COLD WAR FILM FIRST FIVE DAYS OF WORLD WAR III NATO vs. WARSAW PACT 23124

Produced in the 1980s at the peak of Cold War paranoia, this Grumman Aerospace film discusses the theoretical first five days of air combat that would occur in the event of an outbreak of hostilities between NATO and the Warsaw Pact. It emphasizes the EF-111A electronic warfare and penetrating aircraft's capabilities as part of the tactical package, performing jamming of Soviet radars. The film showcases the capabilities of the USAF and its high tech weapons and examines the Soviet threat. It features a great deal of footage taken from Soviet propaganda films from this era to show the Warsaw bloc's capabilities. It includes assessments by General Thomas Swaim of the U.S. Air Force's Tactical Air Warfare Center. According to Swaim, the pressure that would be brought to bear on NATO forces by the Soviets would be immense in terms of numbers, with the Soviets holding a considerable advantage in strength. The USAF's high tech F-111, F-4, and F-16 aircraft and their technological edge would be key to fending off an enemy offensive. The first five days of the war would determine the winner in a non-conventional war in Europe.
Features images of Soviet ICBMs at 2:10 on parade in Red Square, Soviet aircraft including tactical fighters at 2:30, and electronic weapons, radars and air defense systems at 3:00. The EF-111A is also shown at 4:10, used to block Soviet electronic systems. MiG aircraft are shown at 5:27 scrambling. The EF-111A ECM platform is seen being built at 6:00, from the original F-111 aircraft. At 7:22 a Soviet aircraft is seen being destroyed in air-to-air combat (likely Vietnam war footage).
The General Dynamics-Grumman EF-111A Raven was an electronic warfare aircraft designed to replace the B-66 Destroyer in the United States Air Force. Its crews and maintainers often called it the "Spark-Vark", a play on the F-111's "Aardvark" nickname.
The USAF contracted with Grumman in 1974 to convert some existing General Dynamics F-111As into electronic warfare/electronic countermeasures (ECM) aircraft. The USAF had considered the Navy / Marine Corps Grumman EA-6B Prowler, but was reluctant to adopt a Navy aircraft. The EF-111 entered service in 1983 and served until it was retired in 1998. Afterwards, the Air Force began depending on Navy and Marine Corps EA-6Bs for electronic warfare support.
We encourage viewers to add comments and, especially, to provide additional information about our videos by adding a comment! See something interesting? Tell people what it is and what they can see by writing something for example: "01:00:12:00 -- President Roosevelt is seen meeting with Winston Churchill at the Quebec Conference."
This film is part of the Periscope Film LLC archive, one of the largest historic military, transportation, and aviation stock footage collections in the USA. Entirely film backed, this material is available for licensing in 24p HD, 2k and 4k. For more information visit www.PeriscopeFilm.com

[@lostinpa-dadenduro7555]

Is it just me, or do the people in these older documentaries sound more educated and articulate than ninety percent of people today?

[@ThommyofThenn]

Edit: Re-read this 2 days later and noticed I left a word out and a letter off another. It's happening to me too! Hahaha You're the only other person I've ever seen bring this up. I'm convinced it's a "thing," and have considered the potential reasons why. When I watch tv from the 60s, I'm often amazed at how well spoken and emotionally intelligent even regular people and characters are. The average person seemed to have a much larger *vocabulary. Today, I have to purposely use smaller words because of how often I've been looked at like I was speaking Finnish when I use a bigger word or something. Anyway, just knowing one other person has realised this is so vindicating to me. Thank you

[@Istandby666]

When I have to write up an operational manual. I have to write them at a 4th grade reading level. So the kids today might comprehend what's actually being said.

[@jtasgl88]

Compare these guys to our current SECDEF: Lloyd Austin. Just lol.

[@ThommyofThenn]

@@jtasgl88 sadly a recent president normalized having clowns in higher offices and the trend seems to have stuck

[@ThommyofThenn]

@@Istandby666 It's tempting to say there is a concerted effort to reduce the population's intelligence to make them easier to manipulate but I think it's a mixture of how we have come to view ignorance as a point of pride, viewing education as a waste of money and cutting funding drastically and having stupid metrics for measuring "progress" such as standardised testing.

[@bobcaruso1368]

This was my world as an 80's era TAC EWO flying F-4Gs. We were ready - Weasels and SparkVaarks were the tip of the spear to suppress and destroy.

[@HasanibnSabah]

As a cold war era Air Force brat: thank you for what you did!

