Why do fighter jets have slanted tails? (Explained!)

[@caominhhungtran6098]

I didn't realize that Binkov has the answer for what I'm looking for my school project replacing the final exam! That's more than fantastic!

[@Binkov]

Happy to help!

[@Only_God_Is_Allah_SWT]

Although he's quite incorrect.

[@svenskaz3428]

@@Only_God_Is_Allah_SWT although you're another butthurt Serb

[@choppergunner8650]

@@svenskaz3428 haha F-117A goes boom

[@brokenpotato438]

@@choppergunner8650 serbs when they lose hundreds of anti air guns, missiles, and radars over a period of a few weeks but finally get a single aircraft kill (and dont even manage to capture the pilot)

[@gophtheengine6185]

As an student in aeronautical engineering I aprove this material.

[@TheSonofGod1]

A yes, we agree. As we study the same too.

[@MASB29]

Aeronautics gang rise up! (Altough I specialized in structure, lol)

[@63Hayden]

Nobody cares.

[@vanderwallstronghold8905]

@@63Hayden I do

[@lochlain7840]

@@63Hayden I do

[@vortigan9068]

If Sesame Street ever went to war i know they calling you up.

[@Ice-US]

Hahaha yeah

[@halipatsui9418]

Sesame street versus united states armed forces. We need this.

[@Ozymandias83]

Nah he’d be detained as a suspected spy cos he knows so much and has a foreign accent.

[@joshuabessire9169]

The Neighborhood of Make Believe doesn't have WMDs!

[@The_CrackedPot_Christian]

1 war ah ah ah, 2 war ah ah ah, 3 war ah ah ah!

[@dl6519]

Very good video. A few additional thoughts, if you don't mind... If the horizontal and vertical tails are at 90 degrees from one another, as in the F-15, they form a "retro reflector" and bounce radar signals approaching from the side right straight back at the emitter. Also when a single tail is blanketed at high angles of attack, the plane tends to depart controlled flight to either one side or the other. This would happen in the F-4 Phantom, its tail would lose yaw control authority and it would depart into a spin. With two tails, especially if they are canted outwards, there is a very good chance that at least one of them will not be blanketed at high angles of attack and will be able to retain yaw control. The YF-23's large, widely-canted twin "ruddervators" maintained yaw authority up to 60 degrees angle of attach, which is incredible. The YF-23 met or exceeded ALL ATF maneuverability requirements without thrust vectoring. In other words, its requirements WERE very demanding, maneuverability-wise, and they were ALL met with two tail surfaces (plus the flaps on the wings). Have Blue's inward-canted tails concentrated the hot exhaust gasses and increased the infrared signature. The outward-canted tails on the F-117 assisted in dispersing the exhaust gasses.

[@ozclanarchive]

6:35 :D :D "Chinese spy bug drone" that's a good one lol

[@geesixnine]

Bugs aren't real

[@Mandrak789]

@@geesixnine China doesn't exist

[@petersmythe6462]

@@Mandrak789 countries are a lie made up by the Catholic Church and NASA.

[@totolaunione3939]

damn you guys should stop watching history channel at 3 am

[@UnknownPerson-xe8hx]

@@petersmythe6462 typical conspiracy theory be like:

[@jesseviitanen9317]

Video idea: how long or could modern Finnish military hold against Soviets in ww2

[@themax9913]

that would be a very nice video imo.

[@virgule888]

Indulging hypotheticals is gay. Do the ~1.5m diameter nuclear torpedo whose loiter time is measured in months.

[@Holammer]

The winter war would be over in a hurry, with fins countering soviet tanks using modern artillery & MBTs instead of molotov cocktails. Personally I would use helicopters and planes to cut off enemy supply lines, basically doing what the fins did in the war, but now on steroids.

[@jesseviitanen9317]

@@Holammer yeah

[@Binkov]

That's an interesting idea. Why not pitch it to us through our official website? We'll see about it, but obviously cannot make any promises: www.binkov.com/

[@warbuzzard7167]

You know, Commissar, I love you. You have been producing top-notch content now for years. You and your team deserve kudos for your excellence.

