Secret literally alien-like military arsenal of the US & Rus?
1 2018-06-09 by Sanjuras
My theory in short goes, that the two leading supwerpowers (why not China as well) are hiding their true military power in secret locations - not just some experimental tech, but a whole army of thousands, or even hundreds of thousands of secret military tech that's decades ahead of F-22 Raptor and Su-57.
First and foremost, let's take a look at their current spearhead of their military tech ages:
M1 Abrams: 37 years (renowed as the current best tank in the world) AH-64 Apache 31 years (renowed as the current best AH in the world) A-10 Thunderbolt II 40 years (renowed as the current best ground attack jet in the world) F-16 Fighting Falcon 39 years (even though not the best, still commonly used along with other similar age jets) B-52 Stratofortress 66 years (attributes otherwise similar to the B-2, but lacks stealth and has higher bomb payload) B-2 Spirit 31 years (renowed as the current best/most modern heavy bomber in the world) F-22 Raptor 20 years (renowed as the current best fighter in the world)
"They are some old designs, so what? If they do the job, why upgrade?" - Indeed. There has been no major active wars since the second world war, and every war except of the Korean war has been fought completely against opponents using technology that the superpowers have already retired, and only in small numbers, so all the superpowers need to defeat their enemy is a technology that gives the definitive upper hand against their enemy - most times just outnumbering them is enough. The superpowers simply don't need the better technology, so they are not using it. It doesn't mean that they don't have it.
"But if they do have it, then why wouldn't they release it to intimidate each other?" - A crucial strategy in off-wartime is to keep the most modern war technology hidden from the competitors, since leaking it would both leak the technical information/clues and leak the strength that they are opposing - the less the enemy knows the better (it frightens more, since you don't know what you are competing against).The superpowers have been able to handle every military conflict since the korean war with the military tech of 70's performance-wise, so they have absolutely no need to release anything better. All they have released since are the advanced sensors already in use in the industry, and the stealth coating to give the ultimate necessary protection to the pilot. Anything beyond that should remain top secret until the US and RUS are in war. There's no need to mention that what the superpowers want to hide from each other, they most certainly won't publish in the public. Why do we keep seeing a F-22 Raptor/A-10 Thunderbolt II documentary/display video after another? It's the most simple smoke-screen to deceive the public only - no way Trump deceives Putin with this or vice versa.
"The well-known principle of the modern military technology is to upgrade and enhance the already existing weapon platform, like they have done with Apache and Abrams. What you think as 40 years old is actually only few years old in real life." Another simple deception - the most important features of the military tech haven't seen a significant improvement after the first public release. Which for example for the jet are the speed, service ceiling, climb rate, range, and for some decades now, stealth. Take the F-22 Raptor for example, it's top speed is only 2,25 mach, service ceiling 65,000 feet, climb rate, even though not reported, most likely is only somewhat higher than the 3th and 4th generation jets that the most of their enemies are still using.
Let's make a comparison:
F-22 Raptor (1997)
Top speed: 2,25 mach Cervice ceiling 65,000 feet Time to altitude N/A
F-15 Eagle (1972)
Top speed: 2,5 mach Service Ceiling: 65,000 feet Time to altitude: to 30,000 feet in one minute
MiG-25 Foxbat (1964)
Top speed: 3,2 mach Service ceiling: 67,000 feet Time to altitude: to 40,900 feet in 1 minute
Versus in world war 2:
F4F-4 Wildcat (1941)
Top speed: 320mph Service ceiling: 34,000 feet Time to altitude: to 20,000 feet in 12,7 minutes
P-51D Mustang (1944)
Top speed: 440 mph Service ceiling: 41,900 feet Time to altitude: to 20,000 feet in 6,4 minutes with WEP
So what we are supposed to believe is that in 30 years of development, the main characteristics of a fighter jet have actually decreased, and the decrease are being compensated with stealth coating and more advanced electronics. Meanwhile the advanced electronic systems and stealth DO matter alot - being able to detect enemy targets and take them down from further equals both offensive and defensive trait - they are secondary features in comparison, since if you compare two aircraft with equal electronics and stealth but a1 can reach mach 3 while a2 can reach only 2,25 mach, the a1 WILL win. The current competition against minor nations which are using only 3rd and 4th generation jets with only primitive, if any electronics and no stealth and in low numbers distorts the picture, since if the aircraft is being targeted by multiple missiles before it can even detect it's enemy it WILL be shot down, since at it's best it can carry only that much flares.
"But does the old main characteristics of a fighter jet matter any more that much, after the introduction of long range missiles?" - Yes, although it has indeed changed the main role of a fighter aircraft. In world war 2 and in Korean war, fighter's main role was still the bomber escort, which has later become obsolete, since the heavy bombers have been replaced by long range missiles. Does a long range missile benefit from a fighter cover? Simply no. It would however be a misconception to think that this has made the jet fighters obsolete, since the invasion stage of the war still relies on the fighter cover of the stealth reconnaissance aircraft and helicopters. And meanwhile the the helicopter escort needs to operate in lower altitudes at lower speeds, the reco-aircaft cover relies completely on the high altitude performance - the faster, and the higher altitude, the better. The reco-aircraft need to be shot down with jet aircraft, because since they're stealthed and flying in high altitude, they cannot be shot down by the ground defence, and to protect the reco-aircraft, you'll need the best possible high altitude fighter jet to protect the reco. This leads to another spiral of competition, where whole another branch of fighter jets are emerged.
