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

  1. 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
  2. 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
  3. It would make more sense if the countries in area would allow western access to closer airfields so strike can be more effective
    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. Gearing up for yet another embarrassment
    5
  6.  @HansCoche  Going to 3rd world countries for weapons is hilarous
    5
  7. Finally Some one with some sense
    5
  8. ***** 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
  9. 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
    4
  10. Like due to a limited supply but they can refuel their stocks easily by buying JASSMs from the US
    4
  11. 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
  12. What it can do Put Russian forces in a world of pain
    4
  13.  @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
  14.  @josephbingham1255  Yet Ukraine still struck today
    4
  15. 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
  16.  @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
  17. The UK investment is the RCH 155 because it shares a common frame with the Boxer Secondly, Sweden is process of upgrading its Archer from 6x6 to 8x8 The 8X8 has more commonality than the 6x6 Sweden's smart play would be trying to market its 6x6 to the US Army and USMC Ideally simple replace the guns with complete new and other refurbishments and that would cut down delivery time
    4
  18. Add carrier and its perfect time to test out the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC)
    4
  19. With this , Russian aircraft and missile will be completely shut down
    4
  20.  @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
  21. Ironically , Ukraine's lack of aircraft is why the S-400 has been idle so far
    4
  22.  @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
  23. 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
  24.  @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
    4
  25. 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
  26. Its highly unlikely due the RAF penny pinching
    3
  27. 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
  28. 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
  29. 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
  30. The whole vehicle will end up flying
    3
  31.  @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
  32. 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
  33.  @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
  34.  @biscuitcrusader  Ukraine has shown the vulnerability of towed system. Tracked and wheeled unit are far more survivable on the battlefield An Archer can implace, fire 3 rounds and displace in 74 seconds It light 105mm variant of the Archer able to do the same would be far more effective than towed units
    3
  35. 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
  36.  @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
  37. How about no The F-35 single engine still produces more power than both the J-35s WS-21s combined The notion that KAAN, , KF-21 and J-35 addresses the F-35 shortcoming is hilarious First that F-35 design was heavily dependent on model able to do STOVL. A twin engine design cant do STOVL Secondly the F-35A was designed for the USAF and export, the F-35B USMC and export and the F-35C for USMC and USN There is no export for the F-35C yet no one else uses CATOBAR. I honestly though Canada was getting F-35C variant As for the J-35 trying to defeat the F-35. not in 100 or 1000 years As mentioned before the F-35 engine has more power but most importantly, the US doesnt have China's problems with engines. The J-20 is been through at least 5 engine variants thus far. The F-135 has planned growth options which increase thrust and the fuel efficiency. The Engine Core Upgrade (ECU) is planned upgrade engine with tech from the Adaptive Engine Transition Program (AETP, PW still ironing out the details of changing the F-135 to the XA101 ADVENT engine The newer F-35s are getting the APG-85 radar which can installed on all 3 F-35 models with little effort When you compare those stats ,teh KAAN, KF-21 and J-35 ,they are all way behind the F-35 The biggest boon the J-35 , more the point the Chinese aircraft is the USN revealing the AIM-174 The AIM-174 allows non stealth F-18s to launch from long range and be handed over F-35 which can terminally guide to target Allowing the USN to target PLAAF/PLAN assets like tankers, AWACS and the J-15EW
    3
  38. its simple not of the units aboard the CVN-78 have transition to F-35C yet
    3
  39. Short answer they dont like all Russian tech overhyped
    3
  40. 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
  41. 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
  42. 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
  43. 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
  44. Russia's current success is only do the fact that Ukraine has exhausted its western ammunition
    3
  45. No, the bottom line is that the T-90 went alone and two Bradleys handed its ass as a result
    3
  46. 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
  47. 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
  48.  @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
  49.  @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
  50.  Walter Lindinger @ The Austrian shouldnt have had Typhoons in the first place. Their requirements would have been met with a Tornando ADV
    3