Comments by "Thetequilashooter1" (@Thetequilashooter1) on "Grid 88" channel.

@blob4743 All new weapon systems start off rough. The F-16 early on crashed so often that it was called the lawn dart. The F-18, Apache helicopter, MC missile, etc., all had their problems. It’s expected. The problem with the F-35 at the moment are the high costs to maintain it.
1
@blob4743 I have not heard anything about that. For a jet fighter without thrust vectoring to be able to perform the falling leaf would seem to imply that it doesn’t have any problems with its agility. Do you have a credible link to share about your statement?
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 Not even. Google “Did you know the Su-57 Felon has the same RCS of a clean F/A-18 Super Hornet (and 1,000 times bigger than that of the F-35)?” To be effective at BVR, it needs to be VLO, which it’s not. The Su-57’s stealth is one of its fallbacks. It’s one of the main reasons why India backed out of the partnership. The Su-57 is questioned if it even qualifies as a 5th gen fighter. When it comes to drones, Russia is significantly behind. It’s why after the conflict in Georgia that Russia bought Israeli made drones. If the Su-57 had any promise or potential, its ally, India, never would have left, and despite further Russian attempts to convince India to stay in the partnership, India has shown no interest. Russia has no export orders, which Russia desperately needs to help fund the program. The fact that only two production models have been built, with the first one crashing, that it has no exports, its close ally backed out, and that to date the Su-57 hasn’t even shown the ability to shoot its guns or air to air missiles from internal bays in flight, all are good indicators that its future is in doubt. You combine that with Russia never putting into active service any fighter with AESA radar further shows how far Russia is behind the West.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 What jet fighter has that engine?
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 😂, I just searched, and it only has30,874 lbs of thrust. Don’t be like the typical Russian troll and lie.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 I guess you need some examples of items that Russia’s stolen or copied from the west: The a-bomb, proximity fuse, the B-29 bomber bolt for bolt to make the Tu-4, the Sidewinder missile, jet engine from the UK, guidance systems, etc. What realistic examples have you got that the US has stolen from Russia? That’s right, nothing. Put it this way, Russia isn’t known for being a technological leader. It doesn’t have the manufacturing capabilities to build high tech equipment on mass scale efficiently. Russia’s primary source of income is from raw materials, not technology. Stop the nonsense and be sensible.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 Haha, like a typical Russian troll you made up that list. Provide proof. You can’t and you know it. The USA doesn’t need to copy from Russia when Russia is always behind. Just look at AESA radar as an example. It’s an essential requirement for a 5th gen fighter, and Russia still doesn’t have it in any fighter. The US has been fielding it for over twenty years and is now in thousands of aircraft. Russia to date can’t build a jet fighter engine that has anywhere near the power of the F-35. In fact, that was another complaint from India about the Su-57, its lack of engine power. The Su-57 isn’t even stealth. It’s RCS is worse than the F-18s. It’s one of the main reasons why India left the partnership. The Su-57 is a complete disaster. Only two production models have been built, and the first one crashed. It has no export orders, and it still hasn’t even shown that it can shoot its guns or air to air missiles from internal bays in flight.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 😂 The Su-57 isn’t flying over US bases in Iraq. You’re hilarious. When it comes to propaganda Russia is the king. No joke, at one time or another Russia has blamed the USA for causing earthquakes, bad weather, Russia’s failed satellite launches, Russia’s drug problems, Covid, the so-called USS Donald Cook case where the crew abandoned ship, etc. What is really pathetic is that some Russian trolls actually are gullible enough to believe it. And how are Israeli F-35s destroying targets at will in Syria? Syria has even complained that their Russian made SAMS don’t work.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 And like the typical Russian troll you revert to lying because you can’t accept reality. Face the facts, Russia has no fighter aircraft flying with AESA, and Russia has no fighter in service that matches the single engine power of 40,000 lbs of thrust in the F-35 or the F-22’s 70,000 lbs. For Russia’s ally, India, which has purchased Russian equipment for decades, to back out and cite numerous problems just shows how bad the aircraft is. Two critical areas that they found flaws were the engines and stealth, or lack thereof, in the Su-57. For you to argue that the Su-57 is the best shows how deluded your mind is, and you won’t find one expert who agrees with you. I don’t have time for your nonsense so feel free to have the last words with more of your lies.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 You have proof that India’s only problems with the Su-57 are non-technical, and are only because of money and tech transfer? I didn’t think so. Provide the exact name of the report and its date . You know you can’t. The fact that you’re knowingly lying tells me that you know yourself that you’re wrong. While you’re at it, provide just one expert opinion that claims that the Su-57 is the best. That’s pretty hard to do since there’s only one production model. 😂 And when you consider that the Su-57’s first flight was over a decade ago, and it still hasn’t shown it can shoot air to air from internal bays in flight, it simply shows that the program is severely struggling.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 It further states: A jet's fan face produces a massive radar signature. Modern high-performance stealthy aircraft designs use ‘S’ shaped ducts to hide their engines from most or all line of sight aspects, with radar return scrambling baffles being built under the duct surface scrambling returns even more. Some aircraft, like the Super Hornet, use a slotted baffle that covers the fan faces of their engine, which are hidden only partially by the aircraft's duct shape. This measure reduces the aircraft's frontal radar signature, but it is less effective than an s shaped duct and may impact certain aspects of engine performance. Many other features on the T-50 also put a high level of low observability in doubt.
