Royal Marine Reacts To America's New Tank is Legitimately Insane

[@maxmichaels5593]

A little fun fact about the US and Morocco is that they share a treaty of friendship, the longest unbroken treaty in the US. They were also I believe the first country to recognize the US as a country in 1777

[@darrinrebagliati5365]

Right after England grudgingly left.

[@borttorbbq2556]

I think Spain was the first to officially recognized them as their own Nation Morocco was the first to make a treaty with us though.

[@harleydanforth5986]

spain was deffinatly the first country to recognize them as a nation after the whole pirate boat knapping incident but morocco has the longest standing treaty with the us essentially from that same incident

[@Gungnir762]

All due to the US winning a small squabble with GB…

[@rockyperez2828]

1792 during the Barbary Wars

[@8123scooter]

When they say "remote turret' they don't mean from someone 200 miles away. It would be operated by the gunner in the tank. But they would be in the hull and not in the turret

[@Idealdeath8304]

tanks are not obsolete. Our tank tactics are obsolete

[@Cody38Super]

OUR TANK TACTICS ARENT BEING USED IN UKRAINE....OUR TACTICS ARE FINE! THE M1A1's we sent to Ukraine have ZERO ARMOR on them! They even took out the Depleted Uranium Armor and Spald liner! They took out ALL TECHNOLOGY RUSSIA CAN USE !

[@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к]

​@@Cody38Super go cry looser

[@BearNecessities-X]

Tell that to the FPV drone pilots in Ukraine and Russia.

[@Idealdeath8304]

@@BearNecessities-X because they are using old tactics and trying to adapt on the fly. New main battle tanks with have answers for drones. Jammers built in and 20-30 mm guns to take them down. You can’t just add that shit on the fly.

[@odorousobject8165]

In battlefields where airspace is heavily contested from anti-aircraft systems, tanks will always have a home.

[@ssilent8202]

Amen

[@christianmoore7932]

But the question is are tanks good enough to resist anti tank infantry weapons. This is a new race between tank armor and weapons

[@colbunkmust]

@@christianmoore7932 the fact that infantry need AT weapons is proof of why tanks are important. There have always been AT weapons on the battlefield since there have been tanks. Nothing here is new.

[@colbunkmust]

The US need for tanks isn't influenced by AAA. Airspace isn't contested by AAA for the US. USAF/USN SEAD/DEAD is just too good. Tanks exist to provide mobile direct fire support for the guys on the ground. Even if you can dominate the skies, like for example in Israel/Palestine, it doesn't mean you can forgo ground fires for infantry support.

[@Macias78ful]

What we see in Ukraine now is cavalry going against the 1861 Gatling. The future is that same cavalry going against the Vickers. There will be no such thing as air superiority in how we think of it today during the opening phases of future wars in which drones are used. We (the US) and our adversaries plan on using swarm attacks, imagine hundreds of drones looking for targets. We will have to wait until stockpiles dwindle. The tank is great at what it does so it is not obsolete in that sense. What the real problem is, is that tanks will become cost ineffective. We can send a swarm of 200 of the cheapest drones at a T72 and the total cost of the drones is still cheaper. We can send 500 and the T72 is still more than twice as expensive. The T72 is pretty cheap to produce. Swarm attacks are meant to overwhelm and drones will take this to the next level. Not even infantry is safe, the DOD commissioned studies on the psychological and physical effects of fighting underground since they see a future in which infantry moves through sewers and other underground structures to avoid drones.

[@Adplusamequalsadam]

I hear the E is because it’s still a prototype. Once it’s complete it will be called the M1A3. Poland uses both the Leopard 2 and the Abrams.

[@Idealdeath8304]

Yea the E is for experimental. Once it’s adopted it becomes A designation

[@blakedunn9391]

Yes the “E” is for Experimental

[@darrinrebagliati5365]

I thot it was the electric designator!

[@KTdaDon2]

Just a friendly heads up. The E stands for electronic. X is the US Army designation for experimental weapons. Same as the new infantry rifle having the XM7 designation. *Edit. I was mistaken in that E and X/XM designations are both experimental.

[@bobbertbobberson6725]

​@@KTdaDon2no. An E is for an experimental variant. All modern vehicles have electronics, but none are "E" as a formal variant, so i don't know where you're trying to go with this.

[@lobokurg2786]

I remember being in the mojave for a month long training exercise and seeing a company of paladins and Abrams roll by outside the wire in the dead of night. There's nothing quite like it, and I can only imagine how demoralizing it must be for enemy infantry to see that rolling over the horizon.

