วีดีโอ

As a farmer this is going to be my next tax right off. Need this to check my fences right right 😎

Please explain how an 8.8 cm (NOT "88 mm") KwK43 "had a larger calibre" than the 8.8 cm 'L/56 version equipped on the Tiger tank"? "With the maturity of the Soviet, five pair of road wheels the QF20 under gun eventually weakened a bit"! WTF is that supposed to mean? This is a shocking video. Absolutely appalling. And L7 WAS NOT "developed from the QF20 pounder": it was designed to use the same mountings to facilitate retrofit into existing tanks (i.e. Centurion).

2:13 tricycle landing gear is like the F 15 and F 16 this Aircraft has a Tail Dragger Landing gear. You have to focus on the details if you want trust because all of us know different things. So you must be accurate in all facts. Thank you very much….That is all…. On 😏🖖🏼🇺🇸

Cool

Sorry I wasted 5mins of my life listening to this!! 😢

Cool

Using f-words to cross trenches came from land management. They have been used to prevent river bank erosion for hundreds of years.

For those who know the roblox game Centaura this is the armored car used in Centaura for Antares also the corvus one is a austro hungarian Daimler armored car and cetan one is a Italian lancia 1z armored car with a different turret

Fuck your tax bureau!

FYI, they made less than 10 prototypes, of which 2-3 were non-firing mockups. They were never purchased by the military, never issued to troops, and never used in the War of Independence. They were also never sent anywhere else. All the examples are held by the Croatian MOD.

So this is the origin of the SEAL motorcycle/car combination?

Probably run out of money and other resources etc! Denel need to partner up with someone like BAE.

I should put the AA gun on a truck in stead. Speed instead of terrain mobility is more needed on the modern battlefield.

Comet, Archer, Challenger, M10 and Sherman had the 17 pounder, I don't think Centurion made it to WW2, war ended beforehand. Just to be exact.

Fun fact, the tridon was not on a similar 6x6 chassis as the archer prototype, it was the exact same vehicle, they just ripped the 40mm gun off it and added a FH-77B in the back

Made by Swedish steel for steel men...

Jesus, I wish you would learn to pronounce "anti-aircraft" correctly.....

I can imagine this along side an Archer would work great as an inti-drone protection for the Archer.

Great looking machine, but it's not a tank, could use these in Canada.

really stupid AI voice

Haha Bofors gör Pang Pang!

That basically looks like "just" a Bofors 40/48 L70 connected to an ARTE725 tracking system from SAAB Surveillance on a dumper chassis. With a Radar or IR scanner (never purchased to KA in LVT75M) as a course-finding system, it would work fine, but rather "not advanced enough" even at its prototype time. But as a prototype, it makes a lot of sense and is a rather obvious continuation.

I guess the AA version of the CV90 is the better option? Much faster deployment (I think it even can shoot on the move?), the crew has protection inside and I read that BAE Hägglunds is developing anti drone capabilities for it. (Sensor and fire control) Internet as source so take it with a pinch of salt 😊

Nice

You should dig around for material for a video on the Boeing model 390 and 391 discoid or very-low aspect-ratio naval fighter proposals from the '40s. The "Flapjack" fighters which the Navy should have looked into. Like many such very-low aspect-ratio planes (including most likely the Avro / USAF "Weapons System 606a, the Sack AS-6, the Vought V-173 and others, most likely based on the Arup planes of the '30s Arup S-2 (direct progenitor to the V-173) (≈2 mins, but skip ahead to 48 seconds for flight video) th-cam.com/video/Nxz1UF67EQI/w-d-xo.htmlsi=RkIwisBrQuQ42Ksg (A video on the Arup would be good too, for its historical significance to all the other discoid and very-low aspect-ratio planes.) Based on the Arup, the related Hoffman (flying wing) & the Hatfield, the Ehselman ("flounder") of the '40s and others, it should have done very well (without the complexities associated with the Vought/Zimmerman "flapjack" efforts.) the Boeing model 390 was to have a twin row radial buried with a driveshaft turning the prop. The 391 was to have the monster 4-row, 28 cylinder radial of 3500+ hp and contra-rotating props (414 kts by Boeing documents). Some reports say the engine was to be supercharged, with the supercharger exhaust taken out through a rocket nozzle, producing thrust. The cooling air for the engine was also taken to a ring nozzle around that, to propel it aft, again producing thrust (cooling air is usually only a drag). It would easily have done 500kts (Mach .75) in level flight (probably if clean and lightly loaded). Footprint of a Bearcat, with payload of a Corsair or P-47, lightly loaded take off airspeed under 40kts, by Boeing reports 74kts heavy. Stall-proof like the Arup and other very-low aspect-ratio planes.

