@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 Seriously. It seems like if a word exists that can be mispronounced... Cap is there for it. Where does something like that come from?
Those Marines that drowned in that Amtrak that foundered had pretty much NOTHING to do with the LVT's being bad, and EVERYTHING to do with the Corps being negligent, damn near criminally so IMO. There were NUMEROUS systemic Corps-Wide issues that compounded eachother and allowed that incident to occur.: 1. The most glaring culprit that ALWAYS seems to occur, poor and infrequent maintenance of the LVT fleet by the USMC likely as some idiots way of "Saving Money" by spending 10x the amount fixing all the shit that broke cause they didn't maintain it for 10+ years. The gaskets and seals for the hatches, rear ramp, etc on the incident AAVP-7A1 were bad and allowing water to slowly ingress the vehicle; in addition to this during this incident the engines died due to the USMC's poor and infrequent maintenance of them, this allowed the AAVP to drift sideways and instead of hitting them head on with the splash board, they started taking waves over the side that were flooding down in through the Driver and TC's OPEN Hatches which they refused to close and remained open this entire time. And lastly as far as the AAVP goes; either due to the main engines dying and becoming inoperable, or as just another victim of the poor and spotty maintenance; the bilge pumps to pump out water on the vehicle were inoperable as well. 2. Irresponsible safety training by the USMC: NONE of the relatively fresh and inexperienced grunts in the back of that AAVP had undergone escape training for sinking vehicles, which As Far As I Knew all Marines deployed with an MEU are usually supposed to have passed both a sinking AAVP, AND sinking Helicopter escape course. None of the grunts in the AAVP-7A1 that went down had this training AFAIK AND were weighed down by their FULL kit which leads Mr to negligence #3. 3. A Terrible TC commanding the crew AND grunts of that AAVP, at NO point did he declare an emergency or the severity of how much water he was taking on, and at NO point did he inform the men being transported to ditch their gear and heavy clothing as they'd all quickly have to be escaping a sinking vehicle and survive in the sea until fast boats or a SnR helicopter can reach them. IIRC (Aka "I could be wrong") The TC downplayed the severity of the situation to BOTH those on the radio/net he was asking for a tow, and to the troops he was carrying in the back. Essentially refusing to believe it was really happening, all the way until she finally foundered and sank upon which the 3 vehicle crewmen including the TC were forced to climb out of their hatches and swim for the surface. Meanwhile with no warnings or orders to prepare to abandon the vessel from the Vehicles Crew, ALL the troops in the back were still wearing their full plate carriers, plus rucksacks and couple dozen of "X" lbs of miscellaneous gear and equipment. When suddenly from their prospective, it's pitch black and their drowning trapped in a small metal box blind and weighed down by 80-100lbs of gear each. To survive they would've had to strip all and any heavy gear on them, while blindly pulling themselves to one of the multiple known hatch locations they could escape from, then single-file squeeze out the hatch and follow the bubbles (Up). And then not only were they given no preparation by the TC, remember they hadn't even taken the sinking vehicle and helicopter escape courses so wouldn't even know where all the escape hatches were anyways. If The USMC had been willing to replace worn out seals/gaskets, and do preventative Maintenance on the power plant keeping it healthy, this wouldn't have happened; and even if it still did, had the men been giving just a single 5-min safety brief to point out the available escape points, more of them would likely still be here or at least had a chance.
Wow.... That is a level of stupid I'd always hope our military was void of. But, I guess that's what we get for all the stupid shit they pushed for inclusivity to try and get highly unqualified people into positions, Dead men that could've been great soldiers killed because of their own leaderships incompetency.
@@charleslennon1 A case of 'just get it done!" that permeates toxic leadership who are nothing but shithead lifer politicians. Is it all of the nco's and command? Obviously not, but it does happen enough to lead to shit like this. Saw it myself , get told that something needs done and then have to figure out how to get the result: improvise, adapt, overcome after all, no one said it had to be done properly.
The Marine Corps only exists because we live in a pop culture country that funds things for silly reasons. The corps should be two well-funded army divisions. Maybe one division and a few MEU-like Army regiments.
... The Donkey-Rhinocrat Party has had nearly 30 years to wrinkle the USA up!!! - thanks, Epp's Island Air Cho Mo(e) most frequent flyer, Prez Ill b ilL GIGO!
Why would you wear a ruck sack inside an amphibious vehicle as it’s traversing deep water? Why not don your ruck once the rig makes landfall or at least shallow water? Seems like one less thing to drown you. Quick Release tabs on newer Plate Carriers could help with getting the heavy LBE off quickly.
One of the best guys I served with died on a that AAV that sank in 2020, leaving his wife and newborn behind. I think about him almost everyday, and about how we always had so much old gear in the Marine Corps. Even still Marines always preform. Imagine how much they could do with good gear. I also have to imagine how many more would be alive if we better emphasized safety checks and maintaining some level of modernity to our fleet for Marines. They hold high standards for everything or at least that's what is preached but obviously there are some gaps in the plan. Otherwise we would not have good people dying during a training event. Please lets get these amazing individuals some better vehicles. rest in peace Cpl. Rodd.
The soldier should be the number one asset and a human being the first priority. You deserve the best kit. Armour can be replaced but not comrades. We civvies can learn for the first time from watching real combat in Ukraine; Not as a game, but to learn what soldiers do, and we should look after our vets better in your USA and here in Blighty
“Likely to be uncontested.” When I heard that, I had a clear vision of two or three Marines taking cover from enemy fire in an artillery crater, and one of them saying sarcastically “Likely to be uncontested.”
Make Peace or Die is the motto of 1st Battalion, 5th Marines but ACVs belong to the Amphibious Assault Battalions so it was probably an ACV attached to 1/5
I served in the Marines from 99 to 03 as a 2141 AAV mechanic. The hull of the AAV is actually cast aluminum and the armor was to deflect than absorb. I also got to play around with the EFV (we called it the AAAV or triple A V) and she was a beast. She could go 50 MPH in the water because the EFV “skipped” across the water while the AAV sunk into the water. The EFV had a twin turbo V12 where the pistons were the size of your head. The turbos kicked in at different RPMs too. Sad to see she never got put into production but after seeing the ACV, they made the right choice.
@@coppertopv365 They did.... they had a really good upgrade to the AAV at the same time as they were competing the ACV. They scrapped the upgrade and got stuck with a wheeled vehicle that still isnt proven in island campaign missions. wheels in coral...?....?
I was wondering what happened to the AAAV. (Armed Amphibious Assault Vehicle) It was renamed to the EFV. I worked on a prototype Wankel engine design for the AAAV from 1985-90. Back then it was the Marine Corps' top vehicle program. I worked on the basic engine design when it was not known how much power the vehicle actually required, so it was a 750-hp, 700-cubic-inch two-rotor, twin-turbo Wankel. Ultimately, the Marine Corp figured out that the AAAV would require 2500, and MTU won the engine competition with a hyperbar version of their 883 V12. The engine power requirement was a challenge because the vehicle needed 2500 hp to meet the water speed requirement, but only 800 hp to meet its land performance requirements.
I find it REALLY strange that the percentages aren't reversed. I'm wondering if there wasn't a mistake in the report. Your stationary hit rate should ALWAYS be higher, just common sense. I mean, 91% while moving is still incredible, but that seems weird...and wrong.
@@kx8960 Could be explained by stationary forces you to shoot a target with weird angles while on th emove you can wait for the perfect angle to happen to shoot.
@@cm-pr2yswhat you're proposing, the Army already tried. It's called the Stryker Mobile Gun System, and no. It was kind of shit. There's a reason they are adopting the M10 Booker
Thanks for covering the unsafe vehicle concerns. I wondered what the Marines would use, if these concerns were more trouble than you said. It is always far more than concerning when new vehicles can't be safe enough for our Marines to use. I was one of the people who said keeping the old AAV in operation is better than having unsafe new vehicles.
“ I want to have my crayons and eat it too”. Man this is just Gold for U.S. Army humor. I wish you were out of the army doing this when I was in (2006-2012). My platoon would have absolutely loved watching these vids.
Never underestimate Joe's ability to drive in ways they are never supposed to. During my career I saw humvees with half the side ripped off by pine trees (freaking cav scouts), balanced perfectly across a gulch on its front and rear bumper, and with tires ripped off from hitting boulders. Saw a bradley actually stuck on a tree (tried to plow over it, ended up wedged under it so only the very back of its treads were on the ground and they dug it up). Every type of vehicle you can imagine stuck up above the top of their tires/tracks buried in mud. Worst is when they drive into fast running water since that resulted in deaths every time it happened. All of those happened while doing things against training that they were not supposed to be doing. So while I don't like siding with the higher ups, troops can and will do crazy things with vehicles. Especially the new "hotness".
The old AAV was Death Trap, I lost good friends in 2020 off the coast of San Clemente Island...Literally was on The Somerset, the LPD shown and helped save some Lives, but watching super young Marine die before my eyes during a training accident broke my entire morale.
Fun thing? I was inside a Brazilian variant of these (the Guarani) with my 6 year old kid this exact morning, as we had a army demonstration close by. As soon as I saw it in your video, I found it *very* similar to what I was just inside. And as your started talking more, I realized it is about the same vehicle. Biggest difference? We use 6x6s instead of 8x8s. And we have very few autocannon version - I didn't see any in the base I was win, just unturreted and 50 cal ones. Wich makes a lot of sense down here.
@cubefreak123usually not, Brazil is kinda shit in the weapons department tbf. Our Guaranis had an UT-30BR 30mm gun station that was deemed "the worst", but the Army never really announced any plans to mount a different turret. There is the possibility of adapting an ARES TORC-30 turret to it, which can fire at some insane angles. As of right now and from what I know of, only unturreted or .50 cal RWS versions exist. Damn shame.
