We both know I’ll never stop following the US Centricy Freebrums

Either Leo 2A7V or the Panther, Would likely be most effective for Finland. Having served in the Finnish army alongside a Leopard 2A4 unit, would make sense in terms of familiarity, logistics, and the fact that they suit our landscapes better, western Finland is quite flat, but the further north or east you get, the more hilly the terrain becomes so good gun depression is a must, not to mention L44/L55 with DM63 or newer rounds is enough to destroy any likely threat even from the front, and if penetration is not achieved it doesn't necessarily matter. The panic caused by getting hit by a shell, especially if surprised will likely cause the target vehicle to get disabled or rather abandoned anyway.

Got to go with the chally 3 even if it’s coming 5 years too late

KF51 - assuming that there are no issues w the electronics.

KF51, because the the MGCS looks like it is going to be a clusterfuck. But more than any equipment, I would like to have a competent Defenseminister here in Germany. And not one moron and/or criminal after the other.

Yet German biased players still claim to suffer despite having some of the best lineups.

@@pz.vincesiqueiros7185 facts LOL but i wonder if it has bad armor. Ive been asking since how is it possible to have a gaint new gun and many more systems, how is it lighter?

Be careful. They might add the lynx and the panther and then its game over.

@@imamythyouknowyt6860 Phaserverbundstoffe sind leichter und haben eine höhere Festigkeit, aber sie sind nicht schön zu verarbeiten

Armored Warfare more likely....because they are more focused on modern tanks. They already have a fictional Leopard 2AX (a top tier Leopard 2 with a 130mm gun).

I know, right!

Yet >:)

The engine will hopefully not catch fire after ten km

@@neilwilson5785 Does anybody know what actually happened when these engines 'caught on fire' Like, what does that even mean?? An engine is made of iron mostly, iron doesn't burn. There's _supposed_ to be fire inside. What does 'engine caught in fire' mean? Obviously it's the fuel burning but, where? How? And surely that would be a fuel leak? And the tank is on fire? Such an odd statement and _nobody_ ever asks what that means, or defines it in a video. Like, every Ferdinand video will day that's what _happened_ But I've never seen one define it, describe it.

@@MostlyPennyCat if i know correctly, the engine gets strained, and as it tries to spin the central axle (which gets stuck because of, for an example, a stuck transmission) ,and the strain on the material can make it break. engine still running, fuel still being injected into the broken construction, leaking out and it getting ignited is what causes an engine to catch fire. the overheating doesnt help either

Mathimus he is not! Nut forgivable due his otherwise diligent reporting. Chalk it up to a case of confounding by excessive exuberance, LOL. Its ok Mat, we love ya, and who hasn't taken the maths walk of shame one time or another? You think Einstein never said “oops!”? ;)

Typos! “But forgiveable” & “due to” Small keyboard old eyes shaky fingers = Fudd Typos

Was thinking the exact same thing when he said it ecksdee

@@davidatticus5179 - " You think Einstein never said “oops!”" Perhaps he did, but his "oopses" where probably on a very different level.

Most people noticed that. But, 50% is just as deserving because it is still way out of the range of any current opponent. If you can kill an opponent when that opponent has to drive a couple of kilometers to even touch you, I wouldn't want to be the opponent. And that's not even considering the integrated long range, loitering kamikaze drones.

Panzerleid and Erika play in the distance

Germany spends record on Military Russia: Awakens Industry and Mobilises, France: “Mon dieu…..not again!”

Round 3 is long overdue💀

*HOI4 Axis theme starts. Germany draws battle lines huge lines covering all Europe.

We got a puma, we got a panther, we got a tiger the lineup is complete

I feel like the 4th crew member is very much needed because of all the complex systems present in the tank. Cant expect only two people to control and monitor all of them

It is not. The Leopard 3 would be the Main Ground Combat System which is still in development. Rheinmetall didn't work on it and developed the KF51 as a their own design for a new MBT. (Information taken from German Wikipedia)

@@rudatkatzn9171 that once again french-german coop monstrosity will NEVER finish, because the french sre delaying development for the past 10 years already as they are hellbent on making the project their own and have most of it produced by france. This project is a moneygrave and no real german production

@@rudatkatzn9171 it remains to be seen what happens to MGCS. I for one think this is good for KMW and Nexter who make up the MGCS group. They can now concentrate on demonstrating really disruptive technologies and don't have to worry about bringing an operational product to the market quickly. This way the pressure is off. They could spread funding over a longer time and really focus on technological possibilities. The Panther meanwhile utilizes the current state of technology and brings it to the field, so especially eastern European countries can arm up quickly.

@@AbuHajarAlBugatti The development is not delayed the target is 2035. Yes there are some disputes on who produces what and what the tank needs but the same goes for FCAS. Both Germany and France produce outstanding tanks and a cooperation will in the end result in a beast.

