{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/13/2011 8:43:17 AM
23
How come the military doesn't use RCXD's? *serious
I saw a clip from the battle of Falujah (spelling) from 2005 and in one video the marine walked into a room to clear it out and nearly got killed.
I was playing black ops and got an RCXD and instead of risking my life to clear out a room I just drove the robot inside and detonated beside the other team.
No military in the world uses anything like this...
-
They probably have a good reason for not doing so. I'm sure they've thought about it before.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Bryanesie Yes, I also often wonder why snipers don't quickscope their targets before taking the shot too.[/quote] no
-
Yes, I also often wonder why snipers don't quickscope their targets before taking the shot too.
-
Ah, gotcha. That makes a lot more sense then what I was thinking at first. Not the most military savvy person >< [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Recon Number 54 They're ordnance, meant to be used. If you got eyes on IFF, then you're under fire if they are hostiles. Back to square one, keeping your distance and hitting the bad guys when they can't hit you.[/quote]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] wallawalla1992 Wouldn't all you need to keep one out be either a door or a step, that doesn't sound like a very good weapon to have if it can be stopped that easily.. Also I'm sure there are more reasons such as weight issues.[/quote] It could be designed to get over minor obstacles like this. Moreover, it would be an extremely intimidating weapon to fight against from a psychological standpoint. You'd be risking your life to fight against a $3000 (or higher) hunk of electronics.
-
Wouldn't all you need to keep one out be either a door or a step, that doesn't sound like a very good weapon to have if it can be stopped that easily.. Also I'm sure there are more reasons such as weight issues. [Edited on 11.13.2011 1:03 AM PST]
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Shiro2809 Those would be way more expensive than the RCXD, yes? And you could get a positive IFF and then send in the car. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Recon Number 54 I suspect it has a lot to do with the rules of engagement requiring a positive IFF before using lethal force. Otherwise, why not just stand off and use artillery, mortars or SMAW?[/quote][/quote] They're ordnance, meant to be used. If you got eyes on IFF, then you're under fire if they are hostiles. Back to square one, keeping your distance and hitting the bad guys when they can't hit you.
-
Here is a clip of a real life situation where an RCXD could have been used. I would also like to note that Russians used dogs strapped with explosives against the Germans during WW2. But they ran out of dogs fairly quick as you can imagine. [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GoEsN6mDLfs[/url] [Edited on 11.13.2011 12:57 AM PST]
-
Those would be way more expensive than the RCXD, yes? And you could get a positive IFF and then send in the car. [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] Recon Number 54 I suspect it has a lot to do with the rules of engagement requiring a positive IFF before using lethal force. Otherwise, why not just stand off and use artillery, mortars or SMAW?[/quote]
-
Because the team entering would be waiting ducks for other enemy troops as they deployed the vehicle.
-
I suspect it has a lot to do with the rules of engagement requiring a positive IFF before using lethal force. Otherwise, why not just stand off and use artillery, mortars or SMAW?
-
Because this is real life.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] AIM DRUNK [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] KamikaZeGecko21 why don't [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] AIM DRUNK [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CYCLONES6 It's a huge waste of money.[/quote] not really the technology has long existed to make this possible, and the cost of the remote control car and modified grenade would be inexpensive It would also need a camera so the operator would know where to detonate the grenade, even still the cost compared to a life is very cheap.[/quote]Why dont you just throw a grenade in the building like it was designed for. [/quote] In the clip I saw the marines threw several grenades into the room to clear it out, but the terrorist were smart and hid in a fortified position and the poor marine came under fire from multiple AK-47's at close range :([/quote]Blow up the rest of the building.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] KamikaZeGecko21 why don't [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] AIM DRUNK [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CYCLONES6 It's a huge waste of money.[/quote] not really the technology has long existed to make this possible, and the cost of the remote control car and modified grenade would be inexpensive It would also need a camera so the operator would know where to detonate the grenade, even still the cost compared to a life is very cheap.[/quote]Why dont you just throw a grenade in the building like it was designed for. [/quote] In the clip I saw the marines throw several grenades into the room to clear it out, but the terrorist were smart and hid in a fortified position and the poor marine came under fire from multiple AK-47's at close range :( [Edited on 11.13.2011 12:51 AM PST]
-
well you see jimmy if we where to use rc cars that would mean where taking away toys from children did you know when you take away toys from children they cry? If where making children cry why not just send the crying children into the enemy base camp and let them get annoyed to death they will [i] obviously[/i] not shoot the child because he is a child and it will cost no money [i] seems legit[/i]
-
Because an EOD bot and MAV does the job better, and has extra functions.
-
why don't [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] AIM DRUNK [quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CYCLONES6 It's a huge waste of money.[/quote] not really the technology has long existed to make this possible, and the cost of the remote control car and modified grenade would be inexpensive It would also need a camera so the operator would know where to detonate the grenade, even still the cost compared to a life is very cheap.[/quote]Why dont you just throw a grenade in the building like it was designed for.
-
generic rc spy car + C4 = RC-XD
-
I mean, they could. Call of duty video games inspire military in tons of ways! They even made the SCAR- H from MW2. /Sarcasm
-
That's like asking why the Military doesn't use waterguns and gasoline as flamethrowers.
-
[quote][b]Posted by:[/b] CYCLONES6 It's a huge waste of money.[/quote] not really the technology has long existed to make this possible, and the cost of the remote control car and modified grenade would be inexpensive It would also need a camera so the operator would know where to detonate the grenade, even still the cost compared to a life is very cheap. [Edited on 11.13.2011 12:46 AM PST]
-
Because Black Ops is a crappy game thats why.
-
It's a huge waste of money.
