Which Country Has The Most Powerful Main Battle Tanks? | DCS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 чер 2024
- 0:00 Overview
1:41 Details
7:04 Drag Race
11:00 Rough Terrain Race
14:11 Fighting Ability - Challenger 2
20:06 Fighting Ability - Chieftan Mk3
24:41 Fighting Ability - Leopard 2A4
31:34 Fighting Ability - Merkava
35:10 Fighting Ability - M1A2 Abrams
41:30 Fighting Ability - T-80U
46:39 ZTZ-96B
51:28 Leclear
56:33 Summary
SPONSORS
Winwing: www.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Winwing USA: fox2.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Sponsor Reviews: • Sponsor Reviews
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS(UA-cam): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2(UA-cam): / @grimreapers2
GRIM REAPERS(Odysee): odysee.com/$/invite/@grimreap...
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
DCS OFFICIAL SITE: www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...
ONE TO ONE LESSONS: grimreapers.net/one-to-one-le...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
STREAMS(Other Members): grimreapers.net/gr-twitch/
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com/invite/MSYJxbM (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/open?id=1g7o...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #GR #DCSWorld #GRDCSTesting #DCSTesting #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military - Ігри
The Merkava's barrel is not short to operate in urban environments it's a common myth but it's not true. It's the same length as the L44 as it's just a domestically produced version of it. The gun just looks shorter because the first part of the barrel is covered up by the turret.
Yeah, they didn't want to import the L55.
thx
@@knochi956 The newest Abrams SEPv3 still uses L44 gun, which is a bit of a bummer, as it lacks performance with tungsten rounds compared to the new Leopard's L55 gun.
@@AgneDei No major Loss of penetration with the L44 and the M829 Round. They are still capable of hitting out to about 4600 meters with like an 80% change of first shot kills if I recall..
@@jerrybeard2670 Don't compare depleted uranium core to tungsten core rounds, that's dumb because L55 can also use them with significantly higher performance than L44. You just can't work around physics.
Simba Shooting Cap was honestly the funniest thing I've seen in a GR video to date! If only there was a compilation video of such events ;)
I was giggling for about 5 mins afterwards, properly broke me.
@@SamAshworth91 Likewise over here ... made my day
I laughed way more than I should have at that :D
Yeah they definitely need a compilation of all the time somebody kills cap. I went back and rewatch that at least three times. In the subtle movement as a turret is hilarious. The first time I watched it I thought oh no he's going to do it😂😂
I've drag raced a Leclerc in a M1A1 in real life. That thing is fast.. like it wasn't even close it just shot ahead of us and kept on going. She's a lot lighter than you'd think and that's where she gets her speed from I believe.
Okay now I've watched the whole video and that was hilarious. Its best summed up by that the tanks are just fine, this was just an example of tremendously bad tactics; also some poor damage modeling. All tanks are weak on the sides, top, and rear and people have spent the last 100 years coming up with all sorts of anti tank options, no one is invulnerable and those are just the facts of life. Modern tanks draw their advantage from being able to deliver more precise kinetic energy at a much longer ranges in addition to having superior armor and mobility. Tankers will always orient their armor to face the threat and peak over terrain when possible to limit their exposure to incoming fire. rather than just charge and get destroyed. A more fair test for every tank involved would be for them to stay on line but to creep forward till each successive row of tank was within range and then have them stop and eliminate the targets. This would also test the max effective ranges of each tank. Also fun fact, the Leo and the Abrams use the exact same main gun. Modern Sabot rounds would melt through a Panzers armor; it wouldn't even present a challenge. Fun test boys, apparently the Leo just doesn't give a fuck lol.
@@jasong3442 true that, but it would make a boring video to watch tanks fires from 2km away for an hour or so.
The Leclerc is probably even quicker in reverse in real life lol
It has very good hydro pneumatic suspension for the smooth ride on uneven terrain.
@@reefta I doubt such a battle would have taken 4 minutes, forget an hour! IIRC Abrams MBTs were sniping T72s in the Iraq desert for 3-4k meters; one shot a T-72 through a sand dune. Another got a double hit with one round!
