Military use of silver esp. in Tomahawk and other missiles

Welcome to the Precious Metals Bug Forums

Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.

Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!

15 kilogram = 482.26119853 ounces[troy]

@ $24/troy oz = $11,574.27 just in silver!
 
I'm not absolutely certain, but i think they use silver because of it's greater conductivity and because they operate at 400 Hz instead of 50 or 60 Hz. I know that our fighter planes and transport planes all use 400 cycles because I did a lot of work at NAS Key West at Hangar A-981 and in the AIMD [Aircraft Intermediate Maintenance Depot] and asked a basket-load of questions. I also got some massive cash when we recycled all the metals. We gutted out the entire facility of 35,000 s.f., taking it down to the block wall and roof trusses. The bus bars alone brought in around 50K.
 
PMBug said:
Old report from when we were bombing Libya:

http://ausbullion.blogspot.com/2011/03/1650kg-of-silver-fired-at-libya-to.html

Now you can impress your friends with trivia when the Tomahawks start raining down on Syria.
Click to expand...

I have a feeling it would be cheaper to make the entire Tomahawk out of silver, and maybe even gold. Anybody want to guess how much a Tomahawk weighs and how much it costs to blow up a tent? :nugget:

It would make more sense to shower them with paper dollars. Then at least their economy would collapse. :shrug:
 
Well all we should have to do is drop leaflet bombs declaring areas as gun free zones.
 
I was amused to learn that the RAF had various different warheads for their guided weapons.

I was particularly drawn to the concrete option, which apparently was very good for popping into the sunroof of a motor vehicle carrying 'high value' targets ....

Less collateral damage apparently and no one seemed in the least concerned about the delivery cost of a lump of concrete.
 


The contents of the package might be more affordable, the delivery charges still aren't going to be cheap.
 
For the record, I've been doing electronics since ~ 1961. Silver is indeed used for things like BNC connectors, plating on RF coils and the like. The reason is, even silver sulfide (the tarnish) is still conductive - not great, but better than open-circuit. It's a thin plating no matter what. It's only a little better (but heavier for the same conductivity) than copper. They don't use much, and now use gold on contact fingers etc, because it doesn't corrode in the first place.

At high frequencies (higher than 400hz, more like radio stuff) all electricity travels on the skin of the conductor - it's called the "skin effect" for that reason, and it's why NOTHING is made solid silver, period. It has lousy mechanical characteristics compared to other things for one. It's why ham radio operators who build their own transmitters sometimes use copper tubing - the hollow middle doesn't make any difference, and the hardcore ones then silver plate the outside.

I have a very strong suspicion that someone is mixing up milligrams (or micrograms) with kilograms here. I have for example a box you can barely lift of silver plated stuff - it probably has much less than one ounce of silver in it. And in any aircraft, weight is a big deal - they do a lot to minimize it so as to have more room for payload. I was privy to quite a bit of weapons design, and never heard of anything made of solid silver, which is what it'd take to get to those weights.

Concrete would make for a fine kinetic kill, actually, but they'd probably use something smaller and more expensive, like a carbide (like they do in armour piercing bullets). Thing is, for a kinetic kill, you have to hit the target - close doesn't really count, so that's a little suspicious too. Even the best stuff still has a CEP.

In a debate with a weapons designer I once had, who was proposing nuclear bunker busters in a circular argument, I suggested they simply orbit flying telephone poles of WC (tungsten carbide) and de-orbit them in sync over whatever they wanted to seismically crush, like pro blasters do with timed charges to make the pressure waves all add at some spot. It doesn't matter if some Iraqi is a couple hundred meters under concrete if you hit it right - the air side on the bottom spalls off concrete and destroys the contents just fine, from the shock wave. We see this also in space when something hits something else - junk flies off the far side, even at asteroid/moon sizes.

The circular argument went like this - we need it nuclear because a conventional dropped bomb won't penetrate far, and especially nukes, since they are fragile, so we need the power.

And if we do what Doug suggested, they'll think we've nuked them.

I rolled on the floor, literally - if we did what he was suggesting, we would have actually nuked them. Some argument!

Note, neither of us are in that biz now and haven't been for a long time.
 

I did a bit of searching and there doesn't seem to be any definitive source to confirm or correct the report. I did find a 7 page discussion on kitco that had some interesting comments:

 
11C1P said:
15 kilogram = 482.26119853 ounces[troy]

@ $24/troy oz = $11,574.27 just in silver!
Click to expand...

That's all in a single missile!


The debris will be in powder state, so collecting the silver remains will be almost impossible for anyone.

15 kg/Tomahawk? Well that means they're using silver in the military industry heavily.

