Damnit.

hahahahahha

Thanks Captain Obvious!

but an airsoft gun can

what

DracoAvian No, I can go to wikipedia and type "Modern Battle Tank".

james learing And get all the information released to the public. Go ahead and give me specific math on multiple types of warheads and their ability to defeat multiple types of armor. Just even tell me the construction specs of chobham armor.

DracoAvian Oh sorry I misunderstood your first comment.

james learing It's all good.

TheXtraMan Oh ya i put Modern battle tank lol.

true

true but the first tank to see service was French

Jan-Willem Jansen Renault FT 75 BS first modern tank in serial production and introduced at the end of ww1

Lol beat me to it

French planned the Renault first, but the Brits put theirs into production and combat first.

+kimmer6 They should have included that fact in the video.

+Xplosion51 which is a licence built copy of the British 120mm

+Skystalker The Brits gave us the idea of the armor composite (they actually gave the U.S. their secrets to the Challenger ) which was updated and still classified btw the 120mm smooth bore gun was from Germany.

+Kragz88 Actually the Chobham armour is british. The armor in the Abrams is the same armor used in the Challenger. Composite armor is used by many countries. The earliest instance of composite armor was in the 50's with the T-95. But the Chobham is the most effective one.

Leonov Martinovich Yea thats what I'm saying - Britain passed on the secret to the US Military.

Chuck Norris once visited the Virgin Islands...and now they are just called "The Islands".

Phil Whitesell I know you are being sarcastic but he actually lives by me

No, Chuck Norris is everywhere!

Chuck Norris is a shithead

Ikr and it was only 9 abrams that killed those tanks not 12

Exactly...wtf. Did he know the M1 Abrams tank was initially produced with a 105mm main gun tube carried over from the old M60A3 before they converted to the NATO 120mm? Did he know we blew through the Iragi Republican Guard because they didn't put up a fight? Most of their crews weren't trained, some of their tanks/crews didn't even have ammo - they were cannon fodder.

+Kyle Callahan It's kinda funny that the first tanks were literally just called "Tank mk1". It's the same with HMS Dreadnought. It's so weird now because we're used to it being a term.

+Kyle Callahan Ah I was gonna write that :(

+Kyle Callahan Not so much a disguise as a cover story. The British (who invented the things) were, rightfully, worried about spies finding out about their secret weapon to break the trench stalemate. So almost all the workers and subcontractors who built parts for the first MK1 were told they were producing an armored "mobile water tank" to supply front-line troops with fresh water in a hostile environment. Anyone who worked on the project up to the final assembly (where the installation of guns and controls into the supposed water tank interior kind of gave the game away) believed they were building a mobile water tank, and all correspondence, purchase orders, etc. used in the project referred to the vehicle as a "tank". Even after they rolled out into combat, they tended to be referred to as "tanks" by the specialists and crews who had trained on them in secret, and the name just stuck.

+MrJest2 Thats completely right.

+MrJest2 I thought it was the French that had the first go at tanks

Ahman Millener well they're not going to tell you classified information

You wanna learn something new? Export Abrams although with no depleted uranium armour, are being destroyed by Soviet era Kornet E ATGMs, so the base armour of the Abrams is not that great, and the depleted uranium can be countered by other depleted uranium Sabots, the Abrams is no longer an invincible monster in the media

Also British, "murican" tank

And How to do you build the best tank in the world? By taking the best equipment from your allies and molding it into one vehicle. Yes our main gun is German (modified) and our armor is British... Why try and reinvent the wheel? You guys came up with the best, and we wanted the best. So we paid for it. I've put hundreds of rounds down range.. And I can tell you this.. That M256 smoothbore 120mm cannon, with its fire control package is capable of putting an APFSDS-T up a fleas ass at 1200m...

you mean taking the best equipment, and making it better. Also many nations also rip off america. South korea's k1 is almost entirely american inspired.

xtrada HALE It really comes down to this: See first Shoot First Kill First. While all three tanks are very capable of firing on the move, the T90 lacks the raw armor, and the visibility that the Abrams or Leopard does. On top of that, in a hull down position, the Abrams will be better able to use the terrain due its superior elevation and depression. The only thing the Abrams loses out in, is fuel. It is a very thirsty beast, and thus, can be starved out. Just keep the crews away from the vodka... they'll use it to fuel the tank and get back to friendly lines.

