Black Friday Deal! Go to nordvpn.com/covert to get a 2-year plan plus 1 additional month FREE with a huge discount! 2 years of cybersecurity for only $3.16 per month!
The "narrative" that makes up the dialog of this video feeds ignorant brains but is far from accurate. However, I realize the truth can't even be approached on social media for political reasons.
Ok you did it twice. The AMRAAM and Tomahawk are NOT the same as the old ancient originals. They have seen many many upgrades over the years to keep them competitive as new tech arrives. . They are not the same old originals that came off the assembly line 30 years ago.
PL-15. How can they hit what they cannot see? By the time they get close enough for a weapons grade lock the jet that carries them will have been serviced by a F-35/F-22 AMRAAM. The U.S. controls the see first shoot first advanced technology.. not the CCP.
lol you ignore major weapon overhauls on every weapon you mentioned. you also failed to mention china needs to steal nearly every advancement they achieved and did not organically develop any of the competing systems from scratch! come on covert cabal facts not spin!
Wait, what's the use of a long range missile with stealth fighters. won't they just lose there targets, and fall in the ocean. Just by maneuvering to hit it when its standing still.
@@drrugee you really think the criminal u.s. government is going to allow you to surf the net without them spying on you.....look at social media, its a database that idiots willfully post personal info about them....the fbi,cia etc just has to collect it
Pouring $4T into a hole in Afghanistan and lighting it on fire is another reason the US has fallen behind our near-peer rivals. You can't really explain our current situation accurately while omitting this fact.
Who do you think was financing the Taliban through Pakistan's military intelligence service to keep the US there🤔 maybe Pakistan's biggest allie hmmm maybe the CCP While they catch up.
The US defence budget is, indeed, much larger than that of China or anyone. However, one point that is often overlooked is that the US has a huge number of forward bases all the over the globe that are costly to maintain. China has just one, in Djibouti. A lot of the US defence money is spent maintaining all those forward bases.
China has to deal with much more complicated local defense where half of its military is spent focused on internal security as well. China is not just focused on Taiwan
The US spends 3x as much as China, but its not going into new technology, a lot of it goes into salaries of its soldiers, maintaining a lot of military bases around the world, budgets which have to be 100% spend or else they will get less money next year and commercial companies wanting to make a profit so its money inefficiently spend. While in China all the military companies are owned by the government. And China steals a lot of military technology from the US or buys it from Russia and Israel and reverse engineers it thus saving years/decennia in research and development and trillions of dollars. If you correct for all these factors then China is getting a lot closer to the US in spending.
Wasnt it recently discovered that a company lied about the quality of the metal they sold to navy to build subs? Also a navy officer was convicted of buying guns for a Chinese businessman who was later convicted of export crimes? A Many cases like this. The wall of US military industrial complex has more holes than we think
You forget the advantage of higher profits and salary’s, it has the benefit that people are better trained and work harder. Russia has discovered this short coming in their armed forces again and again. In the first Chechen war, they put poorly trained conscripts into their T-80 tanks and BMP’s and sent them into Grozny with no recon and poor tactics. So naturally they were slaughtered by Chechens, many of them veterans from the Afghanistan war! In 2008 in the Georgian war, they again suffered casualties from poorly trained conscripts and the inability of the air force and ground forces in working together, in fact it was said that they fought two different wars. Only the sheer size of the Russian army allowed them to defeat much smaller forces but that advantage disappears against NATO and the US! Russia has attempted to build a professional army but that takes time and money … which then takes away from weapons programs! In Syria the Russians still had problems coordinating between their air force and ground forces … finally putting an army general in charge.
its not only the profit of the companies. Its the way the companies have to operate. The F35 is produced in like 37 states. That is so, so inefficient, and from a logistical standpoint incredibly stupid, but that way the senators and congressmen that give contracts to these firms gain popularity in their district/state
The difference, is China's military industrial complex is more focused, it also benefits from having the US capabilities as a huge target. Designing weapon systems that are specifically tailored to deal with the USA. America on the other hand, spent the current 21st century and the last decade of 20th century, not know what to do with their doctrine and strategy, causing aimless weapon developments. China is designing the PLA to win a specific war under a specific conditions against a few potential enemies. The initiative is on their side also helps with timing of projects, and thus funding.
it also doesn't help that after the collapse of USSR, the US military had no direction as you've said and that resulted in bloating of US military complex. Pointless designs that don't work nor have any combat advantage have been developed solely because they had the money to do so and certain generals wanted to secure their retirement jobs by giving companies pointless tasks.
Another advantage for China is that they only have to focus on defensive weapons and less on aggressive tactics like global power projection and invading forces
This comment is fair, not like the lies of stealing or sth like that. The fact is more simple in my opinion, just Chinese military had too little money during 1979 to 2000. For example only 0.5 billion dollars a year during 1990s.
@@John_Doe448 china is actually having a more and more aggressive foreign policy stands over the recent year, they keep on breaching Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia sea border and even considered invading Taiwan around the corner, heck even the syrian conflict have some china logistical backup... they might not be as openly invasive as the USA, but their global power play is there, exerting soft power to smaller nations etc..
This is the only military tech channel I watch. The others all seem to have idiot robo-narration and a bunch of disjointed footage that has little or no relation to the topic being robo-discussed. This channel should have way more subscribers.
Also never overestimate. Overestimating could make you fear the enemy more than they actually are. Ofc we shouldn't think China's weapons are bad but thinking that they are far superior isn't good either
@@shanerooney7288 and you also have practically the vast majority of Americans and other Westerners or allied nation that underesrimate China and think that juat because it's made in China it's automatically shhhttt
The reasons can be summed up as: 1. The US HAS demonstrated the ability in the past. (BGRV, ASALM, Pershing II, Skybolt, etc.) 2. The US hasn't seen a great need for them. 3. Fear of risk. The only, almost successful X-51 flight almost didn't occur. "We were worried we might fail." So many programs cancelled at the first sign of difficulty because it was easier to kick the can down the road than to risk a career. Hopefully we'll get some new blood in. So much institutional knowledge needs to be rebuilt.
@@sferrin2 If Nc tan is a bot sferrin2 is one for sure too. Way more obvious and a lot more logical since this is an American platform. Dont forget the psyops.
This is not the main threat from China. The real threat that comes from China is in the virtual domain, the recent report published by the pentagon ratified this by claiming that Chinese tech is not only at par with the US but they are ahead of them in developing and implementing disruptive tech. The US knew that Chinese had these advance tech capabilities but they were taken by surprise by the rate at which the Chinese progressed in operationalizing these disruptive technologies.
Its all because of Chinese Students in Universities that are used to spy and espionage on military, medical, and other technology blue prints. US shouldve been more critcal againts them.
Thanks for the analysis - superbly (albeit shortly) done. And indeed - the biggest problem US faces is spending money the wrong way with very low efficiency - they could actually cut their military budget and innovate more - but that would require less politics and taking away some ridiculous pre-conceptions that mostly politicians have, but pentagon isn't immune to.
The US overspends on the military because the military-industrial complex creates a lot of jobs and greases a lot of palms. Military spending is also a huge contributor to US GDP. Sure all this inefficiency creates bloated weapons programs but the US hasn't had to worry about peer competition for decades. The real problem is that if the US military tries to impose cost downs on projects the the US weapons industry would suffer. Employees in the MIC ecosystem would lose jobs, US GDP growth would suffer, and the financial interests of powerful groups in Washington would be threatened. Unfortunately, inefficient weapons programs is a great way to create jobs, keep up the GDP growth, and creates career promotion opportunities for generals and politicians. If you want to be more efficient, then prepare to take a hit to employment and GDP... both of which the American people will blame on whoever is in power. That's why we can't just simply "do better" because we want to.
@@kuanged I know that - but once this creates stagnation (and we have examples of that) - it becomes national security problem. China might not be peer or even realistically a "near-peer", but what about in 25-50 years? This is a problem because catching up takes a lot of time and a lot of money. Also the first step would be to stop increasing military budget every year. And since military programs are usually multi-year programs - you can even spend some money to retrain people that will lose jobs - at least those who need retraining. A lot of them would be really good at other jobs as well. So while cutting down military budget by 50% would create gigantic problems for GDP and unemployment - cutting it down by 5% for couple of years would have almost imperceptibly small effect. Of course you'd need systems in place that would ensure higher efficiency of money spent for this to have good effect, but that's also what military needs. It's in their best interest. And somehow a lot of politicians that want to increase military budget - "because jobs for my state" - don't want to pass Infrastructure bill that would also help in creating jobs immensely - and unlike military budget (apart from R&D) - have benefits to all Americans. It's almost like they vote in the interest of their party and image rather than people they represent. Since not everyone on internet understands this - the last sentence was sarcastic.
Keep thinking that, Chinese weapons are the most tested right now, they have aircraft carrier killers that will demolish any warship u.s has even Russia and Iran got this tech now
A friend of mine once commented that one of the reasons the US may be not especially well prepared for a rising China is that since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has been fighting against smaller, non-state actors in the middle east for the most part. So their military has shifted away from overwhelming technological superiority which is a staple of engaging other nation states and towards smaller, infantry units that are more mobile. Many other western powers are also in this situation. A rising China may lead to the US returning to a military strategy more similar to that used during the cold war against the Soviet Union. European nations facing what seems to be an increasingly assertive Russia may start doing the same.
Look why can you Germans not accept you were defeated? We all know and remember how your 'overwhelming technological superiority' completely failed. After that no one was that foolish to call things superior anymore. Now a rising China will keep them dry from the sea rising. We all see the US flood one state after another each year. Soon they will be permenantly under water. Think the weak to very weak US military will fight back the water? lol!
@@MrFlatage we are not in the 1940s anymore pfft also if you think the US military is weak how about you go fight them? Yeah that's what I thought pathetic
@@JACKAL747 Ah I see you are using the German editting of facts. Are you mad you Germans lost? Are you angry that the US Constitution orders a US SAI to annually state the official status of the entire US military? To give Accountability to the People? Then when people mention this status for 2021? You tear into them like some pathetic coward who hides behind a fake name and is no man who stands for his word. So ... the US Constitution is now someone's opinion? What s-hole country are you even from not knowing which US Supreme Audit Institution does this 'opinion' as you claim? Before you editted you did call me 'buddy' remember? That translates to ... comrade? My dog could beat the USAF.
Agreed, seemingly what our US Military is good at is wasting our money. We know they can do much better, but how are they held accountable? Our Congress just throws money at problems with out evaluating whether the money is providing real benefits and practical use. (ie: the Airforce and Navy retiring vessels and programs so early into its projected life)
What we see is what they want us to see, They have different equipment systems that are 50 years ahead of what we know of, all the money people think is wasted is being siphoned off for the black projects that they have in the pipeline. Once you finely see a new system like all the stealth tech they already have stuff that will take its place being developed.
We buy meteor missiles for our aircraft. We also buy the Navel strike Missile. For our navy destroyers our anti ship missiles suck. Dont get me started on our failed hyperbolic tests in last few months is terrible. With all the dollars we put into our military industrial complex we should be farther along than we are.
What’s the point? A war can only go so far without it becoming nuclear. At this point if China suspects the US has the will to use nuclear weapons they have nothing to counter it. Do you wanna turn the world into an irradiated wasteland over Taiwan? China’s bluster does nothing to hide its deep fear of the US and it’s completely irrational political system. Go ahead and try to take Taiwan - and god have mercy on all our souls
@@dongately2817 Chinese nuclear capability is still unknown, who knows how many war heads do they have. You are only partially right about the irrational system that The US have, it depends, they are absolutely rational when comes to money grabbing, Taiwan already relocating its semi conductor manufacturing and R&D else where, most of them are backed by American capitals, once the relocation complete, Taiwan has close to no value to the US except the old concept of first line of pacific defense.
Haha yes go throw around all the dollars in combat? You think you can win and beat bullets coming at you? Your navy? Dude grow a pair and enlist if you wanna call it that. Even then you will now own it. Are you a communist??
why do you need a Navy when you have platforms in near earth orbit that can drop a titanium rod the size of a telephone pole on any spot on earth at any time? Not to mention laser weapons and skynet. Tomahawks still work very well from what I hear. We better pray the good guys are still in control. all I can say.
@@brentjones2954 Haha Hollywood CGI will save you? Maybe focus on using capital letters to start sentences like a 1st grader is capable of? Did you know a Chinese cannot master that? Tell your Xi one word for me. The word is ... no.
