Problem with Reactive Armor is that when hit it explodes & could kill or maim personnel near or on the tank, including the TC (tank commander) if he has his head out of the turret getting a better view of the battlefield.
If a tank has very good armor it does not need RA. All these elctronic jamming devices also can & do malfunction so incoming missiles from the vertical & horizantal still have a great chnace of hitting a tank.
'Best' is a silly word, since all things have good & bad attribute
in all serious the abrams can go over 80kph. An abrams with no governor can hit 90+kph. T80 is nice, but not the only one thaht can do a jump or go fast.
@redreaper2020 yah our leopards can do over 80 but are governed to.thanls god we got some newer ones now.hope the m1a3 is alot better than the m1a1 cause that was shit lol.i gunned drove and loaded one in teaxs and i did'nt like it compared to the old leopard c2 we had.i don't like the turbine engine as it's slow to start moving and if you come under fire and need to move off a position fast you can't compared to regular engine.
@rayoliver34 your abrams's had bad governors then. Turbine governor isn't like diesel ones. Abrams hauls ass at start. That's the advantage of a turbine, why US still uses it--it has like 50% better lowrange acceleration of the Leo2 diesel.
Without a governor, on full power, the M1A2's engine puts out around 2200hp (rated@1500 due to heat), and will propel the tank to 65mph. That being said, its tracks will shred, the gearbox will bind up, and hydros will burst, but the engine will do it.
@redreaper2020 Wrong at all.M1A2 weights 72tones, it can only drive highspeed on road of 42mp/h 56km/h.Its not faster than any other tank, its much slower than any other tank.2200hp gas turbine must throttled to 1500hp to let this huge fatboy 72tones moving.It breaks after 152miles average,cause gas turbines make lot of troubles.The 1700 degree exhaust burning lot of electronic and make physical damage to the tank.Gas turbines are the worst enginges for tanks.
@Talshet "burning a lot of electronic"? What the fuck?
It isn't throttle to "let this huge fatboy 72tones moving", it doesn't break after 152 miles. It's throttled to keep reliability high. You pull the governor off a jet engine you can push it to insane horsepower; that's any gas turbine engine. The engine obviously isn't that bad or they'd replace it.
@redreaper2020 Ok another guy who thinking when something is worse it would be replaced by something better....wrong the US MOD has contracts with developer wich as not allowed to buy things from other military manufactures wich are not accepted by them, that means if they dont give you option for other engine than the ATC1500 gas turbine you have to buy it and there is no doubt about its mass failure.Here you have lot of informations M1 disease /watch?v=ULC0TOiZZzc why its shit.
The US military, first of all, is buying a new GTE. Second, they've purchased plenty of military equipment in the past, they get a lot of things from BAE, Rheinmetall, etc.
30 year old M1s handled upgraded 30 year old T72s with ease. Proven. Even M-60s outclassed T-72s in '91.
US also has John Deere, Caterpillar, Mack, Oshkosh, Detroit Diesel, Terex, etc. All of which market 1000-4000hp range diesels which are superior to foreign engines in reliability and efficiency.
@redreaper2020 Not one T72B was ever destroyed from M60 and T72M doestn count because this T72 are downgrades of Downgrades and have only 30% armor of the original T72.USA had never develope something more relaibale in Tanks,Missiles,Rockets or Rifles than Europe or Asia.IF you would know about M1 you wouldnt talk shit like that.M1 is the most unrelaible tank.Just make research how often M1 breaked down in Desert Storm before he reaches the battlefield.Its biggest waste of money.
@Talshet you are a fucking idiot. Any nation will adopt defense equipment which meets its needs and performs as good as its industrial base will provide. The US has the biggest defense industry in the world. So, naturally, our equipment is extremely high performance in the areas which fit our doctrine, and suited to the particular demands which suit it. This is the same of Russian, German, or other foreign equipment. We simply have a larger base to draw from.
@redreaper2020 M1 is the most useless piece of shit weights 72tones cant drive of 80% of roads of any country,cant cross 90% usual bridges wich can stand only 50-60tones.Its stuck to often on offroad terrains, its a 1700 degree hot metal shit wich can be seen with thermal size from twice bigger distance than any other tank.It breaks down in average of 160miles and needs 4hours of maintenance (only in base)all other tanks needs only 15 minutes (on field).It cant idle with on engine
@redreaper2020 Why do you think USA have could several times A10s and F16s to destroy their own stucked M1s in Desert Storm,i dont know other country who had problems like that to call an aircraft with million $ missile to destroy a several million $ Tank,because its a fat kid tank that cant drive on its own.Its the biggest mistake after WW2.No other tank weights 72t the only one was the unrelaible useless Tiger.Like Tiger the Abrams is biggest propaganda to make it better.
@Talshet um, the Abrams isn't the tiger. It's closer to the panther.
You bitch about its weight so much, what about hte leopard 2, nearing 70 tons itself? Or the massive Merkava? Hm? Or the Challenger 2? Hell, they use the same exact tracks, except for the Merkava. Chal2 and Leo2 are the same weight, and somehow still work well.
Leopard 2 (24ps/tone) weights 10tones less than M1 and has 1500hp engine (none gas turbine) better tones/qm.Challanger2 weights 10tones less than M1 has no gas turbine, and has 19ps/tone.T-90 49tones (21ps/tone) 1000hp diesel engine (30% smaller than M1 tank) M1 breaks down 1000miles before diesel powered tank breaks.
A Leo2 armored for urban combat is very similar in weight. 5 ton difference. Even a ten ton difference has no real effect on ground pressure or mobility. The M1's optics are better than the Chal2 (in tests the chal2 has slightly longer range due to its rifled gun, but the M1 hits targets faster), has longer gun life, better suspension & tracks than the T90, and is more ergonomic
It's not propaganda. You just don't like it because it's American.
@Talshet your fucking av icon is a soviet hammer and sickle. Bias much?
I have no qualms about saying Russian tanks are good. But for the missions that the US uses its tanks for? No. Overall? Close but probably not. Also, size increases shock value, decreases after-armor effect, and lets us fit compartmentalized ammo instead of tanks becoming flaming jack-in-the-boxes.
The M1 is actually probably the most UNDERrated tank globally. It is incredibly survivable and VERY well armored
@redreaper2020 Ohh jacked-in-box, do you think M1 was never "jacked-in-box"? Just watch some videos about destroyed M1s you will see there are to much cooked off and jacked in box M1s.The M1 is the most overrated tank in history. It has no chance in mass, why?Simple it breakes down before it reaches the battlefield the most do it so.Reason is the 1700 degree hot gas turbine its unrelaible and burns to much gas and equipment and it set the tank onfire during idling.
1.) it is impossible for an abrams to "jack in the box". the ammo storage is behind the turret. There is only ever one round inthe hull, usually in the breech.
2.) if turbines were so unreliable planes would be falling out of the sky. your argument is absurd.
3.) it's underrated. It has won set-piece battles, has a very low death ratio for amount deployed. Everyone says it's crap, yet it wins wars and has done unusually well in cities, far better than the T-72/80/90
@Talshet also, no Abrams tank has ever caught fire from its own engine. I've actually never even heard of it happening with ANY gas turbine. That's absurd.
Your arguments aren't proven by history or fact. The M1 is one of the few tanks which has actually done excellent in urban combat. The fact that it cannot withstand a dozen 155mm shells exploding under it doesn't make it a bad vehicle. Also, the GTE only burns ~30% more fuel than a diesel, and that fuel is about 30% cheaper.
@redreaper2020 Yes M1 set him often on fire.People like you never make researches but talking shit before they even "know" what they are talking.Use google its your friend.And gas turbine are inferior in all catagories to piston engines.Its 3-4 times hotter and can be seen twice further.Gas turbines have horrible logistical problems its cant be maintenanced on field,cause gas turbine must be completly extracted.Lot of M1 during Desert Storm set them self on fire and wear destroyed
@Talshet I have personally actually maintained gas turbines. The chances of a gas turbine setting a tank on fire without some severe mechanical failure are the same as me lighting a fart and flying to the moon. Sounds like an urban legend.
Are they a pain in the ass to maintain? No. The turbine is actually simple to fix, about as complicated as a lawnmower motor. They can be swapped out in 20 minutes with minimal special equipment. The logistics "nightmare" is grossly overstated.
@Talshet the turbine's design is 35 years old (M1 tanks still have the original engine installed whenever built; "replacements" are actually refurbs). This is a big fact with reliability figures; it looks bad on paper but the engines are well past their expiration dates.
Logistics work well. The engines are small and light, easy to simply swap out, and the engine uses the same fuel as plates; the trucks transporting it can also use it. JP8 is extremely cheap.
