Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
@AbdulRa7eeM Because Aircrafts are not so much armored than a Tank, Anti-aircraft weapons like FIM-92 using HE with shrapnels to make much damage as possible on electronic and shape of Aircrafts to destroy it.FIM92 could only damage cameras on Tanks nothing seriously danger for Tank crew or machine.
Because aircraft need to be made of lightweight materials. (Aircraft design is a compromise of performance, weight, construction, etc), so they don't need a big warhead to destroy/damage them...Land vehicles don't have a huge focus on weight, so a good portion of their designs can use heavy materials as armor. They require missiles with bigger warheads to punch holes in them.
CIA supplied thousands of Stingers to the Pakistan ISI and Mujahidin in the 1980's. Many found their way to black market bazaars where anyone with $100,000 could buy one. Who knows how many terrorists used the missiles on innocent victims.
my pops used to work for a place, called Arral Industries in Ontario California, which manufactured the disposable "battery/coolant delivery" portions of the stinger missile system. to ensure that the high pressure coolant was safe to store at the intense pressures within the stainless steel tubing which was coiled around the battery cluster, he used to pressure test them up to 100,000psi until they burst, inside of a special boom chamber. they used to call him "boom boom."
Looks like the technology for remotely controlling a plane has been around for quite awhile. So...you could have remotely controlled a plane to, say, hit a building.
@khalid6591 For example. One theory is that the planes were filled with operatives, who got off somewhere and the planes, or their twins, were guided into the towers. It is a Theory, not a known fact. Until there is an independent investigation, no one will really know, and anyone who thinks about things will doubt the official story.
Not sure if all models have this, but I heard there's also a built in FOF system (Friend or Foe) meaning it won't lock and target US aircraft. Without the locking capability it's pretty much useless.
@HeildemKrieg More like 350 launchers and 500-1500 missile. It was very effective in the beginning of the war. However, after a few hinds were shot down, the Soviets changed tactics and began to place jammer and flares on their aircrafts. The accuracy would be much higher if they are used by properly trained personnel. Stinger had a much better result in Falkland.
Sigh I hate people who only know things from call of duty. I play cod but I actually shoot guns and the people that don't give me and others like me a bad rep
what i meant was that we don't keep active SAM sites all over the US, because it is not reasonable, if we were at serious risk of invasion then i am sure that no plane, boat, space ship, camel, jeep, tank, war elephant, would ever reach our boarders. I was just saying since we don't keep active guard over all our air traffic it is unfair to say we should have been able to shoot down the four planes hijacked on 9/11.
Stinger was the weapon system that pushed the Soviets out of Afghanistan. It was the only system that would knock down a HIND Attack Helicopter. It has a head on hit capability. My MOS was 16P/16S Redeye/ Stinger.
im not lying. Playing CoD dosent teach you anything about the guns. Caliber? Origin? Date they were first produced?
And do you really think you can hold 2 Winchester Model 1887's and fire them both at once? Ive held ONE and i have to use TWO hands. Holding TWO at once and firing them BOTH at the same time is fucking impossible without breaking your wrist (or arm).
Wow that is an amazingly detailed close-up of the targeting hardware... Now it makes sense to put the main sensor actuator and gyro counter-rotational servo in series with each other, eliminating several variable s from time consuming compensatory computation routines
Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
So before you think about buying one and using it against US aircraft, you might wanna grab something not made in the USA.
Soviet Union SAMs are not as good as it NATO counter-part. Example USSR SAMs required radar stations to track and destroyed their targets. Problem is that radar stations are easy prey for low-level and stealth bombers. Making USSR SAMs useless. While NATO SAMs have built in radars and can be manually guided by spotters. Also NATO troops carried heat-seeking missiles compare to Russian armed with RPGs. (FACT: RPGs are not good at shooting down armored attacks helis and is impossible to shoot jet.
@916ppl really? is that why Russian SAM's supplied to Egypt during its 1973 war with Israel turn the powerful IAF into scrap? or is that why the NATO and Israel are TERRIFIED about the prospect of Russia supplying Iran with the S-300 SAM system?
@samuraispirit88 Israel in the Yom Kippur War had only fighter/bombers. These airplanes are not designed for extreme low-level flying like the A10. Meaning the Egyptian radars can locate them very easily. Also Israel and other nation may be afraid that Iran will get the S-300. But with B-2s and missiles radar are no problem Example1991 Persia Gulf War. But, I was mistaken about USSR SAMS not having their own radar (You can shame me about that). They do but it is very easy to trick with drones.
@916ppl i'm not trying to shame you dude, i'm just trying to get you to get your facts stright. Actually man, the Israeli Air Force flew VERY LOW in order to avoid detection, yet the still got owned. The Gulf War was Iraq against 33 REALLY strong countries, so that example is up for debate. the new Russian air defence systems got their own radars, like the S-300 and up, so it'll be really tough for NATO and US air forces to shut them down usign old methods.
