Comments by "The Immortal" (@theimmortal4718) on "Task & Purpose" channel.

  1. I was in this battle. We were asked to help, since we had Bradley IFVs. We went in with 5 Brads and 2 Abrams. We lost 2 Brads there, one a catastrophic kill. March 29, 2008. One of the worst days of my life 2nd Platoon, A Co 1-30th Inf
    1000
  2. New AKs shoot 5.45? The Russians have been using that round for nearly 50 years. Who doesn't know this?
    1000
  3. Yeah, only costs $11000 a piece. All the ones in the arms room will be constantly deadlined
    228
  4.  @alexnderrrthewoke4479  The hid EFPs ( advanced IEDs) in swamp coolers on the side of buildings. One penetrated the driver's side of our 4 track and disabled it and broke the ankle of SPC Esco, the driver. The second hit in the early morning and busted the fuel cell and lit the 2 track on fire. The crew and 1st squad in the back were all wounded by molten copper and burned. Everyone made it out alive. We were lucky and were pretty proficient on medical. Thanks, man. I try not to think about that place.
    210
  5. Where did you get these wack ammo weights? 210 rounds of 5.56 in mags is 7 pounds, NOT 2.7 pounds 210 rounds of 6.5 Creedmoor is over 13 pounds The 6.5 is not an intermediate round at all. It's a full power rifle round like the 7.62x51mm
    125
  6. @Enclave Soldier A 11000 dollar LPVO? We already have brand new 1-6 power Tango6Ts for less than 10 percent of that price. Anyone who thinks these scopes will be in operation very long has never spent any time in an infantry company.
    116
  7.  @mehicanbls1526  They really are. And they don't have to be right next to you or under you. They can fire it from 25-50 meters. The 6-8 inch ones could penetrate us, but the Abrams could take them. At this time, in OIF5, most of our casualties we're from explosives. Our battalion had 19 deaths in that 15 months, almost all from bombs. My company lost nobody, despite the 2/3 casualty rate. I credit that to body armor, universal CLS qualification, fantastic evacuation times, and top notch medical care at the CASH. Some guys got 3 purple hearts that year. I'm one of the only ones still in the army after all this other time. Half my platoon was medically retired. We were never heroes. We are survivors And I didn't serve anybody but my friends.
    105
  8. The OICW, fully loaded was 18 pounds. An M4 with M203 fully loaded, with Acog and PEQ15 weighs 12 pounds. That's nowhere close to the same weight
    92
  9. It's the Russians
    87
  10.  @Painfulwhale360  "Large businesses transactions" 🤣🤣🤣 That's funny. Notice they haven't told you how much the rifle costs? That made a big stink when the Marines were going to pay 1800 for their HK rifles and got it down to 1300/ rifle? What you're not being told is that this ammo costs 5 dollars a round, the rifle is with suppressor and optic will cost upwards of 17k, at least. Is it all that effective compared to our brand new HK 417s with 1-6 optics that we have on our arms room? Probably not. Putting a tracking point scope on it isn't going to make it a super gun. This isn't a "large business transaction", it's a boondoggle.
    55
  11. Gets flu shot, gets the flu. Gets eye injection, goes night blind
    54
  12. I'd say it'll go away if anyone else starts fielding something way better. It's one of the best in the world and soldiers don't feel outgunned with it. I love mine. I've been issued everything from 10.3" to 20" guns and all have shot and carried well. No other major army is carrying anything decisively superior.
    44
  13. The Abrams didn't fight until 91
    42
  14. I think that forgotten weapons figures out that it's mostly the muzzle brake doing most of the work here
    39
  15.  @puenboy1  The M1A1 Thompson was unbelievably popular. Guys fought to get them, and infantrymen ended up taking all the SMGs normally issued to support troops. Many line squads ended up having as many as 4 Thompson's and 4 BARs by the end of the war. Many commando units had entire platoons armed entirely with Thompson's. The gun was abandoned due to cost, and had nothing to do with the popularity with servicemen.
