😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 correct😂😂😂😂😂

Ukrainians lie as soon as they open their mouths!!!

It's toughness due to less tech dependency they are better

Российские Самолеты, лучшие в Мире.

and Bear!!!

Russians always have the worst propaganda, that's why you think they have the worst weapons and that winter somehow helps them as if they don't have to fight in the same conditions as their enemy

🙂🙃😂 👍✋👋

The ghost of kiev shot down 6 million su35s in one day

@@krc306Russia is making Ukrainian ghosts every day

UA is winning on YT und TV but Russia is winning in RL :D

Excelente 😂😂😂😂😂

Ахах 😄😄👍👍

Excelente 😂😂😂😂

and shooted down F-117

you guys managed to shoot down an F-117 bro

@@jesus-valirius1579Видимо сербы не знали, что f-117 невидимка! Поэтому и сбили. Они даже извинились за свой поступок)))

No, the loud knob in the corner yapping on has got it right. It's them fin like thingies at the back of planes, or at least I believe that's the proper Latin term for them.🤣

for the West and Israel, it is better for it to remain this way, but unfortunately for you, everything will soon change and the United States will be ousted from the east as well as from Afghanistan.

The U.S. has had air superiority fighters for a while (some of the best in the world, in fact), and if you think they haven't been focusing on that aspect of aerial combat, then you haven't been paying attention to American aeronautical developments for the past 50-60 years. I'd argue the Russians aren't very close to developing an equivalent plane either, if for no other reason than their industry failing to meat production and quality standards. Their country also can't afford to develop and manufacture fifth generation fighters in any significant number either, so what little fighting prowess their planes may have is wasted because they couldn't field them in any militarily relevant quantity.

@@CaseyCollier i would argue that the US might have good aircrafts, but its most likely for show. Why would i say that, because...the american doctrines, of fighting an enemy, has changed since the end of the cold-war. Nowadays your strike capability is mainly based on the Carrier-groups and the 100+ outposts around the world. Which means quick responds and then backed by supplies. Yeah that might have worked in the middle east, but what about an advanced nation ? Thats why i have a problem with people who`re thinking like an old cowboy. Russia is and always has prepared for an attack of its motherland. Napoleon tried and uncle Adolf as well and they failed. Russia is way more advanced in electronic warfare as many would think, which they showed a couple of times. Reeper drone got hijacked and safely landed (not the one with the fuel incidence). The USS Donald Cook got buzzed in 2014 by a Su-24, armed with only EMP equipment. Imagine you go to war and your fancy toy gets shut off by a single mouse-click. Bottom-line of russian defens is, i shoot you, before you even can see me. Example...official numbers of the S-500 range are 600km, that means they see your F-35 (about 200km visual range) and F-22 way ahead of the game and it doesn`t matter if an AWACS (400km visual range) is in the air. The SU-35 has a visual range of 400km. A Patriot system has an operational range of about 160km. I don`t know why people can`t do the math. Right now russia is, probably, using Ukraine has a testing ground for their weapons and advancing them probably each day. Hypersonic missiles are flying around without a chance of getting stopped. Glide-bombs are taking out Patriot systems. Bradleys, Leos and some M1 Abrams got grilled and and and. I`d say some is showing that western equipment isn`t worth a diam. Russia took full control of the military sector a long time ago, while the US doesn`t or were the Generals in a Congregational hearing lying ? That hearing was quite interesting, because of two points which they said, not me. Combat readiness of the F-35 fleet is below 35% out of 100%. Lockheed Martin owns every plane, cause the USAF doesn`t have excess to software or maintenance, so each time it goes to Lockheed. Someone`s making a hell of cash over there. If you`re wondering if russia can afford planes, i would say yes, because (as an example) a single F-35 costs around 150-200 Million dollars, a Raptor F-22 143 million dollar per plane (it`s actually 350m). A Su-35 is at 85 Million dollars. The SU-57 just around 40-50 Million dollar. This numbers are official and can be found on the internet. So no worries about russia look more to the US and how the industrial complex sucks the american taxpayer dry. Funfact..are people really believing that Stealth is a thing ? I mean an object needs space in its environment to be there. An airplane moves the air around it to get that space. Do we really think no one has figured that out yet and possibly adjusted it`s radar system ? But it sounds so fancy. Lately China claimed that they have the hypersonic missile technology, too. I don`t know if anybody has gotten the news, but the Pentagon or some important agency came out with a report and it said basically (not quoting here). If China should invade Taiwan and the US Navy would send a carrier-group to the shore of China, it would be destroyed because of the hypersonic missile advantage. Instead of looking for who has the biggest BigMac, we should pray for that this will never be put to the test, cause even the dumbest person on earth should know that the result is the A solution. Politicians won`t fight for what they caused, no its us. Keep that in mind. My intention was not to offend you, if so, i apologize.