Russia and it's military is rusty like a box of old nails, 50% don't work in action. We don't have to shoot any planes down - they'll fall from the sky due to mailfunction.
@etphonehome2915 is that why the RPG-7, produced back in the 70's, and the AK-47, produced in 1947, work under EVERY CONDITION and have killed many American and NATO soldiers world wide while the state of the art American equipment jams after firing a few shots in Iraq and Afghanistan?
be real bro, if 50% of their weapons are crap, they wouldnt be a superpower
@martinwajda Yes, they possess a giant landmass, large population, massive natural resources, a big military (thats going through intensive upgrading btw), the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and the ability to launch satelites into space and such, so yes, I believe that Russia is still a Superpower, just cuz it doesnt invade countries like the US doesnt make it otherwise
@samuraispirit88 Please, Russia is a military power but not a superpower. They have no influence or even any allies. The US has both puppets and influence.Plus, Russia doesn't have respecdtable business deals with it's customers. They fail to deliver on time if at all. They have even been victim of Israeli instigated attacks by Georgia. IThe rising powers are Iran, China & India. All which could crush Russia and DO have allies. China has North Korea, Iran has latin nations and India has the USA.
@Molossian I would add that India has Russia as a very important ally, as well. If India and China went to war again, Russia would likely back India over China in every way. The Russians are wary of the Chinese.
Also, Iran is a long ways off from being able to crush Russia. Iran has influence in the middle east via Hezbollah and it's spy networks, but it cannot project power the way the major world powers can. They can't even refine their own fuel.
@azbadgahad India has the US and wouldn't use or neeed Russia. China could handle Russia in no length of time. Russia has serious money problems and military officials selling arms against government wishes not to. The mafia runs part of Russia's military and police force and they aren't loyal. How could Russia defend itself?? Iran could annex souther parts of Russia and Russia couldn't do much.
@Molossian I think they would need and would use Russia. The point is to have as many possible allies as you can. Since Russia is near bordering China, I'm sure it'd be a great and valuable asset. I have visited Russia myself. Their military is quite the force, I've seen Russian tanks lined up in the street. Russia also owns an intercontinental nuclear missile that can hold up to 12 100 megaton nuclear warheads.
@Molossian You quite are wrong. India have more extremely strong military ties with Russia. Their basic army, naval, and air forces are similar to those of Russia. Russia and India both are investing in the PAK-50.
i like how they start talking and nothing is really happening to the plane (i personally thought "this is underwhelming") then about twenty seconds in the plane bursts into flames and breaks up.
It's stupid to deny! Americans have shitty air defence! While Soviet Union developed over 20 different types of land based SAMs and thousands of units, americans have Patriot, stinger what else? How are they going to defend themself?
@Rileyman2rr Don't talk about things you don't know. Thanks to advanced long range SAM missiles Soviet Union achieved air superiority without even fighters. Telling these systems are shitty makes you stupid. I am not saying stinger is shit against some helicopters. I say you cant achieve air superiority with it. This is what is shitty air defence!
@kosiak10851 Ok, so who exactly did the soviet union actually fight on their own... unless my memory is failing only a bunch of tribal Afghans... your right they did achieve air superiority... untill the stinger started raping all of the Mig-24's then if i remeber correctly they left Afghanistan with their tail between their legs. but your right GLORY TO THE UNION SOVIET IT WAS THE GREATEST. which is why they still excist ... oh wait
@Rileyman2rr whats so funny here? Afghans have nothing to do with The Soviet Air Defence or fall of The Soviet Union. You just don't know history. OK, lets talk this way: americans lost vietnam war so their carriers are shit.
@kosiak10851 yeah it does give me three examples where the Soviet Union themselves used an air defense system to block an attacking nation and all i can remember is the shoot down of gary powers... and look up Matthias Rust, that is a perfect example of how extremely awesome the soviet air defense systems were. Now imagine if he had a nuke in there, there was nothing the Russkies could have done about it.
@Rileyman2rr Sept 11th was fail of american air defence bigger than any Rust. Now imagine these american soldiers running with stingers around trying to protect New York!
MANPADS will always be weapons of some insurgents who can shoot down one close aircraft but cant control air.
@kosiak10851 ah that is where you are incorrect. the 9/11 attack was not a breach of the airspace those planes were supposed to be there, they did not come in. also the United States does not keep an active air defense system for their borders, unlike the USSR. and yes a large passanger jet would be a very easy target for a MAN-P.A.D. if you had put them on top of buildings they wouldn't have done much good because the plane would have just landed somewhere else.
@kosiak10851 but that is beside the point. Now if the taxpayers of america had to pay for an internal air defense system of patriot missles and then something like september 11 happened, then i would yield the point that the US air defense systems are inferior.