One of my favorite American myths, aside from exceptionalism lol, is that 1 trillion dollars spent on defense actually gives you 1 trillion dollars worth of defense.
@@ns7353 One day just for fun you should compare American defense spending to American defense industry profits. Just profits, after all expenditures. It rules that you guys don't have basic healthcare but that every missile you buy also buys a lifetime supply of cocktail shrimp for a random contractor in North Virginia, great system!
@@captivatethem yep it’s a great system for everyone else. America screwed itself for years neglecting social and economic progress for Europe who now laughs ungratefully
@@captivatethem the US government spends 3 times as much on welfare and healthcare than they do on defense. The amount of money they commit to things has never been the problem, its the bloated administrative element. For comparison, they spend about as much as Europe per capita on social welfare. Healthcare costs are absurd not because the actual medicine is expensive or the doctors time, but from insurance and other admin costs of the hospital. Same story at universities. Its entirely fixable if people have the will to do it, since they wouldn't have to tax more or spend more money. The proof is in the pudding, Canada has a very good system and both countries are tied at the hip, Canadas medicine is the same medicine the US has but is much cheaper.
People forget the wage difference. A pay of any engineer, soldier or pilot in China will be much lower than that in the US, while the job they make, and their usefullness, will be comparable.
actually, the US imported chinese rocket scientist to build the bomb but treated him like shit afterwards, and he went back to china and helped china develop their first nuclear bomb
One other reason that this video didn't seem to emphasize is that long range missiles do not add any incremental value to the type of wars the US has been fighting over the past 2 decades. Cold war era standoff weapons are more than adequate for combat in Afghanistan & Iraq, that probably also drove the decision to focus on things other than long range missiles.
It’s inevitable for America to be overtaken by other nations in the future. America is just another big empire that has a declining edge in compared to the rapidly advancing nations in the East that have recently had access to proper education, etc. which brings out talents and geniuses that would have never been discovered if no proper education existed. Though it is crazy how China has always been a major power globally, they just occasionally go dormant and get overtaken by other nations, but when they are motivated, they become a powerful nation. America on the other hand is new and never had a history of being a major global power in the past, so maybe America will just fade a way for a few decades or centuries, but then comeback again as a superpower once they fix many problems, just like the history of China.
"百万漕工衣食所系, 废漕改海断然不许” "Millions of people live on channel transport, the revolution is unacceptable!" In the 17th century, the Ming(Chinese) Government wanted to change channel transport to sea transport. Some interest groups said we can't do that revolution for many people living in the old way. For this reason, China has lost the advantage of ship building and international transportation.
Gotta love the comments, we the public know nothing about either sides full ability & trying to predict that is pretty stupid. I study in HK and have seen what China is capable off. While I havnt visited the US im sure that they are equally capable if not better. Why give up your ace when you dont have too, both sides hold things in reserve.
Watch another one of his videos which covers your exact question. Something about advanced technologies acting as a deterrent and a way to keep the enemy in check.
I think it’s safe to assume, the US have been investing elsewhere. Although the inefficiency of U.S. military industrial complex, does suck money away from the tax payer, like nothing else in existence.
The US may spend more in terms of dollar amount, but I would assert since development cost in China are far lower than in the US that China spends dollar per dollar on par or greater than the US does. They are not limited to treaties, environmental impact studies, government oversight communities with regards to cost, IP theft, etc.
Exactly US never used other countries cutting edge technology, everything is developed from it's own scientist from the very beginning. Please do not google operation paperclip.
@@ZxZ239 operation paperclip is greatly overrated, it was really just limited to rocketry. I know its hard to imagine for some people but the US and Soviets were already ahead of the Germans in some areas.
Hypersonic weapons, althought great weapons, are limited in the type of mission capability, and severly ampered by cost. The DF-21D will not be used to kill tanks and or do en-mass strikes at enemy facilities. It's a wepons design do to one type of mssion only, killing sea-born targets and in that way, ofeer deterrence. For China, its a great weapon to defend commercial shipping and stave off any "low capable" adversary, in a country, where 90% of its more capable enemies come from the sea. The Tomahawk, while old, offers way more range of missions at a fraction of the cost, for a country that needs to defend its empire, all over the world. If the funding comes, and all those engineers open the drawers and blow the dust off all those wierd Cold War projects, I have no doubt the US can create and produce its own supersonic weapon. Each country produces whats best for them and its ambitions. China produces a great defensive weapon, altought with only a single purpose, while the US can't produce a multi-billion dollar mssile to shoot at sandal-wearing foreigners.
Even cheaper still are gravity bombs, and the US recently came out with a bolt-on JDAM kit upgrade that can track moving targets. This means America has potentially hundreds of thousands of ship killers deployable by almost anything that flies, balancing the battle back towards who can keep more planes aloft.
@John Smith The DF-21D is a state of the art hypersonic weapon. That means that is crazy expensive and its use MUST be strategic. The chinese cannot have them in high quantities without increasing their defense budget.
Really dumb take, they have weapons for those. What you said is like saying "your AR15 is bad cause its not practical to kill a fly" while i have a fly swatter
exactly. you know why us is mass-producing hellfire missiles for the past decade? cuz they're cheap and can be used for virtually anything not to big. perfect for wars in afghanistan, Latin america, middle east, africa.
Please, way back in 2010 the United States tested the HTV2 at Mach 20. It flew, then they dark projected the Pulse Detonation Rocket Engines. Can't have our adversaries making the relatively simple technological leap. We are far ahead of what's in the public domain and eye.
I agree 100%. It serves no benefit for the US to share with the world every technologically advanced weapon system they create considering they're at the top.
Is that why Gen.Milly called his counterpart in China to avoid war??? You guys don't have your own ISS...China leads on A.I...as per your A.I.Pentagon chief😂🤣
There is a bit of "hypersonic" craze going on. It comes from ignorance. First, it must be remembered that the purpose of a missile is to hit its target. Hypersonic is only a tool to help do that. Second, the US has the lead in stealth and in guidance systems. So, US missiles are stealthier and trickier to make them difficult to stop. Third, Hypersonic performance comes at a cost. For that speed the engine has to be big, making the rocket bigger and more costly. It also can restrict what platforms it can fit. Fourth, older does not mean ineffective. The latest variants of Harpoon, for instance, are very hard to intercept, for the majority of China's ships. Fifth, hypersonic missiles fly high to get their speed. Sub-sonic missiles, like Harpoon, are sea-skimming, making them impossible to detect until they come over the horizon. So, the time to respond by a target is still quite short. CWIS can be effective, though, if they are not stealthy or tricky in the approach flight path. The hypersonic missile that China tested was an alternative to using a ballistic missile to deliver nuclear warheads. It was NOT a SSM missile to be used in local naval or land battles. The reason it concerned the US, is that it negates the effectiveness of THAAD and other anti-nuclear missile defenses. The problem with reports like these, is that they give partial information that gives wrong impressions and ideas. Our military is not stupid. These armchair CZcams experts do a disservice by giving partial and often wrong information.
Everytime I turn around China always has some new and advanced tech and it's happening so fast! Just the other day I was looking at a list of their frigates and only one of them was made before 1990. Also, when it comes to building anything they can do it fast and for a much lower price even if the technology is sophisticated. China will be the next super power eventually.
@@user-os6ch5pt7w Lol. Here's one of many examples: PROC's one and only oversea military base in Djibouti (Fyi, Japan gets to be the first Far East-Asian to inaugurate a military base over there). Those in the SCS are not inside other country's territory. It's located outside or in international waters that's being contested and disputed by different parties.
When ever you have to ask why something that shouldnt have happened, happened. Its usually because some exorbitantly rich, powerful autocrates decided they needed to sell out for even more money.
$1b in China can do a lot more work and buy a lot more than $1b in US. So the budgetary comparison is inaccurate. CPI in China is right on the dot at 1.0 while in US it's at 4.7, meaning generally everything is 4.7x more expensive in the US. If you use this method to adjust the defense expenditure, you'll find the US expenditure is actually below China: (2021 US) $801b ÷ 4.7 = $170b. $170 billion dollar : US defense budget $293 billion dollar : CHN defense budget Crunch these numbers with the fact that the US keeps an active presence throughout the globe 24/7, coupled with multiple wars and offensive campaigns annually.. then you can see why the US is really struggling with new developments.
It's scary knowing that when a global recession, or worse a total monetary collapse comes, the uncertainty of what comes next or which new superpower influences the world is scary
Interesting video but, really, *everything* we know about these weapons is based on information provided by people who have a vested interest in hyping weapons to increase their bottom lines. Has the U.S. every actually acquired and tested a Chinese missile? Probably not. Same question applies to all weapons systems.
I really hope that we have sharp level headed guys like yourself in DOD , the Pentagon , etc..because the work that you do for your channel is second to none! Sometimes I feel like we're in a skif being read in on classified intel!! Lol!! In all seriousness Covert Cabal is painfully honest and gives very intelligent assessments of the state of different facets of our military and it's not easy to speak about things negatively effecting your side or admitting that we no longer have these huge mismatch advantages in hardware or readiness! No American wants to hear these things but we must and its that sober truthful analysis that is needed otherwise change won't come or it will happen too late to matter! Anyways love the channel and appreciate all your hard work, you truely bring the best breakdowns and/or evaluations of all things defence related!! 💪🇺🇸👍
And how exactly do you KNOW that Chinese missiles REALLY outperform US missiles? You read what the Chinese wrote about their missiles or you made a technical comparison and verifies everything by testing them against each other?
It is good for the USA cause for the first time in a long time they have a real challenger to built a military against, they were just wasting money for years
Tech is driven by needs... with it's superior advancements and nobody to challenge it the US didn't see a need to spend on hypersonic. Why would it build anti ship missiles when nobody had a formidable navy?
I'd imagine the US dusting off or reactivating a couple "dark" programs and bring them to the public in the near future since you mentioned how they're not beholden to treaties
@@f-86zoomer37 MK-ultra never really went anywhere. I produced a bunch of mentally scarred guinea pigs and probably kicked off the popularity of LSD, but it utterfy failed in its intended objective of useful mindcontrol.
I think one of the main problems that caused the US to fall behind is that we've been mostly focusing on fighting low intensity asymmetric conflicts in the middle east against terrorist groups. Our major conflict capability as atrophied as the Soviet threat was gone. Big money projects went towards developing delivery systems like the F-35 and Zumwalt destroyer, so now we have super advanced fighters and ships, using munitions that were developed in the 80s with a few upgrades during the '00s. The Zumwalt doesn't even really have its full weapons yet, it's experimental gun was a failure and scrapped and now they want to use it as a hypersonic missile platform, but we don't have hypersonic missiles for it yet.
Terrorists group created by the US itself to justify the need for their presence in foreign soveriegn nations. The US wants to fight both China and Russia. With no use of nuclear weapons... i cannot imagine the US fighting conventional warfare
I am not certain about China...but one thing to keep in mind is that the Americans always UNDER represent the capabilities of their equipment; in order to allow an opponent to either underestimate them, or be forced to plan without certainty. Russia on the other hand has advertised it's hardware capabilities...to the point of being just short of falsehood...because they need to SELL that hardware for income.
@@jamesnewcomer4939 Yes, they are always very underestimated the budget and time need to complete the projects. F-22, F-35, DDGX, Ford CV. Looks like it is natural for big projects to go over time and budget, and the USA cases are the most extreme ones.
You must also remember that a large portion of US Military spending is dedicated to funding ally military forces and defensive obligations in countries like South Korea and Japan.
Go see the NATO spending breakdown reports. The US overseas bases and operational costs (%) is inline with other nations. Everyone knows most of the money goes to secret projects. 1 day before 9/11 $2.3 Trillion goes missing 🙄. Space Force and Star Wars program has been operational for decades.
I agree with you basic point about the budget, but what you call "funding ally military forces and defensive obligations' could also reasonably be called "funding garrisons in vassal states'. Washington is not paying for the defense of Tokyo and Seoul. Washington is paying for the defense of Washington in part by spending money in Tokyo and Seoul. If Washington cut them loose they would both pay what ever they thought was needed for their own defense and make reasonable deals with Beijing and Pyongyang.
I wouldn't say that the US were undisputedly ahead of the Soviet Union during the cold war. I would say that they were pretty comparable in terms of their technology.
You're right, that's why I didn't say undisputedly. I chose my words there carefully, saying "more often than not". They were the first to a lot of major technologies, like nuclear weapons, satellite navigation, computing in general, etc, so I say "technological edges like these arguably kept the US in the lead over the Soviet Union during the Cold War."
