Comments by "Be Kind To Birds" (@BeKindToBirds) on "Forgotten Weapons" channel.

  1. The sea would destroy a gun like this before the ship was halfway to it's destination is why it wasn't used
    1
  2.  @bavarianpotato  That is absolutely not correct, war fatigue and the effects of combat on people are extremely well documented and common throughout history. It's just now there are more people who DON'T have ptsd and less social acceptance of the ill effects of PTSD so it gets spotted and treated when before it was the nature of men and not considered any different. A modern diagnosis is a label applied to a condition that is fundamental. PTSD is the blanket term for conditions that re write the brain, but the brain re writing itself around trauma is as old as life itself. So your statement is entirely mistaken I'm afraid.
    1
  3. You don't understand the point of any of those projects lmao
    1
  4. Compensator definitely gave each shooter more confidence in longer bursts, easy to see right away.
    1
  5.  @famalam943  Bot account lying lmao. How is a lower ballistic force in a heavier rifle going to hit harder?
    1
  6. The extra lethality in light cover for urban environments is exactly in line with this requirement. It is also going to be very difficult for China or Russia or any adversary nation to equip it's force with sufficient armor to stop this kind of round. Exactly like tank warfare.
    1
  7. Unless you do it wrong and stupid yeah, there should be no problem. That problem would be insufficient exposure to full power rounds but that's easily solved in a hot range every now and then and by using hot ammo in your ramp up to deployment. The muscle memory of firing full power vs lower isn't going to be that big compared to the shock of going from a 1 way range to a 2 way range.
    1
  8. Is it really very different from issuing a carbine and rifle? The units that need hot ammo will be familiar with it.
    1
  9.  @Otokichi786  So fifty years of development after when we are talking about. It's like saying "nazi germany should have won, they had icbms" ...Well ...kinda. but you wouldn't look at a V2 and see a minuteman ii But that's what you are doing now with the idea of steam ships. He didn't make the wrong choice (at least not wrong for him and his ambition of power)
    1
  10.  @patparker4280  If you think about it, all of his kills were achieved with a "Suomi" )))
    1
  11.  @Redmenace96  Or ...he could use this exact same resources for something that would have an immediate effect. Like more food or moving his army.
    1
  12. No, it would no have had a direct effect on the napoleon wars! Why does everyone in this thread think this way? Hitler's ambitions were ruined by investment into new tech that wouldn't see fruition until years after his military defeats and here people are saying napoleon should have done the same! He was already on the march to St Petersburg, Alexander had already taken finland, there was already war in spain! A rifle was never going to help him. He invested extremely wisely, that is why he had canned food and not this rifle. Because he didn't need more firepower, he needed food This is just people wishing for a repeat of the Ferdinand! And how do people look back at those kinds of innovations? They call the Nazis fools! But change the details a bit and now every single person in this video is lining up to make the exact same kind of logical mistake No. This rifle wouldn't have helped. And neither would the steam engine. If they had both had years of development put into them they could have helped but you are talking about a man in a tent in the field thousands of miles from France making the decision to start experimenting with new muskets. When he had never had a problem with enough musket firepower and musket firepower hadn't won him europe up to that point. Steph curry doesn't need to learn to tackle game 6 of the finals and if he does, it ain't going to help.
    1
  13. That and a James may hello shirt could be my favorite shirts
    1
  14. You are thinking in terms of old how hard they were to make. Nowadays it's a lot easier and they can be easily mass produced. If the can breaks, ...put a new one on. But the new manufacturing method should be a lot more durable as well as cheaper.
    1
  15.  @SergeiMosin  The opposite, they are MORE durable. Better support structures are possible and weld free. Or ... entirely made of weld in a way lol.
    1
  16. I am so proud of you guys, so much from being in a room in rock island with a crappy mike and a passion
    1
  17.  @terryturner4116  What a completely subjective and irrelevant comment.
    1
  18.  @terryturner4116   Literally every nation on earth was doing stuff in the 1860's dude. It was the industrial revolution. More to the point, a international dick measuring contest gas absolutely nothing to do with my comment about the British decision to invest in disappearing guns. Whatever triggered your patriot pea-brain to associate my comment with subject is your problem, not mine. It could not be more irrelevant. It's a video about a gun that was never useful on an Italian island built by people you never met who have been dead for a hundred years based on an american design and you strapped on your boots like you're off to defend the crown. It's just sad af dude, knee jerk defending something long gone to make yourself feel more relevant now.
    1
  19.  @urmum3773  I don't fall for bots trying to stir up drama.
    1
  20. No, it is the military industrial complex working well and providing the best. Unless you can provide a reason why this isn't the best option I can't see a reason why the company shouldn't get the full ride like when they made the PT boats and what else.
    1
  21.  @hanelyp1  are you working for YouTube or just a fool?
    1
  22. ...I have a new life dream
    1
  23. Fire it a few times it will warm up
    1
  24. It was even a bullpup which we still haven't gotten to lol. Shocking.
    1
  25.  @FrostyFoxGamingIGM  The recoil is exactly the same as a rifle of the same power. The only difference is a rifle is pushing gas and metal out and this is only pushing metal out. The force transfered back does not change with the materials accelerated, only with the mass and velocity of them.
    1
  26.  @server1ok  Completely wrong, it would have the exact same recoil as a sniper rifle fired conventionally with the same energy.
    1
  27.  @DigitalNeb  That is already what it is like to be shot at.
