How did the Russian Lancet Destroy 1 Archer and 2 Abrams Tanks?

Things have taken a rough turn for Ukrainian forces. Recent reports suggest they might have lost a couple of their heavy hitters: at least 2 American-made Abrams tanks and 1 Swedish Archer artillery gun. While both losses undoubtedly deal a blow to Ukraine's military muscle, the burning Archer might leave a deeper, more lasting scar in the long run.
In February, the M1 Abrams tank, a formidable weapon in Ukraine's arsenal, suffered significant losses near Avdiivka, Ukraine. The first tank was hit, with its blowout panels preventing a bigger disaster. Russia claimed the destruction as a victory, though the fate of the crew remains unknown. Conflicting reports suggest a reconnaissance drone may have initiated the attack, followed by a grenade launcher. Shortly after, another Abrams was reportedly destroyed by a Russian T-72B3 tank. These incidents highlight the vulnerabilities of even advanced tanks, such as the Abrams, particularly to drone attacks, and emphasize the importance of tactics that exploit these weaknesses.
In addition to the Abrams losses, Ukraine also reportedly lost a valuable asset, the FH77BW Archer self-propelled howitzer. This artillery piece, mounted on a Volvo truck, combines mobility, firepower, and precision. Its ability to quickly move into position and fire a variety of shells, including Excalibur guided munitions, make it a significant asset. With its automated features, the Archer requires only a small crew, enhancing its flexibility and adaptability on the battlefield. The loss of these Archers, which can target enemies from a distance and quickly relocate, is seen as a significant blow to Ukraine's firepower, as each Archer is considered a valuable asset due to their limited numbers.

[@pimpompoom93726]

According to Russian troops, the Abrams is easier to take out than the latest Leopard or Challenger tanks. American equipment is overrated, it is certainly NOT 'game changers'.

[@krisztiankalman5805]

There was an article in Business Insider last Autumn pointing out that Abrams is epecially vulnerable to drones because its top skin is pretty thin. Granted, when they designed it back in the 1970s there were no drones.

[@errorloading-re4wz]

They claim they are learning from this war and advancing their equipment, while that can be true they aren't the ones fighting on the ground like Russia and Russia has made big changes and learned a lot from actually fighting. Not to mention 45 countries are supporting Ukraine and Russia is still advancing.

[@maa518]

It's M1A1 not M1A2 with DU armor

[@kevinblackburn3198]

@@maa518 wouldn’t change the outcome. The top armor is still very thin

[@gabrielarcari4460]

yea fighting in the middle east against unfit troops proved nothing really..

[@VOID_24.]

T90 destroyed: Russian tanks are shit can't do anything M1 Abraham destroyed: tanks are not invincible 😂😂😂

[@itsmeyourfriend1]

Russians' tanks are much cheaper than Western tanks . And russians dont care about the safety of crews .

[@user-dz1nm6ed4y]

)))

[@olegbelorekov]

BRAVO

[@dannye6912]

ROFL

[@VIPER276]

Fr, and the T-90 actually showed wich one of the 2 is the better tank.

[@mzwandilemakhubu5617]

American equipment burns just like any other hardware in real life, only in their movies is it superior.

[@eu-7536]

You said it wisely. This is true. 😊

[@PuffPuffPass0420]

Some Russian tanks have flying turrets. You can't say thats ever happened to an American tankScrew Russia and Ukraine they are both lead by little men with short complexes who are corrupt while Dementia Joe is laundering money all over the world .

[@Vadim-gi4sg]

Западная техника хорошая, но очень дорогая, это правда, а экономика на войне очень важна.

[@dannyjayke8695]

Or or against third world countries

[@user-oj8kc7mg3s]

Lol, but it costs only 3-5 times more expensive than the Russian one, but at the same time it has the same efficiency.

[@fungames24]

The archer is what allows ukraine to win on the internet every day.

[@kevinblackburn3198]

You need dozens to attack at one time at a group of targets to make a difference

[@bobbyg9662]

@@kevinblackburn3198I don’t believe you understand what he meant ! 🤪

[@mmb811]

... while reality is very much the exact opposite

[@kirilld6206]

I saw a guy on youtube claiming he is pregnant. Ukrainians are not so far away from it.

[@leko4420]

@@kevinblackburn3198Ukraine(NATO) has hundreds attacking at same time. On the Internet.

[@ImperativeGames]

Ukraine already lost thousands of "heavy hitters". I don't understand why some people think that Abrams is completely different from Soviet main battle tanks or Soviet artillery shells are negligible? They work just fine for Russia.

[@rodiculous9464]

Bc muh western exceptionalism

[@nobodyxxxx508]

They thought it will be tanks vs tanks :D without a proper air defence compared to russia's.

[@kirilld6206]

@@nobodyxxxx508 tanks vs tanks abrams will not last long as well. Iraqi t-72A or other first versions are only looking like t-72b3. The difference is more than between first abrams and those 'advanced' once which poles hope for.

[@Hanimichal]

​@@nobodyxxxx508 but also was tank x tank, Abram x t80 and t80 won

[@bjorn1583]

@@Hanimichal it was a T72

[@bagasnuradi]

Yes, Abrams clearly have superiority when they fight against armed farmers in Afghanistan, but in Ukraine they got the real match...

[@billyboyou8125]

The Abrams were designed to fight along side Bradley's, A10's, and Apache tank killers flying above, they were not designed to be cruising down the road acting like lone wolf McQuade on a Rambo mission.