1
It additionally states: It has seemed increasingly clear that the underlying Su-57 design might simply not be readily adaptable to being stealthier than it is in its present form. India may also feel that it has less flexibility to accept a design that doesn't meet more stringent low-observability requirements, even if it has other features that could offset those deficiencies in the near term, on the promise of receiving a stealthier variant in the future.
1
And here’s more about the Su-57’s engine issues: Stealth was hardly the Su-57's only issue, though. There have long been concerns about whether the Saturn AL-41F turbofans, or even an advanced derivative thereof, would be sufficient enough to power the Su-57. On top of that, there are just questions about the reliability and quality control of Saturn’s production in general.
1
Just using common sense says you’re wrong. India and Russia have a long history of military partnerships, and they’ve always been able to resolve their issues. Russia has approached India several times to try to buy the Su-57, but India has repeatedly declined. The fact that Russia can’t find one outside customer, not even China, tells that the aircraft isn’t worth it. Face it, Russia is being left behind in the dust. While Russia is still trying to figure out how to make a 5th gen fighter, the US has already flown a 6th gen prototype. Russia has no where near the technological capabilities when it comes to drones or stealth aircraft. It’s easy to see that it’s only going to get further behind.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 When did I say I had a SAC report? I don’t know WTF you’re talking about. You’ve repeatedly lied over and over. It’s best to just shut up and be quiet when you don’t have a fu*king clue what you’re talking about. Your comments make absolutely no common sense or reason. You’re arguing that the Su-57 is the best despite only two production models being built, the first of which crashed; it has no export orders; Russia’s long time ally backed out of the partnership; it hasn’t even shown the ability to shoot its guns or air to air missiles from internal bays in flight; and not one expert agrees with you. And for you to argue that Russia is suddenly ahead with AESA radar, even though it’s never been fielded in any Russian fighter in service, while the USA has had it in service for over twenty years, and it’s in thousands of aircraft, is absolutely asinine. Do you even know how to have a discussion without having to lie to back up your words, or to try to be sensible and use logic? It doesn’t seem the way. Fu*king grow up.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 Don’t give me that shit. It’s well known that the Su-57 has engine problems, and it’s not just propaganda. Why do you think Russia has to use the Su-35’s engine in it until the Su-57’s can be developed? Just Google Su-57 Engine Problems, and you’ll find numerous articles about it. Here’s a sample: There is another fundamental problem with the Su-57 — its engines are essentially the same as those of the aircraft it is designed to replace, the Su-35S. Although the Su-57 was intended to sport the more powerful and efficient Izdeliye 30 engines, most — if not all — prototypes and production models have been equipped with the Al-41 engines used on the Su-35S. There have been reported problems with the new Izdeliye 30 engines, related to reliability and quality control.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 Here’s another: The Su-57 was designed to be powered by the new Izdeliye 30 engine, but pre-production models had to be tested with the older Izdeliye 117 (AL-41F1) engine due to engineering setbacks. The first serial Su-57 is widely confirmed to have been powered by the old Izdeliye 117, and RIA News confirms that the crash did, in fact, occur during an engine test. And The development of the jet’s second-generation engine has reportedly been a challenge for the Russian defense companies. The current prototypes are powered by older engines, though originally designed to incorporate the second-generation Izdeliye 30 engine. The RAND Corporation quoted a former Sukhoi engineer, who claims the 76 operational models that the Russian Federation Air Force is expected to receive during the 2020s will not have the intended second-generation engine, which contradicts the Russian aircraft maker’s claim of outfitting the batch with the new engines. It remains unclear when the second-generation engines will be ready for powering the Su-57 fighter jets
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 I guess you better go tell all the nations who are lining up to buy the F-35 that they’re all making a big mistake, and that you know more than their experts do when selecting a fighter for their future. You lie, lie, lie. That’s all you do. If Russia is so great why are you here on YouTube supporting a US company instead of Russia’s RuTube? Russia is the king of propaganda, and you fall for it.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 You’re beyond hope with being reasonable. Did you even read the quotes that I cited? Just because you don’t like it doesn’t make it not true. If the Su-57 is as great as you say why aren’t Russia’s typical export customers like China and India buying it? Don’t tell me it’s because of the cost because if it really is the best like you say they would buy it in a heartbeat. It’s because it’s a POS. The engines are crap and it’s not even 5th gen. There are many articles about its engine problems, but you chose to be nonsensical. The F-35 can go supersonic at Mach 1.6 EVEN WITH A FULL WEAPONS LOAD, and that’s with a single engine!Stop the lies. If Russia gets what it wishes, which rarely comes true, Russia’s Su-75, which hasn’t even been built yet, will only fly Mach 1.8 clean. Over 720 F-35s have been built and its numbers of customers keeps getting bigger. Russia and India at one time planned on around 250 PAK-FAs, and to this date there isn’t even one in service.