The numbers speak for themselves: for example, only 195 F-22, and only 1,200 F-15's and 4,600 F-16's have been built. The same goes with AH-64, with only apprx. 2,000 built. Can you imagine a superpower which air-defense consists of only approx. of 10,000 aircraft built in last 7 decades? If 10,000 sounds much, different variants of Spitfires alone were built over 20,500 units in 40-50's alone. If we count only not the number of 10,000 jet fighters alone, but also take into account that the 10,000 aircraft are mostly decades old, then it's obvious that we are talking about the weakest superpower ever if the numbers are correct. Why? Just imagine, if the US military would have relied on the wright's original aircraft in WW2 meanwhile just upgrading the weapons and other gadgets, or even relied in the F4F's instead of quickly developing into the P-51's and P-47's that quickly turned the war in their favor? The man-hours pass by even though we don't see the results, so even if new technology isn't introduced, it's no reason to assume that the development has stopped. Just see how much the commercial technology has advanced in the past 20 years alone: internet speeds, PHONES, COMPUTERS, cameras, cars, and so on, and imagine a world leading superpower sticking with 20 to 40 year old military tech while you buy a new smartphone every year? Abso-fucking-lutely not going to happen. If you are using the latest Samsung of IPhone released this year, then no fuckng way the US military is using tech released decades ago. Back in the early world war two the US lost the fight with less than a year old tech just slightly worse than the Japanese aircraft - to assume that the today's alternative for Japan hasn't advanced in multiple decades to anywhere is simply fucking naive.
Just another open question, but how are they supposed to deal with the enemy satellites? No released military technology is able do deal with the enemy satellites, being unarguably one of the corner stones of the 3rd world war.
Operation paperclip and Roswell:
It's a known fact that the remaining nazi German scientists were harvested to the west in the operation paperclip, and that they were working with highly sophisticated technology at their time; VTOL-aircraft, anti-gravity, rocket & jet aircraft and so-on. There's really no way to tell to what extent did they reach their research - all we know is that they were captured and transported to US to continue their work. Only a little information of their projects have ever been leaked: most famously the Die Glöcke-flying saucer (basically just a picture of this aircraft has ever been leaked) and numerous jet and VTOL-fighters. Just from the leaked information alone we can deduce that the nazi scientists were years ahead of their time, possessing the knowledge that if accompanied with more time and plenty of resources, would have turned the whole world into one german speaking nation.
Curiously only 2 years after the world war 2 the Roswell incident happened - an unknown type of aircraft fell down near the Roswell Army Airfield in 1947, which was originally reported by the witnesses to be an unknown type of aircraft and with unknown materials and alien bodies found on the crash site, but which then soon was reported by the officials to be just a crashed weather balloon with "nothing to see here".
What it seems to me is that they were able to harvest the crucial information about the nazi technology to the west, and were able to develop it into a working anti-gravity aircraft in just two years. They accidentally crashed one of the X-aircraft near the Roswell army airfield where it was tested, and used the witness report to fabricate a two-sided smoke screen where the Roswell crash was made to look like the US are hiding the information about the extra-terrestrials, and while the eye witnesses report about an alien aircraft crash, the US-government releases an official statement about it being just a crash of a weather balloon. No-one knows what happened in the reality, and people either believe that the US are hiding an information about an UFO-crash, or in fact just crashed a weather balloon and there's nothing more to see in here. This leads into a UFO-conspiracy where every detection of an Unidentified Flying Object are reported as an extra-terrestrial aircraft, and on top of that civilians are constantly faking the detections in order to get attention, which should further confuse the russian spies trying to steal the real information about the technological level of the US.
But regardless of if their technology originated from the nazi germany or not, it's obvious that their technology is more advanced than what our commercial technology or phones and computers are, and that it is advancing faster than our commercial tech. There's simply no reason to assume that even though you buy a new smartphone every year, the US is jet fighters older than you.
"So let's assume that they would have developed and hide an army more advanced that what they have published to us - then, where is it?" The first and foremost, underground. even though there are more than 300 million people living in the US, the most of the US soil are completely untouched. The superpowers hold the greatest option to hide anything they want from hundreds of miles away from anyone's sight - along with the military tech that is supposed to remain as a secret. There is enough wilderness in the united states to conduct the flight drills on a regular basis without anyone ever knowing. And if anything gets ever leaked, it's just another weird UFO incident by default. You have probably never seen the test flights of the F-22 or F-15, so why would you assume that you would see the first test flight of the next generation experimental aircraft? Because they openly tell you? Here, have the warmest hug.
Let's open another topic of it's own: invisibility. How the fuck do you know if your military possesses the invisibilty technology? Why on earth would they want to tell you if they would have discovered a tech that would turn their craft invisible? The whole point of the invisibility tech is to NOT be detected, so if a military of a superpower ever reaches the technological level of invisibility, they will NEVER let anyone know about it. Even in the open war, when the enemy planes and fleets start just disappearing without a trace, no-one can ever blame the one with the I-tech because no-one knows about it. How do you know that there is not a military craft floating invisible on your backyard right now? Just a general comment, but at the moment when the tech of invisibility is discovered, no-one will ever no more know the current level of the military tech.
Without any more drifting in my own imagination, what do you think of the original topic? Why would we think that a 20 year old technology would be the best if we have, if a Nokia 3210 isn't the best phone we have by any default? If so, how do YOU make sense of the modern military tech remaining virtually the same for decades?
