Comments by "Be Kind To Birds" (@BeKindToBirds) on "H I Sutton" channel.

  1. It is an evolution that has taken place an infinite number of times because it is always how things are balanced. Smaller and more is better than better has played out so many times in warfare that it is a fundamental rule in how any powers interact
    30
  2. This man has probably been doodling like this for years to this point. I'd like to imagine he was doodling on ms paint when having death by powerpoint and eventually it became his career.
    20
  3.  @donhuang9855  You went off the deep end dude. It is cheaper and more efficient to not carry people and air, you do not build machines for long term that include people unless you have to. This is a coastal defense and short range submarine for the yellow sea, not a part of an underwater surveillance network. If this was being used as mobile underwater surveillance then I would assume china would only do so temporarily until they can afford to emplace an actual fortified system of defense
    14
  4. Perhaps the operators of Houthi drones have to stay close to activate previously waypointed drone boats and also to target and waypoint from other observations. Once the waypoint is good enough they can let the gyro do its work and drive the drone the rest of the way. It is an interesting system where it is vulnerable to jamming but only in the middle of operation. Its ins to travel long distance and ins at final approach. Evolutionary adaptation to the signal environment lives in i think. I expect many combat drones will work this way demonstrated at sea in the future, with signals being either high speed data control or updating ins and mission packages at brief interludes that can be tactically arranged to accommodate the signals environment. Afaik this is consistent with development in land drones and air drones. But I think here on the open sea, now, its being engineered into a truly robust future architecture.
    13
  5. Quite a displacement.
    9
  6. I adore Surcouf, what a fascinating ship. X-1 is beautiful too, I am much more interested in it and the K-class now.
    9
  7. These videos are a small side project he puts together in his free time and his main business and time use is as a defense analyst. He writes for some major publications often. In other words, Don't expect a professional YouTuber with scrips and animations and editors. It's just him talking off the dome.
    8
  8. Actually titanium is very common. Canada has huge reserves but it is found all over the world. Refining titanium is the difficult part, not mining it.
    8
  9. This and the USS Jimmy Carter are unbelievably fascinating vessels and I hope that someday we can know what battles they are fighting under the ice
    7
  10.  @donhuang9855  I see, you mean as a general purpose platform. Well, I do understand your logic now and agree, battery power and small size suit for this purpose as well. Certainly, it will be very popular for export as it can even reduce shipping traffic in a more simple form as a civilian underwater cargo drone. This one seems definitely for military use and definitely crewed though. The idea they can test systems on a boat like this makes a great deal of sense, I apologize, I misunderstood what you meant at first, my mistake. It is very foolish to not realize every shadow can hold your worst enemies in warfare, especially in covert action like submarine warfare.
    7
  11. I doubt its self doubt but rather an explanation. The man gives briefings like this for a living or at least, has.
    5
  12. Or your submarine gets a dolphin bubblegum tracker. Embarrassing day at the pow camp
    4
  13. That does not logically track at all. The submarine force is not engaged and therefore has no new data to build changes on. Massive changes to russia's land forces/air force or even overall strategy may change but they are not learning anything about how to use submarines from fighting a land war in Ukraine.
    4
  14. Looks like a good idea to me. I wonder if soon we will ships implement add on camouflage like those thick anti thermal blankets tanks sometimes use. Perhaps for the whole ship and it's wake thermal blankets are not possible but maybe they can be used to make deceptive camouflage in thermal spectrum. R.A.M. can also theoretically be used to make the ship also deceptive to radar but I think now we have reached the stage of "has anyone done sea water tests of radar absorbing paint". Full ship camouflage or stealth may be more accessible by partial deceptive camouflage. It may also be a temporary thing to quickly change appearance overnight and sneak through an area but the practicality of any of this is questionable now. I really don't think it will be seen but perhaps thermal masking is already used by narco subs. Rest is probably sci fi not reality Paint application being the cheapest and simplest I am really interested to see if other navies adopt this.
    4
  15. No offense to drach but there is a difference between former military analyst and amateur historian... Drach is pretty biased to England and his focus tends to omit a lot of information. Any Drach video has ..holes. This man writes articles for global decision makers. Again, I do quite like drachs content so please don't think I am biased.