Leclerc: *slowly turns turret towards jeep*
Me: 🤣 I know where this is going
TWAT! 🤣🤣🤣
Why not Leopard 2A5 or Leopard 2A6M they are the more common and extensively modified upgrade variants and far superior to the 2A4. I am sure everyone would like if they added the 2A7+ to DCS one day.
yeah, I'm a little sad for that reason :(
@@arnor4214 you would certainly hope so.
However i would imagine is has more armor and is heavier and possibly slower?
Remember that all tanks are a balance between armor, weapons and mobility. Other considerations are repairability, cost to operate and upgrade ability. For instance, the Abrams was built with upgrade in mind and the tank of today looks pretty similar to the original M-1 but is practically a different tank.
The antennae on the Merkava are for the active protection system that protects against ATGM’s and RPG’s.
There’s nothing wrong with the armor on the tanks, the game is still imperfect.
American tanker here....fun fact: the Leopard II and the M1A1/A2 Abrams all use the same main gun - the M256 made by Rheinmetall.
Uhhhhh man idk how to tell you this, the M246 is an L44, Leopard 2's switched to the L55 back in 06-07ish.
Lmfaoo. I hear you bro. I was an M-1 mech. The 44/55 same gun the 55 slightly longer ( gain mussel velocity) uses the SAME ammo. Wait until they find out the armor is made in Britain. They may no longer be Krupp but they damn sure do still make the worlds best guns. 63G here.
@@thomasroth4695 Ooooo don't say Krupp, Germans in the comments ain't gonna like that lol
@@thomasroth4695 Wait till they find out the armour made in britain is the previous gen and we didn't tell them we had something better. one word. Dorchester.
@@92HazelMocha I do know how to tell you this....I'm old. HAHAHAHA! Thanks for the heads up though.
I was crying laughing when simba shot cap. You could almost see the tank smirk.
I was NOT happy
This was a fun one to watch :) Thanks GR!
The moment the turret started traversing towards the Jeep that was the moment I had to hit the 👍🏻like button
Don't encourage him please.
Second that like at the same moment. Almost spit my food out mid bite when it happened 🤣
@@grimreapers I don't think he actually NEEDS any encouragement..... 😇
Absolutely love this video, very entertaining, well done chaps.
A Leopard 2A4 isn't very modern now is it? Also Sweden hasn't used it in many years, only the Strv 122 now.
I agreed they should have used the A6
its young at heart! ;-;
The 122 is based on the L2A4
@@Roguepaladin72 L2A5*, the A4 was before the arrowhead turret.
@@Roguepaladin72 L2A5 not the L2A4
200hundred thousand subs congratulations 🎊🎉🍾🎈 you are my favorite DCS youtuber!
thxx
Love the tank video!!! please do a version of this comparing different IFVs like Strikers and LAVs and BMPs etc.
It would only really work if they tried to use actual combat tactics and not drive fast to the enemy and hope you can hit them before you expose weaker side armour.
smoothbore has no negative ballistic effect on modern fin-stabilized sabot rounds and eliminating the lans and grooves from the barrel reduces weight/manufacturing complexity while adding potential diameter to the projectile at no cost.
So why have rifled barrel?
@@grimreapers Rifled barrel would benefit more from HEAT or more other chunky projectiles I believe
@@grimreapers to fire HESH projectiles, the rifled gun on the Chally is very outdated, this is seen on the new version of the tank the Challenger 3 now has a smooth bore cannon. Smooth bores are also able to fire higher pressure cartridges while having significantly less wear on the gun itself
@@grimreapers Because British use HESH rounds that needs to spin to work properly, this is the only reason for the rifled barrel in the Challenger 2, but it is an old round, in fact the British are thinking of upgrading the Challenger 2 with a smoothbore Rhenimentall L/55 because it wears much less than a rifled barrel and today there are much better ammunition that can replace the HESH
@@grimreapers Because the British really liked the HESH round which needs a rifled gun to work well. They've only just decided to switch to the L55 smoothbore (used on the newest leopard variants). for the challenger 3
Before everything kicks off, I'll be going for the M1 Abrams, as that's what we also use here in Australia.
73 Easting and Medinah Ridge pretty clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of the M1's armor
Exactly. No way these 1940's tanks are taking out an Abrams.
