Remix.run Logo
▲ Aeolun 3 hours ago

Surely, knowing what the requirements are, we can build a cheaper Tomahawk missile these days, right?

SpaceX does the whole rocket launch thing for a fraction of the cost of the space shuttle. GPS is not that complicated any more and all the processing power required fits in a chip the size of a cellphone.

But those things cost 2.5M a piece?

▲memoriesofsmell 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

It's not just the cost of a GPS chip, it's the custom turbofan engine, the other guidance system components, active radar (in some units) and a guarantee that you can keep the unit in a tube for years and ensure that it's gonna work when you need it.

Plus low volume production volums and long times needed to manufacture it.

Could it be cheaper? Yeah I'm sure. But the US Gov is willing to pay for em so why drop the price?

▲cameldrv an hour ago | parent | next [-]

A tomahawk has a good INS, which is still expensive, and it has to be able to sit for years in a tube getting banged around with the waves, and launch on a moments notice.

That’s not to say that it should cost 2.5 million, but Ukraine doesn’t need storability and durability because I think they pretty much get driven from the factory to the launch site in a matter of days.

▲Animats 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

What seems to be happening is that Ukraine, which has a rocket industry from the Soviet era, is building such missiles, and, through a quiet deal with Taiwan, the electronics is provided.[1] This is not a secret but nobody talks about numbers.

[1] https://ipdefenseforum.com/2026/01/taiwan-looks-to-partner-w...

▲lostlogin 2 hours ago | parent [-]

Lucky they didn’t buy from the US. Some tech billionaire would have found a way to shut it down.

▲dylan604 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Would building something reliant on GPS be the right way to go? We've seen how easy it is to make it not very reliable. Musk has also shown that StarLink/Shield reliability are at the mercy of how he feels that day. Internal navigation still seems the most reliable for Tomahawks

▲bushbaba 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

They work in GPS contested environments.

▲hcurtiss an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There is no evidence Musk has tampered with either as it relates to Ukraine.

▲ang_cire 38 minutes ago | parent [-]

What? Perhaps you're behind on the news:

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/order-limit-starshield-...

That Starshield was remotely limited is not in dispute, only whether it was just Elon's doing, or at Trump's behest.

▲lostlogin 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

> Musk has also shown that StarLink/Shield reliability are at the mercy of how he feels that day.

There is a strong feeling on HN that because Trump is President, Musk holds zero responsibility.

This way the illuminati remain pure, when Trump eventually dies.

▲rstupek 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Anduril has several cheaper competitors to the tomahawk in the pipeline

▲GolfPopper 44 minutes ago | parent [-]

Will they work reliably if they're being fired at someone Thiel likes?

▲shagie 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

One of the difficulties that I've heard described is that the United States is the world's best producer of castle technology and has been for the last two centuries.

It has been the best, second to none for a long time. If you want the best castle, you buy it from the United States. Other countries may also sell castle technology... though as Norway noted it doesn't have to buy the best (and most expensive) from the United States, it just has to buy something better than Russia's. ( https://www.reuters.com/business/aerospace-defense/norway-se... )

... And then with the conflicts in Ukraine and to a lesser extent Iran the world has realized that while we've had the best castles for a long time, they're big, expensive, expensive to maintain (and its own hasn't been maintained well) and has the possibility of a switch on the drawbridge that will let it down when the US wants in...

While Ukraine and Russia have rolled up to the battlefield with a cheap cannon that is demonstrating that expensive castles aren't all they're cracked up to be.

---

Yes, you can probably build a cheaper Tomahawk missile today. However, can someone else build a cheaper drone that is even better for the battlefield theaters of the next several decades?

▲saturn8601 2 hours ago | parent [-]

>Yes, you can probably build a cheaper Tomahawk missile today. However, can someone else build a cheaper drone that is even better for the battlefield theaters of the next several decades?

I heard the US produced knockoffs of the Iranian ~$10-50k drone and produces it for ~$35K and its a modular and an upgradable platform (ie. not just a dumb copy). If you ask me, that ability to not only produce castles but also 'cheap cannons' as per your analogy when needed for cheaper and then improve on top of it is a pretty darn good skill.

[1]:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Low-cost_Uncrewed_Combat_Attac...

▲ericcumbee 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

That is happening, just slowly.

▲trial3 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

i am not a medical professional, but i urge you to get checked out for Engineer’s Disease