Yea drones are the future of anti armored warfare. Basiaclly an ATGM that can be steared manually

Let's just hope it doesn't come with all of the horrible design problems that the Panther had.

@@Chopstorm. 2 km/h reverse speed

@@Chopstorm. The Panther didn't have any design problems, it had quality assurance problems. It's obvious when everybody everything someone knows about armored warfare came from a single Lazerpig video lol.

@@Mygg_Jeager Ah yes, like the final drives being too small, the turret drive, the engine issues, the mantlet design forming a shot trap, the horrible design where the front plate needed to be pulled off in order to change the transmission, no unity sight for the gunner, the _ridiculously_ high labor hours required to keep it running in comparison to other tanks, and oh so much more. Those are design issues, not QC problems. You don't design a drive train for a 30 ton vehicle, slap it into a vehicle 15 tons over, and then blame it on quality control issues when shit breaks. Just because laser pig has an opinion doesn't make it wrong. And also, don't hit me with the "but these problems were fixed later on!". Yeah, _some_ of them were, and by then it was far too late to make any meaningful difference.

@@Mygg_Jeager Of course it had design problems. Every tank has design problems, and it is ignorant to assume otherwise. The Panther had a very rushed development, which led to multiple design problems being left unaddressed, notably those concerning the engine and transmission. Combined with the quality of German production at the time when their factories were being bombed left and right, the Panther was very much flawed. Maybe if it was introduced earlier in the war, designers would have had the time to rectify many of its issues.

This was driving me mad. 50% increae = double ... how? whats a 100% increase then? srsly.

50% Increase equals to 1.5x not 2x, 100% increase equals to 2x.

Was gonna say the same thing, thanks

*Further

@@Sambo876 Farther is correct. Try learning english before trying to lecture people.

Rumours go that the future German Tiger um...Panther will be floating on the Earth magnetic field. Also it will be fitted with a 500 miles range laser gun. It will be a drone, operated by a commander with psychokinetic brainwaves and using "The Force" like Luke Skywalker.

What is more important then rate of fire, is to get the kill on first shoot, if you miss, don't hang around, pull back. (shoot and scoot). Rate of fire is not important, because before you have managed to load you'r second round, your enemy have already fired his first shoot and killed you, because he know you are reloading for next shoot and can thus use a few second more to aim before shooting. You don't have time to reload after first shoot

@@heuhen Well said but imagine when the terrain is just plain fields with barely some treeline on some sides. I say it all depends on where you are fighting.

Its funny everyone is making bigger and fancier tanks like Infantry with decent equipment can't knock them out from miles away. Tanks have limited purpose on the modern battlefield and are quickly just becoming massive targets that burn through a lot of resources.

if you want firerate,look at the MANTIS, also made by rheinmetall

There's sort of a poetic justice here as the first Panther was designed for the same reason; countering a Russian tank. The name can't possibly be an accident.

армата т-14 не работает))тока почему то стреляет спокойно..и уже 100+ в армии..а Германия показала танк на шасси старого леопард 2 и танк вдруг стал новый...у него даже башня обитаемая)))

@@albertus1108 Тогда почему на Украине нет ни одной Арматы, участвующей в незаконной агрессивной войне России против украинских домов, больниц и школ? А вы пост не поняли, Пантера совершенно новая разработка, от других танков ничего нет.

@@starseed8087 леопард 2 шасси новая разработка...танцующие солдаты Украины в массовых роликах в интернете мосфильм? в школах нет военных?)) т-14 армата против кого должна воевать то на Украине?против древнего т64?

@@albertus1108 Vielleicht einfach gegen die Panzer, gegen die Russland im Moment auf den Sack bekommt.

I see a lot of problems. 1. The chassis of the tank is the same as the Leopard 2A4 so there are problems with weight, non isolate ammunition and spare parts. 2. There aren t too much ammunition. 20 in the turret and if you want in the chassis but if you want a 4th crew member so you can't have both. 3. The lottering munition on the tank is a good idea but if you want to have them you must sacrifice 10 amunition. For me the only interinsting thing is the gun.

@@Dryadlis Spare Parts and Ammo scarcity are both non issues. Germany isn't a Arab Emirate or a PMC, if they need something, they'll manufacture it. Obviously 130mm Ammunition is already being produced for testing purposes, mass production of the round will begin before the tank is even adopted.

@@Mygg_Jeager No a problem, so go tell to all the countries who use the Leopard 2 A4 and 20 or 10 in this configuration in a tank, how to say, it s nothing.

@@Dryadlis I'd tell them them all to get the Panther. Leopard and Abrams are officially old school. That's not a logical argument lol. That's like saying we should still be using Bren guns in .303 because 7.62 machine guns have limited ammo lol. The world moves on.