    1
  28.  @server1ok  I am a physics major and I promise I understand how it works. The nuance you are elaborating on would have mislead 99% of people who are saying "no recoil" (because they are kids probably) Everyone in the comments thinks it will have less recoil because lasers and video games. The details you are talking about are not what they are assuming, they are assuming space magic = no recoil. And my comment is meant to answer that. There is still an equal amount of force being applied backwards to launch the projectile. These kids are saying space gun, not talking about the finer points of moment of force.
    1
  29.  @server1ok  Look homie, let me explain first of all I'm not a computer person okay. Want to talk about something fun? These guns have been outside a long time okay. Like, a while. Like, literally back in the days of steam engines. So let's make some educated guesses together. Do YOU believe that this 3D printed home kit is the very pinnacle of the technology in use? But can you think of any reason to use this over a conventional rifle? What about almost the exact same parts? thedrive /the-war-zone/russian-backed-separatist-shows-off-questionable-homemade-counter-drone-jamming-gun A lot more practical. The Navy is who plays with big guns, no offense to this company but electric small arms aren't the need. Electronic small arms are, and so are Electric Naval guns. But this idea? Kinda looks like a ballista to me. I think it could have its place on a vehicle or in and emplacement without doubt.
    1
  30.  @server1ok  I am puzzled by the fact you both doubt my expertise and are not aware what you are describing exists already? And the double joke is, this video is literally and example of it, this is similar to a standard rifle cartridge for small game used all over the world. I'm guessing you are somewhat younger? You talk like comic book argument not materials science to me. Not meaning any offense I am just not certain what you think you are correcting me on and the way you talk past me and don't really have great reading comprehension makes me guess that you are arguing something else and using what I said as a stand in because you misunderstood me.
    1
  31.  @Hawk7886  Wow I wish the US military, the most powerful warfighting organization to ever exist, has people as smart as you making decisions for the Army Futures Command. It would be so useful if the Defense Future Command knew about time. Dumb internet dork, the whole point of this move is that TIME is on our side and strongly against China, and Russia. I am really starting to hate the video game generation.
    1
  32.  @G58  If that is your future analysis then you are absolutely garbage at it. And you really think that the US has any near-peers yet? Or that we are going to be bottlenecked at a single factory in a war? Honestly, ...find a new hobby. You are terrible at this.
    1
  33.  @MadMax-bq6pg  You've given me a lot to think about actually. I'm going to have to come back to it even. Cheers mate, take care and God bless
    1
  34.  @N0sf3r4tuR1s3n  Lame bot, only 5 months old and can't even use punctuation
    1
  35.  @kekula69  Your prediction is stupid because soldiers are already and have already been shooting the AP ammo...
    1
  36.  @kekula69  I know. This weapon was not literally built when the video came out mate.
    1
  37.  @kekula69  The weapon was developed for the ammunition.
    1
  38.  @sheikbombalot5781  The US isn't good at occupation But we killed two entire generations of military aged men with virtually no effort and time. Dont confuse the occupation with the overwhelming crushing power of our army. Or do and see for yourself whatever wanna be country you are from. Come break into an americans house and see if you don't get a lot more than you expect lmao. China and Russia are going to take decades to catch up to american equipment NOW. Don't you even dare think how long it's going to take to catch up with us with new guns and all the new tech from the Ukraine war lmao. F.A.F.O.
    1
  39. Neither would have really helped him though. His problems were not enough food and vast land distances. The advantages given by those inventions didn't occur for decades later. If he had been victorious that would have been a gross oversight. Given history though there wouldn't have been any reason those inventions would have helped his situation
    1
  40.  @mitchellline3398  from what I understand, the Germans were the first country to issue them as standard and did so in ww1
    1
  41.    That is made up lol. Explosives can be extremely inert.
    1
  42.  @sorrenblitz805  Uranium is only weakly paramagnetic. Penetration is related to hardness and projectile length. A steel dart will penetrate fine.
    1
  43.  @FloodExterminator  Rats, I guess they all vanished into thin air. Mine did, I am devastated.
    1
  44. Ian I am really interested in how your career has gone from a clunky gun channel (though I do miss the old intro music) to becoming a globally renowned firearms expert. I wonder if one day you will be asked to advise on the creation of a weapon. I could see that if a military were to do something like the MG34 today, they would require someone with a broad and relatively specific knowledge like yourself who could assist with the selection of requirements or systems. I know you may think it silly to think you could design a firearm but part of design is not just metallurgy and contracting but also acting as a sort of neutral where you could say "no we should not pursue integrated bipods because of __ and historically they ___" Analysis is a very small field but can come in great value. God willing we will never see that kind of need for new weapons but consider how many firearms giants were commercial successes beforehand or even just in the press If it happens or not it has been a pleasure to see you go from the old videos taking apart guns in the desert to having the potential to be a subject matter expert analyst on these systems and their historical slotting together. Crozier as head of ordnance was an interesting fellow but imagine a world where Ian was. Very interesting time to be alive as these kind of global experts can exist now
    1
  45. Same in the US army, ammunition is expensive and many units have very small allocations that is for "maintaining competency" with the assumption that you will already be sufficiently trained. In training they have an allocation and assume your unit will do the majority of the shooting. Anyone who shoots casually knows buying ammo is always the bottleneck unless you want some rare kind of special gun. This is why the army is trying to experiment with a less expensive bullet
    1
  46. That has to do with the length of the projectile and it's ability to penetrate. I am certain that dart rounds will be practical. The slug I think is an infancy type round. Also canister rounds.
    1
  47. I am so glad that you talked to British muzzle loaders, that guy is making amazing historical content
    1
  48. Russia thinks that inflicting deep wounds on your serfs is an effective method of regional control.
    1
  49. Videos like these +++ there is so much to firearms and so few educators out there, you champ
    1
  50. It really did feel like "The Army"
    1