Simba Shooting Cap was honestly the funniest thing I've seen in a GR video to date! If only there was a compilation video of such events ;)
@SamAshworth912 жыл бұрын
I was giggling for about 5 mins afterwards, properly broke me.
@elmo2you2 жыл бұрын
@@SamAshworth91 Likewise over here ... made my day
@angelarch53522 жыл бұрын
I laughed way more than I should have at that :D
@Wyomingchief2 жыл бұрын
Yeah they definitely need a compilation of all the time somebody kills cap. I went back and rewatch that at least three times. In the subtle movement as a turret is hilarious. The first time I watched it I thought oh no he's going to do it😂😂
@connorparks11302 жыл бұрын
The Merkava's barrel is not short to operate in urban environments it's a common myth but it's not true. It's the same length as the L44 as it's just a domestically produced version of it. The gun just looks shorter because the first part of the barrel is covered up by the turret.
@knochi9562 жыл бұрын
Yeah, they didn't want to import the L55.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx
@AgneDei2 жыл бұрын
@@knochi956 The newest Abrams SEPv3 still uses L44 gun, which is a bit of a bummer, as it lacks performance with tungsten rounds compared to the new Leopard's L55 gun.
@jerrybeard26702 жыл бұрын
@@AgneDei No major Loss of penetration with the L44 and the M829 Round. They are still capable of hitting out to about 4600 meters with like an 80% change of first shot kills if I recall..
@AgneDei2 жыл бұрын
@@jerrybeard2670 Don't compare depleted uranium core to tungsten core rounds, that's dumb because L55 can also use them with significantly higher performance than L44. You just can't work around physics.
@jasong34422 жыл бұрын
I've drag raced a Leclerc in a M1A1 in real life. That thing is fast.. like it wasn't even close it just shot ahead of us and kept on going. She's a lot lighter than you'd think and that's where she gets her speed from I believe.
@jasong34422 жыл бұрын
Okay now I've watched the whole video and that was hilarious. Its best summed up by that the tanks are just fine, this was just an example of tremendously bad tactics; also some poor damage modeling. All tanks are weak on the sides, top, and rear and people have spent the last 100 years coming up with all sorts of anti tank options, no one is invulnerable and those are just the facts of life. Modern tanks draw their advantage from being able to deliver more precise kinetic energy at a much longer ranges in addition to having superior armor and mobility. Tankers will always orient their armor to face the threat and peak over terrain when possible to limit their exposure to incoming fire. rather than just charge and get destroyed. A more fair test for every tank involved would be for them to stay on line but to creep forward till each successive row of tank was within range and then have them stop and eliminate the targets. This would also test the max effective ranges of each tank. Also fun fact, the Leo and the Abrams use the exact same main gun. Modern Sabot rounds would melt through a Panzers armor; it wouldn't even present a challenge. Fun test boys, apparently the Leo just doesn't give a fuck lol.
@reefta2 жыл бұрын
@@jasong3442 true that, but it would make a boring video to watch tanks fires from 2km away for an hour or so.
@bongodrumzz2 жыл бұрын
The Leclerc is probably even quicker in reverse in real life lol
@bazej10802 жыл бұрын
It has very good hydro pneumatic suspension for the smooth ride on uneven terrain.
@warbuzzard71672 жыл бұрын
@@reefta I doubt such a battle would have taken 4 minutes, forget an hour! IIRC Abrams MBTs were sniping T72s in the Iraq desert for 3-4k meters; one shot a T-72 through a sand dune. Another got a double hit with one round!
@Duvstep9102 жыл бұрын
Leclerc: *slowly turns turret towards jeep* Me: 🤣 I know where this is going
@AHURKY2 жыл бұрын
TWAT! 🤣🤣🤣
@russellknight262 жыл бұрын
Why not Leopard 2A5 or Leopard 2A6M they are the more common and extensively modified upgrade variants and far superior to the 2A4. I am sure everyone would like if they added the 2A7+ to DCS one day.
@Mgaming612 жыл бұрын
yeah, I'm a little sad for that reason :(
@Thisandthat89082 жыл бұрын
@@arnor4214 you would certainly hope so. However i would imagine is has more armor and is heavier and possibly slower?
@jblanken2 жыл бұрын
American tanker here....fun fact: the Leopard II and the M1A1/A2 Abrams all use the same main gun - the M256 made by Rheinmetall.
@92HazelMocha2 жыл бұрын
Uhhhhh man idk how to tell you this, the M246 is an L44, Leopard 2's switched to the L55 back in 06-07ish.
@thomasroth46952 жыл бұрын
Lmfaoo. I hear you bro. I was an M-1 mech. The 44/55 same gun the 55 slightly longer ( gain mussel velocity) uses the SAME ammo. Wait until they find out the armor is made in Britain. They may no longer be Krupp but they damn sure do still make the worlds best guns. 63G here.
@92HazelMocha2 жыл бұрын
@@thomasroth4695 Ooooo don't say Krupp, Germans in the comments ain't gonna like that lol
@M3PH112 жыл бұрын
@@thomasroth4695 Wait till they find out the armour made in britain is the previous gen and we didn't tell them we had something better. one word. Dorchester.
@jblanken2 жыл бұрын
@@92HazelMocha I do know how to tell you this....I'm old. HAHAHAHA! Thanks for the heads up though.
