@ToAstYNaChO lol it's t-72bm goolge it, t-72bm has ERA, well kid you don't know nothink about tanks - go play bf3 or arma 2, only these games allows you destroy t-90 by abrams))
Google for t-90MS - this tank best in the world(ye ye better then Leo2A7+ get some butthurt))
@BANNERTM you dont realize the extent of my knowledge. tell me, what from that picture makes you SURE that is a T-72BM, its so destroyed that there is no way to point out the differences between the two tanks,but now that i think of it, the t-90 has never seen battle, so that cant be one. you are right, but i am also SURE that my knowledge of tanks far surpasses yours.
@ToAstYNaChO Are you woodpecker? T90 has never been involved in fights!!! NEVER,
can you give me that picture in better quallity ? THIS is t-72bm OR other MOD of T-72 (Serbian, Ukrain, Chezh) , Did you see like/dislike bar of this video? Understood? Give me proof!! I fuck on the tanks because would be no war, but i like true....and hate lies!
@BANNERTM if a bare M1A2 abrams and a T-90 face off, a trained abrams tank crew can easily destroy a T-90, its the fact that the T-90 is usually covered in Kontact-5 ERA, a very heavy and thick reactive armor (one of the only types that can significantly diminish the effectiveness of long rod pentrators such as the M289 APFSDS), without that, an Abrams will surely win.
lol this vid is bullshit only couple t90 where ever destroyed because russia army was corrupt in the 90's and the took the explosives from the kontact 5 reactive armor, a rpg 7 is known to have penatrated the abrams side in iraq alos old antitank missles were known to destroy and disable couple of abrams tanks in iraq and yes there where casaulties
Germans and Americans built made a tank project each, the Germans the Leopard II the Americans the Abrahams..
The Leopard won the competition, but the Americans simply didn't want to buy tanks from their "old enemies" xD
"Will be fun to see the Americans drive through summer corn fields.. the gasoline engines will put them in blaze" - some German engineer... Aah fun times.
People keep taking up desert storm.. How can they even claim it was an.. challenge?
Actually, during Desert Storm, 4 M1A1 Abrams were destroyed, along with a couple of M2 Bradelys. The T-90 doesn't "expose" its ammo; it's because the rounds are located around the bottom of the turret. The explosion forces the turret up and out. "Mind if you do some research?
1) Bigger target is more easy to hit. Small tank is more easy to hide. T-90 can dig a trench for itself in 5 min.
2) T-90 can fire by guded missles from it's main gun on 5km distanse and hit its target very exactly. Abrams can't. So, who cares that Abr gun is more accurate?
So, in a duel fight in a open field Abrams will not have a chanse. In a city, you don't need accurate gun.
3) 9 tankists in 3 T-90 vs 9 tankists in ... only 2 Abrams.
@KSGAxAirsoft aha and where you got your information? the only battle the T90 was used and confirmed was the Georgian war about 8 T90 and one destroyed 13 T72 with first shot.
@Talshet Where do I get my info from? From observations and KNOWLEDGE that you seem to lack. The T90 was never used in Georgia. The most up to date tank deployed by the Russians was the T72BM. And to top it off, the Georgians only lost about 5 tanks. The only actual combat experience the T90 did have was in 1999 during the invasion of Dagestan.
@KSGAxAirsoft OMG, hey airsoft kid. The latest tank of russians is T90SM and T90AM.T90S was used about 8 times in Georgia that was confirmed by diffrent people. The T90 destroyed 13 T72 with one shot.Belive what you want, but T90S is not T72BM, T72BM was the oldest T90 with no midfications. T90SM and T90AM has new armor adaptiv upgrades Relikt or Kontakt 5 Arena Shtora 2.
@Talshet Airsoft kid? Hmm... I'm 23 years old and you're calling me a kid. Go fool some one else. The T90 was never used in Georgia. You're an ignorant fool and get this into your head - The T90 was never used in Georgia. You have no support other than "confirmed by different people" who are these different people? Tell me. Give me a source and I want +3 pictures.
Russian tanks are cooler than american. "RUSSIAN TANKS" there you will see our RUSSIAN war machines do things that your crappy abrams and other tanks can't.
1:44 мечтать не вредно! На самом деле у экипажа Т-90 гораздо больше шансов выжить. Топливные баки Абрамыча по бортам легко выпиливаются самым древним зарядом. ВСУ можно подстрелить из "калаша" и топливо просто нахуй сожжёт весь экипаж. Т-90 же
а) защищён (предыдущий мой пост)
б) топливные баки хоть с экипажем и в одной кабине, но броня крепка (смотри п. "а")
в) аммуниция не взорвётся так, как у Абрамчика (п. "а"), дружит с экипажем (см. п "б")
Абрамс - автострадный танк. На одной выставке он на небольшом препятствии повредил гусеницу и был обездвижен (Т-90 прошёл без помех). Абрамсовый движок более прожорлив, поэтому чтобы не отгонять танк тягачами на базу, ему сделали большой бак. Российский же дизелёк с приличной скоростью и хорошей мощностью не кушает столько. Да и двигло Абрамса при езде в пустыне быстро засоряется, не то, что у Т-90. Да и броня российского танка гораздо крепче (крепость брони Т-90 + динамическая защита). Так то!
i'm fully in the camp of the abrams being superior, but you have some faulty information here. there have been many, MANY cases of the crew in the abrams dying.
ну а что ещё американец мог написать об Абрамсе?!))) "ни один Абрамс не пострадал, их всех отправляли на ремонт, а потом назад в бой" может, показать ему фотки с Ирака, с останками его непобедимого танка?
Well the T-90 goes further but the abrams goes faster
t-90 125mm WOW , abrams DU sabot defeats the most thickest armour. T-90 i dont think is as effective. Abrams has blowup pannels.
Abrams has better armour chobbam 1 plus DU and ERA and thick ass armour
t-90 has thin armour like t-72 with ERA
abrams can also fire a 120mm heat-seaking round.
abrams also has a soft kill active protection system against laser. heat-seaking, radar guided and wire guded missiles. CONS fuel, t-90 pros, economic.
@PILUPACKSXXX The T90s new composite armor is far better than the T72s composite armor. When the T90 was tested without ERA against a variety of ATGMs and RPGs, 1 of the 5 Kornet ATGMs penetrated the T90 without ERA, where as the M1 has been destroyed by the simplest of ATGMs and RPGs. With ERA, the T90 was impenetrable.
@PILUPACKSXXX Despite the M1 using DU armor combined with ERA, it has proved still vulnerable to RPG29 fire. A Challenger 2, using the same DU and ERA combo, was penetrated by a RPG29, wounding the driver. It is true that the Abrams can fire HS rounds, but they are extremely pricy and the Shtora and Arena defenses of the T90 would destroy any incoming round. The known active protection systems the M1 uses are used in low numbers and are obsolete when compared to Shtora and Arena.
@KSGAxAirsoft 12 M1A2 was destroyed with RPG7 with the oldest warheads ever produced.Warheads had only 300mm RHA(oldest version) and they still penetrate your M1A2s. And a RPG29 destroyed several Merkava Mk4 the best protected and armored tank on earth. Your M1A2 has no chance against LEopard wich has about 40% better armor.And has more powerfull ammunition than M1 does, Wolfram>DU. The T90 has also Wolfram and DU ammunition with higher velocity than any else reason is 30% bigger propellant.
@Talshet I'm not supporting the M1 Abrams, so please stop using "Your M1A2". Anyways, I would much rather hop into a Leopard 2 or a T90 than an Abrams anyday.
@PILUPACKSXXX Learn facts not only usa fires the SABOT shells with DU. Russians use DU and the better DU/Wolfram because DU make it heavy the Wolfram is harder. Russians have 125mm and use for SABOT shells a special prepelant wich has 30% more prepelant than the usual for normal HEAT shells.The prepelant is the reason for better penetration. Germans use the Wolfram SABOTS wich has about the same penetration as the american SABOTS.Calibre and cartridge is much more important than the DU %
T90 has a lot of advantages for example it has an autoloader and it doesent eat up a lot of fuel unlike abrams, plus m1 dosent have anti infantury rounds unlike the T90.So basicly if abrans will meet a platoon of inf. with RPG 32s the m1 is practicly dead.
oh and on one last notent. many abrams tanks have been destroyed. both by the peoples of iraq, afghanistan and etc, but also by private contracters since there is a policy by the government in which all losses to the company are paid in full and then some. which means more money is made when the company loses equipment.
in all honesty many t 90s have been destroyed yes, but those destroyed were all downgraded exports bought by foreign countries. since the russians are exporting to foreign nations, it's obvious they would exclude the anti missile infared systems, night vision, kontakt 5 reactive armor (sometimes), aswell as the stronger engines, as actually giving those and any other specializations to possible future enemies would be purely ignorant.
@sdiord Not a single T90 was destroyed. Where are you getting your info from? Are you reffering to the T72, because Russia has exported a lot of those.