@@CovertCabal I thought the Soviet union was the first to lunch the first satellite on space?? How come the US was above them when it comes to technologies?
@@REGULUS-g6m There are different technologies. As example GPS based on Sattilites are first made in the US. It certainly isn't a either one or the other has the lead in every tech.
1. Hypersonic missiles are nowhere nearly as powerful or superior to conventional sub or super sonic missiles as some outlets claim. 2. The US has a much wider range of capabilities than either China or Russia. 3. Missile range and speed aren’t everything. Without sensors and data, the best missiles in the world aren’t particularly effective. Sensors and networking capabilities are where the US still has a massive edge, its just not as sexy or headline grabbing as the missiles themselves thus not widely discussed.
That would be interesting, assuming we can trust the public numbers... Remember the pentagon saying they lost track of 2 trillion dollars in "Accounting errors" back in 2001? Who knows what they do with that stuff.
i say this all the time but the US spends 2.2 trillion USD yearly on welfare and healthcare, 3 times more that defense. Their spending per capita is inline with Europe and canada. Its not how much they spend, its the overly bloated administrative system. This is true of medicine, welfare, education and so forth.
It's the old "Guns or Butter" question, where do you spend your money, weapons or food ? But defense has always been essential for any nation's survival. Machiavelli said that a nation without an army was like a fine house without a roof, sooner or later it will rain and all your beautiful things will be destroyed.
Sigh. People constantly misunderstand how things work in military strategy and procurement. You DON'T buy a weapon system because it has X capability "better" than others. You buy a weapon system that does Y JOB better than others. And not all militaries have the same JOB REQUIREMENTS. The US doesn't have hypersonics, because they're not useful to us. They provide ZERO advantage over what we currently have. So why develop and buy a system that doesn't provide us with any new capacity, and can't perform better in actual use-cases for us than what we have right now? The DF-5 is an excellent example of this. It's a long-range SSM intended for anti-ship use. It's also larger than a SLBM like a Trident. So why would we buy/develop something like this for our use? (1) we're not trying to defend CONUS from a foreign navy. (2) We can cram about 6 Tomahawks in the same space as a DF-5 takes up, so it's not terribly great for cramped spaces like on ships. (3) Fewer missiles (6 vs 1) means a loss of tactical flexibility - you can hit 6 times FEWER targets. (4) they have the same warhead size. So you're not getting more "bang" per missile. (5) the DF-5 is only hypersonic IN TRANSIT - that is, while flying from launch location to the general area of the target. Once it gets to the target area, it has to deploy a warhead package that is significantly SLOWER. Why? Because a DF-5 can't steer well enough to hit a moving target. You need a warhead package that can actually steer to target when it's within 20km or so. Which means you have to have a much slower warhead. In effect, a DF-5 is an ICBM that mounts a Mach 2 Exocet missile on top of it. Not very hard to hit with modern SAMs or CIWS once the warhead separates from the main rocket body for terminal attack. (6) A Tomahawk costs about 1/10th that of a DF-5, when you take it's support systems into account. That makes the DF-5 a BAD cost/benefit system for the US. The DF-5 is a good fit for the PLA, where it has to defend mainland China from the US Navy. It makes ZERO sense for practically anyone else. So WTF would anyone else buy it? That's not a "hypersonic capabilities deficiency". It's a "Hypersonics Aren't Useful to Us" assessment. Same thing for the newer Chinese AAMs. Factors OTHER than speed and range are MUCH more important. Does it really matter if a AMRAAM is slower and shorter range if the F-35 can see the J-20 at 50km and the J-20 can't see the F-35 until it gets to 20km? What does it matter if the PL-15 has a 120km range if you can't see anything to hit more than 30km away? Why is the AIM-120 "inferior" because it can't hit stuff at 130km, if it can hit things at 50km with no problem? Range of your weapons isn't ANYWHERE near as important as Range of Detection. The AIM-120 fulfills the requirements, which are "sufficient range to hit a target we can see". The PL-15's "extra" range capability is entirely wasted - you paid for capability you can't use. That's WASTED MONEY. Moreover, it's a little important to understand that the AMRAAM is MUCH more maneuverable than the PL-15, and much less susceptible to countermeasures. The PL-15 on the J-20 is indeed superior to the AMRAAM on the F-18. Except that the J-20 WON'T BE FIGHTING F-18s. Instead, it will be fighting F-35s, whose other capabilities mean that the extra range of the PL-15 is completely useless. And the AMRAAM's capabilities are just in line with what the F-35 needs. Again, the whole "we're behind because we don't have a weapon that can do X" is naive in the least, and stupid more generally, because it betrays a complete lack of understanding about WHY weapon systems exist. We're not playing a video game here, people. Bigger is NOT always better. More Features aren't always a good thing. "More" is not synonymous with "advantageous".
Soon every country will catch up as it becomes more difficult to get a qualitative edge. There is a limit to universal physics and the elements on the periodic table. Even Cape Verde island will have ability to field tomahawk, hypersonic, nukes, lasers. Just like gunpowder was invented in China and now everyone has it. It’s a matter of time.
That’s far from the truth…even today most of the country in the world do not have any capability to produce a reliable small firearm. And now weapon system became so complex, that every system has a long supply chain across in many different fields. For example to produce a modern aircraft, sometime even down to a screw is specially designed and manufactured, for more complex part such as avionics, a single part is already challenging enough, let alone to develop and produce the whole plane. lastly, the cost, take look at the military budgets after top 8 on the list, most countries are struggling to maintain what they have now, do not have extra cash to develop anything new
@@andyofzz what supply chain and costs are you talking about. Iran and North Korea have been under sanctions for years and operating a closed economy, yet they built their own nukes, missiles, drones, submarines. You sound bias as if all inventions must come from a particular capitalist system and other people don't have ways of getting things done.
@@du5707 lol first of all, North Korean might be consider as poor country if you consider of the public living standards, however what’s the country spending on military is not small at. Secondly, North Koran has been industrialized especially in the military area since the Cold War, with the support from Soviet Union and China, they can produce tanks and vehicles, although some vital parts are still need to be imported, for example, tank engines. If Russia and China cut off the supply, North Korean army wouldn’t nearly as effective.
As everyone know, job market in China is very competitive due to it's population. And when you have a large population that is well educated and working their butt off everyday, the growth of the country accelerate in all industries. I have lived in Canada for over 22 yeras but still staying in touch with friends and family back home. Based on what I hear from China, and what I personally experience in Canada, I am very concerned for the future of Canada. It took the city of Toronto 13 years to build 2 subway station, most building I see at downtown Toronto is still the same building I see 20 years ago. The word democracy here is only a cover up for the government and politicians, people are abusing unionized environment, government welfare, benefits, rights and freedom to the extrem for their personal interest and benefits. These will only hold back and slow down the development of the country.
Democracy is garbage politicians shit on people so that people think they have some sort of "control". In reality, democracy is a lie, especially in US. What kind of democracy is that in which there are literally just two parties? Its all jokes.
Never really. All the times the US developed missiles were in response to the latest Russian missile developments. All their developed missiles were not as capable as the Russian missiles. Also US has a different military doctrine compared to Russia and China.
@@FirstDagger Well actually, the Chinese were the first to get their hands on a Sidewinder, then they shared it with the Soviets. It wasn't until about 2016 or 2017 that the US lost its edge in missile technology.
amraam is a 30 yr missile but its been upgraded to the new aim-120d, the pl-15 can outrange the new aim-120d but both have similar no-escape zone range, if a target is over 80km the pl-15 can only hit cargo plane or awacs or other non maneuverable targets, during a air exercise between china and thailand in 2015, thailand gripen armed with aim-120c dominate chinese j-11 armed with pl-12 in beyond visual range mock combat, pl-12 was suppose to be the better missile with better performance against the old aim-120c yet the gripen with its old aim-120c ended up winning during the thai-china air exercise. you can boast about all the range or speed outperform western missiles, but if you dont have advance guidance systems like the americans or the europeans, than those far range speedy missile are useless.
@Alien Reject aint the chinese and the russians brag about there radars can track any fighters including american stealth fighters 😆😆😆 so its suppose to detect the gripen first eh.
The Thailand exercise where Gripen dominated J-11 in bvr was mainly down to J-11 having older radar and obsolete Chinese pilot training. Individually, Chinese pilots were great, as demonstrated by J-11’s dominating performance against Gripen in dogfights, but they lacked group cohesion and don’t know what to do as a team in bvr. PLAAF training had been heavily changed since then and one can only assume that newer pilots were much better trained for group engagements.
@@thomaszhang3101 thailand gripen were old version of the gripen and doesnt use new aesa radar like american and other european jets, the argument the j-11 have obsolete radar against the gripen is bullfart since the gripen c use by thailand is considered old version of the gripen that came out in 2002.
I worked on hypersonic AtoA missiles several decades ago, they had twp problems, they are very expensive, and they really can't maneuver. Accuracy is also a problem because they just can't turn fast enough in final guidance. So they are not the Panacea. back 40+ years ago they used to cost $1 million dollars a piece. A similar missile today will cost $50 million a piece. So now you know why the navy has cheap subsonic cruise missiles for most missions. So in the future Subs and Ships will carry a few Hypersonics for initial attacks at high priority targets, but most missiles will not be.
Hello from Russia, Covert! I`d really like to see your perspective on a recent russian anti-sattelite missile test. Keep up the good work you are doing!
@@markcooke5270 If you refer to the recent anti-satellite missile test, then you should know that the US, China and India also performed such tests in the past. India, China and Russia didn’t use US test as a pretext for PR attack against the US. United States, on the other hand, did.
@@markcooke5270 You are right. Russia bad. US putting 10 times more crap up there. Good. Right? Ah yes ... I will do it for you. Said every dictator in history.
Treaties can't be the reason, since we break treaties at will. The goal to overtake the US also isn't the reason, since our goal has ALWAYS been about supramacy. The real reason we fell behind is complacency. We think we are so far ahead of everyone that the urgency to innovate is just not there
China can innovate all they want but a lot of their high tech weaponry is going to be very limited with their chip shortages. In a non nuclear war china has incredibly limited capability to put boots on the ground and a hypersonic missile or stealth fighter cant clear buildings or establish a beachhead. Chinas current economic situation is also not really conducive to waging a war with anything but a much smaller country where their tech advantage isnt really a major factor
Let's also not forget the assymetric nature of propaganda/classified information. The US, as the incumbent superpower, has an incentive to conceal their system's capabilities. That way, the goalpost for competing powers aren't clear during the development phase, and it'd be more advantageous for the enemy to underestimate the true performance goalpost, and come out short. China, on the other hand, is a challenger, and hence if they wanted to be taken seriously by third world nations (in the cold war sense), they need to first of all, appear far ahead of the status quo to win over genuine support. Furthermore, their demographic issues and policies that won't allow for resolution of their demographic issues, needs to out-smart the US. How? By exaggerating their capabilities and having the US waste resources on countering their systems. Fact is, the most surefire for the Chinese to win is to encourage as much US wastage as possible - the more the US has to maintain overmatch on a system, the less quantity of that system the US can produce.
This is the best answer. The US, to an extent, wants to domestically stoke some fear of China such that public support for military spending will remain high. China has every intention of acting as strong as possible, but life is getting worse there. Much worse. I don't put much stock in a CZcamsr's analysis. It's not really clear what either side's true warfighting capabilities are. It's the most important thing, and rn it's probably the case that the US is still significantly better prepared to fight a very vicious, short, sharp war.
