Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Sandboxx" channel.

  1. The factors that you are missing is that normally , stealth aircraft fly with reflectors to protect their stealth during non combat operations In combat, radars don't simply operate freely , They are normally targeted for destruction Their ability to operate depends on various factors. Their range and the range of the weapons used against it
    710
  2. On a scale of 1 of 10 its about 2 First its projected payload is extremely low compared to other bombers Second, China still lacks aerial tankers and bases to deploy it globally Even without bases, they dont have the tankers to send it long ranges The problem with it operating in such a limited area is that its much easier to find
    147
  3. Skynet and Legion approve this message
    144
  4. its not about power, its about delivery and flexibility and the US has better options than Russia
    112
  5. Its pretty simple to understand. One F-15E can carry up 16 GBU-38s while a B-2 can carry to 80 Effectively 5 F-15Es or 1 B-2 More the point, bombers can mix and match their payloads. The B-1B for example can carry a mix of GBU-31s/39 plus AGM-154 and AGM-158s But most important is that bombers combat radius is far greater than strike fighters They can fly thousands of miles or orbit for hours without the need to hit the tanker F-15E, F-16s and F-18 have to top off hourly Adding conventional strike capabilities to their bombers was the smartest thing the USAF ever did
    95
  6. When you realize what type of sub the Foxtrot was I would say the Cartel got a blessing by not getting it
    88
  7. The simple answer is yes The key to the F-16 survival is it not trying to engage Russian aircraft in the air and staying well clear of S-300 and S-400 sites SHORADs and jammers are vital targets that F-16s must engage with AGM-88s and unlike the MIG-29 and Su-27, the F-16 can fully use it in all modes As long as Ukraine doesnt overstretch, they will be good
    66
  8. Yes , they are heavy on the propaganda
    44
  9. Its just another reflection on how poorly training is done in Russia When helicopters are armed ,they generally avoid doing what the KA-52s did in case of a accidental discharge The helo and weapons are oriented away from personnel Secondly the range control area is this is not clearly marked This looks they set this up hastily When buildings are clearly marked, the pilots their position on the range Just looking at the video, there are so many things wrong its amazing that no one died
    43
  10. Well they hyped it up and the US countered it with an old Patriot missile
    37
  11. Russia has operated units in Syria in plain view of western intel gathering aircraft since 2015 or the units operating in Ukraine, again ,in plain view of the western intel gathering assets. The US has long range cruise missiles able to attack the S-400 from over 300 miles and now the development of hypersonic weapons makes the S-400 moot
    34
  12.  @lgnfve  Its like they never have heard of SEAD and EW
    29
  13. Looks pretty damn good Can't wait to see rest of the angles as well as that test flight
    28
  14. Russia claimed that they knocked out all of the Ukraine air defense capabilites but MIG-29s are designed to be rugged and able to operate from austere runways So its possible that the Ukraine airforce relocated some aircraft and Russia sent its aircraft unescorted and bomb laded under the impression that Ukraine had no aircraft left would have caught off guard
    28
  15. The a heck of flex for the F-22
    25
  16. By Dec 2020.,the V-280 has logged over 200 hours while the SB-1 barely logged 26 hours The V-280 demonstrated that it was considerably more mature and ready
    23
  17. Aircraft going over the side has been happening since WW2
    21
  18. The NGAD does need to reuse some F-35 tech but we do need a true successor to the F-22
    21
  19. The F-16 is a decent fighter Its record is not as impressive as the F-15Cs
    20
  20. The simple fact is that media does not understand the complexities of fighter development and the F-35 is not a rare case Sukhoi was given the contract for the PAK FA in 2002 which become the Su-57 yet its 2024 and there barely 32 Su-57 due the massive delays with the project Chengdu built the J-20 as outgrowth of the JXX program. There are 300 built however in the 13 years its flown, its gone through over 5 engine changes as China continues to struggle with developing reliable engines for it aircraft. Also realize that China deleted the gun from the J-20 which cut development and design time Now note that with the Russian and Chinese programs, the sole users were just RuAF and PLAAF while the F-35 is built to meet the requirements of the export market Simple facts like this , the media glosses over
    19
  21.  @Just_A_Random_Desk  Exactly the point The F-15 has handed MIG-29 and MIG-25 their asses more than once
    18
  22.  adam  The way Russia uses them is not practical The way the US would is very practical Example by attacking S-400 , S-500 and bases with A-50 AWACS , USAF aircraft could attack with impunity using air launch cruise missiles as Russian forces would have no way to stop the USAF. S-300 on down are no match for newer US weapons China's defense strategy relies heavily on its DF-21/26 keep the USN carrier at bay If the USN can neutralizes the DFs, blow for blow, the PLAN, PLA and PLAAF has zero chance against the USN
