- Join me in War Thunder for FREE on PC, PS®5 and Xbox Series X|S: gjn.link/RedEffectWarThunder. Follow my link to get the game as well as an exclusive bonus. Thank you for supporting the channel!
Regarding the side armour; the K2 was primarily designed for combat within the extremely mountainous and hilly terrain of the Korean Peninsula. Whilst side armour is an important factor for tanks, it is greatly less so for Eastern Asian vehicles, another example being the Type 10, which also does not have significant side nor top armour despite being classified as a 5th gen. vehicle. Furthermore, with relation to the cannon, it is to be noted that the mount was designed with the purpose of upgrading the cannon to 140mm standard that was being developed by Rheinmentall at the time when needed, with very few modifications, hence there being no need for a minor gun upgrade as of now.
Arjun had gone through major upgrades recently and the army is in the decision to order Arjun. With new sabot projectile being designed by oshcrop. And the camera sight is also re-enforced!-source aero India 2019 (Indian army is not dumb to order or even test a tank with major armour weakness know that first) www.timesnownews.com/india/article/army-yet-to-approve-upgraded-arjun-mark-1a-all-you-need-to-know-about-indias-most-powerful-desi-tank/694232
we're talking about war thunder here, as a f2p player I don't feel those who pay have any advantages against f2p players in battle, in this game skill is what matters.
They're easy target for infantry/guerrillas because of the many weak spots in the armor. Besides, the new formidable NK armor presented at the recently held parade leaves nothing to be desired, being perfectly able to knock out K2BP from afar.
@@EduardoW-v7i lol, you know the north Korean armed forces are decades behind, right? The K2 in its current Form exists because there is no need to upgrade it further, because there is no reason for it. Korea has one enemy, that's the north, which is far from a real threat with its armed forces. The only thing that makes North Korea a threat are nuclear weapons and fanatics. The Korean Air force is superior, the navy and the ground forces too.
@@EduardoW-v7i FORMIDABLE NK ARMOR! Ahaha ok, well tbf you are right about the guerrilla warfare because NK received some newer AT systems from China and Russia but also the only thing formidable about the NK tanks is the fact they have lots of ERA on their tanks which im assuming is to stop Korean F-15s from taking out multiple tank columns
RedEffect, I wrote an article about the K2 in National Interest magazine and the War is Boring blog. You probably read my article. Anyways, the reason why many tanks have strong side armor is to protect them against attacks on the flank. This is more of an issue in fighting around open country and in urban warfare. It's pretty clear that the Koreans made some engineering choices and compromises given their unique circumstances. Korea is mountainous and thus fighting in open country is going to be very rare. So, a choice was made to make the front very strong but the sides rather weak. This is because Koreans know where the tanks will be coming from and can just have tanks ready to encounter the attacker, thus frontal protection with this tactic in mind was key. For example, the active and modular suspension can make it kneel in a trench and lower the target profile of its hull and turret in a "hull down" position inside a prepared tank entrenchment. Given Korea's mountainous terrain a high power to weight ratio was important, so tonnage was to be kept to a minimum. At barely 55 tons, this is probably one of the lighter modern main battle tanks of Western aligned countries, excluding the Japanese Type 10 (which has even less armor, sacrificed for mobility as Japanese roads are not designed for vehicles much heavier than 40 tons). However, it doesn't make sacrifices in terms of fire power, mobility and frontal protection. It is actually more mobile than most other modern Western aligned MBTs, having a much higher power-to-weight ratio than the Leo2A6, M1A2, Challenger 2, etc. Again, the Koreans need to move this thing up and down hills and mountains as quickly as possible. The key to the K2's lower curb weight but not many compromises on anything else is the autoloader. One thing the Koreans learned from having 40 T-80Us is that the autoloader provides numerous advantages. Having an autoloader can make a tank smaller. A human loader needs to stand up to do his job. He also needs room to swing ammunition from the ammo storage to the gun's breech. That cascades into numerous design compromises. For example, tanks with a human loader are generally taller, longer and heavier. The Koreans tend to do this a lot. Take numerous design elements and make hybrid solutions. Their main infantry assault rifle, for example, has been called an AK piston married with an M-16 chamber and an FN style body. Now, why does the K2 that's being offered to Poland different? Well, the terrain of Poland is totally different than Korea's. Poland is much flatter, first of all, and a more mobile style of warfare can be practice in Poland. Hence, greater side armor is necessary. In terms of the APS, or active protection system, it was found that quite a few modifications of the original K2 need to be done in order to incorporate the native APS. So, for budgetary reasons this isn't being incorporated into the existing fleet of K2s, at least not right now. But since the Polish tank, if it is ordered and manufactured, will incorporate the APS from the very beginning, incorporating it will be much cheaper. Regarding your comment that the gun is now a bit underpowered, underpowered vs. who? Active and in service tanks in both the West and the East are L55 120mm (Leo2A6 and M1A2) and 125mm for Russian and Chinese tanks. However, the K2 can sport a larger gun. It was actually designed, from the ground up, to be able to use the experimental Rheinmetall 140mm gun. I believe the Leo2A7 will have a 135mm gun, which can be fitted into the K2 as well, if they decide to do so. Now, with a bigger gun the number of rounds a tank can store inside will go down somewhat. So, bear that in mind. It's all a compromise at the end of the day. Lastly, it's too bad your first video on the K2 is so nitpicky instead of focusing on both pluses and minuses. Perhaps you were having a bad day, I don't know. The design of every tank one must put geography and the enemy it will encounter into consideration and I don't think you did that. Perhaps you can put out another video of the K2 that will be fairer. Cheers!
Edward Kim problem with the K2 is how sophisticated it is. It will definitely fare worse in a high attrition low supply environment than the K1 or the M1 abrams of American troops that would be fighting in Korea in the event of renewed hostilities. Sure it may be a good tank in perfect situations, plus the auto loader also has a down side. An auto loader malfunction just means longer loading than loading in a tank with manual reloading.
@@goforbroke4428 Uh... the M1 is the worst logistical hog as it burns way more fuel than a diesel engine. It's the M1 that needs a better supply environment. Also, you talk about the disadvantages of an autoloader, but what about the advantages? The advantages are many... including smaller size and weight. The K2 is 10 tons lighter than the M1A2 and the Leo2A6, has one road wheel less and is nearly 2 feet shorter. NATO tanks with manual loader needs height for a standing human loader, thus higher profile. Reliability? Highly reliable as it uses the bustle autoloader, not the carousel auto loader of Soviet/Russian tanks. The French and Japanese also use the bustle autoloader.
@@edwardkim8972 I am well aware of the abrams disadvantage in that it has a turbine engine, which is a jet fuel burning bitch. But there comes a point where too much technology in a piece of equipment is detrimental, the ROK army won’t be fighting just the North Koreans. As soon as the PLA gets involved in hostilities on the Korean Peninsula, the advantages of the K2 will diminish due to almost guaranteed attrition. From what I have seen, the K2 is not suitable to be mass produced. Also, the suspension that can change the way the tank sits is a disadvantage in itself, from what I have heard those types of suspension can be very finicky and not as easy to maintain as a conventional torsion bar suspension system such as what the abrams and other western tanks possess. I never made the position that the abrams is great logistically either, it’s an over engineered overcomplicated piece of computerized trash. The k1 is still an excellent tank, and possesses what is needed to fight in a mechanized operation in Korea. The k2 is just too much, especially when most of the ROK army is leg infantry with quite a few units possessing outdated equipment.
@@goforbroke4428 uh... the South Korean K1 has the same suspension too? And the South Koreans have over 2k K1s? It's not hard to maintain. The K2 is kinda made for the export market. 70% of the components for the K1 are imported thus South Korea cannot export it. With the exception of the transmission, most major components of the K2 are domestically produced. Once the transmission is figured out, no export restrictions on the K2. Oh, and the strategy is to have the K1 do most of the fighting if it's the North Koreans. The K1s aren't going anywhere.
@@edwardkim8972 I am aware of the K1 having the same suspension, but it is simpler in design as a whole. That’s my point, an older simpler tank is still a good one. And large numbers of them is even better. The ROK army is a large army, and it could hold its own in a war against the North Koreans and maybe even the Chinese.
Having RCWS restricts the vision of the crew, making them rely on sensors and optics, which is good, but become problematic when the system is broken or damaged. The open top machine gun allows for more awareness for the crew, which would allow the tank to engage better. Plus, the argument that the RCWS leaves the crew safer is not a good argument, since modern tank warfare usually takes place in long ranges the RCWS will not protect its crew against tank shells and missles. The m1a2 and the challenger still uses open top machine guns, but I do think adding a shield would be better.
The problem pointed out in the video above is a common problem for all tanks around the world... the side armor and the top armor are weak in defense of any vehicle...
No, that's not true at all. Some tanks actually have very thick side armor with extra additional add-on armor protection for enhanced side protection For example Abrams TUSK and British Challenger 2 (it has one of the best side protection) but also some Leopard 2 variants (Leopard Revolution used in Indonesia and SIngapore) And also the French Leclerc AZUR variant. Even the Russian T72, T80 and T90 have much thicker armor on the sides on turret and hull. So it is possible to give tanks a little bit better side protection, which shows how vulnerable the K2 really is, and that is a very big problem.
@@xAlexTobiasxBAbrams TUSK is an improvement kit aimed at street warfare in the Middle East. In open areas and urban areas, the side is relatively likely to be exposed to the enemy, so reactive armors have been added to the side. On the other hand, since K2 assumed and designed for combat in mountainous areas, and North Korea is weak on detection, it is less likely to expose sides to enemies. Therefore, K2 chose mobility while lowering the weight to 55 tons.
