BERIEV MAINSTAY: The Soviet AWACS

[@Deltarious]

I'm a huge fan of all the rotating radome aircraft, AWACS or otherwise, and it's a shame they're not going to be arround for that much longer. It's cool that technology has improved but there's just something about the spinning radome that's just *right* to me

[@GregStonham]

You know what else is a huge fan? The front of those engines... (tumbleweed...crickets...)

[@ThePlayerOfGames]

Playing Nuclear Option as the Medusa, fictional AWACS with anti-missile laser 😁

[@ssyn6626]

I agree that, um wall, fence whatever the e7 has is awful looking the US just makes everything hideous anymore.

[@28ebdh3udnav]

With how fast technology has advanced, they're only using the last of what's *left*

[@bfc3057]

​@@GregStonhamthat doesn't work for several reasons. It wasn't worth it

[@I_am_not_a_dog]

One of my… *mainstay* KZbinrs I’ll show myself out

[@wretchedexcess1654]

That was clumsy...

[@GrigoriZhukov]

Oh, what is that outside your window.

[@eyerollthereforeiam1709]

Groan..

[@shainemaine1268]

I liked it!

[@jamesrandall1979]

I laughed buddy

[@KRGruner]

I have to say, the quality of your videos is top notch. Really well done.

[@paulwoodman5131]

He really is good. I'm always impressed with his videos. Can't wait to hear another one. Every subject is wonderfully well researched and well spoken. This guy is good 👍.

[@TimJonkman-m9m]

I see not a pound for air to ground I click I like

[@sjoormen1]

nothing else to do.

[@davefloyd9443]

Can you do the story of the Nimrod development? Amazes me the RAF were still using a Comet derived airframe in 2011.

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

The issues had been fixed.

[@andrewcockburn7484]

USAF still use dash80 derived airframes in 2024....

[@davefloyd9443]

@neiloflongbeck5705 Yeah, but growing up in the the 80s/90s it was always on the news about the project, its tech, cuts, changes of plan etc etc. Never really got the full picture, from Comet>Nimrod MR1>MR2>Sidewinders>MRA4>Cancellation. It would be great to get a NAPFATG deep dive on the old girl.

[@andrewpease3688]

Almost as old P3 was the main opposition 2 engines were ruled out,which is a shame in light of the P8 and the forthcoming A321 NEO XLR MPA

[@neiloflongbeck5705]

@davefloyd9443 agreed.

[@skymechanic5718]

As someone who used to work on the E2 Hawkeye, I truly do appreciate this video.

[@TheThanimal]

I am in school to get my A&P. We are talking about environmental control systems in one of my classes. Obviously I don't have any insider knowledge of the Mainstay, but it is very telling that there was no heating in the cabin during the the takeoff and climb to altitude. The clue as to why might come from the mention that it's performance was not as advertised. On airliners, heating and pressurization can come from taking compressed bleed air from the compressor section of the aircraft engines. This has limitations. When you rob from the engines, you steal some of the engine power. If you need all the thrust of those engines to takeoff and climb to altitude, you can't afford to take too much bleed air. It is possible that flying in that thin air and level is when you can finally take some of that bleed air and heat up that cabin.

[@braincraven]

I love this history of specific aircraft. The progression from strategic decisions leading to aircraft development and finally tactical deployment.

[@SolarWebsite]

The Mainstay always makes me think of the beginning of the Tom Clancy book Red Storm Rising. "F-19" stealth fighters (the F-117 was still secret) surprise attack the Soviet mainstays, allowing NATO aircraft to attack targets almost at will. Absolutely worth a read for anyone who likes military hardware.

[@N1njaSnake]

Later editions have the F-117 edited in.

[@amerigo88]

Clancy's military equipment stories are great but, his people are cartoon characters - two dimensional.

[@Solnoric]

Most notable bit of that book for me was how he got a TON of shit for depicting the Apache as not an invulnerable grim reaper of the battlefield. And then the gulf wars happened and he was vindicated.

[@lordcraycray2921]

F-19 “frisbee”. The only thing that he got wrong was that F-117 didn’t have air to air, but F-22 changed that in spades. Now, and F-22 (and mostly F-35) could supercruise or low level fly and launch from the theoretical maximum of the new longer range missiles, probably greater than 200 miles away and since the Mainstay is such a large an non maneuverable target they would last long at all.

