The Insane Engineering of the M1 Abrams

Sign up to Brilliant using my link and get 20% off your an annual subscription: brilliant.org/realengineering
Watch this video ad free on Nebula: nebula.tv/videos/realengineer...
Links to everything I do:
beacons.ai/brianmcmanus
Get your Real Engineering shirts at: standard.tv/collections/real-...
Credits:
Writer/Narrator: Brian McManus
Editor: Dylan Hennessy
Animator: Mike Ridolfi
Animator: Eli Prenten
Sound: Graham Haerther
Thumbnail: Simon Buckmaster
Spanish VO: Josi Gold
French VO: Lorraine Boissoneault
References:
Select imagery/video supplied by Getty Images
Thank you to AP Archive for access to their archival footage.
Music by Epidemic Sound: epidemicsound.com/creator
Thank you to my patreon supporters: Abdullah Alotaibi, Adam Flohr, Henning Basma, Hank Green, William Leu, Tristan Edwards, Ian Dundore, John & Becki Johnston. Nevin Spoljaric, Jason Clark, Thomas Barth, Johnny MacDonald, Stephen Foland, Alfred Holzheu, Abdulrahman Abdulaziz Binghaith, Brent Higgins, Dexter Appleberry, Alex Pavek, Marko Hirsch, Mikkel Johansen, Hibiyi Mori. Viktor Józsa, Ron Hochsprung

[@RealEngineering]

For the first time ever this episode is available with both French and Spanish voice overs. We have also made a sound effect and music free dub under “English (Ireland)” for anyone they prefers the most pure version of my voice 😂

[@user-el6tm4iw1r]

Absolutely looking forward to you dominating the european audience. 🤗

[@MercuryCells]

I was put on the English Ireland track by default and was super confused as to why no music lmao

[@gmeinero]

la calidad del audio en español es mejorable, también la locución está lejos de la calidad de la pista original en inglés

[@iemozzomei]

Haha, it defaulted to the music free version as well. I didn't notice the difference. Hm, who needs music when we got your dulcet tones anyways hah!

[@Sirbozo]

Mm

[@MrGoesBoom]

The fact that this tank is technically over 40 years old ( I say technically since it's been constantly updated ) yet is still considered a top tier asskicker is definite kudos to the people who designed them.

[@micahmurphy4546]

The same could be said for the F15

[@dominicbrunsmeier]

Considered by whom?

[@Attaxalotl]

@@dominicbrunsmeier By almost everyone who knows anything about modern tanks

[@samsonsoturian6013]

@@dominicbrunsmeier You

[@morlov4076]

it's robust and capable, but no top tier at all. From 'really in service' ones that will be T-90M and K2

[@saeklin]

Love the ever-increasing layers of armor for specific scenarios. "The lab nerds told us to spread a thick layer of chunky peanut butter on top. We don't understand why, but they assure us its 100% necessary."

[@funveeable]

US military industrial complex is always bad unless it's not US soldiers using the weapons. Since Americans are pretty stupid, this should be how the US becomes richer. Sell weapons to fighting nations. Too bad we are just giving them away for free.

[@hkr667]

I expect no longer than a year after a new video called "The insane logistics of peanut butter armor"

[@protoquark]

If you read this comment in Cave Johnson's voice from Portal 2 it's even better.

[@KoishiVibin]

Composite armor is like any other armor. Have lots of it, place it at an angle.

[@JackRabbitSlim]

@@hkr667 "Newer variants also come with a jelly substance layered in between the peanut butter side plates, to absorb additional impact, as it was found that just peanut butter alone would result in too brittle a surface. One small downside of this revolutionary armour was discovered when Russian forces unleashed a flock of hungry pigeons"

[@QuilloManar]

"The exact specifications of the M1 Abrams armour is strictly classified" War Thunder Players: "Not for long."

[@user-oc9me2tr2n]

Корнет уже рассекретил 😂 И дроны за 500 долларов плевали с верху морковкой от рпг 7 😅

[@blanchbacker]

@@user-oc9me2tr2n Вы должны говорить по-русски более тщательно, с лучшей грамматикой. Ваш троллинг не работает, когда мы не можем понять перевод!

[@user-oc9me2tr2n]

@@blanchbacker я говорю что шутки скоро закончатся, перестанут вообще все люди шутить, на носу первая ядерная война, а теперь представим, сможет ли этот танк запустится без ЭМИ

[@blanchbacker]

@@user-oc9me2tr2n you wish

[@crypto_que]

We were on patrol and FREEZING one night when we came up on the Cav & took a break. Man this tank is a life saver the TC in the turret provides watch and the heat from the engine keeps us warm (and dry) until it’s time to move on. I love this tank.

[@maximusmiles8435]

The hot exhaust is also good for making a nice hot cup of joe.

[@CCM1199]

Infantry loved us especially in the winter time because the back of the tank was always nice and hot. I loved sleeping on the back deck of the tank since my sleeping bag becomes a sauna during the evening.

[@bryanhill3041]

Yeah but the noise will drive you crazy!!!

[@shawncalhoun1363]

Also good to heat up some water for a nice shave in the morning. But don’t get too close or you’ll melt the Velcro on your rain gear.

[@easy_eight2810]

Fun fact: The M1 and many modern MBTs can travel upwards of 100kph, it's just that their transmission is governed to around 68-72kph to preserve the tank's lifespan and for the safety of the crew

[@alantoon5708]

Back in 1990 after the invasion of Kuwait the Georgia Guard ran their M-1 IP's down the interstate with governors disabled and at the road speeds as described.

[@anthonykaiser974]

The initial M1s could easily.

[@Inv1ns1bl]

then there is russian tanks which can barely get up to 60 km/h

[@concept5631]

​@@Inv1ns1blThat's what being a kleptocratic mafia state gets ya.

[@dominiklevai7102]

@@Inv1ns1bl Sure, let's just ignore the T-80 lmao.

[@gooflydo]

When I was in the military (2000-2004). I remember these things being Insanely quiet when they needed to be. Like people had to put up glow lights in order to make sure the tanks didn't run them over by accident while they were sleeping. I thought it was very stupid until I heard one only 30 feet from where I was getting ready to go to bed, and I could barely hear it. It was very eerie, like seeing an elephant tiptop or something.

[@GardenGuy1943]

Yes. I knew a man that died from this exact scenario. Sad.

[@imaXkillXya]

I hated when they would shoot right next to me in the middle of the night while I was trying to get my 2 hours of sleep. Then I saw a gunnery from afar and it was glorious.

[@gabagool...not_italian...]

Did you commit any war crimes?

