Why should this tank change everything? What makes it a game changer? Nothing. It is just another weapon with advantages and disadvantages as compared to other weapons. Stop boring me with this hyperactive, lying hyperbole. Thank you.
Because it can do missions that are to dangerous and it can get to enemy positions whit out being noticed and it can be used to send ahead of infantry so that no live will be lost on missions
Any tanks in Ukraine. You have to understand NATO weapons are much different than what Ukraine has. The intelligence apparatus that NATO hardware is plugged into has the capability of taking out drones by the dozens. Hundreds even.
@@lance3540 when America builds weapons, it doesn't plan its weapons against China or Russia. It builds them against itself. Neither Russia or China have the capability of keeping up or being any threat to nato weaponry. America already has a way to defeat drones. With more coming online everyday. We're dicking around with lasers and anti-missile stuff. Wow. Ukraine and Russia are taping together. Homemade drones. None of what you see in Ukraine would work against NATO... You don't spend as much on the military as everybody else on the planet and not have an advantage on the battlefield....
I defer to negative comments, by this simple idea; Use it Wisely! It has abilities not seen since the Hellcat Tank-Destroyer. It's almost 'Quiet' and could get much more silent. It has a Low Thermal Image, as well. And, lastly, It's a LOT QUICKER than most other craft out-there. The Studebaker 'Weasel' was a Recon Favorite in WW-2, because, it was amphibious, quiet, quick and Nimble, and 101st AB used it to great advantage, even-though, it was usually Un-Armed! Give it GUNS, and, the Battle-of-the-Bulge wouldn't have been.... This Is, that; and in a Modern war-front, it DOES NOT ALWAYS need a Human on-board. Not a Game-changer it was a decade ago, but, it'll add to Flexible Response.
@@dadejazzba402 They could but the Ukrainians tried it against Russia with tanks and infantry véhicules, it did not turn in their favor. The Ripsaw is a nice "tank" but it would need to be built to military standards to to stand a chance in an actual real war with planes, tanks and other vehicles the enemy has.
@@micheltremblay4774When was this? I think the issue here is the video, not the real thing. The key to this is autonomous versions made at costs that allow them to be deployed in high numbers and in mined environments.
Everyone is forgetting that no war is won without boots on the ground. autonomous devices are simply support weapons. Support weapons need support and that is boots on the ground.
Boots on the ground are nothing more than targets for the enemy! What's needed today is what you are seeing, along with tactical backup, staying ahead of our enemies has to be a priority when faced with the extreme sized forces I hope we never have to face! Consider these weapon systems disposable! Wars can no longer be won by brute force alone but will be won by ingenuity and science! U.S. Army Sgt. Bill Fitzpatrick 67th MP Co. 1970-72
@@billfitzpatrick6202 I appreciate your experience as a buck sergeant military policeman from the Vietnam Era. But I'll defer to an infantryman who fought on the ground in three wars. "You can kill 'em all. You can destroy everything they have. But no battle is won until a 19-year-old with a rifle stands on a hill unopposed."
Watch Ukraine planes destroy tanks. The aircraft is equipped with visuals that remove the picture's noise, making the targets extremely easy to spot. In fact, it makes them look like shooting fish in a clear glass fishbowl. The pilot can see everything. The men on the ground cannot hide, and the vehicles cannot evade the pilot's visuals, leaving them nowhere to hide. There is no safe tank!
Well good comments all. No system is perfect and can be destroyed, but, I can see many uses for the Ripsaw and it can save lives by being unmanned. I like how it has its own drone helicopter and ground crawler. Perhaps an anti-drone weapons system can be developed as an add on package. Creativity and imagination are key. Very fine start.
The ripsaw was first seen in the GI-Joe Movie with the Rock. He drove it. It's a Cheaper than a tank or training of a soldier. Drones and FPV's have Changed the battle field like how tanks did 100 years ago. Must Keep Up!
If you look at the old hasbro toys from the 80’s and 90’s, the two brothers must have gotten some inspiration, which led to what you reminded us of here. Pretty cool, actually.
I have seen cleetus McFarland break one i personally don't think there's anything cleetus can't break i hope that boy never gets ahold of a m1 god only knows what he could destroy
My first thought is whether the Ripsaw can mount the Skyranger 30 or 35mm AAA turret. A good and mobile anti-drone and anti-helicopter 'Flakpanzer Junior' would certainly be welcome, especially if it can be remotely operated ir work semi-autonomous.
This tank is good for Hollywood movies But Can't withstand the contested battlefield scenarios No armour no protection no safety measures Even heavy tanks r struggling to survive in the current contested battlefield scenarios Loitering drones will kill it easily at current battlefield scenarios
Maybe it should have 5 attack drones that follow it,cuz that thing is fast,wth drones protecting it ,it would be effective but it would need it,with eyes on inside seeing whats out there ,if it was a robot thst would save on personnel!
Yep it did change everything, especially when they got blown up by the cheap drones even before reaching the battle field as the world witnessed in Ukraine. The Ukrainians were told not to use them by the Americans.
@@williamlloyd3769 The films production team bought an existing early model Ripsaw from Howe and Howe. They had a lot of trouble with it, and were frustrated. But, honestly, I never heard what caused the issues. Possibly it was the early prototype, and not fully developed, possibly it was hard to modify into the Gigahorse prop vehicle, possibly a Us vs Metric issue, or all 3 plus shit I never thought of. But it does indicate there may be weaknesses in the design.
If an emp or low yield nuke was used it would change the fair fight dynamics on the battlefield, you wanna go down that road we have just the thing for that.
Interesting and thanks, how much a copy? Any tank is subject to serious, possibly disabling, counter fire. So how much? The latest and greatest version of Arnold?
such propaganda !!! Hi-mars missiles are taking out tanks all over Ukraine. And Abrams tanks are suffering the same. I wouldn't want to be a tank driver
Sounds like a new type of war equipment. Unmanned Tracked Vehicle (UTV). Extremely cool. Many are suggesting that drone warfare is the future, and I would not disagree. Anything that saves lives is good in my book. I think I would want some of these in my group. Now we have drones that have their own drones.
This effort would be a great help in the Ukraine where the ground conditions change dramatically. The speed and weight getting the vehicle over mine fields without damage. A wheeled mud version would do great too. Seasonal restrictions are a reality in the Ukraine.
will it tho? will it REALLY???? i think not..... i think its all hype....... and if people... ALL PEOPLE started living under the DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE THEM DO UNTO YOU.. the world would be a much better place and weapons like this would be SUPERFLUOUS... AKA unnecessary!!!!!!!
As long as the Army doesn't think it has an autonomous fighting vehicle, this thing should prove useful. Used as a remotely operated vehicle, it would be able to perform a variety of tasks without putting a crew in danger.
But what impact will this have on the battlefield? Probably little or none, unless one of the big military industrial complex defense companies buys them out. They're not about to let a small company steal their pork.
Ukraine has shown that remote control and programmed drones and weapons can be hacked, there is always a counter to any new weapon so anticipating such counters is essential.