    4
  16. Modernizing a missile is also a trivial task. Even extending the fuel tank is really quite simple if you have the capacity to do such work. It is very believable that they could have extended the missile and changed what electronics they needed to and had a drastically different performing flight path (to the extent the airframe can handle) and retain the significant base payload due to electronics modernization being lighter and smaller. Seriously a very real threat from any one to any one and was a significant problem all through iraq and afghanistan as well even with the most basic of engineering. Missiles are really adaptable
    3
  17. Putting it on is an aspect of demonstrating it
    3
  18.  @donhuang9855 Yes but now why do you need the submarine? You can install an automated listening device like the Russians and US and UK and ...many many others do. No, the most obvious use of thus sub is the same as the S-boats in ww2 but with a even more limited range and capacity.
    3
  19.  @donhuang9855  Now you are just making sweeping generalizations and correlations with no real substance.
    3
  20. Russian design philosophy has been quite interesting but we are really seeing how their decisions in the past have failed to produce a navy that can fight the battles they are used in. It will be interesting to see how their fleet will continue to change and how much of their firepower philosophy is going to pass on, their new ships are a lot more sensible, focused, and dangerous, at least for the oceans we have.
    3
  21.  @gunnermurphy6632  My dad raised me with a piece of advice. (When I asked him why he bought a pistol for 400$ that he didn't want to shoot that much) "A 400$ gun you shoot a few times and then sell is worth about 400$"
    3
  22.  @Pg4141laika  LMAO "yet you call it America" That was slick.
    3
  23. Nowadays suare rigged ships are training ships. It must have stumbled across the narco sub while cadets/students were learning sailing. They won't say where or the circumstances because it reveals information about those training missions and information about counter-naeco work. But it was probably just a random accident.
    3
  24. Well trained animals in war are really common. We haven't heard much about what trained dolphins do but these animals have been around a long time. It's strange, but they have always been there.
    3
  25. It aged fine, the boats are good.
    2
  26.  @richardstaples8621  for your second query: it is larger for the same sized pressure hull. You can make a slab sided submarine the same displacement but then the pressure hull inside would be much smaller and so you have a less torpedoes, crew, range, and whatever. So if you have two pressure hulls of the same size then an angular shape is going to have triangles covering it, increasing it's displacement over a boat that is merely sheathed.
    2
  27.  @johnmoore8599  They have continually done those kinds of missions already is the point. They have done fire missions and seal deployments for decades, even in syria they have had more experience than in Ukraine Ukraine is not a submarine war, submarines are not engaging except as surveillance vessels which is also a typical mission that won't give them any new information. Literally everything you mentioned is a mission that the submarine fleet has already been doing and barely has any link to the invasion of ukraine. It is poor logic to claim the submarine force will be able to innovate based on this land conflict. The only ways they can affect the conflict are all old news. Combined arms warfare is advancing rapidly in Ukraine, naval warfare is not at anywhere near the same rate or way. Even the difference between a deployed force in the black sea now and deployed forces 10 years ago is only the difference between practice and training. Being forced to adhere to standards can be eye opening for ragged militaries and navies but there are almost no chances for russia to innovate. Naval blockades aren't very different from how they were centuries ago even. And this all still applies to the surface fleets mainly and even less to the submarine force. Any spywork, seal work, surveillance, or fire mission, is all old news and been naval tactics and doctrine for literally decades now. Ukraine doesn't have a peer force to test the theories against, you can't really see how well you perform in combat if the only difference in your day go day is "now the danger and targets aren't simulated" And history simply does not support the idea that a less used aspect of the military is going to innovate or advance after the conflict. There will undoubtedly be major changes to the ground forces of Russia but I will eat my hat if in ten years the Russian navy isn't almost identical to now. If not in ships than in intent and design. It isn't like Russia is going to suddenly decide they don't need belgorod or suddenly decide to not make their new little cruiser. The navy has to do its job to contribute to victory, so the conflict can make them a more competent force. But they have zero reason to innovate, zero requirements that their subsurface navy hasn't already had decades of experience in and is already designed for. Logically it just does not track in any way to assume that a more dangerous submarine force (for russia) will be the 10 year result of this conflict. Ukraine's navy absolutely. Russia's ground forces absolutely. But russia's subsurface navy is "not broke" and so there isn't any reason to "fix" it (aside from the trends they already have identified and have been working to for decades. Those shortcomings may accelerate the trends by necessity but much the navy was always further ahead than the land force in how far along it has been in that endless modernization slog.) Ukraine isn't a shipping nation, there aren't any naval areas to protect from attack, there is no reason to deploy naval special units or fire missions when you own a land border and an artillery army. It just does not track whatsoever to predict a more dangerous submarine force. There is no reason to believe the Russian navy is going to make any big changes at all from the last decade(s)
    2
  28. I think you might be a little loopy mate.
    2
  29.  @sawspitfire422  Of course it is always a balance but I am talking about the continual laws of interaction between powers and how strategic decisions almost always fulfill them.