[@legofanofnz2466]

​@Repent and believe in Jesus Christ If you read this, I would recommend starting conversations with people, face to face. It's easy to ignore people on the internet, but direct conversations carry much more impact. In Jesus's name we pray,

[@SCFPV]

​@@gabagool...not_italian... Did you? No, of course not, you've never even served. You just sit safely back behind your keyboard and screen and enjoy the safety and freedom the military gives you the ability to enjoy. Keep criticizing the ones who keep you safe, whilst they do what needs to be done, and have the balls to do it, unlike you.

[@arnelnarvae9742]

As a retired USMC Tanker who participated in Desert Shield/Storm, OIF, OEF, this is a comprehensive and most interesting video. Thanks for making it! SEMPER FI...SEMPER TANKS

[@nexpro6118]

Marine Corps no longer has/uses tanks.

[@arnelnarvae9742]

@@nexpro6118, thank you, I am quite aware of that. Thanks & cheers! 🙂

[@nexpro6118]

@@arnelnarvae9742 I didn't know if you did, brother! Semper Fi!!!

[@MrCmon113]

@@arnelnarvae9742 Non iam tanks. : (

[@CCM1199]

I worked with some 1812's in 2007 in the RAMADI AO....Their callsign: Heavy Metal. They were a great bunch of hardcore tankers then. I am a retired Tanker with a K4 Identifier

[@michaelabrams1244]

Forty years of top performance. What a tribute to all involved, from designers to operators, to maintenance. Thanks to all who serve(d)!

[@arthas640]

it is an amazing tank. The Soviet's always thought they made the best tanks in the world and had the edge over the US but Desert Storm proved how dominant the Abrams was. At the time it was the larges tank battle since WW2 and in part due to the power of the Abrams it lasted a matter of minutes with the Soviet built, Soviet trained Iraqi tank fleet was in ruins while the Abrams took nearly nearly no casualties and the survivability of the American armored forces was so good there were only 2 dead Americans and 1 was a scout whereas the Soviet T-72s and Chinese Type 69's were curb-stomped into slag. The Commieboos and Vatniks always make excuses like "the Iraqi's weren't well trained", "the Iraqi's didnt use the right tactics/doctrine", or "the Iraqi's had tanks from the 70s" but the Iraqi's were mainly elite Republican Guard in major tank battles like Medina Ridge, they were Soviet trained and used the correct tactics like deploying on the ridge using it as cover, and the Abram's is only a few years younger than the T-72s it dominates. As old as it is even if the T-14 Armata ever gets out of the prototype stage and they actually enter combat I'd be surprised if it can take out an Abrams, especially considering Russian quality. The Abrams might be pushing 40 but with upgrades it's pretty comparable to newer tanks.

[@koekiejam18]

@@arthas640you forgot to mention that the Abrams smaller brother (the bradley) ALSO wiped the floor with russian tanks despite it being an IFV.

[@anderstermansen130]

yet we still dont have electric tanks!

[@tedarcher9120]

T-64 is in service for 60 years, so not super impressive

[@michaelabrams1244]

@@tedarcher9120 60 years is great, but does that make 40 years unimpressive? No. It is still a tremendous accomplishment and should be appreciated. Perspective over bias.

[@kit888]

16:45 The Chieftain cannon is rifled, the Leopard cannon is smooth bore. So even though both are 120mm, they can't use the same ammunition.

[@theherk]

Can they share manufacture processes? Genuinely curious. If so, you'd still benefit from same bore, with respect to front lines or near field manufacture.

[@Appletank8]

IIRC the next gen Challenger is shifting in favor to use a smoothbore 120mm.

[@First-Last_name]

​@@Appletank8 the Rheinmetall Rh-120 will replace both Challenger2 and M1 Abrams main guns. Everyone wants a Rh-120 to do the shooting.

[@voin5371]

@@theherk Not exactly, with a rifled barrel it is designed to spin the round so the projectile you're firing will naturally require to spin as a requirement to achieve accuracy like a HESH round or have a mechanism that mitigates or ignores the rifling of a barrel so the projectile is unaffected by the rifling, I believe they used specialized APFSDS rounds where the sabot is designed to ignore as much of the rifling as possible to stop the dart spinning as much when exiting the barrel. In the end, you still need munitions designed around the barrel concept, smoothbore or rifled, to work at their peak and remain accurate and precise less you want your projectile to go of course.

[@Deilwynna]

@@First-Last_name m1 abrams already have the Rh-120 gun, just that its designated differently in the american system, in usa its designated as M256 while in germany its Rh-120 L/44 or Rh-120 L/55 depending if its the short gun (as used on earlier leopard 2 models) or long gun (used on later leopard 2 models) version

[@RyzawaVT]

The engine heat signature animation was super cool. The 3d model of the interior is also gnarly!

[@FlyboyHelosim]

Gnarly. LOL

[@invisibleink7379]

Mighty 🇺🇸

[@TarisRedwing]

Still just warm enough out the back to keep cold hands warm in Korea 😅

[@thorwaldjohanson2526]

Does anyone know where that animation was from? The best I've seen so far.

[@JoboMcFakeAF]

"Bad News" written on the barrel😂

[@catalintimofti1117]

Truly the worst for anything in front of it ☠️

[@Devinci297]

I was a tank mechanic for 5 years! Great stuff. My favorite part was taking apart the engine completely one time and rebuilding it. My worst was replacing the transmission! 😆

[@Nox-qo1ws]

That's wholesome

[@HypnosisBear]

LoL

[@monketok141]

Why does this read like sth my 7 year old would write at school as a recount 😂

[@NoName-cn3cp]

​@@monketok141 because he's lying

[@JamesBrown-ux9ds]

​​@@NoName-cn3cp How do you know? Rebuilding the engine is done in a shop, not at the vehicle, and it's demanding and needs knowledge, skills and expertise. Doing a chassis could be outside in mud, darkness, rain or snow as well using tools weighing pounds each - looking after and calibrating injection nozzles for instance is a different job.

[@The_Viscount]

For those not familiar with US designation convention, M is short for Model, and A is Alteration. SEP refers to a specific series of upgraded equipment. So the Model 1, Alteration 2 with a Systems Upgrad Package becomes M1A2 SEP. Abrams is the model name. Specifically, the tank is named for Creighton Abrams, a Vietnam era General. After all, we have a lot of pieces of equipment called M1, so it helps to specify the model's name.

[@naksachaisaejane1982]

I always thought A is for "adopted change" and E is for "experimental change" in old system. Well, close, I suppose?

