vids 8 mins ago this comment is an hour, how? 😟

​@@AFG.1youtube lets you schedule when videos go live, even if they are fully uploaded already

@@misterperson3469 ohh makes sense thanks

I'm English, and what I'd like to know, is why we read so many Americans making such ridiculous claims, like the F-22, is so much better than the Russian SU-57, (that relies on washing machine chip technology), and has the RCS (radar cross-section) of a Jumbo Jet? Seriously, just what on earth is that all about? Not only is that claim completely wrong, but it couldn't be any more wrong! The really obvious, and factual truth, is, they've no idea what the RCS of any military aircraft is, as they're always kept classified! But even more stupidly, they never even ask any of the most obvious questions, as they all, always, just assume so much! Questions like, what do either the F-22, or F-35's have available to them, to detect, track, and target enemy stealth aircraft, from BVR (beyond visual range)? And yet, if they had just asked that one, really obvious question, then maybe they'd understand, that today's reality is nothing at all, like they think! Seemingly, they don't even understand, that stealth alone, defeats high-frequency (short wave), radar, by absorption and deflection, but it does not defeat low-frequency (long wave radar). Therefore, to detect, track, and target enemy stealth aircraft from BVR, can be done with long-wave radar, (but it must also be enhanced), to remove all background clutter for targeting purposes. So, regardless of the aircraft's RCS (they all believe means so much), when they're being detected, tracked and targetted by long wave radar, they're far from stealthy, and they just light up, and they stand out like a beacon in the night. It also seems, they don't know that neither the APG-77 radar in the F-22, or the APG-81 radar in the F-35, have any kind of long wave radar, (hence, they can't detect any enemy stealth aircraft from BVR). So, just think about that, and what it actually means? This is also a fact, the US air force will be fully aware of, only it seems the reality is, when the F-35 radars were being designed 13 years ago, there were no other stealth aircraft to think about as a potential threat! So, obviously, we must ask, just what do the F-22, or the F-35, actually have available to them, to detect enemy stealth aircraft from BVR? They have, AWACS, (that can transfer all targetting data to the F-22 - F-35's in real time). Only, that's not possible today. And this is why actually understanding any potential adversaries, real abilities, becomes extremely important, critical in fact. As, on the other hand, we find this Russian SU-57, (rubbish) the Americans all claim, is equipped with a 5th generation radar, (with enhanced long-wave radar), their new Byelka (2band) radar used in SU-57. They can detect, track, and target enemy stealth jets from BVR, and very easily today. Russia has designed, and developed, the first L-Band fighter radar we've ever seen. They've embedded L-band AESA radars into the leading edges of the wings. The L-band AESA radar "data" gets processed in real time (through extremely powerful Russian computers), being significantly enhanced, removing all background clutter, seeing them perfectly able to detect, track, and engage enemy stealth aircraft from BVR. This new Russian radar technology, along with its very impressive range parameters, and it's jamming ability (over very large areas) make this aircraft deadly to all other aircraft types. (But according to the Americans), it's just Russian rubbish, right? They can also detect, track, and target enemy stealth fighters, long before they enter Russian airspace, (from much greater distances today), with "real-time" data from all those massive Russian ground (long wave stations), that are all protected with the networked S-400 defensive system. Russia's new (2band) radar, covers all frequencies across all channels, used for tracking, targeting, and also for jamming (over large areas). It's part of Sh121 multifunctional integrated radio electronic system (MIRES) on board the SU-57. We should also understand, that Russia tested this new radar suit in the SU-35's, so they also have the option of fitting this radar into the SU-35's. Seeing the SU-35 at no disadvantage against either the F-22/35. As although the SU-35 can be detected, tracked, targeted and shot down from BVR by the US stealth fighters, the SU-35 equipped with this new radar is just as able to detect, track, target and shoot down the US stealth fighters from BVR. Seeing the all-important, huge Russian advantage, in BVR missile range, plus the excellent manoeuvring, neither the F-22/F-35 have, as more than critical, (if you're going to avoid simply being blown out of the sky). The truth is, this new Russian 5th generation radar, design, has very clear potentials, to provide genuine shared multifunction apertures, with applications including... Search, track, and destroy, missile mid-course guidance, against low signature aircraft, identification of friend or foe with secondary surveillance radar. Passive angle tracking and geolocation of JTIDS-MIDS-Link-16 emitters at long ranges. Passive angle tracking and geolocation of L-band AEWC - AWACS and surface based search radars at long ranges. Passive angle tracking and geolocation of hostile (i.e. Western) IFF and SSR transponders at long ranges. High-powered active jamming of JTIDS-MIDS-Link-16 emitters. High-powered active jamming of satellite navigation receivers over large areas. High-powered active jamming of L-band AEWC-AWACS and surface based search radars at long ranges. High-powered active jamming of guided munition command data links over large areas. [Effectively, and completely, neutralizing the USA's use of AWACS for their detection]. The Tikhomirov NIIP L-band, AESA 5th generation radar, is an extremely important strategic development, and it's a technology which once fully matured and deployed in useful numbers, will render narrowband stealth designs like the F-22 & F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, and many, UAVs, as highly vulnerable to all flanker variants equipped with such radars. Furthermore, just what have the Americans, ever seen the F-22 actually, do? Well, other than flying over a beach, on a KZfaq video? Absolutely nothing!

