Comments by "Valen Ron" (@valenrn8657) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. 84
  2. 22
  3. 19
  4. 15
  5. 10
  6. 8
  7. 7
  8. 7
  9. 6
  10. 5
  11. 5
  12. 5
  13. 5
  14. 5
  15. 4
  16. 4
  17. 4
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 3
  26. 3
  27. 3
  28.  @roblockhart6104  FYI, the so-called "super maneuverability"'s thrust vector (improves tail related flight control functions) benefits low-speed nose pointing (relative to empty weight) which is countered by 360 degrees targeting and thrust vector enabled A2A missiles. Acceleration helps energy recovery after an instantaneous turn. F-16's tail and LERX design is not for Hornet's nose pointer/high sustain G minimum turn radius low-speed regime. F-16 Vista's thrust vector control enables F-16 to fight in nose pointer/high sustain G minimum turn radius low-speed regime. Original source (non-English) http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/jutut/kotimaa/suomella-vahvat-ilmavoimat-mutta-kuinka-kauan/ Frisian Flag 2012 exercises in Holland, Finnish F-18Cs gets 100 kills and 6 loses against Eurofighter (Germany, UK), Polish new F-16 and older F-16 planes (Norway, Belgium) and Gripen (Swedish) Finland's F-18C has a 16:1 kill ratio over Germany/UK's Eurofighter, Poland's F-16C Block 52+ and Norway/Belgium's F-16A MLU, and Sweden's Gripen. F-16's angle of attack is limited to about 26 degrees. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k3b-b762QRY Super Hornet's high angle of attack with minimum turn radius advantage holding its own against F-15's high energy turn rate advantage dogfight example. http://theaviationist.com/2016/03/01/heres-what-ive-learned-so-far-dogfighting-in-the-f-35-a-jsf-pilot-first-hand-account/ Norwegian F-35 Pilot Counters David Axe's Controversial Dogfighting’ Report. Date: 2016, before December 2017 F-35A Block 3F. Well according to a Norwegian pilot the Jet handles better in a dogfight than the F-16 in some respects. He said that the F-35 can pull its nose around and keep a target in its sights better than the F-16 can. He said it's easier to be aggressive with the F-35. The F-35 which lost to the F-16 was a very early built F-35, one of the first and the idea of the test was to explore the F-35's ability to maneuver at high AOA. The test exposed areas of improvement which were needed, the test pilot said that the jet had the performance there but it was limited by the software at the time, and by the sounds of it the software has been improved because many of the weak areas found during testing appear now to be some of its greatest areas Fighters such as F-22A combine F-15C and Hornet-style dogfighting capabilities.
    3
  29. 3
  30. 3
  31. 3
  32. 3
  33. 3
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. EU has a “mutual defense clause" article 42.7 of the Treaty of the European Union (TEU). NATO’s Article 5 can be seen as similar to article 42.7 TEU. NATO’s Article 5 can't be used when two or more NATO members are at war with each other. Invoking Article 42.7 TEU might bring EU's F-35A Block 3F fleet into the mix e.g. F-35 fleets of Italy and Netherlands. Norway is not an EU member. UK will soon be out of EU, but UK has bases in Cyprus. https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/09/23/pax-mediterranea-italy-turkey-france-oil-european-union/ France and Italy join forces against Turkey. Franco-Italian energy cooperation already established. There's a gas pipeline EastMed project from Israel to Greece via southern Cyprus. Israel has open the door for Turkey on joining EastMed energy cooperation. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-greece-cyprus-israel-pipeline-idUSKBN1Z10R5 EastMed project has Israel, Cyprus, Greece, and Italy. https://www.neweurope.eu/article/eu-reiterates-support-for-eastmed-pipe-urges-turkey-to-respect-international-law/ EU supports the EastMed project. From https://theintercept.com/2020/02/06/congress-exxon-mobil-eastmed-pipeline-cyprus/ US Congress backs Exxon Mobil's EastMed project. When there are hydrocarbon fuels, the US will be interested. U.S. military brought the 26th Marine Expeditionary Unit to Limassol, Cyprus, on the USS Iwo Jima (Wasp-class LHD) as Exxon Mobil commenced exploratory drilling in the region. USS Iwo Jima (Wasp-class LHD) has 20 F-35B. Noble Energy (Chevron, USA) and Qatar Petroleum also supports the EastMed project.
