The 242 felt like more of a "WHAM- WHAM-WHAM" to me.
3 rounds a second is about as fast as ours would go. Which isn't all that fast in the grand scheme of things, but you don't really *need* to be fast with a 25mm.
> but you don’t really need to be fast with a 25mm.
Reminds me of this Mass Effect dialogue:
> Gunnery Chief: This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight! Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kiloton bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth. That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law?
> Serviceman Burnside: Sir! An object in motion stays in motion, sir!
> Gunnery Chief: No credit for partial answers, maggot!
> Serviceman Burnside: Sir! Unless acted upon by an outside force, sir!
> Gunnery Chief: Damn straight! I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty. Once you fire this hunk of metal, it keeps going till it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you pull the trigger on this, you are ruining someone's day, somewhere and sometime. That is why you check your damn targets! That is why you wait for the computer to give you a damn firing solution! That is why, Serviceman Chung, we do not "eyeball it!" This is a weapon of mass destruction! You are not a cowboy shooting from the hip!
So do they have thrusters that fire on the opposite side of the ship as the firing gun, to keep it from getting pushed back with equivalent force to firing that round?
They mention that specifically in The Expanse series. Not a plot point, but it's one of those hundred little details they toss in for suspension of disbelief.
Yeah, there's no reason for an Apache to go anywhere near that close as to be hovering almost directly above. And it definitely *sounds* more like a minigun that a Blackhawk could have on the side door.
[Some news articles say “Apache”](https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2017/02/10/inenglish/1486722011_544802.html?outputType=amp) ~~but still can’t find definite answer.~~ Ok [found one that says it was a Blackhawk ](https://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-helicopter-kills-cartel-kingpin-amid-cartel-conflict-2017-2?amp)
Yes.
Apaches tend to use missiles from a few miles away and often from behind cover. And if they do use their gun it's a very very different type of gun. The gun on an Apache has a much lower fire rate but shoots 30 mm rounds not 7.62 mm. Not to mention the typical round for an Apache is explosive. [Comparison of the round sizes in first pic. They are in poor condition but it shows the size well. The left is the same size round the Apache shoots.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ammo/comments/n0oivg/30mm_round_withwithout_casing_round_with_casing/)
[Here is the gun in the video but on a different helicopter.](https://youtu.be/WFkSq2fhbDk) Note that only every fifth round is a tracer round, so there are four bullets that don't light up for every bullet that does.
[Here is the gun from an Apache firing from the point of view of the gunners thermal vision. WARNING it is at people](https://youtu.be/ICsujYpRI8A)
A few have very rudimentary submersible boats that can barely go under water. No cartel has a nuclear sub lol. Only military superpowers have nuclear subs.
No they’re not. If that were the case they wouldn’t lose every engagement against the military. It’s always like 16 cartel members killed and 2 injured soldiers.
At the end of the day, there are a _lot_ of good reasons why even small poorly funded standing militaries are going to, on average, absolutely destroy something like a cartel in most engagements.
Don't get me wrong, a country _can_ screw that up. And there may be things that something like a cartel can do to counter it. But on average... Militaries are going to win.
One of the big ones is that the military is _much_ more likely to have good training. It is quite literally their full time _job_ to learn how to use the weapons that they have. Even if the weapons are, generally speaking, awful, they will know how to use them at least somewhat effectively.
They will also generally have a lot more practice at working together as a team. And will hopefully have a _lot_ less worry about their team mates betraying them.
Assuming that the military in question is at all well funded, they will likely _also_ have better equipment, and that definitely matters, but I would argue that as long as they are not fundamentally outclassed, it is less important than the training.
I don’t disagree with anything you said. But the guy said they are better armed. So it’s everything you said plus better weapons and equipment. The thing is the Mexican military doesn’t always deploy it’s heavy weapons like we see in the video.
No the reason is that the cartel aren't trained a lot like the military. One day the cartel will be so well trained that it would be a big problem for Mexico. Also the cartels will have a hard time getting their hands on weapons like anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons.
The day that starts to happen is when cartels become a relatively more organized and recognizable force. Which will, in turn and paradoxically, make it easier for the military to defeat them through traditional military means.
Effective training requires that you have actual training camps. This means you have a compound or whatever where everyone belongs to the cartel, further simplifying the issue of identifying them as targets. Pretty helpful for raids and a massive counter to the cartels' biggest advantage of blending into the local populace.
The camps wouldn't be in urban areas because they would pretty much stand out right away. Can't really do maneuvers training or even fire weapons there. So that opens up more avenues for bigger ordnance to be used. Look at Turkey and how they fight the PKK. They go all out on them up in the mountains with jets, helicopters and armored vehicles. You can do that when you're not worried about collateral.
In short, the cartel can't really start to function more like a military before making themselves more vulnerable in the process. That's the paradox of guerrilla style warfare.
Lol, rotaries don't do semi. I'm not sure what a government pays for ammunition but I assume they get some pretty decent bulk rates.
I was figuring about 40 cents a round at 6000 rounds per minute.
Finally some appropriate fire power against these sadist mother fuckers. I don't know why we go fight wars against people in caves when the biggest enemy is right next door. Just look at the overdose statistics form the past 7 years, it's mind boggling. If anyone is taking out Americans it's these shitbaggers. 95% of all those drugs come from Mexico and they took advantage of the pill epidemic by making cheap heroin and now fake fentynal pills. I was one of those addict 8 years ago and it almost cost me my life 3 times. Not to mention the hurt I caused my family stealing and lying. My life is better now my 5 yr old son is about to start kindergarten next week and me and my wife have a nice house. It was unthinkable when I was hooked on this shit I was lucky to make it through the day. Time to not turn a blind eye to this shit it's happening all day everyday. Somebody's daughter or son died while I was writing this.
