Comments by "" (@craigkdillon) on "Matsimus" channel.

The Marines started off as marines -- that is soldiers on board ships. However they developed into America's expeditionary force. As such, they became a self contained complete army, who could everything the US Army could do, but on a smaller, possibly more targeted foe. They have infantry, of course. But, they also had Harriers, now F-35Bs. And, IFVs, and tanks, and artillery, and hospitals, and logistics, etc etc. Instead of being all sad and weepy about leaving the Abrams behind ----- You should be asking questions - 1. Why? Is there a basic change to the Marines war doctrine?? 2. What is replacing the armored strike force in the Marines? The tanks may go away, but their function and purpose remain. How will Marines do that without the Abrams?? 3. What experiences caused this decision. 4. Who made the decision?? How long has it been considered?? How fixed or permanent is it??
196
For a long time now, there have been assertions and discussions about tanks, fighters, aircraft carriers becoming obsolete. They are to done in by missiles, drones, smart artillery, or some other new thing. But, then they are saved by other new things - reactive armor, anti-missile missiles, energy weapons, etc. Trouble is, at some point any of these things may happen. RC drone vessels, swarming bots, energy weapons, or something else may make any or all of these devices obsolete. It happened to the horse, the battleship, the ship-of-the-line, the sword, the shield, the bayonet, so it will likely happen to the mainstays of our current military ...... someday. Just not today.
35
Australia should pick the Hanwha for one other reason --- it is from Korea, and Australia and Korea may have to fight together someday. So, supporting each other is a good way to start.
9
One thing you didn't mention was its cost. How cost effective was the S-tank??? I suspect that it was cheaper than the M-60 tank in the 1960's, probably a lot cheaper.
3
@Elron What does Obama have to do with this?? Presidents don't decide these things. That is left to our brilliant staff in the Pentagon.
3
Loli4lyf That would be a five pointed pentagram.
3
@UbermanNullist Nothing is inevitable. Likely? Yes.
3
@UbermanNullist Don't agree. There have been many totalitarian governments that didn't go to war. They go to war ---WHEN they see it to be in their benefit. Franco didn't go to war. Brezhnev and Krushchev didn't go to war. Mussolini went to war with Ethiopia, and only joined Germany in WW2 after Germany beat France. War with China can be AVOIDED if, and only if, the west stays strong, acts strong, and looks strong.
2
@UbermanNullist I am more optimistic than you, it seems. I still feel war is NOT inevitable. The current Ukraine War has probably chastened China some. I think the depth and breadth of the sanctions shocked Xi & gang. China would do even worse than Russia if they were applied to China. Maybe that will dissuade them from starting a war.
2
@UbermanNullist Democracy in the west actually goes far back into the Germanic and Gallic tribes of Europe. Rulers and kings were often elected. American democracy grew out of the democratic traditions of the Anglo-Saxons. The Punic Wars pitted the Roman Republic against the Carthage Republic. Yep, both were Republics. China has known Imperial rule for 2500 years or more. It has no institutions, customs, traditions or philosophies that support democracy. BUT...if you look at Taiwan, you will see that Chinese people are open to it, and love it, when they get the hang of it.
2
@UbermanNullist The American Democracy was also influenced and inspired by the Iroquois Confederacy. In 1856, at the Albany Indian Congress, Benjamin Franklin first proposed the unity of the colonies. Twenty years later, he helped approve the Declaration of Independence.
2
Why didn't they talk about the good mileage it gets as a hybrid vehicle?? The drive system was inspired by the Prius.
2
The number of sorties per 24/hrs is critical. The Gripen takes only 10 minutes to re-fuel and re-arm. That is an incredibly short turn around time. With the development costs paid, current Gripens can be bought for about $30M each, I believe. That is pretty cheap. It may not have all the stealth that an F-35 has, but the majority of situations an air force faces do not require that. It is also important to have numbers. For instance, the F-22 is a great plane, but with only 190 of them, that is almost worthless if the US ever needed them in a war. For regional, targeted, brief engagements, only a few may be adequate. However, the F-35 has really dropped in price to about $75M each. Is it twice as useful as the Gripen? I wonder. Also, if Canada were to use them together, it would be nice if they networked battle info for tracking, targeting, and killing. I wonder if they can do that?
