Comments by "Comm0ut" (@Comm0ut) on "Found And Explained" channel.

  1. ​ @jbradley8659  The correct answer is "the NUCLEAR TRIAD" of which the bomber force was a key component. The more the Soviets had to defend against the more it cost them and the eventual result vindicated the triad which is maintained to this day. In a nuclear exchange pilot lives don't matter, they're not even drama when millions are immolated. Bombers permit gestures that missiles do not. Instead of just considering hardware, read Herman Kahn and learn about how complex (and real) nuclear war theory and doctrine really are.
    36
  2. "Useless" is pure clickbait, ignoring the deterrent utility of the nuclear triad and why the manned bomber fleet existed and exists today. Not flying conventional combat missions is irrelevant to the strategic nuclear mission and the triad forces prospective opponents to defend against submarines, land-based systems, and the (much more technically diverse and more quickly EVOLVING) airborne systems which unlike the other two may be recalled. No study of nuclear bombers is complete without mentioning real nuclear war doctrine. Atmospheric testing proved limited nuclear war practical and did so by detonating the equivalent of a modest war above ground, much of it in the continental US! Hustler was suboptimal and nuclear doctrine evolved such that it was not worth keeping. The design, testing and operational experience gained OTOH paid off. Turns out the ideal "bomber" is a standoff weapons platform with a heavy payload (B-52 with nuclear ALCM etc during the first half of the Cold War which never ended).
    3
  3.  @stejer211  The plebs are nasty IRL, especially Karens with their screaming snotlings and obeest hamplanets crowding you out of a seat you paid for but their wingfat occupies. I'd rather take a military Space Available flight with plenty of room and sling seats than fly commercial less than First Class.
    1
  4. The narrator was obviously not alive during that so-called Golden Age. That was a far less crowded era and travel considerably more pleasant in consequence. Statistically flying was far safer than driving but the weak are frightened of everything and modern social conditioning means they've no idea to be otherwise. Do note people terrified of flying still drive autos to the funerals of their loved ones killed in car crashes. As an aircraft mechanic I slept then and sleep like a baby today because the real risk was and remains trifling.
    1
  5. A complete ramjet with the jet engine in front as a coaxial flow inducer is an interesting variation on afterburner/reheat that makes up for the then-primitive fuel controls and other jet engine tech.
    1
  6. Good at devouring rubles in a nation with a lower GDP than California so I approve.
    1
  7. Corrosion control maintenance on those had to be horrendous along with any work not done on land. Quick turns aren't happening (combat aircraft exist to generate combat sorties). Operation in other than the most gentle sea states is impractical and dangerous. Looks cool, obsolete silly idea, end of story.
    1