36.2k BOSSentinel Comments

  • [KE-RP][PEA] SessNuH 130 18 days ago

    Republic of spin:
    @B1BLancer
    Swisher-man:
    @Voytek
    Check-or-slow-vak-air
    @MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26

    +1
  • [KE-RP] TEC-2 Asuncion 18 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc what. The. Bro is Mr. 5x5

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Treason. 19 days ago

    @deutschFELLAtheLeopard2A7 @SPWithLizzie I looked at the modern Japanese flag and flipped the colors and added a lightning bolt

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc @SPWithLizzie I am on General corps’ side, he knows his [Her?] facts

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie the control range is what the range of drones means

    +1
  • DH-106 19 days ago

    @NotRob119 NOOO MAKE A FORUM FOR IT I WILL READ IT

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    The one below didn’t know it was a drone

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    Here is the 1950’s one
    Yes — the aircraft in the image does appear too modern for the mid-1950s based on several features. Here’s a breakdown of why:


    🔍 Modern Design Elements:

    1. Sleek, blended fuselage
      The smooth, almost stealth-like fuselage design is reminiscent of post-1970s aircraft design. Mid-1950s jets still had more angular or segmented airframes.

    2. Delta wings with blue highlights
      While delta wings did exist in the 1950s (e.g., Convair F-102, Dassault Mirage III prototypes), the extreme tapering and modern materials/colors shown here lean toward a later generation.

    3. Twin-engine rear with afterburner flames
      The sharply defined rear engine configuration and flame effects suggest powerful turbofans or turbojets with afterburners. In the 1950s, afterburning engines were still in early stages and not as refined or integrated as seen here.

    4. Lack of visible intakes or sensors
      1950s aircraft often had more prominent nose or wing-mounted air intakes and antennas — this craft’s clean design suggests either a stealth concept or something more advanced.


    📅 1950s Comparison:

    Aircraft like the F-100 Super Sabre or English Electric Lightning were high-tech for the time, but they had:

    • More visible rivets and panel lines
    • Simpler cockpit integration
    • Straight or mildly swept wings early on

    This aircraft looks more like something from the late 1970s onward — possibly even influenced by 1980s stealth or high-speed reconnaissance concepts (e.g., SR-71 Blackbird, B-1 Lancer, or experimental aircraft like the YF-23).


    ✅ Verdict:

    Yes, too modern for mid-1950s.
    It looks more like a late Cold War or even early 21st-century design in terms of aerodynamics and propulsion.

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 19 days ago

    @DeeganWithABazooka naw.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    ChatGPT question

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    Thanks for the clarification — that it's a drone changes the context quite a bit.

    Now looking at it from an 1980s drone design perspective, here's an updated assessment:


    What Fits the 1980s Context:

    1. Twin-engine configuration with visible afterburners
      While rare for drones at the time, the U.S. and USSR were experimenting with high-speed UAVs (like the Lockheed D-21 and Soviet Tupolev Tu-123). The engines and flame effects seen here could plausibly fit an experimental supersonic reconnaissance drone of the late Cold War.

    2. Delta wing layout
      This configuration was being used on both manned and unmanned aircraft in high-speed roles. The D-21 drone had a similar sharp delta shape.

    3. No cockpit canopy (unmanned)
      Fits perfectly for a drone — especially recon or strike variants. By the 1980s, high-speed, non-recoverable drones were already being deployed by superpowers.


    ⚠️ What Feels Too Modern for the 1980s:

    1. Sleek, seamless airframe
      The surface of this drone looks highly refined — like modern stealth drones (RQ-170 or X-47B). In the 1980s, most UAVs still showed clear panel lines, rivets, and bulkier avionics housings.

    2. Bright engine flames
      Drones of the era were usually optimized for stealth or surveillance, not afterburning thrust. This visible exhaust suggests a high-performance, possibly strike-focused drone, which would be quite futuristic for the time.

    3. Blue accent coloring
      Operational military drones in the 1980s would almost never use visible bright markings, especially for stealth or reconnaissance. It gives off a sci-fi or concept prototype vibe.


    🧠 Final Judgment:

    Borderline too modern for the 1980s — but not impossible.
    If you frame this aircraft as a top-secret experimental drone, perhaps developed in the late '80s under a black project (like how the F-117 was kept secret), it would be just barely believable.

    But for a typical 1980s military drone, this design is too advanced in terms of aerodynamics and likely performance.


    If you're worldbuilding or designing for an alternate Cold War history, this could be a plausible 1988-era prototype — something in your universe might use in an experimental strike-recon drone program.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    I am calling @Generalcorpinc

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie again, not possible for the 1950’s

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie uh, so?? The MJ-4 was a fighter, and the Most powerful military rn is just making them. I am serious, this has to be 2000’s. A fighter drone??

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie your desc. Says Capable of light air superiority and light ground attack.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie also, country music is kinda fire

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie then why can it go 300 miles???? I am the second most advanced country and I have one half that that weights 2x less than this!

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie just look I know it’s NBC but it’s somewhat trustworthy. But yeah.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie the D-1A has the missiles for the regular so players on mine, it’s just a surveillance and recon drone

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie the drone tech of it.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @AviationLoverGEEK444 @SPWithLizzie guys. [Gals] early 2000’s rock and pop is really good.

    +1
  • MJ-4S-2Q 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie uhh you know this is like modern right

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie no we are in NATE together

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Selling surplus. 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie ok, two H-21’s are flying to your country now!

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Selling surplus. 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie ok, total is 14 million dollars, anything else?

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Selling surplus. 19 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc ok. Thanks for purchasing surplus!

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Selling surplus. 19 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc no. Countries only, unless….. I will sell them for 10 million each.

    +1
  • X-Panzerfaust 3A1 [KE-RP] 19 days ago

    @Mitterbin you have to tag the whole RP

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @SuperSuperTheSylph possible!

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @keiyronelleavgeek566 you got to have a navy,

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @keiyronelleavgeek566 or do you want some to beef up the For-rantish navy?

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @RB107 The naval power is back!!

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @B1BLancer do you want some? I will give you some, like 25 for 200 billion.

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @RB107 am I allowed to resell them unarmed?

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @RB107 I know this is a lot, and it’s a point I need to make. I want the entire stock. 5 Trillion. It’s just a fraction of the current military spending budget, like 1/2. I need this change.

    +1
  • RD CVL Longboard 19 days ago

    @RB107 caught you fast. Publishing

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 19 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie well. Single day delivery??

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 19 days ago

    @deutschFELLAtheLeopard2A7 I am not signing. You are going to inhibit my lethality.

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 19 days ago

    @deutschFELLAtheLeopard2A7 I will not give up arms. Never.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc you have been in since 1950. I can remember this. You have

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc I did in 1950. I started to do so annually in 1951. I am pulling the 200,000,000 out.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc I will push the release date to 1960, and I am removing the funds I annually put in to your company.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc there’s your point! You put it 20 years ahead!

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc its the sessna engine.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc its radar, or radio controlled, from a B-1B.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc its a twin supercharged V-16

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc you are using ai?

    +1
  • [KE-RP] Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty 20 days ago

    @SPWithLizzie because I have 400 and counting.

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc you camera has no thermals, no night vision

    +1
  • [PEA] D-1A “Hellfire” 20 days ago

    @GeneralCorpInc it isn’t a turboprop. It’s a engine out of a civilian light aircraft

    +1