Well said! Propaganda is a huge tool that China is well known for. And US generals are very good at hyping it up to so that they can get all the new toys that they want. A good example would be the F-22. During its initial days there was lots of Congressional doubt that it was even needed because of the collapse of the USSR. The US had F-15s go up against India’s fighters, including the Su-30MKI and the Mig-21, and the US fighters came out on the losing end. The exercises were used by the USAF to warrant the need for the F-22. What wasn’t told was the F-15s we’re outnumbered by a 4-1 ratio, weren’t allowed to take BVR shots, older F-15s were used with pilots who had little flight time that year, and AWACS weren’t used. In other words, not very realistic. Another example of why the USA should not be too concerned is that during the MMRCA tender India’s Air Chief stated that the USA had the best weapons, radars and systems, and the USA wasn’t even offering its best. With regards to hypersonic missiles, the USA was already flying a Mach 12+ missile in the 1950s. The fact that the USA broke the world record for hypersonic duration of flight over ten years ago with the X-51 Waverider, there’s no doubt there’s technology that isn’t publicly available. China can brag all it wants, but nothing beats real combat where the systems can get tested in real-life situations. Plus, it’s doubtful that China can even intercept what is in our current inventory, and they have no answer for the F-22 or F-35. A missile’s range means little if it can’t lock onto the target. Another example are US SAMS. Russian and Chinese SAMS get tons of recognition, but it’s the USA and Israel systems that are routinely shooting down missiles in real combat. Saudi Arabia has been very successful with the PAC-3 now that their soldiers are better trained. They commonly shoot down Iranian made ballistic missiles being launched in Yemen. Saudi Arabia just placed an additional order for more than 200 of them. If they were disappointed they wouldn’t be buying more and would have gone elsewhere. It’s also funny how this video makes no mention of how an Israeli F-35 destroyed a Chinese SAM that Iranian forces manned. There’s quite a bit of bias with this video. For instance, he knocked the Phoenix missile for its size, yet the Iranians used it extremely well against the Iraqi fighters in the Iran-Iraq war. While I do agree that the US needs some improvements, it’s not dire like this video portrays. One missile I wish the US had an equivalent to is the Meteor. That’s a real game changer.
The PLA typically doesn’t make the capabilities of their weapons systems public. The capabilities you hear about are extrapolated from third party estimates. For this video, the main source was a US military training manual.
actually, I am sure a lot of the chinese military footage you used in your videos have HD version available, Im not sure why you have been using thsoe 240P quality footage 😅
haha if I could get good quality Chinese military footage... I would love that! The US releases a ton, Russia releases a ton, but China is difficult to find. I've searched for a long time to find good footage
@@CovertCabal actually the chinese national TV has a military channel, and everything is in HD. i found one youtube channel thats pretty good czcams.com/users/militarycntvvideos not sure whether its official or someone from china repost these to youtube, sadly only in chinese. i think the guardian channel has the highest quality footage of their military parade too czcams.com/video/7395qcF2MGA/video.html love your content if u need any help in finding specific footage or image feel free to reach out 😛
@@timothy1949 Thanks! Yea I'm actually subscribed to them to check for footage. Only problem is all the logos/graphics/subtitles they put over it. And most of them are so quick jump cuts that it makes it difficult to use. If you come across any other good, clean sources... that would be a life saver! Send me an email - gregr1251@gmail.com
China is hyper-secretive about weapons test and stuff like that… so while I don’t think we should get complacent, I suspect that not all of these new weapons work as well as advertised.
@@MrCastodian Based on the fact that China has a tendency to glorify their successes, and completely hide their failures in other aspects of their society. They probably do the same thing with their military.
@@Cris-xy2gi Well if you look at the way they revealed their second aircraft carrier is actually the opposite of 'glorify their successes'. Basically, there is no official news of that one being built until they can't hide it anymore. Similarly, with the one they are currently building, there is still no official news that it has Catapult system despite it is already on the ship
china is usually very good at keeping its weapons a secret until they're pretty close to operational. I mean the J20 was literally unknown until it was flying over the heads of US diplomats visiting china in 2011.
I met a Chinese guy who once said, the US is like a boxing champion who spent the last two decades beating up children and perfecting the skills of beating a child more efficiently. China is a lighter weight boxer but when the US was stomping kids left and right, he's been training himself to fight a bigger and stronger opponent.
@@Slimdaddywills watched the whole video and saw that all the ships it hit had no wake, meaning they were stationary. I'd think including an antiship missle hitting a building would be a dead giveaway.
I've been thinking about this question, a lot of others have been too and I think the answer must be, on the balance of probabilities,that the Russians and Chinese do have hypersonic weapons including anti-ship missiles that actually work. Consider that, (1) none of this is magic, the technology is definitely possible (2) They have announced that they have them, a bluff is certainly possible but it's a huge risk if the opposition sees through your bluff and (3) America says it is developing counter measures
Don't worry, with the top rated high high school in San Francisco dropping test scores for admissions and the UC system following suit, we should have no problem generating the next generation of engineers to take on these technical problems.
Yeah. China isn't as powerful as USSR by a long short. For example, the Chinese can never really deploy nuclear missiles in Cuba. Just military complex chunking out propaganda.
One country spent the last 20 years to fight a modern war with modern requirements. The other spent 20 years making gear to fight goat farmers and defend vehicles against IEDs. Also helps when you gradute the entire population of the US in STEM graduates and don't have colleges dedicating resources to liberal arts and gender studies instead of hard science
The US spends 3x as much compare to China in military hardware, assets and its soldiers. But labor cost of making planes or submarines for example is dirt cheap in China compare to US. The latest 5th gen J20 of China probably cost $50 million dollars while our F35 is like what 135 million. Do not quote me on the numbers. So the Chinese can make more planes, ships, drones at a lesser cost compare to the U.S. Another thing that pisses me off is that Chinese saves billions of dollars from R&D by stealing or hacking our military technology. We lose our edge by giving our secrets to the Chinese and we pay the price. It is utterly unacceptable. If we do go to war with China, GOD help us. I just hope those MADE IN CHINA military hardware will not last long when all hell breaks loose. We need to step up to the plate just like what Ronald Reagan did during his term. Confront the Evil Empire.
Most of the people makes the mistake when it comes to air to air missiles, range is not everything. Amraams can be have less range then chinese and european missiles, but they have no competition when it comes to wroking against electronic jamming.
"The U.S. Navy knows this from experience. In 2005, the Navy itself targeted the decommissioned carrier America in order to determine just how much punishment the vessel could withstand before slipping beneath the waves. "The ship was pummeled by explosions both above and below the waterline," The War Zone reporter Tyler Rogoway explained in 2018. "After nearly four weeks of these activities, the carrier was scuttled. On May 14, 2005, the vessel's stern disappeared below the waterline and the ship began its voyage to the seafloor." "America stood up to four weeks of abuse and only succumbed to the sea after demolition teams scuttled the ship on purpose once and for all, it's clear that America was built to sustain heavy damage in combat and still stay afloat."
A nuclear war head mounted on a Chinese hypersonic missile can take out a whole fleet not just one carrier, especially since no serious air defense weapons have been developed by the US the last 30 years.
Black Friday Deal! Go to nordvpn.com/covert to get a 2-year plan plus 1 additional month FREE with a huge discount! 2 years of cybersecurity for only $3.16 per month!
The "narrative" that makes up the dialog of this video feeds ignorant brains but is far from accurate. However, I realize the truth can't even be approached on social media for political reasons.
Ok you did it twice. The AMRAAM and Tomahawk are NOT the same as the old ancient originals. They have seen many many upgrades over the years to keep them competitive as new tech arrives. . They are not the same old originals that came off the assembly line 30 years ago.
PL-15. How can they hit what they cannot see? By the time they get close enough for a weapons grade lock the jet that carries them will have been serviced by a F-35/F-22 AMRAAM. The U.S. controls the see first shoot first advanced technology.. not the CCP.
lol you ignore major weapon overhauls on every weapon you mentioned. you also failed to mention china needs to steal nearly every advancement they achieved and did not organically develop any of the competing systems from scratch! come on covert cabal facts not spin!
Wait, what's the use of a long range missile with stealth fighters. won't they just lose there targets, and fall in the ocean. Just by maneuvering to hit it when its standing still.
As long as the US possesses Nord VPN they do not need to worry about anything.
The cyber war is now won 🇺🇸🙆🏻🙆🏻🙆🏻🇺🇸
nord vpn is spyware
@@elusive7625 really?
@@elusive7625 explain
@@drrugee you really think the criminal u.s. government is going to allow you to surf the net without them spying on you.....look at social media, its a database that idiots willfully post personal info about them....the fbi,cia etc just has to collect it
Pouring $4T into a hole in Afghanistan and lighting it on fire is another reason the US has fallen behind our near-peer rivals. You can't really explain our current situation accurately while omitting this fact.
Yet people say we shouldn't have left.
The freedom and liberty of the afghan people is worth any cost.
But have considered all the opiums that have been produced? /s
Who do you think was financing the Taliban through Pakistan's military intelligence service to keep the US there🤔 maybe Pakistan's biggest allie hmmm maybe the CCP While they catch up.
@@mylesdobinson1534 Why does an indian name himself myles dobinson is what i'm wondering.
The US defence budget is, indeed, much larger than that of China or anyone. However, one point that is often overlooked is that the US has a huge number of forward bases all the over the globe that are costly to maintain. China has just one, in Djibouti. A lot of the US defence money is spent maintaining all those forward bases.
To be exact the US have to look after over 750 oversea bases and logistics 😃
Not to mention inflation rate .. goods and labor cost in China are much less costly than in US .
Don't worry, the US can print dollar bills , dollar hegemony , that's the key
US spends about 350 billion on base maintenance and personnel costs (salary, healthcare, etc)
China has to deal with much more complicated local defense where half of its military is spent focused on internal security as well. China is not just focused on Taiwan
The US spends 3x as much as China, but its not going into new technology, a lot of it goes into salaries of its soldiers, maintaining a lot of military bases around the world, budgets which have to be 100% spend or else they will get less money next year and commercial companies wanting to make a profit so its money inefficiently spend. While in China all the military companies are owned by the government.
And China steals a lot of military technology from the US or buys it from Russia and Israel and reverse engineers it thus saving years/decennia in research and development and trillions of dollars. If you correct for all these factors then China is getting a lot closer to the US in spending.
Wasnt it recently discovered that a company lied about the quality of the metal they sold to navy to build subs? Also a navy officer was convicted of buying guns for a Chinese businessman who was later convicted of export crimes? A Many cases like this. The wall of US military industrial complex has more holes than we think
Dont forget the salaries of ghost soldiers in Afghanistan
You forget the advantage of higher profits and salary’s, it has the benefit that people are better trained and work harder. Russia has discovered this short coming in their armed forces again and again. In the first Chechen war, they put poorly trained conscripts into their T-80 tanks and BMP’s and sent them into Grozny with no recon and poor tactics. So naturally they were slaughtered by Chechens, many of them veterans from the Afghanistan war! In 2008 in the Georgian war, they again suffered casualties from poorly trained conscripts and the inability of the air force and ground forces in working together, in fact it was said that they fought two different wars. Only the sheer size of the Russian army allowed them to defeat much smaller forces but that advantage disappears against NATO and the US! Russia has attempted to build a professional army but that takes time and money … which then takes away from weapons programs! In Syria the Russians still had problems coordinating between their air force and ground forces … finally putting an army general in charge.
China defense spending is higher using PPP.
its not only the profit of the companies. Its the way the companies have to operate. The F35 is produced in like 37 states. That is so, so inefficient, and from a logistical standpoint incredibly stupid, but that way the senators and congressmen that give contracts to these firms gain popularity in their district/state
As long as the US has emma and her 2 moms, they would no longer need advanced missiles
The difference, is China's military industrial complex is more focused, it also benefits from having the US capabilities as a huge target. Designing weapon systems that are specifically tailored to deal with the USA.
America on the other hand, spent the current 21st century and the last decade of 20th century, not know what to do with their doctrine and strategy, causing aimless weapon developments.
China is designing the PLA to win a specific war under a specific conditions against a few potential enemies. The initiative is on their side also helps with timing of projects, and thus funding.
it also doesn't help that after the collapse of USSR, the US military had no direction as you've said and that resulted in bloating of US military complex. Pointless designs that don't work nor have any combat advantage have been developed solely because they had the money to do so and certain generals wanted to secure their retirement jobs by giving companies pointless tasks.
Another advantage for China is that they only have to focus on defensive weapons and less on aggressive tactics like global power projection and invading forces
This comment is fair, not like the lies of stealing or sth like that. The fact is more simple in my opinion, just Chinese military had too little money during 1979 to 2000. For example only 0.5 billion dollars a year during 1990s.
While China is building up millitary to counter US.
India, Japan, Korea and so on Will be the downfall of CCP
@@John_Doe448 china is actually having a more and more aggressive foreign policy stands over the recent year, they keep on breaching Vietnam, Malaysia, Philippines, Indonesia sea border and even considered invading Taiwan around the corner, heck even the syrian conflict have some china logistical backup... they might not be as openly invasive as the USA, but their global power play is there, exerting soft power to smaller nations etc..
This is the only military tech channel I watch. The others all seem to have idiot robo-narration and a bunch of disjointed footage that has little or no relation to the topic being robo-discussed. This channel should have way more subscribers.
