Reupload because subtitles got mucked. Previous comments: The P90: Designed for rear echelon to kill Commandos The truth about the P90: Used by Commandos to annihilate rear echelon. 👍431 Tell Zach to be real, with his luck he would still get issued a full size rifle. 👍238 Armored crews are probably gonna see it way before the boys in the rear. Try sticking the new full sized rifle behind a driver's seat, ain't gonna be comfy.👍 201
What I’m wondering is why didn’t they put the ACOGs on the carry handles, because the M150 ACOG was designed to mount to carry handles in the first place, if I recall correctly the detachable carry handles have the same hardware and mounting system to accommodate an ACOG as the fixed carry handles do
I think the point he was trying to make was: give the people that don't need a full sized weapon a smaller one so when command adds a bunch of shit they can't put as much shit on it and it'll be the same weight as what they're rifles should be.
@@lloydgietzmann6596 Oh I know, and it's super reasonable. But I love how it's like Zach lost the plot at some point because he remembered the carrying handles
In Ep 77 Diamond City Blues, the same thing happened. Mike's a saint, but it's grating, and his frustration bleeds through sometimes. Mike: *asks whether machine gun is called so because the parts are machined metal parts* Zach: *immediately starts ranting about machine gun and submachine gun designations* Mike: "my God I didn't mean to send you down this route...😅"
For anyone wondering about the weight complaints, when you’re carrying a ton of weight all day ounces start to feel like pounds. With the weight of a full plate carrier, main weapon, side arm, ammo, helmet, pack or camel bag, and all the small stuff like a knife or toothbrush, your kit gets heavy. On base it might not be a problem but in the field, the last thing you want is to be weighed down especially by unnecessary equipment.
Truth. That's also why long distance runners and hikers quibble over ounces and grams. Downside is they seem to replace every ounce of saved weight on soldiers kit with 2 ounces of new crap.
@@arthas640 Well, also we are talking about rear echelon troops whose job has nothing to do with directly shooting people until it does where something with a bit more range than a pistol may be heavily desired. But also being rear echelon, they probably aren't doing a whole lot of running or hiking to fulfill their roles.
@@TheGrandslam89 Depending on the assignment the rear echelon troop isn't actually supposed to fight anything. A supply convoy driver may stop their trucks for whatever reason and bring the gun with them. They get attacked. Then they shoot only as much as is needed to GTFO and let somebody with better stuff handle it, because you don't want your ammo/fuel/spare parts to get blown up anyways.
@@arthas640 Same reason my uncle bitching about how easy soldiers today have it compared when he was in Vietnam, and it's like... motherfucker, you were carrying like, 50 pounds tops when you were outside the wire. Your kid is marching around a fucking desert in damned near twice that these days. Fortunately neither of your back injuries are service related.
Army commercials: We are an amazing unit of strong individuals who will protect everything, no matter the cost. Zach: So here's the time that my commanding officer threw a hissy fit because he didn't like that his last minute repair was taking too long, even though he didn't do the paperwork I have to remind him of every time he comes in.
Zach: complaining about the brass’ dumbest decisions in a fervent manner Mike: *listening like the good soldier he is thinking about how efficient his rifle was at shooting*
I feel like Zach should definitely be back in the army. Not as any kind of grunt, no no...but as an advisor to the top brass. Much like an evil mastermind should keep a small child on staff to point out any glaringly obvious flaws in their plan for world domination, the army should keep Advisor Zach on staff to point out any time their dumb bullshit is, in fact, dumb bullshit.
From the way you describe the carry handle being bolted to the bottom of the rifle, i imagine it being used like a shitty DIY foregrip, and that the optics were more relied on
Yep, that's exactly what you see in photos from the sandbox. I remember when one got a lot of circulation on various gun forums, and a bunch of couch commandos ragged on the Marines doing that. It was pointed out that it was a better option then throwing it in a rucksack to be lost, it was actually more guarded from damage than mounted on the reciever, and the Trijicon Acog is actually zeroed by hitting it with a rock, so the chances of the optic failing are lower than the irons. Which are actually kinda delicate on the A2/A4.
@@peaceoutbruh7085 More how easy it is to adjust the sights on the A2/A4. It's got the big easy to use knob for windage and the dial for elevation it is possible for them to be bumped off of zero while rucking/riding/ dismounting. And it was at one point SOP too dummy cord them to the reciever as the mounting system tended to loosen. But that is standard for anything mounted to rails. Historically the M1 Garand, which had similar easy to adjust sights( developed for the same reason, the Camp Perry competition shooters demanded it for the KD range) so much so they at one point added a locking bar to the sights so that after it was zeroed it couldn't be adjusted without armorer assistance. Meanwhile the ACOG( and Aimpoints ) are set them and forget them with nonexposed adjustments. As long as mounted properly, they won't lose zero outside of excessive abuse.
So I started my career in the infantry. Carrying a rifle with all the Gucci gear. Peq15s, ACOGs/ccos, surefire lights we had a series of COs who were wise enough to let good rifleman do whatever the heck they wanted with their rifle. When I became a 91 fox naturally I had to move to a maintenance unit. At the maintenance unit we have bare bones m4a1s, and we're not really supposed to stick extra stuff on them. Our primary optic is the stupid flip-up spoon backup iron sight. I have nothing against iron sights, I have shot expert multiple times with the carry handle irons, but the buis is terrible. I got so annoyed with the backup iron sight that at one point I brought my personal ta50 ACOG in and slapped that on my M4 and shot with that. I got a stern talking to for doing that. About 2 years into the maintenance company, I was helping with a sensitive items inventory, and I came to find out we have more than enough ACOGs and Peqs for every rifle in the company. We're just not allowed to use them, because the commander doesn't want them to get messed up, or for pieces to get lost. The Army spent how many hundreds of thousands of dollars on these aiming devices and they're just sitting in boxes in a cage.
The list of "Idiot things idiot commanders do because they're musty farts who think they're smart." continues to grow longer and longer........Now I think that it's at the point I need to digitize it, since it's taking up the whole fucking room!
Of course, their logic is "well we are saving them until we need them!" But then when you would need them, no one is qualified to use them. So you still don't get them.
That makes Zach's command even worse, because if your CO could stash away all the useful attachments, Zach's CO could've let his guys dump unnecessary rails.
Wack. I can understand not wanting to deal with the headache of keeping track of that shit, but as a taxpayer I paid for that gear and it’s a waste for it to just sit in storage
I remember when I got my KAS rails. Put just enough panels on it to cover where my hand went, and left the rest naked. When we got our* m68s, we were pretty stoked. Then no more than 5 days later, they took them from us, threw them into a storage bin, threw the bin somewhere, and told us they were taken away because "we might break them". But we were still signed for them. Along with our bayonets and 2 frag grenades each. On PAPER we had those things ready to rock in our kit, in REALITY they sat in bins/boxes collecting dust.
Current army here, as of a year or so ago, units were still getting m4s. I think they'll give smgs to officers and tankers and other such jobs and keeping m4s for rear echelon troops like cbrn or admin
Likely not, those SMGs were pretty explicitly ordered for essentially bodyguards given they bought less than 1,000. Essentially people who needed something nearly pistol sized but with more firepower than a pistol. Everyone else might reasonably be asked to fire over 100 meters if they actually had to use their gun for self defense where a carbine would be a better choice.
Zach’s description of his rifle sounds so cursed, the Frankenstein’ed A2 with a railed handguard, with all the covers and a grip, with a gooseneck and red dot 💀
that's literally what the M1 carbine was designed to be, a light weapon for rear echelon troops so they'd have something better than a friggin 1911 to defend themselves if they needed it without having to carry a full sized battle rifle like the Garand. The Army then promptly forgot about this lesson for the next 80 years.
Initially, that’s what the M4 carbine was for actually. The idea was that frontline troops would get M16A4s and Tankers and real lines would get M4 carbines (this is why they had the thin pencil barrels that SOF found were somewhat prone to overheating) but then they started issuing out M4 carbines to everyone
M1 carbine was outdated by the time ARs made the reigns, and a AR carbine is so ubiquitous and cheap there is no reason NOT to issue them over an inferior firearm.
