Comments by "Solo Renegade" (@SoloRenegade) on "The Armourer's Bench" channel.

@saml7610 we were hitting beyond 300yds with ridiculously worn out M16A2s back in 2004. M16A4 is a solid weapon. Yes, likely getting rid of worn out stock from OIF/OEF, but it's not that hard to replace the barrels.
23
they are not all M110, many are just AR10 or AR15 setup for long range. Gotta look close for the distinguishing features.
3
Derivative of the US hornet mine.
3
how naive
2
best way to defeat them is to attack the mobility, or use mines/artillery/AT weapons (not RPGs though).
2
@fanta4897 no, it was not just a prototype. It was being taught o frontline soldiers decades after being a prototype. you don't give prototypes to trainees during peacetime to train on 1-2 decades after something was a prototype and still call it a prototype. The US army was capable of fielding it, but never did. the US doesn't use mines as they are defensive weapons and we've never fought a war in which such a mine was useful since its development. also, mines are widely frowned upon. Yes, if you have a whole field covered in these that can start to stand out like a sore thumb as they are not buried and reasonably large. But one or two strategically placed can be effective. But they are defensive only. you place them when expecting an enemy advance on your position. but these mines are more expensive to, with lower probability of kill, as you have to be sure the enemy will approach it otherwise it's wasted. Air power, artillery, drone strikes, AT missiles, etc. are more cost effective, and better for advancing. The US hornet mine has a few days to 2week self destruct to avoid littering lands with mines after a war. so if it never finds a target or is never retrieved, it is lost. Waste of money if it self destructs, and it's not cheap. Whereas something like a javelin, NLAW, etc can be used both offensively and defensively and has greater range from point of firing.
2
@jeffreyprezalar220 I was trained to deploy the Hornet mine 20yrs ago
2
and we know Russia is supplying Ukraine with a LOT of mines
2
@matthewjones39 wrong. this will not defeat HEAT weapons. It will only stop drones and RPGs. I'm speaking from combat experience with such armor and weapons. RPGs are a HEAT weapon, but the method by which the cage armor defeats the RPG specifically has nothing to do with the HEAT warhead specifically, but the design of the rocket/detonator. All other modern HEAT AT weapons like TOW, Javelin, NLAW, and more will go right through like a hot knife through butter. And it does nothing to prevent mobility kills by RPG/Drones, nor does it prevent mines, artillery, and more from taking them out.
1
@matthewjones39 this is not that type of armor. This is cage and sheet metal armor. Spaced armor doesn't work as well as you think. You can find pics of Panver IV in WW2 taken out by 75mm M4 Shermans through their spaced armor. I've also watched FAR too many armored vehicles in Iraq and Afghanistan get penetrated, and the rounds went through spaced armor, and even passed in one side and exited out the complete other side of the vehicle. (two sides of a vehicle are spaced armor) Spaced armor is better against kinetic weapons, not HEAT rounds. And bar/cage armor is designed specifically to defeat RPG and NOTHING ELSE. My truck in Afghanistan had cage armor, and it was penetrated by a HEAT round (non-RPG weapon). I watched tons of trucks with cage armor penetrated, and tons of armored vehicles with no cage armor get penetrated clean through by PRG and other HEAT weapons. You need to do more research into physics and how these weapons and armor works.
1
@cideltacommand7169 "cage detonates heat" Yes "heat goes through a lot of space armor," Wrong. Look closer. that "armor" is just tin or sheet metal, paper thin to a HEAT round. And the cage has more empty space than thin/soft metal wire. Tin is a very soft metal too. "THEN hits actual Armour with possible era" most Russian ERA has been found to be fake. But even still, ERA doesn't cover the entire tank, nor from every angle (especially from above). the HEAT round will form go through the cage/space armor like it's not even there, then penetrate the hull. You do know that modern HEAT AT weapons attack from a distance, right? NLAW, Javelin, Cluster munitions, and more all fire their HEAT projectile from MANY feet away, further away from the hull than the cage is, and it will punch clean through the tank. Again, I've faced these weapons in actual combat, and trained in their use.
