LOL in whole trailer just 1 shot from water RB, yea, no new content on that, and nothing to showcase as a result DUH. Have you even tried water RB? Just interesting
Oh i didn't even notice that! I actually wrote a comment that Cappy missed a chance to drop a Perun joke, but he actually did it! Thanks for pointing it out!
I saw this so I was listening intently and almost missed the asterisk. I was just out catching frogs with my 4 year old so my reflexes were all warmed up
Oh man you just brought back so many memories. No wonder I can’t remember whatever it was my wife told me five minutes ago; my brain is stuffed full of decades worth of gaming cruft.
@@yewkyler7686 I recall having fun with the big Chinese tank that you could customize with different turrets, but we’re talking 20 years ago so I don’t remember if it was actually that useful of a unit or not.
@@joshcarter-com you mean the overlord tank. That tank is kinda good to be honest And in case you can't remember what it can do then in that case i will tell what they starting with. 1. The three turrets are battle bunker ( it can hold 5 infantry unit and they shoot from inside), gattling cannon (provides anti infantry and aircraft defence), and propaganda tower(allow units around them to heal) 2. It can be upgrade with nuclear engine(increase speed for tanks) and nuclear shells(increase damge and leaves small amount of radiation).
The missile model equipped on TYPE 625E is FB-10A, which uses a semi-active and infrared imaging dual-mode seeker . The range of FB-10 is 10km, while FB-10A has improved and bolded the engine based on FB-10, increasing the range to 18km. At present, FB-10 has been basically eliminated and replaced with FB-10A.
That thing genuinely looks like it would have been a GIJoe vehicle in the 1980s. Probably called something like "Skysweeper", came with one figure, seats six, and was worth 10 flag points, and in the 80s would cost about $25-$35 ($50-$70 today)
Are you just from Mars, China can manufacture the most high tech products independently in the world. Do u see any country can build space station, rover on Mars and getting soil from far side of moon independently?
@@williamlee297 Wow,. someone so far up their own [butt] they mistake their own [turds] for asteroids. Admit to your ignorance and this next part will not hurt as much. I was talking about GIJoe and the crazy vehicles they had in the 1980s. If you were there or at least know of it, you'd understand. Also, China is making the same stupid mistake Soviet Russia did, trying to outspend the US and the West. It all looks good until the economy collapses. Which would stop China from doing something even stupider, assuming Russia does not actually beat them to it, starting WW3, over Taiwan in this case. Also, when the US Govt decides they don't want to spend money, THEY WON'T. All for building a Space Industry, instead of a Space Program, so the Govt does not have to spend gobs of money and making future space endeavors much less costly and sustainable. The Martian Rovers were totally NASA missions. That is why they worked... better than intended or designed to. But an honest Congrats to China getting soil samples back... FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE 1960S Moon Missions. Not that they weren't first but they were the first ones who did AGAIN. Serious Kudos for that.
At 2:55 you noticed that the vehicle was tilting, but not that the gun was tilting WITH THE VEHICLE. 3:35 That's how it looks when the turret is stabilized. (The vehicle has it's nose pitching up, but the barrel stays flat.) So, I guess in the first example they just had the gun directly against the lower limit of it's elevation? But the angle at which it bottoms out seems to make the Gatling quite questionable as an anti-personnel weapon, unless your enemy pinky promises to never attack you from the low ground.
It's not completely crazy; remember, China is primarily a land power that shares a massive, mountainous border with India, a long-time geopolitical rival. Going off the assumption that the enemy would always have the high ground makes the anti-personnel mode a potentially useful feature. But this all assumes that this vehicle actually works as advertised or has a well-trained crew, which I seriously question.
@@ManiaMac1613The large country is able to have Asia's largest navy instead of being a token little country you acclaim for having smaller. And it's already well trained enough to even make plenty of things for its crews instead of nothing.
@@tritium1998 That's why I only said "the enemy attacks you from the high ground" and not "or you attack the enemy from the low ground". I get that the anti-personell use is a last resort, I just don't get why they had to limit it to only work in half as many cases as it could have with more depression.
First off, I would not class the gun on the Stryker M-SHORAD in the same ballpark as on the Type 625E. The Stryker's gun fires a 30x113mm round at around 800 meters per second. Which was a fine muzzle velocity for a cannon to fire at aircraft in the 50s, but with aircraft getting faster it was eventually replaced with cannons firing rounds traveling at 1050 meters per second, like the 20x102mm or the 25x137mm. The M230LF cannon on the Stryker is as such very much intended to shoot down drones and other relatively slow moving targets. By comparison the Type 625E's cannon is said to fire a massive 25x287mm round. Now I cannot find any information on that round and gun system muzzle velocity. But the smaller case of the 25x184mm of the legacy anti-aircraft guns China has, has a muzzle velocity of 1050 meters per second. Considering the much higher case capacity it would not be untoward to imagine that the muzzle velocity to be ever higher. Which would be very welcome in shooting down very fast targets, such as incoming missiles. And if they developed an APDS round for it, then it will be even faster still. Secondly to point out, missiles tend to have an arming range and do very poorly at a very fast target at close ranges, especially as it is flying perpendicular to the launcher. This is why there is a combination of gun and missile system. So that the gun can handle targets within this minimum effective range of the missile.
@SpruceWood-NEG uh huh. Sure. Was just saying that i came across your comment as i was at a part of the video where it fired at a drone and the barrel climbed visibly. I did watch the whole video, but yeah, i apparently certainly didn't see this with my own two eyes
@@GoMrTom no? There is nothing rotating there. The 2A38 works according to the Gast principle, in which the alternately firing barrels load each other. The Gatling principle works in a completly different way
Yeah, the Pantsir uses a Gast gun (a double-barrel system in which the recoil of one barrel provides the energy to load the other barrel). The Soviet Union had a lot of experience with that system for both aircraft cannons (the GSh-23 and GSh-30-2) and 2A38 cannon of the Tunguska. So it was unsurprising that Russia stuck with the 2A38 for the Pantsir.
Im pretty sure the quality of Chinese radars, compared to Russian, would depend, heavily, on whether thas an AESA radar or not. Chinese AESA radars are actually better than Russia due to domestic microchip industry and access to better chips than Russians can get. Their sonars are also much better as a result.
Yeah it's actually insane how much that vehicle reacts to that gun being fired. I wonder if they even tried to develop a type of counter balance system of some kind for something like this?
@@benmcreynolds8581 Its really impossible. This is the suspension of the APV chasis at work. To properly counter the balance all you have to do is give it a hard contact with ground, something basically all truck howizers have. Its really not hard to do, and if some APVs are given stationary jobs they might be fitted with something like that.
@@WhiteWolf65 spot on. Good description on how a system such as this can improve. I'm curious if we are going to see advancements in some versatile stability systems?
This "Thanks!" is for the humor inserted at 9:35 . I'm working with my earphones in and had to review those 3 seconds twice just to lol and let my coworkers know I'm still crazy. "Doot" right back at ya Cappy.
The Type 625E looks like the sort of platform a country would park around a civilian target like a electrical substation, fuel depot, office building, etc. The "soft" target would be relatively far away from the front line. What is surprising is the small amount of storage area for ammo because a creative adversary will attack with armed drones in a swarm and from different directions. Would not be surprised if there was a partner vehicle that carries the EW equipment. On a side note, the PRC can cobble together equipment in a short period. It may not be very good, but having something can be better than having nothing.
Could be a last resort type weapon, similar to the Phalanx. Park next to critical targets. Connects with comprehensive air defense. Last line of defense when all else fails and thus needs intense but short barrage on incoming missile.
