Which one do you choose?
Which one do you choose?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
twitter.com
Seryoga, is that you?
America didn't choose right either, it's a prototype
THICCCCCC
Post a right one
The project was cancelled
Why would you compare an experimental prototype whose sole purpose is to serve as a testing platform?
Both are shit. We should use our fighter budget on ground based Anti Air
>Abandon mastery of air
We have enough artillery to get by without air support
>fly at 10000 meter
>hit with bomb
problem solved
Great China
Finns have no hope of air superiority though. But even a small number of ground based anti air wepeons forces a much more carefull aproach by the enemy. Some weapon plattforms cant be used altogether until its safe enough. That applies to many helicopters for example. This diminishes the advantage the enemy has from air superiority to a large degree.
Post jets now
That only works if something is spotting for the bomber
That's BUK-M1. It's capable of hitting targets at 25km altitude. Still a middle range system though.
>implying funland would ever get airsuperiority agaist russis
>25km
isn't space only like 12km lol
this lmao.
25km that would be close to the moon LOL
Not quite.
This system is also supposed to target cruise missiles.
Depend if China is bullshitting about their quantum radar.
Even our war planes are fucking fat
even planes in america are obese
If you arent fat you are commie
the second one looks like a high altitude diabetes bomber
>That only works if something is spotting for the bomber
Do you think person lasering targer. That is for unguided rockets and canon.
This is just a prototype, fucking retardic moron.
Boeing wasn't even commissioned.
i smell in here. dont take it too serious guys
Well shit!
Oi mate! Easy Vlad.
>tfw Eagle Dynamic just announcing new MAC
>tfw its also keyboard and mouse friendly
youtube.com
but thin is not an American thing