Everything you need to know about new Abrams M1A2 SEP V3

[@captainedward8278]

Thank god a non-computer voice.

[@dale6827]

Least I'm not alone in hating that

[@1vesuvia]

Too bad it's Russian

[@seegsonroboticsworkingjoe]

Mike Langelo you got a problem with Russia

[@alesigno100]

tank god*

[@derptank3308]

Alessandro Signori The door is over there, use it

[@justinh7673]

I just enlisted yesterday as a m1 Abrams crewman. So excited

[@mikegeorge8132]

Get in shape now before boot camp starts. (19k 1991-2013) It was the best of times, it was the worst of times...

[@NPCBot-be9yg]

Good luck, I'm not military, but a tank crewmen seems interesting

[@rickdubbink]

Good luck!

[@heavypupper1219]

Just a little warning though. Be ready to be sent to Iran. Things have been heating up and a war seems likely.

[@richfarfugnuven6308]

Be able to run 2 miles in 12-14 minutes in boots.

[@panpiper]

In my youth (I'm nearly 60 now), the US military still rolled around with M48 relics, phasing in the M60, which while pretty enough, still had homogeneous steel armor, which against the serious weapons of the day was as useful as paper. It was frankly embarrassing just how useless it was for the purposes of armor. When the US finally rolled out the M1 MBT, I was ecstatic! Finally the US had a tank worthy of the title, a tank that could stand in the thick of battle and actually shrug fire! It made such an impression on me that to this day, I cannot imagine a better tank. I am an M1 chauvinist.

[@spritezeroxxx66]

When the M1 was introduced, most modern soviet tanks at that time could go straight through it with APFSDS

[@matthewbalberchak9510]

The M60s armor was actually quite good. The turret was poor, as it was roughly an M48 turret. The hull was able to take 100mm AP and APDS shells. And M60A1 has a turret that was almost impervious to even 125mm APFSDS shells.

[@mikeck9946]

SpriteZero: No...they couldn't. The M1s armor was VERY effective against HEAT warheads and anything but a short range direct-on hit with a APFSDS round. In combat, its very difficult to get a 90 degree hit on the side or rear of a tank. Except for very close ranges, the sloping armor on the front would not allow penetration. SO no, the M1 wasn't impenetrable but its absurd to say "it would go straight through." If that was the case, there would have been burning M1-A1s in the Iraqi desert instead of T-72s

[@spritezeroxxx66]

comparing M1s to Polish vintage T-72Ms firing late 1960s ammo (Which the Iraqis used during the war) to M1A1s and M1A2s isnt really fair. And I'm talking about Soviet DU APFSDS from 1980+ fired from tanks such as the T-72B Obr. 1987 or the T-80U. Even the 3BM22 from 1976 had a fair chance of going through the M1 Abrams at close range (M1A1 and M1A2 not included). And while the armor of the Abrams was effective against shaped charge munitions, it couldn't stop the newest soviet ATGMs mounted on Attack helicopters or ground strike aircraft, but mostly shoulder fired munitions. I never said the M1 Abrams was a bad tank either, IT was superior to soviet tanks at its introduction, as long as it didnt get hit by them. And keep in mind that the tank doesn't have to be penetrated in order to become combat ineffective. A nonpenetrative hit from a 125 mm gun, or an RPG hit to the Abrams could knock out it's tracks, gun, gunners optics, and drivers sights, essentially rendering the tank combat ineffective. In a situation like that, (if the gun is disabled), the crew would bail out, and the tank would be rendered destroyed by the enemy

[@matthewbalberchak9510]

SpriteZero Xxx Everything you said was about as accurate as you can get, except the last part. If a tanks non-critical parts are hit (Gun, Sights, View ports, External fuel tanks, (tracks are only one that would cause a “kill”) the tank is not abandoned. If something like the main sight is hit, an auxiliary is used. If the gun is hit, you retreat. If the drivers view ports are hit, the commander directs him very carefully. Also, I forget which 125mm was introduced in the early/mid 1980s, it had around 550-575mm penetration. That shell would go through the M1IPs turret and hull, but not M1A1s turret. and not M1A1HAs turret or hull.

[@Mr.Deleterious]

01:01 tank commander chill'n with a bag of chips while casually driving over a car. Murica'

[@Staryanuke]

Those are David sunflower seeds

[@Noisykiller12]

can it survive a 150mm shell from a Sturmpanzer tho?

