Hamas poses a threat to Israeli citizens, committing war crimes without restraint, and it can not continue. In the pictures: the summary of the data written in the post about the Hamas rocket fire and a video of a rocket falling on the road. Imagine how many people could be killed by her. Please share this post. #ChooseYourSide #FreeGazaFromHama #StandWithIsrael #HamasisISIS

Come and hear about the war crimes committed by Hamas. This is an important post, read it all. I mean, beyond the "usual" things they do, like killing Israeli civilians, LGBTQ+ individuals, and opposition figures in Gaza. This war crime is the relentless rocket fire on Israeli civilians. In 2001, Hamas, the Gaza basee terrorist organization, began independently producing and launching rockets into civilian population centers. Since then, especially after Israel fully withdrew from Gaza in 2005, Hamas' rocket fire intensified, and their launch capabilities expanded significantly. Instead of investing in Gaza's infrastructure, Hamas diverted aid funds, equipment provided by the UN and world governments to build rockets with the sole purpose of indiscriminately killing Israeli civilians. They placed launchers and bomb-making facilities within civilian populations and schools. The attached video shows Hamas using sewage pipes and hoses to construct long-range rockets, and an image displays missile depots and launchers inside a mosque and a Gaza youth movement building. Rocket attacks in the early years killed dozens of civilians, with thousands injured despite citizens seeking shelter during rocket alerts. At this point, Israel decided to invest billions in the Iron Dome defense system to protect its citizens. Israel's commitment to protecting all citizens, both Jewish and Arab, contrasts sharply with Hamas. After years of effort, Israel successfully deployed the Iron Dome, boasting a 96% success rate in intercepting rockets aimed at civilian centers. The system identifies and intercepts only those rockets posing a threat to population centers, sparing open areas. Launching such rockets into civilian areas is a war crime, turning launch sites and missile depots into legitimate military targets, even within civilian populations. Imagine the Israeli casualties if Israel hadn't neutralized missile depots or activated the Iron Dome. Now, consider the following data: The cost of producing a Hamas rocket ranges from $100 to several thousand dollars for a more sophisticated one. They use simple materials like cement supplied by the UN, irrigation system pipes, and other basic tools. Israel, on the other hand, invests a significant amount in Iron Dome missiles, with each interceptor costing between $50,000 and $200,000. Israel's annual investment in defense, protecting both its Jewish and Arab citizens, amounts to billions, while Hamas invests billions in developing rockets aimed at killing civilians and in the development of terrorist infrastructure. Since the current conflict began, Hamas has fired over 9,000 rockets at Israel, with over 10% landing within Gaza itself. The Iron Dome intercepted over two thousand rockets, costing nearly $200 million for the entire interceptor supply. Imagine the potential damage if all these rockets hit Israel – thousands of rockets could cause an estimated over a thousand casualties, thousands of injuries, and extensive damage. Hamas' continued rocket fire on Israeli civilians is a war crime. It always has been and always will be. We can no longer turn a blind eye to this. After Hamas carried out a brutal massacre in addition to rocket attacks, we had no other choice. Israel stands on the side of morality and justice. While Hamas fires missiles at civilian populations and commits atrocities against innocent civilians, Israel targets only legitimate military objectives according to international law. Israel uses precision missiles, costing hundreds of millions of dollars, while Hamas fires indiscriminate rockets. Hamas poses a threat to Israeli citizens, committing war crimes without restraint, and it can not continue. In the pictures: the summary of the data written in the post about the Hamas rocket fire and a video of a rocket falling on the road. Imagine how many people could be killed by her. Please share this post. #ChooseYourSide #FreeGazaFromHama #StandWithIsrael #HamasisISIS

Ori Miller | אורי מילר

404,990 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🇱🇧🇮🇱 For years, Hezbollah's threat to Israel came with a simple mental image: a warehouse full of rockets and a finger hovering over the “launch everything” button. Crude, overwhelming, and terrifying in a very blunt-force way. That version of the problem hasn’t disappeared, it's been upgraded. Hezbollah is estimated to still have thousands of rockets and missiles, even after a war that chewed through stockpiles and an Israeli campaign that made a sport out of blowing them up. Short-range rockets for saturation, medium-range systems that can reach deep into Israel, anti-tank missiles waiting for any ground incursion, and anti-ship weapons. That alone is enough to keep northern Israel on edge, but rockets are yesterday’s nightmare. Today’s headache comes with wings, a camera, and just enough intelligence to make Israel's multi-billion-dollar defense system sweat. Enter Iran’s favorite export: drones. The kind that loiter, watch, wait, and then slam into something expensive. Hezbollah isn’t just receiving these systems anymore. It’s learning how to build them, tweak them, and mass-produce them locally. Which means this isn’t a supply problem Israel can bomb away. It’s a manufacturing problem that regenerates. Here’s how the future fight looks: Rockets go up first; loud, messy, designed to overwhelm and distract. Air defenses light up, radars turn on, and interceptors launch. Then the drones come in. Some scout, some jam, some just wait patiently for something valuable to reveal itself, and then they dive. It’s not brute force anymore, it’s layered harassment with a brain. Israel still holds the technological edge. Its air defenses are among the best on the planet, its intelligence is deep, and its ability to strike back is unmatched in the region. But even the best systems have limits, especially when they’re forced to play whack-a-mole against something cheap, persistent, and increasingly local. That’s the shift. Hezbollah is no longer just a rocket army. It’s becoming a hybrid force that blends old-school saturation with modern, Iranian-designed precision nuisance. Not powerful enough to win a war outright, but clever enough to make every day of one painfully expensive and unpredictably dangerous.

