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

  1. Take a class with a Tavor or Aug. You'll be just as fast
    2
  2.  @anonymousanglo1169  The M4 is 6.75 pounds. The M4A1 is 7.5 pounds. Do you find that heavy? It's largest competition, the AK74M, is also 7.5 pounds. Is that too heavy for you? Would you call the AK74 an overheavy pig of a gun? The G36 is 7.5 pounds. The AKMS is 7.3 pounds The Steyr AUG carbine is 7.3 pounds The FAMAS is 7.9 pounds The Tavor is 7.3 pounds The M27 is 7.9 pounds. The M4 is right in line with those guns The WWSD project is great for a civilian who will never fight a protracted battle with the rifle. As long as you won't need a PEQ15 (soldiers do) and you won't need to fire 300-400 rounds in a fight (soldiers do), it works ok. The WWSD guns aren't durable enough for modern combat by a long shot. I carry an M4A1 everyday (I'm deployed in Afghanistan right now). It's not a heavy weapon.
    2
  3.  @anonymousanglo1169  It's not a violation of OPSEC to tell you I'm in Afghanistan. This is my 6th combat deployment since 2003. The barrel is specifically heavier to help the rifle raise it's sustained rare of fire. It's there for a reason. After fights like Want, it was called for. Again, how is 7.5 pounds heavy to you?
    2
  4.  @anonymousanglo1169  No soldier would prefer an M16 in modern combat. We need to have the ability to mount optics, taclights, and PEQ15 illuminators. It's the only way to fight at night.
    2
  5. That's not reality.
    2
  6.  @danialyousaf6456  Shit. Misread your comment. Yes, that's true. 338 is an accurate round over distance. Not as far as 50, but it's half the weight and size.
    2
  7. Thank you! Someone who knows. Nowadays, we also have thermobaric rounds for the Gustav
    2
  8. Bows and blades are both obsolete in modern warfare, tho
    2
  9. You can fire a Gustav from the prone, just fine. You lay 90 degrees to the launcher, like all AT weapons. It can also fire CS rounds like the AT4. We've hit targets out to 500 meters with the standard AT4, and have sights that adjust out that far.
    2
  10. Sort of. The 9mm fires a heavier bullet at about 250 grains
    2
  11. 1 mile is more realistic
    2
  12.  @helenaprimera516  Electronic warfare is over 100 years old. Armies were doing it in WW2
    2
  13. I really hope this goes nowhere. I firmly believe the 2 caliber system is the best for us and would rather they just focus on a lighter belt fed SAW. I would prefer the KAC LAMG. It checks all of the boxes I'm interested in- sub 9 lbs, more controllable, and more manuverable The need for a 6.8 round is imaginary..
    2
  14.  Reaper5.56 Xx  The M79 shoots the same rounds. The M32 can shoot medium velocity rounds but it's the only one
    2
  15.  @matthiuskoenig3378  That's not correct. The SIG Spear, with suppressor, is 36 inches long. That's with a 13 inch barrel. The RM277 is 33.5 inches long, with a 20 inch barrel and suppressor. Two and a half inches isn't a lot, but the longer barrel will have more endurance and have less muzzle blast. It also seems to have less recoil. Also the ammo can be fired from legacy weapons like the M240, M110/A1, and M134 with just barrel changes. The ammo is lighter, as well.
    2
  16.  @Tonius126  Everyone moved away from full power battle rifles decades ago as well, but here we are again, aren't we? No reason an improved bullpup can't be a good match for improved ammunition, too.
    2
  17. I like the new m17. I'm carrying one right now. Better grip and the frame mounted safety. Much better holster, as well.
    2
  18. I was a WSL for 2 years in 1-327 INF. We love our Limas. Great guns
    2
  19. If you've committed immoral acts, you're not a good guy
    2
  20.  @lalmuanpuiijahau7531  Yes, of course, IEDs are included.Those are mines. 90% of all casualties are due to explosives. Grenades, mortars, rockets, artillery, missiles, bombs, mines, etc. This idea that we need to ditch the assault rifle and issue battle rifles comes from the tendency to fight the last war. Afghanistan. As you said, we can't rule out being in a battlespace where fights are occuring in a matter of feet, not hundred of yards, as in urban and jungle environments. Guys just will not be laying down in a good supported prone position laying sniper fire at enemy positions 800 meters away. Yes, we have different firearms for different uses. Just in the rifle platoon, we have carbines, grenade launchers, AT4s, SAWs, GPMGs, and DMRs. Replacing the SAW with a GPMG and the carbine with a DMR isn't good use of resources. All of those classifications are designed for a niche, and when you try to press one into the other's role, you're going to have problems.
    2
  21.  @lalmuanpuiijahau7531  Yeah, we need to keep the assault rifle as the main individual weapon. I've used the AR since I was issued my first A2 in 1990. It's a great gun and dors what you need it to. Especially the advancements the last 15 years. I also can say that about the AUG. Fir most jobs, it excels. Honestly, if Steyr could produce a brand new AUG design, using more modern manufacturing techniques and materials, I bet they could shave the weight down to less than 7 pounds with a 16" barrel and would make it easier to do all the jobs soldiers do that are rarely considered.
    2
  22.  @WilliamOPearce  That's not even close to the truth. The fact is, the US Army and Marines have been steadily upgrading the entire time. We're using everything people would consider high tech, from scout drones, loitering munitions, top attack antitank missiles, the most heavily armored IFVs in use, AI net centric communications and sensor packages, long range Himars, etc. Ukraine isn't the US vs Russia. It's the third most powerful military in the world being stalled by a weak nation with NATO weapons deliveries. The fact that Ukraine has lasted this long against Russia is amazing. It's the equivalent of Steve Erkul lasting 10 rounds in the ring with Mike Tyson. The fact they've gone from having Russians attacking all over their country, to containing them, to striking deep into Russia is quite a development.
