@greenday5224 Dude on all youtube videos with music you can see under the video on the right writtern under the veo counter in blue and grey the song and buying it from youtube :)
love this vid every time I need a little pick me up I watch it hooked up to big old speakers and think back to days when my best bud who could go every 2-3 seconds, he would pump off 3-4 rounds and I would be sitting on the fender, man miss that shit, that smell,the heat, and just the power, Well who ever had this vid thank you bother. Dave
Actually thats not true, Rotary winged aircraft, even hardened attack helis, are alarmingly vulnerable, even to small arms. However, all modern well equipped forces will have integral anti air assets with thier armour, these make attack helis ineffective and even have a good chance of taking out fixed wings.
Plus next gen tanks have hard and soft kill AATGM systems (though I dont know how effective they will be vs JDAM type weapons) Which increase thier lifespan.
Also the abramsA2 or A1 with DU (I think all or nearly all A1 have DU now?), especially TUSK2 is one of, if not the best protected tank in the world. And the gun with the M829A3 is capable of killing any other tank at normal engagement ranges. And what are you on about, the engine being exposed? wtd?
The A1 upgrade was adding the M256, HA upgrade was next which was the DU. Certainly all the A1's during Operation Desert Shield were upgraded to HA whilst in Saudi. There is no TUSK 2 or certainly any official records of it, hovever TUSK does not compliment the DU Laminate armour of HA, its ERA to protect weaker areas. M829A3 is a good round however, the M256 is cal Length 44 and can not match cal Length 55's which CR2 & Leo2A6 use, Leclerc is 52.
Also, the M256 firing A3 is estimated by all reliable sources (I have seen at least) to achieve better penetration than the L55 firing DM63. Though this is all estimates so it is hard to know.
TUSK 2 does exist, both in an improvised unofficial way (ie dictated improvisation.) and in a prototype version in small scale deployment.
ERA doesnt supplement the DU areas of a tank no. (though I imagine it would if a threat capable of penetrating the frontal armour arose.) But that doesnt change the fact that the M1 is one of the best, if not the best protected tanks in the world.
I have a pic I will shack and pm for you. Google if you want, though how long it will take who knows
It just un fair, childish, not inpartial and not proffesional to say that because insurgetns use mostly IED's and because all modern tanks are not enough protected over side hull and even sie turret agains more powerfull weapons, that M1 is not great construction, in fact is is great construction. As I said, in many design areas superior to other, in other areas equal. In fact, the only failure with using M1's in Iraq was lack of up-armor kit for less protected areas from the start of war.
Byt the way, FV4034 Challenger 2 tanks performance in Iraq was same as M1 tanks. The only reason of smaller numbers in damaged and destroyed tanks is, that UK Army from the start used up-armor kits, this is because more emphasis on good all around protection in UK Army, US Army have to wait up to late 2007 until T.U.S.K.-I was fielded, and now in production is T.U.S.K.-II and in development T.U.S.K.-III.
I know that many peoples only source is Wikipedia or Discovery Channel or TV or stupid internet sources. I spend 10 years of my life on educating about modern tanks. And really M1's performance in Iraq is just great, if insurgency doesen't use big IED's there will be really small tanks after attacks in real bad shape, unfortunetly there were many big IED's.
I have some knolwedge and I react in such manner when I see stupid comments of people that don't know anything about modern weapon systems. M1 tanks is one of the best tanks ever designed, frontal armor was neve perforated by enemy AT weapons and ammo, side and rear armor is same without up-armoring as in any comparabale tank, crew safety is superior in M1 than in any other tank, even Merkava series.
Cana use 20 Leopard 2A6M loaned from Germany, 20 Leopard 2A6 also prepered to upgrading to 2A6M variant and some number of Leopard 2A4 and Leopard 1C2. Australia use 59 M1A1SA's modified to be hybrid of M1A1SA and equipment from U.S.M.C. tanks. Egypt use 1005 export variant M1A1's and M1A2's with weaker armor, SA 300 M1A2's with weaker armor and Kuwait 218 same M1A1's as SA. Saudi and Egyptian tanks will recieve digital packadge upgrade from M1A2SEP.
