Another?

Lol 😂

@@carpetclimber4027 He has 2 on his roof, I installed them. With those babies installed, he's safe from intercontinental ballistic missiles

Nerokasta

Well can I interest you in a cwiss system for close in defense? For those pesky threats that may get past the other missile defense systems

Kreo it is bias and copy binkov. binkov is unbiased.

@@fatgirlboy9341 This doesn't copy binkov at all...

John Law Binkov mostly talks about possible ideas for a War or Battle, Cable mostly talks about the Future, and Present branches of warfare and geopolitical conflicts. Each stay to their own realm. How is Covert Cable Biased, can you give me an example?

@@fatgirlboy9341 I'd love to see where Covert Cabal went from unbiased review to a clearly taking sides.

Thats what Kove wants you to think

What if I tell you that all weapons are firstly created to protect goverment from they own people, secondarily to impose will upon udeveloped countries and finally to fight against equal foe.

Serj Levonyuk Proofs?

@@SerjLevonyuk that you know nothing about the real world, thats what i believe

@@carso1500 There is probably a little bit of truth to what he said tho.

It's Israel's fault. Their military planes often attack ground targets in other countries, then hide behind civilian airplanes. If a missile is following them at that moment, they sometimes accidentally hit the civilian airplanes. What Israeli airplanes do is basically using civilians and children as live shield. But the news then blame it all on the enemy, never even mentioning this disgusting tactics.

The lumbering "deathstar" SAM, it such a funny trope. Too many believe it to be reality though...

That could easily be why Syria hasn't used their newest AD systems yet, they're saving them for when they really need them. Use them on a small raid they might end up giving the Israelis valuable intelligence on the system's actual capabilities and potentially compromise their air defense at a time when the Israelis might be coming in for more than a simple raid.

@@Riceball01 exactly.

Like Star Wars; or nukes.

You would think that AA can be easily tested with a handful of cheaper sacrificial drones or even RC aircraft. Fly a few decoy sorties over defended areas and see how effective AA really is.

@@gooble69 That is why you need light AA to cover up heavier ones. Heavy AA simply should not engage drones/decoys.

_covertly_

@Melani Natasha even before the deployment, Israel very rarely bombed the northern parts of Syria.

Yeah, Patriot has very bad operational results indeed.

Now imagine the other side. One spear, one throw, will likely break if it hits a shield. This is how deterrence works.

@@silphonym But a nuke is the equivalent of a bullet against the shield.

@@JonatasAdoM no, the nuke is the equivalent of f**king grenade in the bar fistfight.

Greetings professor Falken.

What city?

@@kekkeyan8614 Khamis Mushayt and Abha

Yup yemen cough iranians have been lobbing dozens of missiles at the UAE and actually few have gotten through

@@Kozak806 no it's alright, they always get shot, it's actually quite a sight.

@Jeffro 2000 hope you had a good time in Saudi Arabia sir. When were you deployed?

😳😳😳

yeah, it entirely depends on whose interests you mean when saying "it's the best at protecting interests"

@@512TheWolf512 here's an idiot. 😆

@@nesseihtgnay9419 please, you didn't need to introduce yourself

@Русские геи Didn't the russian aerospace defense forces tested the S-400 in Syria?

@Русские геи that argument is pretty stupid, combat excercises in most cases simulate combat conditions as closly as possible, if it works there, then there is no reason to doubt its effectiveness in real combst

Sorry, we didn't know it was invisible xD greetings from Serbia :)

Because they visually observed that plane's flight path over time and knew it would fly overhead, what speed it would be at etc,...They didn't lock on to it, they just knew roughly where to shoot.

The F-117 was designed in the 80s. Only 1 shot down out of 1300+ missions is really good.

@@KevinWilliams19723 If I may correct you on this. Stealth technology is designed to be most effective against the most common, cm wavelength (X-K band) radars. The early warning radars used by (among others) the S-125 used metre wavelength radar (UHF). With those a stealth plane is "visible", but it cannot provide accurate information, what the target is or if it is one target or several in close formation, only that "something is there". That is enough to engage the target once it gets within missile range, with a low chance-to-hit of course. Cm wavelength targeting radars can still see the stealth target, but only from a relatively short distance, say 20 kilometres instead of 80. At the time of the incident I served in an air defence regiment next door (11th Duna Combined Home Air Defence Regiment, Hungary) that operated both S-125 and S-75 systems. Next couple of days we discussed it at length. It's been a while though.

