Russian T-72 Destroys The M1 Abrams with Its First Shot

The war in Ukraine has escalated into a fierce battleground where both Russia and Ukraine are relentlessly targeting each other's military equipment. This prolonged conflict has resulted in the destruction of numerous tanks, leading to Ukraine being dubbed the "tank graveyard."
Amidst this, the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation recently announced that a T-72B3 tank had destroyed an American-supplied M1 Abrams tank in Ukraine. This incident reportedly occurred near Avdiivka, with the Russian ministry spokesperson claiming that the T-72B3 achieved this feat "with the first shot."
Notably, this is not the first time this particular T-72B3 tank has been involved in such an event; it is actually the third time it has been destroyed. However, this is the first documented instance of a US-supplied tank being destroyed by a Russian tank in direct combat. This makes us wonder; how did the Russian tanks manage to eliminate the US-supplied tank in just one shot?

[@Chr0n]

The Abrams was highly lauded by the US because its been winning battles against goat herders for 20+ years.

[@guytech7310]

But it lost to the goat herders with its tail tucked behind its legs in Afghan!

[@ConfusedTreeLine-hf3gk]

Totally agree

[@amiralsrbani24]

Looks the Zionist Jews who own the US Military Complex went Biblical on us by naming the tank Abraham! Shear arrogance ! They killed Abraham now !

[@YanniEhm]

Hey. goat herders can be dangerous. LOL

[@nevillereimers6336]

You can puff your chest out when there’s no opposition America is finding out the hard way they are not the biggest and best when it comes up against someone who can give as good as it gets

[@MorsDesuper]

I'm quite sure that the T72B3 crew played at least 700+ hours of War Thunder LOL

[@MZW-xj7vd]

Fr especially targeting the very known weak spot of the Abrams, even a tiger 1 can penetrate the area just under the gun ☠️

[@Supersaiyanvegeta72]

😂 They also got the steam special on PC for the export version T 72 few months back.

[@racistlobsterofficial]

700 on war thunder gets you to about BR0.00001

[@menzbercedes8962]

​@@racistlobsterofficialfor me 300 hours of warthunder . And I'm in rank 8

[@Jesse-040]

Fr

[@dartawnasailo4449]

I don't know why people think the Abrams is indestructible and when it is killed, they insult it so much.. Any tank can be killed, no matter the armor, every tank has it's weak spots... Side shots will kill any tank

[@michamichaowski8375]

Ukraine got the older M1A1 version stripped of all of its most advanced armor and equipment. They are not M1A2 sep V3

[@viethoangtruong54]

@@michamichaowski8375 It will all be the same, even the merkava, which is among the best of the best gets rekt by cheap UAV and makeshift RPG warheads.

[@michamichaowski8375]

@@viethoangtruong54 maybe you are right - for them moment. But there is research made already how to counter that threat. Its like a constant competition between the sword and the shield. It never ends.

[@rocket870]

Yes I know right.. Wait until they hear about the 23 Abrams destroyed in Afghanistan. Nine of which were destroyed by old Soviet era T-62 tanks and RPG rounds. The T-62 has the capability to run APFSDS but mainly us HE or HESH. The Iraqi army had the base model of T-62s with sandbags and other metal sheets bolted to the turret. The Abrams can take and withstand hits from a T-62 all day any day, but the way HE works is that it just explodes and destroys anything in its path. Most of the time only the barrel, tracks, and thermal sights were destroyed by the HE explosion but the tank itself was either destroyed by friendly fire so no tanks could be captured or destroyed by RPG rounds... seven Abrams were purposely destroyed by U.S troops to prevent the capture of their disabled tanks that could easily be repaired in the matter of a few days to a week

[@neilas1630]

@@michamichaowski8375 yep and thats why in ww2 tanks advanced so fast because it was constantly trying to advance against the opposite side

[@user-lg8rh7sm2g]

Crowing roosters 2022 "Ahahaha flying Russian tanks" Crowing roosters 2024 "No tanks are invulnerable"

[@fibonaccigroup9480]

Russia is not Afganistan, Iraq or other countries where American troops fought with civilians/ It is another level, higher level of war game

[@sbrengard]

Meanwhile Russia is literally fighting drafted civilians with drafted civilians.

[@guytech7310]

Last I recall, the US left Afghan with its tail tucked between its legs to sandal wearing goat herders. The US has become a bully that targets people that simply cannot fight back. When someone punches them in the nose, the go running ans screaming away. As a american, I can tell you that the US gov't is an embarrassment of epic proportions!

[@5arnavi9]

​@@sbrengardIt means that you admit that Ukraine no longer has soldiers

[@mr.r1178]

​@@sbrengardLike every major war

[@toddflynn7156]

​@@sbrengardWrong, there's no draft, it's volunteer only.

[@iceman3577]

Men those tactical shovels are nastyyyyy

[@jnishar]

they are very lucky to have shovels.. In germany they only have broom sticks!

[@user-xe8zj6rc3o]

@@jnishar 😛

[@iceman3577]

imagine if us or germany havee H&K tactical shovels ... in 1 days russia loose the war but they only have m1 abrams and leo :( @@jnishar

[@nemiw4429]

​@@iceman3577they havent yet used: hypersonic shovels, shovel satelites, T-Shovelty5 Tank, Shovelsub[marine], shovel allround attack & defense weapon made from stalinium with Stalins mustache.

[@iceman3577]

western stuff : chucle im in danger" @@nemiw4429

[@tan14327]

sending 1 insanly large expensive tank out into a field is a terrible idea

[@krazykilljoy7180]

They don't necessarily have many options U.S only sent 31 along with their dwindling numbers they gotta make due with what they have and in the grand scheme of things they are using them in a smart way for the most part

[@Krystina-UA]

We got the tank for free, thanks to US taxpayers 😅 We know how to fight but we have not much choices. Unfortunately material gets destroyed in a war, or do you believe...just roll out some tanks and the war is over? 🤣

[@theholypeanut473]

You act like the US cares about the tanks cost

[@mariobgvoynov2041]

They dont send it alone?

[@gernhard.reinholdsen]

Maus.jpg

[@Farrierr]

Guys tank is a tank, it is not indestructible no matter which nation produced it

[@Eagle-eye-pie]

The irony being it wasn’t a tank that was destroyed.

[@BelugaChonky]

Weren't saying that a year ago

[@Eagle-eye-pie]

@@BelugaChonkywho wasn’t?

[@krazykilljoy7180]

And people wonder why U.S heavily invested in aircraft and a navy to support it

[@RendezvousAtFox-ft2eh]

Yeah they are making a big deal out of them destroying an abrams using "only" 1 shell, although pretty much ALL tank duels ends with who gets the first round on target. Real life isnt battlefield 2042 where a tank will take multiple hits. For the most part, tank combat can be reduced to tactics, and what tactics one can use deoends on the tanks abilities like speed and manouverability, aswell as how the battlefield looks and other supporting army branches aswell. DefenseTV is very pro-russian, and along with the majority of their fans, heavily biased in russias favor.

[@tmafungo84]

Did the Russian tank ask for the Abrams' preferred pronouns?😢

[@NKomarov]

😂😂😂

[@mays9185]

Now that's funny and I'm a American 😂😂😂😂

[@user-xh5pc3wd2m]

its a shetank

[@lordyemeth]

yup, it's was/were

[@brentsrx7]

Ok, that's funny. Are you Russian?

[@grass846]

The crew probally active 500% booster

[@superspies32]

They also forget to buy Universal backup.