[@anthonydale1169]

@@naksachaisaejane1982 The KZbin channel "Not What You Think" did a great video on the aircraft designations and what each letter stands for. Hadn't thought about designations for tanks and other vehicles. kzbin.info/www/bejne/iYbcYpSpibRnnK8 Although the US don't follow their own labelling system very well 😂

[@Horseshoecrabwarrior]

Abrams was also a WW2 tank commander, if memory serves.

[@Deathbomb9]

System Enhancement Package.

[@CheemsofRegret]

​@@Horseshoecrabwarrior yes, Col Creighton Abrams, under Patton's command. His Sherman nicknamed "Cobra King" spearheaded the operation to relieve the 101st in Bastogne.

[@johngardner2807]

I was chosen to work on the xm project,in its early developement,due to my MOS of 63Hotel20(Heavy wheeled/tracked repairman). The hydrogas chamber kept leaking ,so we chose the torque rod system. I left the military,in 1981,after 9 years service. Seeing all the improvements,makes me proud to see the tank has become so advanced,and safer ,for the crew !

[@ajmush3131]

And your Proud? Your talents could've went to making this world a better place, instead you chose the route of Death. Feeling proud of yourself, helping the ruling elite take control of any foreign country that isn't a slave to the west. Go to bed everyday knowing you had a hand in every single death NATO has caused all over the world. Especially the 3 Million killed in the Middle East. Must be proud that you had a hand in snuffing out the lives of all the little ones and/or their parents. I'm so proud of you, great job. God will have questions for you when you meet him.

[@user-md8ri9ot3f]

The sheer quality of production of these videos absolutely boggles the mind. These animations are top of the line. Great work from your team..

[@joeobrien196]

Such technician detail simplified,deserves recognition.

[@Ihavpickle]

Agreed daddy

[@FrigidDeadline]

I've been learning about tanks from all kinds of sources for a long time but never realized torsion bars have to be asymetrical. I had also never seen an explanation like that about hydraulic suspension. Good stuff.

[@TheCostantinus]

Honestly it's a shame that the M1 Abrams doesn't have hydrogas suspensions, but I guess simpler mechanics are more reliable on the battlefield

[@aaronbaker2186]

​@@dove3853 raptor Jesus or zombie Jesus?

[@outerrealm]

But he can't be bothered to include miles along with kilometers/KPH, unlike most other channels which include both. Yeah, I'd say that's insane

[@sukarmatakamu]

@@outerrealm cope

[@Joe_P]

They don't have to be. Ideally they are not. They made them this way on the Abrams because they could make them longer (more torsion). If you made them even, you'd have shorter shafts connecting to a bulkhead in the middle (presumably)

[@stefanlaskowski6660]

I actually saw the tank when it was still the XM1 at McGregor Range. Two of my buddies were tank commanders during the testing phase, they were both in the 3rd ACR. I heard a lot about it from them.

[@kyrg]

An idling M1 is an Infantryman's favorite hand warmer.

[@AmariLambo]

Crunchy’s

[@user-ps7do7kp7b]

In high school I wanted to be a Marine tanker. I enlisted and got put in artillery, but I served with a few tankers and being on base, you are bound to see everything else you are stationed with, so it was always a treat to see an Abrams roll by. I never saw them on the range unfortunately.

[@mikebrase5161]

When I was in 1st Cavalry Division back in the mid 90's we saw the next battalion over in the motor pool stenciling USMC on all their M1A2 Abrams tanks and then driving them to the rail head.

[@wilsonlima1522]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/qqvJq2WOoZeUeqM

[@GLARebel]

Artillery is awesome too though. Ain't nothing more satisfying than firing the big cannons.

[@nexpro6118]

In, 2023, the Marine Corps no longer has/no longer uses tanks.

[@Mace8388]

was with tankers on my first deployment and they are fun to watch ride full speed and fire downrange, I also got to throw rounds and gun for a M777

[@arenio]

the model of the abrams in this video is insane. i love that dedication.

[@JS-br7bo]

What does model mean😃

[@Stierenkloot]

@@JS-br7bo 3D model?

[@JackRabbitSlim]

@@JS-br7bo An attractive person whose aesthetically-pleasing body & distinctive facial features are used to market a product such as clothes.

[@lars3509]

​@@JS-br7bo A model is a subjective representation of reality only taking into account the neccessary details while disregarding the rest. Models can be a real, physical object or pure theoretical/mathematical concepts. All models of any type have in common that they are wrong, yet are similar enough in some scope, that they're a useful concept to investigate instead of the real system.

[@panzer948]

@@JackRabbitSlim what about model kits of cars, tanks, and planes with 1000 pieces we built as kids (and that I still do to this day). So you have people models, 3D digital models (in a computer), and real 3D actual models built to a certain scale of the real thing.... You know that.... So what does 1:1 scale mean?

[@TheWildcard4542000]

Started out as a loader in this thing during desert storm, then driver, then gunner and then track commander. Loved it, smooth, fast, accurate and a beast. I miss tha turbine wind up soooo much.

[@kakashi_senpai042]

Great work! Your engineering skills and attention to detail are really impressive. Well done!

[@gary2smooth]

There is no better auto loader in the world than Greg off several monster energy drinks

[@Nefville]

I once parked my car in a row of 8 or 10 M1 Abrams at Ft. Knox over at the motor pool because the tiny parking lot there was full and I had a printer to replace. When I was walking in I turned around to see my Ford Focus in a line of multi-million dollar, state of the art tanks and it brought a huge smile to my face. I'll never forget it 😂😂

[@x-ray_apha_delta-9403]

Nice 😂

[@LizardVideoDude]

That would have made a great picture, especially with a caption like "Hey lil' bro." 😉😂

[@vidura]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA OHHH WOWW HAAHHHHAHHAHHHAAHHHAAHHHAA. YOU A FUNNY GUY HAHHAHHAHHHAAHHHAA. REAL FUNNY GAHHHAHHAHHHH.

[@mikeg1433]

@@viduraOk Fouad

[@TruckerMike74]

I remember wheb they accidentally backed a Abrams over the fence on to the tank trail

[@MindlessAtrocity]

Retired 6 months ago from this beast. I fuckin miss it everyday. No matter how many times I see a video pop up about the M1, I always have to watch it. I love how the Armor community is so small I always see friends in these vids. I'll also add that the US Army does not use the HEAT round anymore except to basically get rid of expiring training lots. The MPAT has been the round of choice over that, which will soon most likely be replaced by the new AMP round that many have seen around the internet.

[@ToddJustman]

Best job I ever had

[@kromevony1446]

Buddy of mine J Wyckoff was on the ground floor of introducing these critters. He said they were ok to wrench on but drank fuel like a starving man eats.

[@shmallkine]

would you happen to know what those smoke launchers are at 16:24?

