Comments by "Stephen Villano" (@spvillano) on "Forgotten Weapons"
channel.
-
166
-
128
-
Well, he also gave us McNamara's Morons.
With predictable results in casualties.
He also believed that videos could teach anyone to perform any task. Leading to tapes that featured, for one example, Magic Medic, who carried the tiny M3 aid bag, but would suddenly produce a two foot long erector set of a Thomas Leg splint and a full box of cravats to secure the infernal contraption that was obsolete during the Vietnam war... He also apparently concealed quite effectively, a full litter, Stokes litter, M113 APC and probably had a nuclear reactor inside of that bottomless bag.
Earlier in my career, similar tapes on the original Pershing, long replaced by the 1A and then 2 was in progress, with tools being used we'd never even heard of or could find a use for...
Highly effective at being inept and utterly incompetent. The only thing he seemed effective at was fucking up wet dreams.
39
-
39
-
24
-
22
-
14
-
There were problems with metallurgy, non-chromed rifling, tolerances, political interference that resulted in precisely the prohibited type of smokeless powder being in the rounds and more. If you want something fucked up, ask the Army to handle it, want it mangled beyond recognition, give it to a politician.
But, don't forget, not all USAF were zoomie and missile guards. Some did run CSAR missions.
One thing though, how'd you get cleaning kits? The early '16's shipped without cleaning kits, resulting in men thinking that they never needed cleaning. At least, per everyone I knew that served in Nam when the M16 was introduced.
Loved my M4 in the sandbox, although I really loved the reintroduced M14, brought back updated as an M1A as a DMR.
Although, the best things we had beside our Strykers was Kevlar and radios to call for air or indirect.
12
-
11
-
11
-
@Slizzo82 most of the problems, other than wear and tear that should be caught at the armorer level and sent to depot for rebuild, was PMCS.
I had the distinction of giving the class in my battalion when we switched over from light infantry to mechanized (and later, Stryker) on the M2. Distinction, as I was a medic. Wasn't always a medic, knew the gun inside and out, so being one of a few who knew the gun well, got to lead the instruction team.
We're on the range after class, I'm BSing with some of the other NCO's and I hear a gun's firing rate becoming erratic and varying in volume. Before I could get the word Fire from CEASE FIRE out, the barrel was launched 25 meters downrange. We went to check fire, I approached the position and asked, "OK, you remember class, so who didn't perform their PMCS?". Assorted excuses and bewildered looks, "Remember I mentioned checking your detent spring? How the barrel could unscrew when firing? That could've send the feed dawgs and tray into your faces, which is why it's so high on the list, the correct answer to my question is, "we all failed to perform our PMCS, as PMCS done partially is PMCS conducted not at all. Now, get this weapon off of my firing line and checked by the armorer and fixed and I'll see you in retraining".
Recycled them to retraining, never had to mention it in class, but they did follow the standard the best of all classes afterward.
Irritating was, I had actually harped on that issue in the first class, as it's a fairly common problem.
Used to blow their minds by placing the gun from the M113 deck into the pintle alone. They'd work as a group of two or three to get the gun into position. I'd lift it handles down, lever the barrel up to cantilever it to the roof and lower the base onto the pintle. Basic body mechanics. Work smart, not hard.
They also went nuts trying to learn to outshoot me, that never worked out, but at least we got plenty of experts in their weapons in the attempts!
Never got to fire the mk-19 or Barrett, the latter by refusal, as my spine wouldn't forgive me for that much of a shove. Did get to be AI in the TOW missile school, given I was present at Redstone when it was introduced.
8
-
8
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
And the source of a $200 million saga on updating hydrogen bombs. A small change in a component tagged "FOGBANK" during its production yielded reproducible results decades later, when that component had to be replaced and oh, while we're at it, upgraded technologically.
