Comments by "Solo Renegade" (@SoloRenegade) on "Daily Mail World" channel.

those weren't guided missiles. they were straight shot weapons that made no corrections to flight. more like an RPG type anti-tank.
47
@michaelpark5681 she handled an emergency like a pro.
18
some people actually like war too
7
even WW1 pilots had windscreens and goggles.
3
except than in WW1 those trenches would have had WAY more guys on both sides.
3
just improvising on the fly, having experience, situational awareness, and common sense. In warfare the dumb people die quickly, and so the ones that survive longer are the smart ones.
2
wrong, BVR is a dogfight too.
1
@rebelliousfew wrong, visual range is only one realm of a dogfight.
1
@rebelliousfew "You’re still wrong no matter how much you wanna personally delude yourself. Ask quite literally anyone who does military aviation, and they will disagree with you." declaring something to be true, doesn't make it so. and you're wrong, many in the military, or former military combat veteran like myself, will agree with me.
1
@rebelliousfew "Sorry bud, I’m quite sure you never served with how you talk." You just love being wrong and picking fights you can't win. Spent years of my life in combat, even served in a highly decorated unit. A big part of our success came from developing and testing combat tactics. Nothing worse than someone with no combat experience arguing with those who do have experience, and telling them what it's like and how it works. " You’re still wrong anyways." yet you can't produce any facts to back that up. "All the pilots I have spoke to previously, both from the Air Force and Navy, have all said a dogfight occurs within visual range." name names. BVR is a dogfight in every sense of the word. "Where do you think the term ‘dogfight’ came from?" has no bearing on the issue. whether guns, heat seekers, or radar guided weapons, they all fight at various distances. from close in, to the max range of the weapon.
1
@rebelliousfew You claim BVR is not a dogfight, contrary to ALL evidence. You claimed to know fighter pilots who agree with you. So it's on YOU to share those names. It's not my job to prove your argument for you. "And why must I give names when these are people you are unable to contact, let alone know of?" because you're lying, and this statement only proves that. Doesn't matter if I know them personally, there are records of every fighter pilot, I can look them up. "You refuse to provide facts yourself, but if you wanna keep deluding yourself, simply because you, supposedly, served then that’s your issue. " What facts have I refused to provide? And nothing I claimed is based solely on my service, nor conditional on my credentials. I only brought it up when you made a false claim about me having never served. I was only refuting that specific lie. " To me, it sounds like you were not a pilot in either branch, so why don’t you leave the terminology and explanations to the people who have flown? " I am both an airplane and helicopter pilot, and flight instructor of both. And as a civilian I am now an Aerospace and Mechanical engineer, who even does work for NASA and others. I also am an amateur historian, with emphasis on military and aviation history. So, I have flown, I teach aerodynamics, aircraft design, engineering, history, and more. I also fly, teach people to fly, and design airplanes. What flying experience do you have? you try to discredit me for not having flight experience and military experience, both of which are false. So what is YOUR military and flight experience that gives you teh right to speak on this (according to your own arguments)? " I’ll say it again, the various pilots I have previously spoke to ALL unanimously agree that a dogfight occurs within visual range, and I’m quite avid in military aviation myself, a bit of a nerd if you will, and I have personally never heard the term of a dogfight being used for BVR engagements. You like telling me I’m wrong, but can you prove it?" you may be a "nerd" about aviation, but you are decades away from knowing half as much about it as I do. Yes, BVR is a dogfight. "A dogfight, or dog fight, is an aerial battle between fighter aircraft that is conducted at close range. Modern terminology for air-to-air combat is air combat maneuvering (ACM), which refers to tactical situations requiring the use of individual basic fighter maneuvers (BFM) to attack or evade one or more opponents." BVR requires an individual pilot to engage in, "tactical situations requiring the use of individual basic fighter maneuvers (BFM) to attack or evade one or more opponents." if you don't maneuver in relation to your opponent in BVR with the proper tactics, you will die. the range has increased, but maneuvering remains. The tactics used in BVR are also used inside visual range prior to a merge. And in team tactics, you can be in a merge with one opponent and BVR with another opponent at the same time. And both threats have to be out maneuvered. "Beyond Visual Range combat ( BVR ) is a kind of aerial warfare which is fought at a range the pilot can´t see his enemy with his own eyes" yet, you can see an opponent miles before a merge occurs, and must use BVR in that interim distance, while fighting within visual range, using the tactics of BVR. Making BVR a visual range fight as well. People regularly refer to it as a "BVR Dogfight". Also, many aircraft have IR/visible cameras to visually see their opponents even in BVR. Using radar is no different than using goggles, scope, or binoculars to enhance the biological limitations of the human and allow them to see further. The problem here is people fail to define terms appropriately and try to over classify things. It's a never ending problem of scientists and corporate bean counters to over classify everything and then create far too many irregularities and contradictions. A definition is valid if and only if its premises guarantee the conclusion. As you can see, I have proven the definition of BVR and Dogfight you use does not hold up in a lot of cases and ways. Webster dictionary definition of a Dogfight: "a fight between two or more fighter planes usually at close quarters" Notice is says USUALLY, not ALWAYS. That is a formal (official) dictionary definition of the term in the English language. And it holds up to scrutiny as it allows for BVR situations, and doesn't create issues in visual ranges beyond merge distances.