Hahahahaha I'm loving those 2 new concepts: "robo-narration" and "robo-discussing", lol. You are quite on point.
Erm you might want to find your news on another platform 😂😂😂😂
Or some indian propaganda shit eith their unbearable accents
i honestly dont understand the robo voice on military channels. like what makes creators to wake up one day and say robo narration it is!
When I hear the robo voice studiously mispronouncing words I hit 'home'.
Plot Twist: Y'know those UFO's? Yeah, that's us.
Never underestimate your enemy!
Also never overestimate. Overestimating could make you fear the enemy more than they actually are. Ofc we shouldn't think China's weapons are bad but thinking that they are far superior isn't good either
@@sw-reload9232 ; Yes most people don't get that, Ghost armies and fake silos are a thing. Balance as with everything is needed.
@@FirstDagger
Funny thing is, western media literally think China has hundreds of new silos (the objects in question were a wind farm)
@@shanerooney7288
and you also have practically the vast majority of Americans and other Westerners or allied nation that underesrimate China and think that juat because it's made in China it's automatically shhhttt
China has less experience in war.
The reasons can be summed up as:
1. The US HAS demonstrated the ability in the past. (BGRV, ASALM, Pershing II, Skybolt, etc.)
2. The US hasn't seen a great need for them.
3. Fear of risk. The only, almost successful X-51 flight almost didn't occur. "We were worried we might fail." So many programs cancelled at the first sign of difficulty because it was easier to kick the can down the road than to risk a career.
Hopefully we'll get some new blood in. So much institutional knowledge needs to be rebuilt.
The nazi/jew/Soviet generation of scientists that greatly helped the US military is no more.
@@k.k.c8670 Thanks for the info Chibot. No rice for you today for being too obvious.
@@sferrin2 If Nc tan is a bot sferrin2 is one for sure too. Way more obvious and a lot more logical since this is an American platform. Dont forget the psyops.
@@k.k.c8670 ccp bootlicker
@@sferrin2 finished high school yet?
one senior engineer paid 30000USD/year in China but 200000 USD/year in the US. So actual defense spendings are similar.
This is not the main threat from China. The real threat that comes from China is in the virtual domain, the recent report published by the pentagon ratified this by claiming that Chinese tech is not only at par with the US but they are ahead of them in developing and implementing disruptive tech.
The US knew that Chinese had these advance tech capabilities but they were taken by surprise by the rate at which the Chinese progressed in operationalizing these disruptive technologies.
Its all because of Chinese Students in Universities that are used to spy and espionage on military, medical, and other technology blue prints. US shouldve been more critcal againts them.
Thanks for the analysis - superbly (albeit shortly) done. And indeed - the biggest problem US faces is spending money the wrong way with very low efficiency - they could actually cut their military budget and innovate more - but that would require less politics and taking away some ridiculous pre-conceptions that mostly politicians have, but pentagon isn't immune to.
And convincing a lot of people the budget needs to be cut
The US overspends on the military because the military-industrial complex creates a lot of jobs and greases a lot of palms. Military spending is also a huge contributor to US GDP.
Sure all this inefficiency creates bloated weapons programs but the US hasn't had to worry about peer competition for decades.
The real problem is that if the US military tries to impose cost downs on projects the the US weapons industry would suffer. Employees in the MIC ecosystem would lose jobs, US GDP growth would suffer, and the financial interests of powerful groups in Washington would be threatened.
Unfortunately, inefficient weapons programs is a great way to create jobs, keep up the GDP growth, and creates career promotion opportunities for generals and politicians.
If you want to be more efficient, then prepare to take a hit to employment and GDP... both of which the American people will blame on whoever is in power. That's why we can't just simply "do better" because we want to.
@@kuanged I know that - but once this creates stagnation (and we have examples of that) - it becomes national security problem. China might not be peer or even realistically a "near-peer", but what about in 25-50 years? This is a problem because catching up takes a lot of time and a lot of money.
Also the first step would be to stop increasing military budget every year. And since military programs are usually multi-year programs - you can even spend some money to retrain people that will lose jobs - at least those who need retraining. A lot of them would be really good at other jobs as well. So while cutting down military budget by 50% would create gigantic problems for GDP and unemployment - cutting it down by 5% for couple of years would have almost imperceptibly small effect.
Of course you'd need systems in place that would ensure higher efficiency of money spent for this to have good effect, but that's also what military needs. It's in their best interest.
And somehow a lot of politicians that want to increase military budget - "because jobs for my state" - don't want to pass Infrastructure bill that would also help in creating jobs immensely - and unlike military budget (apart from R&D) - have benefits to all Americans. It's almost like they vote in the interest of their party and image rather than people they represent.
Since not everyone on internet understands this - the last sentence was sarcastic.
@@Tzar1 Which is a big hurdle.
Gender reassignment surgery for our top generals isn’t a good use of taxpayer dollars and time? How dare you!
Theyre better because theyve never been tested and fact checked
Keep thinking that, Chinese weapons are the most tested right now, they have aircraft carrier killers that will demolish any warship u.s has even Russia and Iran got this tech now
A friend of mine once commented that one of the reasons the US may be not especially well prepared for a rising China is that since the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has been fighting against smaller, non-state actors in the middle east for the most part.
So their military has shifted away from overwhelming technological superiority which is a staple of engaging other nation states and towards smaller, infantry units that are more mobile. Many other western powers are also in this situation.
A rising China may lead to the US returning to a military strategy more similar to that used during the cold war against the Soviet Union. European nations facing what seems to be an increasingly assertive Russia may start doing the same.
Look why can you Germans not accept you were defeated? We all know and remember how your 'overwhelming technological superiority' completely failed. After that no one was that foolish to call things superior anymore. Now a rising China will keep them dry from the sea rising. We all see the US flood one state after another each year. Soon they will be permenantly under water. Think the weak to very weak US military will fight back the water? lol!
@@MrFlatage we are not in the 1940s anymore pfft also if you think the US military is weak how about you go fight them? Yeah that's what I thought pathetic
@@JACKAL747 Ah I see you are using the German editting of facts. Are you mad you Germans lost? Are you angry that the US Constitution orders a US SAI to annually state the official status of the entire US military? To give Accountability to the People? Then when people mention this status for 2021? You tear into them like some pathetic coward who hides behind a fake name and is no man who stands for his word. So ... the US Constitution is now someone's opinion? What s-hole country are you even from not knowing which US Supreme Audit Institution does this 'opinion' as you claim? Before you editted you did call me 'buddy' remember? That translates to ... comrade? My dog could beat the USAF.
Agreed, seemingly what our US Military is good at is wasting our money. We know they can do much better, but how are they held accountable? Our Congress just throws money at problems with out evaluating whether the money is providing real benefits and practical use. (ie: the Airforce and Navy retiring vessels and programs so early into its projected life)
What we see is what they want us to see, They have different equipment systems that are 50 years ahead of what we know of, all the money people think is wasted is being siphoned off for the black projects that they have in the pipeline. Once you finely see a new system like all the stealth tech they already have stuff that will take its place being developed.
U.S weapon development seems to have shifted towards a system of the more a contractor fails to deliver, the more profitable it is for them.
You hit the nail on the head. Some of the comments are just excuses for the failure of the American MIC.
We buy meteor missiles for our aircraft. We also buy the Navel strike Missile. For our navy destroyers our anti ship missiles suck. Dont get me started on our failed hyperbolic tests in last few months is terrible. With all the dollars we put into our military industrial complex we should be farther along than we are.
What’s the point? A war can only go so far without it becoming nuclear. At this point if China suspects the US has the will to use nuclear weapons they have nothing to counter it. Do you wanna turn the world into an irradiated wasteland over Taiwan? China’s bluster does nothing to hide its deep fear of the US and it’s completely irrational political system.
Go ahead and try to take Taiwan - and god have mercy on all our souls
@@dongately2817 Chinese nuclear capability is still unknown, who knows how many war heads do they have. You are only partially right about the irrational system that The US have, it depends, they are absolutely rational when comes to money grabbing, Taiwan already relocating its semi conductor manufacturing and R&D else where, most of them are backed by American capitals, once the relocation complete, Taiwan has close to no value to the US except the old concept of first line of pacific defense.
Haha yes go throw around all the dollars in combat? You think you can win and beat bullets coming at you? Your navy? Dude grow a pair and enlist if you wanna call it that. Even then you will now own it. Are you a communist??
why do you need a Navy when you have platforms in near earth orbit that can drop a titanium rod the size of a telephone pole on any spot on earth at any time? Not to mention laser weapons and skynet. Tomahawks still work very well from what I hear. We better pray the good guys are still in control. all I can say.
@@brentjones2954 Haha Hollywood CGI will save you? Maybe focus on using capital letters to start sentences like a 1st grader is capable of? Did you know a Chinese cannot master that? Tell your Xi one word for me. The word is ... no.
One of my favorite American myths, aside from exceptionalism lol, is that 1 trillion dollars spent on defense actually gives you 1 trillion dollars worth of defense.
Wages go into a huge portion.
@@ns7353 One day just for fun you should compare American defense spending to American defense industry profits. Just profits, after all expenditures. It rules that you guys don't have basic healthcare but that every missile you buy also buys a lifetime supply of cocktail shrimp for a random contractor in North Virginia, great system!
@@captivatethem yep it’s a great system for everyone else. America screwed itself for years neglecting social and economic progress for Europe who now laughs ungratefully
@@captivatethem the US government spends 3 times as much on welfare and healthcare than they do on defense. The amount of money they commit to things has never been the problem, its the bloated administrative element. For comparison, they spend about as much as Europe per capita on social welfare. Healthcare costs are absurd not because the actual medicine is expensive or the doctors time, but from insurance and other admin costs of the hospital. Same story at universities. Its entirely fixable if people have the will to do it, since they wouldn't have to tax more or spend more money.
The proof is in the pudding, Canada has a very good system and both countries are tied at the hip, Canadas medicine is the same medicine the US has but is much cheaper.
People forget the wage difference. A pay of any engineer, soldier or pilot in China will be much lower than that in the US, while the job they make, and their usefullness, will be comparable.
The US need to import a couple of German rocket scientists again. Worked pretty well for them last time
actually, the US imported chinese rocket scientist to build the bomb but treated him like shit afterwards, and he went back to china and helped china develop their first nuclear bomb
@@levelazn You mean, they accurately described him as a Chinese spy, and guess what? He proved it by stealing US info and taking it back to China.
@@user-os6ch5pt7w no he was officially apologized by us government later
@@user-os6ch5pt7w czcams.com/video/sFbjO72u5A0/video.html
@@levelazn Okay, Wumao. That didn't prove anything.
my nephew who's a VP in the defense industry was asked about this and said don't believe for a second.
Really glad I watched this video about why NordVPN has the current edge in missile development
Trillions went to lost war in AFG, while China out innovated the U.S. in missiles. SMH.
Freedom for afghan people is worth any cost
@@aj2228 Lol.
@@aj2228 you do know that the uses invaded the talaban and then put up a puppet government now the talaban got its country back.
@@aj2228 they are free from Americans, finally
@@andyofzz wow, communist.
One other reason that this video didn't seem to emphasize is that long range missiles do not add any incremental value to the type of wars the US has been fighting over the past 2 decades. Cold war era standoff weapons are more than adequate for combat in Afghanistan & Iraq, that probably also drove the decision to focus on things other than long range missiles.
In other word, they were design to kill farmers with guns and innocent civilians and children
Egypt was biggest super power for 3000 yrs. And now is medium size country. Rome rule for 500 yr. Balace of power change in time, nothig special.
Actually roman culture is what americans are. Funny that romans finally broke the game.
It’s inevitable for America to be overtaken by other nations in the future. America is just another big empire that has a declining edge in compared to the rapidly advancing nations in the East that have recently had access to proper education, etc. which brings out talents and geniuses that would have never been discovered if no proper education existed.
Though it is crazy how China has always been a major power globally, they just occasionally go dormant and get overtaken by other nations, but when they are motivated, they become a powerful nation. America on the other hand is new and never had a history of being a major global power in the past, so maybe America will just fade a way for a few decades or centuries, but then comeback again as a superpower once they fix many problems, just like the history of China.
PL15 is smaller than Phoenix, but it is still large in size. The J20 is a large plane compared to F18/F15.
Yeah cuz what ever China says is the truth. Lmao.
Don't worry, China has a no first strike policy.
Except against Japan.
