What is happening with Abrams tanks in Ukraine?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 18 тра 2024
- A lot of stuff has happened in relation to the Abrams tanks ever since I last covered them on my channel. One got captured, potentially a second one too, several have been lost as well...
Patreon with discord: / redeffect
Outro: "face away" - svard
So about 20 left and we still didn't see any T-tank vs Abrams fight yet. Damn drones ruined armoured warfare.
Nah... A tank destroying another tank is very rare since the first tanks appeared. Even in WW2 the most tanks were destroyed by artillery, airforce, infantry anti tank weapons and mines. Other tanks are pretty much last on the list... This war in Ukraine is no exception...
based drones made Ukruks beg for the wrong type of gear.
This is equivalent to war thunder players saying cas is ruining the game for tank players 😂
I don't think if that happens it will be anything interesting. Most likely, the fight will be one-sided - whoever sees the target and strikes the first blow wins.
There was a leopard vs t 72 (probably) fight and the t series won by shooting the side of the leopard
A whole new front has opened in the comments: the 68th and 69th NAFO Cope Brigade vs the 2nd and 3th Russ Bots Battalion.
Hell yeah i'm bringing the popcorn on this one
"already in position, sir- just give the order."
Russ Bot reporting for duty
Uke Bot spotted.
URA!!
It's a real war, tanks get blown up and sometimes captured. The Crews are terrified of burning to death so often the crew will jump out even if the tank is still in fighting shape.
Sherman tanks shooting smoke rounds to Panthers so the crew would panic thinking the tank was on fire. Apparently it worked sometimes.
This was really common even in world war 2. The Finns captured many Soviet tanks because all they would have to do is kill a the crew member with anti-tank rifle and the crew would very often completely abandoned the vehicle leaving a perfectly intact tank to be captured.
Keep in mind western tanks are designed with crew survivability as a priority. It is far easier to egress from an Abrahams, Bradley, Leopard etcetc than Russian T- Series and BMPs. Casualties easy point this out as almost all crews from these vehicles survive so far.
yeah no matter the county, no mater the tank, no matter the soldier
fire sucks universally
@@metralla I heard of russians running up to German tanks with hammers to make the sound of hits, and the crew leaping out. The kings though were the Japanese with their crazy anti tank sticks with mines on the end.
People saying about Russians wanting to capture unharmed Abrams tank to examine it... fully forgetting that even Egypt, current BRICKs member and close Russian ally, have over 1300 Abrams tanks that been fully inspected from top to bottom by Russian military specialists years ago. They even had time to test all current shells for penetration at various angles.
P.S. at 2nd Iraq war there was a Russian specialist team who secretly tested Kornet ATGM at Abrams in real combat. C'mon, guys! Where is the analytics? Russians know more about Abrams then its operator crew. Pretty sure there is a full documentation available
Yeah. These Abram’s are old as hell.
Same for the Leopards. I think the newest version Ukraine has is at least 20 years olds
@IrrationalCharm they are the ones from the Gulf war, they've send the same to Eastern Europe nato members, I've seen then up close
Where did you learn that "at 2nd Iraq war there was a Russian specialist team who secretly tested Kornet ATGM at Abrams in real combat"?
Not stating that I dont believe just that I am curious.
@@nimdaqa Long story short I've heard it form various sources, but one that comes to mind for sure is Russian "Combat Approved" series dedicated to ATGMs, where Korent producing factory CEO told this very story that not a Russian military personnel, but their own factory member with a support of local contractors continuously tested it there. There are lots of US-sided reports about it too. There are even rumors that on 24 March 2003 president J.Bush called V.Putin (this phone call existed) and asked about amount of new ATGM systems being sold to Iraq referencing to Kornet (Americans did not know what was it exactly at that moment)
@@preludeh22a57Thanks!
FPV drones have really changed the game when it comes to armored combat. Not saying they are now obsolete but they are definitely not as good as they used to be 20-30 years ago.
as always - new anti-tank weapons are countered with new protection and new tactics
MBTs were shown to be obsolete already after the second Chechen war.
There are no really good drones yet, but there is no normal systemic counteraction, even simple ones. There is no real electronic warfare on both sides.
@@TROONTRON no, outside big cities they were very good still. In cities they got rekt
@@TROONTRONMBT is obsolete because of russian incompetence in the chechen war
braindead take lol
Tanks in the 1930s: well, we just need protection on the front against other tanks, the sides will only be shoot with rifles.
Tanks in the 1950s: well, we only need protection on the side against light RPG and bazookas and recoilless rifles...
Tanks in the 1990s: well, we only need protection on the front, the side, and the skirts, and active defense because RPGs, IEDs, ATMGs, etc etc...
Tanks in the 2020s: well, it's either a perfect sphere of armor or nothing I guess.
2024. Battering ram tanks and turtle tanks
RPG 7 Made in 1973
We might just end up with tanks just meant for close artillery (razing buildings) with much less effort in protection, like the Booker tank. Only able to withstand small arms and RPGs when hit from certain angles. They'll only be used if enough active anti-drone equipment is around and not have to worry about lugging around all of that extra armor to survive a MBT hit.
2040s Incoming Laser Active protection system or dual warhead APS.
@@floofy5529 an MLRS on a pickup truck. Toyota had already done that...
Armed only with plot armor...
Turns out it doesn't matter what tank you use since all can be disabled by mine and then destroyed by an FPV.