@@imrekalman9044 good viewpoint, as mentioned in end of video, that there are many factors to consider in defense system. it is more complicated than just press button and system is running.

I've found the opposite news. Armenians have shot down the Azerbaijan drone produced in Israel: eurasiantimes.com/watch-now-armenia-shoots-down-israeli-drone-operated-by-azerbaijan-defence-forces/

@@cinegraphics yes that was a separate engagement. The S-300 got it first kills but were suicide drones and had one destroyed a few days later by Azerbaijan drone.

How are chinese drones and missiles?

@@NitinJadhav-cc2xh knock offs but will still probably do their purpose Russia started making more stuff that they sell to china unable to be reverse engineered cuz china was copying designs from even Russia Thier ally

@@UninstallUpdate it actually makes no sense to launch an S-300 rocket at such a drone, because the drone is probably much cheaper than the defense rocket...

Still tho,Its hard to trust a not battle proven weapon system.

Air defenses are expensive as fuck though

What if the opponent launches 50 cruise missiles at once at the mighty S-900 which costs say 2 billion dollars ? Hitler did not saved the war with jet airplane, or V2. Better to spend that money on schools and universities :D

Agree : (((((

I noted that too, everyone was masked up.

@John Doe Amen.

Prizrak2084 this is kinda like the video, masks work in tests or controlled environment with skilled workers like in surgery. But real life?

Prizrak2084 those mask-wearing countries are now having a big second wave of cases. What will you do to push your pseudoscience then? Personally I’ll trust my medical training I got from the CDC during the 2009 pandemic when medicine wasn’t so politicized and I was on the front lines as an EMT. We were immunized, trained in the proper use of properly-fitted N95 masks, and the CDC told us that nothing would keep us safe from H1N1 or any other respiratory illness except to stay at least six feet away from anyone showing symptoms. We didn’t even go into the room with patients unless absolutely necessary, and if we did we were considered exposed, regardless of other precautions. But I guess you don’t trust Obama’s CDC.

Prizrak2084 LOL, you actually resort to pretending I didn’t contradict you. Such defense mechanisms.

Most weapon systems don have half the challenges that air defense systems have

Saudis are not allowed to operate any patriots in their country, they are all operated by the US

That makes it even funnier then that they were pointed the wrong way haha.

But Iran is north.

True, they’re not exactly friendly with one another. The missiles that the Yemenis lob at Riyadh are Iranian after all.

I imagine they would have a officer or group of officers give an order to turn air defence online. Kind of like a chain of command authorizing a nuclear strike but as the threat gets higher in a specific area the decision to go online would get more and more local eventually to battalion commanders or even single lieutenants

@@Aaron-wq3jz I was thinking more of Areas in peactime but tensions are at a boiling point, like Saudi Arabia or Iran. It would be hard for an AI to differentiate between a civilian plane to a military one. But yeah, a chain of command could work in certain areas, like in Europe where tensions are relatively low.

Well, I think Red Flag does a great job at simulating real combat as best as possible. As for 5th gen fighters, new aggressor squadrons are being equipped with early block F-35s, this will make it possible to simulate 5th gen vs 5th gen combat in the near future.

@@rusher2937 all true and it is definitely easier to test aircraft as opposed to air defence, but even things such as Red Flag aren't a full substitute. It may not be the aircraft but rather the sensors and weapons on board, just as in an air defence battery. The battery and fighter alike may prove flawless in training - but the reliability of the actual weapon or sensor against a real target (with tailored techniques, technologies and tactics) may prove inadequate when compared to a simulated system or hardware tests against target drones. Perhaps in a decade or so we may see targeting drones replicate actual maneuvres and techniques employed by human piloted fighters. Having an F-16V conduct complex procedures could help improve the hardware of both air defence batteries and air warfsre fighters alike.