@@annonE22 The sides (and rear, roof, bottom) of a tank are always at risk to be exposed to the enemy, doesn't matter what terrain or environment. So that's not an excuse. The front of the tank only makes 10% of the tanks surface area, the remaining 90% are literally vulnerable at all times. Only APS active protection system) can provide reliable defence against missiles and RPGs, and even then it's still vulnerable to drones, mines and artillery...
@@xAlexTobiasxB Thank you for sharing additional insights about the K-2 tank. It's true that side protection can be a challenge, and during the K-2's development, weight restrictions may have limited some aspects of its armor. However, South Korea's military strength, including a substantial infantry force, can provide crucial support and cover for the tanks. This synergy between mechanized infantry and tanks can enhance their overall safety. The Leclerc Azur and M1A1 TUSK mentioned above are upgraded kits, and they are not appropriate to be compared with K-2. It's essential to note that South Korea's ongoing state of war can result in a higher level of secrecy and potential advancements in their tank technology, including the K-2. The K-2 is relatively new tank so there are lots of potentials of improvements, including the ongoing development of Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) and the availability of Active Protection Systems (APS), which, while developed and manufactured, might not be installed yet due to concerns about nearby infantry. I understand that your intention was to provide more accurate information, and I appreciate that. Im sorry if my reply offended you. (written by translator so there might be something wrong. sorry!)
Considering how mediocre NK's tank armor or other protective measures are, it is safe to say that SK's tank cannon will work regardless. The downside is that said cannon, regardless of the upgrades, may not be able to penetrate Kim's thicc armor layer
Glorious leader will use his chubby belly to shield all Glorious Korean People from the shells of the evil imperialists! Dear Leader's love for his people is only surpassed by the effective armor THICCness of his belly rolls! -North Korean State TV in the near future.
It’s a cheap and easy solution, especially ERA that can degrade sabots. Redesigning turrets and hulls and or creating composite armor packages are expensive and time intensive tasks, slapping on some era bricks is cheap and easy and generally pretty effective.
@@92HazelMocha That decision is the hardest and even the countries with a strong heavy industry do it every 30 or so years! I also like the option of modular composites that could in time be changed with the more advanced ones but that's not easy especially within the turret.
All modern MBT's side protection are inadequate. Also the K2 is designed to be able to take on multiple tanks in a hull down concealed position. She was designed to be specifically a mobile defensive tank that can accurately engage at long distances being able to hull down and shoot an scoot. The days of Fulda gap style tank bum rush is over. The North Koreans can try that but ATGMs, helos, air strikes and well emplaced tanks with highly accurate precision fire and almost 100 % one shot one kill/immobilization/neutralization means that even a large division or divisions of tanks can be decimated with some ease.
@@edwardkim8972 the 300~400 mm for the sides are only with the additional ERA blocks which is only effective against some old RPGs but any modern RPG and Missile (costing around 100 k) can easilly destroy this 6 million dollar expensive tank, unless it gets APS soon
They did develop hard kill active protection system, but put off its adoption for two reason. 1) Hard kill detonation can hurt infantry soldiers near by. 2) Current hard kill technology is not yet good enough or mature enough for general adoption, so waiting for new technology to mature. On regarding some lacking armor spots, they does not rely solely on heavy armor for survival. They prefer lighter weight for agility and mountain climbing capability. Other features they prefer are lower profile for low observability and good sight and fire control with sophisticated electronics and sensors. It is mix of Western tank doctrine and Russian doctrine. Some says it is Russian tank made with Western technology.
That's nonsnse and bad excuses. We have already been on the moon. Israel is using APS since 2012 very effectively on the Merkava tank. The technology is more than mature enough.
Still probably the most flexible and well rounded tank on earth right now, at least the best platform due to its modularity and smart compartmentalization/weight distribution, its a Tank that will likely age really well. Even Norway is considering replacing our Leopard 2 tanks with these tanks, it would be perfect for Norway due to our many hills and mountainous terrain. Its like a hybrid between everything that is great about the Abrams, Leopard 2, Type 10 and Leclerc.
5:00 - K2PL is officially dead. Poland goes for baseline K2 'cause timeline!'. However - relative simplicity allows to have large number fielded at less eye-watering costs.
Here are some added intrigue. Norway recently settled on their 8 year plan Military budget. And on the top of the budget as the most urgent is new MBT and armored vehicles. They are currently doing a evaluation between the Leopard 2A7 vs K2 Black Panther. They have recently aquired the K9 Thunder Mobile Artillery from south korea aswell as a big military Support vessel for the navy KNM Maud. You also forgot to mention the K2 exclusive ammo, that should compensate the guns lack of firepower. The Smart Top Attack Munition. Which penetrates a tanks top armor, and few if not no tank has a significant amount of top armor. Now if the K2 Black Panther is chosen as the new Norwegian MBT. Then definatly there is more to it than on what public gets to know. (Which obviously there is, alot of info is classified, having served and worked with alot of classified military information. One cant really take account armor thiccness alone. But also its composition and design And it be interesting to see the Norwegian version of the K2.
The transmission is not a problem, its cost (and the possible export control) of the German product is. To get around it, a Korean company called S&T has also developed the transmission years ago, but it was not adapted by the Korean Army citing that it did not meet its durability requirement. S&T has been protesting that the way of measuring and KA's unrealistic high requirements are the real problems. Recently, S&T claimed that they were able to make improvements and KA finally agreed to use their products for the next batch production of K2. S&T also claimed that Turkey agreed to buy the same for their Altai MBT (licensed K2 technology).
I usually don't stress hearing that a tank may have features 3-7 years behind the curve but using first-gen style ERA sounds like utter madness on a otherwise solid-MBT
It's not really necessary for the main threat of the north Korean ground forces. Unlike for example the US, Korea doesn't have multiple conflicts all over the world with different needs and different threats.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma Still, an upgrade to something closer to Kontakt-5 wouldn't increase the vehicle's weight significantly, but it would substantially increase its protection.
The transmission is the main problem stopping Poland from buying the license for K2PL. The Polish Ministry of National Defense announced they want to buy/produce at least 800 new MBTs. If Koreans can fix their shit, that would be a huge contract for them.
I talked to the representative of hyundai rotem said that the Korean box is already there and has passed the tests. in addition, work on a new powerpack is underway.
@@filipmisko9363 „South Korea’s arms acquisition agency has decided to equip third batch of K2 Black Panther main battle tanks with a German transmission system, a part of the tank’s power pack that includes a locally developed engine. The decision is a blow to a 15-yearlong effort to replace the German RENK transmission system with an indigenous one, which local industry expected would pave the way for exporting the tank. The Defense Acquisition Program Administration, or DAPA, made the decision Nov. 25 during a committee meeting led by Defense Minister Suh Wook, ahead of mass production of 50 more K2 tanks.“ www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2020/11/30/south-koreas-k2-tank-export-plans-suffer-under-transmission-failure/ Only three weeks ago - 25. of November - DAPA ( South Korea’s defence procurement Agency) declared that the Korean developed transmission failed in durability tests. So whatever your source at Hyundai Rotem told you is bogus!
My cousin was an M1 Abrams Driver assigned at the 39th parallel. He got discharged for going $30,000 in detb on drunky whores and local shops. He constantly got reprimanded for being a slob and unkempt. He accidentally decapitated a fellow soldier after not following procedure. Turned the turret and someone had their head sticking out. My cousin was the driver and was supposed to be the only one sticking his head out that hole but still decapitated a Soldier breaking the rules. Sticking his head through the driver's hole. But my cousin was supposed to announce he was turning the turret. All that together got him discharged. He was very lucky he didn't go to military prison.
My dad joined the Navy during Vietnam. He fell through all the cracks and didn't learn anything. When he got his assignment on ship guns. He shot down two American Jets. As soon as he saw something on the radar he just started shooting. I think he was the one that shot down the first American jets in Vietnam, through friendly fire.
2:25 o you really would want to rely on luck? yes! Entire war tactics is based on ratios of firepower, attrition equations, propbabaility of destruction of one type versus another. This is how you fight wars.
It is not that simple. It is illegal to produce an exact copy of what other company is making (of course, some companies don't care about that), if you want to do that, you need a licence. But having a licence would make it hard for Hyundai Rotem to export K2 to other countries, since that equipment would still be affected by German law, therefore, they need to design a completely original transmission in order not to have any problems with production and export.
@@theodorsebastian4272 T-72 mechanical transmissions are nowhere near sturdy enough to deal with a 1500hp engine, not to mention their rather primitive mechanical steering.
Really convenient for the Germans, that the K2 can't be exported with the german transmission. Your country can't purchase a K2 due our restrictions? Why don't get one of our Leopards instead?
I would like to note that the K2 was designed to be able to add ERA in needed locations that the crew sees fit in a frontline situation allowing for customization of the tank. Also, the reason a Korean hard-kill system is cause of the close space of their mountains making the possibility of their own troops being injured or even killed by said system. However, they are upgrading the tank to be able to have a hard-kill installed if need be. To add Hyundai as of me commenting this has stated that they hope to see their own transmission in the K2 by 2025 at the lastest. So I guess your hopes of its problems getting fixed are closer cause it is a REALLY good tank and these upgrades will make it even better. Glad to see my favorite panther is "getting gud" 😂
I bet the Type 90 and 10 has limited armor due to the required lighter weight, and the type 10 has CVT which is mostly unproven for heavier applications. Unconfirmed but they also seem to lack a remote controlled HMG. Good tanks, but compromises had to be made to make them support the mountainous area of Japan.
It's probably the "still overkill against norks" part that has kept these issues on the backburner. If it's still going to kill a really bad t 55 knock off in an insultingly casual manner, would you really care if its 4 or 6 times better?
