Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "BFBS Forces News" channel.

  1. Stalking was much easier till the thermal imaging became inexpensive
    816
  2. So much for Russia's claim as superpower
    195
  3. The fact that Russia sent S-70 and Su-57 with their limited numbers into Ukraine shows that the Russian air force is in worse shape than previously thought and starting to get desperate.The official story was it was test flight gone wrong but why Russia do a test flight 365 miles from Ukraine There was something nearby that they were trying to destroy with the S-70 for propaganda but it ended badly for them
    77
  4. They need at least 100 units
    41
  5. PAC-3, SM2,SM-3 SM-6 and now THAAD all of the US missile defenses are getting in some work
    35
  6. Going to Iran and North Korea for weapons How the mighty Russia has fallen
    34
  7. The fact they have managed to gain this much momentum is impressive
    34
  8. The problem for Russia is that ATACMS can be launched from the HIMARS which unlike the M270 is highly mobile I fully expect Ukraine to sprint 4 HIMARS in to Russia at different points and launch quick salvos , the pull out quickly
    28
  9.  @EpicThe112  That would be incorrect The T-14 like all tanks is still very much vulnerable to top attack weapons The Switchblade 600 travels too high for APS to detect till its too late The Javelin maxes out at 500 ft which the T-14 while Switchblade 600 can maxes out 15,000 ft The operator can literally drop it down on vertically on the target
    28
  10. If the UK still has stocks os MILAN missiles that would be a great start
    28
  11.  @MrVioletpandora  YAWN
    23
  12. Its not if, its when Russia gave safe haven to Assad so they are not exactly going to get a warm response from the newly formed government and will be likely told to leave
    21
  13. Flexible no larger and far more realistic budget yes
    21
  14. Its not the end, they are being shipped back to Boeing and remanufactured in AH-64E models
    19
  15. Its not unsustainable if you change tactics Instead of being defensive, be offensive and deal with the problem at the source The drones are coming from Yemen so TLAM, and Storm Shadows need to be paying Yemen a visit
    19
  16. Simple While Ukraine only has a few Su-24 that can use Storm Shadows, they have 60 plus western MLRS that can use ATACMS which allows Ukraine to strike Russian forces far more effectively Since the US is giving missiles with BLU-97/B Combined Effects Bomb payload. That means each missile can cover a large area That means whole positions can be struck at once
    18
  17. GD didnt bribe that UK MoD Eighty percent of the vehicle manufacture will be completed in the UK, with 70% of the supply chain companies UK-based] The Ajax family project supports 400 jobs at General Dynamics UK's two facilities at Merthyr Tydfil and Oakdale in South Wales, and an estimated further 4,000 jobs in the British supply chain The UK always tries to with the option with local job potential
    16
  18. Its a moot point the drones are not close enough for the CIWS to engage so missiles are the only option
    12
  19. Yeah the current events in Ukraine does not aspire any confidence with Russia's capabilites
    11
  20. The LMUR missile gives Russian forces capabilities that the US has had with the Apache and Cobra for decades
    10
  21. Yeah, the copy and paste plane from Temu can never match the F-35
    10
  22.  @pizann350  Ukraine forces should hold off till they have Harpoons Once they have Harpoons Use the smaller Switchblade units to attack the ships radar and defensive equipment once thats neutralized, follow up with a Harpoon to the water line Switchblade 600s can used against smaller ships or FACs but for larger ships, they need the Harpoon or a few Israeli IAI Harpy. The Harpy 70bs warhead is far more damaged and keyholing 3 to the stern would knock out a ships engines
    10
  23. If the West speeds up delivery of air defense equipment as well uses PMCs to operate/slash train Ukrainian forces Ukraine could get an integrated air defence system (IADS) up and running in no time
    9
  24. Keep with Trump's theme of appointing unqualified people
    8
  25.  @JiTiAr35  And it shows that both Soviet Russia and the current federation claims of parity with the US and China were false
    8
  26. Its not really a true contest The AI was flying an F-16 the problem with that is the F-16 was built to carry a pilot so there are limits Imagine if it was flying a purpose built aircraft built specifically for an AI Human rated aircraft can pull a 12 G plus in emergency AI built aircraft would be able to sustain 12 G plus in normal operations
    8
  27. Even with Russia moving its ammunition and logistics hubs out of range, there are still many other material targets for the HIMARS Command posts, communication sites, airfields, parked vehicles ,EW equipment and S-series systems
    8
  28.  @fredslipknot9  Not likely thermal scans across varies wavelenghts so a clock would have protect against that
    7
  29.  @deanwood1338  The Burke has 90 cells on flight I and 96 on Flight IIs on up Additional the Burke can quad pack ESSMs 4 missiles in one VLS cell But like I said, they should stop firing Asters and SM-2s and start lobbing TLAMs in to Yemen
    7
  30. Going to rock Russian forces world
    7
  31. Be careful at this point Ukraine and not get careless
    7
  32. Drones, MANPADS and ATGMs are having a greater effect that Russia forces had anticipated What the Ukraines need is drones with higher payload similar to US drones
    7
  33. Its simple You are sending inexperience troops against combat hardened Ukraine forces It only ends badly for Russia
    7
  34. The best option for the UK is either the Pzh-2000 or Archer
    6
  35. Tanks usefulness depends on various factors but mainly who is doing the fighting Against countries with significant air power and precision munitions, they are basically useless Against countries without significant air power and precision munitions, they still have some use The US for example has endless ways to shred armor, the most lethal method is tank plinking. Tank plinking coined in 91 was them dropping 500lbs GBU-12s on Iraqi armor That is still very much surefire way of killing armor. The GBU-53 and Spike NLOS are the latest additions to the US arsenal for killing armor Like the GBU-12 both weapons can easily kill armor Ukraine lacks significant air power but does have a number of precision munitions that are making things difficult for Russian forces Tactically , Ukrainian forces are winning but strategically, they are still losing. They haven't completely shut down Russia's armor down yet They have been able to chip away as Russia's supply lines to cause problems but they lack the capability to decimate it If the UK provides Harpoons with land attack capability and the Ukraine forces employ combined arms with their use They can completely shut down Russia's armor. Unlike the MAM and Javelin, the Harpoon's 488lbs warhead is literally like dropping a 500lbs GBU-12 which allows it to destroy far more targets per missile. Used correctly, they can start wiping out Russia bases with 8 to 10 Harpoon missiles per base
    6
  36. That would be incorrect Here a few examples When Mutual assured destruction was coined in 1962, none of today's technology existed Today the USN has sea based missile defense able to intercept ballistic missiles as well as numerous land based defenses Russia's defenses rely mainly on the hyped up S-400 and S-500 with no sea based defenses So defensively , the US has better capabilites, and thats not counting the addition NATO defense systems Russia's new RSM-56 SLBM has been tested 31 times since 2004 with 11 failures The US Trident SLBM has tested 177 times since 1989 with 10 failures Conventionally speaking Russia's performance against poorly equipped Ukraine has been underwhelming. In Syria, Russia was boosting the effectiveness of the SVP-24 , PGMs and OLS series In Ukraine, all 3 have been woefully inadequate The new term for Russia is woefully inadequate
    6
  37. 10 Switchblade 600s They need at least 100
    6
  38. You can't fight without proper supply Ultimately Russia is getting off lucky as Ukraine doesnt have the capabilty to smoke that entire convoy
    6
  39. Simple , Experienced drone operators like the ones shown here can pilot small drones with incredible speed and precision through difficult terrain For ISR (Intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance), they can quickly gather info before the enemy can respond The same goes for precision strike ,they maneuver the drone in a manner that makes it harder to detect before it too late But the fact still remains that drones can be dealt with the right preparation and weapons
    5
  40. You are correct , it protected crew but the video also shows the deadly accurate fire from the Bradley kept T-90 pinned down The shot placement shows that Bradley was precisely targeting the T-90s commander and gunner sights The impacts from the 25mm HEI likely destroyed or blinded the T-90s sight and since the Bradley was pouring it on, the commander couldnt exit to visually engage the Bradley And eventunally, the tank had to be abandoned
    5
  41. The smart play honestly would be trading Patriot systems Countries that have IRIS-T , NASAMS, Aspide, The US should trade or provide them with Patriots in exchange , they give those units to Ukraine as their forces as already familiar with them, its speeds things up and Ukraine would able to get integrated air defence system (IADS) up considerably faster
    5
  42. It will not Russian navy only has a handful of ships and subs in the Black Sea Secondly, they can't carry that many missiles If anything, Russia is opening the door for Ukraine to finally get long range precision missiles from the West
    5
  43.  @meme4one  You have understand context Most SHORAD systems range between 10-31 miles The Spike NLOS latest variant range is 31 miles That means that Spike can easily target Tunguska, Panstir , Buk and Tor systems without ever getting range Remember that Spike has small launchers that can be carried by Helo Imagine special forces carry Spikes NLOS and simultaneously attacking the enemy key target
    5
  44. Abrams isnt as effective as ATACMS
    5
  45.  @HansCoche  Going to 3rd world countries for weapons is hilarous
    5
  46. If the West would simply give Ukraine long range precision cruise missiles, this conflict would be over very quickly
    5
  47. Gearing up for yet another embarrassment
    5
  48. That would be incorrect The US Army run of FIM-92C was 20,000 missiles as well massive stocks of FIM-92E and thats just them The key benefit of the Shahed drone is that its slow moving and very easy to target even with first gen MANPADS Ukraine using up obsolete FIM-92 stocks and other older MANPADs saves money For one, thats savings in demilitarization costs how much do you think it cost to demilitarize a stinger Warhead and rocket motor has destroyed, electronics removed and then the remaining metal may or may not be recycled Sending gear to Ukraine is very sustainable
    5
  49.  @canihazburgers @ Compare to US ships , UK are relatively weak. For starters, the US takes carrier defense very seriously. US CVN and LHD/A are layered with RIM-7s, RIM-116s , RIM-162 and CIWS. The UK carriers only have CIWS and thats it. They are completely reliant on the type 45 for protection. The benefit of CATOBAR is that CVNs can launch heavier planes. This allows CVNS to operate planes like the E-2 for AWACS whereas the UK uses the Merlin crownest. The E-2 large size allows it to pack a far more advanced sensor suite than the Merlin. Now the F-35B has huge advances on CATOBAR but in the end still lags behind in payload. The Type-45 destroyers are advanced floating sam sites. The claim was made that Sea viper is more advanced than US AEGIS. The problem is that they are apples and oranges. The US aegis is designed for full spectrum combat, air,land, sea, underwater and space whereas Sea Viper is strictly anti air. The Aegis can engage targets on land with TLAM, subs with ASROC, aircraft with SM2/3 ,pace targets with SM-3s and ships with Harpoons. The newly minted Cooperative Engagement Capability allows both ship and planes to act as spotter and shooter. The Type 45 use the Aster missile which tops at 120km. The US SM-6 is rated excess of 240km. side note , the SM-6 is anti air, ship, land and ballistic all rolled into one missile.
    5
  50. Simple, The JDAM has far more flexibility than the Kinzhal and can be used against more targets Russian stand-off weapons are now having to contend with the growing number of western air defense equipment that Ukraine is getting Airfields are operating more and more as they now have protection Gepards and Avengers are providing point defense while IRIS_T, NASAMS and, HAWK provide short to med defense RIM-7s are another layer of defenses in the works As long as Western Ukraine remains untouched, Russia isnt winning this
    5
  51. Finally Some one with some sense
    5
  52. The UK is reconsidering that The Type-45s performed as designed in the red sea however the US Burkes and Ticos were engaging ballistic missiles with SM-6 and SM-3s The Type-45s have sensors but not the weapons due to limitations of the Sylver VLS. They are upgrading to ABM capability but again the Type-45 VLS only carries 48 shots, the US burkes carry 90-96 missiles while Ticos carry 122 So the UK problem is the limited ammo on the Type-45 Now the smart pay for the UK would be working with MBDA to software connect land based Aster-30 BMD to the UKs Land ceptor so the UK would only have to buy the missiles and launchers and they can fold that purchase in with the RN purchase of Aster-30 but thats just the smart thing
    5
  53. In conflict with those countries, its quality over quantity. As far as British tanks facing off against Chinese or North Korea Armour Not likely however with Iran and Russia is very likely Iran tanks are a joke and Russia made the T-14 so expensive that they can barely procure it in large numbers so they have to rely on their stocks of T-90/80s/72s for frontline action.
    5
  54. Completely different designs The Typhoon, Borei , Ohio and Delta are SSBNs whereas the Oscars were built around the massive P-700s The Astutes are SSNs. Different design requirements
    5
  55. Its not happening The Su-35 was touted as this super multi role aircraft yet its been silent all of Ukraine apart from 5 losses
    4
  56.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  In August 2018, the U.S. Air Force awarded a $480 million contract to Lockheed Martin for the development of an air-launched hypersonic weapon The USAF completed the first All-Up-Round (AUR) test on December 9, 2022. No potato for you Ivan
    4
  57. Ironically , Ukraine's lack of aircraft is why the S-400 has been idle so far
    4
  58. Yeah You are forgetting how many have been lost so far which is 18 destroyed and 2 captured Secondly, Ukraine has sent captured models to the US so its likely the US has provided Ukraine with intel about the strengths and weakness about it
    4
  59. Add carrier and its perfect time to test out the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)
    4
  60.  @gamingelke6968  Now thats an interesting deal but Russia ultimately wont do it Russia like everyone else makes deals with people for various Offering safe haven in exchange if they were to go back on their word , it wouldnt look good for their deal making
    4
  61. It would make more sense if the countries in area would allow western access to closer airfields so strike can be more effective
    4
  62.  @1chish  Flying from Cyprus to the Yemen is helluva of a trip Having carrier a in the Arabian Sea is considerably shorter It also allows for time sensitive strikes Cyprus can be for large assets like tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft while the carrier sets in the Arabian sea
    4
  63. Like due to a limited supply but they can refuel their stocks easily by buying JASSMs from the US
    4
  64. They should be buying LRASMs for their ships and aircraft. MQ-9 STOL with AWACS , SEA Guardian and reaper kits for the QE class MV-22 for the QE The Type-83 should be equipped with the MK-41 VLS so it can use any weapon instead of the useless Sylver VLS Thats just for openers
    4
  65. Well as the Prince of Wales is out of action with broken shaft The QE is going pulling all the weight for the UK power projection At this point, they may wanna consider a third ship built with CATOBAR EMALS and AAG was not ready when the QE and PoW were being built The USN has matured technology so the risk would be minimal now
    4
  66. ***** its really the Falklands war why the RAF is opting for STOVL. the capable of planes like the Harrier and F-35B to go from ship to shore with little preparations is huge combat ability
    4
  67. With this , Russian aircraft and missile will be completely shut down
    4
  68.  @1chish  You are forgetting that Ford is the first application. The USN C-13 steam cat and MK-7 didn't get their reliability overnight. Those systems date back the 60s EMALS and AAG are still relatively new compared them. Same with everything else. Noting besides weapons was carried over to the Ford Class Every you mention is completely new tech. The QE cost less because does less and has less Ford has to accommodate F-18, F-35, E-2, EA-18G, MH-60 and CMV-22 plus the future MQ-25 and FA/XX Besides the F-35s, and helos, the QE does not have to accommodate much else So we are just going to ignore the Prince of Wales issues ?