Idk why everyone thinks that only t-seris tank suffer from modern combat
It still is. Crew survivability difference is absolutely real.
Go ask the crew if they want to sit in an Abrams/Leo and have higher chance of surviving or sit in a T-72/T-80/T-90 and the whole crew go to space together.
@@danh7411 crew survivbility is a huge problem but i more ment alot of people thing that nato tanks under nato commanders could use basicaly 1980s style tatics and not get punished just like the russian have and will still be uber effective
@@danh7411 Most T series tanks losses are not disasterous ammo cookoffs but moderate damage and the crew survives. This is especially true for T90M that has blowout panels like the western tanks
Don't bring an Abrams to a shovel fight
rusty shovel*
Come up with new jokes already.
Getting almost as old as the russian turret toss jokes
@@sapiensiski you mean how the coping nafo bots bring the 3 days thing even tho no official in russia said it
@@avex3903 Russian state media was saying that though. State media. I wonder what state means? It couldn't mean that the media is controlled by Russia.
Or the fact that VDV at the beginning of the invasion were dropped in with only around 3-7 days with of equipment, and no support/supplies?
@@avex3903 "coping nafo bots"
You guys ever listen to yourselves? You make fun of the people saying "russian bots" but sound exactly like them
Unbelievable lack of self awareness
you dont send 31 tanks to a war to help out, you send hem to see how they stand up top modern warfare
☝🏻
Just goes on to show how useless tanks really are
190%
The answer is... Not well at all.. they are a 70tons semi mobile target that need fuel every 8hours...
I don't think the Abrahams got A SINGLE kill..
its a win win for both parties which is exactly why US has been so keen on sending equipment to Ukraine. Good image + testing
Never thought I'd see the day that an Abrams would be sporting Kontakt-1
it's not actual Kontakt-1 but American made ERA for the Abrams TUSK upgrade (made in USA)
@@militaryanalysis5028 in the video he clearly says kontakt-1
@@militaryanalysis5028someone didn’t watch the full video
@@militaryanalysis5028 and the ukrainians are putting actual kontakt-1 on it lol
@@militaryanalysis5028It had American Tusk ERA on the sides and Kontakt 1 at the friont
LazerPig must be furiously painting his nails somewhere!
Ah yes.. poor nafo bastard!
Yeah him and Adam really went full brain rot with this war
He's bust thinking of ways to insist Red is merely commie mouthpiece. "HIS NAME HAS RED IN IT! COMMIES! RED! SEE?!!?!??"
Wasn't he part of the NAFo?
*Trotters.
It’s lacking putinium armor
it's lacking ukropium armor.
Does it have Copium armor?
Unatianium is lacking
@@nemiw4429
Copinite ore is quite interesting.
When under pressure, it takes literally any mineral deposit and twists it into a shield to protect its fragile core.
Refined Copinite ore, known as Copium armour, is highly resilient to fact-based attacks. But if directly exposed to logic it will shatter like glass.
No it wasn't blessed that's why.
What crazy is that some expert and analyst immediatly claim that tank is now obsolete or not that useful when they saw Abrams destroy that so quickly and they panic so hard. idk what did they expect in conventional war for tank
American decision makers have forgotten what it's like to fight an actual war that isn't "counterinsurgency" against impoverished, malnourished dudes with flip flops and small arms that were manufactured during the Reagan presidency lmao
Realists will say, it's a war and tanks will be destroyed, and that's very true. What the west is scared of is people realising that any major war, like the one they want so badly with China, will cost many millions their lives, and unlike the image hollywood sold them, their tanks will blow up just as easily as all the others do. In real terms its nothing, but in propaganda terms for the west, it's a fatal blow.
Lets see if F16 is game changer as Abrams...
I think chieftain might have said it and I agree with him. That tanks will never be obsolete, cuz no matter what, it has a mobile cannon
Western "experts" high on their own propaganda.
They ain't got the Russian bias armor
Nah fam Ukrainian bias is out of control. Good to see someone cover the other side for a change
@@AndRei-yc3ti I think he's talking about a video game.
@@AndRei-yc3ti its a meme from War thunder
@@AndRei-yc3tiit’s not though
Its a meme from war thunder and world of tanks @@AndRei-yc3ti
Everyone is an idiot for using a bloody horrible war for bragging rights in a comments section.
yep
Not my war
Been like this forever I’ve just chosen not to argue anymore all this death for a now worthless wasteland with no infrastructure
Guarantee that if UA-cam was around during Alexander the Great era, he'd be roasting his enemies
You're the first in the line
Same thing that happens with any other tank in this war. Seen by recon drone and promptly destroyed with fpv drone, atgm or mine. Recon drones that allows you to see the every movement of the enemy has never happened before in a war. It’s no wonder tanks are being destroyed so frequently in this war.
How they started talking. )) And recently they said (based on thousands of primitive fakes) that Russian tanks are bad. ))) How quickly and completely the rhetoric of the Westpithecus changes! ))
The difference is that in western designs the crew survives when the tank is knocked out while in glorious russia crew gets promoted to kosmonaut ))))
@@___seb3341 Another idiot doesn't know about the uselessness of NATO anti-personnel shells. )))
@@___seb3341 Another id _ i_ ot doesn't know about the uselessness of NATO anti-personnel shells. )))
Yeah, they raise a scout drone 400 meters high and hover, a cloud of dust can be seen kilometers away when an armored vehicle is on the move. Then they send sevral fpv drones.
