10 bucks that in 10 years these same vehicles are getting armour slapped on the sides and get dropped in a battle they aren't suited for.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
this would be peak levels of irony lol I bet you're 100% right about this prediction
@larz101a3 жыл бұрын
lol hell yes! what do you think that huge engine is for........upgrades!
@JeepCherokeeful3 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose they’d exceed the payload of the delivery vehicles, probably
@lowtdave3 жыл бұрын
Lol...100% correct and then the whole, why are the engines overheating all the time fiasco. The last time this happened was right before Iraq I think it was...they kept promoting light and fast strike forces...not taking into account russian ATGMs and other large weapons proliferation across the planet. Next thing you know...ive got sand bags under my feet and whatever metal on the doors...or the old, take the extra vests and put those on the doors. How the hell did we survive those first few years.
@CommissarMoody13 жыл бұрын
Yeah sounds like a easy bet to me. I remember riveting steel and Kevlar pleats to 5 tons and other vehicles in Afghanistan.
@MixtapeEntertainment3 жыл бұрын
The Ground Mobility Vehicle has been around for years. It's called a Toyota Hilux.
@kakerake60183 жыл бұрын
The Africans are way ahead of us.
@minhducnguyen6743 жыл бұрын
The African side of Toyota engineering is the path way to abilities some considered unnatural.
@swordsman11373 жыл бұрын
@@billyteflon1322 wait what? T-62 turret? The craziest Hilux that i saw on internet and magazine is the one who use soviet 57mm rocket pod as mobile MLRS.
@jackbronsky3 жыл бұрын
I was thinking the same thing ... why not just go to the local Toyota dealer? No need for specialized vehicles. Just ask the enemy, who are likely driving a Toyota pickup.
@minhducnguyen6743 жыл бұрын
@@jackbronsky They use SUV for such occasions. You think an American company will let a foreign competitor get that contract? There are a few occasions where some unit were given money to buy local Toyotas because they needed a vehicle quickly and they couldn't wait for the shipment to get there. Also because they haven't try to modify those pick up trucks so that they can survive a drop from the transport planes. The buggies are meant for airborne infantry. The Brit however, were very quick to see the opportunity to sell Toyota upgrade packages and the Russian already decided to have their own technical trucks, the UAZ patriot. It performes like a Hilux, reliable like a Hilux, cost like a Hilux, just without the Toyota logo on it.
When military vehicles track with fashion trends taxpayers should start asking more questions
@kurtr10903 жыл бұрын
Light and fast, I mean slower and armored; I mean invincible behemoth. This is exactly how the humvee was presented, evolved and ruined.
@G1NZOU3 жыл бұрын
Not quite true, they're not replacing MRAPs with these, they fill different purposes, these are lightweight for fast recon, the MRAPs are for situations where you think you'll take more fire or there's more risk of IEDs, while tracked IFVs are for the ultimate protection and firepower support of the infantry they carry. The Humvee was never originally designed for the purpose it started to get shoehorned into, it was fore rearline dutes as a utility vehicle.
@gnaskar2 жыл бұрын
I think the very obvious lack of armor is meant to remind both its riders and officers that it isn't an armored vehicle. The very fact that noone in their right mind would want to be in the thing within half a kilometer of an enemy, means it will most likely be used "correctly", aka with an early dismount.
@johncogswell28902 жыл бұрын
The problem is this - are you SUUUURE you're at least a half kilometer away from the enemy? If somebody ever told me I was at least 500m away from the enemy I'd be like, how TF do you know that, dude? You got somebody on the inside of their Company CP?? Shoot, I'd rather hump a damned baseplate for an 81 than deal with this bullet magnet.
@hashtagunderscore31732 жыл бұрын
@@johncogswell2890 Drones, bro 😎.
@johncogswell28902 жыл бұрын
@@hashtagunderscore3173 That's a good point assuming you have adequate coverage, but having known one too many Lance Corporal Snuffies, (PFC for Army, I guess) - I wouldn't be too trusting of that. "Yes, Corporal I checked the batteries for the PRC. They're good to go." Morgan Freeman: The batteries were in fact, NOT good to go.
@adaslesniak2 жыл бұрын
@@johncogswell2890 And if this guy was you comrades in engagement with overwhelming enemy forces and they need support? You still wouldn't believe them?
@johncogswell28902 жыл бұрын
@@adaslesniak Well you can be sure I'd be wiring up an exfil and arty to cover them for it, but I'd also be radioing the Casualty Collection Point to expect multiple WIA. We all look after each other, Adas, but we will give each other shit for doing dumb stuff if it could have been avoided - at the end of the day, not while the two-way rifle range is hot, if ya know what I mean.
@fuxl1003 жыл бұрын
i'd imagine this wouldn't be used to replace any armored vehicles but rather be given to units that would be walking otherwise. They wouldn't have been armored anyways but now they are way quicker.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
yes exactly this is almost entirely meant for the 82nd airborne to use in order to gather on an objective after an airborne drop. its supposed to be better than walking 100 kilometers there or yoinking a local car to get there.
@isaiahmiller91423 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose Oh, we're not supposed to commandeer someone else's mode of transportation?
@HanSolo__3 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose Shoulnd't they just pick a regular 4 person 4x4. The cost is 25% and it does not draw attention. Still this is far from enduro bike - the opposite of RPG7 target.
@minhducnguyen6743 жыл бұрын
@@isaiahmiller9142 Just need someone who can speak foreign language and a stack of dollars, much more compact and lighter. But seriously, I did hear some service men said sometimes they get deployed without vehicle and when they asked for one,they were given some money and told to just buy a Toyota.
@sambojinbojin-sam65503 жыл бұрын
@@minhducnguyen674 And honestly, if they had the big lumpy reliable engine, coolant and the air filters, so it didn't die immediately while hauling 1-2 tonnes of people and cargo, that'd be better. Why? Because they have windows and air-conditioning. And that is important, no matter where you're fighting. Note: you can't easily airdrop something with civilian glass windows. The air-con usually breaks as well. Still not sure why basic toughened doors, air-droppable glass windows and reliable air-conditioning wasn't a priority here. Chunky diesel engines with good air filters and cooling solutions is pretty damn easy to do.
@definetly-not-trotzky3 жыл бұрын
When I get hit by an IED why would I want to get a scratch when I can get pulverized into liquid dust in my beach buggy instead?
@UrDadsFavouriteMaleEscort3 жыл бұрын
At least your buddy will only take your skull fragments as secondary shrapnel instead of the door panels
@hugopepe17223 жыл бұрын
at least you won't feel anything. The HUMVEE has enough amour to make your death more agonising
@Deez2763 жыл бұрын
I just assumed I was dead already when the Blackhawk lifted for the FOB. Makes it easier to deal with the stupidity around you.
@majungasaurusaaaa3 жыл бұрын
IED means you're dead as a light element anyway.
@Spider-Too-Too3 жыл бұрын
If you are fast enough, IED can hit you
@travis-coltgray95363 жыл бұрын
What’s crazy, is the HMMWV was originally designed like this. Then we threw heavy ass armor on it, now we have come full circle.
@fludblud3 жыл бұрын
The armour was only thrown on the Humvees because the most Iraqi insurgents had in the 2000s were small arms and RPGs that the armour could withstand. The issue now 20 years later is that every militia worth a damn is up to their necks in ATGMs that can cu through armour like paper and blow up any tank within 5km away. This was actually a serious issue in the war against ISIS with Iraqi army MRAPs basically getting point and clicked away by ISIS TOW gunners and it was only thanks to airstrikes that it didnt become more of a problem. At least with open topped vehicles theres a chance you'll be thrown clear of the vehicle in the explosion instead of whats left of your squad trapped inside the wreckage of your MRAP and slowly burned alive.
@16B93 жыл бұрын
Get the paint can and stencils for "NO STEP", "NO HAND HOLD", "MOGAS ONLY".....
@manictiger3 жыл бұрын
@@matchesburn Give them nice enough stuff and they just sell it to the highest bidder. Trying to get a bunch of child 7777ers to defend their own country was one of the dumbest things we've ever done, and we've done a lot of stupid things.
@Cybernaut5513 жыл бұрын
Ironic but acceptable.
@hellcy72373 жыл бұрын
This is all i could think about during the video- "This was LITERALLY the original idea for the Humvee, a fast light scout vehicle that shouldnt be used for frontline combat"
@LeadPaint12 жыл бұрын
When I entered the Army in the early 80's we had these....they were called jeeps. Worked incredibly well until being replaced by Hummers. Anyone remember all the nice paths in downrange Ft. Bragg that perfectly fit a jeep that were now to small for Humvees?! Gone downhill since then. They used to tell us that if we came under fire in a jeep to unass that shit or bug out. By the time I got out of the Army the vehicles were all siege machines. I would welcome these new vehicles.
@CorePathway2 жыл бұрын
Better un-ass that M151 when bullets fly, BECAUSE YOUR ASS IS 4 INCHES FROM THE GAS TANK! 🤷🏼♂️🤣🤣😵💫
@XanthusBarnabas2 жыл бұрын
I was not happy when we transitioned from the Jeep...
@DerDudelino2 жыл бұрын
Does that make sense though? A couple guys can easily hide in the woods and shoot with their AK on such a vehicle and your crew has almost zero protection.