    4
  69.  @yellowtunes2756  Again wrong When you have true air superiority , you have complete control of the battlespace. In essence, the enemy is unable to act freely That Gulf War is example of true superiority as west had complete control of the battlespace Vietnam again is irrelevant to modern warfare. Secondly wars are not fought with similar levels of equipment as Ukraine has shown. War are fought with advantages The Pzh-2000 were out of action due the high-intensity of Ukraine firing. That problem is simply due to low number of Pzh-2000. Ukraine doesn't have enough western SPA yet Russia's lack of camera's also makes no sense. The US has high resolution optics on everything so commanders can view situations as well confirm target movement and destruction. Incorrect The M777 needs 20 min per mission and range is just 25 miles. It has to set up, communicate/fire ,then break down and leave which normally takes 20 miles The Pzh-2000 needs 6s min per mission. Set up, communicate/fire and displace ,its range 40 miles The HIMARS only needs 3 mins and its range 50 miles. The missile are preloaded while its on the move so all it has to do set up, fire and displace A KA-52 can cover 25 miles in 9 minutes which means it can easily engage M777s Even at max speed, the KA-52 covers 40 miles in 12 minutes , 15 mins for 50 miles By the time a KA-52 gets over head, Pzh-2000 and HIMARS are over 4 miles away. HIMARS as much as 10 miles away This goes back to Russia's lack of air superiority The US maintains air superiority by having aircraft 24/7 patrolling kill boxes The principle benefit is that aircraft can react within minutes. a supersonic Su-35 or MiG-35 can cover 50 miles under 3 minutes but more importantly if they had advanced western targeting pods and Brimstone missiles, they could precisely target and fire while en route without having to get overhead yet factor why Russias's air superiority is farce
    3
  70. The SM-6 is designed to do far more than the Aster
    3
  71. No, the bottom line is that the T-90 went alone and two Bradleys handed its ass as a result
    3
  72. Reload VLS at sea is something that even the US cant do The principal weakness of the Type-45 is its Sylver VLS. While the US MK-41 is designed to be completely universal , the Sylver is limited MICA. Crotale , Aster for air defense Only the A-70 model can carry the MdCN for land attack That limited capability is biting the RN in the ass but apparently, the RN still hasnt learned its lesson by its purchase of the Naval Strike Missile While the Harpoon they used were old, the latest model of Harpoon has much longer range as well land attack capability If the UK was smart .they would have brought the LRASM instead The LRASM can be used on the F-35 and P-8 in addition to RN ships On ships, its VLS capable as well as the same topside launcher as the Harpoon and NSM. The LRASM also has land attack capability as well
    3
  73.  @lidlb1tch282  You would be wrong What you are describing as well what 90 percent people get wrong is called modes of engagement When you are behind the missile, thats called tail chase engagement. In that type of engagement, yes you are "chasing after the missile and the missile you launch has to enough speed to overtake the target that is where people confused, not every engagement is tail chase When I am the target and you are shooting at me, that called head engagement The missile is coming at me ,so speed is irrelevant. What I have to do is calculate a point at the incoming missile path to intercept it so if I know in 30 seconds, the incoming missile reach point x, then I will time my interceptor launch so it simultaneously arrives at X Now maneuvering missile claim to be able to avoid interceptors ,however that's why larger warheads with enhanced fragmentation and proximity fuzes are making a come back They don't need to be hit-to-kill, they just detonate close enough so fragmentation shreds the missile or causes enough damage Now if the missile in front and I am shooting at it from the side, same principle applies, I am shooting ahead of the missile not at the missile Speed is needed here but not as important Now the reason why interceptors have higher speeds and range is so they can get off more shoots at longer ranges At close range, you may only a get 1 or 2 shoots at most but at longer range, you get in more shots
    3
  74. That's incorrect Here a simple example for you S-400 40N6E missile covers 250 miles in 1 min 21 seconds Modern cruise missiles like JASSM needs at 30 mins to cover that distance Even with an EA-18G jamming, it can't suppress an S-400 for 30 mins The AGM-183 ARRW design speed is Mach 20 It covers that distance in 1 min 7 seconds An EA-18G can easily keep an S-400 suppressed for 1 min allowing to ARRW to reach the S-400 with ease The way Russia and China uses them without any EW support makes interception easier whereas the US will use combined arms when possible
    3
  75. Lets look at that what is China actually building? China's newest frigate Type 054A is a mere 4000 tonnes while the Type-31 is 5700 tonnes and Type-26 nearly 7000 tonnes so in just tonnage, the Chinese ship literally closer to the 1960s Type 21 frigate than the newer Type-31 or Type-26 The Type-054A primarily weapons is 8 YJ-83 While the Type 31 frigates will be fitted for but not with the Mark 41 Vertical Launching System, the Type-26 will have a 24 cell MK-41 VLS which gives the UK access to the LRASM, JSM, TLAM MST as well Missile de Croisière Naval (MdCN), so its kinda confusing that you are trumpeting the PLAN ships when they are literally jokes compared to their western counter parts
    3
  76.  @maximusvaliant8597  The S-400 has been a none factor
    3
  77.  @Maliothemaster  Again its called ejection seats not ejector moron. Secondly, the system is only validated when it actually works and so far it hasnt worked versatile means moron that it can cover a wide range of mission types ding dong and again that has not being proven. The Ka-52 has extremely limited combat experience whereas the Apache has proven its versatility across decades hence why India brought Apaches instead of the Ka-52 The Ka-52 has been offered since the latest 2000s and to date only has one actual buyer The Mi-24 series has no problem finding sales as its proven like the Apache wheresa. The Ka-52 has one order outside of Russia and 30 for Egypt No one is interested in a unproven weapon system like the Ka-52 Upgrade kits allow the 70mm hydra to be used with the same precision as guided ATGM at fraction of the cost moron. kits increases the weapon capacity as high as four times depend on which kit is used. It allows the 70mm be used for most targets and hellfire saved for high value targets Again appealing to countries on budget as they can precision guided weapons much cheaper. As for the Ka-52 having more advanced sensors wrong moron The Apache's longbow system can simultaneously attack 16 targets while the Ka-52 can only attack 4 targets simultaneously. All the Apache has to do is rise the longbow radome to fire whereas the Ka-52 has to completely unmask to fire The longbow hellfire can be fired against targets behind obstacles whereas the Ka-52 Vikhr is line of sight only. The Arrowhead ding dong is the latest upgrade to the tads/pnvs system and it was rolled in 2005 while the Ka-52 was still ??? The Ka-52 only has one sighting system in the nose and nothin else
    3
  78. @Mali Sharpe First The Ka-52 has ejections seats not ejectors seats ,secondly at the altitude helicopters operate, the odds of them having time to eject is virtually nil The Ka- has had a few accidents and ejections seats didnt save the crew Secondly the Ka-52 weapon load is exactly why no one is buying it. To arm fully the Apache, you need 30mm rounds, 70mm rockets, 1 ATGM and 1 AIM While the Ka-52 needs requires over 10 types of weapons so if you are on budget like most countries are , the Apache appeals to you in that area The US 70mm hydra has 6 different precision upgrade kits whereas the Ka-52 has zero The AGM-114 has upgraded successively since 1982 as well has decades of combat experience under its belt The Ka-52 9K121 Vikhr has never been used in combat and only been upgraded only just recently so basically the Ka-52 has very little combat experience and mosty unproven weapons. Russia has sent it to Syria but again thats not going rise interest The Apache raised interest during the Gulf war by flying nap of the earth and knocking out sams as well killing armor whole sale Then there is technology. the Apache greatest feature is the Arrrowhead also known as the Target Acquisition and Designation Sights, Pilot Night Vision System (TADS/PNVS) The pilot and gunner each have their own sights which means while the gunner is focused on the target, the pilot can look elsewhere. The KA-52 only has one sight so yeah just saying
    3
  79. The J-20 has literally become useless over night As far countering tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft goes, the J-20 is pretty much becoming useless in that regard One of the unique features of the IRIS-T is that seeker is sensitive enough to allow it to be targeted against both air to air and surface to air missiles The Russian R-77 also claims the same performance ,able to down both air to air and surface to air missiles as well precision-guided munitions The AIM-120D FR3 currently adds that ability to target both air to air and surface to air missiles as does the AIM-260 JATM The F-15EX with AMBER can carry up 22 AIM-120s vs the J-20 load of just 4 BVR missiles ,even without AMBER, the F-15EX still carries 8 AIM-120 The J-20's ability to target tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR relies them attacking from outside defending fighters range,however its moot if the defenders can shoot down the missiles In order to protect the missiles, they will need J-16 EW to jam radar, without , those missiles won't get near tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR and they can't risk getting up close The J-16 problem is that the E-3 , E-2D and the E-7 would not have any issues with its jamming. Unlike the Russia, the US heavily invested in aerial jamming with the EA-18G, EC-130 Compass call and the newer EC-37B, AWACS. Training with these assets makes it easier for them to deal with the J-16s jamming as well EA-18G, EC-130 Compass call and the newer EC-37B counter jamming The J-16 last and by far biggest problem is the RC-135 Rivet Joint and Combat Sent which can read the J-16s jamming So J-20's role has been drastically reduce and only getting worst
    3
  80. If you factor in mission needs, losses , accidents and maintenance Ukraine would need at least 40 JAS-39 theres barely 300 JAS-39 built Ukraine needs the AGM-88s for hunting SAMs and Jammers, the JAS-39 is not equipped to use the AGM-88s The F-16 can use CBU-87/89/97 cluster munitions. As Sweden is party to Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), they wouldnt be able to integrate those weapons Remember, Ukraine use cluster munitions have inflicted serious damage on Russian forces. 6 ATACMS with cluster payloads wiped out nearly 20 Russian helps As far as industrial capability goes Lockheed can integrate French , Germany, UK Israel and other weapons to the F-16 faster than SAAB can to the JAS-39 For the future Yes absolutely 60-100 JAS-39E/F , however for right now, its the F-16
    3
  81.  @alexlanning712  Exactly fools , yes men and crazies
    3
  82. its simple not of the units aboard the CVN-78 have transition to F-35C yet
    3
  83. The key addition of EMALS and AAG will allow for easier use of UAVs which opens the door for a lot of possibilities The E-2D endurance is limited by fuel and crew which is normally 8 max as is the SH-60 which has even shorter endurance An MQ fitted with surveillance kits for air or maritime endurance is over 18 hours plus The Ford newer reactor has directed energy weapons in mind both Laser and High power microwave weapons There is a lot possibilites for this the class
    3
  84. Canada wasted so much time with the CF-18 replacement, they literally don't have the time Australia is shifting away from European made to US made as EU assets have been lacking So neither not happening
    3
  85. There were plenty of options but the MOD just decided to take the worst one The best option was the US made LRASM. The LRASM can be used by F-35s and P-8s, additionally there is VLS capability as well top side container launcher models Adding it to the Typhoon wouldnt an issue as the LRASM actually weighs less than the Storm Shadow The LRASM would have given the UK a very capable weapon against all ship types but usable by both the RN and RAF FYI, Lockheed is testing it from HIMARS and if that is success, the trifecta for the UK The NSM is great light weapon for coastal defense but for deep water combat, its useless
    3
  86. That would be false The F-35s DAS combined with the AIM-9X allows the pilot to target without having to reorient the aircraft or even move his head The Eurofighter HMD to reorient the aircraft in target The newer models of the AIM-120D has higher off boresight capability The Meteor not so much
    3
  87.  Walter Lindinger @ The Austrian shouldnt have had Typhoons in the first place. Their requirements would have been met with a Tornando ADV
    3
  88.  @wolfmaster0579  Thats just people who don't know what they are talking about Example The DF-21 is claimed as carrier killer but is far from that In order for it to hit, It needs mid-course and terminal guidance. That is a point for vulnerability as EW jamming can disrupt its communication rendering it useless Same with AWACS killer missiles, again requires mid-course and terminal guidance which if jammed makes the missile useless The missile requires constant updates till its own seeker locks on As long as you can jam before the missiles onboard systems go active, 9 of 10 times, you will survive China's claimed Fractional Orbital Bombardment System (FOBS) test doesn't change the fact that advance detection systems can be provide warning The US can defend against any hypersonic weapon currently, the problem is making it cost efficient and accurate The Chinese DFs and Russian Avanguard can be intercepted by the SM-3 very easily but the SM-3 runs between 11-25 mil per missile its very expensive solution The cheaper route is upgrading the SM-2 and SM-6 which why you see the SM-2 Medium Range Block IIIC Active which is SM-2 upgraded with SM-6 tech and the SM-6 SM-6 Block IB which is SM-6 upgraded with SM-3 tech Raytheon has the glide phase interceptor program I will bet the farm that it would the Israeli Stunner seeker which they helped developed fitted to an SM body Shooting them down require more advanced sensors Oddly enough, the MQ-9 with both Broad Area Maritime Surveillance kit and STOL would be easiest solution BAMS has 18 hour endurance ,1200 mile range and able to whatever sensors needs which is an AESA radar and at least 2 Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) instead of E-2D crews on 6 hour rotation, you can crew the MQ-9 directly from the ship
    3
  89. There are several reasons but the biggest is likely manufacturing In 2012, the UK received its 500th Brimstone while the US placed an order for 24,000 Hellfires The Brimstone is not exporting with great success
    3
  90. Short answer they dont like all Russian tech overhyped
    3
  91. There is nothing wrong with the KC-46 program The problem is why the USAF not thinking in the long tern The KC-10 should been brought in larger numbers. The USAF should have then purchased KC-767A outright instead of trying to wet lease The continue with the E-10 MC2A and replace all 707s with the newer B-767 air frame
    3
  92. Currently no The S-400 uses an AESA which is extremely hard for the legacy ALQ-99s to suppress. With current weapons and technology, they need 7 minutes to able to attack the S-400 radar and command track in order to render the site useless Right now, suppressing the S-400 is very resource intensive for the USN and USAF It requires EA-18G and EC-130s as well ADM-141/160 decoys as well a F-35s with AGM-88s and F-18 with other precision munitions In theory, the enemy has time to counter Now with the future Next Generation Jammer Pods and ARRW They just need 1 min 5 secs with one EA-18G, F-15E and F-18 The EA-18G can fully suppress the S-400 or S-500 radar as the NGJ are designed for AESA systems, the ARRW only needs 1 min 5 seconds to cover 275 miles The F-18 role is simply clean up the remaining equipment with precision missiles As long as the US develops a Mach 10 plus hypersonic weapon to work with the NGJs Russia or Chinese defenses won't matter
    3
  93.  @danielk1152  How about no Ukraine borders Russia , Russia didnt have to travel thousands of miles like the US . Go through diplomatic channels to stage their forces Ukraine is literally right next down and Russia cant do anything The list of Russia's tactical blunders in Ukraine is miles long but lets go with the simplest As you stated, Ukraine has been getting a lot western equipment yet Russia has done nothing to stop it What a superpower would have done is land its forces in Western Ukraine and established bases to cut Ukraine off from Poland, Slovakia Romania and Moldova With Ukraine cut off, there would be Abrams,. Bradleys, HIMARS, ATACMS. Storm Shadow F-16s , Advanced air defensed or even artillery , The whole list of weapons giving Russian forces nightmares wouldnt exist Now the US has cleared JSOWs for Ukraine which like ATACMS has single warhead and submunitions payloads and worst, the JASSM is in process Unlike the Storm Shadow, the US has thousands of JASSMs and parting with few hundred wouldnt be issue as Lockheed has ramped out production Russia not a superpower just a super joke
    3
  94.  @deadcell1  Vietnam was different time and different reality however remember that US traveled over 8000 miles to Vietnam and 7000 to Middle East Yet Russia who borders Ukraine cant seal the deal after 3 years
    3
  95.  @pitmarkovic4545  incorrect The A129 predates the Tigr by nearly a decade. Yes there was initial involvement with other countries but as common with most EU programs, it didnt last long The A129 came first , the Tigr, then WAH-64/MK1 , and lastly T129 The A129 is being replaced by the AW249 Tigr is being upgraded to the MKIII , while Germany and Australia are retiring their Tigr WAH-64 is being replaced by the AH-64E for the UK as well Australia replacement for its Tigrs T129 is being replaced the ATAK-2 and T-629
    3
  96. Of course they are not worried They working on the Main Ground Combat System (MGCS) with 130mm gun to replace the existing Leopard 2 tanks so whatever Russia captures is literally moot
    3
  97. No 88 Leopard 1 32 Leopard 2 a mix of 2A4 and 2A6 14 Challenger 2 31 Abrams Additionally Germany has lifted export restrictions allowing countries with Leopards to send them to Ukraine
    3
  98. The whole vehicle will end up flying
    3
  99. Russia's bright idea is sending in a vehicle with less armor and protection than tank in a ATGM rich environment ??? So rich being that they can double tap So crew survival is literally zero
    3
  100.  @josephbingham1255  Yet Ukraine still struck today
    3
  101.  @EpicThe112  Thats incorrect The T-90s top armor lays flat not angled like the side armor so the distance that Javelin has to travel is still relatively short Also remember that unlike the Javelin, the Switchblade 600 can target specific locations, the operator can literally target the commander hatch The explosive force would like kill both gunner and commander, as well cause severe damage As for capturing the T-14, there would be no need Remember , the logic at first was trying to punch through the armor with force till they realized that top attack weapons can destroy armor with considerably less effort The only capabilities that FGM-148G that its in RD would need is similar to France Missile Moyenne Portée and Israeli Spike Both the MMP and Spike have Man In The Loop guidance which allows the operator to target specific locations, Lock after Launch allowing the missile to be fired in the blind longer range as well seekers with Electro-optical and imaging infrared homing Also the remember that Javelin is just for infantry for the US The US main anti tank weapon for ground forces is the TOW. While its has shorter range, its still very effective but still dated Even if newer Russia tanks use Relkit ERA 4s24 Remember the US military coined tank plinking by smoking iraqi tanks with 500lbs laser guided bombs that worked in 91 and sure as hell works in 2022 as GBU-12s cost 22K and can be dropped from 9 miles away
    3
  102.  @admiralmallard7500  That would be incorrect The F-35A can be adapted with the drogue . That was part of the pitch for the CF-35 for RCAF But looks like they opted to simply buy the A330 MRTT with the boom and save money instead paying for the F-35A to be modded
    3
  103. Russia's current success is only do the fact that Ukraine has exhausted its western ammunition
    3
  104. which company makes trucks
    3
  105. Its highly unlikely due the RAF penny pinching
    3
  106.  @kinfolk565  Right its 10 months later and where is Russia No one where Are they are at's Kyiv doorstep Nope They are kicking in the door at DPR and LDR far from done
    3
  107. Canadian may lost the record but they are still the better shooters than Ukraine The US, UK and Canadian shooters all used standard weapons and rounds to achieve their shots 338 or 50 What they did is neck down 14.5 cases for 12.7mm to make for the HL rifle in other words, they took a cheap short cut
    2
  108.  @Whiskey.Tango.Actual  30lb vs over 50lbs for the Horizon Even suppressed , the Barrett is easy to carry and use
    2
  109. Thats a moot point A Russian T-14 cost 4.6 mil yet $27,000 precision guided 500lbs bomb will turn it to shreds Weapons costing less than their targets is fact of life in warfare
    2
  110. The only issue with Phalanx is its reloading and limited magazine
    2
  111. No, the basis for the CIWS was the sinking of the Israel destroyer Eilat by P-15 missiles It showed that existing defenses were not able to stop missiles The sinking of UK ships during the Falkands war only reinforced the need for CIWS