[@amerigo88]

@@Solnoric i would have thought Vietnam made it clear that combat aerial operations within range of small arms fire would show attrition was the only way forward.

[@Combatant5]

4:54 the decision to build an AWACS platform off the Il-76 (the in service aircraft that eventually became the Mainstay's parent aircraft) was likely more to do with logistics than with politics. If you had an aircraft like what Tupolev designed, that is now the only aircraft in that supply chain, and you don't need as many AWACS birds when compared to strategic airlift ones. EDIT: It's also worth noting that Ivan decided that the Il-76 would be a great base platform for his tanker as well thanks to the production count of the type.

[@briancavanagh7048]

Besides, design bureaux like to design things. So if given the opportunity they would always propose an optimised new design. Same in the west.

[@dasgelbevomei4739]

@notapound your videos are just one more reason to look forward to Fridays. Keep up the good work!

[@BigUziVert2190]

Love your videos! Always informative and great to watch or listen to! sometimes ill just be doing stuff around the house and put it your vids for background sound. Very informative and enetrtaining and also very relaxing in my opinion! Keep up the great work!!

[@a.n.7229]

Where did you get all these photos? This isn't just technically detailed and well-narrated - it's visually stunning too!

[@pastorrich7436]

Fascinating! With the Mainstay visited, how much longer until we can expect the Sentry? Perhaps even Rivet Joint, Cobra Ball, et al?

[@acompletelynormalhuman6392]

So apparently the tu 114 (what the moss is bassed on) is a tu 95 that has been modified to carry passengers instead of bombs just in case anyone else was wondering why it looked like a tu95

[@Lord_Ronin_The_Compassionate]

Is that the plane that causes hearing loss for the poor passengers?

[@presidentmerkinmuffley6769]

​@@Lord_Ronin_The_Compassionate WHAT?!? Yes it is.

[@Lord_Ronin_The_Compassionate]

@@presidentmerkinmuffley6769 thank you for your help, although I didn’t get your joke about people shouting “WHAT?”. Upon reading it again I must say that I like your style, so please forgive my initial ignorance - the problem of getting old. Apparently the British government/military doesn’t consider hearing loss in the right ear after operating the FAL SLR and assorted SA80’s, MP5’s isn’t service related. Sound familiar? EH? PARDON ME, I COULDN’T HEAR YOU.. Again, thanks.

[@garynew9637]

​@pr😂😂esidentmerkinmuffley6769

[@padawanmage71]

Thanks for this video! I i have a plastic model of the Mainstay i still need to finish LOL.

[@TheOfficial007]

Are there plans to look at the E-3 as a result of this series?

[@horusfalcon]

This was an interesting report. Beriev as a bureau did some interesting work.

[@SuppressedOfficial]

Every one of your videos is solid gold, bro.

[@jpatt1000]

LOVE the interior shot @ 14:00. Crystal clear and great color!!

[@Taurevanime]

Good video as always. Now that you have covered Soviet AWACS development. Will we see you also cover some of the other nations? Such as the most glorious Fairey Gannet AEW.3? Also a shoutout for you to only cover anything that can be conclusively proven. I have seen far too many militaria and history youtubers jump on speculation and present it as fact the past few years.

[@antoniolopez696]

As usual, this was an excellent video, well documented and organized.

[@Tom-Lahaye]

Very in depth review of this plane. Compared with the E3-A the A50 is quite crammed full with equipment and does look cluttered. It clearly shows the difference between Soviet and western computer technology at the time. Living close to the Geilenkirchen Germany airbase the E3-A is a daily sight for me, and a regular Il-76 visits the base now and then, it transports goods to Ukraine, together with an An-12 turboprop cargo plane. Quite cool to see US and ex Soviet planes in the same place.