Leave a comment whether you agree or not. Peace!
65 comments
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
I do find it incredibly intensely how the still the fastest manned plane in the world is from the mid sixties.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
maybe i should mention the X-15 reaching 4,500 miles per hour in the description indeed. It makes absolutely no sense.
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
Yeah I definitely think it’s a high probability we have a secret space program. Hell you can go on Lockheed Martins YouTube channel and they already have laser weapons in use today on battleships, drones, and fighter jets.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
Solar Warden, maybe? well, let's just say that the mission TRILLIONS of the US budget aren't vanishing into the black holes.
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
Yeah the Gary McKinnon revelations were interesting but all based on an autistic computer hackers word. I think Bob Lazar is legit, at least most of his story, so that could be part of the program. What worries me is if we did make a deal with the “grey” ETs instead of the “conscious nordics” who wanted us to get rid of our nukes. Unfortunately this topic is a rabbit hole that’s almost impossible to get to the bottom of due to the nature of the topic and compartmentalizations.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
they both might be a fraud, or just another of them. who the fuck knows, really? i never really liked either of them, but the problem they've brought exist: if you include certain type of technologies, then how do you tell what is a fraud and what is not?
Regardless of what it was, something blew up Phil Schneider's hand and killed him after his revelations.
1 x2yzh9 2018-06-09
no it's pretty simple, when our (thanks! great job fucking over our species) air force captured the 'grey'(s) at roswell, there were also two /other/ crash landings-one in germany, and russia, specifically. Well, our good old air force manhandled the fucking aliens and interrogated the shit out of them. so when they went back to their leader, they got as pissed off as we would have, hence they threatened to basically glass our entire fucking planet and the air force/CIA made area 51 because they fucked with the wrong alien basically.
1 Loose-ends 2018-06-09
It does if you look into it. Pretty much a man strapped on to a more of a missile than a plane, launched from a bomber going top speed at high altitude.
It was quite simply "an experiment" trying to see what kind of altitude and speed records could be set with a man aboard. There's far more to aeronautics and aerial combat than anything even remotely like that.
You can make a similar case that today's cars are really no better or more powerful, or more efficient in any real sense than those from the 60's and 70's.
All of today's mileage gains have come as the direct result of reducing the size and weight of vehicles and that includes using solid state digital electronics and sensors to replace mechanical components that truth be told those new fangled electronics don't actually do any better than those old mechanical and analog parts did.
There are limits and there are also well established and long standing processes and procedures in engineering that we can do in a variety of ways, but not actually in any truly better ways that are only that in relation to some other criteria or particular application.
1 ravangers 2018-06-09
why build a faster manned vehicle that could result in casualties when you can make an unmanned one that can travel 4 times faster at no risk of loss of life of the pilot. The reason they havent done it is because of the advancement in unmanned tech.
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
Yeah I totally agree with that, but manned tech is useful for certain reasons why not advance manned jet speed tech so fighter pilots can fly around faster then they already do.
1 ravangers 2018-06-09
Manned tech is useful for sure, but there is a mechanical ceiling.
That so called fastest plane was not a fighter jet, it was a recon plane. So the f22 fighter goes 1,500 mph carrying bombs and defense systems. The SR71 would go 2,200 mph carrying only cameras and intelligence equipment, with no defenses except speed. Was made with crazy russian titanium alloy obtained from black CIA projects. They had to wear spacesuits to use it, the purpose was to fly fast enough over them so they couldnt be seen, but be low enough to take pictures. Now you can use satellites to get any pictures you need without people risking their lives.
"A total of 32 aircraft were built; 12 were lost in accidents, but none were lost to enemy action." It was more a dangerous to itself than to the enemy
1 Kendle_C 2018-06-09
I'm thinking one of the reasons it's secret is the human made UFO's have cost a lot of lives figuring them out. One main reason: the entire solar system is traveling 514,000 mph and the Earth is rotating 1000 mph. Unless those craft are capable of more than that one jump and you're dying in space. What about navigation, that is finding home.
1 WowSuchJosh 2018-06-09
Not at all how it works tbh
1 Kendle_C 2018-06-09
How does it work, these celestial mechanics with a craft that acts like they're mass-less? Remember those sudden turns?
1 WowSuchJosh 2018-06-09
I agree! The way the craft act signifies potentially zero point energy and antigravity. That being said, your logic is flawed. Its all dependant on the observer, not the one moving.
1 Kendle_C 2018-06-09
We can't say either way, it's unknown. In any case to simplify, if they break our rules and blip into another dimension, what if it's moving, say, the opposite direction. How does one keep a known position in that situation? I think man made UFO's had to have had a learning curve which cost lives. Example: Philidelphia Experiment, waking up in cold rolled steel ship decks?
1 WowSuchJosh 2018-06-09
I was mostly making fun of your logic that if they were in our atmosphere, they would have to go as fast as earth etc etc. Which just isn't true. When you throw a baseball up in the air, you aren't throwing it 5 feet vertically and 1000mph or whatever in the opposite direction of earth's rotation.
Yes lives have been lost in the trial and error of MRVs but most believe they are well past that point.
1 ravangers 2018-06-09
if youre riding on top of a train and you jump, you will still land in the same spot, that's how momentum works.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
remember that the craft is already traveling at the speed of the solar system and earth rotation when it's launched.
1 Kendle_C 2018-06-09
Yes in a spiral.
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
Just us pulsars.