🇱🇧🇮🇱 For years, Hezbollah's threat to Israel came with a simple mental image: a warehouse full of rockets and a finger hovering over the “launch everything” button. Crude, overwhelming, and terrifying in a very blunt-force way. That version of the problem hasn’t disappeared, it's been upgraded. Hezbollah is estimated to still have thousands of rockets and missiles, even after a war that chewed through stockpiles and an Israeli campaign that made a sport out of blowing them up. Short-range rockets for saturation, medium-range systems that can reach deep into Israel, anti-tank missiles waiting for any ground incursion, and anti-ship weapons. That alone is enough to keep northern Israel on edge, but rockets are yesterday’s nightmare. Today’s headache comes with wings, a camera, and just enough intelligence to make Israel's multi-billion-dollar defense system sweat. Enter Iran’s favorite export: drones. The kind that loiter, watch, wait, and then slam into something expensive. Hezbollah isn’t just receiving these systems anymore. It’s learning how to build them, tweak them, and mass-produce them locally. Which means this isn’t a supply problem Israel can bomb away. It’s a manufacturing problem that regenerates. Here’s how the future fight looks: Rockets go up first; loud, messy, designed to overwhelm and distract. Air defenses light up, radars turn on, and interceptors launch. Then the drones come in. Some scout, some jam, some just wait patiently for something valuable to reveal itself, and then they dive. It’s not brute force anymore, it’s layered harassment with a brain. Israel still holds the technological edge. Its air defenses are among the best on the planet, its intelligence is deep, and its ability to strike back is unmatched in the region. But even the best systems have limits, especially when they’re forced to play whack-a-mole against something cheap, persistent, and increasingly local. That’s the shift. Hezbollah is no longer just a rocket army. It’s becoming a hybrid force that blends old-school saturation with modern, Iranian-designed precision nuisance. Not powerful enough to win a war outright, but clever enough to make every day of one painfully expensive and unpredictably dangerous.

Mario Nawfal

94,871 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

🚨 Russia has found a cheaper alternative to Iskanders — and is already using it extensively against Ukraine Reuters reports that Moscow has begun mass-deploying RM48U missiles, originally designed as training targets for air-defense crews. They are now being launched from S-400 systems against ground targets. And the scale is already significant: in July and early August, RM48Us accounted for more than half of the 228 ballistic and hypersonic missiles fired at Ukraine. The problem is that they are far less accurate — Ukrainian investigators estimate an average deviation of around 300 meters. At the same time, the missile carries a roughly 115-kilogram fragmentation warhead that detonates in the air and spreads fragments over a wide area. According to investigators, one such missile struck a railway platform in Kvitneve near Kyiv on August 5. Eight people were killed. For Russia, there is another advantage: cheaper RM48Us can be used to drain Ukraine’s interceptor stocks, while more capable missiles such as Iskanders, KN-23s and Zircons are preserved for later. In effect, Moscow is turning old training missiles into expendable weapons for overwhelming Ukrainian air defenses.

🚨 Russia has found a cheaper alternative to Iskanders — and is already using it extensively against Ukraine Reuters reports that Moscow has begun mass-deploying RM48U missiles, originally designed as training targets for air-defense crews. They are now being launched from S-400 systems against ground targets. And the scale is already significant: in July and early August, RM48Us accounted for more than half of the 228 ballistic and hypersonic missiles fired at Ukraine. The problem is that they are far less accurate — Ukrainian investigators estimate an average deviation of around 300 meters. At the same time, the missile carries a roughly 115-kilogram fragmentation warhead that detonates in the air and spreads fragments over a wide area. According to investigators, one such missile struck a railway platform in Kvitneve near Kyiv on August 5. Eight people were killed. For Russia, there is another advantage: cheaper RM48Us can be used to drain Ukraine’s interceptor stocks, while more capable missiles such as Iskanders, KN-23s and Zircons are preserved for later. In effect, Moscow is turning old training missiles into expendable weapons for overwhelming Ukrainian air defenses.