[@sim51m]

they forgot to attack the D point

[@roo1871]

@@sim51m Hahahahahahah hilarious finding these comments here. Was not expecting this when I came to the comments on this video

[@atomalfa7883]

war thunder moments

[@nomad5195]

The 500% SL from that will probably just cover the repair costs 💀

[@thisisveerus6667]

For the record gents, the vehicle at the start of the video is not an M1A1SA supplied by USA, that is infact an M1150 ABV, also supplied by USA, which is based off of the chassis of an M1. So take this with a grain of salt.

[@terra7869]

I was just about to mention that. The lack of the barrel and the openings on the roof gave it away right away.

[@JamesStreet-tp1vb]

You'd better take EVERYTHING Russia says with a grain of salt

[@josephriley7560]

Better yet, just assume everything Russia says is a mountain of bull shit because it usually is.

[@vast9467]

it’s an abrams without a gun

[@bonkabinkleton8288]

@@vast9467 and without the armor, its just a shell, probably doesnt have much for composite armour other than enough to stop chemical penetrators

[@Gary91511]

If you look you’ll notice the tank doesn’t have a cannon. It’s not an M1A1 Abrams, it’s an Abram’s conversion into either mine clearance or something similar for engineers.. not sure why this is so impressive to people

[@Francisco-FX]

So a tank from the soviet era destroyed the hollywood's best tank lmao

[@user-wu7ul7lb8j]

Оскар обратно 😂

[@haldakcze420]

@PabloM11111 ...take your pill and get along with the truth, bro 😄

[@lightworker2956]

@PabloM11111 Random internet users who provide zero proof (i.e. you) aren't very reliable sources of information.

[@Faeku_urSelf29]

​@PabloM11111Keyboard Clown 🤡😅

[@DanielCallahan-dd9yk]

The Abrams is technically from the Soviet era too, lol. This is another Russian media lie. All the Abrams taken out so far in the Ukraine have been from drone drops in the open hatch or direct hits from artillery directed by drone.

[@tomlee6263]

I was an M1 Abrams crewman back in the early 90s. We trained in tank platoon and company sized units, 4 to 16 tanks, supported with Bradleys and ground troops and air/artillery support. The problem here isn't necessarily the M1 Abrams, but tactics. You don't send in 1 tank to battle. You need a whole team. Sending 1 or 2 tanks out there is suicide. This shows lack of experience with Ukraine military command...

[@adamelestratega]

Its not a lack of the Ukraine command, its just the fact that in the war in Ukraine doing so its suicide and impossible for the Ukrainians, who developed hit and run tactics due to the fact that they cant get that many tanks into a single battle

[@1991pavlik]

😂😂

[@diopmamad]

Have you forgotten about Bradley Square. If the US army with your tank platoon was deployed in Ukraine it would be destroyed the same way. Fighting Irak is not the same as fighting Russia

[@user-cl2ov1zf3u]

Так как вы думаете что будете воевать так не будет) самолёты в небе кружить сколько захотят и прикрывать танки не будут ) или если ты ранен ты не позвонишь по раций и не вызовишь вертолёт ты будешь ташить раненого в зелёную зону (ну или первую помощь в красной) где ему уже окажут помощь если смогут)

[@user-ix7pj8zb8x]

Так это американцы ж их учат воевать и что делать. Ваши инструктора.

[@riverinafritsch2573]

Sir, that is a mine clearing vehicle. a M1150, this thing is running M1 Abrams *Classic* armor. it's not meant to be fighting a tank much less anything at all.

[@TomasFunes-rt8rd]

This is known as "stupid use of military assets."

[@nuketown2321]

i know, im looking for the barrel on it and i dont see it and everyone in the comments is hating on the "abrams"

[@dsmitty017]

Why is Russia bragging about destroying a M1150 ABV? It had no main gun, it was a mine sweeper vehicle.

[@Soichy2]

Well, its armor is the same as the version with a gun. Moreover, it was better protected, since it did not have ammunition that could detonate if it hit the tank.

[@slingblade313]

Because there have been several M1A1/M1A2 or whatever stupid version of Abrams destroyed so far, it's just the M1150 was the FIRST spotted and destroyed.

[@piotrmalewski8178]

For the same reasons the West and Ukraine is bragging about destroying Russian tanks. It's propaganda issue, and I'm growing to believe nobody takes this conflict seriously. Putin has failed to announce general mobilisation which annuls the strenght of his army and makes use of his tanks according to the doctrine they were designed for, impossible! On the other hand, Ukraine is refusing to conscript men under the age of 27 while in WWII countires would officially conscript men of 18 years of age, and often as young as 16 or even 15 to fight.

[@linvydasb.7875]

@@Soichy2 "its armor is the same as the version with a gun" Yea but having armour and no gun doesn't win u a 1v1 battle. Abrams has blow out panels if the ammunition some how detonated. The video provided no proof that a T-72 destroyed M1 Abrams, Which googling is a Abrams tank with a cannon. So I can conclude that this channel is full of shit, and its content.

[@B-52H]

​@@Soichy2those are modeled after the M1a1s from the 90s we never gave them any modern tech abrams

[@nesseihtgnay9419]

why are people acting like the M1 is invincible? its a tank, and tanks can take out any tanks, thats war.

[@akyukon]

It's because Americans think they are superior to other countries and their technology is superior, invincible. The US military excels at long distance air strikes against 3rd world countries and the government uses this success as a propaganda weapon.

[@isu152stalin2]

Because they watch too much hollywood that involves the Abrams, that's why. Only fax here

[@ishikaorimura6803]

Thank you!!! You are the only person with a brain in this comment section.

[@southerndragon4933]

Your one of the few to point that out. But it's most likely those that like one faction over the other faction.

[@ishikaorimura6803]

@@southerndragon4933 one sided over?

[@AlexandroMechina-yb3tf]

"Russia discovered that shovels fits really tight on tank cannon, might be more effective than anticipated" -The Telegraph.

[@non9886]

but these shovels are extra forged. they can cut us steel as butter...

[@WarAuthority]

The shovelFS is the greatest tank round ever created.

[@SSFFRRJJ]

Gaijin right now is happy AF

[@madrazo8567]

True

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

lol

[@v3lk052]

And 1 bradley still can destroy Russian tanks xd

[@jjojo2004]

Ok guys--export Abrams and Bradley APV’s do not have the same armor protection as the American models! 😂

[@Wanaruona]

M1 Abraham are effective in Hollywood movies.

[@briangriffith3985]

well, they were asked for by an actor🤷🏾‍♂️

[@thomasmusso1147]

​@@briangriffith3985 And one who was supposedly a comedian at that. Now that's a joke .. 😏.

[@queiston774]

Strike

[@danilalekseevic9436]

As russian i can say that abrams is good tank , but it was fighting towards t55s , t62s and some export versions of t72s with old shitty apfsds.

[@smyers820gm]

WTF IS AN M1 ABRAHAM 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂

[@frogman4700]

A tank is a tank, no matter what kind of fancy technology you put into it its a giant metal box on tracks. Leopards, Challengers, Abrams, T-64s, T72s, T, 80s, T 90s, They're all good tanks, but they arent invincible. Enough explosive power can take any of them out.

[@etzwei7994]

Yup, something ignorant people refuse to believe since it doesn't align with their worldview and opinions.

[@N4CR5]

Yup I saw a IED made of ANFO (few gallon jugs of it) make an abrams literally go flying, I think A-stan. The crew survived but had serious injuries. They are well put together but not invincible.

[@Cesko_Plny_Fialovejch_Zmrdu]

Abrams does have any fancy technologies, USA just refuse to talk about it so people assume its made out of some sort of alien technology

[@petrikchamula1670]

yeah, i really hate when someone thinks their countires weapons are the best and dont have respect for foreign tech, all of the tanks are diffrent but they´re all incredible machines altho with weaknesses, many complain about russian tank turrets flying but they refuse to believe that one well placed rpg will ruin an abrams, the crew will live but not without serious injuries

[@miletello1]

Exactly….this simply shows the Russian crews are better which isn’t a surprise to anyone…Ukraine isn’t using good tactics.