[@geodkyt]

OK, one thought occurred to me... Why the heck did the Soviets bother with tactical ID numbers on the airframe of *this* aircraft, especially large, high visibility ones. I understand why they did it with fighters and even bombers, and it makes "convienience" sense to do it to standard transport birds, too ("Pvt Skippovich, go check the brakes on Number 77. That's the Il-76 with the ten foot tall red '77' on the rear half of the fuselage - think you can find it on the tarmac?") But, an AWACs bird is a *specialty* platform. They don't operate in formations (so, being able to visually ID the individual airframe in a furball isn't a problem - it's the big ass cargo airframe that's being himoed by a UFO). You shouldn't have so many parked in the same place that being able to ID it by reading a much smaller, lower visibility tail njmber should be adequate. Heck, you might only have ONE on the entire air base at any given moment (amd if PVT Skippovich gets lost and starts working on the wrong airplane, well, pushups and "verbal counselling" exist; he wont get it wrong twice.) But having those big ass red numbers on a specialty platform (and one an adversary is *highly* motivated to neutralize) gives away too much information to an adversary. Thise numbers can be read from *miles* away with a telescope or an airborne optical sensor like the camera pod often carried on F-14s. Theyre certainly something a "casual observer" (i.e., "NATO spy") anywhere with line of sight on the airfield or thr approach path can read. Which means, your adversary has less trouble tracking WHICH Mainstay is deployed WHERE atvany given moment... and crews have habits. Habits that often can be exploited, if youve managed to make observations so you know that under circumstance X, Red 40 is likely.to do Y. If nothing else, it gives you a feel for operstional readiness rates, lets you confirm damage reports ("Hey, we thought Red 50 got tagged a month ago, and we havent seen here *anywhere* since those reports.") It's the same reason pretty.much everyone stopped painting hull numbers on the sails of their submarines. Or was this simply institutional inertia - "Should we be painting tactical IDs on these birds?" "Of course. Comrade Lieutenant! We oaint them in all the OTHER aircraft, right?"

[@chriskortan1530]

I think you're discounting the very simple expedient of repainting those numbers and create the question of just how many "#44' s" are there? To be fair though, given Soviet history of poor maintenance and training, it's probably vital to ensure the correct aircraft is being worked on or scarce parts are put on the right plane, lol.

[@shainemaine1268]

Mate please proofread yo shit if you're gonna make it that long! I invented the art of long-winded, pointed yet unnecessary commentary - but I always make sure that if I type something several paragraphs long in a youtube comment, I go back through it before posting so if people are taking the time to read the entire thing it isn't going to be riddled with errors & incorrect (or just sub-optimal) grammar. I read the mistakes in my head exactly as they're typed, and am sure I'm not alone in this particular form of neuroses... Also have you ever been involved with any military force for any reason, or a KZbin professor on the topic? I don't know the exact, 'official' answers to/reasons for the points you raised here but - I'd absolutely presume (whatever is the Russian equivalent to an Air Force) had their reasons for doing this at the time, and probably have plenty still since it's been kept that way so long. Personally I could imagine several reasons you'd want your aircraft to have clear & easily identifiable tailnumbers, but it would only be more speculation except for a couple obvious ones: If it has to in any way interact with civilian/commercial ATC, it's probably a good idea to have each individual airframe be CLEARLY visually distinguishable. Also (to one of your points) they do actually tend to have multiple units based at the same locations, probably for ease of maintenance on such specialized equipment (and there's Baeriev's manufacturing center which is basically their own airfield). Removing all the high-visibility tailnumbers might get confusing, since all of them are one of two paint schemes. The 'United' States does this as well but we have quite a few more - mainly because our government's current devotion to this f__king "status quo" cancer requires far more aerial coverage ('global', one may call it). Russia really only has to have enough to cover itself without the need for much of a reserve because as much as they might use it as a bitching-point, they know for a fact we have absolutely no desire to invade or attack them without (and recently this has been made abundantly clear) SIGNIFICANT and severe provocations - though we could've done a better job of not outright ostracizing these people for whatever glaringly hypocritical reason we decided to go with that particular day, but that's certainly beside the point now... they were going to do what they were going to do regardless, but we would've looked (and maybe even been) alot better had we given an honest effort to validate them as a legitimate nation - nevermind one of the worlds few (& I really hate this term) "super" powers. Who knows, it might've even changed things just enough that the world wouldn't be in quite such a f__king mess today... "We don't want to make them feel like they're important!" - quote from some USN commander during a NATO naval exercise in the (Baltic??) Sea, after being asked why the US didn't give adequate & advance notification to Russia before the exercise began. Surely the actual reason had far more to do with not wanting them observing our maneuvers, but still... that's not exactly what I'd call a statement of respectful diplomacy. Plus I'd certainly say they've since made it very clear just how "unimportant" they are! It's mindblowingly moronic how people STILL think theyre a joke to be taken oh so lightly, when they currently have (probably, it's not like there's contests or something) THE most advanced hybrid-warfare component of any modern military in existence today. One which proved able to functionally cripple our whole government with a few well-placed "reasonable politicians", bought or blackmailed media, and f__king Facebook memes! I'm very sorry this comment devolved into a rant about this, but one major point made in "The Art of War" is to ***NOT*** underestimate ones' opponent... it's been a while since I've dived into that gem, but I really don't remember it saying, "Talk mad s__t on your enemy every chance you get - often with flagrant hypocrisy, do everything you can to (falsely) convince everyone of their cultural incompetence, undermine every attempt they make to peacefully coexist and prosper, and treat them overall like they're not worth the ammunition it would take to conquer them" (ironically the same exact 'tactics' they've so victoriously applied to invading Ukraine). This behavior is historically proven to be extremely foolish, and it just makes it difficult to trust anything out of our government officials' mouths - which is actually a thing you're SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO DO, since it's generally (one of) the ways you avoid surrendering to the f__king Taliban (not to mention "constant lying to their own people" being yet another of the myriad offenses we love to criticize the Russians' government over)! Again, sorry this turned into what it has, but its a long-winded sentiment I stand by - regardless of my desire to see the Ukrainians beat their asses so badly they won't even teach about their "Special Suicide Operation" in their schools. NEVER f__king underestimate... Btw how do you get a 'bold' font, and is there an option to italicize?