    2
  41. 2
  42. 2
  43. 2
  44. 2
  45. 2
  46. 2
  47. 2
  48. 2
  49. 2
  50. 2
  51. 2
  52. 2
  53. 2
  54. 2
  55. 2
  56. 2
  57. 2
  58. 2
  59. 2
  60. @Oblivion >My problem with this whole "Stealth doesn't need dogfighting ability, it eliminates everything from a distance" thing False narrative. F-35A Block 3F still has 9G dogfighting capability. From Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A - Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018 1. Lightest empty weight F-16A MLU air-superiority model needs to be clean (no weapons, no external tanks) to make visual range dogfight interesting against combat loaded F-35A Block 3F. 2. Dutch has acknowledged early F-35 Block builds being beaten by F-16s with external fuel tanks which are NOT applicable for F-35A Block 3F build. Don't use Block 2A/2B/3i numbers! Quoting Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A - Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018 specifically against David Axe's report Knight divulged a little more information about flying basic fighter manoeuvres (BFM) in an F-35. 'When our envelope was cleared to practise BFM we got the opportunity to fight some fourth-generation fighters. Remember, back the rumors were that the F-35 was a pig. The first time the opponents showed up [in the training area] they had wing tanks along with a bunch of missiles. I guess they figured that being in a dirty configuration wouldn't really matter and that they would still easily outmanoeuvre us. By the end of the week, though, they had dropped their wing tanks, transitioned to a single centerline fuel tank and were still doing everything they could not to get gunned by us. A week later they stripped the jets clean of all external stores, which made the BFM fights interesting, to say the least.
    2
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1
  69. 1
  70. 1
  71. 1
  72. 1
  73. 1
  74. 1
  75. 1
  76. 1
  77. 1
  78. 1
  79. 1
  80. 1
  81. 1
  82. 1
  83. 1
  84. 1
  85. 1
  86. 1
  87. 1
  88. 1
  89. 1
  90. 1
  91. 1
  92. 1
  93. 1
  94. 1
  95. 1
  96. 1
  97. 1
  98. 1
  99. 1
  100. 1
  101. 1
  102. 1
  103. 1
  104. 1
  105. 1
  106. 1
  107. 1
  108. 1
  109. 1
  110. 1
  111. 1
  112. 1
  113. 1
  114. 1
  115. 1
  116. 1
  117. 1
  118. 1
  119. 1
  120. 1
  121. 1
  122. 1
  123. 1
  124. 1
  125. 1
  126. 1
  127. 1
  128. 1
  129. 1
  130. 1
  131. 1
  132. 1
  133.  @EmperorLionflame  Wrong. Original source (non-English) http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/jutut/kotimaa/suomella-vahvat-ilmavoimat-mutta-kuinka-kauan/ Frisian Flag 2012 exercises in Holland, Finnish F-18Cs gets 100 kills and 6 loses against Eurofighter (Germany, UK), Polish new F-16 and older F-16 planes (Norway, Belgium) and Gripen (Swedish) Finland's F-18C has 16:1 kill ratio over Germany/UK's Eurofighter, Poland's F-16C Block 52+ and Norway/Belgium's F-16A MLU and Sweden's Gripen. Poland, Norway and Belgium has selected F-35A over losers in Frisian Flag 2012. ----------- http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=55&t=5525&start=1335#wrapper From GTA4's post, F-35A beating EuroFighter in acceleration. https://hushkit.net/2015/12/18/typhoon-versus-rafale-the-final-word/ Both Rafale and EuroFighter has similar angle of attack limits. For Rafale http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/flight-test-dassault-rafale-rampant-rafale-334383/ The DFCS is a "g" demand system with +9.0g/29° angle of attack (AoA) limit in air-to-air mode and +5.5g/20° AoA limit in both of the two air-to-ground/heavy stores modes (ST1 and ST2) to cater for forward or aft centre of gravity For F-35 http://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=22&t=15013&start=210 Article copied beyond Aviation Week paywall. So it got stuck at 60 or 70 deg. alpha, and it was as happy as could be Classic Hornet can sustain 45 degress angle of attack. Beyond 45 degress, Hornet would be out of control. F-16 Vista with thrust vector control can sustain 90 degress angle of attack. