AbramsX and KF51 Panther Rambling.

Totally unresearched Op-Ed piece, due to popular demand. Why some of the new features aren't new, why some make sense, and why I think neither tank is going to go into production.
Edit: Indeed, so unresearched, I missed that though KMW makes Leopard 2, the KF51 is Rheinmetall.
Financial donations:
Patreon: / the_chieftain
Direct Paypal: paypal.me/thechieftainshat
Utreon: utreon.com/c/thechieftain
Merchandise
the-chieftains-retail-hatch.c...
Public facebook page:
/ thechieftainarmor

[@weibherrman]

White sands, palm trees, clear skies, and a discussion on tanks 10/10

[@WarmasterDeath]

and what looks like a pacific aviation museum shirt!

[@chrisdt2297]

The vibe of this video is superb

[@abergethirty]

White Sands missile Range ...

[@ang9196]

You forgot cocktails with an umbrella!!!

[@TRPilot06YT]

Just need a couple of beers now

[@windwalker5765]

"The prime threat right now is currently dragging T-62s out of storage." Owned.

[@stupidburp]

Worth a chuckle but the real pacing threat is PLA Type 99A MBT. It is roughly equivalent to Russian T-90 or latest T-72 upgrades. Has a bunch of fancy features added. Abrams is still superior overall but this is a real threat.

[@SonsOfLorgar]

If he'd want to add insult to injury, he could have added that the 105mm on the Centurion or S-tank is good enough to deal with that threat... 🤣

[@dudududu1926]

@@stupidburp The problem with rating Chinese equipment is you never know what is real and what's on paper...

[@PeterJavi]

​@@dudududu1926 Hey, I've heard that before

[@inisipisTV]

@@SonsOfLorgar - The problem with that is he didn’t tell the fact a tank battalion of British Chieftains and US M-60 tank where totally annihilated by a battalion of Soviet T 72 (without losing any tank) during the Iran-Iraq War.

[@matthayward7889]

Chieftain really slumming it on holiday there. Well deserved!

[@gerry343]

Nah, its a green screen!

[@matthayward7889]

@@gerry343 😂😂

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

He assaults beaches better than any Marine I've ever met.

[@simonsezo2328]

@@gerry343 bruh.

[@adspie]

@@gerry343 Nope it isn't green screen, you can see the airplane flew in the background and flies flying at the back of his head.

[@purplespeckledappleeater8738]

He is on a beautiful tropical beach talking about tanks. Best wishes to Chieftain on some well-deserved R&R.

[@DefaultProphet]

Truly living his best life

[@darkfalc007]

And when I do it my friends call me a weirdo

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

I think we call this Recon. You have to know if the beaches can handle an amphibious armor landing.

[@johnnycab8986]

It's so pristine I thought it was blue screen at first.

[@brettlynam5048]

Where is the “Oh bugger, the cabana’s on fire” test?

[@karakiri283]

I went to Eurosatory this year and spoke with the people developping the Embt and Ascalon gun. Couldn't have anybody to talk with when i went to the KF51 sadly. - Regarding putting a fourth crew member in the tank, they told me it was an interim mesure to deal with the overload of censors that are now on armored vehicules and that this crew member will be replaced by AI when they will be done working on it. - The logic behind bigger guns is that the 120 is now at its limit when it come to its evolution capacities. They say that guns are expected to fire lot of No Line Of Sight munitions and 130/140mm will have better time doing it than a 120mm. Also, for tanks that are expected to be in service up to 2080 or more, a 120mm seem too limited. There is also new requirements regarding ammunitions performance and autoloaders (they want to double the autoloading speed with the Ascalon compared to the Leclerc). All in all it would need a new gun, so they just jumped on a new caliber with more evolution possibilities, better than building a new 120mm. - For the autocannon, it's about drones, slow flying threats and light cover or armored threats (where a main gun would be over kill but need something heavier than a 12.7). 30mm turrets also have a wider range a ammunitions (like airburst or proximity fuses), more range etc. And these new turrets, derived helicopter guns, are very light and dont add much weight compared to a remote 12.7. Thx you for the video Chieftain and have a nice holiday.

[@jadeezomg]

All good points! Drones especially are a huge threat, as we've seen in countless videos from ukr. definitely need something more reliable than a .50 without airburst/proxy.

[@gargoyle7863]

I agree. I rate a fourth crew member (drone operator/commander assistant) as an asset not a liability. Especially when you're the platoon commander.