Yeah I kind of figured that DCS not having all of the data on these tanks was the main reason. Besides they're there to be destroyed by modern aircraft.
@@fredkruse9444 A 1940s tank could penetrate the Abrams from the side, just no chance from the front.
For the fighting ability test, for better results, use a wider battle spread. A narrow spread has the same effect as being surrounded on 3 sides.
I hope to see this test again if the tank models ever get updated to be more accurate.
The Pz-IV and th Pz-V barrels may be the same caliber, but the Panther's is certainly longer, thus a higher muzzle velocity of the projectile.
And if I'm not mistaken also had larger brass, standard ap round of the panzer 5 were lighter but the round itself was about 3kg's heavier, also about 250-300 Ms velocity higher on standard ap
@@piminat0r Yeah. Same with the Tiger 1 vs Tiger 2. Both technically 88mm, but damn the Tiger 2 gun packs a hell of a lot more punch.
88 x 571mm vs 88 x 822mm shells AND a longer gun.
A more logical progression, both in terms of armor and firepower, would have been the Panzer4 -> Tiger1 -> Panther, -> Tiger2.
Sure the Panther "only" has 80mm of frontal armor compared to the Tiger 1 100mm. But the panthers armor is sloped back while the Tiger1 armor is almost completely flat, thus making the Panthers armor effectively thicker. (not that any of that level of armor matters against modern 120mm guns). And the long 75 on the Panther had more penetration than the 88 on the Tiger1.
Congrats on 200k and keep up the good work
thx
Abrams have 2 ammo racks. One near the breach and one in the back. Loading from the first one takes very little time. You're supposed to shuffle ammo from the bigger shelf between fights. Loading ammo directly from the rear shelf takes a lot longer.
The ammo is stored in an armored compartment..The ready rack behind the loader and the semi ready rack behind the TC. Ready rack holds 25 rounds. Semi ready 20. To access the Semi ready rack you have to disconnect the hydraulic door actuator on the ready rack, fold down TC's seat and then wrench door partially open to start pulling rounds out. Takes about 10 plus minutes to do complete transfer.
Watching tank battles on the gulf war and the commanders were saying they were going fast and could fire once every 6 seconds and just drive through the enemy without slowing down.
T80 is derivative and development of T-64, Russia's top of the line tank from the 60's and 70's, while the T-90 is a development of the T-72 which is a cheaper tank intended for large numbers and also export markets. The 64 and 80 were more well developed and refined than the somewhat more economical and basic 72 and 90 respectively, though of course a lot also depends on the level of advanced equipment on the specific model.
But wasnt T64A , T64B variants worse than T72A,T72B variant in all aspects?
"The 64 and 80 were more well developed and refined than the somewhat more economical and basic 72 and 90 respectively"
If by "well developed and refined" you mean "riddled with issues, prone to failure, overambitious and badly designed" then yes... yes they were.. The T-72 wasn't cheaper because it's worse.. it was cheaper because it already had a pre-existing industrial base for its production.
There's a great WW1 mod for DCS that includes many tanks and vehicles. Would love to see them included in tests like this.
When Simba shoot Cap, I laughed so hard I got light-headed. Thanks, Simba I needed that laugh!
The Merkava has active shield, which of course not simulated here. with that, with a full crew it is a lethal monster. aiming and shooting fast in a hard terrains. DCS is a good flight sim, but not too good with the tanks yet.
The IMI 120mm barrel is 44 calibers, just like the M256 in the M1A2 and Rh-120 on the Leopard 2. Merkava has the power pack mounted in the front (for extra crew protection), so the gun probably sits a bit further back on the chassis.
The power pack and transmission on the Leopard 2 is absolutely amazing, so winning the drag race is no surprise.
В этой гонке должен был победить Т-80У он имеет 27 л.с на тонну и самое низкое удельное давление на грунт
the reason the merkava's barrel seems short is due to the turret being mounted more to the rear than the more traditional middle position and the face the add-on armor it posses extends so much on the barrel, when in reality the gun is as long as a Leopard 2 or a M1A2
Watched Tank Chats from The Tank Museum Channel and more, about each tank being used. It made for an enjoyable afternoon.
