Comments by "Titanium Rain" (@ChucksSEADnDEAD) on "C.W. Lemoine" channel.

  1.  @WALTERBROADDUS  What peace? Russia doubled down and gambled their entire future on this war. If they strike a peace deal, they lose everything. It's a sunk cost fallacy situation, if they give up they are still a sanctioned nation with a degraded army. Meanwhile Ukraine knows what Russian "peace" entails. Executions and gulags. It's easy for you to say "peace" when it's not you who will be frogmarched into basements.
    25
  2. ​ @nemanja162  They showed the tail section, look up M39 ATACMS test video. The rocket spins and deploys the payload by breaking the nose apart, the tail section crashes on the ground. Meanwhile we have drone footage of a S-400 being destroyed in Crimea a month or so ago, and Russian milblogger confirmation that S-400s were hit in the other week. But keep telling yourself it never happened.
    25
  3. By losing pilots and airframes?
    17
  4. Two different aircraft means two different pipelines for pilots and mechanics. Unless your force is massive (like the US) it's incredibly expensive to run two dissimilar fighter aircraft. The problem with remote strips is that now you have to hire people to live in those remote areas. Your pilots, mechanics, etc will eventually want to settle down and have a family, which they can't do in the middle of nowhere. A remote strip isn't just a strip. There has to be fuel, weapons, parts, mechanics, security, etc manning that base otherwise you're only landing for emergencies.
    17
  5. The S-400s that can't do squat about ATACMS? And got hit by a S-125 modified into a ballistic missile?
    16
  6. ​ @joshuapaul2022  Can we see them? If they're downed easy, why did a drone fly into Crimea and film a S-400 getting hit?
    16
  7. The F-35 was never a F-22 replacement. Without the CALF program developing into the JSF, the F-22 program would have still been axed due to the GWOT.
    15
  8. The National Interest reads like it was written by feeding an AI with junk from other defense news blogs. They had an article titled "Desert Eagle: what you get when you mix an AR-15 with a gun" or something like that.
    15
  9. ​ @beatmaker50  Doesn't humanize them one bit when you have seen the pics of civilians on the other end. He'll have one PAC-2 with his name on it one day.
    13
  10. It's essentially a Harrier but actually good.
    12
  11. You're not dogfighting a missile, you're forcing a lead prediction off your intended exit. You're confused about the concepts at play here - you can still maneuver in a "non-maneuverable" fighter because even those are quite maneuverable compared to bombers and cargo aircraft.
    12
  12.  @DennisMerwood-xk8wp  Amazing, tell me more about these "modern missiles". Stealth is a hoax? Someone inform the Russian and the Chinese.
    12
  13. The problem is that less advanced jets will get attrited away without acomplishing much.
    11
  14. You cannot take off from dirt roads, you need an actual paved road. Jesus Christ this game of telephone keeps getting worse. In a few months the Gripen will also be able to take off vertically.
    11
  15. You people have been saying this about the HIMARS, Ceasar, etc. for two years.
    10
  16. The MiG-29s lost the wing root intake in modernized variants because that volume was needed for extra fuel.
    10
  17. We assumed they shared some of our values but it turns out they act like all the other autocratic states: there's not enough training and inter branch cooperation to prevent competent troops staging a coup, there's an entire branch separate of the army with internal troops that answer to the head of state rather than military officers, there's three rival intelligence agencies, almost everyone in a position that matters was picked on the basis of loyalty rather than competence and everyone is encouraged to engage in corruption.
    10
  18. You people will cope and seethe about the Ghost of Kiev for the rest of your lives. The Russians already admit it went down.
    9
  19. It already has modern electronics. The thing is three decades past its expiration date. It's like putting a young man's brain on a 70 year old.
    9
  20. You got it backwards. Nobody will ever buy a CAS bird. The Europeans aren't making one. The Russians aren't making one. The Chinese aren't. It's a dead end design, it's a dodo. The animal kingdom has moved on. If you depend on a platform that was outdated in the 1980s when Tunguskas were introduced, you're already doing something wrong and need to think how to get out of that dependency.