1
@ignaciomunizdiaz5194 Instead of talking shit all the time why don’t you back up your words with proof? You won’t find one publication that supports your ridiculous comments. And I don’t mean the crap that Russia plans to have as those are just hopes, but what the Su-57 has right now. You’re choosing to be ignorant, which makes you stupid. Everything I have written comes from articles all over, and all you have are your useless words. You haven’t been able to back up anything you’ve written. You’re the epitome of a Russian troll.
1
@andreyg.2388 What’s so funny? Show me a video of a Su-57 doing an essential combat maneuver that you consider impressive. The most looked at measurement maneuvers are instant and sustained turn rates, and the ability to recover from high bleed turns. It’s easy to see the Su-57 lacks power when it’s ass drags and falls after doing turns. The Su-57 is supposed to be very agile, but it hasn’t really shown it.
1
@andreyg.2388 I know a lot more than you do. You’re just another example of why people think that Russians are brainless zombies.
1
@andreyg.2388 Then prove me wrong! You can’t and you know it. Russians watch the crap on Russia’s TV and many actually believe the nonsense. All you’ve done is make personal insults, avoiding debating. You would argue against me if you knew wtf you’re talking about, but you don’t.
1
@andreyg.2388 I get my news from all over the world. You obviously watch too much Russian TV. First off, the US doesn’t even need hypersonic missiles against Russia. Russia can’t even stop subsonic missiles that hit the Moskva, and it can’t stop HIMARS rockets that are only flying at Mach 2.5. Even when Russia knows exactly what is being targeted, like a bridge, it’s had no ability to stop them. Secondly, Russia’s hypersonic capabilities are overhyped. The Kinzhal is just a modified Iskander that is dropped from a fighter or bomber. The US had this capability back in the 1950s when it had the GAM-87 Skybolt that flew around Mach 10-12. Russia’s other hypersonic missile is the Zircon, which has never been shown in flight for more than two seconds. Its design copies the US X-51 Waverider, which is just a test-bed missile. It broke the world record for hypersonic duration of flight around a decade ago, and it can be seen here on YouTube. Just search X-51 Waverider Breaks Hypersonic Duration of Flight Record (2010) to see it. And finally, Russia depends on US made microchips for its advanced weapons. Search here on YouTube for EVIDENCE SUGGESTS RUSSIA’S ‘HYPERSONIC’ KINZHAL MISSILE IS POWERED BY AMERICAN TECH. With the existing sanctions, it will be very difficult for Russia to build any of its advanced weaponry as Russia has shown that it uses large amounts western parts in all of its more advanced weapons. Remember, it’s Russia that has the long history of copying from the west, not vice versa.
1
@Rumbler298 Go to The YouTuber The Ready Room and you can see first hand the Malaysian Su-30 lose all three times to the F-18. Funny thing is that Egypt has realized the advantages of AESA when their Rafales recently jammed their Su-35’s PESA radar. That hurts for Russian trolls like yourself. Face it, you’re wrong, the Su-30 doesn’t have AESA radar. You won’t find one article supporting your opinion that an actual sale has gone through. Those kinds of sales are big announcements because it means hundreds of millions in sales. The fact that you have been unable to provide any proof of any kind just shows that you know yourself that you’re wrong. Making plans and actually going through with them are two different matters. Russia planned to have hundreds of Su-57s and planned to sell hundreds more, but look at what happened, India backed out of the partnership citing numerous problems with its stealth, engines, etc., and Russia has only built two production models, and the first one crashed. Seriously, prove me wrong by providing a credible link or STFU. All you have done is show that your words carry no weight because you can’t back them up with proof. No joke, every site that I’ve gone to about the Su-30 states they have PESA. And what you can’t seem to understand is that Russia doesn’t have the manufacturing capabilities to build high tech equipment on mass scale efficiently, like AESA. For you to think that people are just going to believe you without proof is asinine. Unless you provide something credible to support your words, I am done with you.