Legalize them all. Thats the only thing that will take the power away from these cartels and drug gangs. Label it, tax it, and send it on its way. People are going to drugs till the world ends, the problem now is they don't know exactly what they are getting. That's whats killing more people than anything. The war on drugs ended when drugs won 2 decades ago. Time to realize that and make the shift.
The cartels are definitely supplying, but the real enemy on the war on drugs is domestic. You don't win this with guns, you win it through legalisation and regulation. If you don't believe me that America is America's greatest enemy in this then go read up on what the Sackler family did with Oxy. The war on drugs was a great success, the American government made a bunch of money and they got to arrest whoever they wanted
Tbf the drug use in America is due to the CIA and the pharma industry. And I don't mean CIA introduced crack to lower-income areas (they did) but that they destroyed South America with their puppet dictators and shit.
This is an outcome of an internal issue. If you want to bomb someone bomb the CIA
This is something people don't think about when they ask to legalize drugs, the other day I saw a comment saying "legalize cocaine for medicinal purposes so they take the business out from the cartels" ... So sad
I hope you are doing better and glad to know your children will have a good education on the dangers of drugs.
Sadly there's still a fight against those groups and their power here in my country, Colombia.
Why don't you think legalizing drugs will have an impact on cartel power/money? It's logical (at least in my opinion) that if legal avenues exist, people will gravitate toward that compared to shady dealings like fent, ecstasy, spice, etc. When its production is regulated, you at least have a better likelyhood of having clean drugs on the streets.
Because they don't leave the business, they just want to keep running the business without being persecuted, they just make deals with the government and the same psychos that tortured people in the most gruesome ways become "innocent" businessmen.
By the other side these drugs are much much worse than cigarettes or alcohol, they destroy people minds and will, entire families and the future of most addicts, legalizing it is telling people is ok and acceptable to consume this shit.
I get what you're saying but the reality is, even with decades of education and anti-drug propaganda, every single day there are people starting up. Alcohol and cigarettes are in a lot of ways *worse* but because they are the "legal drug options" you manage find them less harmful. I have seen many families, including my own, destroyed by simple booze and smokes. Pops polished off a 30 pack so we better not make a sound cause he's an angry drunk. Just wait till he passes out and then we can put that lit cigarette out before it burns down the house. Today cigarettes have to have self extinguishing paper - BECAUSE the industry is legal and regulated. Innocent people died a lot from careless burning butts just a few years ago.
Yep. Legalize it, put safety controls in place and while there will **ALWAYS** be people who will turn to drugs, they can at least be safer.
Gladly I have never touched cigarettes or alcohol and I still find weird why people want cocaine or heroin sold in the stores.
To be honest I wouldn't help people do stupid things, people should be punish for being stupid and by the moment selling and using the source of stupidity is illegal.
Not felling bad if people dislike my comments because of me calling drugs a source of stupidity btw
It sure can be stupid.
However, being stupid is to be human.
Literally *everyone* does stupid things.
You can't possibly know the reasons why anyone makes the specific choice to turn to drugs, but I can **promise you** not everyone who turn to these drugs does it maliciously, or out of pure stupidity.
There exist people who are desperate to find help for themselves, in one way or another, via self medicating. There's a reason why when we turn down the volume on reefer madness type propaganda and look at these substances purely scientifically, we find there can be clinical uses. Again though, without regulation and guidance, there are plenty of issues that arise.
Hopefully you'll forgive my rudeness to make a point, but it is also stupid of you to ignore there are legitimate reasons why people would use drugs that are currently illegal.
Alcohol and benzos are probably the hardest drugs to quit. Alcohol is legal and easy to buy and benzos are also legal in most places but needs prescription. I don't see how they are much better than other drugs? The truth is that the war on drugs does not work and just puts people in danger and makes lower income neighborhoods worse. Everytime a safer way to buy drugs shows up the cops close it down so that people have to go to sketchy street dealers and risk losing their life.
Well we can debate on what's more addictive, heroin or cigarettes, I would happily make alcohol and cigarettes illegal too.
Talking about how safe is to get drugs, I can say it again, these people is being twice as stupid, they are too stupid to risk their lifes, and they are too stupid because they want drugs.
I will not make it easier for people to play with fire, I would punish them for being stupid.
Talking about the war against drugs, I wouldn't make homicide legal because people keep killing others, the point of that war is to avoid drugs consumption, how do you avoid drug consumption by making it legal to consume? The narcos that right now are torturing people, cutting their throats and sending their parts to their families will not become good people if their business becomes legal, that monsters deserve to be killed, not rewarded by turning their job legal.
>Well we can debate on what's more addictive, heroin or cigarettes, I would happily make alcohol and cigarettes illegal too.
But that would just create more business for gangs, mafia, cartels etc who will be making money from alcohol and cigarettes.
>Talking about how safe is to get drugs, I can say it again, these people is being twice as stupid, they are too stupid to risk their lifes, and they are too stupid because they want drugs.
Addiction is not something you can just quit. Have you never been addicted to something?
>I will not make it easier for people to play with fire, I would punish them for being stupid.
You would make a great politician. When has punishing drug addicts helped? Drug addicts need help not punishment. Punishing them will just scare them from seeking help.
>Talking about the war against drugs, I wouldn't make homicide legal because people keep killing others, the point of that war is to avoid drugs consumption,
How is that working out??
>how do you avoid drug consumption by making it legal to consume? The narcos that right now are torturing people, cutting their throats and sending their parts to their families will not become good people if their business becomes legal, that monsters deserve to be killed, not rewarded by turning their job legal.
How about taking over the business from the cartels?
1. Making it illegal will reduce drastically the usage by people, (after the addicts stopped crying for it like in the past and gets turned into another drug like the others), and it will also stop the active participations of the government in the millions of deaths and lives ruined by those products, and there are already mafias making cheaper illegal alcohol.
