Comments by "Geoffrey Lyons" (@granatmof) on "F-22 vs Russian SU-57 Fighter Pilot Reacts" video.

  1. There isn't going to be any major improvements to the F22. It's how it is. The SU57 "could" improve, but Russia doesn't have the resources. The F22 is the superior fighter and the 57 is an attempt for Russia to say they're keeping up with 90s US technologies. They're not. And as far as the shoot down of the F117 is concerned, that was a failure of operational policies, not a failure of stealth. The F117 followed the same path and schedule as it had done the previous night. The ground radar scanned once, and got nothing. Stealth was a success. The radar crew scanned a second time, stealth was a success. At this point any radar commander would have boot and scoot to avoid any anti radar missiles, but instead they broke protocol and scanned a third time, and got the hit right as the bay doors were opening on the F117. As far as competition goes, the arguments of onee VS the other are meaningless outside of air shows. The fact is, neighter of these would go head to head one on one. The US is going to have other resources in the sky in a Top Gun like situation. The SU 57 is exportable, the F22 is not. The US has decoy missiles, hunter seeker anti radar missiles.
    6
  2. ​ @roseivory8496 no nation in the world attacks with out of date tech if they don't have to. The goal is to hit fast and hard to achieve overwhelming battlefield dominance that the oppositional force has no choice to surrender. Longer conflicts do mean that nations may develope newer weapons during the war that they roll out as they become ready. Look at Desert Storm/Sword. Coalition Forces hit the 4th largest military in the world, fast and overwhelmingly. Stealth fighters fly around the world to attack communications infrastructure before the main assault begins. Attack choppers fly low to the gore to evade radar to take out key forward radar locations. With the gap in the radar the assemble air assault begins in earnest. It's and overwhelming onslaught. Weeks later, the Coalition forces push in with the latest and greatest Abrams and Bradleys. At certain battles, a couple dozen take out hundred of enemy tanks. How? By using the latest and greatest technology first. Russia has not used the SU57 in any meaningful role. Why? Because it's the Bismark: its expensive, there's few of them, and it's deployment has a greater loss than benefit should it fail in combat, even accidentally. If Russia had dozens of them, they could risk losing them. Instead they have maybe a single dozen with carrying states of unreadiness. However I'm biased. I'm and American, and I think Russia is a big loser. They used to be great, but a culture of corruption from the top down to the bottom has hollowed any any greatness. American readiness is certainly effected by inefficieny. But overall, the US fields the largest and best military in the world bar none. Us military hegemony has protected most of Europe from major conflict for nearly 80 years, and American engineering prowess and scientific and technological research and contributions have completely transformed the world in those 80 years. No matter where you are in the world, if youre reading this, it's on a American website, accessed from a device probably using American made hardware running an operating system made or influenced by American companies. You're on the internet, when has its earliest roots in American military research, and ethernet protocols developed by Americans, so much so IP address used to be assigned by an American based group, which is why the US government has such a dominant market share of IP addresses. What have been Soviet or Russian contributions to global peace and global trade and global technological advancements? There's been plenty. But they're under whelming next to the overwhelming American contributions.
    1