Military Experts Rate 70 Military Battles In Movies And TV | How Real Is It? | Insider

field, the Army still has a sepa

rate

cap for the drill sergeant. It's called a bush hat. A-left, a-left, right, left. ♪ There she was walking down the street ♪ ♪ singing do wah diddy diddy dum diddy do ♪ That part where the character starts singing that diddy bop, it's interesting that most of the cadences, that's actually where they come from, right? Popular tunes, R&B music, I mean, even children's songs. Even my own voice has been harnessed in a cadence in the Gatorade commercial singing the cadence of hard work. ♪ Work, work ♪ ♪ Hard work ♪ So these guys, you know, they're jumping on the bandwagon, throwing the diddy bop in there at the same time.

Razzle Dazzle! Cabin for two, three, four! Cabin for two, three, four! Yeah, that's not happening. However, in the Army, in what we call advanced individual training, where those training periods range from six weeks to six months, maybe even a year, drill competitions and ceremonies are often used to continue to motivate those individuals. who have the longest training periods. But it's not as likely in basic combat training because we focus on shooting, moving, communicating, and treating ourselves and others on the battlefield. I would have to say a four. He locates a wounded soldier, represented by a doll.

You will then need to transport him to the emergency field hospital. There's a lot going on there so far. When it started, it was definitely something you would see in recruit training. You know, many women leaders are now in senior leadership positions, something that hadn't happened for many years, until the

military

began to

real

ly open up the infantry ranks to our female leaders. An aggressor team will try to stop you. They are all waiting for the rangers training and can't wait to capture you. According to the information and instructions they were given, it is actually advanced individual training.

You know, medical training. They're not going to be as complex with a mission that would be so deep, and that was evident when I saw them there in the river, because the risk of, you know, maybe someone drowning or something else with all that equipment on them. , then not many people will want to put a recruit in that type of environment. Again, the risk factors would not be something you would see in recruit training, but definitely something very similar in terms of challenges when it comes to the

military

. You know, the Marines have a Crucible and the Army has something called The Forge.

Very similar, in the final test of all the training they receive during recruit training. And there are medical lines where they might have to treat a victim or transport them, as you saw here, to

real

ly see if all the training has gotten to the point where they're confident that these people can leave and go to their next destination. assignment. I have to give it a five for realism. ♪ Casey Jones was a son of a b---- ♪ ♪ Casey Jones was a son of a b---- ♪ Hazing is something that, again, has never been accepted, but it happens. This represents an environment where there is still initial entry training or initial military training, but it is an Officer Candidate School.

Typically, officer candidates are a little more mature, have been in the military for quite some time, and have reached the enlisted ranks. There are levels of hazing that may be more acceptable in that environment than in recruit training. So there was a mandate that provided leadership across all branches to come up with progressive ways, if you will, to attack and confront hazing. And whether it was reporting, like in the military, you know, not in my squad, to hold not only the leaders accountable, but also each other. No sir! Drill Sergeant: DOR! I will not resign! Well, then you can forget it!

You are out! Do not do it! There are about two or three layers of checks and balances so you don't have that rogue DI or rogue drill sergeant who might take something personally as seen in this clip. Because of the flexibility and the things that happen at Officer Candidate School versus what happens in recruit training for initial training, I would say it's probably around a seven. Okay, Shirley, you can leave them now. Weight training has always been important in the military to support body weight. And in some cases, you may have to lift, carry, or drag another person.

Sand buckets and using them as weights are much less expensive than purchasing weights for each Marine. But then they get the same physical exercise. Exercise Instructor: See the jab? Outside? Straight to the body once again. Working with the blade. They were doing combatives, right, with the boxers, and then the instructor showed them hand-to-hand combat with the knife, because every marine, every soldier, every person who joins the army is a fighter first, right? Therefore, pugil stick training is one of those ways that you instill that confidence in the individual and his ability to stand his ground. And it's also fun to watch.

I'd say it's about a seven. Greetings everyone, I'm Nicholas Moran. I came in as an armor officer for M1 tanks and then became an M3 Bradley. He currently works as a civilian vehicle historian, primarily for World of Tanks. The Ripsaw, which was basically a tracked toy for people to ride, looks just like it does in the movie here. Because it had such a light weight ratio and so powerful, the thing is incredibly fast and incredibly agile, which of course attracts the attention of the military, well, wait a second. We have this vehicle that can go anywhere very, very fast.

Can we do something with that? But the variant the Army has been looking at lately is actually a robotic combat vehicle. I think it's the RCVM, and it's being wired like the M5, and on top, as shown in the clip, is a remote weapons station. You're driving on ice and those don't look like ice tracks. Believe it or not, there are actually ways to get more grip on a tracked vehicle on ice. It's anything from snow chains, which were used in World War II, to these days, you can have claws where you take off some pads and basically put cleats on the track.

This thing goes pretty fast performing its various maneuvers on the ice, and that's questionable in this context. I can't think of any reason, other than adhesion, to trace why a tank would have a grappling hook attached. The Lambo at the point where they connect is basically underwater, and that provides more resistance than this thing can carry. Well, that's your point of realism. The door opened instead of getting the Lambo out. I'm going to be generous. I'm going to give it a point because it has clues. And I'm going to give him a point because he pulled the door instead of the whole Lambo, so I'm going to give him a two.

You may have seen that the Americans had someone standing behind them firing the .50 caliber. The .50 caliber was originally used on American vehicles as an anti-aircraft weapon. And the reason it's on that external mount on the back is that it's a lot easier to aim up if you're standing on the rear deck and then aim up, rather than trying to stick your head out the hatch and such. Once you set Low from the side and you can't even use the scope. Sherman! One of the things Sherman was very good at was showing up when a tank was needed, and they didn't usually go one by one or two by two.

They used to walk in groups of five and seventeen. Yes, of course, in a tank versus tank duel, it was not necessarily the best. For an infantryman who is under heavy attack, he doesn't care if the best tank in the world shows up, as long as the tank that shows up a) actually arrives, and b) is good enough to deal with any of the infantryman's problems. . . Then you'll notice that the Germans don't really have tanks, which was a problem the Germans had in World War II, is that their industry just wasn't up to the standards of the Americans or the Russians.

So what we have here are a lot of assault guns and tank destroyers. There it looks like a Marder, or at least a representation of one, a Sturmgeschütz, which is an assault weapon, and a Jagdpanther. The Jagdpanther is the only one that poses a serious threat to an allied vehicle. Why didn't the Jagdpanther just sit there and attach its extremely tough frontal armor to the Shermans? Well, you could do that, but then you would probably now be placing your weak armor on the flank of the American infantry, who are equipped on the scene with bazookas, anti-tank rocket launchers.

The Germans are now flanked and very sensibly immediately abandon the attack and begin to retreat. This is the best you can get on celluloid or in digits. If there's ever going to be a 10 for "rating a tank battle", this is probably it. The tanks represent Saint-Chamond. There is only one in the world. It is in the French national tank museum in Saumur. Now, those in the know will look at the wheels and realize that the vehicle is based on a BMP or MT-LB, which are Soviet Cold War vehicles. At this point in the war, we're talking late 1918, the Germans are very familiar with tanks, but you'll still want to shoot them for a couple of reasons.

One is that if the tanks accompany the infantry, well, you will have an effect on the infantry and perhaps suppress them to the point that the tanks advance on their own. Secondly, the tanks were not the most robust at that time. There was a problem known as spatter, especially when tankers once wore a type of chain mail in front of their face with goggles to stop bullet bits entering the gaps in their armor. Finally, it's psychological. It makes you feel so much better to do something, even if it's a useless gesture. The first tank guns of the First World War would generally have been converted artillery pieces or, very often, naval guns.

The big problem you are going to have getting them closer is called depression. So there's a stop to how far down the gun will be pressed, and that determines how close you can get to the enemy trench before you have to stop attacking them. To date, the ability to cross ditches in meters, that is, how many meters of ditch can be crossed, remains a criterion. The idea that you can cross it without collapsing it, well, that depends on whether you want to collapse it or not. So even as late as the Iraq campaigns, a tank would drive up to a fortified enemy position, turn in place, and bury the people inside.

And it's one of those unfortunate realities where tanks basically have many ways to kill you, and tracks are one of them. You'd think that a hand grenade wouldn't do much good these days. The tracks on the Saint-Chamond were basically for my entire tractor, so they weren't as battle-resistant as a modern vehicle would be. In fact, the armor is so thin that many heavy bullets, even developed rifle bullets with an armor-piercing core, could penet

rate

these early tanks. This is eight and a half, maybe nine. I might quibble with a few things, but overall it gets the point across.

Oh well. Then Rambo got into his, I'll call it T-72. Actually it isn't, but the helicopter here represents a Hind. I think it's actually a Puma, but the Hind, the Mi-24, was a combat helicopter that still has troop-carrying capabilities, as well as carrying a lot of rockets and missiles and being heavily armored. It's basically a flying tank, for lack of a better term. Wait, is he driving or is he shooting? I can only think of one tank that is fully capable of fighting with a single crew member, and that is the Swedish Strv 103, commonly known as the S tank.

The driver also acts as a gunner, so you are supposed to be accompanied by anti-aircraft vehicles , since their job is to defend you from aerial threats. So our enemy is in an attack helicopter, a gunship, and has missiles on the tips, probably AT-2 Swatters, which are effective from several kilometers away. And instead, he's firing unguided rockets at the front of the Rambo tank. Why don't you just fly in behind and fire the rockets at the engine cover or the rear turret, or you know, somewhere that will actually cause damage? And so the enemy pilot dies as his stupidity deserved.

Officially, if you must charge towards a plane, do so at an angle. You should not only aim for the lead, but also the distance change at the same time. Whereas if you're charging directly at it, you're simplifying the problem for the plane coming toward you. You don't need to worry about aiming. It has a tank, so I'll give it one. Fire. The premise of an ambush in an urban environment by armored vehicles is not unheard of, but the idea of ​​armored vehicles operating in an urban environment without infantry support is usually questionable. Panthers are not very suitable for close range fights.

They would really excel on the Eastern Front, well, in the steppes of Ukraine, for example, with nice long lines of fire. That said, they canget away with it in this context because they know that the enemy is a single tank without infantry. Oh look, you're walking through a building again, except this time you've done one thing right. It has the turret crossed at the rear. I mentioned it before, you don't want to walk through a building if you can avoid it. In this case, I guess they couldn't, because they're being shot at. And if you're going to pass, turn your turret and you'll stay safe.