[@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL]

Super cool. Were you aware of thing such a the F-117 at the time? If so was it factored in to planning a doctrine? What was it like knowing you were flying against the guys trying to shoot you down? Sead takes a big set of balls I'm sure! F-4 is such an amazing aircraft, an absolute unit.

[@charleswheeler3689]

US Army 1983-1986. 16S Redeye/Stinger gunner and team chief.

[@aaronwhite1786]

The most fun thing to do in modern flight sims is definitely Wild Weasel work. I would love a fully simulated F-4G, but I'm going to guess all of those systems are probably still too classified to get anything working. At least there's still the F-16 to fly Wild Weasel missions with in DCS.

[@treypeters1087]

YGBSM

[@peppertrout]

General Swalm died on 2/15/2015. He sounded like an articulate and intelligent man. RIP.

[@oakspines7171]

Articulate, assertive, and accurate assessment. Such a good man.

[@langsuan123]

In totally unrelated news he also served as 'Vice President of Business Development, TQM and Special Technical Programs' at Northrop Grumman from 1991 until 1995 (per his obit). No doubt a fortuitous coincidence.

[@TeachinTV]

My dad earned a fortune during the 60s and 70s producing and selling a high-tech version of "honeycomb," a bonded material made from aluminum, cardboard or Nomex, a flame-retardant kind of plastic "paper." He sold this stuff to all of the major aerospace companies that made trim tabs, bulkheads, panels to save weight and add strength over wood or solid metal. As a junior high kid, I remember all of the discussions over our dinner table about the "TFX," something that was on everyone's lips that followed defense issues. On the news, Chet and David would tell us about the "TFX." Years passed before it took flight and became the FB-111. Now, I'm conserving all that he's left to me dating from those days, especially memories.

[@oneilluminatus]

First time I heard of and dealt with honeycomb was at my A&P school. Incredible strength to weight ratio. 👍

[@TeachinTV]

@oneilluminatus Yeah man! As an experiment, l brought a square 2-inch chunk to school to see what happened if our 250 lb. French teacher would crush it by standing on it. She stepped on it, rocked on her heels, and slightly damaged the cells on the edge. It was completely uncrushed. I won 14 bucks on bets.

[@arjanv45]

Thanks for sharing. Very interesting

[@gregoryjclark81]

A close friend of mine I grew up with in Boise, ID in the early 1990s, his father was based at Mountain Home AFB when they were flying the F-111 Aardvark and the B-1B Lancer. I had the privilege of visiting the base a few times then, my first sonic boom causing me to run for the dugout at the baseball field. The F-111 was a badass bird.

[@andrewmorke]

Clancy's Red Storm Rising was an interesting read.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

Yes, with lots of inaccuracies like the IR guided BUK. But it was interesting to see how the FOFA appeared in the book even in that time even the conception docs were classified.

[@mcyounglordlauch7012]

​@@militavia-air-defense-aircraftthat's the interesting thing about this book, clancy just guessed by what would work what the air force has (eg the stealth fighter bomber)... So to critize, that he is incorrect about a few things is ok, but you have to keep in mind, that he only had declassified sources...

[@sjp35productions6]

It was and still is. I bought my first copy and would read it while I was on down time after Retreat (I was a firefighter). I must have read it at least 10 times the first year I had it. Since I was on a SAC base, I would have been deployed to Europe had that scenario materialized.

[@jtasgl88]

Check out "The Third World War"

[@coops1964]

@@jtasgl88Written by?

[@pshehan1]

The Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF) flew the F-111 from 1973 to 2010, 37 years. That is the time frame from the Wright flyer to the B-24 Liberator, which the RAAF also flew. By the end of the war, the RAAF was the fourth largest air force in the world. The RAAF F-111 went through a number of technological upgrades in that time. A remarkable aircraft. My grandfather and two of my mothers cousins were in the RAAF during WWII. One was a bomber pilot KIA over Milne Bay New Guinea. His brother was a bomber pilot shot down over Germany and sent to Stalag Luft III. He was supposed to go out in the Great Escape but being the closest thing they had to a doctor in the camp, his place was given two another man who was among the fifty executed. Geoffrey Cornish felt survivors guilt ever after. He became a prominent cardiologist after the war who also established Red Cross blood banks throughout regional Australia.

[@lxndrlbr]

I did not have sound from 0:00:11 to 0:00:45, did anybody had that too? Using Firefox 63 up to date. Anyway, I love your work PeriscopeFilm, I wish you continue your work successfully.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

It's likely the sound was removed by KZbin at the request of a music rights holder.

[@georgejetson3648]

The words said at the beginning of this film are classified. 😮

[@Cronoviajero]

60s documentary, not 80s.