7000... you only proof that you don't know anything about US armor corps. Make calculation. 4000 M1A1's in various variants, 1170 M1A2's and M1A2SEP's, 894 M1IP's and 3000 basic M1's. 4000 M1A1's are upgraded to only two unified standards, M1A1SA and M1A1FEP with armor protection of M1A2SEP, older M1IP's and M1's and 400-500 oldest M1A1's wait in storage to be upgraded to M1A2SEP standard. US have in inventory 9064 M1 tanks in various variants.
More, Side hull armor of any tank doesen't survive attack of HEAT round with penetration value bigger than 300mm RHA, but in first 1/3 of hull M1 have bigger side protection than any other tank, 900mm RHAe vs. HEAT, rest side hull have same protection like in any other tank.
Patriklas, to your tiny information about M1 tanks. There is 5000 M1A1's in many variants, know upgraded to only 2 variants, M1A1SA and M1A1FEP. 1170 M1A2's upgraded to M1A2SEP's also 400-500 oldest M1A1's, 894 M1IP's and most of 3000 M1's were be upgraded to M1A2SEP variant.
T-90 is just upgraded T-72B, the really new tank is T-90A, it have most of it's origins in Object-187 prototype, and of course Object-188/basic T-90. But M1A2SEP is one of the best tanks in the world, in many areas it is superior to any other tank, in others equal... yeah five hundred M1's destroyed in Iraq, what a BS so all M1A1's in US inventory were destroyed... buahaha what an Idiot!
And maybe you learn kid that only between 80 and 150 tanks were taken out by insurgents mostly using big IED's and only 4 to 5 were destroyed by overkill tank and MRAP killer IED's. RPG's make only light damage, I've seen tons of photos, good material. Besides this I start to work on military press kid, so I know what I talking about.
WHAAT? BULLSHIT! take a single look...t-90= death trap. 6 shots from the m256 gun at 200 yards and survived? bullshit.. too much russian fan boy sites i guess, eh?
you un-americans can tell yourselves all that you want to go to sleep at night . we fight for the right, we have the best technology, and we will always prevail. by the way, it is a ceramic composite that makes the a-1 as close to invincible that you can get at this stage, no?
KugelfangBV1, Oh really? ;> Strange, M1A1/A2 tanks frontal turret armor have LOS thickness 875-900mm (similiar got FV4034 Challenger 2), and uber Leopard 2 only 600-650mm in all version + 33mm (max) empty inside wedge armor that is in fact simple armor screen in newer standards, Leclerc have something about 800-900mm LOS thick frontal turret armor, depends on place. I don't see any superiority in European tanks, and I am european.
I have more infos. M1's turret side armor is on its full lenght 350-400mm LOS thick, Leopard 2 have only 200-250mm LOS thick only over crew compartment and 80-100mm thick over turret bustle. Know if projectile hits US tank in 30-45 deegre angle, armor have about 650-800mm LOS, and in Leo2 only 400-450mm LOS + side turret armor of M1 is angled so there is small additional boost in protection when projectile hit armor in such angles.
In fact the only European tank that have armor LOS thickness similiar in most places to M1 is British Challenger 2 (turret side armor similiar but only over crew compartment, turret bustle is protected only against smaller caliber auto cannons). It doesen't means that rest of EU countries tanks are piece of shit, but this means that they are not superior to M1, M1 is also not superior to them in anything.
In fact all wester designs are preatty much equal to each other in almost everything, M1 is superior in crew survivability and its frontal protection is bigger, not as pure armor but it got smaller weak spots that are harder to hit. Hah Russian tanks like T-90A and T-80U have comparabale frontal protection to western tanks, South Korean and Japanese tanks also, same goes for Chinese ZTZ-99 series.