@rainnelmaclang48032 жыл бұрын
@@DerDudelino In a jeep, you WILL have to dismount and engage those couple of guys with AK. If you have more ammo and body armor, chances are you'll be able to neutralize your enemy. In a Hummer. you will hunker down inside and call for reinforcement. In the mean time, those couple of guys with AK will shoot your tires out, immobilize you, and turn you into bait while they set up ambush for the reinforcement you called for.
@garyanderson30452 жыл бұрын
People don't realize how much fire 9 men can bring with a 3 pack left and right. Add a dozen switchblades and you get a driver/gunner & 2 more as tactical/ medic for support. Then blow smoke, regroup and hit the flank before the enemy can count. Two mobile platoons, --priceless!
@mcallahan90603 жыл бұрын
This vehicles role is currently being performed in every hot spot on the planet by Toyota Technicals at 1/8th of the cost on one of these.
@reganbond613 жыл бұрын
Petition to manufacture the Toyota Hilux in the US
@____________8383 жыл бұрын
I’m sure the cost is much lower than even 1/8th...
@alperakyuz97023 жыл бұрын
@@reganbond61 dont you think us army is already op enough, you need to keep the competition.
@reganbond613 жыл бұрын
@@alperakyuz9702 no, stonks
@johnswanson26003 жыл бұрын
I feel like they could've bought a modified Chevy Colorado Duramax at a quarter of the cost with a front bench seat and the option to remove the doors and add bucket seats in the bed. They could've even wrapped it in Kevlar and it would've been almost as good as this
@ivansonnerbrandt23953 жыл бұрын
"there are reports that they flip over when firing recoilless rifles" Huh, thought they were recoilless Edit: Its a joke. Y'Know, haha funny
@kilianortmann99793 жыл бұрын
That only means they recoil less.
@tonymirarchi3 жыл бұрын
Ask military intelligence about that.
@Vuntermonkey3 жыл бұрын
Gun doesn't recoil, the vehicle does.
@Bean413 жыл бұрын
Recoilless rifles, ain’t -Murphy
@Osama-Bon-Jovi-013 жыл бұрын
Hold (X) to flip warthog
@2p0rk3 жыл бұрын
Yeah, because the Humvee shows that no vehicle ever gets pushed into a role it wasn't intended for, right?
@afwaller3 жыл бұрын
This was literally the original purpose of the humvee
@orlock203 жыл бұрын
@@afwaller So how are these going to be uparmored, because we all know the motor poll will be up armoring these vehicles Maybe they will mount racks for sandbags.
@afwaller3 жыл бұрын
@@orlock20 they’ll just strap body armor to the sides, hang the whole pc from the door like clothes drying outside
@Unforseenak3 жыл бұрын
laughs in russian and chinese.
@FakeSchrodingersCat3 жыл бұрын
@@orlock20 I am going to go out on a limb and say the first step to up armoring these is adding doors.
@pacificostudios2 жыл бұрын
In a low-threat environment, they might be great for getting a squad up to a forward position. However, the U.S. Army hasn't fought a war like that since Korea, unless you count Gulf War I. It's basically an overgrown Willys-Overland Jeep from WWII.
@ashirii83472 жыл бұрын
I can understand it to quickly move troops in well protected areas but I seriously doubt they'll keep being used for that and just get random armor welded to it
@fredcollins89192 жыл бұрын
Actually theyd be GREAT in low to mid threat/intensity tropical environment esp Latín América where these light vehicles WILL once again (like unarmored Humvees before it in late 1980s) Will prove themselves to be reliable fast hard hitting & Priceless in general. For Urban combat & Open field combat with near peer nations then a well armed well armored fast moving APC/IFV/LAV Will Be a better choice
@SoundsSilver2 жыл бұрын
@@fredcollins8919 Even in the near-peer case I’d rather give 500 more of my guys some dirt bikes than have just one more tank. Armored vehicles will remain valuable, but some forces can benefit greatly from dispersion and speed, especially under conditions of ubiquitous drones and ATGMs/RPGs. M1A1 tank costs $6.21M Dirtbike costs $10k That’s 621 dirt bikes
@fredcollins89192 жыл бұрын
@@SoundsSilver am certain the US Army & USMC WILL most definitely do something along the lines of what you are mentioning, esp taking in everything that has been learned & mastered in diverse terrain, environments & battlefields large & small over past 25+ years......Amen! Cheers!
@lowercentenary2 жыл бұрын
Special forces beards mfhahahaha...discipline in the army seems to have gone to f all these days...
@gyneve3 жыл бұрын
Even with the non existent armor, I imagine a lot more people are gonna die from rollovers than gunfire.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
the vehicle does have a reinforced roll over protection kit installed but yeah that is definitely a big concern. Even if you're wearing your seatbelt I could see a limb or two not making it.
@ruthlessrubberducky57293 жыл бұрын
Just like halo.
@gyneve3 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose That's what I was thinking. It starts rolling, limbs stick out and get chopped off when they get trapped between the bars and ground. There's a reason why so many new utvs have doors.
@SonOfTheDawn5153 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose Cool, bullshit seatbelt you're stuck in (gear snagging) when you encounter an ambush or fuck all when hit with an IED or mine.
@skm94203 жыл бұрын
@@SonOfTheDawn515 yeah you can't remain safe for both senerios in an open air off road vehicle with today's safety restraints.
@luisfelipevaldes53063 жыл бұрын
So basically... The u.s is bringing back the Jeep Willie's
@whyle53183 жыл бұрын
Willies are legit awesome, my family has a 1946 civvie version and it is the catsl
@isaiahcampbell4883 жыл бұрын
I was actually thinking the same thing.
@Biggus_Nickus3 жыл бұрын
Actually thought the same thing. It seems like a useful thing to have in a desert, that's why the russians switched out from the heavily armored units to faster lighter mobile ones.
@starstencahl89853 жыл бұрын
@@Biggus_Nickus For the specific purpose, they’re awesome. Quick movement of infantry. Better than walking, actually safer and way faster
@Wolvenworks3 жыл бұрын
basically a less cool version but yes, jeeps.
@tharionthedragon35313 жыл бұрын
The US Army is literally going back to ww2 Jeep Willie's. Lightweight, reliable, sometimes have guns on them, can be paradropped, and no trace of armor.
@hughmungus27603 жыл бұрын
back then there were clear battle lines and it was assumed you wouldn't get ambushed by the enemy when you're behind your own lines. I don't know what they're expecting to achieve with these except much higher casualties.
@gregorybowe93833 жыл бұрын
@@hughmungus2760 Well supposedly population growth is out of control...and it's cheaper to bury a soldier than pay his disability... I'm joking...but our loving leaders are not.
@userequaltoNull3 жыл бұрын
@@hughmungus2760 you're still thinking of the last war. The next big war will be against China, not Hezbollah.
@hughmungus27603 жыл бұрын
@@userequaltoNull no it won't because MAD is still a thing.
@LoneStar4553 жыл бұрын
@@hughmungus2760 MAD?
@goifur Жыл бұрын
This doctrine has been in use for a long time in the Indian subcontinent, this is not a vehicle for engagement and is very vulnerable to ambushes, but it is very effective in quickly mobilizing troops, especially in forest and hilly terrain, because it can go over narrow, muddy roads and less conspicuous than an attack helicopter
@321Isotope3 жыл бұрын
So we’re just doing “Mad Max” now? Nice. “LT! WITNESS ME!”
@Sigmar_Heldenhammer3 жыл бұрын
WITNESS!
@jonsimpson62403 жыл бұрын
MEDIOCRE!
@magicalmagicmagician52233 жыл бұрын
VAlHALLAAAAA!!!!
@Spider-Too-Too3 жыл бұрын
Witness
@alfredt.51853 жыл бұрын
@@Sigmar_Heldenhammer WITNEEEESSSSS *runs over IED*
@NATE101093 жыл бұрын
Good, we are slowly moving towards making warthogs a reality.
@Boosttackle3 жыл бұрын
Gimmie that gauss hog
@slamshift69273 жыл бұрын
And the US Army quickly realizing why the Troop Hog was a terrible idea. Instant Killpocalypse anyone?
@HowIsTheCraic3 жыл бұрын
Was looking for this comment
@thedude48403 жыл бұрын
@@slamshift6927 seriously has anyone thought about how tactically and logistically bad the hog is. If it’s a gun hog it’s only able to transport 3 dudes and if it’s troop hog it’s way to open and is screwd if it runs into a small armored vehicle.
@slamshift69273 жыл бұрын
@@thedude4840 The standard warthog is actually not a bad idea, it's a fast moving heavy weapons platform capable of hit and run tactics.
@Mrgunsngear3 жыл бұрын
You’re spot on on how they can be misused
@miltechmoto3 жыл бұрын
Put a javelin missile on the back of it and some smoke screen launchers, then swarm the enemy like tango and cash.
@gmodiscool143 жыл бұрын
or just nuke them
@gmodiscool143 жыл бұрын
@@bibekjung7404 WHAT
@destinytroll13743 жыл бұрын
Here he is again
@JESUSsaves23453 жыл бұрын
Yeah I see a col and Lt joy riding these things
@christianflohr66712 жыл бұрын
I could see how light armor could cause officers to trust it more than it should be and send it out on more risky missions, whereas completely unarmored might force them to think more. Like they won’t try to use it like a tank because it’s not even remotely close in the first place
@TechnoEsoterica Жыл бұрын
I was going to say light armour is a must at minimum but you're totally right.