1
@yaz2928 LOL, is that why during the MMRCA tender India’s Air Chief stated that the USA had the best weapons, radars and systems, and the USA wasn’t even offering its best? Is that why both Algeria and Egypt canceled their Su-35 orders due to its antiquated PESA radar? Is that why AESA radar is considered an essential requirement for to be 5th gen, which Russia to date hasn’t fielded in any fighter, while the US did with its F-15Cs over twenty years ago, and now has it in thousands of aircraft. Face the truth, Russia is not known for being a technological leader as its main revenue sources are from raw materials. Russia also doesn’t have the manufacturing capabilities to build high tech equipment on mass scale efficiently. The Su-57 is a joke. Despite flying for over a decade it still has no foreign orders, its only partner, India, backed out citing numerous problems, only two have been built, with the first one crashing, and to date it still hasn’t even shown the ability to shoot its guns or air to air missiles from internal bays in flight.
1
@altumurnemtzra2026 It’s true, you just can’t accept it. Russia doesn’t have the manufacturing capabilities to build high tech equipment on mass scale efficiently like the USA. It’s also why Russia has so often copied from the West.
1
@kosovoisserbia8937 Don’t lie, no F-117s were shot down over Iraq. Just one was shot down over Serbia, and even it was a fluke. It flew the same flight path four nights straight and at the same time at night. It had no ECM support, and US commanders even admitted screwing up.
1
@kosovoisserbia8937 “The routes used by the F-117s during the shoot down had been flown previously multiple times. This contrary to the F-117 operations in the 91 war where they flew into Baghdad, never repeating the same inbound track consecutively. Perhaps this was due to over confidence in their equipment, and air superiority. During Operation Allied Force, the NATO air campaign, it was standard operating procedure (SOP) for all strike missions to be accompanied by electronic warfare aircraft [EA-6B Prowlers]. These aircraft flew with strike missions to detect, jam, and destroy enemy radar installations. Because of these aircraft, it was difficult for the Yugoslavian anti air forces to operating their radars and get target quality tracks on even conventional military aircraft. Keep in mind, during the 78 days of Operation Allied Forces we flew 38,004 air sorties and lost only 2 aircraft to enemy fire. The Prowlers were a big part of that unprecedented record. ‘Unfortunately, on the day Vega 31 would be taken out of the sky, the Prowlers were grounded due to weather. The decision was made for the F-117s to fly their strike mission unsupported.” From “An In-Depth Analysis of how Serbs Were Able to Shoot Down An F-117 Stealth Fighter during Operation Allied Force” NATO won on air power alone. The USA didn’t lose the life of even one soldier. You can talk about all the what if if you want, but that doesn’t change history. And history has continued where SAMS are nearly effective as they used to be.
1
Um, India had a competition between the Apache and the Mi-28, and the Apache kicked its ass. The Mi could not even complete the trials. It’s why India already has 22 of them and they placed an additional order of six more.
1
Ethan Mac Maybe the F-16A, but not later versions.
1
@Stephano.MBravo1 The latest model F-16’s AESA is top notch, but I am not putting down the Rafale’s avionics by any means. It’s just that the USA has been fielding AESA for over twenty years and has it in thousands of aircraft, while France just recently started putting it in its Rafales.
1
On paper, and it’s unproven. You won’t find any Russian SAM ever intercepting either ballistic or cruise missiles, not even in tests, while there are numerous videos of USA missile intercepts available and shown here on YouTube.
1
@nerdianz8081 Haha, typical Russian troll comment. What I said is true, and the only thing you can do is reply with childish name calling. Tell me exactly what I wrote that is not accurate. You can’t because it’s factual.
1
You don't know what you'e talking about. The one time a F-35 was taken out was due to testing weapon systems, it wasn't a DACT exercise. The F-35 would have no problems defeating the Su. The Su is huge on radar and would be taken out long before it even knew the F-35 was in the vicinity.
1
Detection doesn't mean much when the missile's seeker head cannot get a lock onto the aircraft at BVR. Even in visual range, exercises have shown how the F-22 has been hard to get a missile lock. The same can be said true of the F-35. Quite frankly, the Su-35 doesn't have a chance. Not only will the F-35 detect the Su-35 well in advance, it will get the first shot off with time to spare. The F-35 doesn't even have to launch missiles. That's the purpose of the F-15EX that will launch missiles from outside the kill zone of the Su-35, and the F-35 will guide them into the target.
1