So I can get one!!!

Jonathon Davonger T-90 is having a completely different approach for defense. It uses systems that destroys/deflects/neutralizes an incoming projectile before it hits the tank. The T-90 is also much lighter and a bit faster. It also uses an autoloader system (for good or for bad, in my own eyes - for good) and is capable of firing (guided) missiles. Has superior power to weight ratio and operational range can reach 50% higher than the other two with the later engine model. The Leopard is having a multi-fuel engine and is more fuel-efficient as well as generally cost-efficient. It shares the same gun as the Abrams, which is considered to be of the best tank armaments. Abrams has superior raw armor and science behind it, as well as popularity around the world for the numerous places it can be seen at (for good or for bad). Abrams is faster on road, but slower off of it. Most of basic comparisons you can get. Also, I think the Leopard can actually run on vodka among other fuels types (joke) :)

at 12km neither tank could even *see* eachother let alone shoot one another.

Except, at those distances, 'flat' is out of the question as the curve of the earth is in full effect. On top of that, the ATGM on the T-90 can only reach out to 5-6km at best before the motor burns out. The Abrams now has its own ATGM with a range of 12.1km. It's designed for use against helicopters and 'fast' vehicles, but it'll still take down an MBT if it can hit it. Also, the, the Rhienmetal 120mm Smoothbore can hit out to 4km with APFSDS Ammunition.

***** Top Gear won't be aired anymore, Jeremy Clarkson attacked the producer of BBC and got Top Gear booted off.

***** you realize there is an american version of top gear right...

Cara Institute of Advanced Hypnosis LOL same...

constitutional libertarian that is a big pile of shit

+constitutional libertarian there's a shitier american version of all british shows now

How long ago was that?

I too was part of the first training cycle for the M1 at Fort Knox. I completed basic and AIT in 79 and was held over to be part of Cycle 1. We were allowed to put the M1 through it's paces and killed several of US in the process...

In ww2 during combat the first thing my dad did is take off the governor. His Sherman would do about 45. he didn't throw it out because if the engine blew it would court marshal time put it back on afterward.

+John Hall Yeah that 42 MPH fact left me laughing. I have heard time and time again from tankers about doing 50-60 MPH down Iraqi highways and in other places. Don't know about you but I laughed when he commented on the armor package for the Abrams and left off as if that was fact. Last I checked the actual composition of the armor is classified information and so the exact composition and even placement of armor on the chassis is classified.

Joe Dawson I'm an old 19D cav scout... I've been around those Abrams tanks since the mid 80s... they will absolutely haul ass! and yes you are correct about the armor composition being classified... I've seen it cracked one time, by running into another Abrams, and it is kinda honeycomb looking with some green radiotor fluid type liquid...

John Hall Thank you for your service and I have had a chance back in high school to ride in an Abrams in 2003. We were a group of students from the JROTC in Bangor,ME ( if you have come from overseas and landed in Bangor you have seen the BTN's troop greeter detail) But we had a blast and the driver told us himself that alot of guys have the wrench turners remove the governing device the reason being if 45 MPH is considered fast enough to evade and dodge the enemy the 60 is even better. Haha....Yeah I am not sure what that fluid was but I am sure the government felt it was required. Who knows maybe when they finally field the A3's we can find out when the declassify that particular package.

+John Hall is it true that the m1 abrams have high fuel consumption and can only idle for 8 hours?

dunno, I was a cav scout not a tanker... just got to play with em a few times

Yeah - when the British shipped them to the battlefield (at least the first time they were used in battle) in WWI, they labeled the crates with with the word "tank", so that enemies would presume the crates to be carrying water tanks.

Originally the project was called Water Carrier or WC. The British General leading the project changed it to "tank" seeing as how both can be called water carriers, but the British nickname for a toilet is a water closet or "WC" He didn't want to be the head of the toilet division, and the name stuck.

No, the "tank" was called tank, so German spies during World War I would think that "tanks"we're water carriers, and plus you are a complete dumbass, tanks weren't shipped in crates, the tank mk 1 was about 30 feet long and they were shipped out in the open on giant ships

+The war Monger And on flatbeds on trains, covered in canvas/some sort of tarp

+The war Monger Her Majesty's land Ships were majestic as all hell.