[@danielschneider8548]

No F15 in the sixties

[@molnibalage83]

​@@danielschneider8548And neither ef111a

[@Idahoser11]

basically the synopsis of the Tom Clancy novel "Red Storm Rising". Read that when I was in USAFE in the 90s.

[@auwz66]

The F117 was already flying missions when this film was made.... crazy!

[@zarjesve2]

Was flying until this "Wunderwaffe" was grounded by Yugoslavia in 1999.

[@apigthatflies]

​@@zarjesve2it is still flying. Now as OPFOR.

[@RJM1011]

@@zarjesve2 Shows how little you know about what went on in Yugoslavia back then !

[@zarjesve2]

@@RJM1011 And you show that you do not know where your ass is.

[@hoghogwild]

Panama was 1989, what missions were flown prior? The F-117 reached Initial Operational Capability in 1983, as did the EF-111A Raven. Amazing capability.

[@DocP91B]

I got excited as soon as I saw the 366th FW crest. I was a Gun fighter for 8 years out at Mountain Home.

[@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL]

Love the F4 and F111. Always seem to get looked over to the F14 and 15 but amazing aircraft.

[@Szarko32c]

I'm here just to watch the cool airplanes. I'm from the opposite side, the warsaw pact, so it's a gizmo for me.

[@geemanbmw]

A twice the speed of sound radar jammer the Raven was EPIC!

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

It was theoretical, not a utilized capability.

[@edsenior]

@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft I trust you mean the EF-111A, not the AN/ALQ-99 ECM system. However, a quick review of the operational history of the EF-111A shows that it was utilized, first during Operation El Dorado Canyon against Libya in 1986; followed by Operation Just Cause in Panama (1989) and Operation Desert Storm (1991.) Of course the EA-6B, which originated the AN/ALQ-99 ECM system, has used various versions of the system from 1972 until the present day.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

@@edsenior I talked only about M2 speed, nothing else.

[@nevoobrazimiy]

Thanks! Very interesting film

[@Conradlovesjoy]

1:52 even today we seem to forget this point….

[@YouTubemessedupmyhandle]

Today the Central European environment are NATO members.

[@ggaggagga4]

These days we know that a nuclear WWIII will only last a few hours. Anything that happens after that will be inconsequential...

[@tomjahnes364]

love the music at the end!

[@katherineberger6329]

The first five days of World War III: Day 1: Bombs fall, everyone dies. Day 2-5: "They make a desert and call it peace."

[@bobmills2049]

You forgot total control of what ever population is left.

[@Marla958]

Nice sideburns, General! The most laid-back branch of the military, Air Force.

[@sjp35productions6]

AFR 35-10 allowed for sideburns to reach the bottom of the opening of the ear canal, just above the ear lobe. That was in the reg at least until the ‘90’s, when I got out. As for facial hair, we were allowed to have a moustache that had to be trimmed at the top of the upper lip and terminate at the corner of the mouth.

[@BuddyLee23]

You should see the space force. They are so chill they can operate in 3 Kelvin!

[@haroldhumerickhouse7904]

I discharged from the AF in 1977 at Nellis AFB, I Always enjoyed Redflag.

[@hauntedhouse7827]

This is fascinating, The russians actually created a new branch of their military to operate the ew eq

[@redcat9436]

It was a mistake to retire the EF-111 and EA-6B without a replacement for them.

[@stijnvandamme76]

There is a replacement in the NAVY :EA-18G Growler USAF thinks they don't need it due to Stealthy will probably be reversing course on that now that Ukraine has hit

[@Zao-gq2dn]

​@@stijnvandamme76h

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

The AB-6B has replacement the EF-18 Growler. The USAF simply budgetary reasons does not have SOJ plane the USN/USMC provides this kind of role. The USAF never thought that SOJ is not important just because of stealth.

[@samk2266]

more realistically, its all obsolete because missiles come in & blow away the airbase

[@ryanreedgibson]

What happened to the audio at the beginning?

[@marctronixx]

music copyright strike

[@michaelrogers58]

Soviet electronic jamming.

[@hoghogwild]

F-111 and EF-111A were amazing aircraft. I always thought there was a Mach 2 limit of the SParkVarks?

[@pinetree9343]

Good video

[@sailordude2094]

Thats for the upload and channel! BTW, in Creation Of The Humanoids the Nuclear War only lasts about 48 hours.

[@nickjohnson3619]

this is from when you could get a more honest assessment from American military leaders when they weren't high on themselves for knocking the tar out of Iraq

[@terryadams2652]

@perisocope film, your silly running clock doesn't improve the viewing experience. It sucks, it's distracting (and silly).