@markm73352 жыл бұрын
I was crying laughing when simba shot cap. You could almost see the tank smirk.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
I was NOT happy
@jamesscott69172 жыл бұрын
Remember that all tanks are a balance between armor, weapons and mobility. Other considerations are repairability, cost to operate and upgrade ability. For instance, the Abrams was built with upgrade in mind and the tank of today looks pretty similar to the original M-1 but is practically a different tank. The antennae on the Merkava are for the active protection system that protects against ATGM’s and RPG’s. There’s nothing wrong with the armor on the tanks, the game is still imperfect.
@russellknight262 жыл бұрын
The moment the turret started traversing towards the Jeep that was the moment I had to hit the 👍🏻like button
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
Don't encourage him please.
@robertdiaz45942 жыл бұрын
Second that like at the same moment. Almost spit my food out mid bite when it happened 🤣
@trevorday7923 Жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers I don't think he actually NEEDS any encouragement..... 😇
@johanj36742 жыл бұрын
A Leopard 2A4 isn't very modern now is it? Also Sweden hasn't used it in many years, only the Strv 122 now.
@ericstefko48522 жыл бұрын
I agreed they should have used the A6
@plushiie_2 жыл бұрын
its young at heart! ;-;
@Roguepaladin722 жыл бұрын
The 122 is based on the L2A4
@92HazelMocha2 жыл бұрын
@@Roguepaladin72 L2A5*, the A4 was before the arrowhead turret.
@vberl95732 жыл бұрын
@@Roguepaladin72 L2A5 not the L2A4
@n8spL82 жыл бұрын
smoothbore has no negative ballistic effect on modern fin-stabilized sabot rounds and eliminating the lans and grooves from the barrel reduces weight/manufacturing complexity while adding potential diameter to the projectile at no cost.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
So why have rifled barrel?
@Oscar-qh5jn2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers Rifled barrel would benefit more from HEAT or more other chunky projectiles I believe
@Ninjapancake362 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers to fire HESH projectiles, the rifled gun on the Chally is very outdated, this is seen on the new version of the tank the Challenger 3 now has a smooth bore cannon. Smooth bores are also able to fire higher pressure cartridges while having significantly less wear on the gun itself
@Maverick9662 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers Because British use HESH rounds that needs to spin to work properly, this is the only reason for the rifled barrel in the Challenger 2, but it is an old round, in fact the British are thinking of upgrading the Challenger 2 with a smoothbore Rhenimentall L/55 because it wears much less than a rifled barrel and today there are much better ammunition that can replace the HESH
@connorparks11302 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers Because the British really liked the HESH round which needs a rifled gun to work well. They've only just decided to switch to the L55 smoothbore (used on the newest leopard variants). for the challenger 3
@aztec01122 жыл бұрын
73 Easting and Medinah Ridge pretty clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of the M1's armor
@fredkruse94442 жыл бұрын
Exactly. No way these 1940's tanks are taking out an Abrams.
@adaml832 жыл бұрын
Yeah I kind of figured that DCS not having all of the data on these tanks was the main reason. Besides they're there to be destroyed by modern aircraft.
@voidtempering87002 жыл бұрын
@@fredkruse9444 A 1940s tank could penetrate the Abrams from the side, just no chance from the front.
@arokh722 жыл бұрын
Before everything kicks off, I'll be going for the M1 Abrams, as that's what we also use here in Australia.
@kenhelmers26032 жыл бұрын
This was a fun one to watch :) Thanks GR!
@ajgorney2 жыл бұрын
T80 is derivative and development of T-64, Russia's top of the line tank from the 60's and 70's, while the T-90 is a development of the T-72 which is a cheaper tank intended for large numbers and also export markets. The 64 and 80 were more well developed and refined than the somewhat more economical and basic 72 and 90 respectively, though of course a lot also depends on the level of advanced equipment on the specific model.
@timurlane40042 жыл бұрын
But wasnt T64A , T64B variants worse than T72A,T72B variant in all aspects?
@marinodezelak1180 Жыл бұрын
"The 64 and 80 were more well developed and refined than the somewhat more economical and basic 72 and 90 respectively" If by "well developed and refined" you mean "riddled with issues, prone to failure, overambitious and badly designed" then yes... yes they were.. The T-72 wasn't cheaper because it's worse.. it was cheaper because it already had a pre-existing industrial base for its production.
@cailewis90892 жыл бұрын
For the fighting ability test, for better results, use a wider battle spread. A narrow spread has the same effect as being surrounded on 3 sides.
@bigfootape2 жыл бұрын
The IMI 120mm barrel is 44 calibers, just like the M256 in the M1A2 and Rh-120 on the Leopard 2. Merkava has the power pack mounted in the front (for extra crew protection), so the gun probably sits a bit further back on the chassis. The power pack and transmission on the Leopard 2 is absolutely amazing, so winning the drag race is no surprise.
@BBCRF2 жыл бұрын
В этой гонке должен был победить Т-80У он имеет 27 л.с на тонну и самое низкое удельное давление на грунт
@Livi705902 жыл бұрын
Should have had the 'How well can it make tea' test between the British tanks.
@brianjohnson87252 жыл бұрын
When Simba shoot Cap, I laughed so hard I got light-headed. Thanks, Simba I needed that laugh!
@tannersiebel2 жыл бұрын
I hope to see this test again if the tank models ever get updated to be more accurate.
@ilejovcevski792 жыл бұрын
The Pz-IV and th Pz-V barrels may be the same caliber, but the Panther's is certainly longer, thus a higher muzzle velocity of the projectile.
