Comments by "Sedna063" (@Sedna063) on "Matsimus" channel.

  1.  @dogdog2257  German Eurofighter is not bad. Maintenance issues because the German MOD is just incapable.
    19
  2.  @gabilax2745  I would not call the Rafale a strategic bomber. It lacks the range and the payload to fly deep into enemy territory and deliver strategic strikes. Strategic bombers are B1-B, B52 and B2 - all have at least 30,000 kilos payload and ranges of above 10,000 kilometers. Rafale is a great tactical bomber. As to reconaissance, the current damocles pod limits it a bit.
    9
  3.  @terrywainman6050  I would not call the Rafale "french junk" because that would not just be an insult but wrong as well. And in terms of A2G, Rafale has an edge, because low flying missions and it can carry 1.5 tons of payload more. But sure, the Typhoon is great. But in some aspect it loses to the Rafale and vice versa.
    6
  4.  @thomasbessis2809  Laughs in German. Dude - Germany has been building fighters for decades. We were a partner nation for the Tornado and founding member of Airbus. Half of the engine in the EF was supplied by MTU
    6
  5. And they give lift, the canards of the Rafale. Much lower mininal speed which is advantageous for carrier based planes. This also gives them a very high payload and great handling at lower air speeds. EF is designed for unconditional dogfight. Anything else can be offset by it's strong engines. And great comment, you must be the only one ever to know of Damocles. I heard that they will get a new pod though, couldn't find something about it though.
    5
  6.  @spartan-ml7nk  What aircraft flies at 200,000 feet?
    4
  7.  @thomasbessis2809  I would not say routinely. All aircrafts mentioned have lost and won against each other. The Eurofighter was designed an air superiority fighter but then, so was the F15 and we know how capable it is in strike role. Principally, the Eurofighter can do the same as the French. Airframe is slightly different and the payload is worse but then, it can drop a bomb / PGM, shoot missiles and cruise missiles just fine.
    3
  8. 14 hardpoints give me a hardpoint
    3
  9. He did way more than sit in a hotel (and a lot of that time on British insistance). He was the first President of the 5th republic and had a large influence to rebuilt it. Plus, he never collaborated with the Germans during the war. He also served his country in WW1 and was a POW. Way more than Churchill.... Sincerely, A German.
    3
  10.  @DeNihility  I am not too sure that the Canadians will buy US. After all, they are still pretty pissed the way they treated Bombardier.
    2
  11.  @Vincou13  It is only strategic when they nuke with it. A real strategic bomber carries the fight deep into enemy territory without resorting to nuclear weapons.
    2
  12. Do you have any proof for that ridiculous allegation that the EU wants all countries to replace it immediately? Because I call BS.
    2
  13. Leih Tory similar to the Eurofighter Typhoon. RCS of both is perhaps 0.5 M*2 but then, radars can pick them up quite early nowadays with advances in tech
    2
  14.  @manassurya2019  They were far easier to maintain but also much less capable. Dassault had to because the Rafale M is a carrier plane - much harder requirements.
    2
  15. De Gaulle led a division in 1940. Eisenhower wasn't even with the war effort in 1941. Saying that De Gaulle did nothing is false.
    2
  16.  @Laspartam  And a baguette holder and a "Umweltplakette" (environmental friendly seal)
    2
  17. @Dan oz Napoleon would not a good name. Kinda like Germans don’t name anything after the Kaiser or Bismarck anymore.
    2
  18.  @mothdude4211  In 1940s..... Today is 2020 and it would not be feasable to call a new ship Bismarck anymore.
    2
  19.  @ENGLISHISBEST  He was the leader of the free France and re-established a strong republic, worked with Germany to became friends and then founded a lot of precursors to the EU. He is probably the most important Frenchman in the 21 century.
    2
  20. Ehm, Typhoon flies in Syria and Libya too.
    2
  21.  @pradhyumanchaudhary6495  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kptbU-57ALo You may want to Google Operation Ellamy.
    2
  22. T B6 And I would sit myself in an EF anyday for any mission (well, not SEAD against Kaliningrad).
    2
  23.  @stupidburp  Same number as Typhoon. One must say, our Eurocanards are fine pieces of machinery.