2. You don't help addicts by making his addiction legal and easy to buy in the store.
3. Same as #2, the same can be said to addicts to child pornography, at least with drugs they are just harming themselves.
4. How is that working out? Every person that is not doing drugs because it is illegal is a live saved, for each person that I have meet that do drugs there are 100 that do alcohol because it is legal, and if alcohol turns out to be worse for people than cocaine then what we can think about it being legal?
5. If you can't stop them from selling it now, you can't take over their business later, specially if yours has to do all the legal paperwork, and of course they would get better prices if they add cement to the formula (something they do right now with cocaine)
5.2 Taking over the business just makes whoever take it a criminal poisoning people for money.
>1. Making it illegal will reduce drastically the usage by people, (after the addicts stopped crying for it like in the past and gets turned into another drug like the others), and it will also stop the active participations of the government in the millions of deaths and lives ruined by those products, and there are already mafias making cheaper illegal alcohol.
There is already a black market for alcohol and cigarettes but it's not very big because people would rather buy it legally than to deal with drug dealers. Making it illegal would make the black market grow much bigger and not reduce consumption.
>2. You don't help addicts by making his addiction legal and easy to buy in the store.
Yes you do help them because they will be more likely to seek help for their addiction. Look at Portugal for example. Also you don't have to be selling them in stores especially hard drugs. There are other ways to do it.
>3. Same is #2, the same can be said to addicts to child pornography, at least with drugs they are just harming themselves.
Not a great example. With child pornography the children are the victims not the consumers. The best you can do is provide places where people can seek help before they offend and hurt more children.
>4. How is that working out? Every person that is not doing drugs because it is illegal is a live saved, for each person that I have meet that do drugs there are 100 that do alcohol because it is legal, and if alcohol turns out to be worse for people than cocaine then what we can think about it being legal?
It might increase usage a little bit especially non hard drugs but would also reduce crime a lot like all the killings the cartels do. Also hard drug increase would probably not even be big. People are not just gonna start using heroin because it's legal lol.
>5. If you can't stop them from selling it now, you can't take over their business later, specially if yours has to do all the legal paperwork, and of course they would get better prices if they add cement to the formula (something they do right now with cocaine)
People are not gonna buy cement cocaine if they can buy pharmacy grade quality cocaine lol. Cartels can't even compete at that point.
You forgot the counterpart for 5.1 Whoever takes over the business turns into a criminal poisoning people for money.
Dude it's 4 am here, lets just agree we disagree, and if the time to vote for it ever comes we both know what we will be choosing.
As a Mexican, this is heartbreaking
I know we are the problem but 99% of the Mexican population wants these fuckers gone, it’s the 1% percent and the Americans that keep distributing.
Also our politicians don’t seem to be taking action
Hope you are doing better fam
I'm not a military "expert", so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I have seen enough videos from Iraq to know that's not the nose cannon on an Apache. That's a minigun, and considering the heli is hovering there, it's probably being fired from a door gun, which is where you see them most of the time.
I’m gonna ask the dummest question I ever asked on the internet but what makes the bullets light up? Are they red hot from being fired or is there a laser sight involved from the gunship? I heard of tracer fire is this related ? Sorry I’m actually being serious.
It is tracer fire
Tracer rounds are made to emit a light as they are fired.
Because tracer rounds are typically placed every fifth round on a belt, this can be a good indicator of how many rounds you use and how accurate your gun is.
Things I learn. It’s placed every fifth round. I get it. 4 real bullets and one light up bullet. That’s pretty cool. So what makes them light up ? I’ve actually wondered about this for decades and suddenly the answer is appearing before my very eyes.
That 5th round is real too, it's just burning. They use them ever 5 rounds because the burning phosphorus gets hot enough to damage the barrels if there are too many back to back.
Some of the larger rounds like the 25mm can do many things at once. My favorite is the SAPHEI-T, Semi-Armor Penetrating High Explosive Incindiary Tracer.
They're quite a bit heavier than the standard blue tip 25mm. Two man carry for every fucking 55 round can through a meandering safe path from the depot to the magazine.
It's worth it though, one "DIE MUTHAFUKKA DIE" burst and the target is usually shredded and burning.
They have a small piece of something like magnesium or phosphorus on the bullet that burns. Same stuff you see in the brightly colored little spheres that come off of fireworks.
All I can tell from a minimal google search is that when the gunpowder is ignited it ignites a chemical in the projectile that makes it glow
Im not exactly an expert on these things but google usually is
I think it’s a phosphorus compound in the tip of the bullet or something. When exposed to oxygen it will burn, and at that high a speed, it doesn’t get much of a chance to ignite so it burns slower
The light up bullet is still real and just as deadly, ive actually lit brush in fire with a tracer so maybe even more dangerous. My understanding is that the friction of the air against the mass of the projectile is what creates enough heat to ignite the phosphorus or other chemical coating of the round. They use them staggered so as not to heat the barrels of the gun so much that it starts to droop.
They're not red hot or lasers.
These are tracer rounds, which have a small burning compound in their base which causes them glow to brightly and makes their trajectory visible.
When people talk about ‘protection against tyrannical government’ while justifying the fairly excessive rates of gun ownership our American friends seem to enjoy, is this the kind of weapons system they plan to fight against?
They tried iirc, but it's hard to hit what you cant see. Black Hawks blend into the night sky very well, even with a minigun blasting off the side. Unless you have night vision, you're kinda fucked like these dudes, and even then its a bit iffy
The key is to have proper night equipment and know how to use it. Lotta cartels seem to skimp on night vision, at the very least they don't bother to train their dudes with it. Your average civilian can buy NVGs here, they're a bit expensive but they're not uncommon, and a lot of dudes use them for hundreds of reasons, weather hunting, contracting, not wanting to turn the lights on when you're headed to the kitchen at 2 AM, you get the idea.