[@spudpud-T67]

Did you not notice they are just armed Russian farmers and convicts fighting in Ukraine too.

[@user-hz5gh9ss8i]

The Abrams got the country mixed up. They probably thought they were going to Iraq again. But Russia is not Iraq

[@duoglass342]

А вы думали в сказку попали? Нет, всё по взрослому и бить вас будем долго и больно. Ибо нехуй.

[@TwiceStruck]

​@@user-hz5gh9ss8iTanks predate FPV drones, a $ million worth of armor Protection system isn't going to stop $5,000 worth of drones, just shows the world how Taiwan is screwed if China commits, they have 1,000x the drones Russia has and 3 times better.

[@David_D.15]

America, the Country of Movies and Story Telling 🤣

[@MrBigblacksock]

better than the dump u live in

[@chandanaik3453]

Hahahahaha😂😂😂😂

[@faiqanjum9010]

and fat people

[@elgoog7830]

Essentially a delusional land, where everything is fictitious and ridiculous.

[@dzaazd1765]

In general, 2 Abrams were hit by ATGM, your news is distorted

[@user-oy5mm3pb2g]

4 M1-Abrams Tanks and 2 Abrams Minesweepers destroyed in 12 days. 10 Bradleys and about 3 Himars woth 2 Patriots wasted in 6 days.

[@vulgarisopinio]

3 Patriots, if I’m not mistaken

[@UKESRfertilizer]

Anyone know how many us tax payer dollars this is? Omg

[@theiranianputin2770]

@@vulgarisopinio Could be 3. Not sure tbh. Definitely 2 though.

[@unskilled822]

@@vulgarisopiniothose things are hella expensive and easy to destroy since it depletes so quickly, a single cheap grad can destroy it with just enough luck

[@nobodyxxxx508]

@@UKESRfertilizer american taxes go to american weapon manufacturers, unlike EU they are not paying for general goverment expenses. (guess its around %80 percent ammo about US sendings)

[@jayte4932]

Ukraine is a laboratory and an absolute gold mine for the Weapons manufacturers and IT companies. And the poor die on the battlefield. And the privileged, we get to watch from afar in comfort, arguing and analyzing as if we're talking about a football game, cheering on our favorite team. And the poor die on the battlefield.

[@kiralight2929]

It's always been this way and you are exactly correct. This kind of nonsense will go on until they feel the pain personally.

[@magicsmurfy]

Exhibition for weapon manufacturers. I love that show! It is a good testing and demo ground. Save a lot of time in making good PPT.

[@user-mk3wg2de3u]

Sadly that's very well put. God have mercy on all of us.

[@kakakiri2601]

i mean we actually has done this a lot so why

[@IGATECK]

I think that applies to every modern conflict

[@LorimaRBG]

To call Abrams - beast - is just rediculous. According to Russian fighters on the battlefield: it is much more difficult to destroy a Leopard-2 tank than an Abrams. Abrams is just paper tiger ... like NATO .

[@gabrielarcari4460]

sounds like the rules from ww2 still counts...

[@VLADIMIR-08090]

@gabrielarcari4460 I saw a video of an fpv drone flying into the stern of an Abrams and it burst into flames like a match three managed to get out half burning and the fourth was unlucky.

[@tnix80]

If I hear about stupid blow out panels one more fucking time...

[@tonyclough9844]

NATO has more tanks and artillery planes ships and men than Russia.

[@zeffy._440]

@@VLADIMIR-08090 Yeah I saw that video as well those 3 were practically burning while the 4th was killed

[@rochus_wagner]

The Ukrainian front showed how vulnerable the weapons of the NATO states are, they can be eliminated immediately with cheap drones. Who in the world will buy Leopard and Abrams, etc. after this?🤔

[@AZ-dj1ni]

NATO: But hey, our tanks are better, because they cost more and we prioritize quality over quantity

[@andrzejzajadczyk8349]

In your comment just change NATO to RUSSIA and Leo/Abrams to T80/T90 and u’ve got an universal comment.

[@rafaelgoncalvesdias7459]

Puppet corrupt western states

[@kthec1298]

@@andrzejzajadczyk8349almost as if anti tank weapons are doing what they are supposed to do, of cause no tank is save, not western nor eastern, but the way the west talks about their tanks you could think they are wonder weapons

[@festekj]

@@AZ-dj1niquality ? They get stuck in the mud and require high maintaince. High maintenance = bad quality

[@mickg7299]

It’s the humble drone that is the real game changer in this conflict, relatively cheap and very effective.

[@user-pg2kj7ps7o]

Yes, and it has rendered armoured vehicles defunct. The world should have noticed the short war between Armenia and Azerbaijan a few years ago.The drones won it.

[@XxXAC3XxX1]

I feel like drone swarms are gonna be the real game changers when it comes to war fare. Thousands of these buggers in sky, targeting troops and vehicles

[@voiden3338]

@@XxXAC3XxX1maybe not a swarm. The point is to not see it coming, that’s why world powers are investing in loitering munitions

[@gmm5550]

airdrones and cheap handheld antitank and airmissiles and seadrones..yes

[@royk7712]

I bet China will all out in drone tech since dji dominate commercial drones

[@matthewwagner47]

"Will this tip the scale in russia's favor?" You obviously only been keeping up with western propaganda and cnn/msnbc talking points. Russia has been successful in almost every operation in every corner of the battlefield. Ukraine is unable to take back any territory. You speak as if ukraine is winning.