@KSGAxAirsoft i you notice the russian federation has exported atleast 500 downgraded t 90s to india. this i know for sure. i believe they have imported them to the middle eastaswell, althou i may be think of the t 80s and (as you said) t 72s. however, i know for a fact they have shipped them to india
@sdiord They are not downgraded, they are upgraded with Israeli systems giving them more advantage. The Indian version is called T-90S "Bishma". While the regular T-90S export models are downgraded versions.
@Nickael7 by t90s i meant plural not the t90 S model. any who. every t90 system exported from russia is downgraded. this is a fact. for example the infarred tier three anti missile system is absent from the indian t 90s (plural thank you) (or bishma if it so important that they be called such). you dont even have to look it up. just look at one of their pictures of the indian t90s (bishma) the infarred counter measures on the front of the tank are missing outright.
@sdiord But have you read that India has upgrade systems from Israel Kinetics Ltd, for hard-kill TROPHY systems. And India has developed their own ERA "kasthan". I have the feeling why, the Russians didn't want to sell their dynamic protection: 1) Reverse engineer from western powers i.e England, Germany, 2) May fall under the hands of wrong people Pakis, etc. Read carefully about the Bishma model from the other regular exports.
Abrams armor is Classified.And ''Tech'' meanings high 3rd weapons and thermal cams for AAG and Hellfire Missiles.Also M1A1 can Laser Target for airstrike.i was'nt talking about high tech armor.
No T-90 tank has been destroyed ever. The one in the video is T-72B with K-5 ERA which was destroyed by Georgian 152 mm 2A36 howitzer (I have whole article about that particular case); T-72 B with K-5 and T-90 look very similar, but difference between them is big.
But, 120-130 various variants of M1 abrams tanks were destroyed (mostly by enemy fire, very few by friendly fire).
Just look "mighty Abrams" tanks on Live Leak (view?i=599_1253018578) - [with world wide web dot liveleak dot com/...]
As i like both the T-90 and the M1A2 Abrams, there not comparable in battle as the M1A2 is only fought T-72 and T80U, and don't be saying the M1 was taken out several times in Iraq for one they were by RPGs not by tanks none at all and there was no actual deaths of crews, and as he says in the video they are taken back, recycled and sent back to the front, the T-90 has been in combat but not in very big ones, Georgia conflict only battle T-80U that only concludes it can beat an older generation.
Its true M1 Abrams is better as compared to T90. However the kill numbers are just hyped, Abrams vs other tanks without "Air support" would see Many Abram kills. Ofcourse Abrams will come out as a winner overall, but will see many many kills. Atleast 30 Abrams killed for every 70 T 90's. Remember, I am talking about no's without "air support".
this is crap and thats not a t-90 destroyed its a 72 with reactive armor u fool t-90 are in moscow alone and m1s not being destroyed u have to be joking there crap made in the late 70s with laminant steel composite armor not classified stuff fool
oh one more thing, during the first gulf war the Iraqi army was using obsolete tank rounds from the 1970s that would never pierce the armor of ANY modern tank in addition to the abrams. What good is a tank if it uses special fuel and lots of it. Want to know how to beat the US army in tank warfare? All you have to do is destroy the source of fuel for the tanks, attack the supply lines and the tanks cant move cuz they cant use diesel oil as fuel, utterly useless tank in the real world. sorry kid.
@ROCKSvsUZIS yeah but they have to get to the supplies first. our tanks would have pushed the enemy so far back that the enemy couldnt even reach the supply lines. not to mention
@PitbuyllGamingHounds you use special forces to attack supplies, fast moving mechanized infantry with a small footprint that can slip behind our lines. Its not hard to do. Guerilla warfare is very effective against conventional forces, and if you yourself have conventional forces you always attack tanks with mines and attack helicopters. No army is invincible, certainly not ours (a fast moving army with thin supply lines and spotty intel) supplies are ez to get to its rarely well guarded.
Lol wow whoever made this video clearly does not know what he is talking about. First the armor of Abrams tank is not classified its depleted uranium,it has a fuel hungry turbine engine that runs on JP-8, has a short operational time, short travel range,requires too much maintenance,has an infared based fire control system with no analog backup,weighs too much,notoriously bad tracks that disengage on adverse terrain,exposed auxillary electronics,the list goes on this tank is not that great.
@PitbuyllGamingHounds the armor is NOT classified, what the armor is made of is known by all, however, its composition is classified NOT the materials its made of
На намом деле Т-90,лутший танк.Я сам из Украины и жуву там же.Американцы хвалят свой Абрамс,но почему же тогда в Ираке его подбевали самые первые гранаты,не говоря уже о пушках и т.д.......?!
А Т-90 укомплектовон так,что в него тежело попасть........у него хорошая броня,обшит коробками и соят ракетницы,что бы отводить снаряд в сторону и взрывать его потом............А Абрамс отвисает в этом.......!Вот и всё.Зачем эти лишние споры.
you are info is junk the t-90 it has got bigger range than the abram's it may have bigger fuel capacity but the t-90 is 46 tons than the abram's that is 60 tons . The ammmunition is not exposed like the t-72 .. try this is a channel this will give you real info ! M1 Abrams Versus T-90 (English Subtitles)! copy paste it at the search !!!
какое глупое видео... абрамсы показали себя хорошо, пока воевали против Т-54/55 и Т-62. Против Т-72 абрамс проигрывал. Был случай, когда ваш хваленый Аабрамс подбили из ДШК!!! И, по мнению автора, который ничего не смыслит в технике, абрамс лучший. А лучшими у нас всегда считались танки, которые можно подбить из ДШК))))(это я посмеялся))
@ISR1917 An Abrams can also take RPG's all day along frontally, but if you hit it from side or rear you can destroy or damage it, like a T90. It's not only the number, it is very importar where you hit the tank. That said, I am not claiming one tank is better than other, just saying "some RPGs hit some tank and it survived/was destroyed" is not enough information :)
бла бла бла.!америкосы были пиндосами и суждения о прелести танка такиеже. На открытой местности рулит артиллерия и авиация. А в городских условиях реактивный снаряд ,пущеный из укрытия, сделает из экипажа жаркое в любой консервной банке; ток ворочиться, мне кажется, удобнее на руссе, чем на современном подобии Maus-а. А по поводу орудия - это просто смешно, напоминает детские мерилки письками : "У кого больше" - Снаряд решает все вопросы брони.
You made a conclusion that abrams goes futher based on its larger gas tank. You're fogetting that abrams has 1500 hp turbine and t-90 has 1000 hp disel engine (its lighter 'couse it's 3-men crewed and doesn't need that power), which is 1.5 less hungry. T-80 had turbine, but russians decided turbines aren't good for tanks. They are fragile, thursty and has higher than 1100 degree exhaust, looking good at IR.
Actually abrams goes 410km and t-90 goes 550km. 140 km difference, not bad, huh?
THE T-90 saw combat in the chechen war and NO T-90s were destroyed or damaged, however the image of a destroyed tank isn't a t-90 its a t-72, and i can prove it....
lol, which retard made that ridiculous dumb video. T-90 kills any abrams at a range of 5000 meter. abrams noobtank combat range is 2000 meter, it will not even realize what hit them. not to mention u can buy 2 T-90 tanks for 1 useless abrams noobtank, what a waste of money.
lol, this noobvideo even thinks a fight between abrams and iraqi camel-tanks is a "fight" xD
By the way, to remind you result of modelling of educational fight of division F-35 against Су-30 МКИ? 20 minutes. Your planes have held on 20 minutes. And at the best outcome they will manage to bring down no more than two Су.
It is all delirium, abrams makes the way RPG-7... And the distance of fight Т-90 ~5 km (shooting by guided missiles through a gun) - at abrams simply isn't present chances to approach to Т-90 :)
Я из России .Я не думаю ,я знаю, что на дистанции 1000м -1300м Т-90 и Т-80 (основной танк России-около 5000 шт) уступят Абрамсу в равных условиях (дуэльная ситуация один на один ,или батальон на батальон).Российский танк очень плохо зашищён ,и сточки зрения выживаемости на поле боя не сравнится,даже с Леопардом 1.Но при крупной опперации НАТО или Армии США против России, или России против США и НАТО не будет дуэльной ситуации. 80 % Абрамсов не доедут до Т-80 и Т-90.Ракета с Т-90 бьёт на 5000м
@ooooboy1 ты забыл, что наши танки со всех сторон обложены динамической защитой, поэтому не так то просто их уничтожить и на 1000 метров. А вот у абрамса динамическая защита есть только по бортам. Да у него очень толстый лоб, но посмотри какой у него зазор под башней, туда только слепой не попадет. Плюс абрамс выше и больше, а значит в него проще попасть.
@barbozz У Абрамсов есть динамическая защита. Вы не видели что-ли, как абрамсы обвешаны мешками с песком в Ираке?)) lol. Против мин им это не помогло. Абрамс хуже Challenger'а.А вообще лучшие танки в мире это Т-90 и Leopard. Еще у нас был проэкт Black Eagle, но слишком невыгодным оказался. Ща уже на основе Black Eagle модернизируют Т-90. USA пытаются модернизировать Абрамс по технологии Т-90, потому что Абрамсы берут броней и становятся все неподвижнее и неподвижнее..