It is how it is
it do how it do
@@Non-finite-Dimensionalityreported for correcting misinformation
@@Non-finite-Dimensionality It do be how it since.
Great video 🙂
woah hi mat
Never expected to see you here!
Oh the Russian Propaganda department is here
your vids suck.
@devildolphin2102 I'm an American citizen and I support Russia.
New video in quite some time
and it's a waste of time
@@noble9759 A waste of time would be looking at all the footage and information that gives u the same conclusion as in the video/something worse due to your skills. It would be a waste, because you can watch this short video. The only problem I have is the kind of click-bait name, but that's not really a problem, as you can understand what the video is from start, so you'd be able to simply close it.
@@reload5817 Jesus christ never waste your time with comments like this ( sorry I'm rude) but like I've seen dozens of places talking about this if it's the first post in awhile this guy has to have like zero idea what to do but I don't know I'm not a youtuber tho
@@reload5817 plus most of these dudes get small details wrong anyways sometimes like bro it's a war. The Abrams being shipped over aren't the best. Like bro why did he have to make this (I am ranting about seeing the same group of youtubers posting the same sort of crap as the other guy it's not entertaining when there's nothing to add. And the news old)
This is my problem with youtube itself 🗣️
Maintenance company I +5% to division capture rate
Abrams: Has blow up panels to protect the crew from a ammunition explosion
Russian: entire Turret blows off after a single hit in the ammunition rack.
Russian people: NaTo TaNkS aRe A jOkE
sorry, who's tanks are in a exhibit in Kubinka now?
@@sixmillionisimpossibleNice username btw, really shows the audience that this kind of nonsense plays to.
We had a T-90 at a gas station in Louisiana. Sit down.
@OGShively
>bubba DeMarcus of Brownsville seething about Russians
lmao, Sherman really was the good guy.
@@sixmillionisimpossibleok 2 month old account
Torsion bars are overstressed and collapsed when a tank burns out as well.
Wait, can these tanks be lifted like a 16 year old with a Silverado?😂
@@ApolloTheDerg Given an active suspension yes.but once burned out the armour and steel has been compromised.
You hear stories about the Abrams tanking 100 RPG shots and not being destroyed, but some shitty little drone takes them out ...
Tbf, moderately trained insurgents tend to aim center of mass at the most armored parts, with older RPG warheads, but still… you could absolutely kill one in one shot if you where positioned properly or just got lucky.
No rpg rounds can attack from top, that's why. Top part of tanks are vulnerable for tanks created in the 90s and 80s. Just ask t 90 and below
Legend met reality.
*shitty little drone with RPG on it/
Actually hamas modified rpg took out most modern merkavas. Explain that.
Fpv drones with rpg warheads are crazy scary for tanks. They can hit you in the roof where you got no armor. This war turned into pure attrition war, and i dont fancy chances of smaller industrial power. (unless they get a ton of support every year ofc)
That being said, fpv drones in hand of insurgents are even scarier. Even if they get conquered, i doubt conqueror can hold on to the land without high attrition. Unless they will start using terror tactics themself and decimate population ofc.
Ukraine's chances are literally in their allies' hands, no help from NATO = they will surrender in the next 5 years. Enough help from NATO = Putin is cooked.
those are not just cheap FPV drones but Lancet Anti-tank drones with a powerful Anti-tank warhead (similar to missile)
and it does not need to hit the roof, it's enough to hit the vulnerable left or right side which is very vulnerable too
@@morowenidi4621 FPV drones are actually not that hot for terrorists. They require constant uplink during the run, they require full explosive charge to do their work. They got metal to detect, size to be sus and preparation time to pull things off. They can be human shielded against. They can be shot down with shotguns (Guess one weapon of choice for the police). They are easily detectable and they need doubles to get through a simple window.
If you need a covert operation, planting charge is better.
If you don't care about being covert, throwing charge is better. In fact, something like gammon grenade can be rolled in plastic to be immune to dog/vapor scan detection.
If you don't care about being covert and don't care about casualties, car filled with the pop is better.
FPV drones are basically first generation ATGMs if they had the tech to actually mount cameras. Slow, capable of complex maneuvers, deadly, main weakness is the meatball operating it. As ATGMs, they are perfect weapons to deny territory. As ATGMs, they are scary, which makes them priority targets which makes their life expectancy extremely short despite all the brag about "remote work". But FPV drone squad looks like pickup truck or ordinary house, so there is not much to show.
@@militaryanalysis5028 Lancet Anti-tank warhead is not actually all that hot. In fact, it's a victim of trying to fill many roles (Because quite often Lancet drones roam like 50km behind enemy lines, so you can't really choose a warhead). As a result, you look at ANCIENT КЗ-6 (Kumulyativny Zaryad 6, Copperjet charge №6). It's actually build like old WW2 Era charges, using 1.8kg of explosives to pierce measly 200mm of RHA. The trick though is that this 200mm hole got the girth of AV actor's primary tool. This one is typically complemented by tail charge, which is typically 000 buck pressed into Kolbasa (UR-77 demining charge section piece). Tail charge explosion is about 3 grenades strong, but less frags. Reliably turns light vehicles into frags though, with thin liners not helping.
So what we see survivability of Leopard 2 is indeed the best among all tanks western or eastern alike. Good Armor in combination with the best chioces are made for ammo storage ! It was critisised over and over again for having still a big ammo storage in the hull.
But as it turns out it is the better option.