[@allanpawlowski5857]

Okay, former weapons repair guy here, so this is what I remember... An "X" is an experimental weapon, a NEW weapon, like the XM-8. The "E" is for proposed modification to an existing platform. These have NOT been approved, USUALLY. When two weapons share a designation, like the M60 tank and M60 machine gun, the tank will get A1 while the machine gun get E1. "A" is used for a finalized change to a platform. Additionally, "B" is used for supplemental improvements that don't merit a full re-egineering. M1151A1B1, for example, designates additional armor added to the base armored variant, M1151A1, of the base model truck, the M1151. There are also R1 designations, meaning rebuilt from the ground up with "new" components from an older version where certain parts are no longer used. Example would be the M1097R1, a rebuilt base model HMMWV (M998) redone as a heavy a heavy variant to extend its service life- using A2 HMMWV parts and able to carry modern equipment.

[@happyjohn354]

XM and E when talking about a military vehicle or weapon tends to mean "experimental" like the first version of the M16 the US adopted and fielded was the XM16E1.

[@TheSilent333]

I only know this from playing World of Tanks lol

[@christianmoore7932]

3:30 the US has the most powerful naval force in the world if they want a tank somewhere it will get there

[@generalilbis]

I've seen and heard things about how the Maritime Command isn't in the best shape right now, though I acknowledge the sources could have been talking out of their asses because they looked at available data without correct context. Still, if the US has been stingy with budget money to ensure its transportation capabilities are always at peak performance, suddenly having to get additional armour & supplies to a foreign battlefield because things have kicked off with Russia or China could be a bigger issue that desired.

[@odorousobject8165]

Not a ton of countries use the M1. It's super expensive and requires a lot of logistics and parts to support its operations. Iraq got M1's after we absolutely rocked them in the gulf war when they were still using soviet tanks

[@michaeld.uchiha9084]

Thats why most countrys buy Leopard 2.

[@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к]

And abrams shit, and leopard shit

[@SilvaDreams]

​@@АлексейАлексеевич-м8кThe irony that the Abrams is now a 60 year old design, yet it's still one of the top tanks in the world.

[@53kenner]

@@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к Yep, they shit all over T-90s, T-72's, and so on...

[@Shablagoo7861]

@@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к сок май баллз т80 т70 т90 т- всё сок Дик анд еверий хоан знать Every Russian in my family doesn’t even talk about back home after coming here after a while. Every Russian immigrant friend I have from school joined OUR military for citizenship and school and now a years into navy and army and you what’s crazy.. they smile! It turns out it’s not a cultural thing it’s that you are all traumatized after centuries of not having any rights. Blinded. We’re aloud to dissent in ways you can’t even comprehend because you’ve never seen it. Even if we had another civil war if any foreign force touches our shore or boats we will unite like no other

[@andsoiderparound9909]

I want to recommend reacting to The M1 Abrams Scandal by Spookston for additional Abrams lore.

[@daltonv5206]

Spookston would be a fun channel for him to look at for more tank/vehicle content

[@andsoiderparound9909]

Agree especially when he has a lot of useful tank information including the Eugene Stoner Interview

[@Nickles4]

Yeah I’ll vouch for spookston. Love that dude

[@jdanon203]

The US wouldn't need to "get tanks over there," at least not initially. The tanks and everything that goes with an armored brigade would come from the nearest US Army regional APS which are stationed all over the world. For example if a ground war suddenly kicked off say between Israel and Iran, the US wouldn't need to wait weeks or months to get involved. The US Army could mobilize an entire armored brigade from the Kuwait APS in a matter of a few days while additional resources get flown/shipped in from the US or other nearby stockpiles. Wendover did a nice video that explains this called US Military's Massive Global Transportation System or something like that a couple years back.

[@odorousobject8165]

If we have uncrewed F16's already in the air, and predator drones with hellfire missiles - not a huge stretch to imagine UGV's to include tanks in the future.

[@SnowmanTF2]

Ironically it is drastically simpler for a computer to fly an aircraft than it is navigate all the clutter on the ground. Just look at all the difficulty car makers have had; there were attempts for decades to even just make driving on a highway with standardized dimensions viable, it gets at least an order of magnitude harder to drive city streets were much more variance in design and what other objects might encounter, and this is before even considering not being on a generally smooth surface that you are basically guaranteed can hold several times a passenger car's weight and reliable maps exist showing paths.

[@One_foot_in_the_Grave]

Ppl have been saying tanks were obsolete since before world war II, then the next war happens and we are flying our tanks around the world. We flew them to the Gulf, nam, Korea etc. if we fight China tomorrow it will probably be in Taiwan the Philippines maybe Korea and our tanks would be utilized heavily there as well.

[@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к]

Omerican your country was pissed up in all this counties, shut up

[@ISAFMobius18]

In the words of The Chieftain, tanks will always be around when you need something to kill another tank.