[@davidwright8432]

'First five days'? Now, it'd be first five minutes. Progress in the big city.

[@williamthomson8892]

i was born 1962, captain scarlet was aired in 1967 and i was 4 yoa then came along joe-90 another gerry andersons show ......jt

[@jamescox2575]

the description said, "... The first five days of the war would determine the winner in a non-conventional war in Europe..." I think they mean CONVENTIOAL, not NON-conventional.

[@rdelrosso1973]

A Russian General said that WW 3 would last as long as a trip to the Bathroom. I think he meant NUCLEAR, not CONVENTIONAL!

[@redpillrules3136]

Video is missing audio for first 50 sec.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

This is what happens with KZbin and their copyright system for music.

[@redpillrules3136]

@@PeriscopeFilm k

[@lukestrawwalker]

I've read that basically our entire assumptions about how a war in Europe would have unfolded were faulty... While we were preparing to meet an onslaught of Soviet and Warsaw Pact armor overrunning Western Europe in a conventional war, and were prepared to use tactical nuclear weapons to repel such an onslaught, the Soviets were well aware of this and had instead prepared to take out our nukes and bases and as much of our conventional forces as possible in a first strike, then use their armor to overrun what was left of Western Europe in the aftermath. Always preparing to fight the last war... OL J R :)

[@brucepaulson6279]

Boom Boom out go the lights!

[@Revup1]

A video made before the experience of the first Gulf War (1991), where we saw the result of soviet cold war technology and doctrine pitted against western air power.....the result wasn't even a close call!

[@nowarwithrussiaandchina4667]

That was against 2nd rate opponents using older Soviet technology. No S-300, no Buk, no Tunguska, no Su-27/MiG-31 to challenge Western air power. Soviet air power and air defense was similar to what Ukraine inherited.

[@DocP91B]

​@@nowarwithrussiaandchina4667 The Soviets were, and the Russians are a second rate force. They can't establish air superiority against Ukraine today. I spent 21 years in uniform. I'm a graduate of USAFWS. Poland has a more. Effective air force than Russia. Numbers of aircraft doesn't equal quality of equipment or personnel.

[@zarjesve2]

@@DocP91B Neither NATO could establish AirSuperiority in Serbia in 1999. 88,499 km2 surrounded by NATO countries. After you lose first F-117 you start to fly above 4.5km until the end of war. You did not manage to suppress Serbia air defence for 78 days of AirSuperiority and as result you manage to destroy 10 of 300 tanks and you did not manage to break Kosovo border! You could only keep destroying civilian infrastructure...

[@RJM1011]

@@zarjesve2 Hard to believe you are really this stupid ????????????????

[@timsimmons9995]

@@DocP91B False, you don't understand the combat going on in Ukraine today. Furthermore, the US took a long time to gain air superiority in the Vietnam war against 2nd rate forces, and the US has lost more wars, conflicts, and skirmishes than it has won since 1945. And the US has not even fought a peer military since 1945, the US should have won every conflict and skirmish yet has lost more than its won! It's unearned egos like yours that perpetuate the war machine versus peace.

[@christianhotz437]

The tasks of Western Air Forces outlined in an impressive manner in this video still apply today. Having been an officer in the German AF 1984 -1998, I hope that the US and Europe will continue to stay firmly together in the Cold War 2.0 we are facing now. Great admiration for our american Friends!

[@owlgothic248]

The Hypersonic era have began

[@marcm4268]

2:24 Chevy Chase?

[@moelll]

I dont think the war would last 24 hours let alone 5 days

[@fil19653253]

general dynamics grumman comercial brochure ,

[@davidhudson5452]

We can hope that we never have too use our forces like this i will take a standoff old cold warrior SAC

[@phil20_20]

Nice try with the B-70 prototype!

[@nodirips_8537]

5:27 the soviet fighter plane is not a MiG. It is a Sukhoi Su-9 or Su-11

[@wheelcha1rman2]

The SparkVaark!

[@frankpinmtl]

I'm guessing Grumman didn't make enough profit in order to give it's employees uniforms/coveralls to work in, huh?

[@Warsie]

I mean it's the 1970s, and I don't think many of the employees cared enough to wear uniforms as opposed to just jeans and whatnot haha

[@thomasjoyce7910]

Those particular employees weren't: A- Public-facing brand-ambassadors B- Interchangeable drones C- Coal-shovelling labourers

[@donaldjohnson-ow3kq]

Seems very relevant today, since Ivan is making trouble again.

[@whiteknightcat]

Except back in the 80's, one political party wasn't actively supporting Ivan.