[@lmeza1983]

Yeah fighting a war hardened army with access to modern equipment is not the same as fighting peasants in flip flops armed with rusty AKs 😅

[@absinth2k1]

During the First Gulf War, which occurred in 1990-1991 after Iraq invaded Kuwait, the Iraqi army was much better equipped and one of the largest armed forces in the world at that time. The military was still operating under the considerable financial and material investment made during the Iran-Iraq War in the 1980s. Here's an overview of the Iraqi military equipment during the First Gulf War: 1. **Tanks**: Approximately 4,500 to 5,500 tanks, which included a large number of Soviet T-55s and T-72s, along with a smaller number of more advanced T-62s and some French-made AMX-30s. 2. **Armored Vehicles**: Around 2,800 to 3,000 armored fighting vehicles, including BMP-1 and BMP-2 models. 3. **Artillery**: More than 3,100 artillery pieces, with a robust array of field artillery, self-propelled guns, and multiple rocket launchers, including heavy systems like the Soviet-made SCUD missile. 4. **Aircraft**: The Iraqi Air Force had roughly 700 aircraft, more diverse and capable than in the Second Gulf War, including advanced fighters like the French Mirage F1 and Soviet MiG-29s. 5. **Air Defense**: A dense network of air defense systems, featuring a mixture of Soviet SAMs (surface-to-air missiles) such as SA-2, SA-3, and SA-6, and more sophisticated systems like the French Roland and Soviet SA-8. 6. **Naval Forces**: Though smaller and less significant, the Iraqi Navy had several missile boats and patrol crafts capable of laying mines and conducting coastal defense operations. Iraq's military during the First Gulf War was well-equipped with large quantities of heavy equipment and a variety of systems, reflecting heavy investments during the 1980s. However, despite this formidable arsenal, the Iraqi military was quickly overwhelmed by the technologically superior and better-trained Coalition forces, leading to a decisive defeat. The effectiveness of the Iraqi military was hampered by outdated tactics, poor strategic planning, and the superior air power and precision-guided munitions of the Coalition.

[@Cubewuse161]

​@@absinth2k1 My guy is so thoughtful that he can give a detailed analysis of Iraqi armed forces, yet he didn't hear of the events in between 2001-2021🤓🤓🤓

[@user-nb1nx2rm8x]

​@@absinth2k1иракские танки даже т 72 были отстоем потому что это были первые экспортные версии данных танков у которых на момент войны броня была уже слабой прицелы были значительно хуже

[@philipp-mauricederleh7010]

Yeah .. and destroying a M1150 ABV (which can't shoot back because it has no gun, like you see ) is not the same as destroying an Abrams 🤔😂😂

[@galatian5]

Ukraine was fighting peasants in flip flops armed with rusty AKs? Or do you mean Russia has been doing that most of their career?

[@godofhate4167]

Lmao that's not even a real Abrams, this variant doesn't even have a fucking GUN on it. Its merely transportation. That's like shooting a T-90 with no turret towing a trailer and Ukraine broadcasting videos being like "we killed the BEST Russian tank with an AK-47". The amount of people in these comments talking about "goat herders" clearly don't know how fast the M1A1 cleaned up soviet T-72s in Desert Storm is just fkn gold lmao

[@erraldstyler]

iits a minefield clearing vehicle on a Abrams hull. M1150 ABV

[@quocthang7959]

In Desert Storm, M1A1 destroyed only T-72M (export version for third world countries), this version don’t have laser range finder, night vision, computer, composite armour, modern APFSDS round… Soviet Army’s T-72A/B are very different

[@godofhate4167]

@@quocthang7959 Russia's armor makeup doesn't matter against the long rod of the US DU APFSDS, and in Desert storm, they used the M829A1, which was able to defeat all types of Russian armor during that time. Now the US has the M829A4, which properties are still classified, but we can assume the performance is far superior than the A1, A2 and A3 variants since the M829A3 was "theoretically" (and I say this because its classified) able to pen 400-700mm of RHA and the US specifically designed its ammunition to have less velocity because the Rod has such a thick diameter therefore more kinetic energy. Its kind of hard to deny the billions the US puts into ballistics and technology compared to Russia, which is currently nailing roofing tin in the shape of turtles to the roofs of their MBTs. No one can tell me Russia has better tech after seeing that.

[@quocthang7959]

@@godofhate4167 no, in 1996 US’s test, M829A2 can not defeat the T-72A frontal armour with Kontakt-5, even at 1000m. If Iraqi have T-72A instead T-72M, the result is very different. You can google to read this test

[@user-lg8rh7sm2g]

@@godofhate4167 Have you ever wondered why a Russian drone for 500 dollars has already destroyed 5 Abrams for 10 million each? The billions invested by the US government mean nothing when most of it is stolen))

[@user-sy3wp9cy8d]

Don't worry Canada will send another 13 billion while it's seniors are going to food banks and watching tv with blankets on them

[@krabby4456]

FJT

[@Wolfwolveswolf]

Yes- the Luciferian System, which Rules the west.

[@rigel1176]

That is exact what happened in Germany also ......

[@twasb2000]

@@rigel1176 Well Germany is on Putins list of territories to recover and countries to destroy, not an easy decision for the Germans

[@iamblight707]

Ugh. So many Russian bots

[@shadowsdt2901]

fought against an extremely weak army in Iraq and then insurgencies hahahaha This is the history of the M1 Abrams, Now is the first time they pit him against a real army. In short, this tank's history is more media-related than practical.

[@xrazzr1]

its like punching a kid and claim that you are the strongest mf ever and then getting suprised by getting punched back by a big dude

[@aidboo1054]

United states armed forces relies on combined arms. Abrams was not meant to fight completely alone, or with just a little support. Just like how 2 Bradley’s managed to knock out a t90’s optics once it was all alone. And just because movies like showing this tank doesn’t mean it’s history is media related, I’d say Russian tanks are more media related with how much they are shown on tv over there

[@mdmubin832]

@@aidboo1054 mybe u didnt go through the info fully...bradley just managed its escape....t90 was destryoed by the drones...yes the bradley damaged it enough

[@kurfsolb]

Army of Iraq had only old soviet tanks and on top of that, they had only practice training ammunition. So americans had it pretty easy over there. But against equal enemy, they are not so great.

[@andrzejd5301]

@@aidboo1054 funny as fuck salty much Abrams is a pieces of shit like any other tank it will be destroyed 🤣

[@MavericIsCool]

They are literally export versions, my dads abrams survived a shot to the side rpg-7 in a Abrams the Bradley with them absolutely teared up that building, he says they train in this type of terrain so also the crew sucked and they travel in big groups

[@KK-gr9df]

The Russian AI narrator can’t say the word Abrams 😂

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

It's AI?

[@KK-gr9df]

@@user-bu7sr1bo6n Yeah…it’s a computer generated voice. Some words get mispronounced. This is a Russian video.

[@remipast3347]

@@KK-gr9df Video made by a bot for a bots in a comment section, lovely, ruzi propaganda is some kind of a joke

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

@@remipast3347 lol

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

@@KK-gr9df oh ok

[@MrCshx]

As a Russian, it is difficult for me to understand the surprise at this event. Once upon a time, when I asked ("why we are not building new tanks?"), I heard an answer from one of the Russian military engineers who said: - "It is much easier, faster and cheaper to create countermeasures for any modern tank than to build a completely new one."