@MrMarinus18 Жыл бұрын
But also it's important to remember that armour is a tiered system. Putting a body on it that's 3mm thick is just adding pointless weight as any bullet will just go straight through. If you are going to add an exterior you need to actually make it thick enough to stop something. This is something the Americans learned with the humvee where it's car body was so thin it couldn't actually stop anything but still added a considerable amount of weight, slowed down loading and reduced visibility. With the American army now has decided to create 2 cars, a large armoured car and a light buggy. If the vehicle is unarmoured you shouldn't pretend otherwise as that's just adding useless weight.
@IanWaldrop3 жыл бұрын
As a marine who drove all though Iraq in 03 and 04 in a hmmwv w/no doors, I don’t get it. They’re fast, light, and so easy to get in and out of you know. Just take the armor off of what you already have!
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
that would be making too much sense! haha
@NotoriusMaximus3 жыл бұрын
GM needs new contracts
@ancaplanaoriginal53033 жыл бұрын
I've actually heard that unarmored humvees were safer than armored humvees because the explosion kicked you out of the vehicle and you didn't get smashed against the roof or trapped between the armor and the shockwave.
@loganholmberg22953 жыл бұрын
Thats what I was thinking. You could also use the truck version and put 2 more seats in to get it too a 6 man crew like this new vehicle. Also I'm sure GM could put a new, faster and more efficient Engine in the bloody thing if they needed it to go faster and farther. The only advantage to this new vehicle is that it would probably be narrower so it would be more suited to going down old backroads and trails that were made for old Hilux's and Landcruiser's in most other countries. Although being a US GM military vehicle I wonder if they actually thought of that. GM doesn't really make anything targeted to the off-road community like Jeep, Toyota or well "old" Landrover does.
@robertdole53913 жыл бұрын
Upside of a new vehicle is that Pep Boys and Auto Zone have spare parts. Not just a single defense contractor so if the sh*t ever hits the fan your unit can take their GPC to the local auto parts store and fix any faults overnight. They wont have to wait on parts assembled over 20 factories in 20 separate congressional districts.
@Tomkkat153 жыл бұрын
Oh, so exactly what the Humvee was intended to be? A lightweight, mobile, speedy vehicle reminiscent of the jeep? In before they get overly up-armored.
@tihomirrasperic3 жыл бұрын
it is history first you add armor, then you take it off, then again the same thing of the next generation and this is repeated all since the Roman legions
@Themilkmanmilkermilkingmilkmen3 жыл бұрын
IED’s
@anhduc09133 жыл бұрын
@@tihomirrasperic Same with tanks. In WW1 you put tons on, in WW2 you take some off for mobility, toward the end you put tons on, then in the cold war they took some off, again for mobility, then after that they put them back on with all kind of new tech like reactive and composite.
@cafenightster45483 жыл бұрын
Where are they suppose to spend our tax dollars? It's not like the Humvee was specifically built for this role.
@niccadoodles3 жыл бұрын
The Humvee started out way too bulky to begin with and had to armor anyways. Looks like the hood and front end are bullet rated, at least.
@prime-rib3 жыл бұрын
During my 36 year career, I've seen this cycle many times. It goes like this: "small....bigger....BIGGER....SUPER BIG"......then the switch happens...."we gotta get small...super small" (light, mobile, blah blah blah). Here we go again. This doesn't just apply to vehicles. It applies to everything from field messes to intel collection equipment. It keeps the budgets nice and high as there's always new equipment to buy and train on.
@TheGerd3 жыл бұрын
Can confirm, also happens with intel.
@TheMichaelStott3 жыл бұрын
It's the circle of life. Starts of with an original idea, gets changed over a few years to the point it becomes useless and someone tells people how it was originally and they try to go back. If you've seen this cycle you can basically call yourself a fortune teller cause you can easily predict the future☺ it's kind of the reason why people start to sweat when they hear a senior say "watch this shit" 😂
@roonbare27693 жыл бұрын
Happens in ordinance too.... " this is overkill , and far too heavy! We need something lighter, faster, cheaper, with smaller projectiles but more capacity , so we can sustain constant fire...!" To "These are worthless pee shooters that bounce off everything with no range! We need huge guns that only take one shot to destroy anything!" Then repeat...
@MG-fr3tn3 жыл бұрын
Wow that's like evolution is that funny saying evolution to the prescriptive who think they are leaving the collateral stuff that comes with intolerance/ prescriptive
@colincampbell7673 жыл бұрын
It's all about solving the problems with the stuff you currently have. Bigger is always better until you get to the point where a small vehicle is needed to solve the problems of big vehicles. I'm old enough to remember the old CUCVs (Commercial Cargo Utility Vehicle) Which were Chevy 4x4 pickup trucks and Blazers which were modified for Army use. IMO these were the best _utility_ vehicles the Army ever had. They were never intended for front line use and were versatile, reliable, inexpensive repair parts - and came with the same warranty their civilian versions had.
@barnmaddo3 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure how it works, but with improvements to drones, thermal imaging and machine learning. It might be much harder to setup ambushes. So a buggy could be useful for quickly repositioning troops through areas already under surveillance. They also might be predicting that ATGM's will start developing/proliferating fast enough to make more heavily armored personal carriers just big expensive targets.
@megalonoobiacinc48632 жыл бұрын
this comment aged well
@ArpanMukhopadhyay932 жыл бұрын
Agreed!!! Gold comment!
@siegfriedarmory62712 жыл бұрын
For the people scrolling back in 10 years: This Nostradamus-Level comment was written several months before Russia invaded Ukraine.
@dianapennepacker6854 Жыл бұрын
IFVs will need active protection for sure and being able to spot targets and deal with them from range with an auto cannon. This comment aged sort of well though for sure. Yet there is still room for heavily armored IFVs. You still don't want a single ambush of small arms taking out entire squads ya know? ATGMs still only have so much ammo at hand! All vehicles IMO should have a 50 caliber at the very least.
@MrChickennugget36011 ай бұрын
@@dianapennepacker6854 Tanks and IFVs are definitely still important. There is a reason why both Russia and Ukraine can't get enough of them. Even old tanks are sought after. Its just tanks are used much more like in World War 1 as infantry support and suppression vehicles and they are not as able to "tank" hits. Granted Russia's fleet of T-72B3s are not exactly cutting edge in terms of armor.
@flydriveride3 жыл бұрын
Suddenly, a shotgun shell booby trap becomes an actual IED threat.
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
Or one of those VC grenade-on-a-branch traps.
@PatRiot-3 жыл бұрын
A 10 year old with a paintball gun could destroy them 😅
@MrPoporucha3 жыл бұрын
>SLINGSHOT AMBUSH INTENSIFIES
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
@@MrPoporucha "You'll put someone's eye out with that"
@steveolson693 жыл бұрын
@@emceha so was David he dropped Goliath with a stone.or maybe he got Goliath stoned and msnbc got it wrong again!
@dash48003 жыл бұрын
This is the sort of thing that will be produced for 5 years, never used for their intended purpose and inevitably retrofitted to serve a function that is actually needed on a regular basis.
@jimmiller56002 жыл бұрын
So, it's like half the stuff DoD orders?
@egoalter12762 жыл бұрын
Tbe US has been without a frontline APC for over 30 years, without integrated AA in their armour for 60 years, without a worthwhile SAM for 30 years, without a usable ATGM for over 20, without HE rounds for their tanks for 40, and if I bothered to dig, Id probably find more. A million projects to update some piece of equipment, or fix some lack of capability seem to start, go nowhere and then be forgotten for 5 years. This thing is filling the nieche the hmmvw was supposed to, but that got coopted, because the US had no APC.
@mattmattmatt1313133 жыл бұрын
Original unarmored humvee sitting in the corner crying... "But I thought you said you don't need me anymore!"
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
Time is a flat circle.
@vivosmartphone22803 жыл бұрын
There were unarmored humvees??
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
@@vivosmartphone2280 :)
@Coyote-wm5op3 жыл бұрын
Even the ones with no armor have no balls and get stuck. Did it in Kosovo back in the day on goat trails. Needed the winch, log chain, and the other truck just to pull it back up the small hill.
@Mike256543 жыл бұрын
@@vivosmartphone2280 There were Humvees without doors.
@jonskowitz2 жыл бұрын
I could see these being useful for rapidly redeploying troops from behind a heavy screening force, green zone mobility, or even as a rapid airmobile unit as intended... Would be nice if it at least had a single-sheet of kevlar around the crew cabin so that when one of these inevitably drives into an ambush the crew in the trailing vehicle aren't immediate casualties from the shrapnel of the leading vehicle being blown up.
@nicholasmosley28512 жыл бұрын
Ah but that is where the slippery slope begins. Remember the hmmwv. The High Mobility Multi-purpose Wheeled Vehicle. As soon as someone put a little armor, the next person put a little more and then boom. Hmmwv can’t turn going more than 20mph or else is rolls.
@Raul_Menendez3 жыл бұрын
Instead of cars that cost alot. Why not do what the Japanese did in WWII in the Malaya Campaign. B I C Y C L E S
@kentershackle13293 жыл бұрын
Nahh, they will.make it out out some fancy space carbon alloy, bullet proof sprocket .., some crazy gears box, will cost USD50k per bike
@Raul_Menendez3 жыл бұрын
@@kentershackle1329 Eh... You're right. Common sense don't exist in the US Military.