@@Mygg_Jeager There simply no spare parts for this hull. This tank have no ammunition. 20 in the hull no isolate but it s an option because you can have a 4th crew member. So you have a very dangerous weakspot or you have -20 amunition. Next is the storage amunition in the turret, there are 20 amunitions on total there. If you want some lottering munition you have to sacrifice 10 of your amunition. You don't see a problem there? This tank is just a demonstration of technology nothing else. Just like the E-MBT.

Hehe, yeah. For years i have been saying that i would consider it a weakening of the tank to get rid of that 4th set of eyes and hands, so i am quite surprised and pleased that they went this way.

No the 4th man makes coffee ☕

@@webcrawler9782 I know it's a joke, but I wonder. The Boxer has a kettle for longer missions, for which it is built. And a toilet. Wonder if it is actually an option to cram a tea/coffee kettle in a tank.

I'm digging the Palpatine.

Drones could be used as 3rd person cameras for maneuvering through shit terrain or to see above trees, hills, buildings, etc.

I don't like the name of the tank. The ll WW is nothing the Germans should be proud of. In my eyes the name is a glorification of that time.

@@Rainerunsinn828 don't overthink.

I would agree. Spiritual heritage of the III Reich is not, quite, something to aspire to.

@@jinksomiabodyart3189 No one believes the Third Reich was good and rightfully so but its important to remember what happened to it and to learn from it. The modern german government is way different than the one previously and it has little to no corruption than the previous one. The U.S. is also present there and would be alerted if Germany were up to no good. So while it may have been bad, its history has an important impact on the future.

@@starblizzard3654 Of course its important to remember it and to learn from it. It is very important. But one thing is to remember it, the other is to glorify this part of our history.

Germany has a pretty good history with auto loaders? Not in tanks! Because this is the first German tank with a auto loader. But in this Panther tank, despite the auto loader, there are still 2 guys crawl around in the tank turret. There's still sometimes a fourth man is said to be part of the crew a so-called weapons expert. It will probably be decided by lottery before the battle whether the fourth one will ride in the tank or stay at home. But in this tank there are two soldiers in the turret: commander and gunner. Only the driver and the optional fourth soldier - the weapons expert are in the hull. So In the current version, the Panther always has two men in the turret and one or two man in the hull. By sticking to the principle of the manned turret, the Panther shows itself to be a representative of the past and not of the future. In modern tanks, the turrets are always unmanned, which, together with the automatic loader and ammunition, are completely separated from the crew in the tank hull where the soldiers are also safest. So with modern tank killing systems - like Javelin, NLAW and the increasingly powerful drones - a manned turret will often become a deadly trap for the crew. Unmanned tank turrets are also smaller, weigh less and no longer endanger the soldiers. If the armor of such an unmanned turret penetrates a projectile, the force of the exploding ammunition can be dissipated to the outside via blow-out panels. So the entire crew is protected deep in the hull behind thick walls of hardened steel, much like the Russian modern T-14 Armata. A protection concept that focuses on the survival of the tank crew also boost the morale and combat readiness of the tank crew. If the crew of a main battle tank can assume that there is a certain probability that they can even survive a direct turret hit, this increases the aggressiveness and operational readiness of the tank crew. So German Panther is not a 4th generation main battle tank and is not a good tank!

Sure, the country with the highest knowledge and experience in constructing industrial machines in the world will fuck up a less complicated autoloader over the more complicated autoloader of the PZH2000.🙄 And just to take the wind out of your 2 page rant, being in the turret is purely optional. If the battlespace is contested, most commanders will probably do their work in the safe space, if not they will take advantage of seeing everything with their own eyes.

@@wudruffwildcard252 Germany in not the country with the highest knowledge and experience in constructing industrial machines in the world.

@@GreatPolishWingedHussars hey, which country would that then be instead of Germany?

@@patrick3426 Of course the USA! Silicon Valley is in USA! In addition to the state NASA Space agency there is also a successful private space technologies company in the USA. The USA also produces the very technologically advanced stealth fighter aircraft like F-22 and F-35. The USA are also very progressive in civil aviation! The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is considered the world's leading technology university. In all of these technology areas, the US is superior to the Germans. The Germans are not able to produce fighter aircraft on their own and therefore produce fighter aircraft together with other European nations, while they also producing obsolete jets. The Germans also need European partners for production of space technologies and civil aviation because they alone are not able to produce in this area. The United States, on the other hand, can do it all alone and better.