I thought they weren't invisible on radar... that it makes it impossible for counter measures to get a lock on the target to fire.

Isn't the B2 a subsonic plane?

“Ah, yes comrade, bees fly at mach 2 around here all the time. For some reason though, every time they do, our stuff starts to explode.”

Only Tu-160 can reach that speed, not B-2

Top speed of the B2 is Mach 0.95. You don’t need speed when you’re invisible.

@@bettyswallocks6411 it was a joke my guy

Not the prototype, but a scale model, and it was in 1980. Northrop had not yet won the program, and construction on the prototype (which was also the first production plane) wouldn't begin for another few years, and it wasn't completed until 1987 or 1988.

Say that like it's a bad thing... maybe I want the roller-coaster experience..

There are private jets.

Not just that, but it would be nearly impossible to meet the emergency exit requirements.

Eh, still you see concepts of airliners which are much more wing shaped. It’s 100% possible but Boeing would rather cut quality and R&D costs rather than innovate, which is why the French make better passenger planes now

Agree...I used to take a worker driver bus (greyhound style) to work everyday. They are fine out on the highway but suck bad on city streets where the road often slants one way or the other and you end up moving up and down what feels like 3 feet...it was a roller coaster ride to say the least :>)

However Radar deflecting shapes shush as those used on the F-117 also make submarines harder to detect on active sonar as Radar waves act quite similar to sound waves in water.

@@luther0013 Indeed.

​@luther0013 then there's the difficulty, as with aircraft, of optimizing both aero (or hydro) dynamics and geometric stealth. Given that drag depends both on the velocity and the viscosity of the fluid, we can see that this is a harder problem for subs.

@@marcondespaulo if your invisible what does it matter if you move slower than an iceberg.

They’re produced by the countries capable of building and affording them because they’re all things considered superior. If they weren’t there would be no reason to build them. Yes….you can parse via different metrics to argue for X or Y but in the aggregate, considering all mission types..they’re better.

Jack Northrop died 8 years before the first flight of the B-2. He only was able to see the concept plane after getting special clearance

It's getting upgraded with new engines and radar.

It will never be useful either

@@MaticTheProto Found the Russian 😂

@@bigchungus1848 nah. You also wouldn't ride a horse to war nowadays

@@MaticTheProtoYou would. B52 may get old, but it is THE MOST terrifying bomber EVER. B52 is forever

is it does lines on the tarmac that i've seen on military airfields? the description is the same I believe just want to know if i saw the in person.

this sounds like complete bullshit. do you have any corroborating source on any of that? B2's use the same taxiways as every other aircraft. they are not painted red. and why would your cousin and colleague be in a taxiway?? your story makes zero sense.

@@taitai4993no. the only red things you will ever see on an airfield are red signs that indicate important intersections where pilots "hold position" much like a stop sign. Every entrance to a runway from a taxiway will have the runway numbers on a red sign, and often there will also be a painted on indication of the runway numbers on the tarmac as well. i guarantee that's probably what you saw. there are various things that can be indicated with a red sign so could be any one of them. but it definitely wasn't a special goddam taxiway like the original commenter is trying to say exist 😂

@@syntactyx did I say sign? No there are red lines painted on the tarmac. If you watch the video you'll see a red line painted infront of the hanger. All of this is coming from my cousin who was stationed at Whiteman airforce base.