[@anderstermansen130]

when do they release electric tanks?

[@joshdavis8928]

The smell of the combustible cases mixed with JP8, cigarett smoke and ass is something I'll never forget.

[@GamerBro22299]

Metal hunk of beast! Also the 3D visuals of delving further into the tank is insane! good stuff

[@sshah2545]

The sheer quality of production of these videos absolutely boggles the mind

[@raphaelsantiago9387]

Actually one of the reasons why the Turbine engine was chosen over a diesel engine is because of noise. While the Turbine engine does produce a louder noise at closer distances, at longer distances the diesel engine is louder because the higher frequency noise of the turbine easily dissipates over distance while the lower frequency of the diesel persists. Autoloaders are not a Russian unique mechanism. Some NATO tanks, heck even American vehicles use them like the French LeClerc tank, American M1128 MGS, Japanese Type 10, etc... The US even considered an autoloader for their MBTs during the MBT-70 program. The Autoloader fitted in the MBT-70 was the German Rheinmetall autoloader. While it was fast, it was ultimately unreliable. The US then opted for their own homemade autoloader which was more reliable but sacrificed loading speed. In the end the autoloader system was too expensive, unreliable, and complex.

[@viceralman8450]

Noise and performance as the turbine are small and light but has a massive output. THe type of autoloader is different Russians use carrusel autoloaders, NATO used cassette autoloaders which are safer on the ammo storage department.

[@forrest225]

Thats a good point. The frequency of the noise makes a huge difference in how far it carries. I've noticed this a lot when offroading. 2 Stroke dirtbikes are loud and high pitched up close, but the sound fades quick. 4 stroke dirtbikes are much lower pitched, and you can hear them from much much further away.

[@n3v3rforgott3n9]

@@viceralman8450 sadly noone is beating the Russians at turret tossing. :(

[@raphaelsantiago9387]

@@viceralman8450 While its true that Russian autoloaders are known for turret tossing, it was actually quite good at the time. The CIA conducted experiments and the autoloader did not have a malfunction in thousands of loadings. Very impressive reliability.

[@viceralman8450]

@@n3v3rforgott3n9 Only the Chinese are a rival on that department.

[@skepticon9390]

The M1 Abrams series have proven too robust to be easily replaced. My Marine Corps brother-in-law has seen these tanks return under power looking as if they’ve been badly damaged. Like the A-10 “Warthog,” the M1 Abrams is just too damned good to replace.

[@dougmassari6977]

Or maybe, the tank is good enough to make better.

[@skepticon9390]

@@dougmassari6977 Exactly. That is why we keep doing as much. 👍

[@elricofarmer1561]

This is a GREAT video. I really appreciate your details and explanation in easy to understand terminology. As an engineer, I find this type of video very intriguing.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

HESH rounds are mostly used as anti-fortifications since it decimates brick walls and such, but the round most armies carry loaded in the chamber are HEAT rounds since they can be used on almost any target effectively.

[@thysonsacclaim]

The UK uses HESH though right?

[@brandonlatzig]

@@thysonsacclaim They did, they have now switched away from hesh

[@leonardusrakapradayan2253]

​@@brandonlatzig they got 🅱️ESH now

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

​@@thysonsacclaim not anymore soon the challenger 3 will have 120mm smoothbore

[@HyperNebula]

We haven't used hesh since the old m1 105s

[@honestabe1940]

As a soldier who began his Armor career on the M60's, went to M1's, was on the Design/Development Team of the M1A1 and Plt Sgt of an M1A1 Armor Company and later worked for 3 yrs with Russian Armor, I believe I am qualified to say, "Great Job"!

[@SlinkyTWF]

I mustered out just as the M1 was coming into service. It still maked me cringe when they called an M48A5 an M60...

[@euangallagher7545]

How were you allowed to work with m1 development and Russian armour

[@calgsus911]

So your worked on American armor and Russian? How?

[@Fkitilltank]

Hercules Hercules

[@callmethreeone]

🤣

[@borisfumic9269]

I love fairytales...but in flames....😂

[@ashtray2294]

You have thousands of videos with russian tanks for that

[@Theinitedstatesofamerics12345]

Russians trying not to flex about destroying 4 M1A1 abrams tanks with watered down armor, lack of protection systems and bad crew members (impossible):

[@bryan-zamanizulu-stone3911]

Thanks so much for the different audio tracks! I’m a polyglot and as much as I love your voice, it’s great to learn another language at the same time as watching your amazing videos!

[@FarmerKen355]

I am impressed, I have watched several videos on the Abrams but I found your video to be excellent. As a former tank crewman in Vietnam on the M48A3 1967-1969 it was often challenging to explain to novices many of the aspects your video covers very well. I have shared this video with several friends for that purpose. Compliments to the chef. FYI re replacing torsion bars in a tank. In the field changing torsion bars can be a challenge and on more than a few occasions we used some C4 to remove the road wheel arm where it was stuck in the housing. I doubt we could have done this in a workshop environment. Thought I would share a little story from the jungle.

[@rec.thecritic]

See that's why this tanks are no good on rougher terrain like Ukraine

[@rec.thecritic]

I also think they should have radars for missiles and at least have 4 missiles to stop them n jamming signals to stop any drones missiles ect around the tank period, it should have heat sensors to see soldiers at night and destroy.

[@Inv1ns1bl]

@@rec.thecritic The M1 has had thermals throughout its entire lifetime, but active protection kits are quite expensive iirc

[@SuperCatacata]

@@rec.thecritic 🤡

[@zoopdterdoobdter5743]

*I absolutely love that you cover the engine!* 🎉 I'm tired of hearing channels say it requires _"jet fuel."_ There are a lot of good reasons a turbine engine was chosen -- Yes, it's a gas guzzler...but, you can also fuel it with cooking oil in a pinch and logistics has been a US strong suit for nearly a century. 😉🇺🇲

[@VyarkX]

As a comment i saw said, “it doesn matter that your tank guzzles fuel if your logistics can install a gas station in the middle of the desert”

[@SldOnEmWithDa45]

I heard they’re getting rid of it for more traditional diesel engines.

[@DarkElfLover]

​@@SldOnEmWithDa45 if you're referring to the engine proposed with the Abrams X its more a hybrid system that still needs testing

[@javilorenzana]

Yeah! Like making up so many wars in that region to get those yummy resources! Logistics FTW.