And what you can see here is that the T-34-85 has a very neat cross handle, so it performs two functions. In this case, you can see that you have it in manual mode, turning, as opposed to electric mode, where you just turn the handle 90 degrees. However, maybe the gunner just doesn't know, because in the movie, it was a found tank. Even I, when I first got on a T-34-85 and try to see where the second control lever is, I can't find it. This is quite feasible. When facing the Panther at this close range, the T-34 crew now has a choice.

You can flee or try to attack. Now, I would probably agree with crew 34 on this for two reasons. One, the Panther was looking completely in the wrong direction. And the other thing is that Panthers aren't the easiest thing in the world to kill, unless you can get around them or behind them. And in this case, they are already behind them, so why not participate? But the only thing I could have done differently was to back up two or three tanks and aim the gun at the engine cover. It would be a more guaranteed kill than trying to aim for the turret ring.

So the explosion was actually a little faster than what would actually happen. Generally speaking, when a tank is hit, it takes a couple of seconds, and those are the seconds that make the difference between life and death when you exit a vehicle. Although in reality, the net difference for the crew is academic. They are basically toast. In this context, I don't know, maybe a seven. The film is set during the time of the Yemeni civil war. Actually, it's still ongoing. The movie was made in Morocco, so you have the M60s and the T-72s. So the exact nature of the tanks found in Yemen isn't quite there, but hey, for movie purposes, it makes the point.

There are certainly western and eastern tanks in the area. Alpha Tank, attack from the right! Hongxu! Turn 20 degrees left, hurry up! So what I have here is a VIC-1 CVC, combat vehicle crew, helmet. And the reason why you would want to wear a helmet even if you are inside the tank is very simple: you are being thrown around and there are a lot of sharp, pointy things sticking out of you while you are being thrown around. , you don't want to hurt your head. And of course you also have the dust goggles, because the tanks throw a lot of dust at you.

You don't have a windshield. If you're going 40 miles per hour, there's still enough wind for you to notice, so you should also wear a pair of goggles. It's good to see that the armor actually works. So what happened there is explosive reactive armor with bullet impact. So, those bricks that you see, and what they generally consist of, although this is an oversimplification, are a couple of pieces of metal sandwiching a piece of explosive, and that when a bullet hits it, it explodes and destabilizes it or destabilizes it to in the extent to which the main armor belt behind can stop it.

Turn right! Nan Xia, get ready! Fire! You have a couple of problems. First of all, if the entire turret system is offline, then the tank still rocks a little. It may not seem like much, but it will be swingy enough that you won't be able to hip fire a 125 at a point target like a tank like that. Secondly, he is literally shooting from the hip and watching you. I don't see why I couldn't continue using the scope. Then he can pull the trigger himself. Sand storms happen. In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, there was one that basically shut down the war for a couple of days.

Well, your big problem with a sand storm is the air filters. Then the sand will get into the air filters and clog them very quickly. However, in this context, I don't think they had much of a choice, because being chased by a platoon of M60s, they were probably going to die anyway, so why not head into the sandstorm and hope for the best? ? So I think seven is probably fair. I'm not even sure where to start. I'm trying to think of some reasonable military context in which this vehicle could exist. The US military has one vehicle, the M1117, which is a derivative of the former Vietnam LAV-100.

It's basically a huge armored 4x4 with a turret on top for use by military police. I'm sure they wouldn't mind something like this. Generally speaking, convoys, due to the nature of the roads, tend to be in a column rather than in a row as in the shot here. You have several options, depending on how many vehicles you have, how far apart you want the vehicles to be. Because the idea is that your lead vehicle is far enough in front of whatever is protecting the main body of the convoy. So with only three vehicles, you're a little limited in what you can do, but typical will be maybe two in the front, then the main asset, and then one in the back.

Cannons are not common, but they exist. You can also sometimes find them mounted as experiments in tanks, but they are basically a waste of space and weight, which is why you don't see them in tanks. In terms of missile launchers, yes, missile launchers on armored vehicles exist. This particular lift of the 4 by 4 is probably closer to a BRDM anti-tank system, but it is actually for anti-armor purposes, not anti-aircraft. But hey, I guess when it comes to Batman, anything goes. I don't have anything. Zero. I'm sorry. No. The Germans seem to be equipped with Pak 40. It was a very good anti-tank gun, 7.5 cm caliber, definitely a valid threat against an M4.

Antitank! HE.! Cross to the left. Cross to the left! That was a doctrinal fire order. Now, the reason I know this is because they actually sent me the script to film. But that's basically alert, aim and execute command in abbreviated fire command. Fire commands in World War II were not as regimented as they are today, but the fundamentals remain the same. You have an argument. Do you want to advance across open terrain as a full platoon or do you want to jump in sections? In this case, because of the amount of infantry they are trying to provide cover, I can perhaps understand why they went like a full platoon in line.

But it's also a very, very open and long field, so perhaps it was necessary for the entire platoon to advance in a line simply to be able to see the objective. Another weapon, who sees it? Someone may wonder: how can a Pak 40 fail at such a close range? You'll be surprised what stress will do to you. So studies have been done and the reputation of the 88 is such that it is not missing. In reality, they are firing 20 rounds to get a single kill, because the stress of combat is such that you are not calm and focused at a shooting range when you are doing scientific tests.

It's, "Oh God, I'm about to die." Let's turn them on. Come on. Let's clean it up. That scene is basically the reason I became an oilman. A line of tanks, with all machine guns firing. A single tank is considered to have firepower roughly equivalent to an infantry platoon, because you have the heavy machine gun on top, you have a coaxial machine gun, you have a bow machine gun, and, by the way, you have a cannon. That's a lot of firepower for a single vehicle, and you can imagine the sheer suppression and psychological effect that comes from this, let alone the lethal effects.

I know there were people who didn't like that I gave the last "Fury" a nine, but I give this one a nine too. I can't get elevation and he knows it. So this was a real problem in Afghanistan, and it's a mountainous country, is that their tanks, which were really designed for open warfare on the plains of Germany, can't get high enough. So what the Soviets ended up doing was developing a variant of the ZSU-23-4 anti-aircraft gun, the Shilka, called the Afghani. So they would use them in conjunction with tanks to provide that short range, high elevation security that Daskal here is having trouble with.

The actual effect of hitting the gun tube will not be the petal effect as seen here. That's for visual effect. What you'll actually get is a very small hole going through the gun tube, but it's still bad enough to have disabled the gun. The grenade will not have separated the tracks, so I must conclude that it was the rocks, but it is not impossible for rocky terrain and perhaps a less experienced driver to tilt your track in such a way when turning that it becomes trapped with rocks between the tracks. wheels and tracks and breaks the track pin, and that throws the track and loses it.

This scene is probably seven to eight. My name is Nicholas Irving. I am a former US Army special operations sniper. I am also known as The Reaper for my 33 confirmed kills in Afghanistan. Eve: Maybe I have a chance. Absolutely not. She is abrupt. As if she had no support. It's about putting in the effort to make that shot. And that gun, well, yeah, that's it, no. The Olympic Arms K23B is what it is. That weapon literally has an accuracy of up to 50 meters. That distance appears to be, at most, a couple hundred meters. Put it back in the case and go back and get a different one.

It is not clean. I repeat, I do not have a clean shot. Yeah, I don't think he had any clean shots. In the military, a clean shot would be not hitting, injuring, or killing something you didn't intend. If your target is one of those two men, that bullet, you know, is 5.56. He'll plow through the bad guy and potentially hurt or kill the guy he's trying to help or save. M: I said take the photo. Can't. I can hit Bond. Take the damn shot! If they force me to shoot, I will pull the trigger, but I am not going to guarantee anything.

Fortunately, the train is coming towards her, instead of moving left or right. That eliminates a lot more math behind taking a shot. When it gets closer or farther away from you, it's just a matter of aiming above the target or a little bit below the target, rather than, you know, aiming in front of it and having that guy essentially run towards the bullet. I would rate it as one. It's just not happening at all. That little tactical pause to take a deep breath before the shot was really good. To be more precise, you basically need to be calm, and one of the easiest ways to calm your body right before an injection is to simply breathe deeply and get the blood circulating.

He would have been more square behind the rifle, instead of having his legs out to the side like that. Maybe I squatted or kneeled and put my weight behind the gun. That way, when you move back, it's more of a backward movement and not this movement. You'll basically get it just by your body alignment and the way you hold the rifle. Mike: There you go. Yes, I think it was smart of him to let the vehicle get close to him. Everyone thinks that as a sniper we want the longest and furthest shots, but ideally you want the closest ones, just because it makes your job so much easier and it's almost like you're 100% guaranteed to hit.

But with that, if I'm protecting someone and I shoot at the vehicle a few meters away from him, the moving vehicle is still going to hit the guy. I don't like that the car did a triple axle, like 20 feet from the guy. That's not like that at all. The only moving vehicles I shot at were machine guns. And I've never flipped a car. They usually just crash into a wall or crash into another parked car or just go off the road into the desert. I would give it a six. The only thing that makes me back away or give it a lower number is that the sniper waits for the car to get closer.

I mean, as for it being a high-precision sniper rifle hidden like a flute, I don't think so. There are many important things about a sniper rifle that make it accurate, but the barrel is really important, and most sniper rifle barrels are fluted and float. There is no interference between the barrel and the stock of the gun, so as not to interfere with the harmonics when firing. That flute looks like a continually long, very long object. It's probably accurate, maybe at the distances it shoots, but I also don't know what caliber it's shooting at. But it's Tom Cruise, so it's probably very accurate.

It would give the sniper the best position. Whatever it's in, that little room or the designs on the walls, I think that really gives it an edge, and it's almost like shooting through a lagoon. It's like a tactic snipers use overseas, where you make a small hole in a wall or something and a sniper steps away from the wall and shoots through that hole to hit an object outside. The guy with the glasses on, well, he's not actually in a hidden position, but I guess he's using hisoutfit so that it does not stand out as little as possible.

The worst position, Tom Cruise would say. Any sniper rifle can be suppressed, even up to .50 caliber sniper rifles. You will still hear a noise. It sounds like a clap, a loud clap, or if you took a ruler and slammed it on a desk. Unless you use subsonic rounds, which I may be using in this case, where I could see that no one else would hear anything. In reality, shooting lights is extremely difficult to do. Sometimes that was one of our things abroad. When an assault team goes into a building, they want the lights to go out to darken it, and that's actually quite difficult because it erases everything, and it's hard to find exactly, I guess, where the middle is.

