Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "" video.

  1.  @terrymichael5821  LITENING not likely but LANTRIN because the tech is much older
    3
  2. @@JimCarner The LANTRIN pods they will give will do the same job as the HTS LITENING is too new and SNIPER is no go SO LANTRIN is the only way to go for them MLU can use the LANTRIN
    2
  3. In Ukraine case, baby steps is what they need to do Their first strike should be against the Black Sea Fleet and bases and take them out of the equation completely The second strike should be against Russian forward operating bases , specifically bases where aircraft ,supply lines and Kerch bridge After that pull back. Knocking out those 3 objectives buys Ukraine weeks if not months of tactical advantage The biggest mistake Ukraine can make is trying to head on with Russian forces Those 3 objects can be attacked with Harpoons and Storm Shadows basically launch and leave not need to get up close and personal yet
    2
  4.  @hypocritease  They need to ask the US for its expeditionary airfield equipment These types of hangar can be put up and down with in hour
    2
  5.  @nietkees6906  Not likely First with F-16s in the mix, it will take considerable strain off Ukrainian ground forces While hunting air defenses with F-16 can be challenging due fighter and AD , Ukrainian ground forces have already been destroy Russian air defenses equipment Hell just they smoked an S-400 site recently So with ground forces actively hunting Russian air defenses equipment, F-16s are free to support ground forces Since Ukrainian forces can easily tell F-16s from MIG-29s,Su-24, Su-25 and Su-27s, the Ukrainian air force can ground all those aircraft So ground forces instead of guessing will know to engage any of those aircraft on site
    1
  6.  @nietkees6906  How effective has Russian AD been so far Not very As far the F-16 , you forgetting key points Ukrainian, MiGs and Sus by modern standards are woefully obsolete The F-16s Ukraine will get a very much modern Their RWR, MAWS and EW is vastly superior to the MIGs and Sus they are using
    1
  7.  @nietkees6906  How kills does the S-400, at most 5 so far The reason why Russian air defense is keeping the Ukrainian force out of the fight is lack of weapons As far as precision guided stand off weapons, Ukraine has very little. The weapons they do have are unguided and require to get 1 to 3 miles of their targets which makes easy for AD Lets look at what the F-16 can do The GBU-12 can be launched from as far as 9 miles away and unlike the JDAM,. the GBU-12 is immune to jamming The AGM-65 can be launch from over 12 miles away and like GBU-12 is immune to jamming While the MIG-29 and Su-27 can use the AGM-88 at fraction of its capability, the F-16 can fully use the AGM-88 to max capability from 40 mile away At 40 miles, systems like the Pansir S1, Tor, Buk, Tunguska and other Russian SHORADs are now useless as the F-16 can accurately target them at the range which MIG-29s and Su-27 currently cant do With those out of the picture, the threat drops to S-300, S-400, as well Su-35 and MIG-31s with R-37s This where combined arms come in and grounds forces can do Ukrainian air force a solid and target the S-300 and S-400 sites Kinda of hard for S-300 and S-400 to go after F-16s when Ukrainian ground forces are dropping HIMARS and 155mms on them And that leaves up the few Su-35 and MIG-31s to try which a needle in haystack If Ukraine ground forces keep up the attacks against the S-300 and S-400, the F-16 will have free reign
    1
  8. @@JimCarner if Ukraine plays its cards right, the HTS will be moot
    1
  9. ​@@JimCarner The newer Blocks of the F-16 dont need the HTS as it been programmed into targeting pods and use the aircraft radar which has considerably longer range than HTS The EA-18G has HTS functionally built hence why you dont see the HTS mounted on it HTS is carry over from when aircraft needed to specialized for roles The newer but older LANTRIN can function as HTS with the F-16s radar
    1
  10.  @gups4963  Precision weapons from the US JASSM is maybe because the USAF as could send older model JASSM-A which would allow to buy newer JASSM-ER and XR models in place The SLAM-ER is no go as the USN has not brought a weapon to replace it yet. That was supposed to be the JSOW-ER but that was canx place of newer yet to built JASSM. The AARGM-ER and LRASM/JSM are too few number to even considered AIM-120C-5/7 is what Ukraine will get The newer models of Harpoon is also what Ukraine will likely get
    1
  11.  @gups4963  Reverting JASSMs to baseline software circa 2000s isnt that hard to do The US gives Ukraine 100 JASSM-A and USAF places order for 50 JASSM-ER and 50 JASSM-XR so it works out either way The AGM-88A-D is most likely but E and G not happening The US gave Ukraine PAC-3 MSE which most modern variant of the Patriot because the odds of it ending up in Russian hands very low Russia has been shown its searching the aftermath of Ukraine strikes looking for bits and pieces to see what was used So an intact AGM-88G in Russian hands is not something the US wants to deal with AIM-120C-5/7 and AIM-9R are still capable but old enough not to betray anything Same with JDAMs as well PAVEWAY, Maverick, Harpoon,and CBU-87/97 All capable but still old enough to not betray anything Now what the West should be doing is buying Israel's F-16i Sufa that Israel is trying to get rid of as well KC-130 The Sufa key feature is its use of CFTs Why that matters is that F-16 has CART CFT which allows to use drogue instead of boom for aerial refueling Israel's Sufa CFT are fitted wit advanced EW which Ukraine could piggy back of and a number F-16s like airborne jammers similar to EA-18Gs That would greatly increase their survival
    1
  12. @@JimCarner The LANTRIN has under gone some upgrades but compare to LITENING and SNIPER, its still very much older "Building on the LANTIRN’s success, Lockheed Martin would create an advanced targeting pod for fighters and bombers called Sniper, offering twice the resolution, triple the recognition range and 10 times the geopointing capability of the LANTIRN" LANTIRN ER, which is the latest LANTIRN production configuration, is offered as a newly fabricated pod, or as an upgrade to existing pods.
    1
  13. @@JimCarner Targeting pods carry the software needed for the HTS without the need for the HTS to be physical present
    1
  14. @@JimCarner I have provided plenty, you are just oblivious HTS was carry over from the 80s and hasnt been seen on any newer aircraft
    1
  15. @@JimCarner Dont have to the absence of it on newer aircraft is all that needs to be said the absence of it on the EA-18G again all that needs to be said HTS become moot as SAM range increased substantially
    1
  16. @@JimCarner Once again , already thoroughly backed The HTS is absent of newer aircraft as targeting pods have taken that role over
    1
  17.  @vic5015  The simple answer is yes Lockheed and MBDA combined solve that very quickly
    1
  18. @@JimCarner Ukraine doesnt need permission for Novorossiysk as its naval target. completely different set of rules and its destruction would have clear strategic impact TLAM are no go simply because there are very little ground launchers. Both the Army and Marines only have a hand ful of TLAM launches Secondly, its not the weapon they need All you need to target for the Kerch bridge is 1 section and sever it Ukraine can that with Su-24 and Storm Shadow but they have to few aircraft to commit to an all out attack The KEPD-350 is irrelevant The only weapon that matters to Ukraine is the ATACMS as the combined 60 HIMARS and M270 can use it which would give Ukraine massive striking power
    1