@@kathrynckthere's a few good Sequel games, but movie wise yeah nah. Frankly I really weird series when you consider it, I can firmly say that most of the games are rather excellent and have fantastic campaigns that continue The Terminator story.... And yet I can't think of anything pas Terminator 2 that is actually good when it comes to films or books.
@@anarchyandempires5452 Terminator 2, and Aliens (with the 's') are the two best examples of great sequels. There are some others... but it's pretty rare, yeah. Sequels are hard. You make a sequel because something achieved great popularity. But it's pretty difficult to say "I'm going to make an immensely popular movie/game" hehe. If one could do that, they could basically just print money ;) It's a little like that viva la dirt leage clip, (execs in meeting with creator): "We'd like you to just make this next video do what that viral video did." "you want me to somehow make it viral???" "Yes, make it viral, exactly." "I can't just make something go viral" "are you refusing to make the content we're asking for here? We pay your salary you know" hehe. Also, you're beholden to existing cannon. Which can be good with good cannon, but it does put creativity in a box. On top of that, expectations are way higher. And expectations color perception pretty strongly. Try some media which was hailed as the greatest thing since sliced bread... and you end up just thinking "wow, that didn't live up to the hype". Then try some media which was completely trashed in reviews, and you'll end up thinking "It's not THAT bad... actually kinda fun". If you're trying to fill big shoes... And then there's corporate mentality "just buy a popular IP, and cash-grab it with minimal investment". After all that, a good sequel is quite the unicorn. Even worse if you're trying to make a movie based on a game, or a game based on a movie, what makes one work, won't translate to the other.
Many times while watching your excellent videos I ask myself “Where else could I get this detailed information?” and the answer is always the same…”Nowhere”. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
13:02 quick and effective OODA loops -- Observe, Orient, Decide and Act -- is a four-step approach to decision-making that focuses on filtering available information, putting it in context and quickly making the most appropriate decision, while also understanding that changes can be made as more data becomes available.
In the age of digital communication, you can decentralize "centers of gravity", having e.g. small command units spread over an entire continent and communicating with each other electronically (if your electronic communcation breaks down, it will probably break down for your entire system anyway, so this would be a feasible approach). The same is true for all other military aspects: Have small operation bases with comparably few military hardware items, operations and maintenance crew and coordinate them via the "combat cloud". That makes your military infrastructure way more resilient. You already mentioned redundancy. The interesting question for me is how attacks on a combat network like you described with falsified data works. Just imagine that in 20 years from now, sophisticated AIs battle each other, and they also excel in providing false information to the opponent that looks very plausible, or hide some of their combat capabilities behind slightly altered data about these capabilities. This could build up to making essential tactical and strategic mistakes for the opponent. I believe that the most efficient way to battle such a data based combat network and system is to feed it with false information that is just enough off to produce an initially small deviation from a proper response to an attack that evolves into a massively inappropriate reaction of the entire network, kind of like a chaotic effect where a small difference can produce immense result deviations. The response to that must be extensive validation capabilities, deciding on plausibility of data and the reactions to it, and will probably be a cat and mouse game like between hackers and network administrators.
I wondered if something like that happened in Ukraine, with poorly skilled rus frontline (mis-)schooling the AI in Frankfurt, as it was developing plans for the 2023 Zaporozhye offensive
We shall have to wait till we get to that point. We know who our enemies are, and at present, they lack this serviceable threat.
5 หลายเดือนก่อน
@@JohnMullee ukies attacked right as advertised on massive Russian fort network... that wasn't an AI . And when satellite cover is extensive as well as spy network you can fool on operational level. Or before the war when alert is low the "Intel is in limbo"
In the history of warfare, there have been low end units. You just have to have trust; trust in the cloud. Hate to be on just a plain rib boat....rather be on a LCS, from there rather be on a Frigate and so on.
Hats off to a great video and excellent research! While just skimming the surface due to the incredibly complex set of topics, you kept it interesting and straight to the point. I'm looking forward to your next video on this subject! 👍
Very informative! I am looking forward to the next video in the series. The most important consideration in my opinion, is how to train the warriors who will fight this extremely complex style of war.
Sir, i think you are right when you said in one of the last videos IIRC, that you found the perfect recipe for your content! The Editing, lighting and the new slideshows as visual elements bring your content on a new level. Now the superficial side of your content is getting closer aligned to the always excellent level of substance. Which means this channel can finally reach much more people, who are not super nerds like we are, and more people can enjoy quality analysis, compared to most military content on TH-cam, which is clickbait crap. Great work!
Very interesting and informative. I'm skeptical about this in so many ways, but I want to hear more. I am heartily sick of the propensity for technologists to imagine they're the first to conceive an idea, and consequently blunder on in ignorance of their own history. Looking forward to the next installment.
Secrets are fleeting things; military secrets particularly so. I'm sure our adversaries will place espionage elements in such a way as to maximize their ability to acquire and transmit data back to their decision makers.
Setting aside for a moment all the work and knowledge you put into these videos, I would like to say that your humor is appreciated and leavens an heavy subject.
strategically used EMP's could have an extremely dramatic/devastating effect on this type of system of systems. hardening against such attacks must be done throughput the entire system including civilian infrastructure...that seems unlikely at best
@johnaikema1055 Well, if we had anywhere near to decent, not even good, regulations on our power companies one, our grid wouldn't be in such terrible shape, and two, it could have been done over time with minimal costs. To do it now we'd have to go pretty fast and the cost would be way too much for the electric companies to deal with on their own, so we'd have to use a hell of a lot of taxpayer's money, which when it comes to giving that to electric companies they're very well known to use it appropriately! (*Sarcasm, heavy sarcasm) We could do it under the guise of bringing our grid up to 21st century standards, and do our best to keep it a secret even well after our grid and most industries, hospitals, ect were hardened.
@629 Attacking russian territory automatically enables the use of nuclear weapons! So this system is effective against talibans and similar parties who have only sticks and stones. Oh, how US was defeated by the guys with sticks and sotnes? Why this system wasn't implemented in the afghan war?
@@NikiPetrovAtanasov the US was never defeated militarily by the Taliban lol, they took 20 to 1 casualties against us. We toppled their government at the beginning of the war in Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. Our failure was a political one, we weren't able to establish a stable government that would stand and fight after we got bored and left. Russia on the other hand is still stuck in the invasion phase of their war in Ukraine and making no real progress after 2 years, which is absolutely pathetic. And yes, a war on Russian territory between the US and Russia would most likely go nuclear, but a limited war contained to defeating the Russian invasion of Ukraine might not. In that scenario, the US would absolutely stomp Russia's military without trying
Main concerns: hacking, adversarial data injection from captured equipment, jamming. If there’s a remote disconnect option for captured equipment, that’s vulnerable to attack
Combat Internet and combat cloud... i used those terms in my stories thinking I'm doing something original... damn 😮 keep this coming sensei, this is stuff 👍
I mean the F-35 has a better at dogfighting than the F-16 after upgrades as the X-35 vs the F-16 in 2001 was not just a prototype but was being purposefully used less efficiently for data analysis
@@godhimself478 dogfight? What is this, Midway? Who needs to dogfight when you can blow your enemy put of the aky before their sensors even detect you?