[@DJkibos]

I gave a like because of the line at the end, "Only real peace can bring us all together." 7:00 Truth! Keep making videos Binkov 🙂

[@craigkdillon]

Everyone: Peace can bring us all together. World leaders: War will tear us apart. OK, so its WAR, obviously.

[@WilliamDye-willdye]

I like this format. It's a concise explanation of a single topic, with excellent animation and a willingness to include technical details.

[@rupeshmahato2882]

Love how detailed he brings his videos 😍

[@yasho.]

Once again I'm asking for your support for "1980 US vs 2020 US" hypothetical war.

[@frenstcht]

It would never work. If 80s U.S. came to 2020, they'd be rendered useless by availability of online porn; if 2020s U.S. went to 1980, they'd be choked to death by clouds of Aquanet.

[@LexlutherVII]

@@frenstcht 80s porn were the best!!!🔥😄

[@frenstcht]

@@LexlutherVII Totally! But you had to rent it on VHS =D

[@Binkov]

Hello there! Why not visit our official website: www.binkov.com/ and pitch us your suggestion there? Obviously, we cannot make any promises since we already have a number of videos scheduled for release, but we'll certainly give it a thought :)

[@Shoeg4zer]

2020 wins, no contest. 40 years of technology = enormous force multiplier.

[@DragNetJoe]

The main reason pre-stealth was improved directional control at high AOA. Traditional middle tail vertical stabs end up getting blanked out by the fuselage and wings at high AOA. That's why airplanes like the F-16 have fairly restrictive AOA limits, while the FA-18 has no AOA limit. Even the venerable Tomcat had slightly canted tails.

[@theyes5759]

How about Nothern part of Africa vs Southern part of Africa

[@TheJoeSwanon]

I know it’s messed up and all for the wrong reasons once South Africa integrated all their armed forces they went from a first class military to an almost Third World

[@MrCooper83]

@@TheJoeSwanon Not only the military.. S. Africa will be 3rd world country soon...

[@PlazaGaming]

Could Russia invade North Europe?

[@MrCooper83]

@@PlazaGaming Norway is member of the NATO. Also Finland and Sweden would be supported by the organization so Russia would be defeated. Also Russia cannot afford a full scale war against those countries.

[@PlazaGaming]

@@MrCooper83 No allies allowed as usually

[@michaeld1170]

Canted tails are also partly the reason why planes like the F-18/22/35 can perform the flat spin despite the absence of yaw thrust vectoring. Dynamic pressures generated from the forward fuselage are able to reach the tail even with the absence of forward momentum

[@AirShark95]

US vs Canada? How quickly could the US conquer Canada?

[@thisguy4614]

Haha I enjoy that you asked "how quickly" instead of "if" they could. Very nice.

[@jackfletch2001]

3 seconds

[@thecrab2791]

Canada’s big and very friendly. It would be a lot of work to invade them and I also don’t think anyone has anything against Canada.

[@Sahd079]

He's already done that.....

[@Staann]

The political implications of invading canada would be to much for america

[@ommsterlitz1805]

Please do "Why Rafale have canards ?"

[@Jenkouille]

Well, it's indeed relatively close to the reason of the choice of a 2-tails design. Canards fit well with delta wings (Rafale, modernized Mirage III, J-10, Typhoon, Saab 37, ...). It allow to control the angle of attack of the delta wing, and thus help to stabilize the plane and help to reduce drag during manoeuver (which is an issue of the delta design), to facilitate low speed approach (another issue of the delta design).