So Abrams has virtualy all ammo in his Turret behind a door. OK. But it has 42 rounds of ammo there. Leopard has 15. So even in case of ammo going of in the turret (considering bulkhead closed in both cases) on Leopard it is 15 rounds burning. Abrams cooking of is 42 rounds . So triple the amount of Leopard 2. Thats also tripple the energy stored there. And that fire WILL burn its way either in the turret through that bulkhead or the enginedeck below. Thats the tanks complete inventory of ammo placed just in the highest point of the tank.
it was always a weakspot. In the Bundeswehr it was known that that ammostorage is going to get hit . Nobody thought about drones back then but artillery was a concern.
So in Leopard the biggest amount of ammo is cosiderably protected by heavy frontal armor and heavy sideskirts. It was always the better choice. Fast foward to today and exactly this Spot in the hull makes it virtually unreachable by drones. it would need literaly a top attack heavy warhead dronebomb to the drivers hull to have achance to set it of. All other angles are not possible for a drone to set the ammo off.
On Abrams they put the all the ammo on the highest point and one does not just put all his ammo on the highest point on a tank and expect it to last. The soviets had kind of the right idea with their ammo storage but execution is bad as ukraine conflikt proves day by day.
There isnt an invincible weapons system, western tanks get destroyed in ukraine because they have huge bounties on their heads, as soon as they are spotted elite drone teams are dispatched to take them out, remember that russia is paying good money to soldiers who destroy these tanks. The other thing to remember is that ukraine doesnt haver air superiority or air support for its armored units, soldiers in this war say that there are hundreds of drones buzzing around, even the best tanks are going to be destroyed if they face 3 or 4 drones. Finally, ukraine has lost western tanks yeah, but russia has lost a lot of t80 and t90 tanks that are usually sold by russia as better than leopard, strv, challenger or abrams.
ua-cam.com/video/Fpa2hc23Xos/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/Fpa2hc23Xos/v-deo.html
This should more be a point that Soviet MBTs aren’t bad because they get destroyed, same with here how a western MBT isnt somehow bad because it got destroyed.
It doesn't helps that most western MBT were designed with air superiority in mind , meaning that without it they aren't performing as well as they should, meanwhile Russian tanks were designed without air superiority in mind (aka is better to have it , but it can work without it) , so them not having air superiority either doesn't affect them as much
@@ulforcemegamon3094you mean that russian tanks are better as long as it's not you getting burned alive in one.
didn't Ukrainians take them off the battlefield recently because they were too heavy and were getting stuck in the mud?
or is it because they were losing them too fast?
Don't quote me on this, but they are being used more as a pseudo artillery right now, they don't want to lose them, and don't have huge stocks to tanks to send to front lines. Handheld AT is too common on both sides for any tank sent to the front to survive realistically
It's because the Abrahams were soo good the russian have already retreated to Moscow.. is not like the russians are laughing at nafo tanks stuck in the mud loke a bunch of horny stepsisters
Both, there are more Leo2 losses than Chal 2 and Abrams since they have more of them thus more expendable
Probably both. Obviously they are way too heavy, as are virtually every other vehicle during the mud-season.
they took off a whole brigade which fought on the front line for a year straight and that brigade happened to be the one which had abrams tanks. its just coinsidence which was used by russian propaganda.
/k/opers made a thread about how "only 4" tanks were lost and a few days later it got up to 7. In that same thread they made some silly comparison to how many Russian tanks were lost when they should really be asking why those nations could only collectively muster 31 tanks. Those 31 aren't gonna last forever
such a waste and butthole in chief will STILL send more...
The /k/oping was so bad since the start of the war that I never went back there. It was no different than Reddit.
notice how they never bring up the russian tanks lost are last gens given to the donbass MILITIA and not the russian army proper.
They don't make that distinction because they're intellectually and morally dishonest.
@@BlackMetalVengeance you jsut got bullied lol
Its fucking embarrising that the collective west only managed to awnser russias efforts in tank production and refurbishment with fucking 31 Abrams (disregarding the leopards ofc)
If there is enough info available, could you make a video covering the leopard 1s that were sent to Ukraine and the variants. I haven't been able to find much on them, only that they're in Ukraine.
theyve prolly been used as artilery
Most were heaps of unusable garbage that Ukraine sent back...
Are any Leopards left?
Challengers are in the rear.
Abrams are being taken off the battlefield.
Leclercs are ... not off the table.
@@thulomanchay ukraine is slowly but surely becoming a top tier warthunder match that doesnt end
They're probably in the north border allowing actually useful assets to be moved east. They're likely doing nothing.
i feel like western media forgot abrams/ leopards/ challengers are tanks too and they arent invincible
No one called them invincible.
@@phishphood423 people like to act as if they're invincible though (do not ask me to cite)
@@phishphood423they called them game changers. This cargo cult still goes on with f-16. In the first days of war they prayed on bayraktar.
@@phishphood423 LOL. I have been hearing about their invulnerability and invincibility for 20-30 years. )))
@@paulwilson8061 Sure, Ukraine has kind of hid their tanks, but at the current rate of losses, Ukraine has tanks for years. A couple Abrams being taken out vs around 140 T-90 series tanks taken out is a big difference. Especially when there are far more sep v2s than T-90s, and sep v3s than T-14s
30 tanks was never going to make a difference. Seriously - it was a joke! 30? Seriously
Would nothing be preferable?