@Talshet Most diesels are replaced after a few thousand hours of use, whereas the turbine is sent to the factory, refurbished, and sent back out, for a fraction of the cost. Some of the M1A2s just back from Iraq are using engines that were actually built in the 1970s.
Large diesels wear out rods and heads. Turbines churn through oil and bearings starting/stopping, but there's no wear on the rest of the engine. The actual overall reliability is VERY high, just wears out bearings fast
@rayoliver34 Once Leopard can fire an ATGM to the range of 4km or in case of a Reflex missile - 5km then we can talk about whats impressive. The engine compartment internal volume in Leo2 is 8 cubic meters. The whole T-80 armored volume is 11 cubic meters. I wonder whats easier to hit from a long range. Massive Leo2 or small and agile T-80U?
the m1 won against the largest army in the world, you´r talkink wihtout any historical reference. also, the russian equipment always has been a bad quality trash.
the m1a2 and m1a1 have top secret armar and that was made inthe 1970s and the usa is coming out with the m1a3 soon witch shows we are more than 1 step ahead
@kirbyroxy What will the A3 feature that makes it more viable than the A2 version? And more to the point, how much more will it cost to retrofit existing A2's with similar gear? When it comes to talking "best" anything, factors beyond just the machine itself bear consideration. The King Tiger in WWII was the best tank of its time, but the shattered German infrastructure made them too costly to get out in time, and they lacked the fuel for long term use. If the T90 does it as good for less...
Yes Marshal I can understand why Russians would not think tanks are supposed to be used in town.Ours have been quite effective in Iraq,the part of the difference is tactics of course but the increased elevation and depression of Abrams main gun is very useful when dealing with people shooting from rooftops and basements and the main limitations we have with anti personal weaponry is controlling the lethality because of potential collateral damage
@SuperRatchetclank, You're another asshole calling people nazis when they are not simply because they know more than you &/or don't agree with everything you do. You are the nazi or bolshevik whatever dictorial jackass.
@Nickael7 In fact I've never been to Russia nor do I have any desire to go there.I can go to Canada however and I have been there before.Are you threatening me?
@RedStormRising250 Yeah! go to Canada as well, Police system is not very efficient there, so somebody can be disappear easily without a trace. ;-) If you find that threatening its your personal mental problem, but yes people disappear there as well. Just a little warn.
As for urban combat - tanks are NOT for that one - and those "variables" in 99% the time will not be in its favor there. Things like BMPT is direct product of tank combat experience of ours
@MarshallJukov, It depends on the situation in the particular engagement. Tanks were not made for urban combat but indeed have performed excellently as have SPGs etc. Tanks & SPGs simply ptovide direct & indirect arty. fire & must be protected by infantry, otherwise there is trouble. AFVs must keep to large to midsized open avenues & streets, parks, etc. & not get caught in narrower streets with much rubble etc. Western Allies, USSR, Axis & even Japanese effectively used tanks & SPGs in UC
@MarshallJukov, 115mm had a slow rate of fire, so that is a good reason to replace it. 115mm could have been produced in Israel & the west without a problem, but the 105mm L7 was overall more than sufficient, & so was the 90mm.
115 had no slow rate of fire - it used single piece ammo and its rate of fire was limited to 10 rpm only due barrel cooling.
Everyone could produce rounds for 115mm if they wanted - but its extremely expencive. Gun itself usualy costs barely 5% of ammunition it uses. To develop ammo for a new gun is costly. Thats why they just replaced it with L7 - they had plenty of ammo for it and domestic production of them
@MarshallJukov, If you believe the Abrams was the worse tank produced after WWII I feel sorry for your reasoning. As for the rest it matters little since the Abrams has proved itself & is much better protected now & has better ammo (always in development) than the first models that were more than sufficient to deal with anything that could oppose them. Abrams is still more than sufficient to combat any other tank, AT round, AFV available. Losses will occur & that is nothing new.
Sorry but it didn`t proven - Iraq had no modern MBTs. And M1 had massive series there - i gave you video series to study.
As for ammo - it described in that series also - M1 has ZERO anti-infantry capability. And M829A3 is too slow and long to effectively penetrate modern 4S23 ERA and composite armor that negates DU "self-sharpening" effect.
@SuperRatchetclank, Thank heavens there are excellent unbiased Russian, German, USA, Brit, Chinese, etc. historians & people that are quite open-minded & aware of matters & realize we all have made errors in the past, present & will do so in the future & only want the best for all.
@RedStormRising250, Hi, & the gun & ammo were the same as the Russian gun & ammo. These 2 idiots here are, mmm, idiotic!!!
Yes, the FSB/GRU & OMON (modelled after USA SWAT teams) etc.
What's funny is that Nik calls everyone a terrorist, or whatever if they know something he doesn't etc. To him only one side can be right, their is no compromise & that makes him a vunerable psychotic that is easily led by some 'workers' paradise everything's OK there aren't any problems' nonsense.
Sorry but Spetsnaz wasn`t modeled adter SWAT lol - in USSR it started by Svechnikov and Starinov during civil war in Spain. As separate regiments they was formed in 1950.
OMON isn`t actualy a special mikitary forces - its just thugs for police operations - not an elite military
USSR never needed OMON. It was created by traiitor gorbachev to deal with countless riots and protests happened since late 1980s as result of his sabotage of the country. OMON basicaly still used for this purpose, aspecialy since 1993
Assad Babil wasn`t "an improved T-72M1" mister - that buckled of bolts made of pig iron had no Russian parts either - because Russia or USSR never sold tanks to Iraq.
Me and Mago devastated your miserable arguments there and now you migrated here hoping for hideout to start it all over again with same false arguments you used before?
@MattJoey2142 maby .. but you should grow balls .. cause with that peace of shit military technique that Russia has , you will have to fight with shovels , cause all your military is rusted and from soviet times = shit ! :D
@dav4ix It is a technique USA probably is jealous of. You have no fundamental resourses explaining Russia's tanks are old, rusted machines from Soviet Union. Look at USA. Abrams is their only active tank now, made in 80's. The T-72 is now upgraded to the T-90's which was late 1990's. So the T-90 is more advanced than the Abrams tank if you really research.
@MattJoey2142 well to be honest i dont give a damn thing about americans , i live in Europe and we have the best tanks ! Russia have quite old ones .. even if upgraded ...
@MattJoey2142 we just upgraded the abrams recently it is the best tank in the world we proved it in the gulf war against the latest soviet tanks Russia can upgrade all they want well just do them one better. Russia has always been all show they havent won a conventional war since WWII and the only reason they didnt burn back than is because america saved both you and UK's butts by shipping you weapons and raw materials
@MattJoey2142 Face it as long as russia has the attitude that they are superior to America and Western Europe they will always be atleast n one step behind us
@timenyart, hey yo this is not the 20e century wake up !!! Doesn't mean the T-90 is crap. Just look what is going on in Iraq with your M1A2 Abrams. You've been brainwashed with lots of western propaganda. I suggest you to go fight in Iraq (like my older brother did) riding in one of those metal radioactive coffins of yours. My brother is lucky to be alive, cause he didn't participate much in the battle like the other tankers, who are maimed, death or injured for the rest of their lives.
@Nickael7 If what you say is true about your brother and all my condolences, however that doesnt mean the T-90 is better than the abrams, the M1 is a main battle tank which means it is designed to combat other tanks on the battlefield, the US has barely fought conventional warfare since Korea, Iraq is guerilla warfare and street warfare for which the Abrams wasnt designed, if what you say about the Abrams is true than the same is true for the T-90 even more so
@Nickael7 and the Russians have been pulling this crap about how their borrowed or copied technology is better than ours since the Cold War, Putin is one of the biggest anti-western propaganda machines their is just check out their new 5th generation fighter that is allegedly better than the F-22 even though it hasnt been tested in true combat and looks like an exact copy of the Raptor
@timenyart, since the time of the cold war the US. has been copying the rockets for flying to space, the TOKAMAK fusion reactor for the Hydrogen bomb, reverse engineering the MIGs and tanks, they tried to copy the AK-47, satellite in space, and the list goes on... American engineer is no more like it was before, specially when it was during the cold war. Now things have totally changed. After the T-90 upgraded, their will be the T-95 mark-1 to counter the Abram M1A3-M2A1, chally -2 leopard 2A7+
@Nickael7, USSR got its first MIG jet engine from the British, its Tu-4 heavy bomber was a direct copy og the US B-29, the USA developed the A-bomb first & also sent Stalin uranium for his nuke weapon research in WWII, etc. etc. etc. USA never did what you said if did, but it was rather the USSR that did what you said the USA did.