I sat down. I'll give it a five. Those shots are, you know, possible, but I don't think this scenario, the setup is that realistic. I grew up watching this movie. It's one of the reasons I wanted to become a sniper. Each sniper has his rifle and ghillie suit. What it essentially does is break the contour of the human body and imitate or make you look like a bush or foliage. But it's not just the ghillie suit that allows you to camouflage yourself. What you'll really want to do is put a bunch of natural vegetation on the ghillie suit so that you look more like the natural environment, rather than just this big pile of ghillie suit.

Sniper: Three to five in the legs. You have the observer and you have the sniper. The observer is the one who does not pull the trigger and is holding or using a telescope. Through it, it looked like a red dot camera or something, and that's not what it looks like. Or you will have a reticle that mimics or is similar to what the sniper uses. These million points or lines in radians will give you the distance and will be able to track where the bullet hits. He is moving. Sniper: 650. Hit me. Being a sniper, between 80% and 90% of your job is observation.

In reality, it is very rare for a sniper to have the opportunity to pull the trigger. Most of our material is limited to transmitting information, observing things, taking photographs and telling commanders what is happening on the ground. So you can be out there for as long as the job needs you. I think everything he did there was good. It looks like he's using an M24 sniper rifle, it could be, or something similar, a variant, but they are good up to about 800 meters. At 650 yards, that's not it, it's far, but it's not that far for a sniper.

And a body shot, which is what I would normally aim for, was perfect. That's all you're going to do at that distance. My only problem is that he would probably have something soft under his rifle, maybe leave a backpack or something to rest it on. That helps with harmonics and getting the rifle to bounce completely away from you. I'll give it a seven. I was going to give it an eight, but a seven because the sniper scope and reticles and all that just didn't make any sense. Staying still when attacked by a sniper is almost a death wish.

It's only a matter of time before he comes up with something that will make those bullets hit. Running in a zigzag pattern and leaving as fast as you can is probably your best option. To prevent an enemy from coming in and doing what just happened here, sneak up behind you, in sniper school they don't teach you more than two shots. With two or three shots, your sniper skin will be burned. The ideal would be to move to a new location. Once you have a good sniper hideout set up, the chances of you getting out after the second or third shot are slim.

But there are countermeasures to discourage people from entering that sniper hideout. For example, for us, we could set up a claymore or some booby traps or something behind us, or even a guy with a machine gun usually watches our back. Actually, that wasn't that bad, and it's nighttime without night vision, so I'll give it to them. We hit targets at night, but the distances are extremely close. We had a sniper scope that was mounted with a PVS-14, I believe, which is a night vision accessory that goes on the front of the scope. Bolt guns, bolt rifles, they jam all the time, especially in dusty conditions.

That bolt pistol, when you remove it, is exposed to the elements. And it's a slower process compared to a semi-automatic process, where the bolt returns extremely quickly. Therefore, it is more prone to collecting dust and things of that nature that could cause it to get stuck. Man, this is getting tough. I don't know. I'd give it a six because, realistically, filming at night like that, I could see that you missed a lot. I have hesitated to do this when a sniper pinned me down in Afghanistan and took off my helmet. If that's your last resort and all you're trying to do is locate a sniper's position, I probably would have placed my helmet on the tip of my gun and hung it, rather than throwing it away.

Maybe you'll need it for later. But there's no way the enemy sniper would have hit that. For example, in World War II, snipers often used trees to hide and shoot, and there is really no benefit to hiding in a tree. Once they discover you, all they have to do is focus all their weapons on that tree and cut it down. Hidden under the tree or in the tree hole, where some of them get hollowed out, I could see that. But I'm afraid of bugs, so that's not for me. As far as shooting when he did, nine times out of 10, if they send a sniper, it's to keep an eye on their guys and make sure nothing happens to them.

But if we're already engaging targets and they're already shooting at us, then anything moving on that opposite end that's a threat or has a weapon will be shot. So, yeah, he had every right to shoot some bullets at this guy. I would have done it too. I'd give it a nine, only because I've been in a situation where I debated taking off my helmet and using it as a decoy. Isaac: I don't know! So, I was a technical advisor on the set of this movie and I also played the dead guy that he got the radio from.

I should have won an award for it. The best dead man of all time. But that sand was real. We were really in the desert and it was brutal. It's extremely difficult to aim, we call it a blackout, where it's like a semi, small, I guess, dust storm that came up, so you can't see anything. So you definitely won't be able to make a shot, especially at the distances you travel with so much dust floating around, obscuring your vision. Isaac: Give me maximum plus four! Six thousand correct! I'm not going to say that it's impossible to take out an enemy sniper hiding among things like that.

The most difficult thing the good sniper will have to do is locate it. From what I remember, I remember it was over 1,000 meters away, which is extremely, extremely far to conduct a counter-sniper operation. The sound of the rifle that John Cena is firing in the movie is not what it sounds like in real life. This sounds like a semi-automatic rifle with a silencer or something. In real life, that weapon is just a big thunderous bang, a big explosion. The way he was shooting it in the movie, it's like it's a semi-automatic, instead of him opening the bolt every time and the sound goes off.

Did you catch it? Please tell me you caught him. Yes, he was dead from the beginning. For example, shooting in an open area and a sniper is watching you, there's really nothing you can do about it unless you get up, take a chance and run. Simply walking away slowly wouldn't work. He'll just watch you crawl and decide when to shoot anyway. So it's a lose-lose situation. In this scene here, I don't think I worked that day, so... No, I don't have much control, but I would rate this scene as... oh god, I'm doing this to myself.

I'm going to give it a five. I don't know if I would feel comfortable taking that photo through the windshield of a helicopter. Bullets act strangely when they hit objects, and the first object the bullet will hit is glass, and because it is curved, it will deflect the bullet up or down, left or right. There really isn't any determining factor as to where that bullet will land. So, one shot, one death for that helicopter scene, not so much. From under the car, that's a really nice thing to do. I've shot from under various vehicles and structures and things like that.

Especially in an urban environment, you will encounter so much rubble and rubble on the battlefield or where you fight from, so you will have to make do with what you have. The only problem was the placement of his hand on the rifle. She already has the bipods. I don't see the need to have her hand under her holding him too. It's just extra weight hanging around for no reason. I probably would have had my support hand closer to her or held the stock in my shoulder pocket instead. During sniper school, we were always told to call in an airstrike when facing another sniper, because it's very difficult to take them out or fight them.

I believe he is firing a 7.62 caliber bullet, which is within the capability of taking out a target at that range. The odds of him being hit at any range would have meant she would have had to know that distance ahead of time and mark her range for it. Instead, she just put him there and pulled the trigger on his head. It's really not like that. But other than that, I think she did pretty well. Under the circumstances, she probably would have done the same. But I would give it an eight. She seemed very calm behind it.

And some of the best snipers I know are women. Oh. Yes, this movie is based on a real sniper, Mrs. Pavlichenko. She was credited with over 309 kills, and as for putting that bullet in the tank like that, I don't know. I only aimed at a tank once, and it was by accident, and I was quickly reminded, don't do that again, when they pointed the big cannon in my direction. She entered her bubble. Carlos Hathcock, a Marine Corps sniper, called it getting into her bubble. That's what she's doing when all these mortar shells and explosions are going off around her, is getting into that bubble.

Being able to isolate the outside world from the chaos and calm down and ignore everything to get a shot. I can relate to that 110%. No. So bullets don't travel in straight lines like that. They travel in an arc, even at 100 yards. So to win that battle, you have to aim higher, making the bullet rise, peak, and fall again. All snipers make really good NFL quarterbacks. He vomits it up and they land on the target, and the bullets work exactly the same way. Since it's based on a true story, I'll give it a nine, not a 10 just because of the bullet's trajectory.

Women are the best snipers there are. New shot. Team: Abandon selective targeting. All objectives are now free. The distances he shoots from are very plausible. Here it seems that it is at most 150 or 100 meters away. Less than that, because you're shooting downhill, so possibly less than 50 yards. The range is not bad either. I'm used to thousand dot sights and Horus reticles, and they look like busy Christmas trees without the lights on inside the sniper scopes. It was a very simple grid. Filming in a crowded environment is extremely difficult. During the International Sniper Competition I attended, one of the challenges was shooting moving targets in a crowd.

It's extremely difficult to do, but our distances were much greater than what he appears to be shooting at, by far. As for the angles they gave and the distances, it's not that complicated. My only concern would be worrying about where the bullet will impact after hitting the target. Because they are so close to each other, he also has a chance of being hit. He would give it a solid eight. It's very realistic. The scopes are always in poor condition. I don't understand why they don't put a real range reticle in there. So this is a real telescope, similar to the one used by the guy or the sniper in the movie.

And he's using it quite correctly, that is, he's using it for target detection, to identify where there may be a threat. He noticed a little bullet on the edge of that window and then, you know, he found things that were out of place, that didn't make sense, and he finally found where the sniper was. It's something you rarely see in

movies

, the real use of target detection and how important it is for a sniper to find the smallest details and things that are out of place to find who he's looking for. What you want to do is move away from the hole and not position the barrel sticking out of the hole.

It reveals your position and alleviates the entire purpose of why you made that hole in the first place. I'll give it a seven. I love the use of target detection, but he made a mistake by putting the barrel through the hole. Hello everyone, Jay Ly here. 13-year-old Navy EOD or Explosive Ordnance Disposal Veterinarian. He completed four combat deployments, three to Afghanistan and one to Africa.Oriental. Apparently that thing is the Cadillac of streetcars. Can I 100% say this wouldn't be entertaining? No, because it could be like that, but what I do know is that there are probably a dozen other ways to attack this device from inside the bus.

I mean, something rudimentary like getting a stick with a film on it, so you can x-ray the device and really see what's going on. Harry: Jack, I'm going to need you to watch the cable. Harry, it's covered. He's talking on a radio and/or phone right next to this thing. It starts electronically. They don't know if that energy will cause that device to fire or not. So all this is not realistic at all. I can't ignore it! Will trigger. Shit, it's a foldable circuit. Yes, collapsing circuits are real. There are two or more detonators, and when you cut one, the other will fire.