The F-35 and F-16 are both multi role airframes. unlike the A-6, which was designed to be a long range, all weather, attack aircraft. At least, as far as I'm aware. I'm no scholar when it comes to air operations though.
This entire concept is the embodiment of the American way of war. As an Aerospace Expeditionary power, anything that allows airpower to increase overall force effectiveness or vice versa is implemented. Done well, and with adequate prep work, the opponent will be overwhelmed. However, it's very much an American way of war and not applicable to those without such requirements or being directly tied militarily to the American system. And I would expect adversaries to strike at all levels with enough force to degrade the system into something lesser. It remains to be seen how this develops. A most informative video M7.
Thank you for your video. Food for thought indeed. I have never though how vulnerable large projects like the F35 could be to sabotage and asymmetrical attacks on its Data.
A lot of nostalgia for the graphics in the first 1/3 of the video. Reminds me of the sorts of things being talked about & drawn up in the 1980's. Even the grid-plane graphics hehe. Far from 'new' ideas, but it's always being worked on and made more up to date. Not a fan of "cloud" terminology though. It's like Apple suddenly one day said "you can put files ...on the internet! We call it the Cloud!" and literally everyone who owned an actual computer rolled their eyes in unison. All the eye rolling could have destabilized earth's orbit, we got lucky there. Technically, an individual soldier is an incredibly complex system of systems... they're just refined by evolutionary pressure to be fairly reliably functional ;) There was a combined land & air exercise (a fairly large one) where an AWACS was unavailable due to maintenance issues. An F-35 took over the job, and did just fine. If it hadn't, the exercise likely would have been scrubbed. In many ways, the system of systems you discuss is kinda an old concept in the US, and things like the F-35 actually immensely _improves_ the system resiliency over what predates it. I'm gonna call this one a "miss" as 'concerns regarding the F-35' go. If anything, it helps to address these concerns, rather than proliferate them.
He makes it sound too complex but it is simple. F35's, drones, satellites and surveillance and reconnaissance (SAR) vehicles gather data on enemy positions using their sensors. That live information is transmitted/shared directly between armored vehicles or F35's in formation in real time. Sounds good to me. But maybe he is implying all sensor data is relayed to one satellite and the Russians just have to knock it out and the battle is won. That sounds like the Russian version of a Hollywood ending!
The potential advantage of a redundant distributed network is to eliminate what you call a center of gravity. One criteria of the Uptime Institute's tier four concept is fault tolerance. In the initial expression of the concept no one failure could knock out a system. This is due to adequate redundancy including dual pathing. This wascfurther extended by hot sites, a duplicate installation geographically distant. The principle could be extrapolated to multipathing where multiple nodes would have to be taken out simultaneously to impair the network. The advantage of AI will include rapid containment of a cascading failure such as a virus by isolating paths out of the affected nodes faster than they can spread and reconfiguring elements of the surviving network to prevent overloads to both the pathways between nodes and the nodes themselves. This is a supervisory function that hasn't been applied yet to data processing systems or utility power distribution grids or information networking grids. This means that they remain vulnerable to cascade global network collapse resulting from failure or a transient discontinuity at a single point. This is how the northeast power grid was knocked out by a single transformer failure in Niagra NY 1965 and again by loss of a single feeder in Ohio in 2003. In nearly 40 years they hadn't figured out the cause let alone a fix. It isn't going to be cheap. Most of the time the entire network will have to operate at a very low percentage of its design capacity.
The over riding priority is to have a human in the loop to approve a strike or destruction of a target. The human in the command layer has access to nearly unlimited information from all the sensors. My experience with computers is that glitches are inevitable. So the human in the loop may not receive all the information in a timely manner to make a decision or is inundated with so much information, some of it irrelevant, in that it will make it impossible to get through all the information in a timely manner. Then add in the effect of the fog of war and the enemies electronic warfare capabilities. Then there is the possibility of the enemy doing the same in striking a command post trying to make a go no go decision.
Which is why it might be working because itself opening up a new form of flexibility only dreamed and hoped for which will making the 5th and 6th generations of battlefield scaringly effective but also in itself it's opening up the real potential of humanbeings the enemies of the machines.
People do not understand that Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were chosen as political and military targets by the pentagon for a very specific reason. The pentagon essentially ran a massive experiment on warfare and tactics measuring the statistics and effectiveness. These countries were basically a laboratory to run different studies on how to develop our air power. Through all of these tests the conclusion was consistently that being able to bring in airborne weapons against enemy ground forces was the only way to actually win any battle. We see now with Russia and ukraines brutal artillery based attacks how stagnant and weak any offensive forces are. They can only make small gains with large amounts of casualties making them useless and any gains can easily be lost. Air dominance is about clearing a battlefield so that the enemy is forced to retreat and key positions can be taken away from them. Drones, ospreys, f 35s allow the flexibility to attack defensive targets so that 4th generation fighters, attack helicopters, tanks and ground forces can operate safely. The F35s primary purpose is to destroy anti air defenses, the osprey allows troops and supplies to be dropped in to establish communication and scouting while drones protect them until other assets arrive and secure the area. A simple explanation is that if you were to make a video game of a war, this would allow you to do everything you can do in a game but isn’t yet possible in real life. We are about 5-10 years off from this becoming a reality. This is why I believe that Russia, China and Iran are attempting to make their military movements now before they fall too far behind in technological advancement. China and Russia do not have a real 5th generation fighter and by the time they accomplish this America will have a 6th generation fighter. They don’t have the money or technology to catch up.
Well said, a lot of people don't realize that Vietnam was both an insurgency as well as a full scale war. People remember the Vietcong but seem to forget the NVA (an actual army). I just wonder how well all this network and sensor based warfare will work on a large scale with an adversary like China or Russia. Without all the network, sensors, etc you're pretty blind. Look at how the conflict in Ukraine has reverted to trenches with drones. Granted, I believe that's also a result of a lack of material, men, maintained vehicles, lack off airpower, as well as corruption (on both sides). I think with the widespread use of affordable technology, consumer drones, etc will actually hamper the US approach. Especially when it comes to attrition warfare with a near-peer.
Plus these new weapon systems take a lot more R&D, technology, global trade, etc compared to something like a Sherman tank. Look at Russia and how much they relied on foreign made electronic components in their military tech, it's hampered them in some ways with sanctions. They do still get them through black/grey markets though. There were a few Russians even caught in the US trying to sneak out match grade .338 sniper rounds and tech components a few years ago.
@OznerpaGMusiC that's right buddy boy you got it dead right dead right dead right on the head it's what it was buddy right on the head dead right eith the band comment buddy you got it there
Haven't watched the video with the telling thumbnail, yet - but will surely enjoy the 'structualist' argument... Recently, I noticed that Peter Ustinov narrated upon 5th generation*Data Links* ...in 1993... implemented on the Mikoyan Mig-31 supersonic interceptor... I can't remember that You had adressed that case ? Surely by now something can be said on respective tactics in air campaigns - e.g. in contrast to ground and airborne early warning RADAR...