    2
  23.  @MetaVita  Exactly
    2
  24. The US Army's tooth to tail ratio is currently 1:8
    2
  25. With medium velocity grenades, the m32 has a max range of 800 meters
    2
  26.  @The_Foxymew  Wait- Are you under the impression that combat is one on one like call of duty? Do you think tanks are fighting alone?
    2
  27.  @The_Foxymew  Oh, I think you do. Why would you think the tank getting shot at would be the one to spot the incoming shot? Why not his wingman? Or the other section? Or the adjacent platoon? Armored vehicles fight as a formation, not individually placed along a map. Ever heard of overwatch?
    2
  28.  @The_Foxymew  "A tank round tracks several times the speed of light" Are you on drugs?
    2
  29.  @jamesbest2487  Very. It was also used to a great degree in fast assaults into Chinese lines. Col. Hackworth went into great detail about this in his book
    2
  30.  @phantomsoldier497  Sure I can. All day long. They were both wildly successful and popular firearms with decades of good use put to them. The Thompson was very popular with troops, was deadly in combat, and was decently compact and lightweight (weighs the same as the Garand. Why does making that statement hurt so many people's feelings? Seriously.
    2
  31. The 30mm turret is absolutely necessary, whether it be on a tracked or wheeled IFV. Not only can they punch holes in much larger vehicles at 1600-2000 meters, it has HE that hits like a grenade launcher for soft skin vehicles, fortifications, and dismounted troops in the area. It's the best weapon for killing or suppressing anti tank teams. This allows the vehicle to either transport a full rear compartment full of troops, with a little bit of firepower, or just carry a couple of troops with the crew, and a lot of extra ammo. I do think that the Protector MCT is the most though out remote operates 30mm turret out there right now. It's the one being installed on the Stryker Dragoon. Remotely operated. Easy to reload from in the hull, fantastic optics and sensors, expandable, has room for spike or javelin ATGMs, and network capable.
    2
  32. The ejection can be switched for lefties
    2
  33.  @kalapuikko666  This new cartridge can't pierce level 4
    2
  34. The SCAR H destroys optics, has additional recoil and a reciprocating charging handle. The stocks are fragile and break as well.
    2
  35. The 1911 wasn't drop safe
    2
  36.  @johnygreen81  Yeah but the GI issued ones weren't.
    2
  37. Such stupid in the comments
    2
  38.  @jimmyjones4985  All of them. A platoon armed with assault rifles will completely roll up one with battle rifles. Whole fleet issuing full powered cartridge rifles is a step backwards. They just simply can't keep up the rate of fire and there's very little benefit. There's a reason why most armies are using 5.56, 5.45, or 5.8. We would be best served doing what every other army is doing and retain 5.56x45 for carbines, and 7.62x51 for machineguns and DMRs. We carry wat to much other shit including armor, sustainment packs, radios, antitank weapons, and mortars already. Most killing is done with crew served weapons, not individual weapons.
    2
  39. It's worse than that. It's only 20% lighter than a conventional round. The SIG 6.8x51 round is 24 grams. The same weight as our 7.62 round. The composite cased 6.8 round is 18 grams, vs 12 grams for 5.56. That's 50 percent HEAVIER than our current round. That means ammo will be heavier, not lighter. Same issue with 338. It's TWICE the weight of our current 7.62 round. Who's going to carry all this shit?
    2
  40.  @EgnachHelton  Not really? That's a sales campaign. They haven't even published cartridge weight
    2
  41. Assistant gunners are trained to rest the gun over their shoulder holding the bipod while gunners stand behind them, just like we do with the Barret in Sniper sections
    2
  42. The Ironman armored is the PPE equivelant of the NGSW
    2
  43. We clear rooms with TOW missiles
    2
  44. It's obvious why the LSAT wasn't adopted. Idiots like General Milley think we need 6.8 battle rifles and full caliber machine guns to replace 5.56 weapons. Of course, when they do that, instead of a 9 pound MG with 8 gram cartridges, you get a 12 pound gun with 16 gram cartridges.
    2
  45. The disadvantage of the M1117 is cost. The advantage is that it has all around .50 cal, while MRAPs (including the JLTV) can taken out with AK fire, as the engine compartment is basically unprotected. If you added 4 tons of composite non explosive reactive armor, you get 90% all around protection from most light AT weapons
    2
  46. Rock of the Marne, brother. A 3-15 INF
    2
  47.  @phucprice6698  It's still kind of different than the UK army. We retain or SAWs in the squad and keep two M240s in a weapon section. One out if 4 soldiers carry an AT4. If we are going specifically on an anti armor mission, we draw 2 javelin CLUs and half a dozen missiles. DMRs have always been subject to change. In the beginning of the war, units either fielded refurbished M14s or accurized M16A4s. For the last 12 or so, we've been using the MK14 EBR, which is far from ideal. The infantry is finally fielding the HK G28 as our DMR, similar in some ways to the UK L129A1. A solid choice and finally what we need. This idea that one gun can and should do it all is a non starter out of the gate. What you end up with is a gun that doesn't do anything especially well at all.
    2
  48. Yeah he never even mentioned it. We haven't used Humvees in combat for nearly a decade. The jltv is lighter and shorter than the MATV, but both are made by Oshkosh.
    2
  49. There is absolutely ZERO evidence that the Russian military is going to replace the 5.45x39mm cartridge, let alone in 5 fucking years. It's really doubtful that the US military is going to replace 5.56x45mm with a new wonder 6.8, either. That program is doomed with the cost.
    2
  50. It doesn't have constant recoil, unfortunately. It has a reciprocating barrel
    2