US Army Test Replacement for The M1 Abrams Tank

Рет қаралды 216,689

SPOTLIGHT

Жыл бұрын

US Army Test Replacement for The M1 Abrams Tan
Check out to our science channel ► Brain Impact: / brainimpact

Пікірлер: 359

@LouSaydus Жыл бұрын

The angled turret of the abrams just looks so badass. Hard to think that this design is over 50 years old now.

@Kefp_mimi Жыл бұрын

Modern anti-tank shells will not take into account any of your armor angles. The only thing that could be done to prevent it was to increase the strength of the materials and arrange the structural alignment of each layer of armor properly. However, nothing could guarantee fire safety with such a heavy weapon. The role of a tank is to fight in the front. You are responsible for sucking all the enemy's weapons at you. Of course, that would take a lot of damage. You were prepared to die at the first decision. Nothing is safe in battle, even if you have the most advanced tanks. everything is dead

@AeiousKillhound Жыл бұрын

@@Kefp_mimi Probably following up the Merkava approach with Engine in the front could be a partial solution for crew safety

@Kefp_mimi Жыл бұрын

@@AeiousKillhound If you put the powerpack at the rear cooling arrangements can be close to the powerpack, and be better protected from frontal hits. Weight distribution - With the heaviest armour on a tank being at the front, having the engine at the rear helps to keep the centre of gravity around the middle of the vehicle. Engine rear makes it much more accessible to repair and maintenance. It always helps to not have to remove several tons of armour if you want to get at the powerpack.

@Kefp_mimi Жыл бұрын

@ericclausen6772 Жыл бұрын

Yep and it keeps the turret from doing a jack in the box like Russian tanks

@LILKRANKIN Жыл бұрын

The Abrams is far from replacement. The army awhile back stated it’ll remain in service beyond 2050 due to how upgradable it is. The SEP V3 just entered service and SEP V4 isn’t far away.

@VectorGhost Жыл бұрын

I don't think you have a clue on what your talking about. The abrams is long over do for replacement. We don't need a new variant or upgrade we need a new tank for the modern day battlefield. It's to heavy, it's a product if the 80s. We need a new tank that's lighter, an with system already built in to handle the new future battlefield. You keep adding shit on it will be to heavy for bridges and a logistical nightmare. Plus it looks likes 140 or 130mm guns are the future.

@LILKRANKIN Жыл бұрын

@@VectorGhost The Abrams is going nowhere bud 😂 Sure, it’s heavy. Good indication that it’s well protected. You know, one of the biggest qualities that a tank needs. You want a light vehicle? Get in a Bradley and get killed by anything bigger than a 30mm gun. As for weight solving, they’ve given the Abrams APS to negate a major need for armor improvements against explosive munitions. And guess what. The Abrams was tested with a 140mm gun before. Army didn’t want it as it could barely carry any ammo, required an autoloader, and the 120mm gun was more than enough to deal with current and future threats.

@VectorGhost Жыл бұрын

@@LILKRANKIN again its weight, the fact that its gonna become a logistcal nightmare, its still build on an 80s chaise? I'm aware of all this qualities, but doesnt mean its fit for a modern day battlefield

@LILKRANKIN Жыл бұрын

@@VectorGhost The US has vehicles that can transport Abrams tanks anyway they’d want. C-17 Globemaster for air transport, LCAC for aquatic transport, and if there’s a bridge that can’t support 68 tons, the Army invented the M104 Wolverine for a reason. Age? The Abrams is by no means the oldest tank platform currently in service. Britain has the Challenger 2 which is based on a 60’s platform. Russia and China are made up entirely of early 60’s platforms as well. Russia’s newest tank from 2014 was a major failure as well. The Abrams was designed to be a very upgradable platform. Which essentially makes it a timeless platform. If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. And the Abrams is still arguably the best tank in the world. All of the supposed “issues” the Abrams has have already been solved.

@jamesshantie1923 Жыл бұрын

@@LILKRANKIN and look at its contemporaries like the Challenger 3. Almost as heavy with a comparable armor package.

@nole8923 Жыл бұрын

The Abrams is a tough tank to replace regardless of its age. It will require break thrus in armor technology requiring stronger and lighter material and also resistance to shoulder fired weapons such as the javelin and NLAW. The current gun can be improved upon but isn’t the main area that needs improvement. Resistance to shoulder fired weapons and weight reduction is.