THE major risk: All what you described isolates the human, makes it impossible to understand or judge how certain aspects come into being. What that system is really good for is fully automated drone warfare.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug the most interesting thing about this whole doctrine is how well these redundancies will actually function in practice. Sure, I can use my cellphone without network connection, its not very useful though (unless I had cold stored data). It's even less useful if I cant charge or power on the device.
I think the most vital aspect is not stealth but rather information superiority. Stealth serves information superiority in that it denies vital information to the enemy though, so it's probably on the features list of just about every platform involved in some capacity.
How did you get Russell Crowe to do your video? And, who dubbed in your voice?? Seriously, loved it. GREAT analyses and explanations, found nowhere else that I am aware of.
Ummmm.... Why the FCK isn't the Cheyenne mountain that USED To be called Home by NORAD re-staffed & be an Absolutely Secured Site that be linked to assets via remote radio upload&download antenna sets that are cheap to produce & EXPENSIVE to find&destroy, linking NORAD to ALLL the data generators & verifiers & obliterators. I mean, exactly WHAT is the NORAD site in the Cheyenne used for at this time?!? that would Preclude re-activating it?
I like your point at the end about F35s in opposition to the USA. It isn't unprecedented, F14 and F5 are both present in opposition air forces. However, by the time that an opponent has the opportunity to fly the F35 in anger against America, NGAD or NGAD successor would probably wipe the floor with F35. Right?
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I guess I didn't consider that a possibility. Do you think NATO is that shaky? Or do you think there enough of a chance of a rogue state in NATO (that has access to F35)
I suppose as with any combination of systems it’s only as strong as it’s weakest link. Technological advances can seem strange at first but with time they then become essential. Just like putting radars on aircraft or missiles on aircraft. Not seen as essential or even worthwhile at the the beginning but now are very much so.
Discussions on 5 Gen warfare/Network centric reminds me of the admirals before ww2 like Isoroku Yamamoto who were pointing to the advantages of aircraft carriers. The traditionalist agreed on it but pointed to the track record of battleships (though, I think dreadnaught types seem to have only fought at Jutland) thouand their predecessors (ship of the line) which can range up to centuries. Now, this is not yet tested in a near-peer combat environment (hopefully will never happen) but has merit so many nations are persuing it.
Its a funny thing about warships. There still are dedicated anti-ship ships in use that rival or even outmatch the firepower of a post-dreadnought battleship, but are smaller, and are usually tasked defending (or destroying if applicable) an aircraft carrier. Mind you, losing a single supercarrier would be devastating to any country. I think the relatively high cost of an aircraft carrier is quite restrictive for many nations to pursue such a goal and might seem to overcome the problem in another way (russians for example have dedicated aircraft carrier hunting nuclear subs). I think that the relative cost of such an integrated defense system, and its perceived weaknesses might lead other nations down a different path. My problem with a highly digitalized combat system is that it could theoretically be hacked / infilitrated to disable a weapons system or turn them against their own. Battlestar Galactica had a few episodes that centered on this issue.
@loneirregular1280 The American world order has made most countries not see proper navies as necessary. When trade routes are protected by America, the use case for a strong navy is weakened. This has stunted naval development significantly in my view. Its starting to come back with China etc, after about 3 decades of stagnation.
I understand assets are “hardened” against EMP but it strikes me that well placed blasts of the correct radiation could make such complex systems collapse or at least hinder effectiveness for a low cost. Is this a naïve perspective?
Bravo another scary scenario, grown up in n the age of paper maps, and 2 way radios. Then seeing intertial guidance pushed aside for GPS and we're talking at least a quarter century ago. Network Centric Warfare needed sensor tech to catch up. All these layers have rushed ahead unbelievably. I bet lots of effort is being put into ways of affecting authentication so that enough disruption of sensors to affect polling to spoof or shift an RT response to derail the attack chain.
I am interested in front line positions being supported from home bases for smaller systems. Distant operators providing support with satellite or other communications. This could mean many NCO could have their own information and support systems. Each squad, platoon or vehicle could have support. This can include reliving combat data and even support like logistics. Reducing the work load of troops in 24/7 combat operations. For example an operator could track ammunition and fuel coordination. Also operating sensors or drones. Also provide very practical combat information. Having access to advanced battlefield computer operating systems. When tank crews get a break from active operations day and night. A tank crew could do other tasks or resting while rear support operatives can use a tanks sensors or operate a tanks own drone. Reducing a tank crew work load. An NCO could quickly ask questions from a designated support team. Such as where and when to get supplies or ammunition. As the Western nations are reluctant to send large numbers of troops in combat they could have remote support from home bases. For global operations. Remote operators could help with deconflicting allied support. Reducing blue on blue accidents. Remote operators can also focus issues with more senior commanders. Or other allied units helping to provide air support. Providing air crew with the ground situation.
As always, great content ( that is not available anywhere else ;-) ). Complexity is not vulnerability. Humans are more complex then crocodiles, but humans make shoes and bags from crocodiles, while crocodiles don't that with humans.
You know that the 5th gen warfare is just a gimmick to sell more expensive and sophisticated weapon. The most important aspects of any war "effector" is its its reliability, agility, effect and sustainability - consider those in the exact order. 1. Reliability - you need system that will perform whenever you need it and in the way you expect no matter the situation (this is includessystem security too) 2. Agility - you need the system that is easy and quick to deploy, use and relocate 3. Effect - the system should be able to put maximum damage to the opposing targets by any means respective to its purpose 4. Sustainability - in military perspective this differs a bit... means system should be versatile: can use multiple ammunitions, interoperability - to be able to operate within and together with other systems (here comes the comms and sensing), independence - to be able to operate independently without other systems data, operability - use munitions and human personnel effectively SO this is what makes the weapons better and army wining. What is the purpose of missile which cannot be guided to hit the correct target, what is the purpose of multipurpose fighter jet that needs the whole infrastructure even for the simplest mission and cannot be fly "solo", how good is the system stop working because of fragile parts?
I think the capability to use layered attack with high stealth platforms providing targeting and spotting information for heavily armed “middle trucks” loitering far enough behind to survive without stealth is the kind of ability that will utterly overwhelm a tier 2 state enemy. Much as we saw with Iraq’s defenses being so quickly overwhelmed. But, do our assets have the operational range for this approach to work against a near-peer? If the carrier group can’t get close enough to deliver its F-35’s to the operational area…
Those AI generated images steal the show lol, especially that one that adds extra wings and canards to an otherwise hypersonic body plan meant to fit inside a narrow shock cone.
Networking is not the only capability for F-35 as it has its own capabilities all within the Squadron to view the battlefield scenario with its own inherited sensors via Radar, DAS, ECM, ESM, ELINT stealth capabilities queued in with some of the best weapon systems out there. In war nothing perfect but the F-35 does have very good independent sensor capabilities all available to the Squadron for which it has to apply its tactics. If the network goes down I'm sure the squadron is trained to fight within its own capabilities.
So basically the individual aircraft can form their own sub network? I wounder how prone that would be to disruption during conflict. In a true full scale conflict, I see networks and infrastructure being the first targets.
today Air Combat : link this link that, call someone to confirm random radar spike is actually red, touchy thing, more touchy thing, then fire yesterday : just outturn them ok? would be cool furball
Not spiritual, but close.. It's all cultural.. You can't even have spiritually as we know it without culture. Hence why we have different relgions. All those religions were formed and shaped under different cultural circumstances.