[@orlock20]

With the Trophy system, the projectile would be shot down before it hit the tank.

[@Swarmie]

orlock20 nah fam projectile too slow it would just think someone's throwin a rock at it

[@jPlanerv2]

Nothing can

[@clouster75]

No Tank can survive glorious nazi Sturmpanzaaar

[@theoneclipguy2974]

War thunder!!!

[@user-zf8es3jd3r]

What if......mount a U.S. Navy Railgun on upcoming M1A3 Abrams tank?

[@alephnull3102]

You'd need to plug it in to a wall outlet

[@orlock20]

The big problem the U.S. navy has is the short lifespan of the barrels. Right now, the experimental barrels last less than 100 rounds.

[@user-zf8es3jd3r]

@@orlock20 yeah true, nevermind exchange the barrels after every combat against talibans and freaking adversaries of U.S.....

[@user-zf8es3jd3r]

@@alephnull3102 bring the wall to war

[@mytmousemalibu]

@@orlock20 Im sure "barrel" life will improve, give it time. When the first jet engines were built their useful service life was on the order of minutes. Now its thousands of hours before major overhaul. The railgun technology has a lot of ground to cover before its a useable concept. I would expect it to mature a lot faster than the gas turbine did.

[@majorborngusfluunduch8694]

Have you considered looking at modern (and older, for fun's sake) Chinese tanks? The way things are looking nowadays I feel like it'd be more appropriate to compare American vehicles with Chinese ones. It would also be interesting to compare Soviet/Russian vehicles with them as well, considering their surface level similarities.

[@RedEffectChannel]

;)

[@ethancole9618]

Yeah would be cool to have a look at the type99a or type 96

[@Maverick-gg2do]

He granted your wish.

[@justinerrico2096]

John Doe china just copies US tanks so that would be a useless comparison

[@limcharles9730]

@Justin Errico you dont know much about tanks dont you? if any chinese designs are more similar to soviet/eu tanks rather than americans

[@patrickmarchand7158]

I know this one and some others are getting old at this point, but I just started watching your videos and I find them extremely informative. Keep up the great work I've been learning a lot

[@CMDRFandragon]

Need a new version of this video. The thing is in service, complete with the thicc turret armor, trophy and all that. Its lookin chonky boi.

[@installlinux6156]

I like the meme thumbnails.

[@loganfrancel9275]

Me too.

[@jackvony5615]

I would point out that the Abrams has waaay more weight simulators than seen on previous prototypes. This means that the armor upgrade is going to be pretty massive. And our friend the LFP has 3 large weight simulators on it. I would guess this increase of armor will be conservatively around 100mm KE, likely more. But that is all speculation. Also, every single Abrams in US service is getting Trophy, so I’m sure the SEPv3 will have it. Tanks in Europe were already seen with Trophy during exercises. www.armytimes.com/news/2018/07/05/abrams-tanks-get-new-round-of-israeli-made-shields-to-fend-off-anti-tank-weapons/

[@904_noah]

It's funny how we all know how little armor the T-14 Armata has, especially for the turret lmao. I'd bet money M829A4 would penetrate it

[@DashTheRaptor]

Very nice video, I have been wanting to learn more about this upgrade and this is a nice summery. I really hope the do something about the lower plate and the new round looks very impressive.

[@chandrapoetra5613]

0:08 Deja Vu!!!!! i've been here in this place before........

[@jaroslavdudas7227]

No

[@Alnilam82]

3:40... here we are.

[@BRANFED]

really liking your channel dude

[@spamuraigranatabru1149]

*WHERE IS MY MODERNIZED SHERMAN TANK?*

[@spamuraigranatabru1149]

M50 and M51 are alright but have you heard of the M60 Super Sherman? 60mm hyper velocity gun!

[@namefamilyname1029]

it will be soon in war thunder !

[@markpippin550]

Name Familyname no you’re just saying that be quiet

[@This_Pleases_The_Nut]

The M3 will also have a McDonald's satellite phone.

[@odinswolf4301]

4:45 T SERIES

[@merkavamkivm3373]

Lol

[@samuils]

They will not meet T14, T14 project has been halted as of 08/03/2018 and barely any units were built.