@StoutProper3 жыл бұрын
Bikes aren't great in the sand tbh
@mirai_the_idiot3 жыл бұрын
maybe use dirt bikes (MADE FROM PURE BIDENIUM, STALINIUM AND PUTINIUM)
@oompalumpus6993 жыл бұрын
TACTICAL BICYCLES!
@MannenFromNorth3 жыл бұрын
These will probably be very popular at the second hand market with beach people 👀
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
the military versions aren't street legal though they burn too much JP8
@@Taskandpurpose No ATVs are street legal. that's kinda the point
@nathankeel43083 жыл бұрын
@@mntahoe1759 what're you talking about? ATV'S are street legal under many state laws.
@GastropodGaming20063 жыл бұрын
@@nathankeel4308 and besides that, police in states with ATV street illegal laws give 0 shits 9/10 lmfao
@chubascov.3 жыл бұрын
Now they can drive so quickly, the IEDs won't be able to explode in time to destroy them!
@salvagedude6253 жыл бұрын
I mean, it's been done.
@davidgoodenough64503 жыл бұрын
We did it guys, IEDs are not dangerous anymore gg
@HereticJon3 жыл бұрын
I mean, yeah that's how the US minimized casualties from IED's where they didnt have armored or mine resistant vehicles. Most IED"s use a remote detonator, generally cheap phones, and those have a semi-random delay of half a second to a few seconds, enough for a vehicle doing decent speed to be well out of the danger zone.
@williamt.sherman98413 жыл бұрын
You only get IEDs when the local civilian population is hostile. don't fight stupid wars don't deal with stupid IEDs
@HereticJon3 жыл бұрын
@@williamt.sherman9841 The United States has chosen to set itself up in places maybe it shouldn't, and no politician is going to make a power vacuum in those places. It's dumb. But I guess if somebody is going to be the evil power in a region, it may as well be a first world nation that has rules of war.
@Zulutime44 Жыл бұрын
I drove an M151 jeep for 2 years for the S4 in an infantry battalion (peacetime Germany). Very useful for rifle company commanders, staff officers, the colonel and his XO, as they needed to move rapidly and quietly behind the FEBA. A fighting battalion has a substantial logistical train, with jeeps riding herd. The new Polaris RAZRM sidebyside is perfect for this task.
@NikovK3 жыл бұрын
The Army keeps trying to re-invent the Willys Jeep.
@Upbt50gt3 жыл бұрын
Yes
@tadatada53 жыл бұрын
Im still surprised why we arent starting horse riding again. Horses worked for military like 4000 years. what can go wrong???
@dionp383 жыл бұрын
@@tadatada5 yes! and we can teach them to jump out of planes too!
@tadatada53 жыл бұрын
@@waxdood You shure about that? Is there any new study about it? Hah lets spend 50 mil on study first. its even cheaper thanany other upgrade study!
@KosherPorky3 жыл бұрын
@@dionp38 just recruit a bunch of pegasi, then you wont have to air drop them.. idiots these days smh
@TreyVaswal3 жыл бұрын
The lack of doors reinforces the need to GTFO it when there's contact.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
when you think about it doors are a huge waste of time, they're the middlemen between you and being outside
@omabrax05553 жыл бұрын
it looks like the precursor to the ◾ M831 Troop Transport from Halo-3 does it not❓
@trytesting41143 жыл бұрын
guess just have to make sure kick up enough sand and dust for cover otherwise its 1 shot 1 kill (or maybe 2 kills) for the enemy
@Excludos3 жыл бұрын
@Keith Marshall The problem is that it's a slippery slope. Adding reinforced doors add weights, so now you need a bigger engine and tougher components, adding cost. So now you might as well stay inside and fight from the vehicle instead of exiting, so the entire vehicle needs to be reinforced, adding more weight, tougher components, and more cost. At this point, you have an expensive vehicle, which reasonably should be able to withstand explosives and IEDs, adding more weight, tougher components, cost, and suddenly you have yourself an MRAP. There's very little middle ground between "Lightweight cheap vehicle not meant to be anywhere near a fight" and "vehicle meant to be used in combat"
@m0r73n3 жыл бұрын
@@Excludos Yes valid point, but adding light weight kevlar doors for protecting against small arms fire would probably be doable. There's no way its gonna protected from IED blast and if you end up on top of one you are using it wrong.
@GreatgoatonFire3 жыл бұрын
So this seems like a high budget version of a Technical.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
The high class technical, I like that
@GreatgoatonFire3 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose I want to see it's engine start after going trough the Top Gear stress test. Aka drowned in the tide and getting placed on a high rise building that gets demolished. Also slap like a 50 Cal on that bad boy.
its like riding into battle on horseback, dismounting then fighting on foot.
@thecanadianlanboy81323 жыл бұрын
When a single machine gun burst can wipe out your vehicle and it's whole crew
@occamtherazor32013 жыл бұрын
Bro, do you even OIF-1?
@brandino97yyc3 жыл бұрын
Probably. But really as long it stay out of urban combat should be alright
@alexlance91503 жыл бұрын
@@brandino97yyc said no officer..... ever..... Send em in boys
@just16893 жыл бұрын
or single shotgun shell
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
@@brandino97yyc I'd not want to take it within 200m of any forest, wood, copse, or spinny either.
@DermotiusOfficial3 жыл бұрын
"You cant destroy an armor when there is no armor to begin with"
@FakeSchrodingersCat3 жыл бұрын
This vehicle completely makes all enemy AT obsolete.
@patrickmartin22023 жыл бұрын
Don't even try to destroy if it unarmoured. They'd assume it's a civilian.
@DermotiusOfficial3 жыл бұрын
@@patrickmartin2202 lmao, imagine the weight on this
@iamt_tl3 жыл бұрын
Who says, marines can throw a bunch of C4's into the back of it and drive it straight into a tank. Just need another person to press the detonator.
@DermotiusOfficial3 жыл бұрын
@@iamt_tl we have the same wavelength lmao
@salvagedude6253 жыл бұрын
This seems like an accident waiting to happen if in the hands of someone who is either being lazy or incompetent.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
they added some nice roll over protective guards and intense seatbelts (that no one is going to wear probably) but yeah this could take a left turn if its used incorrectly
@richardlooch21093 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose i don't think this is going to take off due to the fact that all it takes is one dude with an AK to destroy the entire vehicle. this could be used to get small amounts of supplies and troops for fort A to fort B quickly in case of an emergency but putting a tarp and a place on the top for mk19s, 50 cals, 240 Bs, SAWs, and rocket launchers would be reasonable as it gives it a massive (much needed) boost to its offensive capabilities.
@williamt.sherman98413 жыл бұрын
like the trillion Dollar accident in Iraq? US used Jeeps and unarmored 998s for decades without any problems and only needed MRAPs after we decided it was a good idea to overthrow Saddam and become a friendly neighborhood occupier.
@mnk90733 жыл бұрын
That's why you gotta keep the officers far away from them, duh.
@rickyredbeard82743 жыл бұрын
You could say that about anything, really.
@JohnDoe-pt8gs2 жыл бұрын
A "cutvee" vehicle similar to this was used in Somalia by one of the seal teams I believe, many soldiers were hit many times. Very important to understand this vehicle's limitations
@blackhawk7r2212 жыл бұрын
Yea, you don’t drive a thin-skinned cucvee on an urban presence patrol.
@murkelusious56703 жыл бұрын
The Dutch have been doing this for years. Mostly because lack of money.
@EstellammaSS3 жыл бұрын
I think it’s under-protected on purpose, as a way to discourage misusing them. If you put a gun on top or any sort of armor someone would definitely drive them into battle and get killed as a result. The same reason why you don’t give everyone a sniper rifle so they don’t go plinking at targets 2 km away, sometimes being more capable doesn’t mean it’s more useful
@FollowedGaming3 жыл бұрын
This is a pretty valid point, no doors make it hard for even the stupidest lt to use it wrong. Source am soon to be stupid lt.
@carlost8563 жыл бұрын
@@FollowedGaming you underestimate the potential of human stupidity. You can't make something idiotproof, because they'll just make a better idiot.
As Einstein said There are only two things infinite in the world The universe and human stupidity And I'm not sure about the universe
@JWMoore893 жыл бұрын
Used these in Afghan back in 2018 definitely a go! The ability to bring more ammo more fire power and quickly dismount to conduct operations while having a mobile base of fire out ways its negatives. The GMV has 4 hard points for light to medium machine guns and one heavy hard point for a 50. MK19/47 or MK44 mini. There's scenarios where they shouldn't be used but for small unit operations they are extremely fast and effective. Think of them more as an aid for ground operations not mounted ones thats where they shine.
@Spedley_21422 жыл бұрын
Excellent answer. I hadn't thought about how much mores stuff you can carry vs marching. Also, having no doors means you can get out so much faster. I'd say they are ideal for fast response to a 'known' enemy and if things go wrong there's no harm in falling back quickly.
@sidecharacter71652 жыл бұрын
So this vehicle kind of operates like how the Dragoon units used to?
2 жыл бұрын
@@sidecharacter7165 How Dragoons were supposed to operate. Dragoons relatively quickly transformed into cavalry historically.
@sidecharacter71652 жыл бұрын
@ I am aware, but I suppose I could also suggest how chariot units were used as transport initially.