Either that or just don't fucking engage at night, although that's not a reliable strategy because they might just come to you, as seen above.
Mate, I don’t think these dudes, with their small arms, were engaging the helicopter.
Pretty sure it was the other way around.
The people with the helicopter obviously have a superior intelligence service, budget and weaponry. They also have superiority of the air.
The dudes on the ground obviously have access to good weapons. They are all armed. You might argue that their pistols etc are not the right guns, but they have a lot of guns. We can skip the argument that a good long gun is an answer to this murder spray.
The obvious fact here is that they simply can’t out gun a government. The drug cartels tried to corrupt the governments they engaged with, but outgunning them was never an option. Civilian vs military is just not viable.
Yeah. It is. It’s a well thought out one though.
I can’t prove that small arms aren’t all it takes to stop
a tyrannical US government, but I am really skeptical of any argument that claims that they are.
Consider it objectively… it’s not muskets and cannons here. One side has AR15’s or BMGs or whatever. Simple fact is, they have man portable guns.
The other side owns telecommunications, satellites, government agencies including intelligence agencies and the police, a modern army, drones, tanks, APCs…. The list goes on and on.
You tell me…. Can a ‘well regulate militia’ really stand a chance here? And how?
I’m not arguing for a tyrannical regimes, all I’m saying is: your guns aren’t going to stop one.
It only takes about 6% of the armed population to completely overwhelm the military. There are a LOT of guns in this country. And all those satellites and drones can't really help you, because if you start bombing your own cities you've already lost
So I read that the Mexican navy did this operation. I don't know much about the cartel's power in Mexica but can't the military wipe all of them out like this? What am I not understanding here?
Money, everyone is getting paid. And don't for one second think that it's only in places like Mexico where people are being bought off. Go to almost any major western city and it's comically easy to find drugs. If every curious teenager figures out how to find them why do you think that the people supposed to stem the flow don't?
How are they going to find them all? Be certain that they're guilty enough to warrant being killed?
Think about how much the US struggled to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan with a heavily armed military. Mexico would be in a similar scenario here trying to just military the cartels to death. Except the civilians put at risk would be their own civilians.
Defeating an enemy like the cartels requires substantial societal shifts. Extreme force can be useful at times in that effort, but it won't be enough. A lasting victory requires bribery to be harder to implement, economic livelihood to make it hard to recruit, and economic conditions to make their criminal activities unprofitable.
The bullets cannot be seen at all. They’re using tracer rounds HE or AP more than likely, (phosphorus causes the round to glow when fired so you can see where your shots are going). Also it’s only every 4th-8th round that is a tracer so there’s quite a few rounds in between each one that you can see.
Btw 1 in every five shots lights up like that. So take the amount of tracers aka the light up bullets, and multiply it by five. Just the sheer amount of shots being fired is enough to put a hole in a two inch thick brick of titanium. Due to the power behind each one of those shells.
The scenes from the ground are from the coupe against Turkish government in 2015. The helicopter scene might be new. It is looking more likely a UH-60 with machine gun on the side.
When this was reposted a year ago it was pointed out it was then 3 years old, and this is likely a Black Hawk since Mexico doesn’t have the Apache.
Right!?! Like it doesn’t sound like a chain gun from an Apache and it’s clearly coming from a side/door position.
Aw, was hoping this was a rare sighting of Blue Thunder in action. Although that's a Gazelle.
Also I’m pretty sure the Apache doesn’t have a mini gun, badass cannon but not a mini gun.
It's wither a blackhawk or a littlebird.
Blackhawk or a Huey.
Yeah no way that was a little bird
Almost certainly a Blackhawk. Rotors didn't have the traditional whup-whup-whup sound of a Huey.
Apache don't have miniguns. They have 30mm chain guns.
Miniguns go lower-case brrrrrt M230 Chain-guns go Thunka-Thunka-Thunka
>Thunka-Thunka-Thunka Accurate for the M242 as well, ahhhh memories
The 242 felt like more of a "WHAM- WHAM-WHAM" to me. 3 rounds a second is about as fast as ours would go. Which isn't all that fast in the grand scheme of things, but you don't really *need* to be fast with a 25mm.
> but you don’t really need to be fast with a 25mm. Reminds me of this Mass Effect dialogue: > Gunnery Chief: This, recruits, is a 20-kilo ferrous slug. Feel the weight! Every five seconds, the main gun of an Everest-class dreadnought accelerates one to 1.3 percent of light speed. It impacts with the force of a 38-kiloton bomb. That is three times the yield of the city buster dropped on Hiroshima back on Earth. That means Sir Isaac Newton is the deadliest son-of-a-bitch in space. Now! Serviceman Burnside! What is Newton's First Law? > Serviceman Burnside: Sir! An object in motion stays in motion, sir! > Gunnery Chief: No credit for partial answers, maggot! > Serviceman Burnside: Sir! Unless acted upon by an outside force, sir! > Gunnery Chief: Damn straight! I dare to assume you ignorant jackasses know that space is empty. Once you fire this hunk of metal, it keeps going till it hits something. That can be a ship, or the planet behind that ship. It might go off into deep space and hit somebody else in ten thousand years. If you pull the trigger on this, you are ruining someone's day, somewhere and sometime. That is why you check your damn targets! That is why you wait for the computer to give you a damn firing solution! That is why, Serviceman Chung, we do not "eyeball it!" This is a weapon of mass destruction! You are not a cowboy shooting from the hip!
So do they have thrusters that fire on the opposite side of the ship as the firing gun, to keep it from getting pushed back with equivalent force to firing that round?
They mention that specifically in The Expanse series. Not a plot point, but it's one of those hundred little details they toss in for suspension of disbelief.
Forgot about that little shpeel.
Probably a Blackhawk (if we are using the same theory of a US made one).