[@johnmangele6758]

samuils it hasn't been canceled, T-14 is just not going to mass produce, it's making it in batches now

[@alienmorality]

​@@johnmangele6758 lol

[@bkup1332]

Is it just me or do the desert colored vehicles in the snow make y'all think of yellow snow...?

[@SupesMe]

I’ve been hoping you do a thing on this. Now will know exactly what’s so different about it

[@dragancrnogorac3851]

Professional, like any other video. Keep up good work

[@kanyeeast8450]

My cousin is going to be a tank driver in Kuwait in 2019, probably driving one of those, wish him best of luck.

[@lightningphoenix7155]

They should have just made a new chassis for the Abrams because that new frontal lower armour is just a bigger weakness now.

[@redenginner]

They could design a weld on package that fixes the problem instead of producing w whole new tank

[@Native_love]

Red Effect, you have one of the best tank channels on KZbin! You should write a book! Thank you sir!

[@mettreaper1732]

M1A2 upper plate *exists* Russian HE projectiles: let us introduce ourselves.

[@Phunny]

MettReaper This isn’t War Thunder. No one uses HE rounds for tank combat.

[@stilpa1]

@tronNope, it is well known that they have best HE

[@stilpa1]

@tron turret ring and the roof, it is that simple, you atop trying to win an argument, without one

[@RomanianReaver]

You cocked up mate. Some of the Iraq T-72s had laser range finding, others had coincidence range finding.

[@andrew2353]

It could benefit massivly from the Rheinmetall 120 L/55 gun

[@sctm81]

Too unwieldy in urban combat. DU ammo makes up for penetration.

[@americanmig160]

Sturmpanzer eats Abrams for breakfast

[@rileychurch1821]

Hi, just wondering about your opinion on upgunning Abrams to 140mm, and other tanks

[@Kalashnikov413]

that Abrams variant called CATTB, which is a testbed platform to mount different gun. Ofc, the 140mm gun prove to be more capable, but the reload was quite long, and you can't store many shells, since the shell is quite big

[@nicholoscaudillo]

Great update video. I've watched your older stuff and you've gotten much more concise

[@hermanman8235]

It looks tough and beautiful at the same time.now that's a what we called IMPROVEMENT

[@MasterChief-sl9ro]

It got new tracks. Has integrated 6th generation battlefield data linking. The artillery new rounds. Used in support. Can now locate and destroy targets the tank see. Without the aid of laser designation. It simple has an optical link to what the tanks see. Is uploaded in flight to the round. In real time. Using a library of images. It chooses the best attack profile to destroy the target. Very deadly. As it uses the same concept the Israelis Spike ATGM uses.. But in an artillery battery.

[@typicalspace_yt6141]

Is this true what about the new abrams we have ?

[@UENVEYME2]

***FACT: At ranges greater than 1500 meters, the T72/ T90 cannon fire is ineffective against the Abrams frontal armor.*** ***At the same distance, the Abrams can turn the T-72/T-90 into an instantaneous 3 person crematorium. ***

[@daveybernard1056]

Bring back the Tiger I with a proper fusion engine.

[@tonywallick1337]

Epic thumbnail for an epic tank

[@timothy1949]

quick question, as far as i know the armor level of the abrams is classified, do we have an estimate of the turret and lower plat protection of the abrams?? thanks.

[@tylerdurden4080]

No they don't but everyone keeps saying how vulnerable that power glacis is, so it's either true or complete BS. My guess is that it could be true but most likely not because the front glacis is huge and makes a very inviting target so to not armor the hell out of it doesn't make sense at all. But then again it's the army so yeah.

[@CalgarGTX]

They have again forgotten to click the L/55 gun in the research tree

[@JaM-R2TR4]

dont tried it, and declined it.. its too long, and cant handle heavy DU APFSDS... it would have to be modified, but actual benefits are not that high.. they will rather go with new chemical guns that use shorter barrel but can handle much higher pressures, therefore deliver a lot more energy to APFSDS rounds...

[@CalgarGTX]

@@JaM-R2TR4 In the world of modern MBT tank gun sizes it's not THAT much longer and I don't see why it wouldn't handle a DU round as well as the L/44, it's mostly the same gun tech wise, you would just get a higher initial velocity on it

[@dugclrk]

Thanks, very nicely done and informative. Subscribed.