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

Yeah I cringe when people keep saying it use jet engines the M1 have good soft factors also every tank are expensive amd sure while chinese amd russain tamk are cheap they donihave as good armor and russian have lacking mobility when retreating

[@reddevilparatrooper]

Once upon a time back in the mid 1980s I joined the Army as an Airborne Infantryman, a Paratrooper. After getting out later I joined the National Guard of another state and became a Tank Commander on the M1A1 Abrams. Being a former infantry NCO I learned how to operate and maintain it, I was sent to Boise Idaho for a 5 week course or National Guard AIT. First I was a gunner then became a TC Tank Commander. In the Guard I met many former active duty Tank Commanders and I listened and learned armor tactics over beer and bullshit sessions. I had acquired knowledge from being in mechanized infantry on how to work with tanks. I learned very quickly on how to work within my platoon, Troop, and Squadron. I loved the gunnery and tank qualification tables. It was great to qualify on gunnery because I had a very good and loyal crew, that what makes the Abrams a lethal weapon in combat.

[@Markdmarque]

Gas turbine gobbles fuel like nothing else and gives a heat signature that can be spotted more easily. It is very fragile and prone to failure

[@danh7411]

Clearly it's so good that Russians also use turbines on their T-80.

[@NamanArusia]

This channel is a genuine treasure trove. Seriously if it wasn't for the educational and science/tech infotainment channels like this, KZbin would have died in oblivion of increasingly predatory social media sites spawning nowadays.

[@jameslester4474]

Sure, a treasure trove of information for our ENEMIES !

[@innocento.1552]

​@@jameslester4474 nothing is said in the video that your enemies cannot easily find. He did not reveal classified information. Get off KZbin and study

[@pondoz]

@@jameslester4474 WE ARE COMING FOR YOU WE ARE COMING FOR YOU WE ARE COMING FOR YOU WE ARE COMING FOR YOU

[@theschmedaparadox1018]

​@@jameslester4474 I take that as a joke

[@_spooT]

The fact, that it retained the M4's reputation of speed, maneuverability AND being spacious is insane. The designers really had the crew's survivability in priority

[@MyHentaiGirlNeko]

A tank can be easily replace, in war time the US crank that sh*t to 11, out build pretty much anyones But a well trained and experienced crews are hard to replace, require time and resources

[@Loquacious_Jackson]

​@@MyHentaiGirlNeko I am choosing to ignore your comment based on your profile picture and username. I will not elaborate.

[@SirNobleIZH]

@@Loquacious_Jackson no need to elaborate

[@t00ls742]

M4s????...before the M1 there was the M60A3....the last of the 60 series....I have been in both M1 and M60A3 in my 23 years of service

[@_spooT]

@@t00ls742 m4's as in the sherman. and yes, i know that the m60's were before the M1. but I'm just referring to the M4 shermans in terms of how they performed during their time. fast, maneuverable, spacious and designed to be easy to maintain.

[@playo9197]

Wow, this is an extremely comprehensive video. Thank you soo much for doing this!

[@aaronpingle9839]

Hearing and feeling the rumble of those monstrous jet turbine engines approaching for the first time is something I'll never forget.

[@samsonsoturian6013]

Or stop hearing...

[@Diepotatoes21]

This guy must be the hulk

[@aaronpingle9839]

​@@Diepotatoes21 great reference... terrible movie

[@ruloch8620]

Hola vengo del futuro, los abrams ya fueron entregados pero ahora la guerra es con drones así que los tanques no tienen oportunidad y ya han sido destruidos como si se tratara de piezas obsoletas.

[@valuedhumanoid6574]

I have been in the factory in Lima Ohio where these beast are made. It was a religious experience for military enthusiast like me. Just an amazing place. And the test track where they run them thru their paces is also a dream. Amazing machine

[@palladin9479]

The M1A2 Abrams comes in multiple versions, one for US only and another that is made available via the Foreign Military Sales (FMS) program. The US only variant does not use Chobham composite opting instead for an extremely classified depleted uranium composite. This stuff is so classified that whenever there is a tank accident and the armor is exposed, they evacuate the area, throw a bunch of tarps onto everything and wait for a specialist team to show up. I was at Knox (home of armor corps) during the development of the M1A2 SEP upgrade package and got to be involved in some of the prototypes the Mounted Maneuver Battle Lab (MMBL) was doing. Yeah that DU armor is essentially indestructible and takes a ridiculous amount of punishment to render a tank inoperable. This is why our enemies target the tracks instead to render the tank immobile, though still operational.

[@raphaelsantiago9387]

Actually it's a common misconception that DU armour is stronger than NERA. The reason why the US went for DU instead of NERA is because NERA takes more space but it's lighter, DU on the other hand is more compact but it's heavier. DU is stronger by size, NERA is stronger by weight.

[@palladin9479]

@@raphaelsantiago9387 You are confusing two different things, NERA is a material DU is an element. The armor the US version of the M1A2 use's is a composite that use's DU, which is one of the densest materials known to man. There is more then just DU involved but the exact mix and makeup is extremely classified and will not be discussed. What I can say is this, it's practically invulnerable to anything short of a nuclear device or concentrated massed firepower. Over in the sandbox, whenever a M1A2 would be rendered non mission capable (NMC) on the battle field, and there was no time to get a tank recovery vehicle out, they would have to destroy it. It took dozens of Sabot rounds from multiple other M1's to do this. This is why our enemies target the trends and mobility systems instead of trying to get through the armor.

[@raphaelsantiago9387]

@@palladin9479 While yes NERA (Non explosive reactive armour) is a set and DU is a material I am more specifically talking about NATO NERA. Whether that be Chobham or German Type-D NERA. DU NERA is weaker by weight than other counterparts, while DU NERA is stronger by size than other counterparts. And no DU is not indestructible. Simulations show that DU is as strong as Tungsten if used as a pure armour.

[@palladin9479]

@@raphaelsantiago9387 Again you are being super obtuse. I said the US M1A2 has a classified composite made of multiple materials where DU is just one such component of. No you don't know what's it in, you don't know what it can do no will you. So please continue playing War Thunder.

[@ActionScripter]

The effectiveness of DU is wildly overstated and misunderstood. It's a super dense material and American armor designs use it well, resulting in very effective NERA arrays containing DU as one element. It does not make the tank "essentially indestructible". Aside from the obvious caveats of how the strongest DU arrays are only in the frontal arc, just wait another generation and the latest anti-tank weapons will punch through current-gen DU armor, same as every composite armor innovation in all of tank history.

[@bransonclayton]

Thank you for bringing so many more great details and comparisons that other engineering explainer videos just quickly gloss over. This is my "nerd candy" and worth watching several times over BC of the vast info presented. Keep up the great work my friend.

[@nicholasmiles4942]

The fact when I clicked this video it brought me to this comment annoys me. Thanks youtube for taking my attention away from the video I wanted to watch to see someone giving away money.