@Nickael7, Ha ha ha!! Just google the info on the inet!! It is all well known for decades!! Even RT has an episode describing how the USSR got the British jet engine!!
@christof139 Or is another Western propaganda ? The A-bomb is U.S. engineering, but not the H-bomb, do you have any idea what is a TOKAMAK first of all. Migs is not created by British jet engines in fact, it was the Germans who invent the first jet engine, the British Mr. Whittle copied it.
@Nickael7, USA developed the H-bomb first. "The first thermonuclear bomb was exploded in 1952 at Enewetak by the United States, the second in 1953 by Russia (then the USSR). Great Britain, France, and China have also exploded thermonuclear bombs, and these five nations comprise the so-called nuclear clubnations that have the capability to produce nuclear weapons and admit to maintaining an inventory of them."
You should read what educated Russians write of all this & USSR propaganda
@Nickael7, German Jet engine was more primitive than the British jet engine, & the Brits gave the USA a copy of their engine & we improved it, so we only needed 1 engine per aircraft. Fianlly, the jet engine of the F-86 Saber Jet is the engine that all modern jet engines are based on. "The first gas turbine to successfully run self-sustaining was built in 1903 by Norwegian engineer Ægidius Elling."
@Nickael7, Read again. British had their own version, & then the Germans developed thier version. USA used British engine & improved it. Germans & Brits had to use 2 engines. USA XP80A/P80 used in southern Italy in 1945 in small numbers used 1 engine.
@christof139 I told you again send us a solid proof VIDEO. Is that simple and clear for your brain to understand these very simple words. It seems that you're the one who is mentally challenged by a simple, quick and firm way to demonstrate the PROOF IN A VIDEO. Is that too Complicated To Understand ??? A VIDEO @_@ with all the proof in it. I don't give a #@$ about wiki or google.
@Nickael7, You 'TELL' me nothing genius. Get off your lazy butt & Google all this easily found info. You make a fool of yourself. Post all this info. from many sources much better than Wiki would take much time & is unnecessary since ALL this info. is readily availble on the inet form relaible sources.
@christof139 I can give you solid VIDEO proof the Russian invention the Tokamak. The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Look for in YT for Russian Tokamak. Now I want yours...
@christof139 The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Look in YT for Russian Tokamak. Now I want a video of yours that show me the proofs of the JET-engine.
@SuperRatchetclank, A Romanian compressed air engine without internal combustion except for the piston engine supplying the compressed air, & no proof that there was combustion in the compressed air propulsion stream or that it ever flew. However, the design was a jet engine!
@christof139 I got some reliable sources to prove that it was the Russians who invented first H-Bomb. The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Hence the Tokamak reactor is necessary to create the Critical mass for Deuterium, tritium for the H-bomb. Search in YT for Russian Toakamak.
@christof139 Go fuck yourself you NAZI fuck prick, I have Jewish descendant, I got family members killed in EL Salvador by the Right-wing soldiers trained by the U.S. marines in the infamous schools of Americas.
@Nickael7, Left wing soldiers killed many innocent people in El Salvador etc. No difference between left or right in that situation. Similar to many things that happened in the USSR & Russia & everywhere else in the world over the course of time.
The USA Christie tank used the Christie suspension system. Some few Christie tanks were produced in the USA such as the M1928, M1930, & M1932 (also when BT2 was made in the USSR).
Interesting isn't it? USSR produced under license.
@christof139 You have no idea of what right-wing death-squad did to the indigenous population in El Salvador, you didn't see what these untermenches did to our people, General Roberto d'Aubuisson killed thousand of innocent people including friends and families. SO GO SUCK HITLER'S DICK FUCKING NAZI SYMPATHIZER. The FLMN Guerrilla saved our lives from those nazis trained by your country. You're one ass big liar, your not even Polish, but another Neo-Nazi prick pretending clean his face.
@Nickael7, "The Birobidzhan experiment ground to a halt in the mid-1930s, during Stalin's first campaign of purges. Soviet authorities arrested and executed Jewish leaders, and Yiddish schools were shut down."
You have no idea either because most likely you weren't born yet.
Ha ha ha!! Yes, I am indeed of Polish descent, hate Stalin & the Bolsheviks, the nazis & neo-nazis & silly people like you, although you do provide some humor.
@christof139 There are no death-squads in the left wing party of El Salvador. Stalin was an imbecile not even a communist, but another totalitarian fuck and Hitler was 1000 times worst. BTW, good use of google translate goof.
@Nickael7, You have 'Silva' in your name & so do I. It is derived from the Roman diety of forest & field, Silvanus. Be careful in Canada since most Canadians aren't commies etc. Maybe you'll get deported.
Seems Ortega in Nic. has violated the constitution there a good number of times 7 many Nics. don't like that, so he may get voted out of office. Same happened to Mr. T. in Honduras & looks like this may happen to Chavez in Venezuela.
@christof139 Yeah right you got Silva in your family name. Another big fat lies of yours. Go back to your basement and go pray to Hitler. The U.S. has plot many times in Nica. Hond. and Ven. a coup d'etat agaisnt them. The CIA was behind all these times.
@Nickael7, On one side of my family my grandfather was of Portugese descent & granny was Sicillian, the other side is Polish. Hence, Silva is my surname genius. The Polish name I will not tell you since it is none of your business & I would not dishonor the name by saying what it is to a jackass like yourself.
I know of the Portugese meaning of the word 'silva', but 'Silva' is different, although they both come from old Latin Silvans & hence silvan referring to flora. Rome conquered Iberia.
@Nickael7, Now back to armour/armor/tanks, AFVs, etc., which you have little kowledge of or experience with.
USSR was the 1st to employ the SB (smoothbore) tank gun in 115mm in the T-62, but it had a slow rate of fire, the turret traversed much to slow, & the main guns on most USSR MBTs can only be depressed to -6 degs. which limits their use in hull down positions on high ground. Then the much better 125mm SB was developed. Many nations replace the USSR 115mmSB with the Brit/NATO L7 105mm.
@Nickael7, 150m/s = whoopty do. Do you have delsuions or something that you are going to lead a great tank etc. force to assault NATO etc.? You sound like a ridiculous kid.
Check out the new 140mm main tank guns. USA version: The 140mm smoothbore Advanced Tank Cannon (ATAC) System consists of the XM291 gun, the XM91 autoloading system and a family of 140mm ammunition.
@christof139 You're back in stone age if 140mm is the only advance thing, there will be the 152mm as well with an accelerator. BTW, I have a nation and its called Quebec. And I feel so sorry about you big fat BSs you've been throwing at me, it just doesn't work at all. Falsehood is you, cause you didn't experience my war-torn childhood. And yes, again I have Jewish descendant. Does this causes a problems to you. FMLN never and never violated rights they win their election DEMOCRATICALLY in 2009
@Nickael7, No, I posted that to see what you would say dummy. Deception per Sun Tzu etc. i know that the USA & Germany had a 140mm but opted for the 120mm in the L2 & M1 way back when. Fact is that a 140mm may be too big since the rounds weigh ~100lbs & come in 2 parts. Too big is the general consensus but it is still being attempted in R&D. Same goes for the Russian 152mm, but they might be able to develope their 135mm OK. FMLN did violate peoples' rights. Ortega is also a jerk .
@christof139 FMLN did never violate people's right, only jerks like you who defend RIGHT-WING PARTIES LIKE ARENA who committed the most horrendous crimes in the 20e century. The people were not just killed, they were mutilated, burn alive with flame-throwers, blown by tanks, crushed with hammers, electrocuted, gutted, ripped to shred with machetes, they even killed women that were pregnant, where they gutted the ladies and pulled the baby or fetus alive.
There is no need in 135mm because 152mm already fit into MBT and there is wide array of munitions for this caliber. We don`t have troubles with 2 part munitions either because we using proven autoloaders for like 4 decades already
@Nickael7, In 1998, Daniel Ortega's adopted stepdaughter Z. Narváez released a 48-page report describing her allegations that Ortega had systematically sexually abused her from 1979, when she was 11, until 1990. On 4 March 2002 the Nicaraguan govnt. accepted the Commission's recommendation of a friendly settlement.
@Nickael7, In the 1990 presidential election, Ortega lost to V. Barrios de Chamorro, his former colleague in the junta. Chamorro was supported by the US & a 14-party anti-Sandinista alliance known as the National Opposition Union, an alliance consisting of conservatives, liberals, & communists.
There is also a lot of the same concerning the FMLN in El Salvador.
@christof139 Nicaragua is not my country of origin I don't know about your BS. If you want to talk about my things you're going with my country of origin EL SALVADOR, Hijo de puta.