I'm not sure how L55 120mm high pressure gun can be inferior to Leo2A6+ or any other tank, is modern Ammo is used. German Rh-120 L55 A1 was more a fix, than upgrade.
I think you should revisit this tank, I've heard they got a domestic gun, domestic power pack and transmission now. And have done some interesting things with the suspension. And they have some really interesting ammo options
I think the end of 2023 would be a good time to revisit it, since the Altay MBT just entered serial production this year. ROK's exports of K2 tanks will finish by 2025 and serial production on the K2PL in Poland begins in 2026.
War in the narrow Korean peninsula is either forward or reverse, with hills and mountains all around you. There isn't any flank to worry about besides some sneaky random infantry AT weapons, thus less need for side armor.
*South Korean tank K2 was developed to the South Korean army to fight with COMMIES in the mountain terrains of the Korean Peninsula. So, side protection was not an issue and a very important thing that time !!!!* For the army of the Republic of Poland - it could be a serious problem, because of the variety of the terrains, but mostly FLAT continental with rivers. So, K2-PL definitely required to do something serious with a side protection, so Koreans did it. We are waiting to build a real working prototypes as soon as possible !!!! *Moreover, fully Korean made transmission, would be appreciated, and I think that South Korean Hyundai Industries are definitely capable to develop a good engine-transmission POWER PACK !!!! Just give them a credit and a little time more !!!! They are already working under pressure, because of the tanks for their own army, for Turks, and for the future Polish cooperation in development and fully scaled production of the K2-PL in Poland, to be manufactured under the SK license !!!!*
My understanding is the that Polish Wilk program has been put on hold since they bought 250 M1A3 SEPs from America. Those M1A3 SEPs will replace the antiquated T-72s and Twardy tanks. Apparently, the Wilks will replace the over 20 year old Leo2A5s in Polish inventory?
And the sub ammunitions of the KSTAM II projectile are the same as the ones from the German SMArt 155 artillery round! So no export without German permission. „KSTAM-II was co-developed by South Korea and Germany's Diehl Corporation. The KSTAM-II is launched from the 120 mm L55 main guns mounted on the K2 Black Panther main battle tanks that are to be fielded by the South Korean military, and will be used for attacking targets, stationary or moving, that are hidden behind obstacles. It is similar to the SMArt 155.“ en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSTAM
@@markschoning5581 wrong ktasm was built off American xm943 staff round but very similiar to the other rounds because it is not an arcing round but a straight fly over attacking downward round and it does not have flying seekers but distance and magnetic feelers kind of like tow 2 aero.
@@jeffreyprezalar220 No KSTAM II stands for Koren smart top attack munition, and is using the same type of sub ammunition as the German SMArt 155 artillery round! What you are talking about is the KSTAM I round! en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSTAM
1. ERA is not a problem, it has their own KAPS and MAWS system and hard kill system which gives much more than enough protections against RPGs, etc. 2. K2 can be refitted with 140mm gun, so it still beats the current German one. 3. Local transmission will be developed ultimately, so that's not a problem with tank either. More like issue with exporting overseas.
2. You know that you are talking yet again about a German gun do you? The 140mm is still RHM and like the K2 all NATO tanks who use the RHM 120mm could be upgraded but need new turrets and the same conclusion was conducted for the K2. 3. Same again planed but still not there...
한국 국방부의 독트린이 전차보다 아파치 같은 헬기가 더 중요하다고 생각해서 k2의 예산으로 아파치 가디언을 사는중이죠. 북한을 상대로 k2는 오버킬이기때문에 대량의 기갑차량을 파괴할 수 있는 헬기를 구매하는중. 그래서 전차 개량 사업 역시 k2위주가 아니라 k1계열을 업그레이드 하는중이구요.
South Korea designed its tank against the North Korean invasion. This also explains why the Poland version has better armor than SK ones. If your tank is designed for a certain doctrine, then it is not a surprise if it appears to be weak in a certain area that employs a different doctrine.
Red effect the picture you showed of the k2 black panther south korea has offered to Poland. Has 7 road wheels instead of 6 road wheels the basic k2 has. So this means there probably a new k2 black panther in the works. Dont forget that south Koreas neighbors north korea and China dont have a better tank than them. So the k2 black panther would win against all of north koreas tanks and most likely would beat any Chinese tanks.
Nice point you got there its lack of side armor and foreign transmission. But the point of ROKA's armor maneuver was "First to hit, Do Not Detected." so its win win by the lose side armor to lower weight and great transmission to maneuver. Anyway, always good video with nice infor. Thanks Redeffect!
I'm korean and we have a lot of corruption inside the defense industry(?) Usb costs about 100 usd, apc's engine going off on road and unable to start the engine again, armored car's wheels dismantling on road, helicopter's door and main rotor dismantling mid flight etc so pretty sure that tank is fucked up in other ways too
K2 side protection data is highly classified. but poland defence minister maybe know about K2 real armor spec. u know why poland order 1000 k2pl and even 180 k2 original(not K2pl ver) from south korea.
Tactics are different too. M1A2 SEP that Poles will be getting will be in heavy hitting heavy armored brigades. The K2PL will be in lighter mechanized brigades that swing around Russian units and attack in the flanks, so the K2PL will need to be meaningfully lighter than the M1A2 SEPs that the Poles will be getting to fulfill the heavy assault tank role.
redeffect is just youtuber, he don't know. south korea ADD(agency for defence development) adapt K2 tank to super composite armor plate. so actually even base K2 tank with no addition armor can protect RPG 7 isn't it interesting?
@@HJDore i'm norwegian and have read some norwegian articles about the norwegian talks about getting the K2, sorry but thats all i got. i also read the norwegian army magazine sometimes, and there was an article about it i think. the basics of it is that the deal would be that they set up a production line for the K2 here in norway for our tanks, and im not sure if the 130mm was a requirement or a required option so we could switch to it
It seems like most countries try to cheap-out when developing a new tank even though everybody knows they will have to use that same model for up to 40-50 years (with upgrades ofc).
I have a question, whenever Chinese tanks are mentioned, people always assume they are bad because their information is unspecified or there is little data on them yet when a Korean or Israeli or whatever tank is mentioned with unspecified data, people assume what they are told and assume the tank is good.
Maybe the lack of side armor is because they intended or the designers thought since they will be defending the tanks will most likely have their flanks secured. In theory sounds ok but if the enemy breaches the flank the tank and the crew are toast
Also it has literally no side armor which means the k2 has to be directly facing the enemy and even a slight angle will have the sides penned as modern apfsds gives no shits about angles
Considering the only 2 neighboring countries that would attempt to actually fight the K2 Blackpanther aka A BEAUTIFUL Tank. Would be North Korea error a joke of tanks. But also China which all I see their tanks as good target practice. Tho war thunder from my experience gets some things correctish. Most of it isn't truly Military like due to the lack of communication and the sheer of braindead people because there's no communication due to language barriers only when it doesn't become an issue is from people scouting and those willing to use the map.
problem with playing online games is that theres other people in them. Warthunder, like most other online team based games is basically you vs 16 enemies, and the others on your teams are just blue dots on your minimap that do nothing useful
The Ukraine war has revealed that thick and heavy armor on tanks is not an advantage on the battlefield but a critical weakness. The M1, Leopard, and Challenger tanks could not traverse mountainous terrain, but only the K2 could accomplish this. Additionally, in the Ukraine war, the M1 and Leopard tanks got stuck in the mud due to their heavy weight, forcing their crews to abandon them and flee. This was a point of criticism for the K2 compared to the M1 or Leopard tanks. But it has been proven that modern warfare does not require thick and heavy armor but rather active protection systems capable of actively destroying drones and anti-tank missiles. This is because modern shells, anti-tank missiles, and drones can penetrate even the thickest and heaviest armor. However, the M1 and Leopard tanks are already too heavy to add such active protection systems. In contrast, the K2 can accommodate these systems and is actually planned to be equipped with them in the future. Even the aspect that was considered a disadvantage for the K2 has turned out to be an advantage. Ultimately, the K2 is faster, more accurate, provides a more comfortable driving experience, and is capable of active defense against drones and anti-tank missiles. It can also swiftly navigate through rugged terrain and mud to escape. Additionally, the K2 has an attack method that neither the M1 nor the Leopard possesses: it can use special shells to attack the upper part of enemy tanks from a much greater distance. Furthermore, since all wheels are individually controlled by a computer, it can effectively manage the shocks transmitted to the tank while moving quickly over rough, unpaved battlefield terrain. The K2 also requires a crew of only three, one less than the M1 or Leopard, due to its use of an automatic loading system. For this reason, the K2 can reload using the automatic loading system and fire accurately while moving quickly over rough terrain, which is almost impossible for the M1 and Leopard. In fact, in tests conducted in Romania, the K2 demonstrated a very high hit rate of 90% while moving quickly over unpaved terrain and firing. Of course, the hit rate in a stationary position was close to 100%. Of course, it's an impossible scenario, but if the M1 and Leopard were to engage in combat against the K2, they would not be able to defeat it. The fact that the U.S. has abandoned its original plan to develop next-generation tanks with thick and heavy armor. And lighter and more mobile tanks like the K2 is very telling. This change underscores that thick and heavy armor is an outdated concept, as revealed by the current Ukraine war. What is needed is not thick and heavy armor, but a system that can directly intercept and destroy or jam drones and anti-tank missiles. And the K2 can achieve that. This is why Poland and Romania chose the K2.