It is common for us to train for that. It is very unlikely that you will encounter that. Well, at least in Afghanistan, in my experience, we don't find many circuits collapsed. It was mainly pressure plates and things like that. Very simple circuits. Officer: Howard Payne, Atlanta Police Bomb Squad. Jack, I want you to get out of there and stay still. Let's go after the source. No, they should 100% do something with this device and not rely solely on the attacker to help them. There are tools that we have to disrupt an improvised explosive device and a component, so that it disrupts the firing train.

It will interrupt all the circuits and separate the components remotely, and then we will go down, check the interruption and then separate the components further and do our thing. Jack, I believe he is a bomb disposal officer for the Los Angeles Police Department. He should know these aspects of component recognition and be able to identify how this device works, or at least have a good idea of ​​it. This definitely gets a zero because he knows better and should have taken some action. He should have brought a tool with him. I could have recorded it right next to it and smashed that thing right outside the bus.

We had less than three minutes left. What do I do first? Pressure sensors. I activated it when I sat down. If I get up, my car explodes. This is already nonsense because he sat down and is now armed. And there is a stopwatch. In

movies

and television, they often incorporate these big timers that count down to detonation. But in reality, it is mainly a safe and arm type mechanism. If I'm a bomb planter, I need to be able to plant it and then get it safely away. There is a stopwatch, but you won't see this giant clock.

It's like, "You have five minutes before you die." Orange, yellow, green. The colors don't matter. What I need you to do is tell me which one is hot to the touch. Compared with hot wires and cold wires, you can make a circuit with proper resistance, so that none of the wires are hot. So the cinematic tropes of warm wire or wire colors are a total travesty. I can go to Home Depot, Lowe's, any hardware store, any hardware store of your choice, get whatever color wire I want and put it here. Take out the small box from the kit and turn it on.

That kit probably looked like something I'd pull tools from in a special operations forces environment. In my experience in Afghanistan, it was all special operations forces or special naval warfare. We fly in helicopters somewhere, land and run to a target, or walk a long distance to reach a target. You really want to limit what you have in your body. So, yeah, we're not going to be carrying briefcases and backpacks full of tools. Just cut it in half. The orange wire between the two clamps. I don't want to go into that specifically in detail because that's how we attack certain things.

But yes, those clamps have a very specific purpose for multiple detonators, and you would need another item that he doesn't have to do diagnostic work on that type of device. You'd need a little more time, I mean, a lot more training than just him saying, "Oh yeah, clip it to the hot wire and then cut it between them." There are many tests you must perform before you can cut a cable. But yeah, the whole scenario, him sitting on it, putting it together and then having the opportunity to make it safe, yeah, you want it. So yeah, we'll give it a two.

We'll give it a two. How it was set up and how it was implemented, totally legit. He had a Claymore. He put it on top of the Grand Slam bomb, the huge British bomb. Claymores are used everywhere. They are already wired. They are prefabricated to be installed as booby traps. That's what they are for. So he just had the tripwire, he put something out that he thought one of these people who were chasing him, idiots, would grab. There are 100% bomb detection dogs, and in this clip, I think those dogs are looking for human detection. Your goal is to sniff out Rambo, not necessarily detect explosive dangers in the forest.

And even if they were, those dogs run at full speed. Basically, it's like you're trying to smell a hot dog in the corner while you're running down the hallway, essentially like you're hyperventilating. It's never going to happen. Would the shock wave be so widespread? I mean, it was prolonged to have that effect. The explosive component it contains is Tortex. They added aluminum to the composition of that explosive to prolong the explosion. But that being said, it's like a nuclear blast wave that continues to die down. It would be really big and done. That shock wave would have killed a minor man.

Not John Rambo. The explosive component it contains is Tortex. It is approximately 50% stronger than TNT. And that's just the explosion. Fragmentation goes exponentially further than explosion. So yeah, it's definitely in that. This is probably the most realistic clip as far as how things work and how people think. Man, I could give "Rambo" an eight. He has taken down two for survival reasons. That's nonsense at best, even for John Rambo. I have it! It's a cylindrical cipher! D-U-N-N. It's my last name. He knows who I am. If someone is going to make an improvised nuclear device like this cipher, anything is possible.

There are many ways to weaponize nuclear weapons. I can't go into details. There are state-sponsored ones and then there are non-state sponsored ones. The state-sponsored ones will have all kinds of different protocols, safety devices, whatever, arming sequences. Without state sponsorship, if someone is going to make an improvised nuclear device like this cipher, it can be armed when it hears his voice, when it hears my voice, whatever the case may be. Benji: I speak without a mouth. Flight through the air without wings. It's me? An echo. That's all! That's all, that's all. Yuck. Can't. I can't even handle this one.

This is... he's talking to you. How do you know that if you answer this question it won't sound off? It is empty. Apparently it was a mud suck, right? A fake IED or fake device. In real life, hoaxes are actually very common, very common, especially in Iraq and Afghanistan. Basically, they were used as intelligence gathering devices. They would put it on the road. Completely false. Just something that would trigger an EOD response, and then they would be observing and videotaping the entire procedure. Despite all the craziness in the scene, using a hoax to gather information about people and learn more about them is absolutely true.

We'll give this one an eight, along with "Rambo." Oh God. We would clown a lot in this movie during training. Like, we would pretend we're this guy and do the most outlandish s**t because that's exactly what he did. He is attacking a VBIED, which is an improvised explosive device placed on a vehicle. Walking into a VBIED without a tool, an explosive tool, an energy tool or anything, not even a pole or anything to process this vehicle, is simply foolish. He went down to the field with a bomb suit and a crowbar. I mean, great. They'd probably send a robot with a tool first, right?

Especially because yes, that's a lot of HIM. A VBIED is no joke. I mean, even the guys on the wall, their security element, would probably die if that thing exploded. What the hell is he doing? Dead. Dead. He could have died half a dozen to a dozen ways in this clip alone. Not to mention the entire movie. Kicking it, randomly opening the trunk with your hand, opening the hood with your hand, turning on the wipers, pulling random wires under the hood. Any of those could have activated that thing. Yeah, I think he took his headphones off.

He puts the headphones back on. The most realistic thing there was the radio. In fact, he took off his headphones so he could focus and get his thought process going. And then when they asked him to put it back on, yeah, that's probably the response you'd get from an EOD tech. We definitely make safe IEDs by hand. I have done it and it is not ideal. We want to go as far as possible because of the risk of something going wrong. But yeah, he could have done a lot more with his hands, like cut that cord, detonate it right out the door.

I forget how many 155s, but that's what was in the trunk of that car once he saw the main load, and that's what he should be looking for anyway. Just reckless abandonment. Yes, it is totally Hollywood style. The only realistic thing was the communication aspect. Gets one. One in 10. Three miles under water, the water is crystal clear, so I mean, that's... no, there's no way. On my fourth team, I was on a mine countermeasures team, but it was underwater sea mines and underwater improvised explosive devices and things like that. It is supposed to be a nuclear bomb that has fallen into the abyss.

It's a big problem when we get into 200 feet of seawater. We are definitely not going to free climb to the bottom. There are always lines of descent. We establish a safe zone. Yes, it does not have any search tool. He only has his eyes and a flare, which is crazy. And that's just the diving aspect, so we haven't even gotten to the EOD part. Hiram: He did it. Oh Lord. We will go step by step. Communication is totally absurd. It's three miles underwater. What RF signal can penetrate three miles of water? We have very rudimentary ways of communicating, namely a float on the surface of the water that is connected to us by a line, and we just pull it, and the certain number of pulls means a certain thing.

So we communicate like this in a bottom-line focused environment where we take seismic and magnetic precautions. But yeah, nuclear, that's a totally different ballgame. You have to cut the ground wire, not the lead wire. Without going into details about nuclear weapons design, we would have investigated this device: This is exactly how it is made safe, if we want to separate components, separate the fuse. Sometimes we do it explosively, sometimes we do it mechanically, and then we just pick it up and take it to the beach and explode it on the surface. I'd have to give realism a big award, a zero, because that's not how nuclear weapons work at all.

Here! McIntyre, can you hear me? I love this program. It's so fun. Unexploded ordnance, UXO. They are very common because sometimes fuses simply fail and remain a threat because we simply do not know their status. Why wasn't it shot? It is a moment? Is it a question of proximity? Is it a delay that has not yet reached the end? So it's a big concern, not so much for everyone else behind the coverage, but mainly for the guys who are right on top of it. The heartbeat is regular. Do you have a leak? It stopped working. It is definitely possible to use a stethoscope to examine a suspicious fuse.

It seems silly, but yes, that's legit the old way. It was one thing. For old bombs like that, they had clockwork mechanisms in the fuse that you could hear ticking. We don't see that much anymore. It was a lot of training in school, just to expose myself to it. It's a propaganda bomb! Brochures are definitely used. They were launched throughout Europe during World War II. They were employed in, I mean, North Korea, Vietnam. Leaflets are definitely a type of psychological warfare or even just a means of communicating with a population that is confined to an area.

But yeah, I'd give it a solid seven for realism. Of course, two random people wouldn't be working on this pump, but yes, we have to couple it up a bit. I just don't know why they didn't have any bomb squad. So on the side of the timer, there should be a serial number. That will tell me which wire they need to cut. Here "Archer" shows an inexperienced person being trained through this whole ordeal, like many other movies and TV shows. It would be almost impossible unless it was configured exactly how the manufacturer wanted it to be configured.

If that's the case, totally doable, right? I can guide you through anything. It's like, OK, cool, how many wires are there, what colors are they? Are you ready? Lana: Damn it, Archer! The first letter is B. Bravo. Thank you. The second letter is: M as in Mike? My God,that's pretty spot on when it comes to communications, especially when shit is hitting the fan. Oh, I can relate. You have radio frequencies, you have interference, you have distance, you have other things in the way, so your signal can degrade. Everyone is cheering up in this episode, but in real life, when things happen and communications are a problem, you really stay calm, cool, and collected on the radio.

That way, even if it's a weak signal, you'll still be able to hear what's being said. Archer: I'm doing it, God! Lana: Oh my God. Ray! Ray: What's going on? The stopwatch sped up! The trope here with the green wires being cut and speeding up the clock is just wrong because there's no point in having that feature there unless you're trying to create some kind of anxiety, and in real life, believe me, if you're faced with a real explosive that can detonate in any action, keeping it at bay will be difficult enough. So yeah, at the end of the day, people want their stuff to explode.