@Kevin-qj7fp Жыл бұрын

so true thats the only thing that any tank fears is a person hiding near the road that fires a shoulder mounted explosive weapon that can destory a tank or maybe a tank machine gun that can pen the armor and destroy tanks

@Vincent98987 Жыл бұрын

@@Kevin-qj7fp a machine gun CANNOT destroy a tank, unless it's a cannon 20mm is considered a cannon, a 14.5mm dshk is considered a heavy machine gun

@AeiousKillhound Жыл бұрын

@@Kevin-qj7fp He probably thought about IFVs ... but anyway even "rifle" can do a lot of damage it targeting the sensors on the tank (not easy but doable)

@Micsmit_45 Жыл бұрын

Armour probably isn't as big a deal as you might think. Look at what Rheinmetall has done with their KF-51. Most of its protection comes from its APS

@davidjacobs8558 Жыл бұрын

maybe they could replace that gas guzzling turbine engine with German made V12 Diesel engine?

@ExSoldier762 Жыл бұрын

My single biggest regret in getting my army commission was branching infantry instead of armor. I did eventually get a branch transfer and go to the Armor Officer Advance Course but it was too late for those of us in the reserve. Clinton wanted midnight basketball and so he RIFF’d about 10k Officer’s in 1994. I was caught in that. If I’d gone Armor from the start, I might’ve stayed for my full 20 on active duty. Want to make God laugh? Tell HIM your “plans!”

@GenPatton0043 Жыл бұрын

it wasnt just officers bro, he dumped all combat arms units in the reserves. By that point, I was in the reserves too and they forced us to transfer to other MOS's that were none combat arms. That fucker screwed a lot of guys

@NFLYoungBoy223 Жыл бұрын

I wish the Marine Corps still had Tanks

@henriquemontalvao8492 Жыл бұрын

Were you deployed?

@juniorleslie4804 Жыл бұрын

God doesn't laughed; he is proud that you have faith in him and the future. It doesn't always work the way you want, but you can learn from every you do.

@aaronsmith4940 Жыл бұрын

Ride not walk

@napolean2160 Жыл бұрын

I'm confused as to why the thumbnail of a video about the Abrams tank is a variant of a Russian T-90

@soul-om4id Жыл бұрын

That is also a CG model. Lolz

@ljubomirculibrk4097 Жыл бұрын

@@GeofenceVictim Hope your going to be in front lines, just to se how smart that statemant is.

@RainArchiver Жыл бұрын

There is the M1A2 SEPv3 or C variant in current use, and the M1A2 SEPv4 or D variant still under development.

@gryphus64 Жыл бұрын

Australia should purchase 300 or so A1 Abrams Main Battle Tanks from the boneyards in the USA and upgrade them for joint deploymnet to Darwin, so US forces, Polish etc can train on the large open ranges there!

@madman026 Жыл бұрын

you sir are a damn genius

@thomasmoran9114 Жыл бұрын

The M-1 Abrams is constantly being upgraded and rebuilt. The design may be old but it is a new tank every time they rebuild them.

@iiceman2431 Жыл бұрын

Oh yeah pretty much

@DavidJones-me7yr Жыл бұрын

They need to develop a battlefield EMP round!

@wargriffin5 Жыл бұрын

I'm not seeing anyone bring up the biggest issue with the Abrams tank, which is fuel efficiency. The M1 Abrams currently gets 0.6mpg in a world where we're running into inflated oil costs and supply chain issues.

@justincooper5189 Жыл бұрын

Maybe try a hybrid idea. Is that what you're thinking? Diesel/electric Abrams to allow for more range? It's not a crazy idea, but I doubt the Pentagon would give a shit. It's range of 275 miles is what I would call shit mileage, because if you're taking enemy territory, and you have them out gunned, the last thing you want is to have to stop for fuel.

@williamsullivan3337 Жыл бұрын

My grandfather worked at The Warren Tank Plant in Detroit for most of his working life. Although he retired before the M1 started production I’m certain that he was involved with the prototypes. I myself wonder if tanks themselves aren’t becoming obsolete. But I am fascinated with the idea of unmanned tanks. Drone tanks.