This is funny and scary that people that have no knowledge about military equipment talks about it, and such stupid opinions like "my tank is better than yours" because of something... national proud? This is completely failure thinking. US makes great tanks, M1 series are really great, the whole construction, design solution, and the whole idea on building a tank over crew survivability as primary design requirement.
Surely some German probably say that M1 series have flaws, sure all tanks got some, and how many flaws got Leo2? Thinner armor compared to other tanks, unprotected ammo in hull, huge frontal weak are thanks to raised glacis plate that is always weaker than rest of armor, and under glacis is unprotected ammo, huge gun mantle that is always weak spot. Weak protection of turret bustle where are placed turret drives.
Some maybe all of you, not only M1 bashers or Russian tanks bashers think twice or more if needed and start to learn in reliabale sources (TankNet and many good topics on Military Photos) about tanks, not stupid Discovery or other TV programs, stupid internet sites or stop this stupid thinking "my tanks is better than yours"....
Well, the Leopard and the Abrams both have Chobham Armor. It is basically the same. What sets the Leopard apart is its Gun. The L55 is superior to the L44. Also, the engine installed in the Leopard doesn't produce as much heat, making it tougher for heat seeking projectiles to hit it.
The leopard 2 and the Abrams both use the same armor technology and main gun. They're pretty much an even match in terms of speed, durability and offensive power.
They dont use the same armour technology, the Leo2 A4/A5/A6 use perforated armour plate on the hull and Tungsten laminate on the turret. A5/A6 use additional passive MEXAS system on the turret. M1-A1/A2 use composite armour/DU laminate, far from the same! Thou both can achieve the same road speed, its the least important factor of mobility and the Leo2 A4-> has better all round mobility. The A6 has an L55 cannon which exceeds anything an L44 can do, so again is not an even match.
@TankNutDave tell the name of the song and ill suscribe :D
greenday5224 6 months ago
@greenday5224 Dude on all youtube videos with music you can see under the video on the right writtern under the veo counter in blue and grey the song and buying it from youtube :)
TankNutDave 6 months ago
Nastiest tank in the world!!
nemesis42487 11 months ago
bad ass
mred15155 1 year ago
what song who the band
rcnuty 1 year ago
hey dave i have a question what template of joomla did you use to create your website?
I cant find a good one for mine
BigFatBompa 1 year ago
lol Sadam or who ever he was, was like, The fuck is that?
JDMnubi 1 year ago
Try to get no cancer when you work with this material, dum dumber the dummest.
Uncle sam needs you to geve you a nice precent if you shot thoose fucking uranium ronds, morrons....
GraspolC3 1 year ago
love this vid every time I need a little pick me up I watch it hooked up to big old speakers and think back to days when my best bud who could go every 2-3 seconds, he would pump off 3-4 rounds and I would be sitting on the fender, man miss that shit, that smell,the heat, and just the power, Well who ever had this vid thank you bother. Dave
rockstarcarservices 1 year ago
@rockstarcarservices welcome
TankNutDave 1 year ago
Quality is lacking.
Sunburn2007 1 year ago
God this thing is sick
nycwiseguy91 1 year ago
GIR780997 ,unless you operated one of these than you can suck a dick.i used this beast for over 3 years.
TransAmRob383 2 years ago
beast!
scottrules95 2 years ago
the abram is to heavy and doesnt have a hard hitting gun and the engine is exposed on them as well THEY ARE NOT A VERY GOOD TANK!
the only redeeming fact about them is how advanced their electronics are
GIR780997 2 years ago
with todays tecnology every tank is useless....get 5 attack choppers wipe and entire division of tanks.
theyre like defendless bugs.
The only good reason for a tank to exist is to rape poor countries.Other than that, tanks useless.
I think there even was a documentary about tanks era at it's final journey.
