If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can start your claim in just a click without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: www.forthepeople.com/TaskandPurpose?s=86%3A2313
Hod, ambulance chaser ads were the worst part of 1970's & 80's TV. Now UA-cam is doing it, only 99.999% of UA-cam is garbage also. Goggle really does just suck as a company.
The microchip myth is stupid. Why would only US allies and the US themselves be able to make microchips. Its really not hard to make those: By or steal the plans to make the machines to make them. Step 2, build the machine. Step 3 watch the microchips being made as all you need to do is feed the machine with energy and materials.
I'm not that shocked I was waiting for either Russia of China or even both countries to slighly help the DPRK get fairly modern tanks to help keep the balance against what they see as American imperalism
@@Matthew-is7zs Our country's tanks have not launched new products for several years. On the Chinese Internet, we will complain that the Army's tanks are too old compared to the Navy's warships and Air Force aircraft. As for the Russian tanks... at least they're still trying to move in Ukraine, right?
@@dorivaldojunior2254 Kim has the only computer in North Korea. It is only able to play Red Alert 1. He is playing Red Alert 1 to learn how to fight the Western countries. Twin barrel big tank with anti-air missile launcher will win the day.
@@dorivaldojunior2254 , the War Elephant design seems like overkill for an armor vehicle but sure, someone like Kim can dream that up. I can see it possible for mobile artillery, but not for tanks.
on a serious note, i don't know the capabilities of the russian kornet ATGMs, but if it is like Ukraine's Stugna-Ps that can also be used on low flying helicopters, i could see a possible use for them. other than that, they would be more of a liability between cost, additional maintenance, and an exposed weakness on the turret.
I called Kim, he said the ATGM are more cost effective, addresses logistical resupply problems, saves on barrel wear , and to be employed from defensive and commanding heights positions. Also Kim said his tank is loosely based on the Japanese MBT type 10. Kim also said he really likes your show and hopes you come for a visit sometime.
Most modern MBT have that same boxy layout the same as stealth fighters have the save general design features because of the function dictates the form!
@@rustynail6819 We left gear, but we did not leave an Abrams... Given the number of UH60 left behind, do not be suprised a chinese copy of that comes out soon...
They had 9 of them that were apparently able to move under their own power for an entire parade. Say what you will but its still better than the T-14 Armata.
I read that the reason the T-14 actually looked broke down was because the crew had absolutely zero training on it outside turning on and giving gas. Not sure if it's true but read the driver accidentally hit the parking brake and didn't understand why it would not move.. not sure it true but seems kind of believable.
@@markpozsar5785 Because they have a better understanding of NK than me?Because he went there as a Chinese tourist for one day? Because they have tighter trade with NK than the west? Because NK students studies at his school? Why is that irrelevant when it’s factual?
@@alexorehowski3387 I want whatever it is that you're smoking. Russia has lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 5,000 tanks over the course of its illegal invasion of Ukraine. Ukraine has lost a handful of Leopard 2's and at least one Challenger 2.
@@kylerogers175 while also the biggest note not being used by American Troops who have much more extensive training/combat use with said Tanks. Its like watching an amateur gun enthusiast use a m60 vs a highly trainer Marine. The results will be massively different.
Meanwhile the other Korea's k2 can function as a pseudo artillery with smart rounds, and their actual artillery can give the topographer a job every seven seconds
The T-series tanks they have most technical experience with all have the ability to do this, either with manual range tables, or electronic range calculation. The Russians have been doing this for years, and the North Koreans almost certainly have this ability as well.
North Korea also designed a new Wheeled Tank Destroyer also called " M2020/2024 ", it resembles an American Strike IFV / Russian BMP-3 but with a 155mm duel purpose anti-tank / field gun and 4 ATGM systems.
First rule of warfare, NEVER underestimate your opponent. Even if they were made from wood, you should treat them like they are more advanced than yours, until you know for certain it's not.
@@TankboiDeng Yes, i hear myself. I also know lots of situations when the battles and wars were lost solely due to overestimating, like famous ploy of a fortress being defended by a sole musician, or like entire history of Rommel's adventures in Africa.
Chris, your programs are first class in all respects. Your research and analysis are thorough; your presentations very clear, highly informative and yes, entertaining as well. You are one very smart and exceptionally well informed "Mud Soldier." Your contribution to the American people is greatly appreciated by this old soldier. "NEVER Quit", Col. J. P. Kress, USA (Ret.)
This feels a lot like those ricer cars that have a ton of stickers, bolt on chrome exhaust nozzles and huge spoilers, but nothing under the hood but a bare stock engine. Lotsa visuals, but none of it actually does anything.
I was suspect of this when carefully looking at the video clip of the parade. One of the tanks is driving down a smooth parade street, and is bouncing out of time with it's track's beat. For those that don't know a tank can start to bounce if you match the speed of the tank to it's suspension's rebound frequency coupled with the flat sections of the track hitting the pavement at the same time. It's annoying, and drivers can do a one second left - right of the controls to get the track to be offset again so it doesn't happen as badly. But for it to seemingly bounce quicker than the track hitting the pavement causes me to suspect this is another of their cobbled together parade pieces. While the real tanks are kept out at the training fields.
I preordered 5 of these when the Kickstarter was launches. They work well as dimmer/volume switches (Hue & Sonos) and even managed to get a button press to trigger a specific playlist. I got excited about all the more complicated things it might do, but quickly discovered it can't do any of them.
One thing toward the turret - look at the Israeli M60 upgrades, namely Magach 7A and 7C. There is still a cast and rounded turret under that boxy shape with all of the new shape being aplique armor, so there might actually be a rounded cast turret that we know from previous DPRK tanks.
It´s a plausibility. French and israeli did uparm shermans well into the cold war the latin american countries operated the shermans with experimental 60mm high velocty guns,as well as other models well in to the cold war, the reason was that there was large number of them and they were quickly growing obsolet, so they were dirt cheap, and in many cases USA, didn´t even want to get paid for sharing their toys. The 75mm autoloader was a gun inspired by the panther´s gun in terms of ballistic performance. Not only regional refurbishment´s of pattons were made by individual nations, but US arms industry did supply several nato and asian countries with either kit´s or fully refurbished M47´s,M48´s and M60´s during the cold war, meanwhile the soviets were not willing to supply their T-64´s outside the USSR, instead choosing to supply T-54/55,T-62 and T-72 for export´s.
I remember Richard Deutsch of the Farmboorke regiment in Austria allegedly said that Israel and the Brits found a way to inject concrete between the mated pieces. Could be his assumptions were correct? I used to talk to the guy pretty regular but he passed away in 2021. He was a military contractor and kind of a Mentor. He said the UK did that with some obsolete tanks they mothballed for just in case purposes. To me it does sound plausible.
14:25 Note to the editor : Tanks, and guns dont fire the whole bullet, the white part isnt supposed to be there, its just a dart. The white part has the explosives to propell the dart, and it gets ejected back into the tank.
Some UA-camr that defected from north korea states that the parades that feature enormous missile carriers have simple hollow steel tubes made to look like missiles.
@@hotcakesism they do at every single military parade in the world 🤣. What do you think those missiles can just go off? Or maybe North Korea is just more safety conscious than the rest lmao
Yea this tank is real. The latest released footage of the Chonma-2(popularly known as M2020) actually shows us the ammunition it uses, and they are very different from Soviet Ammo.
"A break in the armor would be a weak point" Yeah, well, that is if that *is* armor, and not just a bit of superstructure on top of a normal T62 turret hiding beneath. :P
Bradley has entered the chat. Bradley's main gun actually killed more tanks than tanks have killed tanks. One benefit of the TOW though, is that it has a longer range than the main gun. You can hit the enemy before they're able to hit back.
The TOW is wire guided, correct? If so, how’s it possible to have a wire that is thin enough, spools out fast enough, and knows when to let go of the originating weapon? I mean, how does it work. I understand some submarine torpedoes operate the same way. And for miles, right?
Exactly about the ATGM and why the lack of professionalism of this video didn’t understand that is funny! All Russian MBT beyond the T-62 series have this capability 🤦🏾♂️
@@4411825 I was gonna say the same lol. The question isn't why a tank has an atgm. Spoiler alert many tanks around the world have atgms on it that's not the problem. If these are top attack atgms then they're actually useful. Problem with a main gun fired atgm or shell is that it has to go through armour. Top down attack missiles... don't. I don't think this guy knows much about tank weapons. As for it being on a launcher. Technically makes it more versatile. Like it can at theory kill a tank with the atgm then follow up with a shot from the main gun. The atgm is a guaranteed hit essentially but the gun can still deviate. also the talk about a grenade launcher being on top instead of a 50 cal. Yeah. That's pretty obvious why you'd want that lol. The whole point of the 50 cal was to take out armoured vehicles and these days just light armoured vehicles. However how useful that actually is compared to a normal machine gun and more importantly, a fully automatic grenade launcher that can fire dual purpose rounds for anti armour and anti infantry... yeah a grenade launcher is a bit more useful. Israel already uses them. So does the US but the US doesn't mount them on tanks. Not that it makes much sense to me because if you're forced into an urban environment an automatic grenade launcher is hands down more effective than a main gun, coax or 50 cal. Whatever though.
The thing about the weaker armor on the roof: they could always just place a cope cage on top of it like Russia is doing. If WWIII were to ever happen and conflict did happen in the Korean Peninsula it would be very interesting to see the cope cages attached to North Korean tanks, or maybe even the North Korean equivalent to Russia’s turtle tanks.
Like everything else the engines are probably provided by China and as well tuned for climate and environment as is all the junk they produce. Being all speculation from what I know if it is a diesel engine top range would be about 60 to 75 miles if that. One can clearly see by the things profile there is no spare fuel spaces on the thing. Not even a tool compartment either by appearances I make that subjective statement. Part of the height of the Abrams is the fuel tank under it. Otherwise if would look a lot like that 2020 abortion on treads. Being made in NK that produces next to nothing mechanical the hydraulic systems are probably the worst of their kind as far as surviving diff climates and the engines surviving diff blends of fuels. Thee epitome of the reasons Russian tanks ain't so popular in South America. Mexico had quite a few T34s and T72s. Over the years they just stopped running because of lousy fuels. Most South American truck drivers fill up in the USA and take reserves back. I have noticed quite a few trucks going back and forth over border with extra saddle tanks on em even 100 gallon main fuel tanks for just such purposes.
As long as you don't plan to use them in action, they can be as fancy and look as fierce as you want. All they need is to look shiny during the parades.