When I was an enlisted man in the Army (I retired as a Captain/O-3E), we had to take a special class to get licensed on the M151A2 "Jeep" because of its independent 4 wheel suspension and high center of gravity. No one was blaming "lower enlisteds," they just identified a training shortcomings that no one identified until M151s started turning over at fairly high speed especially off roads.
0:45 as an Australian I agree. We’ve had 2 major amphibious landings in our history, and landed on the wrong beach both times…. We did win the second one though… in spite of McArthur.
I was Army National Guard 1975 till 1981 Basic Fort Jackson SC 😊 AIT was on same base Wheeled vehicle Mac. 😊 the whole AIT pushed preventative maintenance 😊 When i got home, i was assito a US Army ( ST) small tug (45 foot) when we did summer camp, we had drills that required all crew and engineers to CARRY are M-16 at all times Even with it slung behind me on strap, I could NOT get out of the rear engine room square small hatch. I would just set the rifle down when i had engine watch dutys. If the white stripped hat evaluators surprised us with a visit, I would take the gig 😊 Not carrying the Rifle around the engine room, possibly rubbing up against a moving part of the 1950s, built 200 HP Buda Diesel engine. Even the pilot house had those round bulkhead watertight doors with 6 heavy latches.
Ah, yes the AAV I remember choking on diesel fumes in knee deep seawater in the back of those during training exercises praying to god I don't die in that steel coffin.
Water always gets in. There's automatic pumps to get empty it out. The one that sank during the training exercise was due to two of them colliding. The one that sank was because the pumps got overwhelmed by the amount of water the collision let in.
My nephew is crew chief for an A10 squadron. Please understand that shell diameter (30mm) doesn't equate to the same cartridge. The GAU-8 is a 30x173 round, while all chain-guns were designed to be lower recoil for helicopters, etc. I believe it a 30x113 (?) which has significantly less propellent, velocity and power. Still a great weapon though.
Good point about the drivers being blamed for rollover versus a design flaw. Considering the less than optimal environment that combat is, they really should address that problem instead of just shift blame.
The real question is how the ACV’s tires will handle driving over reefs in the Pacific. In WW II the Marines switched to all track vehicles due to tires being shredded during landings on atolls.
Oh shit! Nobody thought of that! The people who design military equipment for the most powerful branch of the most powerful military in history has been outwitted by coral reefs! Have some faith, man. The Marines got this.
@@christopherlane5238 unfortunately, the gear is made by engineers who also do the testing and evaluation, not soldiers. The lowest person at the program office making final decisions is probably a Lt Colonel or Colonel.
I’d assume bolt on tracks are and option depending on the drive unit. I was apart of the trial for them in 2011 on our ASLAVs (Australianised LAV). Helped get off the landing craft up beaches and could be easily removed within 30 seconds. Getting them on was a cunt though.
So basically the Brazilian Army and the USMC made their own variants of the same italian vehicle, that's so cool. I would never realize that the VBTP Guarani and the ACV are cousin vehicles without watching this video.
IVECO factory where the ACV "base" model is built, here in Italy, is on my way to work. It's not uncommon to see them running to and from testing grounds early in the morning (obviously weaponless). And boy, they're HUGE. I served in the Alpine Paratroopers in 83/84, and I feel proud that a little piece of my country is helping protect those Marines. God bless them and all the US service members-past, present, and future.
I'm binge watching your youtube vids ! You've gained my trust and that's not easy to do. The random humor you throw in makes it so fun to learn from you
At the beginning of WW2 US M-3 light tanks in the Philippines had the M-3 Stuart tank armed with a 37mm cannon. The armor piercing shells available for it were quite capable of piercing Japanese tanks (when they could hit it, but that's a different story). However, HE ammo did not arrive with the tanks and their AP ammo. In the thick foliage of the Philippines the Japanese didn't have many tanks anyway. What they did have were lots of troops and anti tank guns. The US Army quickly (and sadly) learned that AP cannon shells were not the best thing to use against a charging mob of infantry. Sure, 3 or 4 of them might get 37mm holes and fall down, but the other 180 or so kept on coming. A similar issue was noted when dueling with Japanese artillery that had both AP and AP HE ammunition. Only a direct hit on the enemy gun itself would stop it from shooting. An AP shell hitting a gun crew only took out that man and someone else usually rep[aced him quickly. More common were 37mm AP shots from an M-3 that did not hit either but did kick up harmless clots of dirt alongside the enemy gun. Against dug in positions and pill boxes on other islands a 37mm AP round proved to be a very ineffective choice. Making a sudden 37mm hole in a concrete wall or dirt mound does not by itself incapacitate those standing nearby. Having an AP/HE round would have probably worked better, but that took a few years to arrive in theater. During much of the early fighting in the Pacific the only useful weapons on the M-3s were the multiple machine guns. More than once a neighboring M-3s machine gun was the only way of getting hostile infantry off your own M-3. If there was none, well the easily removed hatch covers with rubber fuel lines filled with gasoline, a match or turret hatch locks that could be bypassed with an enemies bayonet meant you weren't coming home. The result was that by the time the US Army had fallen back to Corregidor they had no more M-3s (although the Japanese had captured several). The British had a similar experience when they went into Burma with 110 M-3s and only about 6 made it out. So while I am happy there will be a 30mm chain gun on the new USMC amphibious vehicle, I certainly hope it will also have high explosive shells with fragmentation effect as an ammo option.
Usually autocannons nowadays have dual-feed capability, meaning you can switch from one type of ammunition to the next with a single button press, and HE is always present.
Watched from the bow of a LST as Amtracks launched, back in the 60s. I was amazed that they came back to the surface and turned toward shore. My DCKW never sank LOL thank God.
Yeah you get a real sense of just how big the ACV is, with the guy trailing behind it as it's driving along. The tires go up to his waist or top of hips!
In 1950, China's GDP was 4% of that of the United States. In the three years of the Korean War, the Chinese People's Volunteer Army entered the Korean War with 1.9 million troops and nearly 500000 additional troops, totaling 2.4 million (only the army, 225 tanks). Check how much military force the United States invested in the Korean War. During the three-year Korean War, the United States entered Korea with 1.796 million participants. The United States has deployed a total of 1153000 Army personnel (1823 tanks), 241000 Air Force personnel (a total of 3000 combat aircraft, with over 1700 deployed on the battlefield), 130000 Marine Corps personnel, and 265000 Navy personnel (210 warships). These combat figures do not include the United Nations forces. The entire Korean War: China sacrificed 183108 people and injured 383218 people. US military: 54246 deaths and 103248 injured. 628833 UN troops died and 1064453 UN troops were injured.
@bennettbush3906 The Battle of Changjin Lake in the Korean War. This was a battle in the early days of the Korean War. From November 27 to December 24, 1950 (just 28 days), a direct confrontation took place in the Changjin Lake area of North Korea. The U.S. military included the 1st Marine Division (abbreviated as the 1st Marine Division) and the 3rd and 7th Infantry Divisions, as well as the 1st Army of South Korea, with a total of about 100,000 people (the U.S. military dispatched 195 tanks, 7 aircraft carriers, and 500 military aircraft. 3,000 sorties hovered over the volunteers every day); the 9th Corps of the Chinese People's Volunteer Army, which launched the attack, consisted of the 20th Army, the 26th Army, and the 27th Army, with nearly 150,000 people (only the army). This is the data of the battle between the two sides, and this is the scale of the war. In the 28-day "Changjin Lake" battle, the U.S. military suffered 19,843 casualties, and the Chinese Volunteer Army suffered a total of 48,156 casualties. In just 28 days, the total casualties of both sides were close to 70,000. This is how fierce the war was. Do you understand what I mean by real war? The Chinese Volunteer Army had no communication equipment, and communicated with whistles and charge bugles. Holding old weapons, wearing tattered clothes, eating potatoes frozen harder than stones at minus 40 degrees Celsius, they fought barefoot in the snow against the American army armed to the teeth. They drove the American army out of the strategic position of "Changjin Lake" and wiped out the "Polar Bear Army" that the American army was proud of. Our "bitter victory" is exactly what the United States fears. What does it mean to do it at all costs? What does it mean to move forward courageously? Do you understand?
My brother was with the unit where the 2020 incident occurred. AAVs our long past their retirement date. Also, to note, the commanding officer knew those specific vehicles were not sea worthy, and sent them out anyway. Not to mention the AAV only holds about a dozen men and in this specific incident it was holding about that plus gear.
LOL, Retired Army Infantry and sorry about my friends pronunciation. BUT! You guys hog all the crayons. All I ask for is the Grape ones, LOL. Salute and best wishes in seriousness. Respect and hope you have luck in peacetime
Please quit keeping typos in titles, e.g. negeration when meant generation. I've been noticing it regularly in your recent vids and generally I'm captain oblivious. I know it generates comments but your channel doesn't need it. The quality of content is too good to also need such silly 'engagement' tricks.
Perun has them too, even he makes mistakes. I've seen PowerPoint presentations made by million-dollar consulting firms with typos. It's accidental, not on purpose. Some quality spelling correction tools maybe needed.
@@oompalumpus699 That's nice. Perun has a fulltime day job. His defense analyses on his gaming channel started as a one-time side jump that has grown out of hand. So his powerpoint presentations on YT are just a sidehobby next to his gaming hobby. Task and Purpose is a professional channel and is Cappy's main occupation. Those multi-million dollar companies should be ashamed. Typos are avoidable errors. They happen, but they should be rare occasions, not regular ones.
You showed a video presentation of a LCAC. However, you may of wished to mention the primary over the horizon method of getting Marines ashore is by the approximately 72 Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) vehicles. The U.S. Navy is in the process of transitioning from the original LCAC to the Ship-to-Shore Connector (SSC), or LCAC 100 class, a new generation of hovercraft. That deserves a video. The LCAC 100 is being delivered to the U.S. Navy, with production ongoing to replace the older LCACs.