​@@ArisenfromDogma Afaik in red flag sensors are used to their full extent, probably even jamming. Weapons can't for safety reasons, but are also constantly tested in other training areas. Of course nothing is 100% reliable, but in the past years electronics have become increasingly cheap to manufacture and reliable in both the civilian and military domain. Based on what I heard from real pilots, the F135 engine (which is fully automated) is incredibly reliable by today's standards. I agree that no training is a complete substitute for real combat, enemy tactics might be unpredictable, and testing of niche tech is often not done to the extend that real combat will, for economic reasons. However, I don't see how modern targeting drones like QF-4s or QF-16s wouldn't already be able to perform complex maneuvers. I guess the main reason that small prop-driven drones are often seen in videos is that in those situations the main scope is training the operators in their procedures at low cost, not hard-test the limits of the system. Maneuvering QF-4s have already been used when testing stuff like the AIM-9X, it only makes sense that they and similar platforms are also used to test a variety of other air-to-air and surface-to-air missiles and attached systems.

@@rusher2937 again all good points (and it is QF-16 as you said, not F-16V). "and testing of niche tech is often not done to the extend that real combat will, for economic reasons." Knocked it on the head there. Whilst it is different depending on the system being tested, ensuring great reliability of a system requires continuous and robust testing. For economic reasons (among others), this is not always feasible and a factor in the design of both air defences and fighter/fighter mounts. There are potentially also commercial reasons - companies lobby hard to ensure their interests (such as perceived product reliability) are ensured. The M16 and M2 Bradley, prior to Pentagon acquisition reforms, are good examples. This is not to say the risk has disappeared however and it is not something limited to just the West. With regards to complex targeting drones, complex manoeuvres are only one part of the problem. Nothing occurs in a vacuum - targeting drones should be able to manoeuvre with regards to everything else in the battlespace. If the West is training for multi-domain operations, then targeting drones (including other systems replicating their own unmanned systems) need to be able to work with integrated air defence networks in a coordinated manner, or in a manner exploiting the complexity of the ground for low-level operations (for strike, interdiction or anything else). Training systems such as drones will become more advanced, particularly as AI and other software becomes more advanced and robust. This may even alleviate the limitations placed on testing large quantities of air defence and fighter systems. But at the end of the day no one can predict how war (tactical and close through strategic) will play out once it all goes hot. This isn't unique to aircraft or air defence - but the cost of preparing for real business remains a barrier to good business.

Pilots with real air combat experience are all in diapers now.

A proven tactic, leaching off of a larger creator in order to get publicity for yourself

Wow use a good channel with massive views to try and boost your own which isnt good at all

Boooooo

I meet a ada ssg at bliss, and he said they never went to the field, worked half days but the patriot batteries deploy quite often though.

@@smokeypuppy417 Nice

Heading there in feb 🤦

@@christianmendez26 fort bliss is where all dreams go to die especially if you are on east bliss.

@CAG Hotshot 19k, 5th Brigade 1st CAB, Future Combat Systems. Barracks number 2905.

Да он пропагандист,говорит С-300 не было использовано против Израиля,а что у Сирии С-300 по всей стране установлены?С-300 в Сирии прикрывают только Дамаск по моему и все.Я имею ввиду Сирийские с-300,а не те которые на Российской базе.

@@imperskiikulak446 В Израиле есть: 224 F-16 58 F-15 EAGLE 25 F-25 STRIKE EAGLE 24 F-35 Одна или две батареи C 300 не могут помочь против такой силы

@@simonsimonovic4478 это здесь не при чем. просто там гористая местность. израиль пользуется этим.

@@simonsimonovic4478 есть и Красухи ))

It all makes sense because the main goal is to make money. Air defense is just a side by-product of making money. The same is true for all other products on the market.

Or they could install AA's on satellites

Interesting opinion...

@@janavavrova6448 thanks appreciate it

@@patrickb4620 if you mean the gameplay from 3:15 thats DCS World

Too funny.

it is more like.. S-300: "You know I COULD shoot you down, I could" f-16: bomb release and hit target. F-16: " No its fine no no ur fine I'm gonna just, you know, leave." F-16: leaves S-300: "Holy shit thank god."

Same.

That thing faild to defend against local missiles costing only $200 he clearly dosen't have to talk about trash

@@negan_lq9499 ​ Next time maybe watch the video before commenting? It'll help you look like less of an idiot.