@piminat0r2 жыл бұрын
And if I'm not mistaken also had larger brass, standard ap round of the panzer 5 were lighter but the round itself was about 3kg's heavier, also about 250-300 Ms velocity higher on standard ap
@JustLiesNOR2 жыл бұрын
@@piminat0r Yeah. Same with the Tiger 1 vs Tiger 2. Both technically 88mm, but damn the Tiger 2 gun packs a hell of a lot more punch. 88 x 571mm vs 88 x 822mm shells AND a longer gun. A more logical progression, both in terms of armor and firepower, would have been the Panzer4 -> Tiger1 -> Panther, -> Tiger2. Sure the Panther "only" has 80mm of frontal armor compared to the Tiger 1 100mm. But the panthers armor is sloped back while the Tiger1 armor is almost completely flat, thus making the Panthers armor effectively thicker. (not that any of that level of armor matters against modern 120mm guns). And the long 75 on the Panther had more penetration than the 88 on the Tiger1.
@FalcoGer2 жыл бұрын
Abrams have 2 ammo racks. One near the breach and one in the back. Loading from the first one takes very little time. You're supposed to shuffle ammo from the bigger shelf between fights. Loading ammo directly from the rear shelf takes a lot longer.
@jerrybeard26702 жыл бұрын
The ammo is stored in an armored compartment..The ready rack behind the loader and the semi ready rack behind the TC. Ready rack holds 25 rounds. Semi ready 20. To access the Semi ready rack you have to disconnect the hydraulic door actuator on the ready rack, fold down TC's seat and then wrench door partially open to start pulling rounds out. Takes about 10 plus minutes to do complete transfer.
@williamroberts68032 жыл бұрын
Watching tank battles on the gulf war and the commanders were saying they were going fast and could fire once every 6 seconds and just drive through the enemy without slowing down.
@warbuzzard71672 жыл бұрын
Oh, when Simba did The Thing to Cap... priceless!
@Goober_____2 жыл бұрын
200hundred thousand subs congratulations 🎊🎉🍾🎈 you are my favorite DCS youtuber!
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thxx
@giwrgosv2 жыл бұрын
A similar test was conducted FOR REAL in 1998 in Greece. The tanks that took part were the M1a2 Abrams, Challenger 2, Leclerc, Leopard 2a6, T-80U and T-84 from Ukraine. The test included among others: firing on the move, starting at 60% slope, traversing a ditch 2 meters deep in water, vertical obstacle, detection and identification of target at night and endurance and fuel economy run for 1000 km. To no-one's surprise Leopard came first followed closely by Abrams, then Leclerc and T-80 and T-84. Leopard was also somewhat cheaper than the other western tanks. As far as i know it is the only comparative test of modern MBT ever.
@AgneDei2 жыл бұрын
With the turbine engine it's quite interesting for the Abrams to get a good result in a test where the fuel economy is a factor. I guess it had small weight for the final score, as besides that it's a great tank.
@giwrgosv2 жыл бұрын
@@AgneDei Abrams came marginally first in the technical evaluation actually, it scored well in optics an fire control devices. Only when price was evaluated Leopard went on top, again marginally. There where also 2 companies that didn't present a tank in the test.
@swingingbunny35502 жыл бұрын
The Merkava has active shield, which of course not simulated here. with that, with a full crew it is a lethal monster. aiming and shooting fast in a hard terrains. DCS is a good flight sim, but not too good with the tanks yet.
@toddw67162 жыл бұрын
Not very accurate, the M1 is deadly at long range so the aiming system doesn’t appear to be accurate. They would have wiped them out at long range. I suspect these tanks are not so accurate but it is a flight sim
@TheEvilmooseofdoom2 жыл бұрын
They claim they're trying to make a Digital Combat Simulator but their prime focus is flight. I believe the M1 is deadly at range when stationary, but not sure about moving and of course a video game can never be that realistic anyway. :)
@3idraven7142 жыл бұрын
I think it was the ammo they used…sabot is great against composite heavy armor…but non composite pure armor they might have done better with a heat type AT round…I think they used that with the Chicom tank and the hit ratio seemed better until the Panther 75mm/L70 high velocity sent them all to Mao’s tomb
@DUKWAK2 жыл бұрын
Simba blasting Cap was hysterical. Lol
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
neg
@DUKWAK2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers "TWAT!" 🤣
@kevindahlke5032 жыл бұрын
The Israel tank was not built for speed because Israel is a small country. It was built for survivability of the crew.
@Aardvark8922 жыл бұрын
There's a great WW1 mod for DCS that includes many tanks and vehicles. Would love to see them included in tests like this.
@frenchouiaboo8162 жыл бұрын
the reason the merkava's barrel seems short is due to the turret being mounted more to the rear than the more traditional middle position and the face the add-on armor it posses extends so much on the barrel, when in reality the gun is as long as a Leopard 2 or a M1A2
@perrykivolowitz73232 жыл бұрын
If you're going to include a T-80 shouldn't you have some farm tractors nearby? You know, to drag the T-80 off the field? Just sayin'
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
lols
@KaterChris2 жыл бұрын
Considering how well the outdated Leopard 2A4 did, just imagine the current 2A6 or new 2A7, which are basically a new generation :-)
@wmouse2 жыл бұрын
Don't get me wrong, I love DCS for what it is, but it simulates tanks so poorly that I'd expect a 2A7 to perform worse than a 2A4 for no conceivable reason other than "Because it's DCS." After all, the M1A2, which is closer to a 2A7 in real world capabilities, did worse than the Leopard 2A4. Another way to look at it: the Leopard 2A4 already performs, compared to the M1A2, as if it's actually a Leopard 2A7.