Amazing content as always, thanks ! With so much (allied) countries going south to keep their sovereignty, like the french scorpion program, and the US quickly deprecating existing standards like the L16, I'm wondering if we'll see the emergence of interoperability protocols via open standards, similar to the TAK exosystem for example, doesn't matter if your protocols are well known if their cryptography is strong enough. Sorry about my crappy english, have a great day !
Resilience is the Achilles heel in the matter just knock out the enemies polar and or equatorial satellites and you are a game changer. By the way, aircraft formation is just copies of real birds formation.
Look how quickly the conflict in Ukraine has reverted back to trenches, albeit with drones. Granted, both sides have lacked material/men and corruption is big on both sides. As cliche as it sounds, it reminds me of the corny quote "war never changes". I definitely does, but the fundamentals will always be the fundamentals. They're relevant regardless, whether you're fighting with sticks and stones or nukes. I feel like part of it is because warfare really does deal a lot with the human psyche and philosophy. Just like no matter the tech, the fundamentals of information and psychological warfare will remain the same. Unless our whole psyche as a species changes.
I'm honestly really surprised this hasn't been looked into more. I'm sure it has, we just don't know. I bet it will also only become more of a thing the more drones and automation become a part of warfare. You can probably get the same effect with cheap one time use drones though (a la kamikaze drones/drone swarms)
Firth level air warfare systems is very precise and aimed towards air superiority at all times. However, it is heavily reliant on satellites, AWACS (although this system appears to be going obselete) and interlinked squadrons of aircraft like the F35s. However, as is not reported, is there a falling domino's effect, I.e. if you (the enemy) knock out one critical system does all the other systems collapse? E.g. knock out the military and civilian satellite network and the air warfare system is dead? Unlikely, although it's capabilities will certainly be diminished.
With super computers processing high fidelity information from sensors - the army that processes faster wins and is able to engage and defeat the enemy - now imagine adding AI and you get a system that can think out from vast data the best way to attack or defend assets even with weapons with limited capabilities.
True, but that only works if you have information to process from those servers. It's a little hard to use all that stuff if the network is down. Which makes me wonder how feasible this stuff would be in attrition warfare with a big state actor.
20:55 *"Stay tuned for the next episode."* Hey, we don't have to *tune* anything to watch TH-cam videos. How can this guy possibly be qualified to talk about military technology when he doesn't even under stand basic computer technology. (Apparently I'm in a weird mood.) Thanks for the interesting video.
Love the channel. Personal opinion, the F-22 is struggling to remain relevant. Barely a hundred are combat capable, the logistics of maintaining the fleet outweigh their potential in a fight that really matters. Its still arguably the best fighter ever developed, though even there I'm dubious. 1v1 sure but no airborne weapons system operates in a vacuum. If the theatre is the western pacific, the F-22 won't carry the day as many anticipate. As for the cloud, its integrity would surely be compromised in a battlespace featuring a high level of adversary electronic countermeasures. Again, just my uneducated thoughts, happy to revise my opinion if presented with reason to do so. EDIT: I'd LOVE IT if you created an alternate channel where you shared your personal thoughts regarding geopolitics and grand strategy!
I wonder what AI's clear definitions of "war" and "adversary" are. Because what would stop AI from simply arranging things to maximize deaths on BOTH sides?
That's the scary thing, even both "war" and "adversary" have differnt meanings depending on the context. Who's to say that Ai could striggle with some of these nuances. It's a very differnt scenarios is you just view it from a "ones and zeros" point of view.
Yes... All this is good as long as everything works and the war is waged against a weak enemy But how will all this work against a proportionate enemy? When I was 25 years old I was in awe of such systems. But with age, my admiration somehow diminished
Every time an F-35 comes off the assembly line a bald eagle hatches and shareholders shed a tear.
With the world wide adoption of F35 by western nations I think the shareholders will be quite happy.
Actually they park it in a field full of other new F35's becasue the new update is not working 🤔
😂
😅😅
Soon bald eagles will plague Fort Worth like pidgeons
"Otis why don't you found a union?"
They made a movie about that. It's called Terminator
But there's only one good sequel.
😂😂😂
@@kathrynckthere's a few good Sequel games, but movie wise yeah nah.
Frankly I really weird series when you consider it, I can firmly say that most of the games are rather excellent and have fantastic campaigns that continue The Terminator story.... And yet I can't think of anything pas Terminator 2 that is actually good when it comes to films or books.
That's cute, I going to use that in the future. Thanks.
@@anarchyandempires5452 Terminator 2, and Aliens (with the 's') are the two best examples of great sequels. There are some others... but it's pretty rare, yeah.
Sequels are hard. You make a sequel because something achieved great popularity. But it's pretty difficult to say "I'm going to make an immensely popular movie/game" hehe. If one could do that, they could basically just print money ;) It's a little like that viva la dirt leage clip, (execs in meeting with creator): "We'd like you to just make this next video do what that viral video did." "you want me to somehow make it viral???" "Yes, make it viral, exactly." "I can't just make something go viral" "are you refusing to make the content we're asking for here? We pay your salary you know" hehe.
Also, you're beholden to existing cannon. Which can be good with good cannon, but it does put creativity in a box.
On top of that, expectations are way higher. And expectations color perception pretty strongly. Try some media which was hailed as the greatest thing since sliced bread... and you end up just thinking "wow, that didn't live up to the hype". Then try some media which was completely trashed in reviews, and you'll end up thinking "It's not THAT bad... actually kinda fun". If you're trying to fill big shoes...
And then there's corporate mentality "just buy a popular IP, and cash-grab it with minimal investment".
After all that, a good sequel is quite the unicorn. Even worse if you're trying to make a movie based on a game, or a game based on a movie, what makes one work, won't translate to the other.
I just came here for the download link for a free F35
Will it run on Android?
@@theo_korner
Yes, but you cannot sense it for it is stealthy.
Dumpster Diver
*"You wouldn't 3D print a F-35 would you?"*
I hear the CCP has free plans for download and a sweet DIY guide.
I love how the osprey is so slow the F-35 has to go into STOL mode
Actually that’s not true. You can pull up F-35’s refueling with the Osprey. In cruise mode.
_YOU WOULDN'T DOWNLOAD A PLANE_
Why not? Flight DX is all about downloading new planes.
Lol, guy above is definately not as old as the O.P.
These anti piracy commercials are getting really out of hand 😂
I'm here for Otis. ✌
Otis for UN president.
Many times while watching your excellent videos I ask myself “Where else could I get this detailed information?” and the answer is always the same…”Nowhere”. Thanks for sharing your knowledge!
13:02 quick and effective OODA loops -- Observe, Orient, Decide and Act -- is a four-step approach to decision-making that focuses on filtering available information, putting it in context and quickly making the most appropriate decision, while also understanding that changes can be made as more data becomes available.
Ooda is literally done by every person every day. It's just a theory to thinking normally
@@Steamthrower1 If you are on a LCS or boat with no sensor...Trust the OODA and the cloud.