[@mohamed652]

Russia wins but after it loses lot of soldiers ..... It lost over 400k soldiers since the beginning of the war in Feb 2022

[@kapodistriansociety]

@@mohamed652@mohamed652, you got the number wrong. Ukraine lost at least 500K dead and over 1 million wounded and out of combat. Russia has lost 40K troops

[@ggee7391]

@@mohamed652 Sure you are not watching the BBC?

[@matthewbeesley5850]

@@mohamed652 True, but Putin doesn't care about personnel losses. 400k soldiers lost since Feb 2022 is equal to about a month's losses to the USSR in WW2.

[@kevinblackburn3198]

This is a Ukrainian channel

[@kpl4174]

Ukraine has lost in total 2 ARCHER already. As for Abrams, 3-4 confirmed ones, plus 2 mine clearing ones

[@hansmalefjord7934]

And how many tanks and other stuff have they killed, its a war, we have lots more to send.

[@user-kf9ve2nb5m]

Отправьте все, мы уничтожим все что вы поставите.@@hansmalefjord7934

[@havanasyndrome3024]

​@@hansmalefjord7934none of the Abrams have taken anything out. Else it woulf have been getting page news 24x7 on CNN.. the first tank was taken out about 3 hours after ukrane bragged about finally bringing the "game changing" Abrams. 😂😂😂. It was driving to the Frontlines when it got roasted.

[@sinclair2469]

wow thatssssssss so many! russia is so superior! 3-4 tanks and 2 archers, wowie!

[@clintbillton2161]

And 3 american himars in one week.

[@vulgarisopinio]

How can one destroyed Archer tip the scale? Ukraine has already lost with or without Archers, Abrams or Patriots!

[@DanMorgan-bh5fv]

It's because they never had air superiority.

[@nobodyxxxx508]

An archer can single handedly destroy a stronghold and back off. Other artillery are only being used in strongholds that are easy to spot. Tactically very important. And as far as I know Ukraine gave them to brigades with 50-60km distance in their placements.

[@themanwiththegoldengun1998]

​@@DanMorgan-bh5fvair superiority is hard to achieve for either side especially for Ukraine and it now looks like the Russians have improved their ISR systems

[@cavscout62]

Russia has perfected linking ISR to Strike Systems, something they’ve been working on since the 1970’s. When one can view everything from space and send coordinates to all Strike Systems in the arsenal, rounds on target are almost instantaneous.

[@r0mi44]

8 pieces on ~1000 km of front, what were they hoping for?

[@oldwizard93]

Вся эта шумиха вокруг абрамсов из-за рекламной компании этих танков.

[@deniszero7706]

Pour les occidentaux le faite ça coûte cher c'est meilleur 😂😂😂

[@nobodyxxxx508]

it actually is a beast for tank war and urban march, but drones can hit them with heavier explosives than these two. So less to say, they are being outplayed at ukraine because of lacking air defence.

[@oldwizard93]

@@nobodyxxxx508 один или два абрамса были поражены птурами (atgm). Поэтому заявление что произошедшее возможно только от недостатка поддержки с воздуха ошибочно. И если на то пошло, поддержка с воздуха на работу дронов влияния не окажет.

[@user-eq2rx4xj6l]

@@oldwizard93 не пойму . в день десятки танков горят а тут два абрашки. они что золотые?или кто то выебывается

[@oldwizard93]

@@user-eq2rx4xj6l потому что эти танки рекламировали как ультимативное оружие на протяжении 30 лет.

[@andrzejd5301]

The Abrams is good fighting old outdated tanks, fighting goat herders in the desert and so on, but when fighting a modern army not that good

[@anonydun82fgoog35]

A couple weeks ago an Abrams was taken out by.... a T-72B!

[@iScoopyPal]

+ farmers and terrified women/ children in sandboxes.

[@user-hz5gh9ss8i]

The Abrams got the country mixed up. They probably thought they were going to Iraq again. But Russia is not Iraq

[@FiliusFidelis]

Sweden does have a Long tradition of weapons making. But we've forgotten our traditional rules about not selling weapons to countries engaged in active conflict, this is hardly the first instance of that though.

[@user-si3dp1hc8b]

Стокгольм🔥🔥🔥🔥Стекольну застеклим🚀🚀🚀🚀🚀💥💥💥💥💥

[@monpetitpeid3582]

It's what you do when you sell your soul to devil 😈 do as your evil master says.

[@nikicamalezic5388]

That is why Croatia chose to buy Rafales and not Grippens . We had Experience from our Homeland war against Serbian aggression when we asked for servicing our RBS-15 rockets. We were denied...and we had to figure it out and service it by ourselves. Thanks god we have smart, educated and resourceful people...

[@user-rz6pw8ve7j]

Хорошая машина, но шведы не знают, что такое большая война и массовое производство. Когда все вооружения должны быть очень просты и массовы.

[@digimaks]

Sweden shall stick to making Ikea stuff, instead of sending weapons to demented Kiev distatorship. (call it dictatorship, since Zelenskiy has modified constitution fo urkaine, cancelled elections of Ukraine and took all the power formt he Parliament!!! This is insane.)

[@killpendos]

Макрон, отправь свои войска на Украину, я хочу посмотреть на сгоревший Париж.