But it still has its lovely gun

uhhh yes cries in 5.7 german br against stabilized shermans

@@rext87able The Sherman tanks in ww2 were shit thats why the german tanks always clapped shermans. The only thing that killed german tank back then were the soviets and maybe the usaf

@@X_thespinne i mean yeah but not what i was talking about

​@@X_thespinne also their own transmissions 😅

And until the russians have learned to quit bullying or actually mass produce the advanced tanks they design, and make sure the real capability match the paper specs. and to not drive in tight columns, this tank could entertain it's crew with competitions of how many lined up T-wagons it can punch out with a single shot...

@@SonsOfLorgar exactly. Plus Russia simply doesn't seem to have the funds to buy more T-14s... xd

@@SonsOfLorgar bullying. What a sophisticated term. I could say more but I'm probably talking to a brick wall.

@@seancooney297 While I generally dislike replying with a video-link, I think this sums up the "bullying"-argument rather nicely: kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aMdndqd81r3HimQ.html

​@@seancooney297 it's a perfectly adequate catch all term for the Russian governments terroristic behaviour since the 16th century, both towards it's own inhabitants and neighbouring countries. What's your point?

Not with their economy in complete recession due to sanctions and lack of cheap oil and gas, lol. They're reverting back to coal power plants.... lmao.

And to me this is where the 4th crew member could go. Because that gives the maintenance, backup should the auto-loader fail. I understand the desire to move to less men, but 4 does seem to be the sensible minimum to run a tank.

The fourth men shoud operate the drone system.

This reminds me of auto manufacturers concept cars. They look really cool but never actually go anywhere.

@@hardlylivin6602 Happens all the time in military stuff. However the Leo2 is a 70s design. And this one might have some chances if its cheap enough, I think so its basically the same engine. We shall see.

But it doesn't even have a point defence laser.

The panther 2 hull: 'Am I a joke to you?'

@Svannuta oops wait Lemme add that in

My Brain for no reason: *_"Is this the Panther 2?"_*

@@moisesezequielgutierrez *3. 2 already existed on drawboards back in WWII.

@@M3dicayne Parts also build, just never fully assembled.

I was wondering about that as well lmaoo

CH3 upgrade is meant to keep Challenger competitive until 2040 when the next generation of tanks come out of Europe and the US. Panther is really a Leopard 2.5. As Matsimus says, 130mm isn't really necessary now but it may be be by 2035-40. To be honest even then I think it's a bit of a dead end. Even today it's clear that there are very few engagements where you have line-of-sight to enemy vehicles at over 3km. Smaller, smarter AT missiles that can self-acquire targets like Brimstone are clearly the future for long-range anti-armour fire. This video showing the tank in woodland and heathland is also faintly ridiculous as this is actually nightmare tank country, you're limited to narrow lines of advance and can't take advantage of your 4km cannon and there is cover for infantry AT teams everywhere.

@@colobossable Wenn man sich den Munitionsverbrauch der Ukrainer ansieht, erkennt man, dass die Panzerabwehrraketen sehr schnell leer sind. Erst dann kommen die billigeren Panzergranaten ins Spiel

@@colobossable if you are facing an enemy like in Afghanistan or now the russians in Ukraine yes, BUT if there would be a war between NATO and Russia, you surely would see tank warfare on a big scale.

Yes how original to name the new German tank after the Nazi tank! Not to forget the Nazi tank was the loser's tank! But this is nothing new. When it comes to German weapons, whether from World War II or today, there are always these absurd exaggerations. Even with regard to the quality of the German tanks of the Second World War, It's completely exaggerated. That hasn't changed, and it is also exaggerated about the quality of today's tanks. As so often! There are states that develop and produce various excellent weapons but there are no hymns of praise for these weapons from enthusiastic fans. This phenomenon of absurd exaggeration regarding German weapons is something that should be scientifically investigated by psychologists. Well not all weapons made by Germans are good! By the way, how original to name the new German tank after the Nazi Panzerkampfwagen V Panther! Not to forget the Nazi tank was the loser's tank! This upgrade of the Leopard II tank may well be considered a stopgap because the German armaments industry has not developed a new tank. The T-14 is expected to have a 152 mm gun in the future the Panther has been more modestly up gunned from the NATO standard 120 mm to a 130 mm gun. By the way, the funny thing is that the description of the new tank shows how outdated the German Leopard II tank is. Wow the new Panther tank has reactive armor compared to the Leopard II witch has none! Reactive armor was developed in the 80s! Only few tanks like the Leopard II have non! Although now one can upgrade the Leopards with it! ! In any case, most Leopard II tanks worldwide drive around without reactive armor! Oh how advanced is the Panther compared to the Leopard II because the Panther has an autoloader and therefore only has a crew of three soldiers. WOW! Soviet tanks had that back in the 70s. But wait a minute! There's still sometimes a fourth man is said to be part of the crew a so-called weapons expert. It will probably be decided by lottery before the battle whether the fourth one will ride in the tank or stay at home. But in this tank there are two soldiers in the turret: commander and gunner. Only the driver and the optional fourth soldier - the weapons expert are in the hull. So In the current version, the Panther always has two men in the turret and one or two man in the hull. By sticking to the principle of the manned turret, the Panther shows itself to be a representative of the past and not of the future. In modern tanks, the turrets are always unmanned, which, together with the automatic loader and ammunition, are completely separated from the crew in the tank hull where the soldiers are also safest. So with modern tank killing systems - like Javelin, NLAW and the increasingly powerful drones - a manned turret will often become a deadly trap for the crew. Unmanned tank turrets are also smaller, weigh less and no longer endanger the soldiers. If the armor of such an unmanned turret penetrates a projectile, the force of the exploding ammunition can be dissipated to the outside via blow-out panels. So the entire crew is protected deep in the hull behind thick walls of hardened steel, much like the Russian modern T-14 Armata. A protection concept that focuses on the survival of the tank crew also boost the morale and combat readiness of the tank crew. If the crew of a main battle tank can assume that there is a certain probability that they can even survive a direct turret hit, this increases the aggressiveness and operational readiness of the tank crew. So German Panther is not a 4th generation main battle tank and is not a good tank!