    2
  112. Basically there version of the US Tactical Recovery of Aircraft and Personnel (TRAP) teams however the advent of heavy lift helos like the CH-53 and CH-47 make it simpler for a heavy lift helo to external carry the helo back to base via trying to fix on the spot But there are some cases where fixing it on spot is the better option
    2
  113.  @alenkerr8533  They are not The Type-45 lack of BMD and Land attack is being highlighted during this conflict
    2
  114.  @alenkerr8533  Flight III Burke
    2
  115. Either way it would be great addition for Ukraine
    2
  116. What it can do Put Russian forces in a world of pain
    2
  117.  @miikapekk5155  Patriot's key advantage is 1 launcher can hold up 16 missiles
    2
  118.  @dlmdee  Yet here we are two years later
    2
  119.  @lidlb1tch282  Again incorrect The Cooperative Engagement Capability is network integrated fire control capability that shots to be taken from any direction More to point network-centric warfare allows targets to be engaged from any direction The quote plasma does not make the missile invisible to radar, Secondly the zircon irregular path actually makes it easier Every move it makes bleeds off kinetic energy In order for it to regain it, it has to commit to trajectory to build up KE during terminal phase if it not, it will impact with far less energy That why ASM pop up during terminal phase to try and build up KE
    2
  120.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  And you point ? The USAF , USN and US Army all plan on declaring IOC this year
    2
  121.  @Rio.Motel.84  Thats incorrect The Plasma does make getting a lock harder but infrared search and track (IRST) combined with Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS) negate that problem
    2
  122.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  The only ships able to carry the Zircon is frigate and subs, and that barely a combined total of 11 ships Secondly the US has already created its hypersonic weapons and they are both superior to Russia's junk The Long-Range Hypersonic Weapon (LRHW) has nearly 3 times the range and nearly double speed of the Zircon Russia has ran out of missiles The missile they are using are formerly nuclear cruise missiles with fitted with conventional warheads
    2
  123. Its certainly a intel coup for Russia but at the end of the day, Germany should have realized that Russia was closely watching and listening especially considering how much damage that Storm Shadow has done already and unlike the Storm Shadow, the Taurus can attack ships at sea which is one headache they dont want
    2
  124.  @meme4one  No indirect first with precision missiles its all precise targeting
    2
  125.  @SCscoutguy  The problem there is that if the NLOS was considered, it would go back to why not add the Brimstone instead of NLOS as far as the UK goes But then ,the brimstone's problem is that MBDA ability to met the scale the UK needs is has been issue In 2012 ,UK received its 500th Brimstone with production at 2000 missiles The US ordered 24,000 Hellfires just in 2012 The US Army isnt buying a massive order yet due to possible conflict with JAGM increment 2 and 3 which are supposed to do what the NLOS does
    2
  126.  @FuriousFire898  So far out off 133 built 37 destroyed
    2
  127. Ukraine needs to speed up the RIM-7 and Buk project so they can have effective defense again gunships at long range. The KA-52 is taking advantage of that gap Between MANPAD and SHORAD ironically the US Army had dropped the AIM-9X in favor of the hellfire and Stinger for the stryker SHORAD as well the USMC had also dropped its Avenger units The KA-52 has renewed the need for US forces to have SHORAD defenses able to engage gun ships like KA-52 before they get in range
    2
  128.  @luciussander8217  They need at least 100 units
    2
  129. As far as we know it has none There are two options on the table they can consider The USMC is looking at equipped its F-35B with NJG pods so it can function as a jammer as needed The option which is the likely one is the MQ-9 The MQ-9 has several kits that can fill the roles that QE need
    2
  130.  @heisenberg906  The IAF has claimed several times that they downed an F-16 but they have zero proof. All it is them trying to save face If the IAF had downed an F-16, where is the crash site? The IAF claimed its crashed on the PAF side but plane crashes produce considerable wreckage which is impossible to cover up Secondly commercial satellites would spotted it When the US attacked Syria, independent sources confirmed the strike from commercial satellites so the fact that the IAF has no actual wreckage says its all Lastly ,the IAF is buying new missiles because they admitted that the Russia R-77 were inferior
    2
  131.  @heisenberg906  The only thing that is known is that a IAF MiG-21 got smoked by the PAF plane Secondly the PAF does not fly MIG get your facts straight
    2
  132. The simple answer it doesnt as far as Ukraine is concerned ,however Russian forces its desperately needed moral victory
    2
  133.  @AA-xo9uw  Incorrect its STOVL not STOBAR BAR in STOBAR stands for arrested landing which the F-35B does not do
    2
  134.  @maximusvaliant8597  Yawn yawn lay off the potatao juice their ivan
    2
  135. The Type-45s lack of true land attack capabilities has been sore spot for the RN While the Type-45 has advantages over the US burkes, the Burkes VLS is universal allowing to carry missiles for land attack While US ships can respond with TLAMs almost immediately, the RN has to rely on the RAF for response Kinda why the RN is looking to equip the Type-83 with universal VLS so it has same flexibility that US ships enjoy
    2
  136. Spine no There is no way to impose a no fly zone without directly engaging Russian aircraft Its possible to have aircraft and AWACS defend targets away from the front but Russian aircraft are not going to stay at the front
    2
  137. Yes but they cant do it over Ukraine without directly engaging Russian aircraft
    2
  138. Yes the UK needs more Typhoons but not those models. The war in Ukraine has show that assets like EA-18G would be invaluable. Russia's EW has been a major show stopper as Ukraine lacks the means to deal with it effectively. EA-18Gs would have no problem locating and destroying Russian EW sites Additionally, the EA-18G primary of SEAD again invaluable. The newer variant of AGM-88, the AARGM-ER range is 160 miles That allows it to engage everything short of the S-400 and S-500 The UK should invest in the Typhoon EK with SPEAR-3 SPEAR-EW and SPEAR-5 capability A Typhoon EK backing both F-35B as well Tempest would keep both combat effective for decades to come
    2
  139. They need Typhoon EK for EW
    2
  140. Its being rolled out to the whole army
    2
  141.  @operator9858  No ATACMS would wipe out that line Ukraine is not going to win this fighting tactically they have to fight strategically Abrams holding the line does nothing In two ATACMS strikes, Ukrainian shredded two Russia airfields. The first strike destroyed 18 helos which cost Russia 10 KA-52s The damage from the second is still unknown but that also was home to Russian gunships That is the kinda of fighting Ukraine needs to do massive asset denial
    2
  142.  @wilbur948ie  Yet Russian need drones from Iran and missile from NK Russia may be exporting but thats only to countries who dont have any other choice The S-400 Triumf and Pantsir missile system were once hyped up but so far in Ukraine, not living up to the hype Same with the T-90, KA-52, Su-34 and whole long list of Russian equipment getting shredded wholesale in Ukraine Hell the freaking M2 Bradley has been a super star even withstanding direct hits from missiles and tank main guns Taking a licky and keeps on ticking The same cant be said for Russian equipment
    2
  143. The F-16 has gone as far as it can go and needs to be retired The increase demands of modern warfare are too much for it now
    2
  144. The F-16 was backed doored into the USAF as the Figther Mafia claimed that the F-15 was just another F-4 The F-15 performed beyond expectations so F-16 instead replaced the F-5, F-101, F-105 and other aircraft while the F-15 retain the air superiority role The USAF between 50s till the 70s had massive overlap with aircraft By the 80s it was F-15, F-16 and few . By the 90 F-15 and F-16s were the mainstay with the rest being retired There was some good from the F-16 As for the Su-27 It was different case, Till 2001 Mikoyan was top dog due the MIG 19/s-21s performance in the Vietnam and the Middle East However when the Teens series was introduced , Mikoyan rep went took a massive nose dive The last straw for Mikoyan was Serbia where MIG-29 got its ass handed to it yet again After that, Sukhoi took over as the mainstay for Russian forces
    2
  145. So basically V-2
    2
  146. Its good step but now move up to MQ-9 testing
    2
  147. ​ @1chish  The 14 that UK has wont have problems finding new homes The A400M has fixed its issue but there is no market for it Hell Spain is looking at canx its remaining orders The mistake that they made was asking the USAF to buy it They should have asked the USMC and likely would gotten sale The USAF has C-5,and C-17 so there was no need for the A400M The USMC relies on the C-130 as well as support from the USAF The A400M in theory would have reduced the USMC need for support from the USAF which is appealing EU companies are so focused on the USAF, they forget that USMC has unique position to buy things
    2
  148.  @bobsmith3983  How about no The F-22s has actually done real world operations that vaildates most of it capabilitis The J-20 is just an air show plane
    2
  149. A lot of new, untested equipment and inexperienced pilots which literally sums the Chinese air force The F-22 has deployed multiple times overseas and to real operations as has the F-35 whereas the J-20 has never left China Sending the F-22 and F-35 pays dividends for the USAF as they gain valuable data during their deployments as they are able to see how they perform as well as resolve any possible problems. More the point ,sending aircraft abroad how you get actually real world data China keeping its J-20s in tight box trying concealing its capabilities only backfires on them Hell Russia did the same with the Su-57. Sent into Syria for real world operations. The Russian air force was using the Su-57 on sly in Ukraine, however as the number of newer and more advanced systems like IRIS-T and NASAMS and other on the way, they will stop using the Su-57 as these systems far more capable Till the J-20 actually does real worlds operations far outside the box China keeps it in, it will never compare to the F-22, F-35 or even the Su-57
    2
  150. Simple answer it doesn't The J-20 is literally a joke compared the F-22 and F-35
    2
  151.  ruoyulong5130  We can safely call that a lie
    2
  152. China needs to give it rest. Airbus and Boeing duopoly is beyond solid, its damn near a force of nature The notion they think they can break into the market is beyond absurd especially with the notion of 100 percent Chinese made parts and engines
    2
  153. As far countering tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft goes, the J-20 is pretty much becoming useless in that regard One of the unique features of the IRIS-T is that seeker is sensitive enough to allow it to be targeted against both air to air and surface to air missiles The Russian R-77 also claims the same performance ,able to down both air to air and surface to air missiles as well precision-guided munitions The AIM-120D FR3 currently adds that ability to target both air to air and surface to air missiles as does the AIM-260 JATM The F-15EX with AMBER can carry up 22 AIM-120s vs the J-20 load of just 4 BVR missiles ,even without AMBER, the F-15EX still carries 8 AIM-120 The J-20's ability to target tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR relies them attacking from outside defending fighters range,however its moot if the defenders can shoot down the missiles In order to protect the missiles, they will need J-16 EW to jam radar, without , those missiles won't get near tankers, AWACS and other C4ISTAR and they can't risk getting up close The J-16 problem is that the E-3 , E-2D and the E-7 would not have any issues with its jamming. Unlike the Russia, the US heavily invested in aerial jamming with the EA-18G, EC-130 Compass call and the newer EC-37B, AWACS. Training with these assets makes it easier for them to deal with the J-16s jamming as well EA-18G, EC-130 Compass call and the newer EC-37B counter jamming The J-16 last and by far biggest problem is the RC-135 Rivet Joint and Combat Sent which can read the J-16s jamming So J-20's role has quite a hurdles to overcome
    2
  154. True but the critical fact is that isnt enough for a sustained conflict if you factor in mission needs, losses , accidents and maintenance Ukraine would need 40-60 planes, There are only 300 JAS-39s built With the F-16 there are over 4600 built Enough for Ukraine needs right now For the future, yes buy JAS-39E/F but for now its F-16
    2
  155.  @MrCABman1972  Thats not how it works The aircraft would be Ukrainian use as they paid for them but they still need maintenance, support and logistics. Aircraft have to be supported by the manufacturer ,that universal for any deal and supporting JAS-39 equipped to use cluster munitions would be a violation of the CCM. There is no getting around that fact Ukraine wants the JAS-39 right now because they need to build up their air force numbers , hence why are also open to Mirage-2000-5 as well possibly F-18s They need western air craft able to do more than what they have
    2
  156.  @MrCABman1972  No excuses ,simply facts Sweden is party to Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), they wouldnt be able to add cluster munitions to the JAS-39 or even allow it as that could be considered a violation Ukraine need AGM-88s and the JAS-39 cant use it Germany has refused the KEDP-350 So again Ukraine needs to find a weapon The F-16 is already weaponized for Ukraines need
    2
  157.  @1chish  Lets see The F-35s aboard carriers would considerably closer. This would allow the US F-35Bs to use Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)/ Naval Integrated Fire Control-Counter Air (NIFC-CA) capability with F-35s acting as sensors The UK already tested its Typhoons with the F-35 Multi-Function Advanced Data Link (MADL) with Babel Fish trials similar to the USN CEC/NIF-CA This would allow both US and UK F-35s to spread out and stealthly sweep the Yemen. The Houthis have radar sites but are moving them constant to avoid attacks The F-35s stealth and sensors would be ideal for this situation The GBU-39/53 and Paveway IV/GBU-49 also ideal if they come across a high value target, they can service it instead of waiting There is a lot the F-35 can do but most importantly , it goes back your point PRO -would say its great chance CON- would say you spent all that money for them just sit for them to set on sidelines because of cost
    2
  158.  @gone547  He is wholly unqualified for the position point blank How much time do you think military commanders had to spent explaining things to Sec Def Austin or Mattis Nada as far former commanders themselves, they required no explanation as 90 of percent of things as their time as being Generals in the armed forces ,they had the necessary experience As Austin and Mattis served, they truly understand the needs of Enlisted and Officers through the branches The Sec Def position point blank should people who have at least held the rank O-8 or higher in the Armed forces The Sec Def is supposed to be the subject matter expert to president on military affairs Hegseth has never been a Flag officer and never held an strategic positions within the military Why do you think Mattis and Austin were confirmed with relatively ease As former flag officers in the US military ,there was zero doubt about them being qualified for the position
    2
  159. It keep with Trump's theme putting unqualified people in key positions
    2
  160. Russian morale is in the crapper so everything is big deal to them
    2
  161. Lockheed isn't at FRP unit and the UK is still trying to figure what they want to do
    2
  162.  @1chish  In order for SELEX to be a "world leader" with AESA, they would have had to deliver same amount and diversity as the Northrop, Raytheon and ELTA Those 3 have delivered the same amount and diversity , Selex has not No Typhoon is 3rd in radars and sensors The F-15EX beats the Typhoon because it can simultaneously carry SNIPER XR, LEGION and DRAGONEYE pods in addition to its own systems
    2
  163. If they don't run into the normal drama with European joint programs, this could be a very good plane
    2
  164. They are certainly taking their time
    2
  165.  @lukeallison3713  Expensive is relative if they were only buying for the RN, then yes but a buy for RN, RAF and possibly the British Army would drive cost down quite a bit
    2
  166. Combat is fought with every advantage you have. ISIS can only do some much whereas the West has been killing them at wholesale prices
    2
  167. No what JDAMS can do is cross off Russian targets whole sale Ukraine is currently limited to munitions with 200-300lbs class warheads JDAMs changes that to 500,1000 and 2000lbs class options Imagine know Ukraine forces dropping 20000lbs accurately , more to point, JDAMS can been launched from 15 miles away accurately
    2
  168.  @bobsemple9341  Yeah no where is all the fighting taking place outside Kyiv nope near Kyiv nope All the fighting is taking place in the separatist regions Funny how Ukraine pushed Russian forces back to literally Russians doorstep
    2
  169.  @bobsemple9341  Hope is what Russia is clinging to
    2
  170.  @darreloutland4604  its the same thing they used Isklander as basis for the Kinzhal
    2
  171. @Wolfmaster057 Hypersonic weapons are not overrated, the way China and Russia uses their hypersonic weapons is overrated China took a short cuts and its DFs are massive launchers that can be easily tracked and destroyed. The only ship with hypersonic weapons is their Type-055 again too few to matter. Even the CH-AS-X-13 on the Xian-H6 again too few to matter Russia's hypersonic are pretty much the same , too few to matter The MIG-31 can only carry 1 Kinzhal and they have to be specially modified to carry it Only the upgraded Tu-22M3M can carry the Kinzhal and even then, only carry 4 missiles The Zircon requires specially modified ships and subs which again too few to matter The US AGM-183 ARRW program alone is vastly to superior to Chinese and Russia programs in every way possible 1 B-1B can carry up 31 missiles. Even with the USAF inventory of just 62 planes 5 planes can carry up 155 missiles. The US can literally overwhelm both China and Russia with just 5 B-1Bs each The ARRW range is 1000 miles and claims Mach 20 as its designed speed From 1000 miles, away , at Mach 20, they can strike targets in 4 mins, 2 min at 500 miles The key factor is that B-1Bs with EA-18G jamming can attack both Russia and China defenses from over 500 miles away The current combination of ALQ-99 , AGM-88 and TLAMs gives Russian and China defense both on land and in air ample time to counter attack The EA-18G still has to get close but the high speed of the ARRW reduces the chances of interception by aircraft As for Russia's nuclear torpedo Just more hot air and incredible stupid idea
    2
  172.  @wadopotato33  The irony of your statement is that Russia is exact reason why the US military is heavily invested in SEAD/DEAD As for SEAD/DEAD Its not prohibitive when you have the right tech for the job You need airborne jammers like the EA-18G, Typhoon EK, Tornado ECR and the proposed JAS-39 EA Said jammers need advanced tech like the Next Generation Jammer which is designed to counter AESA radars You also need assets like Rivet Joint for locating sites You need long range missiles 300 mile range for attack S-300/400 sites. The AGM-88G can attack SHORADs as well other medium range defenses Lastly you need stealth for support If cost is problem, one of the proposed items was make lite Growler assets Regular F-18E/F without all the custom EA gear but still wired to use NGJ pods You still get a jammer but minus a few bells and whistles The latest trend is roll/off kits that turn regular assets in weapons platforms there are ways to reduce cost
    2
  173. I would not say that Russia was unprepared or gambled, Ukraine has shown how ill equipped Russian forces are for conventional warfare Russia's tactical failure in Ukraine can be traced back to Battle of Antonov Airport Russia's plan was to capture that airport and land IL-76s full reinforcements and make V line direct for Kyiv 7 miles away With Kyiv captured, the rest of the country would fallen easily But that plan fall apart Just as the second run at Kyiv As for lack of air superiority Russia has no airborne jammers or SEAD aircraft The list of Russian air force short comings in Ukraine is miles long
    2
  174.  @michaelmcnally2331  its called cost The KC-45A A330 MRTT' principal problem was Airbus has no presence in the US military training, logistics and maintenance with the USAF would all have to be built up from scratch Boeing's only mistake was not using the 767-400ER air frame Incidentally ,Airbus has the same issue as the A330-200 is out of production but there still demand for tankers
    2
  175.  @MAINT03  You obviously didnt The drama started when the USAF tried to wet lease the KC-767A instead buying them There was no need for request for proposal (RFP) or invitation to tender (ITT,) It should have been sole award direct contract
    2
  176.  @1chish  The A330 was never in the cards. The USAF should have brought the KC-767A and avoided all that drama Boeing principal advantage they are built with up training, logistics and maintenance with the USAF AIrbus would had to do that all from scratch
    2
  177. Thats about right
    2
  178.  @1chish  Thats a sensible decision to use the Typhoon but the question is how long will take to develop the electronic warfare systems ?