[@DeanstuD]

The reasons you've stated, I am sure is why I painted or rather did not paint the numbers on USN EC-130Q. They originally had numbers and letters on the tail, and nose. I am sure the reasons they were were removed were like you said. Ha as I read your comment, I thought it sounded like an old training video. We only had the Buno a few inches tall near the tail to ID them other than that I could recognize them pretty well by patina, but I was in corrosion control, so I was washing/inspecting/painting them. One of them (2 or 3) "wasn't anodized" at all or maybe not properly, and it would loose chunks all over so they were very splotchy and they wouldn't allow us to repaint too large an area. Until it came back missing "too large an area", and we did paint a larger than authorized area. That was right near the end and they were soon off to Tuson? as they were replaced by the E-6A. I'd like to see a TACAMO vid like this one.

[@petesheppard1709]

Great video! It’s always enlightening to see what the other side has to work with. As a follow-up, would you consider the EC-121 Warning Star? It was in service at about the same time and performed a crucial command and control role during the Vietnam War.

[@shawnmiller4781]

And arguably the first example of the awacs concept to see service

[@presidentmerkinmuffley6769]

​@@shawnmiller4781 E-2 was in service, as an AWACS both radar picket and coordinator but really only for Fleet Defence. EB-66 could also technically fill in that role along with the EC-121, in Air Force use, but E-2 was already doing what it still does.

[@ComfortsSpecter]

Incredible History Great examples Good work My Man

[@karenhensley8745]

I love your videos you're the best that this kind of a genre well except for maybe Greg he's ruthless but could you please do a video on the vat super crusader 3 in in depth I am visually impaired and I've asked several people to make a video about it for me but you're the perfect person to do it keep up the great work

[@Kaiser_Kenny]

What I find amazing is that this channel started like a year ago and immediately came right out of the gate with high quality in depth content.

[@callenclarke371]

Excellent content. Thank you for this. A parallel E-3 Episode would be very welcome.

[@ramal5708]

Can you do a video on the E-8 JSTARS?

[@nmc052able]

Thx for yet another great video!

[@DarkRendition]

I would love to hear him narrate an audiobook ❤

[@Nahlol72]

🐐 job - love Soviet aviation , it’s an alternate tougher universe.

[@DarkRendition]

His videos reminds me of the “Great Planes” series from the late 80s early 90s.

[@davidjarvie9546]

Great research and attention to detail, I thoroughly enjoy your work. Fascinating subject matter, sometimes I wonder how many of these aircraft actually flew...lol....respect to the Russian pilots who took on these monsters. Thanks.NAPFATG...✈👍

[@christophmahler]