[@user-ov2gr5tm7l]

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@PCLinke]

lol

[@diegoslinger1254]

Париж нам не помешает

[@shahrincamilleal-johary3742]

Макрон - гомосексуал

[@Felipethug2010]

🇧🇷

[@kapodistriansociety]

The Abrams is a gas hog and needs constant maintenance; ask Col MacGregor, who fought in the battle of 73rd Easting on 26 February 1991, during the Gulf War

[@josephvanwie6706]

It must look like a mini Sun on night vision!

[@sadikesad3619]

@@josephvanwie6706 Exactly.

[@voiden3338]

Which is why logistics is important

[@digimaks]

Not only "gas-hog", but it is also very heavy, which makes it easy to get stuck in soft terrain.

[@bryanwozniak8861]

Despite the Gulf War in 1991, the Abrams tank has yet to experience a true battlefield. This lack of real combat serves as a testament to its capabilities, proving that nothing is truly invincible in the midst of warfare.

[@user-jj1uz3pp8e]

Как и т 90

[@KondorDCS]

Bryan, Iraq was hardly a real challenge for the Abrams. With the amount of support, setup and intel the americans had over Iraq on 1991, they would have defeated the iraqi army with WW2 era Shermans.

[@josephvanwie6706]

They were excellent against Camels and untrained Iraqi conscripts.

[@Vadim-gi4sg]

​@@KondorDCS и возможностью подкупа военных и гражданских Саддама.

[@omega2469]

Americans have nothing besides their airforce and Marine fleet,,, They can come and bomb anything and destroy a lot of infrastructure and buildings but can not invade a country,,, Don't take Iraq as an example because the Shia'a in Iraq wanted the power and worked with thw Americans,,, Americans can not even win a war against Iran, let alone the sophisticated Russian army and systems,,,

[@servietskyofficielle8074]

Nothing can resist to the power of shovel

[@bobmasefield317]

Plus those washing machine chips.

[@shanerooney7288]

Untrained troops with shovels, a deadly combination.

[@Valhura77]

@@bobmasefield317 The scary thing is when they upgraded the shovels with the washing machine chips. Humanity has never wielded such power.

[@monpetitpeid3582]

Yes, it shovels 💩.

[@OLEG-gt2yt]

...russian shovel

[@zlatkokovach7862]

Five Abrams tanks have been destroyed so far.

[@shanerooney7288]

I think one of those (the 4th) was a new video of an old kill.

[@yogasounds1]

Nato military hardware is for show, not for war.

[@castlegate2015]

Its for showrooms, not for battle. 😅

[@Arkoudeides.]

For Hollywood movies.

[@shahrincamilleal-johary3742]

It's to make big money for the MIC. Now in a real war the mask starts to fall off and we see them for what they really are

[@PaulMitchell-uj1uu]

It’s a scheme to extract tax payer dollars from the US public and put them in the pockets of the shareholders of the MIC.

[@hamidouseck4068]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@RegisMichelLeclerc]

The main question is... How did they detect the Archer? There's a well known Iranian technology about deciphering communications and radio signal analysis, and Glonass is perfectly able to receive GPS signals and analyse them. If the Russians are using such tech, no GPS device is safe, especially the ones using the special encryption layer of the protocol (it's like screaming "I'm here, I'm a military target!").

[@tobi3428]

Tornado S working with Glonass

[@jokopurwanto8076]

with contra battery radar or ISR drone..

[@dma60]

Да просто пошли за водкой и случайно увидели, что стоит какая-то хрень. Долбанули, а это Лучник оказался.

[@user-dt5mc5bh5i]

"КТО К НАМ С МЕЧОМ ПРИДЁТ, ТОТ ОТ МЕЧА И ПОБИГНЕТ...!"👊

[@benhaloho8231]

People were laughing when Shoigu said that Abrams are "tin can with a gun". They're not laughing now.

[@ralphreinhardt6020]

No tanks from ANY country are invincible. Never have been and never will be.

[@escapednpc60]

$4 Million tank vs a $20k drone a fair trade? How the mighty have fallen, tanks are possibly obsolete now.

[@ObeyNoLies]

The cavalry charges of Desert Storm are obsolete. Tanks are still useful as part of an armored formation.

[@Francisco-FX]

They are even before this war I said it a single rpg fucks a tank

[@potatomine6678]

​@@Francisco-FX fr the moment the track is hit and destroyed it's pretty much just a sitting cannon with some atgms

[@user-nn8bt2ch2w]

Хочу вас расстроить по курсу доллара такой дрон стоит 600$ долларов США

[@brandonbao7097]

It's hilarious how people think if the Abrams had DU armor it will be Gulf War all over again. Do people not realize that DU was only present in the front turret cheeks of American Abrams? Sure it helps, but it will hardly be the game changer that people think it is, the frontal turret cheeks will always be the strongest points on ANY tank. DU Abrams essentially have stronger turret cheeks, but it's basically equally vulnerable anywhere else.

[@ppen8359]

I disagree. The tank is "injured" and not destroyed like a destroyed T-90 with its turret blown out would look. The tank is well made and I doubt any of its crew died. The armor is pretty good.

[@diojan4610]

The narrator has no idea that Ukraine had lost the war already.

[@tigeror4935]

YES COMRADE!

[@bernardphilippe9180]

Bravo à l'armée Russe. Bon travail continuez comme ça.