With todays JDAM's, a tank is the last place i wanna hide from bullets.
xStalkerxx 2 years ago
Actually thats not true, Rotary winged aircraft, even hardened attack helis, are alarmingly vulnerable, even to small arms. However, all modern well equipped forces will have integral anti air assets with thier armour, these make attack helis ineffective and even have a good chance of taking out fixed wings.
Plus next gen tanks have hard and soft kill AATGM systems (though I dont know how effective they will be vs JDAM type weapons) Which increase thier lifespan.
passwordresetisbroke 2 years ago
Also the abramsA2 or A1 with DU (I think all or nearly all A1 have DU now?), especially TUSK2 is one of, if not the best protected tank in the world. And the gun with the M829A3 is capable of killing any other tank at normal engagement ranges. And what are you on about, the engine being exposed? wtd?
passwordresetisbroke 2 years ago
The A1 upgrade was adding the M256, HA upgrade was next which was the DU. Certainly all the A1's during Operation Desert Shield were upgraded to HA whilst in Saudi. There is no TUSK 2 or certainly any official records of it, hovever TUSK does not compliment the DU Laminate armour of HA, its ERA to protect weaker areas. M829A3 is a good round however, the M256 is cal Length 44 and can not match cal Length 55's which CR2 & Leo2A6 use, Leclerc is 52.
TankNutDave 2 years ago
Also, the M256 firing A3 is estimated by all reliable sources (I have seen at least) to achieve better penetration than the L55 firing DM63. Though this is all estimates so it is hard to know.
passwordresetisbroke 2 years ago
TUSK 2 does exist, both in an improvised unofficial way (ie dictated improvisation.) and in a prototype version in small scale deployment.
ERA doesnt supplement the DU areas of a tank no. (though I imagine it would if a threat capable of penetrating the frontal armour arose.) But that doesnt change the fact that the M1 is one of the best, if not the best protected tanks in the world.
I have a pic I will shack and pm for you. Google if you want, though how long it will take who knows
passwordresetisbroke 2 years ago
my vote still goes to merkava IV ^_^. i would love to see the newest abrams/leo2a6m variants deployed in the hamas and hezbollah - infested areas.
merkava04 2 years ago
It just un fair, childish, not inpartial and not proffesional to say that because insurgetns use mostly IED's and because all modern tanks are not enough protected over side hull and even sie turret agains more powerfull weapons, that M1 is not great construction, in fact is is great construction. As I said, in many design areas superior to other, in other areas equal. In fact, the only failure with using M1's in Iraq was lack of up-armor kit for less protected areas from the start of war.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
Byt the way, FV4034 Challenger 2 tanks performance in Iraq was same as M1 tanks. The only reason of smaller numbers in damaged and destroyed tanks is, that UK Army from the start used up-armor kits, this is because more emphasis on good all around protection in UK Army, US Army have to wait up to late 2007 until T.U.S.K.-I was fielded, and now in production is T.U.S.K.-II and in development T.U.S.K.-III.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
I know that many peoples only source is Wikipedia or Discovery Channel or TV or stupid internet sources. I spend 10 years of my life on educating about modern tanks. And really M1's performance in Iraq is just great, if insurgency doesen't use big IED's there will be really small tanks after attacks in real bad shape, unfortunetly there were many big IED's.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