The last line is basically PRC weapon design since its inception. They dont try to make a perfect thing on the spot, but first churn out an indigenous product that fits the requirement by whatever means nessecary, then improve on it.
No, critical infrastructure defense is the job for the LD-3000, the one with a 11 barrels 30mm gattling gun. This 625 is a field AA, equivalent to a ZSU-23-4 Shilka.
I think the central door might be a service hatch to the turret rather than an escape hatch. The turret looks unmanned and there is bound to be a sizeable ammo drum for the rotary 30 mm underneath, so it might be just to allow a technician inside for maintenance. With the windows and door on the rear the system operators are likely sitting back there rather than under the turret.
The human-made boop noises when pointing out the radars and optical sensors made me laugh AND comment. Well played. Sometimes it's the little details that really make a difference.
Ok, so firstly, good take overall. One thing to note is that China don't usually sell their best equipment as exports. And referring to the airborne AESA radar doesn't necessarily translate into ground search/track radar. Albeit I don't think the radar detection range is very crucial to this system. And no I don't think this thing is designed to combat anything more than 10km even with the missile systems. It is more likely to engage shorter range targets than PGZ09 (Gepard like system). It would likely of limited use against fighter jets, but rather specialized in combating drones. As you can see in the footage there's proximity fuse shells from the gatling gun that burst before the target, this is already very good since many older systems, world wide as well, don't even have such options given even larger calibers. This emphasizes its effectiveness against drones. However, since it's acting like such a layer in the air defense sphere, being capable in its own responsibility is already sufficient. I don't see it as a All-in-one system that can cover a multitude of ranges and different targets at once. For longer ranges, as you mentioned there's HQ17 (Improved Tor) and other systems. For combating close range aircraft and helicopters there's PGZ-09 (Gepard) and similar systems. It doesn't have to have capabilities to deal with high altitude aircraft. If such scenario happens, that this 625 system is in dire need to deal with high altitude jets, that probably indicates the air defense sphere has already collapsed and shouldn't be considered as a design failure, but a strategic failure. My take is that, it is, "Seemingly", a good system that covers the special need for destroying drones in the very contemporary battlefield environment. And to have such a system to fulfill a role like that is already visionary and before many other nations' attempts even started. Pantsir and S300V etc. are all capable systems, but really none of them provide precisely targeted solution to the drone threats. We've seen the amount of Tunguskas destroyed in Ukraine. It seems that Russian army do miss a layer of air defense that is in most dire need, which is specifically the role of the 625 system's design philosophy. That's why, I think this system may prove very useful in a modern context. And another note is that, if we look at history, do not underestimate Chinese army, especially the ground forces.
The problem over years all like make money and forget Mentality from that and Political People stupid unbelievable Stupid not think of later so they have what they need but for over the Top People not necessary
@@pitmarkovic4545 Ok bud, people have to pass Turing Test before they comment LMAO. So apparently ChatGPT 4o translated this comment into: "Over the years, people have become focused on making money and have adopted a mentality that overlooks long-term consequences. Politicians and influential people are seen as incredibly short-sighted and foolish, only thinking about their immediate needs and excesses, rather than what is necessary for the broader population and future sustainability." to whom that wonders.
Chinese Gatling anti air might work great at the Himalayas. Himalayan elevations and terrain are a challenge for drones but not a big enough challenge for light attack helicopters. Himalayan warfare is heavy on infantry.
That reasoning basically make this vehicle seem like it is not a good enough reason to be made, because that sounds like wasted money when cheaper alternative is already exist. But the biggest issue with this anti-aircraft is it has no stabilizer and no chassis holder to prevent the APC that carry this gun get pushed around while shooting so its end up with lower the accuracy which is fatal for air defense. Since it mean to be anti aircraft it mean to not moving around like APC and IFV.
@@Ilyas-ty6cy since when did large militaries around the world make everything that made sense tho, there're so much "fuck around and found out it sucks and we all waste our time" projects
An auto cannon 35mm or greater has a few options for programmable ammunition, which would be extremely helpful in engaging air targets. But a wall of lead always works well too... Plus the smaller ammo may be easier to field in a major war
Thing is, wall of lead requires a big infeed of lead. That said, maybe it’s just easier for China to manufacture “dumb” ammo for this gun in larger quantities than it would be to manufacture sufficient “smart” ammo for autocannons?
@@OneBiasedOpinion doesn't make sense. They have the easiest time manufacturing "smart" ammo that isn't extremely advanced. It is much faster and cheaper for them to produce microelectronics and sensors for production on the scale of hundreds of thousands for expendable ammo, a rate hundreds of times higher than Western industrial complexes can accomodate. I'm thinking a simple programmable airburst is what they have (which is actually somewhat demonstrated on one of the videos). The radar has no problem getting within a couple meters of the drone in rangefinding
Chris - I really enjoy your videos and am especially grateful for the role they play in bringing U.S. military deficiences to the attention of people that can do something about them. In that regard, it would be great if you could do a piece that would analyze the vulnerability the U.S. Navy would face in wartime, due to our relative lack of a robust shipbuilding industry.
I still think a big thing in the future will be "cooperative engagement" using normal AFV 20-40mm guns on existing vehicles, built with high traverse and commanded from one air defense radar/sensor vehicle. The radar vehicle has to emit to target, so it can send command guidance and tracking data to other vehicles without breaking radio silence any worse.
Future is going to be point defense. Point Defense like in the Expanse. Basically turreted cannons that can track and kill automatically. Every vehicle should have it. From .50 cal vehicles to higher calibres or even lasers. With automatic air burst ammo of course like the AHEAD ammo. It is going to be needed to shoot all the missiles and drones the modern battle field will have.
When you can't build a motor/transmission up to the task, you have to lower the weight, to lower the weight maybe you sacrifice vehicle stabilization means...and magazine size...and armor...maybe even fuel tank. But I could be entirely wrong.
@@joshshepherd5660 It is obvious that this anti-aircraft vehicle is equipped with a stable sight. Upon closer inspection, the gun barrel is always aimed at the target during firing.
@@fatdoi003you can literally see the barrel pointing higher and higher as it lifts the vehicle so that would be a hard no. Anything past the initial burst is hitting nothing but air.
@@SpruceWood-NEGwatch it closer, as the vehicle rocks back from the recoil the barrel of the gun keeps pointing higher and higher. Unless the drone was rocketing straight into the air at point blank range there is no compensation for the recoil.
In Ukraine both sides had to flow super low to avoid SAM sites. This vehicle seems like its capable to shooting down helicopters and low-lying aircraft that it's long range anti air defense won't be able to engage.
The old Gepard AA seems to do that and more just better, it has 15km targeting radar, twin 35mm guns with 1100 rounds/minute cadence and 6000m range. And that's a 50 year old system at this point. Obviously something like this would be much more costly if built new.
@@BL-yj2wp or better, plain old zsu23-4 is adequate, and many countries (Poland, Vietnam, …) have implemented missiles into that. This is just an over built casket.
@Main6343z-uy4gq China knows what they're doing? They haven't been in a conflict in the entirety of the 21st century, their last war ending in 1991 when their war with Vietnam ended officially, they have withdrew forces much earlier though. China does not know what they are doing, they are doing every type of warfare so if a war with the US eventually comes they'll have something to throw at them that might work.