[@ragingmonk6080]

The demonstrator model of this tank was first shown in action during 2022. It was built before the war in Ukraine ever started. They may have added or changed some things since the war began. The M1 tanks that America exports does not have the same kit as what we use. The version sent to Ukraine is from like 1991. The F-16 that America allowed to be sent are block 20 from the 1980's. Yes the country that donated them strapped some newer sensors under the wings. That does not make them block 70. Also the Abrams that Ukraine was given runs on diesel the US version runs on JP 8 (low grade jet fuel).

[@TheGoldenVegas]

M1 operators right now: Morocco, Egypt, Poland, Australia, Iraq, Kuwait, USA, and Ukraine Operators in the future with orders: Romania, Bahrain and Taiwan Weird situation: South Korea’s K1 is based on the M1 as a starting point but has lots of changes and is 100% its own thing. Pretty similar situation to Japan’s F-2 & the F-16.

[@davidkintzer1604]

In America we had labor day (paid holiday for most) this monday so to me today feels like a Thursday. I was a little bummed when he started hyping up friday, but now that i realized it's actually friday im pretty hyped!

[@Heisenberg-Blue]

Remote control means that no one sits in the tower but all crew members all sit in the hull. The tower is controlled from there.

[@jamessproles2228]

To be fair, we have been sending Ukraine older and discontinued equipment and systems...that includes tanks. They received older versions. Basically, we have done nothing more than dip into our junk drawer.

[@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к]

Words of real looser

[@ryanthompson3737]

And yet Russia lovers can't get their head around that fact, and pretend like this is current US technology. Most of the tech sent were introduced before most people were even born.

[@gregmiller-qq5on]

Also, like with the HAWK air defense missiles, it is actually cheaper to give them to Ukraine to shoot than it is to pay to have them de-weaponized (I believe the cost for the Hawk is $40,000 per missile to junk them)

[@briandix4633]

Chris apparently forgot about or didn't see anything on the Shillelagh atgm that went into service in the 1960s for use by the m551 Sheridan light tank. It was fired through the main gun, although very few were used in combat in the 20 or 30 years in service, I believe because it wasn't very reliable and the Sheridan itself wasn't great

[@randlebrowne2048]

It required such a large diameter bore on the gun that, when firing normal tank gun rounds, it was restricted to relatively inaccurate, low velocity high explosive rounds. It didn't help that it's aluminum armor could actually be penetrated by small arms fire (it was just a tank-shaped scout/fire support vehicle light enough to be para dropped).

[@K4RV3D]

To touch on your question about making the whole thing remote controlled, They break. A crew is on board to repair it while also fighting people off it, so it can't be stolen and can be brought back online and leave. Remote goes down, you'd have to cede it to the enemy or self destruct a very expensive piece of machinery

[@barrettson1028]

And then we’re gonna have this tank in service for the next 30-40 years, and every decade we’re gonna have a new kit to install on it and make it heavier and heavier until we’ve spent enough defense dollars and cancelled enough projects to finally figure out what tank we want to replace it with…bureaucrats

[@axis1247]

That's every weapon ever, thats every tactic ever. Everything is iterative they change over time to suit new situations and technology.

[@7y2oN]

If I remember correctly, I think I heard Cap talking about the Task & Purpose team in a video. It’s literally him and one other person. It’s either his sister or his wife who does a lot of the editing.

[@Fun.Guy.Forager]

Most countries have our tanks because we gave it to them to establish defense.

[@arlandlockhart170]

We have stuck a roll of TP on the front of the round. Worked best with the HEAT round. Flaming torch at 1500 meters per second. The coke can whistled like crazy. Loud.

[@murfdog2216]

Israel has their Merkava, Germany has the Leopard, France has the LaClerc, Britain the Challenger, Korea has the Panther, Japan has the type 10 and Swedan has the Stridzvagn 122.

[@daleswanson1784]

Many thinks the future is all high tech space based or other non- ground weapons. But, reality still demands control of ground areas to win any conflict. As long as that is true infantry will be required and as long as infantry are involved, tanks and artillery will be needed to protect infantry and establish control over any ground area. Until the grunts occupy it, you don’t control it.

[@danor6812]

Tanks worked in Desert Storm and no matter the war. To win a war you have to occupy the territory. You can't just send in men to occupy it, you need the tanks. The designation of M1-E3 the E stands for experimental. Once it's in production it will be changed to A3 or whatever.

[@johnthomas2485]

Actually, the Army had the Shillelagh Missile in the 1960s. It was deployed on the M60A3 and the M551 Sheridan. Launched from a short barreled 152mm gun.

[@Joe-b2n]

Tank are more vulnerable. They are however very effective in bringing mobile firepower. AIR Superiority is a must with tanks, always has been.