1 TuxAndMe 2018-06-09
Utterly fantastic post! I wholeheartedly agree and I'm both terrified and incredibly curious as to what an actual hot war between superpowers would look like.
If we had a military presence in space, you can bet your ass you wouldn't know about it. And that's a great hiding place, too.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
excellent point - if you were able to enter to the space with your aircraft, then you could execute full military drills in the space without ever re-entering the earth atmosphere before the completion of the drill. - the question "why aren't there any military drills held in the earth atmosphere with the aircraft?" would simply be because they are all held in the space.
1 Denate 2018-06-09
Wars are not a real thing, they're scripted theatrical events
1 AFuckYou 2018-06-09
Are you saying people dont die in wars?
1 redditready1986 2018-06-09
No but the people that die are a real thing.
1 pariahprism 2018-06-09
Wat?
1 Denate 2018-06-09
It's a scam run by bankers to create national dept, it transfers national assets to private bankers.
1 pariahprism 2018-06-09
Ok. That statement may be valid. I wasn't sure if you were suggesting that wars didn't exist vs. wars are very real things, however the actual root-cause mechanisms differ significantly from the auspices under which they are sold to the general public. Agreed.
1 Madrenoche 2018-06-09
Tell that to the thousands of unarmed Palestinians, press and children being killed by Coward IDF snipers.
1 Setonrebel 2018-06-09
Although I would love to game it/ theorize it, I have absolutely no desire to see a large scale hot war, ever..
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
Out of all the guys Lazar seems most credible to me, especially because of George Knapp who seems trustworthy and has done a lot for the subject. Something happened to Schieder but those shitty 90s early 2000s PowerPoints and YouTube videos don’t show shit.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
Regardless of if Schneider was a fraud or not, check the videos of him "accidentally" showing his hand man - i doubt that anyone in the 90's could have faked that. maybe he cut his fingers off like nattramn, but it seems more legit than you'd expect to anything to appear "legit" before believing.
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
You could lose your hand in a variety of accidents that doesn’t show anything
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
You're absolutely right, and Schneider could be just another fraud. But taking into account what all of the chances are the US really sticking in to the technology of the 70's as they pose to, what are the chances of the so called frauds to be real, or at least the US to be the greatest fraud in the first place?
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
That he got the properties of Element 115 so completely and totally wrong is interesting don't you think?
1 hightechhippie 2018-06-09
I disagree, Lazar, spoke about 115 b4 it was found in Main Stream , There are also various isotopes of a given element , so I don't think " lazar" got 115 wrong. If anything, there is not enough info to validate or discredit based on the 115 part.
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
And you don't think he got it wrong?
1 hightechhippie 2018-06-09
No I think he was pretty accurate considering all the varibles that had to be applied . in summary ---"IDK" shit - we don't know .
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
How much Moscovium would be left if you started with a 1000 kg block after 30 days?
1 amoebassassian 2018-06-09
Love this!
1 ImhotepMares 2018-06-09
It's kind of like how you hear about the "Rods from God" weapons system every once in awhile. Just because there is no physical evidence doesn't mean it isn't there.
1 CybertronE2035 2018-06-09
The new advanced Alien technology share is weaponizing the power of the mind from what I hear. Psychic abilities and neural control of computer systems. Look up project Stargate, and the new stuff too.🇺🇸🦋
1 jdotg 2018-06-09
Just consider the radio frequencies that blast out of every smart devoce. You login an account and attribute that device to a specific identity.
Consider the news in Cuba and Canada where diplomats were electronically attacked..
You create a back door by literally inventing the entire industry, semiconductors, and you have total control ...
1 DerkDerkinson 2018-06-09
Great post! There is without a shred of doubt hidden military technology.
Ever notice that it was almost immediately after 9/11 that smart phones were released? Think about the timing of that for a second...
Immediately after the greatest “terrorist” attack on American soil and the creation of a “new enemy” the smartphone technology is released allowing the government and Deep State special access to a sea of our personal information, and respectively, the end of real privacy.
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
Except GSM based Palm Pilot systems had been on the market for years before 9/11.
1 marywasalizard 2018-06-09
You need to consider mass, force and requirement, when comparing jets.
Jets nowadays are a LOT heavier because of arms, defenses and systems to keep the pilot alive. Not to mention the fact of all the extra gadgets, wires, cables and gizmos.
Two fuel tanks full of fuel can weigh more than the average car. Try calculating those forces into a jet doing 700mph.
Btw one of the main fighter aircraft used today has a top speed of 650+ MPH
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
Lightning II, which has the top speed of only 1,6 mach, and service ceiling of 50,000 feet?
Yes, the plane probably (no official estimates given of what i can find) has an excellent climb rate, but it's top speed and service ceiling are so low that it seems that the plane only relies on the enemy being unable to see the F-35 via radar.
The best in comparison aircraft i think for the F-35 would be Tempest V from the second world war, which was able to outrun it's german enemies in the low altitudes, where it was designated. The question with F-35 really isn't that if it can outrun the 4th gen fighters, but if the RUS are able to design a ground defense aircraft that can outrun the F-35. Or would it be able to evade the best the money can buy-russian ground defense aircraft's missile attack and counter-maneuver attacker to defend herself?
It seems that the F-35 is just another black market jet killer relying completely on the technological disadvantage of the enemy, with not much of a purpose in the modern versus modern-battle. How are we defining "modern" btw? we haven't seen anything "new" except the f-35 in decades.
"Has a top speed of 650+" excuse me?