Forgot to say: I love your videos, very in depth, very good information. Learned a lot from this one. Keep up the good work! 👍
In the age of digital communication, you can decentralize "centers of gravity", having e.g. small command units spread over an entire continent and communicating with each other electronically (if your electronic communcation breaks down, it will probably break down for your entire system anyway, so this would be a feasible approach). The same is true for all other military aspects: Have small operation bases with comparably few military hardware items, operations and maintenance crew and coordinate them via the "combat cloud". That makes your military infrastructure way more resilient. You already mentioned redundancy. The interesting question for me is how attacks on a combat network like you described with falsified data works. Just imagine that in 20 years from now, sophisticated AIs battle each other, and they also excel in providing false information to the opponent that looks very plausible, or hide some of their combat capabilities behind slightly altered data about these capabilities. This could build up to making essential tactical and strategic mistakes for the opponent. I believe that the most efficient way to battle such a data based combat network and system is to feed it with false information that is just enough off to produce an initially small deviation from a proper response to an attack that evolves into a massively inappropriate reaction of the entire network, kind of like a chaotic effect where a small difference can produce immense result deviations. The response to that must be extensive validation capabilities, deciding on plausibility of data and the reactions to it, and will probably be a cat and mouse game like between hackers and network administrators.
I wondered if something like that happened in Ukraine, with poorly skilled rus frontline (mis-)schooling the AI in Frankfurt, as it was developing plans for the 2023 Zaporozhye offensive
We shall have to wait till we get to that point. We know who our enemies are, and at present, they lack this serviceable threat.
@@JohnMullee ukies attacked right as advertised on massive Russian fort network... that wasn't an AI .
And when satellite cover is extensive as well as spy network you can fool on operational level. Or before the war when alert is low the "Intel is in limbo"
In the history of warfare, there have been low end units. You just have to have trust; trust in the cloud. Hate to be on just a plain rib boat....rather be on a LCS, from there rather be on a Frigate and so on.
Hats off to a great video and excellent research! While just skimming the surface due to the incredibly complex set of topics, you kept it interesting and straight to the point. I'm looking forward to your next video on this subject! 👍
Very informative! I am looking forward to the next video in the series. The most important consideration in my opinion, is how to train the warriors who will fight this extremely complex style of war.
So many interesting facts you are relating to us. And also information about the consequences of all these changes to aircraft and their doctrines
Sir, i think you are right when you said in one of the last videos IIRC, that you found the perfect recipe for your content! The Editing, lighting and the new slideshows as visual elements bring your content on a new level.
Now the superficial side of your content is getting closer aligned to the always excellent level of substance. Which means this channel can finally reach much more people, who are not super nerds like we are, and more people can enjoy quality analysis, compared to most military content on TH-cam, which is clickbait crap.
Great work!
Babe wake up! A new Millennium 7 * HistoryTech video just dropped! 😆
I'm up, i'm up! just let me eat some coffee grounds here...
@@kathrynck coffees on the counter hun 😆
@@ghostmourn Ohhh wet coffee. fancy! :D
So worthwhile to watch.
Not again. I’m off to the shops. I don’t know what that man and his vacuum cleaner have that I don’t.
Very interesting and informative. I'm skeptical about this in so many ways, but I want to hear more. I am heartily sick of the propensity for technologists to imagine they're the first to conceive an idea, and consequently blunder on in ignorance of their own history. Looking forward to the next installment.
Wow why does this have only 10k views? It’s a great topic.
Thanks sir for your content.
At 15:32 that is a very real caveat. It's all way CLASSIFIED and most of us don't know, but we can dream.
True but if history is anything to go by most things that are hyped up military or not never live up to expectations.
@@JagdgeschwaderX True for Russia and Iran, not true for the US. Historically America downplays its capabilities.
Secrets are fleeting things; military secrets particularly so. I'm sure our adversaries will place espionage elements in such a way as to maximize their ability to acquire and transmit data back to their decision makers.
@@JagdgeschwaderXAmerica has almost always downplayed what it is capable of. That’s historical fact.
Always great content... but that shirt/tie combo is the absolute slickest, my man!
Setting aside for a moment all the work and knowledge you put into these videos, I would like to say that your humor is appreciated and leavens an heavy subject.
strategically used EMP's could have an extremely dramatic/devastating effect on this type of system of systems. hardening against such attacks must be done throughput the entire system including civilian infrastructure...that seems unlikely
at best
EMP's would imply the use of nuclear weapons, at which point it really doesn't matter
yes, the use of emp as more than an extremely small experimental effect without nukes is still in the future.
@johnaikema1055 Well, if we had anywhere near to decent, not even good, regulations on our power companies one, our grid wouldn't be in such terrible shape, and two, it could have been done over time with minimal costs. To do it now we'd have to go pretty fast and the cost would be way too much for the electric companies to deal with on their own, so we'd have to use a hell of a lot of taxpayer's money, which when it comes to giving that to electric companies they're very well known to use it appropriately! (*Sarcasm, heavy sarcasm) We could do it under the guise of bringing our grid up to 21st century standards, and do our best to keep it a secret even well after our grid and most industries, hospitals, ect were hardened.
@629
Attacking russian territory automatically enables the use of nuclear weapons! So this system is effective against talibans and similar parties who have only sticks and stones. Oh, how US was defeated by the guys with sticks and sotnes? Why this system wasn't implemented in the afghan war?
@@NikiPetrovAtanasov the US was never defeated militarily by the Taliban lol, they took 20 to 1 casualties against us. We toppled their government at the beginning of the war in Afghanistan in a matter of weeks. Our failure was a political one, we weren't able to establish a stable government that would stand and fight after we got bored and left. Russia on the other hand is still stuck in the invasion phase of their war in Ukraine and making no real progress after 2 years, which is absolutely pathetic. And yes, a war on Russian territory between the US and Russia would most likely go nuclear, but a limited war contained to defeating the Russian invasion of Ukraine might not. In that scenario, the US would absolutely stomp Russia's military without trying
Main concerns: hacking, adversarial data injection from captured equipment, jamming. If there’s a remote disconnect option for captured equipment, that’s vulnerable to attack
High power jamming networks and low orbit EMPs.
Thumbnail Is so Adorable
Actually Interesting and New Doctrine
Vibey
Combat Internet and combat cloud... i used those terms in my stories thinking I'm doing something original... damn 😮 keep this coming sensei, this is stuff 👍
Exceptional lesson ,thank you .
Now this is ingenious, top marks for the designers for this from n east Scotland
F-35 is just the modern version of A-6 pretending to an F-16.
I mean the F-35 has a better at dogfighting than the F-16 after upgrades as the X-35 vs the F-16 in 2001 was not just a prototype but was being purposefully used less efficiently for data analysis
@@godhimself478 bro still want dogfight?💀
Anything you're basing that of, Captaincurd? Or are you just pulling that out of your ass?
@@godhimself478 dogfight? What is this, Midway? Who needs to dogfight when you can blow your enemy put of the aky before their sensors even detect you?
The F-35 and F-16 are both multi role airframes. unlike the A-6, which was designed to be a long range, all weather, attack aircraft. At least, as far as I'm aware. I'm no scholar when it comes to air operations though.
Super good video, thank you!!!
This entire concept is the embodiment of the American way of war. As an Aerospace Expeditionary power, anything that allows airpower to increase overall force effectiveness or vice versa is implemented.
