Comments by "1IbramGaunt" (@1IbramGaunt) on "Ed Nash's Military Matters" channel.

  1.  @garyhewitt489  which is where the RAF, our OWN drones and advanced surface-to-air missile systems like Sky-Sabre come in
    1
  2.  @garyhewitt489  well there is the Dragonfire directed-energy weapon in development as we speak too
    1
  3. @Joseph Walsh true but then they'd definitely be on equal footing with their Chilean neighbours and almost equal footing with the British, neither of whom will be exactly very pleased with seeing that become the case
    1
  4.  @garyhewitt489  I meant fancy futuristic stealth-drones with lasers and ATGM's and other advanced gizmos, not THAT kind, the crappy home-made kind you're talking about there could probably just be dealt with BY the tank! Detected with it's own various fancy threat-detection systems, then shot down with it's machine-gun, chain-gun or Active Protection System, and just deflected by it's Dorchester/ERA armour even if not!
    1
  5.  @garyhewitt489  the Saudi's are using the far cheaper, far more weakly-armoured and far less advanced export-variant of the American Abrams tank, NOT Challenger 3's, and also at the end of the day they're Saudi Arabia lol. As for the Armenians this does not exactly come as a surprise haha
    1
  6.  @garyhewitt489  I dunno, that's what they thought many times during the Cold War when anti-tank missiles were thought to have made the tank obsolete, and yet here the tank still is, as every time an actual real war happened rather than a hypothetical one the tanks proved vital, and no new development has ever fully, truly successfully replaced them or rendered them obsolete to the point of uselessness in over a century, they wouldn't still be in use with (and new ones being developed for) every single major military power out there otherwise
    1
  7.  @garyhewitt489  as for your robot soldiers theory, possible but that's still kinda a long way off in the future yet I feel lol, and as for the whole swarm of bees UAV thing, there are VERY fast-firing defensive weapon options, already out there like Phalanx, Aegis, Sea-Ceptor or Sky-Sabre and still in development but getting there like Dragonfire, as well as computerised radar-guided targeting systems that can detect, track, lock onto and destroy targets faster than any human gunner ever could; plus of course it doesn't have to stop at defensive warfare, we're developing drones of our own after all too, including ones with air-to-air combat capabilities that could simply be launched in response to the enemy's ones and have a sort of drone dogfight with them
    1
  8.  @garyhewitt489  agreed there fully
    1
  9. The commander's cupola and driver's hatch both have bulletproof-glass vision-blocks
    1
  10.  @alganhar1  yup
    1
  11. The smoke dispensers are already on it and fully integrated?
    1
  12.  @Weakeyedominant  is there any tanks where they have the smoke-grenade launchers any other way?! Don't think I've ever SEEN a tank that hid it's smoke-launchers behind a little flap or something, the other stuff you were talking about maybe but the smoke launchers have ALWAYS been "bolted onto the exterior" like that, on everybody's tanks in every country! That's just the normal way to have those! There's many variations in the designs and positioning, but they're always on the outside of the turret like that
    1
  13.  @komradearti9935  if you say so, why though? Genuinely curious? Seems an unnecessarily complicated extra bit of expensive time-consuming engineering for just protecting a set of smoke launchers, with the optics or APS I could understand but not the smoke launchers, there's a reason every other major MBT I've ever heard of just hasn't bothered with that and just put them on the sides of the turret wherever seemed best, gotta save money and time and maintenance somewhere so that there's more of those things left for everything more important
    1
  14. I know right, HERESY lol
    1
  15.  @rayhan_2k841  exactly, much like how the Challenger 2 was such a radical redesign of the Challenger 1 that the two had practically nothing in common besides the gun, despite both still having the same name they were completely different tanks to all intents and purposes
    1
  16. Seemed to work well enough in Iraq
    1
  17.  @alganhar1  I just meant I hadn't heard any complaints from tankers who used them on sand while out there
    1
  18. The A4's might not be grounded but they take a lot of keeping in the air I bet haha, and unlike these new JF17's don't stand a chance against any modern opponents
    1
  19. They're destroyers not frigates
    1
  20.  @XxermandxX  tell that to the Iraqi army
    1
  21.  @davebignell773  saving HMS Belfast didn't seem to be a problem, nor did saving any of those other preserved museum-ships you mention, and frankly most surviving ships as old as Warspite would be today have far less incredible gloriousness to their names than Warspite did yet they survive and she doesn't. Was saving just one more ship too much to ask for the penny-pinchers? Despite the fact they'd already scrapped dozens of other WW2 warships? you would've thought just one being kept aside, put out of the way somewhere for later restoration, would make no difference whatsoever, doubt her steel could've been worth much
    1
  22.  @manumano3887  the original Chinese version has that you mean, Argentina's ones are gonna have to be reconfigured for taking whatever old surplus American weapons they still have instead
    1
  23.  @d-rob5513  as for Big Lizzie and Prince Of Wales they ain't bloody THERE though are they and they'd take weeks to arrive, technology may have changed since 1982 but the distances sure haven't, the only way we could get Big Lizzie and her carrier-group there inside a MONTH right now is if she actually went straight home from the SCS the long way round past Cape Aghulas and relied solely on ship-to-ship refueling, and Prince Of Wales still isn't fully operational yet