4:08 This situation sounds eerily similar to 75mm M4 Sherman Tankers being issued 76mm Shermans that could be ‘exchanged’ where upon the aforementioned Tankers basically had that exact reaction.
Doesn't help Tigerphobia was a thing, so they were going "Why give us these giant signs that say 'Big target over here! Come blast us right in the fucking side of the turret!' That's a fucking STUPID idea! 'Better armour penetration'?! I'D RATHER NOT HAVE MY ARMOUR CRACKED OPEN LIKE AN EGG!"
@@airplanemaniacgaming7877 Honestly it seems as if most anything would crack the Sherman like an egg! If it’s any consolation I hear they passed ‘Oh my God the tank is on fire!’ Test With flying colors so it sort of goes hand-in-hand that you might as well get whatever helps ensure the first shot is definitive!
The sherman's armor wasn't great but it also wasn't terrible. Yeah if you shoot at it with an 88 It'll die but guess what, So will a tiger I. THe sherman was fighting what germany had produced in high numbers. Which was PZ4s (which they were slightly better than in theory, roughly equal in pratice), PZ2s 3s and 3s. Which the sherman was leagues better than simply because those tanks had shit guns. It's like comparing a brand new ferrari to a used truck. They do different things for different ppl
Isn't it a much greater logistical problem to have an entirely separate weapon platform using a different caliber of ammunition and parts from a different manufacturer than giving them A2s?
If the SMG is a 9mm the supply chain already exists. And since the SMG would presumably be issued to non combat jobs they're not expending ammo at the rate a rifleman or Machinegunner would be. They'll likely never fire their weapons, except for range training.
Yes, but also no. The standard loadout for the M1 carbine in WW2, the OG PDW, was 3 magazines. 1 in the gun, 2 in a pouch on the stock or belt. And probably 90% of soldiers issued one never fired it once in combat. Which was the same loadout for the 1911 it was replacing, 1 mag in gun, 2 in pouch. And some branches like the navy only loaded 6 rounds in the magazine, because they never updated the SOP after changing from revolvers, because they were only used for ship guards in port. The idea for the P90 was similar, it had high enough capacity in the one mag that it was thought you wouldn't need to reload because it was for emergency use only, the idea was it was used to break contact with a sudden attack, if you got stuck in a sustained firefight you had more problems than any small arms was going to solve. So ammo was more of a fixed cost than for service weapons, as most wouldn't be used outside of training. Kind of like most guys issued a M9 in the last 20 years probably never fired it while deployed outside of deployment workups. I don't think the initial rollout of the P90 FN even had a mag pouch for them. I know the local PD that issed them for a minute had to get their pouches done custom.
True, but you also have to keep in mind the logistical strain from keeping these old weapons. Like where do you buy a new FAL bolt when the old one broke? Someone has to go out their way to make it, and when demand is low so is people willing to make these old parts. The less people making them means the one's that are being made and sold are going to be more expensive. At some point, holding and maintining old equipment is going to be more expensive than just buying new ones. And like Zach says, someone up top is gonna be like, "hey, these guys uses M16's, why don't we slap all this shit on these M16's that these people are carrying?" and give them a bunch of shit they don't need. If they're given SMG's then the top brass might not just shove a bunch of accessories onto these guys. Also M16's are long, which makes carrying them around a bit more annoying than, say, a pistol, or a compact SMG.
I’m siding with Zach. The littler guys could make more use of a simpler and lighter weapon. Always a little something to be said about conscript proofing your weapons and I hate tacticool attachments. Everything you need to make the weapon effective should be a seamless part of the platform because it’s loose, ugly, expensive and cumbersome otherwise. If I have a rangefinder on my rifle, I want It to be minimal and sleek. I don’t want a Swiss army scope that’s taller than the actual rifle and just crashes or gets hacked. On the idea of a new adoption itself, It sounds pedantic but when you adopt a new weapon you usually do that to have an edge and outpacing maintenance costs. Discontinued leftovers from a different time when you had different technical abilities are more of a liability; they need to be overly modified to make them effective and of course they create more logistical bloat because you need more of their outdated parts and ammo. The end of their lifecycle is typically when they get thrown into surplus and become assimilated into civilian self-defense/levied militia. Selling them to whoever wants a cheap gun to defend themselves and our country but can’t be trusted with our brand new shit. At least not the MIC production models (apart from gun control and the actual price of modern weapons).
" everything you need to make the weapon work should be a seamless part of the platform..." It's thinking like that that almost landed us the XM 29 OICW.
@@mechwar31 we’re talking about sidearms for non-infantry. Did I say they should be given a grenade launcher? Is it the grenade launcher? If we were talking about the whole scope program no I fully support that program retroactively.
Nothing is never simple in the military, so much "dress right dress" when it comes to anything. Like lining up every vehicle in the motorpool for the weekend when no one will be there.
Repost of my comment on the now unlisted earlier version of this video: Not to mention rear echelon troops don't need to carry the broomstick that is the M16A2. Smaller lighter SMGs that have less to snag on stuff (like when you're exiting a vehicle) and less to bump into things (like when you're in a CQB environment). The P90 would be my go to for that. I understand sticking with 9x19mm but I do not know of ANY 9MM SMG that can take a 50 round mag that is anywhere near as compact, light, and snag resistant as the P90 when using said 50 round mag. Even if you managed to find a 9mm SMG that meets those specs for the same cost as a P90 9x19mm has worse ballistics against targets wearing soft armor and has much worse range than 5.7x28MM. If the Army was dead set on a 9mm SMG and I was in charge of what they picked I'd probably use old M16 Lowers and go with CMMG radial delayed blowback 9x19mm uppers with 5" barrels for weight and size. All of the controls are the same as an M16 (besides the forward assist, though they could be built with a standard mil spec upper receiver that has the "forward assist" if the Army required it) and the 30 round 9mm magazines dimensionally (external dimensions) are the same as 30 round AR pmags. No need for new mag carriers because the mags are the same size. You have a use for those old M16 lowers with lots of parts commonality with M16s and M4s (lower wise).
Major issue with the 5.7mm ammo is its absurdly high price. Oh also the fact that no other weapon share the ammunition with it (unless you take Five seveNs as well, bit then you got all this stock of 9mm just sittin there)
Or just put one of the adapters that allow the lower to use P320 mags and maintain commonality. They already are issuing 21 round magazines for it. Or, the SF guys just selected the Sig Rattler as a PDW, as a conversion kit and whole system, just put those out there, give everyone who is not frontline guys one, they are transitioning to the XM5 in 6.8, so worries about a new caliber (.300 Blackout) are already kinda moot. Plus .300 BLK has a much better performance inside 100 meters than either 9mm or 5.7, and it can use SLAP rounds that have phenomenal armor piercing capability that exceed either.
@@MandoWookie I haven't seen such an adaptor made for the AR series of rifles to take P320 mags. I think if they had to stick with 9MM they might as well convert old ARs using a new upper and a new buffer.
@@_Salok the price would get lower under mass production for the militairy, the only reason it's expensive is because only FN produce it, in low quantitys too because their business decisions are pretty shit to be honest
I want these two to play Insurgency: Sandstorm and just have a rant about the guns and the customizing of said guns. it would be freaking great, and maybe play the game little... maybe. I enjoy the rants more.
I love listening to Zach rant about this stuff. It makes me feel good to hear someone who knows how ridiculous things can get when it comes to chain of command, but also I love to hear all these neat gun facts. I learn something new every time I watch these kind of vids. Also, honest question. What MOS's would qualify as rear echelon troops? I'm just slightly curious.
Brass need to quit micromanaging crap like this and let their NCOs and lower officers do their damn jobs. "But lower enlisted dumb" - yes, yes they are, and that's why you have sergeants and captains _keeping an eye on them_ and whipping them into shape.
