Jump to content
Sturgeon's House
Sign in to follow this  
Commissar Binkov

Binkov's Battlegrounds: military analysis videos

Recommended Posts

Hello everyone!

 

I've made some videos concerning topics of military, strategy, technology and so on. So far I'm getting pretty good feedback on them so maybe you too would be interested in seeing them.

 

Here's one on Turkey vs Russia: hypothetical air war

 

Or US AMRAAM D missile compared to Russian R-77-1 missile

 

Or UK vs France: hypothetical war

 

So tell me what you think! :)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Glad to see you here.

 

I liked the AMRAAM vs Adder video quite a bit, because it is the first video I've seen on youtube that illustrates the kinematics of air to air missile launches.  Much of the discussion of air to air missile performance on the internet is based on fantasy.  Ignorance of basic facts of missile operation, like the fact that the motor burns out after a few seconds, or that range is enormously dependent upon launch altitude, is rampant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is the newest video! A bit of a fantasy setting, but a realistic depiction of forces involved, I'd say.

 

USA vs Russia: Arena war

https://youtu.be/r8KglkOgH-g

 

 

Also, I am glad you liked the video about missiles. Of course, much in the videos is simplified and some stuff is omitted.

 

Britain will have a better SAM defense once its CAMM family of missiles is online. While not of long range, important addition will be the fairly high ceiling of the system, enough for creating a barrier through with enemy planes will have to fly.

 

Edit: For the paramilitary in the newest video I included various border guard forces as well as the former Internal troops (now National guard) for Russia.

Edited by Commissar Binkov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is really interesting - thanks Binkov!

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZcwDfaY4OW4

 

The first thing of note is just how many missiles an AEGIS destroyer could potentially take on before getting hit.

 

The second thing is just how short the response time is - 30 seconds or so. So you're probably going to direct and fire in an automated fashion, which suggests that there is considerable scope for fuck-ups.

 

All in all, it seems that some sort of missile high-low mix (lots of cheap, relatively useless missiles mixed in with a few expensive and capable types) might be optimal for dealing with a fleet. That, and using a multitude of sensor systems for both attack and defence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have some questions.

 

a)  Why are the SU-35s carrying R-27ETs when they have R-77s?

B)  You describe the F-35s as keeping their radars off.  So you are not convinced that the LPI mode would work effectively?

c)  You also describe the SU-35's MAWS as being capable.  Is there any good source for information on Russian MAWS?  Most sources I've read are convinced that even the PAK-FA is equipped with a primitive, UV-based system that would not be useful against BVR missiles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of questions as well. I'm given to understand that the F-35s IRST is pretty high resolution and very capable have you taken that into account?  Also are you factoring in the datalink/sensor fusion that the F-35 has? IE 1 F-35 can apparently provide targeting data to all of the other F-35s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I have some questions.

 

a)  Why are the SU-35s carrying R-27ETs when they have R-77s?

B)  You describe the F-35s as keeping their radars off.  So you are not convinced that the LPI mode would work effectively?

c)  You also describe the SU-35's MAWS as being capable.  Is there any good source for information on Russian MAWS?  Most sources I've read are convinced that even the PAK-FA is equipped with a primitive, UV-based system that would not be useful against BVR missiles.

 

Not sure where he's getting his range figures for F-35 with bombload. Shouldn't its range go down less drastically than the SU-35?

 

EDIT: If we take this as gospel, then what you really need to maximize the Lightning is a longer-ranged AMRAAM.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
a)  Why are the SU-35s carrying R-27ETs when they have R-77s?

B)  You describe the F-35s as keeping their radars off.  So you are not convinced that the LPI mode would work effectively?

c)  You also describe the SU-35's MAWS as being capable.  Is there any good source for information on Russian MAWS?  Most sources I've read are convinced that even the PAK-FA is equipped with a primitive, UV-based system that would not be useful against BVR missiles.

 

I don't know if he is taking these into consideration but I can speculate.

 

R-27ET have an IR seeker, which depending on the radar seeker of the R-77 might make it a better missile against stealth targets.

 

If they are getting a data feed from the ground radars and/or if the Su-35 are actively scanning once the ground radar picked them up, the F-35 would not need to actively scan at all.

 

Based on Dragon029's videos the scenario seems to be generous in the range the Su-35 are able to detect the F-35.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of questions as well. I'm given to understand that the F-35s IRST is pretty high resolution and very capable have you taken that into account?  Also are you factoring in the datalink/sensor fusion that the F-35 has? IE 1 F-35 can apparently provide targeting data to all of the other F-35s.

 

Or ground launched missiles for that matter.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure where he's getting his range figures for F-35 with bombload. Shouldn't its range go down less drastically than the SU-35?

 

EDIT: If we take this as gospel, then what you really need to maximize the Lightning is a longer-ranged AMRAAM.

 

The missile ranges he uses for AMRAAM (which model?) and R-27ET are way too short. He also appeared to use the flawed hit statistics that count a second missile as a miss if the first hit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The North Korea one illustrates why it's not in Best Korea's interests to nuke Worst Korea and Japan. Not saying they won't do that, it just means that the US would have no reason not to just bomb the shit out of them from a distance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shoot. My lack of Internet data up here means I'll have to watch these when I get back.

 

Not sure if Binkov deals with it but the issue with North Korea isn't necessarily their nukes but the fact that they have thousands of artillery pieces within range of Seoul. 

Worst Korea is no longer the Third World shithole that we saved back in 1950-53 and is instead - what? - the sixth or seventh largest economy in the world. Any war - even a relatively short and victorious one would still devastate South Korea's economy, cost tens of thousands or more civilian casualties and probably cause a worldwide recession. All so South Korea and the US (and Japan?) can spend the next ten years rebuilding North Korea while trying to reprogram 20 million indoctrinated zombies. 

And that's assuming China is totes OK with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Donward said:

Shoot. My lack of Internet data up here means I'll have to watch these when I get back.

 

Not sure if Binkov deals with it but the issue with North Korea isn't necessarily their nukes but the fact that they have thousands of artillery pieces within range of Seoul. 

Worst Korea is no longer the Third World shithole that we saved back in 1950-53 and is instead - what? - the sixth or seventh largest economy in the world. Any war - even a relatively short and victorious one would still devastate South Korea's economy, cost tens of thousands or more civilian casualties and probably cause a worldwide recession. All so South Korea and the US (and Japan?) can spend the next ten years rebuilding North Korea while trying to reprogram 20 million indoctrinated zombies. 

And that's assuming China is totes OK with it. 

The China matters take on it is that South Korea would desperately love to see reunification, Japan would desperately love to occupy North Korea, and China is very unhappy about either possibility but very keen on the idea of keeping a buffer state or grabbing a slice of the North Korean pie for itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×