@m1t2a12 жыл бұрын
Watched Tank Chats from The Tank Museum Channel and more, about each tank being used. It made for an enjoyable afternoon.
@djzoodude2 жыл бұрын
I'm wondering how accurately modeled the tanks really are. Realistically, there's no WW2 round that is getting through modern composite armor. The Challenger 2, Abrams, Leopard 2 etc. would have probably gotten through this without losing a tank. Also, the Abrams should have the best side armor of the group. The Abrams' designers sacrificed a bit of frontal armor to beef up the armor on the rest of the tank. The other western MBTs went for max frontal armor.
@tomriley57902 жыл бұрын
Not sure that's true - Abrams armour (non-export version) was based on the Challengers.
@djzoodude2 жыл бұрын
@@tomriley5790 the original Abrams and the original Challenger both had Chobham armor, but even then, I believe it was arranged differently on the two tanks. Since then, both to tanks have undergone numerous upgrades. The Abrams is now on version M1A2 SEP v3 and the Challenger is on version Challenger 2 LEP. They have both upgraded their armor significantly since the original versions, with the Challenger now on version 2 of Chobham armor, and the Abrams now includes depleted uranium as part of its armor. Both tanks are extremely well armored, but I believe the current Abrams has slightly better all around armor than the Challenger 2.
@Nicolas103912 жыл бұрын
@@djzoodude challenger 3 is newest version.
@djzoodude2 жыл бұрын
@@Nicolas10391 The Challenger 3 is in development, but won't be in service for like 5 more years. Same deal with the M1A3, in development, but not in service yet.
@michaeldehart6482 жыл бұрын
Battle of 73 Easting showed what the Abrams can do, and that wasn't even the new A2
@stephenhamblin3333 Жыл бұрын
Hilarious when he blew the jeep up at the beginning. absolutly the funniest shit I've seen all day .keep it up boys .
@angelarch53522 жыл бұрын
Love the tank video!!! please do a version of this comparing different IFVs like Strikers and LAVs and BMPs etc.
@Thurgosh_OG2 жыл бұрын
It would only really work if they tried to use actual combat tactics and not drive fast to the enemy and hope you can hit them before you expose weaker side armour.
@enigmaronin24982 жыл бұрын
As you were saying at 26:00 MBTs have gun velocities reaching 1500-2000 metres per second whilst ww2 tanks averaged at around 500-700mps
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx MASSIVE difference.
@endgovernmentextremism2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers Not to mention the sabot rounds back then were hardened steel while today they are tungsten or depleted uranium alloys.
@AgneDei2 жыл бұрын
With an AP round the Panthers 75mm L70 gun had muzzle velocity of around 1130mps, and the Tiger 2 88mm L71 gun with APCR round reached muzzle velocity of also 1130mps, but with a much bigger round, so the best of the best guns in 2WW weren't all that bad. The 2000mps is a bit high. The German 120mm L55 gun on the Leopard can reach around 1800mps with a kinetic penetrator (the sleek, discard sabot round), and it's surely quite lower for the 120mm L44 gun used on the Abrams. So the muzzle speed of modern MBT's is significantly higher, but not that dramatically higher. The other big difference is that the newest projectiles have much longer penetrators made out of materials way more dense and hard than what was physically possible during WW2, and those are the main reason why very good armor class went from 180-200mm in 1945, to equivalent of 900-1000mm of hardened steel in 2000s.
@scottr99002 жыл бұрын
An Abrams would have a hard time killing another Abrams. I’m betting that the tank that slows down is suffering from dust filled v-packs. 😀
@M3PH112 жыл бұрын
not it took a round to the front axle mounted gearbox and lost a bunch of gears.
@scottr99002 жыл бұрын
The tensioners are mounted to the front bogies. But the drivetrain is connected to the rear drive wheels. Ask me where my Craftsman 15/16” is.
@nuclearTANK2 жыл бұрын
Not if they're both using DU APFSDS, during the gulf war an Abrams fired on another Abrams with a DU round and it went right through the frontal armor
@josephgrant65112 жыл бұрын
@@nuclearTANK Ummm... that's inaccurate.
@jerrybeard26702 жыл бұрын
Smooth bore guns use a Sabot round when firing Primary Armor Defeating rounds (Sabot) Penetrator encased in a discarding sabot carrier which is discarded after round exits barrel. penetrator is basically a dart flying at roughly 4-5 times speed of sound in a near flat trajectory...Very accurate..
@nuclearTANK2 жыл бұрын
The Abrams doesn't fire missiles, Rhinemetal did develop a missile for the 120mm used by both the Leopard and Abrams but the project was later dropped as neither one was interested in it
@imellor7112 жыл бұрын
Absolutely love this video, very entertaining, well done chaps.
@gibmeister58542 жыл бұрын
Wow the lack of tank knowledge amazes me.
@evo3s752 жыл бұрын
yay, Leopard won the drag race, but this is not the newest design, that would be the 2A7 series
@TheNecromancer66662 жыл бұрын
2A7V is the latent operational model
@ThePerfectOwnage2 жыл бұрын
@@TheNecromancer6666 V's are older models upgraded to 2A7 levels.