[@giridharnatarajan842]

The only lone survivor is the Britt challenger, because of secure show piece, never seen a war field.

[@Arumenuyama]

Some of them were already destroyed too!

[@theiranianputin2770]

Challengers were 100% destroyed around Robotyne last year. After that, I think they pulled them from the front lines.

[@giridharnatarajan842]

@@theiranianputin2770 really, then as expected the mainstream news tried to suppress this. That’s why all the challengers have returned back without challenging the Russians.

[@VIPER276]

At least 2 Challenger were destroyed.

[@alexlazar4738]

WTF? 8 archers? Are you kidding me ? You'll have problems getting my country estate with that kind of firepower.

[@GopnikVlad]

N A T O + B a n d e r i t e s = kaput

[@user-fv5gt4yt6l]

Классно сказано!!!

[@andresdeks]

Leopards and Abrams were game changers according to the West😂😂

[@Nuxvomicaaa]

game changers for putin, they knew something :D

[@Dino-uv2ng]

Ya, they burn at a higher temperature.

[@p10plus60]

And before that there were game changing Bayraktars, Javelins, Ceasars, Bradleys, Leopards, IRISes, Patriots, etc.. All wunderwaffe, all were supposed to make Putin board his chopper and flee to Pyongyang 😂

[@Dino-uv2ng]

@@p10plus60 And they did that with shovels.

[@KlaunFuhrer-du7fr]

NAFO experts....🤣🤣🤣

[@jonherweyer8023]

Riding in any vehicle on the modern battle field is a death sentence.

[@jjryan1352]

Battleships aren't much better off. Sitting ducks.

[@bjorn1583]

@@jjryan1352 attacking naval targets in a non-naval war is a waste of resources and is a sign of a dying dog lashing out to try and save face

[@claqyagami6914]

Not true. Tanks and armoured vehicles are still necessary to get troops across open terrain. You may lose the machines but the troops get to where they are needed. Not to mention the immense firepower that they can unload at point blank range against the enemy.

[@jjryan1352]

@@bjorn1583 oh, you assumed i was talking about the Black Sea. Doesn't change the fact. I'm talking about hypersonic missiles and sea drones. Yemenis can harass and damage large naval ships with just missiles and small boats.

[@shanerooney7288]

As someone formerly in the military, I agree that anywhere on the modern battlefield is a bad place to be. If war starts up in my country, I'm going somewhere else.

[@RuslanMasinjila]

IT is actually at least 4 Abrams

[@user-gg6kw3xt9n]

exactly but american counting 😂😂😂

[@youmad7068]

and 2 Archers, footage of second-one being hit by Lancet somewhere on the road is circulating telegram channels for more then a week now

[@kevinblackburn3198]

All military equipment is vulnerable to attack and should be considered disposable

[@user-nk8gu4nj8f]

Вчера видео выложили как горит пятый.

[@youmad7068]

@@kevinblackburn3198 it is not disposable if it cost 8+ million dollars per piece. It is overpriced, over-complicated weapon system, Ukraine would do better with something like their own Bogdana SPH or French Caesars that this Swedish piece of shit. Instead of 8 Archers they could had 18 Cezars and it would do the same job.

[@josefklobasek9757]

bravo rusko

[@Lumi-OF-Model]

IT is actually at least 4 Abrams.

[@LordHawHaw100]

And three thousand tseries tanks

[@donaldgrant9067]

Yep and the American brass is saying "They aren't using them right."

[@user-fp1ff2uw1z]

Раньше была великая пятёрка охотника, которую обязательно надо собрать как трофеи. Лев, тигр, слон, носорог и бизон.Это было в девятнадцатом веке. Теперь это Абрамс, Челленджер, Леопард, Патриот и М777. 😊 Доброй охоты, Маугли!😂

[@mustang9670]

Bruciano benissimo questi armamenti tecnologici

[@user-hk1qn9ue2t]

Well, let's be honest - at least these Abrams made it to the front. Unlike Challenger 2...

[@factsnotfeelings3247]

0:05 "..this have taken a rough turn for Ukraine forces..." is an understatement. Fact is they are getting wiped out by the Russians.

[@kxng_k0Ng_]

31 leopards was destroyed tracked disabled abandoned now it’s 37 plus 5 plus 1 was abandoned in a fab 200 or 250 a couple of days ago.

[@louiszinkan6259]

You forgot the number of commie tanks lost!

[@alex-E7WHU]

All of these gamechangers and yet the game is still the same. 😂

[@jennyohara4011]

Surely Russia or China can make thousands of Archers

[@ObeyNoLies]

Sounds over engineered. Who needs this multi-strike capability? It would be better to just have more equipment.

[@shanerooney7288]

​@@ObeyNoLies x5 as many vehicles means x5 as many crew, x5 as much fuel, x5 as many radios, x5 as many breakdowns, etc, etc. Logistics is an important consideration.

[@alerausm]

we have a 203 mm self-propelled cannon Malka

[@nTnz_]

Well, lets get it on then! xd The Swedish Archer is still the only fully automated and fully automated recalibrating Howitzer with the longest range.