[@attilaabonyi8879]

Smart thinking​@@gargoyle7863

[@chartreux1532]

As a German who also served 6 Years (231. Gebirgsjägerbattalion Bad Reichenhall) i'm glad we keep the Animal Naming Conventions for our Military Vehicles. I'm also excited about the V12 Diesel it uses from MTU and more Details about the Tank in general as well as some of the Claims & Technology it has after some proper further testing. Prost & Cheers from the Berchtesgadener Land in the Bavarian Alps

[@CharChar2121]

I like your naming conventions, too. In the US, our naming conventions for equipment are often extremely politicized

[@filmandfirearms]

@@CharChar2121 I much prefer the old Russian system, where the name of any vehicle was just the abbreviated classification followed by the year it was made for tanks, and the gun caliber for AA and artillery. In the case of AA, they'd also add the number of guns if that was more than 1. The very first time I heard of the ZSU-23-2, I immediately knew it was an AA platform with twin 23mm autocannons, despite having never seen the thing in my life. Of course, Russia has long since abandoned this system, though its ghost still remains. The T-54 was not designed or put into service in 1954, but in 1947. Same with the T-55, T-62, T-64, T-72, and likely everything else Russia makes for the foreseeable future

[@aliasalias8433]

Grüße aus Altötting😀

[@SonsOfLorgar]

​@@filmandfirearms Sweden has a very similiar naming system for vehicles and equipment as the Soviets did. Eg: Strv 122B= 2nd mbt in service with a 12cm main gun, upgrade pack B Strf9040C= IFV on CV90 hull, 40mm main gun, upgrade pack C Pansarskott86= Anti tank round adopted in 1986 (aka. AT4/LAW)

[@neilgriffiths6427]

@@CharChar2121 The Brits have stuck with all our battle tanks starting with a "C" for nearly 100 years, love the Germans sticking with the big cat naming conventions - but, really, shouldn't it be "Panther 4"?

[@ThumperE23]

We all should thank Chieftain's Household Six for loaning him to us on their vacation.

[@andreperrault5393]

C-in-C House

[@SpiritOfMontgomery]

@@andreperrault5393 he’s GOC house. Any good husband/boyfriend knows that their partner is, in all likelihood, CnC Household Command

[@magnem1043]

Bro is away from nuclear threats 😂😂

[@danceswithmules]

Possibly one of the most relaxing videos I've watched in a long time. The Chieftain waxing poetic on advanced MBT prototypes while ocean waved gently lap upon the shore.

[@epicwinman101]

I feel like the 30mm cannon is for taking out drones because you can fit a proxy fuse and still get a nice bang.

[@tomhenry897]

It’s to kill anything to small for the 120

[@Wyrmnax]

​@@tomhenry897 That is assuming there exists something that is too small for the 120mm that isnt dealt with by a .50 I think that is the whole issue. Mg can handle? mg it down. Somewhat armored? Send a HE round its way. The only times when the 30mm makes sense is against armored IFVs, and ad that point I think they are enough of a threat that a 120mm round is very much justified, and against larger drones that a .50 might have trouble reaching out to. A 30mm system limits ammo capacity and is way, *way* heavier than a .50 (From a M2 to a Bushmaster is a fivefold increase in system mass, not counting ammo) - and going by what the Chieftain said out there, tonnage is at a premium in a MBT. Do I think it is warranted? No. But then again I am not a military planner, and I DO know that drones will change the way we look at the battlefield.

[@brettd2308]

Anti-drone use is exactly what it's advertised as. The idea makes sense - giving tanks a local defense against drone attacks - but as Chieftain alludes to, we're more likely to see it implemented via drone tanks. I know the US has been experimenting with possible new tank platoon structures that would see several drone tanks slaved to each manned Abrams, and if they did something like that, you could have the 30mm mounted on the drone tanks instead, creating a sort of anti-drone escort.

[@stupidburp]

For anti drone use, a vulcan cannon would be nice to have. Huge amount of ammo required though. Probably limited to no larger than .50 cal because of the volume and weight of gun and ammo. But 7.62 vulcan rotary cannon might be more feasible and could also be useful against dismounted infantry. Where are they going to store all that ammo? I dunno. But same or less issue than a big pile of 30mm. This could be in a remote turret with both manual control and a mode integrated with the active protection system for use as a CIWS against incoming missiles, rockets, and mortar shells.

[@therealCG62]

The 30mm for anti-drone work always seemed a bit weird to me. It's just an M230 (or, apparently, an M230 with a different feed mechanism and a longer barrel) on a different turret, and the M230 isn't exactly super accurate, nor is it an exceptionally high fire rate weapon (and the version used for SHORAD mounts is apparently even lower rate of fire than the one hanging off the bottom of the Apache) Like legit the only upside I can see for using the 30mm over a 25mm or 20mm gun mount is the M230 was designed to be lightweight

[@readhistory2023]

I feel for you Chief. That's one tough duty station for producing videos.

[@buddy1155]

Actually it is, as I work remote this is exactly what I tried. Living on a cheap island and earn western money, it seemed like a great idea. I had to buy every thing ruggedised or buy every two months a new laptop, internet sucked. Other cultures don't really understand "personal space" and looked over your shoulder while you are working in a public area, so you end up working in your apartment. If you got called especially if I was in the village you have to scramble to a quiet space as it was terrible noisy on the street. There was also the time difference, what makes it very hard to agree on deadlines... until the end I had to think very hard if someone asked me can you have it don by "the end of the day" or "can it be fixed by tomorrow morning". Together with the occasional one-on-one meetings I had .... it was unfortunately just not worth it.