Should have had the 'How well can it make tea' test between the British tanks.
Cap, congratulations on the 200k!
thx
Great Vid Cap!
A similar test was conducted FOR REAL in 1998 in Greece. The tanks that took part were the M1a2 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leclerc, Leopard 2a6, T-80U and T-84 from Ukraine. The test included among others: firing on the move, starting at 60% slope, traversing a ditch 2 meters deep in water, vertical obstacle, detection and identification of target at night and endurance and fuel economy run for 1000 km. To no-one's surprise Leopard came first followed closely by Abrams, then Leclerc and T-80 and T-84. Leopard was also somewhat cheaper than the other western tanks. As far as i know it is the only comparative test of modern MBT ever.
With the turbine engine it's quite interesting for the Abrams to get a good result in a test where the fuel economy is a factor. I guess it had small weight for the final score, as besides that it's a great tank.
@@AgneDei Abrams came marginally first in the technical evaluation actually, it scored well in optics an fire control devices. Only when price was evaluated Leopard went on top, again marginally. There where also 2 companies that didn't present a tank in the test.
Congratulations for 200K subscribe ❤️
thx
Congrats on 200k
thx
Considering how well the outdated Leopard 2A4 did, just imagine the current 2A6 or new 2A7, which are basically a new generation :-)
Don't get me wrong, I love DCS for what it is, but it simulates tanks so poorly that I'd expect a 2A7 to perform worse than a 2A4 for no conceivable reason other than "Because it's DCS." After all, the M1A2, which is closer to a 2A7 in real world capabilities, did worse than the Leopard 2A4.
Another way to look at it: the Leopard 2A4 already performs, compared to the M1A2, as if it's actually a Leopard 2A7.
As you were saying at 26:00 MBTs have gun velocities reaching 1500-2000 metres per second whilst ww2 tanks averaged at around 500-700mps
thx MASSIVE difference.
@@grimreapers Not to mention the sabot rounds back then were hardened steel while today they are tungsten or depleted uranium alloys.
With an AP round the Panthers 75mm L70 gun had muzzle velocity of around 1130mps, and the Tiger 2 88mm L71 gun with APCR round reached muzzle velocity of also 1130mps, but with a much bigger round, so the best of the best guns in 2WW weren't all that bad.
The 2000mps is a bit high. The German 120mm L55 gun on the Leopard can reach around 1800mps with a kinetic penetrator (the sleek, discard sabot round), and it's surely quite lower for the 120mm L44 gun used on the Abrams.
So the muzzle speed of modern MBT's is significantly higher, but not that dramatically higher. The other big difference is that the newest projectiles have much longer penetrators made out of materials way more dense and hard than what was physically possible during WW2, and those are the main reason why very good armor class went from 180-200mm in 1945, to equivalent of 900-1000mm of hardened steel in 2000s.
Smooth bore guns use a Sabot round when firing Primary Armor Defeating rounds (Sabot) Penetrator encased in a discarding sabot carrier which is discarded after round exits barrel. penetrator is basically a dart flying at roughly 4-5 times speed of sound in a near flat trajectory...Very accurate..
Oh, when Simba did The Thing to Cap... priceless!
I'm wondering how accurately modeled the tanks really are. Realistically, there's no WW2 round that is getting through modern composite armor. The Challenger 2, Abrams, Leopard 2 etc. would have probably gotten through this without losing a tank. Also, the Abrams should have the best side armor of the group. The Abrams' designers sacrificed a bit of frontal armor to beef up the armor on the rest of the tank. The other western MBTs went for max frontal armor.
Not sure that's true - Abrams armour (non-export version) was based on the Challengers.
@@tomriley5790 the original Abrams and the original Challenger both had Chobham armor, but even then, I believe it was arranged differently on the two tanks. Since then, both to tanks have undergone numerous upgrades. The Abrams is now on version M1A2 SEP v3 and the Challenger is on version Challenger 2 LEP. They have both upgraded their armor significantly since the original versions, with the Challenger now on version 2 of Chobham armor, and the Abrams now includes depleted uranium as part of its armor. Both tanks are extremely well armored, but I believe the current Abrams has slightly better all around armor than the Challenger 2.
