Yea I was thinking of that video when I started watching this. He .. Veratasium didn't plan that experiment all that well though. Something like a blimp with a hanger and a way to stabilize the weight, plus some fins and .. actually trying out small scale versions of the design first .. would have gone a long way.
We do have way better guidance systems than back in the 70s. In theory we should be able to build something with fins and guidance that could withstand a harsh re-entry .. at least long enough to line itself up with a target. But testing would be difficult. Nuclear weapons you can bury in the middle of the desert. Our oceans are filled with shipping lanes. If you chose a big enough testing area and you're off by 1 mile, you're probably okay. If you're off by 100 miles, you could have a lot to cover up or explain.
As other comments have mentioned, it's cool, but it's impractical and way too expensive/difficult to covertly develop compare to all the traditional bombs and drones we now have.
His experiment and video are garbage on many levels. He says it doesn't work... and offers zero proof that it doesn't. Discusses kinetic energy being explosive at hypersonic speeds, then drops things a few hundred feet up... not scaleable... not ever going to be exploding at low speed. Did not go supersonic let alone hypersonic. WTF. Shows no imagination to address issues he raises. (all look very over-come-able to me) Dropped steel rather than tungsten. Swung around the payload under that chopper like clowns. His expert lies/fucks up and says they aren't prohibited under same UN resolution as nukes in space from 1963.
(post is archived)