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

  1. FYI - the B-52 was the last fighting plane developed by Boeing, Military bombers or fighters, but not tankers or cargo planes,
    1
  2.  @Youtubeuser1aa  haven't a clue. Were there?
    1
  3.  @Echowhiskeyone  My point was about the skin of the plane. Seems to me, for the SR-71 to have the heat issues described, it would have to a LOT faster than Mach 3.
    1
  4.  @Youtubeuser1aa  what was made of stainless steel? The SR-71 or the Russian plane? you are right, I don't know about aircraft design.. It just seems to me that if one plane can go Mach 3, w/o titanium, then the SR-71 must be going a LOT faster.
    1
  5.  @BTD3Fan  Wow. That much?? I just threw out Mach 5 because I thought it must be able to go a lot faster. If what you say is right, then my wild ass guess was close. Thanks.
    1
  6.  @clapanse  Thanks. I did wonder about what was used on the X-15. Also, I thought titanium was used on the SR-71 because of thermal issues. You seem to be saying that it was only done for weight. If so, why did Lockheed select titanium and have to engineer the construction tools and techniques?? (BTW - I am not an aerospace engineer. If you are wondering about my LACK of credentials) {However, I do have my YT Masters Degree in flummery.)
    1
  7.  @Youtubeuser1aa  Thanks.
    1
  8.  @clapanse  Aerospace Engineer?? HA ! ! I am a bonafide YT expert on ALL topics. Seriously, though, seems to me the biggest argument against the SR-71 going much faster is the fact that it was not using a scram jet engine. The Chimera engine from Hermeus sis supposed to go Mach 5, and uses scram jet technology to get that speed. So, I presume the SR-71 was limited. B U T -- I then still have the question -- why the titanium hull?
    1
  9.  @Youtubeuser1aa  Actually, the "top" speed of fighter aircraft is NOT a sustainable speed. They can only do it for a short while. I expect that to be the case with the Soviet jet. While the SR-71 could sustain Mach 3+ all the way.
    1
  10. Wow. All these new engines will thrust US far ahead. I presume one of these will be used on the NGAD aircraft. Imagine the next fighter going 5 mach to 9 mach. The F-22 and F-35 will look like toys. This is the next huge step in aircraft design. First biplanes, then monoplanes with advanced piston engines, then jets, and now the coming dual mode scramjets.
    1
  11.  @LunaticTheCat  Yep. Right now the idea is one piloted NGAD and two loyal wingmen. Well, what if it turns out to be one NGAD and 6 loyal wingmen?? OR --- NO NGAD, and 20 drones??? OR NO NGAD, and a swarm of self-directed drones??
    1
  12. I think it is amazing how much more advanced American air technology than other nations. The F-22 & F-23 were designed 30 years ago. The BEST China and Russia could do is to build planes that approach the F-22 in some categories --- maybe. Meanwhile, our Air Force considers the F-22 to be obsolete, and is creating several new gen 6 aircraft for the Air Force and Navy. These new designs will be another leap forward, while our adversaries haven't been able to respond to the F-22 or F-35. On top of that, we have the Hermeus hypersonic engine development. Who knows how that will change things. Hypersonic drones? Hypersonic fighters? Hypersonic cargo planes? (OK, that last one is silly.) Pretty incredible.
    1
  13. China is just catching up - after 30 years. That's nice. BUT --- in 10 years, USA will have the NGAD hypersonic fighters. They will adaptive engine technology having BOTH turbo-jet and ram-jet capability. NGAD fighters will go 3000+ mph.
    1
  14. First come the drones. Next, comes the anti-drones. Anti-drone tech is developing tast. And we haven't applied AI yet.
    1
  15. What a crock. The whole point of a missile is to hit its target. Stealth does it more reliably, IMO, since it is harder to knock down, Both reduce the time to respond by a defender. Stealth by not being detected until very close, and hypersonic by being very fast. IMO, counters to hypersonic will be easier, since they are easily detected.
    1
  16. Ah, Jedi stealth. That is not the drone you are looking for. You don't see anything. There is nothing there. Move along.
    1
  17. Why can't the B-1 and B-52 carry the MOP??? You say only the B-2 can carry it. I thought the others could carry more than 30,000 lbs as well.
    1
  18.  @BadDadio  I figured that. But, the concept is still the same right?? Little strips of stuff that reflects the radio waves, making a mess of the radar returns. The genius of it was that it was low tech and cheap.