[@DSillius]

The Abrams is a fairly old platform, they are being upgraded a lot. But the 'Abrams' showed in this video are 90's Variants and are not the latest Abrams'. Considering the Abrams platform dates back to the 80's, but is still getting upgraded to this day by the USA. One more thing, its the Crew, not the Tank. (thanks for reading if you did)

[@Greeknext1]

@@DSillius Man, I understand you love your country and all that, but partly people are right, this tank for the first time in the history of its existence ended up on a real battlefield where it will not crush and blow up shepherds with AK and RPG-7, which is older than the Abrams , but will fight with other tanks and professional military personnel ready to clash with him. And as practice shows, the vehicle did not show ANYTHING that could distinguish it as superior in any way to other tanks. But this is exactly how you positioned it from the moment of its creation. And I think that’s exactly what the public is laughing at.

[@DSillius]

@@Greeknext1 ???, i know damn well that the abrams can be absolutely demolished by super cheap weapons.. its still the crew and not the tank.

[@ronaldgagne8364]

@@Greeknext1 Close to 8,000 Russian Tanks destroyed. Only 3 Old American Tanks with inexperienced crews. Nothing to laugh at. Unless you're laughing at the Russians being sacrificed for the benefit of billionaires.

[@BHShaman]

Yea, like Ukraine is swept the field of Russian Tanks with cheap drones. Guess Russia got played by their own advice.

[@YanniEhm]

The round used to destroy the Abrams was a shovel.

[@blazini]

Armor Piercing Discarding Shovel Rounds

[@korencek]

I thught it was a "jar of pickles".

[@slewone4905]

Russian shovels sure dig big holes.

[@r0mi44]

sharpened

[@manmin517]

And armour piercing hammer😂

[@xJaBar4x]

Is everyone forgetting that the M1's being sent to Ukraine are the stripped down versions? They don't have nearly as much protection or current upgrades.

[@ThamMalaysia]

Most of the kids commenting here know little about tanks.

[@jamesmann7449]

What about the latest v2 and V3 versions that were blown up in Afganistan and Iraq in the mid 2010s?

[@xJaBar4x]

They weren't meant for urban warfare. Nothing is indestructible.

[@monpetitpeid3582]

So you are saying US purposely sent joke tanks to the front line, ensuring Russia victory ✌️. Time you wake up from slumbering sleep 😴 💤 🤔.

[@xJaBar4x]

You are obviously uneducated. The US sent tanks that did not have components that could be compromised and allow the Russians to steal our advanced technology. Please inform yourself before commenting on the big boy stuff.

[@davidbrodsky5640]

Did they thing that the Abrams was indestructible? Everything can be destroyed.

[@redherring9497]

$4 million Tank vs. $500 drone 😂

[@gunmasterx1164]

You wouldn't be able to destroy an Abrams like the way you can with Russian tanks thanks to its blow out panels.

[@YugoslavGamer]

@@gunmasterx1164 The temperature inside the crew compartment raises to at least 55°C in best case scenario. This alone makes blow out panels useless.

[@gunmasterx1164]

@@YugoslavGamer That was in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[@gunmasterx1164]

@@YugoslavGamerand how does heat make the blow out panels useless, they're designed to deflect the explosion away from the crew, not the heat as well.

[@korencek]

@@gunmasterx1164 Russian anti-tank weapons spray molten steel on impact at very high speed, causing internal weapons to detonate. This can penetrate anything. Blow-out panels work only against tungsten penetrating explosive core.

[@leon38id]

Да ваш Абрамс только против людей в тапочках может чувствовать себя хорошо.

[@alexy.3512]

You got it! 🤣

[@user-hn1ph6ry8l]

Не-не - надежнее против босоногих. А ну как тапками закидают насмерть?

[@user-er3rv4bj9q]

Если взглянуть правде в глаза, Абрамс действительно более совершенная в плане защиты машина чем тот же отечественный Т72Б3. Но, как водится, это не делает его неуничтожимым, позиционное превосходство нашей т72йки позволило уничтожить грозного врага в лице Абрамса

[@tastethecock5203]

обычный ОБТ, в противостоянии с другими ОБТ будет решать то, за кем первый выстрел.

[@coraddo280]

🤣😂

[@brentblackwolf6325]

Sure, but look at how the Abrams still has it's turret lol

[@josephriley7560]

And crew probably survived and didn't get turned into confetti like the Russians do.

[@Blackout_-pe1rv]

People forgot that this is real life, there is no such thing as an Invincible tank

[@josephkush1032]

This is why they didn't want to use the Abrams until they had nothing else to send. The images of piled up leopards and Bradley's was already embarrassing enough

[@karlrasur8356]

and what about those piles of russian equipment ? that is not embarrassing ?

[@elacme626]

suure, they destroyed 3 Leo's and 2 Abrams and now you dimwits are cheering. While ruzzia lost 3000+ tanks 🤣🤣🤣 Also bradley destroyed the mighty T-90 And bear in mind, the Abrams crew survived the attack of T-72 but if a Abrams were to hit a T-72 the crew will be minced meat

[@DSillius]

Totally not like they sent the first variant of an Abrams that isnt even in service anymore to ukraine right?.

[@Horxy]

what the hell is actually happening here lmao? as if Russia isn't losing their modernized versions aswell. There's destructions on both sides but when I look at every single video either they're all on that side or the other.

[@josephkush1032]

@Horxy russian tanks are the fraction of the price and use a lot more protection against drones.

[@OhTheGeekness]

These comments are silly. No one has ever said that an M1 Abrams is invulnerable to enemy tank rounds. The video shows drone footage of the knocked-out M1 but does not make clear where the round hit. Of course a Sabot round can disable an M1 if it hits in the correct place. A single M1 crossing open ground is vulnerable to enemy tanks. Anyone with any knowledge of tank warfare already knew this. A force of Abrams being deployed and operated correctly by well trained crewmen is another story. It is not a perfect tank, and no one has ever claimed that it was but it is a very capable tank. These comments need to calm down.

[@Ekzomira]

Every one talks them up to be invincible so equal talk of how good they are means equal talk of their destruction

[@RePlayBoy101]

all of these comments just shows how low most peoples intelect and critical thinking is ... this is also why regimes prosper ... the dumber the population is, the freely the regime acts

[@neudaiz]

Not to mention the actual video of the "M1 Tank" that the T-72 knocked out is clearly not actually an Abrams. They add in the OTHER 3 destroyed Abrams to confuse but look close. No barrel. It's a recovery vehicle or some other utility vehicle.

[@OhTheGeekness]

@@neudaiz oh right. I noticed that the barrel seemed to be missing but I assumed it was something with the video or that I was looking at it wrong or something.

[@UrielVentris1984]

@@OhTheGeekness oh that makes sense then its a recovery vehicle made to look like an abrams

[@1968konrad]

Im from germany; our tank experts never claimed that a leopard solves all problems and its still vulnerable, but if used under the conditions of a war of combined weapons it can exploit advantages; better shelter, faster target acquisition, greater range, user-friendlyness. Tanks are, due to the circumstances, frequently used as a kind of close support position under conditions of trench warfare und uncleared minefields.

[@nikolamma]

Ah ja Deutsche…. Alles auf papier aber in praxis ….

[@user-dy3im4zg1z]

Good answer. ''Panzer-Stukas'' stiff "friendship", inferior air force of enemy, not modern or inadequate enemy tactics, mechanized artillery, mechanized infantry to protect tanks from RPG's f.e., A/A defense for UAV's, concentration of all armour etc. in only one zone, a very good scouting-preparation for the field's nature [not forests, or rivers, or ''tsernozem''-mud fields etc., this is the most significant preparation for armoured tactics...] KOSTAS TRENT

[@kylefranklin9328]

I dont see an abrams i see a m1150abv, but in any case had it been an abrams and the roles were reversed you would've had a disabled t72. getting the first shot off in any armored engagement is a huge advantage

[@user-qe7ir6vc1g]

5 танков Абрамс уничтожено, все которые выползли из укрытий. Горят лучше Леопардов

[@JohnDoe-gk5xj]

Russia ❤️

[@renex8434]

How many T-tanks have been destroyed?