Done well, and with adequate prep work, the opponent will be overwhelmed.
However, it's very much an American way of war and not applicable to those without such requirements or being directly tied militarily to the American system. And I would expect adversaries to strike at all levels with enough force to degrade the system into something lesser.
It remains to be seen how this develops.
A most informative video M7.
Thank you for your video. Food for thought indeed. I have never though how vulnerable large projects like the F35 could be to sabotage and asymmetrical attacks on its Data.
A lot of nostalgia for the graphics in the first 1/3 of the video. Reminds me of the sorts of things being talked about & drawn up in the 1980's. Even the grid-plane graphics hehe. Far from 'new' ideas, but it's always being worked on and made more up to date.
Not a fan of "cloud" terminology though. It's like Apple suddenly one day said "you can put files ...on the internet! We call it the Cloud!" and literally everyone who owned an actual computer rolled their eyes in unison. All the eye rolling could have destabilized earth's orbit, we got lucky there.
Technically, an individual soldier is an incredibly complex system of systems... they're just refined by evolutionary pressure to be fairly reliably functional ;)
There was a combined land & air exercise (a fairly large one) where an AWACS was unavailable due to maintenance issues. An F-35 took over the job, and did just fine. If it hadn't, the exercise likely would have been scrubbed. In many ways, the system of systems you discuss is kinda an old concept in the US, and things like the F-35 actually immensely _improves_ the system resiliency over what predates it. I'm gonna call this one a "miss" as 'concerns regarding the F-35' go. If anything, it helps to address these concerns, rather than proliferate them.
Excellent!
He makes it sound too complex but it is simple. F35's, drones, satellites and surveillance and reconnaissance (SAR) vehicles gather data on enemy positions using their sensors. That live information is transmitted/shared directly between armored vehicles or F35's in formation in real time. Sounds good to me. But maybe he is implying all sensor data is relayed to one satellite and the Russians just have to knock it out and the battle is won. That sounds like the Russian version of a Hollywood ending!
I'm always amazed at why the lift fan door doesn't blow off. Don't know much about physics I admit but the thing looks like a barn door in a storm.
Landing a B-52 on a carrier, that’s thinking outside the box! (10:10)
The potential advantage of a redundant distributed network is to eliminate what you call a center of gravity. One criteria of the Uptime Institute's tier four concept is fault tolerance. In the initial expression of the concept no one failure could knock out a system. This is due to adequate redundancy including dual pathing. This wascfurther extended by hot sites, a duplicate installation geographically distant. The principle could be extrapolated to multipathing where multiple nodes would have to be taken out simultaneously to impair the network. The advantage of AI will include rapid containment of a cascading failure such as a virus by isolating paths out of the affected nodes faster than they can spread and reconfiguring elements of the surviving network to prevent overloads to both the pathways between nodes and the nodes themselves. This is a supervisory function that hasn't been applied yet to data processing systems or utility power distribution grids or information networking grids. This means that they remain vulnerable to cascade global network collapse resulting from failure or a transient discontinuity at a single point. This is how the northeast power grid was knocked out by a single transformer failure in Niagra NY 1965 and again by loss of a single feeder in Ohio in 2003. In nearly 40 years they hadn't figured out the cause let alone a fix. It isn't going to be cheap. Most of the time the entire network will have to operate at a very low percentage of its design capacity.
The over riding priority is to have a human in the loop to approve a strike or destruction of a target. The human in the command layer has access to nearly unlimited information from all the sensors. My experience with computers is that glitches are inevitable. So the human in the loop may not receive all the information in a timely manner to make a decision or is inundated with so much information, some of it irrelevant, in that it will make it impossible to get through all the information in a timely manner. Then add in the effect of the fog of war and the enemies electronic warfare capabilities. Then there is the possibility of the enemy doing the same in striking a command post trying to make a go no go decision.
Thanks!
Thank you !🙏
Which is why it might be working because itself opening up a new form of flexibility only dreamed and hoped for which will making the 5th and 6th generations of battlefield scaringly effective but also in itself it's opening up the real potential of humanbeings the enemies of the machines.
People do not understand that Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan were chosen as political and military targets by the pentagon for a very specific reason. The pentagon essentially ran a massive experiment on warfare and tactics measuring the statistics and effectiveness. These countries were basically a laboratory to run different studies on how to develop our air power.
Through all of these tests the conclusion was consistently that being able to bring in airborne weapons against enemy ground forces was the only way to actually win any battle.
We see now with Russia and ukraines brutal artillery based attacks how stagnant and weak any offensive forces are. They can only make small gains with large amounts of casualties making them useless and any gains can easily be lost.
Air dominance is about clearing a battlefield so that the enemy is forced to retreat and key positions can be taken away from them. Drones, ospreys, f 35s allow the flexibility to attack defensive targets so that 4th generation fighters, attack helicopters, tanks and ground forces can operate safely. The F35s primary purpose is to destroy anti air defenses, the osprey allows troops and supplies to be dropped in to establish communication and scouting while drones protect them until other assets arrive and secure the area.
A simple explanation is that if you were to make a video game of a war, this would allow you to do everything you can do in a game but isn’t yet possible in real life. We are about 5-10 years off from this becoming a reality.
This is why I believe that Russia, China and Iran are attempting to make their military movements now before they fall too far behind in technological advancement. China and Russia do not have a real 5th generation fighter and by the time they accomplish this America will have a 6th generation fighter. They don’t have the money or technology to catch up.
Well said, a lot of people don't realize that Vietnam was both an insurgency as well as a full scale war. People remember the Vietcong but seem to forget the NVA (an actual army). I just wonder how well all this network and sensor based warfare will work on a large scale with an adversary like China or Russia. Without all the network, sensors, etc you're pretty blind. Look at how the conflict in Ukraine has reverted to trenches with drones. Granted, I believe that's also a result of a lack of material, men, maintained vehicles, lack off airpower, as well as corruption (on both sides). I think with the widespread use of affordable technology, consumer drones, etc will actually hamper the US approach. Especially when it comes to attrition warfare with a near-peer.
Plus these new weapon systems take a lot more R&D, technology, global trade, etc compared to something like a Sherman tank. Look at Russia and how much they relied on foreign made electronic components in their military tech, it's hampered them in some ways with sanctions. They do still get them through black/grey markets though. There were a few Russians even caught in the US trying to sneak out match grade .338 sniper rounds and tech components a few years ago.
Planes only fly close together like that for the photo op, or if they're waiting for fuel from a tanker
"Synergy" is spelt with two "y"s, not an "i" in the beginning and only a "y" in the end. That stems from the greek syllable "syn", meaning "together".
you seem certain he wasn't talking about the obscure Finnish metal band
@OznerpaGMusiC that's right buddy boy you got it dead right dead right dead right on the head it's what it was buddy right on the head dead right eith the band comment buddy you got it there
@@OznerpaGMusiC LOL! Ummm ... no. 😂
Snazzy tie :)
Haven't watched the video with the telling thumbnail, yet - but will surely enjoy the 'structualist' argument...
Recently, I noticed that Peter Ustinov narrated upon 5th generation*Data Links* ...in 1993... implemented on the Mikoyan Mig-31 supersonic interceptor...