    9
  21. Afghanistan, which was under Taliban rule, was offering shelter to Al Qaeda. How is that unrelated to 9/11. Regarding Iraq, the invasion should have happened under Clinton as Saddam wiped his A on the conditions for the 1991 ceasefire. The Saudi citizens were part of an organization that had used Sudan and Afghanistan as their base of operations. The Saudi government and its people did not do 9/11. People sheltered by the Taliban, the de facto government of Afghanistan, did.
    9
  22. That's just nostalgia or preference for the 80s. The original Topgun is also really unrealistic.
    9
  23. The F-16 has full digital control while the MiG-29 is still mechanically linked. When flying a MiG-29 if you speed up or slow down, or change altitude, your wings provide different lift so your CoL moves in relation to the CoG so you need to keep re-trimming to stay level. The F-16 is multirole with modernized cockpits while the MiG-29 is still a fighter that happens to let you drop bombs and fire rockets. The F-16 is made to look for enemy aircraft and fight them, the MiG-29 is meant to be flown by a pilot listening to ground controllers telling him where the enemy will be, and then when close the pilot will turn on his radar or IRST to shoot missiles at the enemy.
    9
  24. Cheaper and better? Each battery costs like a billion and a half, and a system was wrecked in Crimea last year while a drone filmed from above.
    9
  25.  @TheBelrick  Nope. The Legacy Hornet will be replaced by the F-35C while the Super Hornet will be replaced later. The F-16 will eventually be replaced leaving the F-35A. The A-10 is getting more airframes approved for retirement. The F-15 was never to be replaced by the F-35. The F-15 is a twin engine air superiority fighter. It was meant to be replaced by the F-22.
    8
  26. I thought the key to defeating the US was speedboats! Van Riper and Millennium 2000 lied to me!
    8
  27.  @isodoublet  "Right, because such a network would be derived of precisely the right amount of radars needed for triangulation and not a single station more." - You're missing the point. If you take out one emitter, there's now a "hole" in the network where accuracy is compromised because the "third" radar necessary for triangulation isn't there anymore. Of course there's more radars available, but the point is creating the gap. IADS always employ layers. And the air force's job is peeling layer after layer. A triangulation system just makes it easier because it requires three radars to do the job of one. "lots of small, mobile stations that don't stay in the same place for long" - Oh. You do realize that the wavelengths that are optimized for stealth are larger and not really mobile, right? "Yes, you can. You're just scientifically illiterate" - Ahahaha admitting you have no argument through namecalling. ""Stealth" means that the radar return at the given wavelength is weak, but it's not zero" - There is always non-zero levels of energy that get filtered out. That is called noise. The point of stealth is making sure that from most angles, the aircraft is indistinguishable from noise. Fun fact, at Red Flag exercises some F-16s scored kills over F-35s. They detected them visually because they had nothing on radars. By sheer luck they happened to catch unaware F-35 pilots from behind. "You can defeat this by dumping more radiative power" - Hm, such a juicy target for anti radiation missiles. "We're talking mostly software changes here. " - You said "Just fire a missile anyway and put a powerful/smart enough radar head on it". A powerful radar head is heavy. There's no such thing as a free lunch and now you're backtracking to "software". Show me this software that makes radar act like larger radars. "All stealth is worthless if you're close enough to the target." - It's not worthless because now instead of a long range defense system you now have to get "close enough" which means an expansion of safe areas where stealth aircraft can operate from. Stealth is not worthless because conventional aircraft do not have these areas. "Except the F-35 turns like a truck" - Turns on a dime, brother. But regardless, a slight deflection from course will create a predicted trajectory that forces the missile to spend fuel chasing a position in space you don't intend to be at. A heavier missile will have a huge energy disadvantage at range because changing back to the original course will force a turn and a new predicted trajectory. "just about any missile gets anywhere between 30 and 50 gs" - Try to chase a fighter jet into a new predicted trajectory after doing a 50 G turn and you have seconds of fuel left. "Look at the Su-57's engines and get back to me" - Yes, it's cope. And there's 12 of them. Meanwhile there's 500 F-15s delivered.