@TheTrueAdept Жыл бұрын

Well, drones aren't going to be a thing when facing semi-competent opponents. I mean a bunch of Iranian-backed insurgents with common electronics and some pointers from Iran disrupted a sat-link stealth drone... ... so yeah, it's likely going to be a dead end unless you can stuff AGIs into them. The thing with the M1 is that its remarkably future-proofed. Quite capable of being upgraded semi-indefinately. This is largely due to the fact that it hit this 'sweetspot' in terms of design...

@dserrao7188 Жыл бұрын

Don’t let the present war in the Ukraine make you believe Armour is obsolete. Those are incompetent crews, with outdated and bad equipment. For that matter, a LOT of the soviet “newer” tech upgrades for those tanks, weren’t implemented on those machines, as was shown with the “rubber” reactive armour plates. The main reason those soviet vehicles are failing is because of Supply right now.

@unigaming9921 Жыл бұрын

We've been talking about tanks becoming obsolete for decades. It won't happen in our lives.

@dereklucero5785 Жыл бұрын

I loved both cav units I was in (D2/8 cav 1st cav div and Fox 2/3 Armored Cav Reg). Every time I see a lifted full size truck with billy badass showing off, I think to myself, “you’ve never driven shit until you have driven an Abrams”👍

@frankthompson6503 Жыл бұрын

We can safely say that the front wheel sprocket and rear sprocket for tracks need protection.

@arnoldestipona2244 Жыл бұрын

yes, first target of RPG to disable the tank. time to replace these sprockets take so much time and equipment.

@TheJessecarpenter Жыл бұрын

The issue with protecting them is that they would then be much harder to replace, the initial M1 had side skirts over them. Ut no one liked them there so they did what that have now.

@Cruor34 Жыл бұрын

I remember like 20 years ago when games used to come with big manuals detailing the enemies and telling the story etc, one of the games I played was "Heavy Gear" where you piloted a mech suit. One of the enemies you would fight were tanks, and one of the tanks the descriptiopn was like "the backbone of the force and in service for 80 years blah blah" and I was like "wow that is so dumb no vehicle type would last that long" Little did I know the B 52 would have a planned retire date of 2050 (so 100 year old) and the Abrams has now been in service 42 years and likely has 10 more years to go, at least. Now with that said, I still think it's a bit long in the tooth, the gun especially could use an upgrade, and armies with much less money than the US have much newer tanks (France Italy, England, Germany, South Korea to name a few)

@trac9182 Жыл бұрын

The Abrams is yesterday's news we need a tank with a 133 mm Cannon and the ability to protect itself from other Rockets grenade and projectiles we need this today.

@MrBarto15 Жыл бұрын

Were did you got the random 133mm??

@cordellpatrick9517 Жыл бұрын

The Abrams was the first tank to integrate anti rpg and missile tech into it. It's also one of the most battle tested and shaped tanks of this day. Yes there are tanks out there better on paper, but none have seen actual battle until russia recently. And even then they failed horribly. If anything well probably seeing another upgrade and improvement to the Abrams do to its reliability and abilities.

@CODJoma Жыл бұрын

@@MrBarto15 he’s spitting out his ass for something that isn’t able to be done in a successful way.

@MrBarto15 Жыл бұрын

Again wrong… the technology your talking about was developed in israel and adopted by the abrams. Merkava had anti misiles tech before abrams and yes is battle testes against t55 and t72 in there export version that were operating by poorly trained soldiers. The big advantage of the abrams is that the people operating the tank are well trained. Easy as that you can have a ultímate weapon but if you dont know how to use it is well useless.

@darnit1944 Жыл бұрын

The tank on the thumbnail looks like another modernized T-72 begging everyone to let it retire in peace.

@phantom7531 Жыл бұрын

I would like to see them move to a bigger cannon and better support for the top of the tank Russia is having to learn that the hard way . I hope also they can figure out how to really lighten the tank but also be able to protect it as well either by newer tank material or more defensive counter measures but what were seeing though is maybe a move to where the Abraham's will become quarterback and use drone tanks as offensive and defensive counter measures which sounds pretty cool if it works out .

@ExSoldier762 Жыл бұрын

Read a sci-fi novel by David Drake. Hammer’s Slammer’s. It’s a series. That’s the tank I’m waiting for. Nearly every single infantry officer of my era (Cold War) read Starship Troopers (the book not that abortion of a movie series) and chose infantry partly based on the book by Robert A. Heinlein. I wish I’d read Slammer’s first.