NEXTA

54,497 просмотров • 4 дней назад

🇺🇸🇷🇺 THAAD vs S-400: TWO VERY DIFFERENT AIR DEFENSE PHILOSOPHIES THAAD and Russia’s S-400 are often compared as if they perform the same mission. Technically, that is misleading. THAAD is primarily a dedicated ballistic missile defense system. Its interceptor uses hit to kill technology, meaning it destroys the incoming warhead through direct kinetic impact rather than relying on a conventional explosive warhead. It is designed to engage ballistic missiles during their terminal phase, including both inside and just outside the atmosphere. Its AN/TPY-2 X band radar provides high resolution tracking and target discrimination, allowing the system to distinguish the actual reentry vehicle from other objects and continuously update the interceptor with precise tracking data. S-400 follows a different philosophy. It is a multi role long range air defense architecture designed to engage aircraft, cruise missiles and selected ballistic missile threats using different interceptor missiles. Its strength is not simply the advertised maximum range, but the combination of multiple radars, command and control, mobile launchers and different missile types. This creates a major technical distinction: THAAD = specialized upper tier ballistic missile defense S-400 = broader long range integrated air defense THAAD's interceptor is optimized for the difficult terminal ballistic missile problem, where the target may be travelling at extremely high velocity and descending rapidly toward the defended area. S-400's architecture is optimized for flexibility, allowing commanders to select different interceptors depending on target type, altitude and engagement geometry. The real question therefore isn't "Which system has the longer range?" It is: Which system is better suited to the threat? Against ballistic missile warheads, THAAD's architecture is specifically optimized for the mission. Against a mixed package of aircraft, cruise missiles and other aerial targets, S-400 offers a much broader engagement envelope. And in a modern war, neither system is supposed to operate alone. The real advantage comes from layered defense, where long range sensors, command networks, THAAD, Patriot or other systems work together. Range is only one number. Radar architecture, target discrimination, interceptor kinematics, engagement altitude, reaction time, saturation capacity and network integration ultimately determine whether an air defense system survives a real missile raid.

🇺🇸🇷🇺 THAAD vs S-400: TWO VERY DIFFERENT AIR DEFENSE PHILOSOPHIES THAAD and Russia’s S-400 are often compared as if they perform the same mission. Technically, that is misleading. THAAD is primarily a dedicated ballistic missile defense system. Its interceptor uses hit to kill technology, meaning it destroys the incoming warhead through direct kinetic impact rather than relying on a conventional explosive warhead. It is designed to engage ballistic missiles during their terminal phase, including both inside and just outside the atmosphere. Its AN/TPY-2 X band radar provides high resolution tracking and target discrimination, allowing the system to distinguish the actual reentry vehicle from other objects and continuously update the interceptor with precise tracking data. S-400 follows a different philosophy. It is a multi role long range air defense architecture designed to engage aircraft, cruise missiles and selected ballistic missile threats using different interceptor missiles. Its strength is not simply the advertised maximum range, but the combination of multiple radars, command and control, mobile launchers and different missile types. This creates a major technical distinction: THAAD = specialized upper tier ballistic missile defense S-400 = broader long range integrated air defense THAAD's interceptor is optimized for the difficult terminal ballistic missile problem, where the target may be travelling at extremely high velocity and descending rapidly toward the defended area. S-400's architecture is optimized for flexibility, allowing commanders to select different interceptors depending on target type, altitude and engagement geometry. The real question therefore isn't "Which system has the longer range?" It is: Which system is better suited to the threat? Against ballistic missile warheads, THAAD's architecture is specifically optimized for the mission. Against a mixed package of aircraft, cruise missiles and other aerial targets, S-400 offers a much broader engagement envelope. And in a modern war, neither system is supposed to operate alone. The real advantage comes from layered defense, where long range sensors, command networks, THAAD, Patriot or other systems work together. Range is only one number. Radar architecture, target discrimination, interceptor kinematics, engagement altitude, reaction time, saturation capacity and network integration ultimately determine whether an air defense system survives a real missile raid.

Defense Intelligence

12,393 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

"Rods from God" is the informal name for Project Thor, a concept for a space-based kinetic weapon. Instead of using explosives or nukes, you put heavy, ultra-dense tungsten rods into orbit. When you want to hit a target on Earth, you de-orbit a rod and let gravity do the work. By the time it slams into the ground at Mach 10, the kinetic energy creates an impact as powerful as a tactical nuclear warhead—crushing deep subterranean bunkers with zero radioactive fallout. This isn't a new idea either. The history goes back to the late 1950s during the Cold War, when researchers at the RAND Corporation and Boeing first calculated the physics of orbital kinetic impacts. Science fiction writer Jerry Pournelle actually helped formalize "Project Thor" while working at Boeing, pitching it as a way to strike earthbound targets from space without relying on nuclear warheads. The Air Force continued evaluating the concept over the decades, even releasing a formal study on it in 2003, meaning the foundational architecture has been sitting in defense contractor vaults for well over half a century. The X-37B is an uncrewed, reusable military spaceplane that looks like a miniature Space Shuttle. It gets launched on a rocket, stays in orbit on classified missions for years at a time executing secret payload operations, and then lands on a runway autonomously. The theory is that platforms like this could have been used to quietly deliver and park kinetic weapons in orbit under the cover of dark budget programs. Mainstream skeptics write this off immediately. Their argument comes down to numbers: the standard spec for a Rod from God calls for a solid 20-foot tungsten pole weighing 12 tons, while the X-37B's internal payload bay is only 7 feet long and carries roughly 1,000 pounds. Based on those standard specs, critics claim it is physically impossible for the spaceplane to carry those weapons, writing the whole thing off as a theoretical dead end. That rejection relies on a lazy assumption: that the weapon has to be a single, monolithic stick of metal launched all at once. In reality, modular engineering completely flips that argument. Tungsten rods can easily be built as threaded, interlocking segments or stacked modular slugs that fit inside smaller payload bays and get assembled or aligned in space. Spreading modular components across multiple long-duration X-37B missions completely bypasses those size and weight limits, meaning the capability could easily exist regardless of what official narratives claim.