@ta3uk1 Не понял коммент. Мешки с песком это не динам. защита, а мешки с песком. К тому же выше я написал, что у абрамса динам. защита есть по бортам корпуса. Так же не понял, что значит usa модернизируют абрамс по типу т 90? Оно им не нужно, т.к. система управления огнем у них лучше и менять ее они не будут, а брони навесить еще не получится, просто некуда уже. И так 11 раз модернизировали. А чёрный орел - это просто новая башня на шасси т 80у, это не новый танк.
@barbozz У Вас с чувством юмора видно беда)). Мешки с песком использовали в Ираке пиндосы для защиты танков от противотанковых гранатометов, тк динамической защита у них говно или отсутствовала. Насчет объекта 640: шасси было взято от т-80у и почти полностью переработано, почитайте инфо. Далее, не нужно сравнивать управление огнем танка т-90 1992г. выпуска с абрамсом посл. поколения, - это глупо. сравнивайте с т-90 АМ или т-99 "Армада", который скоро встанет на вооружение. Абрамс - говно.
@ooooboy1 Что за бред насчёт плохой защищёности? Т-90А САМЫЙ ЗАЩИЩЁНЫЙ танк!Даже на wikipedia есть инфа про защищеность Леопарда 2 и Т-90 , Т_90 превосходит леопард 2.У Т-90 как и на других танках есть многослойное бронирование, динамическая защита, можно ставить активную защиту, а у западных танков только чобхем.Проблема наших танков это боеприпасы в боевом отделении, но к примеру Абрамсы (не танк а металалом) их перегородка не спасала и боеприпасы детонировали.Русские танки лучшие.
@ooooboy1 Боже ж ты мой. Дуэльная ситуация, это как сферический танк в ваккууме -- недостижимое состояние. Даже если танки наедут друг на друга внезапно с тысячи метров решит только случай. не пишите бред, ПОЖАЛУЙСТА. Ладно там американцы придурки, но стыдно видеть, что свои же не лучше.
@ooooboy1 не прав на 100%. почему по твоему американцы создали "Апач " "Хеллфайр"? для того, чтобы справляться с броней т-72. мой отец имеет реальный боевой опыт(воевал в афганистане, был командиром танка, звание лейтенант). боевики тратили по 3-4 заряда на каждый танк Т-55\т-62\т-64.
логично было бы предположить, что т-72 бронирован лучше, чем т-64. и кстати, основной танк ВС РФ не т-80, а т-80у. по сути, совершенно другая машина. а т-72б по характеристикам превосходит леопарды всех модов.
Я по не русски не очень но из ролика понял что не один абрамс не был уничтожен что не вернулся домой тогда введите WAR IS HELL A lot photos of M1 ABRAMS
@ISR1917 That's true, the powerful Dynamic protection the T-90 has is incomparable, thus making the tank lighter, low cost, more battle efficient and easy to repair.
единственное что хорошее у Абрамса это немецкая пушка. все. Леопард 2 а 6 гораздо опаснее.т 90с и его продолжение т90с-м1 уступали только в СУО..сейчас это устранили..для справки..дальность выстрела абрамса с летальностью 80%(то есть убил вторым выстрелом) 3.5-4 км у т 90с 4.5-5км и про самолеты и вертолеты..снаряд ракета легко их сбивает...Ну о "рамке" наверно уже слышали это БМПТ
Have people already forgotten the T-90's have already gone up agains't the same RPG's the Abrams now are. And the T-90's were almost wiped out of the Russian Arsenal. It's a joke that people are even comparing the two.
@TiKondaRoga There are no T-90s being lost so far, don't talk BS only lost Abrams and one Challenger 2.
Twelve T-90s "VLADIMIR" variant were so successful for the liberation of Dagestan against the Chechen insurgency, one T-90 sustain 7 RPG shots the same RPGs use in Iraq, and the tank survived with all its crew safe and sound. It came back with its ERA block pop out and they just fix them good as new.
@Nickael7 Really...I could have sworn that's what started the scuffle in Goergia. But hey people have short memories. And for such a "great" tank it's surprising that the Russian's are already planning on replacing it, weird huh?
@TiKondaRoga Its a third generation tank that can go toe to toe with an abram. Third generation tank doesn't mean crap, it the munition compartment which is different from a fourth generation tank. You can add CHOBHAM armor in a 3e gen. and advance electronic and still will perform like a 4e gen. In the meanwhile, Russia is waiting that all nation exhaust all tech. resources to create the T-95, which had been canceled, not for economical reason, but for tech. revision.
@Nickael7 It may have just been some future fiction stuff...It was a while ago I heard about it. But from what I heard is they were going to model it to compete with the new leoperd and challenger.
@TiKondaRoga No wait, you're actually right, there is a model of T-72-120 transformed into a 4e generation tank it look badass, but its under license by Russia, but transformed by NATO standards as a cheaper version to probably make lower cost version vs. the more expensive LEO and Challys.
FutureMarine44 The m1 a2 has not the best gun in the world its just one of the best in the world.And many M1 was destroyed in iraq ure information about that is from the desert storm time.The M1 has also not the best firecontrol system in the world only 1 of the best.The m1 a2 is also not the best tank in the world its the German Leopard 2 A6 M.By the way the Armour of the M1 abrams is DU and a bit of steel mixed like a sandwich.
@presidentriche lol im, half afghan half russian. so it doesnt apply to me coz i win either way. my point is your comment says "america > whoever" when america are losing in afghanistan
hey what about range?? T-90-650km M1-450km T-90 equipped with anti laser guided missile counter measure. M1 equipped with NOTHING!! M1s Uranium depleted armor is dangerous for its crew. while T90 using a three layer main protection system(Shtora, Sharpnel, and Explosive Reactive Armor). For more, watch?v=8paDwGHAy-s watch?v=2h4uUfYnXUw
Не принимал Абрамс участие в боевых действиях в Чечне или в Грузии. Вот тогда б мы и посмотрели кто лучше!!!! А так сравнивать смысла нет!!! На открытых участках и 34-ка может повстанцев расстреливать!!!!!!!!!
its so funny to watch amercans write stupid coments to not get pissed off completly
its the 21 century guys(americans) your time is over even the chines make better weapons so americans shut your trap and get lost .Make this the most rated comment to show them that there done in this world.
@igor7702 Explain? May i remind you, there is only 120 T-90s in existence. Aside from tanks, we have a massive air force. We could easily destroy, or disable a T-90 with a 2000lbs. J-DAM. Sure its old, its also cheaper and still does its job fine. Not only that, but I doubt a T-90 will ever encounter an abrams. To much air support!
@funkymunky65 you idiot? We are talking anout tank vs tank not with AIR SUPPORT....Plus there are 890 T-90s in sevice so get some facts and come back and write me.M1A1 vs T-90 the last one is going to win because:1)T-90 has a bigger range2)The T-90 has a diesel engine whch means that it will not burn when hit 3)T-90 has the ability to fire rockets with superb penetration power of about 1000 mm of pure armor4)Do not have to refuel the T-90 unlike M1A1 which has to be refueled each 5 hours.
@igor7702 1) Larger range means nothing, especially when you are surrounded and and outnumbered. (look at the way the T-34's outnumbered the germans) 2) The Gas Turbine engine gives extremely high torque at relatively low RPMs. 3) The M829A3 is more than capable of penetrating the frontal armor of the T-90, which is 60% kontakt-5. 4) Every tank needs fuel. Even the T-90. You can send the empty tank to base for refueling, and replace it with a fresh refueled tank.
@funkymunky65 Larger range actualy means that the T-90 will be able to get the M1/A1 from 5 km. while M1/A1 itself can get only a max range shot at about 2,5 km.The T-90 is way smaller then the M1/A1 making it less vulnerable to accurate fire.My point is that:yes you have to refuel all tanks but the problem is that with the M1/A1 you have to waste alot of fuel to keep them going for at least 5 hours unlike the T-90 which does not need refueling in an entire 10 hours.
@igor7702 I know this, that gives the t-90 an advantage in a 1-on-1 conflict. But If the Abrams is moving around, by the time the T-90's round traveled 5km the Abrams would be out of the way. The Abrams can hit a basket ball sized target from about 1-1.5km, accurately. If this was in an urban scenario, or short range combat scenario, the Abrams would have the advantage, due to the guns faster reload and better penetrators. The T-90 does have the advantage in fuel economy, but we wanted HP.
@igor7702 What I mean by faster reload is the Abrams uses a human loader, while the T-90 uses an Auto-Loader. The Auto loader avgs about 4 secs to reload, and about 6 to switch ammo types. A human can load it in 3 secs, with the world record standing at 1 sec, ammo type switching only adds a few milliseconds, because they are stored in the same compartment, thus making it easier for a human loader to get the right ammo type. Auto loaders can also break and jam, a human can become exhausted.
