Comments by "Asbestos Muffins" (@AsbestosMuffins) on "Military Aviation History" channel.

  1. 1940s japan: "make a missile with a man on it" 1950s lockheed: " write that down, write it down!"
    223
  2. just imagine though for a moment being the guy on the ground and you get nuked 11 times because SAC decided your area has to be six-sigma dead
    159
  3. P-40: "It just works"
    59
  4. I always just assumed it was the near constant bombardment of their industry that delayed the me262 not whether it had or didn't have bombs
    26
  5. The Age Old question of the Ork, Moar Dakka or Bigger Shoota?
    21
  6. Slight question: Does the addition of an ejector seat reduce the room in the cockpit? I'd assume there's got to be several inches of precious space that had to be removed to fit any ejection system into the original cockpit
    17
  7. "today we're looking at a north american classic" F14 sitting in the background screeching Top Gun Theme
    16
  8. this and armor are the two hardest things to transfer because they're not really something you just drop in and use, they really need the logistics and right military structure behind them
    12
  9. I'm not even sure cheap and rugged matters anymore either, as its turned out their stuff was neither cheap or rugged
    12
  10. it still amazes me how they were able to keep these somewhat advanced factories functional with tons of ordinance dropped on then especially the germans. Like WW2 was such a unique time in history where technology was advanced enough to give us such amazing weapons but yet simple enough that factories did not require much in the way of sophisticated machinery to produce weaponry
    12
  11. on the f35's price, it also depends highly on what variant you buy, like the standard A non-VTOL or STOL one is from what I understand, quite cheaper than the more exotic ones
    11
  12. Nothing against you but its kind of a dumb question, russia had shown their ability to overwhelm and operate like a modern military should, hell they even have their own gps system, so its no surprise the west overestimated the russian military, but also its far better than underestimating an opponent
    11
  13. ironically one of the issues is the same thing people gripe about the US, procurement, procurement, procurement. Russia could genuinely build a better plane, (the su57 and f22 are probably equal dogfighters but obviously its complicated) but even the US has several hundred f22s, and is flying away from russia on f35s which will in a rather short time number over 1000, while they have what like 16-20 su57's. the US plans to have at minimum 2400 f-35s, and every nato state is rapidly procuring their own squadrons
    11
  14. I feel like a lot of the reluctance to isolate from adversarial powers still comes from germany. Both France, Britain and others seem ready and willing to go full domestic but germany constantly balks at it for some reason
    11
  15. not unless someone invents mecha that can take the mountainous discontinuous terrain of asia in stride
    10
  16. can't wait to see an iranian made copy of a chinese copy of a brigs&straton lawnmower engine
    8
  17. you don't need 4 engines to be a strategic bomber, just look at italy and their 3 engined bomber ; )
    7
  18. 0:47 Job sim DLC we aren't allowed to have
    7
  19. The 50s budget was all missiles and nukes, and the navy was almost entirely cut out of the nuclear cash rush while also being slashed to a minuscule size when before ww2 they were the biggest slice of the military budget. its also the 50s when the US Army, and Navy are running competing space programs. your nuclear powered super carriers really didn't get going until the 60s with the Enterprise and it wasn't till the 70s that the navy got nuclear carriers in serial production
    7
  20.  @jonnymoka  if by older you're talking about the state of the art american b29
    7
  21. Always found it funny that my JROTC unit had a pile of old computers in the back room because while the government was good at buying them computers, the way one got rid of an old or broken one was to take it to the nearest airforce base for disposal since it was government property...a 6 hour round trip that neither the colonel or master sgt were ever going to do themselves
    6
  22.  @Ireton  you could give them a bit of a break, they were designing planes before most of the logistics of using those planes were worked out. the allies could afford the metal to put grating down, or outright pave the runways, germany not so much. most of its counterparts were designed later like the mustang, spitfire, or w/e the russians had
    6