    17
  23. @@phillipbanes5484 The record of the F-15 is 100 plus kills to zero losses the F-16 has both numerous kills and losses in air combat Turkey has lost a few F-16s in ACM
    17
  24.  @Spearhead45  The way you write is dead give away that English is a second language to you
    16
  25. The development hypersonic weapons and advance jamming systems makes the S-400 moot Current cruise missiles need 30 mins to cover 250 miles , EW planes can't suppress S-400 for that long The AGM-88G travels Mach 4 and covers that same distance in 5 mins hypersonic weapons can cover that distance in as little as 1 min
    16
  26. Yep The USAF was having funding issues with the NGAD but this revelation ensures that NGAD will go through now with money to spare
    15
  27.  @shanerooney7288  Ukraine would still be the same except with T-14 burning instead T-14 has an impressive defense system but it can still be defeated by tactics and weapons
    15
  28. The simple was that it was never going to happen period Here's the rub, adopting an USN aircraft for land use is very easy Now trying to adopt land based aircraft carrier use is virtually impossibe The F-35 differs because the F-35B and F-35C was considered from the start so the airframe had be adaptable for ship use Historically, land based aircraft on carriers never works The F-14 was basically heavily altered version of the F-111B and even with its changes, the weight issues were never resolved The F-22 and F-14 empty weight was over 43,000lbs whereas the F-35C is 34,000lbs and F-18E/F is 32,000lbs So right off the bat, there is that issue Secondly the F-22 sits very low so compared to the F-35 So in addition it would have would have to be addressed Could the USN shaved off 10,000lbs off the F-22 not likely carrier based aircraft only work when they are designed from the start as carrier aircraft adapting the design does not work Look at the Su-33 and J-15 not very capable. The MiG-29K also problem Russia is going to learn the hard way when they try to navalize the Su-57
    15
  29. The Doolittle raiders had balls of steel for that daring mission Now the strange part it is that the experiments with Rocket assisted takeoff and air to air refueling had taken place before WW2 So its odd that no one picked up on those ideas for raid
    14
  30. Well if they fitted with the F-22s F119s or F-35 F-135, it would have likely done Mach 3 with ease but consider the amount of equipment the F-15EX carries externally Mach 3 while cool is not advisable
    14
  31. Thats only because of its low procurement The GBU-39s only 40K and there are 17,000 made Once procurement goes into full swing, you will see massive drop in price
    14
  32.  @Brandonthesnifferofall  You are correct that V-280 has larger foot print but it brings more to table than the SB-1 and Blackhawk For the Marines, the CH-46E required 3 days to make the trip from NC to AZ. The MV-22 does it in one day The MV-22 cruises at 300 mph which is fast enough for it to be refueled by KC-10, KC-46 and KC-135s in the air The Blackhawk can only be refueled by KC-130s in the air The V-280 cruises at 320 mph so its not limited to solely KC-130 for air to air refueling Being able to use jet tankers opens up a lot possibilities for deployment The USAF and USMC have both demonstrated the MV-22s ability to self deployed over considerable distances The Blackhawk requires C-5 break downs . With V-280, it can self deploy to a location, the change crew, allow maintenance to do a quick D/T and get to work with an 2 hours or less With C-5 break down, it takes hours for the Blackhawk , it has to be put back together, QAed, refueled, tested up before it can get to work The Blackhawk carry 105mm while the V-280 can carry 105mm or 155mm Now the real question is what will 160th SOAR and SOCOM say They may procure the SB-1 as its more adaptable for the Direct Action Penetrator (DAP) and Stealth modification
    14
  33.  @hamidshahriari6474  Ukraine getting the AIM-120D isnt unlikely The AIM-120 comes in various configurations Right now the US military has AIM-120D-3 and F3R which are much newer than baseline AIM-120D AIM-120D baselines are being upgraded to D-3 and F3R it may be easier for the US to give Ukraine the older AIM-120D baseline models and buy factory fresh AIM-120D3/F3R but for now, its likely will be AIM-120-C7s
    14
  34. The selection of the SM-6 to become AIM-174B is geared combat enemy missiles than aircraft. The concept is that F-18E/F with AIM-174B backed by E-2D would be able to engage targets long before they become a threat to the fleet Effectively increasing the range of the Cooperative Engagement Capability (CEC) The question now is if the USAF will adopt it for the F-15EX if the AIM-174B retains the 140lbs warhead, its far more lethal to enemy targets than AIM-120 and AIM-260 and USAF may consider to deal with long range Tu-160s attacks
    13
  35. The Su-57 represents Russia understanding of stealth as you can see with its design they literally have no clue
    13
  36. The issue here is that China has no heavy lift helicopter like the US and Russia does Their plans on copying the Mi-26 for the AVIC Advanced Heavy Lifter but that looks to be not working out so like the Z-20, they wanna copy US designs