    2
  30.  @donhuang9855  Yes but in a ultra limited capacity and very near home. And they aren't going to do it full of batteries
    2
  31.  @donhuang9855  Yes exactly. And narrow, trained, perception has very obvious signs
    2
  32.  @donhuang9855  I disagree. I think that it is both corrupted by cost/efficiency much more than you think and ALSO what I said. And it is a matter of faith and experience tempered by education and always captained by God. I am telling you that the United States, despite your opinion of any other nation or empire in history, is absolutely capable of the levels of willpower I am talking about. It isn't a joke or an exaggeration or a test of faith, don't ne laugh. I am telling you what is being literally maintained and has been maintained since the declaration of independence. America is an anomaly, the nation of iron and clay given power to crush all other nations but broken and divided and then destroyed by God. So fear God my friend. Because we already flew nuclear planes 100% of the time in the air ready and loaded for decades. We already have the supercarriers and submarines going 100% of the time for decades. Regardless of cost. As great as china has resurged into the world it still crippled itself with the great leap forward. It still has cut corners and has years at this level to learn some lessons. It has to have experience operating and that is what this is, that is what Chinese government has said many times before: It wants a future of being a leader in technology and industry.
    2
  33.  @donhuang9855  My friend I have enjoyed talking to you very much. I think you are correct, I hope we can find those tools which help us all move away from harmful instinct and measures it with wise reason.
    2
  34.  @riskinhos  Which is identical in function and role to a battle cruiser. Frigates don't have 24, 12 pounders and a ship rig but are still called frigates, don't be a fool.
    2
  35. I feel much the same after going to the local aircraft museum as a child and now as an adult realizing that the SR-71, (actually the cia version at this location) B1A, minutemen missiles, and all the rest had at the time of my seeing them as a child had been less than a decade since they'd been in service. I go back to there sometimes and I have to say I have a deeper reverence and it's almost surreal.
    2
  36. That's terrifying I had no idea that kind of thing happened. Absolutely fascinating that it exists like that but bloody terrifying. Reminds me of that poor young aussie kid who took home a radioactive pellet and put it in his cabinet and it ended in horrific tragedy.
    2
  37. Using the cruiser to capture the island is an interesting insight into the dispersion of their fleet, why would they not used a specialist ship and instead place a cruiser of such high value into a position where it has less courses to evade to.
    2
  38. Not for history. If the culture shifts too much then you lose generational knowledge by favoring popular designs and forgetting innovations.
    2
  39. It didn't get outdated at all. Australia was the only customer at the time.
    2
  40.  @jebise1126  They did, that's the Akula no? Well, isn't Akula the pinnacle of that?
    2
  41.  @networknomad5600  Having seen some of your other comments your opinion means very little.
    2
  42. I wonder if we will see AI dazzling camo, like a ships bow painted with many overlapping images of a bow and the like so ships cannot be identified by ai to stop automatic tracking and force more humans involvement
    2
  43. ​ @raycearcher5794  I'm not interested in fiction but have fun.
    1
  44. If you are building American and British style light carriers BOTH, I have to say ...you get a lot of bang for your buck.
    1
  45. Iirc the US buys a foreign made one. We buy a lot of foreign guns ofc lol
    1
  46. ​ @MsZeeZed  the sea is very shallow in that area. Not great for submarine survivability.
    1
  47. Real conflict is not a video game, your viewpoint is basically a frictionless vacuum.
    1
  48.  @sadlerbw9  You can throw as much hyperbole and straw men out as you want, come try and do anything in real life and you will see that war is not a clear cut and clean result odds machine like a video game.
    1
  49.  @sadlerbw9  You are not the first narcissist on the internet, I have already stated my point and have no interest in being dragged into your self delusional trauma reenactment.
    1
  50.  @stevenpace892  that exact idea on a cheap drone powerboat to act as a decoy warship to missiles.
    1