Watch a US guided missile destroyer launch Tomahawk cruise missiles against Houthi rebels radar sites in Yemen

The guided missile destroyer USS Nitze (DDG 94) launched a TLAM strike against three coastal radar sites in Houthi-controlled territory on Yemen’s Red Sea coast.

On Oct. 13, at around 4AM LT, the U.S. Navy has launched a retaliatory strike against coastal Houthi-controlled radar sites in Yemen, after three American vessels, USS Nitze and USS Mason guided-missile destroyers, and the Austing-class USS Ponce Afloat Forward Staging Base (formerly, amphibious transport dock) were attacked twice in just three days in international waters off Yemen.

“Due to hostile acts, continuing and imminent threat of force, and multiple threats to vessels in the Bab-al Mandeb Strait, including U.S. naval vessels, Nitze struck the sites, which were used to attack U.S. ships operating in international waters, threatening freedom of navigation. Nitze is deployed to the 5th Fleet area of operations to support maritime security operations and theater security cooperation efforts.”

The footage below shows USS Nitze fire Tomahawk cruise missiles against Iran-backed Houthi targets that have threatened attacks against ships in the Red Sea.

The three U.S. warships have been operating in the vicinity of Bab el-Mandeb following the attack on the UAE-flagged high-speed transport vessel HSV Swift severely damaged after being attacked by the rebels with what is believed to be a Chinese C-802 anti-ship missile possibly provided by Iran.

The U.S. retaliatory attack came hours after USS Ponce and Mason were attacked for the second time in four days on Wednesday. In the first encounter, on Sunday, the guided-missile destroyer fired three missiles, two Standard Missile-2s (SM-2s) and a single Evolved Seasparrow Missile (ESSM) to intercept the two missiles that were launched against the American vessels at 7 PM LT. In addition to the missiles, USS Mason used its Nulka anti-ship missile decoy.

Little is known about the Tomahawk Land Attack Missile (TLAM) used in the attack.

The Tomahawk IV can hit at a range of 1,000 miles and can adjust its flight path to pursuit moving targets. Guidance can come from various platforms, including ISR (Intelligence Surveillance Reconnaissance) planes and tactical aircraft.

In an interview given at the end of 2013, PACAF commander General Hawk Carlisle said 5th gen. aircraft will provide forward target identification for strike missiles launched from a surface warship or submerged submarine, in the future. The PACAF commander described the ability of the F-22s, described as “electronic warfare enabled sensor-rich aircraft,” to provide forward targeting through their sensors for submarine based Tomahawks. It’s not known whether the U.S. Air Force has already implemented this capability, though.

The missile, launched through a Vertical Launch System (VLS), is guided by an operator that can redirect the TLAM towards pre-planned alternate targets, or bring the missile to a “holding area” where it can wait for a new target of opportunity. It also features an anti-jam GPS receiver for enhanced accuracy. By means of data link, the RGM-109E missile can download imagery and health status messages to the control station so as to give the operator the ability to change the mission in accordance with the battlefield and cruise conditions.



About David Cenciotti
David Cenciotti is a journalist based in Rome, Italy. He is the Founder and Editor of “The Aviationist”, one of the world’s most famous and read military aviation blogs. Since 1996, he has written for major worldwide magazines, including Air Forces Monthly, Combat Aircraft, and many others, covering aviation, defense, war, industry, intelligence, crime and cyberwar. He has reported from the U.S., Europe, Australia and Syria, and flown several combat planes with different air forces. He is a former 2nd Lt. of the Italian Air Force, a private pilot and a graduate in Computer Engineering. He has written five books and contributed to many more ones.


  1. Failed to mention that the “two presumed/suspected cruise missiles” fell
    short in the water, and even if countermeasures were used on the first
    “it is unclear whether this led to the missile striking the water or
    whether it would have struck the water anyway.”
    Also failed to mention that houthis denied to have launched any missiles towards the yanks’ ships.
    Again world class yank word gameplay, which is highly suspicious.
    Another Gulf of Tonkin “incident” in the making?
    PS: The attack on the Swift, which “didn’t happen” for yanks, and their gcc buddies, for about a week was finally acknowledged… it burned quite swiftly.

    • Seriously, do you have nothing better to do than troll American websites centered around defense? I’ve seen your idiocy posted elsewhere. Go figure your screen name is SU-34. Rofl….We’re all really wore out on your pathetic need to troll any and everything American related. Find another way satiate your pathetic, ingrained, insecurities. It stuns me that everything you Russians do is centered around measuring up to the US. Get a life. Just out of curiosity, have you ever worn a uniform or are you just another pathetic fanboy talking shit from the comfort of your home?

      Nobody failed to mention what happened to those two cruise missiles. The VERY FIRST reports in Western media, before all of the facts were known, was that the two missiles either missed, malfunctioned, or were dropped via “soft-kill” measures. Nice try though.

      Why would anybody mention that the Houthi’s denied it? Considering the fact we deal with the king of denials (Russia) on a daily basis, nobody really cares that they denied it. The fact they were crowing over the HSV Swift kinda makes that denial a moot point doesn’t it. Only an idiot would bring that up, while ignoring the fact they engaged the HSV Swift in the exact same manner. You even bring up the HSV Swift. Have you been drinking?

      World class yank word game play. That’s pathetically rich coming from a Russian fanboy…

      As far as the HSV Swift goes, what the hell are you even talking about? It “didn’t happen”? Maybe quit binging on RussiaToday. It happened, nobody has ever said it didn’t. We don’t give two shits. The Swift was a technology demonstrator for a high-speed transport vessel. It was leased to the emirates and was delivering supplies as well as removing injured civilians. So the Houthis hit a, more or less unarmed, transport vessel doing humanitarian aid type missions that wasn’t even being operated by the US Navy. None of that registers with you though. You’re too busy getting off on the fact that something manufactured in the US, never intended to see combat, was destroyed in a combat zone, while being operated by another nation. Lol congrats I guess. I guess all of the western countries should start laughing at the tens of thousands of Russian manufactured COMBAT platforms that we’ve destroyed with a blindfold on. It was so easy it’s sad. Should we bring that up in absolutely every article that has anything to do with Russia?

      Quit being an oxygen-thief.

      • “So the Houthis hit a, more or less unarmed, transport vessel doing
        humanitarian aid type missions that wasn’t even being operated by the US

        The Pentagon Trolls have to work VERY HARD to spin this and make the US armed support of Saudi war crimes even vaguely palatable,,,

  2. The missiles were salvaged off old Yemen navy patrol boats, not supplied by Iran as has been repoerted by many news outlets.

Comments are closed.