@@djzoodude challenger 3 is newest version.
@@Nicolas10391 The Challenger 3 is in development, but won't be in service for like 5 more years. Same deal with the M1A3, in development, but not in service yet.
Simba blasting Cap was hysterical. Lol
neg
@@grimreapers "TWAT!" 🤣
Mbt stands for main battle tank, a combination of all other tank classes basically in an attempt to get a perfect fit. It's pretty difficult to balance speed, firepower, maneuver ability and survivability which leads to these results. For example the leopard's development prioritised speed and firepower over survivability, the chieftain chose survivability and firepower over speed which leads to the results in ten drag race. (Note that the government chose the worst car manufacturer in the UK to make the chieftain engine leading to poor performance, it was almost constantly being upgraded leading to 16 or more variants of the chieftain.) The chieftain is similar to the challenger 2 but the challenger 2 just does it better.
Question! Did DCS sneak in an update that accurately models the tanks and imports in all their available statistics?
Leopard is also used by Canada. We don’t have the largest armour I think only like 86. But some nice variants of the 2a4
Battle of 73 Easting showed what the Abrams can do, and that wasn't even the new A2
Hilarious when he blew the jeep up at the beginning. absolutly the funniest shit I've seen all day .keep it up boys .
The Abrams doesn't fire missiles, Rhinemetal did develop a missile for the 120mm used by both the Leopard and Abrams but the project was later dropped as neither one was interested in it
good video also The Merkava Mark V "Barak" (Lightning) is planned to enter service in 2023.
I really want to see the last round where you go against the rows of old tanks.
The Israel tank was not built for speed because Israel is a small country. It was built for survivability of the crew.
Hey Simba, how did that battle look in the rear view mirror?
lols
An Abrams would have a hard time killing another Abrams. I’m betting that the tank that slows down is suffering from dust filled v-packs. 😀
not it took a round to the front axle mounted gearbox and lost a bunch of gears.
The tensioners are mounted to the front bogies. But the drivetrain is connected to the rear drive wheels. Ask me where my Craftsman 15/16” is.
Not if they're both using DU APFSDS, during the gulf war an Abrams fired on another Abrams with a DU round and it went right through the frontal armor
@@nuclearTANK Ummm... that's inaccurate.
yay, Leopard won the drag race, but this is not the newest design, that would be the 2A7 series
2A7V is the latent operational model
@@TheNecromancer6666 V's are older models upgraded to 2A7 levels.
@@ThePerfectOwnage 2a6's to be precise iirc
The modern armor piercing fins stabilize discarding sabot round has a muzzle velocity approaching 5577 ft/s 1700 m/s or Mach 5. The tungsten penetrators will go faster initially and the depleted uranium penetrators are heavier so they start slower but they keep their velocity longer.
Do you think they might have used a heat type AT round instead of sabot, against old pure armor (not composite)?
I would like to know what the actual speed and acceleration was.
I can't say anything about current tank speeds/acceleration but the M1 can definitely run over 100kph cross country (regardless of what the official speed is).
The original speed was limited by the surplus M60 track which was used.
Former M1 driver, I've ran around 72mph (116kph) flat out on desert dirt roads. Though the tank slows down A LOT when a hill gets involved. (plus I tweaked the governor settings on mine)
@@YourTechpriest 👍😂
@Local Techpriest yeah..I was always jealous of you guys being in an armored vehicle that could pull a wheelie.
I was Artillery (SP) always with AD'S or CAV and you ran circles around us.. (of course we could shoot further and over hills 😉)
Not very accurate, the M1 is deadly at long range so the aiming system doesn’t appear to be accurate. They would have wiped them out at long range. I suspect these tanks are not so accurate but it is a flight sim
They claim they're trying to make a Digital Combat Simulator but their prime focus is flight. I believe the M1 is deadly at range when stationary, but not sure about moving and of course a video game can never be that realistic anyway. :)
I think it was the ammo they used…sabot is great against composite heavy armor…but non composite pure armor they might have done better with a heat type AT round…I think they used that with the Chicom tank and the hit ratio seemed better until the Panther 75mm/L70 high velocity sent them all to Mao’s tomb
I served on Chally 1/2, the armour setup on them was peacetime armour. The Chally has upgraded combat armour on the front and sides during wartime this would have made a huge difference, unsure if you could do another with the upgraded???