This was the logic behind giving rear echelon troops M1 Carbine in WWII - they found rear echelon couldn't adequately defend themselves with their 9mm handguns. The carbine used the same ammo but greater range and accuracy and was cheap to make and simple to maintain. That said an SMG is a close quarters weapon so not sure what the reasoning is here to equip rear echelon with it as it's also not necessarily cheap or easy to maintain either
Kimber micro 9 came in the shop for cleaning. We put it in our ultra sonic like every other gun. We then tried to reassemble it and the slide got stuck 3/4 of the way on and wouldn't go into battery. It was sent back for repairs
Few years ago I saw rear line units training at JRTC that had M16A2s with M4 stocks M5 rail systems with PEQ2s and M68 CCOs all mounted on the handguard
I wonder why the US military doesn't give a damn about the WWSD rifles which are almost Half(!) the weight of the 9.5lbs rifles the US Army ended up with. I'm not saying they just adopt the WWSD rifle but surely it's a great proof of concept of how light a 5.56mm rifle can be made especially with the force of a major manufacturer behind it. That weight saving is surely the "100% improvement in combat effectiveness" that the army said they'd require to adopt a new rifle. The US army used fixed stocks for years before the M4 carbine, it wasn't a major impediment and is even less relevant with rail mounted optics you can easily move the optic back and forth to get the desired eye relief.
zach should be happy he had M16A2's while he was on iraq, when us Brazilians went to Haiti back in the day, we had to use these old Para-FALs and FALs, even the marines there had to use the FAL MD97 instead of the M16 they trained with.
Listening to the whole M16A2 bit of the rant is even better when you hear the story of how Henry Chan of 9 Hole Reviews was issued an M16A2 in 2012 and was told he had to have a rail system on it, despite being an rear echelon officer
This is actually hilarious, reuploaded a video because of an editing mistake yesterday. Reupload a video with no audio for the first two minute people after a perfectly fine upload. I don't know if its a bit but i love it!
If I remember correctly when my dad was a captain in the army and in his unit they had an armored unit that had like m3 grease guns issued to them and my dad basically issued himself one and requested extra magazines and operated an m3 while he was in the army, (kind of like when zach gave himself an m203)
It's the exact problem in the Finnish army's high readiness force. We had the very light RKs that were just 3,5 kgs. Then we get the new upgraded ones with rails everywhere and the iron stock replaced with an adjustable. The rails (with the flashlight and laser we aren't allowed to remove) add about 1,5 kg to the rifle. The lighter stock makes the front heaviness worse. The only useful thing in the upgrade is the aimpoint
Ahhh The wonderful things the "Good Idea Fairy" comes up with when she cruses through zero* country... *slang back in my day meaning Officer country cause they were O1, O2... as appose to E1, E2... They also lived on levels 0+ (above the main deck of the ship). So this Navy guy say's to a Marine, you know your department of the navy right? To which the Marine replies, Yea, the Mens Department...
I was Chair Force, and a desk job at that. We were trained on no-shit original M16's (triangular handguards, no forward assist, _Vietnam-era_ Air Force M16's) in CATM at Basic, and despite being worn out as all hell they were... kinda nice! A comfortable 7 pounds with an empty mag, everything worked good enough. Easy marksman qualification, no trouble to carry around on exercises. So imagine how _flabbergasted_ I was when I was issued an M4 carbine... and it weighed noticeably more than the rifle I had been trained on. It had all-steel picatinny, a red-dot optic, giant laser module, vertical foregrip, rail covers... it was like nine pounds empty! Wasn't this supposed to be the _lightweight_ carbine? What happened?
You know that the National Guard will get the A2s, the regular Army troops will get M4A1s, and the SMGs will be issued to anyone that works in a 3 shop, because reasons. Just like my first trip to Iraq, the Bn XO had a suppressor on his rifle. Why? Because it looked cool and he’s the XO. Or like the fact the the S3 wouldn’t get onto a Stryker without a Peltor with his ACH, and when he was offered the same Combat Vehicle Communications helmet that his vehicle commander wore everyday, he said “I’m not putting my head outside of this vehicle wearing that”, implying that his brain is far too important to not get the best protection available. Keep in mind, he said that to the guy that wore it everyday, basically saying “your brain is an acceptable loss, mine is not.”
I have a Colt 20 inch A2 that I got from my dad. On the gun I had the same thing Zach wanted, a Pic Rail with a M68 CCO on the rail. I however wanted it to be a traditional style plastic stock rifle with no optic like the Mil A2s. Now seeing that the army did exactly what my dad did, I regret changing it.
ooorrrr... I'm having a thought: What if we just, IDK, cut the barrels shorter on the M16, and maybe put a collapsible buttstock on it to make it easier to have in a vehicle. You wouldn't really need any special parts, special magazines, special ammunition, or special tools. wait, did I just describe an M4?
Better yet, go even shorter and issue the Mk.18. You don't need to worry about the increased parts wear from the massive gas port that much either, because support troops and vehicle crews aren't going to be burning through tens of thousands of rounds like spec ops tend to.
my dad when he was in the guard was assigned an A1 with the old triangle hand guard said he liked it better then the newer rounded Handguards cause it laid better in his palm and when he had to rest the rifle in "Driver Firing Position" so that he could fire the weapon while driving the vehicle.
The one thing that pissed me off about the 2000s military era is that they treated us all like pack mules. So many soldiers have crushed discs and rotator cuff issues from this bullshit.
The military dont usually call it a sub machine gun. They call it a PDW, and use it as such. They already give PDW's to troops like drivers, mechanics, technicians, sometimes pilots. Personel where a full sized rifle would get in the way or weigh too much.
I have to disagree with Zach on this one: if you're in a rear echelon this means you're further from combat, you're NOT on the frontlines therefore you need much longer range to be effective, so logically all rear echelon troops need to be issued sniper rifles. :P
I had to look up a picture of that detachable carry handle thing and yeah first pic was one just bolted to the side of a barrel. I mean I believed it but I had to see that shit
You know the military is doing a good job when the basic soldiers are complaining about 1-2 pounds worth of gear. Instead of complaining about all the meat being rotten, or embalmed, or what have you.
I mean to be fair, an SMG would also require new parts in storage like an old M16, no? And then you would also get a ton of useless extra mounted in it to make it as heavy as a rifle in the first place at some point.
sometimes I feel like this is the true reason fully modular weapon systems like the Magpul Masada or the HK XM8 fell short, because someone in the testing department looked back at the regular army and saw this exact scene: Military Leaders: "We're issuing you an upgrade package of a whole bunch of accessories that can be used to customize your weapon according to individual preference and necessity!" Troops: "Yaay" Military Leaders: "We also expect you to put all the accessories on at all times, and everyone has to put them the exact same way even if it's not optimal for you because otherwise we'll throw a hissy fit if during the next inspection we find the front grip or the PEQ module installed one rail slot farther than what we like" And then the testing guys looked at the uber-modular weapon systems being tested and was like "yeah...with leaders like these it'd be just wasted" and scrapped the projects
I just used an ACOG for the first time a few weeks ago. I only got it because I'm a NCO, everyone else got CCOs. I've only used iron sights for over a decade; it felt weird having modern sights
Unfortunately, the APC9k is only for personal security detachments for senior officers and other high-risk personnel, and only 350 were ordered. It's just another coolguy gun, nobody without a beard will ever touch one in the Army.
Ok serious question: why don’t we equip rear echelon guys with carbines/ haven’t we done this before? I’m thinking of it from a perspective of they’re the same ammunition and fulfill a similar purpose at a shorter firing distance.
Two things... One, what is Zach's opinion on SMGs vs SBRs? And what does he think of the army's new rifle made by Sig that is *supposedly* is going to replace the M4?
SMGs are Zach's favorite type of gun, like to the point where he tried multiple times to be issued an MP5 instead of his M4, haven't heard his opinion on SBR's, and he doesn't like the new rifle. It's heavier than an M4, it's more expensive, it uses its own brand new ammunition not used by anything else, and the computerized sight is definitely going to have reliability and durability problems.