[@sebastianlup]

​@@renex8434including those with fresh Z paintings?

[@jozefhorvat3625]

😂😂😂👍👍👍

[@allex_lyric]

@@renex8434 Any tank can be destroyed. Over these two years, Western propaganda has said a lot that T-series tanks are very bad and are easily destroyed. This video just shows that Amrams is no better. About Leopard and Challenger - the same thing, you can destroy any of them, and YES - even with a shot from a T series tank. T series tanks have a variety of modifications, T72 from 1989 and T72B3 from 2010s - these are two different tanks, despite on the same metal body.

[@andresxhs752]

Leopards, even the first ones, actually performed better than Abrams and Challengers. Pure heavy, old, obsolete marketing.

[@slewone4905]

Nato war games , THe Russians always win. I thought it was an excuse for the military to ask America for more money. I think Leopards tend to win tank competition.

[@kirilld6206]

Germany depends on land forces to survive. US was never good at tanks, britts from time to time (vikkers 6 tonns, Centurion, Chieftain). Maritime powers rely on sea and after WW1 also Airforce. It explains why japanese also didn't have great tanks while they actually could if they wanted to.

[@mariosmatzoros3553]

​@@kirilld6206The U.S has had good tanks (such as the Sherman jumbo, Calliope, m26 Pershing ect.) and still has ... The Abrams sepv2 isn't in Ukraine, they were given only older versions.

[@kirilld6206]

@@mariosmatzoros3553 Sherman isn't a good tank at all, any version. Same goes for pershing, chaffee etc. Just look at the height and speed of those m3, m4, they were good only because of hundreds soviet divisions on the east lol. And total air superiority as well. But sherman was comfortable, yes. At a huge price in specifications ofc.

[@markdavidson1049]

@@kirilld6206 What the fuck are you talking about???

[@robertjfisher6923]

Nothing is impervious to anti-armor missiles. In any conflict, the enemy always gets a vote.

[@giganaut6007]

werent export abrams the ones without the DU layer in the armor composite?

[@caronbicep6476]

Yes they were m1a1 not too confuse with m1a1HA(heavy armor) so they weren’t equipped with DU armor, also these are 40 years old.

[@EMarc23]

First of all that T72 was upgraded and fully modernised. Second, the crew is one of the best on the front. And the last, there is a video from a drone where you can see the battle and can hear drone operator loudly shouting to the tank crew: You have cripled it with the first shot, it's smoking..

[@blazini]

Why everytime the Russians kill something someone has to cope and say they basically used magic? It only took 1 hit from a 50 year old tank that was rebuilt 3 times to kill a Super Abrams. Maybe we're just fools for thinking that since we spend 4x as much on a tank that it's going to be any good.

[@stephanebiazo9341]

Link please

[@DesertStateNevada]

@@stephanebiazo9341 Imagine asking for a link when you know clearly youtube usually deletes comments with links in them, so then you can say "oh you didn't post a link, this means its not true" lmao This was old news, a drone destroyed the Abrams, AFTER it was abandoned. What you don't hear is that the Abrams already destroyed 100+ russian tanks.

[@uroskostic8570]

Give us link

[@DesertStateNevada]

@@uroskostic8570 Imagine asking for a link when you know that youtube will delete comments with links. And then you can screech "oh you didn't post a link this means its not true" lol

[@fandomkiller]

Abrams fuel mileage alone makes them a meme.

[@slewone4905]

Please don't tell me they drove it to the front line. If they did , they would probably beg Russia for some gas.

[@brianpayne4549]

Yeah, it drinks gas, like a lot of people smoke cigarettes, BUT, it has the record to back it up.

[@Amsfootboy79]

Record like what? Like they said against goat herders, 1960s Iraqi tanks and oh that’s right nothing else. Also see what the Yemanese did to a few Abrams in their fight with Saudi Arabia. You’re argument “Abrams tank the best because Merica“, isn’t a valid one.

[@DavidHolguln-vi2wj]

@@slewone4905 Like Russia Was Begging Ukrainian Farmers When They Invaded Ukraine At The Beginning Of Putlers 3 Day Military Operation???

[@brianpayne4549]

@@Amsfootboy79 the gulf War would give you a good rough estimate.

[@NJbro31]

Abrams got that 500% booster on 💀

[@spydude38]

When you are unable or unwilling to utilize combined arms tactics to maximize your lethality against your opponent and instead choose to operate in single units, you set yourself up for failure.

[@BorisBollokov]

It is not about the size of the shovel but how well you shovel with it

[@gunbuckybucketman4578]

Is this a new Russian's idiom?

[@BorisBollokov]

@@gunbuckybucketman4578 yez

[@vitiay7209]

That's what she said )))

[@narsofficiel2646]

😂😂😂😂

[@johnpostlethwaite6086]

I think the era of the tank is coming to an end for all sides.

[@nemiw4429]

Nah just different. Either more armor. Maybe even little muclear reactor cuznuts.gona.weight 700000 tons. Or less armor, but with drones.to.find targets. Actually K-51 Germany Panther tank...

[@yous2244]

Nah, just changed tactics, they definitely will make anti drone defences for tanks.

[@bonaanayaga]

I think Russia has it figured out with the T50s as field artillery the let them fire missles from there turrent

[@zedeyejoe]

They said that in 1919 as well :)

[@nihilistzero8066]

nah russia is about to deploy prometheus systems for their tanks.

[@Ummba13]

The M1 Abrams got destroyed. But then another M1 Abrams came by and destroyed the T-72 launching it's turret into orbit 🌍

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

really?

[@phaidros100]

It was not an Abrams.

[@multigameswithryan9215]

this is not even an abrams tank, it's an M1150 ABV

[@rosszografov614]

It's wonderful to have dreams...but for obvious reasons, that is all western supporters have..all delusional...all a game for little boys, escaping adult reality: The Russian Federation Victory 🇷🇺💯💪🎖️🌍🌏🌎🇷🇺♾️💝

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

@@multigameswithryan9215 frf

[@krystalmae5557]

Imagine spending millions of money just to lost it to low cost weapons lmao

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

ask russia why there t72 are being taken out by 30 dollar drones...

[@a503za350z]

M1 A were involve in wars where the enemy used stones to defend themselves. Never in actual war against another tanks 🤔🤔

[@JohnDoe-gk5xj]

True indeed

[@RealNotallGaming]

YEP!

[@gunmasterx1164]

uh Battle of 73 Easting against the 4th most powerful military (at the time) in the world?

[@johnm8015]

Both the Iraq Wars where the Iraqi army had T-72s??? What the fuck are you saying? Oh you’re an actual Russian bot. What’s it like living off 13k USD?

[@rreno496]

@@gunmasterx1164 don't waste your time trying to educate these tools, they're riding high on their anti-American drivel, let them enjoy it while they can.

[@achekholbeckal889]

The Hollywood props versus real battlefield tanks and the Abram driver name Biden 😅

[@Aceclimb84]

And how many of them real Battlefield tanks have been lost so far what's that a couple thousand they some real Battlefield tanks ! Lol stop its a tank just like all the rest of them they're all meant to kill each other , this entire War is so stupid ! It doesn't matter if it's a Russian tank a Western tank they all go boom and they all go pop but the Russian ones really pop straight up

[@slewone4905]

THat is a lie. It didn't get lost on the way to the front line.

[@Theinitedstatesofamerics12345]

It’s the M1A1 design and the crew has only been trained for a few weeks.

[@magnum6763]

@@Theinitedstatesofamerics12345 weeks???? you think these guys got more than 2 days of training?

