Thread: Feedback?

Originally Posted by NUS

It depends on a version. S-300PMU2's 30N6E2 radar can simultaneously track 100 and engage 36 targets. Several launchers can be used with 1 radar.

Considering the one they quote as 12, it is still false.

The video seems to be a case of overstating appearent issues and worse case senarios. It is not inconcievable that china and russia have capabilities in access of what we have confirmed which is that small numbers of their newer fighters are rapidly approaching or matching F-15 and f-16 capabilities.

This wasn't put up as a response to the current gates budget its been up for almost a year now. It doesn't mention the next generation in depth but seems to be more of a ploy stating that we know the chinese and russians appear to be here which matches our current teen series fighters. Please continue developing the 22, and 35 to maintain air superiority for the next 20 or so years.

Thing is its badly done, mentioning things that many people with a clue know are vapour ware systems at least in the near future. Plasma stealth being the kicker, or taking worst case or propgandistic elements of threat estimates.

It was also poorly edited has anyone watched the whole video that is linked at a .mil site?

Who is the target audience? Idiots. Keep that in mind, guys.

Honestly it seems more aimed at the guys who kept sending letters to their congressmen for decades to keep the battleships on the rolls. It has just enough truth to be scary and believable to the slightly informed armchair and VWF stool general...... You can also count on these guys to go and write angry letters to their congressmen who will allready be fence sitting over contractor jobs.

Those who research much will know that those are most tech demonstrators/or planes with such low build numbers that the difference between them and tech demonstrators is negligable. They'll also be able to find out that some of the things that allow matching with current US systems aren't and won't be in wide spread deployment for a decade or more. Those who don't care won't watch the video and those who actively oppose it can't come out and say from what I saw that its lies. They can quibble points on it and say its a program that has never left the lab or hasn't been succesfully tested but really they are know long term programs.