[@lordgrimoz6085]

The M1 Abrams is a limited share weapon. Countries must take on the training in America, provide the personnel for training and mechanical teams, and also accept that there are American handlers and observers that come with the equipment.

[@brianvanhedel]

a lot of european countries have tanks, but mostly either german, english or soviet tanks some also have m1s ofcourse. I live in the netherlands, we sold pretty much all our tanks after the cold war, however recently the government ordered a batelion of leopard 2a8 tanks. we kept about 10-15 leopard a2s after the cold war. we also have a lot of leopard 1 tanks that have been modified for thinks like bridge laying, anti mine, escavaters and other types of recoveryvehicles.

[@John2r1]

The US military is a logistics organization that dabbles in combat. We can have boots and armor on the ground anywhere in the world in 72 hours or less.

[@mirkodizdar3700]

but cant have it in Russia,Iran,China,Houthies.90% of US navy would be sunk from 8000km away by hypersonic missles but americans keep drinking your superriority kool aid😂😂

[@John2r1]

@mirkodizdar3700 Here's something I've learned from my time in the military. The US doesn't show off its toys. When you hear about something new, like, for example, the F-22 Raptor . The US has had it for years or even decades before you found out. Hint the F-22 Raptor first took flight on Sept. 7, 1997 in Marietta, Georgia. Also, the US has multiple hypersonic missile systems. One is ground launched, and the other is air launched. The recently unveiled Mako Hypersonic missile fits inside an F-22 or F-35. So while China and Russia were bragging about their hypersonic missiles, which are actually transonic at best. The US was making hypersonic missiles fit in an F-22 Raptor. Fact is China imitates US designs. They do the same with Russian designed weapons and equipment. Like their new stealth bomber, the H-20. It in as advanced as the B2 stealth bomber. A bomber developed by the US in the 1970s that first flew on July 17, 1989. And was introduced in April 1997. See how that goes ? Technologically speaking, it would surprise me if all the UFO sightings in the US are just Experimental US Aircraft. Consider this fact the US developed the Internet, was the first country to put a man on the moon, developed ICBMs , invented Stealth Aircraft, was the first country to shoot down a satellite with a missile launched from a F-15. Created the first 5th and 6th generation Aircraft years before anyone even knew that was an option. With the NGAD program expected to field the new fighter aircraft in the 2030s. . And on the ground of course there is the Abrams X which is everything the T-14 is pretending to be in a stealth Tank. Basically if you know about it. It's old tech and the US is already a working on its replacement. Oh and the US can actually shoot down Russia's Hypersonic missiles with Patriot missile defense systems made back in the 1970s. As Ukraine has shown. And China might want to check the fuel in those " hypersonic missiles " of their's considering their nukes had water in them. Also the US has shot down everything the Houthies have shot at US ships. But of course before China or Russia touches America's boats, they might want to ask Japan how that turned out for them. Hint Japan went from the dominate military in the east to drawing anime. As to the Houthies and Iran... Iran might want to remember what happened to them when they touched the boats. Operations Praying Mantis. An Iranian undersea mine damaged the USS Samuel B. Roberts. Didn't even sink it. The US Navy a few days later took out Half of Iran's functional modern Navy in 8 hours of work. Then there is the Minor issue for all of them of Rapid Dragon being used. Which is basically pallets of cruise missiles that can be dropped from cargo aircraft outside the range of any of their air defenses and hit them. The US has over 4,000 cargo aircraft. Hence the logistical organization that dabbles in combat part. Oh and the US has targeted Houthis well the US and UK have launched aurstrikes against them in Yemen. Guess how may US or UK bombers or fighters have been shot down . Answer 0. Now the Houthis have shot down a reaper drone.

[@davewilliams5721]

​@mirkodizdar3700 trust me, America has plenty of things that nobody knows about. Especially when it comes to defensive measures.

[@Ray-Koto-McLellan]

28:30 no no the gap between the equipment is still there and still large. The feeling capability that we are seeing right now is they all tanks are vulnerable to first person view drone weapon strikes because they are small fast and able to carry a shaped charge. Play the task and purpose guy said the exposed exhaust and cooling system is a major failing point

[@Echo4Sierra4160]

An autoloader takes 5 seconds to load the gun. A well trained loader can do it in 2

[@Fun.Guy.Forager]

Thats what i see the future of tanks being a drone. Can he smaller and nimble then.

[@TheFirefish224]

... main cannon fired missiles have been around for ages, most abrams precursers had them even

[@GregAlverson-ri9nb]

When theu say remote turret i dont think theh mean remote as in drones controled from elsewhere, i think the remote theh are talking about os controled from inside the tank. This pevents jamming etc from heing an issue while keeping the crew safe with new visuals that do not require someone to stick their head out of a hatch to man a 50 cal machine gun. The other type of remote is likely tracking, like the top mount gun being able to auto track and engage drones or maybe missles. When the M1A1 was designed, accuracy for various attacks that might get a top shot on a tank was much lower than it is now.