Ricocheting doesn't work against APFSDS , and I assume that the turret armor on the KF51 Panther is hollow like the one on the Leo2 I do agree with the other points though.

@@Ocastia They may not ricochet, but they do shatter if the angle is great enough.

@@foods3019 shure but we are talking about < 5° angles or something like that.

@@Ocastia ... that lie is still going around? We're talking far larger angles, to be honest. Last I've heard its something along the lines of 45 degrees plus.

@@TheTrueAdept you've been commenting in a lot of chains, and seemingly know your shit in each one. I'll trust your input on the shatter/ricochet angle.

The simple, smooth surfaces on those new vehicles make them rather boring to model, don't you think? They kind of look like plastic toys to begin with.

​@@TrangleC that's where weathering and diorama context comes in

@@TrangleC well, yes and no. This one have more detail than Takom's PL-01( Polands prototype tank). And with weathering and posible add on armor or modules it could become interesting model after all.

Yeah, was thinking the same! I 1/8 full metal version!

Truly impressive the tank only becomes when you experience what you can do with it. Like these Norwegians with their German-built Leopard 2 (yes, US Marines with their M1A1 also joined the fun). *Drifting in a main battle tank.* Enjoy. kzfaq.info/get/bejne/eNulp7qfp8Ctln0.html

Anyway, the 5th generation tanks will be stealth tanks that will look really modern. The Panther, on the other hand, is still only a 3rd generation tank.

@@GreatPolishWingedHussars says who

@@lordlexus3120 Actually most experts!

@@GreatPolishWingedHussars no Source?

@@GreatPolishWingedHussars Until you have a scource the "moste experts" is only you and we neither know if you are an expert, and one person clearly cant be "moste"

i think they work at this project since years. They also work since 10 years at the MGCS which still isnt finished yet, so probably they began a little later but around that i think. But yeah it fits perfectly. 100 b to spent and a new panther xd this is just like having a new dick and a new wife. wait.. does that make any sense at all

Facts

What do you think how long it took to develop that kind of tank? Probably more than a decade...

@@EngelinZivilBO Probably yes, but at the same time no, since it is based on the Leopard looks (And probably similar armor) plus already existing things that Rheinmetal produced themselves for it, but yeah maybe

That is one reason why the Boxer is so versatile. I don't know if you could call it plug and play but all Rheinmetall vehicles have a very open and adaptable software architecture. You can basically slap any weapon, gun, sensor and what not on a Rheinmetall vehicle.

DEJA VU I'VE BEEN ON THIS TIME BEFORE

with anything bigger than the current 120mm single piece ammo you have to use an autoloader. The rounds are too heavy to be loaded by hand effectively

@@Alexx120493 just give the loader some Panzerschokolade, he'll make the job done.

@@Alexx120493 how about an exo suit to assist?

@@randomblacktemplar738 Too bulky and big

@@Alexx120493 only 10mm biger and maybe 10kg more weight could be a new ammo storage where you could slide or drop the shell into a guide and from the guide slide it into the breach

I know since I serve in tanks.

But only 20 ready rounds. No idea how many the vehicle can actually carry but it remains that the 130mm rounds are significantly larger than 120mm, and the latter are at the very edge of what can be manhandled inside the turret. So does the vehicle only carry those 20 ready rounds? If so that is simply not enough. More lethality is not much use if you are only carrying a quarter of the available ammunition loadout of say a Challenger II. I would rather have the longer loiter time for the platform, especially as a tanks main role is direct fire support for the infantry. If more ammunition IS carried, then how easy is it to feed those into the autoloading mechanism? Those are big rounds, so how does the crew add more ammunition to the autoloading system inside the vehicle if it does carry more than the stated 20 ready rounds?