[@bobmills2049]

The good old days when people had fear of nuclear war.

[@telesniper2]

4:28 damn that f-111 fuggen some shi+ up

[@lewiemcneely9143]

I give it one hour. In two, all will be ashes.

[@Cander509]

Nothing electronic about the 60 or so Soviet armored and motorized rifle divisions that would have come roaring through the Fulda gap..

[@robertkalinic335]

Sigint ground recon or ground surveillance radars... nothing useful about your comment.

[@JebHoge]

No radios? No SAM or AAA radars?

[@filipbertram78]

Electronic jamming is a war proclamation...

[@christopherneufelt8971]

In a mapping session of historic events with current policies (I think it was around end of 70s?) the strategic research of Nato found that it was not the massive amount of weapons that was of concern about the Soviets, but the very fact that they were fixed on their ideology and way of living more than the comfortable people of Europe and US. As such, a financial war against USSR was the best option to control and eliminate the Warsaw Packt. The historic event that was in focus was the 30 years Peloponesian War where Sparta was considered USSR and Athens (naval power by the way) the West.

[@DCresident123]

the MIC really brainwashed you well huh

[@christopherneufelt8971]

@@DCresident123 It is one point of living in the cold war and learning some uncomfortable truths, and another point to view the events after 40 years. So how does it feel now with open borders and criminality skyrocketing simple because some people want to enforce universal tracking for all the citizens to combat it? Good luck on the next months, everyone will need it.

[@HungarianRepublic]

@@DCresident123*the leftists

[@r3d5ive87]

“Las Vegas”

[@bb9xc]

Wow, F-111 publicity!

[@xusmico187]

7 days to the rine.....

[@nathanthompson3401]

The Warsaw Pact still exists?

[@jamesrogers47]

No. It fell apart with the collapse of Soviet control over Eastern Europe, around 1991 or 92. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the East German government , marked the beginning of the end of the Warsaw Pact.

[@jubileefellowship2014]

Why do these "PeriscopeFilms" always have that annoying min/sec counter at the bottom of the screen? Can it not be turned off?

[@dheujsnrhfydhehehshshhdggsd]

Essentially it's branding . Helps establish they were the source of the labor to digitize old stock footage so others don't copy it and repost as their own work.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Here's the issue: Tens of thousands of films similar to this one have been lost forever -- destroyed -- and many others are at risk. Our company preserves these precious bits of history one film at a time. How do we afford to do that? By selling them as stock footage to documentary filmmakers and broadcasters. If we did not have a counter, we could not afford to post films like these online, and no films would be preserved. It's that simple. So we ask you to bear with the watermark and timecodes. In the past we tried many different systems including placing our timer at the bottom corner of our videos. What happened? Unscrupulous KZbin users downloaded our vids, blew them up so the timer was not visible, and re-posted them as their own content! We had to use content control to have the videos removed and shut down these channels. It's hard enough work preserving these films and posting them, without having to spend precious time dealing with policing thievery -- and not what we devoted ourselves to do. Love our channel and want to support what we do? You can help us save and post more orphaned films! Support us on Patreon: www.patreon.com/PeriscopeFilm Even a really tiny contribution can make a difference.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

@@PeriscopeFilm How can be licensed any of the posted videos?

[@edsenior]

@@PeriscopeFilm Aside from the occasional blocking of subtitles, I have no problem with Periscope Films putting time code window dub versions of their owned material on KZbin. Otherwise, we'd never get a chance to see many of these old films.

[@darvindillon8525]

Ah yes, the EF-111A. Killed an Iraqi Mirage without weapons.

[@PeriscopeFilm]

Wow. How?

[@HBMPaladin]

1:46 Expert at the time gives military-strategic analysis based on the assets and the location of the war. Experts on TV today provide Movies-PlayStation-military-industrial complex brainwashed hyped mentality analysis: They suck in everything, We win 1000%

[@chrisboek2346]

Spark vark

[@artkahn888]

Is the F-111 the grandfather of AWAC?

[@jimheimerl1637]

The E-3 Sentry flew before the EF-111 Raven.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

They have totally different roles. F-111 - strike plane EF-111 - stand of jamming E-3 - AWACS

[@artkahn888]

@@militavia-air-defense-aircraft Thank you for the clarification 🫡🇺🇸

[@Mae-nr7wr]

our crazy leaders today shouldw awatch this

[@c1ph3rpunk]

Ok, ok, you sold me, we’ll take 1000 of them, geez, level up the sales spiel. You probably want me to buy extended warranties too, right? For what, 10 years? Fine, whatever, I’m late for my golf game, call my assistant.