@funkymunky65 The T-90 has the world recored of firing 23 rounds in a 1 min. beating the ,,Leopard".Plus with an auto-loader T-90 is not that big unlike the M1/A1.Auto-loader are made for bad conditions and you said that they need time to change ammo.Thats not really the truth.Computers are programmed to change ammo instantly.Plus unlike Humans,computers do not make mistakes.Depleted uranium that you use is bad for the crews health.Test have shown that the T-90 can with stand a DP round.
@igor7702 Sure, computers don't make mistakes, machinery jams though. And yes, they do need time to change ammo, because I know a friend overseas who has been in the T-90, and is the gunner in a T-80U.
Besides, the T-90 is an over-upgraded T-72. You don't think we can't do the same thing with the Abrams?
Ever heard of the M1A3 Prototype? And yes, a T-90 can resist a DP round, but not a M829A3 Penetrator, it easily defeats kontakt-5. And the frontal armor of a T-90 is only 60% Kontakt-5.
@funkymunky65 Armor of a T-90:Steel-composite-reactive blend vs APFSDS: 545 mm + 250-280mm with Kontakt-5 = 800-830mm; vs HEAT: 650 mm + 500-700mm with Kontakt-5 = 1,150mm.of armor.You said you can upgrade the M1/A1 then why you do not do it,I will tell you,beacause it will cost to much and will not be able for mass production.For every good tank there will be a better ATGM.Reactive armor will hold the M829A3 because the round will get blown of the T-90 as soon as it hits the tank.
@igor7702 Also, the M829A3 was tested on a REAL kontakt-5 plate. And even the other armor types you listed. It obliterated every plate. Wondering how we got it? Hint: Russia and the USA are allies now. We bought it from them. Why don't we do it? Because the technology is still being developed. I'll ask you why they didn't come out with the T-95? Now APS systems are getting popular, soon ATGMs will have to use way more elaborate systems to deliver it's payload to the target. Speed is one of them
@funkymunky65 M829A3 is a cumulative round,ofcoures it will slice through metal like a hot knife through butter.Try to test your M829A3 on Kontakt-5 with reactive armor on it.M829A3 will bounce of like a little rock.Its imposible to beat through reactive armor without an another round hitting the same spot which is 99.9%imposible.And where do you get the Kontakt-5 armor?Plus tell me the site where you read about the test on the Kontakt-5 ok?Post the link of the site in your response.
@igor7702 I use Wikipedia for all this. Look up "Kontak-5" and "M829A3". We already have the M829E4 on the way. Also, if you knew how Kontakt-5 Works, you would know that Fitting it with ERA would be very hard.
The M829A3 penetrator travels at well over mach 3, and when it impacts, it focuses all its energy in to an area the size of a quarter. ERA wouldn't be very effective, because the shape of the penetrator would deflect the blast.
At worst you might offset the penetrator a few inches.
@funkymunky65 As a response to the M829A3, the Russian army have designed Relikt, the most modern Russian ERA, which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5.It detonates on command before the round hits based on information from radar.
@funkymunky65 M829A3 SHOULD penetrate you never know.Depleted uranium-M829A3 that means the crews health is damaged,even thoght the uranium is depleted it is still radioactive.If you put in more DU,yes you will make the round more effective but, you will suffer from it later on.
@igor7702 True, but they understand this risk when they put their name on that piece of paper.
Not only that, but the complications usually don't come until way late in their life.
Example: My grandfather was a B-25 Pilot, and was almost deafened by all the Flak shells launched at his plane. But the lived to the ripe old age of 84. War is hell on your body, no matter your occupation.
1:24
It's not t90 it's old t-72
FutureMarine44 you are troll
BANNERTM 5 days ago
@BANNERTM no that is a T-90, the T-72 has never had ERA Placed in a triangular pattern on the turret. Unless its a T-72BM, which it isnt.
ToAstYNaChO 1 day ago
@ToAstYNaChO lol it's t-72bm goolge it, t-72bm has ERA, well kid you don't know nothink about tanks - go play bf3 or arma 2, only these games allows you destroy t-90 by abrams))
Google for t-90MS - this tank best in the world(ye ye better then Leo2A7+ get some butthurt))
BANNERTM 1 day ago
@BANNERTM you dont realize the extent of my knowledge. tell me, what from that picture makes you SURE that is a T-72BM, its so destroyed that there is no way to point out the differences between the two tanks,but now that i think of it, the t-90 has never seen battle, so that cant be one. you are right, but i am also SURE that my knowledge of tanks far surpasses yours.
ToAstYNaChO 1 day ago
@ToAstYNaChO Are you woodpecker? T90 has never been involved in fights!!! NEVER,
can you give me that picture in better quallity ? THIS is t-72bm OR other MOD of T-72 (Serbian, Ukrain, Chezh) , Did you see like/dislike bar of this video? Understood? Give me proof!! I fuck on the tanks because would be no war, but i like true....and hate lies!
BANNERTM 1 day ago
@BANNERTM i just said that it has never seen battle...
ToAstYNaChO 19 hours ago
@ToAstYNaChO Thanks cap
BANNERTM 12 hours ago
Abrams is bullshit
Leo2A7 and T90 best tanks in the world
BANNERTM 5 days ago
@BANNERTM if a bare M1A2 abrams and a T-90 face off, a trained abrams tank crew can easily destroy a T-90, its the fact that the T-90 is usually covered in Kontact-5 ERA, a very heavy and thick reactive armor (one of the only types that can significantly diminish the effectiveness of long rod pentrators such as the M289 APFSDS), without that, an Abrams will surely win.
ToAstYNaChO 1 day ago
@ToAstYNaChO hmmm abramses in iraq were destroyed with rpg 7 (lol) , t-90 was shoted
with new models of rpgs-27 , after that tank could shot and go, i suppose you are from usa?
BANNERTM 1 day ago
lol this vid is bullshit only couple t90 where ever destroyed because russia army was corrupt in the 90's and the took the explosives from the kontact 5 reactive armor, a rpg 7 is known to have penatrated the abrams side in iraq alos old antitank missles were known to destroy and disable couple of abrams tanks in iraq and yes there where casaulties
meee2014 2 weeks ago
по абрамсам) lurkmore_to/Abrams
Silme17 2 weeks ago
Fun fact.
Germans and Americans built made a tank project each, the Germans the Leopard II the Americans the Abrahams..
The Leopard won the competition, but the Americans simply didn't want to buy tanks from their "old enemies" xD
"Will be fun to see the Americans drive through summer corn fields.. the gasoline engines will put them in blaze" - some German engineer... Aah fun times.
People keep taking up desert storm.. How can they even claim it was an.. challenge?
grahwo 3 weeks ago
Actually, during Desert Storm, 4 M1A1 Abrams were destroyed, along with a couple of M2 Bradelys. The T-90 doesn't "expose" its ammo; it's because the rounds are located around the bottom of the turret. The explosion forces the turret up and out. "Mind if you do some research?
BMW9871 1 month ago
1) Bigger target is more easy to hit. Small tank is more easy to hide. T-90 can dig a trench for itself in 5 min.
2) T-90 can fire by guded missles from it's main gun on 5km distanse and hit its target very exactly. Abrams can't. So, who cares that Abr gun is more accurate?
So, in a duel fight in a open field Abrams will not have a chanse. In a city, you don't need accurate gun.
3) 9 tankists in 3 T-90 vs 9 tankists in ... only 2 Abrams.
kvi4222 1 month ago
Abrams sucks
egorak2011 1 month ago
trolololo!
petunized 2 months ago
Damn, remove this fucking gay song ><
risqification 2 months ago
youtube.com/ watch?v=5v25iFBckHk&feature=related
BETITPERFLOP 2 months ago
Америка сосет!!!!! т 90 лучший, ололол!!!
gunsmith94 2 months ago
YOU CAN KILL THE T-90 BY DAY DREAMING, IDIOT AMERICUNT. FUCK YOU, YOU PILE OF SHIT.
dacotw 2 months ago
Thats not a T90 that was destroyed. No T90 was ever destroyed.
Talshet 3 months ago
@Talshet T72BM destroyed by artillery fire. Thankfully, the crew survived.
KSGAxAirsoft 2 months ago
@KSGAxAirsoft aha and where you got your information? the only battle the T90 was used and confirmed was the Georgian war about 8 T90 and one destroyed 13 T72 with first shot.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet Where do I get my info from? From observations and KNOWLEDGE that you seem to lack. The T90 was never used in Georgia. The most up to date tank deployed by the Russians was the T72BM. And to top it off, the Georgians only lost about 5 tanks. The only actual combat experience the T90 did have was in 1999 during the invasion of Dagestan.
KSGAxAirsoft 2 months ago
@KSGAxAirsoft OMG, hey airsoft kid. The latest tank of russians is T90SM and T90AM.T90S was used about 8 times in Georgia that was confirmed by diffrent people. The T90 destroyed 13 T72 with one shot.Belive what you want, but T90S is not T72BM, T72BM was the oldest T90 with no midfications. T90SM and T90AM has new armor adaptiv upgrades Relikt or Kontakt 5 Arena Shtora 2.