@Main6343z-uy4gqwouldn't say naively. China has plenty to hate on and has countless joke worthy blunders. And he actualy dose a decent job at talking about what this system could ligit be good at.
i have this surround sound thing and the boops about the turret mounted radars made me jump so bad i actually fell out of my chair. it was hilarious so thank you
Ah yes, a new episode of my favorite military analysis program: "Maybe, Possibly, Slightly Potentially Credible Defense" with host "Mission and Duty" Keep up the good work!
I wonder how much corruption is in the PLA. We spend almost $1 Trillion on defense, yet the Generals act like all of our equipment is broken and they have to pinch pennies. Where does all of that money go?
1 American generals request NOT to buy stuff all the time. They get overridden by Congress to preserve local jobs and political favors. 2 even if there was 0% corruption, you still have to act like you're poor the whole time. Those who don't fight for a budget, gets their budget taken. Same as every corporation, downside of running a govt like a business.
It goes to funding the worlds police force. When you have bases across the planet it gets pretty expensive to maintain them and keep them in fighting condition
You should never use Chinese exports as a guide for anything that China does or doesn't do. First of all, anything that china approves for export which they also use will be gimped Nf be a far inferior version. Like missiles/rockets will have less range and probably even an inferior search and target system. Second. China many specialized "to order" products that they themselves will never use because they already have better stuff commissioned, or because of doesn't suit or fit in with China's military strategies and doctrines. A good example of this is the JF-17. Designed purely for Pakistan and this specific needs. Mainly a light, short range, cheap but still quality 4th gen+ multi role jet. China already has J-10 and doesn't really have any use for anything smaller and especially short range. Other export only variants are the VT4 main battle tank. They don't use China's best cutting edge technology and so don't really need to be gimped, especially tanks.. But what needs to be gimped and is gimped are the missiles themselves. like the PL-15 that china uses and has 200-300km range is not what Pakistan gets. They get the PL-15E which has a shorter range like 145km. They also have the PL-12 gimped export version also which is the direct counter part to the AIM-120 and the r77. So while the PL-15E is not best in the world good, its still very good and comparable to the best in the West(like AIM-120C AAMRAMs) if not even better since Pakistan also has F-16 and associated AIM-120 AAMRAMs that they can directly compare it with and in real world combat situations. The original PL-15 that china has and uses are the best in the world for their size/cost/complexity for medium range mass production air to air missile category. For usa and west, to beat that they are already using more complex and expensive scramjet missiles which are harder and more expensive to mass produce and also much larger, so they cannot fit 4 of them into 5th gen stealth aircrafts internal weapons bays like the PL-15 can and does. For comparison USAs AIM-120C are only 105-120km, and Russias r77 are also around 100km.
My physics professor in Simon Fraser Uni who once worked at a radar station in Alaska. He said that China's radar is one generation ahead of the United States.
@@arl5012yeah your professor is fucking fake buddy, made up in your mind. The Chinese don’t have the processing power to use very advanced radars like the US, their ship with one of the biggest ship mounted radars can’t even use it past half capacity because it DOESNT HAVE THE POWER OR PROCESSING POWER TO RUN IT.
Chinese equipment, no matter it's effectivness. Always looks good to me, That digital camo that they use on uniforms and vehicles looks nice. And they have such a variety of vehicles, weapons and uniforms. Very underrated in terms of looks. I would like to see someone make a video of the capabilities of the PLA.
The only problem rating their capabalities is that China's last war ended in 1991 with Vietnam. Rating their actual effectiveness in a conflict would be hard with no information like that.
@@TheThreatActor They use gatling cannons as naval air defence, and SU-24 has one, and an early modification of Mi-24 had 12 mm 4 barrel gatling machine gun
love this channel so much. you have single-handedly got me more interested in military information because of how fun, neutral, and accurate you deliver the information
@@EroticOnion23a dude with a molotov? Really? If any vehicle like this is incapacitated by a guy wielding homemade firebombs, it should have been scrapped at the drawing board.
Always acting like a drone swarm can just spawn around a vehicle. When there is no cover for the drones, it won't be easy to attack from different directions
@@Foquro I disagree, they’ve been doing it quite successfully in Ukraine. The thing that most people don’t realize is that a small drone can’t be seen from more than about 1000 ft, and can’t really be heard directionally from about 2-3000 ft, so they can easily approach at high altitude, encircle the vehicle, and attack from all directions.
The striker is not an American design, it is a Canadian designed vehicle. They call it the LAV (light armored vehicle). The us did design its own turrets. Thanks for another informative and entertaining video.
The fact is they have so many personnel they can layer their defense systems with a ton of redundancies and varied formations/weapon systems. It means their opponents have to consider infinitely more scenarios and hurdles to consider.
@@FarmerDrewCope racist. The platform actually does have a stabilizer. But you wouldn’t know that because you’re getting your PLA info from Trash & Purpose. It is well known, unless you’re the typical pro-US anti-China propagandist that China’s weapons of today are state of the art and quality.
While combining Air Defense Missile platform with Air Defense Gun platform makes sense. It gives the Air Defense vehicle best of both worlds. Most Anti-Aircraft guns platforms have mostly been designed so they could be used as Anti-personnel purpose when needed.
US got out of SHORAD gunnery 30 years ago. US counts on air superiority to protect ground troops. German Gephard is retired from the Bundeswehr but doing good work in Ukraine against drones and slow movers. I imagine this is going to go straight to export as it’s already obsolete.
@@GlinkoX3 Well that is part of the problem since that was right after the Cold War. If we are to fight a near peer war, these systems will be needed in protecting certain assets. Air Force and Army Aviation will only be able to do fraction of the job.
@@abbottshaull9831 I believe the army protects critical assets with remote firing Vulcans that interface with multiple radar systems, minimum troops needed to load and maintain the gun. Honestly Don ’t know much about out it. Boots on the ground have the good old Stinger. And AAA guns can be used in anti- MATERIEL missions, not anti-Personnel. There are RULES of war ;)
"yo we need you to take out these drones overhead" "Gotchu fam" *Rain of hot lead and incoherent screaming* "Yo you good?...fam?..silence is good i guess"
If they just take off all the radar and make it a pure light skirmishing vehicle for infintry and helicopters I think they'd do better. The cannon seems way too heavy to effectively shoot down drones.
I think the SKYNEX has it well thought out. Rather than volume of fire, you use larger (35mm) and more expensive rounds that are pre-programmed to detonate near the target, thus using less rounds, and increasing effectiveness.
And? A Indian person would likely also be biased in favor of India. A Chinese person would likely has positive bias for China. Ergo, an American would be biased in favor of America. No matter what. There will be biases, we're human. Idk what you expected.
3:23 Did this man just say that the Pantsir has Gatling guns? Look at it! There is only one barrel on each side! That's an auto-cannon! It's a gas operated 30mm auto-canon capable of spitting out up to 2,500 rounds a minute per barrel.
What makes you think CPC is unreliable and USA is reliable?... I would rather believe the CPC than a country who couldn't even defeat poppy farmers in Afghanistan with arrow and Bow.
Doesn't even have to be a copy to look superficially similar. Could be a cheap knockoff, too. The trick obviously isn't in having a 35mm revolver cannon. Germany has done that for decades, basically perfected the mechanism. The trick here would obviously be in the seamless integration of sensor technology, tracking, network communication, successful programming of the ammo, and ultimately precision. And I absolutely see the point of having 1 system do 1 thing on a modern battlefield. Your vehicle is more-or-less just a chassis to mount the weapon on top, and it is made to operate as part of a huge AA screen, not an independent vehicle encountering various threats. As such, an autonomous gun system that you can mount on any truck, place on a hill as static AA etc. seems like a great adaptation. You don't have this super expensive vehicle that does its own radar spotting and driving. Just a gun hooked into the system, fed targets by radars from the rear. Since you cannot guarantee safety for the short-range systems, it's best to make it expendable and put the components fqr apart.
