Comments by "verdebusterAP" (@verdebusterAP) on "Task & Purpose" channel.

  1. Tactically speaking that doesn't matter Ukraine is what is known as a target rich environment so there is plenty to chose from Russian forward operating bases where personnel and equipment are targets. Dropping a HIMARS missile where personnel sleep it brutal but effective vehicles have to be parked somewhere. Staging areas .convoys Russian bases where KA-52, MI-28 and MI-35s are targets. S-300/400 sites, EW and other air defense assets also targets Even if they pull their logistics back , there is still plenty of material targets to chose from
    4
  2.  @homeonegreen9  Ships are not as important for littoral combat as they were in WW2 The aircraft like the CH-53K and MV-22 can perform resupply from long range. The US military has been looking at the Japanese ShinMaywa US-2 floatplane Resupplying isnt the issue , its defenses from ships, subs and aircraft While the Patriot is capable, its also requires a lot effort to move and set up The USMC needs a defense system able to deal with modern threats but still flexible enough to move quickly
    4
  3. I say no for field use per say. There is too much that can go wrong with a system like that on the battlefield Secondly, the gunner is now carrying a lot weight in ammo in addition to his equipment The A-Gunner role is more than being a mule for ammo. For personnel defending a base, its perfect because they allow them to bring overwhelming firepower and its easier to deal with problems versus trying to deal with problems in the middle of a fire fight Ultimately the best thing to do is improve ammo carriage for M240 and M249 similiar to what the Russian PKM uses and balance out the platoon with M27s While the M240/M249 are reloading or dealing with stoppages, the M27 can maintain the rate of fire
    4
  4. Ukrainian forces have captured Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Thats base models to the latest upgraded version All those tanks weapons, armor and sensors have all been compromised. Additionally, Ukrainian forces know all blind shots and weak spots for Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s so its not looking good for Russian armor
    4
  5. Drones are not a problem if you are prepared for them What the USMC and Army need to do is buy or build Germany's Rheinmetall BOXER Skyranger 30 air defence system mounted on Stryker and ACV for dealing with drones back with Stingers For larger targets the Humvee with AIM-9X and AIM-120C5 Thats being reactive but the US is proactive What the US would is strike the drones before they can be used Thanks to lessons in Iraq and Afghan plus Ukraine Using EW assets to locate targets is very easy to do
    4
  6.  @marcusgarvey7588  How about no For starters All USN subs carry TLAM cruise missiles, so attack the surface ships does not stop TLAMs from raining down on Iran Secondly Israel would allow USAF bombers to operate from its bases USAF bombers can also operate 3100 miles away at Diego Garica Lastly ,the odds of Iran's missile successfully attack are zero Defensively, the USN ships have mulitple ways of counter Iran's attack
    4
  7.  @dianapennepacker6854  The AH-1Z isnt at the Apache's level but it does has the room to grow One key feature of the AH-1Z is that it can use AIM-9s which the Apache can't do Now the confusion is over the USMC wants to test the AH-1Z with AIM-120s and F-35 as sensor/shooter test Which if adopted would give AH-1Z very unique capabilites but its a test not fat yet
    4
  8. Thats true but at the end of the day, the shot down was still the greatest gift for the USAF First, F-117 was designed for maximum stealth and lacked MAWS, RWR and ECM. That brought about the development of ow-probability-of-intercept MAWS and RWR for stealth aircraft. Allowing them to have protection that doesnt betray their positions Second, SEAD operations were highly ineffective against mobile units. The AGM-88 at the time could home on actively transmitting targets. F-16CJ had speed and weapons but was limited by HARM targeting system ability to locate targets. EA-6B had weapons and sensors but lacked speed. Their ability to locate and identify targets as well communicate with other assets was another issue The EA-18G solves all those issues and can locate targets far more effectivelly and the newer models of the AGM-88 can home on targets even if they are cold or moving Lastly, Strike aircraft could not locate targets due to forest and weather as well couldnt communicate with the SEAD aircraft. All aircraft have advanced targeting pods,newer radars allowing for true all weather capability and datalinks so communication between aircraft is substantially faster Losing the F-117 ,justified the USAF/USN/USMC spending on key programs
