Experimental tanks with jet engines

[ravenpaw77]

I'll be honest to .... Thus the Abrams was born ....

[Furicist]

Being honest, good things did come from this concept, even the M1 Abrams is powered by a gas turbine and jet fuel.

[tubernation1]

Wow. I thought the dude at the beginning with the bazooka was there to "motivate" the tanks to make it across the bog...

[osloboez]

@tubernation1 nah thats a manpad sam called the igla - early russian stinger

although that turbines really gave it hardcore capabilities

[SecuR0M]

0:19

"Sah thar's a jet plane above us ah fink."

*Turns on jet engines*

"No matter. We shall take them on our terms.

[bunny153649]

lets put rockets under my house and see if it will fly....

[GlasgowTruthGroup]

This is a perfect example of crazy military engineers with too much time and too much funding. It's common that military development sections will often develop strange new technologies to see if they can be applied to warfare, and that most of them are basically just experiments, but I fail to see how anyone could believe that a jet powered tank could ever be feasible, cost effective, reliable or advantageous.

[SecuR0M]

@GlasgowTruthGroup Yeah.

Now we do.

Because of exactly these experiments.

Derp.

[SingularlyDatarific]

Go Russia?

[WW2MODELBUILDER]

theres always a noob with a rocket ! lol !

[keineahnung126]

0:00 NOOB

[crushedrgb]

Is this a polish or bush administration invention?

[sinclair61]

Imagine a division hurtling down the autobahn at 150-200 kmh. haha

[GroinOfHumo]

I gots me one of those rocket vans in Romania

[pofigstik]

Хули распизделись, пендосы?? Боитесь...

[Me4tsh1eld]

Those crazy russians :).

[cammander263]

these tanks were prototypes, i gess the russians didnt like the idea of the jets on tanks

[49bobbyk]

Whatever happened to the flying tank that could also swim?

[Captain25011]

Finally the Russians found out how to completely waist fuel.

[THEGLOWBRICK]

@Captain25011

This would be a really clever comment, if you could spell.

[Captain25011]

@THEGLOWBRICK you know i really try-not...when i type its horrible spelling cause i think of the first way to spell a word and its sometimes wrong. srry for the inconvenience

[shanebist]

In soviet Russia, Tank drives you!

[dodg3rs21]

lol a tank with a NO ;D...............buh anyway why in the hell would you put a jet engine on a tank? O.O make it faster? lulz

[DanVielwerth]

FUCK YEAH!

[Frozenmonkey2]

look the russians know how to pimp their tanks

[ben5028]

Probably uncontrollable other than a straight line.

[nabeelmerchant]

Difficult to push a tank through jet air the bloody tank weighs hundreds of tons, just scrap the project.

[JBenge308]

Shagohod?

[HellzNord]

that has to be the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen LOL

[SibirianHusky]

@HellzNord

didnt u have a mirror at home ????

[FilmPA]

Um wow holy lollerskates I have never seen this shit

[fresnel149]

0:24 GO BABY GO

[MrSmilingBandit]

lol the russians are so crasy^^.....

[icebear74]

thats crazy..lol.

[hgoajoajgoiajhbiuahp]

Is this tank the one made in April Fool?

[SparkPlugRocks]

hmmm im not sure how much that would help, because tanks don't roll, you cant push them. only the driving wheels can do that. i think, im not sure. don't flame me.

[SmokyMcPot007]

This gas turbines don't even work like normal turbines ... they are not pushing the tank forward like a turbine in a plane does ...

[aracaen]

so this is basucally an old soviet M1?

[dejawolf]

@aracaen old soviet T-80 you mean?

[greatgoofy]

@aracaen technically not. The M1 jet still drives the belts, whereas it here is directly drive by the thrust from the engines a la jet aircrafts.

[dougstiro]

nowadays yes, this was during the cold war though

[videoGunZ]

next we got is a flying tank :D WITHOUT WINGS!

[xb3ud]

no the abrams uses a turbine engine not a jet . it is the same concept but actually quite different

[walidot]

The Abrams uses a jet engine...