2 жыл бұрын
@@sidecharacter7165 Oh, the dragoons were actually a very good historical parallel for you to bring up! As far as I can tell the idea behind dragoons instead of cavalry was mostly about cost savings. The attempts by dragoons throughout history to become cavalry were about social climbing. Cavalry was more prestigious than (dis-) mounted infantry.
@GEORGEEDWARDBROWN3 жыл бұрын
I am a VN vet with 18 months in country with A Trp, 2/17th Cav, 1st Bde, 101st ALL AIRBORNE DIV, running all over II Corps in a M-151 (JEEP), WITH NO DOORS, AND NO ROOF, we had 5 or 6 sandbags on the floor and a pedestal mounted M-60, with a crew of 3, car captain, driver and gunner, occasionly 2 extra grunts sitting over the rear wheel wells. We were the jack of all trades for the brigade, on our pony's, on our feet and in the air. On Nov 24, 1967 returning from a mission my jeep ran over (in todays lingo) a IED. Witch went off under the left rear wheel, I flew out of my seat, my gunner followed close behind me, the driver went left, and our interperturer went from facing inboard above the left wheel to facing to the rear straddling the steering wheel facing the rear, I picked up some shrapnal , my gunner hit his head , those 3 were medivacked out. So I like the concept of a light weight, fast moving vehicle as above, I have seen a M-48 tank torn apart, with no survvier's'. Sorry the later it gets the worse my spelling gets??
@quaternion45653 жыл бұрын
The best part? You can't sleep in an air conditioned vehicle anymore and anyone can catch you sleeping or slacking in the vehicle!! Yay!!
@williamchamberlain22633 жыл бұрын
And no mosquito protection
@xmlthegreat3 жыл бұрын
You better have some real strong insect repellant
@DariusBaktash3 жыл бұрын
Yup. Deadliest animal on the planet and they're making it a ridiculous hassle to do basic prevention (aka, you're now hauling around a ton of netting to cover a basic vehicle). Or, in other climes, you can enjoy things like sand flies (mmm, Leishmaniasis). There's also the complete lack of protection from other basic, basic things like dust, rain, and even a flying rock from the vehicles ahead of you in the convoy (50 mph gravel will be delightful to those folks in the back). I've known ultralight hikers with more packing sense than this thing.
@Scroolewse3 жыл бұрын
Didnt the army just put in the regs somewhere that soldiers should be sleeping whenever they have the opportunity to?
@benlambden3 жыл бұрын
Haven't the SAS been using stripped out and de-roofed Land Rovers for about three decades?
@Make-Asylums-Great-Again3 жыл бұрын
Awesome we should send these over to them.
@juntex403 жыл бұрын
Not just the SAS but also including Infantry Battalions in the 🇬🇧 Army whilst on operations.
@darugdawg24533 жыл бұрын
dont start with me about sas. man o man
@simombreeds95013 жыл бұрын
Since the ww2 in Africa against the Germans
@markiatto_42923 жыл бұрын
Heard one of the main reasons for using them is that, them being open made navigation at night easier
@Guerilla_G3 жыл бұрын
“We need a skeleton 4x4 to carry infantry quickly” “Sweet, just take the doors off that unarmoured Humvee, slap some extra MGs on it and we’re good” “No, I need millions of dollars of taxpayer money so that we can hit 60mph 2 seconds faster” The military industrial complex strikes again
@TheLoyalOfficer3 жыл бұрын
More like a 4x4 that will soon be filled with skeletons...
@ok0_03 жыл бұрын
the engine seems reliable as fuck though
@TheLoyalOfficer3 жыл бұрын
@@ok0_0 Yeah that's about all that will be left after some small arms fire: the engine! As for the guys inside... skeletons.
@ok0_03 жыл бұрын
@@TheLoyalOfficer yeah, I think its dumb because it will almost definitely be misused. But this'll probably be given to troops that would otherwise be walking, in which case they'd be unarmored anyways
@TheLoyalOfficer3 жыл бұрын
@@ok0_0 It's another taxpayer boondoggle. I can't believe the host of the vid supports this vehicle. Just use a humvee. This reminds me of the USMC Growler. Ugh. God help us with these MIC crooks.
@henrymoon32752 жыл бұрын
As a former 11B I was sold when you mentioned these vs humping. They're a go at this station.
@sieciech25143 жыл бұрын
US Army: "Bring on the fast vehicles!" Mines: "Waiting"
@phdlifechannel31003 жыл бұрын
Rocks and slings are back in the game
@giantmastersword3 жыл бұрын
The point is to throw them at hotly contested places with no mines where the first ones into the area have the advantage. ... Which sounds nice on paper, but the last three wars have all been centered on fighting in well-fortified areas which have been fully prepared for attacks...
@davesomeone40593 жыл бұрын
@@giantmastersword Doesn't mean future wars won't need these.
@nimay133 жыл бұрын
Military saw what insurgents and extremists did with technicals, they just copy and make it better. That or place order for a bunch of Hilux's.
@ancaplanaoriginal53033 жыл бұрын
No no no, it needs to be more american. What about a Ford Raptor with a Mk19 on top?
@spartan10101013 жыл бұрын
except it's crappier than a technical because it doesn't even have the doors to provide cover and concealment lol I'll take an aluminum sheet over the naked jeep any day.
@LouisAndPillz3 жыл бұрын
@@spartan1010101 The doors on a technical don't stop bullets, unless they've been modified in some way. They may provide some form of concealment; but the army doesn't need concealment since the enemy already knows they want to shoot at us.
@spartan10101013 жыл бұрын
@@LouisAndPillz you’re right, they don’t provide cover, but I imagine concealment is important for them to maneuver at least over to the engine block or to take cover somewhere else. Without any doors or canvas they’re basically on a shooting range.
@Melanrick3 жыл бұрын
The difference is that those guys are suicidal. An army can't afford that.
@lonewanderer55153 жыл бұрын
The British army have been using vehicles like this for year's and they have worked out pretty well so far. Especially for things like recon and fast attach with a wmik attached for extra fire power
@truenorth59753 жыл бұрын
Just thinking the same. They remind me of the ones the Pathfinders use.
@lordemarsh68043 жыл бұрын
Pretty well cause they have never been ambushed or attacked in them....
@Spider-Too-Too3 жыл бұрын
Small car, big javalin
@happywombat3 жыл бұрын
yes the HMT 400 Jackal.
@MrWiggo913 жыл бұрын
@@lordemarsh6804 are you serious? Take a look at Land Rover WMIK, MWMIK, Jackal and Coyote. All open to the elements and not only have people been ambushed on them, they've literally sat there and fucking slogged it out out Iraqis and Afghans in them.
@yoboikamil5252 жыл бұрын
I like the idea of a small 5 person car zooming around the battlefield shooting everything
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
Thanks for watching! So, do you think the unarmored vehicles are a GO or NO GO? Is leadership going to end up using them correctly? join our discord: discord.gg/vW4KMgA
@barrettbaker87213 жыл бұрын
As long as they use it right. The jeep was used correctly and it was a sturdy workhorse. They can't use it as a frontline combat vehicle. Transportation is key though.
@eyctic71283 жыл бұрын
They should just use the halo warthog
@salvagedude6253 жыл бұрын
I think that it is a good idea if used properly. A possible issue would be, as you mention, if it were used for something that it's not designed for. The design is definitely not idiot-proof and requires good judgment to use. I don't have the knowledge to determine if it's a good idea overall.
@txdino60633 жыл бұрын
Go. Bringing back the jeep.
@leekaijit363 жыл бұрын
Depending how they use it on combat. Mostly Unarmoured Vehicles are very fragile for combat. But if they use correctly they can act as a sharp dagger.
@vercingetorix57083 жыл бұрын
Holy shit imagine trying to drive this through vegetation, a sandstorm, snow, rain or a crowded city.
@nssilver13 жыл бұрын
Or 60 mph at all. The bugs...
@peterprovenzano90393 жыл бұрын
Why would you use that in a city? This goes back to leader ship not knowing how and when to use it and when not too
@kolinmartz3 жыл бұрын
@@nssilver1 they do have that “windshield” that you can roll up. Old school keep style.
@astrofarmer93503 жыл бұрын
You could tarp it off but sandstorm woukd be brutal
@SoloRenegade3 жыл бұрын
Better than walking. For foot soldiers, it's awesome.
@christopherdanielson14033 жыл бұрын
These aren't even armored against the weather. Imagine low 40s and rain... mud splashing in your face...
@ericferguson99893 жыл бұрын
The British have something like that called the Jackel. I'm surprised they seem to like it considering how miserable their weather is.
@tomfu99092 жыл бұрын
This was prophetic. The part about imposibility of air drop anywhere near the object of interrest...
@doodskie9993 жыл бұрын
America: needs a low maintenance, reliable and can go in any terrain vehicle. Spends billions. Other countries: so yeah we use a toyota hilux which this 99% of your vehicles can also do Also you can buy parts for this vehicle anywhere in the world
@SanarySeggnete3 жыл бұрын
And you can mount 14.5 mm AA on it or SAM system on it or anything you want on it while you can still pick up your kids at school , your wife at work
@superchargedpetrolhead3 жыл бұрын
and probably much more reliable than this...
@Phenom983 жыл бұрын
@@superchargedpetrolhead An unrestricted, probably de-tuned 2.6 naturally aspirated diesel? Nah, I don't think so. Sounds pretty fucking reliable to me, a mechanic.