This is how they make them. I'll give them a four. The communication piece was hilariously accurate. The bombs are not in the same line of fire. I have to disable them individually. How long is that going to take? I must find them and then dismantle them. 30 minutes. There's just like a piece of powerful explosive stuck to a pipe. EOD would see that and, boom, I would make a call and everyone would get out of there except one other person, him and another security person, and then I would take immediate action on that device. And the immediate is immediate.

It's not 30 minutes. I was using a mirror for some reason. I'm not going to use an inspection mirror when I have my eyes and can see everything around. So yeah, that's a little cheesy. You have NOD on your helmet, so it's cumbersome, especially when you're working on the one that was at head level. His NOD could catch up, and if there's some anti-movement there, boom. He just made it work, as designed. Then I would take off my helmet, so there is nothing or obstructions that can hit this device. If you're the only one there, yes, that's what you have to do.

It's because it's a threat assessment of what's going to kill me right now. That's an enemy combatant. He'll probably kill me if he sees me. So you have to take care of that first. But yeah, I would have at least one shooter with it a little bit away, so when I'm working, I can focus on this. They could have classified it a little, but all good. Bingo. In the end he used ceramic scissors. I thought that was a nice touch. Of course, he used ceramic scissors instead of diagonal cutters and usually when wires are wound like this, there are two of them and he cut them both.

He could have put the two lead wires together and activated it. Yes, there are a lot of cheesy things. So yes, it has to be low. Three bass. Towards the general direction of the mountain. The robot rarely finds what you are looking for. They are in Helmand, where I was also in Helmand. Helmand province in Afghanistan. And yes, robots are amazing. I didn't see the robot fall with a tool. Tool in, tool out, that's what we do. That's what is preached from day one at EOD school. The robot has cutters, it has grippers, it can separate components, whatever the case may be.

And if he found something, he could counterattack it or they could leave him on the ground. No! After all, that's what a robot is for. They are dispensable devices. In the worst case, when they operate they find something that explodes, not a human being. The entire team was standing in front of the vehicles. That's not at all what would happen. They would be inside their vehicle driving this robot. That way you'll get fragmentation mitigation. At least get behind the vehicle, for God's sake. I need you to keep your head still. You don't nod. This is a clothespin switch.

Very old and very rudimentary, very easy to defeat. Nick, the EOD operator, should have seen that. He identified that it is a pull. Cool. Cut it. Just cut it and go. But he did the holding his head thing. If you tell someone that he is connected to a line with a bunch of explosives, he will freak out. That's one of the rare times you can attack a switch. It is a very clear cut. That could have been handled differently and then everyone would have survived. It's hard. Many EOD procedures and tactics are written in blood, like this one.

The survivors say: Okay, this is exactly what they found. This is what was said on the radio. We now have our new set of TTPs so this doesn't happen again. I'll give this one one out of five. It has some things, some super cheesy things, but overall, it's not bad. Juan: What are you doing? Batman: I can take him out over the bay. The possibility of having a pump that cannot be made safe is really a matter of time. If time is no object, then yes, you can put in the time and diligence and really take it apart to where it is taken apart.

So now you have to weigh, can I make this safe in one minute and 30 seconds or not? And the answer is probably no, right? Because especially with a device as sophisticated as it was supposed to be, it's best to have a minute and 30 to get it as far away from everyone as possible. Yes, water has a great compacting effect because it cannot be compressed. It really depends on what the actual explosive was, the nuclear yield of this bomb, and how deep it was able to go. EOD's mission is the protection of personnel and property. So, yes, getting that device out somehow, moving it, relocating it, even if it's to your own death, is what we would do to protect personnel and property.

Is it a nine? Can Batman be a nine? I'll give it a nine. I like to think his actions were genuine Navy EOD. Hello, my name is Dakata Brodie. I am a 21 year old military veteran. I served 13 years in the U.S. Coast Guard as a search and rescue helicopter pilot and eight years in the Army as a UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter pilot. Alright. Tuck them in, boys. For the Coast Guard, primarily, we deal with the high seas and leaving shore to perform most of our rescues. However, the Coast Guard does train for vertical surface rescues, which is what you are seeing here.

Cliff, cliff rescues and everything in between. Stay completely still. I have to stabilize the car, okay? Hurry! Rescuer: Car secured. Alright. If that is the lifting hook, you are in what you call a compromised situation. Every helicopter pilot would be shocked right now to learn that the lifting hook is attached to a vehicle that could fall. It's not happening. We will not connect with any vehicles. Joby, I'm going down. Harrison, you're flying. So does a pilot go in the back seat? First of all, do you know how many things you can delete? You could literally turn off both engines.

The fact that your vest and everything could get caught and you could tip things over. We actually had one person spin around with his NVGs sitting on top of his head and he actually hit one of the engines and knocked out an engine with that. So, yes, it is very possible to inadvertently turn something off by simply climbing in and trying to get to the back of the cabin. Pilot: Out the door. Natalia, don't worry. I'm going to get you out of here! If I'm out of the helicopter, we have a really big problem. As a pilot, I am never outside.

I understand you! Cut it! Joby, move! They were trying to show that the lift was holding up the truck, right? The hoist you have there weighs about 600 pounds. So it's not your primary means of delaying anything. At that point he was steaming, he was trying really hard. Now, there is a firecracker where you can flip the switch to cut and cut the hoist cable, which is what they were doing at the time. Then somehow they cut a wire, and The Rock and the other person were on a different wire. I don't know what that is. I will say that our helicopter has a cable that we are going to operate with.

Once that wire is cut, everything falls apart. It's not going to happen on so many different levels in this clip. This here is a zero. Pilot: Where are they? The tanker is on the way. Air Force Rescue 231. I don't know why no one uses NVG. Everyone wears NVGs and night vision goggles in helicopters. Nobody uses them. If you have the option to have them on, yes, you will have them on. The fuel probe you just saw is not standard equipment on helicopters. There are only certain helicopters that are performing long range rescues. Most helicopters don't have that.

Pilot: No! The most important thing at that moment is if you fail, where is that tube that flows for the fuel? If you're going to cut that thing off with the main rotor, you're talking about damage to the main rotor system. You would be in a bad situation at that time. Looking at lightning right now. Knock on wood and thank God that has never happened to me. You risk frying many electronics and engine control systems that are there. He hopes his engines stay online. You would probably lose a lot of AC and DC electronic systems inside the helicopter, but you should be able to keep flying unless you get hit by the tail rotor or something.

Every year, the Coast Guard has to conduct what is called dumper training. Then we flip over in a chair in a pool, which simulates having to jump in. You are rolled face down. You have to make several different exits to prove that you have the ability to get out of a submerged helicopter. Every year, and then every six years, unless they changed it, but every six years you would go to the real school, where you would go through the whole simulator of a device that goes in and turns. So this is part of the business. You have a bottle of SEA or a bottle of HEED, which gives you two to three minutes of normal breathing.

In that mode, you have about 10 to 15 seconds if they breathe like I think they do. But the sheer shock of entering and the temperature of the water itself will take your breath away. But I like the realistic aspect of watching someone grab that bottle of SEA and put that stuff in their mouth. Now, for everyone who flies, we have emergency disposal handles. So normal exits will no longer get you out the door. There is too much pressure on that door at that moment. So you're literally hitting your emergency disposal like it's blowing out cartridges and the door opens.

Simply lift the door hinge pins so you can create that full opening at that point. If anyone goes for that, yes, you're going to die. I'd probably give this one about a six. You can put me down. I'm going to look for the two men. You come back and pick us up on my signal. The theatrics there are incredible. They had no business being so close to an exploding platform. We have performed multiple rescues in the Gulf of Mexico. I was stationed in before. So when flying to the platforms, the platforms usually burn, but they always give off gases or things like that.

So all the platforms have more escape type pods and things so that the platform workers can get on and off the platforms, and then we would perform the rescue from open water. Trying to get in there again is not good for anyone and there is a huge risk of debris and shrapnel passing through the rotor blade system. Now you are a victim. You're not going to put yourself or the crew in that situation. Rescuer: Count five. Five. Any standard rescue swimmer deployment, they're just falling over. At that point, we just call it direct rescue swimmer deployment.

Especially when you're deploying someone on a boat that's underway, you're going to have them down, you're going to have them right out of the water, or you're going to have them right on top. But saying you were about to send someone through a flame, a blowtorch in essence, won't happen. Rescuer: One! When someone is on the cable, the hook is actually locked just to prevent any mishaps where it could inadvertently open. For someone to do a pirouette and unhook themselves from the cable at the same time is pretty amazing. No one would be crazy enough to even try to put someone in that situation.

The rescue swimmer would come up and slap everyone in the helicopter for leaving them in something like that. So absolutely not. It's completely unreal. That's a zero. Pilot: Swimmers away! When he jumps out of the helicopter, it is a free-fall deployment of the rescue swimmer. This is reserved for the day only, so we would have only hoisted the rescue swimmer at that point, we would not have let him jump out of the helicopter. They're seeing waves like 20 feet or something like that. That means the helicopter is hovering at least 30 to 40 feet. If you judge that swell wrong, it's a four or five story drop.

That water turns solid very quickly, especially if it is cold temperatures. I have the signal ready to be picked up. The basket comes out of the cabin door. The basket is in the water. It is a standard rescue basket. He is asking for the basket, it has the sign ready to be picked up. That's exactly what you would hear, because we are waiting, keeping our light on the swimmer, making sure we always have him in sight. And while they're getting ready, you'll try to place the device within five to ten feet of them once they ask for it.

Very, very real. Pilot: How do we see the fuel there? Crew: Bingo, we're in bingo. I have togo. Our time is over. We have to go, Carl. That "bingo" fuel, that's a real term. It simply means that if you leave now, you will land with a reserve of fuel when you return to your station. Anything less than there may run the risk of not reaching your destination or airport or of catching fire. It's always a race against the amount of fuel you have. Whoa, whoa! Behind you! Hurry! When you see the winds, the rotor shakes, it hits you, there is a mini hurricane below.

There is no communication with the swimmer in the water at that time. All hand-arm signals. It would be crazy to think you're going to hear a person, a swimmer in the water beneath a spinning helicopter. That's not going to happen there. My God! We lost our tail rotor! The waves out there, that's in the Arctic, more or less, where I think that scene took place. 20, 30 foot seas and even rogue waves can occur, but you try to stay above that. The explosion, that's the Hollywood part. I've seen helicopters crash into runways and different things, and I haven't seen any explode.