[@jamesoprey6330]

@@buddy1155 they understand personal space, they are just too bored to care

[@krco9716]

Seeing those new hybrid engines, Porsche was right afterall. Insert the meme from Back to the future

[@ivankrylov6270]

Diesel -electric engines were used in the original tanks

[@MausLine]

Time to put Maus in the production :]

[@longtsun8286]

It only took 70+ years for hybrid drive technology to mature enough to use in a combat vehicle.

[@WindFireAllThatKindOfThing]

Well, the electric vehicle motor does predate the ICE. The circle is nearly complete.

[@Ava-uq5dh]

The St Chamond used a petrol electric drive :D

[@JessWLStuart]

Someone needs to get The Chieftain a Hawaiian shirt with tanks on it! :D

[@noahway13]

Squib comment. = )

[@Rob_F8F]

Best Chieftain's Q&A ever. On the beach with an brief interruption to accept a tropical drink with an umbrella! Bravo! And Cheers!🍹

[@harri9885]

Nice greenscreen also. ;)

[@raideurng2508]

The electric drive sounds incredibly useful for limited operations without running the engine, reducing IR signature. Not spotted, not hit, not dead. Being able to roll a vehicle out from a berm, aim, and take a shot while having an ambient (or close) temperature hull sounds powerful.

[@garethfairclough8715]

Tbh, I wonder why a tank couldn't have a drive train like that of a diesel electric submarine. The ability to have a smaller engine, running at a near constant RPM to charge the batteries rather than all over the place would (afaik) do wonders for efficiency!

[@nathanrigger15]

@@garethfairclough8715 that's actually a question I've had about hybrid vehicles in general, a tiny apposed cylinder turbo diesel would make quite the little generator.

[@Ruhrpottpatriot]

@@garethfairclough8715 Because this was done previously (Porsche Tiger) and it didn't work well. Back in the day electric engines weren't as reliable and good as today. This has changed, however.

[@yaragi]

It (electric) would be quiet compared to turbine and diesel engines, but I don't think there'd be a lot of situations where the engine's low noise would actually give you a lot of advantage since I doubt that it'd be possible to run very far on battery power, and the noise from the tracks when driving at any meaningful speed is very loud indeed.. But if they somehow manage to cool it down to ambient temperature the effect on IR signature could be beneficial..

[@86pp73]

@@garethfairclough8715 Might be to do with RF noise emitted by the generator and motors. Whilst you might not be able to audibly hear them at long range, they'll put out huge amounts of electromagnetic radiation when being used, and at a high bandwidth. Knowing what frequencies the traction system generates noise on would make them detectable by airborne ELINT systems operating waaayyyy behind the front line. Yes, you can minimise these emissions through various design methods, but this incurs more costs, at a rapid pace. Also, you've got to re-train repair crews from working on mechanical to electrical transmission, or possibly hire new staff outright. Again, very costly.

[@jroch41]

“So here I am taking good time out of my vacation…” Beach in the background. Brilliant. 😂

[@karlheerwagen2972]

The KF51 Panther is from Rheinmetall, not KMW ;). Also the Drone operator is for both, the EMBT and the KF51 optional.

[@jacobdewey2053]

It will also never enter service with anybody so it doesn't matter

[@noobster4779]

If I am not mistaken the KF51 Panther is from Rheinmetall, not KMW KMW still work together with the french on a new MBT (MCAS or something). Rheinmetall was bullied out of that tank building cooperation and then decided to make their own Prototype (because MCAS is taking an eternity already :D) The KF51 Panther is primarily for smaller countries and export, the german army wont buy it because they are waiting for the KMW - french tank cooperation. Its why we upgrade the Leopard 2 for the next few decades as usual. Cant wait for Leopard 2A20VX or something in 2030....or maybe a Leopard 2B. No idea why we arent at b,c,d,e already considering the current Leopard has little in coman with the original Leopard. Usually we love putting dozens of letters on a vehicle model. I mean the Panzer 4 went from A to J in half the time the Loepard 2 exists :D

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Well, that's embarassing. I'll put a comment up.

[@paulzweers784]

MGCS

[@TuxCommander]

That the Panther is for export only is not true. The hesitation of Germany towards it, is just political not because of capabilities of the system. On paper the Panther is superior to the KMW Nexter design, where Rheinmetall is still part this collaboration.

[@jonson856]

Kinda sad. Simply based on design, the KF51 looks much cooler Q_Q

[@eur6430]

@@TuxCommander How is the Panther, which is one MBT superior to the KMW Nexter plan, which we don't know much about yet and which is not a MBT, but a system of different manned and unmanned vehicles?

[@mmclaurin8035]

I love this bit of showing off! A well deserved holiday for our favorite tanker.

[@dwightlooi]

Jeez, this is the best Dynamic Background underlay I have EVER seen!