Playing devil's advocate regarding the ATGM's: As mentioned, tank on tank combat is relatively rare. Having a couple of ATGMs can allow the tank to carry more HE rounds and use the expensive ATGMs for other tanks (though probably still carrying sabot, only less of them). ATGMs are quieter and harder to spot where they are fired from, and can fire from longer ranges, not to mention may hit other tanks behind cover with a top attack (assuming the missile has the capability). They might also make sense if used against other tanks with active protection, allowing a quick double tap ATGM+Sabot in an attempt to defeat the APS (depending on the APS, this may or may not be effective). ATGMs can also be used against low flying aircraft, giving the tank limited AA capability. I think ATGMs can make sense on MBT's if they are used sparingly for those niche cases. With this in mind, awkward reloading of the missiles is not such a big deal, as they can fall back to SABOT from the main cannon if they expend both missiles in combat.
Increased HE complement was my first thought as well. The other very valid reason to add missiles is if the gun lacks in long range precision. Might be the sights, firecontrol system or the gun barrel, but either way a missile would solve that problem, leaving the shorter range engagements to the gun. A third reason is if NK has problems producing long rod APFSDS capable of reliably punch through modern armour, thus limiting them to HEAT rounds that are notoriously difficult to use at long range due to their slower speed and thus long travel times (which was the reason Soviet Union dabbled in gun launched missiles to begin with).
@@Taskandpurpose could also be like the 75mm B-25 guns (Military Aviation History put up a video recently), solid reasons and flawless solution but in the end the application was so limited that it in hindsight was a waste of time and resources.
The ATGMs could also allow for engaging targets at a wider depression/elevation range than the main gun, which is relevant in the very hilly Korean peninsula.
There's a reason we use a six-wheel configuration or an even number configuration on the bottom of a tank. It's the pivot point. If you have a wheel their you drop hard but if you have a gap in between them it adds a cushion in the track that allows the vehicle to pivot a lot softer. As someone that deals with a tractor loader every day I can tell you there's a huge difference in wear and tear as well as operation. Sometimes that little bit of cushioning in between two rollers can be the thing that can keep you from flipping. Tanks are a lot heavier and their noses drop a lot harder.
Chris, I’d watch your videos even if I were blind. Besides the information, you have a viciously hilarious and increasingly subtle sense of humor that makes me look forward to every posts. Even if you have others to help do research, only you could pull off that delivery.
They probably mounted a slot for an APS just so that when other countries ask where their armour is they can say "an APS goes there, we just don't have the APS. There's armour underneath there though." "How much armour?" "I'm late for school and my dog ate my homework" "How much armour is under that APS slot?" "Byeeeeee!"
@@Lurch-Botyou do realise how modern armour works do you? Composite armour is a sandwhich. you have a baseplate and an outer plate, at times there is a middle plate. All of those are traditional facehardened steel. Inbetween you have layers of composite materials stacked and angled. It is 100% possible to have holes in that stack for mounting of systems. And every tank using such a system on its turret has done just that. Optics are all mounted in exactly that way.
@@cryhavocandletslipthedogso1873 oh, your problem is that you go with that as "armour" but no modern mbt uses it as armour. it is the material used to sourround armour and guard it. All steel plates are either face hardened or just hardened depending on the quality, it does not really matter. Lighter vehicles use aluminium for the same purpose. Composite armour is the mix of it all but it needs a frame and that frame is still usually steel. Exact composition remain a secret. It would make sense that only one plate is treated specially while the internal one is softer on purpose to reduce spalling, but again most people will probably never know. I donˋt know for the M1A2 or leo 2, but the T72s use(d?) face hardeing on their upper front plate with the composit materials behind it in a sligtly milder angle than the front plate. but the exact material really does not matter to my point. it is just a shell meant to cover the composite armour inside, which is usually multiple slates of ceramic and other materials arranged in a specific form to increase protection.
I have a feeling it’s just like a flint stones contraption where they have like a bunch of men running on a treadmill to power it and everything is just sheet metal
It is possible that the ATGM launcher was added so that it could achieve standoff with potential enemies. ATGM’s usually have longer range than a tank’s main gun, so standoff would be possible with that weapon system.
Most missiles will have ranges of about 3.5-4km. Most modern APFSDS fired from western MBTs should be able to deal with Russian tanks from 3+km away with their modern anti-era tips, so the distances are actually somewhat similar, if we consider the armor to be on similar level for the mbt2020. European countries are also installing new fire and forget ATGMs on their IFVs with range of 5+km like the AKERON and spike missiles, which would be the bane of tanks on long range engagements. So while the ATGM might look like a good idea on paper, I think it’s uses are still pretty limited.
@@vizender Smoothbore guns using fin-stabilized ammunition aren't as accurate as rifled barrels using spin-stabilized ammunition like British 120mm HESH. So, over longer ranges of 4km or more, smoothbores aren't especially accurate, not to mention that you need to wait 2 seconds for a 120mm APFSDS round from M1 Abrams to hit a target 5km away which will likely miss a target going at high speed over rough terrain, while ATGM can constantly update trajectory and thus it's plausible to hit even slow airborne targets like helicopters or low flying drones which is why you got smart guided munition on modern tanks like Israeli Merkva MK4 or South Korean K2, not to mention beyond visual range wire-guided missiles on IFVs like latest versions of CV90 with Trophy APS that can kill your fancy but obsolete M1A2 Abrams without active ballistic protection from behind a hill by top attack or even by an insurgent using cheap modified civilian drone...
@@IonorRea France advertise that they can hit a target moving at over 40ph when they themselves move at that speed over 2km away. From interviews of crew commander they also claim that, with an APFSDS they are able to hit in an area of a disk with a diameter of about 50cm from 4km away. Modern FCS and rods can still be very precise at such distances
It’s a good point ! Personally I don’t think ranges over 100km are likely in Korea geography , it’s not the desert . Not sure you’d need more range there , maybe in Iraq geography .
But what is the point of anything long range in a country like North Korea which is mostly rough mountains with steep sided winding valleys? To use range they would need to place the tanks on the mountain peaks which would leave them as sitting ducks.
It is possible that their tank's main gun is not capable of firing ATGMs and they have to put an ATGM launcher from the outside, the best way to fix this problem is to not rush your tank production and actually just make a better gun.
Yeah...Only problem being that is a 2A46 derivative, which CAN shoot TGMs. Having an additional bolt-on ATGM system, which is a Kornet-type laser-guided launcher which is capable of HE-VT Anti-Air capabilities, Thermobaric Warhead capabilities, Tandem AT capabilities on a range from 5 to 10 km....That gives you a lot more capabilities while keeping it relatively cheap. Also, before you talk about things being "jury-rigged" and "poor", take a look on the Ukraine front and what got the Leopard, the Abrams, the T-s. The West laughed at "cope-cages mhahaha copium so hard ruzzia lose" and then what? Everyone started doing it, what do you know.
External ATGM's don't have limitation of being squized through the barrel. It means they can have longer range, bigger warhead, easier way to upgrade...
@@nurnburgring3102 Having an unnecessary external atgm launcher creates a weak spot on the side armor, they added ERA for a reason and it may just be that the hull armor isn't enough protection, so taking up space for an atgm launcher instead of ERA will only make it another weak spot with the APS placement, kornet is good, yes. However, it will only be a logistical problem with it being external (this also applies to other external launchers other than kornet) the crew will have to add another stress on resupplying those atgms once they all get used up, also the probability that north Korea has low numbers of atgms designed for the m2020 may force them to remove it to the design completely. Ps, the wars in Ukraine and the middle east Aren't being won, one is just in an advantage than the other, in the end we are just shoving each other down. No matter how strong or well protected your war machines could be, there's no guarantee that it won't be destroyed, it is a factor of war to lose something to gain.
And maybe the Armor piercing round of the tank isn't good enough to fight modern tanks. Usually North Korea recycle part design from older vehicles like the canon or put add on armor on an older tank.
Lol what? The wested billions of dollars on a tank that can shoot atgms. Even then the gun was overly changed in coming years because of problem after problem. Meanwhile having a atgm launcher outside is better since it can help in targeting multiple targets as well as equipping higher calibre atgms
If we learned one thing from the Ukraine war then it would be that a tank, no matter how bad it might be in comparison to our western tanks, is still a tank.
For the tanks having ATGMs, one other explanation could be they aren't confident that their FCS is capable of matching or beating M1/K2 FCS in terms of first round hit probability at range, so similar to the logic of gun/missile hybrids in the 60's and 70's, they slapped on an ATGM to cover off on the "short" range envelope with the main cannon and for things they deem in excess of the cannon's effective range, they have at least a pair of missiles on tap.
If ATGMs on tanks would have any tactical value actual army would have already deployed these. I am quite sure that these "ATGM" launchers on this North Korean "tank" are just mock-ups. The econimic capabilities of North Korea and the military capababiites they claim to have do not match at all.
A recent video from a major South Korean youtuber interviewed a defected North Korean engineer, saying that after the first Gulf War, Kim Jong-Il was shocked by the poor combat performance of Soviet equipment. The Supreme Leader gave an order to obtain an actual example of the M1A1 Abrams and to copy it as best as possible. According to the engineer, they did indeed succeed in getting one, and the copying work was well underway when he defected in the mid 2000s. He says that the M2020 should be the result of this 3 decades long project and is indeed based on the Abrams, with some of the more advanced(less copy-able) tech coming from China, Russia, and/or Iran.
Just because you have a copy of something does not mean you can easily reverse engineer it. I'd be interested in what the defector engineer has to say about NK actually got an M1. An entire vehicle? Doubtful.
@@adamwsaxe "Just because you have a copy of something does not mean you can easily reverse engineer it." Sidewinder missiles and the USSR would like to have a word with you. One ended up in the side of a Chinese MIG, undetonated. The official statement from the USSR was "thanks for the university course in AA missile design" NK is greatly underestimated. Same with Iran, given they got a free predator drone a while back.
@@daviddavidson2357 the Predator drone is 90's technology. It's not like some cutting edge super weapon, and where has that drone lead Iran in their drone techology? Oh right yeah they're using Shahed drones that sound like flying lawnmowers powered by a turboprop engine.
To be fair, they spent 30 years reverse engineering a tank that was in combat 30 years ago. While the modern Abrams may not be too different, It's still a gulf war era tank going up against the next generation. I also have a theory that the military technology that the public is aware of is 5-10+ years behind the true cutting edge of military design. All that plus the poor tank design of the East along with the reduced industrial capacity of NK means I don't think this tank is going to be a huge issue. The attached ATGM means that even if they have Abrams designs, they're still gonna make a lot of stupid tank decisions on their own.