Unlike in 1957, to have the 1983 F-117A with it's 1,720 km combat range cross the Arctic from e.g. former Thule Air Base on Danish Greenland via aerial refueling is as unlikely as the Beriev A-50 tracking them... Not, because pilots can't be made to fly 10-18 hours, but because the RADAR cross section of involved tankers are not reduced, at all... Thus the late Soviet development hell of Airborne Early Warning and Control Systems is only topped by post-Cold War US decades of tinkering in order to get 'low observable', automated tanker drones into operational readiness - unlike with strategic bombers, the very condition of 'stealth' strike fighters toward any strategic or operational effect... From the ability of the 1983 MiG-31B/M to not only 'sense' contacts via it's sophisticated RADAR (even at low altitude), but also control air space via data-linked fused sensors, capable of commanding other craft like the then numerous MiG-29A toward intercept - de facto fulfilling the Mainstay operational role, a video on that platform is arguably due. The legendary decapitation strike unto British aligned separatist Dzhokhar Musayevich Dudayev is originally attributed to the Sukhoi Su-24 platform (possibly the rare 1983 MP variant) - which makes sense due to their mission profile of penetrating contested air space at low altitude and their signal intelligence training. The A-50, however does have an additional role, usually ignored in the West: the coordination of 'Reconnaissance Strikes' unto ground targets - from ballistic and cruise missiles to long range artillery - although drones would be the safer operation.

[@andrewpease3688]

@@christophmahler “British aligned separatist”,tell me more?

[@B1900pilot]

Always outstanding videos!

[@ficklefingeroffate]

Excellent content, as usual.

[@JGCR59]

The usual friday treat :) thanks

[@ndfgaming6824]

A video on the tu-4 and its modifications and use with the USSR and CCP airforces would be awesome ive seen a few weird things in passing (like a turbo prop tu-4) and i would love more context

[@mmmmm54321]

Paper Skies has made an interesting video about the TU-4 development, but they focus more on the political infighting aspects of the project and stories surrounding it

[@louiswilkins9624]

Interesting 🤔, Thanks for sharing

[@mackjsm7105]

LOVE this channel.

[@chris5634C3PO]

Great post, again!

[@RedXlV]

Given the shortcomings you mentioned about the Il-76 platform, and the fact that the A-50 didn't actually enter service until 1984, I wonder if they would've been better off installing the radar and associated systems on the Il-86 instead.

[@Steven-k8t]

the 1st Il-86 appeared in late 1976, so the AWACS variant would take even longer to develop; OTH, the IL-96-400M could be used for that, as well as other planes based on passanger models. in the meantime, they r developing the A-100 based on Il-476.

[@RedXlV]

@@Steven-k8t There would've been some delay, but they might have gotten a better outcome. As for the A-100, we'll see how long it takes for Russia to get that past the prototype stage. A lot of their projects are stuck in development hell right now.

[@DarkRendition]

Yay! Another video!

[@jackconnelly4525]

Such great photos.

[@MUSTDOS]

22:05 Other than possible issues of defection, AWACs platforms are generally sluggish and can be intercepted with "a bigger missile" regardless of how bad its flight characteristics as long as it had range. If anything, even agility should be considered for an AWACS for at least performing a horizontal split S maneuver even at the expense of electronics, which (regardless of who manufacture them or even if they where wired than printed) still face issues with high G maneuvers.

[@MainesOwn]

just an excellent summary, I learned some things.

[@michaelmorley7719]

It's a major improvement over the Moss, in that at least it doesn't irradiate the crew.

[@snizami]

I don't get this reference to radiation, which implies ionizing gamma rays: something radars do not emitt.

[@michaelmorley7719]

@@snizami In the video on the Moss, the narrator mentioned that Moss crews were exposed to unhealthy levels of RF radiation from the radar set.

[@snizami]

@michaelmorley7719 Yes, I picked up on that, but the point remains: neither radio nor microwaves are higher energy ionizing radiation.

[@atomf9143]

A video on the YF-12 or XF-108 Rapier would be dope.

[@Excal500]

PLEASE make an E-3 video in the future!

[@adrianpeters2413]

Allways amazed at the lengths ,that russia had to , and currently HAS to , to basically defend itself ...

[@knightsnight5929]

Even when it's invading its neighbours in imperialist wars of aggression, in a desperate attempt to reestablish it's empire. Shocking stuff.

[@Сталкер-ь2х]

i mean, it has biggest territory so makes sense?

[@adrianpeters2413]

@@Сталкер-ь2х yes indeed ..must stop the western powers stealing all the energy reserves you have ..good luck ... on all fronts ...