    2
  179. HenryDavidT the UK would have gone with CATOBAR if EMALS and AAG were ready at the time the QE was being built however neither was even right now, the AAG is still not quite ready The UK can interoperate with the US on its LHA/D class ships with the F-35B but not on CVNs like the French Rafale.  The root of the problem was the Eurofighter. If they had agreed for a carrier capable of the EF, France would have stayed in that project.The result would be a carrier capable EF that UK could have used for its QE class. It would have given the UK similar capability like the US and France and allowed UK planes to train and operate on US CVNs like the French do Hell right now , French and US is looking at 18 Rafales possibly operating of a US CVN while the De gulle is repair
    2
  180.  @lmaoroflcopter  E-3 and E-7 require a land base or hours via aerial refueling to get on station By having "organic capabilities on hand, they can be launched and recovered as needed Hence why the US Navy operates E-2Ds and rarely relies on USAF E-3s An MQ-9 with Skyguardian for AWACS would massive boost for the UK
    2
  181. @@JimCarner The Mojave can carry same kits as the MQ-9
    2
  182. The Mojave equipped with MQ-9s kits would solve a lot the QE class problems for organic of capabilities The MQ-9 can be fitted with the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) payload for ASuW /ASW The Skyguardian for AWACS Develop a 3rd kit for electronic warfare All that would be left is a platform for aerial refueling
    2
  183. That expensive stuff is combat proven whereas the AW249 is still very much a footnote The UK opted for AH-64E over WAH-64 MK2 was it was cheaper As part of the Improved Turbine Engine Program (ITEP)., the AH-64 will receive the newer General Electric T901 which produces 3000 shp The AW249 T700 is 2503 shp Lastly , the UK uses the Hellfire, JAGM , Brimstone and Spike NLOS All of which are already integrated with the Apache The AW249 has 20mm cannon which the UK does not use. While WAH-64 and AH-64 both uses the same 30mm cannon and ammo Additionally AW249 would have to go through process of integration Hellfire, JAGM , Brimstone and Spike NLOS while its already done on the AH-64E As someone hilariously mentioned, the AW249 can use the Sidewinder and Stinger which the UK doesnt use The AW249 is not worth the problems for the UK
    2
  184.  @solinvictus1234  Incorrect The Spike ER is IR/EO which allows A129 to fire and forget. The problem with using laser targeting with A129 is that laser designation is nose mounted which means it has to stay unmasked to maintain lock which for the A129 is not advisable. The Apache on the other hand has various options Sure it can not
    2
  185.  @solinvictus1234  Incorrect The Apaches MTOW is 23,000lbs while the AW249 is only 18,298lbs your math doesnt add up secondly the stubwing design is still the same as the A129 so it does not carry 16 atgm
    2
  186. Because the Apache is the gold standard for attack helicopters
    2
  187. By all means then Have Iran test that hypothesis
    2
  188.  @Whisk3yKnight  The SM-6 is designed for anti missile aircraft as well ballistic defense
    2
  189.  @teatime6597  Panstirs have been ineffective so far 8 TB2 is barely anything
    2
  190. The Abrams engine is multi fuel ,however it gets the best performance with jet fuel Diesel will work but just not as good
    2
  191. In this case, the ships in question won't be underarmed thanks to MK-41 universal capability As for the numbers Its quality over quantity The QE class has few F-35s but 1v1 against the Admiral Kuznetsov with its Su-33 and MIG-29K, the few F-35s would easily defeat all 3 Same with the China's carriers and the J-15s, no match Its not how much you have , its what you have Lastly As for tanks, You dont need that many any more One USAF F-15E can carrying up 28 GBU-53 storm breaker which 105lbs warhead can shred any armor regardless of APS and ERA The UK Eurofighter and F-35B will have similar capability with the SPEAR-3 You dont need a large amount of armor when your air force can kill several tanks whole sale per plane
    2
  192. 7 months ago, the Russian military had respect 7 months later, the Russian military is literal joke
    2
  193. Yeah no
    2
  194.  @EpicThe112  And all we have seen so far is destroyed tanks
    2
  195. The Gripen is the only real choice but getting to them is a problem
    2
  196.  @bjjace1  They are getting planes , just not the F-16 or Gripen. As the MIG-29 has been successfully integrated with the AGM-88 and they working on the locally upgrading MiG-29MU2, More than likely, it will be more MiG-29 upgraded with western tech The route I would go would AIM-9M/R and AIM-120C-5 gives Ukrainian decent WVR and BVR capability AGM-84 block II plus land and sea targets. AGM-65 and GBU-12/16 for general purpose with second gen targeting pod UPAZ-1A buddy refueling pod so they could carry out extend range attacks
    2
  197.  @mwtrolle  Wrong on all counts Its not quantity vs quality its called feasible How many Gripens are available right, estimates say just 271 examples Factoring in combat losses, the possibility of accidents and aircraft down time There is no way that the Gripen can meet the Ukraine's needs if Ukraine had 112 Gripens in place of its MiG-29, Su-24,25 and Su-27s and the current Gripens operator had at leas 80 planes each with the Swedish air force with 160 plus, then the Gripen would iffy as feasible goes , they would be able to source aircraft from operators as needed but again SAAB would still need to boost up its production line. The Gripen would be perfect but its not feasible The F-16 is feasible as the USAF alone has 1200 F-16s. They could earmark 200 F-16s for Ukraine as well replace losses with virtually no effort The F-16 does not have the Gripen's ruggedness but has the numbers and weapons to fight on a much wider scale Secondly Right now what needed is the F-16C/D Block 50/52 Plus and UPAZ-1A buddy refueling pod F-16s with AIM-9M/R and AIM-120C-5 gives Ukrainian decent WVR and BVR capability AGM-84 block II plus can strike both land and sea targets 77 to 120 miles away AGM-65 and GBU-12/16 plus the gun is all the weapons the Ukrainian air force needs There is enough older models in the US inventory that would prevent Russia from gleaming anything The block 52 supports Conformal Aerial Refueling Tank System (CARTS) which allows the F-16 to use drogue instead of boom The UPAZ-1A buddy refueling pod fitted the MIG-29s allow them to act as mission tankers Why this is important The Black sea fleet is Novorossiysk which 700 miles round trip. F-16s with CARTS and MiG-29s as mission tankers would be able to strike Novorossiysk with ease As well all targets in Crimea The additional benefit of the CFT has Israeli has done is EW Israel has added in additional EW in the empty spaces on the CFTs which Ukraine can take advantage off
    2
  198. Factor in combat losses , and other factors the 271 Gripens built are not feasible for Ukraine The USAF allow operates 1200 F-16s out of 2300 in inventory The USAF could provide 200 F-16s considerably faster The other factor is that Poland , and Romania which borders Ukraine uses the F-16s More countries in the EU use the F-16 ,so getting Ukraine pilots training is extreme easy and dont have to travel far
    2
  199. The RAF getting the F-35A was never in cards because it would have been a threat to Eurofighter procurement as well as the Tempest
    2
  200. Literally wrong on all counts there buddy All the upgrades for F-35s can be applied to any of the models. There only differences is weapons and engines. The F-35B can use the same weapons the rest but some weapons can't be carried internally. The STOVL mod for the F-35B also requires changes with the F-135 but they are still essentially the same engine There technology and avionics are the same Block 4 upgrades are applied to any F-35 model ,its simple user preference Some customers are fine with Block 3, others who want higher specs can ask for block 4 or buy F-35 Block 4 specs As for payload, again wrong The F-35B doesnt have internally cruise missile yet as the Joint Strike Missile (JSM) has been intergrated yet but JSM design to carried internally by all F-35s models Increasing the F-35B payload is simple investment The Powered Joint Direct Attack Munition (PJDAM) program turns a regular MK82 into cruise missile with 300 mile range and can be easily intergrated to the F-35B
    2
  201. While the Brimstone is awesome, its too much missile for Ukraine In order to exploit its full potential, it need advanced FCS to guide which Ukraine doesn't have The Hellfire is the better option because one, its laser guided and getting laser designation equipment to Ukraine is simple Two, the US military has a mountain hellfires to spare while the UK stock is limited The US ordered 24,000 missiles just in 2012 alone. 7300 missiles in 2019 While the Brimstone can simultaneously engage multiple targets, again you need advanced FCS Unless the Uk is planning on provided a mobile FCS or the Ukraine use the missiles in INS mode only
    2
  202. They actually can go 130mm. They tested a 130mm mounted on C2 hull which means that option is available once 130mm is complete
    2
  203.  @kenjifox4264  Combined with the fact that T-90s technology has been in western hands The T-14 is the only tank that Russia has that hasnt been compromised by the west So without large numbers of T-14s The T-90/80/72s are basically target practice and if the NATO does adopt the 130mm, then it force Russia to counter Many believe that Russia will adopt a 152mm round but how many rounds can that tank actually carry
    2
  204.  @Saxondog  Thats was WWII This modern warfare very very different weapons and technology
    2
  205. The KAAN just like clumsy No sharpness to it like other 5th gen
    2
  206. Clumsy defines the KAAN design
    2
  207. Its by no means an answer to the Barret
    2
  208. Its fine Their propaganda machine would never allow it They have keep up the myth that Russia is holding its own
    2
  209. Essentially what Ukraine can use punch Russian forces light out
    2
  210. The drone issue moot The point is light weight easy to deploy system This only weighs 1.4 tons compared to a Foxhound 7.4 tons This can be carried by CH-47 internally while the Foxhound has to be sling loaded
    2
  211. Nope
    2
  212. Simple This is already built and available and in production Sure the UK could build its own but the bean counters would ask why build when you can buy
    2
  213. That would be incorrect The US uses Paveway IV under the designation GBU-49 however its only intergrated with the F-35s When the F-35 first entered service, it had few available weapons. The US had no plans for the Paveway IV but as the F-35 already had it, They give it GBU-49 name and used it for early operations The F-35 is currently intergrated with GBU-54 now so the GBU-49 is on the back burner now
    2
  214. Its not that they skimped on supplies, its the fact that Ukraine forces attack on their supply lines is starting to have a real effect Putin and Russia forces had brushed off the West supplying Ukraine with ATGMs and MANPADs which are the very thing that is creating major problems for them
    2
  215. Europe could in theory do it but highly unlikely Europe's problem is their shear lack agreement They disagree on everything if they could stop for a minute and actually agree, they would be able to fight without US help
    2
  216.  @yellowtunes2756  t's about flying without being interfered by enemy planes, which is the case for Russia-Wrong true air superiority is total and complete control of the battlespace It's impossible to destroy every piece of equipment on the opposite side- Wrong USA lost 10k planes and helicopters in Vietnam.- You best statement is war decades ago that has nothing to with modern warfare your copium is hilarious Lets get the propaganda out of the way, if Russia destroyed 10 himars and 6 pzh2000 in August, they would have wasted no time parading the wreckage for the world to see yet nada. US military developed Persistent Air Support (PAS) which allows for total control of the battlespace. The first asset is the UAVs such as the MQ-9 which can function as both reconnaissance and strike asset The second is the E-8 JSTARS provide Airborne ground surveillance (AGS) as well communicates with the MQ-9 The JSTARS also provides battle management and command/ control of aircraft. Russia has neither The newer EA-18G can network together with multiple aircraft allow them generate targeting tracks for hostile radio-frequency sources in real time They narrow targets to down to very very small areas. Again capability that Russia does not have US aircraft carry Litening, LANTIRN and SNIPER XR targeting pod, Russia aircraft lack targeting pods The only Russian aircraft with an actual targeting pod similar to the Western pods is the Su-57. The MIG-35 OLS is basically the 80s era Pave Spike pod hopeless out dated JDAM, PAVEWAY, JSOW, JASSM, HARPOON and SDB I/II are standard to virtually all US military strike aircraft B-2 can't use PAVEWAYs or SDB I/II but it can use most everything else Lets look at Russian aircraft Not one Tu-95, Tu-22M or Tu-160 can use any of the KAB-series weapons ,more to the point only few aircraft can use them ? Same with missiles. In short, the Russian air force virtually no commonality with weapons, its literally a sock draw of capabilities The Russian air force convinced itself that SVP-24 was good as the western targeting pod and that has been proven false The short comings of the Russia military is endless Strange how the Su-33 and MIG-29K are on the sidelines It's impossible to destroy every piece of equipment on the opposite side- Wrong Its not about destroying every piece of equipment, its about rendering the enemy combat ineffective which the Russian air force isnt doing The way you render an enemy combat ineffective by neutralizing their supplies and weapons its 10 months later and that has yet to happen
    1
  217. Ukraine needs at least 150 more Gepard units to for an effective defense against drones, helo and missiles If they can get integrated air defence system (IADS) up and running, attacks would drop
    1
  218.  @yellowtunes2756  Thats not air superiority , thats propaganda. The Russians flying that much but thats all for show If Russia had true air superiority, that West wouldn't be able to readily supply Ukraine like they are doing If Russia had true air superiority, then HIMARS, Pzh-2000s and other West SPA would have been destroyed long ago If Russia had true air superiority, then Ukraine's counter offensives would have been over before they began True air superiority is total control of the entire battle space.
    1
  219.  @matteusvirtanen392  Compared the rifles that make previous shot This one is joke Its completely ill suited for rapid movement
    1
  220. Interesting but ultimately useless
    1
  221.  @lairdcummings9092  its a cheap short cut
    1
  222.  @TheJustinJ  Given size of the rifle they likely set him up in known location for Russian forcee and let things play out
    1
  223. its very possible and likely given that Ukraine is in full scale war But as anti-materiel rifle (AMR) its very poor design The reason why the M82 Barrett is the most widely used anti-materiel rifle is due the fact it it weighs just 30lbs which makes it extremely easy to carry and has 5 round mag for rapid fire You can get off 5 rounds quickly and easily dispalce The Horizon , you can't do that Setting up for shots with this monster is just a massive chore
    1
  224. The ships will never be close enough fire guns or CIWS its all missile shooting
    1
  225.  @ashleygoggs5679  The US Navy has plans for all its missile for future upgrades as for the UK, that remains to be seen
    1
  226.  @ashleygoggs5679  The Type-45 biggest joke is the Aster missile The US SPY-1 range is 175 miles but they can engage targets up 150 miles with the SM-6 The Sampson's range is over 250 miles yet the Aster maxes out at 75 miles All that radar without no weapon to maximize its capability
    1
  227.  @mrfr87  Active protection systems on tanks are designed to detect incoming missing The only logical solution is redesigning the APS sensors so they are accurate enough to detect small drones as well as software patching CROWS to act as CIWS
    1
  228. The CIWS can do the job but it would need to intergrated with the ships radar The CIWS is designed to be independent from the ships system
    1
  229.  @cerperalpurpose  That would be incorrect While the US has operated them since 2004, operationally they have considerably lower flight hours than US Apaches From 2006 to April 2014, British Apache helicopters flew 50,000 hours in Afghanistan A single US Army Apache unit flew 11,000 hours in 2014 In 2023 , the US Army hit 5 mil flight hours for its Apache So no, the UK Apache a lot of life left
    1
  230. No, the war in Ukraine is highlight Russia's KA-52 and Mi-28 short comings Thanks Iraq and Afghan, US Apaches and Cobra are equipped with more stand off capabilities Russian KA-52s and Mi-28 lack stand off capabilities as seen in their video they do more running and gunning then precision strike hence their massive losses One of the newer features of the AH-64E is that is receive real time video from UAVs allowing UAVs to scout all and locate threats The US Army is in process of upgrading the Longbow radar so they can use the SPIKE NLOS to max effect The NLOS can strike targets up 20 miles away. This is interim measure till JAGM increment II/III is available The JAGM III variant is supposed to be the longest range variant similar to the Brimstone II/III
    1
  231.  @leeprince9283  All areas The Flight I/II with the SPY-1 is limited to 175 miles with the SM-2 and SM-6 and requires external support for the SM-3 The Flight III with SY-6 is 300 plus miles with SM-6 1B and relies minimal support for the SM-3 The Type-45 is better than Flight I/II in air defense but outclassed by Flight III
    1
  232. Absolutely wrong
    1
  233.  @davidbevan3688  The RN for Type-26 and others have gone to the MK-41 It would even smarter if they got the tactical variant for land attack
    1
  234.  @SCscoutguy  Thats why the DDG-X is being designed with swappable moduble Instead of craning missile by missile Yank out the used module and replace it with a fresh one 2 hours at most As for the used module, the shore units can reload it If large scale conflict does erupt, VLS reload at sea is still unlikely unless its done well outside the combat zone Now, the USN did back in the 60s had ships with cranes for reloading SLBMs If they brought those ships back, reloading at sea would easily as support ship would simply crane on the new missiles
    1
  235.  @johnnytyler5685  We are not worried about then, we are worried about what can be done now and those systems can be done now
    1
  236. Operating it can be taught in as little as 3 weeks The problem is that its maintenance requirements take a lot longer to teach The smart play honest would be trading Patriot systems Countries that IRIS-T , NASAMS, Aspide, The US should trade or provide them with Patriots in exchange , they give those units to Ukraine as their forces as already familiar with them, its speeds things up
    1
  237. @Gus Gone Lack of suitable docks is not issue Repairing a ship that size goes considerably smoother when you use the dock where it was built In the US, Newport News Shipbuilding builds CVN as well does refueling and complex overhaul (RCOH) work in the same shipyard Docking the ship somewhere else means a whole lot of effort getting parts, material and personnel security is also an issue
    1
  238. Overstretched No Severely under equipped , yes
    1
  239.  @1chish  The quote Eurofighter GmbH or Typhoon consortium was founded in 1986 so again you come up short
    1
  240.  @1chish  Again trying to rewrite history The ATF was started in 1991. Two companies were selected in 1986 and prototypes flew by 90 with selection by 91 The program entered the Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) in 92 and fly by 1997 with delivery by 2003 and fully operation by 2005 Lets look at the Eurofighter European Combat Aircraft (ECA) programme started in 70s, then cancelled, then restarted Future European Fighter Aircraft (F/EFA) programme in 1983 France withdrew in 1985. EAP demonstrator flies in 1986 The EAP last flight was 1991 Production was till 2000 need I go on
    1
  241.  @1chish  Thats called delayed and no it does not compare to other projects I
    1
  242.  @1chish  One other point, the reason why there was no navalized typhoon was the Eurofighter program was massively delayed and behind schedule
    1
  243.  @chrismitchell4622  In simple terms not happening A hybrid between STOVL and CATOBAR is not feasible. The USN uses flat deck on the LHA/D and if the UK went CATOBAR, the F-35B won't suffer any lost in performance with flat deck. They would just mirror the US in take off Now for the practical problems As this will be a British solution You have to spend time and money developing EMALS and AAG As nuclear power is a touchy subject in the UK, more time and money developing an conventional electric system able to power the EMALS as well the ship France had no land-based catapult test facility, they took the Rafale to US to use the systems at NAS Lakehurst Thats yet another problem for testing the aircraft In simple terms, 20 years at minimum Why do you the UK army went to Rheinmetall for the Challenger 3 Most all the companies that built the original Challenger 1 and 2 were defunct Its easy to buy than build
    1
  244. There was no games being paid, the F-35B is the most complex and challenging of the 3 to build. Besides that, the US also to deal with politicians constantly trying to cut funding. The F-35B was targeted several times because of its issues for cancellation As for the UK changing its order, its simple abacus Future Combat Air System (FCAS) NGF plans to fly by 2027, if the Tempest wants to compete ,it has be either before or within the same year They need money and pulling it from the F-35B is simple gambit Besides the US and UK, there are 100 F-35B on order from other countries which means that F-35B production will be going strong for a while, easily into 2027 They can pull those funds and accelerate the Tempest so it able to pace or outpace the NGF but ultimately the UK won't keep their F-35B numbers to the bare minimum The decision to keep he QE STOVL makes that the odds of a navalised Tempest is highly unlikely
    1
  245.  @hishot1078  it doesnt have to be
    1
  246.  @hishot1078  At 47 plus tons , other SPA require specialized movers At 30 tons no so much How long to repair a track vs industrial tires Like the CAESAR, the Archer also has an 8X8 model Modern warfare is about speed, mobility, and lethality The Archer checks all those boxes
    1
  247. The smart move for the UK would be Swedish Archer The Archer at 30 tons is light enough for the A400M Other options are 47 plus which means they can only be carried by C-17s The Archer operational range is 400 miles whereas others between 200-260 miles The only draw back to the Archer is its lack of manual mode
    1
  248. Not likely
    1
  249.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  Lay off the propaganda and no potato for you Russia is 50 years ahead of the rest of the world in rocket technology. Lets recap that The AGM-183 is designed so that B-1 and B-52 carry between 12 to 31 missiles whereas Russia's Kinzhal Only the Tu-22 carries it and thats 4 missiles Strange how Russia's quote superior missile tech is barely usable
    1
  250.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  Oh living in denial Typical propagandist rants ICBM mines LMAO Its called ICBM sites ding dong
    1
  251.  @СерхиоБускетс-ф7я  You don't understand what Ukraine is doing and has done for the US The Su-34 and 35 all use the Khibiny system for self defense and the Su-30 uses SAP-518 jamming pods Both have fallen into Western hands Hell even KA-52s have ended up in the West So much Russia gear has ended up in the West hands, they are having to continuously revise their plans