    4
  9. Its only going to get worst for Russia
    4
  10. Ukraine has all but confirmed that the next variant of the JDAM will have the GBU-53 seeker Anti-jam/anti-spoof GPS capability is good but if the seeker can switch from GPS to MMW or IR homing there is no jamming that Ironically Electro-Optical guided weapons will also be returning IR and Electro-Optical are much harder to jam because they are completely passive
    3
  11.  @paghilumdihauy  The Su-57 is 5th gen but by standards its between 4+++ gen and 5th gen The needle for 5th is barely moving Its the same as KAI KF-21 Boramae
    3
  12.  @CheekyMenace  The B-21 isnt about stealth The B-21 is about functionality B-2 is stealthy but expensive B-1 is fast but drinks fuel B-52 has great versatility but its very old How do you take their best qualities but still make a bomber for modern and future warfare Sure there are some lessons from the F-117s
    3
  13. Good thinking but not what is needed What Ukraine needs is to make systems similiar the USMC Navy Marine Expeditionary Ship Interdiction System (NMESIS) and Long Range Missile (LMSL) A highly mobile launcher carrying a long range missile Like HIMARS but lighter and more mobile Ukraine needs a missile able to strike targets 500 miles plus carrying least 1000lbs warhead
    3
  14. They are making due with what they have And thats ironic that Ukraine sub par equipment is still doing very well
    3
  15. How about no ZOV24-2-22 FPV drones are working in Ukraine because both sides are ill equipped to deal with tme There are a few solutions to the FPV issue however one that is gaining traction is upgrading active protection system (APS) with additional launchers with programmable airburst round either low velocity HEDP 40mm rounds or high velocity 30mm AHEAD rounds so adding the new features to the existing assets allow them to test options for counter drones Second, the US wouldnt have Ukraine problems in a conflict Russian forces are caught unaware 90 percent of the time US forces have Joint Battle Command-Platform (PM JBC-P) which is carried by all forces and can be equipped even to HMWVVs For battle management and airborne ground surveillance . the USAF used the E-8 JSTARS giving forces on ground real time info on enemy movement Even though the USAF retired it, the US Army has been allowed to buy a replacement for it While Russia doesnt take SEAD/DEAD seriously The US has EA-18G, F-16CJ, EC-130H ,Rivet Joint and Combat Sent as well as E/A-37 in RD and the bulk of US aircraft can use the AGM-88., ADM-141 and ADM-160s The US has a whole arsenal devoted to destruction of enemy defenses and also thanks to Iraq and Afghn, Electronic warfare sensors are far more precise Lastly, the US wrote the book on drone warfare with the MQ-1 and MQ-9 As the US takes SEAD/DEAD seriously, Ukraine wouldnt have SAMs to target aircraft and the US would have its airborne ground surveillance , AWACS and other C4ISTAR aircraft opening with impunity
    3
  16. its not just bigger ,just better
    3
  17. The US is not adopting the 130mm yet as the analysis of the T-90M is ongoing The reason why EU is adopting 130mm is depleted uranium DU is banned in the EU and they only used tungsten alloy rounds which they deemed inadequate again the T-90M and T-14 Tungsten alloy can achieve DU levels of penetration but its as effect not DU. The US has no such ban and uses DU because its qualities DU is naturally self sharpening which means it does not blunt out as badly as tungsten alloy does against composite armor Russian ERA is designed to snap armor-piercing, fin-stabilized, discarding sabot rounds. DU doesn't break as easily as tungsten alloy DU is pyrophoric which means it self ignites and burns at extremely high temps. Even if the round does not penetrate, the burning metal is still problem Thanks to Germany and Ukraine, the US has had Russian ERA enough that they discovered by increasing the mass and diameter of the M829s round it literally smashed through Russian ERA with relative ease hence why the M829 have gotten progressively heavier increasing the mass and diameter with tungsten alloy with 120mm rounds gets penetration but not a killing blow like DU By increasing to 130mm , the tungsten alloy rounds have the mass and speed needed for one hit knock out Another factor to consider is that 120mm rounds like the LAHAT and K-STAM-II can perform top attacks against armor