    8
  28. ​ @xaber_  It's not your job to be a criminal. Recently a Russian drone pilot did his job - with a grenade he fragged his commanders and turned himself in to Ukrainian forces.
    7
  29. ​ @behindthen0thing525  The government is also bleeding money due to the war so let's not pretend that governments are a flawless safety net.
    7
  30. The military industrial complex is about 10 times smaller than when Eisenhower did that address. People throw around references without understanding their context.
    7
  31.  @petrairene  If fitted with APKWS rockets, yes.
    7
  32. ​ @5tre55full  Who confirmed that kill? It was most likely a MiG-31 at max afterburner. The Su-57 is terrible for long range launches when Russia has a faster aircraft with a bigger radar.
    6
  33. "A loss of a Leopard is a tragedy. A loss of a thousand Soviet tanks is a statistic." - people who whine about cartoon dogs online
    6
  34. Conscript mechanics can unbolt parts and replace them with working parts. Now who repairs the part you unbolted? That's still depot level work.
    6
  35. ​ @jonnytest55  Well everyone knows the Gripens are delivered in flatpacks... :P
    6
  36. F-16s can't react in time to SAM ambushes. All air cover can do is get front row seats to the fireballs.
    6
  37. I mean that's cool, but wouldn't a radar still be more accurate as it actually gets 3d spatial information and target speed while the IRST is just picking up a 2D "image"?
    6
  38. It's not like they didn't have two years to put 30 people through their air force academy.
    6
  39. Time plays against Ukraine, but somehow even worse against Russia. The videos of defeated assaults have crossed over to straight up snuff. It's not even combat footage anymore.
    5
  40.  @beatmaker50  Humanizing is literally seeing the human side. As far as I'm concerned, he's flying a war machine and the guy inside is just the brains. Take out the war machine, hopefully the brains don't get to eject and pilot another one.
    5
  41. ​ @AA-or4dt  There's video of a wreckage with a massive landing gear sticking out of the grass. Maybe it was damaged and it returned home but the landing gear was the right size for a IL-76. Also why did you change the goalposts? All you do is bring up different subjects to distract from this loss. What do you earn from it?
    5
  42. The F-16 did 3x the CAS the A-10 did from 2014-2019.
    5
  43. I hate Trump but the border issue is serious. Not an issue that should be used to deflect (like Russian bots do), but still an issue.
    5
  44. ​ @V_for_Vovin  Deflection. It simply makes no sense that Russia would use the Su-57 for long range R-37 use. Why? At that range the stealth doesn't matter. MiG-31 can fly higher, faster, and has a bigger radar. Why would the Su-57 take that shot?
    5
  45. They wouldn't really adapt to the A-10, there's simply no trick up the A-10s sleeves. It has to put itself in the line of fire and it will take losses. It's a very straightforward weapon unlike something like a HIMARS which is very elusive.
    5
  46. They learned so much at Bakhmut they repeated the feat in Avdiivka. Also, the airfield used near Kherson, they kept placing supplies and helicopters there even after the Ukrainians bombarded it several times. They lost so much crap placing assets within strike range, Ukrainians did it 30 times.
    5
  47.  @endjfcar  Anyone with half a brain can change to nautical miles/knots/feet. I'm glad that people who can only use one system of units are weeded out of aviation.
    5
  48. The F-16s you have laying around are better than the Gripens that don't exist.
    5
  49. So much that the GAO slammed the USAF for purchasing 700 of them. >finds out Army is trying to put rotary wing above all >has YA-10 and YA-9 flyoff, gives up A-7F variant >gets criticized for buying TOO MANY A-10s >says it's time to retire it by the legitimate year it should start to be phased out due to age >forced to drag it around for three decades longer >"hurr durr you always hated the A-10" >mfw
    5
  50. Just as the Military Industrial Complex intended.
    5