"Rods from God" is the informal name for Project Thor, a concept for a space-based kinetic weapon. Instead of using explosives or nukes, you put heavy, ultra-dense tungsten rods into orbit. When you want to hit a target on Earth, you de-orbit a rod and let gravity do the work. By the time it slams into the ground at Mach 10, the kinetic energy creates an impact as powerful as a tactical nuclear warhead—crushing deep subterranean bunkers with zero radioactive fallout. This isn't a new idea either. The history goes back to the late 1950s during the Cold War, when researchers at the RAND Corporation and Boeing first calculated the physics of orbital kinetic impacts. Science fiction writer Jerry Pournelle actually helped formalize "Project Thor" while working at Boeing, pitching it as a way to strike earthbound targets from space without relying on nuclear warheads. The Air Force continued evaluating the concept over the decades, even releasing a formal study on it in 2003, meaning the foundational architecture has been sitting in defense contractor vaults for well over half a century. The X-37B is an uncrewed, reusable military spaceplane that looks like a miniature Space Shuttle. It gets launched on a rocket, stays in orbit on classified missions for years at a time executing secret payload operations, and then lands on a runway autonomously. The theory is that platforms like this could have been used to quietly deliver and park kinetic weapons in orbit under the cover of dark budget programs. Mainstream skeptics write this off immediately. Their argument comes down to numbers: the standard spec for a Rod from God calls for a solid 20-foot tungsten pole weighing 12 tons, while the X-37B's internal payload bay is only 7 feet long and carries roughly 1,000 pounds. Based on those standard specs, critics claim it is physically impossible for the spaceplane to carry those weapons, writing the whole thing off as a theoretical dead end. That rejection relies on a lazy assumption: that the weapon has to be a single, monolithic stick of metal launched all at once. In reality, modular engineering completely flips that argument. Tungsten rods can easily be built as threaded, interlocking segments or stacked modular slugs that fit inside smaller payload bays and get assembled or aligned in space. Spreading modular components across multiple long-duration X-37B missions completely bypasses those size and weight limits, meaning the capability could easily exist regardless of what official narratives claim.

Dutch1777

166,720 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

LARGE NUMBERS OF Americans harshly criticized China’s re-usable booster rocket on social media, saying that the US had already achieved similar feats. They are missing the point. The world took such an interest in China’s achievement not because they claimed to be first--they did not--but because a nation from a poor part of the world successfully did what the world’s wealthiest country had done. Remember, China had the same GDP as India as recently as 1986. It’s not specific achievements, but the speed and velocity of China’s rise that is terrifying the US political-media establishment. And that’s why the US is heavily arming Japan, Taiwan, Australia and a dozen other places to stand by to attack China. . COMPARE PROGRESS The missing context of the reports is this: The US, European nations, and New Zealand are ALL actively working on creating reusable rockets of one kind or another. For an Asian nation to zoom to second place is notable. What the Chinese did this week was to fire a rocket into space and successfully land an orbital booster at sea, for reuse. In achieving this, it can be said that China’s Long March 10B rocket is following in the footsteps of the US. Other rockets which have done this are Falcon 9 in 2015 (by SpaceX, helmed by Elon Musk) and New Glenn in 2025 (by Blue Origin, a Jeff Bezos project). . AHEAD OF EUROPE Yet the Chinese did not demonstrate a copy of those systems, but a unique set-up of their own, with the rocket guided down into a floating landing pad while firing retro-boosters. By achieving this feat, the Chinese have overtaken other rich countries, confirming the velocity of China’s rise. Europe’s Ariane Group has been working with the European Space Agency on a reusable rocket stage called Themis. A New Zealand-US project called Rocket Lab has fired boosters, and then parachuted them into the ocean, so parts can be reused on later launches. China has apparently overtaken both projects. . NEXT: SCI-FI ROCKETS It is worth noting that the Chinese are testing multiple systems—so they are also deploying systems where a rocket flies straight up and then returns to earth, intact, to land upright, in the style which has been seen for a half a century in sci-fi movies. Active Chinese companies in this area include LandSpace, Space Epoch, Deep Blue Aerospace and Galactic Energy. So China can say to its American critics: “Yes, you were first. But we’re happy to be making remarkable progress in this area.” Yet the elite in the US will think differently. Their attitude is more likely to be something like this: “Hey, we may be number one now, but at the rate they are going, we’re gonna be eating their dust. How can we Tonya them?” .