Arms races, booming military equipment production will push the price of silver higher!

I see the pros of bombing Syria: higher silver prices. But I still vote for PEACE!
 
I'll defer to DC on this one. I am sure the missiles are built using the finest materials government money can buy, and since each type is sole-source acquisition, prices are simply negotiated, so whatever the vendor can justify in material and labor, he gets to mark up with his agreed upon general and administrative overhead [G&A in business parlance] plus a handsome and guaranteed profit. Time and materials, sole source procurement is the holy grail of government contracting for a reason, and that reason is money; exclusively. We are working with an 8-a contractor because she gets to negotiate no-competition work directly with the government. Under this program, we get a task order up to three million dollars, and we simply negotiate our price. With this woman and the 8-A program, we can command as much as double what a competitive bidding process could generate, and it's completely legal; even encouraged. the program is why a lot of the best demolition and de-construction packages never "hit the street" in a competitive process. We decided to slay that dragon once and for all. We're in a joint venture [JV] with her, and must renew it after three jobs, but can do so nearly indefinitely. She's a little over a year in to a 9 year program, so it's off to the races. In todays contracting climate, it is actually the best thing that could possibly have happened. For years I derided the program as a giveaway, but have recently decided that if I can't fight them I'd just join them. I figure if Uncle Sugar wants to get fucked, it may as well be by me.
 

The logic was that if the guidance failed, the concrete 'warhead' would hopefully kill less nearby innocents.
At the time there was a lot of concern here in the Uk regarding 'collateral damage' aka blowing up children.

Think were over it now as blowing up foreign children doesnt really get much of a mention these days ..........
 
I'd bet that along with almost the entire industry, the missile guys went to primary (not rechargeable) Li batteries, for the power/weight advantage. These aren't the rechargeable guys like in my Volt, but simple primary cells with 3-4 times the power per size, and a bigger yet advantage in weight.

In flight, most missile electronics are run via a tiny turbine that siphons off a little of the thrust gas - there is no need for a huge battery - the little turbine weighs less/watt.

If NASA gets the weights of a huge shuttle (or whatever large) missile conserved to the ounces level, what do you think they work on for missiles that weigh a tiny fraction of that?

I'm well aware that it can take the military 10 years to go from idea to deployment, but this isn't a hard one - it's just an engineering change order. The Li cells are so superior in every way to silver oxide it's a real no brainer. It's even getting hard to get the little sr-44 cells for my calipers - they've gone to alkaline lr-44's at nearly all the suppliers. Li-ion for everything else. I looked for ni-cads the other day for some old solar outdoor lights I have - hard to find even those now. Battery tech has been moving right along...

Now, this IS a guess, but it's not based on BS. More on how these guys work/think and what the advantage would be for their mission. They don't miss much in these airframe systems if they can squeeze in a little more performance.
 
So back up this thread in 2013, Dear old Doug ( DCFusor) was describing telegraph pole sized lumps of tungsten carbide dropping down from orbit to do deep penetration of hardened underground military bunkers .
I guess those Ruskies were following this thread as this seems to be the principle of their deep penetrating Oreshnik or hazelnut that apparently destroyed a large underground missile assembly location in Ukraine. Hard to get any information about the actual damage but the surface was apparently just loose dust with small dents yet local seismographs recorded a miniature earthquake .
From a very fast and very hard inert lump ……
 
They've had the Rod of God things for some time. Not exactly high tech, but extremely effective. Now how do you haul it up that high to start. That's the only problem.



Note, the alien tech and a little tiny UFO with anti-grav tech makes this a moot point and very easy.
 
Last edited:
2,000 is probably pretty close to right. We just fired about 55 at the Houthis and in Libya we took out Qaddafi's air defense network with an attack of about 110 with a small number of additional Brit ones. And so it has gone since the Gulf war. We dont necessarily use them in sustained conflict ; We use them against specific targets in shock and awe attacks, usually against leadership, air defense, leadership, and other high value targets.

The fact is we have a lot deployed. They are basically on every warship we have, at least Destroyers and attack Submarines. We have four SSGN, converted Ohio class SSBN's, that have about 150 each on them ready to go. And since the Gulf War where the Tomahawk was the prince we have developed a wide range of high tech missilery of which I could name but wont bother. They include stealthy anti-ship missiles that "think" on their own and simply cant be stopped. These missiles, both attack and defense, are very expensive and all probably use a significant amount of silver but I doub't a whole lot.