Talshet 2 months ago
@Talshet Airsoft kid? Hmm... I'm 23 years old and you're calling me a kid. Go fool some one else. The T90 was never used in Georgia. You're an ignorant fool and get this into your head - The T90 was never used in Georgia. You have no support other than "confirmed by different people" who are these different people? Tell me. Give me a source and I want +3 pictures.
KSGAxAirsoft 2 months ago
DIE FOR THIS FUCKING MUSIC!!!!!!! DIE HARD
Talshet 3 months ago
no opponents umm british challenger 2 typical yank your stuff always best not
Mrxl600 3 months ago
Russian tanks are cooler than american. "RUSSIAN TANKS" there you will see our RUSSIAN war machines do things that your crappy abrams and other tanks can't.
MegaRussian12 3 months ago 2
1:44 мечтать не вредно! На самом деле у экипажа Т-90 гораздо больше шансов выжить. Топливные баки Абрамыча по бортам легко выпиливаются самым древним зарядом. ВСУ можно подстрелить из "калаша" и топливо просто нахуй сожжёт весь экипаж. Т-90 же
а) защищён (предыдущий мой пост)
б) топливные баки хоть с экипажем и в одной кабине, но броня крепка (смотри п. "а")
в) аммуниция не взорвётся так, как у Абрамчика (п. "а"), дружит с экипажем (см. п "б")
г) Т-90 не унылое говно (инфа 100%)
racdenis 4 months ago
Абрамс - автострадный танк. На одной выставке он на небольшом препятствии повредил гусеницу и был обездвижен (Т-90 прошёл без помех). Абрамсовый движок более прожорлив, поэтому чтобы не отгонять танк тягачами на базу, ему сделали большой бак. Российский же дизелёк с приличной скоростью и хорошей мощностью не кушает столько. Да и двигло Абрамса при езде в пустыне быстро засоряется, не то, что у Т-90. Да и броня российского танка гораздо крепче (крепость брони Т-90 + динамическая защита). Так то!
racdenis 4 months ago
Любой человек имеет право на СВОЕ мнение!
PS using google translate=))
STALKERBooka 4 months ago
Futuremarine obviously did not know that Russian trolls flock to videos that prove their stuff sucks.. poor guy.
DailyStaley 5 months ago
i'm fully in the camp of the abrams being superior, but you have some faulty information here. there have been many, MANY cases of the crew in the abrams dying.
kingmigget 5 months ago
малолетние американцы могут спать спокойно, их танк круче - другой малолетний американец сказал))
Nordick2 5 months ago
ну а что ещё американец мог написать об Абрамсе?!))) "ни один Абрамс не пострадал, их всех отправляли на ремонт, а потом назад в бой" может, показать ему фотки с Ирака, с останками его непобедимого танка?
MegaGenerator 5 months ago
the m1a2 abrams tank has many armor materialls but most of it is aluminum
TheCoxanator5000 5 months ago
M1A2 SEP V2 TUSK anyday turns to ashes any T-90
PILUPACKSXXX 6 months ago
Well the T-90 goes further but the abrams goes faster
t-90 125mm WOW , abrams DU sabot defeats the most thickest armour. T-90 i dont think is as effective. Abrams has blowup pannels.
Abrams has better armour chobbam 1 plus DU and ERA and thick ass armour
t-90 has thin armour like t-72 with ERA
abrams can also fire a 120mm heat-seaking round.
abrams also has a soft kill active protection system against laser. heat-seaking, radar guided and wire guded missiles. CONS fuel, t-90 pros, economic.
PILUPACKSXXX 6 months ago
@PILUPACKSXXX The T90s new composite armor is far better than the T72s composite armor. When the T90 was tested without ERA against a variety of ATGMs and RPGs, 1 of the 5 Kornet ATGMs penetrated the T90 without ERA, where as the M1 has been destroyed by the simplest of ATGMs and RPGs. With ERA, the T90 was impenetrable.
KSGAxAirsoft 5 months ago
@PILUPACKSXXX Despite the M1 using DU armor combined with ERA, it has proved still vulnerable to RPG29 fire. A Challenger 2, using the same DU and ERA combo, was penetrated by a RPG29, wounding the driver. It is true that the Abrams can fire HS rounds, but they are extremely pricy and the Shtora and Arena defenses of the T90 would destroy any incoming round. The known active protection systems the M1 uses are used in low numbers and are obsolete when compared to Shtora and Arena.
KSGAxAirsoft 5 months ago
@KSGAxAirsoft 12 M1A2 was destroyed with RPG7 with the oldest warheads ever produced.Warheads had only 300mm RHA(oldest version) and they still penetrate your M1A2s. And a RPG29 destroyed several Merkava Mk4 the best protected and armored tank on earth. Your M1A2 has no chance against LEopard wich has about 40% better armor.And has more powerfull ammunition than M1 does, Wolfram>DU. The T90 has also Wolfram and DU ammunition with higher velocity than any else reason is 30% bigger propellant.
Talshet 3 months ago
@Talshet I'm not supporting the M1 Abrams, so please stop using "Your M1A2". Anyways, I would much rather hop into a Leopard 2 or a T90 than an Abrams anyday.
KSGAxAirsoft 2 months ago
@PILUPACKSXXX Learn facts not only usa fires the SABOT shells with DU. Russians use DU and the better DU/Wolfram because DU make it heavy the Wolfram is harder. Russians have 125mm and use for SABOT shells a special prepelant wich has 30% more prepelant than the usual for normal HEAT shells.The prepelant is the reason for better penetration. Germans use the Wolfram SABOTS wich has about the same penetration as the american SABOTS.Calibre and cartridge is much more important than the DU %
Talshet 2 months ago
t 90 лучший танк в мире.......абрамс отдыхает)
4ertikful 6 months ago
my apolagies yo nickeal7 as i was in quite the bad mood at the time of my reply. had a rough morning along with the past week altogether
sdiord 6 months ago
"garunteed"? i guess you are US redneck with no education and job prospects that made few babies and had to run away into the army
rasz 6 months ago
sorry my typing was a bit off tonight
sdiord 6 months ago
T90 has a lot of advantages for example it has an autoloader and it doesent eat up a lot of fuel unlike abrams, plus m1 dosent have anti infantury rounds unlike the T90.So basicly if abrans will meet a platoon of inf. with RPG 32s the m1 is practicly dead.
StasTarasov 6 months ago
oh and on one last notent. many abrams tanks have been destroyed. both by the peoples of iraq, afghanistan and etc, but also by private contracters since there is a policy by the government in which all losses to the company are paid in full and then some. which means more money is made when the company loses equipment.
sdiord 6 months ago
in all honesty many t 90s have been destroyed yes, but those destroyed were all downgraded exports bought by foreign countries. since the russians are exporting to foreign nations, it's obvious they would exclude the anti missile infared systems, night vision, kontakt 5 reactive armor (sometimes), aswell as the stronger engines, as actually giving those and any other specializations to possible future enemies would be purely ignorant.
sdiord 6 months ago
@sdiord Not a single T90 was destroyed. Where are you getting your info from? Are you reffering to the T72, because Russia has exported a lot of those.
KSGAxAirsoft 6 months ago
@KSGAxAirsoft i you notice the russian federation has exported atleast 500 downgraded t 90s to india. this i know for sure. i believe they have imported them to the middle eastaswell, althou i may be think of the t 80s and (as you said) t 72s. however, i know for a fact they have shipped them to india
sdiord 6 months ago
@sdiord They are not downgraded, they are upgraded with Israeli systems giving them more advantage. The Indian version is called T-90S "Bishma". While the regular T-90S export models are downgraded versions.
Nickael7 6 months ago
@Nickael7 by t90s i meant plural not the t90 S model. any who. every t90 system exported from russia is downgraded. this is a fact. for example the infarred tier three anti missile system is absent from the indian t 90s (plural thank you) (or bishma if it so important that they be called such). you dont even have to look it up. just look at one of their pictures of the indian t90s (bishma) the infarred counter measures on the front of the tank are missing outright.
sdiord 6 months ago
@sdiord But have you read that India has upgrade systems from Israel Kinetics Ltd, for hard-kill TROPHY systems. And India has developed their own ERA "kasthan". I have the feeling why, the Russians didn't want to sell their dynamic protection: 1) Reverse engineer from western powers i.e England, Germany, 2) May fall under the hands of wrong people Pakis, etc. Read carefully about the Bishma model from the other regular exports.
Nickael7 6 months ago
@sdiord read according article in wikipedia "monkey model". Russians too dislike and distrust muslims and didn't want them to have ny real firepower.
Bloodlust20101983 5 months ago
T90 is slow-ass thats because of heavy armor and 125mm cannon.M1A1's advantage is speed and tech.
MrFrattt87 6 months ago
@MrFrattt87 Tech? Т-90 has an active armor and abrams protected by thick stupid and very harmful layers of depleted uranium.
petriotRF 6 months ago
@petriotRF
Abrams armor is Classified.And ''Tech'' meanings high 3rd weapons and thermal cams for AAG and Hellfire Missiles.Also M1A1 can Laser Target for airstrike.i was'nt talking about high tech armor.