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dj8OJs6E3JM F-35A can sustain 60 to 70 degress angle of attack. Software limited to 50 degress angle of attack. https://www.reddit.com/r/F35Lightning/comments/8a66ta/out_of_the_shadows_rnlaf_experiences_with_the/ Out Of The Shadows: RNLAF experiences with the F-35A - Combat Aircraft Magazine May 2018 1. Dutch F-35 Block 3F, "F-35 sits somewhere in between the F-16 and F/A-18 when it comes to within visual range manoeuvring'". 2. Lightest empty weight F-16A MLU air-superority model needs to be clean (no weapons, no external tanks) to make visual range dogfight interesting against combat loaded F-35A Block 3F. 3. Dutch has acknowledge early F-35 Block builds being beaten by F-16s which changed with F-35A Block 3F build. http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/11/20/a-fly-f-35-erfaringer-fra-den-forste-uka/ More F-16 vs F-35 from Norwegian pilot. I quote Overall, flying the F-35 reminds me a bit of flying the F/A-18 Hornet, but with an important difference: It has been fitted with a turbo http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2009/07/i-flew-supersonic-barely-at-th/ F-35C has 300 degrees per second roll rate. F-35A roll rate: 300 deg/sec. Video proof. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qceZALofOcg&feature=youtu.be&t=1m15s http://theaviationist.com/2015/05/01/aileron-roll-in-t-346a/ According to most reports a Rafale features a maximum roll rate of 270 deg/s, the Eurofighter Typhoon is able of around 250 deg/s, the F/A-18E Super Hornet has a maximum roll rate of 120 deg/s whereas the F-16 can roll at 240 deg/s. Try again.
    1
  134. 1
  135. 1
  136. 1
  137. 1
  138. 1
  139. 1
  140. 1
  141. 1
  142. 1
  143. 1
  144. Original source (non-English) http://suomenkuvalehti.fi/jutut/kotimaa/suomella-vahvat-ilmavoimat-mutta-kuinka-kauan/ Frisian Flag 2012 exercises in Holland, Finnish F-18C Hornets gets 100 kills and 6 loses against Eurofighter (Germany, UK), Polish new F-16 and older F-16 planes (Norway, Belgium) and Gripen (Swedish) Finish F-18C has 16:1 kill ratio against Eurofighter, F-16C Block 52, F-16A MLU and Gripen C/D. https://youtu.be/Bu8G5ABHKc8?t=4183 Around 1 :09:51, RAAF commander mentioned how the Super Hornet had a positive kill ratio in excess of 20 to 1 against the Alaska aggressors F-16 in an exercise in Australia more than a year ago. Australia's F-18F Block 2 has 20:1 kill ratio against F-16s. Super Hornet has lower RCS when compared to any F-16s F-35A has similar kill ratio like Super Hornet. https://theaviationist.com/2017/02/28/red-flag-confirmed-f-35-dominance-with-a-201-kill-ratio-u-s-air-force-says/ F-35A = F-18C or F-18E with turbo and stealth. http://nettsteder.regjeringen.no/kampfly/2015/11/20/a-fly-f-35-erfaringer-fra-den-forste-uka/ More F-16 vs F-35 from Norwegian pilot. I quote Overall, flying the F-35 reminds me a bit of flying the F/A-18 Hornet, but with an important difference: It has been fitted with a turbo http://www.f-16.net/forum/download/file.php?id=26173 To The FUTURE Jan/Feb 2018 ANDREW MCLAUGHLIN; Aust Aviation Magazine "...To the future A former classic Hornet pilot, WGCDR Clare provides an interesting comparison between the old and new aircraft. “The F-35 actually flies very, very similarly to the Hornet, both classic and Super,” he related. “In fact, it’s probably more like the Super in the way it feels. The alpha (angle of attack performance) and the power is similar to a Super Hornet, although it’s got a little bit more power down low. Against S400 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DN-A6PWRFno The video shows F-35's IRST capabilities with tracking/detection >1300Km range. F-35's EO-DAS has 360 degrees IRST distributive sensors with detection range around >1300Km. F-35's 360 degree IRST distributive sensors can feed data to anti-ballistics missile/Aegis combat systems. http://www.defensetech.org/2015/01/22/navy-to-integrate-f-35-with-beyond-the-horizon-technology/ Linking Aegis combat system with F-35. https://news.vice.com/article/us-defense-secretary-announces-navy-can-blow-up-anything-it-wants-any-time-it-wants A test SM missile was fired from USN Aegis ship and track/target data driven by F-35.