[@bryanjk]

@@nicholasmiles4942 bruh it helps support the content creator. people can spend their hard earned money however tf they want.

[@narmale]

simp

[@shadowkillz9606]

@@nicholasmiles4942 you're mad because you're poor. 🖕🤭

[@br.greatmad]

Your country

[@theupsidedownworld99]

👏🔧🚀 It's truly remarkable that the M1 Abrams tank, despite its age, has been continuously updated to maintain its top-tier performance. This speaks volumes about the ingenuity and dedication of the designers behind it. However, it's worth considering the evolving nature of warfare and the emergence of new technologies. How does the M1 Abrams fare against more modern and advanced tank designs? Exploring these comparisons can shed light on the tank's true capabilities and its place in the ever-changing landscape of military technology.

[@arthas640]

it seems to stack up pretty well on paper at least. To be fair though that's in part due to the fact many other countries build lighter tanks because they cant really rely on the same insane logistics system the US military has. With weight and fuel efficiency not really being an issue the Abrams can get heavy armor, a powerful gun, and a giant engine and it's got phenomenal optics and electronics since the US and their allies make the best on the market with companies like the American L3 Technologies and Italian Leonardo S.p.A being some of the best. South Korea has built a real competitor but it's kind of hilarious looking at Russia's once dominant tank manufacturers using scavenged western optics and consumer grade electronics. It's like if in Rocky 2 if Apollo Creed showed up with 2 broken legs and some shorts he stole from a hobo.

[@lyleslaton3086]

And to think, that nerd you picked on in grade school probably works for General Dynamics today.

[@jaked4135]

As a long time viewer, I am constantly blown away by the increasing production value of these videos. Keep up the awesome work, these mini documentaries are phenomenal!!

[@mikek9297]

As someone who works with 3d modeling software, seeing the detail level of these tank interiors and systems models I can just imagine hours upon hours of putting this together from blueprints. Insane ammount of work ! Here' hoping it pays off with some big bucks. This is next level content.

[@44hawk28]

The primary fuel for this tank is jp-5. At least at the beginning. I've even seen it run on Peanut Butter when you're talkin about what fuel it'll burn. I know that is has been tested by chopping the green Parts off of a evergreen tree and running it on them. It has a fuel catalyzing system that will burn with almost anything that might even be able to burn with air. I'm very familiar with the thing because I was working on the axle systems when it was still in development. I close friend of mine was working on the turret at that time. Because it was classified we didn't even learn that both of us were working on it at the same time until about 25 years later. Much of that special armor was directly under the direct control of that friend of mine who happens to still be a Consulting engineer for General Dynamics. The Vickers hardness test is that just a variation with a different scale of the brinell hardness test.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

The M1 Abrams was designed to use NATO F54 (Diesel #2) But unfortunately the AGT-1500 won't start reliably on Diesel fuel... forcing the US Army to adopt *JP-8* Not JP-5. Sounds like you and your friend sniffed too much glue while building scales models...

[@zacherywhinery2278]

Do you happen to remember working with D.G "Gene " Whinery ? He was my grandfather.

[@nielsdaemen]

4:22 Inflammable is one of the wierdest English words: in- as a prefix that means "not": inactive means "not active," inconclusive means "not conclusive," inconsiderate means "not considerate." Therefore, inflammable should mean "not flammable."

[@MrCmon113]

Thanks, very informative.

[@fastfiddler1625]

The US military really managed to land on a ton of great platforms toward the end of the cold war. The AH-64, A-10, CH-47, F-15, F-16 all from the 60s and 70s and have been crazily modernized but with essentially unchanged bones.

[@azurblueknights]

Say what you will about the US, its military certainly knows what its doing. All you really need to do is take a look at Russia. Very few of their platforms are even capable of modern combat even when they're upgraded with a host of modern systems. The platforms themselves just can't stand up to the required rigors.

[@wolfrainexxx]

The A10 is actually a very failed platform that was outperformed by the F-111, and has a LOT of blue-on-blue kills... It's more legend than actual plane.

[@azurblueknights]

@wolfrainexxx Pretty sure you're not even thinking about the correct aircraft. The F-111 Aardvark *did/does not* outperform the A-10 Thunderbolt II, especially when you consider the F-111 wasn't even capable of low speed, loitering CAS like the A-10. I'm not sure what aircraft you're trying to compare to the F-111, but the A-10 Thunderbolt II (commonly known as thr Warthog) has no friendly fire incidents that I can even find after a quick search.

[@ZAC517v]

@@azurblueknights “Since 2001, the A-10 has been involved in four friendly fire incidents that killed 10 U.S. troops” found after seconds of searching, do better

[@azurblueknights]

@Carrotsdontrock That's still not "a lot" of blue on blue incidents. Maybe you need to actually clarify what aircraft is even being discussed that has supposedly killed or wounded more than just 10 friendly troops. Think before you open that hole you call a mouth.

[@mattbrown7935]

I'd love an episode on the leopard 2 or challenger 2, seeing how good and in depth this one is And being British myself I have a bias for the challenger...

[@segagenysis6918]

The Abrams looks better.

[@RminusOR]

@@segagenysis6918 k

[@ka-uy8yh]

​@@segagenysis6918 😂 good one

[@greener2497]

@@segagenysis6918 challenger 2 is the tankiest looking tank in the world

[@segagenysis6918]

@@greener2497 I know. And it looks fat and bloated. The Abrams has more angles, like a mathamatical figure.

[@NickWebb-lc6ry]

Many Marines in firefights saw one of these coming to help and felt that sigh of relief, amazing.

[@boudroux1]

Best job I ever had! I remember the first time I got to climb inside the turret in Ft Knox like it was yesterday.

[@ihavetowait90daystochangem67]

It’s hard to explain but having Armor made out of Depleted Uranium is just so badass

[@raymartcarreon6069]

Heavy Metal Nuclear Armor

[@ylstorage7085]

beg to differ... "super Americium"

[@cykablyatman9677]

it's all fun games until the crew inside gets uranium poisoning

[@elitedima9672]

the cancer you get from DU will be also so badass

[@marcopohl4875]

you could even say it ... *radiates* badass

[@jkutnink87]

The main reason a turbine engine was chosen over a diesel was not just because it was quieter in the front, which allows you to sneak up on the enemy. It was the lessons that we learned in WWII and the logistics of getting diesel throughout Europe. So we chose an engine that can burn literally anything, including cologne, perfume and alcohol.