Even in the military, I saw one take an SA-7 and kill the engine. That was the only one I saw that was on fire. I would give it a seven. It's the Coast Guard. They should have answered the distress call. Pilot: Swimmers ready. Deploy swimmers. So far, we're seeing a pretty much legitimate helicopter rescue. It is day. You can have the swimmer free fall during the day. Its altitude was good, where the swimmer could exit safely. The swimmer will have his goggles and everything down. They are not going to free fall with the equipment on. If they go into the water, they will lose all their equipment.

So they are falling. They will mask up and everything as they come in. The device that comes down and sits about five feet away from them in the water, that's just textbook Coast Guard rescue swimmer operations. When you have Baywatch, it's actually the Los Angeles County Fire Department. They are also known as Baywatch here in the Los Angeles area. We lift with them routinely. The rescue swimmer could easily carry them to the boat. The fire department are also trained paramedics. Mainly, you're going to try to put people on the least risky rescue method, which would be to get them on the boat, unless they've suffered something else and need immediate transportation, bring them in a helicopter and transport them. to the nearest hospital.

But the rescue itself is a good textbook for what you might see if you're going to free-fall the rescue swimmer, yeah. It's a nine, just because of how the rescue swimmer had his goggles and stuff on top of his head. I love the precision flight of that. This is MH-68 or AW109, the Stingray. Really what you'll call HITRON, which is our helicopter interdiction tactic. It's a specialized unit that we have whose main objective is to intercept drug traffickers or anything else like that in international waters. Mainly dealing with drug smuggling, what you would call a fast move.

It will usually leave a ship behind. Your normal cruise is between 120 and 130 or 130 knots, if you really have a good tailwind and things like that. Be careful, it has a weapon on board. Bail out! Bail out! I've never been to HITRON. I flew air force use with the Coast Guard. A lot of times what we try to do is try to stay out of what they're wearing, get out of there and make sure that we can at least maximize the use of our weapons systems. Coast Guard, shoot them down. They went to shoot right there. So normally they'll probably put some points in the water.

They say "dots in the water" because when you see it, it looks like machine gun dots coming out. That's just to increase the level of use of force at that point before they try to shut down the engines and actually try to just disable the boat. That's mainly what they're doing, yes, disabling the boat. So I would give them about a seven. Any time you're compromised, you've got something attached to something that can take you down, that's the worst situation for a helicopter, right? So you're at the mercy of being at that pivot point and completely helpless.

Wet and slippery hand conditions, trying to hold on to a ladder with adrenaline and the amount of rotor wash. There's a mini hurricane down there. So you're holding on with quite a bit of grip. So I'm pretty sure you're probably hugging the ladder at any given time just to try to maintain your grip. Let's stop! Cut it now! Mercenary: We have a job! Pilot: We're going to die here! I said cut it! They were actually doing well speaking as a team for saying to get rid of him. That's a difficult decision. It sounds easy to watch the movie and say that, but it's really hard to say.

Even when we're getting ready to start any lift and rescue, like, "Hey, if this happens, you say 'cut' three times, safety power system or the flight mechanism, you run to that cut button." It was an eight because of how dynamic that environment would be. The stretcher. We call it litter. Any time we're going to use a stretcher, we're going to use a trail line to help stabilize us, because that flat surface that's underneath with all the rotor wash that's underneath is really going to have a good propensity for someone to start really spinning. fast. I'm not sure what was causing the pilot to have so much trouble.

He has the entire ship to look at for reference. Power really wasn't an issue. It almost seemed like they were making the elevator cable look like it was somehow taking power away from the motors. I don't know. Having a dirty cable or seeing a caged cable, that part is real. That can happen, then it could go in there and not exist. You cannot release any more cable at that time. I don't understand why the pilot was struggling so much. I'm not sure. At this point, what has them trapped is some good bait that is clearly below for whatever is eating them.

So it is not necessary to shoot down the entire helicopter. Cut, cut, cut. We will have to preserve the lives of the rest of the crew. There is nothing else you can do. This is more of a three. Please don't fire the flare at the helicopter. We see the flare in the distance. Trust us. If the flare reaches the raft, it will begin to devour it. It's like a phosphorus material, so you're shooting hot phosphorus at the thing trying to rescue you. You're trying to take us down with you at that moment. The flare is meant to be seen, not caught.

We just want to see the flare go off and then find the point of origin so we can come and effect the rescue. Many times, if we go out, it will most likely just be a helicopter. I'm not saying you can't have two. If it is also a coastal rescue, there is a fixed wing asset overhead that will probably go out and do very good radar scans within the area and try to help us. And they will also be able to leave and deliver any type of rescue material. Certain helicopters have radar systems, so we try to see a blip on the radar or we try to map the coast when we're in really bad weather conditions.

Helicopters have a few different lights. So each pilot has his own searchlight and many times you will operate with what is called Nightsun. So it's just a really powerful reflector towards the middle or the back of the cabin. This one here is probably a 9.5. Hello, I'm John Spencer. I am a professor of urban warfare studies at the Modern War Institute. I spent more than 25 years in the US military, but I have been studying urban warfare for more than a decade. It's very accurate to be behind a wall and step out for a second to throw a grenade like that.

The place where he throws the grenade is a little off. The grenades are basically on a timer so they don't explode in your hand. Once it hits the target. It's not throwing, exploding. 100% air support is very vulnerable in urban operations, which is why you normally don't bring it. It flies low, is slow, doesn't have much protection, and generally throws soldiers out of the urban battle. In this situation, they did not expect that level of resistance. Go. Crossing the street can actually be one of the most vulnerable things in urban warfare because there are so many angles, so many windows, so many doors that you can get shot at.

So we teach things like blowing smoke around so people can't see you and going one at a time and mixing up the speed at which you go. If I didn't know this battle, the Battle of Mogadishu, I would say it's unrealistic to have hundreds of people shooting at a small unit, but that's really what happened. And they got the soldiers pretty accurately, but there's been a lot of criticism about this movie and the depiction of the Somalis and the context of what's happening in Mogadishu right now. Hey, Grimes, stay away from the wall. Are you OK?

Yeah! It's actually an iconic scene, when he says, "Stay away from the wall." That was a real tip because once the bullets hit the walls, they travel up the wall like a bowling alley, and can impact if you're standing on it. I wouldn't say it happens in all of them, because each city is different. You have mud, cement, glass, metal, it's a little different, but that's real. Come on, Maddox. You can see the bullet holes in the glass because back then we were not as prepared for urban warfare as we are today, so those are not bulletproof vehicles.

Many of the weapons there are not really prepared for the environment they are moving in, but they were also surprised by what they found. So I would give it about a nine for realism in the urban warfare, not for realism in the representation of the population and the things that are happening. Chris Hemsworth looks more like Jason Bourne in his one-on-one. Hand-to-hand combat is very common in urban warfare. We actually strap our weapons to ourselves, so if we get caught in that situation and we turn a corner or someone grabs our weapon, they can't take it away from us, but not the tactics you're seeing in that scene.

He's surrounded by people with bigger weapons, so he tries to disarm one while another is there. Personally, I would have tried disarming one of them with one of those rifles and then turning your back on something so you don't expect a bad guy to turn 360 degrees and then incapacitate him somehow. I can't say I've been in a similar situation or that we teach that, but it might work. It absolutely slows the person down, buys some time. I'd say you'd want to turn corners as much as possible, and especially in a building like that, just to confuse them about which path you took.

Of everything in that scene, that's probably the most realistic. The fact that it's hidden behind a column, that column is a support column, so it has steel reinforced concrete. On some walls, which may be paper thin, they may be plaster. If you don't have that, then you get behind things like furniture and other things, anything you can to try to cover yourself. Yes, it was a lot of fun to watch, but I'd give it a one or two for realism. I actually love this clip and wish I could show it to more soldiers to get them to think about buildings differently.

Especially if you're defending a house, you want to remove stairs, remove doors, and throw furniture on the floor. But the scene is also great because it shows you that that's not necessarily what protects you from bullets, because bullets go through wood and fabric and everything. That's a big lesson that the clip teaches you and that we teach our soldiers: stay away from windows. You duck under them and slowly walk around them. Incoming bullets probably wouldn't be as dramatic, but as such, we absolutely recommend staying away from windows. Yeah, that clip is really important for something people don't even think about, not even in the military, called hollow mouse, making holes in walls and floors to move around without being seen.

It is very common in large urban

battles

. Actually, I'd love for the soldiers to carry an ax or something, but there are other ways to do it. Sometimes we use explosives, mallets, axes like that to make that hole. Real tactics, real everything, so I'm actually going to give it a nine. I mean, this scene seems very familiar to me because I had my own deployments in Iraq and Baghdad, where we were conducting raids like this, where there are only a few terrorists in a population of millions. For the benefit of your equipment, you will be able to see at night, but also to reduce the risk of being observed and the risk to civilians.

The fact that his night vision goggles were always on top of his head is unrealistic. You'll want to turn off the power or eliminate light sources, so you'll want to use those glasses to your advantage. Execute. It is very common and very smart to have a sniper guard that has angles that people entering the house cannot see. It's a very good decision to have the sniper take the first shot, because you want to save the surprise for the last moment, and a sniper usually has a weapon with a silencer. This particular sniper would probably carry more equipment, and is usually a sniper and a spotter, sothere would be other people with him.

The way they enter this house is a very common, almost too common, thing to be portrayed in movies. It's called entering and clearing a room. Throwing a grenade may be the preferred tactic if you know it is an enemy location and you know there is someone there with a weapon. Of course you're going in with more than just your face. So the way they are stacked at the door is to get in quickly. It actually evolved from SWAT tactics. These tactics were actually developed to limit that amount of violence because there may be civilians mixed in there.

The tactics you see Bradley Cooper employ there are ones I would teach. You want to be behind something that stops the bullets people are shooting at you but can also return fire. We call that coverage. Windows are great for crouching, kneeling and still shooting. Unlike the enemy in that scene running into open areas, that's actually the opposite of what's actually happening. They will stay inside the rooms and make you enter there. You're going to get off the streets and alleys. The butcher is on the move. Repeat. The butcher is on the move. I'm chasing him. When you go off on your own and chase him, that's not realistic.