@andrespatino27613 жыл бұрын
FJ Cruiser, Tundra, Land Cruiser. Land cruiser could carry 7 troops. Tundra like 5 but can attach a mean turret on the bed.
@davesomeone40593 жыл бұрын
Can a Toyota Hilux tow artillery or anti tank guns?
@MWSamekh3 жыл бұрын
This feels like a military industrial complex equivalent to a Hilux with a machine gun mounted on the back.
@MattGoesSkiing3 жыл бұрын
75th rangers and other SF use Hiluxs with machine guns on them. They are armored though and made by battele.
@arctic_shrew_873 жыл бұрын
The hilux would have been a better option
@Seth98093 жыл бұрын
You are just describing the Humvee. This doesn't have a bed, doors, or a mg.
@arctic_shrew_873 жыл бұрын
Hummers are too heavy, slow and wide. Hate those things
@HanSolo__3 жыл бұрын
Yup. Here in Poland we picked Ford Ranger.
@edcfyau3 жыл бұрын
At this rate, they’ll make “military-grade” hover boards for each soldier lol
@davebonselaar11103 жыл бұрын
Hammers slammers individual skimmer boards for the infantry.
@mementomori79113 жыл бұрын
Don't forget the Hammer Of Dawn.
@NFLYoungBoy2233 жыл бұрын
They do
@Shinkajo3 жыл бұрын
I'd prefer jetpacks. Airborne baby!
@mirai_the_idiot3 жыл бұрын
maybe military grade mini tanks (either a smol m1a2, a smollllll maus or a smol t90) (the smol maus is a regular sized tank wth)
@gkr2189 Жыл бұрын
Looks like someone took the warthog from Halo and decided to roll with it. Literally.
@schmetterling4477 Жыл бұрын
How does it work in Halo? Deathtrap, right? ;-)
@emmanuelmartinez62103 жыл бұрын
I’m waiting for the military to start consulting the company that made Warthogs in Halo
@pm.meowth48503 жыл бұрын
No doubt... Russia already has ducking Spartan low grade armor
@E2005-c4j3 жыл бұрын
I am waiting for them to cut 2 axles off the Oshkosh m1070 and call it a personel carrier
@milesfinch3 жыл бұрын
The British Paras and SF have been using them for years.
@dylanpeel63153 жыл бұрын
Paras and SF is exactly what this is designed for, so it's good it's being utilised effectively
@parky53293 жыл бұрын
Light role infantry would also use them in theatre
@VanDiemensLander3 жыл бұрын
Australian SAS and Commandos as well with the Long Rang Patrol Vehicle, been using them since the 80's apparently en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Long_Range_Patrol_Vehicle
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
@Ignacio Muñoz Diaz Not really, if you use something like 82nd airborne, you could drop them with AT weapons.
@taoliu39493 жыл бұрын
@Ignacio Muñoz Diaz Um, Airborne, not Air Assault, there's a difference. That said, Paras by definition are Airborne too. And Air Assault units in the British Army use similar equipment as well.
@0range0ctopus553 жыл бұрын
As a veteran- i say no go. The mrap saved my life many times. 12 bravo
@reganbond613 жыл бұрын
Thank you for your service!
@trinidadgardea86113 жыл бұрын
13 brovo said fuck you
@0range0ctopus553 жыл бұрын
@@trinidadgardea8611 lolololol get back to barrel lickin
@nathanashley52603 жыл бұрын
Sappers lead
@momsspaghetti99703 жыл бұрын
Imo you dont really want too much bulk when your small size and speed allows you to shoot and scoot.
@markandrewsolis20492 жыл бұрын
The brass should consider the enemy point of view: that is, what does the enemy NOT want to see coming at them?
@cjr42863 жыл бұрын
Personally, I was very excited to see these vehicles being introduced. The U.S. military has never truly had motorized infantry; it was either light infantry or mechanized infantry, one extreme or the other. These lightweight vehicles introduce unprecedented mobility to light infantry units without the cost, maintenance, and global-mobility issues associated with mechanized infantry vehicles.
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
You could use them with 82nd airborne, so they have the capability of attacking a target fast and effectively.
@daviddubose88043 жыл бұрын
Think the germans did this with bicycles in ww 2!! Now just a more modern flare.
@HanSolo__3 жыл бұрын
@@daviddubose8804 Bicycle is quiet and spendable.
@matthewzito61303 жыл бұрын
@@daviddubose8804 - I know the Japanese who used bicycle infantry. Not sure about the Germans.
@satnite3253 жыл бұрын
In the 80s they had the 9th Infantry Division - a mobile infantry division experiment modeled around wheeled vehicles. The problem they found was you either needed light Infantry or heavy infantry, the battlefield for medium infantry is actually limited. Basically you get all the logistics problems of a heavy infantry unit without the firepower and armor capabilities it brings. It was easier to give a few more trucks to the lighter units.
@grim69803 жыл бұрын
So basically it is a jeep. I would rather have a jeep.
@daWolf523 жыл бұрын
Jeep's have door's
@petrsukenik92663 жыл бұрын
Not the WW2 ones
@GYMJAX3 жыл бұрын
@@daWolf52 You can remove Jeep Doors easily
@recondo8863 жыл бұрын
@@petrsukenik9266 the ones I drove in the 1980s didn't have doors either... the was a wet weather kit (fabric roof and doors) but for the most part were never used.. it's hard to ride that pedestal mounted M60 with a roof.
@XBLArmory3 жыл бұрын
Two jeeps better than 1 skeleton bus
@sailyourface3 жыл бұрын
I appreciated the Go / No-go segment I think if used for it's *specified mission set* then it will be perfect but I hope they don't turn it into humvee 2.0
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
glad some people liked it I wasn't sure how people would feel about me being unapologetically on the fence with no real take on the vehicle other than "here's the arguments" haha
@StrangeTerror3 жыл бұрын
But let's be honest. They will.
@death_parade3 жыл бұрын
@@StrangeTerror No they won't. Due to lack of even doors on this thing, Soldiers can now point out the VISIBLE lack of protection on their vehicles, instead of like now, having to argue about why the current STANAG level on the vehicle is insufficient for the threat expected.
@speedy58532 жыл бұрын
I've always thought about that. Like some humvees that don't have doors and stuff. It always made me confused. Thank you for explaining!
@falatoronto3 жыл бұрын
Most of the people they fight have the same idea. They call them Toyotas.
@Catman21233 жыл бұрын
When the recruiter said, “It’ll be just like Halo,” this wasn’t what we had in mind. If Tesla made one with a Cybertruck frame and rear mounted .50, I think that they might actually have to pay Microsoft for licensing the design.
@Thegamingassassin13 жыл бұрын
To me they look like a new Jeep, a go anywhere drag everything, not really a front line unit, but everything in between, and is fast enough to dodge the odd round that comes in
@DIEGhostfish3 жыл бұрын
None of our recent wars have had much in the way of a front line. And any war with a power big enough to have a "Front line" with is going to need NBC sealant when the mushrooms start sprouting.
@williamt.sherman98413 жыл бұрын
@@DIEGhostfish our recent wars were idiotic clusterfucks. Don't invade countries and expect to nation build. That IS not the job of the US Army. Fighting other armies is. And if no one is threatening to invade or otherwise GOOD we don't need to constantly be at war. Primary purpose of the US Military should be to DETER war from major hostile nations (Russia, China) not go on Bullshit interventions in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya. How have those wars helped the US? how have they helped the locals? who have they helped? (no one except people who profit from such mis-adventures)
@williamt.sherman98413 жыл бұрын
@@DIEGhostfish as for NBC that is not wise to assume you have no choice to use Nukes. Korea proved that wrong in 1950
@matthiuskoenig33783 жыл бұрын
@@williamt.sherman9841 and also, surely we can give the mounts personal NBC protection atleast for rear eshelon troops.
@dickiewongtk3 жыл бұрын
@@williamt.sherman9841 Those wars help to keep the US dollar its value.
@samisuhonen98152 жыл бұрын
Try going on marches for many dozens of kilometers. Not only are they very rough, especially offroad and with 60kg of gear, but half of your troops have diminished combat capability after such long physical task. Now imagine you could just speed away on a light vehicle to do the same transporting of troops, but in a fraction of the time and with zero fatigue issues. The vehicle is also capable of carrying 100x more gear for the troops than just sending them on foot. This won't really be applicable for huge amounts of troops, but instead for recon and airborne missions where the key is speed. Missions where the squad is intended to sabotage something or gather intel. Same goes for patrolling, a light fast vehicle with easier logistics is a great addition for patrolling an area for enemy breaches. I could also see these being used for reinforcements and resupply. You won't always have to send in an entire truckload of supplies for every task. Sometimes it's a better move sending 2-3 light vehicles packed with ammo, food and water, and with a few replacement troops each. Obviously these vehicles fill a VERY different role than combat vehicles, which are armored to withstand at least small arms fire, and weaponized to bring greater firepower than soldiers can. A non-armored vehicle would be suicidal and idiotic to use for fire support. You would use an IFV for that. These are not meant to replace IFVs. They are meant to fill a role where the IFV would be overkill and too expensive for the requirements. However it would have been okay to have it wrapped in SOME form of protection to at least withstand shrapnel. A random artillery impact 5 lightyears away will shred the entire squad with zero doors on these things.