@Nickael7, Left has lost elections in El Salvador too, but thankfully seems to be happening somewhat peacefully in comparison to the past. If you care about 'your country' then why don't you live there & try to improve it? Or is it you have played I am a poor refugee & am a mental case so please educate me & pay my bills route etc. in the past?
@Nickael7, Not many 120mm or 125mm rounds have ever pentrated the frontal armor of an Abrams, while the improved APDS etc. rounds of the 120mm in the Abrams etc. are very effective. Doesn't matter too much actually with all the AT missiles that will be involved from both ground & air platforms. Experience of the tank crews also counts greatly, so NATO has a big edge.
@Nickael7, What country are you speking of? Quebec isn't a country, so you must not have a country.
Same as Russian 125mm at the time. New Russian gun is only marginally better, but it is actually the quality & type of ammo that means the most. All that was discovered before, during & after WWII but is was the USA's 76mm & 90mm firing new HVAP rounds that proved barrel length & higher velocites weren't the whole story.
T-80 etc. was knocked out easily in Chechenya & is dated but still OK.
And if you actualy look into quality and types of ammo used in 125mm guns you will see that it surpasses 120mm NATO guns with double margin
T-80 wasn`t "easily knocked" - in fact you seem to know very little on details. In circumstances that was there any other tanks would suffer even more, aspecialy M1 who has no anti-infantry capability to speak of and is a HUGE target. In fact even Merkava 4 failed in similar but much safer environment in Lebanon
-6 degrees (-7) depression is well enough considering that all Soviet tanks since T-64 have intergal dozer blade and don`t need to go hull down - they can built entrenchement for themselves really fast, everywhere.
115 was replaces because more promising 125 was on the table even before 115 came - it wasn`t just fully ready. After it came decision was made to switch at 125mm caliber as a standard for all Soviet tanks who can have it
P.S. "many nations" is actualy Israel who captured some T-62s and simply had mo ammunition to use its 115mm gun so they attached L7. In fact U8-TS is much more powerfull than L7
@MarshallJukov, Nations other than Israel replaced the 115mm with the 105mm L7 & M68, & 120 mm M-393 tank guns such as Egypt, Ukrania with 125 mm KBA-101 tank gun.
Yes, 125mm was/is an excellent gun. Abrams 120mm/L44 could be replaced with with 120mm/L55 but as of the present the L44 & new AT rounds are good enough.
It's possible that the Russian 135mm might be feasible & the Chines/British etc. 140mm, but those shells whether autoloaded or not may be too big.
@MarshallJukov, 135mm gun was an R&D gun being developed in Russia - it seems the project was dropped, but it could be reurrected. Yes, the 152mm is being worked on but it will probably be too large for an MBT unless is larger & may weigh 70-tons or so.
BTW, the 125mm gun & ammo inT-72.s couldn't penetrate the frontal armor of EARLY MODEL ABRAMS in 1991 Gulf War & only 9 Abrams were destroyed (mostly by mines) & another 9 wereheavily damaged & not repaired, so 18 Abrams were lost.
ok they got better tanks since kv1 lol or tb5 but.....
nolifemerc 2 months ago
WAR! HUH! WHAT IT'S GOOD for? ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! yeah yeah
danisha861027 2 months ago
can make a tank that can withstand bumps and water but not a car!!! Durable reliable hmmm why not a vehicle for the public? just saying
darskinner 3 months ago
Problem with Reactive Armor is that when hit it explodes & could kill or maim personnel near or on the tank, including the TC (tank commander) if he has his head out of the turret getting a better view of the battlefield.
If a tank has very good armor it does not need RA. All these elctronic jamming devices also can & do malfunction so incoming missiles from the vertical & horizantal still have a great chnace of hitting a tank.
'Best' is a silly word, since all things have good & bad attribute
christof139 4 months ago
If Putin is driving it...........yes,absolutely.
EyFmS 4 months ago
I fucking love the tanker hat!
1N73RC3P7OR 5 months ago
Lame
ezt248 5 months ago
Ripsaw MS2 =FASTEST TANK, NUFF SAID!!!
humvee600 5 months ago
best tank my arse. There are several European tanks which are much better
CBlackjr 5 months ago
Best tank in the world?! ROFLMAO! Pull the other one...
TheSwordGeek 6 months ago
our old one just replaced was the c21a5
rayoliver34 6 months ago
in all serious the abrams can go over 80kph. An abrams with no governor can hit 90+kph. T80 is nice, but not the only one thaht can do a jump or go fast.
redreaper2020 6 months ago
our 30 yr old leopards can jump too.t-80 is'nt that impressive
rayoliver34 6 months ago
@rayoliver34 The M1A3 is supposed to not only jump, but lift off, sprout wings, and fly.
redreaper2020 6 months ago
@redreaper2020 yah our leopards can do over 80 but are governed to.thanls god we got some newer ones now.hope the m1a3 is alot better than the m1a1 cause that was shit lol.i gunned drove and loaded one in teaxs and i did'nt like it compared to the old leopard c2 we had.i don't like the turbine engine as it's slow to start moving and if you come under fire and need to move off a position fast you can't compared to regular engine.
rayoliver34 6 months ago
@rayoliver34 your abrams's had bad governors then. Turbine governor isn't like diesel ones. Abrams hauls ass at start. That's the advantage of a turbine, why US still uses it--it has like 50% better lowrange acceleration of the Leo2 diesel.
Without a governor, on full power, the M1A2's engine puts out around 2200hp (rated@1500 due to heat), and will propel the tank to 65mph. That being said, its tracks will shred, the gearbox will bind up, and hydros will burst, but the engine will do it.
redreaper2020 6 months ago
@redreaper2020 Wrong at all.M1A2 weights 72tones, it can only drive highspeed on road of 42mp/h 56km/h.Its not faster than any other tank, its much slower than any other tank.2200hp gas turbine must throttled to 1500hp to let this huge fatboy 72tones moving.It breaks after 152miles average,cause gas turbines make lot of troubles.The 1700 degree exhaust burning lot of electronic and make physical damage to the tank.Gas turbines are the worst enginges for tanks.
Talshet 3 days ago
@Talshet "burning a lot of electronic"? What the fuck?
It isn't throttle to "let this huge fatboy 72tones moving", it doesn't break after 152 miles. It's throttled to keep reliability high. You pull the governor off a jet engine you can push it to insane horsepower; that's any gas turbine engine. The engine obviously isn't that bad or they'd replace it.
redreaper2020 3 days ago
@redreaper2020 Ok another guy who thinking when something is worse it would be replaced by something better....wrong the US MOD has contracts with developer wich as not allowed to buy things from other military manufactures wich are not accepted by them, that means if they dont give you option for other engine than the ATC1500 gas turbine you have to buy it and there is no doubt about its mass failure.Here you have lot of informations M1 disease /watch?v=ULC0TOiZZzc why its shit.
Talshet 3 days ago
@Talshet WUT.
The US military, first of all, is buying a new GTE. Second, they've purchased plenty of military equipment in the past, they get a lot of things from BAE, Rheinmetall, etc.
30 year old M1s handled upgraded 30 year old T72s with ease. Proven. Even M-60s outclassed T-72s in '91.
US also has John Deere, Caterpillar, Mack, Oshkosh, Detroit Diesel, Terex, etc. All of which market 1000-4000hp range diesels which are superior to foreign engines in reliability and efficiency.
redreaper2020 3 days ago
@redreaper2020 Not one T72B was ever destroyed from M60 and T72M doestn count because this T72 are downgrades of Downgrades and have only 30% armor of the original T72.USA had never develope something more relaibale in Tanks,Missiles,Rockets or Rifles than Europe or Asia.IF you would know about M1 you wouldnt talk shit like that.M1 is the most unrelaible tank.Just make research how often M1 breaked down in Desert Storm before he reaches the battlefield.Its biggest waste of money.
Talshet 2 days ago
@Talshet you are a fucking idiot. Any nation will adopt defense equipment which meets its needs and performs as good as its industrial base will provide. The US has the biggest defense industry in the world. So, naturally, our equipment is extremely high performance in the areas which fit our doctrine, and suited to the particular demands which suit it. This is the same of Russian, German, or other foreign equipment. We simply have a larger base to draw from.
redreaper2020 3 days ago
@redreaper2020 M1 is the most useless piece of shit weights 72tones cant drive of 80% of roads of any country,cant cross 90% usual bridges wich can stand only 50-60tones.Its stuck to often on offroad terrains, its a 1700 degree hot metal shit wich can be seen with thermal size from twice bigger distance than any other tank.It breaks down in average of 160miles and needs 4hours of maintenance (only in base)all other tanks needs only 15 minutes (on field).It cant idle with on engine
Talshet 2 days ago
@redreaper2020 Why do you think USA have could several times A10s and F16s to destroy their own stucked M1s in Desert Storm,i dont know other country who had problems like that to call an aircraft with million $ missile to destroy a several million $ Tank,because its a fat kid tank that cant drive on its own.Its the biggest mistake after WW2.No other tank weights 72t the only one was the unrelaible useless Tiger.Like Tiger the Abrams is biggest propaganda to make it better.
