Comments by "Mike Armstrong" (@mikearmstrong8483) on "Ed Nash's Military Matters" channel.

Yeah, right. And the Brazilians say you are wrong, because they invented it. And the French say the Brazilians are wrong because they invented it. And some some dude in another comment says a New Zealander was first. Every country wants to claim they invented the first airplane, the first submarine, the first telephone. Problem is that none of them can offer any evidence more solid than just bar talk.
1
@timb3499 No it isn't. I can see hills from my front door, so that proves it isn't flat. 😆
1
P-39Q: Good choice. With only 15 rounds carried for the main gun, using AP ammo would be a safe bet to not knock anything down. And with a secondary ground attack role, well .... the P-39 was way overhyped in that role, which is why, contrary to popular misconception, that is not the role for which the Soviets used it.
1
@rogerpennel1798 Of course not; analysis by various means shows that Russia is not succeeding as planned. I'm saying no one should rely on videos that they are seeing at home as a source of real information about this conflict, because the vast majority are not telling the whole truth; they are only showing the selected parts that someone wants to present as the big picture.
1
@rogerpennel1798 Ok, I'll grant you that; there are indeed many characters whose opinions aren't worth the miniscule server space their comments take. And I was probably a little harsh in my response in that regard. Edit: your comment doesn't seem to be showing up in the thread, probably due to its reference to a wig-wearing ex president. But I got to read it in my notification, and I agree on that point.
1
@burningphoneix A tank unit quickly reacting to an ambush with return fire, without calling artillery or deploying infantry support, is not using combined arms tactics. And that was the content of the video. Of course combined arms are much better, but my original point still stands: don't believe everything you see coming out of Ukraine. Because obviously the Ukranians are going to be releasing more videos than the Russians who are denying they are invading, and they are going to show Ukranian successes. They don't want anyone to see: "Look, our heroic defenders fired a missile, but it didn't kill the tank right away, and they got shot to shit in return."
1
@JohnyG29 I think he was sarcastically referring to the fuel leak issues, and the Betty's reputation as a "one shot lighter".
1
The FW-189 was slow, as you say, however it had a reputation for being anything but "easy meat" for enemy fighters. Being very maneuvable, it was a difficult target for a fighter to get onto or hit.
1
Of course China is happy to see him in office. He has threatened to imprison election officials that didn't declare him the winner, and is talking about using the military for law enforcement, so China couldn't pray for a better person in charge of the US. He is the proponent of exactly the kind of policy they like to follow.
1
Why did they paint it white? And where's the trunk?
1
There's something about Rohrbach aircraft; they all look like sausages.
1
Don't start a war by sticking to an alliance with a country that invaded another country to further political ambitions. Don't start a war by attacking other countries that come to the aid of the country that was invaded. Don't start a war by invading other neutral nations yourselves. Oh, wow; look at the ensuing results! You don't get your ass whipped, you don't get peace dictated to you at gunpoint, you don't get disarmed, you don't go bankrupt paying for what you caused, and your people don't starve. If millions of Germans were able to collectively find 2 brain cells to rub together and make a spark, then there would not have been a Treaty of Versailles and there would have been nothing for them to cry about like whiny little wussy losers.
1
It has always been a misconception that the Japanese couldn't have designed their own aircraft if they were better in any way to western designs. During the war it was basically taken as official fact. There was no way that the Japanese, with their slanted eyes meaning inferior vision, and their recent evolution from a feudal society, could possibly be effective as engineers. This myth was taken as gospel even into the 60s, and still hasn't died today. The Zero has been considered a copy of a few different candidates, but it was entirely an indigenous design.
1
2500 hp was way beyond ambitious in 1940.
1
No doubt Ed already knows these details, but for everyone else's benefit, the Army/Navy bombing trials of the 20s were unsuccessful in their intended purpose due to the differing objectives of the services. The Navy wanted to use the trials to learn the effects of various bomb types and sizes on ships, so that resistance could be built into future designs. The Army wanted to prove that ships were obsolete in defending the US coasts and aircraft should become the only means of defending the nation. Meaning that the Army should get the prestige (and the bulk of the defense budget). In the end, the only thing proven was that unmanned, undefended, unmoving ships could be sunk by the primitive bombers of the time. The most vocal advocate of air power at the time was General William Mitchell who was court martialed for insubordination, not for anything related to the bombing tests, but for going straight to the press to criticize his superiors in the War Department (who were not ardent proponents of air power) for their supposed negligence in the loss of the airship Shenandoah.
1