[@thetruth7633]

Five days? Within an hour the Northern Hemisphere is destroyed and so all our hopes and our dreams.

[@meanstavrakas1044]

This is just like the "Missile Gap" of the 1960's! At 9:53 the General lies through his teeth when he says that: " We've got to insure that the Russians do not get too far ahead of us..." . Rarely were the Soviets ahead of us in any area. Desert Shield & Storm proved that!

[@DCresident123]

How did desert storm prove anything?

[@PackDefender]

In Desert Shield & Storm where you see any up-to-date soviet weaponry? No S-300 family SAM-s, no MiG-29, -31 or Su-25 / -27 fighters, no top-notch tanks with ERA bricks, let alone any phased array radar or sophisticated Electronic warfare system. The Desert Shield & Storm prove the US & Allies are capable to beat the crap out a large army with outdated and export-level weaponry.

[@jonhart7630]

@@DCresident123 I think he is referring to the fact that the Iraqi's used Soviet era equipment. Fails to mention, however, this was mostly very basic equipment handled by poorly trained crews. Very different from the Soviet forces and equipment that the Americans would have had to face in Europe. Typical American hubris.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

@@PackDefender Iraq had only a handful of MiG-29. But considering the force ration if the US still had flew only late '70s plane it would not matter the result would be the same just with a bit higher losses and less destroyed hardened shelters.

[@fahey5719]

Desert Shield and Desert Storm were the IRAQUIS, not the Russians, for God's sake. IRAQUIS used obsolete T54-55, outdated Migs, obsolete rear aspect only AAMs, SAM2 and 3, 20-30 old technology, plus they had been blocked and starved for over 10 years. If you had fought RUSSIANS, in Europe, you would have retreated with a bloody nose. Just watch what's happening in Ukraine today. Abrams, Leopards, Chieftains, *Patriots*, smart antitank missiles, precision munitions, ALL have been neutralized or blown to bits. You can't even produce enough humble 155mm shells. In fact you are backwards 10:1 or so. Resources are so limited that to supply tiny Israel in a small border skirmish, you can't call that A WAR, against ragtag Milicians, not even "an Army", (no armor no Air Force no Navy) you had to stop helping Ukraine. And now searching excuses to stop Israel help ... Think why.

[@fahey5719]

FIVE DAYS? 😱 By day 3 or 4 Nukes would start flying , not inside Europe but all the way to USA. Then WHO would keep fighting? US always _dreamt_ war would stay inside Europe ... think again. Even in Europe, do you think the Soviets would not smash all those airfields to bits on day *one*? Where would all those nice planes take off and land from?

[@Ganiscol]

Watching these old (internal) propaganda films with the benefit of hindsight is always most interesting. The reality was, that the state of the soviet military was anything but what it is portrayed in these films - in the '80s it was already on a downward slope in every aspect but quantity. And by the end of the soviet union we learned it was all in shambles. Which of course didnt make the whole situation any less dangerous, but possibly the opposite. When your best card is nuclear, you gonna use it quicker and in higher quantity. So, no, there would not likely have been 5 days or more of war.

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

It does not matter that the USSR was on downward slope, the double digit radar SAMs appeared from 1978 with the IOC of the S-300PT, then from 1983 S-300V1 for army air defense, from 1986 the BUK-M1. Flying terrain following manner alone was way, way too few against these. Also, the USSR introduced the very first double IR seeker capable IR missile the Igla (SA-18) in mid '80s.

[@blaine6267]

Nonsense

[@zarjesve2]

Do you know what was reaction of westerners after unification of East Germany and getting hand on Mig-29 with R-73 missiles? Try to find out, you will be surprised! While Americans had HMD (helmet mounted display) in movies, Soviets had it on their planes!

[@militavia-air-defense-aircraft]

​@@zarjesve2 This is 99% inaccurate. The US had LONG before the USSR a helmet mounted sight just with the not so suitable AIM-9H missile. But they had. And because of the late '60s level and lack of TVC engine capable AIM-9 it was pointless to have. kzbin.info/www/bejne/h5CznqWshZusiKM The MiG-29 and Su-27 had only helmet mounted SIGHT, not display. While the AH-64A in mid '80s had a REAL helmet mounted DISPLAY, the image of the FLIR tower could be projected to the eye of the crew. As I can judge you have no idea about the difference. The HMS is essentially just a crosshair and head tracking to turn the IR seeker into the right direction while a HMD is a sight + DISPLAY. The first HMD for fighters was the JHMCS. Since that the AIM-9X / IRIS-T simply outclassed the old R-73/74. They have larger HOBS launch envelope and IIR seeker.