@@syntactyx my previous reply above this one answers your question.

He also made another blunder @2:44 converting the RCS to imperial: He said 0.0001 meters = 0.15 in (which's 50x the actual 0.003 inches). 0.0001 meters = 1/10th of a mm. Anyone familiar w metric should've caught that. (I'd also mentioned the drag mistake 2 weeks ago also). 🙂

i'd say it looks more like a falcon while diving, a lot of modern aircraft are inspired by bird shapes

​@@jakalantheman3402because why invent a wheel, when you can look at nature, that "developed" the most efficient shapes through evolution for million years

Yea… cuz it was literally inspired by falcons. It’s supposed to mimic their shape

*than

@@Rotorhead1651 the irony xD

@@Rotorhead1651 be nice to the kid

Glad you enjoy our stuff!

@@Rotorhead1651 XD see? I told u I know better about military stuff THAN school.

Lift surfaces produce drag, so if you can use fuselage to produce part of the lift itself, you can reduce wing size, thus reducing total drag.

That was a fun one still own the DVD

F-37 Talon design soo good that it became reason i like to play ace combat❤. I wish i can build detailed model of it

Huh, a man of culture.

The Buff is eternal.

Vertical stabilisers drag and "turn" capabilities should also be re-considered ;)

B-52 will remain in service as long as the Air Force continues to operate.

It also includes the runways, buildings, tooling, materials, computers, security clearances (secret clearances was $50k in 1990 for reference, top secret was $100k), spares for 20 yrs to name a few. Imagine buying a car, paying for the road to your house, your garage, all spares you’d use for 20 yrs and mechanics to maintain it for 20 yrs. Think your car would only cost $50k?

@@USMC6169 a lot of people as forget this also applies in NASA’s rockets which is why the SLS currently seems to have a price per flight that is spiralling upwards because it has only flown once and only 2 new rockets are under construction currently not to mention cost overruns with the ground systems which is responsible for the price per launch increases.

Except a bigger buff

Except itself

I've seen them do low flyovers multiple times at the Rose Parade. When they're flying head-on, they're surprisingly quiet. Most of the time, without checking the timing, we wouldn't have known it was even coming until it passed over us. Only once it had gone past (and from the side as it banked) were we able to finally hear the roar of the engines. Incredible aircraft.

Hand reveal? We are already at back reveal. You need to checkout our recent videos 😁

It’s just a matter of time 😁

@@NotWhatYouThink I hope I'll be here to see it when that day comes! :)

just a theory but maybe he wanted to focus in bombers wing shaped

Because it was a shit project which is mostly an urban legend. Also get your facts straight, none of the German flying wing technology was used by the Americans.

It wouldn’t be stealth then. You’re supersonic footprint would give it away, not to mention heat, and your radar cross-section would go to crap because of the heat generated around your air frame, which you couldn’t use the special materials.

Eh, I think it would be stopped by its own aerodynamics, losing control & breaking apart somewhere between Mach 0.8-1.4, regardless of the engines you used. The idea of an armed space plane is pretty cool though, even if it's not practical in the foreseeable future.

Did you find the Arabic voice quality acceptable?

@@NotWhatYouThink Not the best, but acceptable

​@@NotWhatYouThink ah hell nah it will sound very strange speaking with the normal Arabic accents there are hundreds of Arabic accents and if I hear a different one I get annoyed and start laughing English is good

Because the grandfather of all flying wings is jack northrop. His first flying wing flew in 1929.

@@USMC6169 so we just ignoring them because they were built during the second global disagreement. Also, northop didn't fly the scale model until 1940 the N-1M. Then there are all the gliders that existed. If you take that into account gliders was first experimenting with in 1924.

@@grapes008YT ghosted my first response. no one is ignoring them. I was addressing the statement that they were the grandparents, and they were not. Their flying wing designs didn’t start until ~1940. Their first jet powered wing in 1944-45 never made it off the ground before WWII ended. Northrops first prop powered wing flew in 1929. And if it flew in 1929, and he built it himself, he’d been thinking about it for years and years before flight.

@@USMC6169 and yet, I can't find a single trace online to verify.

including the Horton brothers contributions

Finding great footage is once of the things we are good it … and no, none of it is classified :-)