The change, a contaminant in the original was important, but never documented and when the aerogel version was tried, wouldn't work, nor could they replicate the original component. So, a rather extended and massively overrun in cost R&D program was needed to rebuild the aging weapons. It only took nearly a decade.
Because, guns are easy, compared to thermonuclear warheads. Actually, rocket science is easier as well.
Or maybe some things just shouldn't be built... ;)
2
-
Many years ago, I was working on the testing line for a broadcast quality reel to reel video tape recorder, with all manner of bells and whistles, including bleeding edge digital processing.
I was assigned to test power supplies as they came off of the assembly line. Hipot testing, visual inspect, etc, then live and load testing on our custom jig made for that purpose. It was an early SMPS, no biggie.
Everything checked, just like the drawing, plus out testing sailed through, connected, powered it up, BANG and a mushroom cloud erupted from the Teflon insulated wiring, breaker tripped for my section of the floor. Visual inspection revealed nothing different from the drawings. Set it aside, checked another, exact same problem, as did a third to be sure we had a production problem.
Time to earn my money and justify the cost of electronics school! Ended up tracing the schematic, comparing it to the drawings, line by line, from AC input through... the output of the fullwave bridge rectifier, which the drawing had the positive and negative connected to the same filter capacitor terminal, creating a short circuit in a high current circuit.
They followed the drawing, alas, the drawing was wrong. Over 100 power supplies ended up going back through the assembly line, once change manglement was done mangling the process sufficiently.
And no, I actually like change management. Not having change management leads to pure frigging chaos.
They ended up fixing a little over 200 power supplies, as power supply assembly wasn't halted, so by the time change management gave approval, yeah, the number of wrongly wired units had more than doubled.
2
-
2
-
I know that weapon well enough, we got one full auto and later brand new DMR semiautomatic only models for designated marksman rifles.
Great semiautomatic long range rifle. Fired three rounds in auto and well, I was dubious before and I'm quite proficient at full auto fire, three rounds convinced me it was rubbish. One round on target, the other two shooting butterflies and birds, in damned near any direction save the intended target. Way too light, uncompensated and rubbish in auto. Full auto in .308/7.62x51 NATO needs around 24 - 30 pounds of rifle to remain even an area fire weapon, anything lighter and it's a danger to everyone save the enemy.
Semi, rated to 800 meters, I hit reliably at 1 km. A sniper system it wasn't, but it was close enough for a DMR.
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
A chain gun does not need an electric motor, it can be any kind of motor, hydraulic or for aircraft, where most early chain guns were used, the main propeller motor (aka, engine). The energy source is just an external motor.
Initially, the chain gun was used to both drive the action and time firing, as it's kind of embarrassing to shoot your own propeller off.
A couple of problems with a man portable chain gun is, well, blammo kinda weighs ya down - a lot of blammo, loads of testicles inside of one's socks. Then, there's the power source (I'm assuming a non-human motor here). Not a hell of a lot that one could call useful or man portable when you're up to a quarter ton at the non-starting gate. Think a can or three of blammo, plus batteries are not included.
Then, there's recoil. Something I'd do just looking at being asked to lug a quarter ton, but I'm talking weapon recoil.
You know, "Stop shooting up there, He might just start shooting back and He's a lousy shot!".
I can see them on vehicles, especially given remote weapons station equipped vehicles. Why have a weapon a crew has to exit the vehicle that's protecting them, hence it being remote, just to clear a misfeed or misfire?
The chain can be trivially replaced as they were frequently in cars with a timing chain, a cogged belt.
1
-
1
-
@namenotfound8747 they toyed with a half dozen names when testing it. It was to be a DMR with full automatic capability and well, it's been expanded a bit beyond that, largely to be well and truly rid of the direct impingement mistake Stoner made.
The problem with the SAW is, well, it's a SAW. Great when new, lousy when used and well, worn out. I literally danced a drink can at 100 meters (I'm still mystified as to whatinhell a soda can was doing downrange on a US Army range) with a brand new SAW. Old ones, I danced for joy in not having to lug the damned thing.