    3
  18. If you look at what the Ukrainian forces had before the West supplied them, they would not have been as successful They had all hand me downs from the USSR days Now they have top tier weapons
    3
  19. The simple answer is yes Ukrainian forces have captured Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Thats base models to the latest upgraded version All those tanks weapons, armor and sensors have all been compromised. Additionally, Ukrainian forces know all blind shots and weak spots for Russian T-90s, 80s and 72s Its very easy for the AMX-10 to shred Russian armor as Ukrainian forces know everything about Russian tanks
    3
  20. As for as China and Russia catching up not likely The US has had a lot of experience thanks to Balkans, Middle Easy and Afghan to make the improvements for the B-21 Russia had limited operations and China zero
    3
  21. There is no doubt that the TOW did everything they said but truth be told, its been time to replace with more modern system The smart thing would be upgrade the Javelin similar to how Israel did with its Spike missile One missile able to cover a wide range of capabilities from boots on ground to helicopters
    3
  22.  @goodlife6277  The NAMER has Trophy APS so no kabom
    3
  23.  @goodlife6277  A Kornet, Krishantema, Konkurs, among others strangely MIA in Ukraine
    3
  24.  @kmrtnsn  True the M777 can be carried by air but in potential fight with China, they are a liability A normal set up 2 mins with x amount of time for the mission an 2 min to displaces so nominally between 6-10 minutes The Archer needs 20 seconds to set up. 1-2 minutes for the mission and displace in 20 so nominally 3-4 minutes In Ukraine virtually no Pzh-2000 and Archer have been lost because of their ability to rapidly shoot and scoot Slower SPG have been lost because of their manual loading and time between shoots
    3
  25.  @Stumpy1234  Thats 105mm not 155mm
    3
  26.  @chrissmith7669  Incorrect The KA-52s getting smoke because they are placing themselves well in range of the enemy weapons The video showing KA-52 getting smoked by ATGM is again them getting too close
    3
  27. The US didnt buy it, that was just for Ukraine While MANPADs are good , Ukraine needs longer range systems
    3
  28.  @Birdylockso  The other issue with DF is that they are over 15 tons in weight, in short massive targets So whats stopping F-18s and F-35s from destroying them The F-35s uses stealth an sensors to locate the launcher as sensor Then sends the data to F-18s which in its role as the shooter launches missiles against it The F-35 can also send data to other assets for targeting the launcher China problem is that putting up planes works for the USAF and USN favor As for Russia's Kinzhal and Zircon Same issue jamming and targeting launching asset The Kinzhal can be launched from over 1000 miles but the USN can easily jam comn between the missile and launching asset The USN needs to make the SM-6 from F-18 a reality
    3
  29.  @amc3463  The aircraft they need is the Swedish JAS-39 it can perform air to air carrying 7 AIM-120s or Meteors For attacking that convoy ,it can carry up to 16 GBU-39s For attacking the S-400, it can use the KEPD-350 Sweden designed it for force dispersal. It can land on road and only needs 6 vehicles with trailers to support it
    3
  30.  @Ormusn2o  Not likely
    3
  31. No In conflict, the F-35 with neutralize the enemy radar and communications use GBU-53 and SiAW while the NGAD dealt with fighters and AWACS One flight of F-15EX would carry hypersonic weapons for time sensitive targets SAM sites,, Another would be loaded with JDAMs so once the enemy is robbed of its defense, they would have clear skies to do what they need Example, its easier to just pound a ship in port with a 2000lbs JDAM than expend multi mill dollar LRASM Same with attacking enemy airfield ,2 F-15EX loaded with eight 2000lbs JDAM would be render the enemy runways uses while another pair with sixteen 500lbs JDAM each destroy pretty much everything else and last flight would carry JASSM-ER for striking additional targets That frees up the B-21 for strategic targets Ideally the USAF would have USN EA-18G supporting them keeping the enemy in dark
    3
  32. Facts
    3