    1
  252. How exactly would the UK run out of munition with the US as their ally?
    1
  253. Chair of the Defence Committee is obviously senile but his comment does work in favor for the UK military The Eurofighter uses the Storm Shadow which is produced by MBDA France however the US made JASSM and LRASM would be the better option for several reasons The LRASM can be used on the UK, P-8s and F-35s. It has topside canister launcher that be used on the Type-45 and Type-23. Adding it to Eurofighter gives the UK one missile that cover aircraft and ships. The JASSM-ER 600 mile range would be huge leap over the Storm Shadow. As Lockheed makes it, keeping the UK supplied wouldn't be problem The Sea Ceptor and Aster are capable missiles but Raytheon's SM-2/3/6 exist in greater numbers and producing them in greater is easy for Raytheon EU would easily run out their own weapons but the US would easily keep them supplied with US made weapons Its not knocking the EU weapons , its just saying by adding US capability , it gives the UK more Example In 2012, the MBDA deliver its 500 Brimstone to RAF In 2012, the US ordered 24,000 Hellfires
    1
  254. They should be focusing on perfecting hard kill defenses against torpedo's
    1
  255.  @meme4one  The cost of precision is going down and its getting easier and easier to make systems that were once unguided to guided which greatly increases 1 shot accuracy vs the walking rounds on target One the problems with air defense is they do need radar to locate targets at long radar and depends on terrain and radar even AESA still gives off emissions
    1
  256.  @bonifacenjuguna7453  oryx has confirmed the losses cope harder
    1
  257. Gepard dont have the range Ukraine need to speed up the RIM-7 and Buk project so they can have effective defense again gunships at long range
    1
  258.  @tankman66  Hence why Ukraine need to speed up with Buk and RIM-7 project The RIM-7 would give Ukraine the SHORAD it need to stop KA-52 long before they can get in range it also gives them a longer range against Su-35, Su-25 and Su-30s They have been shown able to survive a MANPAD but the RIM-7 90lbs warhead even with proximity fuze will down the target
    1
  259. Countering is depends how fast the RIM-7 and Buk takes The KA-52 is taking advantage of Ukraine's gap between MANPAD and SHORAD While Ukraine does not have the SHORAD yet They do have Storm Shadows The smart move would be to locate their Forward operating bases and pound them Storm Shadows The Storm Shadow 1000lbs warhead precisely targeted damage or destroy them on the groundf
    1
  260.  @davidrobertsemail  Carrier cant be operationally without its planes There are systems onboard that can only tested when planes are aboard
    1
  261. True but for now its needs to pass test to make sure its operationally ready (again)
    1
  262. The advantage of its size that its near super carrier level The US LHA/D are mini carriers but no where near super carrier level
    1
  263.  @johnallen7807  There UK's problems are easily solvable but its easier said than done
    1
  264. The F-35 is the least of the QE class problems If the UK wants the QE class to be a force to be reckoned with, they have a lot of work to do First the QE class lacks organic aerial refueling capability. They have to rely on MRTTs from land bases Secondly their Carrier onboard delivery (COD) is limited to Merlin Third, their AWACS again is limited to CROWNESTs on the Merlin 4th limited EW capabilities Last their F-35s lacks weapons The MV-22 would be able to address both COD and aerial refueling As for the CROWNEST, the MQ-9 Mojave would solve that problem and more The MQ-9 has SeaGuardian kit for ASuW/ASW and SkyGuardian for AWACS plus the UK's only protector kit For EW, they can follow the USMC plan to equip F-35B with NGJ pods allowing the F-35 to add dedicated EW as needed The UK has the SPEAR-3 which is lightweight weapon but they dont have heavy weight hard target weapon like LRASM or JSM If the UK can solve those problems, the QE class will be a force to be reckoned
    1
  265.  @AA-xo9uw  And again wrong
    1
  266.  @thetruthhurts7675  That very true that CVN need extra time but the big extra for CVN is flexibility Due to constraints of the STOVL , the F-35 is limited on what it can use while on ship The F-35B can use weapons 1000lbs or less on ship with no issue Heavier weapons like 2000lbs GBU, JASSM and LRASM present problems for the F-35B but not for CVN aircraft as the CATOBAR but developing lighter weapons for F-35B is a simply investment The UK chose CATOBAR simply because its considerably cheaper on the ship and aircraft and future tech like EMALS wasnt ready for prime time Ironically the Russian put forth a concept of hybrid carrier with both STOVL and CATOBAR which many be something that UK many consider for their next carrier
    1
  267. @jimfrazier8611 Incorrect The whole point of having long range is so the enemy cant surprise you Thats why the USN is trying to get more range out of ships and AWACS
    1
  268.  @fightforaglobalfirstamendm5617  That would be wrong While the QE has problems, they are completely fixable The MQ-9 Mojave which the UK is testing is compatible with the regular MQ-9 kits Thats Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) kit aka Seaguardian for ASW/ASuW. There is also AWACS kit in development An MQ-9 with BAMS and AWACS would address those short fall For electronic warfare, there are two options, the first an MQ-20 fitted for STOL with EW kit The other which is more likely is that USMC investment with the Next Generation Jammer program is variant of the pods that can plug and play with the F-35 without any modification besides software updating. As for weapons Again with the UK , its simple investment The USN was working on the JSOW-ER which had 300 mile range with a broach warhead , the USAF is working on the Stand-in Attack Weapon (SiAW) , Boeing working the Powered Joint Direct Attack Munition (PJDAM) and Lastly, the Joint Strike Missile (JSM) which already designed for the F-35A and C models The model for the B hasnt been developed yet. Of course, the weapon can only weigh 1000lbs and has to have a multi-role warhead for various target types )there are those options Or the UK can contract a company in UK to develop 300 mile range weapon able to attack both targets on land and sea targets but able to fit in the F-35B weapons bay The QE does have problems but they can be fixed
    1
  269. @jimfrazier8611 Thats why you dont put yourself in that situation
    1
  270.  @LunaticTheCat  They are sourcing units that have to be built The Aspide and Skyguards exist in the hundreds You can pair those missiles with newer radar and control systems much faster than waiting for units to be built Spain has 200 and they retired most, Italy has 37 units , Kuwait has 320 The 3 of them can easily source 100 units Most importantly, it can be armed with RIM-7 Sea Sparrow or Aspide missiles. As the USN is upgrading from the RIM-7 to RIM-162 ESSM They won't mind handing over a few RIM-7s as it allows them buy more ESSMs The RIM-7 has been successively upgraded by USN for counter missile and aircraft operations People are laser focuses on one asset when there other options out there
    1
  271. They need to rethink that and source other systems that can be fielded faster
    1
  272. What is the state of Royal Navy land-attack missile capability?-FYI thats the story navy lookout Britain’s warships have gym where land attack missiles should be -that tag line is all over As you clearly cant comprehend
    1
  273. its called facts try sometime instead of running off at the mouth
    1
  274. its hilarious when dingdongs comment about established facts What is the state of Royal Navy land-attack missile capability?-FYI thats the story navy lookout Britain’s warships have gym where land attack missiles should be -that tag line is all over As you clearly cant comprehend clown
    1
  275.  @composimmonite3918  Its hilarious when idiots you comment about established facts What is the state of Royal Navy land-attack missile capability?-FYI thats the story navy lookout Britain’s warships have gym where land attack missiles should be -that tag line is all over As you clearly cant comprehend clown
    1
  276. 200 at most is what they need
    1
  277. Not only does it make the pilots job easier it makes maintenance a lot easier
    1
  278. Ah how the mighty have fallen The so called mighty Russian bear beaten so badly they have to resort to using ICBMs The fact that they used ICBM is testament to the effectiveness of western defenses
    1
  279. The problem there is that IR scans across many wavelenghts so any protection would have been able to protect against that it can be done but it depends on how thick and weight
    1
  280.  @joeboom0697  The UK's intent is fielding to those groups first, then everyone else The UK's decision is about cost its more cost effective to buy KS-1 in bulk to meet all their needs
    1
  281.  @garagenigel  Yes it
    1
  282. True but at the end of the day Ukraine needs aircraft more than tanks. Ukraine just got the ATACMS with 190 range able to carry 500lbs warhead Thats going to be a major bane for Russian forces Submunitions are good for materiel and light armor but a 500lbs warhead is excellent for pin point strike against high value targets The Kerch bridge for example
    1
  283. Depth gauges are literally one of 3 things that has to work correctly on a sub the others being power and air supply
    1
  284. The simple answer is Ukraine its been 4 months and what has Russia actually accomplished very little. They have been constantly changing the narrative of their invasion as their failures mount
    1
  285.  @limedickandrew6016  Yep and old systems like the Gepard and Avenger that were bound for the scrap yard are getting a second lease on life as they have been super stars for Ukraine's defenses
    1
  286. Apparently a coupling on the shaft broke. By comparison, the QE while off the US lost an engine but that was repaired in 24 hours without a dry dock This is way more serious. How it broke is mystery
    1
  287. Its not insane Remember in Soviet Russia, there are only 2 Channels, Channel one with propaganda and other with political commissar asking why are you not watching Channel China has just one channel
    1
  288. @@karmakazi101 This isnt disposable either
    1
  289. On a scale of 1 to 10, its get a 10 for innovation While the MQ-9 is vulnerable to SAM, this drone has too many potential problems
    1
  290.  @stuartjobling9360  The F-16 is at the end
    1
  291. @@phillipbanes5484 If the USAF intent was to keep the F-16, they would buy new built F-16 with completely fresh operational life not invest in Service Life Extension Program (SLEP) Again wrong The USAF is SLEP not updating or upgrade, its simple an extension to keep the air frame flyable
    1
  292. @@phillipbanes5484 Again you have no idea what you are talking about The USAF is SLEP its F-16 till the F-35 is fully fielded, what part of that do you not understand Due to COVID and project delays, the F-35 Full-Rate Production Decision has been repeatedly delayed and the F-35 production line is not full capacity which means that USAF has keep F-16s around longer than expected. The original FRP was supposed to be in 2018 SInce that didnt happen, the USAF has to extend the F-16 life The program your incorrectly trying to use is the Post Block Integration Team or PoBIT which decided in 2022 If the USAF was truly intent on keep the F-16, they would buy F-16 block 72 not SLEP existing air frame
    1
  293. @@phillipbanes5484 Evidently you cant read
    1
  294. @@phillipbanes5484 incorrect The F-16 service-life extension program (SLEP) is only their to keep the F-16 operational till the F-35 is fully fielded The USAF only has 234 of 1372 F-35
    1
  295.  @frank-ko6de  Right so your claim is that Russian and China are not demanding the most from their 4th gen top fighters cope harder
    1
  296.  @frank-ko6de  The Su-35 carries 12 R-77s to the F-16 six AIM-120 Similarly the Chinese J-11 also carries more than the F-16 The USAF is not adding the JATM to the F-16 So again The Su-35s carries 2 R-37s and the Chinese J-11 the PL-15 Secondly the larger F-15E can carry substantial about weapons both defense and offensive as well sensors with little effort The F-16s limits its payload
    1
  297.  @Zatvornik  Lay off the potato juice their Ivan The fact that you are missing is that the Ukrainian air force has been sidelined for the bulk of the conflict There is no heavy fighting between them and Russian air force Secondly the pilots that are training are in the West and have been for many months Pilots training in the US, UK and Canada, while maintenance personnel are being trained in Denmark and Romania So your theory has more holes than swiss cheese Lastly no Ukrainian pilot would be that stupid As they would effectively giving Russia a gimme Ukraine has lasted this long but not being stupid
    1
  298. They still will The shootdown was against Russian assets not civilian targets big difference
    1
  299. @@phillipbanes5484 The F-15 has over 100 kills to zero losses while F-16s has been downed numerous times Secondly the F-15 airframe has far more growth then F-16 The F-15E/EX can carry SNIPER, LEGION and DRAGON EYE pods with minimal impact to its payload whereas the F-16??
    1
  300.  @kizzyp2735  Case in point The US and UK started dropping TLAMs and bombs on Yemen
    1
  301.  @kizzyp2735  Again this is the US not Russia The US would easily counter mobile launchers One of the problems that US had in Serbia was the F-16CJ , EA-6B and AGM-88s were ill equipped for dealing with mobile units. The newer EA-18G trilaterate targets to very small area and even track signal sources from cell phones The AGM-88G is now a mini cruise missile able to engage moving targets US aircraft have advanced targeting pods that can ID hidden launchers and bunker busters for underground sites RC-135 Rivet Joint track targets by emission Rivet Joint would get the general area the EA-18G would narrow it down Then they would either commit MQ-9s or RQ to examine the area Also remember that the US can easily neutralize Yemen's defense and fly MQ-9s with Hellfire and JDAMs or simple fly RQ-170/180s and let Houthi forces led them back to their hidden site and smoke those sites with cruise missiles or air strikes
    1
  302. Its called baby steps They are starting off small The RN has purchase an MQ-9 Mojave for testing The Mojave is STOL and if successful, the Mojave would open up the door for several capabilties that QE lacks
    1
  303. Its cost too much to go CATS and TRAPS Maybe with the QE replacement in the distance future but for now , the UK has to make do Ideally they MQ-9B STOL or Mojave fitted with mission kits would address a lot but not all of the QE shortcomings They should look at MQ-20 to see if its possibly for it operate STOL with mission kits
    1
  304.  @EnglishScripter  Thats what the Mojave is for
    1
  305. They sure cant thatts why they are buying MQ-9 Mojave The Mojave can be armed with up 16 Hellfires Ample firepower for dealing with rubber dinghies
    1
  306. Send them the Stryker MGS
    1
  307. The Tornado ADV would useful for countering Su-35 and MIG-31 however the F-16 or JAS-39 are still the best option for Ukraine
    1
  308. its not optimistic Its design and power limitations The current generation of UK ships cant support multiple units Secondly its called not putting your eggs in one basket 20mm CIWS and Dragon fire is potential combo
    1
  309. Nope Send 50 M6 Linebacker model those are Bradleys with 4 tube Stinger missile
    1
  310. Actually they not The US can afford to shed a few hundred Ukraine problem is lack of heavy metal but Uncle JDAM will solve that problem
    1
  311. Dig in and wait
    1
  312. Simple MK-48 to either of China's carriers and thats all she wrote
    1
  313. Simple Russian forces are being commanding by people who never served day or flew desk most of their carriers
    1
  314. The A400M problems ended up being a gift horse to both the C-17 program and C-130J Its delays sent many customer to the C-17s and C-130Js The RAF is trying to back to its original plan somewhat with just the A400M but key difference is they have C-17s as well The C-130J continues to popular if anyway , pretty sure someone is already looking to take them off the RAF hands
    1
  315. The simple fact is yes, 62 lives is not even drop in the bottle compared to other aircraft You wanna guess at how many lives were lost with CH-46, CH-53 and UH-60 that the V-22 replaces
    1
  316. its possible Given its massive size, and limited payload its likely has a lot space for fuel
    1
  317.  @bobsmith3983  Right because MAWS and RWR dont exist cope harder
    1
  318.  @ugvadugvaw  When you attach a new weapons to aircraft, the fire control system has to be updated to recognize the new weapon as well allow the aircraft to program the missile With the MIGs. the missiles are programmed on the ground and the pilots simply release it when they reached the designation coordinates There is no real changes made to MIGs FCS, just enough that they can release it The Storm Shadow, Taurus and SCALP is fire and forget. It has no post-launch retargeting capability WIth western aircraft like the JAS-39, they can reprogram the missile while in the air up to launch So with the JAS-39, you are doing a lot more
    1
  319.  @ugvadugvaw  They used a highly abbreviated process to strap those weapons to Russian aircraft The different here is cost
    1
  320. If Ukraine the time and numbers that wouldnt matter The JAS-39 is a lightweight powerhouse and Ukraine would do well with it but I think honestly, Ukraine will look for something else Problem one The F-16 can use AGM-88s while JAS-39 cant The AGM-88 is essential for hunting SAMSs, jammer and other EW sites so its must for Ukraine so if SAAB wants to sweeten the deal with Ukraine , they need to work on adding the AGM-88 s Problem two As Sweden is party to Convention on Cluster Munitions (CCM), they wouldnt be able to add cluster munitions to the JAS-39 Ukraine has uses cluster munitions to great effect. While the Alternative Warhead (AW) which produces 182,000 pre-formed tungsten fragments over area has been some what effective Ukraine has found that standard cluster munitions are far more effective both in anti personnel and anti materiel affects Ukraine used ATACMS with cluster munitions to shred Russian bases. The F-16 can use CBU-87/89/97 cluster munitions while the JAS-39 due to CCM , SAAB cant support or even allow it Lastly, the JAS-39 is only intergrated with KEPD-350 which Germany has refused to Ukraine. So for long range precision strike , its Storm Shadow which Lockheed can add There is the possiblity of JASSM-A Basically With the F-16s , there are very few hurdles with weapons whereas the JAS-39 has alot Honestly, the F-18E/F or Eurofigther Typhoon would be better in the future Ukraine issue with EW and Jamming, I wouldnt buy the EA-18G or Typhoon EK I would follow the Israeli air force path with taking a business jet and making it in to EW platform as well AWACS killing birds with one stone
    1
  321.  @yyperi  pretty much
    1
  322.  @1chish  The F-35 and QEs are expensive options But remember the Somilia pirates were costing billions till CTF-151 stepped in This is far worst The US needs to bring out the B-52s, B-1, Rivet Joint, R/MQ-4, MQ-9 to the support the USN. The QE is larger than US America class why thats preferred as to can operate a large number of US and UK and France can add some Rafales to USN CVNs
    1
  323.  @1chish  The Houthis are not backing down its getting time to take kids gloves off and get down to business
    1
  324.  @1chish  Actually you do The same argument applies to the QE class , Spent all that money just for them to sit on the sidelines
    1
  325. Ah yes, Russia's typical propaganda after getting their lights punched out by Ukraine Its over a year and where does Russian stand out no where Ukraine is now getting long cruise missiles able to strike at much longer ranges
    1
  326.  @alexlanning712  facts
    1
  327.  @Orbital_Inclination  He is wholly unqualified for the position point blank Yes strategic command experience is must How much time do you think military commanders had to spent explaining things to Sec Def Austin or Mattis Nada as far former commanders themselves, they required no explanation as 90 of percent of things as being General ,they had the necessary experience What does he know about military strategy nada Case in point, Obama appointed Gates another unqualified person to the Sec Def and they damn near gutted the US military The USAF was left with inadequate number of the F-22s and by the time Congress realize mistake, it was too late When you put wholly unqualified people in key people, it only ends badly. As Austin and Mattis served, they truly understand the needs of Enlisted and Officers through the branches No doctorate in political science is going to make up for that
    1
  328.  @eliasziad7864  lets see we are 18 months into it and yet Russia has gotten no where
    1
  329.  @jj2jj  as well as BMPT
    1
  330.  @eliasziad7864  ] Of course they would Whats Ukraine most advanced tech outside of what the West sent Basically nothing While Russia has lost T-90s. S-400, Su-34s , Su-35s KA-52 and several pieces of its latest hardware in Ukraine Thats pretty humiliating considering how much boasting Russia does
    1
  331.  @1chish  They will be operating concurrently but not quote change in orders for the F-35 Let like I said, they making a calculated move
    1
  332.  @AA-xo9uw  Spain 2023 budget has replacement aircraft for the AV-8B (Spanish Navy Harriers) and C.15M – 2nd Phase” with € 6.25 billion. The Juan Carlos I is amphibious assault ship so it does not have CATS or TRAPs for CATOBAR or STOBAR The AV-8B has been out production since 2003 and they have already red lined the AV-8B at 2029 So unless they are planning on retiring their Harriers without replacement? which does not sound like Unless they planning on developing FCAS with STOVL capability, The F-35 is only game for them to retain that capability for the Juan Carlos
    1
  333.  @pvp64  The UK needs money for the BAE Systems Tempest program and cutting F-35B gives them billions back in their pocket not someone else's Secondly the USMC, Japan, Italy and South Korea has considerable orders plus additional orders from Spain and Singapore which means that F-35B production line will be open for quite a while so if they decide they need more F-35Bs or got back to the 138 option, they can its very calculated and thought out move thats basically a win a win for the UK either way
    1
  334. You can't compare to the two The USN is main user of the Super Hornet aside from Australia and Kuwait while the F-35 has over dozen user orders that have to be filled Secondly the F-18E/F has been production longer while F-35 production is still ramping up to full rate
    1
  335. The irony there is that they can't improve it unless they deploy and use the system under operational conditions
    1
  336. And the USN isn't worried the slightest about overhyped Russian tech
    1
  337.  @meme4one  The UK MOD has already signed the contract for 623 Boxers Adding the Skyranger is ink a page and can be faster than it takes UK company to build a similar system
    1
  338.  @meme4one  Germany's Sky Ranger is ready and available and also compatible with existing boxers its a win win
    1
  339. Better option would be buying Germany Sky ranger
    1
  340. Its not huge it simple math. The F-35 completely crushed the 5th gen market for the West. There is literally no point trying to compete with the F-35. The 6th gen is differently from F-35. Specifically, EU countries are aiming for it to be an open market not cornered like the 5th gen so its no surprise that so many countries are banding together Trying to get all benefits with minimal risk but potential billions back
    1
  341.  @1chish  No you just like to twist facts SELEX (aka Leonardo) is similar to General Dynamics , a company that covers a wide array of defense programs , Like the GD, they have a hand in defense but not a world leader The F-15EX uses two Advanced Display Core Processor (ADCP) II which can process as high as 87 billion instructions per second of computing throughput Whats under the hood of the Typhoon again, nothing nowhere near that The PIRATE IRST is built into the airframe is its limited both in size and capability The Legion pod has vastly superior resolution and range and already has planned roadmap for increasing both resolution and network centric capabilities The DragonEye's pod which is AESA has allows the F-15EX simultaneously to look in multiple directions. The pod can survey the ground allowing the main radar to maximize its search capability for aerial threats vs allocating T/R modules. In sense it gives the WSO his own radar to use but by all mean continue with the pointless quotes that amount to nothing FYI The Air Force originally asked for funding to buy 33 F-35As in 2023, which was lower than the 48 the service asked for in 2022. Secretary Frank Kendall said the Air Force wanted to use the money freed up by buying fewer F-35s to develop the Next Generation Air Dominance platform, work on a new, advanced engine for the F-35 and more quickly bring on the F-15EX Eagle II Dec 7 Trying quote actual facts not months old garabage The USAF is not walking back on the F-15EX as they need it for the ANG units and if they walk back, it would mean they would have divest precious F-35 and NGAD to ANG which they are not keen on doing From the Sec Def Dec 3 Austin laid out some of the efforts the U.S. military is undertaking to strengthen that deterrence, including that on land, air and at sea.  In the fiscal year 2023 budget, he said, the Defense Department requested more than $56 billion for airpower. That is focused on the F-35 Lightning II, the F-15EX fighter, the B-21 Raider and other systems.