@SuperRegisteredUser i know. thats all people do. i have that game but i knew about those guns before any of those games came out.
but ya. do the stingers have IFF tech or not?
1 more thing, poeple who play those games dont understand war. you cant just order in helis constantly or start bombing constantly or run out and spray. i dont think they even know that it costs billions for 1 missile like this or alot of money to arm and refeul things like tanks and helis
Could a direct hit from a Stinger take out a Hind? I'm very well aware the Afghans used them to counter Soviet air superiority but I am just wondering if ONE single hit would suffice. Thanks.
Ya, during battle I usually have to pull out my stinger and shoot down the harrier or chopper gunner. I prefer this to the javlin because it has more missiles.
Why are you fags talking about MW2 on this video? go find a fucking blog or go watch some MW2 clips dont look for the weapons that are in the game and then make fucking gay shitty comments about them! Fuckin Infinity Ward why could they just make some retarded fake space age guns.
@D1MIN1SH Thats true man. Like when you are doing a long range snipe, there is no variables you have to take in the game. Thats why I switched to battlefield bad company 2 for xbox360.
Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
hell ya! I use the stinger in MW2 to take down those pesky harriers!!! I always have a class called Air2ground with cold-blooded, slieght of hand pro, and scrambler pro. If somebody calls in a chopper i kill myself, change classes, and take it down... usually before it gets a single kill.
First Modern Warfare had Javelin's in the campaign mode. Love killin those tanks!
Javelin is cool too. CLU not re-usable tho.
I think all the COD and airsoft peeps are KickAss!!
to Dogoberto9 hey just use your brain man javelin more powerful then the stinger even in game they say that and even in the real world and javelin is way newer the the stinger stinger made in 1973 and javelin was made and tasted in 2006
we need to save afghan lives by giving modern weapons like surface to air missiles to knock out american air force. deny the americans air superiority, they will retreat immediately because on the ground their troops are very-very vulnerable without air support. help the afghan people to be free by giving man portable air defense systems(MANPADS).
@nerv0582 yeah when i was still in the corps, we used radios that were old as fuck so youd be suprised on how much ancient equipment we still use, believe it or not they are still pretty reliable.
@BIGBLAQFLUTE it entered so late because of testing , but secular armies in the united states, aswell as special operation forces were granted the ADF launcher
funny thing is, i was about to say something like "wow you would refer to mw2 on this video", but i was looking up these missiles for just the same reason... hahah
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
it only does that in modern warfare 2 so you will be able to shoot it. in the game it will lock on to locations to make it seem simpler. but in real life i think you have to lock on to a heatsource or vehicle or something.
This has been flagged as spam show
Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
Bombreaker3 3 weeks ago
i WOULD LOVE TO SHOOT DOWN THE GHETTO BIRD WITH THIS FUCKER!!!
Peta659 1 month ago
was this recorded with a house brick?
chezzylee 2 months ago
Why this missile is only for anti-air crafts and not land vehicles (tanks, armoured vehicles etc)?
AbdulRa7eeM 2 months ago
@AbdulRa7eeM
The warhead wouldn't do anything against an armored vehicle.
RetSquid 1 month ago
@AbdulRa7eeM Because Aircrafts are not so much armored than a Tank, Anti-aircraft weapons like FIM-92 using HE with shrapnels to make much damage as possible on electronic and shape of Aircrafts to destroy it.FIM92 could only damage cameras on Tanks nothing seriously danger for Tank crew or machine.
Talshet 1 month ago
@AbdulRa7eeM
Because aircraft need to be made of lightweight materials. (Aircraft design is a compromise of performance, weight, construction, etc), so they don't need a big warhead to destroy/damage them...Land vehicles don't have a huge focus on weight, so a good portion of their designs can use heavy materials as armor. They require missiles with bigger warheads to punch holes in them.
aussiebear22 2 weeks ago
0:02 *hit* uh...i'm ok i'm good!
0:17 ARRRGH!
Why is it that a lot of aircraft doesn't go down right away when hit? it almost look liked it was going to survive it before turning into a fireball.
blindga 2 months ago
no pilots were harmed in the making of this document
Stickerz100 2 months ago
I'll buy 5 to hit annoying aircraft that fly over my home and give me insomnia!
qwerty350501 2 months ago
I'll take two please! :)
DefconEast 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
america fuck yeah!!
13SmokeAlot 3 months ago
CIA supplied thousands of Stingers to the Pakistan ISI and Mujahidin in the 1980's. Many found their way to black market bazaars where anyone with $100,000 could buy one. Who knows how many terrorists used the missiles on innocent victims.