1
@cideltacommand7169 "Well your clearly wrong since Like 1 Meter of spaced Armour will dissipate the jet enough to just slightly burn the hull" cite your sources. If you watch videos of russian tanks in Ukraine getting destroyed by NLAW, Javelin, and more AT weapons, note how far away from the tank the HEAT round explodes before penetrating. It's often much farther than 1m, and can burn through two sides of an armored vehicle that is more than 1m wide. The HEAT round has to form away from teh armor to give it time to form the plasma penetrator. you're making crap up, with no supporting evidence, and with tons of evidence that plainly proves you wrong.
1
@cideltacommand7169 if the ERA was working, then why do they need the turtle armor?
1
US had the Hornet mine decades ago.
1
"Return to Sender"
1
Derivative of the US hornet mine, been around for about 30+yrs
1
@a_damska I myself trained on the Hornet mine (deployment and disarming) 20yrs ago. But US doesn't really use mines for a few reasons. 1, it's frowned upon and even banned internationally due to the collateral damage (though the Hornet mine self destructs after a few days). 2, mines are defensive weapons, and the US fights offensively. The US hasn't employed minefields for a long time now, and so such weapons just end up sitting in storage and never used.
1
@TheArmourersBench some images at the beginning showed rifles that weren't M110s. As I said, not everything is an M110. Many shown clearly were, but not all. Read carefully and pay attention to detail.
1
@TheArmourersBench a UAR-10 is simply an AR-10 platform. And like I said, and like you showed, not every AR-10 platform in Ukraine is an M110. Not in your video, and not outside your video. an M110 is a very specific model of AR-10.
1
@TheArmourersBench then what are you so angry about? You covered your bases, so why are you arguing with me about it if you agree? The fact is, most people think any military AR-10 is an "M110", seen people do that and say that for many years, including those in the military. Many people don't know the difference, and many people will watch random videos from Ukraine and make the same mistakes. If you're going to add disclaimers, you should put them at teh Beginning of videos, not at the end, as many people don't watch that far. I seen some aviation videos recently where they did the same thing, setup a whole video including teh title as generic advice, only to disclaimer the entire video as applying to one very narrow and specific use case that most people don't care about, and then wondered why everyone was countering them in the comments.
1
@TheArmourersBench "I'm not angry" your responses suggest otherwise. "you initially said there were rifles which weren't M110s in the video so I'm just making sure there are no errors. " False, I'm quoting below what I clearly said in teh first comment above. You're correcting errors, by making false statements? "they are not all M110, many are just AR10 or AR15 setup for long range. " as in, not all AR-10 in Ukraine are M110, and yes, some in the video are not M110 either, but I did Not specifically say that as you claim I did. And neither did I claim you didn't explain that. I made a general statement, as Ukraine has been using a variety of AR platforms for well over a year now. "As for people watching till the end that's on them, it's a 5 min video" true, but understanding how people are in reality vs your idealistic expectations are two different things. If you're on youtube, you should know by now that people rarely watch all of a given video, and that people comment all throughout a video, not just after watching the whole thing. Don't act like you don't know that.
1
@skepticalbadger "You were clearly trying to catch him out" not in the least, I made a statement of fact, a disclaimer if you will. "and are now weirdly backtracking and trying to make him out to be in the wrong. " explain in detail where I backtracked my statement.
1
@eddietat95 you need to work on your reading comprehension skills. My statement is factually and contextually correct. It is in fact you who missed my context and meaning. Try again.
1
@DJ-fd4qk I can't help the fact you read into my comment what wasn't there. I was making a general statement about ALL AR-10 platforms in Ukraine, as I've already explained. Read it like a disclaimer and it might make sense to you. But it's very clear the intelligence level of people watching these videos is rather low.
1
@DJ-fd4qk And it was an accurate statement. "Nobody here said they're all M110" nor did I. And I made no accusations of anyone in the video doing so. " Admit your wrong or delete your comment because you're being a tool" except nothing I said was wrong. Perhaps you should delete your comments for being an idiot.
1
we were still training on teh US Hornet mine in 2004 and beyond, don't make teh mistake of thinking it was shelved. We have just had no use for it in our modern conflicts. the US largely has no need to deploy mines of any type. It is a defensive weapon, US is offensive.
1
US has had these Hornet mines for decades.
1
yeah, a derivative of the US Hornet mine
1