Talshet 2 days ago
Comment removed
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@Talshet um, the Abrams isn't the tiger. It's closer to the panther.
You bitch about its weight so much, what about hte leopard 2, nearing 70 tons itself? Or the massive Merkava? Hm? Or the Challenger 2? Hell, they use the same exact tracks, except for the Merkava. Chal2 and Leo2 are the same weight, and somehow still work well.
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@redreaper2020 M1 is same propaganda shit as tiger.
Leopard 2 (24ps/tone) weights 10tones less than M1 and has 1500hp engine (none gas turbine) better tones/qm.Challanger2 weights 10tones less than M1 has no gas turbine, and has 19ps/tone.T-90 49tones (21ps/tone) 1000hp diesel engine (30% smaller than M1 tank) M1 breaks down 1000miles before diesel powered tank breaks.
Talshet 2 days ago
@Talshet you're an idiot, I say again.
A Leo2 armored for urban combat is very similar in weight. 5 ton difference. Even a ten ton difference has no real effect on ground pressure or mobility. The M1's optics are better than the Chal2 (in tests the chal2 has slightly longer range due to its rifled gun, but the M1 hits targets faster), has longer gun life, better suspension & tracks than the T90, and is more ergonomic
It's not propaganda. You just don't like it because it's American.
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@Talshet your fucking av icon is a soviet hammer and sickle. Bias much?
I have no qualms about saying Russian tanks are good. But for the missions that the US uses its tanks for? No. Overall? Close but probably not. Also, size increases shock value, decreases after-armor effect, and lets us fit compartmentalized ammo instead of tanks becoming flaming jack-in-the-boxes.
The M1 is actually probably the most UNDERrated tank globally. It is incredibly survivable and VERY well armored
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@redreaper2020 Ohh jacked-in-box, do you think M1 was never "jacked-in-box"? Just watch some videos about destroyed M1s you will see there are to much cooked off and jacked in box M1s.The M1 is the most overrated tank in history. It has no chance in mass, why?Simple it breakes down before it reaches the battlefield the most do it so.Reason is the 1700 degree hot gas turbine its unrelaible and burns to much gas and equipment and it set the tank onfire during idling.
Talshet 2 days ago
@Talshet LOLWUT
1.) it is impossible for an abrams to "jack in the box". the ammo storage is behind the turret. There is only ever one round inthe hull, usually in the breech.
2.) if turbines were so unreliable planes would be falling out of the sky. your argument is absurd.
3.) it's underrated. It has won set-piece battles, has a very low death ratio for amount deployed. Everyone says it's crap, yet it wins wars and has done unusually well in cities, far better than the T-72/80/90
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@Talshet also, no Abrams tank has ever caught fire from its own engine. I've actually never even heard of it happening with ANY gas turbine. That's absurd.
Your arguments aren't proven by history or fact. The M1 is one of the few tanks which has actually done excellent in urban combat. The fact that it cannot withstand a dozen 155mm shells exploding under it doesn't make it a bad vehicle. Also, the GTE only burns ~30% more fuel than a diesel, and that fuel is about 30% cheaper.
redreaper2020 2 days ago
@redreaper2020 Yes M1 set him often on fire.People like you never make researches but talking shit before they even "know" what they are talking.Use google its your friend.And gas turbine are inferior in all catagories to piston engines.Its 3-4 times hotter and can be seen twice further.Gas turbines have horrible logistical problems its cant be maintenanced on field,cause gas turbine must be completly extracted.Lot of M1 during Desert Storm set them self on fire and wear destroyed
Talshet 2 days ago
@Talshet I have personally actually maintained gas turbines. The chances of a gas turbine setting a tank on fire without some severe mechanical failure are the same as me lighting a fart and flying to the moon. Sounds like an urban legend.
Are they a pain in the ass to maintain? No. The turbine is actually simple to fix, about as complicated as a lawnmower motor. They can be swapped out in 20 minutes with minimal special equipment. The logistics "nightmare" is grossly overstated.
redreaper2020 1 day ago
@Talshet the turbine's design is 35 years old (M1 tanks still have the original engine installed whenever built; "replacements" are actually refurbs). This is a big fact with reliability figures; it looks bad on paper but the engines are well past their expiration dates.
Logistics work well. The engines are small and light, easy to simply swap out, and the engine uses the same fuel as plates; the trucks transporting it can also use it. JP8 is extremely cheap.
redreaper2020 1 day ago
@Talshet Most diesels are replaced after a few thousand hours of use, whereas the turbine is sent to the factory, refurbished, and sent back out, for a fraction of the cost. Some of the M1A2s just back from Iraq are using engines that were actually built in the 1970s.
Large diesels wear out rods and heads. Turbines churn through oil and bearings starting/stopping, but there's no wear on the rest of the engine. The actual overall reliability is VERY high, just wears out bearings fast
redreaper2020 1 day ago
@rayoliver34 Once Leopard can fire an ATGM to the range of 4km or in case of a Reflex missile - 5km then we can talk about whats impressive. The engine compartment internal volume in Leo2 is 8 cubic meters. The whole T-80 armored volume is 11 cubic meters. I wonder whats easier to hit from a long range. Massive Leo2 or small and agile T-80U?
Spetsnazovets 6 months ago
the m1 won against the largest army in the world, you´r talkink wihtout any historical reference. also, the russian equipment always has been a bad quality trash.
tigrepez 7 months ago
Here you can see very vividly against whom war m1
Type in a search "US Tank crushes Iraqi civilian's car 1"
Here it is the true face of Abrams
Against frightened, unarmed, dwelleth between squatting people??
These are the wars in which M1 was involved ... All of them were against the natives with their spears
RenatSibgatulin 7 months ago
Comment removed
RenatSibgatulin 7 months ago
the m1 has won more wars than any other tanks. results counts no word.
tigrepez 7 months ago
@tigrepez what war wars against soft targets americans talk too much !
rolficus 7 months ago
@tigrepez Because they can't make a better 1 then m1 thats why they use only M1
MrTheVadimpje 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
a m1 can beat it easy than take a candy out from a child.
tigrepez 7 months ago
a m1 can beat it easy than take a candy out from a child
tigrepez 7 months ago
@tigrepez you better shut up kid, you don't know what war means....
8900609 7 months ago
Nothing a javelin missile could'nt solve.
pwnyourpuzzhole 7 months ago
@pwnyourpuzzhole
"Arena" would annihilate javelin's missile, and "Shtora" would cheat it's laser ray.
Scoutrussp7 7 months ago 6
the m1a2 and m1a1 have top secret armar and that was made inthe 1970s and the usa is coming out with the m1a3 soon witch shows we are more than 1 step ahead
kirbyroxy 8 months ago
@kirbyroxy What will the A3 feature that makes it more viable than the A2 version? And more to the point, how much more will it cost to retrofit existing A2's with similar gear? When it comes to talking "best" anything, factors beyond just the machine itself bear consideration. The King Tiger in WWII was the best tank of its time, but the shattered German infrastructure made them too costly to get out in time, and they lacked the fuel for long term use. If the T90 does it as good for less...
Allabaster84 8 months ago
@Allabaster84 then y did russia back out for alittle im ww2
kirbyroxy 8 months ago
lols, best tank in the world, give me a fucking break
TheFederation99 8 months ago
@TheFederation99 if you hate the t-90, then watch a abrams video. get out of here..
sergeikozin47 4 months ago
all tanks are feul guzzlers, even the only pur tiger tank in the uk is a fuel guzler
cammander263 8 months ago
ok i got a big question about this tank 2 questions , Is the turrent hyrdrolicly controled ? is it better than a T-72
cammander263 8 months ago
@cammander263 no, barely and no this tank cant fly
hotpocketpoison 8 months ago
the question is will it blend?
jeffrey625625 10 months ago
t90 is way better than t80 why are they saying it's the best tank in the world?
Merces69 10 months ago
Yes Marshal I can understand why Russians would not think tanks are supposed to be used in town.Ours have been quite effective in Iraq,the part of the difference is tactics of course but the increased elevation and depression of Abrams main gun is very useful when dealing with people shooting from rooftops and basements and the main limitations we have with anti personal weaponry is controlling the lethality because of potential collateral damage
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
I would not be stupid enough to go to somebody else's country so I could be ambushed by an internet troll.