    1
  342.  @1chish  The CAPTOR-E sacrifices too much for the sake of being steerable. As SELEX being a world leader, thats abit of a reach Northrop, Raytheon and ELTA are the leaders as far airborne systems, Selex hasn't fielded munch
    1
  343.  @1chish  RR has both the F-136 and ADVENT already at their disposal so that massive savings in time and money which just leaves design Japan's experience with AESA tech is another gain for the Tempest radar who is developing there rest of the sensors ? Leonardo S.p.A.,helped with the IRST for the Typhoon but Tempest needs both IRIST and EOTS but like I said, neither has time, they need to move fast. They need to borrow pages from the US play book and get the individual tech rolling separately instead of waiting
    1
  344.  @1chish  Meeting member needs is easy but export is potentially more money back in your pocket as well possibly lower unit cost among members There are still many countries with 4th gen inventories that are still looking to upgrade that can't buy F-35 for what ever reason or are still buying 4.5th gen Greece, Qatar, Portugal, Thailand and the UAE are few of them. Taiwan would anger China but also operating an aircraft that close the China is too difficult Same with Ukraine. Turkey may show interest. There is a lot of potential RR was part of the USAF ADaptive Versatile ENgine Technology (or ADVENT) program between 2007-2012 so its very likely they will leverage that tech for the Tempest The ADVENT is designed for power generation for supporting DEW The fact that RR was part of the ADVENT gives them advantage of the Safran and MTU
    1
  345.  @1chish  Neither side has the time if they want to the 6th gen market to be open
    1
  346.  @1chish  that makes the competition in the EU so much interesting to see France on side and everyone else
    1
  347.  @1chish  So you what you are saying to dont include the French
    1
  348.  @Clickathon  Its them simply not argeeing to path and sticking to it No it did not at first, however the F-35 righted itself in the end India bailed because the Su-57 failed to meet its deadlines Russia plan was fly by 2008, fully operation by 2010 and market by 2012 with India IOC by 2015 Lets just say , what actually happened and the fact that as of 2022 only 7 production Su-57 exist was reason enough
    1
  349.  @Clickathon  The reason why the US dominates is because they don't have the problems the EU does The EU and joint programs have very nasty track record If the EU could learn to lay off the constant bickering, they would easily complete with the US
    1
  350. Germany, Spain, Canada, Australia, Korea, Norway, and even Poland will declare an intention to become customers and component manufacturers. Yeah, literally not happening Germany and Spain have already through their hat in with the FCAS program Canada literally wasted so much time with CF-18 replacement ,they literally don't have the time Australia is shifting from EU to US made due to fact its EU equipment has not enjoyed the constant upgrading as US made Korea KAI KF-21 Boramae program is own path to indigenous weapons systems, they are looking to make their own not buy Norway is very much satisfied with its F-35 as well as its support from Lockheed Poland is only country's position is ambiguous however they have expressed interest with the KAI KF-21
    1
  351. @Mullah Poster ' Boeing hasn't fallen behind Lockheed has the F-35 while Northrop has the B-21 Boeing the T-7, E-7 , P-8, AH-64, MV-22 and very long list of other programs bringing in cash both new purchases and sustainment The NGAD has already flown and the USN is not expected to commit to the FA/XX till the NGAD moves forward some more The key factor about the F-35 is that the US is committed to it As for leaning on patents Granted the F-22 ALR-94s, F-35 ASQ-239, MADL ,AAQ-37/40 and HMD as well ADVENT engines will likely be 'borrowed", there is still room for them for their own unique tech You have to remember that F-35 needed an incredibly powerful engine for the F-35B Secondly the Eurojet EJ200 has growth option for increased power
    1
  352. Its not about building your own, its about offsetting the cost 6th gen aircraft will be very expensive and even countries like Sweden which can build their own is doing partnership vice solo The F-35 crushed the 5th gen market and has put a lot money in the US hands The EU is aiming for the 6th gen to be an open market but going solo is a 10 percent chance given the complexity of the 6th Joint programs gives all the benefits with minimal risk and money back The US , Russian and China honestly dont have to do joint programs as they can easily shoulder the cost but for everyone else the increasing cost and complexity of aircraft make joint program the preferred option
    1
  353. The Tempest will replace their Typhoons and F-15Js
    1
  354.  @1chish  Russia is not part of Europe its part Eurasia Secondly its called Americas US and Canada in the North Everyone else the South
    1
  355.  @1chish  Europe or EU, same difference , I believe you are referrring to European Union but for US its, European union or Europe, dont really see much difference There are two projects in Europe or EU , the FCAS and Tempest SAAB is still fielding JAS-39E/F right now so they wont be buying anything for a while Like I said earlier The F-35 crushed the 5th gen market so the FCAS and Tempest goal is for 6th to be an open market The Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) formed with UK, Japan and Italy is interesting development none the less Japan has only committed a handful of the F-35s to replace the F-15J so its interesting to see what happens with GCAP The US has the lead with NGAD as its flown a prototype and entered the Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) phase while FCAS , GCAP , PAK DP trailing The FA/XX hasnt officially kicked off yet
    1
  356.  @1chish  Its not the first time, Japan has turned to someone else besides the US, its first time that Japan has embarked on such a massive endeavor outside of Japan Kawasaki Heavy Industries Aerospace Company , Mitsubishi Heavy Industries and Japan goal has always been indigenous weapons systems So its interesting to see them get involved with multi national EU project considering the EU track record However you are correct, Germany and France bickering is literally what everyone has come to expects from multi national EU projects
    1
  357. So will history repeat itself is the question
    1
  358. Joe Soap  'f Americans want to spend billions of taxpayers money to squeeze an extra 5 knots out of your carries suit yourselves"  5 extra knots ? US CVNs have been clocked at over 35 knots  
    1
  359. Japan sending 4 carriers across the sea was 1941, this is 2016, warfare and tactics are very different. The QE can travel a long distance , true but its has to limit its speed in order to conserve fuel. Example US CVNs can sustain 30 plus knots for as long as needed which allows them to get around quickly, QEs max out at 25 knots and are limited by fuel reserves. As for your nuke theory, nope. Both the US and UK have top of the line missile defense furthermore, no one what to get into a throw weight with the US. 14 SSBN tends to deter that idea Syria is mainly an air support mission, there are virtually no ground troops there Many ports dont allow carriers ,example in the UK, carriers park at sea and crew ride ferries plus not docking allows for faster departure
    1
  360. The LMUR is a capable missile but still very much moot The KA-52 and Mi-28 can only carry 4 missiles max Not very combat effective given the amount of targets that need to be engaged in Ukraine
    1
  361.  @lukeallison3713  Lockheed is working a sub launched LRASM
    1
  362. They need something in numbers and the HAWK is it
    1
  363.  @nosamsemaj9150  Its SOP to carry weapons for self defense in combat zone For as Syrian or Iranian aircraft honestly they are not that stupid
    1
  364. @Drew Peacock That would be false Despite their claims, the DF-21/26 and Zircon/Kinzhal require a complex ship detection/targeting, data processing for real time positioning and communication systems external systems as well as onboard guidance. Any one of those being jammed and the missile is paperweight. The DF-21/26 still need real time info to stay on targeting and the jamming is the simply way to blind it. China can't counter USN jamming unless they get close. Can't use satellites as the USN would smoke it with an SM-3 Chinese aircraft don't have the legs to be out that far and if they did, the USN/USAF would eat em alive. Chinese ships would also have to contend with USN subs In theory , the DF-21/26 sounds good against naval targets but in practical no so much The US has no doubt that DF-26 can hit Guam as its fixed location and they can do is build up its defenses but as far the DF-21/26 pulling of the KO against naval targets a lot of doubt. Granted the USN has upgraded its SM-6 to deal with the DF-21/26 to be safe but also realize that China has barely tested the DF series as they fear that testing would give the US the info its needs to accurately target it The TLAM is tried and true and needs no range upgrade The USN next weapon for land attack will be the Common Hypersonic Glide Body (C-HGB) but there are few steps before it get here first the launching unit called the multiple all-up-round canister (MAC) a derivative of Virginia Payload Module (VPM) has to be installed and tested on surface ships The CHGB is too big for the MK-41 or MK-57. The USN is going have balance the MAC with the MK-41/57 or equip ships solely with MACs Since the MAC is designed for heavier weapons, the USN may go the MAC route as it would allow for increases in the SM-series range The TLAM at 3500lbs is heaviest weapon in the Mk-41 system, the SM-3 is next at 3000lbs USN has strangely negated the ASROC for long time. TLAM or LRASM The US has the ARRW in development which can end the DF-21/26 before they launch. Now China in order to protect its DF-series would have move the missile further inland as well as build defense which is more problems for China. Russia's Zircon and Kinzhal has problems preventing it from being effective
    1
  365.  @glennridsdale577  "Sea Viper really is markedly superior to AEGIS as currently deployed, and will remain so until the Flight III Burke’s become operational in about 2025. That is why the US Navy likes to include a T45 in their carrier battle groups if it can possibly be managed." False. The Sea Viper has advanced technology but not capability. The Sea Viper has no Cooperative Engagement Capability capability which allows ships and aircraft spotter shooter capability. Nor does it have the battle management or weapon capability of Aegis for other types of warfare. Its use to the USN limited to none as it cant guide weapons As you said, the use of the SM-6 is too expensive but at least the USN has that capability if needed "to buy a fleet of E-2Ds would in itself run into the billions". False 6 -8 planes at most. CATOBAR are expensive but their capabilities cant be matched by STOBAR or VTOL carriers. The Type 45 need a major refit. The USN has planes for the TLAMS to gain anti ship capabilities which adds yet another multi purpose weapon
    1
  366.  Dave Klonpenberg @ Diesels are still a threat that USN hasnt dealt with effectively yet
    1
  367. @VIPICCB8 Hence why they may wanna consider a 3rd carrier built with CATOBAR for true power projection capabilities
    1
  368.  @bobsemple9341  11 months later is not winning Thats Russian forces losing badly
    1
  369.  @Rob-vv5yn  Incorrect The backbone of the Ukrainian air force is MIG-29, Su-27 and Su-24 which one, exists in large numbers in friendly hands Getting Ukraine replacement is not hard. Secondly the JDAM does not require the aircraft to be flying fast. Like all weapons has its both as both high and low altitude capability as well as maximum and minimum require speeds. Like everything from Russia, all we have heard is claims not facts about the MiG-31 Russia's Su-57 are attacking from outside as Russian fears them getting shot down
    1
  370.  @ericberg2131  Russia isnt winning this
    1
  371.  @darreloutland4604  No its reverse engineered from the Iskander
    1
  372.  @ericberg2131  Ah yes the typical propaganda what does regions show Russian failure All 3 are deep in the separatist regions Funny they are not knocking on Kyiv door's but Ukrainian forces are knocking on the separatist doors
    1
  373.  @wolfmaster0579  Kill chain is what people dont understand
    1
  374.  @frankrenda2519  You are very confused Unless Iran's drones do something unsafe towards US ships, they generally don't bother with them As for the S-400, its literally joke compared to the AEGIS, more to point, compared to Western systems
    1
  375. Advanced tracking systems able to provide accurate and real time information are far more important than building interceptors
    1
  376. What Irony Russian armor getting shredded by TOW
    1
  377. Hacking is near impossible however in Ukraine, the ATACMS knitted together systems have proven highly resistant to Electronic warfare while newer system have proven to be highly vulnerable to EW So most likely, there is low tech or will be low tech solution
    1
  378. True but once JDAM-ERs with paired with F-16 their accuracy will greatly improve
    1
  379.  @Zatvornik  lay off the drugs buddy Shooting Russian aircraft down while still in Russian aircraft is perfectly ok with the US and the West What they dont want is Ukraine launching ATACMS , SCALP/Storm Shadows against targets in Russian Case in point Russia accused Ukraine of hiding weapons in a old vehicle plant however both missiles Russian fired missed and leveled a mall nearby causing massive collateral damage Shooting Russian aircraft has little chance of collateral damage on the ground Lastly, Russian aircraft are attacking Ukraine while still in Russia so again the US and West dont care
    1
  380.  @davidhouseman4328  Even with its air wing, the UK carriers are far from being a capable force A few RIM-116 would give the QE class better chances.
    1
  381.  @andrewstephenson8243  An exercise and actually war are too very different things Carriers are protected by AN/SLQ-61 Nixie and AN/SLQ-61 counteremeasures Ironically the Gotland is why the USN upgraded the existing AN/SLQ-25 and further developed the AN/SLQ-61 as well developed the Anti-Torpedo Torpedo Defense System (ATTDS), The ATTDS failed to measure up but the drive for hard kill anti torpedo measures hasnt stopped
    1
  382.  @davidhouseman4328  He actually has a point. The UK hasnt committed to equipping their F-35s like the US. Right now they are just flying with PAVEWAYs IV which is for up close attacks but the UK still lacks range precision weaponary for its F-35s The US has the JSOW-ER,JSM, GBU-53 and the planned SiAW for their F-35 fleet. The JSOW-ER gives the F-35 long range hard target penetration with anti ship capability.The JSM long range land and sea targets. GBU-53s is short range multi purpose weapon and the SiAW is long range time sensitive strike/SEAD The UK has the SPEAR-3, and Brimstone planned which are light weight weapons like the GBU-53. Right the UK F-35 can defend against attacks from other aircraft but as far sinking ships are long range, not happening Granted a F-35 at 30 feet above the ocean with an internal weapons load can likely get up close enough to ring a ships bell with PAVEAYS but thats a risky tactic
    1
  383. Because the USAF is stupid it was clear that KC-135 wasnt cutting but instead of buying the KC-10 in larger numbers well the newer MD-11 they kept the inferior KC-135
    1
  384.  @1chish  It does that but it also has pod for specifically for the SEAD role for the Gripen EA: proposed electronic warfare (EW) ‘Growler’ or Electronic Attack variant of the Gripen F. Saab is making their version of the Growler There are somethings that US does play close to vest with
    1
  385.  @1chish  That doesnt make much sense I would figure they would try do something on the level of the US Next Generation Jammer pods or Saab Arexis escort jamming pod as far pods go as well try match the EA-18G as Saab is with the its EW variant of the Gripen
    1
  386. Its much simpler to apply the Growler package to the Typhoon than buying Hornets
    1
  387.  @jimbob100-d3l  All I hear is blah blah blah First The AEA community has been relying on the ALQ-99 TJS for decades,” Lt. Jonathon Parry, NGJ-MB Aeromechanical Project Officer, said in the news release. “Gone are the days of isolated Surface-to-Air Missile systems that operate on a small frequency spectrum and do not integrate into a larger Integrated Air Defense System. Modern adversaries are developing complex emitters that use advanced techniques to defeat legacy jamming. NGJ-MB will provide new capabilities to the fleet to ensure spectrum dominance against current and future threats.” One , dont you feel dumb Second Further development has led to the AGM-88G AARGM-ER, which was contracted for development by the U.S. Navy in January 2018. It marries the AARGM’s warhead, guidance, and control sections in a missile that has revised low-drag tail surfaces, aerodynamic strakes along the side replacing the mid-body wings, and a revised propulsion section for increased fly-out speed and broadly double the range. two look at you clown
    1
  388.  @jimbob100-d3l  Its called simple facts The AGM-88G range is 187 miles. The S-400 missiles reach out of 250 miles In order attack the S-400 with a AGM-88G, the launching aircraft needs to be at least 185 miles away The F-35 at best speed covers 65 miles in 3 min 15s The AGM-88G travels at Mach 4 which covers 185 miles in 3 min 30 plus seconds The current ALQ-99s suppressing S-400 is for 7 minutes is extremely difficult hence the need for additional resources such as EC-130s and ADM-141/160s The ALQ-99s were built under the Tactical Jamming System program in the 70s. Even with upgrades, they been having more and more persistent reliability issues, Which is why they need the future Next Generation Jammer Pods and ARRW
    1
  389. ***** "No I am not clueless Britain is only buying 48 F35's anyway" no you are clueless Britian has  42 on order with 138 planned the other half of the RAF being 160 Eurofighters with 137 delivered to date. The land basing the F-35 means what exactly? nothing The F-18 is used by 8 countries , only 1 actually uses it on carrier. buying a carrier capable plane and land basing it nothing new been done since the 40s "people underestimate Russian military jet capabilities" there is no underestimating, Russia jets are just crap The MiG-35 has been available on the market since 2007 yet to date only one country outside of Russia brought. India was given the choice of the MiG-35 in the MRCA and they passed in favor of deciding between the Rafale and Eurofighter the Su-30 you mentioned earlier the largest operator is India who builds it under license as the MKI. it has more western  technology than Russia built in it the Chinese MKK model also has more Chinese than Russia tech so countries with the capability to gut the Su-30 waste no time doing it
    1
  390. ***** wow you are clueless first even with CATOBAR, the SU-30 would have never been a choice period first look at size Length/Width the F-35B 50/35 Mig-29K 57/34 F-18E/F 60/44 Su-33 69/48 Su-30 72/48 next is size of the carrier The US operates the 100,000 plus CVNs so size of planes is never problem however the Russia carrier Kuzentsov at max is able carry 25 Su-33 due its large size hence the decision to add the MiG-29K and reduce the number of Su-33  the UK QE class is able to carry to 50 F-35s however its similar in size to Russia carrier so adding the Su-30 would cut the carrier's wing size by half or less lastly, is capability the Su-30 is able to carry 8 tons of weapons however it lacks many modern featurs no link 16, targeting pod,  its bombs and missiles are hopeless outdated example the UK uses US JDAM and PAVEWAY IV is dual mode laser/GPS whereas the Russian KAB series is single mode the Su-30s general purpose missile is 690 KG and is able to carry 6 KH-29 whereas the UK uses 48.2 KG brimstone and the F-35B carries up 18
    1
  391. Fedaykin24 The F-35B can operate on US CVN however it is not preferred. The decks of US LHA/D are treated for VTOL and be retreated to handle the F-35B http://aviationweek.com/awin/us-navy-details-ship-mods-required-f-35 CVNs decks dont have same treatments. Harriers have landed on CVNS but not conducted sustained operations is what you are missing. the F-35B can operate on those ships but as mentioned, the decks will have to be treated so it can conduct sustained operations. France leaving is why there the carrier version of the Eurofigther never got off the drawing board
    1
  392. The UK going to STOVL over CATOBAR saves them money at the cost of capabilities. as far as training, the French make use of US carriers and training centers no reason the UK cant do the say as for STOVL vs CATOBAR CATOBAR always has the advantage.