@@TheStacato Shaheds are meant to be cheap and disposable. They’re suicide attack drones, in case you haven’t noticed. Nobody, not even the US, is going to put super-high-tech stuff on a suicide attack drone. It’s hardly a worthy comparison with something like the Predator. Iran has a bunch of recon/strike drones as well, and from what I’ve seen, they seem to be more or less comparable with the early Predator models at least.
I like how every time Russia, China, NK, etc comes out with a new piece of military kit the internet decides to critique the designs so they can go back and fix the critiques in the next iteration.
Are you amazed that they do the basics of iteration to their BIGDILDOX9000 9th version that will cripple and destrory the homesex west, while western designs are either at 4th gen with minimal compromises or at the 6th generation in the state of the art equipament. T4 Armata might as well be considered a fairy tale instead of a tank.
@@jumpergamer1913 I'm more amazed that they don't bother taking the information and actually putting it to use yeah. It was more a comment on the situation more than anything else.
Instead of an ATGM what if its a SAM. The inability to defend against helicopters effectively is always a concern for tank crews from my experience.I know its a stretch seeing as none of them look to have any elevation but is fun to think about
Exactly Steve. This is the comment I was looking for and even though that thing is not a SAM launcher, I feel sure that such weapons will feature on tanks very soon. _(Undoubtedly beginning with the Israelis)_
Missiles on MBTs is a "common" thing for North Korea. Chonma-215, Chonma-216 and Songun-915 have all been seen mounting MANPADS (SA-7 for the -215, and SA-16 for the other two), and the -216 and -915 with Busae-3 and -5 respectively. It's not a good idea, but NK procurement seems to like how it looks.
There was an old PC game called "Army Men" where you fight with little plastic soldiers and tiny toy equipment. This is the first thing that came to my mind when I saw this LOL
@@otectusNK defeated US Army once before. You may call it a cease fire but we all know why the Korean war stopped. USA lost. Thats all there was to it. Then they lost in Vietnam, once again a loss to a primitive enemy. Then latest they lost to Taliban, a bunch of bearded guys who are afraid of little girls in school, what is your point here??
M2020: a repurposed bob Semple with the maneuverability of the kursk submarine, the protectiveness of the m113, the fire rate of the yamato, caliber of that one Japanese light tank from ww2, and the blessing from our great leader Kimmy. perfection.
$10 million Abrams tanks are taken out by $500 RPG-7. It does not matter what tanks are built of today, they are just too expensive for any real combat. Small drones and unmanned launching platforms are the future, just like terminators.
@alexorehowski3387 thats always been the case, old tanks could be taken out by cheap explosives too, perhaps since you are such the strategic military genius why doesn't the government have you remove tanks from combat?
i think with the atgms they aren't designed to be reloaded in the middle of combat, people always think "oh how would you ever reload those in battle and how would you constantly keep them supplied with the missiles" and i think it's more of a thing where they start out with them, they use them, and then they don't get reloaded until they're out of combat and the missiles are available, the tank would still be perfectly capable of being deployed just without the missiles loaded
I agree. Allows the tank to tp engage from long range without having to give away its position. Tanl gun muzzle blasts are very loud, dusty, and flashy
@@theimmortal4718 I'd argue that a much slower, fire propelled missile, probably with a guide wire leading directly to the tank firing it, which has to stay in sight of their target... Is a lot less stealthy than firing a single, extremely fast dart and driving away. Addendum: It is not wire guided, but laser guided. So no guide wire, but you still have to stay and guide the missile to its target. The newest specs for the updated Kornet is 250/300m/s or so for velocity. A 125mm canon firing APFSDS will likely be firing above 1700m/s.
@@theimmortal4718 In a vacuum, maybe. But I feel the long travel time, and the fact that missiles aren't exactly quiet, kinda offset that. I think both would be noticed, just that the gun blast would be noticed when the target's already hit. The missile will still be in transit by the time you're spotted, and you can't even move until you hit your target, because it's laser guided. It's not a fire-and-forget system. Addendum: An APFSDS travels several times faster than the speed of sound. At something like 4 kilometres of distance, you'll have barely 3 seconds to react to a flash of light, before something has been struck. An ATGM travels slower than the speed of light. At the same 4 kilometres, you have what? 13 seconds from launch to impact. 13 seconds you have to stay in sight of your target, guiding a laser at it.
If only this new tank was a symbol of North Korea's ability to feed its population instead of launching nuclear firecrackers into the Pacific Ocean, lmao...
If you wanna go there: - It actually is. Korea aint experiencing a (US induced) famine as of now. At the same time tho: 44 Million americans go hungry to bed every day and that despite the Dozens of Billions in Taxes being gifted to people like Elon Musk.
Those soldiers look quite buff. They can't obtain that physique from being under fed. I don't think we should underestimate opponents. It is well demonstrated how underestimation can lead to defeat. Ask Ukraine.
Keep the " not seen combat" out of this .. we seen how "combat proven" Western tanks are. Nothing survive in a war specially when you come against a determined enemy with enough capabilities to fight back
Hey man, a dune buggy using a VW bug air cooled 4 and drivetrain is NOT 'slap dash'. done right and running a tuned and built Air cooled 1600cc flat 4 out of a late model bug? Damn thing'll run for what it is. A Manx kit with a hot rodded flat 4 in it is WAY lighter than a stock, un chopped bug Chassis and body. (Which is not exactly a heavyweight to begin with) I drove one once, it was NOT like driving my ex GF's mom's stock '68 bug with a 1200cc motor in it... like at all. It was more like driving an under powered shifter Kart. Seriously, it was a ridiculously fun little motor... didn't want to give it Back to the owner. Lol.
Man, the ROK military has those K2 Black panthers. Those on paper I believe are very compatible to the Leopold, Abrahams and has some really unique applications for the terrain.
@@aleksazunjic9672 cope harder, bro. The Abrams is the most successful tanks in history. Modernized American M60s from the 1950s are smoking state of the art Russian tanks in Syria as we speak.
14:25 I love how the sabot round is flying with the sabot, cartridge and case base still attached. If that ever happens, something went seriously wrong with the gun.
Out of all your videos i've watched, this by far the one i've gotten the most kick out of. Really really enjoyable. I laughed I cried I thought why not add some truck nuts at the back of the tank? because at some point, why not?
not to even mention the huge weakpoints in the armour they made in the turret to simply carve in the smoke grenades in it instead of simply putting them on the outside of the armour that every tank in history have
Former US tank mechanic here. Every tank in the world has a weak spot, called the track. Anti-tank mines are designed to trash that when driven over, effectively taking that tank off the playing field. OR, just making it another fish to shoot in a barrel.
Ok, call me a nerd but TWO ATGMs, an AGS-30, a 125mm with MRS, and multiple sights sounds pretty badass. I just wonder if it'll go the route of the T-14 Armata.
How does it do at climbing really steep hills and crossing really deep bogs and minefields ? This tank doesn't need a main gun or missiles. It will never get within range to fire either of them at another tank. It's only useful role will be to suppress food riots in North Korea.
Development was expedited via advanced simulation and modeling techniques. In this instance a purple dong with Suction mount was added to the cab of a lnockoff Komatsu loader. 16 mm film was used to record its movement from various angles and perspectives. Put their Best Men on it. All very hush hush. On the Down Low, if you will
Maybe that's the plan... If they can attract and mate with an Abrams. They might be able to breed a real modern tank. 4d chess glorious leader always one step ahead of the West
I think I know why they might have those ATGMs, and not merely for intimidation. They aren't cut out for winning a war by logistics and efficiency. If they fight it will be desperate and involve attrition warfare both acutely and chronically. These are 'shock units' being built for the acute phase, and as such they are tasked with inflicting damage any way they can. Whether or not it increases the ability to 'win 1v1s' or be 'cost efficient' is besides the point. If the gun is knocked out - if it's out of ammunition - if it fails with the main gun: the tankers will have to fight on. The additional expense of what is already a top of the line tank is minimal; the capacity to take out an extra target or two is key to its role in any possible conflict.
There was an interview with a defected weapons engineer from NK few days ago and he revealed a lot about this tank. And he shed a lot of lights to the history and some features behind it. And it sounds like it’s more formidable than what the experts were guessing from the footages.
@@danfridenstine5751 People have been saying that since approximately WW2. Tanks have always had counters, but there's a lot of value in forcing people to counter it, and the fire power they carry can't really be matched
One note, at 7:51, you mention bright feathers to scare off predators, you're in the right realm of Asomatic coloration, but its not feathers and birds in this case usually, its mostly Amphibians and some reptiles, such as snakes. Feather color is mostly used to attract mates. Great video though.
I agree that atgms on tanks are strange but they are not totally usless. On a total war you might use them to kill hovering hellicopters or moving veicles very far away.
Is it just me, or does the video of the parade with the first reveal (39 seconds in) of this tank show that NK went in the opposite direction to the rest of the world? I'm used to seeing tanks moving through rough terrain with the gyroscopically stabilized sitting motionless while the tank seems to move around it. NK's new tanks are driving down a smooth, tarred road while the guns bounce like they're at a rave.
Wow, the editing on this one! I know, I know..."the info"...but all the cut-scenes and references and pasting Kimmy's face on stuff was really top-tier!
Actually having ATGM launcher on MBT is quite useful. That way tank crew can engage several tipes of targets with full lethality. For example, ATGM can shoot at armoured targets while engaging infantry or fortifications/tow nests with its cannon using HE shrapnel rounds. For close distances they have another cannon on top and probaby another coax MG. All in all armament of this MBT is very good i think. Also keep in mind that MBT designs from the past that had ATGMS on them failed mostly due to difficulties operating them and high costs but today that is not the case as all tanks have computers which are helping the crew with aiming and guiding as well as spotting targets.
Tanks is completely useless against drones. 90% of the Russian tanks has been destroyed by drones (among many other vehicular types of war). Ukraine's battlefield is full of dead Russian tanks.
Turret only flies if the hull has enough integrity to contain the blast well enough to launch it. This... "tank like object" likely won't do that. Bet you a grilled pastrami sandwich and swiss on rye it'll blow out the sides and bottom of the hull if the ammo goes up.
@@Loubie2005 Pretty sure it's only soviet and russian tanks that toss their turrets. NATO tanks *cause* them to toss their turrets, because NATO tanks have blowout panels.