@M3PH112 жыл бұрын
@@ThePerfectOwnage 2a6's to be precise iirc
@Sardaukar2408882 жыл бұрын
HAHAHA lost it when Simba disposed of your Jeep! 🤣
@AgneDei2 жыл бұрын
The Russian tanks AI driving simulation was so realistic that I thought this was a documentary film for a minute :D
@Jojooooooo2 жыл бұрын
Mbt stands for main battle tank, a combination of all other tank classes basically in an attempt to get a perfect fit. It's pretty difficult to balance speed, firepower, maneuver ability and survivability which leads to these results. For example the leopard's development prioritised speed and firepower over survivability, the chieftain chose survivability and firepower over speed which leads to the results in ten drag race. (Note that the government chose the worst car manufacturer in the UK to make the chieftain engine leading to poor performance, it was almost constantly being upgraded leading to 16 or more variants of the chieftain.) The chieftain is similar to the challenger 2 but the challenger 2 just does it better.
@duanesamuelson22562 жыл бұрын
I would like to know what the actual speed and acceleration was. I can't say anything about current tank speeds/acceleration but the M1 can definitely run over 100kph cross country (regardless of what the official speed is). The original speed was limited by the surplus M60 track which was used.
@YourTechpriest2 жыл бұрын
Former M1 driver, I've ran around 72mph (116kph) flat out on desert dirt roads. Though the tank slows down A LOT when a hill gets involved. (plus I tweaked the governor settings on mine)
@Wyomingchief2 жыл бұрын
@@YourTechpriest 👍😂
@duanesamuelson22562 жыл бұрын
@Local Techpriest yeah..I was always jealous of you guys being in an armored vehicle that could pull a wheelie. I was Artillery (SP) always with AD'S or CAV and you ran circles around us.. (of course we could shoot further and over hills 😉)
@Badself55 Жыл бұрын
When Cap says, "say hello boys 🧐", that's when I know the fun is beginning.
@downunda26642 жыл бұрын
Leopard is also used by Canada. We don’t have the largest armour I think only like 86. But some nice variants of the 2a4
@mattsnow92732 жыл бұрын
"Your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!" - French tank commander
@andrewsmall68342 жыл бұрын
I feel like you could've dropped the chieftain and added the Japanese type 10, the Italian Ariete and the Korean K2. Also, if this was realistic then all of the tanks used would be getting one shot kills as soon as they see the crappy old WW2 tank.
@christophersteele49022 жыл бұрын
M1A2 Abrams as with all M! Abrams tanks have a crew of 4 and have a manual loader. The Loader is an actual human. I did notice a lot of shots missing during all of the episodes with exception of the German Leopard 2A4
@SWBB10002 жыл бұрын
Why isn’t the newer Germany main battle tank isn’t shown?
@92HazelMocha2 жыл бұрын
To be fair, it also has the original Leclerc, T90 and only the M1A2 Abrams and not the Series XXI, T90M or M1A2 SEP V3. Most of the assets in DCS are fairly old.
@adrien58342 жыл бұрын
Because you haven't modeled it yet. Chop chop, get to it!
@MTBScotland2 жыл бұрын
Cap getting blown up was inevitable after that le clerc tank comment.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
:(
@MTBScotland2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers I nearly woke the wife up laughing at it.
@28boudreaux2 жыл бұрын
4:04 Simba: "Round out, and on target!"
@strambino12 жыл бұрын
The modern armor piercing fins stabilize discarding sabot round has a muzzle velocity approaching 5577 ft/s 1700 m/s or Mach 5. The tungsten penetrators will go faster initially and the depleted uranium penetrators are heavier so they start slower but they keep their velocity longer.
@3idraven7142 жыл бұрын
Do you think they might have used a heat type AT round instead of sabot, against old pure armor (not composite)?
@matthewgibbs68862 жыл бұрын
best modern tank hands down has to be the bane blade
@92HazelMocha2 жыл бұрын
*stares in Tau Hammerhead*
@Zuemmel2 жыл бұрын
300 tons of glory!
@lolmao5002 жыл бұрын
Merkava tanks are made for urban combats street fighting. Maybe you could do a video with tanks having to go throught a city with soldiers with rpgs in streets and on rooftops.
@montys420-2 жыл бұрын
The Leapard, Abrams and Leclerc all have the same German designed 120mm smoothbore gun, the Challenger 2/3 is having its rifled gun replaced by the 120mm smoothbore gun and im not sure about the Leclerc, as for the Russian and Chinese tank they also have the same gun as each other a Russian produced/Chinese licence copy of 125mm smoothbore.
@Nerule2 жыл бұрын
Sabot rounds are depleted Uraniam rounds peeps. Also, the reactive armor by the A2's are classified, so are how the servo stabilizers keep the tank leveled while hauling ass.
@ecbst62 жыл бұрын
Tanker, tanker, don't be blue... Tinkerbell's a fairy, too 😁
@paulomonteiro31042 жыл бұрын
Cap, congratulations on the 200k!
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx
@lordsqueak2 жыл бұрын
♪ wheres your head at at at ♪ wheres your heaad at at at ♫
@scottr99002 жыл бұрын
APFSDS. Armor Piercing, Fin Stabilized, Discarding Sabot.
@zedtank2 жыл бұрын
cap! the merkava doesn't have a short gun, its turret is placed backwards on the hull since the engine is in the front. it's basically the same gun as the m1's and leopard.