[@MatoVuc]

The AMP means the Abrams finally gets an actual HE projectile, a feature it hasn't had since the introduction of the 120mm gun

[@legioix8744]

Another awesome video

[@DarkRendition]

Subscribed. Most credible tank channel! Love the non-American perspective.

[@davidkueny2444]

That thumbnail made me lol.

[@UENVEYME2]

*** Thank you for being honest about the "EGG SHELL" turret of the T14 ARMATA

[@moisesezequielgutierrez]

I thought it was gonna be a M1A3... Maybe I'll wait for the future 'till this Tank (M1A3) exists

[@akshaymediwala8652]

Wanna hear a joke? The Russian tanks side armor!

[@SuperGeronimo999]

As if the Abrams had any...

[@akshaymediwala8652]

@@SuperGeronimo999 as if any mbt had any!

[@SuperGeronimo999]

thaimilitaryandasianregion.files.wordpress.com/2017/05/clmnpqtxaae3r-q1.jpg

[@Swarmie]

Can modern tanks stop getting ied protection? It's going to make them harder to kill with he In war thunder

[@yourlordandsavior6940]

At least you've made it to top teir

[@shingosshojiopoulos6608]

@@yourlordandsavior6940 yes unlike me the has been playing for 3 years and still is in 3rd tier.

[@nikkotan2840]

i think the APU is only available on the SEP V3 Variants only and not for SEP 1&2.

[@AceTheMM]

Full fucking furniture set on the top of the turret.

[@snuppssynthchannel]

Another great upload.

[@SAUBER_KH7]

Yay new video! And on M1 too. :D

[@AtroposLeshesis]

The main loss factor is due to fire. The second most factor for disabling this tank is the track and wheel hubs getting cracked and destroyed.

[@BagoPorkRinds]

M1A2D (aka SEPv4) with even more improved composite armor, optics, digital sysyems, and ammo is scheduled for testing in 2021.

[@stupidburp]

I think the US Army should still request maximum full rate production of M1A2C until M1A2D completes testing and acceptance because that could take several years. Four or five years of production could mean hundreds of M1A2C. The order for Taiwan's 100 M1A2T should also be diverted to US Army M1A2C. Taiwan could be given many M1A1 instead, perhaps 1000 of them. They could also be given technical assistance to do upgrades themselves up to a more modern standard. They have very old tanks and replacing all active ones to upgraded M1A1 would be a big upgrade for them.

[@stilpa1]

Oh you mean the movie prop?

[@shmoaeelshmoaeel8319]

That gap between turret and hull screams shoot me.

[@stanleytolle416]

One thing that is missed by allot of people with the success of the M1 over the Russian tanks in the Iraq was that the Iraq army was set up to deal with the Iranian army. The vast amount of ammunition the Iraqi tanks had was high explosive to deal with bunkers and massed troops. The anti-armor ammunition they did have was only designed for the obsolete armors that the Iranian tanks had. It would have been a different battle if the Iraqis had been developing their army to deal with a US attack. They would have had the ammunition for their T72s that could take out our tanks. They would also have better tactics like double stacking their anti-tank mines and blowing their bridges. Things like flooding areas and better and more ATMs would be used. All sorts of different military tactics would also be used. We most likely would have won but it would have been a much bigger battle. All this should be kept in mind in any planning to attack Iran. Iran has been gearing their army for a fight with us. My guess, if this fight were to happen, it would be a much tougher fight than we anticipate.

[@markmolter6937]

How do you get all this information.

[@02091992able]

APU isn't that a generator or battery that runs the electronics and turret drives when the tank is stationary and the turbine is shutdown?

[@Romanov117]

No, actually it has several batteries where one is meant to individually run for engines and the other for Turret and Electronic Devices.

[@nuraly78]

May be M1 is not the best tank, but it is the best battle proven tank that has significant sheer number to make a difference

[@morteparla6926]

Nobody every touches on how the SEP packages also add armor. It isn't just electronics.