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
Look it up yourself.I'm not doing your homework for you goatbreeder
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
Right,that's why you spend all of your time on here.How much are they paying you?
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
Actually the Assad Babil was an improved version of the T-72M1.Many of the parts were Russian too.
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250 Sources MR. Svastika.
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@SuperRatchetclank, You're another asshole calling people nazis when they are not simply because they know more than you &/or don't agree with everything you do. You are the nazi or bolshevik whatever dictorial jackass.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 You are one indeed. ;-)
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@SuperRatchetclank Now there is a mature response.Keep it coming goatbreeder
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250 Go back to Russia and see if you'll survive again. XD
Uncle Sam wont be there, because he's pissing in his pants seeing a bunch of brainwash imbecile trowing themselves into the mouth of the mighty bear.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7 In fact I've never been to Russia nor do I have any desire to go there.I can go to Canada however and I have been there before.Are you threatening me?
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250 Yeah! go to Canada as well, Police system is not very efficient there, so somebody can be disappear easily without a trace. ;-) If you find that threatening its your personal mental problem, but yes people disappear there as well. Just a little warn.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, So you are threatening to dissapear someone on the inet. RCMP might be interested in your little commie butt.
Russian tanks with dozer blades needed some TIME to dig in, & TIME is not always available in combat, especially fast & mobile combat.
Tanks, SPGs, direct fire towed Arty., can & have been very effective in urban combat, it just depends on some variables
Yes, the 115mm SB was replaced with the 125mm SB . I know this & have known this for decades.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
Much more time to dig up need tanks with no dozer blades at all don`t you think?
And here is now much time it takes to do it with integral dozer blade
watch?v=W6KvCj7_bMk
watch from 6:36
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@christof139
As for urban combat - tanks are NOT for that one - and those "variables" in 99% the time will not be in its favor there. Things like BMPT is direct product of tank combat experience of ours
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, It depends on the situation in the particular engagement. Tanks were not made for urban combat but indeed have performed excellently as have SPGs etc. Tanks & SPGs simply ptovide direct & indirect arty. fire & must be protected by infantry, otherwise there is trouble. AFVs must keep to large to midsized open avenues & streets, parks, etc. & not get caught in narrower streets with much rubble etc. Western Allies, USSR, Axis & even Japanese effectively used tanks & SPGs in UC
christof139 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, 115mm had a slow rate of fire, so that is a good reason to replace it. 115mm could have been produced in Israel & the west without a problem, but the 105mm L7 was overall more than sufficient, & so was the 90mm.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
115 had no slow rate of fire - it used single piece ammo and its rate of fire was limited to 10 rpm only due barrel cooling.
Everyone could produce rounds for 115mm if they wanted - but its extremely expencive. Gun itself usualy costs barely 5% of ammunition it uses. To develop ammo for a new gun is costly. Thats why they just replaced it with L7 - they had plenty of ammo for it and domestic production of them
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, If you believe the Abrams was the worse tank produced after WWII I feel sorry for your reasoning. As for the rest it matters little since the Abrams has proved itself & is much better protected now & has better ammo (always in development) than the first models that were more than sufficient to deal with anything that could oppose them. Abrams is still more than sufficient to combat any other tank, AT round, AFV available. Losses will occur & that is nothing new.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
Sorry but it didn`t proven - Iraq had no modern MBTs. And M1 had massive series there - i gave you video series to study.
As for ammo - it described in that series also - M1 has ZERO anti-infantry capability. And M829A3 is too slow and long to effectively penetrate modern 4S23 ERA and composite armor that negates DU "self-sharpening" effect.
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@christof139 Oh! Granny is gonna get ya ! RCMP has already problems with that !!! XD The police suck here!
Nickael7 10 months ago
@SuperRatchetclank, Thank heavens there are excellent unbiased Russian, German, USA, Brit, Chinese, etc. historians & people that are quite open-minded & aware of matters & realize we all have made errors in the past, present & will do so in the future & only want the best for all.
christof139 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250, Hi, & the gun & ammo were the same as the Russian gun & ammo. These 2 idiots here are, mmm, idiotic!!!
Yes, the FSB/GRU & OMON (modelled after USA SWAT teams) etc.
What's funny is that Nik calls everyone a terrorist, or whatever if they know something he doesn't etc. To him only one side can be right, their is no compromise & that makes him a vunerable psychotic that is easily led by some 'workers' paradise everything's OK there aren't any problems' nonsense.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
Sorry but Spetsnaz wasn`t modeled adter SWAT lol - in USSR it started by Svechnikov and Starinov during civil war in Spain. As separate regiments they was formed in 1950.
OMON isn`t actualy a special mikitary forces - its just thugs for police operations - not an elite military
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, Yes, you are right, I meant only OMON was modelled on SWAT.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
USSR never needed OMON. It was created by traiitor gorbachev to deal with countless riots and protests happened since late 1980s as result of his sabotage of the country. OMON basicaly still used for this purpose, aspecialy since 1993
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250
Assad Babil wasn`t "an improved T-72M1" mister - that buckled of bolts made of pig iron had no Russian parts either - because Russia or USSR never sold tanks to Iraq.
Me and Mago devastated your miserable arguments there and now you migrated here hoping for hideout to start it all over again with same false arguments you used before?
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
What are you doing sticking you r nose in Russia's business?They have their own FSB/GRU people handling this
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
Ok,so you are a Jewish Salvadorean Russian goat breeder
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250 In fact I am allergic to goats, I breed advance machines instead.
Nickael7 10 months ago
The abrams tank is wetting it's pants at the sight of this motherfucker.
RazorAceYU 10 months ago
yeah i would bet that the M1A2 Abrams the Challenger 2 and the Leopard 2 would beat the crap out of it
timenyart 1 year ago
tanks emit alot of thick black smoke but over all im glad
infamoussafg 1 year ago
its fast , its mean , it breaks afters every 10 miles
dav4ix 1 year ago
@dav4ix abrams are shit
bacon2boy 1 year ago
@bacon2boy wtf is abram ? grow a brain shitfuck !
dav4ix 1 year ago
@dav4ix M1A2 Abrams. USA main battle tank. Maybe you should grow a brain.
MattJoey2142 1 year ago
@MattJoey2142 maby .. but you should grow balls .. cause with that peace of shit military technique that Russia has , you will have to fight with shovels , cause all your military is rusted and from soviet times = shit ! :D
dav4ix 1 year ago
@dav4ix It is a technique USA probably is jealous of. You have no fundamental resourses explaining Russia's tanks are old, rusted machines from Soviet Union. Look at USA. Abrams is their only active tank now, made in 80's. The T-72 is now upgraded to the T-90's which was late 1990's. So the T-90 is more advanced than the Abrams tank if you really research.
MattJoey2142 1 year ago
@MattJoey2142 well to be honest i dont give a damn thing about americans , i live in Europe and we have the best tanks ! Russia have quite old ones .. even if upgraded ...
dav4ix 1 year ago
@MattJoey2142 lol no
adobo777 1 year ago
@MattJoey2142 we just upgraded the abrams recently it is the best tank in the world we proved it in the gulf war against the latest soviet tanks Russia can upgrade all they want well just do them one better. Russia has always been all show they havent won a conventional war since WWII and the only reason they didnt burn back than is because america saved both you and UK's butts by shipping you weapons and raw materials
timenyart 1 year ago
@MattJoey2142 Face it as long as russia has the attitude that they are superior to America and Western Europe they will always be atleast n one step behind us
timenyart 1 year ago
@timenyart, hey yo this is not the 20e century wake up !!! Doesn't mean the T-90 is crap. Just look what is going on in Iraq with your M1A2 Abrams. You've been brainwashed with lots of western propaganda. I suggest you to go fight in Iraq (like my older brother did) riding in one of those metal radioactive coffins of yours. My brother is lucky to be alive, cause he didn't participate much in the battle like the other tankers, who are maimed, death or injured for the rest of their lives.
Nickael7 1 year ago
@Nickael7 If what you say is true about your brother and all my condolences, however that doesnt mean the T-90 is better than the abrams, the M1 is a main battle tank which means it is designed to combat other tanks on the battlefield, the US has barely fought conventional warfare since Korea, Iraq is guerilla warfare and street warfare for which the Abrams wasnt designed, if what you say about the Abrams is true than the same is true for the T-90 even more so
timenyart 1 year ago
@timenyart, you want evidence of what shit is going in Iraq, go to liveleaks and search for destroyed Abrams.