Lemme guess, and a great human rights record too?
"百万漕工衣食所系, 废漕改海断然不许”
"Millions of people live on channel transport, the revolution is unacceptable!"
In the 17th century, the Ming(Chinese) Government wanted to change channel transport to sea transport. Some interest groups said we can't do that revolution for many people living in the old way.
For this reason, China has lost the advantage of ship building and international transportation.
Exactly. That mentally is exactly why the US is losing towards China so much.
They focus too much on Military as some sort of welfar
Gotta love the comments, we the public know nothing about either sides full ability & trying to predict that is pretty stupid. I study in HK and have seen what China is capable off. While I havnt visited the US im sure that they are equally capable if not better. Why give up your ace when you dont have too, both sides hold things in reserve.
Watch another one of his videos which covers your exact question. Something about advanced technologies acting as a deterrent and a way to keep the enemy in check.
At this point it’s a question of who has better UFOs. The US are ok, I’m not sure on China’s.
The American industrial military complex is far advanced compared to other countries. Theyve had anti grav for decades .
@@micjordan1919 so far advanced theyre still scrambling to make hypersonics missiles
@@user-pd9ju5dk5s its all part of the deception.you never reveal your full hand.The us navy has a deep space fleet,have done for years.
I think it’s safe to assume, the US have been investing elsewhere. Although the inefficiency of U.S. military industrial complex, does suck money away from the tax payer, like nothing else in existence.
You are correct, US has been investing a few trillions in Afghanistan and Iraq.
yeah, the stock prices of defense contractors.
US invested alot in Afghanistan and Iraq, which both resulted into a disaster
The US may spend more in terms of dollar amount, but I would assert since development cost in China are far lower than in the US that China spends dollar per dollar on par or greater than the US does. They are not limited to treaties, environmental impact studies, government oversight communities with regards to cost, IP theft, etc.
Yeah, all US jet fighters are sustainable and use eco-friendly fuel.
Exactly US never used other countries cutting edge technology, everything is developed from it's own scientist from the very beginning.
Please do not google operation paperclip.
@@dduay Maybe it's Elon Musk's electric F-35.
@@ZxZ239 operation paperclip is greatly overrated, it was really just limited to rocketry. I know its hard to imagine for some people but the US and Soviets were already ahead of the Germans in some areas.
Also in the states if you miss a contract date or goal you don't get taken out back and shot
“We need to fail down here, so we don’t fail up there”…Neil Armstrong.
OMG the Moon landing ....
Hypersonic weapons, althought great weapons, are limited in the type of mission capability, and severly ampered by cost. The DF-21D will not be used to kill tanks and or do en-mass strikes at enemy facilities. It's a wepons design do to one type of mssion only, killing sea-born targets and in that way, ofeer deterrence. For China, its a great weapon to defend commercial shipping and stave off any "low capable" adversary, in a country, where 90% of its more capable enemies come from the sea.
The Tomahawk, while old, offers way more range of missions at a fraction of the cost, for a country that needs to defend its empire, all over the world. If the funding comes, and all those engineers open the drawers and blow the dust off all those wierd Cold War projects, I have no doubt the US can create and produce its own supersonic weapon.
Each country produces whats best for them and its ambitions. China produces a great defensive weapon, altought with only a single purpose, while the US can't produce a multi-billion dollar mssile to shoot at sandal-wearing foreigners.
Even cheaper still are gravity bombs, and the US recently came out with a bolt-on JDAM kit upgrade that can track moving targets. This means America has potentially hundreds of thousands of ship killers deployable by almost anything that flies, balancing the battle back towards who can keep more planes aloft.
@John Smith The DF-21D is a state of the art hypersonic weapon. That means that is crazy expensive and its use MUST be strategic. The chinese cannot have them in high quantities without increasing their defense budget.
Really dumb take, they have weapons for those. What you said is like saying "your AR15 is bad cause its not practical to kill a fly" while i have a fly swatter
exactly.
you know why us is mass-producing hellfire missiles for the past decade?
cuz they're cheap and can be used for virtually anything not to big.
perfect for wars in afghanistan, Latin america, middle east, africa.
@John Smith Wrong. If they swarm in numbers it will overload any defense, which means China, Russia and everything else are vulnerable to it.
Please, way back in 2010 the United States tested the HTV2 at Mach 20. It flew, then they dark projected the Pulse Detonation Rocket Engines. Can't have our adversaries making the relatively simple technological leap. We are far ahead of what's in the public domain and eye.
The last testing series of the HTV2 failed.
@@kneegrow4656 yeah just like the SpaceX rockets that all fail when an us spy satellite is onboard
I agree 100%. It serves no benefit for the US to share with the world every technologically advanced weapon system they create considering they're at the top.
Is that why Gen.Milly called his counterpart in China to avoid war??? You guys don't have your own ISS...China leads on A.I...as per your A.I.Pentagon chief😂🤣
@@kneegrow4656 They achieved mach 20, but yes the were self destructed into the ocean after travelling over 900 miles
There is a bit of "hypersonic" craze going on.
It comes from ignorance.
First, it must be remembered that the purpose of a missile is to hit its target.
Hypersonic is only a tool to help do that.
Second, the US has the lead in stealth and in guidance systems. So, US missiles
are stealthier and trickier to make them difficult to stop.
Third, Hypersonic performance comes at a cost. For that speed the engine has to be big,
making the rocket bigger and more costly. It also can restrict what platforms it can fit.
Fourth, older does not mean ineffective. The latest variants of Harpoon, for instance, are very hard to intercept, for the majority of China's ships.
Fifth, hypersonic missiles fly high to get their speed. Sub-sonic missiles, like Harpoon, are sea-skimming, making them impossible to detect until they come over the horizon. So, the time to respond by a target is still quite short. CWIS can be effective, though, if they are not stealthy or tricky in the approach flight path.
The hypersonic missile that China tested was an alternative to using a ballistic missile to deliver nuclear warheads. It was NOT a SSM missile to be used in local naval or land battles.
The reason it concerned the US, is that it negates the effectiveness of THAAD and other anti-nuclear missile defenses.
The problem with reports like these, is that they give partial information that gives wrong impressions and ideas.
Our military is not stupid. These armchair CZcams experts do a disservice by giving partial and often wrong information.
If is alien life out there, they are not visiting a planet infested with humans
Everytime I turn around China always has some new and advanced tech and it's happening so fast! Just the other day I was looking at a list of their frigates and only one of them was made before 1990. Also, when it comes to building anything they can do it fast and for a much lower price even if the technology is sophisticated.
China will be the next super power eventually.
It's a good thing that China doesn't have ambition nor agenda to become the next "Superpower".
Proof Wumao?
@@user-os6ch5pt7w
Lol. Here's one of many examples: PROC's one and only oversea military base in Djibouti (Fyi, Japan gets to be the first Far East-Asian to inaugurate a military base over there).
Those in the SCS are not inside other country's territory. It's located outside or in international waters that's being contested and disputed by different parties.
@@peekaboopeekaboo1165 Okay, that proved nothing. Where is this advanced tech?
@@user-os6ch5pt7w Proof that China will be the next super power?
Bro if that does happen I don't know if that's a good or bad thing.
When ever you have to ask why something that shouldnt have happened, happened.
Its usually because some exorbitantly rich, powerful autocrates decided they needed to sell out for even more money.
$1b in China can do a lot more work and buy a lot more than $1b in US. So the budgetary comparison is inaccurate.
CPI in China is right on the dot at 1.0 while in US it's at 4.7, meaning generally everything is 4.7x more expensive in the US. If you use this method to adjust the defense expenditure, you'll find the US expenditure is actually below China: (2021 US) $801b ÷ 4.7 = $170b.
$170 billion dollar : US defense budget
$293 billion dollar : CHN defense budget
Crunch these numbers with the fact that the US keeps an active presence throughout the globe 24/7, coupled with multiple wars and offensive campaigns annually.. then you can see why the US is really struggling with new developments.
Technology is an equalizer. No empire lasts forever.
We’re barley scratching the surface on tech… like BARLEY, and Americans get discredited a lot for their tech.
The Israelis, to whom we’d given the keys to our kingdom of advanced defense ip , kept selling the chicoms sidewinder & python tech.
It's scary knowing that when a global recession, or worse a total monetary collapse comes, the uncertainty of what comes next or which new superpower influences the world is scary
After watching this video, many suddenly became military experts.
When America focused on developing better swords. China focused on developing better shields.
Interesting video but, really, *everything* we know about these weapons is based on information provided by people who have a vested interest in hyping weapons to increase their bottom lines. Has the U.S. every actually acquired and tested a Chinese missile? Probably not. Same question applies to all weapons systems.
This is based on a training manual I probably shouldn't have had lol
@@CovertCabal this video is good, but it does leave out the dark programs however...
Si Vis Pacem Parabellum
I really hope that we have sharp level headed guys like yourself in DOD , the Pentagon , etc..because the work that you do for your channel is second to none! Sometimes I feel like we're in a skif being read in on classified intel!! Lol!! In all seriousness Covert Cabal is painfully honest and gives very intelligent assessments of the state of different facets of our military and it's not easy to speak about things negatively effecting your side or admitting that we no longer have these huge mismatch advantages in hardware or readiness! No American wants to hear these things but we must and its that sober truthful analysis that is needed otherwise change won't come or it will happen too late to matter! Anyways love the channel and appreciate all your hard work, you truely bring the best breakdowns and/or evaluations of all things defence related!! 💪🇺🇸👍
Actually, I think our ability to be self aware and critical is a major advantage we have over countries like China.
_”China big number Won!!”_
We have Mark rainbow cloud Milley.
DoD was cleared out by Obama and replaced with Woke/Marxist appointees.
The right people are definitely there, the problem is in the system itself.
@@PD-we8vf yeah the commander of the social justice warriors, and the newly stood up genderless paratroopers brigade!
And how exactly do you KNOW that Chinese missiles REALLY outperform US missiles? You read what the Chinese wrote about their missiles or you made a technical comparison and verifies everything by testing them against each other?
they literally fired one DF26b lsat year to a moving decoy in SCS, and US navy sent drones over to collect data.
Competition brings innovation. It's good for both US and China.
It is good for the USA cause for the first time in a long time they have a real challenger to built a military against, they were just wasting money for years
Tech is driven by needs... with it's superior advancements and nobody to challenge it the US didn't see a need to spend on hypersonic. Why would it build anti ship missiles when nobody had a formidable navy?
I'd imagine the US dusting off or reactivating a couple "dark" programs and bring them to the public in the near future since you mentioned how they're not beholden to treaties
Like those secret "vitamin drinks" from Vanderbilt University.
those 'dark' programs are typically early prototype or paper-only designs that will take a decade and tens of billions to flesh out.
Yeah those so called “dark” programs is most likely for money laundering not actual scientific development projects.
Like MK Ultra?
@@f-86zoomer37 MK-ultra never really went anywhere. I produced a bunch of mentally scarred guinea pigs and probably kicked off the popularity of LSD, but it utterfy failed in its intended objective of useful mindcontrol.
the money goes into the pockets of politicians.. only half goes into actual defence
"The PL-15 is better than the amraam"
Bluefor DCS players: *angry screeching*
I think one of the main problems that caused the US to fall behind is that we've been mostly focusing on fighting low intensity asymmetric conflicts in the middle east against terrorist groups. Our major conflict capability as atrophied as the Soviet threat was gone. Big money projects went towards developing delivery systems like the F-35 and Zumwalt destroyer, so now we have super advanced fighters and ships, using munitions that were developed in the 80s with a few upgrades during the '00s. The Zumwalt doesn't even really have its full weapons yet, it's experimental gun was a failure and scrapped and now they want to use it as a hypersonic missile platform, but we don't have hypersonic missiles for it yet.
Terrorists group created by the US itself
to justify the need for their presence in foreign soveriegn nations. The US wants to fight both China and Russia. With no use of nuclear weapons...
i cannot imagine the US fighting conventional warfare
Many would argue that real world actionable conflicts are the best testing ground for new weaponry .
Don't fight a war that you can't win.
I am not certain about China...but one thing to keep in mind is that the Americans always UNDER represent the capabilities of their equipment; in order to allow an opponent to either underestimate them, or be forced to plan without certainty. Russia on the other hand has advertised it's hardware capabilities...to the point of being just short of falsehood...because they need to SELL that hardware for income.
