Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "Is USAF getting hundreds of thousands of anti-ship guided bombs?" video.

Those are bombs, not missiles. Meaning we're talking about ships without AA defense or escorts. So, what is a game changer in this scenario? Unrestricted warfare on civilian and trade vessels? Is that what you propose?:D
4
Those are bombs, not missiles. Meaning we're talking about ships without AA defense or escorts. So, what is a game changer in this scenario? Unrestricted warfare on civilian and trade vessels? Is that what you propose?:D
3
I would actually argue about astounding propaganda and censorship capability to manipulate the data flow being greatest asset.
2
@Tonius126 the enemy won't be expending anything as you are putting a plane into killzone, you... ugh. Instead of forcing enemy to seek out missiles, you're gifting them the whole plane with a pilot that needs to approach enemy military ships and their escorts to drop your damned bombs instead of being hundreds of kilometers away to launch a standard antiship missile. There is no saving cost, there is no lowered risk and there is no increased lethality. Unless the target is unarmed vessel without escort, air support and far away from enemy ground installations. What does match the latter description? Ah yes, civilian ships. So it's either USAF now seeks to destroy civilian ships or the video makes a bold claims about "game changing capabilities" that change f//cking nothing at all in real conflict. So what would that be? Relax, I know that you don't get it no matter how many times I explain it, so feel free to insult me. Have a nice day:D
2
Why would China and Russia threaten civilian ships? Above all China that depends on maritime trade. This is bombs, NOT missiles. Meaning they can be used only at a VERY short range. So they are useless against ships with their own anti-air defenses and escorts. Meaning that the bomb discussed in the video is useful only against civilian targets. So, again, why would China bomb its own trade fleet?0_o
1
@roceye Chinese troop carriers 1)would be escorted; 2)would be operating well within range of mainland SAM sites and airstrips. Bombs are suicide for aircraft pilot here. Only missiles provide safe range advantage.
1
@mattkerr3508 I already told how they are going to be used. Not a PR claim, but with an explanation as to why.
1
@endutubecensorship those missiles can be used on military vessels. What's the point of taking civilian maritime trade of the world hostage?
1
@endutubecensorship military vessels have escorts and anti-air defenses. That's why we use missiles that allow planes and ship to outrange defensive measures. Bombs are just free falling munitions used at extremely short range that need the plane to enter the killzone of military vessel and its escorts. Bombs are cheap, missiles are expensive, BUT both of them are expendable unlike aircraft and pilot. Your comprehension capability being too low to get it is not my problem. I'd even suggest that you should pilot a plane on such a mission:D
1
@endutubecensorship it's not 240 bombs, it's still 12 planes! Bombs. Don't. Have. Range. It's kamikaze tactics. A small math test for you, 100-32=?
1