AccordGTR 4 months ago
@HeildemKrieg
wao what a view u have ............ to defend ones land or religion is terrorism.............you have prejediced and corrupted heads
musmansanda 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
my pops used to work for a place, called Arral Industries in Ontario California, which manufactured the disposable "battery/coolant delivery" portions of the stinger missile system. to ensure that the high pressure coolant was safe to store at the intense pressures within the stainless steel tubing which was coiled around the battery cluster, he used to pressure test them up to 100,000psi until they burst, inside of a special boom chamber. they used to call him "boom boom."
bonedustmunroe 4 months ago
4:12 WTF ???
quiteobserver 5 months ago 2
@quiteobserver It's a hit. I also thought that it turned that fast, but you can see a very slight trail from the target.
Stover36 5 months ago
The stinger is the coolest thing ive ever shot crazy -3
OpTicAs5a5sin 5 months ago
lol i saw the guy fly out on fire
TexanMonkey 6 months ago
ada all the way!
vicfirthify 6 months ago
This is why it is important to eject sooner than later.
ahz123 7 months ago
'
america is the best made stinger missile and did hit few ussr russia helicopters Mi-24 down few times,,,
Mi-24 is afraid of stinger missile
bestamerica 7 months ago
@bestamerica Not anymore.
clawbog2 1 month ago
effectively
MrConspiracyChannel 7 months ago
1:04 giant switchblade i hate these jokes but maybe it was chuck norris's
DmitriRussian 9 months ago
this must have been made when color first hit telivsion.
budrick3 9 months ago
This video makes you want to buy one....i skip buying a new car! I wanna a Stinger missile.
SirRetku 10 months ago 51
@SirRetku Lol you never know if a russian plane is gonna come but you always know a car is around your street :P
PET3RRULEZ 5 months ago
Music sets the mood :)
TheLibertyFreedom 10 months ago
Looks like the technology for remotely controlling a plane has been around for quite awhile. So...you could have remotely controlled a plane to, say, hit a building.
WEREFEAT 10 months ago
@WEREFEAT it was an inside job ? : ) peace
khalid6591 10 months ago
@khalid6591 For example. One theory is that the planes were filled with operatives, who got off somewhere and the planes, or their twins, were guided into the towers. It is a Theory, not a known fact. Until there is an independent investigation, no one will really know, and anyone who thinks about things will doubt the official story.
WEREFEAT 10 months ago
TANGO DOWN!!!
Superbowserfreak11 10 months ago
Not sure if all models have this, but I heard there's also a built in FOF system (Friend or Foe) meaning it won't lock and target US aircraft. Without the locking capability it's pretty much useless.
go0fy11137 10 months ago
@HeildemKrieg More like 350 launchers and 500-1500 missile. It was very effective in the beginning of the war. However, after a few hinds were shot down, the Soviets changed tactics and began to place jammer and flares on their aircrafts. The accuracy would be much higher if they are used by properly trained personnel. Stinger had a much better result in Falkland.
RaptureandZune 10 months ago 15
@HeildemKrieg Still better than most MANPAD from the same era.
RaptureandZune 10 months ago
GIVE THESE TO PEOPLE IN LIBYA
Mahdi7777777 10 months ago
@Mahdi7777777
Libya has/had many MANPADS...unfortunately nato flies usually above their height range.
brocalfur 4 months ago
should be used in libya
Djazeiry 10 months ago
What does the cage thing on the side do?
LoonyLooners 10 months ago
id rater have a igla
canadiangangsterno1 10 months ago
What a waste of a nice helicopter.
This is a sales promotion.
Ibringthetruth1 10 months ago
Is there a better quality, higher-resolution, version of this fine film?
eMGeeGFX 11 months ago
I would Love to shoot down the ghetto bird with this little bad fucker! ~)}> BOOM
Peta659 11 months ago
That thing has annoyed me so much in heli simulator games...
AwookieGaming 1 year ago
Sigh I hate people who only know things from call of duty. I play cod but I actually shoot guns and the people that don't give me and others like me a bad rep
chunxmkgee 1 year ago
get stung
killallwemust 1 year ago
it has counter-counter-measures lol
manosman97 1 year ago
what i meant was that we don't keep active SAM sites all over the US, because it is not reasonable, if we were at serious risk of invasion then i am sure that no plane, boat, space ship, camel, jeep, tank, war elephant, would ever reach our boarders. I was just saying since we don't keep active guard over all our air traffic it is unfair to say we should have been able to shoot down the four planes hijacked on 9/11.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
Lol XD
Codmodern2 1 year ago
Stinger probably has the most heli/aircraft kills of all man-portable launchers.
adobo777 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Stinger was the weapon system that pushed the Soviets out of Afghanistan. It was the only system that would knock down a HIND Attack Helicopter. It has a head on hit capability. My MOS was 16P/16S Redeye/ Stinger.
toyotaguyjeff 1 year ago
Comment removed
toyotaguyjeff 1 year ago
this quality on this video is slow like my grandmother
originalbrodyg420 1 year ago
DONT BITCH ABOUT MW2 THAT SHIT DOES GIVE US INFO ON THE GUN BECAUSE WE ARE DIGITALLY USING IT OURSELVES. SO STFU MW2 FTW.
deezo60 1 year ago
@deezo60 Most of that info is fake.