I have some knolwedge and I react in such manner when I see stupid comments of people that don't know anything about modern weapon systems. M1 tanks is one of the best tanks ever designed, frontal armor was neve perforated by enemy AT weapons and ammo, side and rear armor is same without up-armoring as in any comparabale tank, crew safety is superior in M1 than in any other tank, even Merkava series.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
Cana use 20 Leopard 2A6M loaned from Germany, 20 Leopard 2A6 also prepered to upgrading to 2A6M variant and some number of Leopard 2A4 and Leopard 1C2. Australia use 59 M1A1SA's modified to be hybrid of M1A1SA and equipment from U.S.M.C. tanks. Egypt use 1005 export variant M1A1's and M1A2's with weaker armor, SA 300 M1A2's with weaker armor and Kuwait 218 same M1A1's as SA. Saudi and Egyptian tanks will recieve digital packadge upgrade from M1A2SEP.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
7000... you only proof that you don't know anything about US armor corps. Make calculation. 4000 M1A1's in various variants, 1170 M1A2's and M1A2SEP's, 894 M1IP's and 3000 basic M1's. 4000 M1A1's are upgraded to only two unified standards, M1A1SA and M1A1FEP with armor protection of M1A2SEP, older M1IP's and M1's and 400-500 oldest M1A1's wait in storage to be upgraded to M1A2SEP standard. US have in inventory 9064 M1 tanks in various variants.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
More, Side hull armor of any tank doesen't survive attack of HEAT round with penetration value bigger than 300mm RHA, but in first 1/3 of hull M1 have bigger side protection than any other tank, 900mm RHAe vs. HEAT, rest side hull have same protection like in any other tank.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
Patriklas, to your tiny information about M1 tanks. There is 5000 M1A1's in many variants, know upgraded to only 2 variants, M1A1SA and M1A1FEP. 1170 M1A2's upgraded to M1A2SEP's also 400-500 oldest M1A1's, 894 M1IP's and most of 3000 M1's were be upgraded to M1A2SEP variant.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
T-90 is just upgraded T-72B, the really new tank is T-90A, it have most of it's origins in Object-187 prototype, and of course Object-188/basic T-90. But M1A2SEP is one of the best tanks in the world, in many areas it is superior to any other tank, in others equal... yeah five hundred M1's destroyed in Iraq, what a BS so all M1A1's in US inventory were destroyed... buahaha what an Idiot!
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
And maybe you learn kid that only between 80 and 150 tanks were taken out by insurgents mostly using big IED's and only 4 to 5 were destroyed by overkill tank and MRAP killer IED's. RPG's make only light damage, I've seen tons of photos, good material. Besides this I start to work on military press kid, so I know what I talking about.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
bad ass tank
WYTEMINORITY 2 years ago
WHAAT? BULLSHIT! take a single look...t-90= death trap. 6 shots from the m256 gun at 200 yards and survived? bullshit.. too much russian fan boy sites i guess, eh?
greenooze1500 2 years ago 6
russias tanks are as good as a blind sniper
DruGeDuPmeTaLHeadXD 2 years ago
Someone's compensating for something.
czolgolz 2 years ago
compensating for the.......
HPIRCFAN1990 2 years ago
can you stop thinking about your dam dick for a second and think about the work that went in to the bad ass tank
rcnuty 2 years ago
you un-americans can tell yourselves all that you want to go to sleep at night . we fight for the right, we have the best technology, and we will always prevail. by the way, it is a ceramic composite that makes the a-1 as close to invincible that you can get at this stage, no?
mopargerlitz 2 years ago
The Burlington Armour has been there since its introduction, it was the Laminated DU armour that was added on the A1.
TankNutDave 2 years ago
the american fight not for right he fight for this what he think its right.
and the abrams are shit the european tanks are thousand times better than this.