We don't move anywhere alone. It's almost like a cardinal rule. So there would be another person from the team there with him and communicating with each other using some kind of radio or something. If he says, "On the move," then someone else would follow him. He would give it a rating of around an eight. Ambush! This happened to me in Iraq, an ambush initiated by an RPG. Ambushes are very, very common in urban warfare. Your goal is to surprise people, trap them in a funnel like that. Although the bad guys don't usually stay on the roof.

You wouldn't be standing in the middle of the street shooting. You wouldn't last long. We'd look for cover, we'd use those armored vehicles, which is cool. The ideal, however, in the entire situation, is to call it the "kill zone" of the ambush. You want to get out of this. That concept of having, we call it a quick reaction force, a backup team. Because you've been surprised, someone needs to come help you, and we generally keep forces in uniform ready to go in an urban environment like this to be that quick reaction force to come to that aid.

Come on. Come on! They crash the vehicle, which is very common. Trying to lock them in that death zone so they can all shoot you. So I'm actually going to give it a higher rating than I want because the ambush is very real outside of the tactics, so I'm going to give it a four. Drones are probably the most ubiquitous change in urban warfare that has occurred in decades. As I go to Ukraine to research urban warfare in major

battles

, thousands and thousands of drones are being used. It reduces some of the challenges of urban warfare if I can put a drone in front of the soldier to see around that corner, to see over that building.

In the X-ray vision aspect we are not there yet, because we cannot see through concrete yet. Especially there are not many things that can see through steel. It gave me a lot of feelings of real things happening. Especially the use of the dump truck reminds me of the Beirut attacks, where an overturned truck was brought to the front of the base, like in that scenario, but then exploded. That's why urban warfare is so difficult. The dump truck could be a threat. Although it's probably unlikely that you'd use your vibranium shield to throw it into the air, what it means to me is what we call a three-block war, where, when you're fighting on urban terrain, you're actually very concerned about the civilian population and about Protect people while fighting, and there are restrictions on what you can and cannot do.

So, no, that's a very plausible scenario where any soldier who has values ​​is trying to protect the civilian population while he's trying to accomplish his mission. So if the rating has to be for realism, I'll give it about a six. Eight to 10 Tangos, main door. Left! For the trees. A couple of things in there. There are nice touches to add realism to the situation, such as the red dot you see on modern gun sights that will help you aim for the green hue you see in their eyeballs when coming out of the night vision goggles. So when you see some version of night vision goggles, you get a sort of Martian look.

When you look around you, everyone has green eyes. Get to the top of this building. Come on. Blocked by buildings. We have no point of view. This chicken coop is a failure. In this scene, they walk into a really strong building like that. It's a great idea. The strategy was called strong points, or a building that is really strong, has lines of sight or directions from which you can shoot in multiple directions, and in war it has happened where a single building has been held for months just because it was the point strong right. . He says it's a failure because depending on the type, the direction, the building and where the enemy is, they went up there, they thought they would have a good vantage point, but they couldn't see anything, so it was a failure. .

Turn right from it. What we usually see in urban warfare movies is everyone trying to get to the ceiling because it's common sense that I can knock it down, I can see people further away, but depending on the context, you don't want to be anywhere. close to the ceiling because they can also see you from the air, from drones, from mortars, they can hit you. It is based on a real situation that occurred in 2012 in Benghazi, where the embassy compound was being attacked. It's a good idea to go up there so you can see where they're coming from and take better pictures and not waste ammo from the roof.

I would give it a pretty high rating for realism, around a seven, eight, just because of the type of weapons, the tactics, the chaos, and the construction of the building. It's quite real. I think this is an important scene because one of the biggest myths that television and movies portray about urban warfare is that it's just infantry or soldiers firing their weapons. The main urban battles are those of tanks, artillery, engineers and infantry. They are large-scale battles in concrete. Now the damage the tank does to the building is unlikely to just be the entire face of the building falling off.

It's going to do a lot of damage, and that's why you have a tank, because a tank is protected mobile firepower. He has this giant weapon that can cut through that problem, which is concrete and covered. But in this scene, everyone is a tracker. It's almost like a "Star Wars" ray gun. Not everyone will be like this. In fact, there is a myth that tanks do not help in urban warfare, they are too vulnerable. But actually, in the history of urban warfare, if you go into a major urban fight and you don't have a tank, you're wrong.

But the problem is that the tank cannot go alone and the infantry cannot go alone. And as we see in this scene, the infantry worked to protect the tank, and then the tank protected the infantry. But tanks are vulnerable, as you can see here. The Germans shoot from below, where the tank can fire, in the basement. The size needed to take a town, village, or city depends on the enemy they are facing, and I don't think they really knew that. For that street, I think it looked good, absolutely, where you combine a tank section, always two tanks, with an infantry platoon or something to clear a street like that before you find out where the enemy is.

Outside of the lasers in the rounds, this is a very realistic scene of high intensity combat and the combined weapons you need, so I give it a nine. Yuck. Will you take a break? The only thing I can't help in this scene is that everyone walks up to the wall and just places their rifle on top of the wall. That is absolutely what not to do. You're just putting up a flag that says where you are. I have no problem with them moving to the roofs. This is a hasty attack. Two different buildings, that's great; It gives you convergent fire.

So shooting from two different directions. They can cover more of the yard. The scene of this movie is based on the real battle of Mosul that occurred in 2017, one of the largest battles since World War II, 100,000 security forces against an entrenched enemy ISIS force that had to be eliminated. Actually, that's quite realistic. You open an attack like that with your biggest weapon. We call them the weapons that produce the most victims. Failures happen. The way you generally avoid it is that you have more than one point of failure, more than one big weapon, or, as they do here, which is really accurate, once it fails, that's it.

Your surprise is gone. Stroke. Actually, what they are trying to do is quite complex, because they have moving forces with other elements taking down that they have to know and watch very closely when to put out the fire as you go. That's kind of the way I would teach it too, which is as they maneuver while someone else holds them. Booby traps are very popular in urban warfare. Photos on the wall. Anything could potentially be booby traps. We see it right now in the Ukrainian war, when Ukraine takes back its territories from the Russians. But without a doubt you have to be very attentive to all those explosive traps.

One is just the awareness of each soldier not to move or displace things, and then we have bomb-sniffing dogs that we will bring. In fact, I'll give it about five, six. Just something is a little off. It will be on the sidewalk over the ditch. We will eliminate it from behind. The subsurface is a huge component of the three-dimensional aspects of urban warfare. Many cities have cities beneath the cities, and in battles like this, this film is based on the Battle of Stalingrad, which was called the "Rat War" because the underground prevailed. Yes, those are possible urban sniper positions.

Characters on both sides are loosely linked to real snipers who prevailed in the Battle of Stalingrad and who were known for getting into barrels and vents. The cat and mouse between the two snipers, that did not happen. We train soldiers to use the environment and there is some aspect of light and smoke manipulation. That's a real thing, right? Reflective lights on the mirror, but you don't know where the sniper is and you're unlikely to have the ability to blind him, so no, don't do that. I want to give it a higher value because it points out the clandestine war aspect, but the realism of the real thing, this happens, about a three, I guess.

That's as real as it gets. The IED, or improvised explosive device, is the weapon of the last 20 years. The invisible enemy you can't fight. The M2 .50 cal is still used today. It's a very effective large machine gun that has the specific bullet size and penetration you'd want, where other weapons don't. The precision of what the bullets were doing to the building seemed pretty accurate. It is noted that some of them are not penetrating. He didn't fire that many bullets into that wall to create that level of extension and honeycombing of that wall. The tactics there are quite solid, where you have the machine gun covering an upper level while the infantry maneuvers down so that there is control there and they position themselves to enter that building where they know the enemy is.

I can't say kicking in the door isn't real. It's called mule kick. I wish movies would stop showing it because it's not effective, but I've found many soldiers trying it. But it's not the most force you can put into kicking that door. You want to look at the door. Soldier: On the ground! That's an unfortunate but very realistic aspect of that scenario and that chaos where the soldier comes into the room, but controlled and not just shooting everyone. But then there are scared and frantic civilians who even approach you, making the soldier feel very unsafe. That is a very realistic and shocking traumatic situation that is urban warfare.

So if we were to remove the mule kick, I'd give that scene a 10. Gareth Timmins here. I am a former Royal Marines commando who spent time in Afghanistan, Egypt, Somalia and various locations in the Middle East. Gas! It is CS gas, which has been widely used in the Middle East, especially during the Arab Spring. Whether you would shoot it with mortars is another matter. Firing the CS gas and having it explode in the air like that would be like throwing a small capful of bleach into the sea in terms of its effectiveness in trying to poison swimmers.

Mine! I mean, if you were breaking contact like that, I would have thought you would have just driven in a straight line as fast as possible to get out of there. But they seemed to deviate very well, I think for the purposes of the film and for the viewers, actually. The fact that they are perfectly placed on top is quite comical, really. Typically, a minefield would be placed in a certain way to restrict movement or funnel the enemy to a particular point. In terms of space and mix of mines, they were simply placed there just for the vehicle, just to hit it.

In fact, antipersonnel mines are currently banned by the Geneva Convention. WhichWhat used to happen with those was that you would shoot one of the pines, they would come out of the ground at about waist level and then detonate. But yeah, you wouldn't normally see them like this on top, unless there had been a sandstorm, but even then, they look new. If you were breaking contact or trying to get away from the enemy in an open desert like that, without any life support (you don't have an urban environment or buildings), you would absolutely want to stay in that truck. unless it was completely disabled, and at that point you had no choice but to leave it because it was acting as a magnet for the enemy.

But you certainly wouldn't abandon it if it were moving. Improvised explosive devices used in Iraq and Afghanistan overturn vehicles, but it is debatable whether a mine could overturn them to that extent. But certainly the people inside would be seriously injured, if not killed. I'd give it a 3. Yes, they're in the desert, they're in military vehicles, there's military equipment in use, but other than that, it's very loosely based on reality. Radio: I have seven Mexican police vehicles located at the border checkpoint waiting. They are moving and forming in their configurations. They are very, very closed now. Before reaching the border, when they were driving in urban areas or built-up areas, that type of convoy posture would have been perfect if you want to maintain posture and safety and keep vehicles out.

