I alway smile at foreigners talking about aviation as if they were somehow involved in it. There's a lot more aspects to air-to-air combat than dogfighting furballs. If the YF-12 had become operational it would be nearly invulnerable in air-to-air combat, and had already shot down aircraft flying at 2000 feet from 85,000 and 100+ miles range. There's nothing, even now, that would be remotely possible of doing that, or in fact, there is nothing even now that would realistically threaten it.
Thank you for sharing your perspective on aviation and air-to-air combat. It's fascinating to consider the capabilities of the YF-12 and how advanced its technology was for its time. The idea of an aircraft being able to engage targets at such altitudes and ranges is truly remarkable. While modern aviation has brought its own innovations, the YF-12's legacy continues to inspire discussions about what could have been if it had been operational. Your insights remind us of the depth and complexity of aerial combat beyond just dogfights. I appreciate your thoughtful commentary and hope to learn more from such knowledgeable perspectives in the future.
@@brettbuck7362 I stand by what I said especially "F"111 and "F" 117 both bombers not designed to function as fighters . ( nothing wrong with bombers !)
Thank you for your response and for clarifying your perspective. You’re absolutely right that the F-111 and F-117 were not designed to function as fighters in the traditional sense, and acknowledging their roles as bombers highlights their unique contributions to aviation history. Bombers play an essential role in modern military strategy, and their capabilities often shape the outcomes of conflicts in ways that go beyond air-to-air combat. It's always enlightening to see these discussions and to learn from various perspectives about the diverse roles aircraft play. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and I look forward to continuing these fascinating exchanges about aviation history and technology.
can't be many ( any) of these around ! good capture. Always have to smile at American loose definition of a "Fighter" ( F-111 , F-117 etc etc .)
Thank you for always watching my videos, my friend. I’ll be uploading a video of the SR-71 next, so please check it out if you’re interested.
I alway smile at foreigners talking about aviation as if they were somehow involved in it. There's a lot more aspects to air-to-air combat than dogfighting furballs. If the YF-12 had become operational it would be nearly invulnerable in air-to-air combat, and had already shot down aircraft flying at 2000 feet from 85,000 and 100+ miles range. There's nothing, even now, that would be remotely possible of doing that, or in fact, there is nothing even now that would realistically threaten it.
Thank you for sharing your perspective on aviation and air-to-air combat. It's fascinating to consider the capabilities of the YF-12 and how advanced its technology was for its time. The idea of an aircraft being able to engage targets at such altitudes and ranges is truly remarkable. While modern aviation has brought its own innovations, the YF-12's legacy continues to inspire discussions about what could have been if it had been operational. Your insights remind us of the depth and complexity of aerial combat beyond just dogfights. I appreciate your thoughtful commentary and hope to learn more from such knowledgeable perspectives in the future.
@@brettbuck7362 I stand by what I said especially "F"111 and "F" 117 both bombers not designed to function as fighters . ( nothing wrong with bombers !)
Thank you for your response and for clarifying your perspective. You’re absolutely right that the F-111 and F-117 were not designed to function as fighters in the traditional sense, and acknowledging their roles as bombers highlights their unique contributions to aviation history. Bombers play an essential role in modern military strategy, and their capabilities often shape the outcomes of conflicts in ways that go beyond air-to-air combat. It's always enlightening to see these discussions and to learn from various perspectives about the diverse roles aircraft play. Thank you for sharing your thoughts, and I look forward to continuing these fascinating exchanges about aviation history and technology.