Your comment is Full of missinformation. To start K2 is not able to deal with drones in anyway that a M1 Abrams or T-72 would not because it uses an machine gun that is manually operate Then you say its impossible to engage targets on the move as Leopard2 and Abrams, but that is simply incorrect and theres enough footage to show you being wrong. A human loader can easly load even in bump terrain due to the suspension keeping it relatively stable. Theres more wrong stuff but I won't adress them because too long comment. You really should do a research on it Also Poland bought Abrams as well, so...
In therms of what the Japanese have made public, how does the type 10s 'super' ammo compare to the DM73? Personally I can't find any information on the capabilities of the type 10 projectile
Good luck with that. If any public information exists it'll be in Japanese. It's probably about equal to the American M829A4 round in terminal performance.
@@the80386 The question was in regards to the ammo as JSDF claims that it the special ammunition for the type 10 is it's strong suit and can only be fired with type 10's gun.
Why are transmissions so difficult to produce for tanks? You’d think a nation with good car and ship building industry wouldn’t have such an issue with something like a transmission.
Probably as soon as sources become available. The JGSDF is not sharing information about the tank. Japan is forbidden by law from exporting weapons of war so they're not trying to advertise the tank's capabilities, thus public information is scarce.
Welcome to Nato tank design department, we have: Mobility Weak spots Snake-vision sights and little billy over there. ... wait, was that everyone? has anybody seen Protection, and Budget?
@@crabbyjungle5670 a wise man once said; "just because something is the best, does not imply that it is without flaws." Edit: Horribly translated, but u prolly got the point
The biggest problem for K2 is the side armor, but the problem is the turret not the chassis. The side turret for K2 is too thin it can't stop anything. Even if it choose to hull down, an outdated round could still penetrate the side turret from 30 degrees cone, which is the most common engage angles. As for the luck part you mentioned, yes all modern MBTs have to rely on lucks because no MBTs can immune anything even at front. The best engineers can do is to cover as much as possible but it is impossible to cover everything. Abrams, T series, Leopard, Leclerc, etc. All tanks you can name have weak point even from the front. But K2 should resize the ERA by a bit, which would likely be solved in the K2PL since it would use composite armor instead of ERA.
We always have a lot banter and talk about what "the best tank" is. Well...I'm a Canadian and our military uses the Leopard II. Our neighbours and friends to the south use the M1A2 Abrams. Both great tanks, but they're not my favourite. My favourite is the Russian T-90MS.(well...I like them all. They're fascinating machines) Is that the best tank? Probably not, but what constitutes "the best tank"? Impossible to say because there are just too many variables to consider. So why do I like the T-90MS? Because it's just a really cool looking tank. It's that simple.
Thanks for another great video. You show some interesting plans as reference to what you are talking about in the video. Along with statements made in relation to public statements made by Governments and Manufacturers. Would it be possible to provide reference and bibliography to your source? I am sure people would enjoy the opportunity if inclined to dig further on the work you have done. Again,Thank you.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma is very stupid to add Korea(sud and North) tech tree because Korea have only few ww2 she have more cold war and mbt tank if gaijin add Korea tech tree the br is start in 3.7/4.0 with sherman or t 34
Why should the Export to Poland ( in terms of the Renk Transmission) be a probleme? Poland is a NATO Partner in Arms and not involved in armed conflicts as turkey is. I know that the Leopard 2 is a competitor of the K2 but that should be all.
The K2 is much better protected with similar electronics. The K2 would come out on top. The Type 10 is better suited to taking out Cold War Warsaw Pact tanks, but it doesn't really hold up against an actual MBT.
is the engine the real problem of the K-2, because I kept on hearing some news that since they started building their local version of the MTU MB 873 Ka-501 liquid-cooled V12 twin-turbo diesel engine, there were problems that were encountered and if another update is true, is that Germany' MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH is already helping South Korea with it's engine problem. Well that's what I heard.
- Join me in War Thunder for FREE on PC, PS®5 and Xbox Series X|S: gjn.link/RedEffectWarThunder. Follow my link to get the game as well as an exclusive bonus. Thank you for supporting the channel!
Thank you Joe
@@iammusic0099 who is joe
@@lutin_mi06 joe bidome
would you give a look to the italian B2 Centauro? I know it's not an MBT but you also gave a look to the north korean striker so...
vid 44 min ago, comment 22 hours ago???
Problem with K2? The ammo can't pierce Kim Jong Un thicc armor
lmaoo ikr hahahahaha
But his comfort women can
Pretty sure it can
@@aggressivehedgehog8439 damn
But Kim can't fit inside his tank neither
Regarding the side armour; the K2 was primarily designed for combat within the extremely mountainous and hilly terrain of the Korean Peninsula. Whilst side armour is an important factor for tanks, it is greatly less so for Eastern Asian vehicles, another example being the Type 10, which also does not have significant side nor top armour despite being classified as a 5th gen. vehicle. Furthermore, with relation to the cannon, it is to be noted that the mount was designed with the purpose of upgrading the cannon to 140mm standard that was being developed by Rheinmentall at the time when needed, with very few modifications, hence there being no need for a minor gun upgrade as of now.
While when it's time to battle inside pyongyang...
@@luket1085 They'll just call america to bomb pyongyang flat again.
@@EcchiRevenge and it will still be a repeat of Stalingrad or Grozny
@@luket1085 Good, they deserve it.
I want some of what you're smoking
If it can beat Arjun, then it has no problem.
This is the true modern standard
Arjun is invincible, what are you talking about?
A hilux with ATGM can even beat Arjun
Arjun had gone through major upgrades recently and the army is in the decision to order Arjun. With new sabot projectile being designed by oshcrop. And the camera sight is also re-enforced!-source aero India 2019 (Indian army is not dumb to order or even test a tank with major armour weakness know that first)
www.timesnownews.com/india/article/army-yet-to-approve-upgraded-arjun-mark-1a-all-you-need-to-know-about-indias-most-powerful-desi-tank/694232
@@Oombu008 ah yes the mk2 apfsds with 500mm of pen
“No purchase necessary!”
*laughs in microtransactions*
we're talking about war thunder here, as a f2p player I don't feel those who pay have any advantages against f2p players in battle, in this game skill is what matters.
@@thephoenix6673 *laughs in harrier gr1*
@@DangerousSkyFel0n like Ka-50 when it was first introduced, it'll be balanced eventually, always happens in top tier.
@@thephoenix6673 there will always be p2w vehicles
€75 for premium package. "Micro"transaction.
Thing is. These tanks and their excellent ifv's are overkill against North Korean armoured
My cousin serves in the Korean armed forces, he says it's a blast when these things blast by. I'm kinda jealous of him sometimes
They're easy target for infantry/guerrillas because of the many weak spots in the armor. Besides, the new formidable NK armor presented at the recently held parade leaves nothing to be desired, being perfectly able to knock out K2BP from afar.
@@EduardoW-v7i lol, you know the north Korean armed forces are decades behind, right?
The K2 in its current Form exists because there is no need to upgrade it further, because there is no reason for it. Korea has one enemy, that's the north, which is far from a real threat with its armed forces. The only thing that makes North Korea a threat are nuclear weapons and fanatics. The Korean Air force is superior, the navy and the ground forces too.
@@EduardoW-v7i "formidable" LMAO
@@EduardoW-v7i FORMIDABLE NK ARMOR! Ahaha ok, well tbf you are right about the guerrilla warfare because NK received some newer AT systems from China and Russia but also the only thing formidable about the NK tanks is the fact they have lots of ERA on their tanks which im assuming is to stop Korean F-15s from taking out multiple tank columns
RedEffect, I wrote an article about the K2 in National Interest magazine and the War is Boring blog. You probably read my article. Anyways, the reason why many tanks have strong side armor is to protect them against attacks on the flank. This is more of an issue in fighting around open country and in urban warfare. It's pretty clear that the Koreans made some engineering choices and compromises given their unique circumstances.
Korea is mountainous and thus fighting in open country is going to be very rare. So, a choice was made to make the front very strong but the sides rather weak. This is because Koreans know where the tanks will be coming from and can just have tanks ready to encounter the attacker, thus frontal protection with this tactic in mind was key. For example, the active and modular suspension can make it kneel in a trench and lower the target profile of its hull and turret in a "hull down" position inside a prepared tank entrenchment.
Given Korea's mountainous terrain a high power to weight ratio was important, so tonnage was to be kept to a minimum. At barely 55 tons, this is probably one of the lighter modern main battle tanks of Western aligned countries, excluding the Japanese Type 10 (which has even less armor, sacrificed for mobility as Japanese roads are not designed for vehicles much heavier than 40 tons). However, it doesn't make sacrifices in terms of fire power, mobility and frontal protection. It is actually more mobile than most other modern Western aligned MBTs, having a much higher power-to-weight ratio than the Leo2A6, M1A2, Challenger 2, etc. Again, the Koreans need to move this thing up and down hills and mountains as quickly as possible.
The key to the K2's lower curb weight but not many compromises on anything else is the autoloader. One thing the Koreans learned from having 40 T-80Us is that the autoloader provides numerous advantages. Having an autoloader can make a tank smaller. A human loader needs to stand up to do his job. He also needs room to swing ammunition from the ammo storage to the gun's breech. That cascades into numerous design compromises. For example, tanks with a human loader are generally taller, longer and heavier. The Koreans tend to do this a lot. Take numerous design elements and make hybrid solutions. Their main infantry assault rifle, for example, has been called an AK piston married with an M-16 chamber and an FN style body.
Now, why does the K2 that's being offered to Poland different? Well, the terrain of Poland is totally different than Korea's. Poland is much flatter, first of all, and a more mobile style of warfare can be practice in Poland. Hence, greater side armor is necessary. In terms of the APS, or active protection system, it was found that quite a few modifications of the original K2 need to be done in order to incorporate the native APS. So, for budgetary reasons this isn't being incorporated into the existing fleet of K2s, at least not right now. But since the Polish tank, if it is ordered and manufactured, will incorporate the APS from the very beginning, incorporating it will be much cheaper.
