Comments by "The Immortal" (@theimmortal4718) on "Forgotten Weapons" channel.

  1. For what it's designed to do, at that time, I'd rather have a MAC10
    1
  2.  @durayenterprisesllc4440  Of course it can. Holsterable. Limited shoulder stock. Full auto at close range. Both guns are readily comparable. The MAC10 is easier to deal with a malfunction and has a more powerful cartridge.
    1
  3.  @durayenterprisesllc4440  The gun is used for very close contacts. Usually it was affixed with a sling kept close under the firing arm. The 45 ACP variant weighs 6 pounds. Considering the intended range is 25 meters or less, it's not uncontrollable at all. It was designed mainly for guys who are carrying something unsuitable for CQB, like a sniper rifle or belt fed LMGs. In semi auto, the Mac 10 is very controllable out to 50 meters. The 9mm variant is lighter and even more controllable. It's pretty easy to keep all rounds in target in short bursts from 25 meters. The biggest issue involved with the cz is the anemic cartridge. The 32 acp is a terrible combat round and most people wouldn't even consider is for concealed carry.
    1
  4. This thing, or something close, would be better than an M2 on an open topped turret of a JLTV. Feel like first round hits would be easier
    1
  5. Damn, that's the way the BAR should have been
    1
  6. There were several holes with the pdw concept from the beginning 1. Support troops rarely carry pistols and always rifles 2. These weapons are too expensive for anybody but SF 3. The ammo isn't very effective at stopping a threat
    1
  7.  @waltrohrbach2459  No, they don't. These are issued to SOF and some police agencies. The Germans issue the G36 in the role you describe, not the MP7
    1
  8. We used a Russian SPG9 73mm RC in the Ganjigal Valley in Afghanistan. Effective range is 800 meters, but we did hit a truck past 1300 on our second shot.
    1
  9. Fantastic insurgent weapon
    1
  10. Why would they say the Thompson is soooo heavy? It weighs exactly the same as my issued M4A1 with ACOG, PEQ15, and surefire taclight I carried in combat (10 lbs) it's only 8 ounces heavier than the Garand and the ammo is lighter, too. A 20 round Thompson mag weighs almost the same as a 30 Rd AR mag. How is this considered heavy by any combat standard? I can most assuredly guarantee that soldiers did not hate it or trade it off due to fatigue. Where is he getting this from? The weapon was mostly issued to officers and NCOs. It wasn't considered a burden by anyone.
    1
  11. Looks more like a gang weapon
    1
  12. I would imagine that a near ideal optic on this would be a small red dot like the T1 on a low mount.
    1
  13. That's not a heavy rifle. It's an incredibly accurate light machine gun!
    1
  14. I'd much rather have a Grand produced during the same period
    1
  15. Drones integrated into squads and platoons give them the ability to spot ambushes first. Kinda hard to hide from FLIR
    1
  16. The m320 is even better
    1
  17. As a handgun, the c96 looks unwieldy, but as a carbine it makes sense
    1
  18. This was used extensively in south east Asia
    1
  19. A lighter cartridge for the box magazine fed infantry rifles enables the squad to carry more full powered belted ammo for the squad machine gun
    1
  20. Non captive takedown pins on modern firearms annoy me
    1
  21.  Frank Tank  The ngsw program intends to replace 5.56 and 7.62 with the 6.8x51mm round. They don't have an intention of retaining 5.56 us the program succeeds. I think it's a terrible idea, but that's the intention
    1
  22. But is it slick?
    1
  23. What a mess of dangerous features
    1
  24.  @joshuabressel1280  Send me!!
    1
  25.  @joshuabressel1280  That was the motto for 2nd BCT, Spartan Brigade.
    1
  26. We're the guys who did the thunder runs in Baghdad
    1
  27. Most attractive MG ever. Fight me about it.
    1
  28. The A Team had a hard time hitting anything with these
    1
  29.  @davitdavid7165  Guys were able to write their names on walls with the Thompson
    1
  30.  @davitdavid7165  So what? I'm not talking about procurement. I'm talking about if all those are lined up on a table, I'm taking the Thompson. It's not like I'm pulling out my wallet.
    1
  31.  @davitdavid7165  You really are out of your league, here. Nobody who's shot these guns would choose the wire stock on the sten, grease gun, or MP40 over the fixed stock of a Tommy. They're pretty unusable and miserable. A Tommy, by 1942 was CHEAPER to produce than an M1 Garand. They're also VERY controllable. You watch too many movies. All automatic weapons are going to be used in controlled bursts. Usually 3 to 5 rounds. .45 also punches through trees, houses, and cars much better than 9mm. Yes, I'd much rather be using the heavier Thompson in combat. Heavy ,well built magazines, solid wood stock with great cheek hold, a real hand guard rather than a heat shield or magazine, and the ability to punch through thicker brick and plaster walls/wood. It was also much easier to hit at over 100, as it is select fire and could also fire in semi auto which was rare in WW2 for SMGs. They were coveted for a reason, and they are legendary for a reason.