But what about reloading? That ATGM launcher is in a very awkward position. At least on most BMPs (Which North Korea also has) the ATGM launcher is in a position where the gunner, commander, or even any other soldier the IFV is carrying can easily swap out the empty ATGM rack for a new one. They can quite easily get to it with very little exposure. The M2020 ATGM meanwhile is far away from any visible hatches; meaning someone is going to have to fully get out of the tank to reload it, which in a combat situation would be suicidal. Either this thing will have to be accompanied by ground forces who somehow have spare rockets, or one of the tank crew members has to get out and fully expose himself to oncoming gunfire.
there is perhaps a bigger problem here to look at: Soviet/Russian late T-series tanks can all launch ATGMs from inside their 125mm gun barrel and here we have North Korean tank crew launching it from outside, similar to how ATGMs are launched from IFVs like the BMP-2's Konkurs or the Bradley's TOW
unless of course, we are all completely fooled here, and that launcher turns out to be 2 ManPAD missiles specifically tasked for short-range air defense, and thus cannot be used to engage enemy tanks
Didn't really pick that up until you pointed it out, it looks like multiple tanks main barrels are shaking pretty hard 😂😂😂 Lil Rocket Man can't even get his propaganda correct
Mounting that rocket launcher on a tank is like mounting extra double barrel shotgun on your rifle or mounting a flamethrower on your M41A pulse rifle to fight alien queen. 😀
The A-10 is being retired because it doesn't belong on a modern battlefield, even with the titanium bathtub. That job will be taken over by drones, which will use advanced missile systems rather than brute force.
@@smyers820gmit's true that initially the Kornet atgm wasn't designed with a top attack capability, but in the meantime the Kornet-M was developed, which has a top attack capability, in addition to a fire and forget system
@@trevortrevortsr2 sure if they get a sample but they have to get a sample first 🤷♂️. You a Korean in Ukraine would go unnoticed 🤷♂️😂. Russia has always refused to sell their top shelf 🤷♂️
Multiple target engagement, assuming their FCS can support this. Imagine if those tanks had data links. Only one tank would need to expose itself, the other tanks could fire from cover. It's a real advantage. Be great to get captured specimen regardless.
If you’re ever injured in an accident, you can check out Morgan & Morgan. You can start your claim in just a click without having to leave your couch. To start your claim, visit: www.forthepeople.com/TaskandPurpose?s=86%3A2313
Read the website comments . Hilarious
Hod, ambulance chaser ads were the worst part of 1970's & 80's TV. Now UA-cam is doing it, only 99.999% of UA-cam is garbage also. Goggle really does just suck as a company.
Imagine investing in upgraded tank designs and when nearing completion you watch videos from Ukraine taking tanks out with handheld drones.
The microchip myth is stupid. Why would only US allies and the US themselves be able to make microchips. Its really not hard to make those: By or steal the plans to make the machines to make them. Step 2, build the machine. Step 3 watch the microchips being made as all you need to do is feed the machine with energy and materials.
the bradleys sent to Ukraine dont have a reloading capacity for their tow missiles.
Rather than knowing how bad North Korea's new tanks are, I'm more shocked that they even have "new" tanks
Its still a tank and they are still able to produce their own with modern technical equipment so underestimating that is BS
I'm not that shocked I was waiting for either Russia of China or even both countries to slighly help the DPRK get fairly modern tanks to help keep the balance against what they see as American imperalism
You are so naive to underestimate them so much.
@@Matthew-is7zs Our country's tanks have not launched new products for several years. On the Chinese Internet, we will complain that the Army's tanks are too old compared to the Navy's warships and Air Force aircraft. As for the Russian tanks... at least they're still trying to move in Ukraine, right?
I'm honestly more shocked that they made a working APS system, that's honestly impressive
Kim wanted a twin-barrelled tank but they had to talk him down to bolt-on ATGMs instead.
He wanted a mammoth tank hahaha
@@dorivaldojunior2254 Kim has the only computer in North Korea. It is only able to play Red Alert 1. He is playing Red Alert 1 to learn how to fight the Western countries. Twin barrel big tank with anti-air missile launcher will win the day.
@@dorivaldojunior2254 , the War Elephant design seems like overkill for an armor vehicle but sure, someone like Kim can dream that up. I can see it possible for mobile artillery, but not for tanks.
on a serious note, i don't know the capabilities of the russian kornet ATGMs, but if it is like Ukraine's Stugna-Ps that can also be used on low flying helicopters, i could see a possible use for them. other than that, they would be more of a liability between cost, additional maintenance, and an exposed weakness on the turret.
@@dorivaldojunior2254he probably plays halo wars
The fourth guy is down deep inside the tank, pedaling as hard as he can
😂
some flinstones type shit, hes walking that hunk of junk all the way
i am in stitches. comment section didnt disappoint as expected! 🤣
Well that's one way of peddling their wares, I suppose...
I guess u talked about the future Abrams tank, as footprint carbon matters.
I called Kim, he said the ATGM are more cost effective, addresses logistical resupply problems, saves on barrel wear , and to be employed from defensive and commanding heights positions. Also Kim said his tank is loosely based on the Japanese MBT type 10. Kim also said he really likes your show and hopes you come for a visit sometime.
Great to have an embassador of the great leader Kim here in this comment section. :)
What a nice guy, I'm sure his country is lovely!
This comment underrated af 😢
Tell Great Leader Kim he still owes me $50
Will you have to take your own Pies and sandwiches 😆
My first question when i saw the M2020: "Wait...why the hell it looks like an M1A2 Abrams tank?"
The Chinese got a lot of them from Afghanistan. We left a LOT there and not just old M1A-1 but newer ones. The CCP got a lot of gear from their.
Most modern MBT have that same boxy layout the same as stealth fighters have the save general design features because of the function dictates the form!
@@rustynail6819 i'm kinda upset that they acquired the hummer h1 but didn't make anymore of them for sale
@@rustynail6819 We left gear, but we did not leave an Abrams... Given the number of UH60 left behind, do not be suprised a chinese copy of that comes out soon...
Put on your reading glasses Peggy Sue
They had 9 of them that were apparently able to move under their own power for an entire parade. Say what you will but its still better than the T-14 Armata.
The tank itself or the impression given by the presentation?
Design wise it's got a lot of similarities to the T-14 Armata doesn't it?
I read that the reason the T-14 actually looked broke down was because the crew had absolutely zero training on it outside turning on and giving gas. Not sure if it's true but read the driver accidentally hit the parking brake and didn't understand why it would not move.. not sure it true but seems kind of believable.
The T-14 is a next generation tank that all others must compete against 🫡
@@4411825they are already fighting against getting canceled by ruZZian MOD
🇰🇵: We have new tanks, but we won’t reveal much information about it tho.
War Thunder Players: *nuh uh*
fr
@@KPH1992We told you to be quiet..
@@KPH1992what in the hell is wrong with you
@@KPH1992what?
@@KPH1992 Reported for spam 😂
I heard that when the turret is blown off, and it lands upside down, it can be converted into a wok .
you win😂
That;s whishfull thinking on the NK side becasue they have no food to put into said wok
😂
@@gilibrandarn you. You beat me to it 😤
Do tankers taste like pork
"Tractor parts and cardboard held together by duct tape"
Don't diss my boy Bob Semple tank like that
That was corrugated steel, TYVM
@@Attaxalotl and chewing gum plus some laminated crustacean shells as a spall liner.
RedEffect wasn't this sceptical
@@ligametis Because he's an authoritarian rooster suckler
Every 10 yr olds, 40k titan made out of pringles cans.
my Chinese friend said the tank was built with the spirit of the people, he then said: "i mean literally, dead people's souls"
I see what you did there.
💀💀
Can’t blame them, gotta please the machine god 😊
He most likely say the truth.
How is your friend being Chinese relevant here
@@markpozsar5785 Because they have a better understanding of NK than me?Because he went there as a Chinese tourist for one day? Because they have tighter trade with NK than the west? Because NK students studies at his school? Why is that irrelevant when it’s factual?
Looks funny how the main gun is wobbling around in that parade footage. This tank will not be able to hold a beer.
Tanks dont usually drive around with the stabiliser on at all times due to a increased maintenance cost but I do agree it looks funny
It's funny I already know what video you are talking about.
Like Abrams can. Western tanks have not been battle tested until Ukraine where they failed miserably.
@@alexorehowski3387 I want whatever it is that you're smoking. Russia has lost somewhere in the neighborhood of 5,000 tanks over the course of its illegal invasion of Ukraine. Ukraine has lost a handful of Leopard 2's and at least one Challenger 2.
@@kylerogers175 while also the biggest note not being used by American Troops who have much more extensive training/combat use with said Tanks.
Its like watching an amateur gun enthusiast use a m60 vs a highly trainer Marine. The results will be massively different.
Kim Jong Un has been playing World of Tanks recently, pointed at every single model available and told his staff "I want this one!"
So many fools comment so many craps.
Meanwhile the other Korea's k2 can function as a pseudo artillery with smart rounds, and their actual artillery can give the topographer a job every seven seconds
The T-series tanks they have most technical experience with all have the ability to do this, either with manual range tables, or electronic range calculation.
The Russians have been doing this for years, and the North Koreans almost certainly have this ability as well.
Doesnt matter if they have no south koreans to man them in 20 years
@@MrAxeofcapitalismyeah horrible demographics and now the women go on feminist NoChild strike
@@MrAxeofcapitalism lol, almost like pricing your own population out of having a family is a bad idea 🤣
@@ghostofmarx867 Fair. If they want more kids, should start a program to incentivize having one or two children.
North Korea also designed a new Wheeled Tank Destroyer also called " M2020/2024 ", it resembles an American Strike IFV / Russian BMP-3 but with a 155mm duel purpose anti-tank / field gun and 4 ATGM systems.
Planning on doing a video on the Stryker knock off ! That was my ride in iraq so I’m flattered they made one haha
"designed" is a strong word
Is it as good as Russian Terminator? (Sarcasm)
@@TheRezro Probably less as the Russians have at least designed some good tanks/IFV (for the time) so they have SOME experience.
"Designed" designed? Or like they sketched one out on a napkin because "Dat be soooo cool!" designed?
^ said with NK accent, ofcourse...
First rule of warfare, NEVER underestimate your opponent. Even if they were made from wood, you should treat them like they are more advanced than yours, until you know for certain it's not.
