Search results

If you go frame by frame you can see the delivery system and it’s telemetry data just before it’s detonation. The telemetry is blurred out but the object is visible.

The Hush-A-Boom.

@Kirkhill the Brit’s Warrior fleet was deemed surplus to their needs after the modernization effort was cancelled in 2021. So rather than scrapping them, they are being used for a new purpose.

Barrett has some other Mk22 issues. Splitting the action frame being one… Nice gun, but not sure the design was optimal for the barrel change aspect - as pinching aluminum never is a good idea.

I’d suggest dedicated Breaching Vehicles can be done by tether. But you can’t have a lot of jockeying vehicles (especially tracked ones) and not end up tearing up the tether. Tracking so far. See my comments about the limits of tethering above. Additionally there are security concerns...

The LCMM at the time thought he knew better than the users… There was also a budget issue and changing barrel lengths and adding an actual modular handguard didn’t mesh with their concept. There was clear bias toward the Pitchfork due to the designer, and also not going direct to the OEM for...

Same, we are a pretty good at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.

There must be a harder stupider way, Go Army... Potentially. I think you will see the ISV program gates being passed on to the logistic and tactical vehicle fleets. So when ISV successfully passes Gate 1, Gate 1 integration will occur in FTV and HEMMT fleets, etc.

Oh I am totally with you. I joined the CAF in 1987 and was issued a C1A1, a few years later got issued a C7 (Weapons of the 80's/SARP was concluded when I joined, but the C7/8's and C9's where not yet in fully scale issue). A few years later we got issued the C7A1 and C79 (black rubber cover)...

I believe the program is a first ‘step’ in crawl, walk, run. ISV’s are relatively cheap and current. The FTV’s and HEMTT are after that, and then the AFV’s.

It is known this is a R&D effort. FtL and Wired don’t offer a lot for an in combat system. Wired systems exist for certain applications, and FtL for Logistics applications.

The M-16 was acquired by the US Army as an interim weapon to replace the M-14… I’ll spare everyone the multiple page small arms history lecture and go with the short TLDR version The M-14 was an Ordnance pet that was rammed through despite the FAL being a better performer. As well as forcing...

Interesting choice of vehicle to use as the baseline. https://www.militarytimes.com/land/2025/09/02/army-picks-3-startups-to-fast-track-self-driving-squad-vehicle/?utm_campaign=dfn-ebb&utm_medium=email&utm_source=sailthru

Well my definition is that Mechanized Infantry work with Tanks. Hence why I discount the wheeled systems for that role. I prefer the term Motorized Infantry for things like the LAV, even if the it is a little overkill for the term.

Honestly I am not a fan of towed 120mm Mortars - they are crazy heavy and awkward - and realistically you need a Hummer sized vehicle to tow them. They really don't come into to action or get out of action quickly. 8rds in 2 min including coming out of action isn't shabby - and well under what...

Mindboggling that the louder, flashier short barrels aren't getting cans.

Personally I want to stab everyone who still talks about bayonets.

Bolt - M240 (it is an open bolt ;) ) 7.62 NATO Lever - don't have one Pump - Benelli M3 12 ga (okay it does semi and pump) Break - don't have one Semi - KAC SR-25 6.5 Creedmore Select - Colt M4A1 5.56mm NATO 🤡

It (the AVGP/LAV/Stryker) is a Taxi. It’s not a Mechanized Infantry vehicle.

Main issue with them is they are discharged from a 12ga shotgun. Which is a firearm under Canadian law, the others have velocities that don’t consider them a firearm. The same reason that I discounted a 40mm Launcher, as those used to be nothings, but changed (just prior to me selling the...