@blue_diamond_gem3 жыл бұрын
When has the Army ever stuck with “what something was meant to do”? 😂
@mikzpwnz_31993 жыл бұрын
Doing what you're meant to do is a sure-fire way of getting scrapped when the brass decides it doesn't need to do that thing anymore.
@Ferrarithereallucas3 жыл бұрын
UCP, M14......
@captainawasome89853 жыл бұрын
Put a surfboard on the roof, add a guitar and a bong! - It has no other use than being a hippie mobile.
@whiterabbit-wo7hw3 жыл бұрын
Don't forget to paint flowers and psychedelic images on it. Almost forgot. And peace symbols.
@w.callens16293 жыл бұрын
Ha, the opening scene of apocalypse now 2029....
@karakas99053 жыл бұрын
The Czech Army will be getting Toyota Hilux for this.We had modified Land Rover Defender for this with mounted automattc grenade launchers and machine gun on passenger's side.
@player55redcrafter82 жыл бұрын
Good thing Philippines' Squad Vehicle Charlie prototype, simioto the GMB had a .50 cal RCWS on top on it's main specs illustration.
@George-pf8zb3 жыл бұрын
Looks like the DOD could've saved a ton of money and bought Jeeps.
@vulekv933 жыл бұрын
But Jeeps dont have simple Diesel engine, oh wait, they do, its 2.8L straight 6...
@aizseeker36223 жыл бұрын
Reject this thing and return to Humvee
@The_Faceless_No_Name_Stranger3 жыл бұрын
@@aizseeker3622 Humvees where trash even when they were new
@lioncelica51703 жыл бұрын
A Jeep with a 2.8L Cummins would be rad af
@bibekjung74043 жыл бұрын
Who is complete God? The Holy Bible gives the answer to this question. Let's find out. Iyov 36:5 - Orthodox Jewish Bible (OJB) See, El is Kabir, and despiseth, not any; He is Kabir in ko’ach lev (strength of understanding). Translation: Supreme God is Kabir, but despises no one. He is Kabir, and firm in his purpose. In all Bible translations, the word Kabir has been translated as "Mighty" or "Great" whereas Kabir is the original name of Supreme God. Conclusion: This verse of the Bible proves that Kabir is Complete God. The one who worships God Kabir by taking initiation from the complete saint sent by him gets complete salvation. After attaining salvation that souls rest in peace in the eternal abode Satlok forever. The throne of God is in Satlok. www.jagatgururampalji.org/en/bible Brother/SISTER LORD KABIR has send the messenger in present time in the form of SAINT RAMPALJI MAHARAJ... BIBLE, QURAN, VEDH, GURU GRANTHA SAHEB are holy books of Christain, Hindu, MUlsim, SIKh & all these holy books are suggesting one ALMIGHTY GOD KABIR but today preachers of different religion doesnot understand the secrets thats why HUMAN society cannot get full benefits from ALMIGHTY GOD...As a result more and more people are becoming non believer..... … Any kinds of DISEASES(MENTAL, PHYSCIAL, SPIRITUAL), PARANORMAL ACTIVITY,CURSE,BLACK MAGIC,GHOST is cured by Getting Diksya (mantra ) from SAINT RAMPALJI MAHARAJ..Note: No charge is taken. .one can get MANTRA dikshya from INTERNET or BY PHONE CALL after getting dikshya evil things cannot hover around the person....ANY KINDS OF DIESEASES AIDS, CANCER , KIDNEY FAILURE IS HEALED BY SAINT RAMPALJI MAHARAJ......BUT ONE SHOULD NOT VIOLATE GODS RULES after becoming DISCIPLE of SAINT RAMPALJI MAHARAJ - NO MOVIES, NO SONGS,NO MEAT, NO EGG, NO DRUGS( ALCOHOL, CIGARATEES, TOBACCO, MARIHUANA, COCAINE) -NO ADULETERY, NO PORN, NO POLYGAMY, NO PRE MARRIAGE SEX, -NO GAMBLING, NO STEAL -NO ABORTION For more spiritual knowledge Please Download free GYAN GANGA, WAY OF LIVING( JINEKI RAHE) book written by SAINT RAMPAJI MAHARAJ on www.jagatgururampalji.org/gyan_ganga_english.pdf www.jagatgururampalji.org/way-of-living.pdf www.jagatgururampalji.org/en/publications WWW.JAGATGURURAMPALJI.ORG or CALL OR SMS YOUR FULL NAME,ADDRESS,PHONE NUMBER AND BOOK NAME ON FOLLOWING NUMBERS TO GET GYAN GANGA , JINEKI RAHE(WAY OF LIVING) , GEETA TIMRO GYAN AMRIT BOOK FREE OF COST THROUGH OUT THE WORLD AND FREE COURIEIR SERVICE IS AVAILABLE.. Nepal SMS-(+977)9851189380, 9851189381, 9851189382, 9851189383, 9851189384 india:SMS (+91) 8222880541, 8222880542,8222880543 and 8222880544 Pakistan +923460812600 to get Gyan Ganga book free of Cost in various language(Hindi, Urdu, Nepali,Bangali,Tamil,Marathi,Gujarati,Panjabi,English in all parts of world(free courier service is available) INTERNATIONAL-NAMDAAN CENTRE CONTACT NUMBERS United Kingdom: +44 7411853409 United States of America: +1 346-714-0224 Canada: +1 (604) 621-4092, (647) 739-4641 Italy: +39 3298194596, 3454629786, 3208455762, 3207151799, 3668084055 Australia: +61 299204319, Mob + 61 481781769 +61 405761149 Belgium: +32 465296460 Nepal: +977 9802951254 Online - Namdaan Centre Contact Numbers Punjab : +91 7827800194 Nepali : +977 9800878648 Foreigner : +91 7690013500 From servant of ALMIGHTY GOD
@kodywilson263 жыл бұрын
"Full auto from the back seat baby!" Finger is clear of the trigger guard.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
what? you never fire your gun using your mind?
@CommissarMoody13 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose Mind bullets! That's telekinesis!
@HanSolo__3 жыл бұрын
THIS! is how far he is trained. He can't 😆👌
@nomprenom93373 жыл бұрын
Finger discipline even for a joke with an airsoft
@TheMichaelStott3 жыл бұрын
@@Taskandpurpose Shhhhhh! If you tell anyone that, they'll put you on Goat Staring detail😶 say goodbye to your weekend!
@JDBeastmode3 жыл бұрын
For the go segment: when the infantry is marching they’re not armored so this could be used any time you would need to March.
@JeffTL1233 жыл бұрын
Thats what the idea behind being unarmored was.
@kameronjones71393 жыл бұрын
Yes but now everyone is bunched up instead of spread out
@JDBeastmode3 жыл бұрын
@@kameronjones7139 and also moving more efficiently. A 3 day March becomes a 3 hour ride and you still have the armored escort vehicles for cover
@kameronjones71393 жыл бұрын
@@JDBeastmode well no you are very unlikely to have armor escorts if you are using this considering it is primarily for air born and literally any weapon means certain death that is why they tell you to spread out
@JDBeastmode3 жыл бұрын
@@kameronjones7139 fair enough, still statistically worth the risk for superiors to increase marching range and reducing time.
@Jason32Bourne2 жыл бұрын
If this is going to be used, it needs to feature the militaries favorite buzzword: Modularity.
@rickj90603 жыл бұрын
You might be too young. In the early 80's the Army was testing hunter-killer teams using the M274 Mule in Germany w/stingers to see how many aircraft the could get a lock on. They were easy to hide and shoot & scoot. They concept proved very successful.
@MR-vt3np2 жыл бұрын
We had something similar the Nekaf M38A1 Jeep with TOW. Securing a drop zone and hunting for tanks. They operated in teams of 3 jeeps.
@MrDarrylR2 жыл бұрын
9th Infantry Division (Motorized) from 1983-89, aka the High-Technology Test-Bed, was an entire division devoted to sand buggy warfare. 16 thousand soldiers, dedicated to being America's version of Megaforce (the 1982 film).
@fightingfalcon19862 жыл бұрын
A very similar vehicle to the german Faun Kraka, excepting for some differences.
@VisibilityFoggy2 жыл бұрын
@@MrDarrylR Man, that sucks that they JUST missed the Gulf War where they could've torn it up in the desert.
@davidlambert11029 ай бұрын
Talk about "no amour"!
@iivin42333 жыл бұрын
I'm not a soldier but the thought occurs to me: if toyotas work then just use toyotas.
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
They would have to modify the toyotas to drop out of planes, but knowing the Hilux, it would break the earth before it would break.
@DEEZ_N4T3 жыл бұрын
Problem is the US don’t get Toyota vehicles much xD
@PaperEater_3 жыл бұрын
Archlight535 yeah, let's just say Japan doesn't like us very much, after that. Incident.
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
@@PaperEater_ wdym, they are one of our most loyal allies, besides Canda and the UK. The reason we dont get the Hilix is because WE banned the import of them.