Nickael7 1 year ago
@Nickael7 and the Russians have been pulling this crap about how their borrowed or copied technology is better than ours since the Cold War, Putin is one of the biggest anti-western propaganda machines their is just check out their new 5th generation fighter that is allegedly better than the F-22 even though it hasnt been tested in true combat and looks like an exact copy of the Raptor
timenyart 1 year ago
@timenyart, since the time of the cold war the US. has been copying the rockets for flying to space, the TOKAMAK fusion reactor for the Hydrogen bomb, reverse engineering the MIGs and tanks, they tried to copy the AK-47, satellite in space, and the list goes on... American engineer is no more like it was before, specially when it was during the cold war. Now things have totally changed. After the T-90 upgraded, their will be the T-95 mark-1 to counter the Abram M1A3-M2A1, chally -2 leopard 2A7+
Nickael7 1 year ago
@Nickael7, USSR got its first MIG jet engine from the British, its Tu-4 heavy bomber was a direct copy og the US B-29, the USA developed the A-bomb first & also sent Stalin uranium for his nuke weapon research in WWII, etc. etc. etc. USA never did what you said if did, but it was rather the USSR that did what you said the USA did.
christof139 11 months ago
@christof139 Do you have Videos evidence of that ???
Nickael7 11 months ago
@Nickael7, Ha ha ha!! Just google the info on the inet!! It is all well known for decades!! Even RT has an episode describing how the USSR got the British jet engine!!
Are yoy a diehard, silly commie?
christof139 11 months ago
@christof139 I don't trust google, I want solid proof videos, is that complicated for you. And I need don't your insults either.
Nickael7 11 months ago
@christof139 Or is another Western propaganda ? The A-bomb is U.S. engineering, but not the H-bomb, do you have any idea what is a TOKAMAK first of all. Migs is not created by British jet engines in fact, it was the Germans who invent the first jet engine, the British Mr. Whittle copied it.
Nickael7 11 months ago
@Nickael7, USA developed the H-bomb first. "The first thermonuclear bomb was exploded in 1952 at Enewetak by the United States, the second in 1953 by Russia (then the USSR). Great Britain, France, and China have also exploded thermonuclear bombs, and these five nations comprise the so-called nuclear clubnations that have the capability to produce nuclear weapons and admit to maintaining an inventory of them."
You should read what educated Russians write of all this & USSR propaganda
christof139 11 months ago
@Nickael7, German Jet engine was more primitive than the British jet engine, & the Brits gave the USA a copy of their engine & we improved it, so we only needed 1 engine per aircraft. Fianlly, the jet engine of the F-86 Saber Jet is the engine that all modern jet engines are based on. "The first gas turbine to successfully run self-sustaining was built in 1903 by Norwegian engineer Ægidius Elling."
christof139 11 months ago
@christof139 In few words Brits didn't invent the jet-engine, they copied it and improve it. Wow is that it ???
Nickael7 11 months ago
@Nickael7, Read again. British had their own version, & then the Germans developed thier version. USA used British engine & improved it. Germans & Brits had to use 2 engines. USA XP80A/P80 used in southern Italy in 1945 in small numbers used 1 engine.
Are you mentally challenged? Wow.
christof139 11 months ago
@christof139 I told you again send us a solid proof VIDEO. Is that simple and clear for your brain to understand these very simple words. It seems that you're the one who is mentally challenged by a simple, quick and firm way to demonstrate the PROOF IN A VIDEO. Is that too Complicated To Understand ??? A VIDEO @_@ with all the proof in it. I don't give a #@$ about wiki or google.
Nickael7 11 months ago 2
@Nickael7, You 'TELL' me nothing genius. Get off your lazy butt & Google all this easily found info. You make a fool of yourself. Post all this info. from many sources much better than Wiki would take much time & is unnecessary since ALL this info. is readily availble on the inet form relaible sources.
Apparently you are a video freak or whatever.
christof139 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@christof139 I can give you solid VIDEO proof the Russian invention the Tokamak. The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Look for in YT for Russian Tokamak. Now I want yours...
Nickael7 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@christof139 The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Look in YT for Russian Tokamak. Now I want a video of yours that show me the proofs of the JET-engine.
Nickael7 11 months ago
@christof139 Nickael7 is right give us a video of that. Frank is not the true inventor of jet engine.
SuperRatchetclank 11 months ago
@christof139 The Coandă-1910 was the first jet-propelled aircraft ever built. And made the first test flight.
SuperRatchetclank 11 months ago
@SuperRatchetclank, A Romanian compressed air engine without internal combustion except for the piston engine supplying the compressed air, & no proof that there was combustion in the compressed air propulsion stream or that it ever flew. However, the design was a jet engine!
christof139 11 months ago
@christof139 It was the first in its class and served as an example to other nations.
SuperRatchetclank 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@christof139 I got some reliable sources to prove that it was the Russians who invented first H-Bomb. The tokamak were invented in the 1950s by physicists Igor Tamm and Andrei Sakharov, inspired by idea of to Oleg Lavrentyev, when he studyed the realization of the hydrogen bomb. Hence the Tokamak reactor is necessary to create the Critical mass for Deuterium, tritium for the H-bomb. Search in YT for Russian Toakamak.
Nickael7 11 months ago
@Nickael7, You're a bigger idiot than I thought.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 More idiot is you, your mother give birth while standing up and your head fell first against the floor.
Go to your cave and go worship Adolf Hitler.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Don't insult my mother you stupid jackass. You can insult me but I don't insult OP's parents like you dummy.
I am of Polish descent, had neighbors in concentration camps, etc. you neo-nazi asshole. Go suck Shitler's dick like you alwayshave done.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 Go fuck yourself you NAZI fuck prick, I have Jewish descendant, I got family members killed in EL Salvador by the Right-wing soldiers trained by the U.S. marines in the infamous schools of Americas.
GO SUCK BUSH AND HITLER COCK AND GO EAT SHIT.
Nickael7 10 months ago 13
@Nickael7, You're silly & stupid. I served in the military with WWII veterans & am definitely not a neo-nazi jackass like you & your freinds.
Bye bye sonny boy.
christof139 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Left wing soldiers killed many innocent people in El Salvador etc. No difference between left or right in that situation. Similar to many things that happened in the USSR & Russia & everywhere else in the world over the course of time.
The USA Christie tank used the Christie suspension system. Some few Christie tanks were produced in the USA such as the M1928, M1930, & M1932 (also when BT2 was made in the USSR).
Interesting isn't it? USSR produced under license.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 You have no idea of what right-wing death-squad did to the indigenous population in El Salvador, you didn't see what these untermenches did to our people, General Roberto d'Aubuisson killed thousand of innocent people including friends and families. SO GO SUCK HITLER'S DICK FUCKING NAZI SYMPATHIZER. The FLMN Guerrilla saved our lives from those nazis trained by your country. You're one ass big liar, your not even Polish, but another Neo-Nazi prick pretending clean his face.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, "The Birobidzhan experiment ground to a halt in the mid-1930s, during Stalin's first campaign of purges. Soviet authorities arrested and executed Jewish leaders, and Yiddish schools were shut down."
You have no idea either because most likely you weren't born yet.
Ha ha ha!! Yes, I am indeed of Polish descent, hate Stalin & the Bolsheviks, the nazis & neo-nazis & silly people like you, although you do provide some humor.
christof139 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Left wing death squads were just as bad, similar to the Red /TerrorDeath/Purges during the Russian Civil War & under Stalin, Beria, etc.
Niech żyje Polska!! So sorry commies.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 There are no death-squads in the left wing party of El Salvador. Stalin was an imbecile not even a communist, but another totalitarian fuck and Hitler was 1000 times worst. BTW, good use of google translate goof.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, You have 'Silva' in your name & so do I. It is derived from the Roman diety of forest & field, Silvanus. Be careful in Canada since most Canadians aren't commies etc. Maybe you'll get deported.
Seems Ortega in Nic. has violated the constitution there a good number of times 7 many Nics. don't like that, so he may get voted out of office. Same happened to Mr. T. in Honduras & looks like this may happen to Chavez in Venezuela.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 Yeah right you got Silva in your family name. Another big fat lies of yours. Go back to your basement and go pray to Hitler. The U.S. has plot many times in Nica. Hond. and Ven. a coup d'etat agaisnt them. The CIA was behind all these times.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, On one side of my family my grandfather was of Portugese descent & granny was Sicillian, the other side is Polish. Hence, Silva is my surname genius. The Polish name I will not tell you since it is none of your business & I would not dishonor the name by saying what it is to a jackass like yourself.