MrFrattt87 6 months ago
@MrFrattt87 "armor is Classified"?? LOL his armor knows every second. And ability to Laser Target for airstrike have any modern tank.
petriotRF 6 months ago
No T-90 tank has been destroyed ever. The one in the video is T-72B with K-5 ERA which was destroyed by Georgian 152 mm 2A36 howitzer (I have whole article about that particular case); T-72 B with K-5 and T-90 look very similar, but difference between them is big.
But, 120-130 various variants of M1 abrams tanks were destroyed (mostly by enemy fire, very few by friendly fire).
Just look "mighty Abrams" tanks on Live Leak (view?i=599_1253018578) - [with world wide web dot liveleak dot com/...]
brox114 6 months ago
As i like both the T-90 and the M1A2 Abrams, there not comparable in battle as the M1A2 is only fought T-72 and T80U, and don't be saying the M1 was taken out several times in Iraq for one they were by RPGs not by tanks none at all and there was no actual deaths of crews, and as he says in the video they are taken back, recycled and sent back to the front, the T-90 has been in combat but not in very big ones, Georgia conflict only battle T-80U that only concludes it can beat an older generation.
Cheeseybeaver45 7 months ago
Its true M1 Abrams is better as compared to T90. However the kill numbers are just hyped, Abrams vs other tanks without "Air support" would see Many Abram kills. Ofcourse Abrams will come out as a winner overall, but will see many many kills. Atleast 30 Abrams killed for every 70 T 90's. Remember, I am talking about no's without "air support".
honey163230 7 months ago
this is crap and thats not a t-90 destroyed its a 72 with reactive armor u fool t-90 are in moscow alone and m1s not being destroyed u have to be joking there crap made in the late 70s with laminant steel composite armor not classified stuff fool
murf503 7 months ago
@murf503 shut the fuck up it is classified and the abrams is better and you know it
tylercolby11 7 months ago
1:16 Т-72 без активной защиты. 0:20 Т-80. Только 0:13 Т-90. Автор! Ты дебил!
ta3uk1 7 months ago
Смешное видео.
Dmitriy0ru 7 months ago
oh one more thing, during the first gulf war the Iraqi army was using obsolete tank rounds from the 1970s that would never pierce the armor of ANY modern tank in addition to the abrams. What good is a tank if it uses special fuel and lots of it. Want to know how to beat the US army in tank warfare? All you have to do is destroy the source of fuel for the tanks, attack the supply lines and the tanks cant move cuz they cant use diesel oil as fuel, utterly useless tank in the real world. sorry kid.
ROCKSvsUZIS 7 months ago
@ROCKSvsUZIS yeah but they have to get to the supplies first. our tanks would have pushed the enemy so far back that the enemy couldnt even reach the supply lines. not to mention
the abrams being able to out gun other tanks.
PitbuyllGamingHounds 7 months ago
@PitbuyllGamingHounds you use special forces to attack supplies, fast moving mechanized infantry with a small footprint that can slip behind our lines. Its not hard to do. Guerilla warfare is very effective against conventional forces, and if you yourself have conventional forces you always attack tanks with mines and attack helicopters. No army is invincible, certainly not ours (a fast moving army with thin supply lines and spotty intel) supplies are ez to get to its rarely well guarded.
ROCKSvsUZIS 7 months ago
Lol wow whoever made this video clearly does not know what he is talking about. First the armor of Abrams tank is not classified its depleted uranium,it has a fuel hungry turbine engine that runs on JP-8, has a short operational time, short travel range,requires too much maintenance,has an infared based fire control system with no analog backup,weighs too much,notoriously bad tracks that disengage on adverse terrain,exposed auxillary electronics,the list goes on this tank is not that great.
ROCKSvsUZIS 7 months ago
@ROCKSvsUZIS actually the armor IS infact classified. there is no way we would have a tank with armor made only out of depleted uranium.
PitbuyllGamingHounds 7 months ago
@PitbuyllGamingHounds the armor is NOT classified, what the armor is made of is known by all, however, its composition is classified NOT the materials its made of
ROCKSvsUZIS 7 months ago
@ROCKSvsUZIS whatever, i cannot make you think what you dont want to think but dont come cryin to me when you embarass yourself.
PitbuyllGamingHounds 7 months ago
ролик говно,у 1 90 есть автомат зарядания а у абра нет. у абра между пушкой и погоном спереди зазор в 40 см достаточно чтоб башню сорвать
Bogatyr95 8 months ago
абрамс уступает т90 по многим важным параметрам. недумаю что в дуэли он тоже победит тут уже решает кто первее выстрелит!
11195121 8 months ago
The Merkava 4 and Challenger 2 could be opponents of the Abrams for #1 in the world
jq5225 8 months ago
800 abrams at least once hit by rpg in irak 80 of them destroyed
Athor is lier
TheIADepTI 8 months ago
FUCKIN HATERS I like both abrams more however
raptorking375 8 months ago
1:27 T72, not t90
that's war of south ossetia and behind russian t72 is destroyed russian base
MrReflect999 8 months ago
На намом деле Т-90,лутший танк.Я сам из Украины и жуву там же.Американцы хвалят свой Абрамс,но почему же тогда в Ираке его подбевали самые первые гранаты,не говоря уже о пушках и т.д.......?!
А Т-90 укомплектовон так,что в него тежело попасть........у него хорошая броня,обшит коробками и соят ракетницы,что бы отводить снаряд в сторону и взрывать его потом............А Абрамс отвисает в этом.......!Вот и всё.Зачем эти лишние споры.
canechek51 8 months ago 2
That is not a T-90 at all, Russian T-90 would have the Shtora-1 mounted visibly, that is an upgrade version of T-72 with Kontakt-5 layout.
Nickael7 8 months ago
oh and by the way in chechnya a t-90 got hit by 7 rpg-7 and it was steel rolling with its driveer and shooter fine !!!
TheKifinas 8 months ago
you are info is junk the t-90 it has got bigger range than the abram's it may have bigger fuel capacity but the t-90 is 46 tons than the abram's that is 60 tons . The ammmunition is not exposed like the t-72 .. try this is a channel this will give you real info ! M1 Abrams Versus T-90 (English Subtitles)! copy paste it at the search !!!
TheKifinas 8 months ago
Abrams has not good reputation. It has good propaganda.
ManSnowdrift 8 months ago
какое глупое видео... абрамсы показали себя хорошо, пока воевали против Т-54/55 и Т-62. Против Т-72 абрамс проигрывал. Был случай, когда ваш хваленый Аабрамс подбили из ДШК!!! И, по мнению автора, который ничего не смыслит в технике, абрамс лучший. А лучшими у нас всегда считались танки, которые можно подбить из ДШК))))(это я посмеялся))
HeTpoHbMeH9 8 months ago
@ISR1917 An Abrams can also take RPG's all day along frontally, but if you hit it from side or rear you can destroy or damage it, like a T90. It's not only the number, it is very importar where you hit the tank. That said, I am not claiming one tank is better than other, just saying "some RPGs hit some tank and it survived/was destroyed" is not enough information :)
CEITCOGIDO 9 months ago
бла бла бла.!америкосы были пиндосами и суждения о прелести танка такиеже. На открытой местности рулит артиллерия и авиация. А в городских условиях реактивный снаряд ,пущеный из укрытия, сделает из экипажа жаркое в любой консервной банке; ток ворочиться, мне кажется, удобнее на руссе, чем на современном подобии Maus-а. А по поводу орудия - это просто смешно, напоминает детские мерилки письками : "У кого больше" - Снаряд решает все вопросы брони.
stasian73 9 months ago
Retarded Discovery or BBC channels's style video, without any proof and real photos.
DaNukeOff 9 months ago
You made a conclusion that abrams goes futher based on its larger gas tank. You're fogetting that abrams has 1500 hp turbine and t-90 has 1000 hp disel engine (its lighter 'couse it's 3-men crewed and doesn't need that power), which is 1.5 less hungry. T-80 had turbine, but russians decided turbines aren't good for tanks. They are fragile, thursty and has higher than 1100 degree exhaust, looking good at IR.
Actually abrams goes 410km and t-90 goes 550km. 140 km difference, not bad, huh?
0masuk0 9 months ago 4
@0masuk0 That means the t90 has to go further to get re fueled LOL
gwissel1 8 months ago
on 1:15 t-72b in South Osetia. Has been undermined by the crew after the ammunition was end.
taiphyn 9 months ago
THE T-90 saw combat in the chechen war and NO T-90s were destroyed or damaged, however the image of a destroyed tank isn't a t-90 its a t-72, and i can prove it....
SBML99999 9 months ago 2
what a moran he lies too much abram top speed is 47km/hr
27sec172 9 months ago
lol, which retard made that ridiculous dumb video. T-90 kills any abrams at a range of 5000 meter. abrams noobtank combat range is 2000 meter, it will not even realize what hit them. not to mention u can buy 2 T-90 tanks for 1 useless abrams noobtank, what a waste of money.
lol, this noobvideo even thinks a fight between abrams and iraqi camel-tanks is a "fight" xD
FractionTech 9 months ago
@FractionTech You are so right my friend !
valiosubaru 9 months ago
You have forgotten something: Range of an aim shot at Т-90 - twice further than at the American tank.