Sensitive content

LARGE NUMBERS OF Americans harshly criticized China’s re-usable booster rocket on social media, saying that the US had already achieved similar feats. They are missing the point. The world took such an interest in China’s achievement not because they claimed to be first--they did not--but because a nation from a poor part of the world successfully did what the world’s wealthiest country had done. Remember, China had the same GDP as India as recently as 1986. It’s not specific achievements, but the speed and velocity of China’s rise that is terrifying the US political-media establishment. And that’s why the US is heavily arming Japan, Taiwan, Australia and a dozen other places to stand by to attack China. . COMPARE PROGRESS The missing context of the reports is this: The US, European nations, and New Zealand are ALL actively working on creating reusable rockets of one kind or another. For an Asian nation to zoom to second place is notable. What the Chinese did this week was to fire a rocket into space and successfully land an orbital booster at sea, for reuse. In achieving this, it can be said that China’s Long March 10B rocket is following in the footsteps of the US. Other rockets which have done this are Falcon 9 in 2015 (by SpaceX, helmed by Elon Musk) and New Glenn in 2025 (by Blue Origin, a Jeff Bezos project). . AHEAD OF EUROPE Yet the Chinese did not demonstrate a copy of those systems, but a unique set-up of their own, with the rocket guided down into a floating landing pad while firing retro-boosters. By achieving this feat, the Chinese have overtaken other rich countries, confirming the velocity of China’s rise. Europe’s Ariane Group has been working with the European Space Agency on a reusable rocket stage called Themis. A New Zealand-US project called Rocket Lab has fired boosters, and then parachuted them into the ocean, so parts can be reused on later launches. China has apparently overtaken both projects. . NEXT: SCI-FI ROCKETS It is worth noting that the Chinese are testing multiple systems—so they are also deploying systems where a rocket flies straight up and then returns to earth, intact, to land upright, in the style which has been seen for a half a century in sci-fi movies. Active Chinese companies in this area include LandSpace, Space Epoch, Deep Blue Aerospace and Galactic Energy. So China can say to its American critics: “Yes, you were first. But we’re happy to be making remarkable progress in this area.” Yet the elite in the US will think differently. Their attitude is more likely to be something like this: “Hey, we may be number one now, but at the rate they are going, we’re gonna be eating their dust. How can we Tonya them?” .

Nury Vittachi

74,638 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Here's a story for you about how the news industry works. Earlier tonight, the group that invaded Israel, massacred 1000+ people, burned families to death in their homes, took hostages back to Gaza, and recorded it all with GoPros – this group announced that Israel bombed a hospital in Gaza, killing hundreds. Then, instead of waiting for more information from the Israeli side, the editors of the world's most important media outlets said to themselves: "This is enough for us. Let's run with it." Headlines screamed that Israel bombed a hospital. Push notifications were sent to MILLIONS of people. CNN push: "Hundreds of people may have been killed in an Israeli strike on a Gaza City hospital, according to the Palestinian health ministry" BBC push: "Hundreds feared dead or injured in Israeli air strike on hospital in Gaza, Palestinian officials say" NYT push: "At least 500 people were killed by an Israeli airstrike at a Gaza hospital, the Palestinian Health Ministry said" Do you see what they did there? They put the dramatic news in the beginning of the sentence and then they cited the source at the end so that the assertion is technically true. The Palestinian Health Ministry DID say that. The thing is, the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza is a Hamas institution. What do you call people who amplify Hamas propaganda not just as news, but as the top news story in the world? There is no way that a professional military such as the Israel Defense Forces can give an instant answer about a catastrophe in enemy territory during a war. It took around two or three hours for the IDF to share the results of its initial investigation – that the explosion at the hospital was a due to a rocket launched by Islamic Jihad that malfunctioned and crashed back into Gaza. More evidence is coming out as I write this. The sad fact is that it appears that hundreds of Palestinians are dead at a hospital because terrorists in Gaza tried to fire rockets at Israelis and ended up hitting their own people. It's unbearably stupid and tragic. None of this is new, unfortunately. Journalists in the Middle East know – they absolutely know – that a significant percentage of Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s rockets misfire and crash into residential areas of Gaza. I've attached a famous example. This video is from May 2022. It shows a live broadcast of a rocket being launched from a residential area of Gaza. The rocket malfunctions, turns sideways, and crashes into the city. The overexcited broadcaster tries to pretend that nothing unusual happened and asks the camera man to turn away. The video went viral at the time. There are other known instances where this happened. These rockets are designed to kill people. Don't act surprised when they do. I say all of this to remind you to treat breaking news from Gaza with caution, even if it's unpopular to do so.