@@MrHodoAstartes Doesn't matter how different the design is because you will always cope that it's your technology to feel better that it's made outside your control. They also make all those other technology to go along with it.
Play War Thunder now with my link, and get a massive, free bonus pack including vehicles, boosters and more: playwt.link/taskandpurpose24
Please react on zorawar amphibious light tank of India.
War Thunder: The most fun I've ever had while not having any fun.
China Tofu-Dreg Military lol
no its anti inf they learned from korea
LOL in whole trailer just 1 shot from water RB, yea, no new content on that, and nothing to showcase as a result DUH.
Have you even tried water RB? Just interesting
lmao one step closer to Command and Conquer Generals, next youll be talking about china's INSANE Dragon Tank that can spit napalm out from 500m away
I was think exactly the same thing
"The Dragon Tank was built to counter mass swarms of ground-based drones, as well as clear infantry from trenches and jungles in Taiwan."
“ CHINA will grow larger! “
@@katyusha9050 Which one? PRC or ROC? I'm betting PRC, the one that doesn't riot over murderers facing justice.
"What are those, protestors?"
"all complaints to Perun" was a nice touch on that powerpoint presentation. xD
Oh i didn't even notice that! I actually wrote a comment that Cappy missed a chance to drop a Perun joke, but he actually did it! Thanks for pointing it out!
ABSOLUTELY!!!
I saw this so I was listening intently and almost missed the asterisk. I was just out catching frogs with my 4 year old so my reflexes were all warmed up
Hahaha was about to say that
Hopefully Perun can adopt the next slide clicker noise, like we were actually back to rotary slide delivery.
"Keep the cylinders oiled!"
"Move those belts!"
C&C: China Zero Hour
I can't wait for them to make Dragon Tanks
China really stepping into the meta game
god damnit, brain heard those old words. thanks mate for the blast from the past, now im off to steam to reinstal zero hour.
@@glorgbaltger9911 me too!
I saw the first 5 seconds, came in the comments only to make a C&C joke, only to be beaten to it 😢
"I have many bullets to spare" "Keep the bullets flowing" -Gatling Tank Command and Conquer
"Move those belts!"
Oh man you just brought back so many memories. No wonder I can’t remember whatever it was my wife told me five minutes ago; my brain is stuffed full of decades worth of gaming cruft.
@@joshcarter-comquestion what is your favourite unit in c&c generals zero hour
@@yewkyler7686 I recall having fun with the big Chinese tank that you could customize with different turrets, but we’re talking 20 years ago so I don’t remember if it was actually that useful of a unit or not.
@@joshcarter-com you mean the overlord tank.
That tank is kinda good to be honest
And in case you can't remember what it can do then in that case i will tell what they starting with.
1. The three turrets are battle bunker ( it can hold 5 infantry unit and they shoot from inside), gattling cannon (provides anti infantry and aircraft defence), and propaganda tower(allow units around them to heal)
2. It can be upgrade with nuclear engine(increase speed for tanks) and nuclear shells(increase damge and leaves small amount of radiation).
The missile model equipped on TYPE 625E is FB-10A, which uses a semi-active and infrared imaging dual-mode seeker .
The range of FB-10 is 10km, while FB-10A has improved and bolded the engine based on FB-10, increasing the range to 18km.
At present, FB-10 has been basically eliminated and replaced with FB-10A.
Free Palestine
"Its not treason if you dont make eye contact!"
HMMMMMM
*War Thunder documents intensify*
I say within a year we will have this thing and 3 more boxer versions in game
@@TTKDMSI'm from Texas, so I think that Cappy's pace is perfect. 👍
I am french and as a non native English speaker, his speed is perfect for me !
@@TTKDMS I can understand that. 👍
RACIST
9:35 - I'm listening with headphones and the first falsetto "boop" in my left ear nearly made me jump out of my skin. Thanks for that T&P.
why would they even do that
@@mertgokgoz4073 its a joke about radar/sonar sounds in movies
Same here lol
Lol same
Jesus christ I actually nearly pissed myself
That thing genuinely looks like it would have been a GIJoe vehicle in the 1980s. Probably called something like "Skysweeper", came with one figure, seats six, and was worth 10 flag points, and in the 80s would cost about $25-$35 ($50-$70 today)
There was something similar. It had the chassis of the MBT, but had a turret like an dual AA gun with 3 missle tubes in either side.
Are you just from Mars, China can manufacture the most high tech products independently in the world. Do u see any country can build space station, rover on Mars and getting soil from far side of moon independently?
@@williamlee297
Wow,. someone so far up their own [butt] they mistake their own [turds] for asteroids. Admit to your ignorance and this next part will not hurt as much.
I was talking about GIJoe and the crazy vehicles they had in the 1980s. If you were there or at least know of it, you'd understand.
Also, China is making the same stupid mistake Soviet Russia did, trying to outspend the US and the West. It all looks good until the economy collapses. Which would stop China from doing something even stupider, assuming Russia does not actually beat them to it, starting WW3, over Taiwan in this case.
Also, when the US Govt decides they don't want to spend money, THEY WON'T. All for building a Space Industry, instead of a Space Program, so the Govt does not have to spend gobs of money and making future space endeavors much less costly and sustainable.
The Martian Rovers were totally NASA missions. That is why they worked... better than intended or designed to.
But an honest Congrats to China getting soil samples back... FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE 1960S Moon Missions. Not that they weren't first but they were the first ones who did AGAIN. Serious Kudos for that.
@@williamlee297lol😂 So what is your point???
At 2:55 you noticed that the vehicle was tilting, but not that the gun was tilting WITH THE VEHICLE. 3:35 That's how it looks when the turret is stabilized. (The vehicle has it's nose pitching up, but the barrel stays flat.) So, I guess in the first example they just had the gun directly against the lower limit of it's elevation?
But the angle at which it bottoms out seems to make the Gatling quite questionable as an anti-personnel weapon, unless your enemy pinky promises to never attack you from the low ground.
It's not completely crazy; remember, China is primarily a land power that shares a massive, mountainous border with India, a long-time geopolitical rival. Going off the assumption that the enemy would always have the high ground makes the anti-personnel mode a potentially useful feature.
But this all assumes that this vehicle actually works as advertised or has a well-trained crew, which I seriously question.
It's a personnel carrier with anti-air chosen for defense. It's not supposed to be fighting on the frontlines as an IFV.
@@ManiaMac1613The large country is able to have Asia's largest navy instead of being a token little country you acclaim for having smaller. And it's already well trained enough to even make plenty of things for its crews instead of nothing.
@@tritium1998 That's why I only said "the enemy attacks you from the high ground" and not "or you attack the enemy from the low ground". I get that the anti-personell use is a last resort, I just don't get why they had to limit it to only work in half as many cases as it could have with more depression.
First off, I would not class the gun on the Stryker M-SHORAD in the same ballpark as on the Type 625E. The Stryker's gun fires a 30x113mm round at around 800 meters per second. Which was a fine muzzle velocity for a cannon to fire at aircraft in the 50s, but with aircraft getting faster it was eventually replaced with cannons firing rounds traveling at 1050 meters per second, like the 20x102mm or the 25x137mm. The M230LF cannon on the Stryker is as such very much intended to shoot down drones and other relatively slow moving targets.