@@alganhar1 20 rounds are enought (also 4 loitering munitions basiaclly 4 kills garantied) , the leopard has 40, however considering the increas in range and lethality you spend less rounds per target and stay further way and closer to friendly supply. A tanks main role isnt really direct fire support for infantry anymore, at least not the only main role, IFV and APCs now do that,, tanks are just there to mop up anything APCs and IFV cant kill, like other tanks.

the 4th crew member is the recon drone operator, according to the tank page

@@brizzled5193 to be honest, I wouldn't be surprised that it'll be quickly replaced with EW instead of drones.

@16vjtdalfa the 12.7 has just too few ammunition in its box, and in that particular spot it is impossible to replenish without leaving the tank. Personally, I would wish to have both coax and MG turret with .338 Norma, but machineguns chambered for this round are just prototypes even in the US, I also doubt that production of .338 Norma round, specialized for machineguns (cheaper, bigger tolerances, less accurate) actually exist.

@16vjtdalfa mate that’s where the aided decision making comes in, also called Aided Target Recognition… the electro optics will stack targets and assist with flow of data etc… it would be far too much information for a human, and “too slow” to do manually

@@solarissv777 can fit 6.8 and 338 Norma mate… that’s also the same for the RCWS…

True, another way to put it (in case the different phrasing helps somebody) is that double would be 100%+100%. an additional half is 100%+50%.

Putin sweating like a pig.

The first information is true but not the second one. It s not yet the MGCS or the OMT.

@@Dryadlis I thought this was a product of the MGCS? So this IS not next generation but just some sort of interim tank to the MGCS? I read somewhere that the some of the concepts of the OMT will retain the 120mm calibre but will use ETC technology. If true, I think that will be really a next leap forward in tank gun tech rather than upgunning to a larger calibre.

@@ohkabomb917 Yes that s true. The Panther and the E-MBT are some kind of demonstrator of technologie to test some conception, to show how the work is going. I will ne really surprise if someone buy the Panter, it have too many problems.

@@Dryadlis Then you should invest in looking into the Lynx KF41, it is the new iteration of IFVs after Germany was not happy with the Puma and requested a tank hunter IFV which is also capable of operating autonomously without operator input (the 2017 Puma iteration was already fully remote controllable and the KF41 was so too from day 1, so the KV51 most likely already has that capability, but what we yet have to see is how good both Lynx KF41 and Panther KF51 operate in full autonomy mode and how well they can differenciate between friend and foe). Btw Germany pushing AI vehicles so hard is one of the few things our ex Millitary Minister von der Leyen did right (at least in the most part, she even wanted to introduce autonomous ICBM launchers)

@@fatalityin1 Can I have your sources because I m pretty surprise

hm that is what Rheinmetal is doing with KF51 Panther in this video, I think he mentioned it as well in the video

Could be a huge seller but that depends on the final "out the door" price tag per unit sold. Not many nations will dig deep into their pockets in current financial strain to pay for a tank that may cost north of 50 million Euros (I am guessing the price). Does anyone know what the projected MSRP is on this new tank??

Of course it will show unexpected problems, delays, design flaws everything. That’s totally normal for new weapon systems. It will take a few years and update generations to iron out the issues. But the basis is there and it has the potential to become a totally awesome tank once it has matured.

But ... Who in Europe would buy a tank from a country allied to the only possible enemy?

@@bernhardb4711 Did you forget to take your medicine again?

@@ruinerblodsinn6648 Sorry, I missed all the heavy weapons delivery by Germany to Ukraine. Oh, wait...

I did get the impression that the 4th crew, is a sensor/drone operator.

Germany obviously is returning to 1930s sentiments, the name of this tank being only a slight allusion. Are they planing to attack Poland in cooperation with Russia? It looks more and more likely.

Haha paranoid Pole... Absolutely stupid to think about that.

@@ciarypowykonie3096 I hope so you fascist germanophobe poles really get on our nerves with all your antigerman rhetoric everywhere all the time while at same time having millions of you migrating here

@@ciarypowykonie3096 have you looked at Polish procurement projects lately? It's more likely that Poland invades Germany. As they say in the German army: man, if the fire department of Liechtenstein decides to invade us, we have a REAL problem.

Do you know if the DPM have done a video or some other commentary except Twitter? I'd love to see that.

I'm waiting for China to somehow pull ahead of everyone and pull a 140mm ETC Gun out of nowhere any day now . . .

@@tyvernoverlord5363 US and Germany has 140mm but only a test bed

@@joshuajoaquin5099 This I know, thus my comment about China somehow pulling a rabbit out of their ass any day now...