WOT pheasant, I only play REALISTIC games- every WarThunder player

But world of tanks doesn't have the abrams, war thunder does. #warthunder #Merica

*Type 90 coming over the hill*

T-34-122 *appears over the hill to destroy a maus*

Willie_The_SpermWhale abrams 120mm with 650mm of pen with the m900 type 90 no more

VTEC KICKED IN YO

+Anaithnid001 Tanks in the east still often still have HEAT rounds.

I take it you've never played Planetside 2? :P

Anaithnid001 Well, no. I have had it installed for a while but haven't played.

It's a reference to the fact that the HEAT rounds got nerfed, so very few people use them. Particularly as HE does better at farming infantry. Naturally, HEAT rounds didn't get nerfed in real life, lol. That would be awkward.

Anaithnid001 Yeah but in the west anyways, they are not used that much anymore. Western tanks use APFSDS to combat armor, except British Challengers, they use HESH.

Hauptsache Deutdchland mit Rheinmetall😎

The chally 2 is beautiful, and elusive X D

rifled guns are better than smooth bore from what I know

they say that the rifled is more accurate than a smooth bore but has less penetration

Leopold71 *rifling CAN reduce muzzle velocity for a given charge* is a better phrase, doesn't mean it always does because a good design will have minimal impact of velocity plus you can always have a bigger charge and higher pressures to compensate, the benefits are usually worth it hence the majority of guns are rifles, allot of tanks are purely down to cost and NATO ammo compatibility.

That's odd considering I have seen many pictures of infantry being directly behind the Abrams in combat.

Ah really? They probably found a way to cool the exhausts long before, which is good anyway.

+Carlos Fernandez Hiding behind a tank isn't really a prefered tactic for infantry anyway. A lesson quickly learned was that tanks are bullet magnets, so while the infantry appreciate the extra fire power they prefer to stay as clear of it as enemy infantry would.

+mortaché de muerte I feel sorry for you, bruh... ;_;

Be prepared to sweep motor pools for hours

lol

+Tom Palmer We already train to do just that.

Thanks for the info. I wondered about that.

+Tom Palmer Don't slam me but i thing they have a round that dose that.

You're right. A guy told me they did.

Except that for over twenty years, the chemical agents can easily be added to; with items that deteriorate the seals quite rapidly. The seals are rarely maintained properly. Even if they were, even after just one or two exposures to chemical agents every single seal would have to be replaced.

Almost all nato tanks can do that wtf, it's basic NBC protection my dude

Yes, this is true. In fact my Army Unit's motto was "Better Living thru Chemistry" especially when we were down near Del Rio....

Leopard 2 is better

Excuses me do you have a moment for our lord and savior the Leopard 2A9?

Spartan John-G172 the best tank in the world ?

Ken Bradford Yupper's

The TOG* II is the best because it is also a land whale.

+TheEwker Yeah I have heard about the tea thing. I believe the unit that makes tea even has a warning label on it that says do not use while in motion or so a retired british tanker friend of my grand father's has told me ( He was a WWII vet same as my grand father)

+TheEwker Actually Vickers was absorbed in BAE, which means the Challenger 2 can be produced if needed. However, at the present time there is no reason for it.

+TheEwker Abrams is better

AlphaDragonification Pls give reasons...

+TheEwker because it's actually been used unlike the challenger 2? Your doing the same as americans claiming the F22 is the best fighter in the world when it has yet to even be tested. Given the current combat record the only direct loss of a tank was a friendly fire incident.

+George Xyrafis They did. Not Leopard 2s (and thats never going to happen, Germany and America are on too good terms, hell the Leopard project evolved from a NATO combined tank design to begin with) but during the Gulf War M1s shattered T-90s and T-72s like they were toys. Sure some of it has to go to superior training and shock and awe...but still.

+George Xyrafis Well the t-90 is an upgraded t-72 so i'd say there's no significant difference

Evil Genius That only points out how ignorant you are and that this conversation is pointless really. The T-90 doesn't only have slight uprgades. It features new electronics, new armour, new engine, basically it's like a whole different tank with the chassis based on the T-72, that's why they named it T-90 rather than T-72. So yeah there's a huge difference that you are not willing to see

George Xyrafis Its still going to blow up if you nail it with a round from a 120mm Rhinemetal.