Regarding your comment that the gun is now a bit underpowered, underpowered vs. who? Active and in service tanks in both the West and the East are L55 120mm (Leo2A6 and M1A2) and 125mm for Russian and Chinese tanks. However, the K2 can sport a larger gun. It was actually designed, from the ground up, to be able to use the experimental Rheinmetall 140mm gun. I believe the Leo2A7 will have a 135mm gun, which can be fitted into the K2 as well, if they decide to do so. Now, with a bigger gun the number of rounds a tank can store inside will go down somewhat. So, bear that in mind. It's all a compromise at the end of the day.
Lastly, it's too bad your first video on the K2 is so nitpicky instead of focusing on both pluses and minuses. Perhaps you were having a bad day, I don't know. The design of every tank one must put geography and the enemy it will encounter into consideration and I don't think you did that. Perhaps you can put out another video of the K2 that will be fairer. Cheers!
Edward Kim problem with the K2 is how sophisticated it is. It will definitely fare worse in a high attrition low supply environment than the K1 or the M1 abrams of American troops that would be fighting in Korea in the event of renewed hostilities. Sure it may be a good tank in perfect situations, plus the auto loader also has a down side. An auto loader malfunction just means longer loading than loading in a tank with manual reloading.
@@goforbroke4428 Uh... the M1 is the worst logistical hog as it burns way more fuel than a diesel engine. It's the M1 that needs a better supply environment. Also, you talk about the disadvantages of an autoloader, but what about the advantages? The advantages are many... including smaller size and weight. The K2 is 10 tons lighter than the M1A2 and the Leo2A6, has one road wheel less and is nearly 2 feet shorter. NATO tanks with manual loader needs height for a standing human loader, thus higher profile. Reliability? Highly reliable as it uses the bustle autoloader, not the carousel auto loader of Soviet/Russian tanks. The French and Japanese also use the bustle autoloader.
@@edwardkim8972 I am well aware of the abrams disadvantage in that it has a turbine engine, which is a jet fuel burning bitch. But there comes a point where too much technology in a piece of equipment is detrimental, the ROK army won’t be fighting just the North Koreans. As soon as the PLA gets involved in hostilities on the Korean Peninsula, the advantages of the K2 will diminish due to almost guaranteed attrition. From what I have seen, the K2 is not suitable to be mass produced. Also, the suspension that can change the way the tank sits is a disadvantage in itself, from what I have heard those types of suspension can be very finicky and not as easy to maintain as a conventional torsion bar suspension system such as what the abrams and other western tanks possess. I never made the position that the abrams is great logistically either, it’s an over engineered overcomplicated piece of computerized trash. The k1 is still an excellent tank, and possesses what is needed to fight in a mechanized operation in Korea. The k2 is just too much, especially when most of the ROK army is leg infantry with quite a few units possessing outdated equipment.
@@goforbroke4428 uh... the South Korean K1 has the same suspension too? And the South Koreans have over 2k K1s? It's not hard to maintain.
The K2 is kinda made for the export market. 70% of the components for the K1 are imported thus South Korea cannot export it. With the exception of the transmission, most major components of the K2 are domestically produced. Once the transmission is figured out, no export restrictions on the K2.
Oh, and the strategy is to have the K1 do most of the fighting if it's the North Koreans. The K1s aren't going anywhere.
@@edwardkim8972 I am aware of the K1 having the same suspension, but it is simpler in design as a whole. That’s my point, an older simpler tank is still a good one. And large numbers of them is even better. The ROK army is a large army, and it could hold its own in a war against the North Koreans and maybe even the Chinese.
Needs a RCWS. No need to expose tank crew to fire the MG then. That’s important as the Tank has just 3 crew.
K2 PL also solved that problem, Altay also has RCWS, so I don't think it's any problem for Korea, but they seem not to care.
CROWS only needed when fighting in urban area. In the field, you don't really need it.
Having RCWS restricts the vision of the crew, making them rely on sensors and optics, which is good, but become problematic when the system is broken or damaged. The open top machine gun allows for more awareness for the crew, which would allow the tank to engage better. Plus, the argument that the RCWS leaves the crew safer is not a good argument, since modern tank warfare usually takes place in long ranges the RCWS will not protect its crew against tank shells and missles. The m1a2 and the challenger still uses open top machine guns, but I do think adding a shield would be better.
@@randombosniak8986 they have plan to add RCWS later.
Main Problem : They don't have speakers blasting Kpop 24/7.
But kpop will cause cancer for the tank's crew before anyone else
@@someboi4535A mandatory plastic surgery would make them immune to that effect.
Not every Korean likes Kpop lol
@@DefinitelyNotEmma Yeah, some likes Kim Jong Un more.
@Kaiser because people in the west love crap, that's why for example Hollywood is still in business and Hip-Hop popular
The problem pointed out in the video above is a common problem for all tanks around the world... the side armor and the top armor are weak in defense of any vehicle...
No, that's not true at all. Some tanks actually have very thick side armor with extra additional add-on armor protection for enhanced side protection
For example Abrams TUSK and British Challenger 2 (it has one of the best side protection) but also some Leopard 2 variants (Leopard Revolution used in Indonesia and SIngapore)
And also the French Leclerc AZUR variant. Even the Russian T72, T80 and T90 have much thicker armor on the sides on turret and hull.
So it is possible to give tanks a little bit better side protection, which shows how vulnerable the K2 really is, and that is a very big problem.
@@xAlexTobiasxBAbrams TUSK is an improvement kit aimed at street warfare in the Middle East. In open areas and urban areas, the side is relatively likely to be exposed to the enemy, so reactive armors have been added to the side.
On the other hand, since K2 assumed and designed for combat in mountainous areas, and North Korea is weak on detection, it is less likely to expose sides to enemies. Therefore, K2 chose mobility while lowering the weight to 55 tons.
@@annonE22 The sides (and rear, roof, bottom) of a tank are always at risk to be exposed to the enemy, doesn't matter what terrain or environment. So that's not an excuse. The front of the tank only makes 10% of the tanks surface area, the remaining 90% are literally vulnerable at all times.
Only APS active protection system) can provide reliable defence against missiles and RPGs, and even then it's still vulnerable to drones, mines and artillery...
@@xAlexTobiasxB Thank you for sharing additional insights about the K-2 tank. It's true that side protection can be a challenge, and during the K-2's development, weight restrictions may have limited some aspects of its armor. However, South Korea's military strength, including a substantial infantry force, can provide crucial support and cover for the tanks. This synergy between mechanized infantry and tanks can enhance their overall safety.
The Leclerc Azur and M1A1 TUSK mentioned above are upgraded kits, and they are not appropriate to be compared with K-2. It's essential to note that South Korea's ongoing state of war can result in a higher level of secrecy and potential advancements in their tank technology, including the K-2. The K-2 is relatively new tank so there are lots of potentials of improvements, including the ongoing development of Explosive Reactive Armor (ERA) and the availability of Active Protection Systems (APS), which, while developed and manufactured, might not be installed yet due to concerns about nearby infantry.
I understand that your intention was to provide more accurate information, and I appreciate that. Im sorry if my reply offended you.
(written by translator so there might be something wrong. sorry!)
4:14 did the smoke gernade just fail?
Yes xd
Damn
Yeah
dud, things like that happen in real life.
If this was Arjun defender he would say it was a “tactically delayed fuse module” working the way it should.
K2 have developed its own powerpack a little over year ago.
The old issues mentioned here, yes, it's an old issues now lives in the past.
Considering how mediocre NK's tank armor or other protective measures are, it is safe to say that SK's tank cannon will work regardless. The downside is that said cannon, regardless of the upgrades, may not be able to penetrate Kim's thicc armor layer
Glorious leader will use his chubby belly to shield all Glorious Korean People from the shells of the evil imperialists! Dear Leader's love for his people is only surpassed by the effective armor THICCness of his belly rolls! -North Korean State TV in the near future.
I mean you are very, very fond of adding ERA everywhere
It’s a cheap and easy solution, especially ERA that can degrade sabots. Redesigning turrets and hulls and or creating composite armor packages are expensive and time intensive tasks, slapping on some era bricks is cheap and easy and generally pretty effective.
@@92HazelMocha
Constructing an effective ERA isn't easy at all and you still have to have really good composite armor below the ERA.
@@matovicmmilan That’s definitely true, but it’s easier to add on era than it is to construct a new tank entirely.
@@92HazelMocha
That decision is the hardest and even the countries with a strong heavy industry do it every 30 or so years! I also like the option of modular composites that could in time be changed with the more advanced ones but that's not easy especially within the turret.
yes this guy must have ERA attached on his bedroom door
Last time i was here the m84 was still good for modern warfare
All modern MBT's side protection are inadequate. Also the K2 is designed to be able to take on multiple tanks in a hull down concealed position. She was designed to be specifically a mobile defensive tank that can accurately engage at long distances being able to hull down and shoot an scoot.
The days of Fulda gap style tank bum rush is over. The North Koreans can try that but ATGMs, helos, air strikes and well emplaced tanks with highly accurate precision fire and almost 100 % one shot one kill/immobilization/neutralization means that even a large division or divisions of tanks can be decimated with some ease.
just like all tanks, i think these kinds of issuses would be fixed in time, thankfully there is no real rush
Oh you sweet summer child, if only you knew what was gonna happen in the next 5 years...
@@jesusofbullets do you know? Oh mighty prophet
@@pislarustefan5009he’s right🥲
No real rush until suddently there is.