    1
  19. We haven't designed a new stealth fighter in last 25 years. We are overdue, IMO.
    1
  20. Someone suggested you should have more subscribers. May I suggest kittens.
    1
  21. Thanks for the report. I was with you... up until you said we are waiting on Congress... Now, there's the rub.
    1
  22. How do either of our missiles compare to India's highly praised Brahmos missile?? Are they faster? More reliable? How do mission success rates compare? Cost comparison? Types of missions supported? etc.
    1
  23. In ten years, the US military will outclass China and Russia as much as a WW2 army outclassed a Napoleon army. NGAD, laser weapons, wingman drones, and combat networking will reduce China's and Russia's armies to insignificance. They will have no counter to the stealth, precision, and situational awareness our military will have. Their planes, tanks, and other assets will be destroyed, and they won't be able to stop it.
    1
  24. You didn't specify whether it was a Coke or Pepsi can. Details please..
    1
  25. Makes sense. Aeronautical agility is becoming a thing of the past as encounters and kills will be done BVR. If that is the case, then the qualities of stealth, payload, and range become the important metrics. The B-21 excels in those.
    1
  26. Or, it is one of the many 'gaps' used to justify arms production. The 'missile gap' The 'bomber gap' Soviet Union was supposed to be ahead of us in so many areas, until we spent money to get rid of the fictional gaps. Could this be another 'gap' used to spend money on new weapons?
    1
  27.  @fbi805  you cannot read. The 'gaps' were used to get more funding. The SU was never ahead of us in missiles, nukes, or bombers. Now we have the hype about Russia ahead in hypersonic missiles. This is also false. Before you attack someone, make sure they are not on your side.
    1
  28. OMG, not another video quoting the incompetent CSIS "war gaming" analysis. The assertions made in it are ridiculous. For example, it states that the US will lose 4 nuclear subs. Oh yeah? HOW?? China has no ability to find, let alone target and destroy them. It states the China will sink two aircraft carriers? Oh yeah? How? Our carriers will NOT be put so close to China to make them easy targets. Besides -- why should US or Japan get involved at all??? I have yet to see or read anything that gives a reasonable way for China to avoid having its fleet sunk and neutralized by the anti-ship missiles of Taiwan -- HF-2, HF-2e, and HF-3, along with Harpoon missiles. Look at the difficulty the Allies had invading the Normandy beaches. The Allies had air dominance, and thousands of ships, with trained & experienced crews. China has none of that. Plus, modern anti-ship missiles make such an assault doomed. AND - Taiwan missiles are ALL equipped with modern ECCM capability. China won't be able to shoot down many. The CSIS report is incompetent, and should be discarded. American airpower will NOT likely play a significant role in defending Taiwan.
    1
  29.  @shannonhenson609  I think those speculations are very wrong, just as the speculations about Ukraine not fighting. Also, it is missiles and radars that will defeat China --- NOT airpower.
    1
  30.  @shannonhenson609  Taiwan increased mandatory military service from 3 months to one year. I think they take it seriously. Also, look at the development they did creating HF-2, HF-2e, and HF-3 missiles. They can hit the 3 Gorges dam.
    1
  31.  @shannonhenson609  Have they been there recently? have they looked at how popular their president is? and how unpopular Kuomintang is? Military has been expanded. They have been developing their own advanced missiles for 30 years. Young people are taking courses in shooting and self defense. They have seen what happened to Hong Kong. They don't want that. Their military is bigger, better equipped, and better trained than Ukraine's was when Putin attacked. What NONE of the analysts talk about are Taiwan's missiles, and how will China get its ships close to Taiwan to land the troops? Answer: China cannot. Taiwan has well over 1000 anti-missile ships, KF-2, and KF-3. Their KF-2e missile has a range of 1,200 km. (it is not a variant of the KF-2). Remember, Taiwan has access to the most advanced chips to make advanced avionics, radars, and ECCM systems.
    1
  32. Will ranges of missiles be automatically increased when they are fired from hypersonic fighters??? Seems to me that the engines being developed by Hermeus and others will soon give us engines that can power fighters to Mach 5+ speeds. If current missiles can be launched from Mach 5+ jets, they should be able to go farther. Right???
    1
  33. America's ability to design and build advanced weapon systems is astounding. Look at WW2, Britain, Germany, and Japan ended the war with pretty much the aircraft they started with. The US instead created the P-47, P-51, Corsair, Hellcat, and was coming out with the p-80 at the end. Germany had some good R&D, but their stuff never got into mass production, so I discount those planes. The US seems to be a generation ahead of everyone else at this point.