@@TheMrCrucifixion My man... very little of what you have said is actually true. I could get into a whole debate with you about each talking point you've laid out, but we'd be here all day. The bottom line is Russia's economy isn't doing well at all (especially after having a decent percentage of its oil refinement plants destroyed in recent attacks), so expecting them to be able to fund massive military R&D projects like the SU-57, "Checkmate", and T-14 is unrealistic. How many SU-57s have been produced so far? 32 with ten being used as test aircraft. Meanwhile, the U.S. has produced 187 combat ready F-22s and over a 1,000 F-35s have been built with 990 currently being fielded by the U.S. and its allies. Even if Russia's so called 5th generation planes were superior, which I highly doubt, they'd be militarily irrelevant because there's so few of them to field that they'd get shot down by an overwhelming force. That's not even getting into pilot training an all of the other factors involved in aerial combat, which NATO countries are highly adept at. I think it's time that you face the facts and understand just how outmatched Russia would really be in an all-out war with the U.S. and its allies. Heck, Russia's been having tons of trouble dealing with a smaller and supposedly less advanced nation such as Ukraine for the past two years. Why, on Earth, would you believe that they could handle the United States in all-out warfare. I don't like underestimating enemies, but this war in Ukraine has made it pretty clear to me that Russia would get steamrolled by NATO if the allied nations were actually trying. Even if they were just up against the United States, they wouldn't fare very well at all. As for China, they may have sizable troop numbers, but so did Russia and look how that has ended up for them. Ultimately, quantity may have a quality all its own, but it isn't the "end all be all" of military capability. You mentioned how China and Russia have "hypersonic" missiles. So what? Would they actually be effective in combat? I'd argue that they wouldn't be because their maneuverability is significantly reduced from normal missiles, which makes them easier to track and shoot down. Why would I say this? It's because the AA systems the U.S. uses like the Patriot that you're so convinced are inferior can track targets using highly advanced radar systems, such as AESA (which was fielded in 2017 and isn't even the most up-to-date tracking system the U.S. has anymore). Do you know what's faster than hypersonic speeds? The speed of current generation radar. If a bullet is traveling at me with speeds in excess of 5x the speed of sound, but it can't maneuver and is over 160km away (that's an official number, which is always going to be less than what it's actually capable of), then all I'd need to do is track it, determine its trajectory (where it'll be when my highly maneuverable missile gets there), and shoot it down. People act like "hypersonic" is this new technology that's only recently been achieved, when in actuality, we've had it since ICBMs have been around. This isn't some "new" thing that the U.S. hasn't designed its anti-air systems to deal with. We've had plenty of decades to develop the technology. What makes you think it'd fail now, given all of the R&D that has gone into making them affective against ICBMs?

@@CaseyCollierПри ударе по нефтяным базам,цены на нефть поднимаются,что в итоге становится ещё выгоднее продавать нефть из России.Гиперзвуковые ракеты есть почти у всех стран,но разница в скоростях что она развивает,а скорость российских ракет сейчас самая высокая,и это говорит даже не Россия а западные страны.

@@CaseyCollier На счёт,Су 57 этот самолёт ждёт окончательную обкатку нового двигателя,на него ставили несколько модификаций двигателей, несомненно это очень сложно,поэтому на разработку порою уходит все больше времени,в связи с новыми технологиями и возможностями,это уже не 1990 года, и даже не 2000 года,сейчас гораздо сложнее. И даже США потребуется лет 10 мин минимум на новые разработки. На счёт Украины,она готовилась к этой войне больше 8 лет,сооружая доты,окопы,вооружаясь до зубов,и воевали они с помощью запада, именно НАТО во всем помогало ,и даже спутниковое слежение и связь,и много чем другим. Поэтому получается Россия воевала против всего запада ,запад использовал Украину как площадку для войны против России,очень много танков подбито как американские абрамсы ,так и леопарды,и прочую технику запада,Россия с каждым днём улучшает свою технику и способ войны,поэтому ситуация переломлена. Хоть у США будет 20000 ф 35 ,и 100 авианосцев им это не поможет ,у России самое мощное ядерное вооружение. Да и ф 35 ,имеет кучу технических неполадок,очень дорогое вооружение и обслуживание,да и чего говорить об огромной коррупции обороны США ,всё это фантики.

What about Nuclear Bombs? Are they not invincible weapon? Is there a war still?

This is an element of the aircraft's tail, designed to ensure the stability of the machine along the sliding angle. The stabilizer also increases the stability of the aircraft during yaw (angular movements of the aircraft). The design of the vertical stabilizer can include from 1 to 3 keels. They are located both parallel to each other and in the shape of the letter "V". Specifically, the 2-keel shape of the vertical stabilizer is used extremely rarely and for the most part is characteristic of combat fighter aircraft.

I don't know if you're being sarcastic or not cause that clearly isn't the case. Russian Air Force primarily is for defence.

Not sure if that’s true, otherwise why would they ever perform patrols then? I think you’ve bitten off a bit too much anti-Russian propaganda, and that’s coming from a guy who watches daily Ukraine FPV drone combat footage

@@beng7844 Feel free to look up their air force donctrine for yourself.

At beginning of war it happened sometimes. But russions reacted on that and the losses are nearly zero since then.