Veteran to veteran. Great documentary of what's to come. Coming from a different branch and miss-pronounce MEU is actually a great representation for not for your military audience but also for your civilian audience. Your presentation was with that of infographics channel. You kept it like the old Donut channel before presenting here's the new school but let's talk about the old school. Awesome work.
My Niece who graduated high school signed up to the Marines before graduation! She is now after only 1 year in the service she is now a Corporal, and a driver of one of these ACV'S! I am so proud of her as I can still remember when she couldn't even say my name so she would call me "MUGGA MIKE!" instead of "Uncle Mike!" so cute. What is so contradicting, is she is so petite but she is incredibly strong! Like she can beat most guys at arm wrestling! But I told her do not ever think that you can get in the ring and KO a man!!! But keep a good head on your shoulders and pray PSALM 91 as things are gonna get wonky pretty soon child!!! She is the Daughter of an Old School Marine Dad! :D Good stuff Maynard!!!!
I used to call it (say-bots or say-bolts.) Because our vehicle is not speaking French. I’m glad he also says it the ground pound way. Say as it’s spelled, non of this silent T stuff. People want to act all high saying it the French way. What has never been fired and dropped once? A French rifle….. oh… 🎤
I used to say say-bolt when loading my 25mm bushmaster on Bradley. Or sometimes “say-bots” Why? Because I ain’t saying it the “French” way. I’m American from TN; it’s said how it’s spelled. We aren’t speaking “French” on my vehicle.
When I was in the Marine Corps I was with 2nd Light Armored Reconnaissance for a while and then 2nd Armored Amphibious Vehicles (AAV). The LAV-25 like he said is not large surf capable. To dive odd a landing ships well deck and swim to shore the ship would need to be only about a mile off shore with waves that day not larger than about 2ft high to keep from sinking. The AAV however can dive off the ship several miles out and handle larger waves but hopefully not larger than like 4ft. The guys at AAV had a trick for the new guys that they would pull to scare the hell out of you. They would line one of the larger square hatches in the back with a stack of about four quarters in like 12 spots two feet apart. When the rig dove off the ramp and submerged for just a moment water would flood in those spots. You would think you were sinking and be terrified until the vehicle popped back up and started swimming forward with the Vehicles commander hatch open.
One of my least favorite experiences in the USMC was going ship to shore in a LVTP-7 once. I had no illusions about the chances of getting out if it started to sink. If tanks were meant to swim they would have a rubber ducky floatie around it. The EFV looked like an incredible vehicle, and it was very fast on the water, perfect for over the horizon assaults. While the LCAC is also fantastic for over the horizon assualt platform due to its speed and ability to land feet dry, its problem is one of being largely unable to saturate the landing zone quickly with troops and gear where the AAVs can swarm in together in force without a force of scores of LCACs all hitting beach at once.
Its not really next-generation though, is it? At least outside of the American context. A lot of the European militaries have had comparably advanced kit in service for the past odd decade. It is a European vehicle.
@jamesgoldring1052 In certain aspects, by quite a bit. They've a pretty lively and competitive, multinational industry. The biggest point of critique I have with the US military is its failure to look outward comparatively to see gold for gold; that's not the case with the various European nations that keenly observe advances in the US, Russia, and each other. Their artillery systems, and really their artillery doctrine as a whole, is a generation ahead. They've modern designs optimised for rapid burst shoot and scoot capabilities that fire faster, that are better armoured, that are more manoeuvrable, and that have bigger guns. See the Pzh2000, AS90, and the soon-to-enter-service RCH155. Compare those to the M109. They've also developed very capable truck-based artillery too. Their armoured personnel carriers, again are a generation ahead. Much better armoured for artillery, drone, and splinter protection - using composite arrays instead of plain steel/aluminium as with the Bradley's and Strykers. They're more mobile, and better armed with 30mm+ armaments as opposed to the 25mm of the Bradley. See the Boxer, Puma, Piranha V, CV90, the list goes on. Their helicopters again are a generation ahead. Composite airframes make them largely resistant to small arms fire and they're also fitted with better avionics, sensors, and a more survivable, more modern design when compared to the Black Hawks. See the NH90 and AW149 among many other types. Their missile tech is also no slouch, specifically their ARH missiles are a bit more advanced than the SARH PATRIOTs, ESSMs and SM2s. The Meteor missile as well is also the dominant air-to-air missile on the market. In the maritime, they are pioneers in AESA radar, ship stealth, ship design, automation, ship propulsion, gun systems, and crew accommodation. In regards to aviation, their strategic airlifters such as the A400M are also very modern when compared to say, the C130. One point of critique of European militaries may be that they've yet to design a domestic 5th generation fighter, though they are procuring numbers of F-35s. The reason why is because they opted instead to develop the Eurofighter Typhoon instead of a fighter more comparable to the expensive, and arguably failed, F-22. Why they've not developed a 5th generation fighter is not for lack of ability, they're procuring F35s in the meanwhile as they develop their FCAS/GCAP 6th generation fighters.
@angelaferkel7922 I believe the original plan was to procure over 700 F-22 Raptors, in the end less than 200 were procured. They're highly capable aircraft, alongside the F-35 they're the most capable air-to-air fighters in the world... They're also bloody expensive to procure and maintain, and are lacking in regards to multirole capability. Chiefly they lack an IRST to save on cost. I think the USAF wants to retire some earlier airframes, citing obsolescence and high costs to upgrade and maintain them. Of course, Congress denied that - as they do.
Javelins or their comparative Chinese versions and weaponized drones would wreck havoc on any amphibious vehicles. Seems like a death sentence to get caught trying to make shore.
That’s what I thought to, I know Australia (much smaller army and budget) is planning to buy 3 light carriers so that when we need to do amphibious missions, we can put F35s in the air and use helicopters to get our forces from boat to land. It’s quite surprising the USA marines wouldn’t be thinking that to as helicopters allow you to use them as gunships and medevac vehicles on their way back, and resupplies. Of course it only works with air dominance or complete surprise of the enemy.
I was in amphibs, AAVs specifically. That was 30 years ago and I can still smell the gear oil, diesel fuel and hear the sounds of the well deck! Good times.
The EFV would have revolutionized warfare as much the Osprey M-22 has. The Marine Corps got F-ed & stuck with our grandparents AAVs for another 10-14 years because of it. Those 7 Marines that died are blood on someone's hands. All this while the Army wastes BILLIONS on stupid uniform choices, several different failed rifle tests, several failed light tank development projects, they are ALREADY seeking to replace the Strykers when our LAV-25s were around a generation before those and are just NOW going to get replaced. Dat is some bullsh*t! Getting to the shore 5 times faster than these new vehicles would have enhanced their ability to strike faster with less exposure. They would have enhanced our ability to do lighting raids, disrupt sh*t & scoot on back out to sea before they could mount a defense.
Hell yeah man that's the biggest problem I see with this damn ACV is it's too slow in water. I'm glad it has all those other improvements over the AAV, but only 5 mph in water is ridiculous.
The ECV was way too complicated and ambitious of a project. It was conceived at a time when the DoD was handing out money like it was candy and all of the services were coming up with expensive and complicated gold plated projects. I feel that the Corps made the right decision in cancelling the EFV project. It's just a pity that it took the Corps so long to come up with a replacement project for the ECV. I can't help but to wonder if they couldn't have kept the ECV but stripped it of some of its gold plated tech, like the retractable treads.
For the civilians out there The Emm Eeee You (MEU) is pronounced like MEW and prior to deployment all Marine Expeditionary Units go through Special Operations Quals so when deployed they are MEU (SOC) or Spec Ops Capable. From a former 15th MEU(SOC) Jarhead.
1. The largest amphibious assault was okinawa, not Normandy. 2. Who trained the Army in amphibious assaults, let alone pioneered war plan orange in the pre war period? 3. There were Marines at Normandy just like there were Soldiers in the Pacific.
@cm-pr2ys 1. “The D-Day operation of June 6, 1944, brought together the land, air, and sea forces of the allied armies in what became known as the largest amphibious invasion in military history.” - Eisenhowerlibrary. gov, just google it. 2. Your mom. 3. Since when are marines butthurt crybabies who can’t take a joke? 🤣😂
@@cm-pr2ys Most westerners don't realize there was a war in the Pacific. The whole war was only about the US or UK (not both) beating Hitler. They pretend Russia never even existed. SAD.
The Normandy landings were the biggest amphibious assault in history, but 60% of it was done by the British and Canadians. So yes the US army participated in the biggest amphibious assault but they were only 40% of it. The Brits and Canadians are not part of the US army, so counting them in this US army vs Marines bragging match doesn’t make any sense, the biggest US amphibious assault was Okinawa, but Normandy was the biggest amphibious assault in history.
🎖️⭐💪❤️🩹🙏🏆 Can the differentials be locked and unlocked? Or, function differently, like electronic traction control system that applies the brakes to a slipping wheel to maintain traction. Thank you for sharing this
These are super cool but I mean the EFV literally skipped across the water. Those things were V12 twin turbo monsters! They were SO badass! The Marines definitely should have kept that going to at least have a few on hand for fast assault and QRF between small island chains.
The EFV was originally called the AAAV, as young midshipmen in 2002 we were told that they would operational by 2006/7 or by the time we would be commissioned officers.....that never happened...just like getting to Mars by 2004.