@MrBarto15 Жыл бұрын

Russia is fuking up not just because the tank it self. Lacking infantry to help the tanks also lack of proper logistics and the fact that crews are conscripts and poorly trained. Thats the real reason

@Vincent98987 Жыл бұрын

140mm? Eh, that big of a caliber will have no space for ammunition in m1a2

@zachbishop5421 25 күн бұрын

@Vincent98987 Would lower fire rate to with the heavier rounds loaders can't move as quick either like the m109 they need a hydraulic arm to even place the shell In the breach and that's a 155mm

@keithjackson4985 Жыл бұрын

I don't want the Abrams replaced! I'm in love with it! If it's ever replaced, I will need therapy!

@johnknapp952 Жыл бұрын

Not sure about them "Building" new M1 tanks. I don't think they're building new Hulls, just stripping down old tanks (there's thousands of M1's in storage at the Sierra Army Depot). This happens to military equipment all the time. For the M1 they strip it down to bare chassis (Hull), repair any damage and refurbish equipment as needed, then rebuild as new and if need be, to the newest version. Also the M1's going to Poland are to replace the T series Russian tanks that Poland is planning to send to Ukraine.

@tgs9740 Жыл бұрын

My father actually worked on future combat systems While working for Textron Man that was a long time ago I got to see all the cool shit that would replace many vehicles. And much more.

@davegutenech7188 Жыл бұрын

Gotta love it.

@timper4326 Жыл бұрын

Until tanks fly this is the ultimate tank, you can build them smaller, faster but this is what you want by your side. Change the gun, the ammo, the protection, the displays, she'll still rule the battlefield.

@WarDaddy66 Жыл бұрын

Love it

@zwarrior4593 Жыл бұрын

Dis shit dope

@mikecamp1791 Жыл бұрын

Does the Abraham’s tank have air conditioning for those hot areas and also does it have heater for winter weather? Was just wondering.

@ulrichbehnke9656 Жыл бұрын

Of course they have - heaters and cooling - you already need a cooling system for the engine like in your car. But in former wars like WWII it must have been terrible to fight in the desert or in the russian winter.

@dserrao7188 Жыл бұрын

I think the new German Panther has a lot more going for it. The M1 although a good tank, is getting long in the tooth, so to speak. It’s still a good tank, but they need to get rid of that gas turbine…that sucker runs HOTTTTT!!!!! I trained with American crews one time during a down pour…those M1’s idling, started a grass fire behind them their engines are so hot…not a good thing for any reason. It contributes to down time when a pack has to removed and also to the ability of infantry to be able to follow behind you closely. On top of that, there is no big transfer of power for when you hammer the gas…they are slow to start…Fast once up there, but they don’t “jump” like their German counterparts.

@josephhudson8829 Жыл бұрын

The new German Panther

@williamkennedy1550 Жыл бұрын

Fling saucers are real!

@oldguysrock2170 Жыл бұрын

I have no problem with new tanks and other military equipment being produced. I would rather see the existing equipment updated and improved with new tech along with TBE production of new platforms. The M-1 Abrams has proven to work and moth balling all M-1's seems too drastic a move.

@dwightengle8802 Жыл бұрын

With the technology in anti tank weapons, drones, and aircraft including attack helicopters too. Tanks have a low survival rate today. I served in the Army. I was a Tank Commander.

@couchwarrior2449 Жыл бұрын

Pretty much obsolete at this point. The Abrams top turret armor is thin like every other tank in the world and just as vulnerable to a top down missile attack.

@apetheicon1337 Жыл бұрын

Would be cool if they developed ramjet rounds so tanks can hit targets at an even farther range

@mrhqyangtechnic_q_emx8180 Жыл бұрын

I like this title, lol

@ArkArmy90 Жыл бұрын

But will it have A/C ?

@paddington1670 Жыл бұрын

how on earth is a smoothbore accurate out to 3km? that's amazing.

@officialSCP1156 Жыл бұрын

Guided ammunition and advanced scopes

@Owieczkin Жыл бұрын

Fin stabilised projectiles

@fredjansen2659 Жыл бұрын

@@Owieczkin german gun adapted by the us.

@Erik-um1zn Жыл бұрын

I thought the same thing, but then learned that most modern main battle tanks go smooth bore due to the fact that they can have greater initial velocity and they don't need the rifling due to modern ammunition having pop out fins to stabilize and guide the projectile in flight. I think the British Challenger 2 is the last Main Battle tank that has a rifled barrel.

