Change Player Size
Watch this video in a new window

Greatest Ever Tanks - Centurion tank (5)

Greatest Ever Tanks - Centurion tank (5) British 105 mm L7 rifled gun Korean War Vietnam War  
 
Customize

More From: nguyen5055

Loading...

QuickList(0)

Upgrade to Flash Player 10 for improved playback performance. Upgrade Now or get more info.
26 ratings
Sign in to rate
22,847 views
Want to add to Favorites? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to add to Playlists? Sign In or Sign Up now!
Want to flag a video? Sign In or Sign Up now!

Statistics & Data

Loading...

Video Responses (0)

This video has no Responses. Be the first to Post a Video Response.
Sign in to post a Comment

Text Comments (126)   Options

Loading...
wizzzer1337 (21 hours ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
1:55 WAR FACE
OlderG0ds (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
You think the front hull isn't main armor? (rpg)

How come you can talk about how M1 being destroyed by IED but when it penetrates Challenger2 all the sudden oh that's just a fluke there's no dorchester under the tank...lol
00000Dean00000 (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
@OlderG0ds yep, I checked it out you are correct. An RPG-9 hit the Frontal armour and the driver lost a foot. Albeit it was a British newspaper report and they are known for exaggerating stories. I' would wait until more info comes out.

The incident I was talking about was an IED which did hit a none Dorchester protected area underneath the tank.
OlderG0ds (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
I don't see point in comparing IED attacks either. They're all different. No tank could survive many of them. M1 has been destroyed almost exclusively by IED attacks.

So now we're comparing hundreds of IED attack on Abrams to 1 on Challenger 2. How do you know those which hit Abrams weren't a protected area under the tank? This is why it's silly. Challenger can make excuses but not Abrams, even when Abrams has been through worse.

I digress.
00000Dean00000 (1 week ago) Show Hide
 -1
Marked as spam
@OlderG0ds the frontal armour is not Dorchester protected
OlderG0ds (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Ah another excuse. Hey M1 Abrams frontal armor is not dorchester protected either in that case.

Maybe Challenger 2 has a square inch of dorchester protection, so every time it's penetrated you can just say "wait no dorchester!"
00000Dean00000 (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
@OlderG0ds yeah the Abrams has zero Dorchester...
OlderG0ds (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
And you're the self proclaimed presenter of logic and facts?

You do know that the frontal hull armor of a tank is the strongest right?

And that no M1 has ever been penetrated in frontal armor right? And that M1 doesn't use chobham there either right? And that M1 has been hit by anti-tank weapons much much more powerful than an RPG-9?

Rest my case.
00000Dean00000 (1 week ago) Show Hide
 -1
Marked as spam
@OlderG0ds First of all RPG-9 was a typo it was an RPG-29.

Secondly the frontal armour on a Challanger 2 is Chobham mk1 which is the same reactive armour used on the M1. Dorchester is mostly used on the turret as it weighs so much.

Dorchester is not in use nor has ever been in use on any other tank apart from British Challanger 2's. It is still classified.

Rest your brain.
OlderG0ds (1 week ago) Show Hide
 0
Marked as spam
Wow, you're classic mate.

You got an excuse for everything.

You are so hung up on "dorchester". Why?
Did I say dorchester was penetrated by mistake? What good is your indestructible armor if the freaking frontal hull which is the strongest part of the tank (stronger than the turret even with your dorchester) can be penetrated by an RPG?

Fix your brain.

Would you like to comment?

Join YouTube for a free account, or sign in if you are already a member.