  33.  @smilingpolitely12345  The F-16s does not to engage the RUAF in the air The F-16s precision strike capability is where it will hurt Russian forces the most The Black Sea Fleet can only be target when in range or in port The F-16 with Harpoon ASM can easily take the Black Sea Fleet completely out of the picture. Now the US can do Ukraine a solid and give them a few JASSM-A as well wire F-16s to for Storm Shadow as well possible use with KEDP-350s Instead of a few Su-24, all the F-16 can use ASM and ALCM No need to dog fight
    3
  34.  @vaultsjan  The S-400 missile is range 250 miles and S-300 is 120 its very easy for the F-16 to work Ukraine strike S-400 with modified R-360 hence why they were able to pound Crimea repeatedly last month so rinse and repeat but also remember that while MIG-29s and Su-27 can only the AGM-88 at fraction of its capability, the F-16 can fully use it
    3
  35.  @greysheeum  There are no other reasons if the mission doesnt call for it its not used Secondly the Apache's datalink allows for one Apache with long bow to act as the sensor for rest Additional the Apache second mast attachment is the Manned-Unmanned Teaming-Extended (MUMT-X). In others, the mast mount is being test for items other than the longbow radar The last item is EOTS/IR similar to the OH-58 The whole point of the Apache getting various mast options is prove that it can do the job of the OH-58 with little other than swapping out equipment
    3
  36.  @Studio23Media  The F-15 still uses federated systems while the F-22 uses software defined There things that F-15 can test but lack of software defined makes it harder to test much more complicated tech
    3
  37. They are trying to recycle old tech for the Abrams X I don't see them adopting everything The improved situation awareness, power pack and 30mm yes Everything else is very much Iffy
    2
  38. Not exactly Russia's problem in the Ukraine comes down to several factors but the biggest is them being cheap They have APS technology but it has yet to make an appearance The US military is heavily invested in drones and network centric warfare so that everyone has access to eyes in the sky as well as the ability to deploy their own eyes in the sky Lastly, virtually US vehicles have CROWS whereas very very few Russia vehicles have it Russia's problems are easily traced As for armor If the enemy has significant air power and precision munitions, then armor usefulness is in question If the enemy has significant precision munitions and the tanks little protection and support,again usefulness is in question
    2
  39.  @frabe81118  The B-21 has considerably lower RCS than any fighter
    2
  40. Actually they dont The US greatest defense is that few subs can cross the ponds Crossing the Pacific or Atlantic even for SSN is an endurance test The US has forward operating bases and sub tenders that relieve that stress a bit No one else has that
    2
  41. The simple answer is no There are already too much weapons over there Ironically ,its the reason for NATO standard, too many calibers were in use during the WWII by the allies They just need 5.56 and 7.62 for general use , the few calibers for sniper rifles and big 50 Techincally you could simplify things and use 50 for both sniper and HMG Hell I will give you 300.ACC for CQB
    2
  42.  @jawarakf  Again thats still waste of time ATGM teams can simply double tap or use anti material rifles to destroy the tanks sensors or use IEDs The fact is that market for armor destruction has produced weapons that APS nor ERA can't stop Unless you have tanks with ARC reactor like Iron man which can power 500kW laser for a quick firing laser defense system armor days are number The US, Russia and Israel have developed light weight but lethal systems For Israel is the Spike NLOS on Sandcats The US , the JTLV with 30mm cannon and various mission options and Russia the GaZ Tigr with Kornet missile All 3 can be built faster and easier than armor Light enough for helo to carry them externally MRAPs can handle urban warfare
    2
  43. No likely The USAF learned a long time ago that operating stealth with electronic warfare (EW) and Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses (SEAD) With EW and SEAD engaging enemy defenses , they dont have time to look for stealth The loss of the F-117 showed that if you gave the enemy time, they can and will locate stealth so the trick is not to give them that time The TLAMs and JASSMs need 40 minutes to cover 350 miles That means EA-18Gs has suppress defenses for that long which is impossible. Also, a Su-35 or J-11 would get in weapons range in 8 mins The hypersonic weapons like the ARRW covers that distance in 1 min 24 sec The EA-18G can easily suppress defenses for that long and neither Su-35 or J-11 would have time to get in range With defense out of the way, stealth has free reign AWACS can upgrade B-21 with enemy positions so they can maintain a safe distance and risk possible detection