[@spartanx9293]

@@Jenkouille it's not mandatory though for example cranked delta wings

[@Jenkouille]

@@spartanx9293 Of course it's not. Even some quite modern delta winged, like the Mirage 2000D do not use canards, and still perform relatively well

[@jean-francoisdupre3880]

It’s actually a rarely discussed « secret » (that I can speak of since it has been seen on the web): the Rafale doesn’t have canards ! Let me explain: Canards are normally the pitch control surfaces and the longitudinal stability surface. To achieve that the further away they are from the wing the better efficiency they have ( look at the Eurofighter and you will see that the canard is in farther than the pilot). On the Rafale they do not act as pitch control surface in the sense that the aerodynamic forces on them are not sufficient to make the Rafale rotate rapidly enough. But their function is actually to modify the airflow over the main wing and achieve that pitch control function through that modification. A cunning solution that allows to have a smaller and lighter control surface on one hand and to put that control surface more to the rear in order not to block the pilot’s view. The Rafale´s canard also have a safeguard function: when active the aircraft is longitudinally unstable ( like all modern fighter aircrafts). But in case of a FBW system malfunction, the canards are rendered inoperative making the aircraft stable and flyable with a direct pilot to control surfaces link (the FBW computer is disconnected).

[@informationcollectionpost3257]

Good information & well illustrated. In some cases twin tails were used so that existing hangars could still used without having to build one's with a higher ceiling.

[@TerryTurner]

6:34 "A Chinese Spy Bug Drone?" 😂😂😂😂😂

[@terrainvictus1210]

@かたわれ時 it's a good joke though and most if us don't like china.

[@Grim_Yeeter]

@@terrainvictus1210 it's not the country I hate, it's winnie the pooh and his gang that I hate

[@terrainvictus1210]

@@Grim_Yeeter I didn't say the Chinese people. When you refer to a nation, like china you refer to it's government not the people.

[@Grim_Yeeter]

@@terrainvictus1210 makes sense

[@Mirpurmad]

thanks for this video. I understood that slanted tails had some reason in modern jets and some stealth but your video explains it in detail.

[@Rose_Butterfly98]

Some NASA engineers said that the canted tails also help reduce drag but I have no idea how that works.

[@mingming9604]

excellent video . Very unexpected from the usual binkov video on hypothetical scenario!

[@hjalmarovander3548]

Can you please do a video explaining how different liiftsurfaces work and common fighter designs and go over the pros and cons of different designs?

[@sebastianskwarczynski2435]

You did not mention one other big factor in stealth - avoiding the creation of retro-reflecting surfaces on the airplane (ones that reflect RADAR waves directly back to their source). A full retroreflector is created with three surfaces at 90° angles, but even two surfaces can generate a big radar return at certain angles (bigger variety of angles than a flat plate) - aircraft with non-canted tails often have such "partial retroreflectors" between the vertical and horizontal stabilisers.

[@annoyed707]

Informative video. Thumbs up!

[@thelovertunisia]

Binkov you're the best.

[@lusandamarwana6135]

Can u plz do South Africa VS Mozambique

[@THEBIGMG1]

As a KSP player I approve this material

[@tsmama6208]

Let me guess, BDA combat leagues?

[@gl976]

can you do a video on limited war in Korean peninsula? USA SK vs NK CN, no nuclear weapons, only fought on the peninsula.

[@Beliserius1]

One more factor is that vertical tails combined with horizontal stabilizers can create very massive corner reflectors.

[@Quasarnova1]

Good video! Although it is worth noting that the yf-23 did not lack maneuverability. Just like having one large vertical tail can be equivalent to two smaller ones, having 2 large "V" tail surfaces can be equivalent to 4 smaller conventional tail surfaces And the yf-23 had *very* large, all moving tail surfaces. Exact dimensions are hard to find, but I'm pretty sure they are larger than the actual wings of an F-104 of F-5.

[@Ivan--Drago]

I'd say the SR-71, along with the Spitfire and Concorde are some of the most beautiful aircraft ever made!

[@MothaLuva]

2:10 The SR-71 was originally planned with a single tail. They discovered very soon, that at its high operating speed the chances of the pilots being sliced in half during ejection was too high, so they changed it to this twin configuration. I don’t think that stealth requirement had any influence on the SR-71 vertical tail design. Its operating altitude was around 70-80,000 ft where most if not all of the radars could detect it only from below where its planform was quite flat anyway, so the tail wouldn’t have played any significant role in it being more easily detected. The only aircraft „able“ to intercept the SR-71 contemporary was the MiG-25. And this would have been guided by GCR to an intercept point where it’s onboard radar would take over to fire an appropriate missile. But it’s operating altitude was lower that that of the SR, so the MiG 25 radar would „paint“ the SR mostly from below. Slanting inward was to control the Mach 3 shockwave of the engine nacelles, while at the same time putting the vertical stabilizer mass closer to the center of gravity, adding to its longitudinal stability.