Fun fact when I was deployed in 2013 the Italian military striker like vehicle was one of these they called it the Fletcha I believe I believe it means arrow in Italian it was literally the whole of this vehicle with a bushmaster canon on a gun turret
each marine being transported should have a clear view of the landing area so as the acv approaches they can be looking for where enemy fire is coming from and where places of good cover are before the ramp drops. if it was me being transported i'd sure appreciate the preview of what i'm heading into in this day and age some external cams and interior displays don't seem like a difficult addition
"We'd like to introduce you to our newest member of the unit, Sir Berry-us." BROOO lol i had the video alt tabbed for a moment and didn't even think anything of it until you started explaining what it was and i was like... oh no he didn't lmaoo
Iveco makes small trucks and have for quite a number of years , so they have good experience in making something that runs on diesel motors and are different. Good choice!
Hopefully the exhaust won’t leak fumes into the cabin area . I can still remember riding to shore from the amphib ship and sucking in exhaust fumes. We threw up everywhere then gasped and fought to get out after the ramp finally went down. I also used to crew and Test the now famous LAV-AD and remember swimming the LAVs in a calm lake. Yeah they float low in the water. Not for offshore amphib assaults off a stormy beach. This new vehicle seems cool but I wonder if it has the water speed that the AAV had?????????????
To think we will do a WWII amphibious landing is akin to thinking we will drop an airborne division from 3000 ft going at 125-200 knots. For sure it will be a rotor aircraft insert with follow on landing craft with support elements and gear
Probably seals/raiders on those submarine launched vehicles to scout for entrenched or tunneled enemy, then a airborne insert to secure beachhead, then a beach landing.
@@Patson20It will never happen. It will be a missile bombardment followed by helicopter insert. With advanced satellite and onsite aerial imagery, there is no need for a recce element to come ashore prior to precision strikes.
@magellanstravels nobody said anything about precision strikes. And you're forgetting that recon satellites follow a predictable path and it's already causing problems with gathering images in Iran since they just stop and hide when they know the satellite is going to be coming overhead. And regular recon flights won't be possible in a environment like the south China sea at the start of a war. So its entirely possible that PLA forces could be entrenched on or in tunnels on an island we wanted to land on without us knowing. And it wouldn't even need the a company sized element. Just two squads of marines camped in the jungle with javelin type weapons or anti tank rifles would absolutely fuck up an amphibious landing like this. Sure you might kill them all, but they are likely gonna sink 5 or 6 vehicles with full squads before you do.
@@Patson20I’m the one who said amphibious landings wouldn’t happen in modern warfare. Your lack of knowledge about imagery speaks to your knowledge and placement in the military arena. Anyways, Marines are cool dudes. They are extra hard chargers, just not going to be a Sands of Iwo Jima style war in the pacific. We won’t be assaulting a contested beach requiring an amphibious fighting vehicle.
@magellanstravels bro just because you say fancy words doesn't make you smart ot correct. You can look it up yourself, there's many a story about how Iran is evading our satellites. They are limited by physics, they circle the earth at a set speed in a set orbit so you can track when they will be overhead. Sure we have things like the U2, but we saw in the 60s how well that works about near peer contested airspace. And sure there's things like the SR72, but you wouldn't be wasting an experiment asset on a random beach landing for area denial. And this is still before you consider China weaponizing its fishing fleets and coast guard into militias. They could transport troops on fishing boats to these islands and have them appear as civilians. Sure it's illegal but when has international laws stopped China? Even today we send SF to do in person recon on random terror cells in backwater Africa for drone strikes. So why wouldn't we send SF to ensure a company of Marines weren't sent to the bottom of the ocean?
As an Air Force safety officer I’ve seen multiple incidents where military vehicles were rolled and it was always due to aggressive driving habits needed for successful combat operations, unfortunately accidents happen, fortunately we investigate and learn from them and implement better training programs to reduce or prevent accidents. Combat is the most dangerous situation to be in, training and safety along with equipment familiarity and confidence allow American soldiers to fight and win. We train as we fight and in the military there is always dangerous situations, we will always prepare the best we can.
Good stuff Dude. your reports are the best, total in depth research, history, humor, and a person Grunts perspective and attitude. thanks for the video.
Go to TryFum.com/TASKPURPOSE or scan the QR code and use code TASKPURPOSE to get your free FÜM Topper when you order your Journey Pack today!
🇺🇸
10:19 Did you just say “Say-BOT”? It’s pronounced “Say-Bow” - come on man…. 🙄
There’s no I in CERBERUS.
@@Av-vd3wkthank you!
Fume is literally inhaling essential oils which are unregulated in the US.
The mispronunciation of Cerberus and sabot is making me twitch! Please say it was intentional lol
Bro, Thats Comment Farming. And hes good 😂
@@OlafScholzSPD😂😂
Yes. It got you to comment. It's often intentional but I don't know with this channel.
I thought the same
He's just American
Cerberius :D
I almost spit my coffee out when he said that 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
His pronunciations seriously hurt my sound sometimes🤣
@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 Seriously. It seems like if a word exists that can be mispronounced... Cap is there for it. Where does something like that come from?
he said "Sir barious" 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Loved that
Those Marines that drowned in that Amtrak that foundered had pretty much NOTHING to do with the LVT's being bad, and EVERYTHING to do with the Corps being negligent, damn near criminally so IMO.
There were NUMEROUS systemic Corps-Wide issues that compounded eachother and allowed that incident to occur.:
1. The most glaring culprit that ALWAYS seems to occur, poor and infrequent maintenance of the LVT fleet by the USMC likely as some idiots way of "Saving Money" by spending 10x the amount fixing all the shit that broke cause they didn't maintain it for 10+ years.
The gaskets and seals for the hatches, rear ramp, etc on the incident AAVP-7A1 were bad and allowing water to slowly ingress the vehicle; in addition to this during this incident the engines died due to the USMC's poor and infrequent maintenance of them, this allowed the AAVP to drift sideways and instead of hitting them head on with the splash board, they started taking waves over the side that were flooding down in through the Driver and TC's OPEN Hatches which they refused to close and remained open this entire time.
And lastly as far as the AAVP goes; either due to the main engines dying and becoming inoperable, or as just another victim of the poor and spotty maintenance; the bilge pumps to pump out water on the vehicle were inoperable as well.
2. Irresponsible safety training by the USMC: NONE of the relatively fresh and inexperienced grunts in the back of that AAVP had undergone escape training for sinking vehicles, which As Far As I Knew all Marines deployed with an MEU are usually supposed to have passed both a sinking AAVP, AND sinking Helicopter escape course. None of the grunts in the AAVP-7A1 that went down had this training AFAIK AND were weighed down by their FULL kit which leads Mr to negligence #3.
3. A Terrible TC commanding the crew AND grunts of that AAVP, at NO point did he declare an emergency or the severity of how much water he was taking on, and at NO point did he inform the men being transported to ditch their gear and heavy clothing as they'd all quickly have to be escaping a sinking vehicle and survive in the sea until fast boats or a SnR helicopter can reach them.
IIRC (Aka "I could be wrong") The TC downplayed the severity of the situation to BOTH those on the radio/net he was asking for a tow, and to the troops he was carrying in the back. Essentially refusing to believe it was really happening, all the way until she finally foundered and sank upon which the 3 vehicle crewmen including the TC were forced to climb out of their hatches and swim for the surface. Meanwhile with no warnings or orders to prepare to abandon the vessel from the Vehicles Crew, ALL the troops in the back were still wearing their full plate carriers, plus rucksacks and couple dozen of "X" lbs of miscellaneous gear and equipment. When suddenly from their prospective, it's pitch black and their drowning trapped in a small metal box blind and weighed down by 80-100lbs of gear each. To survive they would've had to strip all and any heavy gear on them, while blindly pulling themselves to one of the multiple known hatch locations they could escape from, then single-file squeeze out the hatch and follow the bubbles (Up). And then not only were they given no preparation by the TC, remember they hadn't even taken the sinking vehicle and helicopter escape courses so wouldn't even know where all the escape hatches were anyways.
If The USMC had been willing to replace worn out seals/gaskets, and do preventative Maintenance on the power plant keeping it healthy, this wouldn't have happened; and even if it still did, had the men been giving just a single 5-min safety brief to point out the available escape points, more of them would likely still be here or at least had a chance.
Wow.... That is a level of stupid I'd always hope our military was void of. But, I guess that's what we get for all the stupid shit they pushed for inclusivity to try and get highly unqualified people into positions, Dead men that could've been great soldiers killed because of their own leaderships incompetency.
@@charleslennon1 A case of 'just get it done!" that permeates toxic leadership who are nothing but shithead lifer politicians. Is it all of the nco's and command? Obviously not, but it does happen enough to lead to shit like this. Saw it myself , get told that something needs done and then have to figure out how to get the result: improvise, adapt, overcome after all, no one said it had to be done properly.
The Marine Corps only exists because we live in a pop culture country that funds things for silly reasons. The corps should be two well-funded army divisions. Maybe one division and a few MEU-like Army regiments.
... The Donkey-Rhinocrat Party has had nearly 30 years to wrinkle the USA up!!!
- thanks, Epp's Island Air Cho Mo(e) most frequent flyer, Prez Ill b ilL GIGO!
Why would you wear a ruck sack inside an amphibious vehicle as it’s traversing deep water? Why not don your ruck once the rig makes landfall or at least shallow water? Seems like one less thing to drown you. Quick Release tabs on newer Plate Carriers could help with getting the heavy LBE off quickly.
One of the best guys I served with died on a that AAV that sank in 2020, leaving his wife and newborn behind. I think about him almost everyday, and about how we always had so much old gear in the Marine Corps. Even still Marines always preform. Imagine how much they could do with good gear. I also have to imagine how many more would be alive if we better emphasized safety checks and maintaining some level of modernity to our fleet for Marines. They hold high standards for everything or at least that's what is preached but obviously there are some gaps in the plan. Otherwise we would not have good people dying during a training event. Please lets get these amazing individuals some better vehicles. rest in peace Cpl. Rodd.
