they are upgrading as we are talking using some centauro 2 parts we should have some news at the end of the year

@@user-kk6yg7ds9z that's good to hear since the Italian MBTs were left behind even by the Leopard 2A4s in terms of modernization.

Ariete won't have a major upgrade but a small one

The cold war is over, the only opponent with a sufficient number of tanks to threaten Italy is Russia, which would have to do half of Europe to get to us, and even if it succeeds it should try to cross the Alps, what which is not very easy, he would find himself fighting in a territory that right now lends itself very little to large tank battles so you understand that with a relatively low defense budget there is not much interest in funding upgrades for a vehicle destined to collect dust throughout its operational life.

@@user-kk6yg7ds9z no Armour improvements though, Italian army will continue to use the same old WAR and PSO kits on the upgraded Arietes.

I guess you didn't hear about the garbage collection strike in Rome in 2019/20. Wild boar were coming out of the woods lured by the garbage. That was pollution Lmao.

je montamo er retrofit

To be honest the Army is developing "green fuels" as like the Navy did in past. Our ships today have low emissions and mostly gree due to such development. Unfortunately we can't make our ships parade in the center of Rome... that would be... "Problematic". 🤣

@@danielefabbro822 For the series, We kill people, but always in a Green way

@@limonman1716 yeah. People produce pollution. We contribute to clean the planet.

And others think that Centauro is bad because of it's armour

The only thing wrong in all this is that something is "useless"

"Mancò la fortuna, non il valore"

@@hoshyro Più corretto affermare "Mancò tutto tranne il valore".

@@hoshyro Great translation!! The one below, perhaps more literal, does not convey ANYTHING. Translation with a dictionary is so naive.

@@junanougues Literal translations can be less sentimental even if more correct, I personally think it's a good thing to slightly tweak the sentence if it means you can convey the same feeling

It is not a tank. A tank is a role to be filled, not a description of the vehicle.

Copied from the Rooikat I am sure.

@@Password17179 Here is our Rooikat video. We hope you enjoy it. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z7iXjbCdz76qZqM.html

btw., i wouldn't say the 105 mm is not more "good for the job", i'm a tank driver and yes, we could survive a 105mm hit, but the tank is mostly useless afterwards! some people say a 105mm gun is obsolete and blabla, but when it hit a tank, the crew maybe survive, but 90% of them would abandon the tank nevertheless

@@Ezekiel903 you mean to say even a light tank that has a gun 105mm can do damage even mbt?

The centauro weighs 33 tons the mgs weighed 21 tons.

@@jeffreyprezalar220 yeap, that's not the only reason. Strikers have inferior surface. Their balance in such situations isn't sufficient to hold the effects of the shooting. So their vehicle falls. Of course that's happening because Strikers wasn't thinked and designed to operate such larger guns.

The problem is that the Stryker as a SPG is rather an after thought rather than a dedicated concept. On the other hand, the Centauro is designed and built specifically as an SPG, hence it has most of the quirks figured iut

@@quakethedoombringer indeed. That's exactly the reason why I like the Striker. It can be used for a wider number of tasks. Centauro instead is a pure anti-tank.

If desperate Abrams can go at 100kmh.

That flat belly wouldn't be ideal if it encounters IEDs in the battlefield.

@@Tam0de Irrelevant. Prior to the Centauro all wheeled armoured vehicles had diffs and drive shafts hanging down underneath which is even worse. Now they just need (which they have done) is improve belly armour. Like a tank.

@@Tam0de IED's were not s problem at the time this vehicle was designed

The 8x8 version of the 6x6 Guarani might get the deal tho, since the 6x6 version was already licensed produced by Brazil already. It would be better for the Brazilian Army to simplify its logistics.

@@paulsteaven What he said. Bringing the Centauro is utterly stupid. Stick with the Guarani, same money, keep jobs. Brazil has no threats in South America that require a Centauro.

@@andreinarangel6227 maybe a combination of the two, they already have many guaranis and can adquire more latter, centauro have different role mate. but the main point is fire power and mobility. In my opinion better wth reactive armor if thats isnt a problem with weight reducing its speed. but it have a thiner armor to reduce weight.. a very thin armor in my opinion thats why ive said that. it have a briliant speed and firepower though for its type

Brazil have a decent defense industry, the vehicles you are talking about will be manufactured in the country under license or something like that?

