У нас вы можете посмотреть бесплатно The $4 Billion Machine Gun Hunt (All Failed) или скачать в максимальном доступном качестве, видео которое было загружено на ютуб. Для загрузки выберите вариант из формы ниже:
Если кнопки скачивания не
загрузились
НАЖМИТЕ ЗДЕСЬ или обновите страницу
Если возникают проблемы со скачиванием видео, пожалуйста напишите в поддержку по адресу внизу
страницы.
Спасибо за использование сервиса ClipSaver.ru
The $4 Billion Machine Gun Hunt (All Failed) For 40 years, the U.S. military spent billions trying to replace one machine gun. Through four major programs and 10 weapon designs, challengers armed with plastic bullets, heat-adaptive systems, and revolutionary engineering all failed—until one finally landed a hit. From the $80 million LSAT program that invented polymer ammunition to the $4.5 billion NGSW contract, this is every program, every failure, and whether we actually fixed the weapon or just the paperwork. 📌 TIMESTAMPS 00:00 - The Billion-Dollar Gauntlet 01:06 - The Weight Problem (LSAT 2004) 02:05 - Polymer Bullets vs. Reality 03:21 - LSAT's Fatal Flaw 04:19 - Knight's Armament - Not Radical Enough 05:29 - The Upgrade Instead of Replace 06:23 - The Marine Corps Breaks Away (IAR) 07:41 - The Three That Failed 09:35 - The M27 Controversy 10:40 - The M27 Reality 11:34 - The Armor Penetration Crisis 12:24 - NGSW - The Real Threat 13:10 - Textron's Chaotic Failure 14:16 - General Dynamics' Thermal Trap 15:40 - SIG Sauer's Bi-Metallic Solution 17:04 - The Irony - Weight Got Worse 18:16 - SIG's Monopoly Problem 18:46 - Did We Win? 🎯 KEY TAKEAWAYS LSAT spent $50-80M on polymer ammunition incompatible with M4 rifles Army upgraded old M249s for millions instead of buying replacements Marine Corps M27 IAR cost $29.4M but never fully replaced the SAW NGSW finalists: Textron eliminated for ergonomics, General Dynamics for thermal problems SIG won $4.5B contract but XM250 ammo weighs 27.1 lbs vs M249's 17 lbs—capacity traded for penetration SIG now supplies M17/M18 pistols, XM250, XM5—single point of failure risk 📂 SOURCES & RESEARCH Data sourced from U.S. military procurement records, GAO reviews, NGSW contracts, Congressional budgets, and DOD acquisition reports. Specifications verified through DVIDS, Wikipedia, and defense publications. ⚠️ DISCLAIMER Educational purposes only. Based on publicly available sources and official military documents. Analysis represents research-based perspectives on procurement programs. Not professional advice. Creator assumes no responsibility for errors or omissions. 📽️ CONTENT CREATION PROCESS Original production combining independent research and documentary storytelling. AI narration (ElevenLabs). Visuals: DVIDS public domain footage, Wikipedia images, AI-generated graphics, selectively sourced imagery under fair use. Edited in CapCut with transitions, annotations, and visual analysis.