[@rbtsubs]

We found out this wasn't as true as might have been believed. Though it's true the Russians are good at EW

[@elzorro7of9]

Who came first, NATO or Warsaw Pact? What wars did Warsaw pact take part in? What wars did NATO conduct.

[@user-rz6cy3op5r]

Played this scenario in the early 70s.. the Warsaw Pact used small tactical nukes, combined with heavy armor rolling thru NATO the nukes with the accompanying EMP neutralized NATO electronics and communications, while Shock Troops took key positions.and heavy armor closed the gaps No there is no more Soviet Union, or Warsaw Pact No use to support NATO The old Warsaw Pact dissolved when the Soviet Union fell When we did this scenario back in the 70s, there were just a handful of us online

[@Istandby666]

This ideology is long gone.

[@elmerkilred159]

The U.S. has moved on, but the Russians are still using the same electronic warfare equipment in this film from the 1980s. Russia keeps telling its people that they are fighting the West, but they wouldn't last 5 days on a battlefield now. They would go down like Saddam Hussein. Sad for Russia, Good for America!

[@tbone5726]

Imagine being this delusional.

[@AH-ve9iz]

​@@tbone5726really how? They can't even finish off Ukraine taking about delusional.

[@supa3ek]

Ummmm.....ukrain ???????? Nato vs russia ....?????? ever heard of it ???????

[@michaelanderson3096]

Lazer satellites.

[@zegermanscientist2667]

Fun fact: 40 years later, Russia is currently using the exact stuff shown here in its war in Ukraine.

[@bony7363]

And winning comfortably.

[@zegermanscientist2667]

@@bony7363 For every town they've conquered, they've lost more men than used to live in that town.

[@bony7363]

@@zegermanscientist2667 There have been many losses, on both sides, but especially on the Ukrainian side. It looks like Kharkov will be next, and there's nothing they can do about it.

[@zegermanscientist2667]

@@bony7363 in what universe do the russians have fewer casualties that the ukrainians?! Not in this one.

[@zegermanscientist2667]

@@bony7363 Russias Problem is they cannot win this war with all their effort, and they also cannot afford to lose it. Then Ukraine would join NATO, and that would be it forever. All they can do is prolong the inevitable until Putin is dead. Because after that, at least no one knows.

[@ryanreedgibson]

I want to thank Putin for helping us make NATO so strong! We couldn't have done it without you.

[@Pismensky]

Everything is way more complicated if you dig deeper. Thanks for your comment.

[@DCresident123]

derp

[@Springbok295]

NATO is weak. Russia is stronger than it's ever been. You can blame nearly 30 years of continuous war chasing bandits wearing sandals.

[@AH-ve9iz]

​@@Springbok295So strong they can't even beat Ukraine

[@supa3ek]

Yeah just like how nato is destroying russia in ukrain right now

[@jman2903]

Soviet aircraft

[@ktm8848]

this guy is arguining like there was nothing comparable to the F111 on the other side of the border !!!!

[@katherineberger6329]

There wasn't. The Sukhoi Su-24 was broadly similar in form and base mission, but its capabilities were far more limited - it couldn't be loaded up with jammers; a counterpart to the EF-111 was an impossible lift with the Su-24's airframe.

[@maco8799]

god bless america n sheeit

[@firstlt2]

Amazing how back then so many people were concerned about Russian expansion...today many of those same people are like "Whatever...we should not get involved"

[@13bravoredleg18]

Tired of these never ending wars!

[@redbaron9029]

NATO lost back then as it is loosing now a days

[@defiant18]

Good

[@NLdevnurse]

Nevertheless, NATO still exists. The Warsaw Pact and Soviet-Union do not anymore. And NATO may have its internal differences, I'd prefer that over 'non-existent' anytime.

[@notreallydavid]

World's blackest hair!

[@shaggyofwv]

Ahh the good, old days when people were hired for their skill and qualifications instead of which box they check on race and sex.

[@posmoo9790]

Little did we know back in 1985 but we didn't have a technological edge - the MIG-31 with the first PESA radar and the R-33 missile would have cleared the European skies of the NATO air force. It was essentially a match for the F-14 Tomcat & the American Air Force had absolutely nothing for it.

[@jackwardley3626]

nato air force would have beaten soviet air force and in a conventional long war nato would have won but obviously that wouldn't havent happened.

[@Warsie]

The Soviets DID have pretty good anti-air ground units, so they could just fight a more 'defensive' war and/or focus more on ground support.