[@muslimcel4581]

​​@@nTnz_the archer has been the best weapon supplied to ukraine but they need like 10,000 archers to truly make a difference

[@mikeleichtweis9413]

It might be hard for American's to realize ,but Russian satellites can see you have a drink on your patio at anytime

[@jamessouza7065]

Take a drink then cause you acting like your not an American that lives in America is what I can't imagine. I see alot of the lame generations are like yourself band wagon no commitment to anything other than the prescription antidepressants and anti-anxiety "Hey Tyler..? come on bro where you at man? Did you get the flat tire figured out?" The answer is ALWAYS NO. cause you guys haven't figured anything out. A lifetime of social media zero tolerance policies at school and always making it some top priority to let others know just how you feel about something even when nobody asks and/or has nothing to do with you. I don't watch TV or sports anymore like I used to but in the early 2000's my team was the Spurs and the team they were always up against when it all counted were the lakers.Sometimes we bet them sometimes they beat us but it was almost unheard of to see somebody sporting this team one year and them another the next. .what does this have to do with ANYTHING? These youngsters these babyshit soft emotional train wreck brats do it all the time bandwagon jumpin no loyalty to shit! Only the recent winners are good enough for your complex and sophisticated mind Hugh? That's what you believe right? IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN SOMETHING BIGGER THAN YOURSELF THEN YOUR MERELY EXISTING ON THIS EARTHBUT YOU ARE NOT TRULY ALIVE.

[@MaxCarter8]

Lancet shovel Iskander shovel Kinzal shovel etc..

[@user-fv5gt4yt6l]

Летел "Ланцет" в начале мая.. Как долбанёт, И нет САРАЯ. Русское хокку

[@user-cl6hr1xd6e]

Funny, the EU and the United States decided to frighten Russia with supra -tank and a large caliber of guns! Hitler also tried, but on May 2, 1945 he was terribly upset and accepted the poison! Russia has enough long -range missiles and drones. Fight without aviation - it is very sad for NATO!))) Each Archer and Abrams - according to the lanceote!)))

[@user-ov2gr5tm7l]

👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻

[@Soildus]

To be fair those Abrams didn't have the depleted uranium armor. But it probably wouldn't have mattered if a drone or artillery shell hit the top of it.

[@finscreenname]

Tracks are the biggest vulnerability on pretty much all tanks no matter what armor they have. Knock a track off and the crew runs away because it's not like the old days when they would get out and fix it.

[@amunra5330]

Abrams DO NOT use uranium depleted Armor - its uses depleted uranium shells.

[@Soildus]

@@amunra5330 they use both. There are 3 variants of M1 Abrams. A1, A2 and A3. A3 is the newest and it has depleted uranium armor. A1 doesn't not have that armor. A1 Abrams was sent to Ukraine. Plus I work at Anniston Army Depot that rebuilds tanks. lol

[@therealunclevanya]

It uses British designed "Chobham" armour which is ceramic not radioactive 😄

[@zemm9003]

​@@Soildus it wouldn't have mattered against an attack from above. A cope cage is necessary. Regular armor does nothing.

[@istiaqmujibtafader]

Russia demonstrated its overwhelming military prowess to deter miscalculation or aggression, effectively conveying a clear warning to its opponent. This should be a clear reminder to refrain from underestimating or provoking Russia.

[@user-nn8bt2ch2w]

Поздно брат . Мы не простим гибель жителей России. НАТО будем наказывать

[@VladVsevolod]

Впервые Дуглас Макгрегор озвучивал оценку в 400 тысяч погибших бойцов ВСУ 5 августа. Он ссылался на материалы воздушного наблюдения с Украины, на которых, в том числе, были зафиксированы 123 тысячи свежевырытых могил. Схожие данные приводил в своих обзорах экс-разведчик ВС США Скотт Риттер. Затем 29 августа украинский оператор "Киевстар" во время объявления благотворительной акции с смс-сообщениями за павших солдат включил в запись фразу о том, что 400 тысяч бойцов ВСУ "уже никогда не ответят на звонок". Впоследствии запись была удалена. Депутат Европейского парламента (ЕП) от Ирландии Клэр Дейли раскрыла точное число потерь в ходе конфликта с Украиной. Об этом в пятницу, 8 сентября, она сообщила на заседании Европарламента. «С прошлого вашего посещения Украина потеряла свои территории, потеряла более полумиллиона человек», - сказала она.

[@freerideralec]

The Abrams are thin cans with a cannon

[@moetocafe]

The loss of these machines will not turn the tip against Ukraine. It is on the opposite - it is a result of Ukraine already loosing the war. So these losses are consequence, not a reason to lose. The biggest lose however is not in equipment. It's in men power. Ukraine has already lost so many soldiers, that it's a national tragedy and a major factor in what is following. The delayed US financial support plays a role too, but I don't think it's the main factor either. The war is following a logic , and we're approaching next phases of the conflict, where Ukraine will gradually lose more and more over time, unless they come to reason and sit to negotiate.

[@gerhardgaus5538]

Ja, ich denke das ist die richtige Einschätzung der Lage

[@kapodistriansociety]

The Russian ISR is impenetrable

[@Arty_McParty]

Archer can Unload 6-9 shells per-min, (Has only 5 shells) that's on issue....

[@klausbecker8898]

Was will eine Armee mit einem Schrotthaufen der viel zu schwer für das Gelände ist ? Seine Reichweite ist auch wünschenswert . Der T90 hat einen Panzer in 4850 Meter Entfernung zerstört, da haben die ihn nicht mal gesehen .

