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 ;)

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.

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.

Leclerc: *slowly turns turret towards jeep* Me: 🤣 I know where this is going

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.

American tanker here....fun fact: the Leopard II and the M1A1/A2 Abrams all use the same main gun - the M256 made by Rheinmetall.

I was crying laughing when simba shot cap. You could almost see the tank smirk.

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.

The moment the turret started traversing towards the Jeep that was the moment I had to hit the 👍🏻like button

A Leopard 2A4 isn't very modern now is it? Also Sweden hasn't used it in many years, only the Strv 122 now.

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.

73 Easting and Medinah Ridge pretty clearly demonstrated the effectiveness of the M1's armor

Before everything kicks off, I'll be going for the M1 Abrams, as that's what we also use here in Australia.

This was a fun one to watch :) Thanks GR!

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.

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.

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.

Should have had the 'How well can it make tea' test between the British tanks.

When Simba shoot Cap, I laughed so hard I got light-headed. Thanks, Simba I needed that laugh!

I hope to see this test again if the tank models ever get updated to be more accurate.

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.

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.

Oh, when Simba did The Thing to Cap... priceless!

200hundred thousand subs congratulations 🎊🎉🍾🎈 you are my favorite DCS youtuber!

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.

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.

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

Simba blasting Cap was hysterical. Lol

The Israel tank was not built for speed because Israel is a small country. It was built for survivability of the crew.

There's a great WW1 mod for DCS that includes many tanks and vehicles. Would love to see them included in tests like this.

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

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'

Considering how well the outdated Leopard 2A4 did, just imagine the current 2A6 or new 2A7, which are basically a new generation :-)

Watched Tank Chats from The Tank Museum Channel and more, about each tank being used. It made for an enjoyable afternoon.

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.

Battle of 73 Easting showed what the Abrams can do, and that wasn't even the new A2

Hilarious when he blew the jeep up at the beginning. absolutly the funniest shit I've seen all day .keep it up boys .

Love the tank video!!! please do a version of this comparing different IFVs like Strikers and LAVs and BMPs etc.

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

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. 😀

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..

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

Absolutely love this video, very entertaining, well done chaps.

Wow the lack of tank knowledge amazes me.

yay, Leopard won the drag race, but this is not the newest design, that would be the 2A7 series

HAHAHA lost it when Simba disposed of your Jeep! 🤣

The Russian tanks AI driving simulation was so realistic that I thought this was a documentary film for a minute :D

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.

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.

When Cap says, "say hello boys 🧐", that's when I know the fun is beginning.

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

"Your mother was a hamster and your father smells of elderberries!" - French tank commander

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.

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

Why isn’t the newer Germany main battle tank isn’t shown?

Cap getting blown up was inevitable after that le clerc tank comment.

4:04 Simba: "Round out, and on target!"

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.

best modern tank hands down has to be the bane blade

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.

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.

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.

Tanker, tanker, don't be blue... Tinkerbell's a fairy, too 😁

Cap, congratulations on the 200k!

♪ wheres your head at at at ♪ wheres your heaad at at at ♫

APFSDS. Armor Piercing, Fin Stabilized, Discarding Sabot.

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.

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.

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.

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.

Let's all remember, DCS is a game, a fun game, but not an accurate or true realistic game.

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

The abrams has never been able to fire missiles from its barrel.

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.

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 😆

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.

Krazy Ivan scool of tank driving is modeled after the Krazy Ivan submarine driving school .....same instructors too 😁

According to Science, it has been proven conclusively that Cap hates Bogs.

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.

Congratulations for 200K subscribe ❤️

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.

good video also The Merkava Mark V "Barak" (Lightning) is planned to enter service in 2023.

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

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.

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.

T-80 is better than the T-90, because the T-90 is basically a renamed crappy upgrade of the T-72.

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.

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

Great Vid Cap!

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.

I really want to see the last round where you go against the rows of old tanks.

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.

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

You forgot Armata. It's ok. Sip your tea.

M1A2 Maximum Speed: 42 mph. in real life vs the 37mph T90MS The M1A2 has 1500hp

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?

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.

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.

4:03 😂👍 21:52 bounce kill😆👍👍

the turret front cheeks of the Leopard are designed to break APDS penetrators as they penetrate.