Here's a story for you about how the news industry works. Earlier tonight, the group that invaded Israel, massacred 1000+ people, burned families to death in their homes, took hostages back to Gaza, and recorded it all with GoPros – this group announced that Israel bombed a hospital in Gaza, killing hundreds. Then, instead of waiting for more information from the Israeli side, the editors of the world's most important media outlets said to themselves: "This is enough for us. Let's run with it." Headlines screamed that Israel bombed a hospital. Push notifications were sent to MILLIONS of people. CNN push: "Hundreds of people may have been killed in an Israeli strike on a Gaza City hospital, according to the Palestinian health ministry" BBC push: "Hundreds feared dead or injured in Israeli air strike on hospital in Gaza, Palestinian officials say" NYT push: "At least 500 people were killed by an Israeli airstrike at a Gaza hospital, the Palestinian Health Ministry said" Do you see what they did there? They put the dramatic news in the beginning of the sentence and then they cited the source at the end so that the assertion is technically true. The Palestinian Health Ministry DID say that. The thing is, the Palestinian Health Ministry in Gaza is a Hamas institution. What do you call people who amplify Hamas propaganda not just as news, but as the top news story in the world? There is no way that a professional military such as the Israel Defense Forces can give an instant answer about a catastrophe in enemy territory during a war. It took around two or three hours for the IDF to share the results of its initial investigation – that the explosion at the hospital was a due to a rocket launched by Islamic Jihad that malfunctioned and crashed back into Gaza. More evidence is coming out as I write this. The sad fact is that it appears that hundreds of Palestinians are dead at a hospital because terrorists in Gaza tried to fire rockets at Israelis and ended up hitting their own people. It's unbearably stupid and tragic. None of this is new, unfortunately. Journalists in the Middle East know – they absolutely know – that a significant percentage of Hamas and Islamic Jihad’s rockets misfire and crash into residential areas of Gaza. I've attached a famous example. This video is from May 2022. It shows a live broadcast of a rocket being launched from a residential area of Gaza. The rocket malfunctions, turns sideways, and crashes into the city. The overexcited broadcaster tries to pretend that nothing unusual happened and asks the camera man to turn away. The video went viral at the time. There are other known instances where this happened. These rockets are designed to kill people. Don't act surprised when they do. I say all of this to remind you to treat breaking news from Gaza with caution, even if it's unpopular to do so.

Daniel Rubenstein

506,111 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Yesterday, Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces set a record for the range of a drone strike on the enemy’s critical infrastructure — more than 3,300 km. When Commander Magyar offers NATO countries the “borscht recipe” and says that russia poses a threat to Europe and that NATO countries are not ready for drone war, many people do not take it seriously. Look at the numbers. - There are drones capable of covering 3,000 km and striking targets. From russia’s Kaliningrad Oblast, this distance covers all of Europe, including Iceland. - russia is scaling up and constantly increasing drone production. Confirmed drones launched against Ukraine per day: 948 on March 24. 892 on May 13. Even an “ordinary” night means around 100 attack drones. - Imagine daily mass raids with the modest figure of 200 drones per day against critical infrastructure facilities. Will the stockpiles of “classic” expensive air defense missiles be enough for a prolonged campaign against cheap drones flying in swarms? - No single “magic” air defense system or best drone can stop a mass raid. It is necessary to build an ecosystem of layered defense: early detection, electronic warfare, mobile fire groups, interceptor drones, gun-based air defense, and expensive missiles only for the most dangerous targets. Ukraine pays a bloody price every day for having invented this recipe. If NATO countries think they have plenty of time, they are mistaken. Europe must rapidly turn Ukraine’s lessons into doctrine, procurement, training, and force structure — including dedicated Unmanned Systems Forces in every country, integrated with air defense and conventional forces. Partnership with Ukraine is not only help for an ally that is holding back russia. It is the fastest way for Europe to prepare its own defense against a threat that already has range, scale, and pace.

Yesterday, Ukraine’s Special Operations Forces set a record for the range of a drone strike on the enemy’s critical infrastructure — more than 3,300 km. When Commander Magyar offers NATO countries the “borscht recipe” and says that russia poses a threat to Europe and that NATO countries are not ready for drone war, many people do not take it seriously. Look at the numbers. - There are drones capable of covering 3,000 km and striking targets. From russia’s Kaliningrad Oblast, this distance covers all of Europe, including Iceland. - russia is scaling up and constantly increasing drone production. Confirmed drones launched against Ukraine per day: 948 on March 24. 892 on May 13. Even an “ordinary” night means around 100 attack drones. - Imagine daily mass raids with the modest figure of 200 drones per day against critical infrastructure facilities. Will the stockpiles of “classic” expensive air defense missiles be enough for a prolonged campaign against cheap drones flying in swarms? - No single “magic” air defense system or best drone can stop a mass raid. It is necessary to build an ecosystem of layered defense: early detection, electronic warfare, mobile fire groups, interceptor drones, gun-based air defense, and expensive missiles only for the most dangerous targets. Ukraine pays a bloody price every day for having invented this recipe. If NATO countries think they have plenty of time, they are mistaken. Europe must rapidly turn Ukraine’s lessons into doctrine, procurement, training, and force structure — including dedicated Unmanned Systems Forces in every country, integrated with air defense and conventional forces. Partnership with Ukraine is not only help for an ally that is holding back russia. It is the fastest way for Europe to prepare its own defense against a threat that already has range, scale, and pace.