    1
  34. I do not see how this can be true... UNLESS.... radars have advanced to where stealth isn't as stealthy anymore. Has that happened?
    1
  35. My impression is that the military has ceased to exist in the big cities like Chicago, New York, and LA. The big population centers are ignored. How can the US military meet recruitment goals doing that?
    1
  36. If they hurry, they could do real combat testing by selling some to Ukraine.
    1
  37. BTW -- can the new B-21 carry the MOP? Carry 2 MOPs???
    1
  38. At the end, you mention "doctrine". Does anyone have a good idea of China's military and air combat doctrine?? I presume they started with the Soviet military doctrine, which we now see being shredded in Ukraine. I also understand that China is trying to learn western air combat tactics and procedures. Where do they stand now? I doubt anyone knows.
    1
  39. Also, assuming this can be done ---- If you shoot an AMRAAM missile from a hypersonic fighter going 4,000mph --- wouldn't that give it much greater range?? If so, how much more range do you think??
    1
  40. One thing Ukraine is showing is the diminishment of the significance of air power. Missiles are MUCH more important. 1. SAM's prevent air dominance, or even air activity. 2. Anti-ship missiles will sink China's fleet. If Russia cannot stop the sinking of their flagship, what makes anyone think that China can stop the sinking of its troop ships, destroyers, frigates, etc.?? 3. Taiwan makes the MOST sophisticated chips, which have been incorporated into their HF-2, HF-2e, and HF-3 missiles. They undoubtedly have ECCM, making them very hard to stop. Personally, I think Taiwan can defeat a Chinese invasion all by themselves, with little help from US or Japan. US should send at least 500 Harpoon missiles, and as many LRASM's as possible.
    1
  41. Air superiority means -- fly fast, turn tight, and shoot first. At least that is what it used to mean, IMO. For instance -- I don't think anyone would argue that the F-35 would lose to the F-15 if the F-35 was limited to using its aeronautical abilities alone. HOWEVER - -the F-35 beats the F-15 because of - 1. stealth, and 2) BVR radars & rockets. The F-35 downs F-15 BVR. The F-15 never even sees it. NOW -- if that is true, then the F-35 could actually be a stealth bomber, instead. Why not?? Any stealth weapons truck could do the job, as I see it. If I am wrong, please point out to me what I don't understand.
    1
  42. With the recent huge developments in hypersonic propulsion, is it wise to commit to a 6th gen design now?? Hermeus and Kratos have made amazing advances. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dd4EbOz3sX8&ab_channel=LAMAGRA Maybe the 6th gen should be hypersonic???
    1
  43. Q: if a fighter goes hypersonic --- can it launch missiles from a bomb bay?? Can it carry wing mounted missiles and still go mach 5?? You seem to be saying that current subsonic missiles could still be used on a hypersonic plane, like a possible military version of Hermeus Quarterhorse. Thanks in advance for responding.....
    1
  44. I believe the US Air Force developed Wild Weasel tactics during the Vietnam War. As one who never served, I find the concept one step short of crazy. Do other Air Forces do Wild Weasel tactics? The Russians? The Chinese? Do our allies in UK, Germany, Israel, and others do Wild Weasel, too?? If anyone knows, please respond.
    1
  45. Paraphrasing Sen. Dirksen, "A trillion here, a trillion there, pretty soon, you are talking about real money."
    1
  46. Could the SR-72 be the cover for the even more secret SR-73?? Hmmm???
    1
  47. I thought you were going to swear me to secrecy. Don't want you to get in trouble with Lockheed.
    1
  48. Old? Yes. Dated? No. The A-10 is every bit needed now as it ever was. Stealth? Yes -- on OTHER aircraft. One thing that I hope we have learned is that the idea of a "do-it-all" aircraft is wrong. We need a mix of aircraft doing different things to have an effective combat team. Just like you cannot have a football team with only running backs, or free safeties, no matter how good they are.
    1
  49. Sounds wonderful. Are they only used by the Navy?? That seems silly. So, what Air Force planes can do what the Growler does?? If none, why not??
    1
  50. The C-130 is arguably the BEST plane ever built. Not only is it still flying after 60+ years of flying ==== it is still being MADE after 60+ years of manufacturing. The vaunted DC-3 and B-52 cannot claim that.
    1