The soldier should be the number one asset and a human being the first priority. You deserve the best kit. Armour can be replaced but not comrades.
We civvies can learn for the first time from watching real combat in Ukraine; Not as a game, but to learn what soldiers do, and we should look after our vets better in your USA and here in Blighty
I thought everyone new "died in a training exercise" was code for "died on a black ops mission"
Imagine how much less they would do if the USA tended to the USA.
@@NeilDear I believe he said "Marine" not "soldier". They can get testy about that.
Sorry to hear that, and for your (and our) loss. Godspeed to those heros.
“Likely to be uncontested.” When I heard that, I had a clear vision of two or three Marines taking cover from enemy fire in an artillery crater, and one of them saying sarcastically “Likely to be uncontested.”
Make Peace or Die is the motto of 1st Battalion, 5th Marines but ACVs belong to the Amphibious Assault Battalions so it was probably an ACV attached to 1/5
Great... motto!
Yeah while on the 15th, gotta rep
@@Alastair.88fuck 1/5 lmaoooo
Amtrac motto is YATYAS, You Ain't Tracks You Ain't Shit
worked real well in Vietnam
"A long long time ago in 1996...." Wo there sir you take that back!
All y’all are youngsters. 1970-1997.
I'm telling you. That's not even that long ago 😂
You say that but it's almost three decades
The goddamn year I ETS'd... Way to make me feel old...
@@tkent68 That's the year I enlisted, and I feel old.
The blast mitigating seats are way more comfortable than the wooden benches of the AAV. PLUS there is AC in the ACV
you could say, VCA eht ni CA eht tup ti
In future there will be an electric version, to be called DCV.
@@velisvideos6208 I foresee stiff competition between the ACV and DCV as to which current is superior.
Slava TSMC 🇹🇼
What's next? British Challenger tanks come equipped standard with a tea... boiler? The US would likely install a microwave for your MRE's
"make peace or die" - lol. It's good to know marines never really change.
🤣
americans*
Gotta love that Italian design. ❤
I am happy to have had a chance to be inside a SuperAV. 🎉
I served in the Marines from 99 to 03 as a 2141 AAV mechanic. The hull of the AAV is actually cast aluminum and the armor was to deflect than absorb. I also got to play around with the EFV (we called it the AAAV or triple A V) and she was a beast. She could go 50 MPH in the water because the EFV “skipped” across the water while the AAV sunk into the water. The EFV had a twin turbo V12 where the pistons were the size of your head. The turbos kicked in at different RPMs too. Sad to see she never got put into production but after seeing the ACV, they made the right choice.
Didn't the EFV engines put out more than twice the horsepower of an Abrams for water use?
Maybe the Marines should've kept options open, just in case, an bought 100-120
I believe you, only because you said to have served 4 years 😂
@@coppertopv365 They did.... they had a really good upgrade to the AAV at the same time as they were competing the ACV. They scrapped the upgrade and got stuck with a wheeled vehicle that still isnt proven in island campaign missions. wheels in coral...?....?
I was wondering what happened to the AAAV. (Armed Amphibious Assault Vehicle) It was renamed to the EFV. I worked on a prototype Wankel engine design for the AAAV from 1985-90. Back then it was the Marine Corps' top vehicle program. I worked on the basic engine design when it was not known how much power the vehicle actually required, so it was a 750-hp, 700-cubic-inch two-rotor, twin-turbo Wankel. Ultimately, the Marine Corp figured out that the AAAV would require 2500, and MTU won the engine competition with a hyperbar version of their 883 V12. The engine power requirement was a challenge because the vehicle needed 2500 hp to meet the water speed requirement, but only 800 hp to meet its land performance requirements.
Having a 91% hit rate while stationary and 97% while moving is a whole new level of flex
Ya lol my thoughts exactly
I find it REALLY strange that the percentages aren't reversed. I'm wondering if there wasn't a mistake in the report. Your stationary hit rate should ALWAYS be higher, just common sense. I mean, 91% while moving is still incredible, but that seems weird...and wrong.
@@kx8960 whole this channel is just baffoonery and tricks. Sometimes it shows like this.
@@kx8960 Could be explained by stationary forces you to shoot a target with weird angles while on th emove you can wait for the perfect angle to happen to shoot.
@@eom1682 Dunno, if you're moving, it's because you HAVE to. I know I shoot a lot better when I can stop moving.
Having served in 2nd LAR Bn in Afghanistan, the up-armored LAV-25 can take more than 7.62x39 but they can’t float at all with the armor kit on.
Was is official armor kits or did you have to weld your own steel on?
Imagine a modernized LAV with the troop compartment removed. Would that be a good replacement for tanks?
@@cm-pr2yswhat you're proposing, the Army already tried. It's called the Stryker Mobile Gun System, and no. It was kind of shit.
There's a reason they are adopting the M10 Booker
Hey! 3rd LAR here.
Do LAV crews say YATYAS or is that only a tracks thing?
Thanks for covering the unsafe vehicle concerns. I wondered what the Marines would use, if these concerns were more trouble than you said. It is always far more than concerning when new vehicles can't be safe enough for our Marines to use. I was one of the people who said keeping the old AAV in operation is better than having unsafe new vehicles.
The reason behind the 30mm is, you can use it against drones with ai burst munitions as well. It´s a perfect allrounder
And airburst rounds have really came quite a ways in the last few years.
@@justindunlap1235 Rheinmetall is developing a new round =) I applied for the job a while ago.
not to mention infantery hiding behind solid cover
@@hotdog9262 that´s the "allrounder" part I was talking about, yes =)
“ I want to have my crayons and eat it too”. Man this is just Gold for U.S. Army humor. I wish you were out of the army doing this when I was in (2006-2012). My platoon would have absolutely loved watching these vids.
Definitely not a T&P video without Cappy butchering names/words 😂 Don't get me wrong, It just add charms to his video tbh.
both spoken and displayed? xD
At least it aint some AI talking shit with no idea of actual military service. I mean the AI reads crap written by AI that is shit.
When he records a video with perfect pronunciations, that means he has been captured and needs rescue.
"Discarding Say-Baa Round"😀
🐑
Never underestimate Joe's ability to drive in ways they are never supposed to. During my career I saw humvees with half the side ripped off by pine trees (freaking cav scouts), balanced perfectly across a gulch on its front and rear bumper, and with tires ripped off from hitting boulders. Saw a bradley actually stuck on a tree (tried to plow over it, ended up wedged under it so only the very back of its treads were on the ground and they dug it up). Every type of vehicle you can imagine stuck up above the top of their tires/tracks buried in mud. Worst is when they drive into fast running water since that resulted in deaths every time it happened. All of those happened while doing things against training that they were not supposed to be doing.
So while I don't like siding with the higher ups, troops can and will do crazy things with vehicles. Especially the new "hotness".
It's like a Bradley and a Striker had a baby, and it was amphibious.
And then it sank! 😮😅
u mean stryker?
Better yet, swimmies on a superav. The platform preexisted, it just wasn't amphibious.
The old AAV was Death Trap, I lost good friends in 2020 off the coast of San Clemente Island...Literally was on The Somerset, the LPD shown and helped save some Lives, but watching super young Marine die before my eyes during a training accident broke my entire morale.
But seriously, when aren’t marines going sicko mode?
Never >:3
When they get their favorite crayons.
When they're busy trying to figure out which way to point the crayon before eating it.
Did someone say crayons? I haven't had a proper meal in years
The Marines by definition are NOT defensive. They are an INVASIONARY force.
They do not defend islands, they attack them.
Fun thing? I was inside a Brazilian variant of these (the Guarani) with my 6 year old kid this exact morning, as we had a army demonstration close by. As soon as I saw it in your video, I found it *very* similar to what I was just inside. And as your started talking more, I realized it is about the same vehicle.
Biggest difference? We use 6x6s instead of 8x8s. And we have very few autocannon version - I didn't see any in the base I was win, just unturreted and 50 cal ones. Wich makes a lot of sense down here.
@cubefreak123usually not, Brazil is kinda shit in the weapons department tbf. Our Guaranis had an UT-30BR 30mm gun station that was deemed "the worst", but the Army never really announced any plans to mount a different turret. There is the possibility of adapting an ARES TORC-30 turret to it, which can fire at some insane angles. As of right now and from what I know of, only unturreted or .50 cal RWS versions exist. Damn shame.
9:03 You’re missing the point! Cerberus is a DEVIL DOG!
(Also, it’s pronounced SIR-be-RUS)
I’d go with SIR-ber-US (Let’s not get him pronouncing it (SIR-bee-RUS)🤣
@@goldenageofdinosaurs7192 I’ve seen someone describe it as SIR-Ber-Us
Sir bur us
I’m fully regarded ❤
Sir-brrrrr-us. Just imagine an officer in a warthog shooting at you lol
When I was an enlisted man in the Army (I retired as a Captain/O-3E), we had to take a special class to get licensed on the M151A2 "Jeep" because of its independent 4 wheel suspension and high center of gravity. No one was blaming "lower enlisteds," they just identified a training shortcomings that no one identified until M151s started turning over at fairly high speed especially off roads.
I'm GLAD YOU LIKE MY WORK. I build the ACV 30
Underrated comment!
Can you send me the blueprints?
@@nobody7044-t5o Get them off War Thunder
Proof?
@@Ririannana BAE Systems
“Make Peace or Die” is the motto of the 1st Battalion, 5th Marines, 1st div.
"Sir-burr-us." "Say-bow." C'mon, average grunt.
"LAY-GO-LUS...AR-A-GORN..." -American Dad
0:45 as an Australian I agree. We’ve had 2 major amphibious landings in our history, and landed on the wrong beach both times…. We did win the second one though… in spite of McArthur.