[@notbadsince97]

That XM1147 is really something

[@romeovictor6223]

I love the abrams. I do. Its a great tank. But, what tank fanatics, and M1 lovers (like myself) like to forget is that America doesnt build tanks to be the best in the world. They build tanks to be easily maintained, easily fixed, and produced in numbers. Now dont get me wrong, M1s and all the variants are absolute beasts of a tank. But if you put it up against any tank beuro that makes tanks to be the best, strongest, fastest, in a one on one, then you'll probably be disappointed. If you want something that is top notch in the tank world, then look at how Germany designs tanks. They dont make them to be replaceable. They make them to be the best. And in my opinion they are. Leopards, when used correctly, could put a grinding halt to any opposing team, Russian or America (and we can all only hope we never have to see that, EVER). HOWEVER, the maintenance needed for a leopard? A lot. Is it easy to replace parts as it is on the abrams? Ahaha, no. Definitely not. Are they easy tanks to produce? Absolutely not in any way, shape, or form. Are they expensive? Definitely. Now, I can already hear some of you thinking "well the abrams is battle tested and was amazing on the field and has this and that", and sure, it is, but only against T72s, which arent that big of a deal anymore. Ive talked to M1 tank crews that fought the T72s and a couple even said that if they had been in the T72s and they had the abrams, they probably still would have won. You see, its all down to the tank crew. And in America, you can find some truly invincible platoons of M1s that demolish any job they are tasked with. Thats why they completely kicked ass out in the desert. Not because they had the "best tank in the world" or anything, but because the M1 was good ENOUGH to be used by the USA to get the job done. The crews manning them were better trained than the opposing team, were better prepared for tank warfare, and were better equipped, not with the best tank ever, but with a good enough machine to succeed at what they needed. Is the SEPV3 good? Absolutely. Is it the best? Probably not. It doesnt matter that it isnt the best. What matters is if it can get the job done, and that it certainly can. In the end, it doesnt matter how well the objective was done. What matters is IF you got the objective done. Thats how you win wars. Youre fighting with an M1 because it wins battles, not because it wins battles better than other tanks.

[@SNSTJ__]

Romeo Victor Well, that's long, but i agree with you

[@SuperGeronimo999]

"They build tanks to be easily maintained, easily fixed, and..." Maintenance cost is way higher than a Leopard 2, and if damaged it needs to be sent overseas to get repaired...

[@shirghazaycowboys]

That's a lot of text with a lot of wrong.

[@STANDALONECOMPLEX9]

Leopard 2A6 costs around 6 million dollars. Abrams M1A2SEPV3 costs around 9 million dollars. But do tell me more about how the Leopard is so much better because it's made in Germany. The current gen Abrams is one of the finest tanks in the world right now. SEPV4's optics upgrades and networking packages would allow me to destroy most other tanks in the world before they can even engage.

[@SuperGeronimo999]

Do you actually believe, the more expensive it is, the better it is? Well then... the Leclerc XXI had a cost of 9.3 million €, which translates to $10.7 million. The K2 had a cost of 9.56 billion won, which translates to $8.5 million. K2 PIP will be more expensive. And then there is the Type-10 which costs around $8.4 million.

[@markfryer9880]

Nice to hear a human voice for a change. I don't have any problem with accents from around the world but I really hate the robotic voice and the way it mangles pronunciation. Please excuse my rant.

[@GlazSh0tJFK]

it was said by a tank crewman on youtube that the lower plate is not a weak spot

[@typicalspace_yt6141]

Link ?

[@drsolo7]

M1A2 Stubborn-Egotistical-Panzer V3

[@thedyslexicorangutan8049]

It’s a beautiful tank. It’s seen the most service out of most modern tanks in active service. It’s been extremely effective. Glad that it’s getting the SEP V3 upgrade and that the SEP V4 upgrade is already in research and development as well as the A3 variant estimated to be put in service in the 2030’s. At that point the M1A3 Abrams could possibly be the best tank in the world.

[@tobylong6973]

Noisy yes it can now they middles that shoot on coming missles

[@glock888]

RedEffect rockets such as refleks,arkan,vikhr not laser mark target.it laser mark back of the rocket you launch and you have to lead it to the target manually or use auto assist.so that laser warning not against those rockets

[@loxachi1291]

Although the M1A3 program has only just restarted and won't deliver a tank till 2020 at the earliest I'm very excited that it is confirmed to be getting a new ETC cannon. The XM360 that was developed for the FCS program. Its predecessor, the XM-291, in its 120mm ETC variant achieved 140mm levels of muzzle energy in the 90s during the CATTB and TTB programs.

[@jonny2954]

Close to 17 MJ is very, very low-end of 80s/90s 140mm muzzle energy spectrum (20 MJ).