SMGs? In a modern military???? Why?! I’m assuming Zach is referring to pistol calibers here, to which I can really only think “But pistol calibers suck if you compare them to modern PDW calibers” Is Zach was suggesting a pistol caliber SMG where a rifle caliber SBR/PDW(/SMG) would be so much more effective? All this comes down to is that pistol calibers suck, a rifle round is going to penetrate more, shoot flatter, do more damage, ECT ECT. “But what about the concuss-“ Suppressors, they’re putting them on everything anyway. And 5.56 is about the same weight as 9mm, IIRC a little less but that’s probably changes round to round. But that’s just my opinion
Smgs really have no place in modern combat. I’m aware that socom ran with mp5s when conducting raids back in the day but that really isn’t it anymore. Everyone has switch over to short barrel rifles and even now most special units run the 300 blackout for subsonic rounds. Smg don’t have a role anymore. But to clarify his point, the army adopted the apc9k but they didn’t order much of them. They are only going to be used for personal security type roles and even then there’s many photos out there of people using the sig mcx rattler instead of
@@smileyr I agree, however I will say I think very small SMGs (IE. A full auto pistol with a stock) may have a role as a very small but suppressive fire/hornets nest gun. I’ve seen designs for the P50 by kel-tec that make it into a possible device for compact suppressive fire weaponry, as well as designs for actually good guns. This ideally would be for units who need high concealment but could benefit from being able to send lots of lead down range. (However I personally have more faith in other solutions I’ve seen suggested for this problem) However, my wheelhouse is ballistics, so I really can’t speak much on things like suppressive fire, I can only parrot what others have said.
With the introduction of the M4 I'm surprised that's not considered the answer. It's short enough to be lighter for rear echelon troops. It's close enough to a sub-machine gun with a much better practical range.
I've never been issued anything other than an M4 for the five years I've been in, I'd love to hear a rant about how the M16s are better / worse than the platform we are using now.
We got ripped off in BCT. Literally every other platoon in our battery got issued M4s with red dot sights to train with.... we got old M16A2s. My rifle bolt literally called it quits and somehow part of the bolt face broke off during rifle qualification, so I had to resort to cycling it manually with the charging handle as if it were a freaking bolt action. I still managed to qualify, but I was pissed. 😂
Did- did he reupload the video because of subtitle glitch thing? Oh my god mike, you really try and spoil us the most you can, even when there's an entirely overlookable mistake and you fix it. You both truly spoil us
If Zach was in charge the requisition of the entire U.S Army, it would be the most efficient army in the world. Probably could save a few hundred billion too.
I had an LtCol who was anal about our LBV and said something along the lines of " your vest better match mine" literally 10 minutes after a brief where an Adjutant general said to set it up to our preference.
![[#2024MAMA] G-DRAGON - 무제(Untitled, 2014)+POWER+HOME SWEET HOME+뱅뱅뱅+FANTASTIC BABY | Mnet 241123 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/Ox29z5Nf1Uk/mqdefault.jpg)
Reupload because subtitles got mucked. Previous comments:
The P90: Designed for rear echelon to kill Commandos
The truth about the P90: Used by Commandos to annihilate rear echelon. 👍431
Tell Zach to be real, with his luck he would still get issued a full size rifle. 👍238
Armored crews are probably gonna see it way before the boys in the rear. Try sticking the new full sized rifle behind a driver's seat, ain't gonna be comfy.👍 201
You might need to re-upload again. This time there's no audio.
Mike I think that you're overworking your self. Daily uploads are hard for some one with a job
Legit thought you were doing a bit since this one had no sound when I clicked
The fact Mike re-uploads when he mess up is a show of how hard he works on these. I'll watch again to boost the rhythm of Al Gore
What I’m wondering is why didn’t they put the ACOGs on the carry handles, because the M150 ACOG was designed to mount to carry handles in the first place, if I recall correctly the detachable carry handles have the same hardware and mounting system to accommodate an ACOG as the fixed carry handles do
I love how it's "rant about smgs" but I think most of the rant was about how dumb the command's rifle based decisions were
Yes, but I understand Zach's point. K.I.S.S. (Keep it simple stupid) or make something idiot proof as possible is something I strongly believe in.
But it look cool and army future!
I think the point he was trying to make was: give the people that don't need a full sized weapon a smaller one so when command adds a bunch of shit they can't put as much shit on it and it'll be the same weight as what they're rifles should be.
@@lloydgietzmann6596 Oh I know, and it's super reasonable. But I love how it's like Zach lost the plot at some point because he remembered the carrying handles
Why wouldn't the general want the SMG to be usable at night? Why shouldn't rear echelon soldiers be combat effective?
Mike: But, why not issue old M16A2s?
Zach: [goes off on 16 hour rant with branching tangents]
Mike: My god, what have I done?
Yeah, same thing happened with the Glock 18 rant in NV.
In Ep 77 Diamond City Blues, the same thing happened. Mike's a saint, but it's grating, and his frustration bleeds through sometimes.
Mike: *asks whether machine gun is called so because the parts are machined metal parts*
Zach: *immediately starts ranting about machine gun and submachine gun designations*
Mike: "my God I didn't mean to send you down this route...😅"
it's like talking to my wife.
@@SpaceMissile Is she that into guns, too? :P
@@whiterabbit75 I wish, lol. She won't even let me desk pop.
I love how NPCMike looks like he's just there to listen politely to Zach, but isn't that engaged.
True
I’m surprised he sat there the whole video and didn’t get up to farm or start hammering something.
He's so disengaged, he turned into a clutch syatem.
Not an NPC I think this is their fallout 4 multiplayer.
@@jah24car Mike is an NPC in the Fallout 4 playthrough as well.
For anyone wondering about the weight complaints, when you’re carrying a ton of weight all day ounces start to feel like pounds. With the weight of a full plate carrier, main weapon, side arm, ammo, helmet, pack or camel bag, and all the small stuff like a knife or toothbrush, your kit gets heavy. On base it might not be a problem but in the field, the last thing you want is to be weighed down especially by unnecessary equipment.
Truth. That's also why long distance runners and hikers quibble over ounces and grams. Downside is they seem to replace every ounce of saved weight on soldiers kit with 2 ounces of new crap.
@@arthas640 Well, also we are talking about rear echelon troops whose job has nothing to do with directly shooting people until it does where something with a bit more range than a pistol may be heavily desired. But also being rear echelon, they probably aren't doing a whole lot of running or hiking to fulfill their roles.
@@TheGrandslam89 Depending on the assignment the rear echelon troop isn't actually supposed to fight anything. A supply convoy driver may stop their trucks for whatever reason and bring the gun with them. They get attacked. Then they shoot only as much as is needed to GTFO and let somebody with better stuff handle it, because you don't want your ammo/fuel/spare parts to get blown up anyways.
@@arthas640 Same reason my uncle bitching about how easy soldiers today have it compared when he was in Vietnam, and it's like... motherfucker, you were carrying like, 50 pounds tops when you were outside the wire. Your kid is marching around a fucking desert in damned near twice that these days. Fortunately neither of your back injuries are service related.
Carrying a 7.62x39 AK through tight alleyways (with a sniper rifle on my back) really made me wish for an MP5 more than anything.
Army commercials: We are an amazing unit of strong individuals who will protect everything, no matter the cost.
Zach: So here's the time that my commanding officer threw a hissy fit because he didn't like that his last minute repair was taking too long, even though he didn't do the paperwork I have to remind him of every time he comes in.
Zach: complaining about the brass’ dumbest decisions in a fervent manner
Mike: *listening like the good soldier he is thinking about how efficient his rifle was at shooting*
I feel like Zach should definitely be back in the army. Not as any kind of grunt, no no...but as an advisor to the top brass. Much like an evil mastermind should keep a small child on staff to point out any glaringly obvious flaws in their plan for world domination, the army should keep Advisor Zach on staff to point out any time their dumb bullshit is, in fact, dumb bullshit.