But as soon as they've kind of left that, and now they're going into the open desert and the open countryside, and they would really want to expand the space. The Humvee is a horrible vehicle. It is not comfortable. During this time, you would shut down because you have limited visibility. It's a stretch there, really. Yes. It's a thing. It would restrict your vision, absolutely. Radio: No vehicle, no movement. Oscar 1. Entering on your right. Man: Air, I don't see anything. Radius: Right contact. I think it's realistic. You would have put "correct contact, correct contact", which is what they do.

Again, it's good. There's a natural, widespread chatter about the weather and all that, and that would happen in real life. There would be some banter, some banter, but you would be very focused on the job at hand. So the communication there, in terms of communication with the whole group, is good. It could be a little better, but it's good. Man: I don't see anything. Down down! Definitely, at all costs, you would want to overcome that. We call it "driving through it." They call it "the killing zone." Stopping on that or becoming disabled on that would be like your worst nightmare.

I think the sound and the impact that that bullet would make on the windshield would naturally, despite your training, force you to do that. I think once a few rounds hit it and relieved your "nothing's going to work out" anxiety, you'd like to think you'd be able to get back on track and overcome that. It's just chaos. This is what is called a complex attack. The first ones come out from the left, which is what you would do in a contact with the right. You would exit the left side of the vehicle and use it as cover to try to get a few rounds off if necessary.

In training they always tell you to go out on one side, naturally, that's not taking fire. Then you would come out for cover. And you can see how they shoulder the weapons and how they manipulate the doors and then they push the door and go back to the butt of the gun and stuff. It's very high-level stuff, weapon manipulation and use of cover. It is absolutely magnificent. I wouldn't want to be down there, as a soldier, because you wouldn't have any vision of what's happening and it would be claustrophobic. I can see why he did it, without military training, but it's not where I'd like to be.

You have to try to get away from that killing zone somehow, as soon as possible. I would give it a 9. The only thing that really lets it down is the spacing when they go to break ground in terms of vehicles, but other than that the way they react, weapon handling and communications are really good. He often runs around with a t-shirt or vest on. The sunburn and heat stroke he would suffer would kill him. You would have some type of camouflage shirt, or a tactical jacket, like a thin jacket, and you would almost certainly be wearing a bulletproof vest.

Depending on the sand, it is sometimes soft and would be incredibly difficult to move around. I mean, sure, he's not wearing any gear or body armor, but it would be incredibly difficult. You will run from one side to the other to avoid possible enemy shots, especially if they come from behind. You would be running into cover positions instead of in a straight line. It is there to look like a Hind. In reality it is the Pumas that have been modified. They have been marked to look like real Soviet gunships, yes. They were introduced, I think, by the Russians in 1972.

So they definitely would have been in the real war between Afghanistan and Russia between '79 and '89. Actually, the biggest myth, I think of desert war movies, is the hero's journey that one undertakes. So if you look at, say, "Rambo" or something like that, he's kind of a one-man band. A person is injected in a theater, in a war zone, and in reality it is simply impossible. That weapon system, Dushka 50 caliber, would take him down. Absolutely it would be. And I'm a little bit unconvinced that there are, A, enough rounds for that time period. Sometimes you can get one or two rounds in, then you have to start doing your stopping exercises.

A person could operate that, yes. It would be better with two, but one person could do it. It's difficult because everything that happens is within the realm of possibility. Really is. I would probably give him a 5. I think the success rate I would get doing what he does would be very, very small. Call him. See if there are friends in the area. Lima 2 Charlie. Lima 2 Charlie. The radio operator attempted to establish communication via satellite phone. He has not been successful, but he has not given the responder a chance to respond. We have used them before in Somalia and other places.

Sometimes it is simply a matter of moving to an elevated position or a different location to establish communication. They are not reliable. Who are they, man? I don't know. You would automatically have hit the ground and fallen to the ground, and you would have started watching from what we call your belt buckle, from a prone position. The mirage effect obviously exists. It's there. But it wouldn't distort the images that way and you would still be able to tell people apart. His movement towards you is very relaxed. They don't run, they don't scream. You would be looking for weapons or weapons systems as they begin to approach.

Form a line! They go into an extended line, which is good tactically for this scenario, but the posture they take, the hostile posture, getting weapons and preparing them to attack the shoulder, is an escalation that one will want to try to avoid. . Look, and they are all M16. Some of them have suspended grenade launcher attachments. It is an old American-made weapon. They will be real weapons, probably with magazines only, no ammunition. Soldier: What are you doing? Enough! Guys, cover it. Surely the weapons should have been lowered. I should have had one of them simply raise their hand, but simply taking a more peaceful approach.

Perhaps speaking the local language in welcoming terms would have been the correct course of action to take. He walked directly into the arc of all the boys' firing line. You would never do that. He almost certainly would have been killed if things had gone badly. Realism, I'd probably give it a 5 or 6. It's not uncommon for people to walk into your arc of fire or your line of fire and just not notice. In this case, he would try to sneak for cover in a low profile. Going ashore immediately is good exercise. Try lowering your profile. But the ideal would be to try to get some type of coverage.

I know it's difficult in this scene. It's very open and there are no built-up areas or anything like that. But your tactic in this would be, if you have to engage, engage, but then try to walk away. Yes, it would be the worst case scenario. It's a Minimi you have here, which is a key tactical weapon for the team. A 5.56 belt fed ammunition. But the way you hold it, it's facing up, and then you hold the rear stock. He's definitely been taught that. The exercises in this we also call "the speed of fire." The people with the rifles, the M16s, fire a single shot, which is great in terms of accuracy.

A big thing in Hollywood is that our guns are always on automatic, fully automatic, and that's not really right. Although the exercises are good and skillful, there is no getting around the fact that they look like actors with weapons. I'd probably give it a 4. I think the SAS would actually have done things differently. Very different. I don't think you would have made a preemptive strike like that unless they were literally coming at you and you. The dog is clearly sniffing for explosives, improvised explosive devices. Placing them on the ground is to identify areas to avoid, but they can also be placed on the ground just to show allied forces where they can move.

But they would sit down, yes, when they came across something they were not so happy with. They are waiting for a gift. What it is for them is just a game. In terms of disorientation, like the ringing in your nose alluding to what your ears would be like, absolutely, yes. You may not hear anything for a few minutes. It could burst your eardrums. I mean, it's realistic, but it seems like they bounce back too quickly. It could be an old shell, an old war shell that they've used. Really aiming at a vehicle, like an IED vehicle that was detonated there.

The fact that it's actually on what appears to be a common path for vehicles and stuff points to the fact that it would have been that way. I think it probably could have been a bigger explosion, a bigger explosion, but it would put them back that way, if not worse. Canine error would be a factor you would take into account, especially if you haven't passed the dog through that area as well. Hey! How could your dog miss that? You could have gotten us all killed. He must have activated the bomb from those houses. Everything was fine until after the explosion.

There is no way you can stand up and call someone out for what they have or haven't lost. You would be glued to the ground, you would be surprised, you would be disoriented and you would be scared to death. There's no way you can answer that way. And another thing you need to worry about is that it could be the first detonation. There could be a secondary explosion, and I think if someone detonated it with a command cable, which is what happened, you would probably expect an ambush from that, because there are actually people watching. I think it's really realistic right down to what happens after the explosion.

And for that, I would probably give it a 7. So, the red smoke indicates the LZ, the landing zone, where you are going to extract someone from. A little strange in this clip, because it's almost self-explanatory, given that you have helicopters right above you. So it's just released, probably visually just for the viewers of this movie. It would have been an incredibly aggressive stance on the part of the rescue forces. They wouldn't waste time trying to figure out if you have weapons or if you're friends. There is simply no time for it. He just goes in and out quickly, so everyone who was between them and the extraction of the American personnel would have... it wouldn't have been a great experience for them at all.

Let me see your hands! Americans, or anyone, will always come back for one of their own. You would have had guys on the ground for weeks and days beforehand, providing CTR, close target reconnaissance, and establishing life patterns. What kind of weapons do they have? What time do they go to bed. Where they keep the hostage and if they continue to transfer him. And that would have been getting feedback to be able to create this rescue attempt. So the first phase would probably have been the Specter gunships you see and the Apaches coming in, followed by the ground forces following behind.

Soldier: Are you Marcus Luttrell? You're safe, Marco. You go home. Probably what they could do is ask him for his service number. "What is your service number? What is your name? What is your rank?" and things like that, that would quickly identify him. So he's true to life, right? It actually happened, so I have to give it a 9 or 10. Trey: I have movement. At 12, about 300 meters away, two guys on the roof. Ortega: Are they armed? Trey: I don't know. So, these are US Marines. There are two sides to communication. The initial beginning, where they say, "Do they have weapons?

Do they have weapons?" It's to identify them as potential enemy targets, but it also gives them, in a sense, free rein to attack, if necessary. Search for weapons is the combat indicator. It's a fucking simple question, Trey. Do you see a gun? Trey: Negative! That's not the question you asked. You asked if they were armed. The answer to that question is that I don't know. They're obviously fucking armed, Ortega. Why else would they be running up there? I don't know, right? I don't understand these damn people. I think the talk is Hollywood. It's not realistic. In real life, it would be minimal.

And especially the bad words too, I think this is probably a little tame in termsof what real life would be like. Certainly, his immature nature is definitely inaccurate. Trey: All I know is that we need to see weapons. They're not really using cover well and, yes, they don't really change position between shots. Once they take the first shot, they have to change positions, and especially if it's also a sniper, because he'll just be looking for you to respawn at the same position and he'll be on target. Kevlar helmet. They are effective in protecting your head. It all depends on the caliber of the bullet that hits the helmet, the angle and also how close it is from leaving the barrel to hitting the helmet.

If it's a sniper, which you could argue is from that distance and shoots that way, they would have some sort of long caliber bullet, like a 7.62 long, fired from a bolt action rifle. I could protect it depending on the angle, but if it's a sniper, from that distance too, they would probably get hit towards the center of mass or in the face, but I would protect it. What viewers need to appreciate is that it would be incredibly, incredibly uncomfortable to have your head on it knowing that someone is shooting, because the only thing you can really think about is that in not even a second, you could be hit in the face and you might be just be completely disconnected.

Then you are uncomfortably aware of that. So, yeah, I think you'd be a lot lower. Where do they hit you? In the damn eyes! I mean, they may have kicked up sand in the round and they just want to get out. It's probably the right course of action in that case. He might have had some material from his helmet, if he got shot in the helmet and stuff, so yeah. I would give it a 5 only because I think the chat is unrealistic.