I know of the Portugese meaning of the word 'silva', but 'Silva' is different, although they both come from old Latin Silvans & hence silvan referring to flora. Rome conquered Iberia.
christof139 10 months ago
Typo in post below: Change 'Silvans' to 'Silvanus' the Roman diety of forest & field. So sorry.
christof139 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Now back to armour/armor/tanks, AFVs, etc., which you have little kowledge of or experience with.
USSR was the 1st to employ the SB (smoothbore) tank gun in 115mm in the T-62, but it had a slow rate of fire, the turret traversed much to slow, & the main guns on most USSR MBTs can only be depressed to -6 degs. which limits their use in hull down positions on high ground. Then the much better 125mm SB was developed. Many nations replace the USSR 115mmSB with the Brit/NATO L7 105mm.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 The 125mm Rapiera gun is superior to Nato gun and U.S. giving a muzzle velocity of 1800m/s against 1650m/s.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, 150m/s = whoopty do. Do you have delsuions or something that you are going to lead a great tank etc. force to assault NATO etc.? You sound like a ridiculous kid.
Check out the new 140mm main tank guns. USA version: The 140mm smoothbore Advanced Tank Cannon (ATAC) System consists of the XM291 gun, the XM91 autoloading system and a family of 140mm ammunition.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 You're back in stone age if 140mm is the only advance thing, there will be the 152mm as well with an accelerator. BTW, I have a nation and its called Quebec. And I feel so sorry about you big fat BSs you've been throwing at me, it just doesn't work at all. Falsehood is you, cause you didn't experience my war-torn childhood. And yes, again I have Jewish descendant. Does this causes a problems to you. FMLN never and never violated rights they win their election DEMOCRATICALLY in 2009
Nickael7 10 months ago
Comment removed
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@Nickael7 Sorry sorry man not you the other piece of crap. Called critof139
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@SuperRatchetclank, You're the piece of crap & a jackass.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 Ooh ooh I'm hurt... I'm going to cry, pull a grenade and stick it right up yo ass.
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@Nickael7, No, I posted that to see what you would say dummy. Deception per Sun Tzu etc. i know that the USA & Germany had a 140mm but opted for the 120mm in the L2 & M1 way back when. Fact is that a 140mm may be too big since the rounds weigh ~100lbs & come in 2 parts. Too big is the general consensus but it is still being attempted in R&D. Same goes for the Russian 152mm, but they might be able to develope their 135mm OK. FMLN did violate peoples' rights. Ortega is also a jerk .
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 FMLN did never violate people's right, only jerks like you who defend RIGHT-WING PARTIES LIKE ARENA who committed the most horrendous crimes in the 20e century. The people were not just killed, they were mutilated, burn alive with flame-throwers, blown by tanks, crushed with hammers, electrocuted, gutted, ripped to shred with machetes, they even killed women that were pregnant, where they gutted the ladies and pulled the baby or fetus alive.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@christof139
There is no need in 135mm because 152mm already fit into MBT and there is wide array of munitions for this caliber. We don`t have troubles with 2 part munitions either because we using proven autoloaders for like 4 decades already
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@Nickael7, In 1998, Daniel Ortega's adopted stepdaughter Z. Narváez released a 48-page report describing her allegations that Ortega had systematically sexually abused her from 1979, when she was 11, until 1990. On 4 March 2002 the Nicaraguan govnt. accepted the Commission's recommendation of a friendly settlement.
christof139 10 months ago
@Nickael7, In the 1990 presidential election, Ortega lost to V. Barrios de Chamorro, his former colleague in the junta. Chamorro was supported by the US & a 14-party anti-Sandinista alliance known as the National Opposition Union, an alliance consisting of conservatives, liberals, & communists.
There is also a lot of the same concerning the FMLN in El Salvador.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 Nicaragua is not my country of origin I don't know about your BS. If you want to talk about my things you're going with my country of origin EL SALVADOR, Hijo de puta.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Left has lost elections in El Salvador too, but thankfully seems to be happening somewhat peacefully in comparison to the past. If you care about 'your country' then why don't you live there & try to improve it? Or is it you have played I am a poor refugee & am a mental case so please educate me & pay my bills route etc. in the past?
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 I am part of a group of mech. and Automation eng. I am helping my country.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7 No you aren't,you are part of a group of goat breeding terrorists lead by Marshal jerkoff.
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250 You my friend is a big fat cunt terrorist who puts his noses in Russia's territory, so this makes YOU A REAL TERRORIST. XD
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Quebec is not a nation moron, unless you think as one of the few seperatist types whom the majority of French Canadians do not support.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 For me it is. For you it can be something else.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, Not many 120mm or 125mm rounds have ever pentrated the frontal armor of an Abrams, while the improved APDS etc. rounds of the 120mm in the Abrams etc. are very effective. Doesn't matter too much actually with all the AT missiles that will be involved from both ground & air platforms. Experience of the tank crews also counts greatly, so NATO has a big edge.
Go have your silly wetdreams now.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139 Go: watch?v=8q_dnTVFIL0
there is your so love NATO U.S. standard system
BTW, those 125mm that didn't punch the armor of M1 were IRAQI ASSAD BABIL crappy tanks.
Again you're caught in a big lie.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7, What country are you speking of? Quebec isn't a country, so you must not have a country.
Same as Russian 125mm at the time. New Russian gun is only marginally better, but it is actually the quality & type of ammo that means the most. All that was discovered before, during & after WWII but is was the USA's 76mm & 90mm firing new HVAP rounds that proved barrel length & higher velocites weren't the whole story.
T-80 etc. was knocked out easily in Chechenya & is dated but still OK.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
And if you actualy look into quality and types of ammo used in 125mm guns you will see that it surpasses 120mm NATO guns with double margin
T-80 wasn`t "easily knocked" - in fact you seem to know very little on details. In circumstances that was there any other tanks would suffer even more, aspecialy M1 who has no anti-infantry capability to speak of and is a HUGE target. In fact even Merkava 4 failed in similar but much safer environment in Lebanon
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@christof139 You got OWN piece of shit. Little Nazi prick who doesn't know shit about communism, the war of central America and tank guns.
Take 40kg of HE and blow yourself in tiny pieces, later we will pick up rotten maggoted flesh and use it as fertilizer.
Long live Russia and FMLN.
SuperRatchetclank 10 months ago
@christof139
-6 degrees (-7) depression is well enough considering that all Soviet tanks since T-64 have intergal dozer blade and don`t need to go hull down - they can built entrenchement for themselves really fast, everywhere.
115 was replaces because more promising 125 was on the table even before 115 came - it wasn`t just fully ready. After it came decision was made to switch at 125mm caliber as a standard for all Soviet tanks who can have it
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov Except in town [remember Grozy?]
RedStormRising250 10 months ago
@RedStormRising250
No tanks supposed to fight inside towns in the first place. Just as depression is irrelevant there either.
Plus -6 degrees at 100m gives aim point depression -10,5 meters - thats more than enough.
Anyway just as i said - tanks are not for city combat. Still anti-personal capabilities of T-series much higher
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@christof139
P.S. "many nations" is actualy Israel who captured some T-62s and simply had mo ammunition to use its 115mm gun so they attached L7. In fact U8-TS is much more powerfull than L7
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, Nations other than Israel replaced the 115mm with the 105mm L7 & M68, & 120 mm M-393 tank guns such as Egypt, Ukrania with 125 mm KBA-101 tank gun.
Yes, 125mm was/is an excellent gun. Abrams 120mm/L44 could be replaced with with 120mm/L55 but as of the present the L44 & new AT rounds are good enough.
It's possible that the Russian 135mm might be feasible & the Chines/British etc. 140mm, but those shells whether autoloaded or not may be too big.
christof139 10 months ago
@christof139
Thats because ammunition for 115mm guns is not produced anymore like for 3 decades. Simple as that.
Just as no body developed new tyoes of ammo for this guns.
And i said - there is no 135mm tank gun - there is smoothbore 152mm since 1980s
rnns. ru/uploads/posts/2009-12/1260344989_091009_objekt-292_glavniy. jpg
And there is no actual problems with size of ammo either - with new turret number of rounds will remain the same.
MarshallJukov 10 months ago
@MarshallJukov, 135mm gun was an R&D gun being developed in Russia - it seems the project was dropped, but it could be reurrected. Yes, the 152mm is being worked on but it will probably be too large for an MBT unless is larger & may weigh 70-tons or so.
BTW, the 125mm gun & ammo inT-72.s couldn't penetrate the frontal armor of EARLY MODEL ABRAMS in 1991 Gulf War & only 9 Abrams were destroyed (mostly by mines) & another 9 wereheavily damaged & not repaired, so 18 Abrams were lost.
christof139 10 months ago