[NoobPwner222]

Theres a REALLY good reason why we don't actually put jet engines on tanks. First of all they are REALLY ineffecient and tanks are incredibly heavy.

[musewolfman]

just because it's not a GOOD idea, does that mean it's not an AWESOME idea?

[CrazySnake5000]

but wait doesn't the abrams use a jet turbine engine so actualy we do but we just don't use the exhaust like a jet airplane would you use the rotoations of the shaft just like some hydro's

[Frank12391NL]

nicy try, take a look a an M1 plz...

[DigbyCat]

cum, fly with me....

[IgnasIV]

didn't look any faster with jets turned on

[petunized]

@IgnasIV Voice says, it meant to help vehicle to get out of a bog or swamp. Not to make it faster.

[archmasterzeta]

Lol, this reminded me of Metal Gear Snake Eater, and the rockets that the Shagohod had on it, serving as booster to extend the range of its IRBM

[jzenzayer]

Thats what you get from crazy communists.. They blew more money into their defense program yet neglected thier nuclear containment systems, civil safety and protection, and numerous other flaws that come with a fully atheist govt. system.

[laughthis138]

what a waste of rocket technology. If they were going to give anything rockets it better fly or explode becuz the only thing that tank can do is waste gas

[Suyamu]

that's what the conclusion of the project was - waste of gas - but the technology trials have brought some new insights.

The initial idea was not just out of fun - like: "hey know what? let's pimp our tanks by giving them turbo-reactive jet engines...."

it was to create tanks which can go through swamps and deep mud as seen in the video where any normal tank would sink and get stuck.

And there are lots of swamps in some parts of Russia.

[specterprime1957]

the one vehicle with four tracks looked interesting, but the use of a jet engine for that extra boost.......not too practical....would look at a better power pack with a much greater shaft horse power......the old saying is KISS....Keep It Simple Stupid!

I'm not sure what the power to weight ratios were.....but there had to be a better engine for the aplication

[DevSolar]

"Sneak up"? Have you *ever* seen a moving tank in person? They don't "sneak up" to anybody...

[samipso]

They do, did you ever see any tank battle documentary at all? The only reason tank aces survived is because they found concealed targets and "sneaked" behind / next to an enemy tank.

[DevSolar]

If you believe so.

[dylangeda]

good luck trying to sneak up with that. ahha

[tipo2106]

nice experiment, but useless in combat. They will simpely kill nearby friendly units, and soldiors will not be able to use it as cover when under heavy fire.

[Kayback]

It's the M1 Abrams technically powered by a jet engine? Or a turbine engine at least

[tubekeyj]

What M1 Abrams??? It is the Russian tank with airplane engines.

[micktompson101]

yea it is but different consept

[sanimalscoolzfriend]

somthing like a harier engine....

[Rabel2136]

Suck to trying to advanse behind that thing...

[Valkmir]

and when you look at it it blows up with a giant fireball killing teammates nearby

useless thing :p

[carlover01]

thats friggen epic.

[TaaviTheCorrupted]

If I were an anti-tank team member, I'd certainly be delighted when facing that ;)

[AltGrEnd]

knight rider turbo boost :)

[ionescucristi]

When Russia have built the prototype america learn to go on bike.

[Bunnington80]

Jet tank - what a dumbass idea. How much fuel does the jet consume? However much it's more than they can carry. Jets go! (for15sec)

[zerotem]

Dumb ass idea eh? Thats why the M1A1 uses a turbojet aircraft engine which is quieter than average piston engine and can use almost any fuel. It's closer to aircraft engines than car engines. In a way it worked.....

[NaPalm625]

you can turn your tanks back against the enemy and let the engine rip and cook the enemy to a crisp

[Defender78]

right... when u get close enuff to the enemy, instead of shooting with w guns u pivot the tank around in order to fry em. Menwhile the enemy hauls ass/retreats or blasts u into next Tuesday

[arasaka2020tm]

hehe, i can see why this idea was dropped!

[crushedbytanx]

Jet engine powered tanks= Nightmare/Boner casserole!