By comparison the Type 625E's cannon is said to fire a massive 25x287mm round. Now I cannot find any information on that round and gun system muzzle velocity. But the smaller case of the 25x184mm of the legacy anti-aircraft guns China has, has a muzzle velocity of 1050 meters per second. Considering the much higher case capacity it would not be untoward to imagine that the muzzle velocity to be ever higher. Which would be very welcome in shooting down very fast targets, such as incoming missiles. And if they developed an APDS round for it, then it will be even faster still.
Secondly to point out, missiles tend to have an arming range and do very poorly at a very fast target at close ranges, especially as it is flying perpendicular to the launcher. This is why there is a combination of gun and missile system. So that the gun can handle targets within this minimum effective range of the missile.
"Autocanon fires like 200 rounds per minute"
*Laughs in RH202*
*Laughs in Gepard*
Or even pantsir or Tunguska
@@vipvip-tf9rw those are 2 barreled gatling guns
@@liamshaw3112 2A38 does not rotate its barrels, they are motionless. Just watch some range shooting or at least read the wiki article about Pantsir.
even the german ww2 mk108 30mm fired at over 600rpm
This is way better lmao
“Just gonna step out for a smoke while the gun is firing” proceeds to get crushed by the recoil and burn by the casings
Still safer then that weird tank transport thing with the guns overhead and oil barrels. At least this one isn’t leaking oil and got brass onto you!
lol... as if this is an infantry vehicle operating in urban warfare
@@SpruceWood-NEG reading your comment as i watch the gun fire and climb like 5 degrees
@SpruceWood-NEG uh huh. Sure. Was just saying that i came across your comment as i was at a part of the video where it fired at a drone and the barrel climbed visibly.
I did watch the whole video, but yeah, i apparently certainly didn't see this with my own two eyes
@@joshuacheung6518does seem to lsck a stabaliser
NO. The Pansyr does NOT use a gatling gun.
Correct, they use 2x30 mm cannons. Not a gatling gun.
This page is nothing but a Merica weapons good Russia China bad. That fanboys just lap up.
There are 2 barrels for each cannon. So that is the principle of a gattling gun.
@@GoMrTom not really. it is 4 separate cannons with a separate magazines for each cannon.
@@GoMrTom no? There is nothing rotating there. The 2A38 works according to the Gast principle, in which the alternately firing barrels load each other.
The Gatling principle works in a completly different way
Don't know why but the three "boop" noises at 9:35 for each radar made me howl.
Pantsir-S1 does NOT use gatling gun and i have no idea where did you read that ? Those are 30x165mm 2A38 cannons.
Yeah, the Pantsir uses a Gast gun (a double-barrel system in which the recoil of one barrel provides the energy to load the other barrel). The Soviet Union had a lot of experience with that system for both aircraft cannons (the GSh-23 and GSh-30-2) and 2A38 cannon of the Tunguska. So it was unsurprising that Russia stuck with the 2A38 for the Pantsir.
2A38 is not a gust gun
There's 2 pantsirs he was probably talking about the naval one
Great video. But those weird little "boop" "bleep" "bloop" at 9:40 freaked me the F out, I thought I was losing my mind
9:36 Sounds like the editor put his falsetto voice: "duh" "dah" "pep".
Me too! I just wrote a whole rant about that.
I was watching this alone with the lights turned off and I got really scared lol. Im glad I read your comment
Toot Toot Toot in my left ear wtf
I thought it was a cute addition.
"Send all complaints to Perun's Channel." 🤣
I'll be watching for Perun's reply about the emotional support needs of the average infantryman😂
😂😂😂
The very last layer of defense is the CRAD, or Contact Range Air Defense. This consists of grunts with tennis racquets and pogo sticks.
I thought it was Contact Range Air Protection, or CRAP?
@@DrownedInExile Some might call it a cope-cage .... but it is still crap.
Im pretty sure the quality of Chinese radars, compared to Russian, would depend, heavily, on whether thas an AESA radar or not. Chinese AESA radars are actually better than Russia due to domestic microchip industry and access to better chips than Russians can get. Their sonars are also much better as a result.
Indeed, with the advancement of tech and manufacture, it will progress quickly.
We're so cooked lol
Guy at 15:16 opening his mouth as the massive guns fire.
I wonder what those guns are doing to his ears and brain.
Considering how much the entire vehicle tilts the instant the Gatling gun is fired; there's no point firing bursts longer than a fraction of a second.
Reality is no point of bursts more than a second except for pr.
Yeah it's actually insane how much that vehicle reacts to that gun being fired. I wonder if they even tried to develop a type of counter balance system of some kind for something like this?
@@benmcreynolds8581 Its really impossible. This is the suspension of the APV chasis at work. To properly counter the balance all you have to do is give it a hard contact with ground, something basically all truck howizers have. Its really not hard to do, and if some APVs are given stationary jobs they might be fitted with something like that.
well you can only fire these types of weapons about 6 seconds so that's kinda the point... that's how goalkeepers and sentinels work
@@WhiteWolf65 spot on. Good description on how a system such as this can improve. I'm curious if we are going to see advancements in some versatile stability systems?
This "Thanks!" is for the humor inserted at 9:35
. I'm working with my earphones in and had to review those 3 seconds twice just to lol and let my coworkers know I'm still crazy.
"Doot" right back at ya Cappy.
The Type 625E looks like the sort of platform a country would park around a civilian target like a electrical substation, fuel depot, office building, etc. The "soft" target would be relatively far away from the front line. What is surprising is the small amount of storage area for ammo because a creative adversary will attack with armed drones in a swarm and from different directions. Would not be surprised if there was a partner vehicle that carries the EW equipment. On a side note, the PRC can cobble together equipment in a short period. It may not be very good, but having something can be better than having nothing.
Could be a last resort type weapon, similar to the Phalanx. Park next to critical targets. Connects with comprehensive air defense. Last line of defense when all else fails and thus needs intense but short barrage on incoming missile.
I would say is good and much cheaper than excellent western kit.
Drone defense means cheap enough to have lots to cover a lot of ground
The last line is basically PRC weapon design since its inception. They dont try to make a perfect thing on the spot, but first churn out an indigenous product that fits the requirement by whatever means nessecary, then improve on it.
No, critical infrastructure defense is the job for the LD-3000, the one with a 11 barrels 30mm gattling gun.
This 625 is a field AA, equivalent to a ZSU-23-4 Shilka.
@@leoli2450necessary*
9:40 anyone notice the boop beep when the arrows pop up 😂😂 I found it 😆 hilarious 🤣
I think the central door might be a service hatch to the turret rather than an escape hatch. The turret looks unmanned and there is bound to be a sizeable ammo drum for the rotary 30 mm underneath, so it might be just to allow a technician inside for maintenance. With the windows and door on the rear the system operators are likely sitting back there rather than under the turret.
the bulletcasings ejected near the exit hatch only matter when they shoot towards the front. i believe the hatch rotates with the turret.
The human-made boop noises when pointing out the radars and optical sensors made me laugh AND comment. Well played. Sometimes it's the little details that really make a difference.
It kinda made me annoyed aa I was walking and thought someone was messing around lol
Ok, so firstly, good take overall.
One thing to note is that China don't usually sell their best equipment as exports. And referring to the airborne AESA radar doesn't necessarily translate into ground search/track radar. Albeit I don't think the radar detection range is very crucial to this system.
And no I don't think this thing is designed to combat anything more than 10km even with the missile systems. It is more likely to engage shorter range targets than PGZ09 (Gepard like system). It would likely of limited use against fighter jets, but rather specialized in combating drones.
As you can see in the footage there's proximity fuse shells from the gatling gun that burst before the target, this is already very good since many older systems, world wide as well, don't even have such options given even larger calibers.