Weak Armor is more for the Korean model because we have a lot of mountains however optional armor can be equipped for international models
The front has RHA of 800-900mm and the sides have RHA of 300-400mm. So, frontal armor is right up there. Side armor is better than I thought.
@@edwardkim8972 the 300~400 mm for the sides are only with the additional ERA blocks which is only effective against some old RPGs
but any modern RPG and Missile (costing around 100 k) can easilly destroy this 6 million dollar expensive tank, unless it gets APS soon
@@xAlexTobiasxB not modern, just tandem RPGs, though, most modern rpgs are tandem and most old rpgs arent tandem
@@kyizelma
yeah that's exactly the point
i remember before he died, ppl was makin memes callin him *crack* panther
Who died?
Lol
did u not read my comment? *he*
@@m1a1abrams3 mmm still don't know
@@triatheraider1612 pink floid
They did develop hard kill active protection system, but put off its adoption for two reason. 1) Hard kill detonation can hurt infantry soldiers near by. 2) Current hard kill technology is not yet good enough or mature enough for general adoption, so waiting for new technology to mature.
On regarding some lacking armor spots, they does not rely solely on heavy armor for survival. They prefer lighter weight for agility and mountain climbing capability. Other features they prefer are lower profile for low observability and good sight and fire control with sophisticated electronics and sensors. It is mix of Western tank doctrine and Russian doctrine. Some says it is Russian tank made with Western technology.
That's nonsnse and bad excuses. We have already been on the moon. Israel is using APS since 2012 very effectively on the Merkava tank. The technology is more than mature enough.
Says the anime fan😂
Still probably the most flexible and well rounded tank on earth right now, at least the best platform due to its modularity and smart compartmentalization/weight distribution, its a Tank that will likely age really well. Even Norway is considering replacing our Leopard 2 tanks with these tanks, it would be perfect for Norway due to our many hills and mountainous terrain. Its like a hybrid between everything that is great about the Abrams, Leopard 2, Type 10 and Leclerc.
Don't forget the terrain of Korea is massive hills and valleys. The hard kill APS would be so useful.
5:00 - K2PL is officially dead. Poland goes for baseline K2 'cause timeline!'. However - relative simplicity allows to have large number fielded at less eye-watering costs.
Here are some added intrigue.
Norway recently settled on their 8 year plan Military budget.
And on the top of the budget as the most urgent is new MBT and armored vehicles.
They are currently doing a evaluation between the Leopard 2A7 vs K2 Black Panther.
They have recently aquired the K9 Thunder Mobile Artillery from south korea aswell as a big military Support vessel for the navy KNM Maud.
You also forgot to mention the K2 exclusive ammo, that should compensate the guns lack of firepower.
The Smart Top Attack Munition. Which penetrates a tanks top armor, and few if not no tank has a significant amount of top armor.
Now if the K2 Black Panther is chosen as the new Norwegian MBT.
Then definatly there is more to it than on what public gets to know. (Which obviously there is, alot of info is classified, having served and worked with alot of classified military information. One cant really take account armor thiccness alone. But also its composition and design
And it be interesting to see the Norwegian version of the K2.
No one buys K2.
@@capacsis well, Turkey did by licensing Altay. Altay is a heavily modified (probably up-armored) version of the K-2
K2 could use 120mm NATO shell, depends on the user i guess.
@@capacsis Poland just announced 250 k2 purchase
South Korean military: *WRITE THAT DOWN!!!*
Write what down? You think they don't know about their transmission problem?
@@randombosniak8986 based on the video, its obvious
@@mr.laughington5740 It's obvious what?
@@coreysuh6502 did you watch the video?
Who do you work for_
The transmission is not a problem, its cost (and the possible export control) of the German product is. To get around it, a Korean company called S&T has also developed the transmission years ago, but it was not adapted by the Korean Army citing that it did not meet its durability requirement. S&T has been protesting that the way of measuring and KA's unrealistic high requirements are the real problems. Recently, S&T claimed that they were able to make improvements and KA finally agreed to use their products for the next batch production of K2. S&T also claimed that Turkey agreed to buy the same for their Altai MBT (licensed K2 technology).
They want to keep the weight as low as reasonably possible, resolving all the issues u mentioned would put it over the threshold.
6:52 a German tank on a double kill 1944 colorized!
Bruh... thats a Leopard. It ain't 1944.
@@EvoSwatch I know that. It's just a joke!
wheraboo
@@TacticalTirpitzle weeaboo
@@CC-dq6ck at least im not fapping to "superior german engineering"
I usually don't stress hearing that a tank may have features 3-7 years behind the curve but using first-gen style ERA sounds like utter madness on a otherwise solid-MBT
It's not really necessary for the main threat of the north Korean ground forces. Unlike for example the US, Korea doesn't have multiple conflicts all over the world with different needs and different threats.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma Still, an upgrade to something closer to Kontakt-5 wouldn't increase the vehicle's weight significantly, but it would substantially increase its protection.
According to Alpha defence Arjun is best tank in Nuclear missiles category.
And here we are in 2022 Poland buys k2 and even has plans for K3Pl in the future program.
The transmission is the main problem stopping Poland from buying the license for K2PL. The Polish Ministry of National Defense announced they want to buy/produce at least 800 new MBTs.
If Koreans can fix their shit, that would be a huge contract for them.
I talked to the representative of hyundai rotem said that the Korean box is already there and has passed the tests. in addition, work on a new powerpack is underway.
@@filipmisko9363
„South Korea’s arms acquisition agency has decided to equip third batch of K2 Black Panther main battle tanks with a German transmission system, a part of the tank’s power pack that includes a locally developed engine.
The decision is a blow to a 15-yearlong effort to replace the German RENK transmission system with an indigenous one, which local industry expected would pave the way for exporting the tank.
The Defense Acquisition Program Administration, or DAPA, made the decision Nov. 25 during a committee meeting led by Defense Minister Suh Wook, ahead of mass production of 50 more K2 tanks.“
www.defensenews.com/industry/techwatch/2020/11/30/south-koreas-k2-tank-export-plans-suffer-under-transmission-failure/
Only three weeks ago - 25. of November - DAPA ( South Korea’s defence procurement Agency) declared that the Korean developed transmission failed in durability tests. So whatever your source at Hyundai Rotem told you is bogus!
My cousin was an M1 Abrams Driver assigned at the 39th parallel. He got discharged for going $30,000 in detb on drunky whores and local shops. He constantly got reprimanded for being a slob and unkempt. He accidentally decapitated a fellow soldier after not following procedure. Turned the turret and someone had their head sticking out. My cousin was the driver and was supposed to be the only one sticking his head out that hole but still decapitated a Soldier breaking the rules. Sticking his head through the driver's hole. But my cousin was supposed to announce he was turning the turret. All that together got him discharged. He was very lucky he didn't go to military prison.
My dad joined the Navy during Vietnam. He fell through all the cracks and didn't learn anything. When he got his assignment on ship guns. He shot down two American Jets. As soon as he saw something on the radar he just started shooting. I think he was the one that shot down the first American jets in Vietnam, through friendly fire.
2:25 o you really would want to rely on luck? yes! Entire war tactics is based on ratios of firepower, attrition equations, propbabaility of destruction of one type versus another. This is how you fight wars.
If war thunder Dev add Korean tech tree would be nice.
Why is a mechanical part like a transmission so hard to replicate even when you have access to the German reference design?
It is not that simple. It is illegal to produce an exact copy of what other company is making (of course, some companies don't care about that), if you want to do that, you need a licence. But having a licence would make it hard for Hyundai Rotem to export K2 to other countries, since that equipment would still be affected by German law, therefore, they need to design a completely original transmission in order not to have any problems with production and export.
@@RedEffectChannel Couldn’t they copy T-72 transmission or something?
@@theodorsebastian4272 T-72 mechanical transmissions are nowhere near sturdy enough to deal with a 1500hp engine, not to mention their rather primitive mechanical steering.
@@RedEffectChannel can u please explain why is it so hard for a country like South Korea to Develop a Tank Engine??🤔🤔🤔
Really convenient for the Germans, that the K2 can't be exported with the german transmission.
Your country can't purchase a K2 due our restrictions?
Why don't get one of our Leopards instead?
I would like to note that the K2 was designed to be able to add ERA in needed locations that the crew sees fit in a frontline situation allowing for customization of the tank. Also, the reason a Korean hard-kill system is cause of the close space of their mountains making the possibility of their own troops being injured or even killed by said system. However, they are upgrading the tank to be able to have a hard-kill installed if need be. To add Hyundai as of me commenting this has stated that they hope to see their own transmission in the K2 by 2025 at the lastest. So I guess your hopes of its problems getting fixed are closer cause it is a REALLY good tank and these upgrades will make it even better. Glad to see my favorite panther is "getting gud" 😂
could you do a video explaining and spotting the problems with the Japanese MBT type 90 or type 10
for what we can see on UA-cam, oil leak(dump) is biggest problem
You need to pay him
Nice try, PLA
I bet the Type 90 and 10 has limited armor due to the required lighter weight, and the type 10 has CVT which is mostly unproven for heavier applications. Unconfirmed but they also seem to lack a remote controlled HMG.
Good tanks, but compromises had to be made to make them support the mountainous area of Japan.
Someone watching in North Korea: "write this down!!!"
This tank is flawless when compared to most mbts u reviewed, especially the arjun and pakistani mbt
How dare you disgrace Arjun aka the best MBT the world has ever seen 🤨
@@Dman1998 lmao
@@Dman1998 Best MBT!?Not only the best tank,It's the best weapon that mankind has created!
@@niki6853 and will ever be created
@@radonsider9692 Balistic missiles are no problem for it!