    1
  393. Sorry but for better or worse, the UK needs its Uncle Sam
    1
  394.  @YTStopCensoringFreedomOfspeech  That has nothing to do with the XM7' The first issue was that M855A1 round higher chamber pressure was burning out existing weapons second improvements with body armor raised questions about the 5.56mm ability to penetrate
    1
  395. Interesting ideas they have
    1
  396.  @lmaoroflcopter  If the UK wants to get the QE class up to the level as the USN CVNs The MQ-9s is the only way to go for their specific issues
    1
  397. @@JimCarner The Mojave is designed to everything the MQ-9 but with STOL capabilities
    1
  398. @@JimCarner AWACS for the MQ-9
    1
  399. @@JimCarner They already exist
    1
  400.  @FelixIsMyName  The QE For but not with design has been severally questioned
    1
  401. The QE class wont go CATS and Traps , Buying Mojaves with the Broad Area Maritime Surveillance (BAMS) and Skyguardian payloads as well buying MQ-20s with EW payload is far easier than dropping billions retrofit the carriers The QE lack of capabilities is only resolved by the investing or buying assets. Reconfiguring the ships is just not happening Now when it comes time to replace the QE,, EMALS and AAG should have reached the maturity similar to the C-13 steam cats making it viable But for now, its a no go
    1
  402.  @1chish  its not a myth EMALS requires a large amount of energy to work Since the UK isnt going nuclear, having time to research will allow ample to refine the technology more For starter, the EMALS is not made by General Dynamics Its made by General Atomics General electric brought Converteam in attempt compete against General Atomics when the UK was still considering EMALS for the QE As you stated , Converteam was working on the UK made EMCATS while General Atomics was offering the US made EMALS So GE purchase was simply power play in case the UK did want electromagnetic catapults for the QE The only thing that General Dynamics does is nuclear propulsion for USN subs Frances next carrier will use electromagnetic catapult, its interesting how or where they get from
    1
  403.  @1chish  They can land on a CVN but can't operate for extended operations. Thats only possible one LHA/D as their decks are specially treated for STOVL As for not buying EMALS or EMCATS Thats going to haunt the UK. The UK likely won't go nuclear with their next carrier so they going have engineer one helluva of power supply to support Hence why buying EMALS or EMCATS would allow them ample to time research
    1
  404. You have to look at all the cost There is heavy toll on the airframe every CAT and TRAP that they do For the US, its worth the expense The UK not so much As some one already stated, EMALS and the AAG were not mature enough but the UK still should have purchase both and worked on themselves for the possibly of future carrier The UK has full interoperability with the USMC abroad the LHA/Ds , just not the CVNs
    1
  405.  @JustmikeTangaiKetasi  Russia isnt fighting many countries their genuis Ukraine with just a handful of weapons from the west has been giving Russia the best
    1
  406.  @GunnerRA155  The AW249 has nothing on the Apache but of course crazies want to try and defend what doesnt exist
    1
  407. False again Poland made its decision in 2022 for AH-64E for tender. The lie that you are trying sell is for the AW101 not the AW249. Poland has license to built the AW10. Leonardo tried to use that deal to leverage for Poland's Kruk program however they lost , there was never any deal for the AW249 False again for the billionth time Leonardo has no license to build AH-64E. That ended when the Apache MK-1 was retired ,more to the point, no one has a license for AH-64E Quote the UK Ministry of Defence announced a $2.3bn purchase of 50 new AH-64E Version 6 (v6). Rather than entirely new-build aircraft, select airframes from the current AH1 fleet were sent to Boeing’s Apache production line in Mesa, Arizona, to be disassembled and partially re-built. The first two of the new aircraft were delivered via Boeing C-17 Globemaster III to RAF Brize Norton in November 2020 before continuing to Wattisham Flying Station by road. By early 2022, 14 aircraft had arrived in the UK and the type entered service. The remaining 36 are scheduled to be delivered by summer 2024 in time for the retirement of the AH1 Quote the UK will be able to draw on a global supply chain for its new Apache fleet – with all the benefits in terms of availability and economies of scale which that implies – since its AH-64Es will be almost identical to those being flown by the US Army and other international customers. This will enable the British Army to either reduce operational costs for the Apache fleet So again false Lastly ,they are called the British Army not Royal Army and there is no such conversation The AW249 only confirmed orders are 48 for the Italian Army while the AH-64E has over 1400 orders UK has repeated many times that the reason for buying new built AH-64E from the US is to reduce operational cost by increasing commonality false again
    1
  408.  @solinvictus1234  False again Poland made its decision in 2022 for AH-64E for tender. The lie that you are trying sell is for the AW101 not the AW249. Poland has license to built the AW10. Leonardo tried to use that deal to leverage for Poland's Kruk program however they lost , there was never any deal for the AW249 False again for the billionth time Leonardo has no license to build AH-64E. That ended when the Apache MK-1 was retired ,more to the point, no one has a license for AH-64E Quote the UK Ministry of Defence announced a $2.3bn purchase of 50 new AH-64E Version 6 (v6). Rather than entirely new-build aircraft, select airframes from the current AH1 fleet were sent to Boeing’s Apache production line in Mesa, Arizona, to be disassembled and partially re-built. The first two of the new aircraft were delivered via Boeing C-17 Globemaster III to RAF Brize Norton in November 2020 before continuing to Wattisham Flying Station by road. By early 2022, 14 aircraft had arrived in the UK and the type entered service. The remaining 36 are scheduled to be delivered by summer 2024 in time for the retirement of the AH1 Quote the UK will be able to draw on a global supply chain for its new Apache fleet – with all the benefits in terms of availability and economies of scale which that implies – since its AH-64Es will be almost identical to those being flown by the US Army and other international customers. This will enable the British Army to either reduce operational costs for the Apache fleet So again false Lastly ,they are called the British Army not Royal Army and there is no such conversation The AW249 only confirmed orders are 48 for the Italian Army while the AH-64E has over 1400 orders UK has repeated many times that the reason for buying new built AH-64E from the US is to reduce operational cost by increasing commonality false again
    1
  409.  @solinvictus1234  All false lets recap The UK literally just increased their order from 38 to 50 AH-64E so they are watching nothing. The UK uses the Hellfire, JAGM, Brimstone and Spike NLOS which is already integrated with the AH-64 whereas the AW249 has none of the above so the UK would have to pay that cost. Additionally, the AH-64 uses 30mm on both AH-64E and WAH-64 while the AW249 uses a 20mm cannon which the UK does not use period so again cost. Spain has committed to the MkIII programme for the Tigre Germany is the only one with uncertainty regarding their future. Japan has committed to withdrawing its gunships fleet completely as they see no reason for them Neither Poland, Singapore or Indonesia have any interest All you are hilarious claiming is that customers with recent orders of the AH-64 are going to magically renge orders in favors of the AW249 No is watching or speaking
    1
  410.  @solinvictus1234  Yet despite all the claims ,interest in the AW249 is virtually non existent as no one has made a serious order while
    1
  411.  @solinvictus1234  Lets recap Which is currently the best selling attack gunship on the market and which is still being developed
    1
  412.  @solinvictus1234  False
    1
  413.  @thecommentaryking  Cost of the program is creating issues now If they had opted for an aircraft already used by the US military, cost wouldnt be an issue
    1
  414.  @thecommentaryking  That purchase made no sense
    1
  415. Making a replacement for the Apache is hard nut to crack The USMC AH-1Z has fully glass cockpit as well as newer Helmet mounted sight similar to the Joint Helmet-Mounted Cueing System (JHMCS) uses on strike fighters so any replacement would need both The Mast mounted system would need Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS), FLIR and AESA rolled into one system allow for passive tracking without emission Lastly improved range and speed Its a tall order But the airframe would have to go in completely new direction
    1
  416.  @wor53lg50  Simple cost
    1
  417. American has a lot more than this
    1
  418. ​ @ggoddkkiller1342  Its using 20mm cannon which has doesnt have that bad of recoil but yes, the sensor placement is very iffy
    1
  419. Agusta-Westland may built the WAH-64 but they did not have access to the Longbow radar. The Lockheed and Northrup handled the integration, programming and sustainment for the WAH-64. Agusta-Westland didnt have a license to build the Longbow from Lockheed and Northrup. Even if an aircraft is license built, there are still items that are not including and have to brought separately. Additional the UK retired all its WAH-64s in favor of new built AH-64E from the US. The data from Leonardo mentions various sensors but not does it explicitly say Longbow nor does it say they were giving a license to build it Stingers and Sidewinders are hilarious moot. The addition of AIMs to gunship was from earlier times when radar coverage was virtually non-existent and there was real possibility of being ambushed by enemy aircraft. Today, that capability isnt even a footnote, Hell the USMC AH-1Z is being worked on by for possible carriage of the AIM-120 The Arrowhead entered service in 2003 and was upgraded in 2016 and again in 2022 receiving another upgrade request from the US Army The Apache can track up 128 targets as well simultaneously engage 16, again wrong Lastly the F-35 capabilities cant be compared to some half made helicopter
    1
  420. Oh where was I right Wrong on all counts Agusta-Westland may built the WAH-64 but they did not have access to the Longbow radar. The Lockheed and Northrup handled the integration, programming and sustainment for the WAH-64. Agusta-Westland didnt have a license to build the Longbow from Lockheed and Northrup. Even if an aircraft is license built, there are still items that are not including and have to brought separately. Additional the UK retired all its WAH-64s in favor of new built AH-64E from the US. The data from Leonardo mentions various sensors but not does it explicitly say Longbow nor does it say they were giving a license to build it Stingers and Sidewinders are hilarious moot. The addition of AIMs to gunship was from earlier times when radar coverage was virtually non-existent and there was real possibility of being ambushed by enemy aircraft. Today, that capability isnt even a footnote, Hell the USMC AH-1Z is being worked on by for possible carriage of the AIM-120 The Arrowhead entered service in 2003 and was upgraded in 2016 and again in 2022 receiving another upgrade request from the US Army The Apache can track up 128 targets as well simultaneously engage 16, again wrong Lastly the F-35 capabilities cant be compared to some half made helicopter
    1
  421.  @solinvictus1234  Oh where was I right Wrong on all counts Agusta-Westland may built the WAH-64 but they did not have access to the Longbow radar. The Lockheed and Northrup handled the integration, programming and sustainment for the WAH-64. Agusta-Westland didnt have a license to build the Longbow from Lockheed and Northrup. Even if an aircraft is license built, there are still items that are not including and have to brought separately. Additional the UK retired all its WAH-64s in favor of new built AH-64E from the US. The data from Leonardo mentions various sensors but not does it explicitly say Longbow nor does it say they were giving a license to build it Stingers and Sidewinders are hilarious moot. The addition of AIMs to gunship was from earlier times when radar coverage was virtually non-existent and there was real possibility of being ambushed by enemy aircraft. Today, that capability isnt even a footnote, Hell the USMC AH-1Z is being worked on by for possible carriage of the AIM-120 The Arrowhead entered service in 2003 and was upgraded in 2016 and again in 2022 receiving another upgrade request from the US Army The Apache can track up 128 targets as well simultaneously engage 16, again wrong Lastly the F-35 capabilities cant be compared to some half made helicopter
    1
  422.  @solinvictus1234  Wrong on all counts
    1
  423.  @solinvictus1234  Wrong The AW249 will not have the Longbow nor is it planned to AgustaWestland may built the Apache Mk1 for the UK but they dont have access to that tech any more. UK opted for new built AH-64E from the US and retired its Mk1 fleet this year No where on Eurosatoey does it show case anything about Longbow or AW249. Every image shows a static display with no mast mounted radar or even stub wing Arrohead it's obsolete now- most hilarious thing you said all day. Its called modernization their genius Here a hint The Army fielded Apache Version 6 helicopters to units beginning in 2021. Version 6.5 in development. The Apache outsells the competition principal due to the US Army continued demands for improved capabilities. The Arrowhead program in 2016 received funding for higher-resolution color imaging with longer ranges and a wider field of view and again 2022 You hilarious keep mentioning stingers and sidewinders yet to date, they have never been used in combat by any one on a helo Here's a news flash, no one need Stinger or Sidewinders on their gunships The concept was born back in the day when there was very little radar coverage and the real possibility of gunships being ambushed by enemy fighters so gunships needed something to fight back with however today ,its literally a moot point It can not do what the F-35 does with a half made helment
    1
  424.  @solinvictus1234  How about wrong on all counts there buddy The Apache has the long bow radar which neither the A129 or AW249 has. The Longbow allows for short range strike with Hellfire-L, medium range 10 plus miles with JAGM/MR and long range strike over 20 miles with Spike NLOS. Again not found on the either A129 or AW249 The Arrowhead again unique to the Apache gives the pilot and gunner their own EO/IR systems Allow the gunner to focus on target while the pilot sweeps the area for more targets or threats The Apache also has LInk-16 reception for communication with larger assets The AW249 at best is AH-64C but vastly inferior to AH-64E
    1
  425.  @joerosa2532  The Apache has the Taliban to thank for alot of its upgrades Hellfire M and N model were specifically designed for operations in Afghan Hellfire R combined M and N capabilities and Hellfire RDX aka Salami Slicer allows for use in Urban areas The Advanced Precision Kill Weapon System (APKWS) and several kits for the 70mm hydra again thank you Taliban as cheap but low cost weapon Lastly, several sensor and communication upgrades Arrowhead, Link 16 reception and UAV control All born from operations against the Taliban
    1
  426.  @solinvictus1234  Again The Hellfire isnt listed on it or the prior A129 Just because the the Italian Air force has, doesnt mean , the Italian Army will use it
    1
  427.  @solinvictus1234  Again wrong Helllfires and JAGMs missiles that Apache are heavier than the Spike the AW-249 carries So even if the AW-239 carries 16 missiles which it doesnt, the missile it uses are still consider lightly Wrong The AW-249 does not carry the Sidewinder nor does it carry the Hellfire The Hellfire is used by the Italian air force not the Italian army
    1
  428.  @solinvictus1234  Again wrong maximum takeoff weight (MTOW) is how much the aircraft can take off with The Apache's MTOW is literally 4700lbs heavier than AW249 yet you claim the carries heavier loads so again ,your math does not add up The Apache can carry up to 1200 rounds of 30mm rounds while the earlier A129 carries 500 of 20mm rounds 30mm rounds on average weight over 14 ounces per round while 20mm 3-4 ounces per round A full load of 30mmm rounds for the Apache is half a ton. Even of the AW249 carried 1200 20mm rounds, the weight is barely 300lbs AW249 carries the Spike missile. The A129 carries the SPIKE-ER which only weighs 75lbs while the Apache Hellfire and newer JAGM both weight 108lbs Even if the AW249 carried 16 missiles which doesnt , the weight is barely 1200lbs whereas the Apache with full load of Hellfire is near 1 ton So again wrong
    1
  429.  @solinvictus1234  Its by no means better The Apache can carry up to 16 ATGMs, the AW249 only carries 8 at most The Apache has long bow radar for fire and forget, the AW249 has no radar
    1
  430. @@JimCarner Lay off the drug there buddy Ukraine has been destroying S-300 ,S-400 and other sites using a combination of drones, artillery and missile strikes The attacks against the Black Sea HQ, ships and base were possible as Ukraine had knocked out the S-400 site in Crimea leaving them wit only SHORAD
    1
  431. @@JimCarner Again who said anything about engage the site with HARMs
    1
  432. @@JimCarner That why I said with western aircraft in the mix Ground forces can switch to engaging those sites Pzh-2000 and Archer can easily drop MRSI on S-300 and S-400 sites or Ukraine can take a page from the US playbook and send in special forces ahead of time and strike sites while the F-16 simultaneously approach
    1
  433.  @garyddlewis3067  Trying to train personnel and field all those assets will take considerable time when Ukraine doesnt have By using the F-16s and striking vital areas, Ukraine can buy the time it needs Strike airfields, ships at sea, bridges and major bases in the separate regions as well as counter air missiles against aircraft. Ideally one massive combined arms strike that would bring things to a screehing halt
    1
  434. No , Ukraine needs to keep it simple F-16s , yes, Mirage maybe but rest no Apaches no , UH-60 with DAP as well SH-60 yes UH-60s gives Ukraine transport capable, UH-60 DAP gives Ukraine attack capable and SH-60 will make life miserable for the remaining kilo subs Ukraine needs C-130s as well light aircraft like Sherpa and Spartans that can carry loads back and forth from the front lines Ukraine also adapt C-130s for tankers. The F-16s has the CART CFT which allows to use the drogue instead of boom lastly the F-16s and possible mirage need laser guided bombs , anti ship missiles but most importantly modern radars with the aircraft Ukraine was able to down an A-50 by placing a sam site in position An F-16 at low level being guided by ground forces would able to approach ,execute a pop up and fire The key difference is that Il-22 that escaped would have been shot down with western aircraft in the mix Ukrainian ground can switch to hunting SAM and EW sites
    1
  435.  @Aamirmhmd99  1.24 billion per battery
    1
  436.  @Cav-z1y  Yeah thats not going to happen with the UK its about the same odds of them adopting the existing SM-6 and AIM-174
    1
  437.  @Cav-z1y  With what missile
    1
  438. THAAD isnt rated against ICBM or SLBMs Only MRMB on down The only missile capable of ICBM intercept is the SM-3 as it can intercept ICBM or SLBM before it has a chance to MIRV Hence why Russia and China protest the US deployment of it near them because in the theoretical exchange, their studies have shown that SM-3 can intercept missiles even in boost phase
    1
  439.  @Roar1987  THAAD isnt rated against ICBM or SLBMs Only MRMB on down The only missile capable of ICBM intercept is the SM-3 as it can intercept ICBM or SLBM before it has a chance to MIRV Hence why Russia and China protest the US deployment of it near them because in the theoretical exchange, their studies have shown that SM-3 can intercept missiles even in boost phase
    1
  440. yes 7 but each one is battery equipped with 6 launchers which 42 launchers total You also have to realize that the SM-2, SM-3 and SM-6 in Red Sea have proven that they were worth the investment So sending the THAAD would open the possibility of the US going beyond the planned 8 batteries. Also Iran is less likely to fire as they dont want to give the US any excuse to strike or support Israel striking Iran
    1
  441.  Astuteous Maximus  Superior to the F-15 Nope. First the F-15 is equipped AESA whereas only Eurofighter CAPTOR E built but no one uses it. Secondly the EF uses a built in IRST whereas the F-15 has the legion/Talon HATE pods which IRST plus additional technology. Third the F-15EX which is based on the F-15E frame carry 22 missiles plus newer technology than Eurofighter. Since they are using the F-15E larger frame, there are endless options
    1
  442.  @blackdification  Either way, Russia capturing the Leopard 2 is still moot
    1
  443.  @ReallyFarFarAway  Germany is pledged them
    1
  444. Its just mind boggling that Russia's bright idea is sending in a vehicle with less armor and protection than tank in a ATGM rich environment ???
