Comments by "Old Guy Gaming Network" (@CRAZYHORSE19682003) on "Matsimus" channel.

  1. 140mm with a 30 degree elevation, the tank could also serve as mobile artillery with the right ammunition.
    292
  2. Yes we still need bayonets, it is easier to kill the women and children with them and you don't have to waste ammo.
    211
  3.  @E4MafiaSPC  When I was in the Army, I was airborne infantry so we were combat deployable anywhere in 18 hours when on alert. We had a very young and very green lieutenant as a platoon leader and every time we had a drill for being rapidly deployed I would ask him are we getting bayonets. This went on for like six months......finally he asked me Sgt Smith why do you always ask for bayonets every time we are going to deploy. I told him they save ammo by giving me something to kill the women and children with. You should have seen the absolute look of horror on his face. That troll took six months to come to fruition and it was worth the wait lol.
    102
  4. I am a USN veteran and I have always loved the Kirov's. Beautiful and deadly ships.
    95
  5. Pretty good for a non grunt. This is similar to the 12 mile road marches we had to do at the end of Air Assault School and for the Expert infantry badge. Except we had a 60 pound pack and had to complete the road march in under 3 hours.
    14
  6. I am not triggered but I was a gunners mate in 16 inch turret 1 on the USS Iowa. These guns are cute.
    7
  7. That is the most awesome looking artillery piece I have ever seen. I with the US Army would buy it.
    7
  8.  @bobthetop3242  It was one of pure horror.....I couldn't even keep a straight face for more than ten seconds before I fell out laughing and told him that I had been slow walking that joke for 6 months. When my Lieutenant realized it was a joke he thought it was hilarious because he really thought I was crazy lol.
    5
  9.  @nikitatarsov5172  I think the more capability a unit has, the more valuable that unit is.
    4
  10.  @BlutoandCo  It is not really a myth though. In the European theatre Russia did 80% of the work. Yes they had massive amounts of logistical support from the western powers but without the Russians the Germans would have eventually defeated the UK.
    4
  11. The Type 74 only needed 1 gear for reverse unlike French and Italian tanks that have 7 gears for reverse and only one for forward.
    4
  12. Except the Shkval is only good in a straight line. It can be easily out maneuvered. Russia is decades behind the US in technology.
    3
  13.  @ANIMshit  LOL That is about the silliest thing I have ever heard.
    3
  14. NEVER get a watch with a plastic band if you go to the field a lot. The military bug repellant we were issued would dissolve the band and it would fall off in the field.
    3
  15. I had a war game on my Atari 800 called Reforger 88. It dealt with a hypothetical Soviet push through the Fulda gap. The only strategy I could come up with that worked was immediately abandon almost all of West Germany, pull back behind the main river around Frankfurt. I would blow all the bridges and dig in and wait for reserves to mobilize and US units flown in. I would wear down Soviet air power before counter attacking with air superiority. I would use airborne units to drop behind enemy lines and disrupt the supply lines and route the Soviet formations.
    3
  16. I wonder if they could put a sensor in the B variant that measures air flow to the engine to prevent this type of mishap from having again.
    3
  17. I think it is more of a case of technology that was developed during the Comanche program was transferred to other aircraft.
    2
  18. vzdorr b  Actually the OHP class used SM1 missiles not SM2's. The MK- 13 launcher was too small to launch the SM2. It was Raytheon's decision to end support for the missiles that caused the premature retirement of the entire class. If they had a VLS system the OHP's would still be in service today.
    2
  19. The guy bitching about I didn't need to know your whole resume just sounds like he is jealous. As a former Infantry squad leader who has run across so many fake wanna be soldiers online that would be the first thing I would ask someone if they said they were a squad leader. Although to be fair 99% of the fake soldiers will claim to be a sniper or a seal.
    2
  20. I wonder if we will ever see shoot on the move artillery.
    2
  21.  @afrikasmith1049  In general, it was a joke I pulled on my platoon leader when I was in the Army. Every time we would go on alert I would ask the LT bayonets are we getting bayonets........this went on for like six months. Finally, he asks me why do you keep asking about bayonets? I told him they were great for killing the women and children so I don't have to waste ammo. The look of utter horror on his face was hilarious. Once I let him in on the joke and he realized I had slow-walked that joke for six months to get the payoff he thought it was even funnier.
    2
  22. The reduced crew size alone will save the Navy BILLIONS of dollars over the lifespan of the carrier.
    1
  23. The problem is that with the rapid advancement of tank technology in WW2 and post WW2, the Tank Destroyer concept is obsolete. The problem with your description of your fantasy Tank Destroyer is that in a highly mobile world of modern combat the sides and rear of your Tank destroyer is going to be exposed to either other tanks or even worst ATGM's or RPG's. I too have thought about what you are talking about and my concept for a tank destroyer vehicle would be as such. A Stryker vehicle with vertical launch cells with Javelin ATGM's inside. A dedicated anti tank Stryker could have between 18-24 vertical launch cells. For the sight I would have a telescoping sight capable of being raised no less than 12 to 15 feet. The purpose for that is you could than have your lightly armored Stryker behind a building, on the reverse side of a slope, hull down in a fighting position. It would give infantry formations unprecedented anti tank capability. It could also keep up with armored formations. If you wanted a heavier version imagine a M2 Bradley with it's turret removed and VLS cells in place. You could even go smaller with modified Humvee's with a small 8 cell system. The point is ATGM's can engage further than guns, are more accurate and attack the must vulnerable part of the Tank, the top. That is my concept for a modern day Tank Destroyer type vehicle system.