This emphasizes its effectiveness against drones.
However, since it's acting like such a layer in the air defense sphere, being capable in its own responsibility is already sufficient. I don't see it as a All-in-one system that can cover a multitude of ranges and different targets at once. For longer ranges, as you mentioned there's HQ17 (Improved Tor) and other systems. For combating close range aircraft and helicopters there's PGZ-09 (Gepard) and similar systems. It doesn't have to have capabilities to deal with high altitude aircraft.
If such scenario happens, that this 625 system is in dire need to deal with high altitude jets, that probably indicates the air defense sphere has already collapsed and shouldn't be considered as a design failure, but a strategic failure.
My take is that, it is, "Seemingly", a good system that covers the special need for destroying drones in the very contemporary battlefield environment. And to have such a system to fulfill a role like that is already visionary and before many other nations' attempts even started.
Pantsir and S300V etc. are all capable systems, but really none of them provide precisely targeted solution to the drone threats. We've seen the amount of Tunguskas destroyed in Ukraine. It seems that Russian army do miss a layer of air defense that is in most dire need, which is specifically the role of the 625 system's design philosophy.
That's why, I think this system may prove very useful in a modern context.
And another note is that, if we look at history, do not underestimate Chinese army, especially the ground forces.
The problem over years all like make money and forget Mentality from that and Political People stupid unbelievable Stupid not think of later so they have what they need but for over the Top People not necessary
@@pitmarkovic4545 Ok bud, people have to pass Turing Test before they comment LMAO.
So apparently ChatGPT 4o translated this comment into:
"Over the years, people have become focused on making money and have adopted a mentality that overlooks long-term consequences. Politicians and influential people are seen as incredibly short-sighted and foolish, only thinking about their immediate needs and excesses, rather than what is necessary for the broader population and future sustainability." to whom that wonders.
China does not sell much as busy supplying own military.
@@knoll9812 true, and even for the self serving equipment, the budget is not even on par to NATO standard, which is only 1.7% of gdp.
@@y.m.9277So china is weak?
前些天在B站看到转载翻译的视频，youtube今天就给我推送了本体
至于视频内容，只能说博主是个很自信的人
当娱乐节目看看，落后俄罗斯10年的电子系统，怎么敢说的
1130教做人。。。
哈哈我也
+1
Your 3 boop noises from 9:36-9:42 scared the hell out of me! 🤣
Chinese Gatling anti air might work great at the Himalayas. Himalayan elevations and terrain are a challenge for drones but not a big enough challenge for light attack helicopters. Himalayan warfare is heavy on infantry.
That reasoning basically make this vehicle seem like it is not a good enough reason to be made, because that sounds like wasted money when cheaper alternative is already exist. But the biggest issue with this anti-aircraft is it has no stabilizer and no chassis holder to prevent the APC that carry this gun get pushed around while shooting so its end up with lower the accuracy which is fatal for air defense. Since it mean to be anti aircraft it mean to not moving around like APC and IFV.
@@Ilyas-ty6cy since when did large militaries around the world make everything that made sense tho, there're so much "fuck around and found out it sucks and we all waste our time" projects
@@Ilyas-ty6cy Well its not mass produced yet, it could just be a test batch. If it performs well, they order more.
@@Mrwhomeyou In the plateau area, American and German products are waste products, and cars are particularly easy to anchot.
@@Ilyas-ty6cybut It does have a stabilizer the clips show the vehicle getting pushed by recoil but the barrel of the gun stays level
the Pantsir does not have a gatling gun but a twin barrel gas operated 30mm autocannon.
An auto cannon 35mm or greater has a few options for programmable ammunition, which would be extremely helpful in engaging air targets. But a wall of lead always works well too...
Plus the smaller ammo may be easier to field in a major war
Absolutely. Clusters of rounds especially flack type.
Large clusters of airburst munitions don't require steady radar either, and better survivability versus loitering munitions.
but 30+mm autocannons have much longer range
Thing is, wall of lead requires a big infeed of lead. That said, maybe it’s just easier for China to manufacture “dumb” ammo for this gun in larger quantities than it would be to manufacture sufficient “smart” ammo for autocannons?
@@OneBiasedOpinion doesn't make sense. They have the easiest time manufacturing "smart" ammo that isn't extremely advanced. It is much faster and cheaper for them to produce microelectronics and sensors for production on the scale of hundreds of thousands for expendable ammo, a rate hundreds of times higher than Western industrial complexes can accomodate. I'm thinking a simple programmable airburst is what they have (which is actually somewhat demonstrated on one of the videos). The radar has no problem getting within a couple meters of the drone in rangefinding
Chris - I really enjoy your videos and am especially grateful for the role they play in bringing U.S. military deficiences to the attention of people that can do something about them. In that regard, it would be great if you could do a piece that would analyze the vulnerability the U.S. Navy would face in wartime, due to our relative lack of a robust shipbuilding industry.
Love the new "sound" effects 😁
25mm cannon, the 625e means it is a 6 barrel 25mm AAA system
AD VICTORIAM ⚙️ for the Brotherhood Of Steel! ⚙️🟧
25 mike Gatling AAA Mobile Anti Aircraft Armored Vehicle
@@Paladin.Brandis enemy FPV destroyed
Yes, not 30mm as stated before and after the correct reference to 25mm.
Like soviet zsu 23-4 ? U know SPAA with 4x 23 mm autocannons
Love your style, keep rocking it!
Good to see you again Cappy . Keep it coming. You and McBeth are for real. 🇺🇸
McBeth is a lame.
I still think a big thing in the future will be "cooperative engagement" using normal AFV 20-40mm guns on existing vehicles, built with high traverse and commanded from one air defense radar/sensor vehicle. The radar vehicle has to emit to target, so it can send command guidance and tracking data to other vehicles without breaking radio silence any worse.
Future is going to be point defense.
Point Defense like in the Expanse. Basically turreted cannons that can track and kill automatically.
Every vehicle should have it. From .50 cal vehicles to higher calibres or even lasers.
With automatic air burst ammo of course like the AHEAD ammo.
It is going to be needed to shoot all the missiles and drones the modern battle field will have.
The sound effects are spot on!
Tf is the recoil of the gatling gun extreme
When you can't build a motor/transmission up to the task, you have to lower the weight, to lower the weight maybe you sacrifice vehicle stabilization means...and magazine size...and armor...maybe even fuel tank. But I could be entirely wrong.
hope the gun has some leveling function
@@joshshepherd5660 It is obvious that this anti-aircraft vehicle is equipped with a stable sight. Upon closer inspection, the gun barrel is always aimed at the target during firing.
@@fatdoi003you can literally see the barrel pointing higher and higher as it lifts the vehicle so that would be a hard no. Anything past the initial burst is hitting nothing but air.
@@SpruceWood-NEGwatch it closer, as the vehicle rocks back from the recoil the barrel of the gun keeps pointing higher and higher. Unless the drone was rocketing straight into the air at point blank range there is no compensation for the recoil.
In Ukraine both sides had to flow super low to avoid SAM sites. This vehicle seems like its capable to shooting down helicopters and low-lying aircraft that it's long range anti air defense won't be able to engage.
The old Gepard AA seems to do that and more just better, it has 15km targeting radar, twin 35mm guns with 1100 rounds/minute cadence and 6000m range. And that's a 50 year old system at this point.
Obviously something like this would be much more costly if built new.
@Main6343z-uy4gqwhy do you hate to say it?
@@BL-yj2wp or better, plain old zsu23-4 is adequate, and many countries (Poland, Vietnam, …) have implemented missiles into that. This is just an over built casket.