[@muratti72muc]

the most tank diesel engines can run also with other fuels like salad oil or heating oil, etc. Its much easier to get oil than alcohol. Problem of a gas turbine is that she needs double of fuel like a diesel engine. Means his range to find new fuel is much lower than a diesel tank. Next problem is today with the heat of a gas turbine. You can see them with a thermal camera miles before a tank with a diesel engine. The lower noise of an gas turbine is just an advantage at high speed. At idle the diesel is much calmer than a turbine. The only reason when you use high speed with a tank is when you chase or flee from your opponent. If this happened they have visual contact before. The Russians start to built the T-80 at 1978 with a gas turbine. At there next model the T-90 from 1992 they go back to diesel engines. The next big problem with a gas turbine is the short running times. A diesel engine gets more than twice the run time before it needs inspection. Means more downtime and higher operating costs when using a gas turbine tank. The next generations of tanks will be diesel-electric hybrids. A diesel generator will charge batteries for the electric motors. This type of hybrids use for years in trains, submarines, ships and also the first car the Nissan Qashqai use it now.

[@darthrainbows]

I think there are a couple of things this video doesn't really touch on that are key to the Abrams suitability for operation in Ukraine: it was designed to be super simple to operate (as far as tanks go), and super easy to maintain. It had to be easy to use so National Guard units could train on it in relatively short timespans, and quick refresher sessions would get units back up to speed on its operation. For maintenance, so much of the tank can just be removed and replaced so the tank gets back in service quickly while the damaged parts are repaired separately. Challenger and Leopard might be superior to Abrams in many respects, but there is no contest on these fronts.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

You seem unaware that the M1 Abrams uses the chassis, suspension and tracks from the Leopard 2's

[@arthas640]

Yeah, the engine was designed to easy to remove so they could just swap out a faulty engine, ship it back to a dedicated repair shop, fixed, and then sent back so they wouldnt need to worry about having frontline mechanics needing to know how to fix the engines.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

@@arthas640 The engines were originally designed to be interchangeable between the Leopard and the Abrams as well,

[@lepoofgorl]

the Abrams is eerie. It's on top of you before you expect

[@roxylius7550]

That’s why it got destroyed by cheap russian drone?

[@lepoofgorl]

@@roxylius7550 You do understand that the Abrams sent to Ukraine are like the first rendition of it, right? It wasn't even destroyed and the crew survived, the drone struck the engine.

[@roxylius7550]

@@lepoofgorl didn't american and ukrainian bragged that it would be the total game changer not a year ago?

[@lepoofgorl]

@@roxylius7550 okay Rus bot

[@roxylius7550]

@@lepoofgorl nice argument. I am convinced

[@Akumaa2000]

I was in the Army 89’ to 92’, joined the Army after high school graduation in 88’ (best decision I ever made). I was M1A1/M1A2 tank engine mechanic and tank recovery specialist, did my basic training and tank mechanic school at Fort Knox Ky and was then stationed at Fort Stewart Ga. The video is awesome and pretty much spot on, those torsion bars are heavy as hell and takes at least 3 people if not four just to carry one. I remember during desert shield when the tanks were still being shipped over, we were at a forward area in a hanger near a pier (forgot the name of it) and they took a handful of the M1A2 tanks and started doing brake tests on the street (the street was as long as a landing strip). They would go down the street in the tank and speed up to 45mph back to where we were and the driver would then slam on the brake pedal and the entire back of the tank would come up 2 to 3ft off the ground (I kid you not), then the tank would slam back down to the ground and I was just shaking my head and thinking to myself are these fools trying to actually snap those those torsion bars on purpose ?? That’s at least 6 torsion bars you’d have to replace if they actually broke in half from the force and weight of the back half of the tank slamming back to the ground, I’ve seen numerous tanks that were towed back to the motor pool from the field on maneuvers because of broken torsion bars with the M88 recovery vehicle (I’ve even towed some in myself) and that was on dirt/mud ground etc…..you can imagine how much worse and damage can be done on hard concrete. 63E/10 H8 HHC 4/64 Armor Delta Team Maintenance Fort Stewart GA 24th Infantry Division Operation Desert Shield/Storm Aug ‘90- March 91’

[@SanyaTheNightWitch69420]

Awesome story man was a good read!

[@PAMELAPORTER-ci7mr]

It seems that fooling around in any armored vehicle that could cause expensive damage would be cause for a disciplinary action.

[@Akumaa2000]

@@PAMELAPORTER-ci7mr I agree…..but when you have knuckleheads that’s in charge and are on serious power trips because of their rank nothing will change…..lol (went thru this same thing with my supervisor, he was an idiot and wanted to fight me during the war 🙄)

[@n6cid]

I believe you are thinking about the Port of Jubal while waiting for the super cargo ships to arrive...:) I shared the same hanger bay on January 5th, 1991...:) Was with 2nd A.D. (FWD) out of Germany...:)

[@Akumaa2000]

@@n6cid Yea that was it, couldn’t remember the name for nothing. 😂😂😂

[@jonathanmiller5232]

Man this is just so incredibly good. I just graduated as a mechanical engineer and would always like more details but this strikes the line between well explained and in-depth so well. I was particularly fascinated by the use of a ceramic over a high toughness material like tungsten. It seems incredibly obvious if you've even taken a beginner's course in materials but it seems so clever as a way to essentially "cut" the incoming material with one of the same materials we use in cutting tools and then disperse the chips or fragments across something extremely dense and tough. Awesome.

[@ryanj610]

They do DU on the M1

[@regularguy8110]

Great breakdown. 1500 hp, 70 tons, 120mm cannon and LOVED using it all. Shoot, move and communicate. Edit: You might enjoy "King of the Killing Zone", Orr Kelly, 1989.

[@PlanetFrosty]

Excellent review of the Abrams. New turbines use less fuel in recent variants. Smaller turbines just developed could provide an option at almost 1/2 weight with quick spool up. The new designs where initially for small and medium turbo props, but have promise in tanks and quieter.

[@wideputin19]

My grandfather helped develop the infrared systems on the M1 Abrams. I’m not sure what he did specifically, but I do know that he was part of the team that developed it.

[@gss5.1]

It's really ironic though since you go by wide putin here lol

[@wideputin19]

@@gss5.1 Yeah, that is a bit ironic isn’t it. Although I do think it is worth mentioning that I created this account before all that nonsense over in Europe began.

[@gss5.1]

@@wideputin19 I don't mind, it's just very ironic lol.

[@ASHISHYADAV-ny5nv]

@@gss5.1 lol🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@JacopoSkydweller]

@@gss5.1 Putin is that wide because he gettin' squished. Hopefully the Ukrainians will get him and somebody less psycho will take his place.