Stover36 1 year ago
@deezo60 Digitally using it yourself? AHAHHA!
You know NOTHING about a gun until you have held it in real life.
bigbob572 1 year ago
@bigbob572 liar
Yeti9638 1 year ago
@Yeti9638 uhh. no.
im not lying. Playing CoD dosent teach you anything about the guns. Caliber? Origin? Date they were first produced?
And do you really think you can hold 2 Winchester Model 1887's and fire them both at once? Ive held ONE and i have to use TWO hands. Holding TWO at once and firing them BOTH at the same time is fucking impossible without breaking your wrist (or arm).
bigbob572 1 year ago 2
@bigbob572 well then again they are sliced in half but whatever your wright
evildarktigershark 11 months ago
@deezo60 wow you really are a fucking idiot. a typical shallow dumbass.
0neofthem 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@deezo60 your just angry because you havent learned how to turn off CAPS lock
implode44 1 year ago
Wow that is an amazingly detailed close-up of the targeting hardware... Now it makes sense to put the main sensor actuator and gyro counter-rotational servo in series with each other, eliminating several variable s from time consuming compensatory computation routines
redq182 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser THANK YOU!
EvilRabbiMAn 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
So before you think about buying one and using it against US aircraft, you might wanna grab something not made in the USA.
MenOnBirthControl 1 year ago
Is there a high[er]-resolution version available of this fine ‘documentary’?
eMGeeGFX 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Thumbs up if you got to this video from Call of Duty =P
RuinShots 1 year ago
@RuinShots
^^ :D
TheFishkopf 1 year ago
@RuinShots thumb down.
maxwelltripp 1 year ago
@RuinShots, how do you mean?
eMGeeGFX 1 year ago
0:21 the human torch!!
deathbringer187 1 year ago
Soviet Union SAMs are not as good as it NATO counter-part. Example USSR SAMs required radar stations to track and destroyed their targets. Problem is that radar stations are easy prey for low-level and stealth bombers. Making USSR SAMs useless. While NATO SAMs have built in radars and can be manually guided by spotters. Also NATO troops carried heat-seeking missiles compare to Russian armed with RPGs. (FACT: RPGs are not good at shooting down armored attacks helis and is impossible to shoot jet.
916ppl 1 year ago
@916ppl really? is that why Russian SAM's supplied to Egypt during its 1973 war with Israel turn the powerful IAF into scrap? or is that why the NATO and Israel are TERRIFIED about the prospect of Russia supplying Iran with the S-300 SAM system?
check ur facts
samuraispirit88 1 year ago
@samuraispirit88 Israel in the Yom Kippur War had only fighter/bombers. These airplanes are not designed for extreme low-level flying like the A10. Meaning the Egyptian radars can locate them very easily. Also Israel and other nation may be afraid that Iran will get the S-300. But with B-2s and missiles radar are no problem Example1991 Persia Gulf War. But, I was mistaken about USSR SAMS not having their own radar (You can shame me about that). They do but it is very easy to trick with drones.
916ppl 1 year ago
@916ppl i'm not trying to shame you dude, i'm just trying to get you to get your facts stright. Actually man, the Israeli Air Force flew VERY LOW in order to avoid detection, yet the still got owned. The Gulf War was Iraq against 33 REALLY strong countries, so that example is up for debate. the new Russian air defence systems got their own radars, like the S-300 and up, so it'll be really tough for NATO and US air forces to shut them down usign old methods.
samuraispirit88 1 year ago
Russia and it's military is rusty like a box of old nails, 50% don't work in action. We don't have to shoot any planes down - they'll fall from the sky due to mailfunction.
etphonehome2915 1 year ago
@etphonehome2915 is that why the RPG-7, produced back in the 70's, and the AK-47, produced in 1947, work under EVERY CONDITION and have killed many American and NATO soldiers world wide while the state of the art American equipment jams after firing a few shots in Iraq and Afghanistan?
be real bro, if 50% of their weapons are crap, they wouldnt be a superpower
samuraispirit88 1 year ago
@samuraispirit88 USSR was a super power but today's Russia????
martinwajda 1 year ago
@martinwajda Yes, they possess a giant landmass, large population, massive natural resources, a big military (thats going through intensive upgrading btw), the largest nuclear arsenal in the world, and the ability to launch satelites into space and such, so yes, I believe that Russia is still a Superpower, just cuz it doesnt invade countries like the US doesnt make it otherwise
samuraispirit88 1 year ago
@samuraispirit88 Please, Russia is a military power but not a superpower. They have no influence or even any allies. The US has both puppets and influence.Plus, Russia doesn't have respecdtable business deals with it's customers. They fail to deliver on time if at all. They have even been victim of Israeli instigated attacks by Georgia. IThe rising powers are Iran, China & India. All which could crush Russia and DO have allies. China has North Korea, Iran has latin nations and India has the USA.