[@lesliegrayson1722]

Very informative. Nothing I didn't guess already, still great confirmation for my reasons why the F-22 was chosen.

[@Harm10412]

I'd assume, though, that using the rudders for pitch makes computerized control inevitable (ok, it probably is anyway) because this does obviously not work with the normal usage pattern of stick and pedals?

[@marzolian]

Why are the tail rotors on some large helicopters canted so that the thrust they provide is not absolutely horizontal?

[@КГБСССР-й2х]

I love your vids

[@hamsterindonesia6548]

Why did some fighter such as the F15 n Su27 has its twin tail vertical? What are the advantages of such design compared to the twin slanted tail users such as the F22?

[@Dubanx]

Uh, sorry but you got the stealth aspect a bit wrong or, at least, incomplete. Imagine throwing a ball at a wall. It would bounce off the wall at the same angle it entered, right? Now imagine bouncing it into a corner (90 degrees). The ball would bounce out of the corner in exactly the same direction/angle it entered. RADAR is the same way. The exposed area isn't just larger, but rather having it point directly up results in a 90 degree angle between the tail and elevators, bouncing RADAR back in the direction it came from. Much moreso than a flat surface would.

[@larrybremer4930]

Canted tails can also create or fix adverse aerodynamics assuming your plane is not fly by wire. The F4 various bends and canted elevators are a great example where you want roll to roll without inducing pitch or yaw and pitch to not cause roll or yaw. The cant of tails has similar affect where you want yaw without inducing roll. By its nature most tails are not symmetrical over the longitudinal axis, thus rudder input will tend to induce roll opposite to the turning force that is undesirable in most situations. In civil aviation in fact the opposite is desired where some coupling benefits the plane with docile handling with roll inducing yaw and yaw inducting correct roll but in military aviation you desire minimal coupling of control so rudder will only induce yaw. Outward canting like the F18 contributes to this affect. Consider left rudder input where both rudders will deflect left but the left rudder is also creating a small amount of downward pitch (lift at the tail) due its tilt to the left. Similarly the right rudder is inducing a small amount of up pitch (down force at the tail). Since these opposing forces are not aligned to the longitudinal center of mass or flight axis this has the affect of inducing right roll that will offset the left roll caused by the yaw movement, basically creating a true uncoupling of roll and yaw axis. In fly by wire this is far less relevant since a flight computer can use all available controls to do what the pilot wants regardless of most aerodynamic concerns. A good example of this is the F16 (and most subsequent military fighters) that are so unstable as to make human control impossible. The F16 center of mass is so far aft of its center of lift that it could not be controlled. Its said a nose heavy plane flies badly but a tail heavy plane flies only once.

[@frenstcht]

Thanks!

[@airtexaco]

Great content! Thank you!

[@shabdikacharyya2516]

need long videos Binkov

[@Mustang5L5]

I was just wondering this today actually, and now this video pops up in my feed. Eerie.....

[@shaider1982]

Hope binkov can collab with Millenium 7*👍

[@JosePineda-cy6om]

Awesome video! Thanks!!

[@TheDesertraptor]

Why didnt the F15EX get canted vertical tails?

[@martinrps13]

Because they are not needed

[@savagex466-qt1io]

Im wondering the diffrence between 1 tail and 2 tails. Who is gonna make tri tail or quad tail ? Or is that just silly :P

[@T.Higbee]

What about the eurofighter? Would be nice to have the use of front mounted fins with 1 large rear fin explained if your doing a video of it anyway

[@valenrn8657]

Tempest has canted twin tails.

[@francismarshall8201]

Thanks for the info

[@dozrFAB]

Loved this video

[@nick000002]

It looks more cool to have slanted tails

[@olivertario2619]

Good video bro! You can speak to the challenger 2 or leclerc?