[@loxachi1291]

right. but I imagine the XM360 has vastly improved upon this. Still probably not modern 140mm (25-30 MJ) territory but it will be a very good interim gun (vastly superior to 11.5 MJ on the M256) while also helping to reduce weight.

[@jonny2954]

It hasn't vastly improved upon it. The XM360 barely has more pressure than a M256, in fact it's just ment to be lighter.

[@loxachi1291]

Jonny Jonny source on this? From what I've researched it has an undefined higher breech pressure but likely above the XM-291 or at least equal. It's also 48 calibers in length (XM360E1 going on the abrams) rather than the 44 of the M256. It's explicitly stated this upgrade will allow higher energy KE projectiles to be designed and employed on the XM-360E1

[@jonny2954]

It does have higher pressure than the M256, but not much. As i said: 'barely'. It doesen't come close to a L55A1 as example.

[@sethl6626]

By the time in enlist (around or at 2020) this will be standard, which is exciting. Also: High-Explosive Multi-Purpose=HEMP :)

[@MalcrowAlogoran]

No robot voice, I sub. I can forgive old and overused abrams footage.

[@UENVEYME2]

You left out "ETC" ELECTRO-THERMAL CHEMICAL Cannon/Ammunition

[@jakenikolia1453]

Hey Bob, yeah joe, we need more armor the m1, ok (welding) done!

[@ozza1785]

4:35 But anything is effective vs mbt side armor-_- I remember how i read about soviet tests of 30mm 2A72 autocannon that BMP-3 have - shooting T-55A frontal armor from 1,5km, while BMP-3 was swimming in water. Results was pretty scary - all optics was broken, tracks was destroyed, gun barrel got several holes in it and armor got cracks and holes in it. Dont forget that this is sloped 100mm from 1,5km vs 30mm ffs~

[@Bluesnipible]

It's old and it's Russian. What did they expect?

[@overlord4404]

@@Bluesnipible you are saying that the optics and the barrel of an abrams can withstand a 30 mm round

[@Bluesnipible]

@@overlord4404 Maybe, maybe not. But the Abrams certainly wouldn't have holes in it's armor like the T-55

[@overlord4404]

@@Bluesnipible you do realize that you are comparing tank made in 1946 to a tank made in 1980s with entirely different armor layouts and composition

[@Bluesnipible]

@@overlord4404 That was literally the point of my comment. The original poster was saying that the BMP-3 could penetrate a T-55. I was simply stating that the results would be different for the modern day M1 Abrams

[@CMDRFandragon]

M1147, thats fun to say. Kinda like the US Stryker, M1127 and M1128

[@ehrenyoav3040]

Laser detection is worthless. Can aim a laser at the tank just to confuse and can aim near the tank, and incite at the last minute

[@discostuchannel]

I think UFOs will be more common on the battlefield than the T14

[@erickajander1799]

SIR : ....FINALLY ...ABRAMS TANK IS GETTING a A.P.U. / AUXILIARY POWER UNIT ....EITHER A small TURBINE from JET AIRCRAFT at 400 cycles/ second AC ....or ...a tiny 1 or 2 cylinder mini DIESEL ENGINE ....SUCH AS USED ON "REEFER" TRUCKS/ TRAILERS or type INTERMITENT USE mounted on TRUCK FRAMES for use with "SLEEPER CAB" TRACTOR/ TRUCKS to KEEP THEIR 6+ BATTERIES CHARGED .....HOPEFULLY THE A.P.U. on the ABRAMS is a AIR COOLED / ALUMINUM FIN UNIT. SUCH AS MADE BY GERMAN CO...........**** MUCH BETTER FUEL ECONOMY*** WHEN NOT MOVING ! ! !

[@Empriction]

Honestly T-14 side armor doesn't look that skinny... Remember it being without any side skirts? And if you look at the tank now, imagine if all that side armor is like some secret surprise of composite thickness. You never know the true information about T-14.. Just remember that. *Edit:* Speaking of turret, the mantlet is the thickest. And sides could be weaker, but they have weird angle, so good luck.

[@aidan11162]

Alex Lotus it really doesn't matter about the composition of the side armor or any of the armor on it. If the government cannot afford it, which in this case and according to many accounts it can't, then the tank really isn't of much use. At last count I think the RU military was getting about a hundred. If that.