    2
  44. Yeah, Bullpup designs are good for sniper rifles ,not for battle or assault rifles https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Q-QVBQVYTA See how fast he is able to reload you can't do that with a bullpup
    2
  45. Ultimately, the main gun is not the issue , but rather the secondary weapon The mainstay of most secondary weapons has been 50 cal. but even with CROWS, shooting a 50 cal against drones is still challenging a main gun of 30mm would give it the flexibility to engage both drones and ground targets but 30mm against medium to heavy armor is not very effective for modern warfare The 50mm would highly effective even against T-14 it could easily shred T-14s sensors and tracks and could possibly even get mobility kill bit 50mm for C-UAS is very iffy and and kW DEW for C-UAS would require extra power Abrams X uses 30mm which is very flexible for it size What they need to do for XM30 is go with 50mm but dust of the programmable rounds from XM25 CDTE and go with secondary 25mm cannon which would solve both issue The 25mm is lighter but just as lethal.The problem with 30mm is weight. Logistically the 30mm makes more sense because its already available but additional weight to the XM30 is the draw back
    2
  46.  @angman1966  You kinda have to be able to defeat MBT in modern warfare Case in point, A Bradley smoked a column of Russian armor as they were ill equipped A tank is not going to run up on a Bradly as they know it can punch their lights out
    2
  47. I wouldnt say that The smart choice would have been to go with the HK-417 or FN SCAR or adopt the XM7 with 7.62 but argument was still the same about weight a full load of 7.62 is still heavier its seems like Polymer-cased ammunition (PCA) hasnt reached the point to where militaries are ready to adopt for general use If you could rework the 7.62 round for higher penetration and longer range but reduce the load to weight its not that much heavier than previous rounds you would strike gold But ultimately as tech moves on We are getting close to the 10x24 explosive tip caseless ammo from aliens
    2
  48.  @MrZlocktar  I always laugh when fanboys S-400 and S-500 because you ding dongs don't know what the systems are designed for The S-500 is primary function is for as anti-ballistic moron, not anti-air. range of 600 km (370 mi) for anti-ballistic missile (ABM) and 500 km (310 mi) for air defense Secondly Even with at 310 miles, the US made JASSM-ER range is 620 miles , the JASSM-XR is 1200 miles. The Joint Strike Missile (JSM) range is 350 miles Thats 3 weapons that easily outrange the S-400 and S-500. The US has a very long list of weapons that outrange the S-400 and S-500 most advanced anti-space weapon system on a globe That would be US made SM-3 The S-500 range 370 vs SM-3 Block 1 range 560 and block 2 1500 miles Unlike Russia , the SM-3 is compatible with all 90 USN AEGIS ships Thats facts not propaganda. Example Russian officials brushed off the Javelin missile as joke, yet Russia tanker were seen welding cages trying to protect their tanks from Javelin
    2
  49. Tanks usefulness depends on various factors, the first being the combatants Again a country like the US, tanks are useless. The US sure kill way of killing tanks dates back to 1991 Tank Plinking where US forces were shredding Iraqi tanks by dropping 500lbs GBU-12s.That worked then and even now against the newer tanks like T-14, Armata, it still works. The US military has endless ways of dealing with armor The problem now is that ATGMs have gotten, lighter , longer range, better seekers and improved warhead Example. the GAZ Tigr with Kornet, Israeli Spike NLOS, Tomcar/Sandcar and the US made JTLV with ATGMs are all lightweight assets that can be easily deployed and able to deal with armor The Israeli Spike NLOS, Tomcar/Sandcar topping the scales with its lethality as the Spike NLOS can be launched from 16 miles away,. The Tomcar system is light enough to be carried by MV-22, CH-47 or CH-53 internally but most importantly, the NLOS can perform 90 degree drop on targets which allows to bypass tanks countermeasures The future of armor depends entirely on support from EW an SHORAD
    2
  50. The development of the Sig MG 338 makes the PKM a moot point. More to the point the development of the newer 338 caliber machine guns makes matching the PKM moot as the 338 has longer range and 3 times the energy
    2