[@-Muhammad_Ali-]

never thought of the stealth element. I just assumed the slanted tails were for additional lift ))

[@nucleargandhi3759]

Can we get a video on could Poland take the Kaliningrad exclave, and would it be able to hold it.

[@xGatoDelFuegox]

V-tails do not result in a lighter plane. Based on basic tail volume calculations and drag area they suggest that a tail can be smaller than what it needs to be. Many v-tail planes have poor controllability, in some cases dangerously so. So it is usually more efficient to just have a traditional tail.

[@Nikolay_Paskov]

Can you tell me,from a mathematical type a view,is that true if the fighter planes are not on a same level.

[@valenrn8657]

The canted twin tails generate rear lift instead of having a deadweight vertical tail. YF-23 and Boeing's Loyal Wingman have Pelikan tail design.

[@Bartonovich52]

During regular flight, they generate no forces at all. They create both positive and negative lift depending on what they are doing during maneuvering.

[@paulpowell4871]

we need Binkov Versus Kermit with various weapons and who would win!

[@jamescoop8979]

Binkov would own Kermit in 3 seconds.

[@MyLonewolf25]

Inward slanted tails are also more stable Outward are more stable at high AOA

[@JonatasMonte]

I didn't even know it was called "slanted"

[@curiousfacts7769]

6:35 chinese bug drone steals the show

[@dalecarney6582]

great video...

[@rickjohnson1266]

I wanted to speak to Binkov about sponsoring a video. Dies he gave an email address?

[@randyfleet9968]

Thanks Comrade.

[@joatmon6132]

What? No Beechcraft V-35 at the end? Still a good video.

[@bouseuxlatache4140]

This was really technical. I sweated

[@danysp7182]

So cirrus vision jet are stealth too?

[@usa-1129]

My simple guess,The Mig-25. It was the first jet shaped the way it was and almost all fighters have that shape today. Further more, nato thought the Foxbat was a fighter, like a dogfighter but all the Soviets wanted it to do was fly fast. How we ended up to this place where that shape is used to achieve acrobatic and manuverable superiority is pretty funny. They just wanted the 25 to go high and fast and that's the aerodynamic shape they figured worked best 🤣

[@kathrynck]