@albar428 Жыл бұрын

@@Erik-um1zn The challenger 2s next variant is smoothbore.

@detroitoneness6237 Жыл бұрын

I thought everyone was moving to a 130 round?

@Darknamja Жыл бұрын

Gen Creighton Abrams' son Gen Robert B. Abrams was CINCUSFK from 2018-2021.

@justjoking5841 Жыл бұрын

Thumbnail tricked me... I thought the US was going to make its own T90. Lol

@pawelhuszcza9611 Жыл бұрын

It is not a replacement but a new type designed to support the existing systems

@paytonbevers6492 Жыл бұрын

There is a big weakness that will kill the Abrams but it will long be told in battle against actually Advance tanks and I’m talking about the between the turret and the Chassis

@mariannepompa4152 Жыл бұрын

Germany hav a new tank - KF51 Panther - with autoloader 130mm cannon drones ...

@codfusilli5879 Жыл бұрын

When will they come out with Vibranium armor? That would be the ultimate tank! 😁

@gordonpkm7560 Жыл бұрын

Is there anything that's got thru depleted uranium ??????? MO NOTHING

@joshuaguerrier7392 Жыл бұрын

Just upgrade the mounted gun and probably change the tracks and that’s basically it lol

@abimbolaalexander2826 Жыл бұрын

"US Army Test Replacement for The M1 Abrams Tank" - Talks about M1 for 8 min.

@ryanfeeheley8796 Жыл бұрын

Yeah the Army is not getting rid of the Abrams no way in hell

@dennisbyrne8706 Жыл бұрын

When will they finally replace the M1 tank series already

@SuperGeronimo999 Жыл бұрын

Never. New Abrams will be shown next week, unclear if Army will adopt it, but it would be wise to do so. It's pretty much a whole different tank, not sure if you can even upgrade old ones, probably only share 10% of the parts. Cameras all around, 360° view for the crew, through the tank, similar to the F-35... new fibre cables saving a couple tons, autoloader, new cannon, new engine, new lighter armor.

@nemochrysler Жыл бұрын

hey, you forgot , tank ace and tank commander in WW2

@gianpaolovillani6321 Жыл бұрын

The M1A2 Abrams is a beautiful tank, I want it to remain operational for many more decades, and never need to be replaced from the abramsx. And I want it upgraded from M1A2 to M1A3 Abrams! We must not rely too much on killer robots, it would be dispoyalty and dishonor. Because robots don't have a soul, a heart and they don't know loyalty and honor. Winning wars requires human soldiers who have hearts, souls, and who know loyalty and honor!

@mohammedines6182 Жыл бұрын

Pourquoi il a un système d armement manual et pas automatique ?!!

@ericclausen6772 Жыл бұрын

Actually you would probably live a little longer beating the bushes in the infantry I know tankers grease their road wheels with infantry I was a armoured I cavalry soldiers but I was a infantry soldier but got to do almost anything in armored like tanks mostly driving or loading because we were so short of troops even been to scouts outs

@frankthompson6503 Жыл бұрын

Good to upgrade not spending mega millions of dollars. Would be good to upgrade armor around engine and turret hatch 🐣

@leonardoromero6743 Жыл бұрын

Check out the upcoming kf 51 panther of germany. See the difference

@jerrytjohnson2263 Жыл бұрын

Finally

@timmccarthy982 Жыл бұрын

Long run for the 2nd best protype tank considered for production and not the Armies first choice.

@yfposer Жыл бұрын

2:57 1st ID has abrams?

@IberianCraftsman Жыл бұрын

1:35 Does the gunner need to exit to shoot the machine guns or not?, they should install some Escribano Guardian 2 turrets, and shoot from inside the tank better. 3:40 yeah, like that better

@nivrerabliv759 Жыл бұрын

It's just an upgrade. The real replacement of the Abram will be much lighter and smaller than the Abram.

@arnoldestipona2244 Жыл бұрын

marines got their replacement for abrams. it is more lighter, packing 105 gun and air transportable

@davidbeattie4294 Жыл бұрын

its still a massively heavy, fuel guzzling vehicle. Its very difficult to transport to the battle zone and once its there, may be immobilized by ground conditions or inadequate bridging. it also requires a major repair and maintenance contingent to keep it in fighting trim. But its available and given the Army's abysmal track record designing new MBT's, it was likely the only option to field a better tank this century.

