Comments by "WALTERBROADDUS" (@WALTERBROADDUS) on "Not A Pound For Air To Ground" channel.

  1. Is every Canadian taught this sob story at Birth? It has almost turned into like a religion?
    1
  2.  @RCAvhstape  You could say the same thing about General Electric Space and RCA.
    1
  3. Why?
    1
  4.  @richardmartin8998  on the other hand, being as its main Armament was the Sparrow, that would be a major problem too. It had a high failure rate.
    1
  5.  @ndx6779  I think the better View is make comparisons to other modern conflicts. Such as the experience of the Israelis in their various conflicts and later. The gun has become a less relevant weapon. Tactics and strategy have evolved as weapon technology has matured. I don't think you'll find a greater percentage of gun kills in the Iran Iraq War or Falklands War either?
    1
  6.  @ndx6779  it's an additional tool in the toolbox. But, with Rules of Engagement and the reluctance of North Vietnamese planes to give battle. The chances of using it are not many. Therefore sending the f-104 would not have changed the equation much.
    1
  7. Expensive, unneeded, obsolete.
    1
  8.  @originalSPECTER  why not?
    1
  9. ​ @paulwoodman5131 https://youtu.be/8WOdS1FoL3M?si=P04l6HZCBw64guMD
    1
  10. A p-38 over Alaska must have been a very cold place to be?
    1
  11. The bomber threat was already dying.
    1
  12. What about it? Has nothing to do with this program or specification.
    1
  13. ​ @christophmahler F-5 was not Superior to anything.
    1
  14. Your point?
    1
  15. Oh, God you people are always complaining. There's nothing wrong with the voiceover.
    1
  16. Not really...
    1
  17. I don't see any North Korean flag south of the 38th parallel.
    1
  18. It's a victim of the reality that the ICBM had replaced the bomber. High flying, Mach 3 interceptors were obsolete already. And surface-to-air missiles could do much of the same job anyway.
    1
  19. Reality is, when you look at the statistics it really didn't make that much of a difference. I believe the f-105 actually has more gun kills than the F4. internal gun or not. And Navy and Marine Corps Pilots never had an internal gun.
    1
  20. The Gulf of Tonkin incident was in August of 1964. The Paris Peace treaty was 1973.
    1
  21. I think you mean to say drones or uavs? In either case, the technology was still in its infancy. Keep in mind the era of electronics we are talking about here. You wouldn't find the first real pocket calculator till about 1970. And that was bigger than most cell phones.
    1
  22. ​ @neilturner6749 New Jersey did a cruise in 1968 off Vietnam. It was scheduled to do a second tour but, it got canceled. Other destroyers and cruisers stayed on station doing gunfire support.
    1
  23. The Americans bought the same engine.
    1
  24. Rather than the F-100, did they consider using the Smaller A-37? Better vision with the side by side seating. Harder to hit. Lower IR and noise signature.
    1
  25.  @Ernest-jr  the xp-55 was a dead project.
    1
  26. ​ @andrewemery4272 Yeah, the great freedom of North Vietnam.😂
    1
  27. What are you talking about?
    1
  28.  @christophmahler  the F-14A has plenty of real kills.
    1
  29.  @christophmahler  https://youtu.be/M2_QHdijT7o?si=bXlciVFE1_sVzN1R
    1
  30. On the contrary, they forced the North Vietnamese to sign a peace treaty in 1973.
    1
  31. Seems like a half step to a hovercraft?
    1
  32. ​ @chriskortan1530 I think it's mandatory at Birth that all Canadians be taught to cry about the Arrow? How many generations are they going to keep this up?
    1
  33. It was money spent elsewhere on more useful things.
    1
  34. Why would we? There is a entire separate video on that topic.
    1
  35. @LRRPFco52  True. The generation jets had arrived by 1960.
    1
  36.  @bowencreer3922  I don't know what you are thinking? But, that naval fighter would kick the butt of most of the century series.
    1
  37. Icbms made interceptors in general obsolete.
    1
  38. @johnmoore8599  speed does not guarantee success anymore. And we have long range uavs that can do most of the same Mission now.
    1
  39. @johnmoore8599  I haven't seen anything more than a lot of rumor and speculation.
    1
  40. Where is Naval Aviation in all of this?
    1
  41.  @prowlus  they are contemporaries. To say advanced? Really doesn't apply.
    1
  42. Not at all. They don't look anything similar.
    1
  43. @ODST64  no more resemblance than every other SUV, looks like every other SUV.
    1
  44. Your reading comprehension is poor. There is nothing about the f-15 in the lightweight fighter competition.
    1
  45. @TyrannoJoris_Rex  don't think there's anything that says you have to go in numerical order?
    1
  46. Banshees went to Canada. Panthers went to Argentina.
    1
  47. The Navy and Marine Corps did.
    1
  48. NATO code name. All enemy fighter aircraft have a "f" name designation. Bombers use "b" names.
    1
  49. @Crash-yp7ll  The Fury and Sabre are different.
    1
  50. Sorry , I won't join the Fanboys in love for the F100. I think it's a bad airplane.
    1