[@ISAFMobius18]

Oh ok so the E3 designation is for testing purposes and will be A3 when it goes operational

[@davidbozarth3868]

My son is an airman and was deployed to Incirlik AFB in Turkey as avionic tech support for the A-10 during the effort against ISIS.

[@robertgillespie5121]

Tanks, will never be obsolete. While battles may be won with, or along with airpower. Aircraft cannot occupy an AO.

[@danflom1271]

Remote control of the turret is from the crew compartment not some guy with an RC radio.

[@k9raven960]

As I recall from another AbramsX video, the remote control for the turret (including cannon and other guns and missiles) is controlled from beside the driver by a gunner and Tank commander, and all 3 crew members will sit side by side isolated in the lower hull. This allows them to concentrate the armor to the hull and have less armor in the turret and make the turret lower to decrease the tanks weight and profile. The 3 crew will supposedly be driver, gunner, and commander.

[@Emanuel-t5e]

upside is improved survivability of the crew, downside is it would become easier to disable the turret, and thus disarm the tank.

[@shadowywarrior]

yeah, i think we've adapted to assymetric warfare, which doesnt' necessarily make tanks useful. But Near peer wars will be using armored formations. this war against terror made it where we've been blinded by our current situation, that we've effectively forgotten about other countries

[@Yuki_Ika7]

in terms of soviet and ruzzian tank's features, i would say "good in concept, poor in execution". also by "remote controlled turret" they mean a person inside the tank's hull controlling the turret via an electrical connection or something like that

[@frankymr2]

The usa uses a m1 but with different armor, that they dont put on the export version. Kinda like the f22 how other countries dont get it, they dont get the same armor package. And by remote control he means someone inside fires it from the hull and not in the turret. Some tanks already have that. Also fun fact the marines almost stoped using tanks, to the point they are using only a1m1s and not the new ones.

[@antawnmartinez4269]

I’m in poland too! Working with the polish on the tanks is pretty cool and I got to be in the polish tanks as well!

[@andrewcarlson9492]

Tanks now days are still a huge asset. Like battleships they need support on the current battlefield

[@chugachuga9242]

14:18 FYI in future if you want to see what countries use a certain bit of kit, than you can just go to the wiki page for that piece of equipment and they put lists of the countries using it with a map showing them highlighted.

[@D-DAY-oe8sw]

We sent them the old Abrams, the M1 A1. We have the M1 A2, which we did not send to Ukraine.

[@deh6724]

The difference between the original M1A1 vs the M1A2SEPv3 is insane. If the US is giving anybody equipment it's far from our best.

[@kellydaly119]

I was a tanker in the U.S. Army. We shot against European tanks. With auto loaders they fired 1 round every 12 seconds. We could fire 1 every 5 seconds. Plus we carried 15 more rounds they could not because of the space the autoloader took up.

[@hellhound1389]

We've gotten so used to an air superiority war that we're always going to need slobber knockers

[@DjOdyssey1971]

Quick list that took me 30 seconds to find lol United States - The primary operator and developer of the Abrams tank. Egypt - A significant user, with a large fleet of M1A1 tanks. Saudi Arabia - Operates M1A2 Abrams tanks as part of its military arsenal. Kuwait - Utilizes M1A2 tanks for its defense forces. Iraq - Received M1A1 tanks as part of military assistance. Qatar - Acquired M1A2 tanks to enhance its military capabilities. Australia - Operates a variant of the Abrams tank for its army. Jordan - Uses M1A1 tanks in its armed forces. Bahrain - Has a fleet of M1A2 tanks for defense purposes. Morocco - Recently acquired M1A1 tanks to modernize its military.

[@t2force212]

The E in M1E3 stands for Experimental. If it gets adopted into service it will become the M1A3.

[@Indyofthedead]

T&P just made a video of Chris going over his trauma of seeing someone die in combat. It's different from most of their stuff, but it's powerful. I'd love to see a reaction to it.

[@mech8239]

A military without tanks would have no chance! Tanks are a must on the ground battles for support and troop protection. Also they are a fearsome sight to behold if your a soldier on the opposing side seeing one of them coming your way. I.e. an intimidation factor if you will. Also the ability to deploy in rough surroundings that alot of wheeled vehicles can not get to. Also it does not mean that a remote turret is controlled by someone outside the vehicle. It means someone in the tank can control the turret but not seated in the turret.