[@KiithnarasAshaa]

I absolutely adore the shirt with the various American bombers. Glorious.

[@theadorrodriguez2514]

always giving his fans something even on holiday, what a legend, chieftain we appreciate it!

[@teaser6089]

I hope you are enjoying this well deserved Holliday Chief! Thanks for the ramblings :D

[@simonm.456]

AbrahamsX and Panther KF51 are Like the kids of 2 old friends who already grew up together. It is beautiful how nature makes the next generation MBT's become friends.

[@nhancao4790]

Wasn't expecting holiday Chieftain, a surprise but a welcome one.

[@matevasas]

Have a good vacation, Chief! Wish you and your family well! Good old Ferdinand Porsche was already using diesel-electric drivetrains in the Tigers and Ferdinands back in WW2. They were so advanced maintenance was a huge problem. Nowadays it's really the best option for tanks i think. Even diesel-electric locomotives were developed based on this idea.

[@giroromek8423]

Love the sound of the waves in the background.

[@Ebooger]

Color matched palm tree growing out of your head is an interesting touch. 😁

[@jwenting]

I guess the extra crewmember will end up being an electronic warfare specialist. With those systems becoming ever more prominent you're getting to the point where the commander can no longer operate them and still fight the vehicle, especially with the increased workload caused by taking away the loader. And I guess people are starting to think about adding semi-automatic SHORAD systems to take out drones and large ATGMs, having an extra crew member to oversee those can help as well.

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

Every tank now has a RIO Would be fancy.

[@barthoving2053]

Another option would be that it's a place for the battalion/squadron commander. There's footage of a Ukraine tank battalion operating at Kharkov where the battalion commander was outside the tanks with a tablet and drones guiding his tanks around the battlefield. And it would solve the problem that with a 3 man tank crew if the tank commander is also battalion/squadron commander is called to a meeting higher up the command chain, you suddenly only have 2 crew man for maintenance.

[@Nor-tc8vz]

Let's not forget as a drone operator too.

[@dgthe3]

Stick the drone operators in an APC half a click back. And put Shorad onto a support vehicle in close proximity to the tanks. With sensors that can actually spot a drone or an incoming missile quickly & easily. Drone/anti drone is just another thing to work into combined arms. We don't make tanks be their own long range artillery support or infantry carriers. So why should drone warfare get stuck onto tanks?

[@MrCantStopTheRobot]

@@dgthe3 because drones can be tiny and can feed useful images directly to the person who needs them. You don't necessarily need to sacrifice much to enable them.

[@donjones4719]

There's a big difference between an opinion and an informed opinion. Thank you for sharing your *very* informed opinion, even if you don't have access to the details you prefer.

[@martijn9568]

The opinion of us plebs: Wow, fancy new gun, NEED IT The opinion of the Chieftain: New gun, what are its advantages and its disadvantages over what we use now.

[@MartinBuhr]

Love the way his drink shows up half way through....

[@ABC-48483]

I just recently found this guy.. i love him!! It's nice to find someone on this platform that like actually knows this stuff it's very rare we get insights from a guy like this.

[@MsZeeZed]

Brimfire is the next logical choice in the naming convention 😹

[@railfansteam7716]

This is a much more honest review than the hype that has been out out there.

[@robert506007]

Enjoy your vacation Chieftain! Thankyou for taking the time all the same.

[@MililaniJag]

Gee, he has a beautiful Backyard!! Cheers!!

[@paultzacos7470]

The WW2 VK 45.01 (P), also informally known as Tiger (P) or Porsche Tiger, was a gasoline-electric drive heavy tank prototype

[@voivode2591]

Way before it’s time. But that’s why it failed. 1 difference that he mention was the Turbine has a lot more advantages than most people other than engineers know. Or aircraft mechanics. We will see. They wouldn’t have stuck with it if it was a dead end.

[@alexandrumanole681]

I'm not an expert but I had the exact same thought about putting loitering munitions on a tank as opposed to a different/dedicated vehicle. I thought that conceptually it's like going back to the 30s and tanks with a second gun in the hull or separate turrets for MGs.

[@willatkins9686]

I wasn't envious until the drink turned up!

[@DavidG62]

Thanks Nick. Enjoy your vacation.

[@kilianortmann9979]

The electric system could also take care of the neutral turning capabilities, simplifying the transmission.

[@LazyLifeIFreak]

Now this man his priorities in order, tanks and holidays.

[@jamesg2382]

Love the set and the drink. Hope you have company. Thanks

[@jaxrammus9165]

thanks for taking your time to make this

[@Zeppflyer]

My favorite professional analyst KZbinrs all seem to be on vacation in Hawaii. Now I want a Mojito....

[@TheChieftainsHatch]

Wrong ocean.

[@CGM_68]

@@TheChieftainsHatch they speak Arabic in the Comoros, right? Or could it be Zanzibar?