2
I wonder what a modern updated design would be like? Does ability of modern tanks to shoot on the move negate the turret-less design? Could a new S-type tank be made stealthy?? Seems to me that the S-tank was stealthy in its day. Could a radar stealthy design be done? Would it be worth it?
2
Since the crew do not do much, perhaps they are not really needed, and this vehicle could become a Remotely Controlled Vehicle (RCV) or drone vehicle.
2
Can the new gun destroy modern tanks like the Abrams, Merkava, Leopard, etc??? If so, then it becomes a modern tank. The fact that its armor is older type may not be the most important. I am told that the tank that can acquire target and fire first is most likely to win. So, if the M60 can hit and destroy a modern tank, then it becomes dangerous, and the armor is not that important, I think.
1
I think the F-117 is the most exotic and strange aircraft ever made. It looks other worldly. It looks like a bizarro aircraft from a comic book, not like a real plane designed by real engineers.
1
@aphil4581 How could you call the F-117 "beautiful". Strange. Exotic. frightening. impressive. stunning. and more....but NOT beautiful. It has none of the graceful curves of a DC-3, or Mosquito. It has none of the sublime elegance of B-58 Hustler. It is angular, faceted, and un-aerodynamic. It is said of planes -- it if looks right, it is right. Well, the F-117 looks wrong, and it is wrong. But, it is because it is so very very wrong, that makes it right. The F-117 is not beautiful, but it IS amazing.
1
@aphil4581 I wish I had seen that. Incredible.
1
Desmond Griffith Really?? That low?? I am surprised. In movies, the kill ratio is 100%. LOL Just can't trust Tom Cruise after all.
1
And here I thought the biggest weakness was its budget and politicians.
1
I did not realize that assault ships would be over the horizon - 25 miles away. I always thought like in WW2 - a mile or less off shore, or as shown in movies. Could you imagine how much better D-Day would have been, if no ships were visible offshore? The Germans would not have been aware of the assault until the AAVs were almost on shore.
1
Do skirts or cages protect the treads effectively??
1
Good point about the vulnerability of the treads. With all the talk about armor, I wonder why tread vulnerability is never talked about?? Are all tanks equal in this vulnerability?? I would doubt that. So, how much can they differ?? Do some tanks require larger ordnance to knock them? If so, then what tanks have the highest survival probability when hit in the treads???
1
Also, Trump is tired of our tanks looking so drab. Trump wants chrome wheels, chrome trim, iridescent racing stripes, and rear spoilers installed on the new M1A2sepV3 tanks. He wants us to go to war in style. That is his way of making America grate (intentional spelling) again.
1
Thanks for the explanation. I always wondered why they were doing them. I even wondered if they were real, and not some CGI creation.
1
I have it on good authority, that Trump has his tanks washed by bikini clad porn stars, who strip during the wash. Trust me. This is as true as his tweets. Really.
1
I understand that the Gripen will support more than twice the sorties per day of the F-35. Since you are buying a fighter to fight, then getting twice the sorties is like getting more fighters. Double the sorty rate is like buying twice as many fighters. Only occasionally will advanced stealth be needed, IMO. So, paying the huge amounts of money to have an f-35 force, makes no sense. I like the idea of a mixed Gripen/F-35 force, especially if the two planes can be networked together.
1
4th or 5th gen, it does not matter. Russia is not making the plane anymore. They have only 18, I think. Too few to be relevant. Russia does not have the money to procure the weapons it designs. Russia has great military tech. But, with huge, and likely permanent drop in oil prices, Russia is basically broke. It could not make its vaunted Armata tank, and now it cannot make its Su-57. It has some advanced missiles coming, but can Russia procure them in meaningful numbers???
1
And if they made it virtual reality - so you felt the heat, the mud, the flies, the strain, the bruises, etc...that would be loads of fun.
1
Not when it fires a Tomahawk missile.
1
Instead of reviewing individual weapons, I would like to see a review of the assessed combat effectiveness of various armies. That would require looking at the doctrine, training, maintenance, logistics, experience, and overall preparedness of each.
1
Sounds like the Marines are trying to stay ahead of the curve. Leaving 20th Century doctrine, and moving to the 22nd Century.
1