[@jesselenz5452]

Some of our fighter aircraft have guns which automatically line up with where the pilot is looking. It tracks the eyes of the pilots. What if the turret were to do the same?

[@darrinrebagliati5365]

Might not be fast enough. But imagine if the canon fired guided missiles followed the gunners eyes.

[@williamwest9204]

Abrams have never had a loss in combat until the ones shipped to Ukraine

[@colbunkmust]

That's not true, there were some destroyed in Iraq, both in US service and later in Iraqi army service against ISIS. The US didn't loose many though, and the Iraqi army fighting them at the time got annihilated.

[@carölusrex.1648]

I thought it was all friendly fire incidents, no?

[@chugachuga9242]

American Abrams have never lost a fight against other vehicles, but Abrams have definitely been lost in combat before.

[@cesar88ml]

Egypt disagrees with you guy 😂love the abrams but it was totaled by that coronet missile

[@randlebrowne2048]

@@cesar88ml The US tends not to export the Abrams versions with the secret advanced armor. Our export versions have much less effective armor systems. This is to prevent the (generally corrupt) buyers from turning around and reselling the secrets to the Russians or Chinese.

[@BackwoodsLaw]

Many countries do not have the M1 in any version, due to the philosophy for deployment. The M1 was designed specifically to be used by the US Army in Europe facing off against the USSR's massive motor rifle battalions in the eastern block. The idea was to use 1 or 2 M1's with 2 or 3 Bradley's in hunter/killer teams to control the Fulda Gap. One reason we had the 11th ACR stationed in the north of Germany. It was a purpose built tank, to face down the massive numbers of low quality tanks the Russian Block had. Takes a lot of well trained soldiers to be able to use this type of battle plan. Most countries in the world do not have the ability to commit the types of manpower, time, and money to even consider this type of tactic.

[@ooo_Kim_Chi_ooo]

Morocco is one of America's closest ally. In fact Morocco was the first country to recognize the independence of the US and have been a crucial friend ever since. The M1 wasn't offered to a lot countries because the US had very strict amount limits and all of the export version of the M1 are highly neutered so it makes more sense to buy a Leopard.

[@bobbertbobberson6725]

He keeps using the Abrams X as a visual. The Abrams X is not the prospective M1E3, it was a sales pitch. There aren't any details, let alone visuals, on the M1E3 except design goals

[@xSAPPERxTV]

I know I am a few months behind on this reply... Designation of E means Experimental once congress approves the modifications and allocates funds to the project it becomes an A meaning it is a Baseline Allocation I spent 27 years in the Army and watched the original M1 got through testing until I retired in 2012 with the M1A2 in service

[@jberry1982]

Damn Taiwan has the Abrams Sep V3 TUSK

[@brianvanveghel7815]

M-1E3 the E means experimental

[@jfuller4267]

The remote controlled turd isn’t what you’re thinking. It won’t be controlled by somebody outside the tank. The crew consist of a commander a driver and a gunner. The gunner will be controlling the turret from within the tank. All three would be stationed within the tank next to the driver.

[@darrinrebagliati5365]

Reduce engine size by hybridization, use that space for drone launchers. Design an AEGIS-like system w 'flak shotguns' for anti UAV duties. Reintroduce 4th occupant as UAV operator. I like the remote turret, ATGM upgrades. Also add ground drones as scouts and anchor points in case tank gets stuck. Add winches to the drivetrain. When I get my patent I will explain.

[@Emanuel-t5e]

so essentially you want to go for the Rheinmetall approach 1. Use Lynx (or Puma) infantry fighting vehicle with active protection, and 30mm air burst muntion calibre, plus sensors to detect drones and guidance systems (so the IFVs double as Flakpanzer akin to the Gepard, with 4 km range air burst munition in machine cannons), with SPIKE missiles that can also engage both low flying targets like helicopters and also armor plus .50Cal 2. Use Panther tanks with active protection, with the new autoloader, so the fourth person in the tank becomes available for other tasks, e.g. operating loitering munitions or unmanned ground vehicles, add HERO-120 loitering munitions launchers to the tank beside its 130mm cannon plus .50Cal 3. augment the force with Mission Master ground drones as weapons carriers and scouts Together you have organic shorad and organic loitering attack munitions, organic air based and ground based unmanned reconaissance and effectors

[@darrinrebagliati5365]

@@Emanuel-t5e that would work, I think! Sounds good anyway and doesn't surprise me that someone else thought of it before me! I'm just a truck driver!

[@theshoot2958]

You really should react to the Operations Room's Desert Storm The ground war! The Gulf War, in my opinion, is what really made the Abrams tank famous for its performance in that conflict!