@@cesaravegah3787 guaranís? yep also in argentina. Iveco guaraní 6x6

With the Lambo kit it reaches 250 km/h...

Lmao

Does it come in black? 😎

*slaps roof

HAHAHA

same though i'm italian where do i buy one? i don't like to wait at stops, i'd rather point my gun to establish priority

Heck no, those things cost 15 million per unit.

There’s a video of the Ariete firing on Maximus video. Didn’t look good to be honest.

Ariete is old, very old. Take it from an Italian, it's just surpassed. The chassis itself needs reworking, it would barely compete against 80s era Soviet tanks. They can put all the modifications they want, it's wasted cash. Mobile antitanks it's where is at for the Italian army, in its current state.

@@Metalbringer92 no the Ariete is not that old, matter of fact is younger than the Leopard 2. All in all the Ariete is a decent MBT but sadly not kept up to date. Fortunately a major upgrade is on the way.

The Ariete can hold its ground against all former soviet tanks. The main problem is the engine and armor. The armor is outdated but that can be mitigated with add on armor. The engine to weak is being replaced. Also a modernization of the interior. But beside this necessary upgrade, they plan to focus on a new MBT euro or in collaboration with somebody else like Israel or Poland.

No need for them. It will be upgrated, but not a ptiority. MBTs are obsolite as military assets. Not at all, but their role diminished significantly.

Assolutamente vero! Sarebbe davvero soddisfacente vedere i nostri centauri cacciare quelle bare su cingoli di tank russi.

Fuck that US proxy war

wow non vedo l'ora di regalare ai briganti delle steppe un centinaio di cacciacarri per le loro infinite guerre tribali

A Centauro 1 would do mincemeat of an old T55 or even an updated T62. A couple of Centauro 2 could face a T72 or T90 without too much risk, and, in case of an ambush, the 120 mm smoothbore gun can take out virtually anything. The point being that a Centauro is faster, cheaper, more nimble than a battle tank, snd ideal in a mountain scenario with narrow winding roads. It's not really made to fight battle tanks 1 to 1 in flat terrain. However, in Ukraine, there are very few T72 left, mostly in poor state. Against a T55, even an early version of the Centauro would be in clear advantage because of superior mobility and better targeting tech. I'd be glad to see them kicking the Wagners in the nuts.

There is a prototype it's called Iveco Drako

@@gabrieledecarli9285 I don't think it's a prototype anymore

I doubt it's ever coming to War Thunder, if ever... The vehicle you see in pictures is apparently only a mock-up.... forum.warthunder.com/index.php?/topic/496823-draco-the-76mm-truth/page/2/

@@adityabora9131 Bold of you to assume that would stop Gayjin.

@@adityabora9131 as long as they don't put in the oto 76 strales version with dart ammunition it's good

18 millions USD for 1 Centauro? You can buy brand new Abram, Leopard 2a7 cheaper than that...

@@kuhaku9587 development costs are probably also counted.

@@kuhaku9587 that Is for development, spare parts and general logistics, if you want the best you have to spend... Not like america and Stryker mgs😂

@@kuhaku9587 the final cost of the other 140 vehicles will be so cheaper than that, probably around 1 million at veichle

@@kuhaku9587 you also do not understand the reason why centauro exist, Leopard and Abrams cannot do what centauro can, the whole service Life cost Is also WAAAAY lower...

And you can put them in an Airbus 400

Non penso che un Leopard, possa sopportare un colpo da 120mm..e uno schiaffo micidiale.

yeap, like all italian cars; good looking but good for nothing :)

@@gigihentz5510 Ferrari isn't good for nothing, so isn't Alfa and many other brands

@@gigihentz5510 Ah yes, keep feeding Italy with envy, She likes it, it makes Her grow stronger :)

@@gigihentz5510 Are you invidious?

All copies of the rooikat looks fashionable

Three different uses. The AMX-10RC is used essentially as a light tank in French doctrine, which emphasizes what the French call offensive reconnaissance. The Centauro was meant as a tank destroyer, and was meant to destroy as many soviet tanks as possible. The Stryker was meant as a fire support vehicle, but it failed due not only to a multitude of technical problems but also how it doctrinally fit into the US army.