As for logistics, lose logistics, what are you going to do, shoot dirty looks at the enemy?
Besides, for most of our nation's history, the Army was job security for the USMC. Marines would come in and take the land, Big Army would move in, set up a nice sexy fire base, give it back to the enemy so that the Marines could come back and take it again. Otherwise, the Marines would run out of things to break and take and be out of a job!
Yeah, I fucked with everybody, even my own branch.
Including reminding buddies who were ever so impressed with our Strykers that nobody else had, it's really a LAV 3. ;)
1
-
@namenotfound8747 never had anyone complain my uniform was dirty, just after a day out with scouts getting asked why my uniform wasn't pressed and starched.
He wasn't exceptionally happy about his career outlook when I turned around and he saw I was two grades superior to him.
And your weapons were a wee bit better in quality. Nice custom shop pistols, tighter group capable rifles, why, it's almost as if the Corps expected you guys to actually hit your targets, rather than do what we did - make a shit ton of noise and behave as if we were static displays when engaging.
Oh well, we promoted quickly, not based upon competency, but PT scores, so fire and maneuver tended to be beyond the capabilities of thought in many leaders.
"Like, flank them with the gun, keeping them occupied and approach from here, here and here."
"But, the gun isn't in that position."
"If only it was on a vehicle that could move..."
"They could engage it!"
"It's armored, braintrust! And our rich and retarded Uncle has plenty more that look just like it. Now, move the goddamned vehicle, engage them before they bury us and that isn't a fucking request!"
Covered in Kevlar, got more fire support than God and afraid to move at times.
Peacetime fucks infantry up - always. Took months to get them to actually stop being pretty and capable of breaking shit again. Got in country and they fought like REMFs for far too long. If my uncles had fought like that in WWII, there wouldn't be a synagogue next door to my apartment today and a different flag!
And be completely united in loathing our political leadership - oh wait, that's a constant throughout human history, disregard. ;)
1
-
1
-
During basic training, way back in '82, I needed to use the forward assist incessantly to close the bolt against sand.
That said, the weapons, like all of our weapons at Fort Dix back then were worn the hell out.
Got to my units over the decades, rarely needed to use the thing. Not never, but rarely. Most of the time, just jarring the weapon allowed the bolt to slide forward into battery.
As for the decision, let's face it, which generation ordered the specification for a forward assist? The generation that used those M1 Garand rifles when they were brand new during WWII. The WWI veterans had tried to order them bolt action rifles, rather than those new fangled Garand rifles.
Let's suffice it, some of the more senior personnel in charge of such programs, well, not exactly optimal for the task at hand. Need I mention the mark 14 torpedo? The modification of the powder bags for the Iowa that cost a turret crew their lives? We're just lucky that the M16 didn't come with a T&E, since it had automatic... ;)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@standingwhilepooping4685 did you ever wonder where section 8 came from?
Article I, Section 8, Clause 1, the General Welfare clause. If We The People is a waste of money, whatinhell are we defending then, when the Constitution already declared We The People the United States?
Besides, we wasted more money than God has every year. Like each and every year, SOCCENT would send a warehouse full of state of the art network equipment, brand new and in the box to the DRMO auction for pennies on the thousand dollars.
Or a war "because he tried to kill my dad".
Or the $200 million and a decade of R&D to replace a thermonuclear weapon component that they literally didn't document how to make. Look up Fogbank some time.
And investigating flying saucers a half dozen times, when we already knew they were mostly our own test vehicles.
Or the littoral combat vessels that are being retired brand new because they're cracking apart.
Meanwhile, you'd piss and moan if we didn't use equipment until it was falling apart because of the taxes being raised to cover it.
And we gain the benefit of soldiers, sailors, airmen and Marines learning how to clear stoppages, even if they'll never have to do so again because their unit equipment isn't worn out.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1