At the same time in the USSR, the Sukhavov discoplan gliders. In relation to the Arup & Nemeth, the V-173, the Avrocar & project 606 development of that, at the same time as the Avro effort. The video shows that they were working towards a super-STOL, supersonic discoid unitary wing/body or circular wing jet. They dispensed with the complexity of the Avro lifting engine in the "Weapons System 606a" (and the "Project Y" imaged in this video). The Sukhanov might have worked extremely well, going by the successes of the Arup of the '30s, the related Hatfield "Little Bird" of the '80s, the Payen/Aubrun AP-10 of the '30s, loosely resembling the excellent handling Nemeth "parachute plane" of the '30s, the good flying Vought/Zimmerman V-173 which unfortunately was saddled with the unnecessary affectation of the wing-tip mounted, outward turning, oversized, tuned, plane-changing props. NACA tunnel tests of the V-173 showed that it did not gain anything either in terms of STOL performance or efficiency in cruise, versus more normal 80hp props even spinning the other way. (The V-173 was mostly based on the Arup which Zimmerman saw perform at NACA. The Arup and others proved that the discoid or very-low aspect-ratio planform does snot need the overly complex propeller situation for STOL or to sleek and efficient. Notably *_NOT_* draggy and inefficient in cruise) Sukhavov discoplan gliders In '58 a parasol-wing aerobatic glider, then a tiny integral wing-body glider (both in museums today). Both used GE to get aloft and very-short aspect-ratio planform allows very slow flight at high A in vortex-driven "parachute lift" (not the same phenomena as the vortices on a sharply swept supersonic delta at low speed). Letayushchiy (flying) disk Летающий диск (1964) 17:20 th-cam.com/video/UQ1XiIMgLck/w-d-xo.html video th-cam.com/video/at77GUZm9rY/w-d-xo.html

The Avro machine pictured is the Project Y. The Avro Canada / USAF "Weapons System 606a" was different. A circular wing, with the Coandă / Frost lift engine centered and an embedded fuselage with two normal jets aft. Evidently they were very confident of directional control with directing flow from the lift engine, because it had no fin/rudder. Probably a mistake, made by too many designers trying for all-wing planes. The weight and drag of a fin is more than compensated for by stability and control. Many designers tried for completely tail-less. Some then went on to wing-tip fins which were a little less terrible. When they went on the normal central fin and rudder some produced entirely good planes. Lippisch "Delta" series which turned into the Me-163 Komet unfortunately saddled with the awful rocket system. Charles Fauvel with the Av-10 little test plane. Boris Ivanovich Cheranovsky with the series from BICh (pronounced "Bye-che") 3 to the 7a. Especially the Arup planes from Indiana in the 1930s For a modern example of what the WS 606a might have resembled, see the Rowe UFO ("Useless Flying Object" from Aus. Tiny experimental, circular with tractor propeller and a fin. Good handling little bug. The Flying Show: The UFO Strikes Again th-cam.com/video/eFgr90LobAQ/w-d-xo.htmlsi=dX50MnrvmihapBEa