KugelfangBV1 2 years ago
KugelfangBV1, Oh really? ;> Strange, M1A1/A2 tanks frontal turret armor have LOS thickness 875-900mm (similiar got FV4034 Challenger 2), and uber Leopard 2 only 600-650mm in all version + 33mm (max) empty inside wedge armor that is in fact simple armor screen in newer standards, Leclerc have something about 800-900mm LOS thick frontal turret armor, depends on place. I don't see any superiority in European tanks, and I am european.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
I have more infos. M1's turret side armor is on its full lenght 350-400mm LOS thick, Leopard 2 have only 200-250mm LOS thick only over crew compartment and 80-100mm thick over turret bustle. Know if projectile hits US tank in 30-45 deegre angle, armor have about 650-800mm LOS, and in Leo2 only 400-450mm LOS + side turret armor of M1 is angled so there is small additional boost in protection when projectile hit armor in such angles.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
In fact the only European tank that have armor LOS thickness similiar in most places to M1 is British Challenger 2 (turret side armor similiar but only over crew compartment, turret bustle is protected only against smaller caliber auto cannons). It doesen't means that rest of EU countries tanks are piece of shit, but this means that they are not superior to M1, M1 is also not superior to them in anything.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
In fact all wester designs are preatty much equal to each other in almost everything, M1 is superior in crew survivability and its frontal protection is bigger, not as pure armor but it got smaller weak spots that are harder to hit. Hah Russian tanks like T-90A and T-80U have comparabale frontal protection to western tanks, South Korean and Japanese tanks also, same goes for Chinese ZTZ-99 series.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
This is funny and scary that people that have no knowledge about military equipment talks about it, and such stupid opinions like "my tank is better than yours" because of something... national proud? This is completely failure thinking. US makes great tanks, M1 series are really great, the whole construction, design solution, and the whole idea on building a tank over crew survivability as primary design requirement.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
Surely some German probably say that M1 series have flaws, sure all tanks got some, and how many flaws got Leo2? Thinner armor compared to other tanks, unprotected ammo in hull, huge frontal weak are thanks to raised glacis plate that is always weaker than rest of armor, and under glacis is unprotected ammo, huge gun mantle that is always weak spot. Weak protection of turret bustle where are placed turret drives.
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
Some maybe all of you, not only M1 bashers or Russian tanks bashers think twice or more if needed and start to learn in reliabale sources (TankNet and many good topics on Military Photos) about tanks, not stupid Discovery or other TV programs, stupid internet sites or stop this stupid thinking "my tanks is better than yours"....
TheFinalThought 2 years ago
WOW Great essay lol but where did you get the info?
totticommando07 2 years ago
dude i agree with you!!!
grvc44 2 years ago
What do you mean with blast away armor?
Reactiv armor? But than you mean the tusk version of the Abrams
durchdiemitte 2 years ago
us americans know how to rage war,hell yeah
redroadhammers07 2 years ago
there is no better tank than the abrams tanks.the best of the world
traylor125 3 years ago
Except the Leopard 2A6M
BugattiVeyron135 2 years ago
Haha fuck the leopard. they dont have blast away armor.
imanudist 2 years ago
Well, the Leopard and the Abrams both have Chobham Armor. It is basically the same. What sets the Leopard apart is its Gun. The L55 is superior to the L44. Also, the engine installed in the Leopard doesn't produce as much heat, making it tougher for heat seeking projectiles to hit it.
BugattiVeyron135 2 years ago
The leopard 2 and the Abrams both use the same armor technology and main gun. They're pretty much an even match in terms of speed, durability and offensive power.
GreyCoyote 2 years ago
They dont use the same armour technology, the Leo2 A4/A5/A6 use perforated armour plate on the hull and Tungsten laminate on the turret. A5/A6 use additional passive MEXAS system on the turret. M1-A1/A2 use composite armour/DU laminate, far from the same! Thou both can achieve the same road speed, its the least important factor of mobility and the Leo2 A4-> has better all round mobility. The A6 has an L55 cannon which exceeds anything an L44 can do, so again is not an even match.
TankNutDave 2 years ago
Love the Abrams, those bastards can dish out a ton of damage, and multiple direct hits. It's a thing of beauty, good for us it's on our side :D
Ubergynormousmullet 3 years ago
music?
brufi93 3 years ago
no idea lol
TankNutDave 3 years ago
the music is H-Blockx - The Power
brufi93 3 years ago
music is H-Blockx - The Power
SH0TTYMAD 3 years ago
love it
M1A1M1A2AbramsTank 3 years ago
it does the job :-)
TankNutDave 3 years ago
Great video!! awesome tank!
KINGD1991 3 years ago