God damn I didn’t know how questionable the k2’s protection was
It's probably the "still overkill against norks" part that has kept these issues on the backburner. If it's still going to kill a really bad t 55 knock off in an insultingly casual manner, would you really care if its 4 or 6 times better?
I'm not sure how L55 120mm high pressure gun can be inferior to Leo2A6+ or any other tank, is modern Ammo is used. German Rh-120 L55 A1 was more a fix, than upgrade.
"German Rh-120 L55 A1 was more a fix, than upgrade." What do you mean with that?
I think you should revisit this tank, I've heard they got a domestic gun, domestic power pack and transmission now. And have done some interesting things with the suspension. And they have some really interesting ammo options
I think the end of 2023 would be a good time to revisit it, since the Altay MBT just entered serial production this year. ROK's exports of K2 tanks will finish by 2025 and serial production on the K2PL in Poland begins in 2026.
@@realtalk6195 Also took the L in Norway against the other kitty.
Would love to see you take a look at the Strv 122b+ and the differences between it and its german counterpart at some point!
Would any MBTs survive from a side attack though?
No transmission in a tank? Are you a nut?
Only problem it has...it’s no T-80
Wasn't the T-80 completely annihilated in the Chechnya campaign?
@@DefinitelyNotEmma Actually South Korea operates many T-80s
War in the narrow Korean peninsula is either forward or reverse, with hills and mountains all around you. There isn't any flank to worry about besides some sneaky random infantry AT weapons, thus less need for side armor.
Thanks for the honest review.
Is there a tank that isn’t vulnerable from the side?
*South Korean tank K2 was developed to the South Korean army to fight with COMMIES in the mountain terrains of the Korean Peninsula. So, side protection was not an issue and a very important thing that time !!!!*
For the army of the Republic of Poland - it could be a serious problem, because of the variety of the terrains, but mostly FLAT continental with rivers. So, K2-PL definitely required to do something serious with a side protection, so Koreans did it. We are waiting to build a real working prototypes as soon as possible !!!!
*Moreover, fully Korean made transmission, would be appreciated, and I think that South Korean Hyundai Industries are definitely capable to develop a good engine-transmission POWER PACK !!!! Just give them a credit and a little time more !!!! They are already working under pressure, because of the tanks for their own army, for Turks, and for the future Polish cooperation in development and fully scaled production of the K2-PL in Poland, to be manufactured under the SK license !!!!*
My understanding is the that Polish Wilk program has been put on hold since they bought 250 M1A3 SEPs from America. Those M1A3 SEPs will replace the antiquated T-72s and Twardy tanks.
Apparently, the Wilks will replace the over 20 year old Leo2A5s in Polish inventory?
bro there is a transmission
Nah really 😱😱😱😱💀💀💀
Safe the T-80
I don't understand
@@Frenchdefense9404 SK have T-80U
@@НиколайСмирнов-с7х who SK?
@@НиколайСмирнов-с7х South Korea?
@@Frenchdefense9404 "South Korea" ofc
What i really like about k2 is that it can be a SPG and can fire KSTAM with 8km of range 👍
but why?
And the sub ammunitions of the KSTAM II projectile are the same as the ones from the German SMArt 155 artillery round! So no export without German permission.
„KSTAM-II was co-developed by South Korea and Germany's Diehl Corporation. The KSTAM-II is launched from the 120 mm L55 main guns mounted on the K2 Black Panther main battle tanks that are to be fielded by the South Korean military, and will be used for attacking targets, stationary or moving, that are hidden behind obstacles. It is similar to the SMArt 155.“
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSTAM
@@markschoning5581 wrong ktasm was built off American xm943 staff round but very similiar to the other rounds because it is not an arcing round but a straight fly over attacking downward round and it does not have flying seekers but distance and magnetic feelers kind of like tow 2 aero.
@@jeffreyprezalar220
No KSTAM II stands for Koren smart top attack munition, and is using the same type of sub ammunition as the German SMArt 155 artillery round! What you are talking about is the KSTAM I round!
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KSTAM
k2의 최대 사거리는 10km입니다.
1. ERA is not a problem, it has their own KAPS and MAWS system and hard kill system which gives much more than enough protections against RPGs, etc.
2. K2 can be refitted with 140mm gun, so it still beats the current German one.
3. Local transmission will be developed ultimately, so that's not a problem with tank either. More like issue with exporting overseas.
2. You know that you are talking yet again about a German gun do you? The 140mm is still RHM and like the K2 all NATO tanks who use the RHM 120mm could be upgraded but need new turrets and the same conclusion was conducted for the K2. 3. Same again planed but still not there...
@@Vanadium The gun is made by Hyundai, not German made. 140mm is just a hypothetical, and Koreans can make it if they wanted too.
@@mosesyi5523
Keep dreaming, you Kims did not even develop the transmission till now. Germany makes better tanks than you.
😀
@@mosesyi5523
Hyundai can make cars but a 140mm gun is something completely different. Keep dreaming, Kim.
@@ElJackale It's reality, not a dream. Hyundai makes 120mm guns, I am sure they can make 140mm as well. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CN08_120_mm_gun
한국 국방부의 독트린이 전차보다
아파치 같은 헬기가 더 중요하다고 생각해서
k2의 예산으로 아파치 가디언을 사는중이죠.
북한을 상대로 k2는 오버킬이기때문에 대량의 기갑차량을 파괴할 수 있는 헬기를 구매하는중.
그래서 전차 개량 사업 역시 k2위주가 아니라 k1계열을 업그레이드 하는중이구요.
i see redeffect video. i grab food and i click like :)
South Korea designed its tank against the North Korean invasion. This also explains why the Poland version has better armor than SK ones.
If your tank is designed for a certain doctrine, then it is not a surprise if it appears to be weak in a certain area that employs a different doctrine.
Red effect the picture you showed of the k2 black panther south korea has offered to Poland. Has 7 road wheels instead of 6 road wheels the basic k2 has. So this means there probably a new k2 black panther in the works. Dont forget that south Koreas neighbors north korea and China dont have a better tank than them. So the k2 black panther would win against all of north koreas tanks and most likely would beat any Chinese tanks.
Turkish ALTAY is based on K2 and has 7 wheels too.
Yes, Both the Wolf and the Altay has 7 wheels because the tanks are longer. They are longer because both don't have autoloaders.
@@edwardkim8972 K2PL will be having autoloader
@@kebuszek3021 yes I know that. My original comment is over a year old.
Nice point you got there its lack of side armor and foreign transmission. But the point of ROKA's armor maneuver was "First to hit, Do Not Detected." so its win win by the lose side armor to lower weight and great transmission to maneuver. Anyway, always good video with nice infor. Thanks Redeffect!
Update video about K2PL would be appreciated
RedEffect can you please do a video on the Battle of Grozny.
For the possible enemy for the tank and what type of terrain it are operating in, the tank is totally fine. Building a tank is full of compromises.
But when are you going to upload a video of you playing War Thunder ?
every tank in this world has strong points and weak points ...everyone gangsta with tanks until
*A-10 Thunderbolt* appear....Brrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrpppp
A-10 real gangsta untill the enemy has air superiority fighters
I'm korean and we have a lot of corruption inside the defense industry(?)
Usb costs about 100 usd, apc's engine going off on road and unable to start the engine again, armored car's wheels dismantling on road, helicopter's door and main rotor dismantling mid flight etc so pretty sure that tank is fucked up in other ways too
My cousin serves in the military and although I've heard some things I've never heard that helicopter rotors dismantle mid air lol
@@DefinitelyNotEmma if i remember correctly 5 out of 6 marines including the pilot didn't survived the crash
@@DefinitelyNotEmma i found the video ua-cam.com/video/1qv9qY8DBnk/v-deo.html
@@vodkavodka8903 oh damn, haven't heard of it :/
Poor guys
@@DefinitelyNotEmma yeah it's a shame that the industry is so corrupted to the point that it costs lives
K2 side protection data is highly classified. but poland defence minister maybe know about K2 real armor spec. u know why poland order 1000 k2pl and even 180 k2 original(not K2pl ver) from south korea.
Tactics are different too. M1A2 SEP that Poles will be getting will be in heavy hitting heavy armored brigades. The K2PL will be in lighter mechanized brigades that swing around Russian units and attack in the flanks, so the K2PL will need to be meaningfully lighter than the M1A2 SEPs that the Poles will be getting to fulfill the heavy assault tank role.
redeffect is just youtuber, he don't know. south korea ADD(agency for defence development) adapt K2 tank to super composite armor plate. so actually even base K2 tank with no addition armor can protect RPG 7 isn't it interesting?
Afaik the k2 can be made with a 130mm gun if the customer demands it. There has been talks with norway, and a 130mm option was requested
Interesting, Would you have sources for that?
@@HJDore i'm norwegian and have read some norwegian articles about the norwegian talks about getting the K2, sorry but thats all i got. i also read the norwegian army magazine sometimes, and there was an article about it i think.
the basics of it is that the deal would be that they set up a production line for the K2 here in norway for our tanks, and im not sure if the 130mm was a requirement or a required option so we could switch to it
@@ravener96 It can even mount a 140mm should it be necessary.
It seems like most countries try to cheap-out when developing a new tank even though everybody knows they will have to use that same model for up to 40-50 years (with upgrades ofc).
I have a question, whenever Chinese tanks are mentioned, people always assume they are bad because their information is unspecified or there is little data on them yet when a Korean or Israeli or whatever tank is mentioned with unspecified data, people assume what they are told and assume the tank is good.
Actually tank enthusiasts believe the latest Chinese tanks to be good. It's the North Korean vehicles everybody is mocking.