414 Magyar's Birds

21,831 просмотров • 12 дней назад

BBC and CNN are in panic mode after one of their main sources in Gaza was caught by Israeli soldiers. As you can see in this short video, during the interrogation of Islamic Jihad spokesperson Tariq Salami by Israeli security forces, he explained that the media in the west approved Hamas' terms regarding international coverage of the conflict. According to these terms when Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists fire rockets into Israel but end up hitting civilian targets inside Gaza like hospitals, civilian buildings or schools, it’s Israel’s fault and because Israel’s existence provokes the Palestinians resistance, rocket fire and terror attacks. Further to that, when Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists use the civilian population in Gaza as human shields by hiding inside hospitals or firing rockets from schools, Israel has no right to target the terrorists or rocket launchers because it is a war crime to target schools or hospitals. In order to illustrate the mutual relations between Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the international media, Tariq admitted that the explosion in Gaza’s Al-Ma'mdani Hospital at the beginning of the war was caused by an Islamic Jihad rocket that didn’t cross the border into Israel. Despite the fact that the rocket was fired by the Palestinians the media and Hamas agreed to knowingly blame Israel for the war crime. Because it was Israel’s existence that provoked the rocket firing by Gazans. Tariq also described how Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists use the Shifa Hospital compound and even its medical equipment in order to shield Palestinian terrorists under international laws and prevent Israel’s airstrikes. According to him, when Hamas uses ambulances to transport its terrorists into and out of the Headquarters which are located within Gaza’s hospitals, Israel has no right to target the ambulances or hospitals because it will be reported as a war crime by the Hamas Ministry of Health and international media.

BBC and CNN are in panic mode after one of their main sources in Gaza was caught by Israeli soldiers. As you can see in this short video, during the interrogation of Islamic Jihad spokesperson Tariq Salami by Israeli security forces, he explained that the media in the west approved Hamas' terms regarding international coverage of the conflict. According to these terms when Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists fire rockets into Israel but end up hitting civilian targets inside Gaza like hospitals, civilian buildings or schools, it’s Israel’s fault and because Israel’s existence provokes the Palestinians resistance, rocket fire and terror attacks. Further to that, when Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists use the civilian population in Gaza as human shields by hiding inside hospitals or firing rockets from schools, Israel has no right to target the terrorists or rocket launchers because it is a war crime to target schools or hospitals. In order to illustrate the mutual relations between Hamas, the Islamic Jihad and the international media, Tariq admitted that the explosion in Gaza’s Al-Ma'mdani Hospital at the beginning of the war was caused by an Islamic Jihad rocket that didn’t cross the border into Israel. Despite the fact that the rocket was fired by the Palestinians the media and Hamas agreed to knowingly blame Israel for the war crime. Because it was Israel’s existence that provoked the rocket firing by Gazans. Tariq also described how Hamas and Islamic Jihad terrorists use the Shifa Hospital compound and even its medical equipment in order to shield Palestinian terrorists under international laws and prevent Israel’s airstrikes. According to him, when Hamas uses ambulances to transport its terrorists into and out of the Headquarters which are located within Gaza’s hospitals, Israel has no right to target the ambulances or hospitals because it will be reported as a war crime by the Hamas Ministry of Health and international media.

Liza Rosen

1,052,968 просмотров • 1 год назад

❗️❗️❗️🇺🇦🇷🇺The Ukrainian defense tech cluster Brave 1 has officially unleashed the Firefly guided munition for heavy bomber drones, a massive technological breakthrough that will systematically terrorize Russian occupiers hiding in frontline positions. This lethal innovation is already fully prepared for serial production, signaling an immediate, high-volume influx of precision-guided firepower directly to the front lines. The Firefly can be deployed from a maximum altitude of 800 meters, completely eliminating the dangerous requirement for bomber drones to descend to low altitudes where they are vulnerable to small arms fire. Featuring an advanced automatic guidance system that independently calculates and adjusts the flight trajectory, the Firefly transforms standard drone drops into unstoppable, high-precision strikes. When released from its maximum altitude, the munition generates devastating kinetic energy and explosive force, making it highly effective at obliterating fortified Russian positions, bunker complexes, and wooden field fortifications. This technological leap strikes a crippling blow to the Kremlin's dug-in forces and completely rewrites the rules of trench warfare. While Russian soldiers rely on rudimentary trenches and desperate defenses, Ukraine is deploying mass-produced, AI-assisted precision weaponry that can liquidate enemy positions from the safety of the upper skies. By removing drones from the reach of infantry fire while drastically increasing their destructive accuracy, Brave 1 has delivered a weapon system that will turn every Russian fortification into a inescapable trap, ensuring that the invading forces are systematically hunted and neutralized with absolute impunity.

❗️❗️❗️🇺🇦🇷🇺The Ukrainian defense tech cluster Brave 1 has officially unleashed the Firefly guided munition for heavy bomber drones, a massive technological breakthrough that will systematically terrorize Russian occupiers hiding in frontline positions. This lethal innovation is already fully prepared for serial production, signaling an immediate, high-volume influx of precision-guided firepower directly to the front lines. The Firefly can be deployed from a maximum altitude of 800 meters, completely eliminating the dangerous requirement for bomber drones to descend to low altitudes where they are vulnerable to small arms fire. Featuring an advanced automatic guidance system that independently calculates and adjusts the flight trajectory, the Firefly transforms standard drone drops into unstoppable, high-precision strikes. When released from its maximum altitude, the munition generates devastating kinetic energy and explosive force, making it highly effective at obliterating fortified Russian positions, bunker complexes, and wooden field fortifications. This technological leap strikes a crippling blow to the Kremlin's dug-in forces and completely rewrites the rules of trench warfare. While Russian soldiers rely on rudimentary trenches and desperate defenses, Ukraine is deploying mass-produced, AI-assisted precision weaponry that can liquidate enemy positions from the safety of the upper skies. By removing drones from the reach of infantry fire while drastically increasing their destructive accuracy, Brave 1 has delivered a weapon system that will turn every Russian fortification into a inescapable trap, ensuring that the invading forces are systematically hunted and neutralized with absolute impunity.