Why lol, so they can proceed to not listen to anything he says anyways lol
@@chrisdavey5530 see but then Zach gets to pull the "I told you so" card to some smug high up bastard
He would just be stealing cool prototype weapons or smth
So like a SGM?
@@androgenius_alisa No, no, I think you mean PRACTICAL prototype weapons, he has standards, he doesn't like the Pancor Jackhammer, remember?
From the way you describe the carry handle being bolted to the bottom of the rifle, i imagine it being used like a shitty DIY foregrip, and that the optics were more relied on
Yep, that's exactly what you see in photos from the sandbox. I remember when one got a lot of circulation on various gun forums, and a bunch of couch commandos ragged on the Marines doing that.
It was pointed out that it was a better option then throwing it in a rucksack to be lost, it was actually more guarded from damage than mounted on the reciever, and the Trijicon Acog is actually zeroed by hitting it with a rock, so the chances of the optic failing are lower than the irons. Which are actually kinda delicate on the A2/A4.
I thought it was the proto version of an angled grip
funny enough, a lot of the pics I found have the carry handle mounted right beside a regular foregrip
@@MandoWookie "Which are actually kinda delicate on the A2/A4.:
i beg to differ, you have some chunky wings to protect the rear sight.
@@peaceoutbruh7085 More how easy it is to adjust the sights on the A2/A4. It's got the big easy to use knob for windage and the dial for elevation it is possible for them to be bumped off of zero while rucking/riding/ dismounting.
And it was at one point SOP too dummy cord them to the reciever as the mounting system tended to loosen. But that is standard for anything mounted to rails.
Historically the M1 Garand, which had similar easy to adjust sights( developed for the same reason, the Camp Perry competition shooters demanded it for the KD range) so much so they at one point added a locking bar to the sights so that after it was zeroed it couldn't be adjusted without armorer assistance.
Meanwhile the ACOG( and Aimpoints ) are set them and forget them with nonexposed adjustments.
As long as mounted properly, they won't lose zero outside of excessive abuse.
So I started my career in the infantry. Carrying a rifle with all the Gucci gear. Peq15s, ACOGs/ccos, surefire lights we had a series of COs who were wise enough to let good rifleman do whatever the heck they wanted with their rifle. When I became a 91 fox naturally I had to move to a maintenance unit. At the maintenance unit we have bare bones m4a1s, and we're not really supposed to stick extra stuff on them. Our primary optic is the stupid flip-up spoon backup iron sight. I have nothing against iron sights, I have shot expert multiple times with the carry handle irons, but the buis is terrible. I got so annoyed with the backup iron sight that at one point I brought my personal ta50 ACOG in and slapped that on my M4 and shot with that. I got a stern talking to for doing that.
About 2 years into the maintenance company, I was helping with a sensitive items inventory, and I came to find out we have more than enough ACOGs and Peqs for every rifle in the company. We're just not allowed to use them, because the commander doesn't want them to get messed up, or for pieces to get lost. The Army spent how many hundreds of thousands of dollars on these aiming devices and they're just sitting in boxes in a cage.
The list of "Idiot things idiot commanders do because they're musty farts who think they're smart." continues to grow longer and longer........Now I think that it's at the point I need to digitize it, since it's taking up the whole fucking room!
Of course, their logic is "well we are saving them until we need them!"
But then when you would need them, no one is qualified to use them. So you still don't get them.
That makes Zach's command even worse, because if your CO could stash away all the useful attachments, Zach's CO could've let his guys dump unnecessary rails.
Wack. I can understand not wanting to deal with the headache of keeping track of that shit, but as a taxpayer I paid for that gear and it’s a waste for it to just sit in storage
Zach: Complains about rifle being heavy because of attachments
Also Zach: IS THAT A UNDERBARREL GRENADE LAUNCHER? GIVE ME ONE
I know this was just a joke, but still, to be fair, with a grenade launcher you get a lot of additional functionality
@@koryfredrick1164 also it was actualyl added at the soldiers discretion
But can you slap it on a p-90?
@@captainplexiglass6475 You can put any attachment on any gun, if you're brave enough.
@@screamingcactus1753 _Creates ghetto-fabulous abomination of an M9 with an M203 slapped onto it, somehow._
I remember when I got my KAS rails. Put just enough panels on it to cover where my hand went, and left the rest naked.
When we got our* m68s, we were pretty stoked. Then no more than 5 days later, they took them from us, threw them into a storage bin, threw the bin somewhere, and told us they were taken away because "we might break them". But we were still signed for them.
Along with our bayonets and 2 frag grenades each. On PAPER we had those things ready to rock in our kit, in REALITY they sat in bins/boxes collecting dust.
M68 ?
@@StreetLight099could be wrong but I believe they’re referring to the M68 close combat optic, the common civilian name being the aimpoint comp m2
Are you sure they stayed in that box instead of winding up on Ebay? Because that sounds a lot like one of Col. Kleptovski's schemes.
Current army here, as of a year or so ago, units were still getting m4s. I think they'll give smgs to officers and tankers and other such jobs and keeping m4s for rear echelon troops like cbrn or admin
First M4 I held was last year. I've been in for 6.
What submachine gun do you think they issue to tankers and officers?
@@haplessoperator not to be rude. Dont know, dont care, not in anymore, probaly drunk on this comment
Likely not, those SMGs were pretty explicitly ordered for essentially bodyguards given they bought less than 1,000. Essentially people who needed something nearly pistol sized but with more firepower than a pistol. Everyone else might reasonably be asked to fire over 100 meters if they actually had to use their gun for self defense where a carbine would be a better choice.
Zach, if you re-enlist, you'll get an MP5, a P-90, be promoted to Sargent, and receive a tank. What do you say?
Nice name.
That’s the dumbest re-enlistment bonus ever but then again there some dudes who re-enlist and don’t get anything
@Seth Rilea By tank they mean "Container used to store large amounts of fluid"
@@ClonedGamer001 is it an old jerrycan? Cause the old WW2 jerrycans ROCK, you can really tell they're german, cause they were built to *_LAST_*
@Seth Rilea they give you a sixteen ounce water bottle with a hole in the bottom
I’d LOVE to hear Zach’s opinion on the XM5 battle rifle.
Please Zach do it!
Ask and ye shall receive: th-cam.com/video/Z3mni-weNvM/w-d-xo.html
wish granted ahahaha!
That video was good
@@austindecker7643 where?
Zach’s description of his rifle sounds so cursed, the Frankenstein’ed A2 with a railed handguard, with all the covers and a grip, with a gooseneck and red dot 💀
that's literally what the M1 carbine was designed to be, a light weapon for rear echelon troops so they'd have something better than a friggin 1911 to defend themselves if they needed it without having to carry a full sized battle rifle like the Garand. The Army then promptly forgot about this lesson for the next 80 years.
Initially, that’s what the M4 carbine was for actually. The idea was that frontline troops would get M16A4s and Tankers and real lines would get M4 carbines (this is why they had the thin pencil barrels that SOF found were somewhat prone to overheating) but then they started issuing out M4 carbines to everyone
M1 carbine was outdated by the time ARs made the reigns, and a AR carbine is so ubiquitous and cheap there is no reason NOT to issue them over an inferior firearm.
4:08
This situation sounds eerily similar to 75mm M4 Sherman Tankers being issued 76mm Shermans that could be ‘exchanged’ where upon the aforementioned Tankers basically had that exact reaction.
Doesn't help Tigerphobia was a thing, so they were going "Why give us these giant signs that say 'Big target over here! Come blast us right in the fucking side of the turret!' That's a fucking STUPID idea! 'Better armour penetration'?! I'D RATHER NOT HAVE MY ARMOUR CRACKED OPEN LIKE AN EGG!"
@@airplanemaniacgaming7877 Honestly it seems as if most anything would crack the Sherman like an egg! If it’s any consolation I hear they passed ‘Oh my God the tank is on fire!’ Test With flying colors so it sort of goes hand-in-hand that you might as well get whatever helps ensure the first shot is definitive!