[@adrianpeters2413]

@@knightsnight5929 oh dear my reply was banned in the free western media here on u tube , and no swearing or derogatory abusive language was used ..oh dear oh dear oh dear ..hey what about this as a song title, remember member member remember , remember for what to remember . Top of the poppies for sure .

[@maciek_k.cichon]

Well, they tried. Although I think that the old Soviet airmen were a bit more sharp that their descendants nowadays. Double goes for ops.

[@sim-sam]

So, no toilet on board means that it "shmelled" very much ?

[@snizami]

What do you mean by crews suffering radiation exposure? Typically, that implies ionizing radiation, which radars do not emit. Do you mean thermal burns from microwaves?

[@happycatto9555]

The T-114 was based on the military plane, not the other way around

[@michaelsnyder3871]

I wonder how really effective those little plastic fans over the scopes and electronics bays.

[@iffracem]

NAPFATG video? It must be Friday........

[@briancavanagh7048]

Imagine fitting out an aircraft for a large crew & 7 hour missions and no loo. No wonder the Soviet Union collapsed.

[@hond654]

8:57 was a fair comment

[@Onirot69]

In DCS one of the f14’s always hauls ass passed the fighter screen and smokes the “50” with a phoenix

[@Сталкер-ь2х]

i dont think half the missionmakers remember red awacs exist

[@Sturminfantrist]

can you do a Vid on EC-121 in VN

[@mochabear88]

ty

[@thephantomgam3642]

Now,when are you gonna cover the Hawkeye my beloved?

[@ComfortsSpecter]

⁠spinning radomes are so cool and warbly Adorable

[@bobjones-bt9bh]

was not Patriot- was custom modified S200 missiles. Perhaps the radar that acquired them was Patriot, but they probably vectored S200s toward the radar emissions of the A50s. The terminal homing of the S200 missile took care of the rest- it was upgraded; these were not series production missiles. Very few missiles have the range to have struck at that distance....S200 is one of them. PAC3 has nowhere near the range to have made those hits

[@enterthekraken]

Not a single pound wasted on air to ground here.

[@simon199418]

So many feet 😮

[@LeeviHokka126]

11:14 Doesn't make sense for the crew to wear camo uniforms.

[@markpimlott2879]

'One style fits all missions, perhaps is the simplest explanation in USSR/Russia 🇷🇺 ? 'Forest green's OK for aviation, however not ideal for desert 🏜 😕 or Arctic ❄️ 🏔 🧊 operations! 🤔 🌳 🏡 🌲 🌴 🏜 ❄️ 🏔 ❄️ 🏜 🏡 🌲 🌴 🌳

[@railgap]

I dunno about "continues in service today"! AFAIK, the entire "fleet" of Mainstay are grounded with two problems: leaking radomes and lack of spare engines / engine parts. It looks as if they may soon be relegated to the dustbin of history.

[@atomf9143]

Iirc Russia currently has 7 in active service, down from 9 in 2022 due to a Patriot shot and friendly fire. They have many more airframes- I think like 20- in deep storage, but those are functionally impossible to return to full service. So it is likely that the lifetime of the A-50 and its variants is near a close. Russia does have the A-100 program, but idk how well that’s going.

[@mrj4990]

How does the benefit of reduced range help its ability to clutter jamming? 3:45

[@if5407]

Slow and low internal volume !?...

[@coyote8427]

this video rocks dude (i haven’t watched it yet)

[@richardque4952]

India tested the a50.claim the radar look down performance has difficult picking low flying target.thats why it was rejected.by IAF.

[@shainemaine1268]

Do Russians have 'callsigns'? I can't believe I don't already know the answer to this really

[@maxkircher4671]

Their callsigns are the plane numbers. "44 Red", "27 Yellow", "36 Black" and so on. They don't really do the 'random stuff' callsigns that NATO influenced air forces use. You're not the only one that doesn't know it, I only know myself because it happens to fall inside my sphere of nerd interests.

[@Сталкер-ь2х]

​@@maxkircher4671 they dont even do colors afaik just tail number (which is 3 digits)

[@hidraunfiltered]

DONT STOP MAKING AWACS VIDEOS

[@womble321]

The moss irradiated the crew.

[@johnshepherd9676]

Both the USAF and the USN trialed defensive tactics to protect AWACS platforms and their conclusion was not optimistic. The CAP had to loiter at subsonic speeds but the attacker could approach at supersonic speeds. Coupled with a long range missile the attackers almost always won.