By results of computer modelling counter tank fight between 10 М-1 and 10 Т-90 - up to distance of a shot any American has not reached.
Any.
romannosikov 9 months ago
@romannosikov Wait wai wait and the range is by a missile what about the upcoming XM1111?
Robloxsaltytaco1234 9 months ago
@Robloxsaltytaco1234 You have badly understood me? What should I you explain?
By the way, to remind you result of modelling of educational fight of division F-35 against Су-30 МКИ? 20 minutes. Your planes have held on 20 minutes. And at the best outcome they will manage to bring down no more than two Су.
romannosikov 9 months ago
@romannosikov Psh...
Robloxsaltytaco1234 9 months ago
It is all delirium, abrams makes the way RPG-7... And the distance of fight Т-90 ~5 km (shooting by guided missiles through a gun) - at abrams simply isn't present chances to approach to Т-90 :)
Sergey71147 10 months ago
@ISR1917 I meant to add "The M1A3 will continue it's high power of technology.
Robloxsaltytaco1234 10 months ago
M1 Abrams won a competition against Leopards, and Challengers.
watch?v=JYMlGlfXcSM
Robloxsaltytaco1234 10 months ago
На самом деле замечательно когда вероятный противник тебя недооценивает 8)
Gruzzz79 10 months ago 29
@Gruzzz79
Это они в популистических роликах и статьях недооценивают, что бы людей демотивировать еще до начала боя.
Deternalknight 8 months ago
Я из России .Я не думаю ,я знаю, что на дистанции 1000м -1300м Т-90 и Т-80 (основной танк России-около 5000 шт) уступят Абрамсу в равных условиях (дуэльная ситуация один на один ,или батальон на батальон).Российский танк очень плохо зашищён ,и сточки зрения выживаемости на поле боя не сравнится,даже с Леопардом 1.Но при крупной опперации НАТО или Армии США против России, или России против США и НАТО не будет дуэльной ситуации. 80 % Абрамсов не доедут до Т-80 и Т-90.Ракета с Т-90 бьёт на 5000м
ooooboy1 10 months ago 17
@ooooboy1 ты забыл, что наши танки со всех сторон обложены динамической защитой, поэтому не так то просто их уничтожить и на 1000 метров. А вот у абрамса динамическая защита есть только по бортам. Да у него очень толстый лоб, но посмотри какой у него зазор под башней, туда только слепой не попадет. Плюс абрамс выше и больше, а значит в него проще попасть.
barbozz 7 months ago
@barbozz У Абрамсов есть динамическая защита. Вы не видели что-ли, как абрамсы обвешаны мешками с песком в Ираке?)) lol. Против мин им это не помогло. Абрамс хуже Challenger'а.А вообще лучшие танки в мире это Т-90 и Leopard. Еще у нас был проэкт Black Eagle, но слишком невыгодным оказался. Ща уже на основе Black Eagle модернизируют Т-90. USA пытаются модернизировать Абрамс по технологии Т-90, потому что Абрамсы берут броней и становятся все неподвижнее и неподвижнее..
ta3uk1 7 months ago
@ta3uk1 Не понял коммент. Мешки с песком это не динам. защита, а мешки с песком. К тому же выше я написал, что у абрамса динам. защита есть по бортам корпуса. Так же не понял, что значит usa модернизируют абрамс по типу т 90? Оно им не нужно, т.к. система управления огнем у них лучше и менять ее они не будут, а брони навесить еще не получится, просто некуда уже. И так 11 раз модернизировали. А чёрный орел - это просто новая башня на шасси т 80у, это не новый танк.
barbozz 7 months ago
@barbozz У Вас с чувством юмора видно беда)). Мешки с песком использовали в Ираке пиндосы для защиты танков от противотанковых гранатометов, тк динамической защита у них говно или отсутствовала. Насчет объекта 640: шасси было взято от т-80у и почти полностью переработано, почитайте инфо. Далее, не нужно сравнивать управление огнем танка т-90 1992г. выпуска с абрамсом посл. поколения, - это глупо. сравнивайте с т-90 АМ или т-99 "Армада", который скоро встанет на вооружение. Абрамс - говно.
ta3uk1 7 months ago 2
@ta3uk1 что еще за т99 армада?
barbozz 6 months ago
@ooooboy1 Что за бред насчёт плохой защищёности? Т-90А САМЫЙ ЗАЩИЩЁНЫЙ танк!Даже на wikipedia есть инфа про защищеность Леопарда 2 и Т-90 , Т_90 превосходит леопард 2.У Т-90 как и на других танках есть многослойное бронирование, динамическая защита, можно ставить активную защиту, а у западных танков только чобхем.Проблема наших танков это боеприпасы в боевом отделении, но к примеру Абрамсы (не танк а металалом) их перегородка не спасала и боеприпасы детонировали.Русские танки лучшие.
ARTURizTAGANA 6 months ago
@ooooboy1 Боже ж ты мой. Дуэльная ситуация, это как сферический танк в ваккууме -- недостижимое состояние. Даже если танки наедут друг на друга внезапно с тысячи метров решит только случай. не пишите бред, ПОЖАЛУЙСТА. Ладно там американцы придурки, но стыдно видеть, что свои же не лучше.
Bloodlust20101983 5 months ago
@ooooboy1 не прав на 100%. почему по твоему американцы создали "Апач " "Хеллфайр"? для того, чтобы справляться с броней т-72. мой отец имеет реальный боевой опыт(воевал в афганистане, был командиром танка, звание лейтенант). боевики тратили по 3-4 заряда на каждый танк Т-55\т-62\т-64.
логично было бы предположить, что т-72 бронирован лучше, чем т-64. и кстати, основной танк ВС РФ не т-80, а т-80у. по сути, совершенно другая машина. а т-72б по характеристикам превосходит леопарды всех модов.
Mr1L1dan 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
LoL LoL LoL LoL LoL!!!!!
Luka464 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
1:15 - 1:28 it's T-72
007kentik 10 months ago
1:28 it's a T-72!!!!!!!!!
007kentik 10 months ago
Я по не русски не очень но из ролика понял что не один абрамс не был уничтожен что не вернулся домой тогда введите WAR IS HELL A lot photos of M1 ABRAMS
sergei1711 10 months ago
this story is not Ok...t90 ,is the best tank in the world today!
dovidjenja1 10 months ago
@ISR1917 That's true, the powerful Dynamic protection the T-90 has is incomparable, thus making the tank lighter, low cost, more battle efficient and easy to repair.
Nickael7 10 months ago
единственное что хорошее у Абрамса это немецкая пушка. все. Леопард 2 а 6 гораздо опаснее.т 90с и его продолжение т90с-м1 уступали только в СУО..сейчас это устранили..для справки..дальность выстрела абрамса с летальностью 80%(то есть убил вторым выстрелом) 3.5-4 км у т 90с 4.5-5км и про самолеты и вертолеты..снаряд ракета легко их сбивает...Ну о "рамке" наверно уже слышали это БМПТ
MrRussianSolder 10 months ago
Have people already forgotten the T-90's have already gone up agains't the same RPG's the Abrams now are. And the T-90's were almost wiped out of the Russian Arsenal. It's a joke that people are even comparing the two.
TiKondaRoga 10 months ago
@TiKondaRoga There are no T-90s being lost so far, don't talk BS only lost Abrams and one Challenger 2.
Twelve T-90s "VLADIMIR" variant were so successful for the liberation of Dagestan against the Chechen insurgency, one T-90 sustain 7 RPG shots the same RPGs use in Iraq, and the tank survived with all its crew safe and sound. It came back with its ERA block pop out and they just fix them good as new.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7 Really...I could have sworn that's what started the scuffle in Goergia. But hey people have short memories. And for such a "great" tank it's surprising that the Russian's are already planning on replacing it, weird huh?
TiKondaRoga 10 months ago
@TiKondaRoga Its a third generation tank that can go toe to toe with an abram. Third generation tank doesn't mean crap, it the munition compartment which is different from a fourth generation tank. You can add CHOBHAM armor in a 3e gen. and advance electronic and still will perform like a 4e gen. In the meanwhile, Russia is waiting that all nation exhaust all tech. resources to create the T-95, which had been canceled, not for economical reason, but for tech. revision.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7 I heard it was going to be the T-120, suppose to be a whole new platform.
TiKondaRoga 10 months ago
@TiKondaRoga Are you sure ? Its T-120 and not T-95 mark-1
T-120 hmmm! Never heard about that.
Nickael7 10 months ago
@Nickael7 It may have just been some future fiction stuff...It was a while ago I heard about it. But from what I heard is they were going to model it to compete with the new leoperd and challenger.
TiKondaRoga 10 months ago
@TiKondaRoga No wait, you're actually right, there is a model of T-72-120 transformed into a 4e generation tank it look badass, but its under license by Russia, but transformed by NATO standards as a cheaper version to probably make lower cost version vs. the more expensive LEO and Challys.