The sherman's armor wasn't great but it also wasn't terrible. Yeah if you shoot at it with an 88 It'll die but guess what, So will a tiger I.
THe sherman was fighting what germany had produced in high numbers. Which was PZ4s (which they were slightly better than in theory, roughly equal in pratice), PZ2s 3s and 3s. Which the sherman was leagues better than simply because those tanks had shit guns.
It's like comparing a brand new ferrari to a used truck. They do different things for different ppl
The title of the video should be “bureaucracy in a nut shell” or “one of the many situations the military was dumb”
I mean, that's 98.815% of Zach's rants, though.
@@thegentlemanpirate13 shit that’s true or gun store conversation/random shit that was bad or funny
“60% of your tax dollars pay for this:”
Thats what happens in a stupid democrazy, under a corporation or dictatorship none of this would happen
I love when Zach gets deep into a technical rant and Mike just sits there going 'uh huh' as he gets everything out.
Isn't it a much greater logistical problem to have an entirely separate weapon platform using a different caliber of ammunition and parts from a different manufacturer than giving them A2s?
If the SMG is a 9mm the supply chain already exists. And since the SMG would presumably be issued to non combat jobs they're not expending ammo at the rate a rifleman or Machinegunner would be. They'll likely never fire their weapons, except for range training.
That smg they’re issuing takes the mags and ammunition from the current issue sidearm.
The upper brass might care less about the aesthetics when it's not an M16
Yes, but also no. The standard loadout for the M1 carbine in WW2, the OG PDW, was 3 magazines. 1 in the gun, 2 in a pouch on the stock or belt. And probably 90% of soldiers issued one never fired it once in combat.
Which was the same loadout for the 1911 it was replacing, 1 mag in gun, 2 in pouch.
And some branches like the navy only loaded 6 rounds in the magazine, because they never updated the SOP after changing from revolvers, because they were only used for ship guards in port.
The idea for the P90 was similar, it had high enough capacity in the one mag that it was thought you wouldn't need to reload because it was for emergency use only, the idea was it was used to break contact with a sudden attack, if you got stuck in a sustained firefight you had more problems than any small arms was going to solve.
So ammo was more of a fixed cost than for service weapons, as most wouldn't be used outside of training.
Kind of like most guys issued a M9 in the last 20 years probably never fired it while deployed outside of deployment workups.
I don't think the initial rollout of the P90 FN even had a mag pouch for them. I know the local PD that issed them for a minute had to get their pouches done custom.
True, but you also have to keep in mind the logistical strain from keeping these old weapons. Like where do you buy a new FAL bolt when the old one broke? Someone has to go out their way to make it, and when demand is low so is people willing to make these old parts. The less people making them means the one's that are being made and sold are going to be more expensive. At some point, holding and maintining old equipment is going to be more expensive than just buying new ones. And like Zach says, someone up top is gonna be like, "hey, these guys uses M16's, why don't we slap all this shit on these M16's that these people are carrying?" and give them a bunch of shit they don't need. If they're given SMG's then the top brass might not just shove a bunch of accessories onto these guys.
Also M16's are long, which makes carrying them around a bit more annoying than, say, a pistol, or a compact SMG.
Honestly I don’t understand half the words you’re saying but it’s very entertaining to see Zach get so worked up
Only the real OG's remember when this video first dropped way back in the day.
Damn straight
Ok boomer
Who cares
I’m siding with Zach. The littler guys could make more use of a simpler and lighter weapon. Always a little something to be said about conscript proofing your weapons and I hate tacticool attachments. Everything you need to make the weapon effective should be a seamless part of the platform because it’s loose, ugly, expensive and cumbersome otherwise. If I have a rangefinder on my rifle, I want It to be minimal and sleek. I don’t want a Swiss army scope that’s taller than the actual rifle and just crashes or gets hacked. On the idea of a new adoption itself, It sounds pedantic but when you adopt a new weapon you usually do that to have an edge and outpacing maintenance costs. Discontinued leftovers from a different time when you had different technical abilities are more of a liability; they need to be overly modified to make them effective and of course they create more logistical bloat because you need more of their outdated parts and ammo. The end of their lifecycle is typically when they get thrown into surplus and become assimilated into civilian self-defense/levied militia. Selling them to whoever wants a cheap gun to defend themselves and our country but can’t be trusted with our brand new shit. At least not the MIC production models (apart from gun control and the actual price of modern weapons).
" everything you need to make the weapon work should be a seamless part of the platform..." It's thinking like that that almost landed us the XM 29 OICW.
@@mechwar31 we’re talking about sidearms for non-infantry. Did I say they should be given a grenade launcher?
Is it the grenade launcher? If we were talking about the whole scope program no I fully support that program retroactively.
@@Otterdisappointment no but the thought process is the same, modularity is a lot more important than it seems at times
@@galacticupfan7386 so is dexterity
I wouldn't consider giving a bunch of people a super expensive SMG (compared to the m4) conscript proofing
One step forward, two steps to the side, four steps backwards. We'll get efficient logistics and requisition eventually...
After the heat death of the universe, or once the big bang has occurred for the third time in a row after the one we're in?
Nothing is never simple in the military, so much "dress right dress" when it comes to anything. Like lining up every vehicle in the motorpool for the weekend when no one will be there.
Repost of my comment on the now unlisted earlier version of this video: Not to mention rear echelon troops don't need to carry the broomstick that is the M16A2. Smaller lighter SMGs that have less to snag on stuff (like when you're exiting a vehicle) and less to bump into things (like when you're in a CQB environment). The P90 would be my go to for that. I understand sticking with 9x19mm but I do not know of ANY 9MM SMG that can take a 50 round mag that is anywhere near as compact, light, and snag resistant as the P90 when using said 50 round mag. Even if you managed to find a 9mm SMG that meets those specs for the same cost as a P90 9x19mm has worse ballistics against targets wearing soft armor and has much worse range than 5.7x28MM.
If the Army was dead set on a 9mm SMG and I was in charge of what they picked I'd probably use old M16 Lowers and go with CMMG radial delayed blowback 9x19mm uppers with 5" barrels for weight and size. All of the controls are the same as an M16 (besides the forward assist, though they could be built with a standard mil spec upper receiver that has the "forward assist" if the Army required it) and the 30 round 9mm magazines dimensionally (external dimensions) are the same as 30 round AR pmags. No need for new mag carriers because the mags are the same size. You have a use for those old M16 lowers with lots of parts commonality with M16s and M4s (lower wise).
Major issue with the 5.7mm ammo is its absurdly high price.
Oh also the fact that no other weapon share the ammunition with it (unless you take Five seveNs as well, bit then you got all this stock of 9mm just sittin there)
Or just put one of the adapters that allow the lower to use P320 mags and maintain commonality. They already are issuing 21 round magazines for it.
Or, the SF guys just selected the Sig Rattler as a PDW, as a conversion kit and whole system, just put those out there, give everyone who is not frontline guys one, they are transitioning to the XM5 in 6.8, so worries about a new caliber (.300 Blackout) are already kinda moot.
Plus .300 BLK has a much better performance inside 100 meters than either 9mm or 5.7, and it can use SLAP rounds that have phenomenal armor piercing capability that exceed either.
@@MandoWookie I haven't seen such an adaptor made for the AR series of rifles to take P320 mags. I think if they had to stick with 9MM they might as well convert old ARs using a new upper and a new buffer.
@@_Salok Relative to what it does the price is not absurd and with economies of scale it would reduce the cost per round drastically.
@@_Salok the price would get lower under mass production for the militairy, the only reason it's expensive is because only FN produce it, in low quantitys too because their business decisions are pretty shit to be honest
2:12 NPC-Mike synchronized that comment perfectly! 😆
If they’re doing campfire stories in Fallout 4, then that means there’s still hope of a Fallout 4 continuation!
