วีดีโอ

Terrible bot voice..

i remember being in the Idaho guard and they still had them among the chinook gunners. They are a great weapon the 240B also is a good weapon :) But the .50 Maw Deuce is KING but it's so overkill it's a battle field weapon for heavy armor and combat!

Huh mars?……stupid AI video. Useless

Sorry, but it was the Labour government under Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, that initiated the construction of the two new Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. However, when the coalition government of David Cameron entered power in 2010 they axed the Harriers, HMS Ark Royal & HMS Illustrious. The Cameron government also wanted to mothball one of the new QE carriers. In short, I’m afraid that your video is inaccurate

It looks like a beef up version of the PL-01 prototype experimental stealth tank.

What a stupid western propaganda shitty lies...

Imagine the tank pull up to refuel ..sorry we have diesel only.. hydrogen?.. you have to drive back to your base or call a resupply truck.

The military is retarded for not using the new E6 Echo models that's their loss stupid f****

PKM better but rimmed cartridge is not modern.

Does anyone know if this PA-NG is going to be named Richelieu?

The M60 is still a viable platform. Yes the M240 imho is a much better platform, it’s probably much cheaper to refurbish a ‘60 than buy a new ‘240.

used m60 in leadership school for field exercises

"Yom Kipper"

THUD MENTIONED RAHHHHH

T14 oh right you mean the tank that doesn’t exist dude seriously context. This makes you sound like you’re pandering to authoritarians

Left wing nuts destroy countries

❤good

Ha ha ha ha. Can't even watch after that. LOL OMG. SKIP.

Rivals US Ford class? One country has a century of experience building them, the other country has built one.

the new subs wont have screen doors even though they were offered at a discount, so at least canada saved a few bucks there

I think you really mean why don't we use ridiculous, indiscriminate systems like Grad it's because we're not absolute savages

Uhm ... Because... They are ugly.

The ST-21 would have been a monster. Better radar, thrust vectoring, more powerful engines, AIM-120 upgrade.

Me from France if the labor party want to sell their carrier Come on macron buy one 😂😂

What could possibly go wrong

fuel tank explosion boutta go crazy

By the way, it will be easier to build a 310 meters/1000 Ft nuclear ship than a small one like the CdG....

I was in the Army in the 70s and i loved the M60.

The platform to mount the missiles is too long in my opinion. and should attempt to squeeze in 12 more missiles to use the space and material resources more efficiently. That's if they don't get gutted from defense spending cuts when Donald Trumps is sworn in as President of the United States.

This video is extremely misinformative, in several aspects. First, American aircraft usually have 2 eating surfaces (tail and wings) + lex. According to many aircraft that had delta wings, they only had one control surface. The introduction of canards in delta wings began with the Viggen, Kfir, Cheetha and Mirage 4000 precisely to improve maneuverability at low speeds and generate more lift, thus also having 2 comand surfaces. just like lex, canards has pros and cons are very similar. There are American aircraft that have canards, f14 has contractible canards, lex and variable geometry wings...completely non-function. The US Navy has already purchased and operated Kfir as training aircraft. Russian aircraft like su33, su30, su34 use canards as a third control surface to increase their maneuverability, and it works amazingly both at low speeds and at high speeds. Chinese aircraft also use canards like the J15, J10 and J20 (and don't tell me that this makes the aircraft less stealthy because the Rafale has the lowest RCS of the 4th gen aircraft). The USA does not use canards because they do not have enough know-how to apply canards to their aircraft and they do not want to have to change existing production lines or modernize existing aircraft for cost reasons. but canards and lex are extremely functional for the aerospace industry, and we will increasingly see aircraft with one of these designs.

In a few decades. Don't know much about Hydrogen so how plentiful for all the armies to turn over to it. How easy to make as well how much can be made now. I know it said a few decades but lets get real. With the push for EV's no country is setup to produce that much power to supply 60% EV cars. There is no push to do it leaving it to Oh it will get done. Making Hydrogen will be done the same way, all talk no action!

I've fired the M60 and M60D and loved them both. The D was on a swing mount and you had to get used to the rhythm of the bounce to keep it on target. It was a hoot to fire though. The 240 didn't come around until after I was out so I never got to fire one but I'd take a 60 any day.

Awesome tank in few decades

The Ma Deuce is too big. The Saw is under powered. The M60 is the perfect in between.

Looks like a far better and more capable will carrier than this horribly compromised British ones.

Because they were so awesome John Rambo carried one.

short answer: they are useless

A robot voice you only demonstrates that you are either too lazy or unable to read the requiered source material for your research, if you did any research at all.

This would be a bad idea. France always wants to take over every project in France's favour. Germany joining would be fine, but France, NO!! They're economic nationalist who want everything based in France. Why did they leave the Eurofighter program? Why is Airbus HQ based in France? Why is Air France hoovering up all small European airlines? They're economic nationalist who are in favour of European projects as long as France is a leading member.