    2
  24. Its a Faraday cage, it has EMP protection
    2
  25. None of the Eurocanards use thrust vectoring.
    2
  26. Vector thrust is overrated
    2
  27. The French have a history of building delta-canards though - look at the Mirage series.
    2
  28.  @Fabio-om4kb  It is still quite a show of disrespect that you chose to communicate in a tongue that is not spoken by most users of this channel. English isn't my mother tongue either and I still use it for the sake of communications. Honestly, it really gives the French people a bad reputation with their regard to other people's languages et cetera. Feels disrespectful. Not even speaking to the loss of meaning through Google Translate. RCS reduction has been featured by the Typhoon's inlets as well - they bend so that the engine blades aren't exposed, similarly the way the Rafale's blend sideways. Equally, Typhoon uses carbon composites and Radar absorbing material in the front. None of the aircraft are particularly stealthy though, RCS figures for both are quite similar so we would be rather stupid to compare our jets in that area. Nonetheless, the air intakes of the Typhoon offer superior air flow into the engines.
    2
  29.  @lordtemplar9274  The air inlets of the EF are similarly curved to reduce RCS - the blades aren't visible to radar as well. As I said, any RCS speculation on both planes is just that, speculation. Similar situation with Spectra, we do not know the extend of the capabilities. As for usage - the RAF uses a much different doctrine and would never let pilots fly over SAM systems (even if they used Spectra....). Just a different approach to use soldiers and their life. Technically, it did not need Tomahawks.
    2
  30.  @marc9080  And another French person with a complete disregard for manners and respect. Are you taught to be rude at school? For the record, the Typhoon is not a copy. Otherwise, is every plane a copy because it does have wings? The requirements have been similar enough to employ a similar design yet there are substantial differences. Obviously 4 nations require way more coordination than one nation and plane maker all by itself.
    2
  31. Eurofighter dropped out likewise. Just politics game. Both jets were ideally suited for Canada's needs. Long range, high-speed, strong A2A and A2G. NATOs finest 4.5 gen jets.
    2
  32. It also is way more expensive to built and is built to pristine conditions - it cannot tolerate mud or sand or dust. (MG34 that is)
    2
  33.  @SaintMarneusCalgar  The MG34 had reliability problems when in daunting conditions. The MG42 was easier and faster to produce, cheaper as well and worked better, plus the enormous firepower gave it a tactical advantage. 1 Mg 42 could pump out more lead than 5 BARs
    2
  34. Hey man. Can you do a video on the Eurofighter? I know you did one two years ago but so you made 2 about Rafale and Gripen now so?
    1
  35. Yeah, that teaser couldn't be real. Why would you put your most valuable asset so close to the prime military power on the planet
    1
  36. And according to aerodynamics, Rafale's engine intakes on the side compromise air flow to some extend that it will not flow into the engine at some maneuvers. Basically, fighter jets are always a trade off. As for omnirole, it is more like marketing from Dassault than a real term. After all, a Typhoon can carry a pod too (Litening III which is actually superior to Damocles), bombs and missiles. Does seem like omnirole.
    1
  37. Well, reliability always comes in handy. And then look how much thrust it has with 2. 2 smaller engines are less technically challenging as one huge big one which has to work 100%
    1
  38. omine OL More to do with defense spending
    1
  39.  @lordtemplar9274  The Eurofighter managed to kill an F22 too in simulated dogfights, so what. Those are exercises and not real combat.
    1
  40. Actually, you are wrong. They have been found to be very reliable.
    1
  41. But with less payload et cetera than those competitors.
    1
  42.  @RedXlV  Oh absolutely, it's a masterpiece of fighter jet design.
    1
  43.  @viktorvlasov483  Well, a gatling tends to take a few moments to run to full speed. Shouldn't happen with that Mauser.
    1
  44. Well, the original Abrams gun is already a license of the German gun.
    1
  45.  @stupidburp  They are cheaper and India must look out for costs though. I think they will buy Rafales. Maybe some used ones from France to save some bucks. Others say they want a political alternative as well so that's why they consider Eurofighter too. I love the EF but it is a very long shot. They would rather not buy American because they doubt their commitment.
    1
  46.  @stupidburp  Most parts for the Rafale would still be sourced in France and other high-cost European / American countries. They obviously won't get the entire production line for parts, merely they will get the final assembly line. That might reduce the costs a little but a Snecma M88 will cost the same in France and India.
    1
  47.  @stupidburp  I doubt that the French would give away all their technology away so freely. We will see.
    1
  48.  @GemsOfIndianRight  F/A-18 isn't stealthy at all and the Indians had bad experience with American tech for a long time, given the US policy to interfere with theirs regarding Pakistan
    1
  49. Probably we don't know about anything.
    1
  50. There are some drawbacks to Canada which make it a little more unlikely for it to adopt Rafale. -Rafale uses almost exclusively French ammunition which would mean a complete new set of bombs and missiles, some of them dated. -Spare parts could not be used at all.
    1