@@jamesnewcomer4939 Yes, they are always very underestimated the budget and time need to complete the projects. F-22, F-35, DDGX, Ford CV. Looks like it is natural for big projects to go over time and budget, and the USA cases are the most extreme ones.
You must also remember that a large portion of US Military spending is dedicated to funding ally military forces and defensive obligations in countries like South Korea and Japan.
And then there is PPP for weapons/assets as well as what the US pays a typical serviceman compared to what China pays its own.
Go see the NATO spending breakdown reports. The US overseas bases and operational costs (%) is inline with other nations. Everyone knows most of the money goes to secret projects. 1 day before 9/11 $2.3 Trillion goes missing 🙄. Space Force and Star Wars program has been operational for decades.
I agree with you basic point about the budget, but what you call "funding ally military forces and defensive obligations' could also reasonably be called "funding garrisons in vassal states'.
Washington is not paying for the defense of Tokyo and Seoul. Washington is paying for the defense of Washington in part by spending money in Tokyo and Seoul. If Washington cut them loose they would both pay what ever they thought was needed for their own defense and make reasonable deals with Beijing and Pyongyang.
I wouldn't say that the US were undisputedly ahead of the Soviet Union during the cold war. I would say that they were pretty comparable in terms of their technology.
You're right, that's why I didn't say undisputedly. I chose my words there carefully, saying "more often than not". They were the first to a lot of major technologies, like nuclear weapons, satellite navigation, computing in general, etc, so I say "technological edges like these arguably kept the US in the lead over the Soviet Union during the Cold War."
@@CovertCabal I thought the Soviet union was the first to lunch the first satellite on space?? How come the US was above them when it comes to technologies?
@@REGULUS-g6m reread his post slowly
@@REGULUS-g6m There are different technologies. As example GPS based on Sattilites are first made in the US. It certainly isn't a either one or the other has the lead in every tech.
@@REGULUS-g6m Orbit-capable rockets aren't the same as ICBMs. One needs orbital velocity of Mach 27. The other only needs suborbital trajectory.
1. Hypersonic missiles are nowhere nearly as powerful or superior to conventional sub or super sonic missiles as some outlets claim.
2. The US has a much wider range of capabilities than either China or Russia.
3. Missile range and speed aren’t everything. Without sensors and data, the best missiles in the world aren’t particularly effective. Sensors and networking capabilities are where the US still has a massive edge, its just not as sexy or headline grabbing as the missiles themselves thus not widely discussed.
Can you do a video on how military budgets are spent? Such as salaries, maintenance, r&d, etc.
That would be interesting, assuming we can trust the public numbers... Remember the pentagon saying they lost track of 2 trillion dollars in "Accounting errors" back in 2001? Who knows what they do with that stuff.
Good idea!
It's so nice all countries fight though military power vs the health and wellness of their citizens.
Sad but true
@Ben Dover you are so wrong it’s not even funny
i say this all the time but the US spends 2.2 trillion USD yearly on welfare and healthcare, 3 times more that defense. Their spending per capita is inline with Europe and canada. Its not how much they spend, its the overly bloated administrative system. This is true of medicine, welfare, education and so forth.
It's the old "Guns or Butter" question, where do you spend your money, weapons or food ? But defense has always been essential for any nation's survival. Machiavelli said that a nation without an army was like a fine house without a roof, sooner or later it will rain and all your beautiful things will be destroyed.
Damn that concern for health is really gonna stop all that Chinese organ harvesting
The U.S just needs to throw more tax payer dollars at the problem.
That should do the trick.
Sigh. People constantly misunderstand how things work in military strategy and procurement.
You DON'T buy a weapon system because it has X capability "better" than others. You buy a weapon system that does Y JOB better than others. And not all militaries have the same JOB REQUIREMENTS.
The US doesn't have hypersonics, because they're not useful to us. They provide ZERO advantage over what we currently have. So why develop and buy a system that doesn't provide us with any new capacity, and can't perform better in actual use-cases for us than what we have right now?
The DF-5 is an excellent example of this. It's a long-range SSM intended for anti-ship use. It's also larger than a SLBM like a Trident. So why would we buy/develop something like this for our use?
(1) we're not trying to defend CONUS from a foreign navy.
(2) We can cram about 6 Tomahawks in the same space as a DF-5 takes up, so it's not terribly great for cramped spaces like on ships.
(3) Fewer missiles (6 vs 1) means a loss of tactical flexibility - you can hit 6 times FEWER targets.
(4) they have the same warhead size. So you're not getting more "bang" per missile.
(5) the DF-5 is only hypersonic IN TRANSIT - that is, while flying from launch location to the general area of the target. Once it gets to the target area, it has to deploy a warhead package that is significantly SLOWER. Why? Because a DF-5 can't steer well enough to hit a moving target. You need a warhead package that can actually steer to target when it's within 20km or so. Which means you have to have a much slower warhead. In effect, a DF-5 is an ICBM that mounts a Mach 2 Exocet missile on top of it. Not very hard to hit with modern SAMs or CIWS once the warhead separates from the main rocket body for terminal attack.
(6) A Tomahawk costs about 1/10th that of a DF-5, when you take it's support systems into account. That makes the DF-5 a BAD cost/benefit system for the US.
The DF-5 is a good fit for the PLA, where it has to defend mainland China from the US Navy. It makes ZERO sense for practically anyone else. So WTF would anyone else buy it? That's not a "hypersonic capabilities deficiency". It's a "Hypersonics Aren't Useful to Us" assessment.
Same thing for the newer Chinese AAMs. Factors OTHER than speed and range are MUCH more important. Does it really matter if a AMRAAM is slower and shorter range if the F-35 can see the J-20 at 50km and the J-20 can't see the F-35 until it gets to 20km? What does it matter if the PL-15 has a 120km range if you can't see anything to hit more than 30km away? Why is the AIM-120 "inferior" because it can't hit stuff at 130km, if it can hit things at 50km with no problem? Range of your weapons isn't ANYWHERE near as important as Range of Detection. The AIM-120 fulfills the requirements, which are "sufficient range to hit a target we can see". The PL-15's "extra" range capability is entirely wasted - you paid for capability you can't use. That's WASTED MONEY. Moreover, it's a little important to understand that the AMRAAM is MUCH more maneuverable than the PL-15, and much less susceptible to countermeasures. The PL-15 on the J-20 is indeed superior to the AMRAAM on the F-18. Except that the J-20 WON'T BE FIGHTING F-18s. Instead, it will be fighting F-35s, whose other capabilities mean that the extra range of the PL-15 is completely useless. And the AMRAAM's capabilities are just in line with what the F-35 needs.
Again, the whole "we're behind because we don't have a weapon that can do X" is naive in the least, and stupid more generally, because it betrays a complete lack of understanding about WHY weapon systems exist.
We're not playing a video game here, people. Bigger is NOT always better. More Features aren't always a good thing. "More" is not synonymous with "advantageous".
Soon every country will catch up as it becomes more difficult to get a qualitative edge. There is a limit to universal physics and the elements on the periodic table. Even Cape Verde island will have ability to field tomahawk, hypersonic, nukes, lasers. Just like gunpowder was invented in China and now everyone has it. It’s a matter of time.
That’s far from the truth…even today most of the country in the world do not have any capability to produce a reliable small firearm. And now weapon system became so complex, that every system has a long supply chain across in many different fields. For example to produce a modern aircraft, sometime even down to a screw is specially designed and manufactured, for more complex part such as avionics, a single part is already challenging enough, let alone to develop and produce the whole plane. lastly, the cost, take look at the military budgets after top 8 on the list, most countries are struggling to maintain what they have now, do not have extra cash to develop anything new
Every country will have nuclear weapons? HAHAHAHA. awh God. Listen. Do you know how much money you need to produce and stock pile a nuclear weapon?.
@@abes.4040 obviously you don't need to be as rich as north Korea to them.
@@andyofzz what supply chain and costs are you talking about. Iran and North Korea have been under sanctions for years and operating a closed economy, yet they built their own nukes, missiles, drones, submarines. You sound bias as if all inventions must come from a particular capitalist system and other people don't have ways of getting things done.
@@du5707 lol first of all, North Korean might be consider as poor country if you consider of the public living standards, however what’s the country spending on military is not small at. Secondly, North Koran has been industrialized especially in the military area since the Cold War, with the support from Soviet Union and China, they can produce tanks and vehicles, although some vital parts are still need to be imported, for example, tank engines. If Russia and China cut off the supply, North Korean army wouldn’t nearly as effective.
Cool observation about SpaceX there, thanks for the video.
1:11 US-$778 vs China-$252... Don't assume that they spend money the same way
US: uses missiles explode on hit
China: explode without being hit, explodes automatically
As everyone know, job market in China is very competitive due to it's population. And when you have a large population that is well educated and working their butt off everyday, the growth of the country accelerate in all industries. I have lived in Canada for over 22 yeras but still staying in touch with friends and family back home. Based on what I hear from China, and what I personally experience in Canada, I am very concerned for the future of Canada. It took the city of Toronto 13 years to build 2 subway station, most building I see at downtown Toronto is still the same building I see 20 years ago. The word democracy here is only a cover up for the government and politicians, people are abusing unionized environment, government welfare, benefits, rights and freedom to the extrem for their personal interest and benefits. These will only hold back and slow down the development of the country.
深有同感，变相的共产思潮在统治世界。其实中国光鲜背后的社会现实更是残酷，如果回去工作半年就知道了。
Democracy is garbage politicians shit on people so that people think they have some sort of "control". In reality, democracy is a lie, especially in US. What kind of democracy is that in which there are literally just two parties? Its all jokes.
It's called a developed country for a reason.
It's done developing, leave the rest for poorer countries, don't crowd up the carbon emission quota.
Once their home-grown fighters stop spontaneously combusting I'll take them serious as a military power.
Pride its a beautiful thing.
Not like wars are won by men not machines
Once that happens it will be too late to do anything, and you'll have wasted precious you wish you had back.
The Taliban wore sandals
The correct solution is to withdraw from overseas back to US and re-group. But pentagon is too cowardly to realise that.
Yeah were all going to have fun this century
don't take me wrong but when has the US EVER had a missile advantage?
Never really. All the times the US developed missiles were in response to the latest Russian missile developments. All their developed missiles were not as capable as the Russian missiles. Also US has a different military doctrine compared to Russia and China.
@@quicksilver3287 ; Bullshit, Soviets literally copied the Sidewinder. AMRAAM also was ahead for a long time.
@@FirstDagger Well actually, the Chinese were the first to get their hands on a Sidewinder, then they shared it with the Soviets. It wasn't until about 2016 or 2017 that the US lost its edge in missile technology.
amraam is a 30 yr missile but its been upgraded to the new aim-120d, the pl-15 can outrange the new aim-120d but both have similar no-escape zone range, if a target is over 80km the pl-15 can only hit cargo plane or awacs or other non maneuverable targets, during a air exercise between china and thailand in 2015, thailand gripen armed with aim-120c dominate chinese j-11 armed with pl-12 in beyond visual range mock combat, pl-12 was suppose to be the better missile with better performance against the old aim-120c yet the gripen with its old aim-120c ended up winning during the thai-china air exercise. you can boast about all the range or speed outperform western missiles, but if you dont have advance guidance systems like the americans or the europeans, than those far range speedy missile are useless.
Which country are you from?
Big missiles are also heavy, affecting closer in engagement.
@Alien Reject aint the chinese and the russians brag about there radars can track any fighters including american stealth fighters 😆😆😆 so its suppose to detect the gripen first eh.
The Thailand exercise where Gripen dominated J-11 in bvr was mainly down to J-11 having older radar and obsolete Chinese pilot training. Individually, Chinese pilots were great, as demonstrated by J-11’s dominating performance against Gripen in dogfights, but they lacked group cohesion and don’t know what to do as a team in bvr.
PLAAF training had been heavily changed since then and one can only assume that newer pilots were much better trained for group engagements.
@@thomaszhang3101 thailand gripen were old version of the gripen and doesnt use new aesa radar like american and other european jets, the argument the j-11 have obsolete radar against the gripen is bullfart since the gripen c use by thailand is considered old version of the gripen that came out in 2002.
Waaait a min, the Minuteman is still in service? Holy cow.
We have the Avengers, Justice League and most recently Shang-Chi and the Eternals.
China ain't got shit on us!