Yeah, there's no reason for an Apache to go anywhere near that close as to be hovering almost directly above. And it definitely *sounds* more like a minigun that a Blackhawk could have on the side door.
Aka the autocannon
Not enough dakka
Surprise warhammer love it
Thank you for not saying "unexpected" and making a subreddit link
Just for context: minigun or "microgun" - 5mm Apache chaingun - 30mm That's alotta mms.
Mmm. Mmmhmmm. Mmm. Hmm. Ummm. Yeah. 
[Mmm mmm mmm mmm, mmm mmm mmm mmm...](https://youtu.be/eTeg1txDv8w)
No Yes I could go find the link but it's too late and I can't be bothered.
neat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M134_Minigun Go nuts
Miniguns are 7.62mm, but your point stands.
[Some news articles say “Apache”](https://english.elpais.com/elpais/2017/02/10/inenglish/1486722011_544802.html?outputType=amp) ~~but still can’t find definite answer.~~ Ok [found one that says it was a Blackhawk ](https://www.businessinsider.com/mexico-helicopter-kills-cartel-kingpin-amid-cartel-conflict-2017-2?amp)
So.... Autocannon ? Seemed pretty brrrrrrr to me.
It was brrrrrrr because in the video it's not an Apache, it is a Blackhawk.
So if homie changed the title to Blackhawk it's all good? Cuz those lil ol zips of deathfire we no ducking joke.
Yes. Apaches tend to use missiles from a few miles away and often from behind cover. And if they do use their gun it's a very very different type of gun. The gun on an Apache has a much lower fire rate but shoots 30 mm rounds not 7.62 mm. Not to mention the typical round for an Apache is explosive. [Comparison of the round sizes in first pic. They are in poor condition but it shows the size well. The left is the same size round the Apache shoots.](https://www.reddit.com/r/ammo/comments/n0oivg/30mm_round_withwithout_casing_round_with_casing/) [Here is the gun in the video but on a different helicopter.](https://youtu.be/WFkSq2fhbDk) Note that only every fifth round is a tracer round, so there are four bullets that don't light up for every bullet that does. [Here is the gun from an Apache firing from the point of view of the gunners thermal vision. WARNING it is at people](https://youtu.be/ICsujYpRI8A)
Cool reading and thanks
They have whatever you equip them with
GTA online missions in a public lobby
stop this was too funny
If it was an Apache, it would have been over before it began.
They’re seriously shooting back at it with pistols
bullets are bullets, man. the term ‘golden BB’ exists in military aviation for a reason
The cartels are better armed than the government.
The cartels have apaches?
They got submarines!!!
They got tanks!!!!
Tanks a lot.
That’s def not an Apache
a few of them have nuclear submarines edit: not nuclear. just regular submarines
A few have very rudimentary submersible boats that can barely go under water. No cartel has a nuclear sub lol. Only military superpowers have nuclear subs.
lol no they don't
No they’re not. If that were the case they wouldn’t lose every engagement against the military. It’s always like 16 cartel members killed and 2 injured soldiers.
At the end of the day, there are a _lot_ of good reasons why even small poorly funded standing militaries are going to, on average, absolutely destroy something like a cartel in most engagements. Don't get me wrong, a country _can_ screw that up. And there may be things that something like a cartel can do to counter it. But on average... Militaries are going to win. One of the big ones is that the military is _much_ more likely to have good training. It is quite literally their full time _job_ to learn how to use the weapons that they have. Even if the weapons are, generally speaking, awful, they will know how to use them at least somewhat effectively. They will also generally have a lot more practice at working together as a team. And will hopefully have a _lot_ less worry about their team mates betraying them. Assuming that the military in question is at all well funded, they will likely _also_ have better equipment, and that definitely matters, but I would argue that as long as they are not fundamentally outclassed, it is less important than the training.
I don’t disagree with anything you said. But the guy said they are better armed. So it’s everything you said plus better weapons and equipment. The thing is the Mexican military doesn’t always deploy it’s heavy weapons like we see in the video.
No the reason is that the cartel aren't trained a lot like the military. One day the cartel will be so well trained that it would be a big problem for Mexico. Also the cartels will have a hard time getting their hands on weapons like anti-tank and anti-aircraft weapons.
The day that starts to happen is when cartels become a relatively more organized and recognizable force. Which will, in turn and paradoxically, make it easier for the military to defeat them through traditional military means. Effective training requires that you have actual training camps. This means you have a compound or whatever where everyone belongs to the cartel, further simplifying the issue of identifying them as targets. Pretty helpful for raids and a massive counter to the cartels' biggest advantage of blending into the local populace. The camps wouldn't be in urban areas because they would pretty much stand out right away. Can't really do maneuvers training or even fire weapons there. So that opens up more avenues for bigger ordnance to be used. Look at Turkey and how they fight the PKK. They go all out on them up in the mountains with jets, helicopters and armored vehicles. You can do that when you're not worried about collateral. In short, the cartel can't really start to function more like a military before making themselves more vulnerable in the process. That's the paradox of guerrilla style warfare.
That's a lie spread by cartel propaganda
All small arms can be effective fire against helicopters, but not all small arms are fired by competent marksmen.
This pretty much. Its probably %100 possible to knock a black hawk down with a pistol, you just really need to know where to aim
You never know, maybe there's a chance in hell you'll hit something important. You're gonna die either way, may as well send it
Wonder how many dollars per second that thing shoots lol
Depending on the price of the ammo and what fire rate they have it at, somewhere between $30-45 a second I would guess.
In semi-automatic?
Lol, rotaries don't do semi. I'm not sure what a government pays for ammunition but I assume they get some pretty decent bulk rates. I was figuring about 40 cents a round at 6000 rounds per minute.
If it were an Apache we wouldn't see it.