@faheem65asss2 жыл бұрын
1. Leo - 120mm RH L44 - around 60 tons - German doctrine is mobility and firepower - new Leos have the turret protection added but they still emphasize speed 2. Leclerc - 120mm GIAT CN 120-26/52 - around 57 tons - France had an even bigger focus on low armor, big gun and speed. This heavily informed their tank design, so speed is key. 3. Challenger 2 - 120 mm L30A1 Rifled - upto 80 tons - British doctrine is focused on defense and long range engagements, older british tanks were notorious for their weak engines. The challenger does better, but it suffers in getting to top end speed. It is very well protected and has a great service record. The gun is different from almost every other Modern tank in that it is rifled, this has more to do with british doctrine than accuracy as many people think. The brits might be moving to smoothbore soon. 4. T80U - 125mm 2A46-2 - around 46 tonnes - Russian doctrine is close to the German one, fast, big gun and rush the enemy. This comes from the war and post war plannng of Soviet command. Their tanks are however, notoriously under powered compared to western ones and are not as good at putting the power down. It also depends alot on design t72 series is very different from the t80 series. The t80 uses a turbine engine, basically a plane engine 5. M1A1 Abrams - 120 mm RH L44 - around 60 tons - The abrams and leo came from a joint German US program and are thus very similar. One of the big differences being the abrams engine, it uses a turbine engine for better power to weight. However, the tank is very heavy. It is very mobile, decently protected and has a good gun. I do know personally, that an abrams lost a track once going full tilt in the dessert when it hit a foot sized rock. 6. ZTZ 96 - 125mm Type 88C - around 40 tons - Chinese doctrine is very similar to cold war russian doctrine, with the slight difference that they focus much more on sensors and battle management. The tank is underpowered, due to a weak engine. However, newer chinese designs are considered pretty lethal. 7. Merkava - 120mm MG253 - around 65 tons - Israel focuses on crew protection, the merkava has its engine infront and the crew sits behind, thus protecting them from penetrating hits. The tank is also meant to fight in urban and non-urban environments. The focus on protection means the merkava is not that mobile. It is still however, a lethal platform that is likely the best at protecting its crew from penetrating hits 8. Chieftain - Its basically a really old tank which was underpowered. Doesn't really belong in the competition. NOTE: Merkava, ZTZ and T80 can fire ATGMs as well. The tanks in the game dont seem to be super accurate to their real world performance, and my knowledge is limited. There are 2 main schools of tank design, Soviet (small, big gun) Western (Fast, big gun). In a real world scenario any tank can kill any tank under 1KM. The real difference is made by crew awareness and ability to identify and engage targets quickly, along with how the armor is used. Recent conflicts have shown tanks flanked by ATGM infantry = dead tank.
@faheem65asss2 жыл бұрын
On armor, Merkava is again focused on crew protection, there was a test when sweden selected its mbt between M1A2, Leclerc and Leo 2improved (with wedge). The leo was the best in terms of protection. Lethality wise the L55 is better than the US L44 as well, but newer US tanks are basically sensor systems, and I personally believe in general combat the M1 fits best into its battle role. The antenna on the Merkava are actually sensors for the trophy APS (it can kill incoming projectiles by firing a small projectile at it). Ill again comment that all the MBTs in this video save for chieftain would have minced the ww2 stuff. They have stabilizers and would not miss that many shots in real life.
@faheem65asss2 жыл бұрын
APFSDS - is basically a dart, its a kinetic round and has no explosive. You just use the kinetic energy to penetrate the target and it does spalling damage. Most modern tanks uses this, its also why they use smoothbore. You can't use rifled guns with fin darts HESH - is a chemical round that squashes against the target and uses chemical boom boom to go in
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
Thanks!
@QuintonNG2000 Жыл бұрын
I think the reason the composite armor may seem less effective is because of the sustained fire. Composite armor will absorb and dissepate tons of energy by delaminating, cracking, deforming, spitting off bits, stuff like that, but after it gets hit once it's gotta be pretty much toast. Compared to steel which can take a bunch of impacts as long as none is strong enough to punch through. So that "700 mm" equivalent protection is likely for a single impact on that section, after which the armor is basically useless. This is probably a much more effective strategy against things like rpgs where these tanks are used now. They don't need to hammer on each other from across a field for hours so much as survive a single tank killing missile.
@M3PH112 жыл бұрын
As a tank fan I can answer this without watching the video. IRL, the answer is probably the Leopard 2A7 but it is yet to be seen what the Challenger 3 can do in battle. I'm also a little shocked you bothered with the cheiftan mk3. Doees anyone even still use it? 8:16 it's slightly lighter and has a more powerful engine. It achieves this with the angled spaced armour on the front of it's turret. The LeClerc is essentially the same idea but it doesn't have the power to weight ratio and i believe has taller ratios in it's gearbox (don't quote me on that). 9:41 Torque or the force of twisting. Torque is what gets things moving. The heavier a thing is the more torque you need to get it moving. Once it is rolling there will come a point where torque is replaced by power (in vehichles HP or PS) 14:58 the problem with that is if you get a shell go through it's an immediate mobility kill and the tank is lost. Which means it will fail the test as it will not be able to shot while moving. 20:50 The chally has a stablised gun. The cheif doesn't. So, everytime the chief hit's a bump it puts the gun off target. chally has no such issues. 22:03 So explain how sabot rounds can do it then? No? Ok i will then. The real answer is the angle of slope. The angle of slope increases the *effective* armour thickness. With a hard round tipped shell like a WW2 tank shell, this angle and the roundness of the head is what causes the bounce (reasons why ther UK invented Squash head shells). Sabot rounds being thin and pointy counteract this somewhat. It's like the difference between stabbing something with a spoon and then stabbing it again with a knife 26:09 This is simply down to the type of shell being fired. The modern tanks are firing armour piercing fin stablised discarding sabot rounds (APFSDS) the fin stabilisation increase round accuracy and they are also considerably lighter which also increases muzzle velocity. The Panzers are mostly likely firing Armour piercing capped Balistic capped (APCBC) rounds. This are heavy AF and wobble slightly while in flight. This increases aerodynamic drag, decreasing accuracy and velocity. 33:23 They are for killing targets dug in behind cover and for highly mobile targets where the turret can't move fast enough to keep a lock for the cannon. Some countries do use them against aircraft but they are not actually designed for that use.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Sir!