[@UnderpaidGuardD9]

​@@magnum6763 I'm sure the dang ukrainians get sent alone with their one fucking tank and nothing else

[@Overwatch9]

"Oh no we lost 3 tanks, better spend a trillion dollars taxpayer money on a new tank project"

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

They were working on the abrams x program before any abrams were even being considered sent to ukraine.

[@Carmela-bixoxo]

Most tanks can destroy other tanks Who see 1st win.

[@JamesSmith-bo3po]

New line😅😅😅😅

[@theidiotictroublemaker2281]

Leopard 2 shot a t80 and it did nothing to the t80. The t80 shot back and the leopard crew was sent to god.

[@Nellis202]

@@theidiotictroublemaker2281 Really ? Is there footage of it ? I’m not doubting you , but I haven’t heard of it .

[@garytobin5120]

Nothing has changed the old axiom…if you can be seen, you can be hit, if hit, you can be killed. This applies to any tank on any battlefield.

[@ZETA14.88]

@@garytobin5120 an important tank doctrine is withstanding the first shot and react accordingly, not getting one shot in direct engagement

[@enixword2637]

So the Russians retired the Abram tank series in just 2 weeks of battle,,?? 😂😂😂😅😅

[@user-se6xn7tu5o]

👌🏻

[@VIPER276]

2 years into the war running around to only get destroyed in 5 min in it's first battle 🤣🤣🤣

[@The_Prince_Of_Crows]

Last week there was an article titled "The End of the Abrams Era..." in a major media publication in the US. I forget which one(Washington Post or The National Interest maybe) but the message was received in the west. 😂😂😂

[@legrandfromage6450]

@@VIPER276 well at least it got farther than the ones that sank in the mud past the axles.

[@legrandfromage6450]

@@The_Prince_Of_Crows the Us hasn't developed a new tank model in about 40 years. The ones they have are designed for cruising around on desert hardpan, not soft agricultural land, where they quickly bog down. They are also huge gas-guzzlers.

[@frankodom5200]

Why would anyone think that Russian spokespersons would state the truth?

[@bennettcrozier344]

Also yall gotta realize that the abrams in combat are the older ones from 20 years ago, not chemically composite armored new generation tanks.

[@mabvutophiri5422]

Rest in peace to the M1 Abrams tank's legacy

[@pa008]

What legacy..?

[@mabvutophiri5422]

@@pa008 haven't you never heard that American weapons are invincible

[@user-by3zo7yu9e]

​@@mabvutophiri5422let me correct that they're invisible on the battlegrounds cause they aren't there

[@timothyseeger5296]

You mean Rust in Pieces right 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@user-by3zo7yu9e]

@@timothyseeger5296 that's a good one🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@134iqsigmamale5]

Inform yourself, its already more than 10 abrams destroyed confiremd filmed.

[@user-lf2jh2ru9f]

It become yesterday news......

[@Theaverageazn247]

why are you shocked? if soviet era goat farmers can light abrams in yemen, why wouldnt modern russian AT weapons do the same?

[@ArchangeZ]

Well this video seems to be made around time where 3-4 were confirmed destroyed. Got uploaded today.

[@user-wh2bn6rk8q]

They just rely on a proof where destroyed tanks are visible clearly, there are more episodes stay invisible when drones couldn't take a picture or a video of them

[@Submerjer]

Actually, 2 to 3 thousand have been destroyed, according to the Russian MOD. This includes 47 destroyed by Putin himself (of which 8 were destroyed with his bare hands with moves he learned from Steven Seagal).

[@velvetthundr]

T-72B3 cost a fraction of what any Abrams variant in service. Roughly 500k USD in 2011. It'll be a lot less now, seeing the production has ramped up 10x

[@sturmfalkeg8306]

Why don't people here in the comments understand that it's not about the destructibility of a tank, but about the probability of survival of the crew. I've never seen an M1 Abrams cooking its crew or trying to send it to the moon. It's harder to replace a well-trained crew than it is to replace a tank. And in almost all videos that show footage of the destruction of Western vehicles, the crew survives. What cannot be said about Russian pressure cookers. In every possible version, I would always choose a Western tank.

[@whoguy4231]

M1 Abrams is a zero vs the Rus Washing Machine and Shovel.

[@Azercharty]

Don t forget the mighty log at the back of it

[@nialpollitt3410]

It's turret is also a fantastic low earth orbit vehicle.

[@lmeza1983]

Tungsten shovels apparently

[@MrExplicitblack]

The famous Abrams fought against disarmed Iraq, unarmed or armed with AK 47s Talibans. The Abrams have now really engaged in a hot front and it's just a "tiger paper".

[@DavidHolguln-vi2wj]

What The Hell Is A 'Tiger Paper" ??? Someone Doesn't Have Very Much Schooling, Maybe This Is A Goat Hearder Texting.

[@Stubbino]

@@DavidHolguln-vi2wj They mean paper tiger. Can you speak the same language as them?

[@slavUKR]

​@@DavidHolguln-vi2wjww2 german tank Tiger 1 were thought as a formidable one...but the armor is 100mm front, which can be easily penetrated if not angled correctly

[@ameernasruddin5669]

​@@DavidHolguln-vi2wj Paper tiger mean someone who appears powerful or dangerous, but is actually weak or ineffectual.. bcuz tiger is powerful but it's actually just a paper so it's weak

[@KaiserHooray]

@@DavidHolguln-vi2wj Look at this clown capitalizing all his words in the same sentence.

[@lanorothwolf2184]

Also, what is shown in the video is not exactly an M1 Abrams, it's some sort of mine clearing vehicle or another type of specialized utility vehicles based on M1 chassis. It has no main cannon.

[@nastygothic666]

Try that shot again against a properly upgraded Abrams. The ones sent to Ukraine aren't using depleted Uranium armour and are not likely using the most updated iterations.

[@filin1624]

похоже что распиаренная западная техника не предназначена для долгосрочного боя , тем более на украинском чернозёме .

[@haldakcze420]

"American weapons are made to be sold - Russian weapons are made to win." Learn this!

[@garyg736]

I have been saying that for years US makes weapons for profit while Russia builds weapons that need to be built

[@markbulley1179]

lolz! Aren't they all?! Besides, the Abrams Ukraine have in a basic form and not latest gen which would annihilate at T72 along with a Challenger 2 & 3 which is far superior. Not mention, NLAWS and Javelines make a mess of your much lauded T72 also. Pop goes the weasel.

[@gunmasterx1164]

Russian weapons are not winning in Ukraine

[@vk67new67]

@@markbulley1179 _"which is far superior"_ lolz! Good joke but you needn't be a clown here.

[@culer]

​@@markbulley1179 that is true. I wouldn't share my best variation of any weapon with anyone

[@devonmyhre766]

So they are proud of destroying a 70s tank with a 70s tank that got modernized?

[@gregorteply9034]

Yes.

[@Your_Local_Gore_Enjoyer]

yeah, because the western media are always saying how the Abrams Tank can be a "game changer" and can easily destroy Russians Tanks

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

80's but yeah

[@_Igor_Popkov]

Is it the Russians’ fault that in 50 years you have not been able to make a newer tank?

[@_Igor_Popkov]

Why shouldn't Russians be proud of destroying Nazi tanks? Especially those whom the enemy himself considers the strongest, most protected and formidable? And is it the Russians’ fault that in 50 years the United States has not been able to create a new tank? America believes that its tank is adequate to modern warfare - so why shouldn’t the Russians be proud of the destruction of this equipment?

[@Zeitaluq]

I am pretty sure a lot of Abrams tanks were lost to Improvised Explosive Devices in both theatres of conflicts

[@chrisbeerad8835]

its not the tank its the crew . Doug McGregor warned that sending tanks to people not trained and well practiced would be a deaths sentence .

