Comments by "VisibilityFoggy" (@VisibilityFoggy) on "Chinese Air Forces: Flaming Dragon or a baby Tiger?" video.

I don't think we can say that many of these designs get "canned." They're made for a reason, and it's also important to remember that while the Chinese are on their own, the U.S. has a great number of advanced allies that may be developing their own drone tech that the U.S. military will buy. If Finland, for example, came up with a great strike platform, why re-invent it? The U.S. has also developed the Stingray tanker drone, which could also be used for electronic attack and that is absolutely being deployed, Australia has developed a loyal wingman air-to-air combat drone which is now under consideration for U.S. adoption, and the B-21 is rumored to have an unmanned strike capability – literally a drone the size of an actual strategic stealth bomber. I'd say America is okay.
11
@HiReeZin I don't think they've been lazy. I think the Su-57 has ultimately proven to be more of a concept demonstrator than a deployable platform. If Russia were smart, she would take the Su-57 program and use it as the basis for a sixth-gen fighter. The issue, of course, is engine tech. This goes for China as well. Neither of them have the technology that the U.S. and Europe have developed to provide an equivalent level of reliability, fuel economy and, perhaps most important for platforms like the Su-57, heat signature reduction.
4
Ha, 145km. Its "advanced" missile has a range less than the AIM-120D that the U.S. is already replacing in two years.
2
@newborn6 The issue, of course, is that the only way to "kick out" anyone is to actually fire on them. Merely being there isn't going to deter a U.S. Navy carrier group. And then, of course, if you DO take the action of firing on a major USN ship, you've blown the mission. Instead of deterring the USN, you've invited a whole bunch more of them, plus ships from the JMSDF, RN, RAN, etc., into the region and they will likely be targeting the bases from which the original attacking ships were deployed. It's not as simple as you make it out to be. The reality here is that the U.S. military, which the Chinese seem to laugh off for some ignorant reason, can absolutely decimate their forces and send them back about 50 years in capability in short order – then go home. China, on the other hand, has absolutely no capability to show up off San Diego or Virginia Beach and pick a fight. If they want to try and tangle with all those ANG F-22s and advanced ships in Hawaii, that's their mistake to make.
1
@yaz2928 Not with the Su-35. And DEFINITELY not with the Su-33, which they stole by pilfering a single copy in Ukraine and reverse-engineering. They're snakes. And they need to be defeated.
1
@Scipio's Eyes Why would China sell a monkey model AAM? That doesn't really make any sense, especially since they pretty much can't find any country in the world willing to buy their kit except Pakistan and a few other random African dictatorships. I don't doubt the PL-15 is a respectable missile, but it's not some kind of super weapon. The world's best AAM, without a doubt, is the MBDA Meteor. We'll have to see if the U.S. beats it in range and/or speed to target in the AIM-260 or LREW missiles that are forthcoming. My hunch is that the U.S. will deploy a new "regular" BVR missile and a physically larger and longer range BVR missile that will be specialized for interceptors to take down PLAAF bombers and cargo/refueling aircraft from standoff range.
1