Molossian 1 year ago
@Molossian I would add that India has Russia as a very important ally, as well. If India and China went to war again, Russia would likely back India over China in every way. The Russians are wary of the Chinese.
Also, Iran is a long ways off from being able to crush Russia. Iran has influence in the middle east via Hezbollah and it's spy networks, but it cannot project power the way the major world powers can. They can't even refine their own fuel.
azbadgahad 1 year ago
@azbadgahad India has the US and wouldn't use or neeed Russia. China could handle Russia in no length of time. Russia has serious money problems and military officials selling arms against government wishes not to. The mafia runs part of Russia's military and police force and they aren't loyal. How could Russia defend itself?? Iran could annex souther parts of Russia and Russia couldn't do much.
Molossian 1 year ago
@Molossian I think they would need and would use Russia. The point is to have as many possible allies as you can. Since Russia is near bordering China, I'm sure it'd be a great and valuable asset. I have visited Russia myself. Their military is quite the force, I've seen Russian tanks lined up in the street. Russia also owns an intercontinental nuclear missile that can hold up to 12 100 megaton nuclear warheads.
xMountainDoox 1 year ago
@Molossian You quite are wrong. India have more extremely strong military ties with Russia. Their basic army, naval, and air forces are similar to those of Russia. Russia and India both are investing in the PAK-50.
916ppl 1 year ago
@samuraispirit88 We've evened out our Nuclear arms.
xMountainDoox 1 year ago
i like how they start talking and nothing is really happening to the plane (i personally thought "this is underwhelming") then about twenty seconds in the plane bursts into flames and breaks up.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
so jerky its barely watchable
beardization 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser lol
themesiasinrs 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser the stinger missile in call of duty is SO COOL
mastaguitar5150 1 year ago
no it should go like this CHUCK NORIS SHITS STINGER MISSLES
lilduner183 1 year ago
It's stupid to deny! Americans have shitty air defence! While Soviet Union developed over 20 different types of land based SAMs and thousands of units, americans have Patriot, stinger what else? How are they going to defend themself?
kosiak10851 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 fuck russia. USA or any 1st world countries/
majesticipod 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 Know how many times Iraq fired their Soviet air defenses at coalition forces in the 'no-fly zone'? Hundreds of times.
Now how many coalition aircraft were shot down by these 'superior' Iraq air defenses?
None that I know of.
NOW how many 'superior' Iraq air defenses were subsequently utterly destroyed?
Hundreds of them.
We must be doing something right.
ironhorzmn 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 the best defence is a good offence
finnnnnny 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 with a stinger LOOOOOOOOL na jks, they'll use there airforce probz.
minerofblood 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 then again, maybe the Americans just made one reliable, high-quality air defense system instead of 20 shitty ones.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
@Rileyman2rr Don't talk about things you don't know. Thanks to advanced long range SAM missiles Soviet Union achieved air superiority without even fighters. Telling these systems are shitty makes you stupid. I am not saying stinger is shit against some helicopters. I say you cant achieve air superiority with it. This is what is shitty air defence!
kosiak10851 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 Ok, so who exactly did the soviet union actually fight on their own... unless my memory is failing only a bunch of tribal Afghans... your right they did achieve air superiority... untill the stinger started raping all of the Mig-24's then if i remeber correctly they left Afghanistan with their tail between their legs. but your right GLORY TO THE UNION SOVIET IT WAS THE GREATEST. which is why they still excist ... oh wait
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
@Rileyman2rr whats so funny here? Afghans have nothing to do with The Soviet Air Defence or fall of The Soviet Union. You just don't know history. OK, lets talk this way: americans lost vietnam war so their carriers are shit.
kosiak10851 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 yeah it does give me three examples where the Soviet Union themselves used an air defense system to block an attacking nation and all i can remember is the shoot down of gary powers... and look up Matthias Rust, that is a perfect example of how extremely awesome the soviet air defense systems were. Now imagine if he had a nuke in there, there was nothing the Russkies could have done about it.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
@Rileyman2rr Sept 11th = Rust * many thousands deaths
kosiak10851 1 year ago
@Rileyman2rr Sept 11th was fail of american air defence bigger than any Rust. Now imagine these american soldiers running with stingers around trying to protect New York!