Both the Centauro and AMX-10 RC were designed from the ground up for the role. The Stryker is a LAV 3 aka a Piranha 3, with a gun mounted on it. To save costs, they used a cheap gun with a bad autoloader, that never worked properly.

Well it's not like the Striker isn't successful. It depends on the task. As IFV and AFV is a decent platform, pretty useful and adaptable. But in anti-tank role it sucks because it wasn't developed for that task. It was better when the americans replaced the main gun with a set of anti-tank rockets.

@@danielefabbro822 The main gun on the M1128 Mobile Gun System Stryker was never meant to fight tanks, it was meant to hit fortified positions. The Americans have an anti-tank variant of the Stryker , the M1134 Stryker ATGM.

@@eddgar-ce3md fortified positions? With the Abrams main gun?

The US army dindn't wanted other nation wheel vehicles, the wanted a tank with track, and the result was a garbage tank...

Quale è il tuo sito?

Maybe because it lacks an 8x8 APC/IFV variant, that's why it's fellow European contemporary; Pandur II is slowly getting foothold with its tank destroyer and IFV variant with the recent order of Philippine Army and upcoming order by the Indonesian Army for the said two variants.

Prolly because it's a very specific vehicle, most just go for a real tank, back then there's plenty cheap ex Warsaw pack tank

@@paulsteaven The IFV variant of Centauro is the Freccia. There are several versions, for e ampie with Leonardo Hitfist turret (25 or 30 mm auto cañón) or Hitfist OWS 30, as option to the turret can be addendi an ATGM sistema (Spike). There is also the Freccia AMC that is a mortar carrier ( 120 mm with semi automatic loader).

i think there is a prototype on that chassis named Centauro 155

Already have

yeah!.. that's good but not great,, with only 10 units which the Philippines is ordered are not very good,, bcoz in actual war that small number of 10 can be wiped out in just 1 day.. the great strategy is to get 120 units or more for an effective minimum credible defense, with that numbers maybe its not cost effective,, but in war a high numbers are strategically its combat effective..

@Machine Fack italy don't have the found to change ALL the old equipment at once. they changed the fighter jets, then accumulated founds for ships, then changed the army rifle system and the centauro 2, then maybe a new tank or go back to upgrade airforce

US army did in fact tested and actually fielded few Centauros to evaluate them and possibly buy them. At the end US army wanted a 8x8 wheeled vehicle but not centauro. Google it youncan find some interviews to the US crews who prefers the centauro instead of the striker

@Machine Fack afaik US army is interested in rehinmetall Lynx as Germany, UK and Italy. And IFV is usually armed with an 20/30mm autocannon and possibly ATGM. A tank destroyer is specifically armed with bigger guns and APFSDS ammo. Centauro II is fitted with the same 120mm on the Ariete, slightly modified to fit in the new turret and less recoil for example

lol.

I remember reading something about Russians complaining about the centaur always got traped in mud, and they're too cramped inside... Now, when you have Russians complaining about a vehicle's internal volume, then you probably know how cramped it is

the Bumerang has nothing to do with the centaur, the first is an amphibious tank with troop-carrying capability, the second is a tank destroyer thought to be such and has no troop-carrying capability. an Italian vehicle to be compared to the bumerang and the iveco super av8, an amphibious troop transport vehicle. in fact the bumerang was already under development at that time. the bilateral agreement for the supply of arms to russia was signed by the berlusconi government with putin, the two are notoriously close friends and have always done business together privately. diplomatic relations between russia and italy were excellent, most likely the best among european countries (which the eu never digested) but the russian defense minister and the country's war industry strongly opposed these bilateral agreements. the 2 types of vehicles subject to interest were the light armored lmv lince and the cantauro. the first was subjected to a confrontation with the Russian tiger armored vehicle, the Italian vehicle won the competition and won the order for 3000 vehicles. these vehicles will be built in russia and will take the name of lmv m65 plicb, but the russian defense minister strangely commissioned a new test. (which will never be carried out) in the meantime the production of the first batch of 1200 vehicles will start, it will be the first and last batch, the other two will be canceled. in the meantime the tests on the centaur begin, the aim was to build the Italian vehicle under license with technology sharing. this would have allowed the Russians to use the hull of the cantauro for the new bumerang amphibious vehicle that was already being studied. but the hull of the Italian armored vehicle was not designed for the transport of troops, its structure was designed to withstand the enormous stress of a turret with a 105/120 mm gun. too low in the center of gravity for troop transport. in fact Italy used another vehicle for the transport of troops, called the freccia. however the tests on the centaur were never completed and the order canceled. there were many factors that led to the termination of the agreement, but they are not about the vehicles themselves. one of the determining factors and the strong opposition of the Russian war industry, which aimed at a national product, it must be said that the lynx cost about 20 million rubles per unit, while the tiger was offered for 5 million rubles, this and another factor to consider. but the most decisive was the change of government in Italy, the arrival of the monti government, strongly pro-European and I add also servile towards the eu, strongly tilted relations with the Russians, immediately showing itself flat towards our Russian friends. this behavior made Russia lose the confidence that Russia had in Italy (I would rightly add), forcing the Russian government to cancel the agreement made with the previous government. I would say that the matter is much more complicated than it seems.