    1
  445. In a nutshell more scrap
    1
  446.  @ash1kh  Russia's quote Peresvet laser system range is designed against satellites not drones moron I surprised no one has mentioned curvature of the earth firing from land, it can only aim at targets in its line of sight which is 3 miles or targets in space its reason why laser weapons have limited use physical shells travel in arcs which is why are able to hit targets over 20 miles away They fly over the curvature of the earth, Lasers can't do that
    1
  447. @ronaldson martin Right after 3 months no one is buying the Russian BS
    1
  448. They need to send more these units
    1
  449. The Abrams gas turbine is why they should keep it simple and give Ukraine 1 tank type Leopard 2s and nothing else
    1
  450. Honestly, what they should be doing is keep it simple Give the Ukrainian forces one type tank, preferably the Leopard 2. That greatly simplifies everything Instead having maintenance, logistics and training for Challenger 2, Leclerc, Abrams and Leopard 2 Just having 1 tank type makes things simplier There are a lot of EU countries with Leopard 2 in storage What the West should do is buy those tanks in storage. Germany would simply have speed up getting them refurbished. The US has 3000 M1A1 in storage but sea lift ships can only carry 58 tanks it makes no sense for the US to pull tanks when the EU has plenty to spare and get be ready considerably faster than the M1A1
    1
  451. Iran loitering drones are a literally joke
    1
  452. Whatever you call them, they are still a joke Western Counter-UAS can easily deal with them A few have been downed. Once the Ukraine gets the tech from the downed ones to West West can provide Ukraine with a more exact and effective solution
    1
  453.  @user-sc9oy1kz8g  Russia capable, now thats hilarious The last year plus has shown Russia anything but capable Here are 3 facts The T-90 claimed to be best protected tank in the world yet Javelin missiles are destroying them whole sale, The KA-52 claimed be superior to Apache yet KA-52 performance nearly 40 aircraft destroyed has been abysmal. FYI KA-52 losses are nearly more than Apache losses in the Gulf War, Iraq war and Afghan combined. The so called Su-34 hell duck/flying tank, 21 losses and counting All of Russia's latest tech including are taking a beating in Ukraine Thats not capable thats called getting ur ass handed to you A capable force would have crushed Kyiv and attacked Western Ukraine cut them off completely from the West Instead, Russia left that door open and year later things have gone from bad to worst The Kinzhal is 0 and 7 against the US made Patriot Now Ukraine has Storm Shadow cruise missiles. They have asked Germany for KEDP-350s and US has stated that ATACMS is still very much on the table
    1
  454. True that you can shield a target but that only delays not stops CHAMP didnt work , okay follow up with missile with an actual warhead so how much time are you really buying
    1
  455. Crimea doesnt need to fall Ukraine simply need to destroy Russian assets in Crimea bases , airfields and ships yards and deny Russia its support for the South and Black Sea
    1
  456. Its about to change owners
    1
  457. Between never and never
    1
  458. The irony is that Ukraine doesnt tanks, what need is aircraft with skilled pilots able to put steel on target If Ukraine could do Mercenary air force with former pilots who flew F-16s,JAS-39 and Mirages They could carry more effective strike against Russian forces What Biden needs to do is gift Ukraine 250 JASSM-A and 250 JASSM-B The USAF still has stocks that were made in the late 90s and early which are the older Lot 6 on down No need to give any of latest lot 19 models
    1
  459. Considering that Russia has broken out T-62 on down as well T-72 thats actually not a stretch
    1
  460.  @Louis-ej1lx  How about no The QE reached 32 knots whereas Ford can sustain 30 knots indefinitely. The QE would be out of a fuel in a matter of hours trying to sustain 32 knots As for issues, that would be the QE The Ford has F-35/F-18-Fighter/Strike, EA-18G-EW .C-2/CMV-22-COD. F-18/MQ-25-Tanker, E-2D-AWACS and MH-60-ASW The QE has F-35-Fighter/Strike, Merlin for ASW and Merlin Crownest for AWACS The QE class no onboard aerial tankers, or EW and Crownest is already being shown the door The USN has already committed to the LRASM ,for its F-35 whereas the UK F-35 ? The F-18s can carry JASSMs whereas UK F-35s The UK F-35s are operational but with very limited weapons compared to what Fords are carrying for their aircraft Secondly the Fords are built with EMALS and AAG whereas the QE ? And no the QE will not get because it requires massive changes to the ship The QE has only CIWS for defenses while the Ford has ESSM and RAM And thats just the tip of short comings with the QE
    1
  461. No, they sent it a on mission and things went pear shaped
    1
  462. Russia is thousands of square miles yet they decide to test a drone a stones throw away from Ukraine ??
    1
  463. Russia is thousands of square miles yet they decide to test a drone a stones throw away from Ukraine ?? yeah not buying
    1
  464.  @real_lostinthefogofwar  Russia is thousands of square miles yet they decide to test a drone a stones throw away from Ukraine ?? yeah not buying
    1
  465.  @paulwalker427  Right, Ukraine has so wreckage as well recovered an intact bomb from the so called test flight The video shows the left wing relatively intact and recovery of the bombs means that likely more was intact a literally intel bonanza for the west , worst if any of the comms systems were intact the only cope is Russia trying to down play things
    1
  466. The West has held on the to vain hope of making Putin see the light and withdraw by pulling restriction on weapons use
    1
  467. Ukraine needs the JASSM The JASSM can be quickly integrated to the F-16 whereas the Taurus would need extra time but most important reason is that Germany's stock is 600 missiles while the US stock of JASSMs in the thousands. Ukraine could easily get 250 JASSM-A , 250 JASSM-ERs as both circa late 90s to early 2000bs but most importantly the US can 200 AGM-84 air launched Harpoons, All 3 can be easily integrated the F-16 in short order The JASSM-ER would give Putin a stroke as it can be launched from over 500 miles away which allows Ukraine to hold Moscow at risk with ease
    1
  468. Armor's weight needs to go down if it wants to be survivable for future warfare
    1
  469. It remains to be seen is the 6th gen
    1
  470.  @Arthur54321  True they are learning but they have betrayed so much thats its moot The fact the Ukraine has been able effectively attack S-400s sites one of the biggest fails for Russia The S-400 was the one SAM that Russia was counting on to keep US forces at arms length With what the US has learned from Ukraine's attacks, the US can now easily defeat it
    1
  471. Ukraine has been a massive gift to NATO and nightmare for Russia Russia's conventionally capabilities are barely working
    1
  472.  @TheMVCoho  Why Ukraine has been gift horse for the US tactically, strategically and financially Russia's weapon against the US was EW against GPS and communications thanks to Ukraine, most of that has been revealed The KA-52 and LMUR showed that MANPADS will be ineffective as SHORAD NASAMS, Patriot and IRIS-T are all network centric The US is getting real time data from every Russian missile , drone and aircraft attack But most important, the Ukraine has sent the US very valuable captured Russian equipment
    1
  473. @spec Russia is bark and no bite at this point
    1
  474. The problem here is that Ukraine is not facing a capable force USN MH-60s would be sink these drones Russian's KA-27s mounts its 30mm cannon similar to the KA-50, fixed on the side so they have strife that target whereas USN MH-60 mounts 50 cal on flexible mounts allow the crew to far easier, Additional they laser guided Hellfire and APKWS whereas the KA-27 does not Because of the attack on USS Cole with a small boat, All USN ships have Mk-38 which 25mm cannon on remote mounts with EOTS /FLIR The LCS 57mm cannon has Mk 295 Mod 1 Ordnance for Rapid Kill of Attack Craft (ORKA) The ships in the Black Sea Fleet are literally sitting ducks Now if Ukraine was a little smarter, they would mod torpedo for surface attacks and make them launchable from MAGURA V5 A torpedo with 500lbs warhead hitting the waterline of ship is just as lethal as anti ship missile but most important it allows the V5 to be reused again and again
    1
  475.  @davidhouseman4328  Exactly why they dont compare with CVNs
    1
  476. You have to understand the difference The USN can afford build CVN and LHAs while the UK can not The QE class is similar to the LHA class not the CVN Both the QE and LHA are designed to operate both F-35 and helicopter primarily while the CVN is designed to basically be a floating fortress with an air field
    1
  477. that's a bit of a stretch While it's true that CVNs have more airpower than most countries air forces, the UK isn't one of them
    1
  478. The USN has hundreds of the F-18E/F as they are the main user so its easy for them to get planes The F-35 is has dozens of users and getting planes is still very much a chore right now till Lockheed gets FRP approval
    1
  479. The Gripen is the perfect choice but the F-16 is only the feasible choice SWAF only as has 100 Gripens where the US has over 1200 F-16s
    1
  480.  @mwtrolle  BTW, as for the Israeli EW pods, Israel has blocked their weapons from getting sent to Ukraine BTW, you can't read SMH The additional benefit of the CFT has Israeli has done is EW Israel has added in additional EW in the empty spaces on the CFTs which Ukraine can take advantage off The block 52 also supports EW as Israel has shown" Pretty I sure I never said that the EW would come from Israel, only the fact that Ukraine can take advantage of using CFT to add EW Novorossiysk is not included in that. The Black Sea Fleet is located in Sevastopol and Novorossiysk which are legitimate targets What the US does not want, is deep incursions or them making a play at Moscow which is just 469 away A small number of Gripen wouldn't change anything Before you can operate a hundred of F-16's you need to train pilots and mechanics for those planes Considering that Poland and Romania operate the F-16, what is the issue again ?
    1
  481.  @phlogistonphlyte  Gripen despite being the perfect plane for the job low procurement numbers is the problem Now in the aftermath, I would recommend the Ukrainian air force to buy the Gripen E/F Right now what needed is the F-16C/D Block 50/52 Plus and UPAZ-1A buddy refueling pod F-16s with AIM-9M/R and AIM-120C-5 gives Ukrainian decent WVR and BVR capability AGM-84 block II plus can strike both land and sea targets 77 to 120 miles away AGM-65 and GBU-12/16 plus the gun is all the weapons the Ukrainian air force needs There is enough older models in the US inventory that would prevent Russia from gleaming anything The block 52 supports Conformal Aerial Refueling Tank System (CARTS) which allows the F-16 to use drogue instead of boom The UPAZ-1A buddy refueling pod fitted the MIG-29s allow them to act as mission tankers Why this is important The Black sea fleet is Novorossiysk which 700 miles round trip. F-16s with CARTS and MiG-29s as mission tankers would be able to strike Novorossiysk with ease As well all targets in Crimea The block 52 also supports EW as Israel has shown If West stops dragging and commits to F-16,, they could have it operational in 4 months
    1
  482. The Gripen is the perfect choice but the F-16 is only the feasible choice Ukraine needs an aircraft that can be quickly replace and the shear number of F-16s makes that very easy to do
    1
  483.  @soulsphere9242  In order to be of use, they would need to strike the Black Sea Fleet in Sevastopol and Novorossiysk. Both bases would need to completely destroyed The benefit of having a large number of F-16s You can load a few for SEAD to knock out defenses, and load the rest with AGM-65 each, GBU-12/10 Depending on the number of targets, you could commit 12 planes to each target and have 12 more act as decoys to keep Russian forces busy 36 plans total Remember, you need to destroy ships, ports, fuel and weapon storage as well as support facilities Strike both is the option as they can' reinforce the other
    1
  484.  @AndyWoohoo666  The Gripen is simple not feasible As for the US looking at the Gripen, incorrect Pilot training for the USAF is done in the T-38 which is over 60 years old. The USN and USMC use the BAE systems Hawk as aircraft carrier-capable trainer. The USAF released tender called T-X program for its replacement The Gripen was not part of that Tender ,however Saab did team with Boeing to build a completely new aircraft Now the UK is planning on retire its Hawks and as the Empire Test Pilots' School uses a Gripen D for training, they may be leaning in that direction but logistics, cost, support machine etc is killing the USAF, not likely as the USAF is drawing down its F-16s in favor of the F-35 20 Gripen is useless You have to factor in combat losses, accidents , down time and coverage and 20 is literally a joke They would burn through those airframes a matter of weeks Next is availability of weapons The Gripen isn't rated for the Harpoon but the F-16. The problem with KEPD-350 is severally limited stock. The Harpoon is in the thousands whereas the KEPD-350 is barely 900 The Gripen E is integrated with newer weapons whereas the more numbers Gripen C is not Specifically the Gripen E improvement allow to carry the heavier 1000lbs and 2000lbs GBU while the Gripen C limited to 500lbs GBU Hence why the F-16 is the only real option
    1
  485. The Gripen would be perfect but its not feasible. The F-16 is only real option The F-16 is feasible as the USAF alone has 1200 F-16s. They could earmark 200 F-16s for Ukraine Factoring in combat losses, the possibility of accidents and aircraft down time, 200 F-16s could easily meet Ukraine needs. Even if all 200 were destroyed, the F-16 total example built is over 4500 planes. The F-16 checks all the boxes There are only 271 Gripens Ukraine realistically needs at least 100 planes Besides combat losses, the possibility of accidents and aircraft down time, there are also other factors You need combat air patrol airborne 24x7 You need aircraft able to perform time sensitive strike at any point on the front to support ground forces You need aircraft continuously striking Russian bases in Crimea as well Black Sea HQ in Novorossiysk You need aircraft striking targets in the separatist regions Lastly , you need to able to fight Russian forces head on in the air Thats a lot of planes but checking all those boxes prevents Russian forces from striking with impunity Ukraine problem is hypersonic weapons but they are ways to minimize its effects
    1
  486. The Gripen is the perfect choice but the F-16 is only the feasible choice
    1
  487.  @guyb7995  Considering Ukraine situation they need airframes with a lot of hours
    1
  488.  @guyb7995  Its not numbers its sourcing flyable air frames is the problem
    1
  489. The problem with the F-18 is numbers There were a 1480 F-18A-D built while there over 4500 F-16s models The USAF allow operates 1200 F-16s out of 2300 in inventory The USAF could provide 200 F-16s considerably faster than 200 F-18 The USN sent all theirs to bone yard. The USMC already stripped those of useful parts Canada has been doing the same for its CF-18s The only operator with enough is the USMC or Austrailia's left over Simple put, sourcing the F-18 is problematic The other factor is that Poland , and Romania which borders Ukraine uses the F-16s More countries in the EU use the F-16 ,so getting Ukraine pilots training is extreme easy and dont have to travel far There no doubt that F-18 ruggedness is better than the F-16 but its simple not feasible
    1
  490. The Gripen is the perfect choice but the F-16 is only the feasible choice The F-18 is not an option The F-16s in USAF service have far more upgrades but most importantly more available flight hours than the F-18
    1
  491. The UK hasnt made a final decision on how many F-35Bs it will buy Its between 74 to 138 48 are confirmed ordered but they are still working out what the final order will be I believe the issue is that the F-35 is on Block 4, the APG-85 has been announced , F-35 enhanced performance engine (EPE) package and Adaptive Versatile Engine replacement for the F135 If the UK waits a little, they can get all that included with their next F-35 order vice trying to retrofit it to their existing F-35 and get a more advanced F-35 model If they buy now, just like Typhoon, they will have to commit to upgrade program Its kinda of a weird balancing act right now
    1
  492.  @admiralmallard7500  More like 1000 to 1 odds But those odds are steadying dropping I get what they are trying to do with shifting the Tempest to the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) and getting more and more countries onboard Trying recreate the US success with the F-35 program but the US at this point already the X-35 and X-32 under construction GCAP is still ???
    1
  493.  @admiralmallard7500  There is no lack of demand, its just given way to money Airbus's smartest move was adding the boom to the MRTT A330 Most of the F-35A users had the earlier MRTT 310 without the boom and has been brought the need A330 Since it already has boom., no need to mod the F-35 Lastly, its not empty space The construction of the F-35 shows that entire cockpit and front section are one pieces its literally changing out that module
    1
  494. Oh life is going to suck for the Russian forces
    1
  495.  @graveperil2169  If Dust off cant do it, then its tasked to regular units UH-60 units typical have at least 12 aircraft and depending on the location there may be as many as 3 units Lack of assets will never be problem Like I said, its high threat, then Dust off wont do it
    1
  496.  @graveperil2169  Generally if its high threat, then Dust off wont do it, the medics will go in regular gunship with their kits and try to stabilize the person as best they can
    1
  497. Hence why thats idiotic idea A person's vitals could change instant
    1
  498. Its long overdue but strange only 148 out of 227 tanks
    1
  499.  @terryatkinson7255  The problem with 130mm and 140mm is developing ammunition You have 120mm HESH, WP, Canister and other rounds which are usable in a lot of situations Increasing to 130mm would limit its use as its too powerful
    1
  500. Well you can keep that hope alive. They tested it on C2 hull which means that they can swap turret if need and go 130mm
    1
  501.  @andrewwmacfadyen6958  The biggest factor is what the F-16s will be carrying if the F-16s are equipped with AGM-65s, PAVEWAYS, Harpoon as well Storm Shadow or even better JASSM-A , it will be game over for Russia its been confirmed that AIM-9s and AIM-120s will be given to Ukraine which covers counter air operations but Ukraine still needs long range precision strike capability for both land and sea targets The Harpoon will allow for effective strikes against the remaining Black Sea ships and cruise missile strikes on land targets is a must
    1
  502.  @andrewwmacfadyen6958  Its meant to keep Russia at bay till F-16s are fielded
    1
  503.  @gambanteinodal1246  Bribery is not as rampant as it use to be
    1
  504.  @medic7698  When you dial back the clock you will see the UK tendency to do that With the Tornado The AI.24 Foxhunter was massive overbudget and delay but UK stuck with it instead of buying a US made system
    1
  505.  @memunist5765  That is the UKs ultimate flaw Instead going with the proven LM-2500 They opted for the WR-21 as it was locally built
    1
  506. Considering the propaganda and intel victory for West if one goes down in Ukraine yeah, they wont take the risk yet Russia will use it against the Patriot just for propaganda
    1
  507.  danLTa1  That highlights another reality During WW2, the UK life line was material from the US In potential conflict with Russia, the UK industrial manufacturing capability would be targeted so a supply line from the US would be vital
    1
  508.  @Brae2468  Now the smart play which they wont do is the Foxhound The UK is currently looking at the buying 2700 US JTLV The smart would be for them to adopt the Foxhound to meet the requirements set for the JTLV so instead buying the JTLV from the US, they buy a UK made variant made in the UK of it The US did the same thing with the MRAP and JTLV They adopted the MRAP to meet the JTLV requirements Again the smart play which should be sounding off in someone's head in the UK is why can the Foxhound do the same
    1
  509.  @Brae2468  Money is the factor and they dont wanna to spend anymore
    1
  510.  @Brae2468  Those failed concepts cost billions
    1
  511.  @Brae2468  The UK tried that before and paid dearly The Type-45 was offered both the MK-41 VLS as well the proven LM-2500 which were simple ,easy and available Note that after that nightmare , the Type-26 uses the MK-41 VLS as well as the proven MT-30 Dont why the MT-30 wasnt offered back then but point the UK tried "other" solution and that didnt work How long was the Challenger 2 held up before they finally bit the bullet and team up with Rheinmetall
    1
  512.  @olivere5497  Doesnt exist
    1
  513. Nope, Russia's usage just makes it seem that way
    1
  514.  @Internetbutthurt  It shows that you know literally nothing Shipunov 2A42 30mm cannon which is used Russia BMPs, IFV and AFV effective range 1.2 miles and maxes out at 2.4. The Javelin range is 2.9 Russia ability to counter fire depends solely on the cannons which lack range Even the BMP-3 2A70 100 mm cannon maxes at 2.4 miles using anti-personnel munitions The simple fact is that most of the munitions that Russia forces that out range the Javelin are not optimized for anti personnel The Ukraine forces know this as they operate the same Russia equipment and they are opting for hit and run not direct engagement The Kurganets-25 , Bumerang, T-15 and BMPT "Terminator are unique to Russia but everything else is not BMP series, BTRs and BMDs both in Russian and Ukraine hands The Russia forces scout but Ukraine forces are also being supplied intel on Russia movements by the West is what you are forgetting
    1
  515.  @Internetbutthurt  Russians are operating far too low to ensure accuracy and not hit civilians.-False Everything they brushed off is coming back to haunt ATGMs arent having a big impact-Also false In the middle east, insurgents and talbian had to use IEDs which were hit or miss Ukraines forces with ATGM can accurately target That allow to them to precise target key pieces of equipment what they are smartly doing is knocking out Tunguskas and Panstsr with ATGMs which allows their drones to get over heard The limited payload of the drones is limiting their effectiveness
    1