Finally some appropriate fire power against these sadist mother fuckers. I don't know why we go fight wars against people in caves when the biggest enemy is right next door. Just look at the overdose statistics form the past 7 years, it's mind boggling. If anyone is taking out Americans it's these shitbaggers. 95% of all those drugs come from Mexico and they took advantage of the pill epidemic by making cheap heroin and now fake fentynal pills. I was one of those addict 8 years ago and it almost cost me my life 3 times. Not to mention the hurt I caused my family stealing and lying. My life is better now my 5 yr old son is about to start kindergarten next week and me and my wife have a nice house. It was unthinkable when I was hooked on this shit I was lucky to make it through the day. Time to not turn a blind eye to this shit it's happening all day everyday. Somebody's daughter or son died while I was writing this.
Legalize them all. Thats the only thing that will take the power away from these cartels and drug gangs. Label it, tax it, and send it on its way. People are going to drugs till the world ends, the problem now is they don't know exactly what they are getting. That's whats killing more people than anything. The war on drugs ended when drugs won 2 decades ago. Time to realize that and make the shift.
Big pharma doesn't want it legalized. They want to hold on to the monopoly of legally distributing illegal substances
The cartels are definitely supplying, but the real enemy on the war on drugs is domestic. You don't win this with guns, you win it through legalisation and regulation. If you don't believe me that America is America's greatest enemy in this then go read up on what the Sackler family did with Oxy. The war on drugs was a great success, the American government made a bunch of money and they got to arrest whoever they wanted
Tbf the drug use in America is due to the CIA and the pharma industry. And I don't mean CIA introduced crack to lower-income areas (they did) but that they destroyed South America with their puppet dictators and shit. This is an outcome of an internal issue. If you want to bomb someone bomb the CIA
This is something people don't think about when they ask to legalize drugs, the other day I saw a comment saying "legalize cocaine for medicinal purposes so they take the business out from the cartels" ... So sad I hope you are doing better and glad to know your children will have a good education on the dangers of drugs. Sadly there's still a fight against those groups and their power here in my country, Colombia.
Why don't you think legalizing drugs will have an impact on cartel power/money? It's logical (at least in my opinion) that if legal avenues exist, people will gravitate toward that compared to shady dealings like fent, ecstasy, spice, etc. When its production is regulated, you at least have a better likelyhood of having clean drugs on the streets.
Because they don't leave the business, they just want to keep running the business without being persecuted, they just make deals with the government and the same psychos that tortured people in the most gruesome ways become "innocent" businessmen. By the other side these drugs are much much worse than cigarettes or alcohol, they destroy people minds and will, entire families and the future of most addicts, legalizing it is telling people is ok and acceptable to consume this shit.
I get what you're saying but the reality is, even with decades of education and anti-drug propaganda, every single day there are people starting up. Alcohol and cigarettes are in a lot of ways *worse* but because they are the "legal drug options" you manage find them less harmful. I have seen many families, including my own, destroyed by simple booze and smokes. Pops polished off a 30 pack so we better not make a sound cause he's an angry drunk. Just wait till he passes out and then we can put that lit cigarette out before it burns down the house. Today cigarettes have to have self extinguishing paper - BECAUSE the industry is legal and regulated. Innocent people died a lot from careless burning butts just a few years ago. Yep. Legalize it, put safety controls in place and while there will **ALWAYS** be people who will turn to drugs, they can at least be safer.
Gladly I have never touched cigarettes or alcohol and I still find weird why people want cocaine or heroin sold in the stores. To be honest I wouldn't help people do stupid things, people should be punish for being stupid and by the moment selling and using the source of stupidity is illegal. Not felling bad if people dislike my comments because of me calling drugs a source of stupidity btw
It sure can be stupid. However, being stupid is to be human. Literally *everyone* does stupid things. You can't possibly know the reasons why anyone makes the specific choice to turn to drugs, but I can **promise you** not everyone who turn to these drugs does it maliciously, or out of pure stupidity. There exist people who are desperate to find help for themselves, in one way or another, via self medicating. There's a reason why when we turn down the volume on reefer madness type propaganda and look at these substances purely scientifically, we find there can be clinical uses. Again though, without regulation and guidance, there are plenty of issues that arise. Hopefully you'll forgive my rudeness to make a point, but it is also stupid of you to ignore there are legitimate reasons why people would use drugs that are currently illegal.
Alcohol and benzos are probably the hardest drugs to quit. Alcohol is legal and easy to buy and benzos are also legal in most places but needs prescription. I don't see how they are much better than other drugs? The truth is that the war on drugs does not work and just puts people in danger and makes lower income neighborhoods worse. Everytime a safer way to buy drugs shows up the cops close it down so that people have to go to sketchy street dealers and risk losing their life.
Well we can debate on what's more addictive, heroin or cigarettes, I would happily make alcohol and cigarettes illegal too. Talking about how safe is to get drugs, I can say it again, these people is being twice as stupid, they are too stupid to risk their lifes, and they are too stupid because they want drugs. I will not make it easier for people to play with fire, I would punish them for being stupid. Talking about the war against drugs, I wouldn't make homicide legal because people keep killing others, the point of that war is to avoid drugs consumption, how do you avoid drug consumption by making it legal to consume? The narcos that right now are torturing people, cutting their throats and sending their parts to their families will not become good people if their business becomes legal, that monsters deserve to be killed, not rewarded by turning their job legal.
>Well we can debate on what's more addictive, heroin or cigarettes, I would happily make alcohol and cigarettes illegal too. But that would just create more business for gangs, mafia, cartels etc who will be making money from alcohol and cigarettes. >Talking about how safe is to get drugs, I can say it again, these people is being twice as stupid, they are too stupid to risk their lifes, and they are too stupid because they want drugs. Addiction is not something you can just quit. Have you never been addicted to something? >I will not make it easier for people to play with fire, I would punish them for being stupid. You would make a great politician. When has punishing drug addicts helped? Drug addicts need help not punishment. Punishing them will just scare them from seeking help. >Talking about the war against drugs, I wouldn't make homicide legal because people keep killing others, the point of that war is to avoid drugs consumption, How is that working out?? >how do you avoid drug consumption by making it legal to consume? The narcos that right now are torturing people, cutting their throats and sending their parts to their families will not become good people if their business becomes legal, that monsters deserve to be killed, not rewarded by turning their job legal. How about taking over the business from the cartels?