@@georgesimon2730 kinda, do you keep funding a war or do you force one side to give in. This isn't an extermination, just land capture.
When America got Ukraine to hand over their nuclear weapons to Russia, and promised to protect them, half hearted aid packages and old tanks with the best part of its armour removed isn’t them holding up their end of the deal. Ukraine came to americas aid when they were ruining everything in the Middle East, they didn’t have to!
It is not just 30 Abrams tanks. So far they received: 31 Abrams, 80 Leopard-2 (more to come), 88 Leopard-1s (more to come), 14 Challenger-2s, more then 300 Polish T72s and PT91s, 194 T72s from Czechs, 23 T72s from Macedonia and Morocco,15 T-72 supplied by Denmark and Netherlands, 30 AMX-10 from France, 28 M55S from Slovenia... They received more tanks than most European nation have in their inventory
@@youmad7068 how many abrams have been knocked out total now?
Can I ask you whats the music you use in the closer of the videos ? Its fire.
Svard - Face Away
dude, it's literally in the description!
Abrams are so tough. Real piece of art.
You've made four mistakes in the word "crap"
I'm not sure why anyone expected the same brigade that kept driving their Leopard 2s over minefields wouldn't get the Abrams sideshot by ATGMs.
They were trained by people who told them to just go around minefields. The conclusion was inevitable.
There is several aspect to concider here:
-The video of russian moving the second tank , the good one could be old, kept under wraps until needed or riskis low enough.
- the first one was just an empty shell. Ending up in the expo.
The good one was disassemble and study, thus the silence on it.
So watever happened to it was left to russia and nato spies.
BUT, my guess is that it WAS analize.
Why?
Because months later we got drones precision strike Abram rear an neutralize them with a mere SIGLE drone.
The termo video is A clear examle, and the forest one confirms it by precision.
Red is probably right about the leo2 at 6.43 couse we can't see side armour, upper frontal plate is on a whole diffrent level than track covers, and the side of the turret is very flat plus there probalby is no turret basket like on most abrams (if im wrong correct me bc it's the only evidance that i could find in this image)
The most wild thing is the footage coming out of people climbing on and in the burned out tanks, even when on display.
FYI, don’t ever do that, even these ones don’t have uranium on board, all tanks have plenty of heavy metals and chemicals you don’t want to breath
They properly have more potential threats to their life more than breathing heavy metal...
So sitting n breathing in trench /basement of a totally bombed out flatten area s not higher risk?...
@@boocomban I was more talking about the videos when they were on display in Moscow
If it is really that dangerous the US probably shouldn't let their own soldiers touch it. If the burnt out husk is so dangerous imagine the toxic metal risks for those repairing these things, all the welding and grinding...
@@robincray116 you do realize that their is a difference between welding fumes, and an uncontrolled ammunition fire, right? Also theirs pretty strict regulations on ppe, and osha surrounding the construction of these. As for general use, you know fire chemically alters stuff, and makes previously contained stuff, well un contained.
They got BUCK-BROKEN.
Reverse mutt's law.
Hey Redeffect could you do a video on the T-55AGM tank / Tifon2a? I’ve been curious and looking at info about it but sources of info are few and pretty much say the same thing.
Reminds me of the time in Warthunder where you just get revenged by drones.
me having RWR and smoking when i realise a pesky drone is locked onto me sending a hellfire or some beam guided atgm at me
You’ve given us the best unbiased coverage and the juiciest details of this war. You’re the best RedEffect! It’s been awhile since your last upload but it has been worth the wait!
Remember that british challenger survived hundreds of rpg and got 1 hit by kornet
I think in the end it was actually only hit by 7 rpg warheads but alot of them were fragmentation warheads
It's like medieval chronicles "the knights fought valiantly, each took on 60 foes"
Kornet is much more powerful, not many tank ( especially older model ) could withstand a kornet
Are these export Abrams with the reduced armor or domestic Abrams with the good armor? I'm guessing the former, but I don't know.
They're the base M1 tanks I believe, so just the basic Abrams without the new shiny technology. The Abrams's armor stayed the same through the years so it wouldn't really change much if it was the most modern one either, even the ones with depleted uranium would get annihilated by drones or ATGMs anyway.
they were collecting 1 piece of each vehicle for park before may 9th. everything else is for testing but i suppose they are not in hurry for that.
They know basically everything about western equipment. But studying the current variants in the field is valuable to some degree.
6:50, it's a Leopard 2A4, the turret cheeks are only angled along one axis and the sides of the turret have no angle to them, there is also no storage on the sides of the turret and only storage on the rear of the turret which is something more common with Leopard 2A4's.
Could just be the lighting that's throwing me off tho.
I don't know why, but the Abrams looks like it stunk or the MBT-70 lol
I remember they took some data from the MBT 70 test
@RedEffect do you know which abram is one the red place?
Hey
Just discovered your channel a hour ago,as i can see its pretty cool and into tanks,and as a tank lover,i subcribed.
Says on your channel that location is croatia,i speak croatian...so thats cool
Quickly. Catch that interior vid to see if it has a spallliner or not to end the damn debate in WT. XD
A comparative analysis of the Bradley and the Terminator would be interesting, I haven't seen an appearance of the Russian vehicle for a long time, while the Bradley seems to be still effective against tanks.
Afaik there was only a small number of Terminators and Russian army actually did not like them, so it may be a reason why we're not seeing them lately.