I'm afraid you missed the 2 main reasons, and got a couple reasons wrong or wrong-ish. Both Russia and China are well aware, so there's no harm in explaining: 1) stealth - the angle at which you can detect the vertical tail surfaces with a direct bounce-back of radar signal is "relevant" but not the main reason to avoid straight vertical stabilizers. The main reason is that straight vertical stabilizers you create a 90 degree angle from the horizontal plane (relative to the horizontal stabilizers or wing, depending on design layout). A 90 degree angle between 2 flat surfaces though will bounce a radar signal back in ALL directions which are to the side of the aircraft. Try shooting a pool ball into the corner of a pool table, no matter what angle you shoot from, it will return back in the same direction (roughly). Or look at how reflectors work for bicycles, etc. Same principal. So angling the vertical tails doesn't just change the direct bounce-back return direction, it eliminates an entire 90 degree swath of radar returns. With a non 90 degree angle, you're left with 3 return paths, flat-on vs either the horizontal or vertical surface, or the mid-point in between where radar will bounce back after a double-bounce between them. 2) Supersonic performance - This is harder to explain simply, because supersonic fluid dynamics aren't 'simple'. But in a nutshell, canted vertical tails avoids a peculiar drag & stress penalty in higher supersonic flight. Worth noting, this issue is only relevant to twin stabilizers. A single straight up vertical stabilizer won't encounter this issue. 3) A minor correction: Twin straight vertical stabilizers get plenty of good airflow if they are positioned correctly (as on the F-15). The airflow from over the leading edge extensions forward on the plane are not going to do anything for you at high AoA, where the verticals get most of their airflow at high AoA is from under/behind the wing. If you're at say 60 degrees AoA, the only major source of air getting to the rudders is coming at the plane's belly, and passing through the gap behind the wing, and up along the outer sides of the vertical stabilizers at an angle. Remember that at high AoA, the horizontal tail surfaces will be at a strong angle (in any plane with an all-moving horizontal stabilizer) such that air flow to the outer sides of the rudder (coming from under the plane) is unimpeded at high AoA. For Delta wing aircraft, airflow to the rudder at high AoA is a significant design concern, but this is why many deta wing aircraft go with a single vertical stabilizer, since they are less likely to be able to utilize air from under the plane at high AoA (depends on design though). 4) another minor correction: straight vertical stabilizers also can help pivot a plane upwards if they both have rudders diverted in different directions, since the bulk of the force generated from that is not so much directional airflow, but rather acting as an "air brake" which is high above the center of mass. The effect is stronger if both rudders angle 'in', since it causes an aerodynamic choke point. Using the vertical stabilizers to help adjust pitch is a very energy-draining maneuver though, so the F-15 does not typically do this, because it has a dorsal-mounted airbrake anyway, which can do effectively the same thing, with less stress on the rudders. The "airbrake-less" modern versions of the flanker though can use this in lieu of an air brake. And a tiny nitpick: the all moving tail planes of the YF-23 are "massive", there is no trade off of control surface area, or drag benefit. It's simply 2 tail planes which have the area & drag of 4, but reduces shape complexity at the tail for stealth reasons. Also those things were so big that they offered a sort of "tail wing" effect for when the big wing was in post-stall conditions. Obviously way behind the center of gravity though, but if the main wing was offering force in the form of a giant rudder, it had some interesting flight characteristics (on paper anyway, they benched the YF-23 before fully testing it. In part, I would argue, to avoid issues of second-guessing the contract winner. But I may be biased). The F-4 incidentally had angled all moving horizontal with a large portion of them made from titanium so they could survive interactions with the exhaust coming out of the J-79's. The angles offered more directional control in a sort of early proto-thrust vectoring concept. It helped the F-4 be relatively maneuverable, despite being a bit of a flying brick.

[@tonyyammine2829]

Interesting

[@HPMlangdale]

If you love twintails, anything is possible!

[@brianhiles8164]

_Uh, yes and no._ For the *SR-71,* the tails were inward canted late in its design evolution because at speed there would have been an unacceptable lateral component of force during a roll. For the *F-14,* a single tail was turned into dual tails, and then both canted outward to mitigate transonic “choke“. The characteristic “shrugged shoulders“ look was implemented for the same reason. For the *F-18,* the plane designed with dual outward canted tails at the outset, the cant angle was considerable to maximize the downward component of force aft of the CoG that the rudders provided, to aid rotation during aircraft carrier catapult takeoff. Note this is only possible with an electronic flight control system which could actuate both rudders inwards simultaneously. All planes that you show with V-tails, such as the *F-23,* the *F-117,* and the *MQ-1* _Predator,_ fundamentally have different design purposes than conventional empennages, and really shouldn´t be included in this non-technical examination. You are not wrong to include a discussion of stealth considerations, but the seminal analysis of mathematician Ufimtsev, whose work on the non-intuitive behavior of radar reflection enabled the _Have Blue_ experimental plane and thence the _Stealth Fighter,_ showed that _depressions, joints, and sharp angles_ were the _most_ indicative of radar reflection magnitude, not _attitude._

[@renelaizer6518]

Kermit the frog has a new roll... Aerospace engineer. I wonder how that conversation will go with the grouch....

[@davidlong3696]

You should make a video about what would have happened if the Continental Army had given up muskets for longbows.

[@MishaAmashukeli]

The explanation of the stealth factor is not correct. It's about avoiding a corner reflector. It's not about being vertical or not, but about not being perpendicular to other surfaces around it.

[@fnamelname9077]

2:00 That is DEFINITELY from the Mass Effect ost! SSV Normandy SR1, anyone?

[@PaleRyder563]

Because it looks cool!

[@berzerkfurry477]

I think you missed the buffeting effect that caused perpendicular f-14 and f-15 V-stabs to fail prematurely.

[@Bartonovich52]

That was the F-18 That’s why they have three patches on the verticals plus the extra fin on the LERX. And it’s only a band aid. After so many hours they are junk.