[@MarcinP2]

Loitering ammunitions go onto dedicated tank destroyers. They can ride around on an 8x8 wheeled APC with the before mentioned drone operator.

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

Loitering munitions seem like the type of thing that should be fired one terrain back from the tanks.

[@norbertblackrain2379]

In an ideal world i would agree but it is nowadays hard for military to acquire one new vehicle type. So getting a 2nd combat vehicle in addition to a new tank might be hard to do.

[@Dennis-vh8tz]

@@norbertblackrain2379 A tank belongs on the front line, loitering munitions belong behind cover, slightly behind the front line. Since a single vehicle can't be in two places at once it doesn't make sense to combine these functions into a single vehicle. At least not unless the equipment required to fire the loitering munitions is so cheap and plentiful it might as well be put on every vehicle that could possibly carry the munitions, just in case it happens to be useful (like the US did .50 MG's in WWII). There are plenty of existing vehicles which could hide behind cover and fire standoff munitions or drones. Trucks or APC's would be a lot cheaper than a tank, or if one wants armour to resist counter battery fire, a self-propelled artillery chassis, or a turretless tank hull could be used (removing the turret, and the big gun and it's targeting systems, should be a pretty big cost savings too).

[@V-V1875-h]

Or just a toyota hilux

[@scratchy996]

That's the whole idea behind the Panther. The tank is fully digital, it can run with a crew of 4,3,2 or unmanned, it's designed to be remotely controlled. You could have one armored vehicle stay in the rear and control several Panthers. Or one Panther control another Panther as a "loyal wingman" type of vehicle. Or you can have the optional 4th seat in the Panther control something like the Milrem Type-X, since Rheinmetall has bought Milrem shares. With fully digital systems and AI assitance, the possibilities are endless .

[@ESG1]

Thanks for your take on this subject. Much appreciated. A lot of people have been asking for this.

[@petesheppard1709]

Rambling is thirsty work! Thanks for taking the time.

[@Gillymonster18]

The addition of the 30mm I can see as perhaps being a step towards making a tank more self-sufficient or flexible. Provides a better explosive middle ground so it’s not wasting main gun rounds and won’t need as many shots as say a .50cal. Also possibly frees up IFVs to support the grunts with their weapons so the IFV isn’t having to cover the tank at the same time? Love the new office! Also if it weren’t for the airplanes on your shirt, it would be decent camouflage.

[@Ihasanart]

Theres a lot of new smart ammo being developed for the M230 and its derivatives for anti-drone work, hence M230LF's being included on nearly everything thats being unveiled these days.

[@exo068]

Most modern concepts are now using a remote weapon against drones. The EMBT is probably the best example with its 30mm gun with smart rounds against drones or anything else in the air and the commanders sight having a remote MG against infantry.

[@mark37f]

Most postwar tanks started off with 20mm or bigger coax in prototype, and almost always dropped in favor of 50 cal or 30 cal.

[@gotanon9659]

There a reason pretty big reason why cannon based coax MG keeps being floated around and kept being abandoned.

[@biteursknbiteurskn]

@@gotanon9659 coax=/=remote turret, back in the Cold War modern RWS were not feasible, their existence changes the feasibility of it a lot.

[@FKBiden666]

Five minutes and 50 seconds homey comes in with a drink. Dude living his best life on these white sandy beaches. I love tank chats

[@bigd4366]

Only reason I see for a 30mm today is for anti-drone defense at the individual unit level using airburst ammo (which means you also need sensors and automation to aim the 30mm, because a joystick ain't gonna cut it). Otherwise, .30/.50 is still sufficient. Long-term, I could see a small laser cannon (powerful enough for drones, RAM, subsonic ATGMs, etc.) becoming the primary anti-air protection (backed up by a physical APS for fast-moving inbounds). But, that's been ~10 years away for over 20 years now.

[@leonfa259]

The 3 main threats to tanks according to the Ukraine war seam to be artillery, at rockets and drones. An automated 30mm can supress AT launch crews after launch and may even be able to target the at rockets in flight. It can likely counter kamikaze drones and might work against artillery spotter drones.

[@georgeadams588]

Just getting around to watching this, love the location and the shirt!

[@kokofan50]

I’m in Florida with palm trees outside my window, and it doesn’t feel nearly as tropical here. Excellent vacation spot.

[@alaingabriel1710]

Hey, you should talk about the MBT-70 prototypes which did the exact opposite of the Abrams X, by placing all three crew members right next to the autoloader, in the turret. One of the other neat things (of many) was that all three crew members could remotely take over the driving if the driver was out of action.

