Are pilots actually allowed to fly very low and take risks when they put out those kinds of video ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7gvvr_NyewQ
I mean, wouldn't their CO freak out if they find they voluntary put the aircraft at risk without reason ? Or are those videos made during training where flying low is one of the parameters ?
>>30489747
> dat slavshit Valkyrie
Muh dick!
>>30489747
the first 1:20 seconds of that are retarded, and unwatcheable due to shitty filters
>>30489747
It all depends on the country and the internal culture of the air force in question.
The USAF would not allow anybody to take unnecessary risks with a multi-million dollar aircraft. Other countries might be more liberal. Russia, for example, doesn't seem to mind pilots showing off a bit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9pUIdnNjj6s
>>30489747
Normally justified as training either before or after the event.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DqdM9xvxBaA
>>30489830
>>30489857
Additional question : is there a point to fly that low ? Is low-penetration still a thing for modern air forces outside of atom bomb delivery ?
>>30489747
In VV low and fast is/was an European Cold War thing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GNO_WuXLNfU
Practice practice practice.
>>30489914
If they can't see you then you're still in the game. :)
>>30489914
A quick low level flypast can also make an effective show of force when in support of ground troops.
>>30489914
Modern radar is advanced enough that simply flying low doesn't confuse it so much anymore. It might work as a way for a "stealth" aircraft such as the F-35 to further limit the detection, however.
>>30490247
If you're not flying over flat ground with no features low flight like in the OP's video significantly reduces the precision and detection radius of even the most modern radar.
>>30489790
I thought it was the Slavshit Concorde, the Tu-144
>>30490604
It's freight was never intended to be self loading.
>>30490567
>modern radar.
AWACS can see car and truck traffic on highways.
>>30490923
25 years ago.