@Main6343z-uy4gq China knows what they're doing? They haven't been in a conflict in the entirety of the 21st century, their last war ending in 1991 when their war with Vietnam ended officially, they have withdrew forces much earlier though. China does not know what they are doing, they are doing every type of warfare so if a war with the US eventually comes they'll have something to throw at them that might work.
@Main6343z-uy4gqwouldn't say naively. China has plenty to hate on and has countless joke worthy blunders. And he actualy dose a decent job at talking about what this system could ligit be good at.
Assuming the 625 gun is typical, it's easy to change rate of fire. Just lower the rotation speed. That would decrease the recoil.
The Snail thanks you for the mention🐌
i have this surround sound thing and the boops about the turret mounted radars made me jump so bad i actually fell out of my chair. it was hilarious so thank you
Pantsir uses two dual barrel autocannons. Autocannons can have fire rates up to 2000 ish rpm.
I've already seen this vehicle in Command and Conquer: Generals.
I 1st saw on the Chinese YT channel their marketing video... 1:12 this one, recommended on my YT home
@5:57 didn't even bother to cover it up eh? Approved!
Chris' little "boop"s around 9:40 really got me
Ah yes, a new episode of my favorite military analysis program: "Maybe, Possibly, Slightly Potentially Credible Defense" with host "Mission and Duty"
Keep up the good work!
Built in door defense mechanism while firing. 2 birds with one stone.
I wonder how much corruption is in the PLA. We spend almost $1 Trillion on defense, yet the Generals act like all of our equipment is broken and they have to pinch pennies. Where does all of that money go?
To the general’s pockets. Be warned, no after market services after you bought Chinese equipment. Just ask Bangladesh 😂!
1 American generals request NOT to buy stuff all the time. They get overridden by Congress to preserve local jobs and political favors.
2 even if there was 0% corruption, you still have to act like you're poor the whole time. Those who don't fight for a budget, gets their budget taken. Same as every corporation, downside of running a govt like a business.
@@politicalbandit3904
"market after service" is depending on the contract signed...
chinese just rid of 2 corrupt defense ministers who were @ rocket force.... seems the money is there rather than the army....
It goes to funding the worlds police force. When you have bases across the planet it gets pretty expensive to maintain them and keep them in fighting condition
Bro you gotta post more I always love watching your videos at work😂
this video has a lot of jokes you made my day ❤
dude… you are ‘silly-dad-funny’. it’s the best
@3:28. The Pantsir has dual autocannons, not a Gatling gun (rotary cannon).
Comic elements are great! THANKS
中国不会认为有哪个国家的陆军可以越过中国边界，最大的问题来自空中，就算俄罗斯也不可能越过中国边界
The recoil... Lol.. Physical embodiment of "spray and pray" 😂
I actually really love these deep dives into different weapons and equipment. It's good for all the young soldiers out there watching too.
Defense against small drones is going to be a major issue going forward.
9:35 I jumped when he made those noises while wearing headphones lmao
Bruh I just burped slightly when that sound came on and was like "What the fuck kind of noises is my body producing today ?" xDD
You should never use Chinese exports as a guide for anything that China does or doesn't do.
First of all, anything that china approves for export which they also use will be gimped Nf be a far inferior version. Like missiles/rockets will have less range and probably even an inferior search and target system.
Second. China many specialized "to order" products that they themselves will never use because they already have better stuff commissioned, or because of doesn't suit or fit in with China's military strategies and doctrines. A good example of this is the JF-17. Designed purely for Pakistan and this specific needs. Mainly a light, short range, cheap but still quality 4th gen+ multi role jet.
China already has J-10 and doesn't really have any use for anything smaller and especially short range.
Other export only variants are the VT4 main battle tank.
They don't use China's best cutting edge technology and so don't really need to be gimped, especially tanks.. But what needs to be gimped and is gimped are the missiles themselves. like the PL-15 that china uses and has 200-300km range is not what Pakistan gets. They get the PL-15E which has a shorter range like 145km. They also have the PL-12 gimped export version also which is the direct counter part to the AIM-120 and the r77. So while the PL-15E is not best in the world good, its still very good and comparable to the best in the West(like AIM-120C AAMRAMs) if not even better since Pakistan also has F-16 and associated AIM-120 AAMRAMs that they can directly compare it with and in real world combat situations. The original PL-15 that china has and uses are the best in the world for their size/cost/complexity for medium range mass production air to air missile category. For usa and west, to beat that they are already using more complex and expensive scramjet missiles which are harder and more expensive to mass produce and also much larger, so they cannot fit 4 of them into 5th gen stealth aircrafts internal weapons bays like the PL-15 can and does.
For comparison USAs AIM-120C are only 105-120km, and Russias r77 are also around 100km.
There is an error in your analysis - the export tanks china exports have better front plate armor than the home versions
@@jozefcyran2589That is not true. Thr VT-4 has less armor than the Type-96B, let alone the Type-99A.
I wonder who did they copy 😅
That "click click" noise you make... that advances the slides.... My god man, what technology is that??!! I am shocked... And in awe...
The sound effects (aka Cappy's silly noises) are incredible in this episode. 😆
"Chinese radar is a decade behind the Russian system? " That is new, really creative fantasy.
It’s ludicrous fantasy.
Yes, this point makes him lose his professionalism and impartiality and can only be watched as entertainment
My physics professor in Simon Fraser Uni who once worked at a radar station in Alaska. He said that China's radar is one generation ahead of the United States.
I think I believe the physics prof with military radar experience... @@arl5012
@@arl5012yeah your professor is fucking fake buddy, made up in your mind.
The Chinese don’t have the processing power to use very advanced radars like the US, their ship with one of the biggest ship mounted radars can’t even use it past half capacity because it DOESNT HAVE THE POWER OR PROCESSING POWER TO RUN IT.
Chinese equipment, no matter it's effectivness. Always looks good to me, That digital camo that they use on uniforms and vehicles looks nice. And they have such a variety of vehicles, weapons and uniforms. Very underrated in terms of looks. I would like to see someone make a video of the capabilities of the PLA.
The only problem rating their capabalities is that China's last war ended in 1991 with Vietnam. Rating their actual effectiveness in a conflict would be hard with no information like that.
@@leventekocsis9103
Inquire the Sri Lankan, Cambodian, Pakistani, Myanmar, African militaries... that deployed 🇨🇳 weapons in combat mission.
They put water in thier missile that is the capability of china
@@jdavidblais
Fake news that had been debunked.
@@leventekocsis9103 The US also thought it was the strongest until it got fucked up by some rice farmers and goat herders too
Russia's Pantsir system doesn't have gatling guns, it has 4 30mm cannons, joined 2 by 2, capable altogether to fire 5000 shels per minute.
they don't use gatling guns at all
@@TheThreatActor They use gatling cannons as naval air defence, and SU-24 has one, and an early modification of Mi-24 had 12 mm 4 barrel gatling machine gun
@@gorsh4223 thats pretty cool
@@gorsh4223 The Russians also have a 7.62mm gatling gun that available as a gun pod to be mounted on their helicopters..
9:35 greatest sound effect of a pointing arrow ever in any RUclips video.