You never fail to impress me with your videos. Keep up the great work! 💪

Might be smarter to just order a Ford class from the US.. call it IOUSA.. or Normandy or Utah Beach.

We still had m60s in the arms room in 2009 in an armored battalion.

Machineguns doesn't need to be accurate. Yes, they're immensely helpful against human wave attacks, but that is not their main role. The machinegun is meant to deliver suppressive fire, which forces the heads of the enemy to duck and thus establish Fire Superiority. When that is accomplished, it allows maneuver elements to outflank the enemy. And the M60 is not that bad. The reason for it being called "The Pig" is because it jams when mud gets in. And in Vietnam, mud is everywhere. It is a very wet, hot, and humid environment. That makes every machinegun vulnerable to jamming because they're an Open-Bolt system. That system is necessary so that it prevents overheating. Not only that, the cartridges can also deteriorate over time because of moisture which can certainly jam the machinegun if they're not protected. I think the only problem with the M60 is that because it copied the design from the MG42, with its sliding feed bar (better for a lack of words), users forget to slide it towards the right direction before slamming the feed tray down. In a tense and frightening situation of a firefight, machinegunners often forget to do that.

Bren guns are still an effective weapon . If that is all you got .

I loved the M60.... easy to carry, accurate, reliable and it hit hard.

Yeah, these vessels are essentially old and useless. So decommissioning them is actually a good thing as it can free up more space, and they can possibly sell them and recoup some of the money they spent on them to build new vessels. I swear the amount of stupid comments I see on here is crazy. Bunch of uneducated keyboard warriors on here. Who seem to think they know what they're talking about. Simple answer: no, they don't. So, I'll explain it in a way that uneducated dingdongs can understand. If you have a vessel or vessels that are over 30 years old, sitting at the dock for a number of years is not used. And essentially just sitting using up good dock space. But still, on the naval registry, the best thing they can do is take them off the registry and decommission them. And then they have 3 options.: option 1 sell them to a nation who can maybe get some use out of them for a bit longer as they don't have enough money to build a new vessel. Or to use as a stop gap vessel until the new one is built tested and ready to be commissioned. Option 2 They can sink the vessels ( after they clean them out of hazardous materials, of course) and turn them into artificial reefs. Or Option 3 sell them for scrap. Options 1 and 3 you can recoup some of the money you spent on them. In option 2, you have to spend money to clean them out and get them ready to be sunk. However, once you sunk, you'll provide a new reef that Marine life can live and thrive in. So I hope this clears up some of the confusion as to why they're decommissioning these vessels. However, since it seems most people nowadays have the attention span of a goldfish. I doubt they'll remember by tomorrow or even care.

I ADVISE YOU TO STOP MAKING VIDEOS, YOU'RE TALKING JUST BULLSHIT!!! For example, on the Charles de Gaulle, it wasn't the loss of a propeller but the breakage of one of the propeller blades, and these propellers were manufactured by a French company that has since filed for bankruptcy (permanent closure) it's not a fault of DCNS! and there weren't many problems contrary to what you're saying!! LOL this blade that broke, the deck coating too abrasive, a problem in a tank, and the change of location of several stabilizers! I remind you, you damn idiot, that the Charles de Gaulle is a new generation aircraft carrier for France, the Foch and the Clémenceau were two diesels, now we're going nuclear, so it's something completely new for DCNS, we call it a series lead, so there may be some delays for an aircraft carrier that France is building for the first time, nothing abnormal!! I advise you to take care of this shit that is the F35, start of the 1996 program, we are in 2024, the 3 F35 models are still with more than 800 failures, and the 3 (F35A, F35B and F35C) still do not meet the Pentagon's requirements, for example, the Pentagon requires 7 characteristics to be 5th generation (multi-role, stealth, high altitude flight, super cruise, super maneuverability, data fusion and data transfer!) at what point did the F35 go ​​from stealth bomber to stealth multi-role that does not know how to do it???? it does not have super cruise, contrary to the manufacturer's claims, it cannot fly above mach 1 for too long at the risk of damaging the rear of its fuselage and it is not super maneuverable, in the usa, a simple F16 simply made a fool of it in combat, how could this pile of shit be a multi-role aircraft, it is incapable of defending itself alone, ohhhh for the village idiots, the american idiots, passive stealth only works on high frequency radars, there are a good number of radars, like low frequency radars that don't care about stealth, or OTH radars, or passive radars! and don't stupidly think only about the radars of fighter planes in flight, there are dozens of other radars, in flight (AWACS), on the ground, or at sea! stop telling us your nonsense about the CDG! he has since sailed around the world more than 20 times! and make a second aircraft carrier??? to put what crews, like in the USA, France has problems recruiting soldiers!! besides, the American army was forced to lower the hiring criteria!

You pronounce Hi_MARS

PANG = PA NG = Porte Avion , Nouvelle Génération and no PN AG to 0'14 !!

Il sera prêt pour 2038