Comments by "C S ~ \x5bDuke of Ramble\x5d" (@DUKE_of_RAMBLE) on "" video.
-
9
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
@stormhawk31 It's still a matter of Beyond Visual Range. Since we've had a 30 year head start on stealth, and therefore innovating ways to detect it, asking with the fact that we won't be sitting on our hands in between now and whenever that encounter happens, means we'll have just as much of the upper hand then as we do now.
One has to remember that their technological leaps were achieved through stolen data and designs. So whole, yes, you can definitely understand the why's and hows of technology by having that kind of secret data, you'll not have the fundamental knowledge gained by getting there yourself. By that I mean, there's just as much knowledge held in tests that yield failures, as there's is with tests that succeeded. That's the beauty of science, as ALL data is useful data. Knowing the ins and outs that you've learned asking the way can allow you to exploit flaws in designs. I'm sure they'll have liked at their birds and thought "Yea, we considered that, but it produces a telltale radar return and we opted to not go that path."
Of course, I'm speculating, but it's all valid viewpoints. 😊
2
-
@stormhawk31 Granted. Thankfully we do have multiple non-stealth and very capable fighter aircraft, ones that are, overall, still more capable than their J-20. That's important, since everything else in their stable is rather ho-hum do to being Russian, and in the future these J-20 will likely be their general fighter, in the same way our F-15, 16, and 18s are. I still see these having the edge over them, since future advancements will undoubtedly provide upgraded to them, too. 😊
2