[@CrazyDutchguys]

I believe the common feeling that crew members got out of that layout is that the driver felt severely disoriented a lot of the time if the turret rotated. Plus crew in hull is safer in general, as history shows tanks are most often hit in the turret

[@mbr5742]

​@@CrazyDutchguysThe reason for the disorientation was that the drivers pod counter-rotated to always face forward and there was a slight delay in that

[@oloflarsson7629]

In my opinion, one of the biggest issues with that 30mm is that it makes the tank taller. If you want to get into a hull down position, it means that the enemy has a greater probability of spotting you, before you can shoot. That said, I think that the autocannon coax in the Strv 2000 made sense, as it used up space, that on the M1 Abrams and Leopard 2, was used by the loader. So a autoloader, that feeds from the bustle, combined with a coax (well with separate elevation from the main gun) autocannon on the left side of the turret, might be worthwhile for the Abrama and Leo 2.

[@bamaman6478]

The height problem can be fixed with hydropnematic suspension

[@86pp73]

@@bamaman6478 Only so much, the Abrams doesn't ride that high off the ground. And it's a big gun.

[@oloflarsson7629]

@@bamaman6478 Hydropneumatic suspension cannot compensate for a OWS-system, that sticks up far more, than the ground clearence. And the issue is not total height (well, that is an issue as well), but rather that the OWS sticks up above the turret roof. In entering a hull down situation, that means that the OWS will likely be visible for several seconds longer, before the main gun can be brought on target, giving the enemy a better chance of firing first

[@DerLoladin]

Thats hardly any different to a .50 cal mount though. It may be a "little" bit taller but the universal mounts for the .50, M240 or 40mm are all huge and tall to begin with. So whats the real difference.

[@olekzajac5948]

From what I know they all say these 30mm RCWS are against drones and LM (and that's why they're 30mm and not .50 cals - airburst rounds), so they have to be on a separate mount to get more elevation.

[@Mid_Range_Destruction-31]

For many years of wacthing youtube vids , that is the best background i've ever seen while talking about tanks. Feel's very calming while listening to it

[@andrewdenzov3303]

Very nice tropical beach video! And cocktail!!! We need more videos like this

[@dmathiass]

Well it's seems that these new tanks are the results of the same good idea fairy that helped Hasbro build GIJoe and Cobra vehicles in the 80's. There's always room for more machine guns, cannons, missiles and useless gimmicks.

[@DerLoladin]

Not when those "useless gimmicks" are the reality of the modern battlefield, with programmable ammunition and drones being able to observe and identify you. The missiles may be a bit silly, but having the capability to engage aerial and soft-skin targets with something more precise than a 120 sounds like a fantastic capability to have.

[@dmathiass]

@@DerLoladin 🤘🏻

[@builder396]

Its also a bit of a buffet for the army. They can throw shit on the tank first, demonstrate that its possible and propose use cases for it, and the army later decides what they want and what needs to go. I imagine making a tank with less features for production is going to be the smallest of all problems.

[@samuelmendoza9356]

The practical mind says it has enough cannons and MGs on today's tanks. But the polar opposite says still nags on and says that there is NEVER ENOUGH DAKKA.

[@truckerallikatuk]

I'd suggest that the remote weapon station never needs more than a 20mm. Anything too tough for a 20mm round probably warrants a main gun round.

[@longtsun8286]

A 40mm or 25mm grenade (the latter designed for the OICW) with airburst grenades will probably be good enough for most drones the tank will encounter. For the heavier kamikaze drones, best leave them to specialized SPAAGs, with radar and massive IR sensors to better detect and track incoming drones.

[@DerLoladin]

20mm can not provide programmable ammunition capability currently, which is a big upside for a 30mm.

[@longtsun8286]

@@DerLoladin 20mm ammo CAN be programmed- the OICW was originally to use programmable 20mm grenades, before the US Army changed its mind and asked for 25mm grenades- but it's admittedly more difficult to accommodate the necessary electronics in so small a projectile.

[@DerLoladin]

@@longtsun8286 Well, yes almost anything "can" be done but as things stand right now there is no programmable 20mm ammunition available (AFAIK). I'm sure the capability could be created but I was working off of whats currently available.

[@Redmanticore]

the wide spread useage of Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs or "drones") seems to bring back SPAAGs to most of the modern armies. these relatively cheap, low, slow and small targets are ideal for autocannons. engaging these targets with expensive missiles is unsustainable on the long run, therefore SPAAGs are a much more economic way to counter the UAVs.

[@edreyes1391]

Thanks for taking the timé sir. Now is mandatory fun time.

[@jackusmc2542]

Thanks for taking time out of your vacation.

[@jfdavis668]

The AbramsX has many of the feature I was seeing in a future tank. Drop much of the armor weight, replace with reactive and active armor. Put the 3 men in the hull. Give them remote sensors. Heck, instead of sticking your head out, have a drove flying above your tank as your gun site. If it gets shot, have supply send another one your way. Have 360 vision, if you can do it on a Tesla and a SpaceX rocket, you can have it on your tank. Put in an autoloader. Narrow the inside of the turret and use the space on either side for the active armor suite. Now, there is an issue with fuel. With the 3 crew in the front of the hull, it displaces the fuel tanks of the Abrams. Maybe that goes under the turret? With the Ammo in the bustle, that can allow the fuel or batteries in the remaining current turret space. And yes, it will be diesel electric. Would eliminate the transmission, making room for batteries and fuel.