Maybe the lack of side armor is because they intended or the designers thought since they will be defending the tanks will most likely have their flanks secured. In theory sounds ok but if the enemy breaches the flank the tank and the crew are toast
Also it has literally no side armor which means the k2 has to be directly facing the enemy and even a slight angle will have the sides penned as modern apfsds gives no shits about angles
I mean the K-2 has problems, but it's more than enough for countering North Korean tanks
It's overkill
Bro can you please consider that the mk 2 apfsds that arjun uses has 570 mm pen at 60° 😊
Considering the only 2 neighboring countries that would attempt to actually fight the K2 Blackpanther aka A BEAUTIFUL Tank. Would be North Korea error a joke of tanks. But also China which all I see their tanks as good target practice.
Tho war thunder from my experience gets some things correctish.
Most of it isn't truly Military like due to the lack of communication and the sheer of braindead people because there's no communication due to language barriers only when it doesn't become an issue is from people scouting and those willing to use the map.
problem with playing online games is that theres other people in them. Warthunder, like most other online team based games is basically you vs 16 enemies, and the others on your teams are just blue dots on your minimap that do nothing useful
The Ukraine war has revealed that thick and heavy armor on tanks is not an advantage on the battlefield but a critical weakness. The M1, Leopard, and Challenger tanks could not traverse mountainous terrain, but only the K2 could accomplish this. Additionally, in the Ukraine war, the M1 and Leopard tanks got stuck in the mud due to their heavy weight, forcing their crews to abandon them and flee. This was a point of criticism for the K2 compared to the M1 or Leopard tanks. But it has been proven that modern warfare does not require thick and heavy armor but rather active protection systems capable of actively destroying drones and anti-tank missiles. This is because modern shells, anti-tank missiles, and drones can penetrate even the thickest and heaviest armor. However, the M1 and Leopard tanks are already too heavy to add such active protection systems. In contrast, the K2 can accommodate these systems and is actually planned to be equipped with them in the future. Even the aspect that was considered a disadvantage for the K2 has turned out to be an advantage. Ultimately, the K2 is faster, more accurate, provides a more comfortable driving experience, and is capable of active defense against drones and anti-tank missiles. It can also swiftly navigate through rugged terrain and mud to escape. Additionally, the K2 has an attack method that neither the M1 nor the Leopard possesses: it can use special shells to attack the upper part of enemy tanks from a much greater distance. Furthermore, since all wheels are individually controlled by a computer, it can effectively manage the shocks transmitted to the tank while moving quickly over rough, unpaved battlefield terrain. The K2 also requires a crew of only three, one less than the M1 or Leopard, due to its use of an automatic loading system. For this reason, the K2 can reload using the automatic loading system and fire accurately while moving quickly over rough terrain, which is almost impossible for the M1 and Leopard. In fact, in tests conducted in Romania, the K2 demonstrated a very high hit rate of 90% while moving quickly over unpaved terrain and firing. Of course, the hit rate in a stationary position was close to 100%. Of course, it's an impossible scenario, but if the M1 and Leopard were to engage in combat against the K2, they would not be able to defeat it.
The fact that the U.S. has abandoned its original plan to develop next-generation tanks with thick and heavy armor. And lighter and more mobile tanks like the K2 is very telling. This change underscores that thick and heavy armor is an outdated concept, as revealed by the current Ukraine war. What is needed is not thick and heavy armor, but a system that can directly intercept and destroy or jam drones and anti-tank missiles. And the K2 can achieve that. This is why Poland and Romania chose the K2.
Your comment is Full of missinformation.
To start K2 is not able to deal with drones in anyway that a M1 Abrams or T-72 would not because it uses an machine gun that is manually operate
Then you say its impossible to engage targets on the move as Leopard2 and Abrams, but that is simply incorrect and theres enough footage to show you being wrong. A human loader can easly load even in bump terrain due to the suspension keeping it relatively stable.
Theres more wrong stuff but I won't adress them because too long comment. You really should do a research on it
Also Poland bought Abrams as well, so...
In therms of what the Japanese have made public, how does the type 10s 'super' ammo compare to the DM73? Personally I can't find any information on the capabilities of the type 10 projectile
Good luck with that. If any public information exists it'll be in Japanese. It's probably about equal to the American M829A4 round in terminal performance.
there's nothing super about it. the armor is indeed effective for its weight but that's about it.
@@komradearti9935 is there any source to go with this? I would like to read onto it more.
@@the80386 The question was in regards to the ammo as JSDF claims that it the special ammunition for the type 10 is it's strong suit and can only be fired with type 10's gun.
@@josephahner3031 Japanese it not a problem but even in japanese I cannot find any public sources regarding it's performance
Why are transmissions so difficult to produce for tanks?
You’d think a nation with good car and ship building industry wouldn’t have such an issue with something like a transmission.
Transmission that fits in a mountainous rigid terrain.
Also.... need to move around 55-65 tons as nimbly as a car. The transmission is key for that and the Germans have the best tech right now.
When the "Hitomaru" will be reviewed?
Probably as soon as sources become available. The JGSDF is not sharing information about the tank. Japan is forbidden by law from exporting weapons of war so they're not trying to advertise the tank's capabilities, thus public information is scarce.
İt is clone of Leopard 2.Same engine,same canon
the german engine is being replace with korean engine, the canon is made by hyundai. Israeli Merkava uses German powerpack, so is that a copy?
you know nothing about tanks
Can you please do a Japanese *Type 10* MBT review?!!
Just because you're a weeb he shouldn't
Always fun to see koreans and japanese fight ngl
@@assgrabber5473 the difference is, rooftop Koreans are on our side ._.)
@@DefinitelyNotEmma I'd imagine they'd have plenty of weebs willing to side with them too
@@assgrabber5473 weebs are weak though, since real life is no Anime
what do you think about Norway picking between the K2 and the lepard 2 A7. Is it a done deal the the lepard is better?
Welcome to Nato tank design department, we have:
Mobility
Weak spots
Snake-vision sights
and little billy over there.
... wait, was that everyone? has anybody seen Protection, and Budget?
What? NATO tans have equivalent or better armour to Russians/china
@@crabbyjungle5670 a wise man once said; "just because something is the best, does not imply that it is without flaws."
Edit: Horribly translated, but u prolly got the point
The biggest problem for K2 is the side armor, but the problem is the turret not the chassis.
The side turret for K2 is too thin it can't stop anything. Even if it choose to hull down, an outdated round could still penetrate the side turret from 30 degrees cone, which is the most common engage angles.
As for the luck part you mentioned, yes all modern MBTs have to rely on lucks because no MBTs can immune anything even at front. The best engineers can do is to cover as much as possible but it is impossible to cover everything. Abrams, T series, Leopard, Leclerc, etc. All tanks you can name have weak point even from the front. But K2 should resize the ERA by a bit, which would likely be solved in the K2PL since it would use composite armor instead of ERA.
We always have a lot banter and talk about what "the best tank" is.
Well...I'm a Canadian and our military uses the Leopard II. Our neighbours and friends to the south use the M1A2 Abrams. Both great tanks, but they're not my favourite.
My favourite is the Russian T-90MS.(well...I like them all. They're fascinating machines)
Is that the best tank? Probably not, but what constitutes "the best tank"?
Impossible to say because there are just too many variables to consider.
So why do I like the T-90MS?
Because it's just a really cool looking tank. It's that simple.
Thanks for another great video. You show some interesting plans as reference to what you are talking about in the video. Along with statements made in relation to public statements made by Governments and Manufacturers. Would it be possible to provide reference and bibliography to your source? I am sure people would enjoy the opportunity if inclined to dig further on the work you have done. Again,Thank you.
I want this tank in war thundeeeeer😍😍😍😍
Than they need to introduce a Korean tree though, or add it to the American tree, but they already have enough vehicles
@@DefinitelyNotEmma They would add K2 to Japanese tree more likely.
@@DefinitelyNotEmma is very stupid to add Korea(sud and North) tech tree because Korea have only few ww2 she have more cold war and mbt tank if gaijin add Korea tech tree the br is start in 3.7/4.0 with sherman or t 34
@@aleksaradojicic8114 are you dumb?
You know our history right?
It's like adding polish vehicles to the German tree
@@senzanome5768 as I said, the only other option is the American tree
4:10 One of smoke grenade is failed
I think the tank itself had no weak points. The only weakness that this tank has was its price.
@@o_o-fk7ym OK.
Why should the Export to Poland ( in terms of the Renk Transmission) be a probleme? Poland is a NATO Partner in Arms and not involved in armed conflicts as turkey is. I know that the Leopard 2 is a competitor of the K2 but that should be all.
Japanese tanks when?
You should do a mock battle between the K2 and the Japanese Type 10. I would find that interesting
Type 10 would probably win
@@yellomonky4272 I don't think so...
The K2 is much better protected with similar electronics. The K2 would come out on top. The Type 10 is better suited to taking out Cold War Warsaw Pact tanks, but it doesn't really hold up against an actual MBT.
Yes comrade, I’d choose the T-72 over this any day.
Black Panther says "don't call me Shirley Something"
Armata fanboy obviously.. How is that project going? Is the gun that good, and is it well stabalised?
is the engine the real problem of the K-2, because I kept on hearing some news that since they started building their local version of the MTU MB 873 Ka-501 liquid-cooled V12 twin-turbo diesel engine, there were problems that were encountered and if another update is true, is that Germany' MTU Friedrichshafen GmbH is already helping South Korea with it's engine problem. Well that's what I heard.
Kim Jong Un approves this video.
yes, that's right, unlike Abraham, leopard 2 and l Leclerc. challenge 2 , C1 Ariete don't have blou up panels and they burn like t72
At least arjun have transmission, how can it one of the best mbt 🤣,come on dude
awesome vid as always... keep em coming !