@gmanadventurer88922 жыл бұрын
Let's all remember, DCS is a game, a fun game, but not an accurate or true realistic game.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
agree
@Tetemovies42 жыл бұрын
I worked in the defense Industry (and still kinda do to some extent) and was shown the simulators (for formation not qualification and systems integration) for one of the vehicle that was part of the same program as the vehicle i worked on and i can tell you that on the form, DCS doesn’t have anything to envy to the simulators that are actually used for the users’ formation. Obviously they don’t have access to the manufacturer’s industrial document so their models are bound to have inaccuracies and missing information but it’s far closer to the real thing than your comment implies.
@fadfauziug81462 жыл бұрын
A modern MBTs muzzle velocity with APSFDS it at around 1,750 m/s The Tigers KWK 36 88mm gun with GR 39HL shell was around 600 m/s
@liamspence12912 жыл бұрын
The abrams has never been able to fire missiles from its barrel.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx
@scottr99002 жыл бұрын
They might be thinking of the Copperhead round. Cap, that was a really primitive air burst round. We were told about them, never trained with them, and I never saw one on active duty. Supposedly you could guesstimate the targets height, and fire it out there, and it might damage a Huey. We loaded Sabot and Heaters. Blue ones.
@chrisbrent74872 жыл бұрын
Chieftain has a rifled barrel. Same gun as the Challenger 2 I believe. It was a very successful tank gun implemented on many vehicles. Most use smooth bore guns these days that are all the same gun or copies of. No surprise that the Leopard won the drag race. It was designed to be fast and maneuverable.
@feliscorax2 жыл бұрын
The new Challys are going smooth-bore, too - but I wonder if it can fire the HESH rounds the British Army likes to use so much or if the latter has finally called time on that particular munition type?
@Davros-vi4qg2 жыл бұрын
So, most NATO tanks now use, a German gun (licensed for building), UK armour, used to be Chobham, now ?Dorchester, and a lot of American tech. Each army then decides on survivability, weapon/ammo mix, power/manoeuvrability, comms, ergonomics, reliability/field maintenance and service intervals. Thank you Bovington Tank Museum 😆
@kevinnaber7902 жыл бұрын
The M1A2 Abrams is a decent tank, but like naval air scenarios without AWACS, an Abrams unit that doesn’t have a Bradley or other support vehicle often won’t do well in a battle in constant motion. Most tank tactics would have a tank slowing down, target the flanks first, and not all vehicles targeting the same target.
@thekolt5332 жыл бұрын
Krazy Ivan scool of tank driving is modeled after the Krazy Ivan submarine driving school .....same instructors too 😁
@Jack_Over90006 күн бұрын
According to Science, it has been proven conclusively that Cap hates Bogs.
@Psychobolic77 Жыл бұрын
I'm not mad, because honestly how is DCS going to model anything with such highly classified stats with any sort of accuracy. Seeing the French tanks win after you called it the duff tank was totally worth it.
@gerrypinca90132 жыл бұрын
Congratulations for 200K subscribe ❤️
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx
@lukewhitehouse41032 жыл бұрын
The modern fire control systems on these tanks have such a high hit rate on the move none of these WW2 tanks would be able to hit the target. Pzgr 40 as used on the Tiger is about 800ms-1 the DM33 on the Leopard 2A4 is about 1500ms-1 Leopard 2A7 is regarded as the best tank in the world.
@hanz20352 жыл бұрын
I would say that the 2A7 is very good but certainly not "the best in the world" because no tank is the best, they all have their disadvantages
@lukewhitehouse41032 жыл бұрын
@@hanz2035 Of course tanks are always a compromise, the best tanks generally are a mix of firepower, armour, crew protection and mobility. The list of truly elite tanks is short. Leopard 2A7v+ and the (STRV122B) M1A2 SEP V3 K2 (untested but looks very capable on paper) T90M and MS. Merkava IVM Then we have second tier tanks Challenger 2(TES) Type 10 Leclerc T-72B3 (Ukraine is not a fair assessment of this tank) ZTZ 99. But yes you could argue all day about who has the best tanks, but the important thing is not to be blinded by nationalism.
@jonathanpfeffer37162 жыл бұрын
@@lukewhitehouse4103 not sure I would put the T-90M up there, it still lacks some pretty essential features like blowout panels, and it might still have the old autoloader flaw that prevented earlier variants from using longer more modern APFSDS rounds, not sure if that has been fixed or not.
@lukewhitehouse41032 жыл бұрын
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 The T-90M-MS-SM exported to India and the current Rusfed version has had the autoloader armoured in 400mm composite armour, the rear of the turret has been extended to allow safe storage of additional rounds stored with blow out pannels. A Hardkill APS not fitted to all tanks as of yet, India will likely fit the Trophy system to their T-90SM tanks. The laterst in FCS and battlefield control systems and its just looks so damn good. However all these points are subjective.
@christopherhanton66112 жыл бұрын
good video also The Merkava Mark V "Barak" (Lightning) is planned to enter service in 2023.