[@beachboy0505]

Got the job done, all of these AWACS planes were a WIP.

[@nobodyherepal3292]

What job? Doing nothing for 60 years until their final version got forcefully retired in Ukraine by a US Patriot system?

[@Mukuro-Ikusaba]

The B70... What?

[@trimbalemrbale575]

u said uhf radio has a 1200 mile range. thats an error. try HF radio

[@DeltaDemon1]

Looks quite crude...But it looks very similar to the AWACS. So...

[@N1njaSnake]

Like the Su-57: Temu aircraft

[@willpugh8865]

Well we know 1 a50m was destroyed on the ground by a drone so not necessarily a strange way to be taken out, probably the most likely scenario just because of its mission

[@KSCPMark6742]

Too bad we don't know the identity of the two A-50's Ukraine destroyed. Perhaps they were some of the aircrafts featured, yay

[@MrStasyan2013]

a dollar against ground from air

[@sohrabroozbahani4700]

And then there is... KJ2000...

[@RedXlV]

Which is basically an A-50 except with AESA radar.

[@raideurng2508]

The E-3 is vastly superior in basically all aspects and even after Block 40/45, the US is looking to replace it with more modern systems. The A-50 was never a real AWACS, it was AEW and as we're seeing, they're not long for this world if put into actual combat. A poor attempt to catch up to the US which resulted in an inferior platform.

[@prfwrx2497]

In that they require a separate command aircraft to complete the AWACS loop, you're correct. As to how the radar is inferior... I'll have to watch the rest of the video first.

[@andrewemery4272]

But the E-3 is flown by Transgender Nazis...

[@raideurng2508]

@@prfwrx2497 The real kicker is the soviets never having a proper universal datalink system like link16. So, regardless of the power of the radar, they were unlikely to be able to send actual data directly to fighters as situational awareness, etc. Soviet fighters has many small datalinks, but link16 was a beast of a thing to engineer, but it's so robust, it'll probably be used for decades still.

[@NCD3000-fp9ix]

Yeah that's kind of been proven by the A-50's actual combat record. It's been taken out twice by long range SAMs due to it having to fly much closer to the front than a typical AWACs.

[@robertkalinic335]

It literally does the complete awacs job just like the video says, doesn't mean its just early warning radar cause e3 is better.

[@SP3NTT]

Mandatory algo comment

[@mayto420]

where are the painting images for your thumbnails from?

[@toi_techno]

Junk now Junk when it was first built

[@jimsvideos7201]

No galley is understandable - you an always brown-bag a lunch - but no lav sounds pretty grim.

[@wingmay8571]

Russia only has a few early warning radar aircrafts left. They may have to buy some made in China 😂

[@Rostmeo1]

There are 12 A-50s in deep storage 22 in service (current) and around 2-3 are being produced a year by Beriev it’s safe to say they are not running out anytime soon 😂

[@knightsnight5929]

How many of these do the orcs have left? 😂

[@knightsnight5929]

Is it one or two?

[@fajareraim6136]

im sorry is it me or this mustang is too "overdone"... and it doesnt feel proper...seeing that much chrome on the engine bay... the dash and stuff... unfortunately doug cant show us underneath the body..is that properly "restored" or just another flipper special

[@bestamerica]

' nah nah... american AWACS plane is a much better than ussr russia cheap low classic old weak awacs plane

[@humbertomonteiro6742]

😂😂😂😂😂😂, a submarine..

[@EmarElutin]

Russia has only 6 operational Beriev a-50 AWACS,2 were shotdown in Ukraine.🤣🤣😂😂

[@DaveSCameron]

3:41 I need one of these Bumblebee Radars to warn me about incoming females!

[@weaponsgradepotato]

First.

[@nikolaideianov5092]

Ok

[@hieronymusjacabusprincepso5060]

'one advantage the the Sentry has it can can refuel in mid air..' Yeah, can you not see the refuel probe on the mainstay ? Soft propaganda......

[@efrenmolinar8145]

Did you miss where he explained the Mainstay's radome would cause severe buffeting when it would catch the tanker aircraft's wake turbulence, thereby making air to air refueling impossible?

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

@notapound >>> Great video...👍

[@nikolaideianov5092]

Whos that? We are watching not a kilo for air to ground :)

[@Allan_aka_RocKITEman]

​​@@nikolaideianov5092>>> I am being an _"Imperialist."_ 😉