@PaperEater_3 жыл бұрын
Al Bar oh sry I'm fucking dumb I said that at like 3am
@aaronholst15613 жыл бұрын
I don’t think they realized that bullets are faster than cars
@anotheralpharius20563 жыл бұрын
you just need to make it faster until its faster than the bullets
@malakialkins53323 жыл бұрын
@@anotheralpharius2056 that's not possible a bullet goes 1,800 miles per hour
@thatothersanecustodian80343 жыл бұрын
You dont need to be faster than a bullet, you need to be faster than the guy yeeting boolet at you
@anotheralpharius20563 жыл бұрын
@@malakialkins5332 did you think I was being serious when saying you need a car faster than a bullet
@chinookh47133 жыл бұрын
Faster cars make it harder to aim
@MrTubularBalls2 жыл бұрын
No windscreen.. the driver will be covered in dead bugs after 5 minutes. And imagine driving through the desert in this thing. For the crew it'll be like getting sandblasted in a furnace with a windtunnel attached to it.
@staycoolproductions3 жыл бұрын
Bro this is a huge no go for me, I wouldn't get caught in that tomb stone out of the wire because that's gonna get you shot.
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
I'd rather walk to the objective honestly. I'm quieter than a truck on foot (barely) and a nearby tree would offer more cover and concealment than this thing.
@ianmills92663 жыл бұрын
Worked for the British and Danes
@Treblaine3 жыл бұрын
This isn't an alternative to an APC... see this as an alternative to WALKING.
@ianmills92663 жыл бұрын
@@Treblaine it's not an alternative to walking, as a rule this sort of vehicle would be used alongside merchandise infantry units or to provide reconicance for convoys. They can also be used as a mobile machine gun platform providing fast moving fire support to support infantry advances
@Treblaine3 жыл бұрын
@@ianmills9266 Doesn't mechanized infantry simply mean "infantry that have vehicles to get around rather than having to walk everywhere"
@lukasgiese23313 жыл бұрын
Could look to the UK Pathfinders and their Jackal vehicle for strategies. They rolled with an unarmed vehicle for the longest time.
@cheekboy72473 жыл бұрын
Go look at the sas!
@jaccon61063 жыл бұрын
@@cheekboy7247 no I don’t want to
@Bobbybulsara1793 жыл бұрын
The strategy is 'contact' followed by 'get the fuck out of there'. Other than that it's get within a few miles and dismount when going for a recce. The Jackal 2 is not for engaging the enemy, it's a mobile weapons platform for recce which means you cannot take on the enemy because it has no armour.
@100joshtowner3 жыл бұрын
They also haven’t seen the same amount of combat
@Venicilia3 жыл бұрын
@@100joshtowner The British Army Pathfinders have been in every conflict that US Regular troops have since after the invasion of Panama, if that's what you mean. They're basically equivalent to US Army Rangers, and are probably even a notch above them honestly. They're the guys you send in BEFORE Airborne. I would trust them to know of good ways to use unarmoured offroad vehicles in combat environments.
@Bunderwahl3 жыл бұрын
People always want to fight the last war. Humvee was great, the enemy kept getting shellacked when they stood and fought -so they improvised as armies always do and used road side bombs. We reacted by putting armor on them, they used more explosives, we increased the armor. There is always the need for moving men and support around the battlefield, recon, supply, getting brass around (both ammo and officers). The WWII jeep became a legend and there is still a niche. Yes you would not charge into battle alongside Abrams in it, but who wants to be encased in a cramped sweltering metal coffin when you are just delivering mail, ferrying replacements, going to the range? It might seem silly to drive 10 miles and get out and walk a half mile to the objective -until you realize the other option is walking 10 and a half miles, full combat load, then walking who knows how far to an extraction point.
@ChefofWar333 жыл бұрын
I am just imagineing a big pack of these things just rolling in off road at full beans then powerslideing behind cover then 6 or 7 dudes belly flop out of it into a nearby trench. Would honestly be good for blitzkrieg tactics and keeping the enemy on their toes. Instead of rolling in all slow and ominously so the enemy can plan their attack. Its literally an entirely different combat philosophy, and is more akin to Battlefield 3 tactics. Lol
@linusa29962 жыл бұрын
The 82nd Airborne charged across the Iraqi dessert in unarmoured HMMWV's alongside French tanks
@adamb83172 жыл бұрын
@@linusa2996 if I remember correctly marine recon was right there too in lightly armored or unarmored humvees.
@Forensource2 жыл бұрын
Back in the 1980s, we rode around in Jeep Cherokees. We were prohibited from taking them off a hard road unless it was an absolute emergency. We couldn't even set the thing into 4wd if we wanted to.
@dennismckee61623 жыл бұрын
They may be needed, but your mention of Kevlar door makes a ton of sense.
@parzavaal53353 жыл бұрын
I agree, but what do I know!
@DreadX103 жыл бұрын
Option 1: The kevlar blankets could've been installed already for about the same cost for a vehicle as it is without. Option 2: Roll out a version without kevlar and wait for the soldiers to ask for the obvious, then get a re-design contract to do what should've been done in the first place.
@YouTubechannel-xp1tx3 жыл бұрын
I find the project as crap, why don't they buy Toyota Hilux and add Kevlar blankets and not to forget mount a 50 caliber on it, it's pretty simple
@someturkishguy86382 жыл бұрын
@@KZbinchannel-xp1tx even if they don't want to give money to a foriegn company, they could just use an F-250
@Plantsrdabestt2 жыл бұрын
Def a No go….
@j.kearney4843 жыл бұрын
Ok but imagine your rifle falling out from the seat on a rough trail or something
@Taskandpurpose3 жыл бұрын
"I knew I was missing something! guys, we gotta go back and look for my rifle real quick - its somewhere between here and 100km back"
@Grehmdel3 жыл бұрын
It's a technical built by the US Military Industrial Complex. Why can't we used stripped down Humvees in the same role?
@Angry-Lynx3 жыл бұрын
Slow, heavy, obsolete , wont take 9 guys
@user-pq4by2rq9y3 жыл бұрын
Because a stripped down humvee would be expensive compared to that thing. It is a 2.8l 4 cylinder engine after all.
@PowderLlamma2 жыл бұрын
Great analysis!!! Totally agree that used for proper Task & Purpose this would be quite useful on certain battlefields. Weaponized drones will make most troop carriers deathtraps. At least these can be replaced cheaper and are way more fuel efficient than M113. These little buggies are not for occupation....once airspace is controlled, these are not the Special Tool you're looking for.
@dsz11953 жыл бұрын
I could see the military use this for scouting enemies IF DRONES DIDN'T FREKING EXIST 🤣🤣🤣
@thatdudnum67potatoe453 жыл бұрын
i mean there are a few things that can stop drones easily like there are like radio disruptors like these www.perfectjammer.com/drone-signal-jammers.html but it would be nice if they could put a little itty bit of armor on it
@kameronjones71393 жыл бұрын
Or a machine gun
@death_parade3 жыл бұрын
Watch the video again, carefully.
@stareagle50003 жыл бұрын
"Leadership could potentially really screw this up for everyone if they use it for missions that are outside of it's scope" So.... don't do what they did with the Humvee? I mean technically that was supposed to be a lightweight vehicle for getting around meant to replace the jeep not meant for use in combat type situations. I have no faith that the aforementioned quote is possible.
@michaelbdoherty3 жыл бұрын
Reverting back to the WWII Jeep soon.
@Gcock2 жыл бұрын
Solid idea. Giving light infantry the ability to mix speed into the equation - giving you a resupply and weapons platforms for everything for .50cals to 2.75" laser guided rockets. Speed and maneuverability has always been doctrine - these last low intensity wars have softened us to the fact that speed and violence on action is your best protection.
@fredcollins89192 жыл бұрын
Shouldve & couldve easily been done 30 years ago
@Enzo889913 жыл бұрын
The enemy in the next war: "Man, those light vehicules are much smaller, faster and nimble than the Abrams, I can"t hit them with my missile launcher." Proceeds to load 50 cal. "Too bad they forgot to put in the doors though..."
@sachoune34163 жыл бұрын
I'm mean, from what I've seen already, as well as from reports of other soldiers from the ISAF, americans already often remove doors from their HMMWVs, correct me if I'm wrong
@sachoune34163 жыл бұрын
@Sig Bauer oh ok, thanks for the info
@dickiewongtk3 жыл бұрын
Enemy in the next war: Drone swarm.
@Sethgolas3 жыл бұрын
There's a big difference between fighting a near peer enemy and guerilla fighters. The near peer enemy is going to kill you whether you have the armor or not.
@Sethgolas3 жыл бұрын
@Sig Bauer There's a reason they gave up on body armor in ww1.
@outlawsix13223 жыл бұрын
This is unbelievable, they've already been down this road when they first got the Humvee. why must the Army make the same mistake twice.
@Angry-Lynx3 жыл бұрын
Similar thoughts.... Our polish troops were sent to afganistan in honkers with basically plastic body, some unnecessary losses due to stupid mistake.
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
I see these vehicle more like the jeeps SAS have been using for decades.
@cheekboy72473 жыл бұрын
@@albar428 the sas used landrovers
@albar4283 жыл бұрын
@@cheekboy7247 The land rovers the SAS uses looks like the GMV without the roof.
@matthiuskoenig33783 жыл бұрын
@@albar428 the SAS' landrover EWMIK, RWMIK amd RWMIK+ vehicles have armour though.
@joshuamcguire24233 жыл бұрын
In 03 when We deployed out, Once we hit Kuwait we took off our Paper Doors for 3 months then Got Up armor.... I'll take the armor
@honkhonk80098 ай бұрын
This was a thing beginning in the 90s too. Back when the Army tried testing a team of tanks against a team of buggies with ATGM's on them. Every single time, the buggies with ATGM's won against the tanks.