And the bottom line is we can slap a GPS smart kit onto a dumb bomb and drop it from an airplane to glide to its target for a lot cheaper then it would cost to loose a $1 m to $ 3 m missile. The USN's SM-6 is a remarkable missile that can do everything from air defense to attacking other ships but it costs $ 4m+. There are versions of the SM-3 air defense missile that cost $11 m to $35 m and are more then capable to swatting ICBMs or even satellites in low earth orbit. Even the rolling airframe missile costs dang near $1 m apiece, "all this as in million". And now we are wheeling out land based VLS launchers for both the Army and USMC to fire off advanced Tomahawks-V's from Pacific Islands an atolls. Actually Tomahawks are cheap in comparison to about every other missile.

And America has a whole lot of missilery deployed, in production, and in development. Ive only touched on a few, the next war will be a missile war. Even the Hooties are firing off missiles in the Red Sea. And even more important, and absolutely critical, in the production of such missilery are rare earth minerals. Why do you think we are supporting Ukraine so much ? Ukraine is loaded chock full with rare earths among other important commodities and minerals including oil and LNG offshore in the Black Sea and food stuffs. Its why Putin wants it so badly, he knows a free and prosperous Ukraine on his border would not only be dangerous politically but what the place holds in its soil and sea's are vital to Russia's economic clout. And he wants it so bad he's on the verge of eviscerating his army and economy to get it.
 
America is a missilery producing powerhouse. Lets take a look at the commodity absolutely needed to make a modern missile. The Tomahawk alone needs 480 oz of silver, a number widely disputed but also accepted among experts. Especially considering the technical improvements of the BLK lV and BLK V missiles. So America has, overall, in its Navy alone about 7,000 Tomahawk missiles alone in service and roughly 21,000 in storage with many being upgraded to BLk lV and V standards. So if you use the standard of 480 oz of silver in each missile that comes out to 13,440,000 or $497,952,000. And thats just Tomahawks. The truth is we dont know how much silver is actually used but you can bet its a lot and America is a missile producing powerhouse, and the thing about out missilery is that they actually work.

Add to the Tomahawk parade the entire fleet of American missilery and bombs. In 2025 almost the entirety "smart", meaning they have advanced navigation, A.I., flight controls, seeker tech, extended range, multi-modes, targeting options, and network-centric gear. They get launched by the launch vehicle, get their flight profile handed off to an operator via satellite, then another satellite, then another, then to a drone flying over the battle space, and then are released so their multi-mode seeker is allowed to hunt on its own using mm-wave radar and targeting profiles stored in its memory. And no matter the missile theres a hell of a lot of silver involved in its construction. How much I simply do not know.

Off hand the USN has alone an entire stable of different Standard missiles deployed including the super-smart SM-6. A weapon that can swat a satellite in low earth orbit or hit a moving ship and/or attack a land target. A Swiss army knife of naval missilery. The SM-lV is probably the best air defense missile made. The ESSM and SeaRam make up the shorter range, very efficient, array of defensive missilery. The NSM and modernized Harpoon add to the offensive punch as does the Hyper-sonics now being deployed. Imagine the amount of silver being used ? The LRASM is a super smart stealthy missile that changes its attack parameters on its own depending on the defenses its up against. And of course you have the army and air force. I'm sure you get the picture.

So silver dropping under $38 really surprised me, what with the production/usage numbers. Its military usage is shrouded in secrecy and I believe its price is manipulated by Govt.s. ; Its kept low by a variety of means some of which I can't even guess at. Military I know. Economics I don't.
 
Thats a good breakdown on the tomahawk missiles silver usage. I had no idea we had that many of them. So total silver usage to make those was considerable but how many do we really produce annually? Same with other missile system. Seems like the Patriot systems are in the highest demand right now. No idea how much silver they require. I think that's classified info. Regardless of how much silver they use it's still a very small amount of annual mine production. Solar panels use a lot more annually but that may also be coming to an end with trump gutting the green energy initiative. That was a total waste of taxpayer money anyway.
 
Well an average Burke class DDG USN Destroyer has, I think, up to 96 MK-41 cells in them. Each MK-41 cell can fire a full sized missile like the Tomahawk or SM-series. A Ticonderoga class Cruiser, or "CG" has 122 but we are starting to retire these. But this is just the beginning. Each ship has Harpoon or NSM offensive missiles as well as MK-51 lightweight torpedo's in their ASROC systems. Torpedo's use a lot of silver. the Evolved Sea Sparrow missiles, or ESSM, like the ASROC, are packed 4 to a VLS-41 tube. The NSM and Harpoons use their own quad launcher systems separate from the VLS. They also use triple torpedo tubes built into the ship. The ASROCs are simply rocket assisted torpedos with a range of over 10 miles.