MANPADS will always be weapons of some insurgents who can shoot down one close aircraft but cant control air.
kosiak10851 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 ah that is where you are incorrect. the 9/11 attack was not a breach of the airspace those planes were supposed to be there, they did not come in. also the United States does not keep an active air defense system for their borders, unlike the USSR. and yes a large passanger jet would be a very easy target for a MAN-P.A.D. if you had put them on top of buildings they wouldn't have done much good because the plane would have just landed somewhere else.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
@Rileyman2rr The United States now has planes that can reach mach two or higher defending our borders. NORAD is quite the system, too.
xMountainDoox 1 year ago
@kosiak10851 but that is beside the point. Now if the taxpayers of america had to pay for an internal air defense system of patriot missles and then something like september 11 happened, then i would yield the point that the US air defense systems are inferior.
Rileyman2rr 1 year ago
the stinger missle looks like a torpedoe which never could fly :D impressing
AIVger 1 year ago
another futurastic gift of cold war.
soni2295 1 year ago
Errr call of duty is real life idiots!!!1!!!one!! Jokes jokes ^_^
jimmymcisnotme 1 year ago
Im tired of people commenting on people who bring up CoD on real videos ....
TheDeadApple 1 year ago 2
@TheDeadApple WOW I LIKE TO USE THE STINGER IN COD!!!!
jj10800 1 year ago
@jj10800
Thats nice?
TheDeadApple 1 year ago
Sting yo ass...!
schicktd 1 year ago
@St3V0able Hey man, u are most right, but Justin Bieber ARE Gay, 100% lol.
nerv0582 1 year ago
@St3V0able how are chinese invading australia, either way why would anyone even care and yes cod is not realistic
TH3aznEmperor 1 year ago
OmGzo0rzss i yoOsed TAHT in mudern warfaur too!!11one1! I keeled da pavelaow i wuss al liek PEW PEW PEW PEW then i sayED :D :D :D ;Dhappyface:D
DnBNIK 1 year ago
im tired of people posting comments about mw2 on real vids...its like thats the only thing they think about
blaneman2200 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser i know. thats all people do. i have that game but i knew about those guns before any of those games came out.
but ya. do the stingers have IFF tech or not?
1 more thing, poeple who play those games dont understand war. you cant just order in helis constantly or start bombing constantly or run out and spray. i dont think they even know that it costs billions for 1 missile like this or alot of money to arm and refeul things like tanks and helis
TheA55H013 1 year ago
Could a direct hit from a Stinger take out a Hind? I'm very well aware the Afghans used them to counter Soviet air superiority but I am just wondering if ONE single hit would suffice. Thanks.
go0fy11137 1 year ago
@go0fy11137
It's like asking if a man would die from a direct 9mm hit. location location location
Angelslayer007 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser call of duty gay it is nothing like war with the heart beat monter.
870Remington12 1 year ago
Justin Bieber is my hero.
techbbq 1 year ago
@SuperRegisteredUser Airsoft .fun. Call of duty. Gay.
Roflzmahwoflz 1 year ago
its cool how the missile flys streight into the exhaust of that landed but runing helicopter.
chipmunk3k 1 year ago
@chipmunk3k its ingenious alright as exhaust systems are always an achilles heel in protection vs ventilation
yascumbag 1 year ago
Ya, during battle I usually have to pull out my stinger and shoot down the harrier or chopper gunner. I prefer this to the javlin because it has more missiles.
cristowwal39 1 year ago
Why are you fags talking about MW2 on this video? go find a fucking blog or go watch some MW2 clips dont look for the weapons that are in the game and then make fucking gay shitty comments about them! Fuckin Infinity Ward why could they just make some retarded fake space age guns.
DragonOmegaX 1 year ago 2
Rolf.. i love how mw2 fails at makin its game realistic..
D1MIN1SH 1 year ago
@D1MIN1SH Thats true man. Like when you are doing a long range snipe, there is no variables you have to take in the game. Thats why I switched to battlefield bad company 2 for xbox360.
charger498 1 year ago
@D1MIN1SH Because video games are so realistic.
techbbq 1 year ago
its sad because reality is a game for some kids, cant stop talking about them
fucking disgusting
nn44g 1 year ago
Stingers will not be able to shoot down a US aircraft. Stingers have IFF subsystems and all US aerial vehicles have transponders that give off Mode 4 Signals in essence negating targetting data to the missle.
jigglypiggly 1 year ago
it sucks that we sold this to Iran
derekio137 1 year ago
hell ya! I use the stinger in MW2 to take down those pesky harriers!!! I always have a class called Air2ground with cold-blooded, slieght of hand pro, and scrambler pro. If somebody calls in a chopper i kill myself, change classes, and take it down... usually before it gets a single kill.
First Modern Warfare had Javelin's in the campaign mode. Love killin those tanks!
Javelin is cool too. CLU not re-usable tho.