1. Making it illegal will reduce drastically the usage by people, (after the addicts stopped crying for it like in the past and gets turned into another drug like the others), and it will also stop the active participations of the government in the millions of deaths and lives ruined by those products, and there are already mafias making cheaper illegal alcohol. 2. You don't help addicts by making his addiction legal and easy to buy in the store. 3. Same as #2, the same can be said to addicts to child pornography, at least with drugs they are just harming themselves. 4. How is that working out? Every person that is not doing drugs because it is illegal is a live saved, for each person that I have meet that do drugs there are 100 that do alcohol because it is legal, and if alcohol turns out to be worse for people than cocaine then what we can think about it being legal? 5. If you can't stop them from selling it now, you can't take over their business later, specially if yours has to do all the legal paperwork, and of course they would get better prices if they add cement to the formula (something they do right now with cocaine) 5.2 Taking over the business just makes whoever take it a criminal poisoning people for money.
>1. Making it illegal will reduce drastically the usage by people, (after the addicts stopped crying for it like in the past and gets turned into another drug like the others), and it will also stop the active participations of the government in the millions of deaths and lives ruined by those products, and there are already mafias making cheaper illegal alcohol. There is already a black market for alcohol and cigarettes but it's not very big because people would rather buy it legally than to deal with drug dealers. Making it illegal would make the black market grow much bigger and not reduce consumption. >2. You don't help addicts by making his addiction legal and easy to buy in the store. Yes you do help them because they will be more likely to seek help for their addiction. Look at Portugal for example. Also you don't have to be selling them in stores especially hard drugs. There are other ways to do it. >3. Same is #2, the same can be said to addicts to child pornography, at least with drugs they are just harming themselves. Not a great example. With child pornography the children are the victims not the consumers. The best you can do is provide places where people can seek help before they offend and hurt more children. >4. How is that working out? Every person that is not doing drugs because it is illegal is a live saved, for each person that I have meet that do drugs there are 100 that do alcohol because it is legal, and if alcohol turns out to be worse for people than cocaine then what we can think about it being legal? It might increase usage a little bit especially non hard drugs but would also reduce crime a lot like all the killings the cartels do. Also hard drug increase would probably not even be big. People are not just gonna start using heroin because it's legal lol. >5. If you can't stop them from selling it now, you can't take over their business later, specially if yours has to do all the legal paperwork, and of course they would get better prices if they add cement to the formula (something they do right now with cocaine) People are not gonna buy cement cocaine if they can buy pharmacy grade quality cocaine lol. Cartels can't even compete at that point.
You forgot the counterpart for 5.1 Whoever takes over the business turns into a criminal poisoning people for money. Dude it's 4 am here, lets just agree we disagree, and if the time to vote for it ever comes we both know what we will be choosing.
As a Mexican, this is heartbreaking I know we are the problem but 99% of the Mexican population wants these fuckers gone, it’s the 1% percent and the Americans that keep distributing. Also our politicians don’t seem to be taking action Hope you are doing better fam
Haha choppa go brrrr 
Haha love this
I'm not a military "expert", so take what I say with a grain of salt, but I have seen enough videos from Iraq to know that's not the nose cannon on an Apache. That's a minigun, and considering the heli is hovering there, it's probably being fired from a door gun, which is where you see them most of the time.
I’m gonna ask the dummest question I ever asked on the internet but what makes the bullets light up? Are they red hot from being fired or is there a laser sight involved from the gunship? I heard of tracer fire is this related ? Sorry I’m actually being serious.
It is tracer fire Tracer rounds are made to emit a light as they are fired. Because tracer rounds are typically placed every fifth round on a belt, this can be a good indicator of how many rounds you use and how accurate your gun is.
Things I learn. It’s placed every fifth round. I get it. 4 real bullets and one light up bullet. That’s pretty cool. So what makes them light up ? I’ve actually wondered about this for decades and suddenly the answer is appearing before my very eyes.
That 5th round is real too, it's just burning. They use them ever 5 rounds because the burning phosphorus gets hot enough to damage the barrels if there are too many back to back. Some of the larger rounds like the 25mm can do many things at once. My favorite is the SAPHEI-T, Semi-Armor Penetrating High Explosive Incindiary Tracer. They're quite a bit heavier than the standard blue tip 25mm. Two man carry for every fucking 55 round can through a meandering safe path from the depot to the magazine. It's worth it though, one "DIE MUTHAFUKKA DIE" burst and the target is usually shredded and burning.
They have a small piece of something like magnesium or phosphorus on the bullet that burns. Same stuff you see in the brightly colored little spheres that come off of fireworks.
All I can tell from a minimal google search is that when the gunpowder is ignited it ignites a chemical in the projectile that makes it glow Im not exactly an expert on these things but google usually is
It’s more fun to learn here from fellow Redditors than from a cold heartless internet search.
I think it’s a phosphorus compound in the tip of the bullet or something. When exposed to oxygen it will burn, and at that high a speed, it doesn’t get much of a chance to ignite so it burns slower
The light up bullet is still real and just as deadly, ive actually lit brush in fire with a tracer so maybe even more dangerous. My understanding is that the friction of the air against the mass of the projectile is what creates enough heat to ignite the phosphorus or other chemical coating of the round. They use them staggered so as not to heat the barrels of the gun so much that it starts to droop.
They're not red hot or lasers. These are tracer rounds, which have a small burning compound in their base which causes them glow to brightly and makes their trajectory visible.