1
@rebelliousfew wrong. that unofficial definition, never defined "close range", and as I proved as well, with visual range scenarios, that the definition was invalid. And then I cited an OFFICIAL definition that backed up what I said. But nice try cherry picking. "You originally made the claim that BVR can be a dogfight, not me, I simply stated it isn’t and asked for your evidence. So go ahead, what is your evidence? " I cited the defintion of a dogfight from an official dictionary, you conveniently chose to ignore it. "All you did was quote an English dictionary" Yeah, that's the official source for definitions? Where are you getting YOUR claims from? Name YOUR sources. " Either way, I don’t need some English dictionary definition to define what a dogfight is, all I’m concerned is with what the pilots themselves refer to it as" So, you admit I am right, as I am supported by the official defintion,a nd you reject facts in favor of baseless opinions of random unqualified people who only exist in your imagination. "All you did was quote...part of a Wikipedia article" Yes, and Wikipedia is not a valid source, so we can't use its defintion. "You claim this, but then turn around and say that a dogfight can occur at BVR, despite this part of your quote being contradictory to your claims. " No, I didn't claim it, I cited an example of a definition idiots like you would google and cite, and proved it supported my claims. I then went on to cite a legit official primary source, which you rejected, in favor of your "feelings".
1
Word used by the Western Allies to describe Russian behavior in WW2: "Brutality"
1
@tomasbbb looks like they hit low or hit trees or something. the shaped warheads went off well away from the tank.
1
@odisy64 they flew it a perfectly straight line, like an RPG. Not one western guided AT missile does that. Guidance involves course corrections.
1
@odisy64 I can tell. there is enough detail in the footage. "these missiles are going to fast to tell any sudden course correction of the frames we get." if you can't tell, then you're in no position to claim one way or another. I can tell, and I'm telling you these are unguided RPG-style AT weapons. I've actually had RPGs fired at me in combat, have you?
1
@odisy64 Unguided rockets are perfect for this distance. at short range the missile doesn't yet burn out. RPGs are very accurate at close ranges. Again, cite your combat experience against mine. Just becasue a sniper rifle is accurate, doesn't mean an idiot who can't shoot can be a sniper and hit a target at 100yd with it. "there is a reason you have had RPGs shot at you but never hit you." yes, because the fools either didn't remove the pins before shooting, or they hit our bar armor, or they just missed due to guys who can't hit anything even when they try. Miss rates are higher in actual combat, when your adrenaline is pumping. "have you ever had laser guided missiles fired at you? wouldn't be talking to you if you did." red herring. doesn't disprove a thing I said. you're just lashing out like a wounded animal now, trying to dig up any little thing you can as your argument flounders. pathetic.
1
the return of trench warfare was predicted by many decades ago. Even the US military did studies on it and theorized how it would impact future wars.
1
imagine military underwater torpedoes attacking those ships. How would russia detect and fire back against those? They can't even repel surface drones.
1
@davej3781 Hawker Hart: 185mph
1
@Eagle7433 don't tell me, tell dave
1
@drunkensailor112 yes, and had proper bunkers throughout too
1
not really. a bottled up fleet in an inland sea. Kamikaze attacks and Fireship attacks like these have happened since before the US Civil War. USS Cole?
1
@chucknorris2952 how has antitank warfare changed?
1
still a dogfight, even if it's a sneak attack. "In an actual dogfight you don't shoot short range missile, and disengage, because if an enemy plane is close to you, and you turn back, he will outmaneuver you and you will die." he can't outmaneuver if he's dead after getting hit by the missile at short range....
1
@derHallen i wasn't talking about a drone..... Do you also make BS distinctions for a fighter that engages a bomber? or a cargo plane? or an AWACS? Or and attack jet? Are those not dogfights in your unprofessional opinion as well? Becasue all of those, for all of history, have been dogfights too. You're also obviously not aware of the Mig21 that had to dogfight a Predator drone in Iraq decades ago. Mig21 won, but the Predator absolutely fought back.
1
US has used drones in combat since WW2.
1