[@randomperson-hm9wg]

Now i want a explaination on how to make a plane super manoeuvre

[@axel2770]

Can you do special videos on KZbin originals?

[@gpgpgpgp1000]

Beechcraft made a butterfly tail version of the Bonanza civil aviation plane. I heard it wasn't very popular.

[@UtSlpilot]

The V-35 family of Bonanzas had a pretty big following for a while. They had some design and stability drawbacks, I found them to be unstable compared to flying Cessnas. Acknowledging my prejudices, I called them the “wobbly gobblin”.

[@kingtigerbooks1162]

What many don't know is that the cute little frog, General Binkov, was in charge of strangling dissidents, beating stragglers and having pizzas sent to random addresses during holidays. Known as the Beast of the East with Yeast, he dominated sports teams by claiming to identify as a woman. As a MiG-21 pilot he shot down a hot air balloon, a civilian biplane on a pleasure cruise and a cloud that really did look like a monster -- his only air-to-air kill. His reign of terror ended when he seduced the Premier's wife and was transferred to Baghdad. Please check out my new art book: Great Fighter Jets of the Galaxy 1 by Tim Gibson (100 full-color pictures) Available on Amazon.

[@bobthompson4319]

The thing about the SR-71 that really blows my mind is that because its first flight was 1964 that means most of it is 50s tech ... 50s!!!! And that makes me seriously wonder what 2000s tech can do? The f22 is 80s tech first flying in 1991

[@Bartonovich52]

It doesn’t work that way. Technology plateaued. It’s kind of like comparing a 2000 cell phone to a 2010 cellphone.. and then comparing that 2010 phone to a 2020 phone. The 2020 phone is larger, has more memory, a better camera, faster download speeds, clearer display, etc.. but doesn’t really represent a fundamental leap in technology like what happened between 2000 and 2010 with adaptable capacitive touchscreens being offered to the masses.

[@bobthompson4319]

@@Bartonovich52 I'm talking about a 70 year gap. From the 50s until now.

[@siyacer]

Because awesome

[@garycrasto1310]

Germany vs Scandinavian countries. What if germany invaded and took denmark as flash point for war and could the Scandinavian countries have enough power to liberate it.

[@shmookins]

I still don't understand how a jet plane can fly for longer than 5 min. because it doesn't seem to have a lot of space to store fuel plus how much fire comes out of the engines.

[@bobthompson4319]

The tail on the f23 actually makes it vet maneuverable

[@brittneypallitta6028]

Can you do more country verse country videos those are the best do Texas versus Mexico modern please

[@AviViljoen]

Texas is not a country.

[@matsv201]

The explination why slanted tails dont return radar is totaly wrong. The reason is not that if reflecs The radar up or down, but rather that the fin and stabilizer in a normal configurarion form a perfect 90 degree angle and there for act like a reflector, like in a reflex. Just changing the angle 10 degrees breake this funktion. By having all surface to a angle.that is od to each other all reflex surface can be broken

[@keirfarnum6811]

Cause it looks cool! 😎

[@LittleRamsies]

How powerful Would a Reunified Korea Be?????

[@keithw4920]

Because it looks cool.

[@noahanimations2039]

Ideas for binkovs Battlegrounds : Germany vs skandinavia USA vs Mexico USA vs EU Italy vs Turkey Vietnam vs Laos Germany vs Benelux UK vs Canada

[@mirridulfarhan7105]

Do one with bangladesh and Myanmar please.

[@Empinada]

TLDW: for added pitch authority

[@DejectedCat]

because it looks cool

[@sylvesterstewart868]

They said the F-23's stabilators were too slanted.

[@LittleRamsies]

What if WW2 Took place in the Modern World from????? (2009-2017)

[@PlazaGaming]

Suggestion: Could Russia invade Northern Europe? Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland, Iceland, Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia against Russia.

[@phuktard]

Perhaps a few seconds should have been dedicated to the Houthi and their drones. Definitely not in your model represented. Low budget against top of the line defense, far behind the front lines & overcoming multiple defences and successfully hitting their targets.