[@decimated550]

i don't agree. remember - our planes were better than theirs, but they had more of them. They had tons of theater range ballistic missiles like SCUD. Those would have been launched in their hundreds or thousands, and hit our big soft fat airfields Imagine cratered runways, smashed hangers, fuel depots ablaze. Read the chilling sober prediction by an American general: "For Europe, the military lesson to be learned from the October War is that if there were to be a conventional war in the near future it would go against the Atlantic Alliance. The two essential factors, surprise and missiles, are a positive element in favor of the Warsaw Pact countries." - GENERAL A. MERGLEN

[@jackwardley3626]

@@decimated550 yes if you take nukes out the soviets would be on the offensive for a while but after year in a conventional fight nato would be able to replace equipment and men faster especially the USA they had about twice the industrial capacity of the USSR. plus the i think the U.S. navy would have wiped most of the soviet navy by then.

[@lukestrawwalker]

@@jackwardley3626 War would have been over with in a month, effective warfare in 5 days. I read where even after 30 days basically everything of consequence would have been broken down or out of fuel with no parts, maintenance, backup, or replacement possible. Effective combat would have only been possible for the first five days, even the guy in the video said it. Not like WW2 where you have years to build up armadas of aircraft and resources for the final decision. Later! OL J R :)

[@chetpomeroy1399]

Warsaw Pact nations could have *easily* invaded and occupied western Europe, but they didn't want war. It would have gone nuclear fairly quickly.

[@smellygoatacres]

😂. Easily? That russkie crack must be awesome.

[@NLdevnurse]

So you're saying Western civilization is what it is today because old uncle Ivan thought: 'njet, let's not invade our nice neighbors. We could destroy them in a single blow, but they're such nice people. Let's be happy and listen to American rock music together.'? Seriously dude...

[@Internetbutthurt]

LOL. They completely ignore the fact that WARPAC aircraft would have been operating from rough airfields and hidden and NATO airfields would have been hit in the first hours thus giving WARPAC an even greater aerial advantage. Western technology such as those in this flash brochure were not necessarily superior to WARPAC equipment. NATO airforces would have been shredded by Soviet aircraft with HMS firing HOBS Archers.

[@Grimenoughtomaketherobotcry]

Dream on. WP airfields were hidden from NATO eyes? From the Corona in the early 1960's to the Blackjack satellite to be launched next year, the US has been able to accurately count the pubes on whomever's in charge at the Kremlin whenever they've laid bare-assed on a Black Sea beach. Anyway, Tactical Air Command would've largely been in a mop-up role, after the P-ll's, Tomahawks and ALCM's had had their way with you. And your "secret" locations.

[@tomsoki5738]

NATO airfields all had interceptor and SAM defences, and NATO ground crews, particularly British and US were very well trained in airfield repair. Not to mention fighters don’t need massive take off runs like larger aircraft and even if ALL the airfields were taken out, there was a good few hundred Harriers that could always be up. And of course NATO would strike WP airfields too, NATO had reconnaissance assets that could see temporary airfields and the majority of WP aircraft would operate from fixed fields. NATO deep strike doctrine had been in play since the 60’s, swapping from nuclear deep strike to precision deep strike, again this was a US/UK specialty

[@Dickusification]

In reality it would have gone at least tactical nuclear pretty early, so a lot of this would have been academic only

[@Robsay01]

Ukraine is showing how false this is.

[@RXTRUX1]

Love all the "we're the victim" bs.

[@jerryreed1252]

Imagine what things would be like having donald and his undying love ❤️ for Putin if these guys were still around and serving

[@defiant18]

The war in Ukraine wouldn't have happened because Trump would have told the CIA not to cause a coup there. Go back to sleep ya Nazi mutt

[@Fenrir.Gleipnir]

WW3? Did I miss a world war or something?

[@user-dg2zn6mc8i]

SOVIET UNION THE BEST

[@user-bu3zz2po6n]

Post 1991? Ok then.

[@richgilmour5924]

Funny watching this stuff now after seeing what an absolute joke the russuan military is.

[@andreasmartin7942]

In the 80s even the army of west germany was quite formidable, so no, things haven't always been like they are today.

[@NLdevnurse]

Indeed. It's another history lesson of why having good equipment does not necessarily mean you have an effective (and/or winning) fighting force. The Russians had comparably better and more modern weapons on invading Ukraine (at least on paper) with way more soldiers. But Ukraine's determination, fighting on home turf and on the defensive, as well as (partially) changed school of thought in the military have led to where they are now. So much for 'a few days of fighting' in modern conventional war. I've read that ppl thought the same at the start of the First World War.