1 ravangers 2018-06-09
Great post but Idk man... I'm gonna have to post an even longer one. I like what youre saying but as a contrarian to give you something to think on i'll address each down the line.
1
Of course theyre hiding future tech, but its not unimaginable (most likely.. you really never know - but things like the nuclear bomb were anticipated). Russia just came out bragging about their new insane underwater drone submarines and super-maneuverable nuclear cruise missile. The USA has the X-37B space drone whose true purpose remains classified.
2
As for the old tech still being used, the reason being is that the US is only fighting asymmetric warfare where there is almost no air-air and tank-tank fighting, so why spend billions on cutting edge future tech? The US has just released a brand new (2015) replacement for the Humvee, the JLTV because mechanized infantry fighting against RPG's and IED's are the main threat in current ground wars, not enemy tanks (to take them out the US has full air superiority even with 50 year old planes). In a war between USA, Russia, China, tanks and airplanes will do little compared to hyper-sonic delivery systems, cruise missiles, nukes, new extremley powerful conventional bombs, cyber warfare and laser defense systems. Those are all already declassified.
Also the United States main power projection weapon, the nuclear aircraft carrier just got it's newest Gerald Ford class last year. It uses crazy future tech like electromagnetic launchers and stealth. And the new Zumwalt class, cmon futuristic as it gets. The US's geostrategic location makes mass tanks irrelevant which is why Russia has an insanely advanced new T-14 Armata tank because defending a land based war makes much more sense from their perspective.
TL;DR- Human operated Tanks and aircraft are out of date, so why update them.
3
When you're talking about aircraft tech, and "enhancing existing weapons". That is only true until new weapons are invented. They made the Bow and made it better, and better, culminating in the compound bow, longbow, and crossbow, and then gunpowder came out which changed everything. Max speed a lot of times isnt used for fighting, it's used for retreat so if you make an aircraft powerful enough, or you have enough reinforcements a few hundred MPH won't matter compared to the tech of the F-22.
That just isn't true (us site bias of course) . With modern stealth and computing technology it isn't the best plane that wins it's the smartest intelligence. It's not just simple "stealth and electronics" it's a series of multiple fighters communicating faster than humans can respond.
4
I won't touch on the Nazi involvement because it's all factual and declassified, the one thing i want to point out is that "Operation paperclip" was just one operation, -- Russia and the United Kingdom also had huge operations and so did many others.
5
You keep comparing numbers against WORLD WAR 2, a WORLD wide war in which every major power was involed. Why on earth would any country be producing as many aircraft as they were during this Total War. The United States is actually overproducing aircraft. Take a look at the amount of warplanes that the USA has compared to other nations. The number 1 airforce? USA Airforce. The number 2 airforce? The USA Navy. The US Navy has more warplanes than every other nation. Many times technology loses because it is too expensive, takes to long to create, etc. The Nazis had all the best weapons, premier Jet aircraft, amazing tanks, cruise missiles, no one else had these weapons and yet they were defeated by waves of cheaper units.
This is kind of ridiculous... For one most of these so called "40 year old tech" are retrofitted with modern electronics. How old is your car? Mine is over mine is over 12 years old and its perfectly fine, should i buy a completely new car because mine has a tape deck and not a CD player? I don't think so.
WHAT??? US lost what? Pearl Harbor? That was a surprise attack the planes technology had nothing to do with. Right after that the US won battle after battle with inferior numbers. Then Americans counter attacked with real future tech, the atomic bomb, and won.
6
They who? Well like i said earlier the X-37B reusable space drone from the USA is probably a prototype for their secret weapon. Armed with lasers it could target satellites but this is pure speculation on my part.
7
Like i said earlier its a lesser known fact that many countries had similar program, especially Russia and UK. I always hear people thinking the USA took all the Nazi scientists but they were actually dived up and fought over, obliviously the US got the best somehow but they were split between many countries.
8
Last an not least, Roswell.
Even in the decade that it occurred people were saying "weather balloons". Why in 1947 two years after WW2 did this happen? Well it wasn't that it was 2 years after WW2, it was that it was 2 years after the first atomic bombs were dropped. The US government declassified in 1996 that there WAS a conspiracy and there WAS a cover up. But they weren't covering up aliens they were trying to cover Project Mogul. I understand most people in this sub don't want the governments answers but after 50 years i'm inclined to believe the government is open to declassifying outdated tech. So why did this event happen 2 years after "ww2"? It was because the US wanted to know if the Soviets had found the bomb. They sent weather balloons into the upper atmosphere with sensitive microphones to detect air bursts from nuclear explosions, one failed and fell in Roswell. They covered it up so that the soviets werent thinking the US was doing counter measures. This is something the USA is doing today with their SUPER advanced "global" missile defense grid which has caused Russia to develop these nuclear cruise missiles and drone submarines.
9
TL;DR The future is now, most is not hidden alien technology but super advanced computers.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
2
" so why spend billions on cutting edge future tech?" so the Pearl Harbor would never happen again. Not the surprise attack, but the technological disadvantage which could potentially lead to the US losing an invasion type-war before being able to design and produce the new technology in numbers great enough to defend themself.
3
"With modern stealth and computing technology it isn't the best plane that wins it's the smartest intelligence. It's not just simple "stealth and electronics" it's a series of multiple fighters communicating faster than humans can respond." you need to take into account that we are talking about two equally functioning intelligence and communications. EVERYTHING builds up on the technology itself - there's only so much you can do with the handicapped technology regardless of how you use it. It's not a clash of intelligence since we cannot assume that both (either) of the sides have capped the technological level.