    39
  16.  @cm-pr2ys  It's not bad, but it's no .50. .338 is right in the middle between 7.62 and .50. 50% smaller bullet, 50% less energy, with similar external ballistics.
    33
  17. I believe the US Military pays less than $500 for an M4A1. Add an ACOG and a PEQ15, and you're pushing $3000. Combine that with a $3000 PVS 14 and a plate carrier with 2 plates and a helmet , and a basic infantryman is already up to $8000, before any other additional equipment. Of course, that gives him abilities leaps ahead of any non western army.
    30
  18.  @nitrous_god  The only reason I joined was that I knew Americans were going over anyway, and I wanted to help keep everyone alive. We also helped a lot Iraqis. I rendered more medical aide to Iraqis than our own troops. It was one hell of a place
    29
  19.  @hiteshadhikari  Almost 50 years, now
    27
  20.  @wolverinexo6417  Yeah the 1-6 is a better optic choice. Less to break. Any variable power optic is a poor choice, though. They are too fragile. Infantry companies beat ACOGs and CCOs to death as it is. Giving variable powered scopes to infantry privates is a quick way to have a bunch of deadlined optics.
    27
  21. The tank isn't, but 70 ton tanks are
    25
  22.  @puenboy1  Nobody wanted to carry the Thompson? Lol. Ok
    25
  23.  @karlyo6937  He had a whole list of objectives. He's abandoned all but that one, now
    24
  24. It's not even illegal. We don't use them because they're dangerous to the operator. Nowadays, we use incendiary rockets
    23
  25. The Russian equivalent of this is the Sprut with a 125mm gun on a BMD-3. Frontal protection against 23mm and side protection against 7.62. The Booker and LAV are protected against 50 cal on the sides and 30mm on the frontal arc
    23
  26. Most of these tools who carry a pistol wouldn't notice the difference, since they'll never rely on it to fight, anyway
    22
  27. It's all basic capabilities, now
    21
  28. @Joe Ç Intermediate rounds usually refers to rounds that are halfway between handgun rounds and full powered rounds. The German 8mm Kurz round was the first. The 7.62x39, 5.56, 6.8, 6.5G are all examples of intermediate rounds. 7.62x54R, 7.62x51, 303 British, 8mm Mauser, and yes 6.5 Creedmoor are all examples of full powered rifle rounds. In fact, the only difference in total cartridge weight and size is the lighter bullet. 6.5 Creedmoor us during a bullet roughly 20% lighter than most other full powered rounds.
    20
  29.  @mehicanbls1526  You're thinking of an RPG. Those are HEAT warheads projected by a rocket. An EFP is a bomb that shoots a copper plate at high velocity, melting it into an armored piercing spike of glowing red metal. Functionally, they act like short range APDS
    20
  30. We use a table top simulator called the COFT. It comes in large boxes and sets up on a table. 3 boxes. One for each crew member. Has the same fire control box , gunner sights/yoke, and BCs sights and stick. Can run hundreds of scenarios. It's mandatory to train on prior to gunnery and qualification
    18
  31. That's not the perfect strategy, even though it helps. The Russians are terrible at maintenance, and it can take nearly as many resources to get captured tanks back to mission capable status than to get western tanks or produce new ones. Most of these captured ones need to be transported to nearby NATO facilities in countries like Poland for refurbishing Most of them began as junk, and it would take a lot of work to make them anything other than that. Russian armored vehicles are designed to be cheap and adequate, not to be the best on the battlefield. A couple hundred older M1A2s would be a better choice for Ukraine in 2023, once the UAF have been property trained on their operations and maintenance. Assuming the war is still going on six months from now, of course. The entire Russian force could collapse before then.
    18
  32.  @para_magnus2200  On par, absolutely. Not significantly better, though. I wouldn't complain about being issued either.
    18
  33. Don't bet on getting anything until the rangers have used it for 10 years first
    18
  34. And you can fit more on a soldier. Twice as much
    17
  35.  @jaycee509  The costs add up quickly, but it's worth it. US infantry platoons have equipment like PAS13 thermals that the Chinese or Russians couldn't imagine making general issue.