@SuperGeronimo999 Жыл бұрын

New Abrams has 50% less fuel consumption.

@JoeBribem Жыл бұрын

I'd like to see them use tanks to target aircraft effectively.

@pernykvist3442 Жыл бұрын

Is tanks needed? Why not go and evolve Bradleys?

@uncleruckus69420 Жыл бұрын

You know that’s exactly how I pictured an upgraded Russian T tank but then I thought about it and looked at that tank some more and that looks more Russian than anything

@viper5535 Жыл бұрын

Why is the thumbnail a T-72??

@LemonGaming_ph Жыл бұрын

They forgot the turret ring protection

@wikedgaming Жыл бұрын

The US Army is not looking for a replacement they want a more economical upgrade

@Torchriver67 Жыл бұрын

Might need a companion drone…. The uses would be endless!

@Kefp_mimi Жыл бұрын

@guardianmilitary_ Жыл бұрын

How powerful is the NEW Abrams M1A2 SEPV3 Tank Fire Targets On The Battlefield? check it out👇👇

@douglasgabrielle6623 Жыл бұрын

The title is click bait. They aren't replacing the M1, they are upgrading it.

@SuperGeronimo999 Жыл бұрын

New Abrams will be shown next week, unclear if Army will adopt it, but it would be wise to do so. It's pretty much a whole different tank, not sure if you can even upgrade old ones, probably only share 10% of the parts. Cameras all around, 360° view for the crew, through the tank, similar to the F-35... new fibre cables saving a couple tons, autoloader, new cannon, new engine, new lighter armor.

@newbie_productions Жыл бұрын

They did not show a T-90 in the thumbnail 💀

@ericclausen6772 Жыл бұрын

35 mm auto cannon is what it needs for range

@freefromit2 Жыл бұрын

A metal coffin in today's world.

@Just_A_Random_Desk Жыл бұрын

an 'M1A3' is more realistic than an 'M1A2 SEP V4' if we're being honest. General Dynamics teased a modern Abrams that'll be should be unveiled this October.

@hendi1571 Жыл бұрын

SEP V4 is already in development

@mohairsam9705 Жыл бұрын

The Abrams can run on Cooking Oil I kid you not...

@T.R.75 Жыл бұрын

lol gj on the thumbnail and the title of the vid. really describes what u threw up here.

@curtisblanco4029 Жыл бұрын

If I was going to go to battle in any tank, I would choose the most advanced Abrams.

@jamesozechoski8254 Жыл бұрын

Track vehicle mech.1st AD 63H. 81 to 83..hooah

@ruskiessuck3337 Жыл бұрын

SEP V4 should be fine for another 20 years.

@philippdinkhauser5639 Жыл бұрын

Hey guys, take that time a good one. Germany will produce the Panther. The Prototype is still exsisting.

@wilfredjohnson9436 Жыл бұрын

Haven't seen it in a fight yet?

@WillVRam 4 ай бұрын

2:50 it doesnt show how they can shoot the turrets without expose themselves 3:36 look all this smole. Must be an exhaust system. 6:09 where is this wind meter located in the tanl? M1A2 specs 1:27 a canceled proejct abrams replacer 1:59 motor engine - gas turbine engine - 1500 horse power 2:05 maximum speed - ~68 km/h / 42 mph 2:10 operational range - ~270 miles 2:13 inside view 2:51 SEP - a system upgrade for Amrabs ... (most about the diferent versions) 7:17 hatches closing

@amigatommy7 Жыл бұрын

Not a good idea unless they add a laser.

@0Turbox Жыл бұрын

Why not taking the Rheinmetall Panther?

@SuperGeronimo999 Жыл бұрын

New Abrams is far more advanced. Panther still ~20 years away.

@arnoldestipona2244 Жыл бұрын

abrams must be fitted with israeli trophy active protection system. it can do away, extra armor and make it lighter. the biggest problem with abrams is refueling. it guzzle 115 liters every 100 kms. to make it combat effective, it needs fuel tanker nearby. enemy can take down the fuel tanker ,it makes abrams combat ineffective . that its achilles heel. whereas other tanks uses diesel engine . no need for fuel tanker tailing it all the time.