@@Mandrak789 Yeah as far as I understand there were only like 10 or 20. Besides, it is not really comparable to the Bradley, as it does not carry troops and is purely designed for fire support. It also has much heavier armor, since it is basically a tank with a different turret and armament.
Terminator was made for urban combat and Russia doesn't support its armor with IFVs so I'm guessing since it's a valuable asset, they limit the usage.
Terminator is not an IFV like Bradley, it's a tank support vehicle.
@@Mandrak789Pretty such they like them, it's not made for this conflict.
Honestly that Abrams in the treeline, looks more like the bustle storage on the back of the turret is burning and not the blow out panels. same with the thermal camera tank......the crew stores their bedding and other crap on the rack in the rear of the turret and well, id guess thats easily burned up....
Will you do an analysis of all 138 T-90's up on Oryx so far?
Oryx- cnn, ucro propaganda which counts Eu/Ua destroyed tanks as Russian 🤣🤣🤣
So lemme get this straight, the tanks were disabled, crews ran off, and THEN destroyed by missiles from drones when it's empty? Why? Why not recover the tank when it's less damaged
Let's put you in an Abrams or a T90. You will leave the tank after the first arrival of the drone. This happens all the time - the vehicles is a target for the FPV if it is without a crew. If she is with the crew, then the chance of being hit increases many times.
It's so the enemy doesn't attempt to recover it first.
If it's more damaged, the higher the chances the enemy gives up on trying to recover it.
Or maybe the FPV guy didn't have the idea they were going to capture it in the first place, but that being the case, no one would double tap any tank and risk the enemy recovering it instead.
they cant always get to them and recover them before the enemy recovers them... so they usually try to destroy them completly so even if the enemy gets to them first they cant use them again... also as the other guy said, the crew usually runs off after the first hit... and it takes a while probably for other fpv drones to get there so by the time they are ready to hit the tank again the crew already ran off
@@kalamar_from_slovakia it means the abrams aint a mystery to the Russian. So there should never be no excuses for War Thunder to not being able to model the armour properly
They would get them back in the cover of the night
What's the heating value of Western Added Value? Is it comparable to the turret-launching potential of the rusviet putiniun?
There may already be a solution for the drone threat with the Iron Fist countermeasure.
the US lost several M1 Abrams (sometimes with casualties) during the Iraq War to IEDs, RPGs and EFPs, so it's not wholly surprising to see some losses in Ukraine as well against more advanced weapons, although an insurgency in Iraq and a conventional war between two (near-)peers in Ukraine are two very different things.
Thing is, those are not counted among losses in order to bolster numbesr. Same thing with the "flawless" F-15 with its 104 confirmed kills and 200+ losses that "don't count"
Really, any time USA is involved in a conflict they try really hard to play the numbers game as if it's a k:d ratio on a video game. They will attribute every single enemy loss to USA, even when it's just locals or irregulars fighting under US command, but none of those people get counted as losses for USA if they become casualties under their command.
Go ahead and check, the USA claims they did not lose a single Abrams, they were all self-destructs which "don't count", or people fighting under the USA and not Americans so it "doesn't count".
The real difference is that the militants in Iraq were unable to follow up in destroying those disabled tanks, while the Russians are doing exactly that. In fact, the Russians have at times intentionally waited for engineer tanks to arrive to destroy those at the same time.
@@ZOV-Lancet same story with US Vietnam war time air loses, when jets were officially downed by "engine failure" or "control loss", not clarifying that this very engine failure or control loss occurred due to a missile hit
@@vovin8132
There were a number of Abrams destroyed by friendly fire, and those disabled were destroyed to prevent them from falling into Iraqis hands.
No M1s have been lost to enemy action until 2023. All of the ones in Iraq were fully operational but were demolished by BLUFOR.
Piranha FPV drone now in the history books as the "Abrams killer"
Nobody cares
@@caracallaavg Cope and seethe.
@@ZOV-Lancethas lancet in the name, ok runz bot,now cope at how your tanks don't let the crew survive when hit
@@Anarcho-harambeism You can literally see at 5:00 crew of the Trashbrams burned laying on the side and it's not the only one . Seeth and cope some harder princess 😂
@@Anarcho-harambeism Lmao says the guy with "Anarcho" in his name. Cant wait for you to find out what models represent the vast majority of you Super NAFO Ukrainska Armiya's tank force...
Thank you very much for this excellent analysis
Thanks, RedEffect.
"Nah Uh, these tanks don't count"
Huh? These tanks count, they are saving the crew way better than those ruzki satellite launchers.
And especially since Ukrainians lost only 10 tanks in a year, like is that the “2nd strongest army in the world?”, hunting them real hard to show how obsolete they are but managed to destroy only 10 in 12 months?
@@oleksii000 Lmfao Russian tanks are actually saving the crew way better unlike those westoid satellite launchers.
And especially since Ukrainians lost over 70% of their tanks in a week while Russia hasn't even lost 10% in 2 years. Like is that not the 2nd strongest army in the world? Hunting them real hard to show how obsolete they are but but managed to only destroy 10% in 2 years while losing 70% in 1 week?
🎣
Too easy.