    17
  36. It would help if we at least added an "infantry kit" like we did for the M240. New feed tray cover with rail, a buttstock, and pistol grip.
    17
  37. We use the Carl Gustaf for this. Can fire HE, HEDP, airburst, rocket assisted rounds, HEAT, smoke, illumination, and incendiary. Way more flexible. We have 2 per platoon. We can kill everything from drones, troops, armored vehicles, and bunkers with it. It's the ultimate Swiss army knife, and the newly issued one is 15 pounds empty. That's half the weight of this weapon
    17
  38. There's simply no justification for replacing 5.56. It does we need it to do. We shouldn't be wasting money trying to replace the M4. Instead, we should be going to the block 2 version that SOCOM is now using. Instead of coming up with new weapons to buy, we would be better served with increasing issue of weapons already in stock. We need to have one M110A1 and one M3A1 MAAWS per infantry squad. The weapon we DO need to replace is the M249. We need a lighter, more accurate, belt fed 5.56. The KAC LAMG 5.56 fits that bill, at 8.5 lbs and constant recoil. It's already been developed and is an off the shelf solution. Unfortunately, they haven't bribed the right brass, I guess.
    17
  39.  @navyseal1689  No. Both ended up in the motorpool graveyard at the JSS. The 4 track had a hole in the hull, and you can't just patch it. The 2 track was on fire for hours, so it melted into a puddle of aluminum.
    17
  40. I believe that the newest M1A2 sep 4 has 7 thermal cameras, allowing it 360 degree situational awareness. It also has Trophy APS, and with new 120 MAP HE round they can shoot everything from armored vehicles, structures, and can airburst to kill troops and aircraft. With predictive software, each shot has the accuracy of a guided missile with automatic lead. A possible upgrade might even include a seeker head and guidance fins for even more accuracy. The Abrams is already an apex tank, but upgrades are making it unbelievably capable Future upgrades will have AI assisted detection and targeting software. Coordination with drones, including carrying its own is around the corner.
    15
  41. So instead of a SAW Gunner carrying a 17 pound gun and 21 pounds of ammo (600 rds) equaling 38 pounds, the new SAW Gunner will carry a 15 pound gun and 36 pounds of ammo (600 rds), equaling 51 pounds. What a lightweight solution! Combine that with the brilliant 338 NM machinegun, with it's ammo that weighs TWICE as much as 7.62, and you have about a thousand extra pounds for the platoon to carry. How is this supposed to help our logistics, again?
    15
  42.  @КумысМамбетов-й8ш  I don't think so. It's already seen time in Syria
    14
  43. The army is working on that by working on radios with relatively short ranges but uses every reciever as a retrans. Harder to target from kilometers away.
    14
  44. @Enclave Soldier No, they didn't.. you invented that thought in your head and just decided to throw it out there to see if it stuck? No. It's not the same thing. Anyone who says it is, lacks wisdom. The durability of a LPVO is much less than an aimpoint or ACOG.
    14
  45.  @mehicanbls1526  Oh yeah. I've heard about those. Never saw one. Pretty crazy how much is up to chance, huh? I'm glad it didn't go off. We had something similar in 2005. A mortar round landed in the bussle rack of one of our Brads in our 1st platoon. It was a dud.
    14
  46.  @Venator631  Autoloaders are slower
    13
  47.  @spartanx9293  Doesn't the autoloader carry half as many ready rounds? On the T90 it's 22 rounds vs the 42 ready on the Abrams. I imagine that kind of endurance would matter more than physical endurance. The Armata has 32 rounds loaded, so that is an improvement
    13
  48. It runs on a battery the size of a cell phone battery
    13
  49. One thing to think of is that we already carry alot of electronics. Soldiers carry the pvs 14 monocle and the PAS13 thermal routinely. In most situations, this replaces both. With mount, the PVS 14 weighs about a pound. The PAS 13 weighs 5.5 lbs. The IVAS weighs less than 3 pounds, yet gives the soldier the capability of both for less than half the weight of pvs 14 and pas 13 together
    13
  50.  @bigshmoke9653  Electronic warfare.
    13