​@@joshuajoaquin5099 iirc, the French are also part of that 140mm gun project

Their skill issue

Sabot darts out of this thing are gonna be faaaaaaaast, and since the German's use Tungsten its gonna be about the kinetic energy of a freight train on a small point...

@@tyvernoverlord5363 that's a yes/no thing. The real reason why the US uses DU rounds instead of tungsten carbide is that 1) the round is self-sharpening which leads to _better penetration_ characteristics, 2) it literally sets _everything on fire_ though not to the point of things like Chlorine Trifloride (aka the chemical of all-consuming flame), and 3) is easier to keep its density than tungsten. However, this leads to the fact that you have to stay within a very certain range with DU rounds (around 1.55km/s) or it'll lose its properties.

@@TheTrueAdept 1.) Self-sharpening works against steel targets, but has no effect on modern NERA arrays. DUs higher ductility is actually contraproductive at that, it is more prone to influence by the effects of NERA. 2.) By the time any combustion effect comes into effect (both friction and self-ignition) the crew and ammunition of a armored vehicle has long been chopped up by the srapnel of a entering penetrator, so while it sounds nice, it comes too late to have any lethal effect. The after-armor effects are 99+% kinetic. 3.) That still doesen't defy the laws of physics. More velocity at the same penetrator weight = more penetration power. While it is true that DU reaches and moves past a point of diminishing returns at a certain velocity, it will still increase penetration power at higher velocities. That's just physics. That also started the myth of why the M1 Abrams kept the shorter and less powerful L44 over the L55 gun. It did not, as many think, keep the L44 because the added muzzle velocity of the L55 wouldn't increase penetration. It cetainly would, and even if it wouldn't, it would increase the effective range. The reason was much simpler: the stabilisation system of the M1 couldn't handle the added weight of the longer gun, and a redesign would have been too expensive. So they chickened out.

@@tyvernoverlord5363 Not that much faster. While it has a larger amount of propellant, consider the penetrator also has significantly increased length and thus weight. One reason Rheinmetall chose the 130 mm over the 140 mm caliber was that the ammunition could still be single-piece, so on the 130 mm the penetrator can extend all the way through the rounds like on 120 mm, unlike on two-piece 140 mm designs where it has to be entirely in the front half.

@@TheTrueAdept its also because the usa has a huge ammount of du sitting around doing nothing and it is cheaper to use than tungsten as a result

We live in the future

Welcome to the 21st century. Geoff Who want's his flying car!

Flying cars are made since the 1980! Thats nothing new!

@@HedgehogZone "Flying Cars" have been made since the 1950s. They are lousy cars and lousy airplanes, expensive toys and silly. I want George Jetson's car, you just get in and fly away. It doesn't even have to fold up into a briefcase.

Tank drones yes, but i think if you go that route, a light vehicle with a big gun would serve better.

Oh God it is Skynet all over again...

The new world order already do this. In fact some of these vehicles are specialised drone carrieres.

All controls are digital. That means it is fully ready for semi- or full autonomous operation.

I very much doubt it. USA has such strong presence in military equipment and they have always relied on their own tank designs, atleast ever since WW2. They want to have domestic jobs for their military industry so they will replace current vehicles with something they have designed and produced themselves. Rheinmetall vehicles have good chance to be exported all around Europe and Asia however. As a Finn, im already interested to see whether the next choice for our new MBTs one day will be Panther or whatever would be the next generation Leopard tank. Wont likely gonna happen for a while cause our Leo 2A6s are relatively new and still capable tanks and we are keeping additional 100 or so Leo 2A4s in reserve. But at some point in next 20 years or so there likely comes the question that Leo 2A4s are gonna be hopelessly outdated and Leo 2A6s would need to be removed to reserve so this announcement got me excited to think whether it would be actual competition between two different German tanks in the future

@@Balnazzardi it wouldn't be the first foreign platform to be produced in the US.

Hell Bradley's are built by a British company, BAE Systems Land Systems Platforms & Services.

@@Balnazzardi I agree. The US military would like to have their military equipment to be as homegrown as possible. That means american designed and manufactured. Tho maybe they will adopt the rheinmetall 130mm gun. I read somewhere that one of concepts of the OMT ( us army abrams replacement) will retain 120mm calibre but use ETC technology. Now that will be a true next gen leap in tank gun technology at least until railgun technology in a tank will become viable.

@@ohkabomb917 I believe ETC gun and hybrid transmission (turbine spins only generator, tracks are driven by electric motors only) can be put into Abrams to prolong it's lifespan. And the hybrid powerpack will solve the issue of high fuel consumption as well as provide power for both ETC gun and possible direct energy weapon. Lately, lasers are becoming so powerful and compact that fielding laser APS can become possible (C&C Generals anyone?). The US has just too many Abrams hulls to just throw them away.