@@oleksii000 Cope harder lmfao. Those 90% NATO tank losses in 2 weeks vs 10% Russian tank losses in 2 years clearly tell us who makes better tanks lol0
@@oleksii000 yeah according to you they lost 10 tanks in a year but thats the point if ukraine brought only 10 tanks to the front they all got destroyed you know how many t tanks ukraine got from other countries ? you know they fake some of their t tank lossses and claim them as russians with their photoshop brigade 🤫
There is nothing wrong with Abrams. Modern ATGMs will disable any western tank with 1 hit. Mines will disable the tracks of any tank that goes over them. The difference between Western and Soviet/Russian tanks is that an ATGM will disable the Western tank and the crew will at least have a chance to escape but in a soviet/Russian the chance of a catastrophic explosion because the ammunition inside the tank is hit with the ATGM means the crew has no chance to survive. Every single tank made as of now has no drone top attack protection since this is a brand new type of warfare. All tanks are made to defeat front direct hits from another tanks to various degrees. Brand new tanks will be have to made that take account of drone top attacks.
Not entirely true. A top attack hit from a javelin type system will likely kill the entire crew. Same as a soviet model. Sure the Soviet crew has less survivability than a modern NATO tank, but that is a tradeoff for size.
A soviet style tank is much smaller and lighter for the same protection because of the autoloader. There is a pretty decent chance a Soviet tank will not be seen as easily as a western one.
Nothing wrong except excessive fuel usage, weight and constant need of maintenance. Even ukrainians said many times how they disliked Abrams for how picky the machine is. Until higher ups issued an order to never speak anything bad about "game changers".
@@hansshekelstein9450 Thats an absolutely ridiculous statement in this current year with the masses of thermal gear soldiers can have. It's a worthless assertation with the accuracy of ATGMs, drones and guided artillery.
@@kindlingkingsource? Russia today 😂
@@kindlingking the Abrams is not picky about the fuel it takes. The complaint I have personally heard about them is that they need more fuel than the lighter smaller Russian tanks. Also they get stuck in mud (a little) more easily.
what's the song of your outro?
Anybody notice how thin the number 1 and 2 skirts are??? It's not a deal breaker but one must wonder what else was removed/
replaced? The gunners station on the inside looks modified as well.
For Ukraine 200 T-series tank is better than 20 Abrams
Since they already familiar with it, and quantity is important
Yes and no. Say that Ukraine had 200 Abrams, that is probably equal to 1,000 T-90s in force multiplier as seen in Iraq War. There is also the manpower saving and survivability of Western designs.
@@VandelbergerIraq never had T90M lmao
@@EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE1 Bro, if you think a T-90, with its limited protection for crew, NO NIGHT vision as stock electronics nor the ability shoot while driving at full speed… lmao it’s not even a comparison.
@@Vandelberger You realize Iraq never had T90 only T55 T62 and T72. Also the M variant is similar to SEP 3.
muh freebrams is now a jailedbrams
It surprises me that people would think that the blow-out panels would stop the tank from burning at all.
There are some _very_ famous pictures of burned out M1s, at least one of those was destroyed because external cargo stowage caught fire.
I think the one with all the stuff that's still functional were towed back to the lab where they could examine the equipment so it couldn't be put it on display yet.
nice vid
Didn't live up to the hype they made it
Really? A battalion of M1s have not been lost yet and they have caused losses of hundreds of PCs and MBTs.
@@ArchOfficial in ukraine, yeah no.
@@tarektechmarine8209 The M1 has had more combat success in Ukraine than it has had in its entire history before Ukraine, including Desert Storm.
@@ArchOfficial Where the proof
@@ArchOfficial What are you bs-ing about? As soon as it was deployed, it got wrecked. And it continued to happen almost every time they were spotted. Abrams has no value on UA soil as it's slow, heavy, loud, hot, takes too much fuel to operate etc... Even 300 units wouldn't matter. Especially not since UA army is apparently allergic to FPV drone protection aka cope cage.
I'm more curious about what weapons those F.P.V. drones were using, and, what the best countermeasures for them would be.
Lamp of knowledge ammunition used in Russian FPV Drones
look it up, video is in russian but the YT subtitles work great
An anti HEAT cage and as much EW gear that you can cram into and onto your tank seem to be the current trend.
Damn bro 200k subs? Congrats
These Abrams are being used as 'FireBrigade'.. running up n down the lines, lobbing shell.like an self propelled howitzer.. danggg..
Crew survivability is key. No tank is immune to mobility kills.
copium
@@lek8630Ukrainian crews go back to combat, Russian crew get sent to space lmao
@@lek8630more like truth but whatever
@@aynersolderingworks7009yep
@@RustedCroakerI agree
Where challenger 2 videos at?
As someone said somewhere else, anyone can know everything about Abrams through war-thunder already.
i don't expect the western nations to call these things "Game Changers" after what happened to it in ukraine
No one serious called them game changers. They are just very good tanks, but tanks nonetheless. And far too few were delivered to make an impact. Ukraine would need at least 500 and got, how many? 30 or so?
Russia loses how many thousand tanks but Ukraine loses a few Abrams and now they are all useless? I wonder how well the modern ones do with air support....
"Nuh Uh, none of the losses in Ukraine count because...."
himars was/is a game changer. not even a discussion
Ukrainians and the sensationalist media called them game changers. Everyone else with any sense knew otherwise.
I don't think there is a whole bunch they can learn from a 40 year old tank.
but they're ggame changers
crazy how we started from how scary tanks was in WW1 ( watch the tank scene from all quiet on the eastern front movie) to now this where drones can just clap almost any tank now
Where do you get those videos you use?