I can't remember that You had adressed that case ?
Surely by now something can be said on respective tactics in air campaigns - e.g. in contrast to ground and airborne early warning RADAR...
THE major risk: All what you described isolates the human, makes it impossible to understand or judge how certain aspects come into being. What that system is really good for is fully automated drone warfare.
Destroy the satellites, destroy the submarine cables and you win the war.
There are redundancies on redundancies. taking down the top-tier communications backbone will slow things down but by no means stop them.
@@Laotzu.Goldbug the most interesting thing about this whole doctrine is how well these redundancies will actually function in practice. Sure, I can use my cellphone without network connection, its not very useful though (unless I had cold stored data). It's even less useful if I cant charge or power on the device.
Scrap refuelling scrap - my personal opinion. But your videos are the best out there so keep up the good work.
I think the most vital aspect is not stealth but rather information superiority. Stealth serves information superiority in that it denies vital information to the enemy though, so it's probably on the features list of just about every platform involved in some capacity.
How did you get Russell Crowe to do your video? And, who dubbed in your voice??
Seriously, loved it. GREAT analyses and explanations, found nowhere else that I am aware of.
🤣
Ummmm.... Why the FCK isn't the Cheyenne mountain that USED To be called Home by NORAD re-staffed & be an Absolutely Secured Site that be linked to assets via remote radio upload&download antenna sets that are cheap to produce & EXPENSIVE to find&destroy, linking NORAD to ALLL the data generators & verifiers & obliterators.
I mean, exactly WHAT is the NORAD site in the Cheyenne used for at this time?!? that would Preclude re-activating it?
I like your point at the end about F35s in opposition to the USA. It isn't unprecedented, F14 and F5 are both present in opposition air forces. However, by the time that an opponent has the opportunity to fly the F35 in anger against America, NGAD or NGAD successor would probably wipe the floor with F35. Right?
I was thinking more about among European NATO members.
I would bet money there are a few lines of code hidden somewhere deep that would allow the US to dissable enemy F35s.
@@Millennium7HistoryTech I guess I didn't consider that a possibility. Do you think NATO is that shaky? Or do you think there enough of a chance of a rogue state in NATO (that has access to F35)
I suppose as with any combination of systems it’s only as strong as it’s weakest link. Technological advances can seem strange at first but with time they then become essential. Just like putting radars on aircraft or missiles on aircraft. Not seen as essential or even worthwhile at the the beginning but now are very much so.
So, IRL Command and Conquer? time to put hell march on repeat
Discussions on 5 Gen warfare/Network centric reminds me of the admirals before ww2 like Isoroku Yamamoto who were pointing to the advantages of aircraft carriers. The traditionalist agreed on it but pointed to the track record of battleships (though, I think dreadnaught types seem to have only fought at Jutland) thouand their predecessors (ship of the line) which can range up to centuries. Now, this is not yet tested in a near-peer combat environment (hopefully will never happen) but has merit so many nations are persuing it.
Its a funny thing about warships. There still are dedicated anti-ship ships in use that rival or even outmatch the firepower of a post-dreadnought battleship, but are smaller, and are usually tasked defending (or destroying if applicable) an aircraft carrier.
Mind you, losing a single supercarrier would be devastating to any country. I think the relatively high cost of an aircraft carrier is quite restrictive for many nations to pursue such a goal and might seem to overcome the problem in another way (russians for example have dedicated aircraft carrier hunting nuclear subs).
I think that the relative cost of such an integrated defense system, and its perceived weaknesses might lead other nations down a different path.
My problem with a highly digitalized combat system is that it could theoretically be hacked / infilitrated to disable a weapons system or turn them against their own.
Battlestar Galactica had a few episodes that centered on this issue.
@loneirregular1280 The American world order has made most countries not see proper navies as necessary. When trade routes are protected by America, the use case for a strong navy is weakened. This has stunted naval development significantly in my view. Its starting to come back with China etc, after about 3 decades of stagnation.
@@jgw9990 spot on
I understand assets are “hardened” against EMP but it strikes me that well placed blasts of the correct radiation could make such complex systems collapse or at least hinder effectiveness for a low cost. Is this a naïve perspective?
just coming from an it security event that title made me laugh... 😮
Bravo another scary scenario, grown up in n the age of paper maps, and 2 way radios. Then seeing intertial guidance pushed aside for GPS and we're talking at least a quarter century ago. Network Centric Warfare needed sensor tech to catch up. All these layers have rushed ahead unbelievably. I bet lots of effort is being put into ways of affecting authentication so that enough disruption of sensors to affect polling to spoof or shift an RT response to derail the attack chain.
I am interested in front line positions being supported from home bases for smaller systems. Distant operators providing support with satellite or other communications. This could mean many NCO could have their own information and support systems. Each squad, platoon or vehicle could have support. This can include reliving combat data and even support like logistics. Reducing the work load of troops in 24/7 combat operations. For example an operator could track ammunition and fuel coordination. Also operating sensors or drones. Also provide very practical combat information. Having access to advanced battlefield computer operating systems. When tank crews get a break from active operations day and night. A tank crew could do other tasks or resting while rear support operatives can use a tanks sensors or operate a tanks own drone. Reducing a tank crew work load. An NCO could quickly ask questions from a designated support team. Such as where and when to get supplies or ammunition. As the Western nations are reluctant to send large numbers of troops in combat they could have remote support from home bases. For global operations. Remote operators could help with deconflicting allied support. Reducing blue on blue accidents. Remote operators can also focus issues with more senior commanders. Or other allied units helping to provide air support. Providing air crew with the ground situation.
As always, great content ( that is not available anywhere else ;-) ).
Complexity is not vulnerability.
Humans are more complex then crocodiles, but humans make shoes and bags from crocodiles, while crocodiles don't that with humans.
Imagine, the fighting forces working together, instead of against one another.
You know that the 5th gen warfare is just a gimmick to sell more expensive and sophisticated weapon.
The most important aspects of any war "effector" is its its reliability, agility, effect and sustainability - consider those in the exact order.
1. Reliability - you need system that will perform whenever you need it and in the way you expect no matter the situation (this is includessystem security too)
2. Agility - you need the system that is easy and quick to deploy, use and relocate
3. Effect - the system should be able to put maximum damage to the opposing targets by any means respective to its purpose
4. Sustainability - in military perspective this differs a bit... means system should be versatile: can use multiple ammunitions, interoperability - to be able to operate within and together with other systems (here comes the comms and sensing), independence - to be able to operate independently without other systems data, operability - use munitions and human personnel effectively
SO this is what makes the weapons better and army wining.
What is the purpose of missile which cannot be guided to hit the correct target, what is the purpose of multipurpose fighter jet that needs the whole infrastructure even for the simplest mission and cannot be fly "solo", how good is the system stop working because of fragile parts?
I think the capability to use layered attack with high stealth platforms providing targeting and spotting information for heavily armed “middle trucks” loitering far enough behind to survive without stealth is the kind of ability that will utterly overwhelm a tier 2 state enemy. Much as we saw with Iraq’s defenses being so quickly overwhelmed.