90% of YT videos are nothing but Murican propaganda (including this bs)
Overestimating can be even worse than underestimating, especially if a general knows how to use his reputation.
underestimating is more fatal than overestimation! do you hear yourself?@@TovKafur
@@TankboiDeng Yes, i hear myself. I also know lots of situations when the battles and wars were lost solely due to overestimating, like famous ploy of a fortress being defended by a sole musician, or like entire history of Rommel's adventures in Africa.
@@TovKafur respectfully, can you name a war that was lost due to overestimating the enemy
Chris, your programs are first class in all respects. Your research and analysis are thorough; your presentations very clear, highly informative and yes, entertaining as well. You are one very smart and exceptionally well informed "Mud Soldier." Your contribution to the American people is greatly appreciated by this old soldier. "NEVER Quit", Col. J. P. Kress, USA (Ret.)
Thanks for your input
It's incredibly efficient! Inside the rear compartment are 4 wheels with 9 year old Korean kids running like hell.
Powered by Fred Flintstone!
We know where you live
@@NorthKorean_dictatorship you funny boy Jung-Un. Congratulations on this new 'best tank in the world' comrade. Look very pretty. Da da. It's nice.😊
Ah, is the old flintstone engine design making a comeback?
How many horsepowers does a 9 year old create?
bro bought an abrams off temu for 90% off 💀
Free shipping on all orders. Limited-time offer.
kimbrams
@@m1a2_sepv4_abrams lmao
Oh! Abrams tanks lose so many values.
n1 willjams
IDK! Did you see his generals at the military parade? They had service metals down past the belt!!
Medals*
metals are correct, they are what you wear to pretend you did something@@hckr_-gh7se
Thats because in North Korea the generals wear medals that their grand parents or great grand parents had won
It has been this way since before you were born. If you just now saw that they wear an unholy amt of medals, you are uninformed / stupid.
@@damianodonnell5844👏 congratulations
This feels a lot like those ricer cars that have a ton of stickers, bolt on chrome exhaust nozzles and huge spoilers, but nothing under the hood but a bare stock engine.
Lotsa visuals, but none of it actually does anything.
Never underestimate your enemy
I was suspect of this when carefully looking at the video clip of the parade. One of the tanks is driving down a smooth parade street, and is bouncing out of time with it's track's beat. For those that don't know a tank can start to bounce if you match the speed of the tank to it's suspension's rebound frequency coupled with the flat sections of the track hitting the pavement at the same time. It's annoying, and drivers can do a one second left - right of the controls to get the track to be offset again so it doesn't happen as badly. But for it to seemingly bounce quicker than the track hitting the pavement causes me to suspect this is another of their cobbled together parade pieces. While the real tanks are kept out at the training fields.
I preordered 5 of these when the Kickstarter was launches. They work well as dimmer/volume switches (Hue & Sonos) and even managed to get a button press to trigger a specific playlist.
I got excited about all the more complicated things it might do, but quickly discovered it can't do any of them.
How did you get around the sanctions to buy those tanks?
@@temper44Don't worry about it
Lmao this is very much not the video this comment was intended for
💀
it nearly works though. :)
One thing toward the turret - look at the Israeli M60 upgrades, namely Magach 7A and 7C. There is still a cast and rounded turret under that boxy shape with all of the new shape being aplique armor, so there might actually be a rounded cast turret that we know from previous DPRK tanks.
They don't just completely replace the turrets Magach?
It´s a plausibility. French and israeli did uparm shermans well into the cold war the latin american countries operated the shermans with experimental 60mm high velocty guns,as well as other models well in to the cold war, the reason was that there was large number of them and they were quickly growing obsolet, so they were dirt cheap, and in many cases USA, didn´t even want to get paid for sharing their toys. The 75mm autoloader was a gun inspired by the panther´s gun in terms of ballistic performance. Not only regional refurbishment´s of pattons were made by individual nations, but US arms industry did supply several nato and asian countries with either kit´s or fully refurbished M47´s,M48´s and M60´s during the cold war, meanwhile the soviets were not willing to supply their T-64´s outside the USSR, instead choosing to supply T-54/55,T-62 and T-72 for export´s.
Adding to this, South Africa has done the same thing with the Olifant 1B and Olifant 2 which are modernized British Centurions
@@not_stardust Indeed, but Centurion turret was far less of an egg shape.
I remember Richard Deutsch of the Farmboorke regiment in Austria allegedly said that Israel and the Brits found a way to inject concrete between the mated pieces. Could be his assumptions were correct? I used to talk to the guy pretty regular but he passed away in 2021. He was a military contractor and kind of a Mentor. He said the UK did that with some obsolete tanks they mothballed for just in case purposes. To me it does sound plausible.
14:25 Note to the editor :
Tanks, and guns dont fire the whole bullet, the white part isnt supposed to be there, its just a dart.
The white part has the explosives to propell the dart, and it gets ejected back into the tank.
Silver*
You guy’s goner be surprised,like Mogadishu 1993, North Korea is not Afghan,they have nuces.
@@Autism_central-d9gYanni*
For cripes sakes its just an illustration there turbo. Perhaps slack off on the coffee tomm the crap ain't no good 4 ya anyway...
@@LastManStanding-r4o If you're going to keep copy/pasting that same comment, get a spell checker.
Some UA-camr that defected from north korea states that the parades that feature enormous missile carriers have simple hollow steel tubes made to look like missiles.
Link?
Well yeah why would they bring live munitions to the parade ground? Use your damn minds people
@@hotcakesism they do at every single military parade in the world 🤣. What do you think those missiles can just go off? Or maybe North Korea is just more safety conscious than the rest lmao
Yea this tank is real. The latest released footage of the Chonma-2(popularly known as M2020) actually shows us the ammunition it uses, and they are very different from Soviet Ammo.
@@hotcakesism Her insinuation was that they have very few missles. Use your damn perception, people.
"A break in the armor would be a weak point"
Yeah, well, that is if that *is* armor, and not just a bit of superstructure on top of a normal T62 turret hiding beneath. :P
It looks like plywood to me, a bad try at pimping their T62's. I'm not convinced they are real.
@@davidpowell6098 Who do ya think China has been selling all our used recycled washers and dryers too?
Bradley has entered the chat.
Bradley's main gun actually killed more tanks than tanks have killed tanks. One benefit of the TOW though, is that it has a longer range than the main gun. You can hit the enemy before they're able to hit back.
It killed more _obsoletely armored_ tanks than other tanks in the same theater killed tanks.
Fixed it for you.
@@Chris-fn4dfno you really didn’t fix shit. You just showed the whole internet that you’re a windbag that likes to hear his own voice
The TOW is wire guided, correct? If so, how’s it possible to have a wire that is thin enough, spools out fast enough, and knows when to let go of the originating weapon? I mean, how does it work. I understand some submarine torpedoes operate the same way. And for miles, right?
Exactly about the ATGM and why the lack of professionalism of this video didn’t understand that is funny! All Russian MBT beyond the T-62 series have this capability 🤦🏾♂️
@@4411825 I was gonna say the same lol. The question isn't why a tank has an atgm. Spoiler alert many tanks around the world have atgms on it that's not the problem. If these are top attack atgms then they're actually useful. Problem with a main gun fired atgm or shell is that it has to go through armour. Top down attack missiles... don't. I don't think this guy knows much about tank weapons. As for it being on a launcher. Technically makes it more versatile. Like it can at theory kill a tank with the atgm then follow up with a shot from the main gun. The atgm is a guaranteed hit essentially but the gun can still deviate.
also the talk about a grenade launcher being on top instead of a 50 cal. Yeah. That's pretty obvious why you'd want that lol. The whole point of the 50 cal was to take out armoured vehicles and these days just light armoured vehicles. However how useful that actually is compared to a normal machine gun and more importantly, a fully automatic grenade launcher that can fire dual purpose rounds for anti armour and anti infantry... yeah a grenade launcher is a bit more useful. Israel already uses them. So does the US but the US doesn't mount them on tanks. Not that it makes much sense to me because if you're forced into an urban environment an automatic grenade launcher is hands down more effective than a main gun, coax or 50 cal.
Whatever though.
I really enjoy all the humor you slip into your videos without emphasizing what you just did making it subtle. Good stuff!
@@levelaznif the CIA asked me to Join I totally would ! Unfortunately they haven’t reached out yet :/
@@Taskandpurpose Central Infantrial Averageness
The thing about the weaker armor on the roof: they could always just place a cope cage on top of it like Russia is doing. If WWIII were to ever happen and conflict did happen in the Korean Peninsula it would be very interesting to see the cope cages attached to North Korean tanks, or maybe even the North Korean equivalent to Russia’s turtle tanks.
Much like the Russian cope cages, I doubt they would work.
“….. is the factory that I just mispronounced …..” hahaha. This is why I love this channel.
I added the same comment....you know for the grithm
Glad to see this comment!
Great humour - haha
"Why do you watch Task & Purpose instead of other military channels?"
This. This right here.
Like everything else the engines are probably provided by China and as well tuned for climate and environment as is all the junk they produce. Being all speculation from what I know if it is a diesel engine top range would be about 60 to 75 miles if that. One can clearly see by the things profile there is no spare fuel spaces on the thing. Not even a tool compartment either by appearances I make that subjective statement. Part of the height of the Abrams is the fuel tank under it. Otherwise if would look a lot like that 2020 abortion on treads. Being made in NK that produces next to nothing mechanical the hydraulic systems are probably the worst of their kind as far as surviving diff climates and the engines surviving diff blends of fuels. Thee epitome of the reasons Russian tanks ain't so popular in South America. Mexico had quite a few T34s and T72s. Over the years they just stopped running because of lousy fuels. Most South American truck drivers fill up in the USA and take reserves back. I have noticed quite a few trucks going back and forth over border with extra saddle tanks on em even 100 gallon main fuel tanks for just such purposes.
As long as you don't plan to use them in action, they can be as fancy and look as fierce as you want. All they need is to look shiny during the parades.
Same playbook as the guys who “produced” reactive armor out of cardboard for Russia.
“No way they’ll ever use this… oh, snap!”
@@baomao7243 So the military industrial complex can scam American tax dollar
@@jsanf44373 “The pot calling the kettle black”
Remember when the USA underestimated the Viet Cong and how very badly that ended.