5
"Why on earth would any country be producing as many aircraft as they were during this Total War." because the numbers are the key function of the defense. There can be no working defense against 10,000 machines with 100 machines only, if we assume that the 100 machines aren't completely overpowered over the 10,000.
"How old is your car? Mine is over mine is over 12 years old and its perfectly fine" You wouldn't enter a F1 or a rally race with your car, right? It works on taking you to your work and to the corner store, but it's still a car from the last decade. You wouldn't be mistaken to think that it's still a viable choice to a competition.
"WHAT??? US lost what? Pearl Harbor? That was a surprise attack the planes technology had nothing to do with. Right after that the US won battle after battle with inferior numbers. Then Americans counter attacked with real future tech, the atomic bomb, and won." US lost the first year of the war. They were only able to hold against the japan with developing tactics taking the advantage of the disadvantage of the jap fighters, and they only were able to beat the japanese after developing a tech overpowered over the japanese fighters, and producing them in high numbers. The war was practically won only after the 1943 and the introduction of F6F hellcat. The japs didn't improve their technology until they ran out of the resources to produce it in large numbers, so they lost.
6
"Well like i said earlier the X-37B reusable space drone from the USA is probably a prototype for their secret weapon. Armed with lasers it could target satellites but this is pure speculation on my part." first question of the RUS is that how do we beat the X-37B? another branch of the fighter tech emerges.
7
"Like i said earlier its a lesser known fact that many countries had similar program, especially Russia and UK." I don't see your point here. sure the brits and RUS took the scientists as well, but that should only accelerate the development of the technology. If the brits or the RUS do develop the anti-gravity engine before us, we'll be doomed, right?
8
"I understand most people in this sub don't want the governments answers" they're not viable answers, since there's no definitive proof for anything. "we had a weather balloon program" sure you did, but how do we know if the roswell craft was just a weather balloon? we don't, and we have no reason to assume so. no farmer is stupid enough to mistake a balloon to a crashing spacecraft.
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
In the case of the Amrams that statement blatantly wrong and makes me wonder how much your ideas blinded your research.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
Please do include a description of how much you think that the Abrams has improved over the decades.
Advancement of the electronics and improvements in armor are what i'm aware of, but again, compared to the amount of how much the phones alone have improved in just last two decades alone, i'd have to say that the Abrams have improved just the bit that's necessary for it to survive in the enemy using earlier generation of tanks in low numbers.
In almost 40 years everything in our homes have improved to the point that our kids do not even recognize the gadgets from the 70's. Yet they do recognize the abrams like they recognize the US flag. what is the improvement that you are talking about?
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
So if you ignore all the things that have changed it hasn't changed much? When you ignore the comms, armor, drive train, computers, targeting sensors, ECM, and gun accuracy there really isn't much more to improve.
Do you expect them to float or have shields?
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
Only thing i'm assuming is you to make some definitive comparison between the original Abrams and the thing that it has developed into.
Of course the comms have developed - for god sake, we are having this discussion over the internet. Of course the computers have improved as well. Drive train, sensors/ECM, and so on - no one nowhere said that they haven't improved, but the question is how much, compared to the public technology? if the past 40 years have taken the commercial technology from the ping pong to playing VR titanfall 2 on your laptop, then you'd expect to see at least that in the warfare as well.
1 IMA_Catholic 2018-06-09
How would that tech make a TANK better?
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
how would a 80mm cannon make a horse better? My best guess is, that the technological improvement of the past decades has pretty much outran the theoretical function of the tank as we know it, so i would argue that the assumption of "the old fashion thanks have improved to their maximum, therefore the military is improving along with the commercial technology" is plain false.
1 Cloyne 2018-06-09
i agree the USA definitely has much more advanced capabilities that they say electrogravitics are very real I believe they have managed to reverse engineer crashed craft and also I believe they got info on how they work from German scientists who built some craft after the info was obtained by the vrill society via channeling i think the t3rb is an example of a craft built using tech that has been reverse engineered
1 ElectricVeritas 2018-06-09
He even said they’d find isotopes in the future and guess what we did. His claim was the people at s4 had 500 grams of it and it was from another planet.
1 Absh4x0r 2018-06-09
That's silly, if they had super advanced technologies they would have used them to prevent 9/11
/s
1 Swingfire 2018-06-09
The MiG-25 could not sustain mach 3.2 in any capacity and its engines required a complete rebuild after such flights since aerodynamic forces and heat became so intense that parts of the engine began breaking off and fed into the compressors, severely damaging them.
HTV-2 reached Mach 20 in 2014 so your argument that aircraft performance is plateauing or decreasing just quickly falls apart.
Maybe, just maybe, it takes far more resources and man-hours to build modern jet fighters than it was to build a ton of Spitfires and they are more effective despite their smaller numbers, much like how a modern mechanized infantry division is smaller yet a much better fighting force than a WWII-era rifle division.
This is a meme. The F4F had a positive kill ratio against the Zero.
Ah, the old "I didn't research it therefore it doesn't exist."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-satellite_weapon
Not a single modern aircraft or ship relies on visual identification for targeting so that'd be a pretty useless tech, especially since the wakes of ships and contrails of aircraft would still be visible as well as their radar and infrared signatures.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
"Ah, the old "I didn't research it therefore it doesn't exist."" First, I must admit that i was wrong with this one. editing the post.
