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

  1. Finally Some one with some sense
    5
  2. 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
  3. 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
  4. 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
  5. 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
  6.  @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
  7. Ironically , Ukraine's lack of aircraft is why the S-400 has been idle so far
    4
  8. 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
  9. Add carrier and its perfect time to test out the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)
    4
  10.  @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
  11. It would make more sense if the countries in area would allow western access to closer airfields so strike can be more effective
    4
  12.  @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
  13. Like due to a limited supply but they can refuel their stocks easily by buying JASSMs from the US
    4
  14. 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
  15. 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
  16. ***** 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
  17. With this , Russian aircraft and missile will be completely shut down
    4
  18.  @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
  19.  @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
  20. The SM-6 is designed to do far more than the Aster
    3
  21. No, the bottom line is that the T-90 went alone and two Bradleys handed its ass as a result
    3
  22. 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
  23.  @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
  24. 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
  25. 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
  26.  @maximusvaliant8597  The S-400 has been a none factor
    3
  27.  @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
  28. @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
  29. 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
  30. 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
  31.  @alexlanning712  Exactly fools , yes men and crazies
    3
  32. its simple not of the units aboard the CVN-78 have transition to F-35C yet
    3
  33. 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
  34. 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
  35. 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
  36. 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
  37.  Walter Lindinger @ The Austrian shouldnt have had Typhoons in the first place. Their requirements would have been met with a Tornando ADV
    3
  38.  @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
  39. 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
  40. Short answer they dont like all Russian tech overhyped
    3
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43.  @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
  44.  @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
  45.  @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
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48. The whole vehicle will end up flying
    3
  49. 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
  50.  @josephbingham1255  Yet Ukraine still struck today
    3