@@ruzziasht349 Your memories are bad you forgot it's endless wars to scam your guilbile tax dollar
Playing devil's advocate regarding the ATGM's: As mentioned, tank on tank combat is relatively rare. Having a couple of ATGMs can allow the tank to carry more HE rounds and use the expensive ATGMs for other tanks (though probably still carrying sabot, only less of them). ATGMs are quieter and harder to spot where they are fired from, and can fire from longer ranges, not to mention may hit other tanks behind cover with a top attack (assuming the missile has the capability). They might also make sense if used against other tanks with active protection, allowing a quick double tap ATGM+Sabot in an attempt to defeat the APS (depending on the APS, this may or may not be effective). ATGMs can also be used against low flying aircraft, giving the tank limited AA capability. I think ATGMs can make sense on MBT's if they are used sparingly for those niche cases. With this in mind, awkward reloading of the missiles is not such a big deal, as they can fall back to SABOT from the main cannon if they expend both missiles in combat.
Increased HE complement was my first thought as well.
The other very valid reason to add missiles is if the gun lacks in long range precision.
Might be the sights, firecontrol system or the gun barrel, but either way a missile would solve that problem, leaving the shorter range engagements to the gun.
A third reason is if NK has problems producing long rod APFSDS capable of reliably punch through modern armour, thus limiting them to HEAT rounds that are notoriously difficult to use at long range due to their slower speed and thus long travel times (which was the reason Soviet Union dabbled in gun launched missiles to begin with).
I’m always willing to keep an open mind ! They could be dope as heck for all I know
ATGM idea is great! Not only tank on tank combat is rare, it can be used to engage at long distances. It can be used against helicopters.
@@Taskandpurpose could also be like the 75mm B-25 guns (Military Aviation History put up a video recently), solid reasons and flawless solution but in the end the application was so limited that it in hindsight was a waste of time and resources.
The ATGMs could also allow for engaging targets at a wider depression/elevation range than the main gun, which is relevant in the very hilly Korean peninsula.
There's a reason we use a six-wheel configuration or an even number configuration on the bottom of a tank. It's the pivot point. If you have a wheel their you drop hard but if you have a gap in between them it adds a cushion in the track that allows the vehicle to pivot a lot softer. As someone that deals with a tractor loader every day I can tell you there's a huge difference in wear and tear as well as operation. Sometimes that little bit of cushioning in between two rollers can be the thing that can keep you from flipping. Tanks are a lot heavier and their noses drop a lot harder.
I'm actually impressed to the fact that they produced a tank that looks modern without thinking it's capabilities is modern too
And unlike the T-14 Atrapa, it actually managed to get through its first parade without breaking down.
Of course it's made for show off their current tactic is just nuclear bombs and show of some fake thanks it's not like these times needs to be in war
My uncle in garage can make modern looking tank. It is based on tractor, but still.
@@h.a.9880 TBH T-14 is probably over-complicated but unrefined tank. M2020 is clearly just a prop.
@@h.a.9880 Armata T14 got through its first parade just fine.
Chris, I’d watch your videos even if I were blind. Besides the information, you have a viciously hilarious and increasingly subtle sense of humor that makes me look forward to every posts. Even if you have others to help do research, only you could pull off that delivery.
Those slots in the turret armor for the APS mean it's probably not actual armor, just a skirt or spaced armor over the same old cast turret.
Yeah, IDK what OP is smoking. Pretty obvious that isn't armor plating and the real armor is behind it.
They probably mounted a slot for an APS just so that when other countries ask where their armour is they can say "an APS goes there, we just don't have the APS. There's armour underneath there though."
"How much armour?"
"I'm late for school and my dog ate my homework"
"How much armour is under that APS slot?"
"Byeeeeee!"
@@Lurch-Botyou do realise how modern armour works do you?
Composite armour is a sandwhich. you have a baseplate and an outer plate, at times there is a middle plate. All of those are traditional facehardened steel. Inbetween you have layers of composite materials stacked and angled. It is 100% possible to have holes in that stack for mounting of systems. And every tank using such a system on its turret has done just that. Optics are all mounted in exactly that way.
@@cryhavocandletslipthedogso1873 oh, your problem is that you go with that as "armour" but no modern mbt uses it as armour. it is the material used to sourround armour and guard it. All steel plates are either face hardened or just hardened depending on the quality, it does not really matter. Lighter vehicles use aluminium for the same purpose.
Composite armour is the mix of it all but it needs a frame and that frame is still usually steel. Exact composition remain a secret. It would make sense that only one plate is treated specially while the internal one is softer on purpose to reduce spalling, but again most people will probably never know.
I donˋt know for the M1A2 or leo 2, but the T72s use(d?) face hardeing on their upper front plate with the composit materials behind it in a sligtly milder angle than the front plate.
but the exact material really does not matter to my point. it is just a shell meant to cover the composite armour inside, which is usually multiple slates of ceramic and other materials arranged in a specific form to increase protection.
Prob also why it's equipped with the APG...Most likely a primitive response to drone warfare...
I have a feeling it’s just like a flint stones contraption where they have like a bunch of men running on a treadmill to power it and everything is just sheet metal
Cappy never disappoints in producing the most entertaining videos to just chill, learn, and have a good laugh 😄
Hooah ❤
It is possible that the ATGM launcher was added so that it could achieve standoff with potential enemies. ATGM’s usually have longer range than a tank’s main gun, so standoff would be possible with that weapon system.
Most missiles will have ranges of about 3.5-4km. Most modern APFSDS fired from western MBTs should be able to deal with Russian tanks from 3+km away with their modern anti-era tips, so the distances are actually somewhat similar, if we consider the armor to be on similar level for the mbt2020. European countries are also installing new fire and forget ATGMs on their IFVs with range of 5+km like the AKERON and spike missiles, which would be the bane of tanks on long range engagements.
So while the ATGM might look like a good idea on paper, I think it’s uses are still pretty limited.
@@vizender Smoothbore guns using fin-stabilized ammunition aren't as accurate as rifled barrels using spin-stabilized ammunition like British 120mm HESH. So, over longer ranges of 4km or more, smoothbores aren't especially accurate, not to mention that you need to wait 2 seconds for a 120mm APFSDS round from M1 Abrams to hit a target 5km away which will likely miss a target going at high speed over rough terrain, while ATGM can constantly update trajectory and thus it's plausible to hit even slow airborne targets like helicopters or low flying drones which is why you got smart guided munition on modern tanks like Israeli Merkva MK4 or South Korean K2, not to mention beyond visual range wire-guided missiles on IFVs like latest versions of CV90 with Trophy APS that can kill your fancy but obsolete M1A2 Abrams without active ballistic protection from behind a hill by top attack or even by an insurgent using cheap modified civilian drone...
@@IonorRea France advertise that they can hit a target moving at over 40ph when they themselves move at that speed over 2km away. From interviews of crew commander they also claim that, with an APFSDS they are able to hit in an area of a disk with a diameter of about 50cm from 4km away. Modern FCS and rods can still be very precise at such distances
It’s a good point ! Personally I don’t think ranges over 100km are likely in Korea geography , it’s not the desert . Not sure you’d need more range there , maybe in Iraq geography .
But what is the point of anything long range in a country like North Korea which is mostly rough mountains with steep sided winding valleys? To use range they would need to place the tanks on the mountain peaks which would leave them as sitting ducks.
It is possible that their tank's main gun is not capable of firing ATGMs and they have to put an ATGM launcher from the outside, the best way to fix this problem is to not rush your tank production and actually just make a better gun.
Yeah...Only problem being that is a 2A46 derivative, which CAN shoot TGMs. Having an additional bolt-on ATGM system, which is a Kornet-type laser-guided launcher which is capable of HE-VT Anti-Air capabilities, Thermobaric Warhead capabilities, Tandem AT capabilities on a range from 5 to 10 km....That gives you a lot more capabilities while keeping it relatively cheap.
Also, before you talk about things being "jury-rigged" and "poor", take a look on the Ukraine front and what got the Leopard, the Abrams, the T-s. The West laughed at "cope-cages mhahaha copium so hard ruzzia lose" and then what? Everyone started doing it, what do you know.
External ATGM's don't have limitation of being squized through the barrel. It means they can have longer range, bigger warhead, easier way to upgrade...
@@nurnburgring3102 Having an unnecessary external atgm launcher creates a weak spot on the side armor, they added ERA for a reason and it may just be that the hull armor isn't enough protection, so taking up space for an atgm launcher instead of ERA will only make it another weak spot with the APS placement, kornet is good, yes.
However, it will only be a logistical problem with it being external (this also applies to other external launchers other than kornet) the crew will have to add another stress on resupplying those atgms once they all get used up, also the probability that north Korea has low numbers of atgms designed for the m2020 may force them to remove it to the design completely. Ps, the wars in Ukraine and the middle east
Aren't being won, one is just in an advantage than the other, in the end we are just shoving each other down. No matter how strong or well protected your war machines could be, there's no guarantee that it won't be destroyed, it is a factor of war to lose something to gain.
And maybe the Armor piercing round of the tank isn't good enough to fight modern tanks. Usually North Korea recycle part design from older vehicles like the canon or put add on armor on an older tank.
Lol what?
The wested billions of dollars on a tank that can shoot atgms.
Even then the gun was overly changed in coming years because of problem after problem.
Meanwhile having a atgm launcher outside is better since it can help in targeting multiple targets as well as equipping higher calibre atgms
If we learned one thing from the Ukraine war then it would be that a tank, no matter how bad it might be in comparison to our western tanks, is still a tank.
Except for this clown car
For the tanks having ATGMs, one other explanation could be they aren't confident that their FCS is capable of matching or beating M1/K2 FCS in terms of first round hit probability at range, so similar to the logic of gun/missile hybrids in the 60's and 70's, they slapped on an ATGM to cover off on the "short" range envelope with the main cannon and for things they deem in excess of the cannon's effective range, they have at least a pair of missiles on tap.
False!
If ATGMs on tanks would have any tactical value actual army would have already deployed these.
I am quite sure that these "ATGM" launchers on this North Korean "tank" are just mock-ups.
The econimic capabilities of North Korea and the military capababiites they claim to have do not match at all.
A recent video from a major South Korean youtuber interviewed a defected North Korean engineer, saying that after the first Gulf War, Kim Jong-Il was shocked by the poor combat performance of Soviet equipment. The Supreme Leader gave an order to obtain an actual example of the M1A1 Abrams and to copy it as best as possible. According to the engineer, they did indeed succeed in getting one, and the copying work was well underway when he defected in the mid 2000s. He says that the M2020 should be the result of this 3 decades long project and is indeed based on the Abrams, with some of the more advanced(less copy-able) tech coming from China, Russia, and/or Iran.