"MiG-25 could not sustain 3.2..." regardless if it could not, a fighter aircraft already at 60's was capable of reaching 3.2 mach, which contradicts the idea of the best modern fighter jet being able to fly only 2,25. As i argued, even though the sensor and electronic targeting systems along with stealth have taken a major role in modern military technology, the competition in the classical most important features of the aircraft hasn't lost it's importance.
"HTV-2 reached Mach 20 in 2014 so your argument that aircraft performance is plateauing or decreasing just quickly falls apart." It doesn't. At no point i said that the US would have claimed that they couldn't do better than the F-22 - my argument goes that their claim that their haven't built better technology in large numbers is questionable. Which leads to the another question: what is their true technological level?
"Maybe, just maybe, it takes far more resources and man-hours to build modern jet fighters than it was to build a ton of Spitfires and they are more effective despite their smaller numbers, much like how a modern mechanized infantry division is smaller yet a much better fighting force than a WWII-era rifle division." That's one hell of an argument when you're already being invaded by the enemy fighting with futuristic tech. After pearl harbor & blitzkrieg no superpower is anymore stupid enough to think that even the best you can do at the moment is enough. The "modern" 70's to 90's craft might be actually faster to produce, since the level of the industrial robots have taken quite a leap since the world war two. You are also making a mistake assuming that the modern tech is more effective - the effectiveness comes in relation only to the enemy: if the enemy is at the same technological level as you, the fight is once against just about the numbers and the skill level & tactics. Don't ever expect that you'd be mutilating the Rus with the mechanized infantry and the A-10's as you are mutilating the barbarians not even having a functional air force and fighting with RPG's and AK's at it's best.
"The F4F had a positive kill ratio against the Zero." F4F and A6M fought pretty much a stalemate in the pacific once the US spotted the weaknesses of the paperback duelist. The war only really turned into their favor after developing F6F's, F4U's and TBF's. Funny enough Japan is a 101 example of what happens when you stick with the old technology: pump up all of your resources into an obsolete aircraft and you no longer have the resources to produce the newer technology in sufficent numbers. A '45 picture of Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki speak more than thousand words.
"Not a single modern aircraft or ship relies on visual identification for targeting so that'd be a pretty useless tech, " You are kidding me, right? The potential of an invisible stealth technology is almost limitless. Turn practically every sortie a surprise attack, limitless long range reconnaissance from close range, a fraction of need to worry about the enemy being able to steal your technology, virtually no leaks of the technology trough public, you name it. While it's true that the jet aircraft can be still tracked trough their heat signal, the signal should be almost invisible from the front of the aircraft, until too close to evade. Contrails are visible, but they occur only above certain altitude. there's no need to fly miles high if you are already fully invisible. Ships obviously leave a mark even when stationary, but maybe hiding smaller units will give the better results after all. Invisible tanks, invisible infantry, jets as already discussed, helis, yeah. by the way, should we assume that they are still relying on the jet engines, tanks and helis?
"Anyways, there's a whole bunch of declassified projects" and no bells are ringing when the leading superpower are declassifying their current or recent x-technology projects? Why on earth would they reveal what they are currently really working with? give me one good reason why the US would send a private message straight to the russian ministry of defense about their current technological level, and then try to make sense why would they tell it on the public news. if anything, the most recent declassified projects are nothing more than toying with the public and the Rus.
1 Swingfire 2018-06-09
The fighter versions of the MiG-25 never reached Mach 3.2, only the reconaissance MiG-25R did. No operational combat-capable aircraft has ever gone that fast, trying to reach such high speeds while carrying externally-mounted weapons is borderline impossible, the MiG-25RBF required specially-made bombs to withstand the heat of going at mach 2. Take into account going so fast might actually not be desirable for fighter jets in the modern day: it creates a gigantic infrared signature, it can only be done at high altitudes (therefore it cannot hide from land-based radars) and the sheer heat from the friction can strip off the radar-absorbent coatings of stealth jets. Making an aircraft that's capable of going at mach 3+ requires a ton of sacrifices in other areas of its performance that countries haven't really found worthwile.
Ah, sorry, I believed you were saying that fighter jet performance was receding. Take into account that the technology level of prototype aircraft and production aircraft is vastly different. The US has developped aircraft that are faster, stealthier, smarter, and with more endurance than the F-22 but the F-22 remains (alongside the F-35) the most advanced aircraft that is actually combat-capable and can be produced in factories.
Are you referring to the Germans as "futuristic tech"? Because they were anything but futuristic at the start of WWII, in many aspects they were less advanced than the allies.
You're making the mistake of thinking that Russia is at the same technololgical level as US/NATO which it absolutely isn't. The only top-tier aircraft in the Russian Air Force currently are:
*68 Su-35S *12 Su-27SM3 *~150 Su-27 (including obsolete older variants) *100 Su-30SM *20 SU-30M2
Compared to the US:
*195 F-22 *212 F-15C *220 F-15E *71 F-35A *507 (!!!!) F/A-18E/F *38 F-35B *12 F-35C
So there is no such thing as an equal technology adversary for the US air forces right now, nevermind for all of NATO. Furthermore, the F-15s in US air force service have gone through the MSIP and RMP modernization programs that make them superior to the baseline Su-27 that still composes the majority of RuAF squadrons. The only aircraft that is genuinely 70s-era is the A-10, which I will give you is obsolete and will be replaced by F-35As.