But, do our assets have the operational range for this approach to work against a near-peer? If the carrier group can’t get close enough to deliver its F-35’s to the operational area…
Those AI generated images steal the show lol, especially that one that adds extra wings and canards to an otherwise hypersonic body plan meant to fit inside a narrow shock cone.
How are you going to invade a country when you have less than like 1000 personnel there? 😅
You are unusually well researched in this.
Are you a War Thunder Forum Mod?
😂
Lmao 😂
F35 Osprey perfect match
Networking is not the only capability for F-35 as it has its own capabilities all within the Squadron to view the battlefield scenario with its own inherited sensors via Radar, DAS, ECM, ESM, ELINT stealth capabilities queued in with some of the best weapon systems out there.
In war nothing perfect but the F-35 does have very good independent sensor capabilities all available to the Squadron for which it has to apply its tactics.
If the network goes down I'm sure the squadron is trained to fight within its own capabilities.
So basically the individual aircraft can form their own sub network? I wounder how prone that would be to disruption during conflict. In a true full scale conflict, I see networks and infrastructure being the first targets.
Hot comments in 3, 2, 1, ... ¡Animo!
that thumbnail is some black ops 2 shit
What are these networks based on? How do they function?
today Air Combat : link this link that, call someone to confirm random radar spike is actually red, touchy thing, more touchy thing, then fire
yesterday : just outturn them ok? would be cool furball
The MOST powerful layer is missing: Spiritual warfare.
All warfare is spiritual, even if they don’t realise it
it's not like have DETERMINATION and override F-104 go absolute mach 5 while doing 69G turn XD
Not spiritual, but close.. It's all cultural.. You can't even have spiritually as we know it without culture. Hence why we have different relgions. All those religions were formed and shaped under different cultural circumstances.
also c'mon man
combat cloud is my six defense system deploy thunder cloud doing dogfight, can't change my mind
XD
Why are the f35 not winning in the red sea ?
2:59 why are they staring at blank screen? 😆
the CV-22 are all grounded and the F35 is using more fuel in that semi-hover than it's taking on....other than that, it's great.
Amazing content as always, thanks ! With so much (allied) countries going south to keep their sovereignty, like the french scorpion program, and the US quickly deprecating existing standards like the L16, I'm wondering if we'll see the emergence of interoperability protocols via open standards, similar to the TAK exosystem for example, doesn't matter if your protocols are well known if their cryptography is strong enough. Sorry about my crappy english, have a great day !
are lasers kinnetic or non kinnetic effectors?
Essentially same concepts as from WWII but all advanced technologically.
Main difference is use of computers to aid humans.
Combat Cloud - that’s where I go to download more RAM 😜
Bro, I forgot my combatcloud ID!! 😅
it's dark to think about, yet so comical too..
Resilience is the Achilles heel in the matter just knock out the enemies polar and or equatorial satellites and you are a game changer.
By the way, aircraft formation is just copies of real birds formation.
Exactly, this makes me wonder how feasible network based warfare really is with a large conflict with a near-peer.
Look how quickly the conflict in Ukraine has reverted back to trenches, albeit with drones. Granted, both sides have lacked material/men and corruption is big on both sides. As cliche as it sounds, it reminds me of the corny quote "war never changes". I definitely does, but the fundamentals will always be the fundamentals. They're relevant regardless, whether you're fighting with sticks and stones or nukes. I feel like part of it is because warfare really does deal a lot with the human psyche and philosophy. Just like no matter the tech, the fundamentals of information and psychological warfare will remain the same. Unless our whole psyche as a species changes.
When they gonna re-arm the jet in mid flight?
I'm honestly really surprised this hasn't been looked into more. I'm sure it has, we just don't know. I bet it will also only become more of a thing the more drones and automation become a part of warfare. You can probably get the same effect with cheap one time use drones though (a la kamikaze drones/drone swarms)
It's possible that all these fifth gen aircraft are based on outdated assumptions on how war is to be fought 😮
How do you use this magnificent concept against ... the Houthis ?
Firth level air warfare systems is very precise and aimed towards air superiority at all times. However, it is heavily reliant on satellites, AWACS (although this system appears to be going obselete) and interlinked squadrons of aircraft like the F35s. However, as is not reported, is there a falling domino's effect, I.e. if you (the enemy) knock out one critical system does all the other systems collapse? E.g. knock out the military and civilian satellite network and the air warfare system is dead? Unlikely, although it's capabilities will certainly be diminished.
wouldn't knock out the military and civilian satellite network be a act of war?
2:00 could the network centric warfare concept be seen as the steroided version of combined arms warfare ?
If you think that's bunkers we had missiles fall out of the sky in the 90s.
But can all that cloud C&C compete with a situationally aware commander in an A-50... oh wait, never mind 🙁
With super computers processing high fidelity information from sensors - the army that processes faster wins and is able to engage and defeat the enemy - now imagine adding AI and you get a system that can think out from vast data the best way to attack or defend assets even with weapons with limited capabilities.
True, but that only works if you have information to process from those servers. It's a little hard to use all that stuff if the network is down. Which makes me wonder how feasible this stuff would be in attrition warfare with a big state actor.
After SAM capabilities have increased 1000 times over. It amazes me that fools still want to fly warplanes
The image at 2:50 :D
I thought even Gen 4 fighter pilots clown on movies that depict that close formation flying during combat?
The Yemen battlefield has foreign ships, India & EU
20:55 *"Stay tuned for the next episode."*
Hey, we don't have to *tune* anything to watch TH-cam videos. How can this guy possibly be qualified to talk about military technology when he doesn't even under stand basic computer technology.
(Apparently I'm in a weird mood.)
Thanks for the interesting video.
Love the channel. Personal opinion, the F-22 is struggling to remain relevant. Barely a hundred are combat capable, the logistics of maintaining the fleet outweigh their potential in a fight that really matters. Its still arguably the best fighter ever developed, though even there I'm dubious. 1v1 sure but no airborne weapons system operates in a vacuum. If the theatre is the western pacific, the F-22 won't carry the day as many anticipate. As for the cloud, its integrity would surely be compromised in a battlespace featuring a high level of adversary electronic countermeasures. Again, just my uneducated thoughts, happy to revise my opinion if presented with reason to do so.
EDIT: I'd LOVE IT if you created an alternate channel where you shared your personal thoughts regarding geopolitics and grand strategy!
F22 are getting a much delayed upgrade in Helmet cueing hardware and IRST capability...almost equal to the F35s.
I didn't know you owned a tie.
I have plenty, but I hardly ever use them.😝
I wonder what AI's clear definitions of "war" and "adversary" are. Because what would stop AI from simply arranging things to maximize deaths on BOTH sides?
That's the scary thing, even both "war" and "adversary" have differnt meanings depending on the context. Who's to say that Ai could striggle with some of these nuances. It's a very differnt scenarios is you just view it from a "ones and zeros" point of view.
👍
When failures of systems occur it is often then still dependent upon the human component...unfortunately.
0:37 Except that isn't a tactical formation.
Yes...
All this is good as long as everything works and the war is waged against a weak enemy
But how will all this work against a proportionate enemy?
When I was 25 years old I was in awe of such systems. But with age, my admiration somehow diminished
Very true, like in asymmetric warfare, the enemy gets a vote too.