Merkava tanks are made for urban combats street fighting. Maybe you could do a video with tanks having to go throught a city with soldiers with rpgs in streets and on rooftops.
This one was absolutely hilarious!
I feel like you could've dropped the chieftain and added the Japanese type 10, the Italian Ariete and the Korean K2. Also, if this was realistic then all of the tanks used would be getting one shot kills as soon as they see the crappy old WW2 tank.
A modern MBTs muzzle velocity with APSFDS it at around 1,750 m/s
The Tigers KWK 36 88mm gun with GR 39HL shell was around 600 m/s
Sabot rounds are depleted Uraniam rounds peeps. Also, the reactive armor by the A2's are classified, so are how the servo stabilizers keep the tank leveled while hauling ass.
M1A2 Abrams as with all M! Abrams tanks have a crew of 4 and have a manual loader. The Loader is an actual human. I did notice a lot of shots missing during all of the episodes with exception of the German Leopard 2A4
The M1A2 Abrams is a decent tank, but like naval air scenarios without AWACS, an Abrams unit that doesn’t have a Bradley or other support vehicle often won’t do well in a battle in constant motion. Most tank tactics would have a tank slowing down, target the flanks first, and not all vehicles targeting the same target.
Could you try the "Outerra Tech Demo" (the world engine with some vehicles that TitanIM uses) and compare it to DCS? Please :D ... If only you had access to TitanIM to test more detailed models, sadly it is only for the military xD
The Merkerva also has compartment in the back to act as a troop carrier
I'm probably wrong about this,, but I think the Leopard has a diesel and a gas turbine for some extra Umph when it's needed.
besides that,, I think it just had better acceleration,, after a bit most of the tanks was traveling at pretty much the same speed.
A Barrel launched ATGM used by the Russian 125mm (at least for the tanks featured) could be used for extreme ranges, as the apfsds used could be too "droppy" and might lose too much pen over distance
I think the reason the composite armor may seem less effective is because of the sustained fire. Composite armor will absorb and dissepate tons of energy by delaminating, cracking, deforming, spitting off bits, stuff like that, but after it gets hit once it's gotta be pretty much toast. Compared to steel which can take a bunch of impacts as long as none is strong enough to punch through. So that "700 mm" equivalent protection is likely for a single impact on that section, after which the armor is basically useless. This is probably a much more effective strategy against things like rpgs where these tanks are used now. They don't need to hammer on each other from across a field for hours so much as survive a single tank killing missile.
HAHAHA lost it when Simba disposed of your Jeep! 🤣
The Russian tanks AI driving simulation was so realistic that I thought this was a documentary film for a minute :D
Most modern tanks have ERA that isn't used here (it seems to be modelled on the Chinese turret).
'Armour thickness' is always a function of plate thickness + angle... e.g. the armour thickness of a 50mm plate is only 50mm if it's vertical, every degree of angle adds thickness.
'Effective armour' is what you get if you replaced the exotic composites and angles with steel plates.... so a 50mm thick composite plate at xxx degrees, is the equivalent of xxxxmm of steel plate.
I always amused in your video... hehehe... nice game always guys... the one that I like here is always have a science involved specially answering always the questions "What if" hehe
Chieftain has a rifled barrel. Same gun as the Challenger 2 I believe. It was a very successful tank gun implemented on many vehicles. Most use smooth bore guns these days that are all the same gun or copies of. No surprise that the Leopard won the drag race. It was designed to be fast and maneuverable.
The new Challys are going smooth-bore, too - but I wonder if it can fire the HESH rounds the British Army likes to use so much or if the latter has finally called time on that particular munition type?
I hope they do something about that grass pop in. Really kills the immersion.
I used to be a leopard mechanic in Canada. The speed of that is really at the start. It’s speeds up like crazy for 65 000 kg beast
My daily dose of Cap voice
xx
The Swedish Leo2A4, Stridsvagn 121, was only used temporarily on lease from Germany, all of them are sent back already.