NSTRIKE

44,285 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Elon Musk admitted he is not sure this one is possible. Musk: “This absorbs more of my mental energy than probably any other single thing. But it is so preposterously difficult that there are times where I wonder whether we can actually do this.” He does not talk like this. Mars gets a date. Robotaxis get a date. This gets a maybe. Stern: “What is so hard about it for just a normal person to understand?” His answer comes down to a single number. Musk: “In order to make a rocket fully reusable, you’ve got to basically create a rocket that can do about 4%, if not more than 4%, of its lift-off mass to orbit, which hasn’t happened before.” Four percent. Everything else standing on that pad is fuel, tank, and engine. The landing gear, the heat shield, the extra structure that survives reentry, all of it comes out of that same four. None of it can be left behind. The vehicle has to come home. Musk: “So that means you have to have basically A-pluses across the board: incredibly efficient engines, incredibly efficient structure.” Across the board is what makes this brutal. Most engineering lets you buy a weakness in one place with strength somewhere else. The margin here is thin enough that one component landing at merely excellent drops the whole vehicle below the line. Nothing carries anything. Musk: “But if full and rapid reusability can be achieved, it reduces the cost of access to orbit by a factor of 100 or more.” A hundred times cheaper turns nearly every question about space from whether into when. Telescopes, stations, factories, missions that never made it past a spreadsheet. Musk: “So we’ve got to get rockets to the point where we simply refuel the rocket and we don’t throw it away.” Every other vehicle humans build already works that way. Space is the one place we still build the machine, use it once, and let it fall into the ocean. Musk: “It’s the difference between humanity being a single-planet species and a multi-planet species. It’s really that big of a deal.” Now put his doubt in context. Landing an orbital booster upright was considered impossible by most of the industry. He spent years being told so while boosters exploded on barges. Those landings became routine, then boring, then unwatched. Then they stopped using legs. A twenty story booster came back from the edge of space, slowed itself, and hovered next to the tower it launched from. Two arms closed around it and took its weight in midair. Nothing touched the ground. That was a headline for about a day. He has been on this side of impossible before, more than once. Doubt from him measures how hard the thing is at the start rather than how it ends. Most people never attempt anything where failure is genuinely on the table. He found the hardest problem available and made it the center of his life. That is what real ambition looks like from the inside. Not certainty. A number nobody has ever hit, and showing up to it every morning until it falls.

Elon Musk admitted he is not sure this one is possible. Musk: “This absorbs more of my mental energy than probably any other single thing. But it is so preposterously difficult that there are times where I wonder whether we can actually do this.” He does not talk like this. Mars gets a date. Robotaxis get a date. This gets a maybe. Stern: “What is so hard about it for just a normal person to understand?” His answer comes down to a single number. Musk: “In order to make a rocket fully reusable, you’ve got to basically create a rocket that can do about 4%, if not more than 4%, of its lift-off mass to orbit, which hasn’t happened before.” Four percent. Everything else standing on that pad is fuel, tank, and engine. The landing gear, the heat shield, the extra structure that survives reentry, all of it comes out of that same four. None of it can be left behind. The vehicle has to come home. Musk: “So that means you have to have basically A-pluses across the board: incredibly efficient engines, incredibly efficient structure.” Across the board is what makes this brutal. Most engineering lets you buy a weakness in one place with strength somewhere else. The margin here is thin enough that one component landing at merely excellent drops the whole vehicle below the line. Nothing carries anything. Musk: “But if full and rapid reusability can be achieved, it reduces the cost of access to orbit by a factor of 100 or more.” A hundred times cheaper turns nearly every question about space from whether into when. Telescopes, stations, factories, missions that never made it past a spreadsheet. Musk: “So we’ve got to get rockets to the point where we simply refuel the rocket and we don’t throw it away.” Every other vehicle humans build already works that way. Space is the one place we still build the machine, use it once, and let it fall into the ocean. Musk: “It’s the difference between humanity being a single-planet species and a multi-planet species. It’s really that big of a deal.” Now put his doubt in context. Landing an orbital booster upright was considered impossible by most of the industry. He spent years being told so while boosters exploded on barges. Those landings became routine, then boring, then unwatched. Then they stopped using legs. A twenty story booster came back from the edge of space, slowed itself, and hovered next to the tower it launched from. Two arms closed around it and took its weight in midair. Nothing touched the ground. That was a headline for about a day. He has been on this side of impossible before, more than once. Doubt from him measures how hard the thing is at the start rather than how it ends. Most people never attempt anything where failure is genuinely on the table. He found the hardest problem available and made it the center of his life. That is what real ambition looks like from the inside. Not certainty. A number nobody has ever hit, and showing up to it every morning until it falls.

Dustin

6,836,431 просмотров • 1 месяц назад