@waw44282 жыл бұрын
Could you try the "Outerra Tech Demo" (the world engine with some vehicles that TitanIM uses) and compare it to DCS? Please :D ... If only you had access to TitanIM to test more detailed models, sadly it is only for the military xD
@RobinHood-yk8og2 жыл бұрын
Most modern tanks have ERA that isn't used here (it seems to be modelled on the Chinese turret). 'Armour thickness' is always a function of plate thickness + angle... e.g. the armour thickness of a 50mm plate is only 50mm if it's vertical, every degree of angle adds thickness. 'Effective armour' is what you get if you replaced the exotic composites and angles with steel plates.... so a 50mm thick composite plate at xxx degrees, is the equivalent of xxxxmm of steel plate.
@garymyers66382 жыл бұрын
OK, here's the game for Sunday fun day. However many tanks on a side you can do without crashing the server but not king of the hill (which takes for effing ever). Use a medium terrain environment so there are some surface structure to hide behind but not mountains. Just wipe out the other team. Simple. Limit the zone to about 10 miles by 10 miles just to keep it snappy. Might I also suggest 2 man teams; driver and gunner. Both sides have access to the same tanks if they want them, just assign red and blue and do your PID. (Sock will kill a team mate "accidentally" Battle to the death, last tank rolling, that side wins. Put an insignia on the tanks if you can to make PID easier.
@permanentvisitor24602 жыл бұрын
Great concept
@angelarch53522 жыл бұрын
T-80 is better than the T-90, because the T-90 is basically a renamed crappy upgrade of the T-72.
@raptoractual24772 жыл бұрын
Smoothbore cannons are accurate because thanks use Fin Stabilized rounds that stabilize the round in flight like rifling in a firearm. Also the smoothbore cannons have a longer life.
@vanguard90672 жыл бұрын
More an issue of the fins not rifling, and massive speed
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
thx
@claudetremblay38922 жыл бұрын
I used to be a leopard mechanic in Canada. The speed of that is really at the start. It’s speeds up like crazy for 65 000 kg beast
@Fox3-Luck2 жыл бұрын
Great Vid Cap!
@n1co20172 жыл бұрын
the Abrams has the best round with about 700 mm of penetration at 1km and 1500hp. you asked the muzzle velocity of the old guns is average of 900m/s and the modern ones are around 1500m/s.
@BcHmF2 жыл бұрын
I really want to see the last round where you go against the rows of old tanks.
@bohan99572 жыл бұрын
Can the Challenger II really move that fast? I thought it is the most heavily armored MBT in the world but it moves like a turtle.
@grimreapers2 жыл бұрын
No idea TBH
@3idraven7142 жыл бұрын
Pzkw4 75mm/L54, Pzkw5 75mm/L70…longer barrel higher velocity…that’s why the 4 just bounced…plus 5 has sloped thicker armor…Pzkw6 88mm /L54, Pzkw7 88mm/L70…same comments above….the Leopard, and Abrams they use sabot ammo, Chicom they used heat round…against pure armor (not composite) the sabot just cuts right thru, so you have to pinpoint vital…Inthink that’s why the Chicom tank hit ration looked good at the beginning
@tiadiad2 жыл бұрын
You forgot Armata. It's ok. Sip your tea.
@zsavage18202 жыл бұрын
M1A2 Maximum Speed: 42 mph. in real life vs the 37mph T90MS The M1A2 has 1500hp
@sweetballs47422 жыл бұрын
T-90M* T-90MS is the command tank (export version) used by India.
@zsavage18202 жыл бұрын
@@sweetballs4742 got it.. ty...
@timbaskett6299 Жыл бұрын
The LeClerk: No "Frog" legs for you, Cap!! To be honest, in an armored vehicle, I would love to see an aluminum block diesel Merlin pattern engine. Wasn't it the British that developed the composite armor?
@gerardpullen94492 жыл бұрын
the Merkava wasnt really meant to be used offensively it was designed to be dug in in a canyon and then be nearly impossible to get rid of without sustaining numerous casualties. and the reason it can shoot atgms is they needed something to compensate for the fact that they dont have any depleted uranium for their apfsds shells.
@gerardpullen94492 жыл бұрын
that and while DCS is a great plane sim they just havent put the same amount of effort into the tanks yet
@gorn16752 жыл бұрын
3:07 The Russian T-Tanks are not Follow-up numbered in Versions or something. So for example, not like German Leopard 2A4 -> 2A5 -> 2A6 -> 2A7 are newer versions by rising numbers. The T-72, T-80 and T-90 are more like parallel-productions/constructions that each will always be upgraded to the newest stand of technology if possible. T-80 and T-90 use the same Gun but while the T-80 uses a Gasturbine, the T-90 has a V-12-Dieselengine. This makes the one not Better than the other, they are just different models for different uses. And the T-72 is more or less a cheaper mass-Version that is used in larger groups to overrun enemys when possible. But that does not mean that the T-72 is less modern equiped, it just has an other usecase and is not compareable with T-80 and T-90. I know, the T-80 is an old sovjet tank and the T-90 was intoduced in 90th but that makes the T-80 not less important or less powerfull. They all will be upgraded parallel.
@gorn16752 жыл бұрын
@@TeenTeenFpv that is true. But for example, the T-90 was developed in the 90s But in its core it is just a T-72 that was given a T-80U fire control system an reactive armor. So it is basically a renamed T-72. If you watch in the T-72 history, it ends with the Object 188 (T-72BU) which is the T-90. Even the T-64 is still in use, modified to be as effektive as All others
@Anarchy_4202 жыл бұрын
4:03 😂👍 21:52 bounce kill😆👍👍
@andyf42922 жыл бұрын
the turret front cheeks of the Leopard are designed to break APDS penetrators as they penetrate.