@@shermanfirefly5410 Is not cramped unfortunately, Is typical whining from russians and americans when they do not have/develop the best vehicle for it's class, they cannot show the world they buy from other countries, so they study and try to Copy... Never worked ahahahahahahaha look at the Stryker😂

Also the centauro didn't fail the tests, but that's another story

I believe that instead there is a political choice, they had also tested some LINCE which then they discarded and tried to copy without success with their national industry, the LINCE and used by practically over 20 nations with great satisfaction and saved many lives, the Centaur II is the best in its category if analyzed in technical contexts without political evaluations, which then can have problems and normal if used in extreme conditions.

Agreed, The Rooikat is a good vehicle this looks so much like it. Rooikat now comes with a 105mm gun

@@phillipjacobs7975 Rooikat 105 was only tested as a prototype. All in-service Rooikat have a 76mm gun.

Looks like they based this on the Rooikat. And the Rooikat was at least 30 years ago.

But Wheel vehicles are not as mobile than track vehicles in montangous regions

is a modern MG3 variant called MG 42/59 producted by Beretta ( license )

Rooikat in English: Lynx

The Rooikat is mentioned quite a bit in the first part of the video

Here is our Rooikat video. We hope you enjoy it. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/Z7iXjbCdz76qZqM.html

@@stonepvv rooikat in English is caracal

more expensive ;)

Remember this the US military industrial complex here. Unlike in Italy where these people have to work together since there is no profit in colluding to gouge the government.

a worse product and much more expensive. Collaboration is overrated.

It would be an incredible saving of money, you could practically use the Centaur both as a Tank, as a Tank Destroyer and as an amphibian.

Centauro design from the ground up as a tank destroyer, meanwhile MGS just a pimped APC, but it's still get the job done though

The m113 doesn't have a 120mm on it and won't take anything heavier than a .50 cal and won't reach speed of 100kmh. They both have different purpose and the wheeled vehicles are winning in today's world.

The other thing to consider is that with Italy, the country is not exactly tank country. So much of the terrain is hills and mountains so the problem of ground pressure may not be all that pressing.

@@ChairmanMo There are places with soft soil in Italy, farm land, beaches and any place a river flows. A lightly armored vehicle that is road bound is a death trap

Hell even Albania would not join because in 1968 (probably) when the Warsaw pact invaded Czechoslovakia Albania did not join and left the Warsaw pact and destroyed the relations with the soviets

@@bamboo7563 Albania was the extreme case.. after Hoxha saw the Soviet invasion of Hungary & Czechoslovakia, he completely went into paranoia, shut down the whole country from any diplomatic relation.. the only partner was China but after 1970s, Albania severed the ties between the two.

@@notamoonraker yeah but in the end Albania decided to end it all with China and USSR

You can check out our AMX 10 RC video kzfaq.info/get/bejne/oNOVmKSJsdvJhqM.html

Lol where😂 Edge in what? Firepower? Mobility? Obstacole clearance? FCS? None of those the amx-10rc Is far behind

​@@alessandromazzini7026 huguhĝ

Frog spotted...

​@@alessandromazzini7026Your lack of knowledge is as hopeless as your opinion.

One wheel destroyed, drives back home on seven wheels. One track broken, whole tank is immobilized.

@@jansix4287 makes sense, thank you

Wheels are made to be more resistant than normal civilian ones, plus the Centauro can drive with deflated wheels if I'm not mistaking