Upto this point no single Russian tank has been destroyed by any NATO tank lmao. Bradley disabling t-90 don't count as a kill
Destroying all optics, disabling the turret, and immobilizing the tank doesn't count as a kill? Cope harder
Abrams was disabled from the outside but intact from the inside then??
@@domonkosszabo398 well considering 3 drones hit and 2 Bradley's and yet crew escaped and tank survived No. I would give it to the drones
@@Giganibba511 Tank didn't survive. It was disabled and knocked out by Bradleys, and burned down by drones after. Kill still goes to the Bradley's crew
@@domonkosszabo398 tank did survive and crew also it got only disabled. Who cares about what happened after that lol
I went there yesterday got some pictures
The exhibit
Kissing it brings you good luck 👍
Abrams going through that Hector experience in Troy (post-duel).
which abrams it is at 5:10 ?
Are there any mistakes in their usage?
Maybe a look from this side would be interesting.
he already made a video about it with abrams commander where he interviewed him about this, video is from like a month ago
@@azrael9016 yes, I watched it, but since then, firstly, something could have changed, secondly, I did not really like that video, it seemed to me that there was too much human evaluation, plus with an emphasis on older conflicts.
These tanks are up against opponent with much higher capability, thats all there is to it.
@@renegaderu5126 nothing much could have change for 1 month... emphasis on older conflicts is how every army operates, they evaluate their older conflicts (latest one they had preferably) and behavior of their enemy and adapt in that way.
The main mistake in using them is that they dragged Russia into this perfectly avoidable conflict.
Game changer guys
shush. no one serious and knowledgeable thought Abrams would do any better against FPV drones and mines. it did however not explode catastrophically, something which most T series tanks cannot relate to.
@@phishphood423
>no one serious and knowledgeable thought Abrams would do any better against FPV drones and mines
how many of serious and knowledgeable persons you know on the interwebs?
@@phishphood423 It did it's job, keeping the crew alive.
@@phishphood423 its funny now you say this you were propably one of those that said russians will run when they see western tanks 🤭
@@avex3903 I dont think they were
Congratulations in advance for 200k❤
Can anyone explain to me why these tanks are all by themselves when they get taken out? Shouldn't there be supporting vehicles and infantry to help prevent a lot of this from happening, or am i mistaken? Where are the mine plows and such as welll?
The crew may have gotten out of the Abrams but has it ever been confirmed that they survived and escaped?🤔
Yes, the crew have active social media.
@@Vandelberger Which ones because for at least one of them they got turned to dust by an artillery strike right after they bailed
in the video of the first destroyed Abrams only 3 crew exit the burning tank, and burning themselves, rolling int the ground
@@ruskibot7745 Well I am talking about 9 / 10 tank crews who survive egress from the vehicle. It isn't the tank's fault if they die after they leave the vehicle.
Game changer weapons
Next applique armor that comes out has to effectively protect the tracks
How did the drone blow off the wheels tracks?
Russia doesn't show all their cards.
russia has lost about 500k men now. But hey. They don't tell it.
@@Stebetto3 source? And even with air superiority and artillery advantages and still has more losses than Ukraine? I call it BS
5:08 i'd reckon they either got attacked while transporting it or kept it for testing and so on choosing to show of the destroyed abrams instead. Also showing a charred Abrams would be better propaganda Imho, as some peple tout them as these miracle machines.
You know the folks who got hold of it shot at it a few times with whatever AT weapon they had ... Soldiers being soldiers.
Only fools who don't know that all armoured vehicles are vulnerable regardless of where they are who built them or when.
Nah , the more intact the tank is, the better. Those a collectibles and the russian tank museum would kill to get their hands on a running Abrams
do they have any jammers ????
They 'should' all have them installed with such.
When you pay golden eagle to buy premium abrams and end up in high rank br game
Rededffeecccttttt yeeraaahhhhhhh
at least, the british doesn;t allowed to use Ch2 in combat after 1st lost..
We did no such thing, and I'm pretty sure they're still being used.
@@moritamikamikara3879 Yeah, they're being used to store potatoes in western ukraine, away from danger
@@torenicoWrong! they are being used to make tea for the soldiers. These tanks are fulfilling their true purpose a mobile armored tea maker.
The underwhelming (only to those who didn't already know how mediocre at best an MBT it is) Chally 2 was just bait for the German cvcks to send their Leo 2 en masse and bear the brunt of the damage to their image.
@@moritamikamikara3879 maybe to keep Zele ass in one piece, btw, Gran Shapps was ordered by BAE systems TO REMOVE Ch2 from battle line after 2 tanks were destroyed
Note, if the tank has been on fire it may be the crew did it. We were given a white phosphorus grenade to destroy the tank in '91. Destroying a tank to prevent the enemy using it is part of your SO.
The Abrams tank tracks ⛓️ always melt 🔥 away😮
Has there been an Abrams lost to another tank?
Most of the destroyed Abrams I've seen were taken out by mines.
mines, fpv, atgm, artillery shells. T series tanks mostly die from same thing on both sides
Tank vs tank is a very rare scenario in today's warfare most times tanks die to other threats
Russia claims a T-72 took out an Abrams but provided no evidence
@@renegaderu5126 that what I thought. People really are making this a bigger deal than it actually is.
@@B83N
It is a Bigger deal, when a $200.mines n 3k drones .. can disable ya toughest vehicle BEFORE it even reached contact line. Or ya being forced to use it as FireBrigade lobbing shells like a Self Propelled Howitzer.... wayy back from the frontlines