@davidjacobs8558 Жыл бұрын

why not replace the turbine engine with German made V12 Diesel producing 1500 hp ?

@arnoldestipona2244 Жыл бұрын

@@davidjacobs8558 i dont know if the inside dimension of abrams engine compartment will fit a 1500hp diesel engine. turbine engine is smaller compared to diesel engine in the same horsepower rating.

@charliefoster5133 Жыл бұрын

The abrams will be around for many more years with better upgrades and more firepower

@ericclausen6772 Жыл бұрын

Luxury cruiser just use the brakes sparingly or bury your main gun and your Tank commander fly out of the hatch and if he's good he will grab the main gun before hitting the ground right Lt Wadlin huh now that's a real tank commander huh Lt

@nitroxide17 Жыл бұрын

Weird thumbnail though

@PenDragonsPig Жыл бұрын

The latest and greatest….1970s tank.

@frankthompson6503 Жыл бұрын

Would be good if tanks had drone's and laser's.

@craigkdillon Жыл бұрын

Haven't you heard? The Abrams Sep V8 will have AAP, or Aerial Attack Package. It will be able to fly. Trust me. It's true. Would I lie?? (maybe).

@mxr572 Жыл бұрын

since Ukraine, the tank's vulnerability to smart missile attack may mean its usefulness as a field weapon may be in doubt. the M1 has not been in tested in a real war situation of late. however the survivability of the crew is much better than Russian tanks as shown in video clips from Ukraine. perhaps all military hardware needs a reassessment since Ukraine.

@Gridlocked Жыл бұрын

The war in Ukraine showcased the poor tactics and logistics employed in regards to tank warfare.

@44240xtp Жыл бұрын

Tanks were considered obsolete in the past. It has always and will be a weapons vs armor race.

@ignacio3890 Жыл бұрын

@@Gridlocked Don't belive in the ukranian propaganda

@ignacio3890 Жыл бұрын

THE BIGGEST PART OF THE UKRANIAN VIDEOS ARE FAKE.... THE RUSSIAN HAVE LOST ABOUT 150 TANKS AND 400 THE NOVORUSSIANS . THE BIGGEST PART BY MINES AND ARTILLERY AND THE 2500 TANKS LOSE BY UKRANIE WAS IN. 80% BY THE ARTILLERY

@DANEgerus Жыл бұрын

Soooo M-1 Abrams to be replaced by M-1 Abrams? Like the M-4 rifle is to be replaced by Sig AR-10... er... MCX?

@hoopergangong Жыл бұрын

bros thumbnail was just a russian tank

@matthewcherrington2634 Жыл бұрын

I thought it was named after the abrams from ww2

@xxkrazykrewxxl6254 Жыл бұрын

He was a colonel in ww2 and a general in Vietnam

@jrpriller Жыл бұрын

I think if the tank had a dual cannons it would be better off ?

@arnoldestipona2244 Жыл бұрын

it wont be lighter, it wont fit c-17 and c-5a transport. single gun with better fire cntrol and targeting computers are much better.

@xxkrazykrewxxl6254 Жыл бұрын

That has been tried and failed

@brianvanveghel7815 Жыл бұрын

American tanks do not work alone they always will have infantry nearby or some other kind of unit to support the tanks and vise versa.

@TheCerebralDude Жыл бұрын

Can a future variant have a 130mm gun like the new German Panther?

@philippdinkhauser5639 Жыл бұрын

Well, it would be nice to find an us Joint venture partner.

@SuperGeronimo999 Жыл бұрын

Isn't needed. New 120mm has similar power as the 130mm but carries more ammo and is lighter than even the L/44.

@BewareOfTheKraut Жыл бұрын

@@SuperGeronimo999 That’s nonsense.

@AusTankieGaming Жыл бұрын

Nope sorry Tanks can capture ground but they can never hold it by themselves - A good combined arms team will always be required to do both.

@jrocks6969 Жыл бұрын

Tanks at night bad about killing friendlys

@Kevin-qj7fp Жыл бұрын

the day we can have tanks in the military almost like single people with cars we will see for every human in the army theres a tank would be a good thing we would overpower any opponent instead of 1 million people doing gorilla warfare imagine 1 million people with 1 million tanks doing gorilla warfare no one would stand a chance with over 500000 rounds per second fired at them not even 1 million people marching towrds a base or location