I think all the COD and airsoft peeps are KickAss!!
dbothacrooked24 1 year ago
@dbothacrooked24 nobbody cares about youre stupid game fucking retarded cod fagget
yea youre a fucking no life gay that place stupid idiotic comments nobbody is interested in
dontmakemeMAD1990 1 year ago
@dontmakemeMAD1990 no need to talk shit about cod its actually a really popular game but its does get annoying when they talk bout it in real vids
HerveGamerDude 1 year ago
@dbothacrooked24 shut the fuck up
HerveGamerDude 1 year ago
@dbothacrooked24 ...nobody cares
blaneman2200 1 year ago
I remember this from 14m School haha Ft. Bliss First to fire
Carimm60 1 year ago
to Dogoberto9 hey just use your brain man javelin more powerful then the stinger even in game they say that and even in the real world and javelin is way newer the the stinger stinger made in 1973 and javelin was made and tasted in 2006
nevadausa2009 1 year ago
@nevadausa2009 javelin was used in iraq in like 2003 or sooner
reporter69692003 1 year ago
@ malaymercernary
Fuck you and fuck towel heads! I hope you get hit by a car and die.
axs811 1 year ago
kids
babyturtlex 1 year ago
choppy as hell
platypusone 1 year ago 11
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Make "ColdBlooded PRO" possible!
:D
HelmutHardcore 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
we need to save afghan lives by giving modern weapons like surface to air missiles to knock out american air force. deny the americans air superiority, they will retreat immediately because on the ground their troops are very-very vulnerable without air support. help the afghan people to be free by giving man portable air defense systems(MANPADS).
malaymercernary 1 year ago
@malaymercernary
1. 99% of Afghan civilians wouldn't even know how to use a ground to air missile.
2.The few that could would hardly knock out our air superiority.
billy01231997 1 year ago
in Cod for me the stinger is much faster and so much powerful than the javalin.
i prefer the stinger.:P
Dogoberto9 1 year ago
i use it too much at cod
TheCecino 1 year ago 2
yes the javelin locks too slow
bartjuhh12 1 year ago
dobre
mateuszz61 2 years ago
i want one
howthefagworks 2 years ago 2
The two best things of this video are the porno background music and the classic seventies 'ka-boo-booom' explosion sound for every single explosion.
barkon 2 years ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
if u HATE free prizes ignore the rest of comment
if u love FREE stuff, that is actually legit unlike other scams
you are looking for lockerz, its a web site where u can earn free stuff
check out my 2 videos, where i explain everything and do an unboxing showing proff
daniel2489 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
i have one of these and i take out harriers, attack helicopters, pavelows, AC-130s and chopper gunners with it.
BHAZ4WINGS 2 years ago
@BHAZ4WINGS
LOL ur playin MW2 ! xD
m4aks74u 2 years ago
Videogame nerd
mrpilot6786 2 years ago 5
:D MW2 freak
13SnOp 2 years ago 5
wow i bet you fags didnt even know what this wasbefore the game came out
2WorldWar2 2 years ago 5
what is they dont? ur a retard
bartjuhh12 1 year ago
it sounds like a TellSell commercial :')
"buy 2 stinger missiles today, and get an M16 assault weapon for free"
gamebuster800 2 years ago 3
Its kind of scary that USA had this system since 70's, like in Vietnam war.
nerv0582 2 years ago 17
Comment removed
rgd82abn 2 years ago
@nerv0582 yeah when i was still in the corps, we used radios that were old as fuck so youd be suprised on how much ancient equipment we still use, believe it or not they are still pretty reliable.
clipzngunz 1 year ago
@clipzngunz Made in U.S.A, I guess, lol
nerv0582 1 year ago
@nerv0582 haha true.
clipzngunz 1 year ago
@nerv0582
No. The Stinger entered service in 1981. U.S. involvement in Vietnam ended in 1973.
BIGBLAQFLUTE 1 year ago
@BIGBLAQFLUTE it entered so late because of testing , but secular armies in the united states, aswell as special operation forces were granted the ADF launcher
Littlemanto 1 year ago
@BIGBLAQFLUTE ADS srry typo
Littlemanto 1 year ago
Comment removed
Bratarsch69 2 years ago
Does the Javelin system also lock on a heat source because in MW2 it locks on just about anything
Lee2k4 2 years ago
funny thing is, i was about to say something like "wow you would refer to mw2 on this video", but i was looking up these missiles for just the same reason... hahah
ryanbradfordmusic 2 years ago
@Lee2k4 yes, it locks at heat sources like tanks or airplanes, but can also lock on buildings.
Silencer84 2 years ago
Buildings?.never heard that one before
rgd82abn 2 years ago 2
@rgd82abn
yes, it can lock on to structures using contrasts in the infrared image
Silencer84 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
it only does that in modern warfare 2 so you will be able to shoot it. in the game it will lock on to locations to make it seem simpler. but in real life i think you have to lock on to a heatsource or vehicle or something.
brandeezy108 2 years ago
This fuckin' owns helis on mw2
Guywhohasnosoul 2 years ago
Hell yes, i use it all the time. Pretty awesome thing
mrgamer81 2 years ago