[@JohnyMcNeal]

Jesse Quine No need for them atm. Modernized t-80s are great for arctic region because of the engine and modernized t-90s with new armor, gun, systems, ammo, engine and transmission are more than comparable to the m1s. So, no need. Armata will wait for 152mm and even newer gen of tech for system managment. The most important part was to develop it and implement it as its basically new generation of a tank. Its not just about buying it. You need crews for it, maintenence for it and new t-72b4m and t-90s modernizations are nore than enough and there a ton of those. So its simple.

[@aidan11162]

Johnny_McNeil you do raise valid points and if I’m right it seems you are saying it’s a large scale proof of concept tank. In my opinion I don’t think that’s what’s happening though. You had a tank designed in a time of when the government could afford it. It can’t afford the numbers it wanted now though and is ordering just enough of them to keep the plant on life support in the hopes that the times will change and more will be able to be ordered later. I don’t think it will happen though. If anything I think the T90 will outlast the T14 simply because it’s cheaper and already there

[@НузНарым]

From T-14 will be a separate small army. They are not needed to replace the whole army. Separate tank army like the Syrian Tigers

[@aidan11162]

Нуз Нарым that doesn’t make a whole lot of sense for many reasons. A) you are going to have a unit that uses different gear than everyone else that then requires a whole separate supply chain. The Syrians countered this by having multiple units armed with T90s and not just the tigers. B) any small but elite unit will inevitably be used often and put in the most dangerous situations. The stains again can counter this by having a steady resupply of men and material. At this point there doesn’t appear to be any plans to up the order of T14s. So once a tank is gone it’s gone. Not saying that what you are saying can’t be done but there are a lot of issues with it that would speak against it

[@canadianwaffenwaffle2976]

the only upgrade it will need is the ability to dejavu drift whenever it wants

[@tompalmer5986]

I'm wondering if it would be helpful to have a polymer tank round with a steel base.

[@DennisBell-tz2sb]

The problem I see is that the M1s have been in battle and the ones that the US drive bet everything used against them. Know they keep improving them. The T14 is still a paper tiger. Russia doesn’t want them in battle, WHY?

[@SpikeAPFSDS]

are you dutch, or russian, pls tell me id like to know

[@zaynwot]

I wanna know too !

[@tomjerry1542]

he’s serbian

[@davidscoltock3970]

Makes me wish we had the economy to upgrade the Challenger

[@zacht9447]

M1 TTB when lol basically a Armata for the US from the 80s

[@SonicGold34]

Its literally the same exact tank, only with outdated tech obviously, this is a fucking joke Russia!

[@rotaryman41]

Wait so can this new APFSDS round penetrate T-90’s front? Or any Russian MBT?

[@Kalashnikov413]

prob yes

[@ancientwarrior3482]

Modern shell: can penetrate most modern MBTs sides Literally every modern MBTs side: weak af

[@johnallen7230]

When are you going to tell us about the "Egg Shell" turret on the T-14? Perhaps you tell everyone how the "active protection system" on the T-14 only covers "the forward half of the tank."

[@dnksociety5592]

Now it becomes a immortal tank.

[@markfisher8206]

What about Canadian tanks? Let’s see 360 MArk ten and eleven Centurions replaced by 128 Leopard ones which were replaced by 59 Leopard two’s .Can we see a trend here??

[@java9090]

Can't wait for this to roll out on war thunder

[@vossli1074]

if you had to take a guess what do you think the SEpv3 hull is in RHA? 700mm?

[@stilpa1]

Less

[@myfavoritemartian1]

In the tankers world false bravado will get you a dirt nap.

[@nicolai8820]

1 scene tokyo Drift Music in my head

[@mr.abrams9885]

With these upgrades they never stood a chance

[@donfrandsen7778]

T-72 variant killer !!!(Grace yard) Abrams has ammo digitally link beyond 8km My money is on the Abrams and it’s variants

[@nurashams4093]

Armata still way too cool

[@safamohammed2909]

Howlong the opreational range and is it bbetter than armata t90?

[@Marcelooooo_86]

Where are all my 91A's.... Ordance baby!!!

[@CMDRFandragon]

Given the tank looks no bigger, I do wonder how much the armor did in fact increase, if at all...if so where did it go?

[@yourlordandsavior6940]

Possibly new composite, or it's just hard to see