The only one that would genuinely work is the last one and you can already do that by flying at night. Invisible aircraft would still be detectable by radar and contrails are not just visible spectrum, they are in infrared as well.
The only thing that's known about these aircraft is that they exist and are being funded, it's not like they are mailing the Russians the blueprints or something.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
"The only thing that's known about these aircraft is that they exist and are being funded, it's not like they are mailing the Russians the blueprints or something." you avoided the question. what would be the benefit of mailing even the existence of the best current technology to the competitor? it's crucial, since the disadvantage from showing your cards before all-in is obvious, and already mentioned.
"The fighter versions of the MiG-25 never reached Mach 3.2, only the reconaissance MiG-25R did." doesn't really matter, since we are talking about 75 year old aircraft. the materials as well as the technology should(including retractable missile racks found for example in F-22) have developed a ton in time period longer than it took from the wright's plane for the humans to reach the moon. mach+3 required lots of sacrifices - what it requires now seems to remain unknown.
"Ah, sorry, I believed you were saying that fighter jet performance was receding." failing when trying to be smart doesn't appear very clever. if you just read what i already wrote you you'd notice that i already answered to this comment - and beyond. "my argument goes that their claim that their haven't built better technology in large numbers is questionable. Which leads to the another question: what is their true technological level?" here, read it. and as i already presented in the initial post, F-15 tops 2,5 mach while being able to reach the same service ceiling than the F-22. even though the F-22 is more modern than the F-15 overall, there has been a decrease in it's top speed, meanwhile the service ceiling hasn't increased either. you wouldn't excuse the F-15 flying slower than P-51 mustang even though it would still be firing missiles and be equipped with all the computer age technology.
"Are you referring to the Germans as "futuristic tech"? Because they were anything but futuristic at the start of WWII, in many aspects they were less advanced than the allies." here again, i mean, could you please understand what i'm writing to you. "to think that even the best you can do at the moment is enough." although the early spitfire and hurricane were worse aircraft than E-series of Bf-109, the main point there was that in military competition they can never rest, because the only moment when you know that you are overpowering your competitors is when you are already fighting and on top of that, winning. this again underlines one of the main arguments that i've proposed here: in off-wartime the superpowers should never publish any of their top technology, because the unknown is what frightens the most. even on military level.
"You're making the mistake of thinking that Russia is at the same technololgical level as US/NATO which it absolutely isn't. The only top-tier aircraft in the Russian Air Force currently are:" all the time i've been questioning the best published technology of the superpowers, which also argues that you cannot compare the true military power and technological level of them by comparing their published technology. (even in the case of published experimental aircraft)
also note the Su-57 for example: even though it's not yet in combat use, it still performs only equal to the F-22 which is decades old. Why? because the Rus has no reason to publish anything better.
"The only one that would genuinely work is the last one and you can already do that by flying at night. Invisible aircraft would still be detectable by radar and contrails are not just visible spectrum, they are in infrared as well." obviously there are no combat results for how the modern combat radars perform against stealth aircraft - whether they provide enough data for a working missile lock or not. neither there is yet much combat pressure for further developing the aircraft stealth technology. but while the any type of stealth doesn't make the aircraft invisible to the best radars, it will distort the signal so that the radar system recieves less &/ wrong coordinates for target locking. when used beside thermal and sound reduction technologies on an invisible aircraft, it would be practically impossible to shoot down, even though if it's presence would still be known. in the other hand, any type of concealing technology makes larger percentage of the enemy military useless, since obviously every military unit cannot be equipped with every types of sensory and targeting systems. and last but not least: the psychological effect of the invisible enemy must be horrifying. beside of us humans being in the end of the day simple creatures with natural urge to rely on what we see and being utterly terrified of an enemy we cannot see, the thought that what if the enemy has already found a technology that has turned the already invisible enemy craft to invisible to any kind of sensory system must be terrifying.
1 Swingfire 2018-06-09
By the time something is published, countries have already known about it through the intelligence agencies. Nobody is "mailing" everyone anything. There's no point in keeping an aircraft secret when Russian and spy satellites already photographed it and China hacked your subcontractors' databases.
Furthermore, many times contries have to unveil their weapons in order to pull funding from allied and neutral nations competing in the global arms market. The only reason the Su-57 exists is because India funded it as part of their FGFA program, same for the F-35.
Except that they have indeed published something else, the MiG-41; what they haven't done is produce it because its design hasn't been finished. If they had something ready for production that was better than the F-22 they wouldn't waste resources producing the Su-57.
SR-72 is supposed to do mach 6 at 100k ft+ and MiG-41 will do mach 4, moot point.
1 Sanjuras 2018-06-09
" countries have already known about it through the intelligence agencies." while possible, don't you think that this is a counter-conspiracy theory for the initial CT? besides, it still offers no benefit for the government - it just states at in such point it wouldn't give benefit for hiding it either.
"Except that they have indeed published something else, the MiG-41; what they haven't done is produce it because its design hasn't been finished." - indeed, which is why this doesn't answer to anything. my concern has been on if they are hiding an army of unknown futuristic tech - it may or it may not exist regardless of a future plan published by either of the sides. "SR-72 is supposed to do mach 6 at 100k ft+ and MiG-41 will do mach 4" again it's not a secret that they can do better - the question remains of if they are secretly doing better in large scales, and even hiding completely new types of technologies.
1 Denate 2018-06-09
Wars are not a real thing, they're scripted theatrical events