I want these two to play Insurgency: Sandstorm and just have a rant about the guns and the customizing of said guns. it would be freaking great, and maybe play the game little... maybe. I enjoy the rants more.
I love listening to Zach rant about this stuff. It makes me feel good to hear someone who knows how ridiculous things can get when it comes to chain of command, but also I love to hear all these neat gun facts. I learn something new every time I watch these kind of vids. Also, honest question. What MOS's would qualify as rear echelon troops? I'm just slightly curious.
I love how perfectively timed the Mike NPC is to look like he's face palming in time with the conversation.
Zatch forgot the military always used the equipment from the lowest bidder.
Brass need to quit micromanaging crap like this and let their NCOs and lower officers do their damn jobs. "But lower enlisted dumb" - yes, yes they are, and that's why you have sergeants and captains _keeping an eye on them_ and whipping them into shape.
The people in charge are the real idiots.
mikeburnfire always there to ligthen up a not so good day, a proper thanks to both of you for this
I just watched this early with sound. Now it's re-uploaded with no sound. Unless TH-cam did this I have no idea what's going on
It's always interesting hearing about the dumb decision the military makes with their guns and attachments.
Great video
This was the logic behind giving rear echelon troops M1 Carbine in WWII - they found rear echelon couldn't adequately defend themselves with their 9mm handguns. The carbine used the same ammo but greater range and accuracy and was cheap to make and simple to maintain. That said an SMG is a close quarters weapon so not sure what the reasoning is here to equip rear echelon with it as it's also not necessarily cheap or easy to maintain either
Kimber micro 9 came in the shop for cleaning. We put it in our ultra sonic like every other gun. We then tried to reassemble it and the slide got stuck 3/4 of the way on and wouldn't go into battery. It was sent back for repairs
These two should really make a podcast
Few years ago I saw rear line units training at JRTC that had M16A2s with M4 stocks M5 rail systems with PEQ2s and M68 CCOs all mounted on the handguard
zach just mentions an SMG, then for the rest of the video rants about the M16s
And Zack was so happy at the prospect of being issued a smg he reinlisted into the army
don't put that evil on him
@@ArchOwl come on no ucp/ berets, it's like they are begging for him back.
@@klonoa450 He gets a surprise phone call. "Y'want yer ol' job an' cabinets back, high-thpeed? Promise you'll outrank me."
I wonder why the US military doesn't give a damn about the WWSD rifles which are almost Half(!) the weight of the 9.5lbs rifles the US Army ended up with. I'm not saying they just adopt the WWSD rifle but surely it's a great proof of concept of how light a 5.56mm rifle can be made especially with the force of a major manufacturer behind it. That weight saving is surely the "100% improvement in combat effectiveness" that the army said they'd require to adopt a new rifle.
The US army used fixed stocks for years before the M4 carbine, it wasn't a major impediment and is even less relevant with rail mounted optics you can easily move the optic back and forth to get the desired eye relief.
zach should be happy he had M16A2's while he was on iraq, when us Brazilians went to Haiti back in the day, we had to use these old Para-FALs and FALs, even the marines there had to use the FAL MD97 instead of the M16 they trained with.
"That's it, I'm banishing you to Brazil!"
_Smoking Snakes intensifies_
Listening to the whole M16A2 bit of the rant is even better when you hear the story of how Henry Chan of 9 Hole Reviews was issued an M16A2 in 2012 and was told he had to have a rail system on it, despite being an rear echelon officer
This is actually hilarious, reuploaded a video because of an editing mistake yesterday. Reupload a video with no audio for the first two minute people after a perfectly fine upload. I don't know if its a bit but i love it!
It wasn't fine. Subtitle issues
@@thejugernautkiller390 ah I probably missed it in the first video. Honestly if it was a bit I wouldn't be surprised
If I remember correctly when my dad was a captain in the army and in his unit they had an armored unit that had like m3 grease guns issued to them and my dad basically issued himself one and requested extra magazines and operated an m3 while he was in the army, (kind of like when zach gave himself an m203)
Isn't an m3 grease gun heavier unloaded than an m16 is loaded?
@@TheGrandslam89 An m16 weighs 8.79 pounds loaded and a m3a1 is 7.9 pounds unloaded.
grease gun is heavier loaded
Mike’s a real friend, he has no idea what zach is ranting about half of the time but still listens and tries to engage as best as he can.
What a chad.
It's the exact problem in the Finnish army's high readiness force. We had the very light RKs that were just 3,5 kgs. Then we get the new upgraded ones with rails everywhere and the iron stock replaced with an adjustable. The rails (with the flashlight and laser we aren't allowed to remove) add about 1,5 kg to the rifle. The lighter stock makes the front heaviness worse. The only useful thing in the upgrade is the aimpoint
Ahhh The wonderful things the "Good Idea Fairy" comes up with when she cruses through zero* country...
*slang back in my day meaning Officer country cause they were O1, O2... as appose to E1, E2... They also lived on levels 0+ (above the main deck of the ship).
So this Navy guy say's to a Marine, you know your department of the navy right? To which the Marine replies, Yea, the Mens Department...
From what I understand, the SMG that has been adopted by the army is primarily going to be issued to PSDs.
Love how we’re starting to get back into the same situation with the NGSW program in the Army…
I was Chair Force, and a desk job at that. We were trained on no-shit original M16's (triangular handguards, no forward assist, _Vietnam-era_ Air Force M16's) in CATM at Basic, and despite being worn out as all hell they were... kinda nice! A comfortable 7 pounds with an empty mag, everything worked good enough. Easy marksman qualification, no trouble to carry around on exercises.
So imagine how _flabbergasted_ I was when I was issued an M4 carbine... and it weighed noticeably more than the rifle I had been trained on. It had all-steel picatinny, a red-dot optic, giant laser module, vertical foregrip, rail covers... it was like nine pounds empty! Wasn't this supposed to be the _lightweight_ carbine? What happened?
I wanna know Zach's opinion on the new Sig rifles the military is adopting.
Military when adding everything and the kitchen sink to your rifle: "Upgrades, people! Upgrades!"
Unfortunately it seems it's only gonna be for VIP protection
This seems to be only tangentially related to SMGs. The main thing I'm learning from this rant is that military bureaucracy sucks.
You know that the National Guard will get the A2s, the regular Army troops will get M4A1s, and the SMGs will be issued to anyone that works in a 3 shop, because reasons. Just like my first trip to Iraq, the Bn XO had a suppressor on his rifle. Why? Because it looked cool and he’s the XO. Or like the fact the the S3 wouldn’t get onto a Stryker without a Peltor with his ACH, and when he was offered the same Combat Vehicle Communications helmet that his vehicle commander wore everyday, he said “I’m not putting my head outside of this vehicle wearing that”, implying that his brain is far too important to not get the best protection available. Keep in mind, he said that to the guy that wore it everyday, basically saying “your brain is an acceptable loss, mine is not.”
I have a Colt 20 inch A2 that I got from my dad. On the gun I had the same thing Zach wanted, a Pic Rail with a M68 CCO on the rail. I however wanted it to be a traditional style plastic stock rifle with no optic like the Mil A2s. Now seeing that the army did exactly what my dad did, I regret changing it.
I love watching y'all despite only understanding about 50% of the *words* said, and understanding about 30% of the problems
ooorrrr... I'm having a thought:
What if we just, IDK, cut the barrels shorter on the M16, and maybe put a collapsible buttstock on it to make it easier to have in a vehicle. You wouldn't really need any special parts, special magazines, special ammunition, or special tools.
wait, did I just describe an M4?
Better yet, go even shorter and issue the Mk.18. You don't need to worry about the increased parts wear from the massive gas port that much either, because support troops and vehicle crews aren't going to be burning through tens of thousands of rounds like spec ops tend to.
my dad when he was in the guard was assigned an A1 with the old triangle hand guard said he liked it better then the newer rounded Handguards cause it laid better in his palm and when he had to rest the rifle in "Driver Firing Position" so that he could fire the weapon while driving the vehicle.