Just because you have a copy of something does not mean you can easily reverse engineer it. I'd be interested in what the defector engineer has to say about NK actually got an M1. An entire vehicle? Doubtful.
@@adamwsaxe "Just because you have a copy of something does not mean you can easily reverse engineer it."
Sidewinder missiles and the USSR would like to have a word with you.
One ended up in the side of a Chinese MIG, undetonated. The official statement from the USSR was "thanks for the university course in AA missile design"
NK is greatly underestimated. Same with Iran, given they got a free predator drone a while back.
@@daviddavidson2357 the Predator drone is 90's technology. It's not like some cutting edge super weapon, and where has that drone lead Iran in their drone techology? Oh right yeah they're using Shahed drones that sound like flying lawnmowers powered by a turboprop engine.
To be fair, they spent 30 years reverse engineering a tank that was in combat 30 years ago. While the modern Abrams may not be too different, It's still a gulf war era tank going up against the next generation. I also have a theory that the military technology that the public is aware of is 5-10+ years behind the true cutting edge of military design. All that plus the poor tank design of the East along with the reduced industrial capacity of NK means I don't think this tank is going to be a huge issue. The attached ATGM means that even if they have Abrams designs, they're still gonna make a lot of stupid tank decisions on their own.
@@TheStacato Shaheds are meant to be cheap and disposable. They’re suicide attack drones, in case you haven’t noticed. Nobody, not even the US, is going to put super-high-tech stuff on a suicide attack drone. It’s hardly a worthy comparison with something like the Predator. Iran has a bunch of recon/strike drones as well, and from what I’ve seen, they seem to be more or less comparable with the early Predator models at least.
I like how every time Russia, China, NK, etc comes out with a new piece of military kit the internet decides to critique the designs so they can go back and fix the critiques in the next iteration.
Are you amazed that they do the basics of iteration to their BIGDILDOX9000 9th version that will cripple and destrory the homesex west, while western designs are either at 4th gen with minimal compromises or at the 6th generation in the state of the art equipament.
T4 Armata might as well be considered a fairy tale instead of a tank.
@@jumpergamer1913 I'm more amazed that they don't bother taking the information and actually putting it to use yeah. It was more a comment on the situation more than anything else.
A very smart way to get a free consultacy.
@@MrMontanaNights ok
Instead of an ATGM what if its a SAM. The inability to defend against helicopters effectively is always a concern for tank crews from my experience.I know its a stretch seeing as none of them look to have any elevation but is fun to think about
Mostly not especially for Nato Doctrine. You have to control the skies before you're sending tanks and infantry in.
When I played on the M1A1 tank simulator back in the 80s, I used AX wire guided rounds to take out helicopters. Don't know how real that was.
Exactly Steve. This is the comment I was looking for and even though that thing is not a SAM launcher, I feel sure that such weapons will feature on tanks very soon. _(Undoubtedly beginning with the Israelis)_
Missiles on MBTs is a "common" thing for North Korea. Chonma-215, Chonma-216 and Songun-915 have all been seen mounting MANPADS (SA-7 for the -215, and SA-16 for the other two), and the -216 and -915 with Busae-3 and -5 respectively. It's not a good idea, but NK procurement seems to like how it looks.
There was an old PC game called "Army Men" where you fight with little plastic soldiers and tiny toy equipment. This is the first thing that came to my mind when I saw this LOL
This is the video about NK army, not about US army, dude 😋
@@aleksazunjic9672
You're joking, right? Comparing NK to the US in terms of military might and technological advancement. What a joke lmao.
@@otectus Well, US army is now full of little plastic "men" i.e. "persons" , with sensitivity training and high heels 🤣😆
Army Men RTS was gold
@@otectusNK defeated US Army once before. You may call it a cease fire but we all know why the Korean war stopped. USA lost. Thats all there was to it. Then they lost in Vietnam, once again a loss to a primitive enemy. Then latest they lost to Taliban, a bunch of bearded guys who are afraid of little girls in school, what is your point here??
M2020: a repurposed bob Semple with the maneuverability of the kursk submarine, the protectiveness of the m113, the fire rate of the yamato, caliber of that one Japanese light tank from ww2, and the blessing from our great leader Kimmy. perfection.
$10 million Abrams tanks are taken out by $500 RPG-7. It does not matter what tanks are built of today, they are just too expensive for any real combat. Small drones and unmanned launching platforms are the future, just like terminators.
@alexorehowski3387 thats always been the case, old tanks could be taken out by cheap explosives too, perhaps since you are such the strategic military genius why doesn't the government have you remove tanks from combat?
@@GuPKay Says a person with girl's anime avatar. Dumb.
It’s also made with Kiminium. Which is like glorious Stalinium but with the blessing of our Great Respected Supreme Leader Kim Jong Un.
@@therealspeedwagon1451 its basically shitty stalinium
The advantage of Abrams tank is that they can be seen by satellite because of the intense heat they exhale. 😂
"10 years dungeon for you" had me dead ☠️😅
i think with the atgms they aren't designed to be reloaded in the middle of combat, people always think "oh how would you ever reload those in battle and how would you constantly keep them supplied with the missiles" and i think it's more of a thing where they start out with them, they use them, and then they don't get reloaded until they're out of combat and the missiles are available, the tank would still be perfectly capable of being deployed just without the missiles loaded
I agree. Allows the tank to tp engage from long range without having to give away its position. Tanl gun muzzle blasts are very loud, dusty, and flashy
@@theimmortal4718 I'd argue that a much slower, fire propelled missile, probably with a guide wire leading directly to the tank firing it, which has to stay in sight of their target... Is a lot less stealthy than firing a single, extremely fast dart and driving away.
Addendum: It is not wire guided, but laser guided. So no guide wire, but you still have to stay and guide the missile to its target. The newest specs for the updated Kornet is 250/300m/s or so for velocity. A 125mm canon firing APFSDS will likely be firing above 1700m/s.
@@The_Foxymew
A 125mm gun blast is much less stealthy than a missile launch. There's no way anyone would witness both and think otherwise
@@theimmortal4718 In a vacuum, maybe. But I feel the long travel time, and the fact that missiles aren't exactly quiet, kinda offset that.
I think both would be noticed, just that the gun blast would be noticed when the target's already hit. The missile will still be in transit by the time you're spotted, and you can't even move until you hit your target, because it's laser guided. It's not a fire-and-forget system.
Addendum: An APFSDS travels several times faster than the speed of sound. At something like 4 kilometres of distance, you'll have barely 3 seconds to react to a flash of light, before something has been struck.
An ATGM travels slower than the speed of light. At the same 4 kilometres, you have what? 13 seconds from launch to impact. 13 seconds you have to stay in sight of your target, guiding a laser at it.
@@The_Foxymew
Wait-
Are you under the impression that combat is one on one like call of duty? Do you think tanks are fighting alone?
If only this new tank was a symbol of North Korea's ability to feed its population instead of launching nuclear firecrackers into the Pacific Ocean, lmao...
If you wanna go there: - It actually is. Korea aint experiencing a (US induced) famine as of now.
At the same time tho: 44 Million americans go hungry to bed every day and that despite the Dozens of Billions in Taxes being gifted to people like Elon Musk.
If only the USA was a force for good in the world and it's diabetics did not have to make a choice between buying food or insulin...........
Those soldiers look quite buff. They can't obtain that physique from being under fed. I don't think we should underestimate opponents. It is well demonstrated how underestimation can lead to defeat. Ask Ukraine.
NK just sold few million shells to a certain country ... that is world greatest exporter of wheat ... Hmmm 🤔
@@robertbennett9949 Bit outdated on that burn, Insulin is price controlled in the U.S. now, as of January of last year.
Thanks for your large efforts to update us about their monster tanks, take care and be safe!
I like to think that the tank gunner optics are dude with a periscope passing hand drawings to the Gunner below him.
😂😂😂😂 I will now also adopt this view of their tanks
A kaleidoscope. To aim, rotate the lens till the top of the images all touch.
It's probably a heavily up-armored Yugo GT 4 door wagon, nicknamed, the "Wego..."
A tank that has not seen combat designed by committee with an infallible leader, what could possibly go wrong?
Keep the " not seen combat" out of this .. we seen how "combat proven" Western tanks are.
Nothing survive in a war specially when you come against a determined enemy with enough capabilities to fight back
@@ahmadloai2378
Except our tanks Will keep the Crew alive. Russian tanks throw the crew and turret in the air.
@@Pesky_Anon
Its just a western hating, russia cheerleading muslim/arab. None special
@@AbuHajarAlBugatti👏
Your dissent has been noted, gentlemen. ✍️
1 $500 inhouse made drone will take care of that ATGM attachment ... and the whole tank 😂
Actually the bright feathers on birds are to attract mates, not scare predators.
One has to wonder what type of mate a tank is trying to attract.. 😅😅😅
Their slap-dash approach reminds me of the VW Bug conversion kits from the '70s where you swap the body for a fiberglass dune buggy body or a Bradley.
Hey man, a dune buggy using a VW bug air cooled 4 and drivetrain is NOT 'slap dash'. done right and running a tuned and built Air cooled 1600cc flat 4 out of a late model bug?
Damn thing'll run for what it is.
A Manx kit with a hot rodded flat 4 in it is WAY lighter than a stock, un chopped bug Chassis and body. (Which is not exactly a heavyweight to begin with)
I drove one once, it was NOT like driving my ex GF's mom's stock '68 bug with a 1200cc motor in it... like at all. It was more like driving an under powered shifter Kart.
Seriously, it was a ridiculously fun little motor... didn't want to give it Back to the owner. Lol.
Good video, great level of details, I'm just amazed you are able to present everything so well.
He did not present how it will stand up against Bidens new EV tanks that shoot them giant pink dildos and glitter bombs.
The NVA used the T-62 in vietnam war, though not very many made it passed HUE. B co. 4th inf div. ARMOR recon.
Man, the ROK military has those K2 Black panthers. Those on paper I believe are very compatible to the Leopold, Abrahams and has some really unique applications for the terrain.
South Korea is building so,e real impressive stuff.
Ah yes, the Leopold and Abrahams
@@uku4171 Well, what do you want? A British Challenged 2?
If they are comparable to Leo2 and Abrams, then they are simply cool looking death traps.
@@aleksazunjic9672 cope harder, bro. The Abrams is the most successful tanks in history. Modernized American M60s from the 1950s are smoking state of the art Russian tanks in Syria as we speak.