    1
  24.  @d-rob5513  actually I'm pretty sure I do. While the idea is to finally replace them with something new like Sky-Sabre in the near future, that hasn't actually happened yet, and even when it DOES there'll be a single launcher for a completely untested system, plus the Type 45 or Type 23 aren't always there, so aside FROM those Typhoons, the main air-defence the Falkland Islands actually have? ARE bloody 80's Rapiers still. And like I said before, let's not forget that while at present the Argentine air-force's EQUIPMENT may be a joke, their actual PILOTS sure as f*ck aren't. And as for being certain of supremacy with those Typhoons, the previous point of mine you seem to be completely missing here is that we still don't know jack-shit in terms of CONFIRMED, DEFINITE FACT about the REAL combat capabilities of Chinese aircraft and weaponry, and until they actually show their capabilities in a real war we still won't, nor of course do we know how the Typhoon will fair in a real dogfight against other modern jets EITHER, those Meteor missiles are very impressive on paper sure but they never actually HAVE shot anything down Beyond Visual Range, have they. THEREFORE, until such time as something like a second Falklands War, or Heaven forbid actually a full-on war with China actually happens? The only way we CAN truly have full confidence in our defences down there right now is overall superior numbers and preparedness, rather than relying on technological or qualitative advantage alone
    1
  25. Something I'd like to suggest Ed if you see this comment is that you do a video like this on the new RAF trainer design in the works, the "Aeralis", that's supposed to be eventually replacing the rather long-in-the-tooth BAE Hawk, be interested to hear what you think
    1
  26. ​ @Cartoonman154  true although Forces News has already done an episode on it and the company's done some promotional material, plus nothing's stopping him just giving us his own speculations and musings on it based on all his other knowledge and experience with this sort of thing, should be interesting
    1
  27.  @ivu-fe4ik  might be better to focus on getting a navy that doesn't sink of it's own accord rather than new planes for the air-force then
    1
  28.  @carlosandleon  if it's cheap enough for bloody Nigeria of all places to afford than it's pretty damn cheap
    1
  29.  @andrewfischer8564  that's pretty unlikely lol, some of the late-war German designs LOOKED a bit like modern Stealth-jets sure but that didn't mean they were
    1
  30.  @andrewfischer8564  maybe so then; by the time the Nazi's had jets in our world we were pretty good at just seeing V1 Flying Bombs the old fashioned way and shooting them down though, both with our own new Meteor jets and with "old-fashioned" prop-planes like the Spitfire haha, so even if we wouldn't have seen the German jets coming that still wouldn't necessarily have meant much. Let's not forget how unreliable and dangerous German jet-engines were too. I dunno if that would've all been as true in 1940 as it was in '44-'45 of course, but Britain still stood a chance
    1
  31. @David Howard think that something like the early Gloster jets shown here fitted with that Axial-flow engine would've actually been very good in combat then, enough to outmatch the latest piston-engined fighters of the day that is? It would've likely still turned up too late for the Battle Of Britain after all, but would've been just in time to meet stuff like the Focke-Wulf 190 in '42-'43
    1
  32.  @andrewfischer8564  let me know if you do remember, sounds interesting!
    1
  33. It IS applicable, Gripen has substantial British components in it
    1
  34. Lol
    1
  35.  @noodles169  I'm not so confident of that. While, don't get me wrong, I AM fully confident that one-on-one the Typhoon would wipe the floor with the JF17 or any other Chinese fighter, it's a 3-to-1 advantage in the Argentine's favour we're talking, possibly more if they don't just stop at 14, and we don't actually have much definite cold hard information on the JF17's real combat capabilities or upon those of Chinese missiles, so it's still up in the air; let's not forget quite how skilled, effective and suicidally brave the Argentine pilots actually were in the 1982 war, and that was with far less capable aircraft. And of course there's also the fact that the Typhoon itself still has yet to get into a real life live-fire dogfight with other modern jets, so things aren't 100% certain there either. And I don't like not being sure about such things, hence my desiring more Typhoons, pilots and ground-crew be sent down there to make it a full-on squadron of them
    1
  36.  @KingNeptuneog  huh?
    1
  37.  @eitleoir170  which specific nation is it you mean by "we"?
    1
  38. Shane Murphy didn't they also use those in the comedy movie 'Hot Shots'?
    1
  39.  @EdNashsMilitaryMatters  fair does, but do you "want to believe" hahaha
    1
  40. And now for the all-important question Ed- will you be doing a video on the Ghost Of Kyiv 😁
    1
  41. Plenty of prop-planes fought German jets at the end of WW2 and came out on top
    1
  42. Would it help if we sent weapons do you think? I don't mean proper military weapons that most of us don't have access to, I mean things like shotguns or hunting rifles or even those semi-auto versions of the SA80 that the Cadets use, anything like that? Or non-lethal gear like uniforms, webbing, helmets, gas-masks, even just food & drink? There's clearly a lot more volunteers there than there is the stuff to give them to go round
    1
  43. @mandellorian hello?
    1