@@infinitelyexplosive4131 it's indeed trash, iron Dom never tested in real battlefield, when I talked about real war, I mean never engaged with super Sonic ballistic missiles

@@khaleddekar2188 iron dom is for small to medium air defense not for ballistic missiles

I think most weapons geeks know that the f117 shoot down was a clever one off. The point was that no tech is *invincible*.

@@psuedozardozz So 1 kill is something to brag about? That means that U.S. tech can invincibly invade and destroy.

@@sumerbc7409 No one has claimed otherwise. It simply shows that the opponent is constantly thinking and can't be expected to simply give up. That was also the first time stealth coatings were captured intact by an opponent. New coatings have been developed for more modern aircraft, but that was very close to the end of the 117's life cycle.

@@psuedozardozz True

@@psuedozardozz The Bosnian War took place in Bosnia and Herzegovina between 1992 and 1995. STEALTH F-117s led the way all through out the 1st gulf war.... you are sadly and woefully mistaken. The F-117 was widely publicized for its role in the Persian Gulf War of 1991. Although it was commonly referred to as the "Stealth Fighter", it was strictly a ground-attack aircraft. F-117s took part in the conflict in Yugoslavia, where one was shot down by a surface-to-air missile (SAM) in 1999; it was the only Nighthawk to be lost in combat. The U.S. Air Force retired the F-117 in April 2008, primarily due to the fielding of the F-22 Raptor. Despite the type's retirement, a portion of the fleet has been kept in airworthy condition, and Nighthawks have been observed flying in 2020.[5]

@istiak monsur its not meant to. only counter rockets, artillery, and motors. (C-RAM). Iron Dome is 90 percent successful which makes it effective and is a modern air defense system.

@@men8212 ... the title of the video refers to "Effective" "Modern Air Defenses" which includes SAM systems and any other weapon meant to Defend against a hostile air attack/action(guided or unguided). Iron Dome is a SAM system with a C-RAM type use case proven to be effective and yes expensive. This video raised the issue of real combat use to which Iron Dome has seen successful in real combat use since 2012.

​@@men8212 Near Defense or Long Range Defense. Still "Modern Air Defense" and therefore comparable.

​@@men8212 you missed my point. the joking is comparing for comparison sake. it is kind of humor that you are not understanding it seems. does that make sense to you?

Is that why Israel bombs targets in syria when ever they want to?

@@masonhidari I mean syria does try to counter the Israeli missiles. It sometimes works, usually it doesn't of course

Who wouldn't?

@@1moneyking lol true.

Wolf Puppy The philippines bro! HAHAHA we have the worst govt lol. The philippine president trusts china more than it's citizens

@@1creeperbomb I am waiting for My country Somalia to get those. :>

@@jaranis9273 maybe because they hate the USA. I mean don't forget "American Imperialism"

Pls someone tell us.

@@PohjolanPeikko CMANO

@Русские геи yep aircraft will beat even the most sophisticated Sam's.

Is that Israel’s system?

ricky bear yes

Aegis

Aaron I guess it’s effective against mortar shells

@@ckr3167 both are really effective at what they were designed for

@Intel Guru deservingly so this is what happens when russia claims everything they produce is the best and yet almost everything they produce struggles tremendously. MiG 29 has the worst record of any modern fighter jet and 2nd is the SU27 lmao

@@calebpatterson5141 I love the excuse that all their losses are with other nations yet American, UK and French made products are as well and perform well haha

@@calebpatterson5141 Su-27 is 8 kills 0 deaths. And a third of MiG-29 deaths were to Su-27 in africa.

@Intel Guru It has also shot down missiles from every israeli attack, but you can always add more missiles to the attack to overwhelm the air defenses. The political situation in Syria makes it that the russians can only deliver enough systems to make israeli attacks more costly, not prevent them. It has nothing to do with the systems. Think about it, what would be the next step if the russians give the Syrians and Hezbollah a nearly fully effective air shield? Any guess?

Yeah, unfortunately for Pantsir, it’s been destroyed multiple times by those two countries. Israel has attacked Syria hundreds of times for years. They often release satellite images of the targets before and after the raids, proving that some of their missiles were able to avoid Syrian air defenses and destroy their targets. There’s many images out there on the internet. Shouldn’t be too hard to find.