I worked on hypersonic AtoA missiles several decades ago, they had twp problems, they are very expensive, and they really can't maneuver. Accuracy is also a problem because they just can't turn fast enough in final guidance. So they are not the Panacea. back 40+ years ago they used to cost $1 million dollars a piece. A similar missile today will cost $50 million a piece. So now you know why the navy has cheap subsonic cruise missiles for most missions. So in the future Subs and Ships will carry a few Hypersonics for initial attacks at high priority targets, but most missiles will not be.
50 million to sink a 13.3 billion dollar ship isnt bad
@@MrWizardjr9 Yeah... but you don't sink 13.3 billion USD ships on a regular basis.
@@skeletonofwisdom2922 just need to do it 12 times and they pretty much won the war
@@MrWizardjr9 Yeah... not so easy. Warfare is much more asymmetrical. Things don't work the way we think.
There are Submarines, F-18Gs, F-35s.
Yeah and technology hasn't improved since then. We're still using the IBM PS1 still right?
Hello from Russia, Covert! I`d really like to see your perspective on a recent russian anti-sattelite missile test. Keep up the good work you are doing!
@@markcooke5270 some people would say the same of space Jesus and the star link “constellation”…
@@Orandu Yep, starlink is basically earth orbit occupation
@@markcooke5270 If you refer to the recent anti-satellite missile test, then you should know that the US, China and India also performed such tests in the past. India, China and Russia didn’t use US test as a pretext for PR attack against the US. United States, on the other hand, did.
@@markcooke5270 you know the usa has also done this
@@markcooke5270 You are right. Russia bad. US putting 10 times more crap up there. Good. Right? Ah yes ... I will do it for you. Said every dictator in history.
China has more engineers, scientists working harder
I doubt that " falling behind" in one area equates to being behind. US Defense contractor " hold my beer".
Treaties can't be the reason, since we break treaties at will. The goal to overtake the US also isn't the reason, since our goal has ALWAYS been about supramacy. The real reason we fell behind is complacency. We think we are so far ahead of everyone that the urgency to innovate is just not there
China can innovate all they want but a lot of their high tech weaponry is going to be very limited with their chip shortages. In a non nuclear war china has incredibly limited capability to put boots on the ground and a hypersonic missile or stealth fighter cant clear buildings or establish a beachhead. Chinas current economic situation is also not really conducive to waging a war with anything but a much smaller country where their tech advantage isnt really a major factor
@@seshmarls agreed! They are still a good distance behind, but complacency is our weakness . It’s what all other competitors need to catch up
"Longer" range doesn't mean "Effective" range.
The US might have the most capable airplanes, but without the right weapons fit for purpose and equal to or better than the enemy, it doesent matter
1:12 , "three times as much" and not "three times more," there is a difference! Triggered...
The biggest problem for DOD atm is trying to understand "WHITE RAGE".....According to General Milley..
Let's also not forget the assymetric nature of propaganda/classified information. The US, as the incumbent superpower, has an incentive to conceal their system's capabilities. That way, the goalpost for competing powers aren't clear during the development phase, and it'd be more advantageous for the enemy to underestimate the true performance goalpost, and come out short.
China, on the other hand, is a challenger, and hence if they wanted to be taken seriously by third world nations (in the cold war sense), they need to first of all, appear far ahead of the status quo to win over genuine support. Furthermore, their demographic issues and policies that won't allow for resolution of their demographic issues, needs to out-smart the US. How? By exaggerating their capabilities and having the US waste resources on countering their systems. Fact is, the most surefire for the Chinese to win is to encourage as much US wastage as possible - the more the US has to maintain overmatch on a system, the less quantity of that system the US can produce.
This is the best answer. The US, to an extent, wants to domestically stoke some fear of China such that public support for military spending will remain high.
China has every intention of acting as strong as possible, but life is getting worse there. Much worse. I don't put much stock in a CZcamsr's analysis. It's not really clear what either side's true warfighting capabilities are. It's the most important thing, and rn it's probably the case that the US is still significantly better prepared to fight a very vicious, short, sharp war.
Bhum so basically China is Loki being a bigot making illusions to scare everyone. Now thats comical
Well said! Propaganda is a huge tool that China is well known for. And US generals are very good at hyping it up to so that they can get all the new toys that they want. A good example would be the F-22. During its initial days there was lots of Congressional doubt that it was even needed because of the collapse of the USSR. The US had F-15s go up against India’s fighters, including the Su-30MKI and the Mig-21, and the US fighters came out on the losing end. The exercises were used by the USAF to warrant the need for the F-22. What wasn’t told was the F-15s we’re outnumbered by a 4-1 ratio, weren’t allowed to take BVR shots, older F-15s were used with pilots who had little flight time that year, and AWACS weren’t used. In other words, not very realistic.
Another example of why the USA should not be too concerned is that during the MMRCA tender India’s Air Chief stated that the USA had the best weapons, radars and systems, and the USA wasn’t even offering its best.
With regards to hypersonic missiles, the USA was already flying a Mach 12+ missile in the 1950s. The fact that the USA broke the world record for hypersonic duration of flight over ten years ago with the X-51 Waverider, there’s no doubt there’s technology that isn’t publicly available. China can brag all it wants, but nothing beats real combat where the systems can get tested in real-life situations. Plus, it’s doubtful that China can even intercept what is in our current inventory, and they have no answer for the F-22 or F-35. A missile’s range means little if it can’t lock onto the target.
Another example are US SAMS. Russian and Chinese SAMS get tons of recognition, but it’s the USA and Israel systems that are routinely shooting down missiles in real combat. Saudi Arabia has been very successful with the PAC-3 now that their soldiers are better trained. They commonly shoot down Iranian made ballistic missiles being launched in Yemen. Saudi Arabia just placed an additional order for more than 200 of them. If they were disappointed they wouldn’t be buying more and would have gone elsewhere.
It’s also funny how this video makes no mention of how an Israeli F-35 destroyed a Chinese SAM that Iranian forces manned.
There’s quite a bit of bias with this video. For instance, he knocked the Phoenix missile for its size, yet the Iranians used it extremely well against the Iraqi fighters in the Iran-Iraq war. While I do agree that the US needs some improvements, it’s not dire like this video portrays. One missile I wish the US had an equivalent to is the Meteor. That’s a real game changer.
The PLA typically doesn’t make the capabilities of their weapons systems public. The capabilities you hear about are extrapolated from third party estimates. For this video, the main source was a US military training manual.
necessity is the mother of invention
Yet, somehow they don't look that threatening against the US.
actually, I am sure a lot of the chinese military footage you used in your videos have HD version available, Im not sure why you have been using thsoe 240P quality footage 😅
haha if I could get good quality Chinese military footage... I would love that! The US releases a ton, Russia releases a ton, but China is difficult to find. I've searched for a long time to find good footage
@@CovertCabal actually the chinese national TV has a military channel, and everything is in HD. i found one youtube channel thats pretty good czcams.com/users/militarycntvvideos not sure whether its official or someone from china repost these to youtube, sadly only in chinese. i think the guardian channel has the highest quality footage of their military parade too czcams.com/video/7395qcF2MGA/video.html love your content if u need any help in finding specific footage or image feel free to reach out 😛
@@timothy1949 Thanks! Yea I'm actually subscribed to them to check for footage. Only problem is all the logos/graphics/subtitles they put over it. And most of them are so quick jump cuts that it makes it difficult to use.
If you come across any other good, clean sources... that would be a life saver! Send me an email - gregr1251@gmail.com
@@CovertCabal sure haha 😂
China is hyper-secretive about weapons test and stuff like that… so while I don’t think we should get complacent, I suspect that not all of these new weapons work as well as advertised.
Or it could be the other way around, they did say the newest missile is not a weapon at all, but that is not what most US analysts think.
On what do you base that on, why would they not work as stated?
@@MrCastodian Based on the fact that China has a tendency to glorify their successes, and completely hide their failures in other aspects of their society. They probably do the same thing with their military.
@@Cris-xy2gi Well if you look at the way they revealed their second aircraft carrier is actually the opposite of 'glorify their successes'. Basically, there is no official news of that one being built until they can't hide it anymore. Similarly, with the one they are currently building, there is still no official news that it has Catapult system despite it is already on the ship
china is usually very good at keeping its weapons a secret until they're pretty close to operational. I mean the J20 was literally unknown until it was flying over the heads of US diplomats visiting china in 2011.
It's the operational cost and the price of contracts are what kills their budget I personally think.
I met a Chinese guy who once said, the US is like a boxing champion who spent the last two decades beating up children and perfecting the skills of beating a child more efficiently. China is a lighter weight boxer but when the US was stomping kids left and right, he's been training himself to fight a bigger and stronger opponent.
Has china shown they can hit a moving ship?
Yes they have, and they can
@@Slimdaddywills care to point me to it?
@@sparkyfister czcams.com/video/JRGk2MRIZPQ/video.html
@@Slimdaddywills watched the whole video and saw that all the ships it hit had no wake, meaning they were stationary. I'd think including an antiship missle hitting a building would be a dead giveaway.
I've been thinking about this question, a lot of others have been too and I think the answer must be, on the balance of probabilities,that the Russians and Chinese do have hypersonic weapons including anti-ship missiles that actually work.
Consider that, (1) none of this is magic, the technology is definitely possible (2) They have announced that they have them, a bluff is certainly possible but it's a huge risk if the opposition sees through your bluff and (3) America says it is developing counter measures
It doesn't help that Gender Studies majors have a seat at the table in national security discussions these days...
Name one. If that’s true It’s hilarious and terrifying
Don't worry, with the top rated high high school in San Francisco dropping test scores for admissions and the UC system following suit, we should have no problem generating the next generation of engineers to take on these technical problems.
US should think less about LGBTQ, minorities and woke culture, and spend some time doing high quality work.
This channel is getting goofy. Hypersonics? 4,000mph? Minuteman III comes in at 24,000mph. I'm not worried.
Yeah. China isn't as powerful as USSR by a long short. For example, the Chinese can never really deploy nuclear missiles in Cuba. Just military complex chunking out propaganda.
Yeah but like it's not a tactical weapon. It's an ICBM.
China's DF41 also comes at 24,000mph. You can't compare like this
One country spent the last 20 years to fight a modern war with modern requirements. The other spent 20 years making gear to fight goat farmers and defend vehicles against IEDs.
Also helps when you gradute the entire population of the US in STEM graduates and don't have colleges dedicating resources to liberal arts and gender studies instead of hard science
Chinese missiles study longer and harder and most want to be doctors, but nowadays they want to be rockets or hypersonic glide vehicles!
The US spends 3x as much compare to China in military hardware, assets and its soldiers. But labor cost of making planes or submarines for example is dirt cheap in China compare to US. The latest 5th gen J20 of China probably cost $50 million dollars while our F35 is like what 135 million. Do not quote me on the numbers. So the Chinese can make more planes, ships, drones at a lesser cost compare to the U.S. Another thing that pisses me off is that Chinese saves billions of dollars from R&D by stealing or hacking our military technology. We lose our edge by giving our secrets to the Chinese and we pay the price. It is utterly unacceptable. If we do go to war with China, GOD help us. I just hope those MADE IN CHINA military hardware will not last long when all hell breaks loose. We need to step up to the plate just like what Ronald Reagan did during his term. Confront the Evil Empire.
Most of the people makes the mistake when it comes to air to air missiles, range is not everything. Amraams can be have less range then chinese and european missiles, but they have no competition when it comes to wroking against electronic jamming.
Chinese missiles are also much bigger. Won't be much use if you have fewer missiles
His suggestion that Amraams are 30yo is silly. They've been updated numerous times.
"The U.S. Navy knows this from experience. In 2005, the Navy itself targeted the decommissioned carrier America in order to determine just how much punishment the vessel could withstand before slipping beneath the waves.
"The ship was pummeled by explosions both above and below the waterline," The War Zone reporter Tyler Rogoway explained in 2018. "After nearly four weeks of these activities, the carrier was scuttled. On May 14, 2005, the vessel's stern disappeared below the waterline and the ship began its voyage to the seafloor."
"America stood up to four weeks of abuse and only succumbed to the sea after demolition teams scuttled the ship on purpose once and for all, it's clear that America was built to sustain heavy damage in combat and still stay afloat."
A nuclear war head mounted on a Chinese hypersonic missile can take out a whole fleet not just one carrier, especially since no serious air defense weapons have been developed by the US the last 30 years.
@@alexg1153 AEGIS. SM-3, SM-2, SM-6
Wouldn't all of the crew be dead though, if they had to withstand that much abuse? At that point, it would be harmless.
+5000 Social Credit Score!!!!
💪😎