    13
  37. Its very plausible The footage may questionable but action itself is not We know that Su-25s, Su-24 and Su-34s would be easy targets for a MIG-29 as well transports and helicopters Russia claimed that they knocked out all of the Ukraine air defense capabilites but MIG-29s are designed to be rugged and able to operate from austere runways So its possible that the Ukraine airforce relocated some aircraft and Russia sent its aircraft unescorted and bomb laded under the impression that Ukraine had no aircraft left would have caught off guard
    12
  38. The US has stealth options, Russia does not
    12
  39.  @Rabarbarzynca  They dont to engage Russian bombers , they need F-16s dropping steel on target Right now the most damaging weapon Ukraine has is the Storm Shadow with 1000lbs warhead but its limited on what targets it can engage The F-16 on other hand can use laser guided 500lbs, 1000lbs and 2000lbs Simple deal ATACMS targets S-300 and S-400s in the area, The first section MIG-29s launch ADM-160s with ground forces firing decoy BM-21s to get SHORADs to turn on while a second of AGM-88s locks on an launches against the SHORAD while a 3rd section of F-16s loaded with laser guided bombs strike, ideally 2 loaded with 4X 2000bls each One of the fun things about PAVEWAYs is that US long before JDAM had been working on ways to improve its range allow bombs to dropped from over 9 miles away While Russian EW will cause GPS to drift to causes munitions to be off by as much as 150 ft, the PAVEWAY laser seeker allows the bomb to stay on target Hence why Ukraine should use 2000lbs bombs because 150ft of drift does not matter with 2000lbs bomb or 1000lbs for that matter but like I said, it comes down to Ukraine using the right tactics The absolutely worst thing they could do is try going to air to air
    12
  40. Stealth against ships was always a real nightmare One aircraft uses an anti ship missile for a crippling blow while a second follows through with Quick Sink to finish the job Modern ASM is accurate enough to target specific points on ships A missile to the engine compartment will take all systems off line While striking the bridge is symbolic , the CIC is buried deep in the hull for that reason hence a strike to in the stern has the best chances
    12
  41. The idea of a bomber acting like a missile truck similar to the F-15EX is not a good idea
    11
  42. The B-21 is 6th generation bomber not fighter The confusion is over the fact that it will able to use air to air missiles from its self defense bays
    11
  43. The problem there is that the short sighted people fail to grasp that concept By the time they did with the F-22, it was 4 years too late
    11
  44. The simple answer is that the B-21 can be missile truck for air to ground but as airborne missile truck for air to air is not necessary The US military long ago decided it was more efficient to knock out the enemy's air power on the ground than fighting them in the air A few missiles to runway , fuel depot and munition storage and the enemy's air power in the area is neutralized vs risk a dogfight
    11
  45. I wouldnt say they are playing catch up up China's DFs , ASBM ship and air launched are still very much massive which limits their effectiveness Russia's Kinzhal has proven to be very toothless and the Zircon is hasnt been used enough to gauge its effectiveness Both missiles are limited on what assets can use them The Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM) and AGM-183 ARRW unlike Russian and China designs, they are designed to flexible across the US military So its taking longer to develop Both China and Russia took short cuts to their designs and it shows
    11
  46.  @korana6308  It does not matter The fact is that Ukraine was able to get close enough to engage Russia's best fighter and nearly destroyed it
    11
  47. its not really much of a fight To test out anti-stealth radars, the US has F-22s, F-35s, B-2s F-117s and number of MQ/RQs drones as well as the B-21 at their disposal China has the J-20, FC-31 and a few drones as well as the few times they able to watch US exercises So realistically, the F-15EX would able to track and engage the J-20 at long range Additionally, newer variants of the AIM-120 have increased sensitivity to the point where they able to target air to air missiles The J-20 in stealth carries just 4 BVR missiles while the F-15EX carries 12 nominally with max of 22 The F-15EX can literally out shoot the J-20 But worst for the J-20 is the existence of the AIM-174 The J-20 relies heavily on AWACS and tankers for support While the USAF has it spades, China has very few of each
    10
  48. No, you wouldnt hear peep if the F-22 was built to the original spec with side-looking radars the dedicated infra-red search and track (IRST) system full color and had mutli mission weapons similar to F-35 with the original 749
    10
  49.  @apuuvah  How about no You are missing keep points. F-47 tech is already developed whereas the FCAS and GCAP are still working on their tech
    10
  50. They have no choice but to build it Musk Rat is trying to gun for the F-35 program but the USAF smartly pushed the YFQ-44 and YFQ-42 forward which undermines his chances That wont last long so the USAF and the USN need to make choice and fast
    9