Nickael7 10 months ago
if you claim that abrams goes farther than t90 or any other tank of its class you have no idea about tanks.
mottull1 10 months ago
T90s are way better than the abrams. During a test, an abram lost it's tracks on a simple hill!
THeOSiffi 10 months ago
FutureMarine44 The m1 a2 has not the best gun in the world its just one of the best in the world.And many M1 was destroyed in iraq ure information about that is from the desert storm time.The M1 has also not the best firecontrol system in the world only 1 of the best.The m1 a2 is also not the best tank in the world its the German Leopard 2 A6 M.By the way the Armour of the M1 abrams is DU and a bit of steel mixed like a sandwich.
Killerquamer 10 months ago
FutureMarine44 The gun of the m1 a2 is not the best its one of the best in the world. BUT ITS NOT THE BEST.
Killerquamer 10 months ago
america > whoever
presidentriche 11 months ago
@presidentriche LOL you cant even win in afghanistan
Ryftx 11 months ago
@Ryftx Russia couldnt either. sure whup the shit outta your country...
presidentriche 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@presidentriche lol im, half afghan half russian. so it doesnt apply to me coz i win either way. my point is your comment says "america > whoever" when america are losing in afghanistan
Ryftx 11 months ago
@presidentriche USSR had 95% chance of victory. The 5% was due to the collapse
999cheetos999 11 months ago
JineshJK 11 months ago
That isn't a T-90. It is a dead T-72BM. There were no T-90s at the peace keeper HQ to be destroyed.
stalkingalizee 11 months ago
Не принимал Абрамс участие в боевых действиях в Чечне или в Грузии. Вот тогда б мы и посмотрели кто лучше!!!! А так сравнивать смысла нет!!! На открытых участках и 34-ка может повстанцев расстреливать!!!!!!!!!
SuperYrec 11 months ago
Never destroyed...funny stuff. Of course it has been destoryed, the burned out tanks are not rebuild. But w/e.
gosciu555 11 months ago
@gosciu555 i think he means by another tank
gabrielschembri 10 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
the merkava takes them all! :D
arielhasidim 11 months ago
the merkava take them all :D
arielhasidim 11 months ago
Russians were the first who invented anti missile armour on tanks....
Yanks sucks....
chrisofspec 11 months ago
have you heard about an accurate american missile heading to Turkey?
chrisofspec 11 months ago
its so funny to watch amercans write stupid coments to not get pissed off completly
its the 21 century guys(americans) your time is over even the chines make better weapons so americans shut your trap and get lost .Make this the most rated comment to show them that there done in this world.
igor7702 11 months ago
@igor7702 Explain? May i remind you, there is only 120 T-90s in existence. Aside from tanks, we have a massive air force. We could easily destroy, or disable a T-90 with a 2000lbs. J-DAM. Sure its old, its also cheaper and still does its job fine. Not only that, but I doubt a T-90 will ever encounter an abrams. To much air support!
funkymunky65 10 months ago
@funkymunky65 you idiot? We are talking anout tank vs tank not with AIR SUPPORT....Plus there are 890 T-90s in sevice so get some facts and come back and write me.M1A1 vs T-90 the last one is going to win because:1)T-90 has a bigger range2)The T-90 has a diesel engine whch means that it will not burn when hit 3)T-90 has the ability to fire rockets with superb penetration power of about 1000 mm of pure armor4)Do not have to refuel the T-90 unlike M1A1 which has to be refueled each 5 hours.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 1) Larger range means nothing, especially when you are surrounded and and outnumbered. (look at the way the T-34's outnumbered the germans) 2) The Gas Turbine engine gives extremely high torque at relatively low RPMs. 3) The M829A3 is more than capable of penetrating the frontal armor of the T-90, which is 60% kontakt-5. 4) Every tank needs fuel. Even the T-90. You can send the empty tank to base for refueling, and replace it with a fresh refueled tank.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 Larger range actualy means that the T-90 will be able to get the M1/A1 from 5 km. while M1/A1 itself can get only a max range shot at about 2,5 km.The T-90 is way smaller then the M1/A1 making it less vulnerable to accurate fire.My point is that:yes you have to refuel all tanks but the problem is that with the M1/A1 you have to waste alot of fuel to keep them going for at least 5 hours unlike the T-90 which does not need refueling in an entire 10 hours.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 I know this, that gives the t-90 an advantage in a 1-on-1 conflict. But If the Abrams is moving around, by the time the T-90's round traveled 5km the Abrams would be out of the way. The Abrams can hit a basket ball sized target from about 1-1.5km, accurately. If this was in an urban scenario, or short range combat scenario, the Abrams would have the advantage, due to the guns faster reload and better penetrators. The T-90 does have the advantage in fuel economy, but we wanted HP.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@igor7702 What I mean by faster reload is the Abrams uses a human loader, while the T-90 uses an Auto-Loader. The Auto loader avgs about 4 secs to reload, and about 6 to switch ammo types. A human can load it in 3 secs, with the world record standing at 1 sec, ammo type switching only adds a few milliseconds, because they are stored in the same compartment, thus making it easier for a human loader to get the right ammo type. Auto loaders can also break and jam, a human can become exhausted.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 The T-90 has the world recored of firing 23 rounds in a 1 min. beating the ,,Leopard".Plus with an auto-loader T-90 is not that big unlike the M1/A1.Auto-loader are made for bad conditions and you said that they need time to change ammo.Thats not really the truth.Computers are programmed to change ammo instantly.Plus unlike Humans,computers do not make mistakes.Depleted uranium that you use is bad for the crews health.Test have shown that the T-90 can with stand a DP round.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 Sure, computers don't make mistakes, machinery jams though. And yes, they do need time to change ammo, because I know a friend overseas who has been in the T-90, and is the gunner in a T-80U.
Besides, the T-90 is an over-upgraded T-72. You don't think we can't do the same thing with the Abrams?
Ever heard of the M1A3 Prototype? And yes, a T-90 can resist a DP round, but not a M829A3 Penetrator, it easily defeats kontakt-5. And the frontal armor of a T-90 is only 60% Kontakt-5.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 Armor of a T-90:Steel-composite-reactive blend vs APFSDS: 545 mm + 250-280mm with Kontakt-5 = 800-830mm; vs HEAT: 650 mm + 500-700mm with Kontakt-5 = 1,150mm.of armor.You said you can upgrade the M1/A1 then why you do not do it,I will tell you,beacause it will cost to much and will not be able for mass production.For every good tank there will be a better ATGM.Reactive armor will hold the M829A3 because the round will get blown of the T-90 as soon as it hits the tank.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 Also, the M829A3 was tested on a REAL kontakt-5 plate. And even the other armor types you listed. It obliterated every plate. Wondering how we got it? Hint: Russia and the USA are allies now. We bought it from them. Why don't we do it? Because the technology is still being developed. I'll ask you why they didn't come out with the T-95? Now APS systems are getting popular, soon ATGMs will have to use way more elaborate systems to deliver it's payload to the target. Speed is one of them
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 M829A3 is a cumulative round,ofcoures it will slice through metal like a hot knife through butter.Try to test your M829A3 on Kontakt-5 with reactive armor on it.M829A3 will bounce of like a little rock.Its imposible to beat through reactive armor without an another round hitting the same spot which is 99.9%imposible.And where do you get the Kontakt-5 armor?Plus tell me the site where you read about the test on the Kontakt-5 ok?Post the link of the site in your response.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 I use Wikipedia for all this. Look up "Kontak-5" and "M829A3". We already have the M829E4 on the way. Also, if you knew how Kontakt-5 Works, you would know that Fitting it with ERA would be very hard.
The M829A3 penetrator travels at well over mach 3, and when it impacts, it focuses all its energy in to an area the size of a quarter. ERA wouldn't be very effective, because the shape of the penetrator would deflect the blast.
At worst you might offset the penetrator a few inches.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 As a response to the M829A3, the Russian army have designed Relikt, the most modern Russian ERA, which is claimed to be twice as effective as Kontakt-5.It detonates on command before the round hits based on information from radar.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 Relikt hasn't been deployed yet either. Also, the M829E4 is the response to Relikt. It's a never ending cycle.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 I think that future tanks will be on other physical laws
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 I do too. That's the natural evolution of technology.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 You know what your write why do we keep arguing were allies,and hoe needs war.Seriously.Ok im gone. PEACE!
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 Goodbye. And peace.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 M829A3 SHOULD penetrate you never know.Depleted uranium-M829A3 that means the crews health is damaged,even thoght the uranium is depleted it is still radioactive.If you put in more DU,yes you will make the round more effective but, you will suffer from it later on.
igor7702 2 months ago
@igor7702 True, but they understand this risk when they put their name on that piece of paper.
Not only that, but the complications usually don't come until way late in their life.
Example: My grandfather was a B-25 Pilot, and was almost deafened by all the Flak shells launched at his plane. But the lived to the ripe old age of 84. War is hell on your body, no matter your occupation.
funkymunky65 2 months ago
@funkymunky65 My grandpa died at the blockade of Leningrad in a counter attack near Shilisenburg in 1943.
igor7702 2 months ago