    1
  24. It is interesting to note that Sikorsky was experimenting with pusher props and lift generating wings all the was back in the 60"s with the AH-56 Cheyenne.
    1
  25. It can't be hacked but a little known ability of the F-35 is it can hack enemy computer systems using AI.
    1
  26. Someone should invent a lead computing gunsight in the helmet that is connected to the weapon and the helicopters avionics so the gunners can land accurate fire from the moment they start shooting.
    1
  27. Stoves and or jet boils in the infantry.....not a chance. Cooking in the field will give away your position to the enemy quickly. I ate cold MRE's for 5 years, the only warm meals we got were in the rear with the gear.
    1
  28.  @olisk-jy9rz  I am not aware of any tank having that capability. They would need the right fire control software to fire in indirect mode.
    1
  29.  @kthec1298  Ok maybe I did not explain it correctly. What I mean is ACCURATE GUIDED munitions in the artillery role. I know tanks have been used as artillery in the past, I remember seeing videos of T-26 Pershing's in Korea up on ramps being used as bombardment artillery. I am also thinking about a 140mm projectile is a BIG projectile and how it can increase the effectiveness of the tank in an indirect fire role.
    1
  30. You remind me of me when I was a kid and didn't understand how a 1 mm increase in shell size could make such a big difference. The 75 mm gun fired the M61 armor piercing shell, a 14.62 pound shell at 2024 feet per second. The 76 mm gun fired the M62 armor piercing shell, a 24.55 pound shell at 2600 feet per second. So it is only 1mm difference but the difference in killing power was like night and day. The energy produced by the M61 was 4,096,576 pounds. The energy produced by the M-62 was 6,760,000 pounds. The M-62 produced over 80% more energy than the M-61.
    1
  31. The main drawback to the Hind is it's sheer size and how much heat it generates. The Stinger decimated these things over Afghanistan in the 80's
    1
  32.  @_Matsimus_  Yes, there was no reason for that guy to get all shitty on that guy for simply identifying what unit he was from. As I said before there are tons of fake wanna be soldiers who claim to be active duty or have served. It happens all the time.
    1
  33. The United States Navy has adopted the distributed lethality theory. Where greater numbers of smaller ships are more survivable than a large capital ship.
    1
  34. The real reason why this tank was replaced is because it turned out to be totally ineffective against Godzilla.
    1
  35. Isn't tradition funny at times. I think they should change the name from plank owner to plate owner lol.
    1
  36. I was in the 25th ID 3/22 Infantry from 91-95 and we NEVER wore gloves in the field. From heat retention to reduced tactile sensation we found them to be a hinderance. We carried them in our rucks and only used them when putting out concertina wire.
    1
  37. Yeah the B1 and B-52's are good enough to bomb goat herders but nothing else. In a near peer conflict they will get blown out of the sky with ease.
    1
  38. Japan may be an island nation but they need powerful armor units to defend against Godzilla.
    1
  39. The first time this tank has to go into battle and it transforms into a mech, people are going to crap their pants!!!!!!!
    1
  40. A terrible design and thank god they didn't take it. I would rather see small, stealthy autonomous arsenal ships that have a total of say 64 cells. If your arsenal battleship gets taken out in a fluke strike all those weapons are gone in an instant. With small stealthy autonomous arsenal ships they could be placed in a ring 20 miles out from your battlegroup giving you even more range for your weapons. Add in a data link ability to interface with a stealthy F-35 where the F-35 can launch and guide weapons from these ships you could set ambushes for enemy assets where they suddenly have incoming vampires and they have NO IDEA where they came from.
    1
  41.  @Shelldrakeaus  I could have sworn the US Army had a system in development in the 90's that could do that but it was canceled for being too expensive. I served in the US Navy on the USS Iowa. Our 16 inch guns could shoot while we were moving and at moving targets all off 1940's analog computer technology. If they could do that all the way back then why not today?
    1
  42. My back hurts just thinking about carrying shells for that thing lol.
    1
  43. I think this is nothing more than a Chinese prestige propaganda program. It is not stealthy at all, it is only positioned as such for the Chinese to claim the prestige of being the only nation other than the United states to deploy a stealth fighter.
    1
  44. LOL I had that exact cammo pack with the mirror. I remember once my squad leader told us to cammo up and this was 91-92 when the Ultimate Warrior was HUGE in the WWE. I used the cammo to paint on his face paint. My squad leader laughed his butt off because he loved the Ultimate Warrior too than made me do 20 pushups and wipe it off my face and cammo correctly. Also one tip for the sticks the military gives you carry a small container of baby oil and apply it to your face before using the cammo stick than heat up the stick with a lighter and the cammo goes on really smooth and even.
    1
  45.  @kizzthis9983  LOL I am King of the Trolls. I was Trolling people in the 70's hehehehe
    1