If you mean the fins he was talking about at around 4:15...he was looking at the twin vertical stabilizers that have become so prevalent....at 4:24 he specifically says that the F-15 had the fins he was talking about, so it could not have been canards that he was talking about. 👍

@@iKvetch558 It was when he was looking at the Eurofighter those fins on the front of the nose

@@ActuallyJamie When he looked at the Eurofighter, it was when he wondered which plane that he was thinking of only had a single fin...and then after he saw the Eurofighter he confirmed that it was the one he was thinking about...so the fin he was looking at was the vertical stabilizer. You can see the sequence starting at 4:26 that clearly indicates this. Yes, the Eurofighter has canards...but he was not wondering about those...at least not in that segment. It is possible I missed him wondering about fins on the front of planes later in the video, if you have a different time stamp to reference.

The F-35 is also called Fat Amy for a reason

@@beng7844, I assume because of its proportions...LOL. It's a multirole aircraft (i.e., fighter/attack = F/A), hence Fat Amy.

@@beng7844 ...and? That wouldn't stop it from decimating any plane Russia could field.

@@CaseyCollier that’s… entirely irrelevant. You ok?

@@beng7844 How so? To me, it looked like you were criticizing the F-35 by using an unfavorable nickname. I simply decided to respond with a counter point that rebuffed what you said. It doesn't matter how "fat" or "slow" the F-35 may be. It doesn't win fights by dogfighting, so that sort of argument is irrelevant to a conversation of whether or not it's an objectively effective fighter. It clearly is, which is why I responded to your comment.

Bro su35 is a great plane against any other planes even some 5gens.F22 is the best fighter in the world no doubt.But only US has them.

@@skullrevenant9573 6 SU-35s have been shot down by Ukraine already. they aren't as good as they're being touted as. Dangerous? Sure any aircraft is or can be...but the su35 isn't what RU is claiming them to be 4++++++++ ad nauseum. Every modern aircraft can 'see' them and down them before the su35 can even get close enough to do anything. SU35 will never see it coming until it's too late.

​@skullrevenant9573 wrong, su 57 is the best. 6 radars, hypersonic weapons, and a massive thrust to weight ratio.

@@kotor1892 F22 has far better stealth while su57's stealth is questionable at best.F22 can shoot down su57 without ever being seen.

@skullrevenant9573 Man, we don't know a lot about su 57's stealth. All we have are estimates.

according to whose claims. Ukraine lie alot you can never trust their claims. The fact that most westerners support Ukraine, they wholeheartedly accept whatever comes from them..

All shot down by the ghost of Kiev right? ;)

Yes, but it also has a 12-0 k/d ratio in air to air combat in Ukraine.

Russian aircraft also have less support from other assets. Ukraine shot down one of Russia's few A-50 Mainstay early warning aircraft, so the Russians are keeping their remaining A-50s safe in Russian airspace. Unfortunately for Russia pilots, that means those early warning aircraft cannot provide much assistance.

@@MichaelScheele UA has shot down 2 A-50s (in the same area) and hit one on the ground with a drone. The most RU had were 7-9 (claimed) I believe it to be closer to 7 with the others acting as parts bins. No matter, losing 2 and maybe a third (even for a time) is a huge loss. That was in FEB so even if they got the damaged one going again it left a big hole of a blind spot for RU. Going from 7 to 4 hurts.

@@bluflaam777 , I had forgotten the Ukrainians had downed more than one A-50. Unless they want the remaining aircraft to be unavailable in the east, they will only be able to spare one or two in the west.

@@MichaelScheele They can't make any more. They literally can't afford to lose any more. They don't have the money and can't get the tech needed to build them. I agree with you. RU is in a conundrum.

The problem is that Westerners are led and blinded by hate rather than rational or objectivity. If you think Russia has inferior fighter planes, Us and his vessels should have provided their jets loong time ago, or perhaps use their jets inside ukraina

Actualy f117 was jnicked with old soviet equipment..so yeah ..during NATO terrorist campaign VS serbs..like a lot of planes f16 were damaged .like a lot..and cant compare ukraine PVO with s300 ect ..so basicly USA planes Arent really battle tested VS decent opponents..

@@zrikizrikic9126 the F117 was only hit because someone got lazy and assigned the same flight paths repeatedly over and over. If you keep going in the same place they can hit you with a rock if they have to.

@@drcruelty actualy there were 2 hit and one damaged .on fell in temporary nazi stare croatia,one in Serbia and one was damaged..and spirit of missury was damaged b2..so a lot of lazy dudes there..but not lazy to later hover over 18000 f to avoid rockets,which were old soviet type.which Is Point of comment .and btw there was serbs at aviano who literaly call when planes took off ,Spies..and there was some decent people back there who actualy give data what what kind of payload Is on plane so you Can Guess what Target Is most like to be attacked..ect..so it Is not black and white as you say .actualy that NATO terrorist attavk was clusterfuck military..cluster bombs on towns radioactive DU ammo into riverbeds..literaly war crimes genocide .all that shit to destroy two tanks and one AA system and few trucks...overall bully crimes terrorism

They've been trying to for 10yrs. They keep running into technical difficulties. Cost overruns and tech supply issues. Especially now as you allude to. The ruble isn't worth a literal dime.

SU57