[@otobking]

A few years ago, the military budget had almost nothing for tanks and tripled up on money for Apaches. That’s where their head was. And I will say that a dozen tanks hearing that a single Apache is coming their way will make them question their MOS. Also, the two tanks they’ve got in Taiwan are probably sitting in front of the gates of the Navy seal and Green Beret bases…. Just say’n

[@ActuallyJamie]

Tanks will always be useful. Even if a specific tank isn't sutable in an area, there are smaller tanks for the job. PLUS a tank is just a more mobile more accurate artillary system.

[@jamesscott2894]

Instead of trying to look up a list of tanks by country, you can just go to the tanks page and go to Operators, and you can see the List of M1 Abrams users include the US, Australia, Egypt, Iraq, Kuwait, Morocco, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Taiwan (only the first two delivered so far, but they have way more on order), and Ukraine. Future operators include Romania, and Bahrain. So 10 current countries, soon to be 12 (and yes, that's countries that own and operate their own Abrams, not just "There's a US Base with tanks") The "E" in M1E3 means it's an experimental development. It's still a program being worked on. Eventually when it's ready to be issued to units, it'll be the M1A3. Unless the program produces some radically new enough hull design they realize it needs a new number all together... I personally have doubts they'll drop to a 3 man crew. The Army likes having the extra crew member for things like maintenance, security, other related tasks... though I suppose we could do what the French do, and have tankers in a HMMWV scout platoon attached to each tank platoon to still have those extra crew even with 3-crew autoloaded LeClerc... of course since the French do it that way, we won't do that lol

[@briandix4633]

I would be interested in seeing a collaboration with you Ryan Forrest, either something original or a joint video reaction. Better yet, get you both on the same episode of Unsubscribe lol

[@andrew19k]

Also with remote turrets, even hydraulics. It has a manual override.

[@pltyes21]

You should look into the Israeli Merkava main battle tank as it not only carries 4 crew but up to 8 infantry aswell. Really clever concept for adaptability to different scenarios

[@randlebrowne2048]

I think that the Israelis traded both speed and range (mobility) for the ability to act more as mobile defense bunkers. Given how small the country is, they have relatively little need for speed and long travel distances; so, they opted for other advantages instead. The US can't afford to optimize it's tanks so much for static defense; since they so often have to go on the offense in war.

[@pltyes21]

@@randlebrowne2048 100 percent. A very specialized design based on their unique requirements. Prioritizing occupant protection highest on the list due to their limited number of troops, making it vital to reduce initial contact casualties. I still remember the chain balls dangling from the turret edges to attempt to misdirect rpg impacts aimed at the most vulnerable areas. Those had such an iconic look.

[@danwhite7862]

I think we should put more into EMP Tech and lasers.

[@jefRW]

My recommendation for the R&D for redesigning the manual on modern tank tactics would be to design a video game that involves maps that integrate terrain issues that need working out as well as modern adversarial issues that allows players the ability to command and alter theoretical weapons systems under guidelines that can be produced in the real world. I can’t think of a more comprehensive approach to finding a solution than equipping a group of elementary school kids on summer vacation with kick as video game with all the appropriate resources involved. The little fuckers would have the manual figured out in under a month.

[@michaelposey6529]

Bro, literally first link I got. As of August 2023, the M1A1 Abrams battle tank is used by several countries in addition to the United States. The countries known to operate the M1A1 Abrams include: Egypt Iraq Kuwait Saudi Arabia United Arab Emirates Qatar

[@Anthonyjpaquette]

I think you owe him a beer and a steak dinner

[@MyToxicMasculinity]

M1A2 vs M1E3 Best I can figure is A stands for an alteration and E stand for an engineering change. So A is an upgrade while E is a more significant upgrade a minor upgrade.

[@-Luna-tic.exe-]

Keep in mind there are multiple versions of Based on armor composition We dont sell the DU composite

[@MengMeng-un8fe]

Did you know the Abrams doesnt have a symmetric turret cheeks

[@MZ-bl6wg]

Howe & Howe Defense has contracted with the US Army for their Unmanned electric light tank and it’s insanely badass!! Extremely fast, 1/4 the weight , 1/5 the cost and unmanned !!! It’s the future for sure !

[@GaryJimenez]

I'd rather have tanks and not need them than need tanks and not have them.

[@colbunkmust]

There are ten countries that use Abrams, with potentially Romania and Bahrain in the future. Taiwan purchased 108 Abrams but the first two were documented to be delivered in 2022.

[@WestValleyTransparency]

31:10 One of the biggest reasons why the Wehrmacht's Panthers and Tigers didn't fair well during the rainy seasons on the Eastern Front.