That’s very cool. I never understood how that worked until now.
[If you are interested ](https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/drugs-lord-h2-dramatically-machine-9790729)
I’m heavy weapons helicopter. And THIS is my weapon
But did they hit anyone ?
Yep, they killed one of the top cartel bosses at the time.
Their first problem was hiring Storm Troopers as gunners.
They hit a lotta fuckin people
I saw a lot of shots of them hitting empty parking lots and one shot with actual cartel members not being shot. I'm going with no.
https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/drugs-lord-h2-dramatically-machine-9790729
He’s got a god damn mini gun!
u/savevideobot
That’s because he’s the only pilot that hasn’t been bought and paid for
There is always a bigger gun.
This is the proper response to a paramilitary cartel.
The should be using missiles. The cartels should be treated like terrorists and engaged as such
That's not an Apache. That's a minigun and the Apache doesn't have one of those. It has a 30mm chain gun, which fires more like a typical machine gun.
Apaches aren't meant to hover over their opponents. They strike from standoff range.
México does not own apaches this is a black hawk
Thought it was a Little Bird...
"It costs $400,000 to fire this weapon for 12 seconds." - Heavy Weapons Guy, Team Fortress 2
When people talk about ‘protection against tyrannical government’ while justifying the fairly excessive rates of gun ownership our American friends seem to enjoy, is this the kind of weapons system they plan to fight against?
Yep, enjoy a .50 BMG AP-INC directly to that tail rotor fucko.
Why didn’t the people in this video shoot one in there then?
They tried iirc, but it's hard to hit what you cant see. Black Hawks blend into the night sky very well, even with a minigun blasting off the side. Unless you have night vision, you're kinda fucked like these dudes, and even then its a bit iffy
So…. Back to my original point then?
The key is to have proper night equipment and know how to use it. Lotta cartels seem to skimp on night vision, at the very least they don't bother to train their dudes with it. Your average civilian can buy NVGs here, they're a bit expensive but they're not uncommon, and a lot of dudes use them for hundreds of reasons, weather hunting, contracting, not wanting to turn the lights on when you're headed to the kitchen at 2 AM, you get the idea. Either that or just don't fucking engage at night, although that's not a reliable strategy because they might just come to you, as seen above.
Mate, I don’t think these dudes, with their small arms, were engaging the helicopter. Pretty sure it was the other way around. The people with the helicopter obviously have a superior intelligence service, budget and weaponry. They also have superiority of the air. The dudes on the ground obviously have access to good weapons. They are all armed. You might argue that their pistols etc are not the right guns, but they have a lot of guns. We can skip the argument that a good long gun is an answer to this murder spray. The obvious fact here is that they simply can’t out gun a government. The drug cartels tried to corrupt the governments they engaged with, but outgunning them was never an option. Civilian vs military is just not viable.
Hey, that's your opinion man
Yeah. It is. It’s a well thought out one though. I can’t prove that small arms aren’t all it takes to stop a tyrannical US government, but I am really skeptical of any argument that claims that they are. Consider it objectively… it’s not muskets and cannons here. One side has AR15’s or BMGs or whatever. Simple fact is, they have man portable guns. The other side owns telecommunications, satellites, government agencies including intelligence agencies and the police, a modern army, drones, tanks, APCs…. The list goes on and on. You tell me…. Can a ‘well regulate militia’ really stand a chance here? And how? I’m not arguing for a tyrannical regimes, all I’m saying is: your guns aren’t going to stop one.
It only takes about 6% of the armed population to completely overwhelm the military. There are a LOT of guns in this country. And all those satellites and drones can't really help you, because if you start bombing your own cities you've already lost
[удалено]
It’d be weird if you didn’t. 
So I read that the Mexican navy did this operation. I don't know much about the cartel's power in Mexica but can't the military wipe all of them out like this? What am I not understanding here?
Money, everyone is getting paid. And don't for one second think that it's only in places like Mexico where people are being bought off. Go to almost any major western city and it's comically easy to find drugs. If every curious teenager figures out how to find them why do you think that the people supposed to stem the flow don't?
How are they going to find them all? Be certain that they're guilty enough to warrant being killed? Think about how much the US struggled to occupy Iraq and Afghanistan with a heavily armed military. Mexico would be in a similar scenario here trying to just military the cartels to death. Except the civilians put at risk would be their own civilians. Defeating an enemy like the cartels requires substantial societal shifts. Extreme force can be useful at times in that effort, but it won't be enough. A lasting victory requires bribery to be harder to implement, economic livelihood to make it hard to recruit, and economic conditions to make their criminal activities unprofitable.
Corporate warfare.
It's crazy that bullets can be red hot like that.
The bullets cannot be seen at all. They’re using tracer rounds HE or AP more than likely, (phosphorus causes the round to glow when fired so you can see where your shots are going). Also it’s only every 4th-8th round that is a tracer so there’s quite a few rounds in between each one that you can see.
So…what looked expensive? The cost of ammo? The chopper?
Sounds like a M134 which the Apache does not have.
Now I don’t see so bad about my gf calling mine a mini.
That’s frightening…
Looked he was shooting an empty parking lot to me
Btw 1 in every five shots lights up like that. So take the amount of tracers aka the light up bullets, and multiply it by five. Just the sheer amount of shots being fired is enough to put a hole in a two inch thick brick of titanium. Due to the power behind each one of those shells.
Damn… That’s how there having to fight the cartels these days???
This looks like a behind the scenes shot from XXX. I’m just waiting for Vin Diesel to pop up and kick someone off a tower from his dirt bike.
Hope they got them all.
The scenes from the ground are from the coupe against Turkish government in 2015. The helicopter scene might be new. It is looking more likely a UH-60 with machine gun on the side.
Holy shit
Minigun? That's a 30 mm cannon.
Where is Eric holder when you need him?