With the right kind of optics you can achieve a hit at 5km but current generations are not equipped with them

Use the drone to lase the target, and fire a yet be developed laser guided round perhaps?

Use drone spotting to target, and if the tank has the high ground, I could see 8km shots. A Challenger 1 made a 5100m kill shot on an Iraqi T-72 all the way back in 1991 with just the old 105mm L7 gun

I guess you could wonder about a guided 130mm shell, with the extra energy you certainly have a bit of extra energy budget to play around with. You'd probably need some kind of drone spotting to more reliably use those long ranges the gun can achieve as well, ground level tends to have various obstructions after all. Maybe you could even get relative coordinates or some such? I guess we'll find out in the coming months and years what it can and can not do in this area.

@@mrvwbug4423 - after missing the target several times. That's cheating 🙂 You need a high probability of hit on the first round.

Love the Tiger !!!! 😁👍🏾👍🏾👍🏾

I think eyes in the sky also means the ability to shoot targets you wouldn’t usually find.

Well not even a concept, an actual available capability. But do you live in the north?

You Finns can't buy German anymore, since your only possible enemy is Russia. Germany won't send you any spare parts or ammo until after a possible war...

Who cares its fit for our own use. Build your own tanks. Oh wait lmao

It is not 50% more range, but 50% more stopping power on long range. The effects on short range are much more devastating. Also a tank has more than one purpose and firing bigger high explosive rounds on infantry units should do much more damage too!

It also depends on the ammunition itself you use. Germany recently introduced the DM11 programmable HE round for the LH120 gun in the Leopard 2 and that thing has a weight of 29kg, which is pretty much already the upper limit what an average man can handle in any meaningful time. Also Rheinmetal always said that an Autoloader will be a requirement for the use of the 130mm gun.

@@shi01 That is probably because of the space confines of a tank turret as opposed to the space of a naval mount. For example the 5.5" (140mm) shell used by the Royal Navy was 82 pounds (37.19 kg) but it had a multi person loading crew. So one man would have a lot more trouble.

It's honestly more about elevation there, 120 is already artillery calibre

Yeah I knew they were making a 130mm gun, hadn't heard anything at all about them making a whole new tank to go with it.

The feature I like realy is that every crew member could use the other crew stations remote!

Not a standard coax but definitely a standard pintle mount

From what I've seen in pictures the Driver hatch is directly under the front of the turret, wich means if the turret is facing a certain direction the driver won't make it out easily (probably)

driver hatch covered slightly by turret so if the turret was forward facing it wouldnt really be possible to get out but then again, driver seat and rest of the tank are most likely connected so if a WCS happened you could probably escape through the "back".

@@LocalDeepstateAgent Wrong, if the turret was facing directly forwards the driver can exit and enter

Isn't the coax supposed to match the main gun ballistically? I'd guess the 50% range improvement over a 120 necessitates a much larger coax setup.

Just add more things to M1 Abram and you will get a modernized Maus...

Aw hell yeah modern maus with a 127mm otobreda auto canon with laser guided ammunition and a couple of harpoon launchers in the back of the turret in case youre on a coast and some russian landing crafts decide to show up.

they could have messed with everyone if they gave it a 128mm gun.

A Maus with a 75 kph top speed and enough weapons strapped to it to qualify as a mini land-destroyer sounds like the kind of ridiculousness this century needs

We're looking at somewhere around the 40kg range.

Autoloader would defiently be in use , as long as it's n ot russian-type autoloader , the french lecler tank and the jsdf had been fielding autoloader with their tank for a long long time now

@@cum5681 Russian autoloaders are in fact really good, they are using them must longer than other countries that make tanks, and know how to make decent autoloaders.

@@ozymandiasnullifidian5590 while the mechanical function of the autoloaders indeed seem to be reliable, the placement along the turret ring that coincides with the centre mass as the main aiming point for hostile tanks and AT weapons makes those autoloaders into a liability and the tanks into death traps as soon as they face a weapon that has the ability to penerate the armor close enough to the ammo in the carousel to ignite the propellant.

Where did you get the info about the racks?

@@antonnurwald5700 it's on their site in the KF 51's explenation ;)

@@NicolaiVE Where exactly? On Rheinmetall Defense they have the brochure and a brief description, nothing about ammo count 🤔

You still have 20 rounds because the Tank has two 10 round Magazins in the Auto loader and 10 rounds in an extra magazine

@@lordlexus3120 Please God, tell me the sauce, I've been searching all day for info on the ammo count

Yeah, but it won't have this super heavy metal Tiger 1 design. Unfortunately (although understandable).