Talk:Cruise missile

Jet??

Do cruise missiles use jets or do they use rockets? You'd be hard pressed to get a functioning jet engine on a cruise missile, much less want to spare the expen se of developing and equipping them with one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.153.180.87 (talk) 10:08, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

However, jets are almost always the choice. This is because cruise missiles are fairly big, modern turbojets are very small, and jets give increased range per weight compared to rockets. Rockets are usually reserved for short or very high performance missiles, like SAMs and AAMs, or missiles that exit the atmosphere or fly where there is to little oxygen to support a jet, like an ICBM. --71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:01, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

DIY

This section is pretty useless. The only way this guy can prove he's credible is by having a flight test, so I say delete this section until then. Wsacul 17:15, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

CMs vs unmanned aircraft

Good article, but there is an apparent problem with definition:

Cruise missiles are, in essence, unmanned aircraft.

Japanese kamikaze aircraft could be viewed as manned cruise missiles.

Logically, doesn’t this just mean that kamikaze aircraft are manned aircraft?
--Smallbone10

Heh, good point. I guess the contributor based his/her definition on an implicit assumption of a cruise missile being a targeted airborne explosive device. --Wernher 22:36, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I made an edit that I think should help clean this up. Japan, in an effort to gain a tactical advantage against the allied forces resorted to kamikaze aircraft, another early predecessor to the super-accurate cruise missiles of today. Hope it helps. - Chairboy 22:57, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

I think there should be additional clairfication. The IJN used many types of aircraft for kamikaze missions that were for other purposes, such as the Zero fighter and various torpedo bombers. However, there was one aircraft that they designed specifically designed for kamikaze attacks, the Ohka, which was a rocket-propelled and, later, jet-propelled manned flying bomb. The tactics used and developed for the Ohka even mirror modern cruise missiles, such as the Betty bomber-carried type and plans for submarine and carrier-based launchers. --YoungFreud 20:47, 14 January 2006 (UTC)

I would like to see a list of nations that currently possess cruise missile technology. Also it would be historically interesting to know when and how each nation developed the technology. I would think a concise table would serve.

Stealth CMs

Does anyone know anything about the the newer "stealth" cruise missiles? Something about those would be great. --Commking 5 Aug 2005

See AGM 129 for a stealth cruise missile, though most recently developed cruise missiles are stealthy. --71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:04, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

"CRUSE" an acronym?

I remember that back in the late 60s "cruise" was spelled "cruse" and it was an acronym. Now has my ageing brain fabricated a recollection of something that never was? Or is "cruse" indeed an acronym for something, and if so what? A quick Google on the internet shows that "cruse" is an alternate spelling, but no more. Jm546 02:55, 27 September 2005 (UTC)

The only thing I could find was this: "ALCM - Air Launch Cruse Missile". I found it at [1] Fresheneesz 23:52, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Babur

Should not the large part on this page about Pakistan's Babur cruise missile better be moved to Babur missile? - Andre Engels 13:11, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

Done --Deepak|वार्ता 21:15, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

The Babur Missile is the Chinese developed export version of the YJ-62 (C-602) anti-ship cruise missile and is supposed to have a range of 280km to adhere to the MTCR guidelines. http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/navalmissile/yj623.asp

Chanakyathegreat 05:39, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Models and specifications

What models of cruise missiles are there? What fuel do they use? What different explosives are usually used? These would be useful things to have on this page. Fresheneesz 00:00, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, jeez, there are tons of them. See the link for a list of missiles at the bottom of the page, though it doesn't specify type of missile in that list. That information is really article specific, and you will need to find most of that yourself. Sorry. --71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:10, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Nothing much about Soviet Cruise Missile Program??

There is too less info about Soviet Cruise Missiles. I saw a Tomahawk pictures, ok its justified as it is best cruise missile. I think we should add atleast one Point abt Soviet Cruise Missile program. Cruise Missiles should characterized by 1. warheads-Nuclear/Conventional, Already done 2. Targets-Land Attack/Anti-Ship 3. Launch Platforms- Ship, Submarine, Aircraft and Land.

we can also write about Supersonic missiles.

Air-to-air cruise missiles

The paragraph about China's and Taiwan's cruise missiles mentioned air-to-air cruise missiles. I am deleting it unless someone can give an example of an air-to-air cruise missile. Profhobby 03:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Wouldn't an air to air cruise missile really just be an air to air missile?--71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:11, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Disputed

The Tomahawk and ALCM were the product of a joint USN and USAF acquisition program. The Tomahawk was NOT originally a competing design for the USAF.

There was a competition between the Tomahawk air-launched version and the Boeing ALCM, won by Boeing. 84.9.44.47 13:08, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but, Tomahawk was originally designed for the U.S. Navy as the BGM-109. Later, a modified version of the Tomahawk, the AGM-109, was competed against the AGM-86 for the USAF contract. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Oarsman (talk • contribs) 18:57, 3 February 2007 (UTC).

POV

The reference to USA "assasination" is clearly not NPOV.

V-1

"However, the V-1 did not have the level of accuracy of a modern tactical cruise missile." - Isn't this a bit stating the obvious?

Not if you are stupid-it could be helpful and informing.--71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:12, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Differentiating from UAVs

As the UAV project progresses in organizing the scope of articles on UAVs on Wikipedia, the project naturally bumps up against the fuzzy line seperating UAVs from cruise missles. For the purposes of keeping things organized, I've added a differentiating statment in the intro paragraph, and will be adding a similar one at UAV. Akradecki 00:18, 18 October 2006 (UTC)

Cruisers?

I'm inclined to think that the similarity in names between cruise missiles and cruisers is simply a coincidence. Cruise missiles are fired from land, from submarines, from aircraft, and from many different classes of ship. Cruisers have also been around longer than cruise missiles. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by SHCGRA Max (talk • contribs) 20:09, 12 December 2006 (UTC).

Cruisers are ships that are larger than destroyers and smaller than carriers, and cruise missiles are missiles that fly for the duration of their flight at a cruising speed and altitude.--71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:14, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Cruisers?

I'm inclined to think that the similarity in names between cruise missiles and cruisers is simply a coincidence. Cruise missiles are fired from land, from submarines, from aircraft, and from many different classes of ship. Cruisers have also been around longer than cruise missiles, and so are hardly speciallised to carry them, beyond the fact that they are among the largest ships currently in service and cruise missiles tend to be quite large. I've removed the offending sentence.--SHCGRA Max 20:14, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Babur .....small missile??

Babur is not a small cruise missile, it is roughly of the same size as the tomahawk........and what is the meaning of mentioning babur in large cruise missiles and again mentiong it in small missiles???--Mm11 09:08, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Well there are 2 version First 500km extended to 700 & the under development extended range missile. There is a missile that is being inducted and developed, reports state its range to be extended as far as 1500km then why not it be palced long range mssile section. while people have only vague ideas as to what sagarika or nirbay looks like, no video or international defence mag coverage, only indian news papers requoted elsewhere if another source. [Dm] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danishmmh (talk • contribs) 14:57, August 28, 2007 (UTC)

Brahmos-2 Hypersonic?!

The article states that the Brahmos-2 is hypersonic, but the Brahmos-2 article states that it flys between mach 2.5 and 2.8, while hypersonic is mach 5 or above. I am moving it down to supersonic.--71.242.29.26 (talk) 01:19, 30 November 2007 (UTC) Ah, I see my mistake. Brahmos-1 is mach 2.5-2.8, but Brahmos-2 directs you to the article for Brahmos-1. However, Brahmos-2 is not currently deployed, and wont be developed fully until 2013. I am changing that.