MilAvHistory
patreon
Early Access x2: MANPADS and Drones
🕑 Added 2022-08-30 21:18:40 +0000 UTCTwo new videos in Early Access!
Drones: Proliferation, Effectiveness, and Media Hype
> https://youtu.be/d4M1AUhSgFg
"Drones" in their aerial form (UAV, RPA and UCAV) have featured prominently in past and present conflicts and wars. With their employment came a veritable media hype. But not everything said about "drones" stands, once placed into context. In this video, I explore the benefits and limits of using UAVs and RPAs in conflict zones, and explain why they differ from UCAVs.
MANPADS: Detailed Look At The Most Cost-Effective Air Defense
> https://youtu.be/yArJ-tH06d0
MANPADS (Man-portable Air Defense Systems) are amongst the most respectable and cost-effective air defense systems out there. Although simple in comparison to the more impressive long-range systems, the versatility and pop-up threat posed by MANPADS makes them a special threat to pilots.
Hope you enjoy, looking forward to your feedback and thanky ou for the support. Remember to also check the earlier post for additional videos that are still in early access!
Best
Chris
Comments
Bill Lemmond
Just watched the MANPADS video. Very thorough and balanced. Amazing that such expensive missiles are relatively cheap. I recall reading that some Sherman tank model cost $75,000 (in 1944 dollars) each to produce. Other sources had P-51s around $250K or $350K (It's been decades since I read this.), and P-47s at twice the cost.
Military Aviation History
Thanks very much, Bill!
Bill Lemmond
Hi, Chris, Just watched the aerial drone differentiation video. Thanks for the abundant clarity. Happy to support you. :)
Military Aviation History
No nation got it right from the start of the war, but you don't necessarily need a perfect concept as long as you are flexible enough to make and predicte required changes.
O D
I do not think I am an expert on WW2 AC even though I've read a lot about the subject over the years. It seems to me Fighter pilots are Jocks . I'm not sure they really get that fighters were to protect bombers ( WW 1 and 2 ) . But it also seems the Air Forces of all sides were not good at making their doctrine and also making sure their AC fit their doctrine. The US long range bombers didn't really have a long range fighter until the P51 as an example. . Did any nation get it right in WW2?