I was Army National Guard 1975 till 1981 Basic Fort Jackson SC 😊 AIT was on same base Wheeled vehicle Mac. 😊 the whole AIT pushed preventative maintenance 😊
When i got home, i was assito a US Army ( ST) small tug (45 foot) when we did summer camp, we had drills that required all crew and engineers to CARRY are M-16 at all times
Even with it slung behind me on strap, I could NOT get out of the rear engine room square small hatch. I would just set the rifle down when i had engine watch dutys. If the white stripped hat evaluators surprised us with a visit, I would take the gig 😊
Not carrying the Rifle around the engine room, possibly rubbing up against a moving part of the 1950s, built 200 HP Buda Diesel engine. Even the pilot house had those round bulkhead watertight doors with 6 heavy latches.
8:50 I looked at the AAV. I saw that it said Cerberus. I was expecting him to _say_ Cerberus. When he said "Serberius" it made me fall outta my seat 😂
What's next, the marines quoting Shakespeare? "Is this a crayon which I see before me?" (Macbeth Act 2 Scene 1)
LOL! 😂
To chew red or green, that is the question
Mmmmmmmmm craynons 🤤🤤🤤
Just leave the Grape ones alone. They are mine and mine alone
“These foils all have a length”
Ah, yes the AAV I remember choking on diesel fumes in knee deep seawater in the back of those during training exercises praying to god I don't die in that steel coffin.
Water got in?
I smell diesel and salt water everytime I see an AAV. And it's been over 25 years since I've been in one.
Water always gets in. There's automatic pumps to get empty it out. The one that sank during the training exercise was due to two of them colliding. The one that sank was because the pumps got overwhelmed by the amount of water the collision let in.
Diesel fumes and asses. Semper Fi
But did you die?
Or would rather swim?
Sir berry-us
Ker-ber-us
Sir, bury us - what anyone says to the marines they're fighting.
💀
Sir, bury us
My nephew is crew chief for an A10 squadron. Please understand that shell diameter (30mm) doesn't equate to the same cartridge. The GAU-8 is a 30x173 round, while all chain-guns were designed to be lower recoil for helicopters, etc. I believe it a 30x113 (?) which has significantly less propellent, velocity and power. Still a great weapon though.
Good point about the drivers being blamed for rollover versus a design flaw. Considering the less than optimal environment that combat is, they really should address that problem instead of just shift blame.
The real question is how the ACV’s tires will handle driving over reefs in the Pacific. In WW II the Marines switched to all track vehicles due to tires being shredded during landings on atolls.
Oh shit! Nobody thought of that! The people who design military equipment for the most powerful branch of the most powerful military in history has been outwitted by coral reefs! Have some faith, man. The Marines got this.
@@christopherlane5238 Bigger flaws have been missed before...
@@christopherlane5238 unfortunately, the gear is made by engineers who also do the testing and evaluation, not soldiers. The lowest person at the program office making final decisions is probably a Lt Colonel or Colonel.
Materials science has come a long way since WWII. Tires are a lot more durable today.
I’d assume bolt on tracks are and option depending on the drive unit.
I was apart of the trial for them in 2011 on our ASLAVs (Australianised LAV). Helped get off the landing craft up beaches and could be easily removed within 30 seconds. Getting them on was a cunt though.
So basically the Brazilian Army and the USMC made their own variants of the same italian vehicle, that's so cool. I would never realize that the VBTP Guarani and the ACV are cousin vehicles without watching this video.
Same here, I always thought that Iveco made the Guarani for us (based off the SuperAV) and the ACV was a totally new design. Huh.
Cerberus (sir-bur-us). Not... whatever you said. and Sabot (say-bow). WTF, Amigo?
suh-BO
He reminds me of Charlie from It's Always Sunny sometimes. Part of the charm now
Much pronunciation! Very engagement!
These are half the comments. The other half are debating whether he's making obvious mistakes to farm comments, or just a moron
He's a Chinese spy
IVECO factory where the ACV "base" model is built, here in Italy, is on my way to work. It's not uncommon to see them running to and from testing grounds early in the morning (obviously weaponless). And boy, they're HUGE. I served in the Alpine Paratroopers in 83/84, and I feel proud that a little piece of my country is helping protect those Marines. God bless them and all the US service members-past, present, and future.
I'm binge watching your youtube vids ! You've gained my trust and that's not easy to do. The random humor you throw in makes it so fun to learn from you
BTW Israel is having a Fireworks night right now. A new video on Air defence is needed.
Faxxx
TAIWANESE Lives Matter 💯👀🇹🇼
0:22 "Next Negeration" (sic)
Star Trek: The Next Negeration
That's what plantation owners called when their slaves had kids
9:51 Norwegian not Noregian.
🤦♂*Picard facepalms
I need to take off my Jordi racism goggles.
At the beginning of WW2 US M-3 light tanks in the Philippines had the M-3 Stuart tank armed with a 37mm cannon. The armor piercing shells available for it were quite capable of piercing Japanese tanks (when they could hit it, but that's a different story). However, HE ammo did not arrive with the tanks and their AP ammo. In the thick foliage of the Philippines the Japanese didn't have many tanks anyway. What they did have were lots of troops and anti tank guns. The US Army quickly (and sadly) learned that AP cannon shells were not the best thing to use against a charging mob of infantry. Sure, 3 or 4 of them might get 37mm holes and fall down, but the other 180 or so kept on coming. A similar issue was noted when dueling with Japanese artillery that had both AP and AP HE ammunition. Only a direct hit on the enemy gun itself would stop it from shooting. An AP shell hitting a gun crew only took out that man and someone else usually rep[aced him quickly. More common were 37mm AP shots from an M-3 that did not hit either but did kick up harmless clots of dirt alongside the enemy gun. Against dug in positions and pill boxes on other islands a 37mm AP round proved to be a very ineffective choice. Making a sudden 37mm hole in a concrete wall or dirt mound does not by itself incapacitate those standing nearby. Having an AP/HE round would have probably worked better, but that took a few years to arrive in theater. During much of the early fighting in the Pacific the only useful weapons on the M-3s were the multiple machine guns. More than once a neighboring M-3s machine gun was the only way of getting hostile infantry off your own M-3. If there was none, well the easily removed hatch covers with rubber fuel lines filled with gasoline, a match or turret hatch locks that could be bypassed with an enemies bayonet meant you weren't coming home. The result was that by the time the US Army had fallen back to Corregidor they had no more M-3s (although the Japanese had captured several). The British had a similar experience when they went into Burma with 110 M-3s and only about 6 made it out. So while I am happy there will be a 30mm chain gun on the new USMC amphibious vehicle, I certainly hope it will also have high explosive shells with fragmentation effect as an ammo option.
25mm variant does, the 30mm will likely have the same.
Usually autocannons nowadays have dual-feed capability, meaning you can switch from one type of ammunition to the next with a single button press, and HE is always present.
This is entire comment was just you saying that you hope they have HE which the always have especially in vehicles designed to support infantry
Watched from the bow of a LST as Amtracks launched, back in the 60s. I was amazed that they came back to the surface and turned toward shore. My DCKW never sank LOL thank God.
Yeah you get a real sense of just how big the ACV is, with the guy trailing behind it as it's driving along. The tires go up to his waist or top of hips!
“Grab a bunch of crayons, too munch on” 😆
Canadian Army Veteran 🇨🇦
🫡thank you good neighbor !
@@Taskandpurposetough neighborhood
Keep the crayon jokes rolling 😂
-Marine vet
Make Peace or Die was the motto for 1st Battalion 5th Marines... not sure if it was adopted by another unit. Oooh Rah!
In 1950, China's GDP was 4% of that of the United States. In the three years of the Korean War, the Chinese People's Volunteer Army entered the Korean War with 1.9 million troops and nearly 500000 additional troops, totaling 2.4 million (only the army, 225 tanks). Check how much military force the United States invested in the Korean War. During the three-year Korean War, the United States entered Korea with 1.796 million participants. The United States has deployed a total of 1153000 Army personnel (1823 tanks), 241000 Air Force personnel (a total of 3000 combat aircraft, with over 1700 deployed on the battlefield), 130000 Marine Corps personnel, and 265000 Navy personnel (210 warships). These combat figures do not include the United Nations forces. The entire Korean War: China sacrificed 183108 people and injured 383218 people. US military: 54246 deaths and 103248 injured. 628833 UN troops died and 1064453 UN troops were injured.
@@mingmuyiyang8615I bet that huge injury count for America was Frostbite and other wounds caused by the cold and terrain.
@bennettbush3906 I guess you didn't understand what I meant.
@bennettbush3906 The Battle of Changjin Lake in the Korean War. This was a battle in the early days of the Korean War. From November 27 to December 24, 1950 (just 28 days), a direct confrontation took place in the Changjin Lake area of North Korea. The U.S. military included the 1st Marine Division (abbreviated as the 1st Marine Division) and the 3rd and 7th Infantry Divisions, as well as the 1st Army of South Korea, with a total of about 100,000 people (the U.S. military dispatched 195 tanks, 7 aircraft carriers, and 500 military aircraft. 3,000 sorties hovered over the volunteers every day); the 9th Corps of the Chinese People's Volunteer Army, which launched the attack, consisted of the 20th Army, the 26th Army, and the 27th Army, with nearly 150,000 people (only the army). This is the data of the battle between the two sides, and this is the scale of the war. In the 28-day "Changjin Lake" battle, the U.S. military suffered 19,843 casualties, and the Chinese Volunteer Army suffered a total of 48,156 casualties. In just 28 days, the total casualties of both sides were close to 70,000. This is how fierce the war was. Do you understand what I mean by real war? The Chinese Volunteer Army had no communication equipment, and communicated with whistles and charge bugles. Holding old weapons, wearing tattered clothes, eating potatoes frozen harder than stones at minus 40 degrees Celsius, they fought barefoot in the snow against the American army armed to the teeth. They drove the American army out of the strategic position of "Changjin Lake" and wiped out the "Polar Bear Army" that the American army was proud of. Our "bitter victory" is exactly what the United States fears. What does it mean to do it at all costs? What does it mean to move forward courageously? Do you understand?