George Xyrafis Yeah, it's so new, modern and up to today's standards that Russian Army of course, never decided to replace it with a new tank. I've done my research. New armor or not, it will still not survive a clash with another western tank.

TheTabellarius now tell me about the one where stalin didn't kill twice as many people as hitler.

MrNotadream DU isn't laced with radioactive material, it is radioactive. Although weak it does emit radiation, if you believe the authorities this is only a danger if the DU gets under the skin, ingested or breathed in. The problem with radiation is not immediate effects but prolonged exposure, doctors and nurses use all sorts of imaging devices day in day out; its why when you get an X-ray they don't stick around. You might get a pretty harmless dose but they might do 100s of people a day, tell a crew they are going to spend 1000s of hours encased in a slightly radioactive material filled with slightly radioactive DU perpetrators and they might not be so hot on the idea. Australia made it a condition that the US remove the DU layer on the Abrams they added after the Gulf War during the sale. Some things are unavoidable, the sights on these tanks routinely use exotic radioactive materials. The bigger danger though is not to the crews if you think DU is generally safe enough to be handled in solid form, taking what you said... "DU rounds are only claimed to leave a tiny amount, almost untraceable, radioactive levels AFTER they are fired into a target" What do you think happens to the sabot round once it hits a target? It turns to dust and shards and goes everywhere in an explosion, when a vehicle goes up. The whole problem is leaves behind dust and contaminated material everywhere that troops and civilians can breath in or eventually find in their food and drinking water. Its essentially fallout. Its not safe to use, but its effective and cheap use of the bi-products of enrichment and nuclear power. The cost though is a risk to US troops and the political consequences inflicting generations of people you are meant to be liberating with birth deflects and cancer. Since we use the stuff in cruise missiles as well it's agent orange all over again.

Dear Boris does the truth offend it was all fact and nothing but the fact your honour. Poor little yankee fan boys don't like to hear how vulnerable the DUD 1 really is

TheTabellarius It's just simply the best tank in the world (that is in use).

Chino Gambino good knolege of tanks I say bravo.Where do you find that information.

Perhaps, or they would've just ended up going with the Leopard 2 that Germany was trying to sell to US. The Challenger would also be garbage without with armor package, although I did hear it was a British Challenger that still holds the record for the longest range tank to tank kill, at over 5km. I guess keeping that rifled gun had its uses.

+Rimasta1 it was a challenger 1 that holds the record

+Keenan Carr (ScorpontGamerZofficial) Good, you owe them saving your ass during WW2. Also since m1a1 they started using DU mesh.

+Dangerous Amoeba The one time America "saves" us and they never let it go. You just shortened the war. And you bunch of pussies only came into the war because Japan beat the fuck out of Pearl Harbour like a piñata! And newsflash, WE helped in the Battle of the Pacific. At least we aren't friend,y fire statistics. We had to take the red part of our Royal Air Force Roundel so you didn't shoot our Spitfires down!! A B29 shot down its escort because they thought a Spitfire F. Mk IX was a Japanese Zero! Who the fuck were you guys recruiting?! Half Blind boys who didn't pass middle school?! That would explain a lot

Wow, britcuck denial is hilarious. News flash, if US didn't send over tanks Africa would be German. Then you would have sat on your island, while Germany demolished Europe since you lacked industry to bomb them at the rate US let you. Your plan was litteraly, to plant mines on the beach and wait. US may have shot down a Raf plane by mistake. But the Raf shot down a Raf plane literally days after the war started. Battle of barking Creek.

lol yeah, they can't destroy them with AT guns so they have to use missiles used to bomb military compounds.

uuh no the konkurus is an old soviet anti tank missile .

+Michael Mieir lol that made you look dumb

If they can shred through a M1A2 Abrams with the TUSK it can shred through any tank in the world

Sniper3322 no , t90am with relict is stronger .

I was in the 2nd Armored Div. And frankly, instead of being at Ft. Hood, I kept trying to be the US Army Repr on the Miss Venezuela Contest....just sayin'

GhostGameplayer Lp well t14 was made more than 20 years after the abrams

GhostGameplayer Lp its like comparing a spitfire with f86

+paperitgel98 i know, it's just a joke comparing it really isn't fair

***** very funny......ha ha .......................ha

+paperitgel98 there are 2 types of jokes in the universe: the good ones and my jokes lol