Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "The Wild Weasels - When Electronic Warfare Became Real" video.

Look up "Welcome to JSTARS: Morale Stops Here" patch.
8
@Alex-cw3rz "another aircraft was hit" - But not shot down. It returned home. Meaning that the feat was not repeated. It doesn't matter how much you classify something, you can't hide a missing airframe. "Is just embarrassing, just except it." - You mean "accept it". No, it's not embarrassing. What's embarrassing is bragging about a shootdown for 20 years even though it didn't change anything. "It's the equivalent of saying if yugoalsivia had bought S-300 NATO would have never entered" - No, it isn't. The planets needed to align for something to occur. It took both great skill from operators and the golden opportunity. If a normal, average skill crew couldn't have done it during average circumstances, you can't infer anything other than the extreme levels of skill displayed. "If their had been SEAD support it wouldn't have been a stealth mission" - False. Do you think planners are children? SEAD is in the air. It doesn't tell you anything. You don't know where the F-117 is. You don't know when. All you know is that if you turn on your radar a HARM is fired. That's all you know. "No SAM unit would ever fire just one missile" - That's beside the point. What if the second missile lost track too? We wouldn't be discussing anything here. "the reason the flight plan was known was due to spy's" - This is false. The F-117s were using the same ingress routes. There were no spies in NATO command centers. "you'd repeat patterns within days making it utterly useless" - If they're used randomly no pattern can be established.
3
F-35 purchase costs are in line with most current production 4th gen pricing. It's the maintenance cost that is higher.
2
Several ways. First of all is by using energy, rocket motors burn out quick, especially the boost rockets, so if you point your aircraft to where you don't want to be the missile has no option but to fly in that direction. You then turn back to where you intended to go and now the missile has to waste its sustain phase motors to go back into another predictive intercept course. By the time it gets close to you it's either too slow to keep up with the aircraft or it can't turn due to lack of airflow over the control surfaces. You can also dive under the missile's minimum altitude. Modern missiles can target aircraft flying lower but again, at low altitude the air is denser and thus drag is higher. You can pull a missile down to waste its energy defeating the high drag low altitude air, and then climb up to altitude to slow down the missile. Plus there's the fact that although the missile can pull more Gs (at proper speeds) you can force a hard enough turn that loses speed and the missile's turn still forces an overshoot due to speed. You just have to do this in a way that doesn't land you inside the proximity fuze.
2
@Alex-cw3rz the SAM that took out the F-117 was also placed as close as possible to known routes due to planners' complacency, it failed to get a lock twice, a third lock was only attempted because observers counting incoming and outgoing flights knew there was no SEAD support because they were under strict rules to never attempt more than two locks, and even then the first missile lost track and flew in front of the aircraft harmlessly. It took both tremendous skill and luck to bag a single aircraft and the feat was not repeated. Had flight planners chosen a different path instead of getting lazy, it wouldn't have happened. Had there been SEAD support airborne, they wouldn't attempt the third lock. Had they fired only one missile, it would have had a 50% chance of completely missing the radar returns.
2
Why? The F-15 would be put in unecessary danger by getting inside of SAM range. The F-35 could drop a SDB on the radar. Done. It's off. No need to light up for anyone or use a missile.
1
That was already used in the Gulf War.
1
@hippopotamus86 the optical spectrum is absorbed by the atmosphere at a shorter range than the microwave spectrum
1
Germans were fighting for their home, which was lead by genocidal maniacs. The North Vietnamese were fighting for their home, which was lead by the same sort of maniacs. Explain how killing 100 million under the reds was better than 12 million under the fash.
1
Because the USAF uses F-16s and not 18s?
1