@bennettbush3906 What I want to express is "spirit".
I was always jealous of the Marines on Pendleton. The TRAC marines were having so much fun in Del Mar.
My brother was with the unit where the 2020 incident occurred. AAVs our long past their retirement date. Also, to note, the commanding officer knew those specific vehicles were not sea worthy, and sent them out anyway. Not to mention the AAV only holds about a dozen men and in this specific incident it was holding about that plus gear.
7:12 seriously missed opportunity to say
“Make peace or rest in it”
MEU is pronounced “Mew”. C’mon cap your land lubber is showing.
Comment farming. Mispronounce words to get people to correct you to get better algorithm engagement.
@@TheJBergcomment farming is weak sauce. T&P should let it go.
LOL, Retired Army Infantry and sorry about my friends pronunciation. BUT! You guys hog all the crayons. All I ask for is the Grape ones, LOL. Salute and best wishes in seriousness. Respect and hope you have luck in peacetime
@@jackwalker9492 serves you army fucks right for hogging all the budget, and no, no crayons for you :p
Please quit keeping typos in titles, e.g. negeration when meant generation. I've been noticing it regularly in your recent vids and generally I'm captain oblivious.
I know it generates comments but your channel doesn't need it. The quality of content is too good to also need such silly 'engagement' tricks.
Its how you get clicks with this current negeration.
Perun has them too, even he makes mistakes.
I've seen PowerPoint presentations made by million-dollar consulting firms with typos.
It's accidental, not on purpose.
Some quality spelling correction tools maybe needed.
There's no error
@@oompalumpus699 That's nice.
Perun has a fulltime day job. His defense analyses on his gaming channel started as a one-time side jump that has grown out of hand. So his powerpoint presentations on YT are just a sidehobby next to his gaming hobby.
Task and Purpose is a professional channel and is Cappy's main occupation.
Those multi-million dollar companies should be ashamed. Typos are avoidable errors. They happen, but they should be rare occasions, not regular ones.
You showed a video presentation of a LCAC. However, you may of wished to mention the primary over the horizon method of getting Marines ashore is by the approximately 72 Landing Craft Air Cushion (LCAC) vehicles. The U.S. Navy is in the process of transitioning from the original LCAC to the Ship-to-Shore Connector (SSC), or LCAC 100 class, a new generation of hovercraft. That deserves a video. The LCAC 100 is being delivered to the U.S. Navy, with production ongoing to replace the older LCACs.
Veteran to veteran. Great documentary of what's to come. Coming from a different branch and miss-pronounce MEU is actually a great representation for not for your military audience but also for your civilian audience. Your presentation was with that of infographics channel. You kept it like the old Donut channel before presenting here's the new school but let's talk about the old school. Awesome work.
That canon may not take out other battle tanks from the front, but it can take out their eyes
Proven in UA.
I know it's Cerberus but I've got to admit SirBuryUs kinda makes sense
How did they manage to get better precision when moving then when they are stationary?
Exactly... Was wondering if I was the only one that noticed that !!!!
Incredible to see how far military technology has progressed recently.
The sheer power of these machines is truly awe-inspiring!
My Niece who graduated high school signed up to the Marines before graduation! She is now after only 1 year in the service she is now a Corporal, and a driver of one of these ACV'S!
I am so proud of her as I can still remember when she couldn't even say my name so she would call me "MUGGA MIKE!" instead of "Uncle Mike!" so cute. What is so contradicting, is she is so petite but she is incredibly strong! Like she can beat most guys at arm wrestling! But I told her do not ever think that you can get in the ring and KO a man!!! But keep a good head on your shoulders and pray PSALM 91 as things are gonna get wonky pretty soon child!!! She is the Daughter of an Old School Marine Dad! :D Good stuff Maynard!!!!
I used to call it (say-bots or say-bolts.) Because our vehicle is not speaking French. I’m glad he also says it the ground pound way.
Say as it’s spelled, non of this silent T stuff. People want to act all high saying it the French way.
What has never been fired and dropped once?
A French rifle….. oh… 🎤
Yes, colonel!
“People want to act all high…” do you pronounce that last word hi-g-huh?
10:19 Did you just say “Say-BOT”? It’s pronounced “Say-Bow”
sab-aught
lol has to be on purpose
Corpse Man
@@ahurn3438 I think a lot of thee time he's reading a script and sometimes it's hard to say things normal when you are sight reading. Boatswain
I used to say say-bolt when loading my 25mm bushmaster on Bradley. Or sometimes “say-bots”
Why? Because I ain’t saying it the “French” way.
I’m American from TN; it’s said how it’s spelled.
We aren’t speaking “French” on my vehicle.
When I was in the Marine Corps I was with 2nd Light Armored Reconnaissance for a while and then 2nd Armored Amphibious Vehicles (AAV).
The LAV-25 like he said is not large surf capable. To dive odd a landing ships well deck and swim to shore the ship would need to be only about a mile off shore with waves that day not larger than about 2ft high to keep from sinking.
The AAV however can dive off the ship several miles out and handle larger waves but hopefully not larger than like 4ft.
The guys at AAV had a trick for the new guys that they would pull to scare the hell out of you.
They would line one of the larger square hatches in the back with a stack of about four quarters in like 12 spots two feet apart. When the rig dove off the ramp and submerged for just a moment water would flood in those spots.
You would think you were sinking and be terrified until the vehicle popped back up and started swimming forward with the Vehicles commander hatch open.
One of my least favorite experiences in the USMC was going ship to shore in a LVTP-7 once. I had no illusions about the chances of getting out if it started to sink. If tanks were meant to swim they would have a rubber ducky floatie around it. The EFV looked like an incredible vehicle, and it was very fast on the water, perfect for over the horizon assaults. While the LCAC is also fantastic for over the horizon assualt platform due to its speed and ability to land feet dry, its problem is one of being largely unable to saturate the landing zone quickly with troops and gear where the AAVs can swarm in together in force without a force of scores of LCACs all hitting beach at once.
8:51 I'm sorry Cappy but...Cer-bear-eus?!
Its not really next-generation though, is it? At least outside of the American context. A lot of the European militaries have had comparably advanced kit in service for the past odd decade. It is a European vehicle.
Really because they have less of an empire to grapple
They focus on singular technologies
How much further ahead are they
@jamesgoldring1052 In certain aspects, by quite a bit. They've a pretty lively and competitive, multinational industry. The biggest point of critique I have with the US military is its failure to look outward comparatively to see gold for gold; that's not the case with the various European nations that keenly observe advances in the US, Russia, and each other.
Their artillery systems, and really their artillery doctrine as a whole, is a generation ahead. They've modern designs optimised for rapid burst shoot and scoot capabilities that fire faster, that are better armoured, that are more manoeuvrable, and that have bigger guns. See the Pzh2000, AS90, and the soon-to-enter-service RCH155. Compare those to the M109. They've also developed very capable truck-based artillery too.
Their armoured personnel carriers, again are a generation ahead. Much better armoured for artillery, drone, and splinter protection - using composite arrays instead of plain steel/aluminium as with the Bradley's and Strykers. They're more mobile, and better armed with 30mm+ armaments as opposed to the 25mm of the Bradley. See the Boxer, Puma, Piranha V, CV90, the list goes on.
Their helicopters again are a generation ahead. Composite airframes make them largely resistant to small arms fire and they're also fitted with better avionics, sensors, and a more survivable, more modern design when compared to the Black Hawks. See the NH90 and AW149 among many other types. Their missile tech is also no slouch, specifically their ARH missiles are a bit more advanced than the SARH PATRIOTs, ESSMs and SM2s. The Meteor missile as well is also the dominant air-to-air missile on the market.
In the maritime, they are pioneers in AESA radar, ship stealth, ship design, automation, ship propulsion, gun systems, and crew accommodation. In regards to aviation, their strategic airlifters such as the A400M are also very modern when compared to say, the C130. One point of critique of European militaries may be that they've yet to design a domestic 5th generation fighter, though they are procuring numbers of F-35s. The reason why is because they opted instead to develop the Eurofighter Typhoon instead of a fighter more comparable to the expensive, and arguably failed, F-22. Why they've not developed a 5th generation fighter is not for lack of ability, they're procuring F35s in the meanwhile as they develop their FCAS/GCAP 6th generation fighters.
@@arakami8547F-22 is a failure?
@@arakami8547i am from europe and agree with what you said but im little confused about why you think the Raptor was a failure?
@angelaferkel7922 I believe the original plan was to procure over 700 F-22 Raptors, in the end less than 200 were procured. They're highly capable aircraft, alongside the F-35 they're the most capable air-to-air fighters in the world... They're also bloody expensive to procure and maintain, and are lacking in regards to multirole capability. Chiefly they lack an IRST to save on cost.
I think the USAF wants to retire some earlier airframes, citing obsolescence and high costs to upgrade and maintain them. Of course, Congress denied that - as they do.
Javelins or their comparative Chinese versions and weaponized drones would wreck havoc on any amphibious vehicles. Seems like a death sentence to get caught trying to make shore.
They will mostly be used to secure uncontested beach heads, and with the support artillery and air if not.