[@DonWolfe-p8k]

Not as many countries use current heavy armor these days..us doesn't usually export current versions and they are expensive

[@mrjackpots1326]

The one thing that should always be kept in mind is that when potential enemies (Russia and China) say they have this new thing and it does this this and this, the Pentagon gets busy to counter that. The reason the tech gap turns out to be so big is because Russia and China routinely lie about the capability of their new weapons. Because of the way their political systems work, nobody in the development chain ever tells the truth about test results. The Armata is the perfect example. The Russian tank the Americans were worried about doesn't even really exist beyond prototypes that are barely functional and depend on high tech parts from the West to be manufactured. Those parts are embargoed so no tanks are being made and none have shown up in Ukraine. Whenever new American weapons are being developed the media and politicians descend on them with relentless criticism until the thing works exactly as stated. Test results are published. That is the difference between democracy and totalitarianism. Truth wins.

[@randlebrowne2048]

The same thing happened when the Soviets lied about the Mig 25's capabilities: The Americans freaked out and made an *actual* super-fighter (F-15) to counter the overestimated figures. The result is an aircraft with a 100+ to zero kill/death ratio after 30+ years of service!

[@АлексейАлексеевич-м8к]

Might 25 is interceptor, the fastest battle plane and good, powerful machine, oh and f 15 shit@@randlebrowne2048

[@noahosmond3154]

I don't know if he understands what they mean by the remote controlled aspect of the turret. The person controlling the turret will still be in the tank as one of the crew. They just don't need to be in the turret. Also there will still likely be a wired connection to the turret and the gunner, if I were to guess.

[@MariaM-ic5bz]

As a T.O.W Gunner we never believed that tank warfare is absolete it is very viable and we all thanked our respective God's that the US and many other countries haven't fought a conventional war

[@Topher1558]

The letter "E" in a tank designation indicates an experimental modification version.

[@randlebrowne2048]

And the "X" means a whole new type of system, rather than just a modification of an already existing one (the "E").

[@colinjames7569]

There is the physical aspects of tanks. And there is also the tech that goes along with it. The technology will be used to throttle the capabilities, will be controlled by the US, based on interests.

[@aganaom1712]

one thing that im curious about is consideration of doubling down the abrams' ability to communicate with other field assets the US is already developing a missile with a relay system that can utilize an aircraft to fire a missile from outside it's own effective targeting range and allow another aircraft to guide it in. is it too much to suggest that the abrams getting a similar capability could be a good idea?

[@shamrock3957]

I don't think tanks are obsolete, just outdated. Current tanks were designed for Tank on Tank warfare before the advent of Drones and modern atgms. New generation Tanks will be designed with modern threats in mind. Also new anti-drone platforms will inevitably come about thanks solely to the Ukraine war. Between new Anti-drone weaponry, Electronic warfare, passive and active anti-drone defenses i think it fair to say we'll see the effectiveness of FPV drones drop when faced with tech specifically designed to counter it.

[@Daehawk]

You're thinking too far ahead. The remote turret controller would be IN the tank with them. But he was be in a position that is in the hull the the tank not the turret. No one would be in the turret then. Just an auto loader mechanism That way they could lower the amount of armor on the turret saving weight and protect the crew below better. I think one of the things a tank needs now days is a drone of its own. Have a drone launch ability on the tank. Not the gun launched type but like a small area on the top of the hull where a drone could sit and wait to be launched. They might have a 2nd drone in the tank as a backup. These drones would be used by a member of the crew to fly out ahead of the tank and scout the area. To see whats up ahead for their tank. Maybe scout a building or a small town village. It could also give the tank crew the ability to look around their tank from an outside and above view. So if enemy soldiers are moving near them trying to get close or something. Check the tank for damage too. Never have to get out of the tank and leave yourself open to getting shot or killed in a battle space.

[@bariman223]

I think remotely operated, in this video, means controlling the gun via somewhere else in the tank, not outside of it.

[@marktemple6411]

E = Experimental, as in not fully adopted yet. When it is It will become the A3

[@spiderenigma2803]

x is experimental, is is named after a tank commander, not sure witch one

[@2844Bottoms]

Not many use the Abrams because it's a logistically and technically very demanding tank. Unlike most tanks that use traditional diesel engines while the Abrams uses a jet engine. It is stupid heavy weighing in at 65 tons without any additional armor packages or equipment. Making it the heaviest tank currently in service and the least fuel efficient.

[@americasfavoritebrazilian2399]

NATO would not be on the ground like that. They would clear the battlefield from air and sea before sending tank's!

[@SirShadowman]

M1e2 series M1 "experimental" model 2 M1a2 m1 series alteration 2 (original base tank model being m1) sep is service extension package. I don't think it'll be a a3 but a m2 Abrams if new hull (think going from a m48 to m60 in naming)

[@1flash3571]

Those Drones, Mines, Himars, and Shoulder fired Rockets are spanking on them tanks.