There's a video of an RC model flying well, and of the original taxiing over a rough field but not taking off. th-cam.com/video/lx0vtWmZL9k/w-d-xo.htmlsi=MRez6HWjAzhJOQK5 The pilot's view was only a little worse than most biplanes with two seats: The pilot sat in the back, with the front seat at the CG either with a second person or a cargo, or empty. The pilot has zero view directly forward or down, so all approaches and was done on a curve, going straight at the last second (like the F4U Corsair onto a aircraft carrier ship). Remember that the "Spirit of St. Louis" had a huge fuel tank at the CG with the pilot behind it with no forward view but a periscope for helping with the final landing. Reports of poor performance will have to be cited, though poor speed might be no surprise since it relied on the drag of the aft end for directional stability instead of a fin as on streamlined planes. Several planes with markedly good performance didn't do well, because they too looked funny (especially the Arup and the Nemeth): See TH-cams for Arup S-2 and S-4 1932 th-cam.com/video/Nxz1UF67EQI/w-d-xo.html th-cam.com/video/_XrSFVDa3mY/w-d-xo.html Nemeth parachute plane 1932 th-cam.com/video/yV1P9160GD4/w-d-xo.html Hatfield Little Bird 1984 (Related to the Arup) th-cam.com/video/zK63GJ0saBA/w-d-xo.html Eshelman flatfish plane 1942 th-cam.com/video/JpV68abt8uc/w-d-xo.html Rowe "UFO" 2015 th-cam.com/video/eFgr90LobAQ/w-d-xo.html Horton "Wingless" 1953 th-cam.com/video/JfhMFKGkgL4/w-d-xo.html Wainfan "Facetmobile" 1992 th-cam.com/video/djdG0TNvPio/w-d-xo.html

Swedish military procurement officer in call to Volvo Trucks: SMP: Hi, this is the Swedish military, do you have any Volvo Construction Equipment A30D six-wheel drive articulated haul truck in stock? Volvo representative: Why, yes we do, how many do you need? SMP: Yes.

Obsolete, bulok na yan, wwar 2 era.???????

The should pair it with the Archer to protect it from drones, as long as they can figure out how to detect them faster!

LOL , Fake! The vehicle in the pictures is built in one copy to test the accessibility. The old cannon doesn't work, It simulates a cannon that will later become the Systems Archer. Many of the vehicles and the old weapons are not Swedish, no TRIDON exists. The uniforms are not Swedish. Swedish camouflage clothes are a mixture of dark green colors. Swedish nature is 80% forest. We can't have desert uniform in a dark green forest. Swedish uniforms are also created for guerrilla warfare. Greetings from Sweden.

Aw A Cute Tank

swedish rusty crap .very bad canon .

If Sweden did Technicals, they would probably be the best Technicals in the world. 😉

The main problem of these early british tanks wasn't the height, it was their tight width, they couldn't be upgunned as for the Matilda, or if (barely) possible, as for the Crusader or the Valentine, it resulted in a very tight and uncorfortable turret, that greatly hindered crews' capabilities. It's strange that, given that the 6pdr was in development before the war, they didn' tought to make their tanks more apt to being modified, as happened to the Pz III & IV, also if for the former was only tanks to Guderian's insistence that it had a slightly larger turret ring. Another thing that surely was very dangerous for the crew were all these rivets, expecially on the turret, everyone of them , if the tank was struck, would've became a ricocheting nightmare.

TRIKA

Got the Shaft HP the wrong way round. Useless.

Largest brit armoured car mk2 and mk3 1 inch wider than a sherman tank I own a MK3 75 mm AEC last one left

This is such a beautifully crafted machine gun. It just arrived too late and was too expensive. But what a work of art!!

Such a joke to rob the Greek government went bankrupt. 😢

The landing gear in not tricycle type. It's a tandem layout. The dual wheel on the center leg acts as one.

Awesome I like vickers

“One of the largest armoured vehicles produced by Britain”, ahem the AEC Armoured car, Valentine, Matilda 2, Churchill tanks and AVRE’s, Sherman Firefly, Crusader, Centaur, Cromwell and Comet want a quiet word, not to forget the first Centurions rolled off the production line in 1945, TOG II was produced as a prototype, as did the tortoise. Also, the Daimler Armoured Car was at least the same size!

Le "Jag" fait partie d'une nouvelle perception et conception de la nouvelle force armée française, le programme SCORPION. Le programme Scorpion vise à renouveler et moderniser les capacités de combat « Au contact » de l’armée de Terre autour de nouvelles plateformes et d’un système d’information du combat unique. Il formera un ensemble, avec le Griffon, le Serval, le Mepac, Chars Leclerc rénovés etc. Le tout relié par un sytème de communication unique, mais compatible avec les forces armées de l'OTAN. En extrapolant ce programme sera aussi compatible avec les unité navales et aériennes (hélico et rafales)

この手作り装甲車両は本当にカッコいいですね！

Are those fuel canisters at 1:40

Just unlocked it in Enlisted and wanted to know more. Nice video

Please, my friend, how far does this rifle's bullet travel?

1:45 what does 16 knots of thrust even mean?