The M1A2 uses Chobham, pronounced like the town in England [CHOB] + [UHM], and it's abilities are still classified why you can't find anything on it's effective armor thickness. But looking at what hits the tank has survived in actual combat, it seems to have the effective stopping power of 800-1200 mm's of steel.
Merkavas barrel is exactly as long as that of Leopard 2A4 and A5. L/44.
It was not built to be used in urban environments, that is just a neat side effect. Israel built it's own 120mm gun, so it's not a license built version of a Rh120 nor the M256.
The Leclerc is actually quite a good tank it seems. Not sure it ever saw actual combat, But from what I've heard this TS armor and fire power are both quite substantial.
The Leapard, Abrams and Leclerc all have the same German designed 120mm smoothbore gun, the Challenger 2/3 is having its rifled gun replaced by the 120mm smoothbore gun and im not sure about the Leclerc, as for the Russian and Chinese tank they also have the same gun as each other a Russian produced/Chinese licence copy of 125mm smoothbore.
Priceless Simba....Priceless almost pissed myself.
The abrams has never been able to fire missiles from its barrel.
thx
They might be thinking of the Copperhead round. Cap, that was a really primitive air burst round. We were told about them, never trained with them, and I never saw one on active duty. Supposedly you could guesstimate the targets height, and fire it out there, and it might damage a Huey. We loaded Sabot and Heaters. Blue ones.
best modern tank hands down has to be the bane blade
*stares in Tau Hammerhead*
300 tons of glory!
OK, here's the game for Sunday fun day. However many tanks on a side you can do without crashing the server but not king of the hill (which takes for effing ever). Use a medium terrain environment so there are some surface structure to hide behind but not mountains. Just wipe out the other team. Simple. Limit the zone to about 10 miles by 10 miles just to keep it snappy. Might I also suggest 2 man teams; driver and gunner. Both sides have access to the same tanks if they want them, just assign red and blue and do your PID. (Sock will kill a team mate "accidentally" Battle to the death, last tank rolling, that side wins. Put an insignia on the tanks if you can to make PID easier.
Great concept
I'm digging the Leclerc and Leopard 2A6/2A7.
The shells fired by the mbt's are apfsds-t rounds so basically they fire a 20mm shell out of a 120-125mm barrel resulting a mind blowing muzzle velocity of about 1700m/s. When compared to german ww2 guns which usually had a velocity of 800-1000m/s depending on the gun and the round. Also the armor isn't just x amount of steel. Its layered armor with many materials like textolite, tungsten, depleted uranium and rha. Also eastern tanks use alot of explosive reactive armor like relict which makes chemical and most kinectic rounds completely uselles, but era is destroyed after one hit.
Also the 105-125 mbt cannons are all smoothbore so no rifling. They use fins to stabilize the round so the spinning of the round wont affect the trajectory.
the Abrams has the best round with about 700 mm of penetration at 1km and 1500hp. you asked the muzzle velocity of the old guns is average of 900m/s and the modern ones are around 1500m/s.
the turret front cheeks of the Leopard are designed to break APDS penetrators as they penetrate.
Weren't the Tigers IIs firing at the same time as the Tiger Is? It looked like they were too closely packed together.
The LeClerk: No "Frog" legs for you, Cap!! To be honest, in an armored vehicle, I would love to see an aluminum block diesel Merlin pattern engine. Wasn't it the British that developed the composite armor?
1. Leo - 120mm RH L44 - around 60 tons - German doctrine is mobility and firepower - new Leos have the turret protection added but they still emphasize speed
2. Leclerc - 120mm GIAT CN 120-26/52 - around 57 tons - France had an even bigger focus on low armor, big gun and speed. This heavily informed their tank design, so speed is key.
3. Challenger 2 - 120 mm L30A1 Rifled - upto 80 tons - British doctrine is focused on defense and long range engagements, older british tanks were notorious for their weak engines. The challenger does better, but it suffers in getting to top end speed. It is very well protected and has a great service record. The gun is different from almost every other Modern tank in that it is rifled, this has more to do with british doctrine than accuracy as many people think. The brits might be moving to smoothbore soon.