The one thing that pissed me off about the 2000s military era is that they treated us all like pack mules. So many soldiers have crushed discs and rotator cuff issues from this bullshit.
The military dont usually call it a sub machine gun. They call it a PDW, and use it as such. They already give PDW's to troops like drivers, mechanics, technicians, sometimes pilots. Personel where a full sized rifle would get in the way or weigh too much.
1:22 Keep more parts in the inventory, leading to a more complicated logistics situation? A new SMG would also complicate the logistics situation
Yeah makes no sense, the us already uses ar15 rifles
I have to disagree with Zach on this one: if you're in a rear echelon this means you're further from combat, you're NOT on the frontlines therefore you need much longer range to be effective, so logically all rear echelon troops need to be issued sniper rifles. :P
Shouldn't our frontline troops be given shotguns and SMGs? Better yet, give them ballistic shields and swords - they're up close!
@@kirbyis4ever Dude, yes, bring back the good ol' knife fights. ^_^
"we're changing the modern warfare paradigm"
@@kirbyis4ever I was scared you were being serious until I read the last part
They should give officers revolvers again like back in the day too. Though this one's purely for style points.
When I was in D.C. a couple years ago, I did see some guards around the pentagon have some b&t ap9k pros that they adopted
I watched this once already, Might as well watch it again
Glad we got that styer bullpup and we just use the short barrel config for the rear kids.
On the Wikipedia image for the compm2 you can see the wire holding the detachable combat grip
I had to look up a picture of that detachable carry handle thing and yeah first pic was one just bolted to the side of a barrel. I mean I believed it but I had to see that shit
You know the military is doing a good job when the basic soldiers are complaining about 1-2 pounds worth of gear. Instead of complaining about all the meat being rotten, or embalmed, or what have you.
I mean to be fair, an SMG would also require new parts in storage like an old M16, no? And then you would also get a ton of useless extra mounted in it to make it as heavy as a rifle in the first place at some point.
I fucken love how zacha rants have become so iconic that if a video is posted about hust rants, everhones like "oh hell yea"
That one guy who predicted a re upload deserves a cookie
You guys NEED a podcast
sometimes I feel like this is the true reason fully modular weapon systems like the Magpul Masada or the HK XM8 fell short, because someone in the testing department looked back at the regular army and saw this exact scene:
Military Leaders: "We're issuing you an upgrade package of a whole bunch of accessories that can be used to customize your weapon according to individual preference and necessity!"
Troops: "Yaay"
Military Leaders: "We also expect you to put all the accessories on at all times, and everyone has to put them the exact same way even if it's not optimal for you because otherwise we'll throw a hissy fit if during the next inspection we find the front grip or the PEQ module installed one rail slot farther than what we like"
And then the testing guys looked at the uber-modular weapon systems being tested and was like "yeah...with leaders like these it'd be just wasted" and scrapped the projects
It's okay, Mr.Burnfire, I didn't understand literally any of the gun lingo being chucked around but I still found it fascinating to listen to
I just used an ACOG for the first time a few weeks ago. I only got it because I'm a NCO, everyone else got CCOs.
I've only used iron sights for over a decade; it felt weird having modern sights
Good lord. What branch and unit are you with? It took your unit 20 years to get an acog?
3rd ID was the same way
@@deaddad6310I think a lot of these guys are making shit up, or never served.
I never thought I'd be able to tell someone's a POG just by their accent and voice
Unfortunately, the APC9k is only for personal security detachments for senior officers and other high-risk personnel, and only 350 were ordered. It's just another coolguy gun, nobody without a beard will ever touch one in the Army.
You guys are awesome I love listening to you keep having fun
Ok serious question: why don’t we equip rear echelon guys with carbines/ haven’t we done this before? I’m thinking of it from a perspective of they’re the same ammunition and fulfill a similar purpose at a shorter firing distance.
Always wondered about the seldom seen odd carry handle mounted under a soldier's rifle early in GWoT.
Somebody should send these videos to someone high in the chain of command for them to take notes.
Two things...
One, what is Zach's opinion on SMGs vs SBRs?
And what does he think of the army's new rifle made by Sig that is *supposedly* is going to replace the M4?
Made by sig, one word Expensive
SMGs are Zach's favorite type of gun, like to the point where he tried multiple times to be issued an MP5 instead of his M4, haven't heard his opinion on SBR's, and he doesn't like the new rifle. It's heavier than an M4, it's more expensive, it uses its own brand new ammunition not used by anything else, and the computerized sight is definitely going to have reliability and durability problems.
A new video for me to watch instead of working on my senior project? Hell yeah!!
The carry handle doubles as iron sights incase the optic breaks. Chances are the Marines didn't have money to buy a $30 flip up optic for everyone.
SMGs? In a modern military????
Why?!
I’m assuming Zach is referring to pistol calibers here, to which I can really only think “But pistol calibers suck if you compare them to modern PDW calibers”
Is Zach was suggesting a pistol caliber SMG where a rifle caliber SBR/PDW(/SMG) would be so much more effective? All this comes down to is that pistol calibers suck, a rifle round is going to penetrate more, shoot flatter, do more damage, ECT ECT.
“But what about the concuss-“ Suppressors, they’re putting them on everything anyway.
And 5.56 is about the same weight as 9mm, IIRC a little less but that’s probably changes round to round.
But that’s just my opinion
Smgs really have no place in modern combat. I’m aware that socom ran with mp5s when conducting raids back in the day but that really isn’t it anymore. Everyone has switch over to short barrel rifles and even now most special units run the 300 blackout for subsonic rounds. Smg don’t have a role anymore. But to clarify his point, the army adopted the apc9k but they didn’t order much of them. They are only going to be used for personal security type roles and even then there’s many photos out there of people using the sig mcx rattler instead of
@@smileyr I agree, however I will say I think very small SMGs (IE. A full auto pistol with a stock) may have a role as a very small but suppressive fire/hornets nest gun. I’ve seen designs for the P50 by kel-tec that make it into a possible device for compact suppressive fire weaponry, as well as designs for actually good guns. This ideally would be for units who need high concealment but could benefit from being able to send lots of lead down range.
(However I personally have more faith in other solutions I’ve seen suggested for this problem)
However, my wheelhouse is ballistics, so I really can’t speak much on things like suppressive fire, I can only parrot what others have said.
With the introduction of the M4 I'm surprised that's not considered the answer. It's short enough to be lighter for rear echelon troops. It's close enough to a sub-machine gun with a much better practical range.
I've never been issued anything other than an M4 for the five years I've been in, I'd love to hear a rant about how the M16s are better / worse than the platform we are using now.
you never carried a saw or 240? how????
@@mondaysinsanity8193 I fired a SAW at basic, but I haven't touched one since. Never had to carry or really handle one in any capacity.
@@SierraWhiskeyND what mos??? Cuz basically every tends to get a turn as gunner
@@mondaysinsanity8193 91B. The rare times I get to touch any weapon is during qual, followed by cleaning, and occasionally messing with a CROWS.
We got ripped off in BCT. Literally every other platoon in our battery got issued M4s with red dot sights to train with.... we got old M16A2s. My rifle bolt literally called it quits and somehow part of the bolt face broke off during rifle qualification, so I had to resort to cycling it manually with the charging handle as if it were a freaking bolt action. I still managed to qualify, but I was pissed. 😂
Any day Zank is ranting about guns is a good day!
It’s gonna be for VIP protection mostly.
Did- did he reupload the video because of subtitle glitch thing?
Oh my god mike, you really try and spoil us the most you can, even when there's an entirely overlookable mistake and you fix it.
You both truly spoil us
If Zach was in charge the requisition of the entire U.S Army, it would be the most efficient army in the world. Probably could save a few hundred billion too.
I had an LtCol who was anal about our LBV and said something along the lines of " your vest better match mine" literally 10 minutes after a brief where an Adjutant general said to set it up to our preference.
7 minutes of gun jargen i dont understand a single word of, great!