[@kirkuk2076]

Surely all tanks modern or otherwise are now very vulnerable on any modern battlefield

[@jaimemartinez8971]

The scale has been in Russia’s favor since the war started…

[@Stacie45]

At least one report indicated that at least one disabled-destroyed Abrams was recovered by Russian forces. They referred to it as an "empty tin can", meaning it lacked modern fire control components, or may have actually had the modern fire control components stripped out prior to it being handed over to the Ukrainians. This may indicate the US knows the Ukraine project is on the way to failure, and they are basically pretending to continue to help.

[@louiszinkan6259]

Which tank do you want to be in? Thousands of Russian tanks destroyed or four Abrams that were destroyed?

[@Stacie45]

@@louiszinkan6259 None. Not dumb enough to play that game.

[@RunPJs]

It makes no difference. Ukraine is already lost, maybe now it is a bit more lost

[@rogersmith8480]

I don't think this ARCHER will tip the balance in Russia's favor. It just gives The Armed Forces of Russia more capabilities of what N.A.T.O. will use on the battlefield with Russia in the event of a real war with Russia. In addition, ARCHER will give The Armed Forces of Russia more military technology since now the Armed Forces of Russia has the basic understanding of ARCHER.

[@KondorDCS]

My main beef with the Archer is that, looking at it, one has to wonder how many shells does it carry? The Ceasar has the same problem, it's great that it can rapidly change positions, but that comes at the cost of having much more limited supply of shells then a tracked SPG. I suppose there is a tradeoff for everything.

[@eu-7536]

As far as I know, the Russians have not yet captured a single one of these guns. They all go to Russia in a faulty state. A pile of iron.

[@rogersmith8480]

​@@eu-7536 Well, I heard with LEGITIMATE CONFIRMATION that the Armed Forces of Russia has captured one of these ARCHERS. So please recheck your sources.

[@eu-7536]

@@rogersmith8480 Could you write in Russian using a translator on your keyboard? 😊

[@Fedup4130]

What are you talking about the balance has been firmly in Russias favor for a long time.

[@igorvasin6960]

did you upload a video today? You should have known long ago that 5 Abrams were destroyed today! there are many photos and videos of these destroyed tanks. o This is the weakest tank in this conflict and was hidden for a long time. Now they die very easily on the battlefield.

[@exoticalover3615]

It is almost as if the narrator is still surprised all this sent weapons aren't "game changers". They are ALL being destroyed easily the moment they are discoverd/fire their artillery. He also speaks of only 2 Abrams, if seen at least 4 burn already and they just started using them. Amazing for an army using shovels and washing machines...

[@Aramiji994]

Maybe Hollywood will make accurate films with Russians in the future, so that Russia will not be underestimated again in 10-20 years. This should be a lesson to the West never to underestimate Russians, Russia is peaceful but won't let anyone finish it off.

[@iamtesting3824]

Flying shovels aka lancet

[@runemoldestad4029]

The archers are not hard to destroy, neither are the abrams, nor any tanks russia has. In this conflict, both sides have the capabilities to destroy anything the enemy deploys.

[@janwoldens1696]

❤Abraham uses as much fuel when stationary as in operation, the engine is a turbo type used for helicopters, it needs re-fueling every 8 hrs, generates a lot of heat visible from space so it is easy to track, 8 components are easily combustible due to the self-generated heat. Source: colonel US army retired, Dr Doug MacGregor PhD (a tank battalion commander in Irak), the CEO "Our Country Our Choice" organisation, in the US' info portal "Judging Freedom".🤔⚖️

[@ErictheAss]

Even Goat's Horn can penetrate Abram's armor

[@paulroberts7429]

Ukraine as become a weapon's test ground for the military industrial complex, but the most valuable weapon that is reaping havoc is the drone, drones are cheap, lethal and highly maintainable and they come in all shapes and sizes, drone=$30,000 vs tank=$50million.

[@onlinebills9169]

The ONLY reason the Abrams had some reputation is because our enemies were always goat herders in Iraq and Afghanistan. Armies with antiquated weapon systems. Now that Abrams is facing a very powerful military like Russia, we get to see that our "heavy hitters" are just a joke!

[@user-kn2em3iy6d]

Usa and West Technology weak... Weak...

[@shayaldwarka7907]

Strong in third world countries or at least those with less anti tank or air defenses. Weak against any nation with same capabilities

[@gabrielarcari4460]

German tanks always been the best regarding toughness

[@josephvanwie6706]

Plus it's trannies using the equipment, the military discharged all of the straight guys.

[@spankmemyers4779]

Russian technology super weak weak 🤡

[@buravan1512]

The technology behind the Projectiles, have been improving very rapidly too.

[@I.KS2005]

Lancet is the most underrated drone ever Always lancet everytime

[@Chinunit22]

"Everything that moves gets destroyed" Col MacGregor

[@petrsindler1525]

Tip the scales in Russia’s favor?!? Where have you been?

[@wriLLoGic]

Abrams glows in dark to infrared

[@pacificdragon1]

I think Ukraine is a lost cause. The Ukrainian government should be trying to negotiate for peace and get the best terms it can before there is no Ukraine or Ukrainian men left.

[@Desertfox8902]

😅😅😅😅Now you know that it burns like all tanks

[@eastern2western]

What looks good on paper does not work in real life.

[@Ummba13]

The archer is not an air defence. So of course it will get destroyed if not supported by it.