Ive already mentioned the SeaRam missile launchers. They either have them or several Phalanx defensive gun systems which we just used to defend against the Houthis successfully. Each ship carry two helicopters capable of carrying several weapon types, most notable torpedos. They have extremely powerful SPY-1 or now SPY-6 radar systems with Aegis combat systems. As well they are carrying powerful sonar suites and othe fire control radars. These ships are floating electronic powerhouses manned by the best sailors in the world and they are loaded with silver.

Even a nuclear submarine uses silver by the ton. A USN Hunter/Killer of the Virginia class is a marvel of engineering. Out three Seawolfs even more so. Both can carry Tomahawk missiles, the Virginia SSN can have 12 VLS tubes to launch missiles. The MK-48 Heavy Torpedo is loaded with silver and with a warhead in the 650 lb class can sink any surface ship afloat. We have 4 early Ohio class SSGN submarines converted to fire up to 154 Tomahawks apiece. Altogether we have up to 51 SSN's of the Seawolf, Los Angeles, and Virginia class, all armed with Tomahawk missiles fired from the standard torpedo tubes, most of these 51 boats having 12 VLS tubes. We are now developing the ability to reload them at sea. All have world class sonar and fire control technology. They are the quietest boats to ever put to sea. This superior technology is heavily reliant on silver.

And all that is just the beginning. We have 14 Ballistic missile boats, each one capable of carrying 24 Trident-ll MIRV'ed missiles. Because of arms agreements the boats all carry just 20 Trident-ll's, which means we have up to 280 at sea and of course an unk amount used as test missiles or reloads. Tho of course with yields of up to 450 KT I can't imagine there being much of a world left to reload in "Hiroshima was 16 kt". We are currently building the Columbia class SSBN which will be even quieter.

On the whole America is upgrading out entire nuclear response triad of missile submarines "Columbia class", ICBMs ", new "Sentinel" class ICBM , and the B-21 stealth Bomber, equipped to deliver gravity bombs and cruise missiles while remaining undetectable to enemy radar.

Imagine the amount of silver used in this production ?
 
Hmmm US apparently produces 90 tomahawk missiles a year at a production cost of over $ 0.5 million usd and a sale price of 1.2 million . Curious how there is a stockpile of 21000+ 7000 and that is just what the navy have .
311 years of production at current levels ?
 
21,000 in storage no doubt in various states and block types. Remember the missile has been around since the early '80s so thats 45 years of production.Including some years that were the hottest in the entire Cold War. Four different manufacturers built them to keep up with the demand. In the '80s and into the '90s we had the 600 ship Navy and most of them, with the exception of the frigates, carried Tomahawks. There were also land launched versions, which we still have, and air launched versions. There were sea launched nuclear versions able to deliver a 150 kt war head to over 1.000 mi and it was these weapons, along with the Pershing-ll IRBMs, that scared the bejeezus out of the Soviets and helped win the Cold War.

I was part of a USAF operation that brought the old tactical gravity bombs back to America to be dissembled as they were being replaced with the cruise missiles and Pershing-ll's. We were tasked with the convoying of these weapons in America's S/W. I only speak of it because the weapons, indeed the base itself, has been history for many years.

The lack of current Tomahawk production is a sore point in the military but we have so many in storage its actually easier to refurbish them to BLK-lV and BLK-V standards. Most of all considering there is a 2 year lead time for the production of brand new missiles. Up to 2023 we have fired about 3,000 TLAM's by our Navy.
 
I can imagine some navy machinist drilling a hole in the middle of an ASE to make a washer for a missile jet engine.
 
Modern military weapons are component pieces that are easily up-gradable by replacing the entire component. For instance the Tomahawk, indeed almost every missile, is constructed to be easily upgraded by replacing or adding components to enhance performance. Both software and/or hardware.

The missile is designed to be easily up-gradable with a construct called "open systems architecture". Not all parts of the missile may need be replaced or fixed or upgraded so the missile itself is designed, baked in, to have certain elements upgraded or simply replaced. Not all parts of the missile have the exact same service life so you see where this is going. Software is constantly evolving. Engines have a long service life but seeker technology is improving at a much faster rate. Much of it at an exponential rate. For instance the Tomahawk BLK V looks much the same as the original ones from 1981 but they are a far different missile today. The BLk V is an absolutely lethal and smart open water ship killer. The BLK lV has far more computing power and is far more accurate with a far higher success rate.

But they have the same 1,000 lb warhead as the early versions and many have simply been upgraded from early generations. None of them are very stealthy and they emit rather high IR signatures from their engine heat. We make them work by zinging them in low, saturating the targets, and including electronic countermeasures in the strike packages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…