希望佬美这种博主越多越好哈哈，赢就完事了。
他们是如何做到鄙视🇨🇳同时宣扬🇨🇳威胁论的……😂
7:10 - It may be the PLA is developing a multi-layered, mu;ti-threat air defense network
Not only do you get a lot of good information from Chris, you get some good laughs!😅 😅
Gday @Task & Purpose, please mate do the Aussie accent, i love it hearing people give it a go, great vids, love the channel. From Down Under.
love this channel so much. you have single-handedly got me more interested in military information because of how fun, neutral, and accurate you deliver the information
All of these seem very easy to beat with a swarm of 5+ drones approaching from different directions. 🤔
If you can sneak up to it a dude with a molotov can take any vehicle out?...probably an aircraft carrier too...🤔
@@EroticOnion23a dude with a molotov? Really? If any vehicle like this is incapacitated by a guy wielding homemade firebombs, it should have been scrapped at the drawing board.
Always acting like a drone swarm can just spawn around a vehicle. When there is no cover for the drones, it won't be easy to attack from different directions
@@Foquro I disagree, they’ve been doing it quite successfully in Ukraine. The thing that most people don’t realize is that a small drone can’t be seen from more than about 1000 ft, and can’t really be heard directionally from about 2-3000 ft, so they can easily approach at high altitude, encircle the vehicle, and attack from all directions.
@@MiguelGomezMountainRunner but they wont be so stupid to leave the vehicle alone in a battlefield. Those SPAA's travel around in a group.
The striker is not an American design, it is a Canadian designed vehicle. They call it the LAV (light armored vehicle). The us did design its own turrets.
Thanks for another informative and entertaining video.
no swiss MOVAG PIRANHA
5:42 made me laugh, great content as always Chris!
The fact is they have so many personnel they can layer their defense systems with a ton of redundancies and varied formations/weapon systems. It means their opponents have to consider infinitely more scenarios and hurdles to consider.
15:20 guy firing the quad cannon with no visible hearing protection, and screaming! 😂
WTF is it hitting without stable gun ? Isnt that a BIG, obvious problem? Wont export customers also see this?
Quality being sacrificed for quantity is the entire Chicom SOP and that is probably what the export buyer would be looking for
Well, the gun on the A-10 isn't super precise either, but ... BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT
@@FarmerDrewCope racist. The platform actually does have a stabilizer. But you wouldn’t know that because you’re getting your PLA info from Trash & Purpose. It is well known, unless you’re the typical pro-US anti-China propagandist that China’s weapons of today are state of the art and quality.
While combining Air Defense Missile platform with Air Defense Gun platform makes sense. It gives the Air Defense vehicle best of both worlds. Most Anti-Aircraft guns platforms have mostly been designed so they could be used as Anti-personnel purpose when needed.
US got out of SHORAD gunnery 30 years ago. US counts on air superiority to protect ground troops. German Gephard is retired from the Bundeswehr but doing good work in Ukraine against drones and slow movers.
I imagine this is going to go straight to export as it’s already obsolete.
@@GlinkoX3 Well that is part of the problem since that was right after the Cold War. If we are to fight a near peer war, these systems will be needed in protecting certain assets. Air Force and Army Aviation will only be able to do fraction of the job.
@@abbottshaull9831 I believe the army protects critical assets with remote firing Vulcans that interface with multiple radar systems, minimum troops needed to load and maintain the gun. Honestly Don ’t know much about out it. Boots on the ground have the good old Stinger.
And AAA guns can be used in anti- MATERIEL missions, not anti-Personnel.
There are RULES of war ;)
So, Perun is running your complaint department? How generous is that!
I wonder who owns that email - I doubt it’s Perun
I laughed. I cried. I peed my pants. Twice. Great video Cappy and crew! 😂😂
They should've made it a tracked vehicle. Then it really would've been a gattling tank. Might help with recoil, too.
I love how you use the metric system 🥺
The metric system is easier to understand and to use.
"yo we need you to take out these drones overhead"
"Gotchu fam"
*Rain of hot lead and incoherent screaming*
"Yo you good?...fam?..silence is good i guess"
If they just take off all the radar and make it a pure light skirmishing vehicle for infintry and helicopters I think they'd do better. The cannon seems way too heavy to effectively shoot down drones.
Lol yea you know so much why you not making some for the US military lmao
@@cuties5864Because I don't have a billion dollars to start a weapon making corporation.
Drones come in al sizes. You need 20mm for bug ones.
I think 30 mm gives exploding ammo.
@@cuties5864 You know this is the internet right? You know people can comment their opinions, right? Why you trying to censor people?
Why would they take off all the radar to have no detection and tracking to be "better" for you with your fake expertise?
I think the SKYNEX has it well thought out. Rather than volume of fire, you use larger (35mm) and more expensive rounds that are pre-programmed to detonate near the target, thus using less rounds, and increasing effectiveness.
This thing honestly looks cool as hell, coolest AA vehicle I have seen
Says wont be biased in videos
Becomes increasingly biased whenever talks about China
And? A Indian person would likely also be biased in favor of India. A Chinese person would likely has positive bias for China. Ergo, an American would be biased in favor of America. No matter what. There will be biases, we're human. Idk what you expected.
@@sasquatchman22 if you’re gonna be biased, just don’t say you’re not biased, duh
At first you said it was a 25 mm then you said it was a 30 mm make up your mind dude
lool, send complaints to Perun?!!! You both rock!
>Video is about a new Air Defence vehicle
>Same video is sponsored by War Thunder
"in the business, we call this foreshadowing" - Count Dankula
笑点:讲中国雷达落后俄罗斯十年😂😂😂
因为中国雷达落后，搜索范围小，所以选择射程更近的火炮，笑了😂😂😂
不知道哪个国家现在还用毒刺防空😂😂😂
这个频道一直都是propaganda，之前还有说过中国百分之70多的战斗机引擎是进口的言论，故意曲解citation，原文说的是中国军械进口中百分之70是战斗机引擎
他们能把黑的说成白的，美国不是一个诚实的国家
让他们自嗨挺好的😂
笑嘻了
不知道哪个国家现在还用毒刺防空 - Ukraine does
If he doesn't talk about bullshit about China, then there's no views on his channel. Too much bullshit make no sense at all. 😂😂😂😂😂
3:23 Did this man just say that the Pantsir has Gatling guns? Look at it! There is only one barrel on each side! That's an auto-cannon! It's a gas operated 30mm auto-canon capable of spitting out up to 2,500 rounds a minute per barrel.
Notice the kick back in the hull of the vehicle when it fires. There is no compensation in gun when the vehicle kicks up in retaliation of the gun's
What makes you think CPC is unreliable and USA is reliable?... I would rather believe the CPC than a country who couldn't even defeat poppy farmers in Afghanistan with arrow and Bow.
*Puts hand up*-
Is the similar unit of the German AA just a coincidence?
Doesn't even have to be a copy to look superficially similar.
Could be a cheap knockoff, too.
The trick obviously isn't in having a 35mm revolver cannon.
Germany has done that for decades, basically perfected the mechanism. The trick here would obviously be in the seamless integration of sensor technology, tracking, network communication, successful programming of the ammo, and ultimately precision.
And I absolutely see the point of having 1 system do 1 thing on a modern battlefield.
Your vehicle is more-or-less just a chassis to mount the weapon on top, and it is made to operate as part of a huge AA screen, not an independent vehicle encountering various threats.
As such, an autonomous gun system that you can mount on any truck, place on a hill as static AA etc. seems like a great adaptation.
You don't have this super expensive vehicle that does its own radar spotting and driving. Just a gun hooked into the system, fed targets by radars from the rear.
Since you cannot guarantee safety for the short-range systems, it's best to make it expendable and put the components fqr apart.
@@MrHodoAstartes Doesn't matter how different the design is because you will always cope that it's your technology to feel better that it's made outside your control. They also make all those other technology to go along with it.