[@rhamph]

It's all great on paper but keep in mind that current cameras and screens are still shit compared to the human eye. That's why The Chieftain insists on sticking his head out, it really does help that much.

[@Ruhrpottpatriot]

This is sort of the direction Rheinmetall wants to go. Basically go back to the 5th person, who instead of being a radio operator, is the UAV operator that gives your tank much more self recon capabilities. Not sold on the autoloader. Repairing a machine is always more labour-intensive in the field than just sticking another human in it. Also not sold on reactive armour, at least not as primary protection. We all can see how well reactive armour works, or doesn't work in Ukraine right now. It also has the problem that it's very easy to counter with just another layer. See JAVELIN or Panzerfaust 3 with their tandem HEAT rounds.

[@corwinhyatt519]

"have a drove flying above your tank as your gun site. If it gets shot, have supply send another one your way." Makes for an easy mission kill of a multi-million dollar piece of military hardware using a simple break-action shotgun.

[@jfdavis668]

@@corwinhyatt519 yes, it's working real well against Ukraineian drones.

[@86pp73]

@@jfdavis668 It's only working well for the Ukrainians because the Russians have no real strategy or equipment to deal with it. Anti-drone technology has been in development with a lot of countries already, mainly for counter-terrorism purposes, and don't think it won't get rapidly adapted for the battlefield if it needs to be

[@JeffKogut]

I think a drone operator as an organic part of the crew is in the cards for the future, they are too useful for situational awareness. And not a tethered drone. This crew could also operate suicide drones, I could see a stack of a dozen of these in vertical launch tubes to use at targets behind buildings, etc. Imagine the above plus a main gun with 24-36 rounds. And versus a conventional tank with 50+ rounds would still get its ass kicked if the enemy is killing you over the horizon or from behind cover. Fifty rounds does nothing if the tank is killed before being able to engage the enemy.

[@th3narrat0r5]

The chieftain has graced us from the beach!

[@MrWolfstar8]

Cheers, looks like an awesome vacation

[@jesuschristhomeslice9492]

Best thing about the AbramsX is that it looks good 👍

[@adrianwintle5284]

My concern with all the crew in the hull is: What do you do if someone with a machine gun wipes off all of your remote sensors?

[@bamaman6478]

There are ALOT of sensors/cameras so it's not rlly a issue unless you got a gun and 20 minutes on your hands not even mentioned the whole ass tank shooting you

[@JWQweqOPDH]

Well you could do the same with every view port in a conventional tank. You can't stick your head out if we assume you're being blasted by a dozen MGs.

[@tomhenry897]

Job for the 4th person to crawl out and replace If shot no big lost

[@stupidburp]

If surrounded by enough infantry to take out all sensors, hit reverse and get out before they hit you with an ATGM.

[@sgtNACHO]

Enjoy your holiday!! Looks beautiful!

[@KernowekTim]

Cornwall looking good Chieftain. I can see Wexford in the back-drop. Makes me feel a wee bit home-sick. Have a great time. Nice cocktail. "Chons da re'th fo".

[@tisFrancesfault]

It has to be stated, much like Ajax, companies dont like criticism from the people who would use the system. Because they tend to be, well critical. (in ajax's case, they got RAC to test the system and not reccie or armoured infantry. Thus you got excellent reviews on its light weight mobility, and tech; as they would, as they are used to 65 tonne CR2s not 12 tonne Scimitars...)

[@clarkbarrett6274]

Not an accurate statement. Soldier Vehicle Assessments are welcomed and more is better. Helps the companies make the vehicles better, faster. As Chieftain noted the whole purpose of taking 4 tech demonstrators to AUSA was to get customer feedback on things that they like or don't like. I promise many, man people were quite surprised to see a H-E tank, with all the extra tech, on the floor. Now it's up to the Army to determine where to go next.

[@CssHDmonster]

i think all the ideas are very simple: make the tank into a land battleship, i think the industry wants to create mechs but doesnt have the tech yet

[@SlavicCelery]

WW1 ideas coming full circle eh?

[@CssHDmonster]

@@SlavicCelery more gun good

[@SlavicCelery]

@@CssHDmonster The biggest problem with the concept, without a doubt, the amount of crew to successfully utilize all the information. A battleship has a massive crew. 3 people in a hull is not enough.

[@ScottKenny1978]

Well, that's certainly my mental image for all the different APS that should be installed. 3 different hard kill, plus soft kill.

[@jic1]

Somebody (possibly The Chieftain himself) pointed out that mechs will never make sense, because any technology that could make them viable would be much more effective if used in a tank.

[@jeremyholland4527]

I look forward to seeing you in December at the museum of the American GI!

[@xxxlonewolf49]

Love the commentary with informed opinions. Scouts Out!