That’s what I thought to, I know Australia (much smaller army and budget) is planning to buy 3 light carriers so that when we need to do amphibious missions, we can put F35s in the air and use helicopters to get our forces from boat to land. It’s quite surprising the USA marines wouldn’t be thinking that to as helicopters allow you to use them as gunships and medevac vehicles on their way back, and resupplies. Of course it only works with air dominance or complete surprise of the enemy.
I was in amphibs, AAVs specifically. That was 30 years ago and I can still smell the gear oil, diesel fuel and hear the sounds of the well deck! Good times.
"Nobody else can"??? Have you ever heard of Normandy??
What’s Normandy??
@RayMond-tt2yr It was the fancy European part of WWII. Nobody really talks about it because there weren't any Marines there.
@@RayMond-tt2yr the scene of the largest amphibious Landing in military history, by the United States Army
@@rogerthat4545 but only Marines are amphibious.
@@fematrailer, Canadians where
The EFV would have revolutionized warfare as much the Osprey M-22 has. The Marine Corps got F-ed & stuck with our grandparents AAVs for another 10-14 years because of it. Those 7 Marines that died are blood on someone's hands. All this while the Army wastes BILLIONS on stupid uniform choices, several different failed rifle tests, several failed light tank development projects, they are ALREADY seeking to replace the Strykers when our LAV-25s were around a generation before those and are just NOW going to get replaced. Dat is some bullsh*t! Getting to the shore 5 times faster than these new vehicles would have enhanced their ability to strike faster with less exposure. They would have enhanced our ability to do lighting raids, disrupt sh*t & scoot on back out to sea before they could mount a defense.
Hell yeah man that's the biggest problem I see with this damn ACV is it's too slow in water. I'm glad it has all those other improvements over the AAV, but only 5 mph in water is ridiculous.
The ECV was way too complicated and ambitious of a project. It was conceived at a time when the DoD was handing out money like it was candy and all of the services were coming up with expensive and complicated gold plated projects. I feel that the Corps made the right decision in cancelling the EFV project. It's just a pity that it took the Corps so long to come up with a replacement project for the ECV. I can't help but to wonder if they couldn't have kept the ECV but stripped it of some of its gold plated tech, like the retractable treads.
The AAV was bad because amtrackers didn't maintain them.
8 marines 1 sailor
A non monochrome goth girlfriend? Thou doth wrestle with the truth too much.
For the civilians out there The Emm Eeee You (MEU) is pronounced like MEW and prior to deployment all Marine Expeditionary Units go through Special Operations Quals so when deployed they are MEU (SOC) or Spec Ops Capable.
From a former 15th MEU(SOC) Jarhead.
US Marines...? yeah, we all got probs buddy, says PPCLI
Forestry machines use removable tracks over the tires. Tracks could be used on beachheads then removed for land use.
OH PLEASE.... -You never had a Goth Girlfriend and you know it....
Can you ever really have a goth girlfriend? It’s more like they temporarily own your soul
Too real. He's for sure been there
Just here to remind the Marines that the largest amphibious assault in history was conducted by the Army… 😂😂
1. The largest amphibious assault was okinawa, not Normandy.
2. Who trained the Army in amphibious assaults, let alone pioneered war plan orange in the pre war period?
3. There were Marines at Normandy just like there were Soldiers in the Pacific.
@@cm-pr2ysall it takes is a simple google search to see that Normandy was a larger amphibious assault than Okinawa was.
Army stays winning.
@cm-pr2ys
1. “The D-Day operation of June 6, 1944, brought together the land, air, and sea forces of the allied armies in what became known as the largest amphibious invasion in military history.”
- Eisenhowerlibrary. gov, just google it.
2. Your mom.
3. Since when are marines butthurt crybabies who can’t take a joke? 🤣😂
@@cm-pr2ys Most westerners don't realize there was a war in the Pacific. The whole war was only about the US or UK (not both) beating Hitler. They pretend Russia never even existed. SAD.
The Normandy landings were the biggest amphibious assault in history, but 60% of it was done by the British and Canadians.
So yes the US army participated in the biggest amphibious assault but they were only 40% of it.
The Brits and Canadians are not part of the US army, so counting them in this US army vs Marines bragging match doesn’t make any sense, the biggest US amphibious assault was Okinawa, but Normandy was the biggest amphibious assault in history.
🎖️⭐💪❤️🩹🙏🏆
Can the differentials be locked and unlocked? Or, function differently, like electronic traction control system that applies the brakes to a slipping wheel to maintain traction.
Thank you for sharing this
These are super cool but I mean the EFV literally skipped across the water. Those things were V12 twin turbo monsters! They were SO badass! The Marines definitely should have kept that going to at least have a few on hand for fast assault and QRF between small island chains.
Yeah. I thought the whole idea was get ashore as quick as possible. Sitting duck if you’re wallowing along at a low speed.
We had the same problem with Ospreys and they needed to change the training.
Such a fantastic showcase of advanced military technology at its finest!
Such impressive technology, these machines redefine modern military capabilities!
The EFV was originally called the AAAV, as young midshipmen in 2002 we were told that they would operational by 2006/7 or by the time we would be commissioned officers.....that never happened...just like getting to Mars by 2004.
This video perfectly captures the brilliance of modern military technology
Ahh, it's Italian! That explains so much. I can definitely see the Bertone styling; very reminiscent of the Countach.
The Tires do help a lot with buoyancy.
Fun fact when I was deployed in 2013 the Italian military striker like vehicle was one of these they called it the Fletcha I believe I believe it means arrow in Italian it was literally the whole of this vehicle with a bushmaster canon on a gun turret
Price vs quantity stated is incorrect, unit price is between $5 and $8m. One published order was 40 units for $211m
Wow I haven’t watched this guy for ages this was like a damn flash bang
each marine being transported should have a clear view of the landing area so as the acv approaches they can be looking
for where enemy fire is coming from and where places of good cover are before the ramp drops.
if it was me being transported i'd sure appreciate the preview of what i'm heading into
in this day and age some external cams and interior displays don't seem like a difficult addition
From the Brazilian Army! You know that is going to be a SMOOOOOTH vehicle.
The wheels help it float too... dont forget that as a plus.
"We'd like to introduce you to our newest member of the unit, Sir Berry-us." BROOO lol i had the video alt tabbed for a moment and didn't even think anything of it until you started explaining what it was and i was like... oh no he didn't lmaoo
Iveco makes small trucks and have for quite a number of years , so they have good experience in making something that runs on diesel motors and are different. Good choice!
Sir... thank you for sharing this...love the content and your sense of humor.
Hopefully the exhaust won’t leak fumes into the cabin area . I can still remember riding to shore from the amphib ship and sucking in exhaust fumes. We threw up everywhere then gasped and fought to get out after the ramp finally went down.
I also used to crew and Test the now famous LAV-AD and remember swimming the LAVs in a calm lake. Yeah they float low in the water. Not for offshore amphib assaults off a stormy beach.
This new vehicle seems cool but I wonder if it has the water speed that the AAV had?????????????
To think we will do a WWII amphibious landing is akin to thinking we will drop an airborne division from 3000 ft going at 125-200 knots. For sure it will be a rotor aircraft insert with follow on landing craft with support elements and gear
Probably seals/raiders on those submarine launched vehicles to scout for entrenched or tunneled enemy, then a airborne insert to secure beachhead, then a beach landing.
@@Patson20It will never happen. It will be a missile bombardment followed by helicopter insert. With advanced satellite and onsite aerial imagery, there is no need for a recce element to come ashore prior to precision strikes.
@magellanstravels nobody said anything about precision strikes. And you're forgetting that recon satellites follow a predictable path and it's already causing problems with gathering images in Iran since they just stop and hide when they know the satellite is going to be coming overhead. And regular recon flights won't be possible in a environment like the south China sea at the start of a war. So its entirely possible that PLA forces could be entrenched on or in tunnels on an island we wanted to land on without us knowing. And it wouldn't even need the a company sized element. Just two squads of marines camped in the jungle with javelin type weapons or anti tank rifles would absolutely fuck up an amphibious landing like this. Sure you might kill them all, but they are likely gonna sink 5 or 6 vehicles with full squads before you do.
@@Patson20I’m the one who said amphibious landings wouldn’t happen in modern warfare. Your lack of knowledge about imagery speaks to your knowledge and placement in the military arena. Anyways, Marines are cool dudes. They are extra hard chargers, just not going to be a Sands of Iwo Jima style war in the pacific. We won’t be assaulting a contested beach requiring an amphibious fighting vehicle.
@magellanstravels bro just because you say fancy words doesn't make you smart ot correct. You can look it up yourself, there's many a story about how Iran is evading our satellites. They are limited by physics, they circle the earth at a set speed in a set orbit so you can track when they will be overhead. Sure we have things like the U2, but we saw in the 60s how well that works about near peer contested airspace. And sure there's things like the SR72, but you wouldn't be wasting an experiment asset on a random beach landing for area denial. And this is still before you consider China weaponizing its fishing fleets and coast guard into militias. They could transport troops on fishing boats to these islands and have them appear as civilians. Sure it's illegal but when has international laws stopped China? Even today we send SF to do in person recon on random terror cells in backwater Africa for drone strikes. So why wouldn't we send SF to ensure a company of Marines weren't sent to the bottom of the ocean?
As an Air Force safety officer I’ve seen multiple incidents where military vehicles were rolled and it was always due to aggressive driving habits needed for successful combat operations, unfortunately accidents happen, fortunately we investigate and learn from them and implement better training programs to reduce or prevent accidents. Combat is the most dangerous situation to be in, training and safety along with equipment familiarity and confidence allow American soldiers to fight and win. We train as we fight and in the military there is always dangerous situations, we will always prepare the best we can.
Also for anyone wondering a MEU is a marine expeditionary unit
Good stuff Dude. your reports are the best, total in depth research, history, humor, and a person Grunts perspective and attitude.
thanks for the video.