    1
  145. 1
  146. 1
  147. RCS has related function with enemy radar's detection and track distance. For example, Russian Zaslon-M can detect a bomber with RCS of 20 m^2 from 400 km away and track the same 20 m^2 target about 200 km away. External missiles equipped F-35B (only external missile significantly contribute to the total RCS) will still have less RCS than similar equipped SU-33 (both aircraft and missile significantly contribute to the total RCS). Furthermore (against your standard high frequency radars comments), Lockheed Martin Corporation's year 2010 stealth fiber material patent which covers more than standard high frequency radars http://www.google.com/patents/US20100271253#v=onepage&q&f=false SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION In some aspects, embodiments disclosed herein relate to a radar absorbing composite that includes a (CNT)-infused fiber material disposed in at least a portion of a matrix material. The composite is capable of absorbing radar in a frequency range from between about 0.10 Megahertz to about 60 Gigahertz. The CNT-infused fiber material forms a first layer that reduces radar reflectance and a second layer that dissipates the energy of the absorbed radar. In the patent filing, LM made note on F-117's stealth problem and solution for it. LM's year 2010 stealth fiber material patent is effective from 0.1 MHz to 60 Ghz which is included all VHF, L-band, S-Band, X-band, Ku-band P-Band – 30-100 cm (1-0.3 GHz) L-Band – 15-30 cm (2-1 GHz) S-Band – 8-15 cm (4-2 GHz) C-Band – 4-8 cm (8-4 GHz) X-Band – 2.5-4 cm (12-8 GHz) K-Band – Ku: 1.7-2.5 cm (18-12 GHz); Ka-Band: 0.75-1.2 cm (40-27 GHz). F-117A was downed with VHF based radar. Lockheed Martin reveals F-35 to feature nanocomposite structures (ie. CNT) http://www.flightglobal.com/news/articles/lockheed-martin-reveals-f-35-to-feature-nanocomposite-357223/ Lockheed Martin has revealed the F-35 Lightning II will be the first mass-produced aircraft to integrate structural nanocomposites in non-load bearing airframe components. A thermoset epoxy reinforced by carbon nanotubes will replace carbon fibre as the material used to produce F-35 wingtip fairings beginning with low rate initial production (LRIP)-4 aircraft, said Travis Earles, a manager for corporate nanotechnology initiatives. Meanwhile, the same carbon nanotube reinforced polymer (CNRP) material is being considered to replace about 100 components made with other composites or metals throughout the F-35's airframe, he said. The shift to CNRP as an airframe material has been anticipated ever since carbon nanotubes were discovered in 1991. It is widely considered one of the strongest materials ever invented - several times stronger than carbon fibre reinforced plastic (CFRP), yet lighter by about 25-30%.
    1
  148. 1
  149. 1
  150. 1
  151. 1
  152. 1