4. T80U - 125mm 2A46-2 - around 46 tonnes - Russian doctrine is close to the German one, fast, big gun and rush the enemy. This comes from the war and post war plannng of Soviet command. Their tanks are however, notoriously under powered compared to western ones and are not as good at putting the power down. It also depends alot on design t72 series is very different from the t80 series. The t80 uses a turbine engine, basically a plane engine
5. M1A1 Abrams - 120 mm RH L44 - around 60 tons - The abrams and leo came from a joint German US program and are thus very similar. One of the big differences being the abrams engine, it uses a turbine engine for better power to weight. However, the tank is very heavy. It is very mobile, decently protected and has a good gun. I do know personally, that an abrams lost a track once going full tilt in the dessert when it hit a foot sized rock.
6. ZTZ 96 - 125mm Type 88C - around 40 tons - Chinese doctrine is very similar to cold war russian doctrine, with the slight difference that they focus much more on sensors and battle management. The tank is underpowered, due to a weak engine. However, newer chinese designs are considered pretty lethal.
7. Merkava - 120mm MG253 - around 65 tons - Israel focuses on crew protection, the merkava has its engine infront and the crew sits behind, thus protecting them from penetrating hits. The tank is also meant to fight in urban and non-urban environments. The focus on protection means the merkava is not that mobile. It is still however, a lethal platform that is likely the best at protecting its crew from penetrating hits
8. Chieftain - Its basically a really old tank which was underpowered. Doesn't really belong in the competition.
NOTE: Merkava, ZTZ and T80 can fire ATGMs as well. The tanks in the game dont seem to be super accurate to their real world performance, and my knowledge is limited. There are 2 main schools of tank design, Soviet (small, big gun) Western (Fast, big gun). In a real world scenario any tank can kill any tank under 1KM. The real difference is made by crew awareness and ability to identify and engage targets quickly, along with how the armor is used. Recent conflicts have shown tanks flanked by ATGM infantry = dead tank.
On armor, Merkava is again focused on crew protection, there was a test when sweden selected its mbt between M1A2, Leclerc and Leo 2improved (with wedge). The leo was the best in terms of protection. Lethality wise the L55 is better than the US L44 as well, but newer US tanks are basically sensor systems, and I personally believe in general combat the M1 fits best into its battle role.
The antenna on the Merkava are actually sensors for the trophy APS (it can kill incoming projectiles by firing a small projectile at it). Ill again comment that all the MBTs in this video save for chieftain would have minced the ww2 stuff. They have stabilizers and would not miss that many shots in real life.
APFSDS - is basically a dart, its a kinetic round and has no explosive. You just use the kinetic energy to penetrate the target and it does spalling damage. Most modern tanks uses this, its also why they use smoothbore. You can't use rifled guns with fin darts
HESH - is a chemical round that squashes against the target and uses chemical boom boom to go in
Thanks!
Smoothbore cannons are accurate because thanks use Fin Stabilized rounds that stabilize the round in flight like rifling in a firearm. Also the smoothbore cannons have a longer life.
More an issue of the fins not rifling, and massive speed
thx
The barrel on the Merkava looks shorter than it really is because much of it sits back in the turret.
Also, the turret is located more to the back of the tank (though they seemed to have put it in the middle in the simulator), since the engine is in the front of the tank and not in the back as in most tanks. This makes it look even shorter.
It appears that it’s pretty common for the computer models to under represent the American battle capabilities.
That’s the Crazy Ivan maneuver from the Hunt for Red October.
Thank you simba
Technically it did not use an autoloder using oscillating turret the AMX series
When Cap says, "say hello boys 🧐", that's when I know the fun is beginning.
Cap getting blown up was inevitable after that le clerc tank comment.
:(
@@grimreapers I nearly woke the wife up laughing at it.
Pzkw4 75mm/L54, Pzkw5 75mm/L70…longer barrel higher velocity…that’s why the 4 just bounced…plus 5 has sloped thicker armor…Pzkw6 88mm /L54, Pzkw7 88mm/L70…same comments above….the Leopard, and Abrams they use sabot ammo, Chicom they used heat round…against pure armor (not composite) the sabot just cuts right thru, so you have to pinpoint vital…Inthink that’s why the Chicom tank hit ration looked good at the beginning