[@ltribley]

During the multi-year war between Yemen and Saudi Arabia, the Houthis took out a number of Abrams in the same configuration as those sent to Ukraine. The weight is a disadvantage and it's not well suited to the soft rich farming soil in East Ukraine where it becomes easy for them to get stuck. Recently the Ukrainian's got one stuck during a BBC news segment! About 1/3 rd of the bridges in Europe cannot support the weight. And as Col. Mcgregor pointed out, the heat from the turbines "lights it up at night" for targeting and destruction. It's also maintenance intensive making battlefield repairs mext to impossible, and so heavy requires special transports. It took the US MONTHS to send any over. The US asked (like the British) Ukraine not to put the Abrams in action if at all possible. For marketing purposes they did not want to see them as "crispy critters" on the battlefield, easily defeated with inexpensive drones, RPG's, etc. which is exactly what happened. This is the ONLY time its seen combat in "peer-level" Warfare amd lets face it, it failed the test. The upgraded version supposedly with better armor would likely not perform much better. It was either Larry Johnson, or again Col Mcgregor who stated that it and other US military equipment is more "boutique" rather then being built to withstand the rigors of WW-level combat. They're designed in way's to keep the MIC in business, coming back for more. The Bradley's were the same. Burnt out hulks on the battlefields easily taken out.

[@wolfdima]

Archer is very advanced artillery system, let's give credit where it's due, but in modern warfare even top-of-the-shelf systems are vulnerable.

[@Mark_Tven893]

Есть огромная разница--танк для войны и танк для продажи..В танк для продажи нужно поставить комфорт для экипажа,в танк для войны --выживаемость и возможность вести бой при значительных повреждениях при любых погодных условиях,в любое время суток

[@scruffscruffeton986]

Scales been tipped in Russia's favor since Feb, 2022. West has never realized it though.

[@gofastnotnow2546]

Lol, only 2 weeks, right?

[@raffagino8366]

What kind of question? Don't you know that for every piece of artillery that is supplied to Ukraine, Russia produces hundreds of them every year and more powerful ones at that. The Russians fired 8 to 10 times more than Ukrainian artillery when Western warehouses were full of them. I'll let you guess the situation now that the western warehouses are empty!!! Poor Ukrainians, their criminal leaders have concluded a mortal deal for Ukraine and its people. Ukrainian leaders have agreed to wage a proxy war against the deadliest army in the world, Russia. They unfortunately made a deadly deal with Satan (USA) and lost.

[@jonathanjudeoneildelisle481]

Tanks are now obsolete. Who, in his right mind, would get into one?

[@mikebryant614]

I agree to a point, but Ukraines problem is, they are horrible about deploying Tanks as "stand alone" units, with no infantry support. We knew better than to do that back in WW2 .So, a large part of the issue is Ukraines inept Military tactics.

[@rogerboniface8086]

I always knew they were death traps even 30 years ago.

[@muslimcel4581]

Metal coffins

[@stevannikolovski]

"Russia claims, Russia claims..." Russia does not claim anything, they work and do. And yes T-72B3 did destroy Abrams before Abrams even saw it. Abrams didn't know what hit it. From 5 km away.

[@kakakiri2601]

abrams on gulf war : IM BEAST abrams on ukraine : looks like im aging now

[@andrekosche9696]

Только у евреев хватило ума не слать туда свои танки.

[@Militaryst.]

Им самим не хватает, судя по видео, как хуситы их из прг жгут.

[@buravan1512]

They were smart enough to make huge profits too😂 From KOLOMOISKY who recruited ZELENSKY, V NULAND, KAGAN, BRZEZINSKI Jr, YIRMAK, BODANOV, SCHMIHAL, etc... all these Bandits share the same Heritage.

[@rustykilt]

Do i detect some bias towards Russia.

[@hstetser5376]

Makes you wonder if these machines would have been more effective had well trained crews in them

[@Valhura77]

Man those shovels and washing machine chips are fucking deadly

[@finderskeepers7293]

The reputation of the Abrams is in the dirt.

[@konstantin7406]

Washing machine chips seemed to be very effectively

[@antoalghozi311]

"Game Changer,Huh" 😂😂

[@wazza33racer]

cheap drone destroys "worlds best tank" oh my, how things have changed since the Gulf War.

[@lmeza1983]

the longer they fight the less UCR territory will exist.

[@KlaunFuhrer-du7fr]

THey are made to shot and scoot to quickly avoid counter fire.... but the arent fast enough for drones...

[@deadmanwalking6342]

Archer is not designed for open mud and clay infested plains like Ukraine but for hard forest roads in dense pine and spruce forested hilly rocky Swidden/Finland/Norway.

[@AbdulHadiMojaddedi]

You sound like someone who has never been to Sweden or Finland

[@deadmanwalking6342]

@@AbdulHadiMojaddedi You sound drunk!

[@andreaskampe9143]

​@AbdulHadiMojaddedi northern Sweden and Finland has so many trees that makes hiding easy. Hundreds of km of nothing but trees. Ukraine is flat and has no REAL forrest, only a few narrow strips of trees between the neighborhood farmland. Finland is called the the county of ten thousand lakes. The use of drones, surveillance and kamikaze drones makes it very hard to hide large objects in the open

[@AbdulHadiMojaddedi]

@@deadmanwalking6342 it's not my fault that Russia is demolishing your so called "advanced technology"

[@AbdulHadiMojaddedi]

@@andreaskampe9143 and how about Skåne? Is that also just hills and trees? Come on! There is plenty of flat open terrain in both Finland and Sweden