    1
  32.  @davitdavid7165  Why are you using a reductio ad absurdum fallacy? Nobody is talking about 1000 yard shots. And nobody is talking about weighing a soldier down with ridiculous amounts of weight. An M1A1 is 10.5 pounds unloaded. An M1 rifle is 9.5 pounds, unloaded, but is harder to carry because it's longer and has more of its weight forward. A basic load of 5 mags for the Tommy, once they went to 30 rnd mags (150 RDS), weighs 10 pounds. Base load for the M1 rifle was 88 rounds, weighs about 7 pounds. That means a rifleman was carrying 17.5 pounds of ammo and weapon as a base load, while the squad leader with the Tommy was carrying 20.5 pounds. That's 3 pounds extra. How did guys survive???? And guys carried way more than that in ammo in actual combat. Most riflemen were carrying 300 rounds, as well as belts for the MG, or mags for the BAR, rifle grenades, hand grenades, mortars, or rockets for the bazooka. Guys carrying the Tommy weren't just loading up on tons of ammo, though. They were usually squad leaders or platoon leaders, not pack mules. Most guys carrying the Tommy would be the least encumbered in the company, moving light. They might carry a pistol and a few grenades, but that's it. Why would I worry about the recoil? An SMG is the LEAST recoiling weapon in an infantry company. A Garand or BAR has more recoil than a Tommy. You should should shoot one, sometime. They're pussy cats.
    1
  33.  @Snookynibbles  Sure, like the M1919 and BAR machine guns. The line grunts all carry about the same weight, total. If you're not carrying the BAR, you're carrying mags for it. Same with belts of ammo, rifle grenades, or bazooka rounds. The Thompson was one of the smallest weapons the infantry used in WW2. On average, WW2 soldiers were a lot smaller. Probably closer to 150 pounds, and still ran around with a ton of hardware. A ten pound gun isn't slowing anyone down
    1
  34.  @Snookynibbles  That's the SEALs. That's not how grunts fight at all. Uneven loads throughout a squad is a mark of a poor leader. This is all handled during pre combat inspections.
    1
  35.  @Snookynibbles  Lol. A leader will still consider an individual soldier's size when considering cross loading. For example, a team leader will carry several extra drums for his SAW gunner to keep everyone similarly burdened. Loads are METT-TC, so it might be everyone carrying rockets or extra javelins in anti armor ambush.. It also might be riflemen carrying 20 mags and a dozen hand grenades, instead, while conducting MOUT. A platoon is, before anything else, a cohesive family in combat that helps each other out. We're pack mules dragging huge amounts of gear, weapons, and ammo. We take turns carrying each other's sh*t
    1
  36.  @wbertie2604  That's not how it worked at all. As always, WW2 soldiers were heavily overloaded hitting the beaches. Leadership made them carry enormous amounts of useless BS. I'd rather carry less cartons of cigarettes and canned food before I scrimp on my weapon. 3 pounds can easily just be throwing away your shovel
    1
  37. The crack happens just a few feet in front of the muzzle. A person can also hear a slower moving projectile tearing through the air if it gets close enough to their head.
    1
  38. You'd prefer this? Soldier: "when are we going to train on machine guns?" Them: "can't, we're waiting on a new batch from France" Soldier: "didn't you have some already?' Them: "yes, we sent them with the guys going to France" Soldier: "so I'll get one in France?" Them: "no, they'll be sending them here, for the guys going to France" Seems more logical?
    1
  39. I don't own one but I see how Clint Smith fires these birds head shotguns and it seems to work very well
    1
  40.  @lairdcummings9092  Oh I totally agree, but it shows it's not the weapon can't be used effectively. It's a training issue.
    1
  41.  @lairdcummings9092  I think people should just st try it. For some people, a very short shotgun cam be advantageous. These shockwaves have become popular with narcotics cops who needed a gun that's quick to get out of a car
    1
  42.  @lairdcummings9092  Hey, just telling you that it can be shot well and people use it in real life. I don't know what you want
    1
  43. The F1 is a more attractive rifle
    1
  44. Looks heavy
    1
  45. The Thompson was an NCO and officers gun
    1
  46. The combination in the thumbnail is gorgeous
    1
  47. You have to speak quietly so as to not wake her
    1
  48. Everytime you click a video, you are for free
    1
  49. Very similar to the SPG9
    1
  50. Nowadays, 10 pounds loaded with 4 grenades isn't all that heavy. I would have been fine carrying this in Iraq as long as it was reliable.
    1