Thanks Cappy now I’m worried about “barrel droop” 😂😂😂
See a doctor if you notice signs of barrel droop
Can’t wait for this to be added to war thunder and have it’s documents leaked.
Xdd but imagine if they add North Korea 💀💀💀
:) what could possibly go wrong?
lol
14:25 I love how the sabot round is flying with the sabot, cartridge and case base still attached. If that ever happens, something went seriously wrong with the gun.
Out of all your videos i've watched, this by far the one i've gotten the most kick out of. Really really enjoyable. I laughed I cried I thought why not add some truck nuts at the back of the tank? because at some point, why not?
😂 can you imagine a pair of truck nuts on the back of a tank
Thank you for the adventure time reference, very nice.
One of my favorite shows !
I subscribed just because he's a fan.
not to even mention the huge weakpoints in the armour they made in the turret to simply carve in the smoke grenades in it instead of simply putting them on the outside of the armour that every tank in history have
Kim is just trying to compensate for somthing...
Former US tank mechanic here. Every tank in the world has a weak spot, called the track. Anti-tank mines are designed to trash that when driven over, effectively taking that tank off the playing field. OR, just making it another fish to shoot in a barrel.
Ok, call me a nerd but TWO ATGMs, an AGS-30, a 125mm with MRS, and multiple sights sounds pretty badass.
I just wonder if it'll go the route of the T-14 Armata.
How does it do at climbing really steep hills and crossing really deep bogs and minefields ?
This tank doesn't need a main gun or missiles. It will never get within range to fire either of them at another tank.
It's only useful role will be to suppress food riots in North Korea.
@@OKOKOKOKOKOKOK-zn2fy fr
i cant help but notice the barrels wiggling up and down when it's driving.
The stablizer is off when parading
It's a Y-Axis Main Gun Destabilizer.
Next Gen shit
Development was expedited via advanced simulation and modeling techniques.
In this instance a purple dong with Suction mount was added to the cab of a lnockoff Komatsu loader.
16 mm film was used to record its movement from various angles and perspectives.
Put their Best Men on it.
All very hush hush.
On the Down Low, if you will
Peacocks use those feathers to attract a mate, they don’t scare away predators
They gotta keep Russia and China don't they?
Edit: I am fairly sure that it's the males who have those feathers to attract the females.
Maybe that's the plan... If they can attract and mate with an Abrams. They might be able to breed a real modern tank.
4d chess glorious leader always one step ahead of the West
@@Mortarion-xt9wp are you, sir, implying that vladimir putin and glorious leader xi jingping are infact, femboys?
I think I know why they might have those ATGMs, and not merely for intimidation. They aren't cut out for winning a war by logistics and efficiency. If they fight it will be desperate and involve attrition warfare both acutely and chronically. These are 'shock units' being built for the acute phase, and as such they are tasked with inflicting damage any way they can. Whether or not it increases the ability to 'win 1v1s' or be 'cost efficient' is besides the point. If the gun is knocked out - if it's out of ammunition - if it fails with the main gun: the tankers will have to fight on. The additional expense of what is already a top of the line tank is minimal; the capacity to take out an extra target or two is key to its role in any possible conflict.
There was an interview with a defected weapons engineer from NK few days ago and he revealed a lot about this tank. And he shed a lot of lights to the history and some features behind it. And it sounds like it’s more formidable than what the experts were guessing from the footages.
Need at least some scraps of info so we can find this interview too.
The age of the tank has come and gone.
@@danfridenstine5751 Nah.
@@danfridenstine5751 People have been saying that since approximately WW2. Tanks have always had counters, but there's a lot of value in forcing people to counter it, and the fire power they carry can't really be matched
@@Joesolo13did they have $200 drones that can wipe out entire buildings remotely in ww2?
It is a huge relief to see you came out with a new video after spending hours studying to the point where my brain is melting. Thank you.
One note, at 7:51, you mention bright feathers to scare off predators, you're in the right realm of Asomatic coloration, but its not feathers and birds in this case usually, its mostly Amphibians and some reptiles, such as snakes. Feather color is mostly used to attract mates. Great video though.
You telling me I won't get laid if I garage one of these?
I agree that atgms on tanks are strange but they are not totally usless. On a total war you might use them to kill hovering hellicopters or moving veicles very far away.
Let's see it in action before jumping to early conclusions.
Point being; We don't want to see it in action, because that would mean war were declared...
Tanks are quite useless in modern warfare anyway.
Is it just me, or does the video of the parade with the first reveal (39 seconds in) of this tank show that NK went in the opposite direction to the rest of the world? I'm used to seeing tanks moving through rough terrain with the gyroscopically stabilized sitting motionless while the tank seems to move around it. NK's new tanks are driving down a smooth, tarred road while the guns bounce like they're at a rave.
Seems like I wasn't the only one who saw that.
The guns are prob decorarive decoys. All the firepower is in the ATG...Do what you can with what you get...
From Raytheon to ambulance chasers, the ads just keep getting better 😂😂
Says you with 1.5million subscribers......
For real
I’ve noticed lately the ambulance chasers have really been flooding UA-cam with their sponsored adds
Kim:
"Hey bro i put an anti-tank weapon on your anti-tank vehicle equipped with an anti-tank weapon so you can take out tanks!"
It being a weapons testbed might explain why it has so many diffrent weapons
Wow, the editing on this one! I know, I know..."the info"...but all the cut-scenes and references and pasting Kimmy's face on stuff was really top-tier!
hahaha the meme's and graphics were on point for this vid. kept me chuckling all the way through it .. great work!
Actually having ATGM launcher on MBT is quite useful.
That way tank crew can engage several tipes of targets with full lethality.
For example, ATGM can shoot at armoured targets while engaging infantry or fortifications/tow nests with its cannon using HE shrapnel rounds.
For close distances they have another cannon on top and probaby another coax MG.
All in all armament of this MBT is very good i think.
Also keep in mind that MBT designs from the past that had ATGMS on them failed mostly due to difficulties operating them and high costs but today that is not the case as all tanks have computers which are helping the crew with aiming and guiding as well as spotting targets.
Tanks is completely useless against drones. 90% of the Russian tanks has been destroyed by drones (among many other vehicular types of war). Ukraine's battlefield is full of dead Russian tanks.
What we really need to know is how high the turret can fly. Perhaps we can get Dim to send one to POOtin for testing.
Just like all nato tanks in Ukraine lol
Turret only flies if the hull has enough integrity to contain the blast well enough to launch it.
This... "tank like object" likely won't do that. Bet you a grilled pastrami sandwich and swiss on rye it'll blow out the sides and bottom of the hull if the ammo goes up.
@@Loubie2005 Pretty sure it's only soviet and russian tanks that toss their turrets. NATO tanks *cause* them to toss their turrets, because NATO tanks have blowout panels.
@@Techno_Idiotobut Abrams tank got destroyed instantly in Ukraine
@@Theriandefender and? Tanks get destroyed in war. We never said they were invincible.
10 years dungeon for you got me laughing so hard
The M2020 that Kim was riding was upgraded with a mini fridge and a portable microwave that's the only thing that works besides driving it😬
When you can’t feed anyone, who are you fighting???
🤣🤣🤣
loved this episode, very informative as usual
Atgm launcher could shoot fire and forget missiles for low flying aircraft/helicopters. Not the worst idea
Specifically why they were added...
But what about reloading? That ATGM launcher is in a very awkward position. At least on most BMPs (Which North Korea also has) the ATGM launcher is in a position where the gunner, commander, or even any other soldier the IFV is carrying can easily swap out the empty ATGM rack for a new one. They can quite easily get to it with very little exposure. The M2020 ATGM meanwhile is far away from any visible hatches; meaning someone is going to have to fully get out of the tank to reload it, which in a combat situation would be suicidal. Either this thing will have to be accompanied by ground forces who somehow have spare rockets, or one of the tank crew members has to get out and fully expose himself to oncoming gunfire.
@@therealspeedwagon1451 you dont reaload it, you shot it and done
there is perhaps a bigger problem here to look at: Soviet/Russian late T-series tanks can all launch ATGMs from inside their 125mm gun barrel
and here we have North Korean tank crew launching it from outside, similar to how ATGMs are launched from IFVs like the BMP-2's Konkurs or the Bradley's TOW
unless of course, we are all completely fooled here,
and that launcher turns out to be 2 ManPAD missiles specifically tasked for short-range air defense, and thus cannot be used to engage enemy tanks
North Korea: Can produce advanced Main Battle Tanks
Also North Korea: Cannot produce antibiotics and food
🤣
That Barrel shake on the middle tank at 0:39
Didn't really pick that up until you pointed it out, it looks like multiple tanks main barrels are shaking pretty hard 😂😂😂
Lil Rocket Man can't even get his propaganda correct
@@nolongerblocked6210 cringe
Mounting that rocket launcher on a tank is like mounting extra double barrel shotgun on your rifle or mounting a flamethrower on your M41A pulse rifle to fight alien queen. 😀
So, dope as fuck?
No. It's not. It's like adding laser guided, heat seaking slugs to your gun...
I did the math. According to the numbers displayed at 11:16, NK's gdp isn't "about 100 times less " than SK's gdp, it's 34.6 times less.
Grammar nazi checking in here. WTF do you mean?
There is no tank that can get through a field where drones fly in swarms. They all go boom. lol
Little Kim: Strongest tank in the world!
A-10: Hahaha Avenger go BRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRT!
The A-10 is being retired because it doesn't belong on a modern battlefield, even with the titanium bathtub. That job will be taken over by drones, which will use advanced missile systems rather than brute force.
Their tank presentation basically enforces the saying "you don't know what you don't know".
Answer - To give the tank some top-down destructive capacity
Kornet isn’t top attack capable
@@smyers820gm Do you think after Ukraine, North Korea can't reverse engineer a top-down
@@smyers820gmit's true that initially the Kornet atgm wasn't designed with a top attack capability, but in the meantime the Kornet-M was developed, which has a top attack capability, in addition to a fire and forget system
@@levilastun829 yes but Korea was never given this technology. They were sold the early version
@@trevortrevortsr2 sure if they get a sample but they have to get a sample first 🤷♂️. You a Korean in Ukraine would go unnoticed 🤷♂️😂. Russia has always refused to sell their top shelf 🤷♂️
Multiple target engagement, assuming their FCS can support this. Imagine if those tanks had data links. Only one tank would need to expose itself, the other tanks could fire from cover. It's a real advantage. Be great to get captured specimen regardless.