[@ComradeRick]

Ну они же еще и самолёты хотят отправить, точнее уже все решено, учат и ждут момента.

[@lmeza1983]

You need to realize most of the "hight tech" stuff is being operated by mer- cenaries

[@mitchellculberson9336]

The depleted uranium was stripped from the tanks & the main gun is still a 105mm not a 120 mm.These 31 Abrams are the plain old M1A1.

[@alexlo7708]

No, the Chobham armour is standard. US only pull off reactive armour as an excuse, had the tank being easily destroyed by Russia. By the way, the Ukrainian adding their reactive armour to the tank. Nevertheless, the M1 had gone in one hit.

[@ellisgoulding]

you can also clearly see that this is a m1150 assault breacher vehicle, with no main armament.

[@Macias78ful]

@@alexlo7708 Why would they need an excuse? It isn't the first time an M1 has been lost in combat. That version as old as it is has a 7:1 K/D ratio against the T72 going back to the first Gulf War.

[@alexlo7708]

@@Macias78ful They really need an excuse. Ukraine war is a real battlefield. It isn't kindergarten for the US like Iraq war. Some news reported most Iraqi T72s were destroyed by close air attack, not by tank duel. By the way, this M1 has the newest record of 0:1 K/D against the Russian T72b3. It was killed in one hit. Completely killed that all tank's crew couldn't escape.

[@Macias78ful]

@alexlo7708 The battle of 73 Easting helped end the Cold War buddy. It proved that Russian gear can't hold up to American gear. It's true even today, which is why France is now the number 2 exporter of weapons. As for the battle of 73 Easting, within the first 30 minutes, about 50 T72 are destroyed along with about 25 APC. By the end of the battle, 160 T72s and 180 APC were destroyed at the cost of 1 Bradley. It was the last major tank battle of the 20th century. But you're right. The US makes war look like it's going against kindergarteners. If the US invades Ukraine, we're in Kiev in a matter of weeks and would be dealing with an insurgency. An insurgency is what Russia has to look forward too but they can't beat the Ukrainians who are using 30 year old hand me down tanks. Sit down, son, because your hero Putin knows the US would rock the Russians. His only defense is to remind the world that Russia has nukes every few weeks.

[@rostyslavadamchuk3300]

One T-72 modified... agains single Abrams: whel you got to be a Ballie Dancer!

[@ZB411]

how can you be sure that It was killed in 1 shot? Russian propaganda cannot be trusted lol

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

fr

[@alexsem1756]

what is you resources, stop watching fake news

[@Lordchippingtonreal]

Speaking from my small experience from tanks, as military personal you are required to atleast count how many rounds you had before leaving your BOP or FOB. So the russians probably would find it really hard and stupidly petty to try to lie about how many shots were fired. plus an anylist with the tank's corpse photos could look for any entry wounds the tank may have suffered. if theres more than one entry wound then that means it wasnt 1 shot. if its more, then more were shot.

[@user-bu7sr1bo6n]

@@Lordchippingtonreal do you think they really took it out in one shot?

[@artenio164]

@@user-bu7sr1bo6nif any tank is penetrated it will be destroyed 95% of the time. So there is nothing special about this really

[@henthust9784]

I'm tired of the phrase 'game-changer' whenever the West introduce another 'firewood' into the Russian stove.

[@mutantos6778]

It's a game changer for M1's legend :P

[@StrataVision]

isn't it what the media says? they say stuff like that to grab more attention

[@KaiserHooray]

The West is all about marketing.

[@trevortaylor5501]

It was a reflex missile shot from the barrel from 7 kms away with the help of drones, also it was a T72-B3M tank 2023 model.

[@nemiw4429]

7km?! Source?

[@trade1713]

It is not a standard shell, it's guided missile. This is the very reason Russians installed this capability in their tanks. ​@@nemiw4429

[@MrCshx]

@@nemiw4429 He is misleading you. It was 2024 modification with specially build version for that exact task - T72-B3M FMREP (for Mother Russian and Emperor Putin). And shot has been done right from the Kremlin square. But don't worry Russians have only one of it's kind

[@slavUKR]

​@@nemiw4429warthunder

[@fernandojohnsen7639]

Dude 7km wtf. it was around 700 Meters

[@thulomanchay]

The superiority of the Abrams is on its ability to spot the enemy tank first and at greater distances. If the Abrams is spotted first, it is as vulnerable as any other tank.

[@pliskenx51mm83]

People act like the Abrams is immortal. Its not. In fact its over 30+ years old and we needed to upgrade years ago.

[@agoogleuseranonymous2658]

Calling the T-72 an Abram killer is a stretch. But any tank modernized can be lethal. The real Apex predator of tanks are drones and artillery shells. But yeah a while ago before they got introduced, the Western media was reporting that these tanks should be able to stand multiple hits from Russian tanks ... I guess not.

[@mutantos6778]

Maybe they were reffering to the hits from coaxial 7,62?

[@mctony0965]

Well the Abrams do have a major weak spot on the front it’s the neck of the turret since it’s huge spot like the video said they shot it between the turret and the hull of the tank. You pretty much kill the hole crew in there

[@koiyujo1543]

as aamerican gen z it's like people think the abrams is invincible when it's not, tanks are actually pretty vulnerable machines in warfare if are not under infantry protection. The media and such potrays that the T 72s or the T80 or T90 would have a hard time penetrating the tanks armor, yes on the front armor, but the weak spots like the turrets neck or the sides or rear are very much able to be penatrated even by a T72s cannon even if it seems outdated it still is a very capable weapon this shows for the first time finally we are seeing abrams actually being destroyed and being knocked out, it doesn't matter how advanced your equipment is what matters is how you use technology against tanks like the t72 against more modern ones.

[@magnum6763]

frontally it can withstand hits yes, but this seemed to be from the fucking side. side shots are death sentences for literally everything. just an edit, i noticed a comment saying its a ABV and looked at the video again, and yeah its a damn recovery vehicle. Those have stripped armor to allow for the extra weight, cutting into both the front and side.

[@erraldstyler]

@@mutantos6778 they were referring to the enemy commanders handgun

[@extraterrestrialfascisti7625]

The M1 tank is not invincible. No tank is. But I’d rather be in an Abram’s than any other tank in current use.

[@jsilvess7722]

Those blow out panels are pretty amazing

[@agreenandscaredtube6078]

have you considered the Leopard 2 A7?

[@HDShayThePro]

Try to take on an M1A2 SEP V3. They got these Abrams because we don't really use these ones anymore.

[@donny5885]

The first one to put effective hits on target usually wins the fight. But I also noticed how the turret is still attached to the hull, and the blowout panels appear to have functioned properly. It’s possible even that some members of the crew could have survived this hit. I’d say that’s markedly better performance than most if not all of the T series tanks I’ve seen.

[@fredericvolatil8910]

he US military-industrial complex makes objects ten times more expensive and not more efficient than those of Russians in almost every field. The poverty in the United States is appalling, given the cost to the State of the defence budget. It is a permanent attack on the citizens.

[@user-ox1pl3po9k]

US weapons are very expensive but usually good. Russian stuff is cheap because they don't give a shit about their soldiers. They'd rather have ten cheap tanks than one really good one. Which is often a good strategy. But again, they don't give a shit about how many men and how many tanks they lose.

[@absinth2k1]

A US worker earn 10 times more then vasily.....thats the reason 😂😂😂

[@onlytrue5169]

the point is the following: the Americans will always explain their loss as a lack of extra protection, this reminds me of March 27, 1999, when the Serbian army shot down an invisible F-117A, the Americans' answer was due to a malfunction, which is a notorious lie, as well as the other two that were hit, one landed in Zagreb (Croatia) and the other in Tuzla (Bosnia and Herzegovina)

[@Slaktrax]

And by an old Soviet era SAM IIRC(?)