[@tacticalmanatee]

Your reasoning for not including a drone/EW/ECM/systems operator or large secondary weapons like missiles or 30mm guns is compelling. I've been thinking along similar lines but you expressed it much more eloquently and simply than I've been able to.

[@SlavicCelery]

That's what you include in the support vehicle.

[@cheyannei5983]

JLTV was designed for this exact role. It can't be so expensive GDLS can't privately design a modern warfare payload/mission package for the JLTV. Plus, other NATO members might pick up JLTV's for the payload if it's good enough.

[@dgthe3]

@@cheyannei5983 NATO usage: Lithuania already is. Belgium will be soon, as will Romania. Others are probably looking into it. The JLTV can be used to carry the SHORAD system. Not sure if it'd be any good for drone operators though. I feel like you'd want more internal space for that.

[@cheyannei5983]

@@dgthe3 JLTV is one of the crowning achievements of procurement in the past 15 years, IMHO. No compromises, it's *really* good... And cheap, too! You don't need that much room, it's just a flight sim as far as the pilot is concerned. I imagine you'd use the two-door variant with a large box on the bed to contain the monitors, controls, and a trailer to carry a launcher, ammo, and a spare UAV.

[@trioptimum9027]

I think the 30mm is a perfect fit for the actual mission of this vehicle. It is, after all, a tech demo. It's SUPPOSED to be about the stuff that isn't quite ready for prime-time. This is the place to put the stuff that didn't quite work the last time you tried it, and see if you can make it work this time. And then maybe your customers go "Huh, a remote autocannon could actually be handy" or maybe they don't. Personally, I wouldn't be too surprised to see some changes in MBT supplementary armament down the road a ways. A full-scale 30mm is indeed cutting into tonnage that could have been armor or ammo, but changing from a .50 HMG to something with a bit more payload and a bit less velocity (I'm thinking somewhere on a continuum from a 20mm autocannon to a Mk. 19) might give you some interesting options. (You could use it to supplement your smoke launchers, timed or proximity-fused rounds would be handy for anti-drone work, you might even be able to integrate it into an APS.)

[@BobSmith-dk8nw]

Thanks Nick. I was unaware of any of this. .

[@Chiller01]

Looks like a lovely spot to vacation.

[@gOtze1337]

I aggree on the Part with the Loitering ammo, Brimstone and giant Secoundary Weapons, stop trying to make Multirole Tonks :) But i ve to say, i like the Idea of an 50cal. Coax(like LeClerc) + Weaponstation with 50cal. Gives it a bit more range and the abillity to engage light armored vehicles and punch through Walls in Urban Situations, compared to 7.62mm This also means only one ammo Type for the MG's on the Tank in the case of Abrams. Anyways, on thing is for sure, Mechanized Units definitly need small Drones in the future, and that is probably more effiecent to do with a specialized Vehicle.

[@AR-GuidesAndMore]

What a terrible backround, i see no models and book, how shall i be certain that you know what you are talking about. 😠

[@--Dani]

Alway excellent analysis 👍 Also looks beautiful where your on vacation...

[@boomerhgt]

Great videos enjoy your holiday and get back in those hatches soon

[@williamsnellen4901]

❤ that’s awesome 👀😎 place 🤔🇺🇸👏🇺🇸👍👏 nice Vacation 🇺🇸

[@fordgtguy]

Enjoy your vacation Chieftan, it looks awesome!

[@paulstone472]

Love your wardrobe. I have that exact same shirt in my closet.

[@ArnsteinTrany]

Great holiday vid, enjoy your time off.

[@barrytaylor6565]

Loving that shirt! and chatting about tanks in the sun , whats not to like, have a great vacation mate!!

[@SkepticalChris]

Very convincing greenscreen of a tropical beach!

[@silentone11111111]

Great insightful vid. Thanks 🙂

[@drones7838]

Love the back ground!

[@chrishewitt4220]

Cheers Nic... I really needed to see a sunkissed beach and drinks being served! Off to Blighty for me end of the month! Then Germany and Denmark. Just have to persuade SWMBO that a side trip to Munster for the tank museum is an excellent idea!

[@Lowlandlord]

That is a truly majestic shirt! Love it!

[@bandenere7774]

Chilliest tank explanation ever. Enjoy your vacation, Slainte!

[@ronfischer191]

Love the location

[@trailridescj7528]

Great drink delivery 🍹

[@nilo70]

Enjoy your vacation Sir !😊

[@slayerofmidgets3201]

Interesting scenery

[@Benecki]

Well done. Have a nice vacation. Greetings from Germany.

[@nomar5spaulding]

When the man comes in with the drink... Chieftain is such a classy lad 👌👌

[@racernatorde5318]

Hope you have/had a good vacation!

[@Iamthelolrus]

The drink delivery was epic.

[@Omnihil777]

I have the feeling, I don't know from where, but I got that hunch that you & your family are on a long earned holiday. I could be wrong, anyways, I respect enormously that you even post a vid out on holidays. You the MAN! Chieftain 4 president!