[xiphas7]

Rofl, 5 seconds of +15mph, I'm pretty sure that's a gigantic advantage in battle.

[JackPLflashpoint]

Yeah, who care about fuel? that would burn tons of fuel in few seconds. BTW that would be a great IR target for anti tank rockets. So high temperature, 100% sure for rocket hit at first time

[JesusJack4x4]

LOOK UP COTTONMOUTHMOVIES

[shkodrani16]

hover tank would be awsome

[BlizBob]

Walking tanks would be even cooler.

[fludblud]

if you mean hovercraft with armour and turret then yes the russians have made one too

[VolcanoSam]

Lmao they already have put wings on a tank mate

[jshaw6000]

Since these russians like to test everything possible, they should go ahead and put wings on this tank to and see waht happens.

[senorfreebie]

They did that in WW2. The project failed ... I believe the test pilots / drivers (whatever) died. The tanks were designed as gliders, with detachable wings for when they landed. They were dragged behind heavy aircraft and let go over the landing zone.

[dbviewer5]

Look at that shit.

Those fuckin Ruskies are crazy!

[Csp499]

"What're you gonna do with a rocket engine on a tank?" -Granin, MGS3

[bum291]

To get away if they are about to overrun with a hundred partisans armed with wrenches, They are rear facing flametrowers at the same time lol :)

[Csp499]

Or, in MGS3's case, attach them to the side of a mobile launch unit to accelerate a launched nuclear missile and increase its range.

[thatman64]

well these are rocket tanks arent they? jets r a bit differnet

[segregator236]

Ugh...come on. Were they trying to make a Thrust-SCC-style vehicle again?

[xm177fullauto]

turbines arent good really bcause you'll need lots of fuel trucks, and they are easy targets.

[misopogon10]

pointless

[chinesecommunist]

Nice. I guess the M1 wasn't the first turbine-powered tank.

The rocket packs don't seem like a great idea, though.

[01e9]

first turbine-powered tank - T-80

[RWDexter]

Actually the first turbine-powered tank was T-62R. It didn't enter the mass production though.

[01e9]

I spoke about the first serial tank!

[cammander263]

@01e9 When was the t-80 made and does it realy have a turbine engine

[PATRONSKiii]

@cammander263 T80 is a T64 with turbine. Both tanks were exactelly the same exept the engine. Of course that was prototypes, from late 1960's. After, the T80 became a new tank, with new hull and suspension, but kept the T64B turret for a moment. The Big improvement came with T80B of 1979, new turret, a lot of improvement, better tank than all T64 variants. Last big upgrade T80U of 1985, also declined in diesel variant UD.

[PATRONSKiii]

@cammander263 The real origin of turbine engine is dark, if you look at dates, soviet made it first, and US copied it to compete with the latest russian tank. However, US were genius engine men, and probably developped their own prototypes of turbines for their future MBT70 without copiying the russians,

[TylerReifenberger5]

@PATRONSKiii To correct you on that soviet did not make the first turbine engine it was an english RAF piolt in 1930 and US did not get it from soviet. The engine is copied but from german design after WW2.

[moicced]

they use it to give power to the tracks, not in the air....

[iamafuckingidiot]

russians and their crazy weapons.. gotta love em.

[shamuratov]

дaaaaaaaa!!!!!!!!!!!! ужaaaс! вoт блин у нaших кoнструктoрoв фaнтaзии былo!!! скoлькo денег нa этo все делo ушлo.... дa...

[faf26]

not very handy on land is it its tearing the tracks apart.on water i think it would sink when it turns of its engine.its to heavy.

[senorfreebie]

Actually the amphibious vehicle shown wasn't a tank, it was literally an amphibious light armoured vehicle with jet engines mounted on top instead of a turret.

[guyon2342]

niet eens :P waarschijnlijk worden die tanks zo zwaar door die straalmotoren dat ze er alsnog niet op vooruit gaan XD nouja in ieder geval: ze zien er niet echt snel uit

[thetilo]

kan nix verstan

[gurugerus]

uebersetzen?