  23. this thing makes the tilt rotor osprey look conservative
    6
  24. plus the f16 is cheap enough and the airforce has enough in spare that the government can afford to arm all the state air national guards with which is absolutely impressive when you realize that every state in the US has an airforce on par or superior to most countries in the world
    6
  25. its like, there's 4 guys making jet engines in the west, 2 are american, 1 is Rolls Royce and then there's SNECMA
    6
  26. I saw the recent Midway movie on just after watching this and couldn't believe how ridiculous the american dive bomber scene was, like storm trooper aim levels of terrible, the climactic scene has a single US dive bomber dive in, recover THEN drop its bomb
    5
  27. its one of those things that if NATO needs it, then its lost its air superiority, which would be a very bleak battle. Maybe there's a conversation to be had about the virtue of cheap AA guns for drones and slow targets but we do have significantly different doctrines
    5
  28. quite a great presentation, lighting and video issues aside, shows the problems with unescorted bomber formations and the difficulty in using bombers as antiship weapons especially against carriers
    5
  29. they were too busy spending all that metal on heavier and heavier tanks
    5
  30.  @MyFabian94  most of the US military's emissions are from ships and military bases which run through massive amounts of diesel and bunker fuels. The tanks and jets are not insignificant but a kc130 runs through hundreds of lbs of fuel on a mission, a single destroyer goes through thousands of lbs of fuel oil
    5
  31. "damnit kevin, its all your fault we lost the war!"
    5
  32. it can be used as both a unit of speed and power
    5
  33. of course britain would quietly scratch off the Eurofighter part of the name
    5
  34. I swear I've seen this thing used as a MIG standin on more than a few movies/tv shows
    4
  35. I'll believe it when I see it since just buying a pre-existing small engined plane for 3rd party CAS has taken 10 years
    4
  36. to me it just seems like russia's military ought to look more like the british military, keep the subs, scrap the carriers, cruisers, and any of the old 1-off soviet stuff, make a smaller but much more lethal ground force, pick a bomber to keep, use it for launching cruise missiles, ditch everything else, basically slim down, make more lethal
    4
  37. such a nice looking cockpit with the glass, if only slightly vulnerable and cramped. I can't imagine what it felt like to be flying in that as you're practically floating in air
    3
  38. the F-82 Twin Mustang has double the plane as any other fighter so its clearly better
    3
  39. VT fuses made for great shore bombardment and artillery fuses especially against infantry, more than a couple generals/admirals quickly figured out a fuse that explodes in proximity to something, might perfectly airburst above the ground
    3
  40. didn't know ukrainian energy exports were a factor in this week's strikes. I didn't see that anywhere else
    3
  41. "da its 6th gen fighter, wait no its better than 6th gen, its 7th gen!" -russian defense contractor probably
    3
  42. well, a first generation ejector seat and probably no parachutes at that point...
    3
  43. "The gun was the only heated thing in this plane, so it wouldn't freeze on those long arctic convoys" Man, I'm not sure there's any amount of coercion short of shooting me that would get me to stand in the back of an open cockpit biplane flying in the arctic circle
    3
  44. oh no it costs more per unit to purchase a brand new aircraft including support services! How can the world be so complicated!
    3
  45. I love how irbms and srbms suddenly all got a new coat of paint, a guidance software patch, and suddenly all became brand new hypersonic missiles
    3
  46. "the swiss kept them in service till 1990" OK we did have F-4s in the airforce in 1990 but a gen 1 jet in the 90s was pretty crazy
    3
  47. it did get me thinking that while things like tanks might be too difficult to deliver and build up the logistics and training, other lighter vehicles in NATO inventories like better IFVs and these sorts of specialized vehicles could be much easier for them to pickup and use
    3
  48. exactly my opposition to the 2% bullshit summed up. you can spend 2% on junk that doesn't help but you hit the neocon goal of feeding the defense spending monster
    3
  49. kind of shocked they never tried the pac 43, it worked for the tiger
    2
  50. it looks like a mig and a saber had a love child while having a sordid italian fling
    2