[@ceu160193]

@@Slaktrax Yes, because that old Soviet era SAM had optical targeting, so whole "radar stealth" thing didn't really matter.

[@dejanpavlovic9748]

Zbog obaranja F 117A srbi su se izvinili, nisu znali da je avion nevidljiv...

[@monpetitpeid3582]

​@@Slaktrax A 1956 S200 missile against US stealth fighter 😢😢😮.

[@monpetitpeid3582]

​@Slaktrax Putin did say they would look very beautiful burning.

[@galacticmarshin4510]

If the M1 that got destroyed in one shot was just a M1 and not the M1A1 then it's easy to take out with modern rounds. The tank doesen't have the depleted uranium armor that the M1A1 has nor the 120mm. If they had a M1A1 then it'd be a different story, one M1A1 could easily wipe out 5 t-72s without even getting shot.

[@gabecollins5585]

I wonder how it would be if it was an m1a2

[@galacticmarshin4510]

@@gabecollins5585 abit better (if it was a American crew), the performance gap between the A1 and A2 is about how well the crew is trained.

[@gabecollins5585]

@@galacticmarshin4510 That’s a huge deciding factor as well.

[@galacticmarshin4510]

@@gabecollins5585 I looked further into the tanks the US sent to Ukraine and found out that they are A2s with their depleted uranium armor stripped out, making it a M1 with a 120 and nothing else added to it….

[@erraldstyler]

Keep dreaming. An Abrams will not take 5 shots from a T72, nor will any other tank in the world.

[@Mavve69]

Duh, they were driving the abrams straight when it identifies as a they/them.

[@user-kv4nc4nx8f]

I’ve been a tank engineer for eight years and never once heard any body this brainless in the comment section.

[@ellisgoulding]

yeah dude for real this comment section is just ruski bots and idiots, i'm losing braincells just reading this shit.

[@VoidWalker2047]

They’re just coping for the loses on the Russian side. It’d be a waste of time trying to explain anything to them

[@JANFU_Nova]

welcome to the unwashed masses! enjoy your stay.

[@niXity9000]

It is just literally a basic russian propaganda video, lightly masked as something else

[@gamerdad9870]

sounds like you made a Disston Tank

[@amacca2085]

Don’t hear about T72’s now usually T80’s and T90’s

[@swiftusmaximus5651]

the T72B3 is vastly upgraded like a F15 A and a F15 E. The updated t72 fire control system is about as good as the Wests and Rooskie ammo may be superior?

[@canon5dmk336]

Here the subject is that the « best tank in the world « is open like a beer can. 😂

[@user-wu7ul7lb8j]

А завалил т72, снаряду пофиг абра с или миркава😂

[@zedeyejoe]

Well the T90 is a re-badged T72,

[@swiftusmaximus5651]

@@zedeyejoeA T80 is a T72 with a turbine engine because the M! has a Turbine. Now they are re powering them to diesel . The t90 is a lil bit bigger tank. The modern fire control systems, the ammo that can get thru all tank armor and superior numbers is what counts . Yes the M1 is tougher but if hit properly they go down with 1 shot too

[@Bulletinstel]

fun fact: the abrams doesnt have its full armour

[@VLADDD-THE-SANCTIONS-IMPALER]

Abrams sent to Ukraine was like giving someone a laptop with Windows Version 3

[@vovak4735]

DOS version 😂😂😂

[@Jin-Ro]

I remember a US Tank Commander interviewed during the end of the Iraq invasion. Paraphrasing "It was a turkey shoot, if the Iraqi's were in our tanks and we in theirs, we still would have won" A tank is only as good as it's crew. All a Tanks job is, is to protect the crew as much as possible, not be 100% invulnerable. And I'm not an American making excuses, I'm English.

[@828enigma6]

Thank you.

[@MrTeddy12397]

Challenger 3 sucks lmao

[@alexandrosgrivas4406]

not at all he iraqis had experienced crews in iraq technology played the biggest role the abrams had way better opitics and could spot iraqi tanks over way bigger distances usually the shot at them with the coaxial machineguns to give the iraqis a fighting chance also americans had night vision and the iraqis didnt

[@dmc8418]

I'm surprised there are any T-72s left.

[@5.56GreenTip]

At first I thought the Abram’s tank just got ammo racked and activated the blow out panels but smoke looks like it’s pouring out of the frontal armor too.

[@DisEnchantedPersons]

The ability to adapt on the battlefield wins battles, not old men that can't climb stairs

[@marr5969]

Of course an opposing force will always say they took out a superior tank. All tanks are not indestructible. The one thing that counts is who will survive the impact and fight another day.

[@dennisrichards7994]

Nope , nobody brags more than the yanks , wait till that f 35 piece of crap tries it in Ukraine !!!

[@theidiotictroublemaker2281]

Yeah they wouldn't make a big deal out of it if it weren't for Americans saying it would eat Russian tanks like in Iraq 😂😂😂😂. For example Russia captured French amx10 rc and destroyed Ceaser artillery also, they destroyed challenger 2 ect... But didn't make a big deal out of it like with Abrams solely because the Russians wanted the Abrams dead.

[@kitanisthe]

"suggests that the lack of confidence in the Abrams.". Odd to claim this.. considering how many T-72's have been destroyed and you want to claim that the loss of three M-1's is a complete lack of faith in a weapon system? This is the same type of thinking that the Press of the world is claiming tanks are now obsolete due to the Ukraine war...

[@pauncristiannicolae9401]

they shooting apfsds rounds with more than 450mm armour penetration,flying with a speed more than 1500 m/second any tank can get destroyed by these types or rounds

[@techpriest8965]

While his voice does sound real, some pronunciation sounds very much AI and clumsy.

[@majesticscope6782]

Yeah Ukrainian bot thinks

[@hectorthewellendowed570]

it is an AI voice for sure. Just feed it script and record it.

[@VIPER276]

It's not a AI you can hear him breathing at time.

[@konstantins4984]

That’s a real person, I saw his interviews

[@damondiehl5637]

You can hear him taking a breath between sentences. Most AI voices don't do that.

[@ouner-699]

It doesn’t matter how the Abrams was destroyed, it is important that Abrams is not a problem for the Russians!

[@rgp8038]

No weapons are a problem with Russia.

[@smitbar11]

Be interesting to hear how many of Putler's Russian tanks have been lost, plenty! But the Russkies and this propaganda channel will conveniently fail to tell you that!

[@user-ud2fc3hj9o]

Putin told you right before sending your equipment that Abrams, Leopards, Bradleys would burn faster than that paper with the agreement on the transfer of NATO equipment to Ukraine ...))) Does history teach Western countries nothing?)) Every 100 years, a Russian soldier has to repeat to another Hegemon (Genghis Khan, Napoleon, Hitler...Biden?) A historical lesson:Russia is never so weak that it can be conquered ...)) Brave soldiers of the "United Europe" have already come to us on the best tanks at that time, changing the course of the game, as they would say now: Tigers and Panthers, with black crosses on the sides ...))) With the best aviation in the world-Luftwaffe ...))) If you try to forget about the result of that trip, now in the era of Thermonuclear weapons and hypersound, it can be easily and quickly recalled ...))) So the result, NATO superweapons, "capable of turning the tide of the game": Javelin, Bayraktar, Leopard, Hymers, Abrams, Challenger, Patriot-all this is thrown into the trash ...))All samples of these weapons are already in Kubinka and are being carefully studied by our engineers ...)))) There is still the last most terrible weapon that has not yet been seen in Ukraine and which can really turn the tide of the war-you need to call John Rambo!!)))

[@anatoleondulet4881]

I was told that it was a "wunderwaffe", I was fooled ?

[@ScottishGamer4632]

But losing half their tanks to a small country is a problem💀