[@mustafae5798]

Currently a tanker in 1st Cav. At 3:15 that’s not true we use jet fuel primarily, it can take diesel or gasoline but really performs best with JP8.

[@shawncalhoun1363]

Fairly accurate, aside from how comfy the gunner’s seat looked in the animation @15:00 I only wish…

[@jamesharvey3993]

Thank you for mentioning that the Abrams often uses diesel!! Most people seem to think that it can only use JP8 because it’s a turbine…

[@viceralman8450]

It a use almost anything flammable as fuel.

[@1224chrisng]

Can it use Fryer Grease in a pinch?

[@saxreaper]

@@1224chrisng apparently it can, if its a burning liquid, it can probably be thrown into a turbine's fuel tank

[@Sinoops]

@@1224chrisng It should be able to yeah

[@Deathbomb9]

Every diesel in the US military runs on JP8. It's a variation of diesel fuel.

[@mastergamingnic1681]

All the top secret tech probably got leaked by War Thunder players already

[@felixleong61]

Bruh

[@USSAnimeNCC-]

And all to prove their tank are the best lol

[@pierre-henrigreze4363]

Thank's for your team to to have made the effort of tranlating your audio in french, i do speak english from a long time, but i know that most of my fellow citizens do not speak english (neither any other foreing language...)

[@raymondsmith6943]

Excellent video, love how it's been broken down so well, makes understanding easier. 👍

[@dt99022]

15:59 Perfect example of the need for these compartments. The tank was being engaged directly from the front, and yet the missile still found its way around the side and punching straight up and into the rear end of the turret. Crazy ballistics. Yet, the crew survives.

[@C0lon0]

Or just be like the french, uses autoloader with separate compartment for the ammo, faster to reload and you don't need the space for one more person and spare one life in case of the destruction of the tank.

[@dt99022]

@@C0lon0 Fewer people in a tank is not objectively better. After all, every member has a purpose, so fewer members means more tasks for the remaining crew. It goes without saying that being a tanker is a tremendously stressful and demanding job. The more each person has on their plate, the higher chances for any one member to make a mistake. And every mistake may cost the entire crew their lives. So, having an extra person isn't so bad. For the Abrams, the US maintains that added failure points and complex machinery is no match for another soul on board. There are trade-offs, but neither method is inherently wrong.

[@arthas640]

@@dt99022 Yeah the extra crew member comes in handy, especially with how heavy a lot of the tools and gear are often requiring multiple pairs of hands to move. America has always been one of the best when it comes to prioritizing crew survivability, a lesson they learned in WW2 when they realized a skill crew was worth more than piddly savings by cutting corners on a tank. In WW2 when pushing through France to Germany when a Sherman got KO'ed its crew often just bailed out and hopped in a new tank to continue fighting in the same battle whereas Soviets and Germans often got baked in their own tanks. Similar story with US pilots/planes which may have been the real place the US realized skilled crews were worth more than equipment. Russia seems to be learning that lesson the hard way in Ukraine as they're running out of tank crews much faster than tanks and are starting to get to the point where they've got plenty of tanks, they just lack the men to operate them and the crews they do have arent crack aces but green recruits. Kind of ironic since Putin seems to have a nostalgic view for Stalin's Russia and WW2 yet the USSR was the opposite of Russia today: in WW2 the longer the fighting dragged on the better his army got as the men gained experience so that even men that had been in the army for a few years were already experienced veterans yet today many of the men arent living long enough to gain any experience and they're only rushing men through training faster and faster.

[@lzh4950]

@@dt99022 Might be a challenge for countries face a declining birth rate though

[@chetpower772]

it was shot from behind that thing your saw infront of the tank was a fly lol

[@resep9172]

Destruido el primero 😂

[@SkyAIChannel]

I just admire what these people where able to do...they whent from passing the sound barrier in rocket powered x planes to building the biggest plane at the time that could also go Mach 3 in less than 15 years ... and all of that without real computers....just wow

[@alexkart9239]

2:58 i love how you converted the weight from metric to imperial units

[@Banana_Chris]

I always try to differentiate in life, which is difficult for many people. I say war is terrible, but when viewed in a differentiated or technical manner, war is very interesting, especially for engineers, scientists, and so on. I also find it amusing, for example, how a tank generates smoke from fuel, which reminds me of defense mechanisms in the animal kingdom

[@TheFrankant]

Same. I think it is because war is a scenario where technology and ingenuity have to be at the highest peaks to be effective. Same thing is applied into astronomy and space exploration, but sadly, we are so busy hurting each other that we forgot the color of the sky

[@goldenalbatross9462]

@@pyropulseIXXIit works by injecting diesel into the exhaust. Because of its high flash point, it simply turns to vapor which then condenses into an opaque cloud as it leave the exhaust pipe.

[@onyxfinger7431]

War is awful, but it is also very ingenious

[@mistformsquirrel]

That's a lot how I am. I hate war, genuinely - I wish it were something that just did not happen. But it does, and I'd be lying if I didn't find the technology and techniques of it fascinating. I guess it's like how some people enjoy True Crime stuff on some level?

[@jamest3002]

Good engineering is just that. What a tool is used for, right or wrong, is up to the user.

[@geniuskennard8016]

I'm grateful to have lived one of my dreams and driven a M1Abrams1 camouflage Tank in training 1990!

[@billyponsonby]

I didn’t know a lot of this. Excellent detail s particularly on engine, armour and suspension.

[@brucermarino]

Another great video, thank you! My understanding is 1. That depleted uranium also helps to reduce the penetration of kinetic energy projectiles. 2. That an important mechanism of reactive armor is that HEAT projectiles where we hit perpendicular to the surface. As the outer plate of the ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor) goes toward the projectile the jet is forced to cut and elongated hole in the plate effectively using up more of the jet. I can dig up references, if you need. Thanks again for your great work. I appreciate your videos!

[@alexalbrecht5768]

DU does help reduce penetration. The density of the material forces a penetrator to displace more material in a given area. DU penetrators also leverage this advantage with a few others.

[@brucermarino]

@@alexalbrecht5768 Agreed. Thanks, Alex

[@unprofessionalanzhelia297]

ERA doesn't work by increasing the distance, otherwise Secondary HEAT charges wouldn't defeat it. ERA disrupts the formation of the copper jet through the interfering shockwaves it has created.

[@brucermarino]

@@unprofessionalanzhelia297 I believe both mechanisms operate. At least, this is according to the technical materials that I have read.

[@unprofessionalanzhelia297]

@brucermarino The plate does contribute to disrupting the jet by moving away, but it's for disruption. Shaped charge copper jets can easily cross a few extra millimeters (also why spaced armor actually helps in some cases as typical charges have sub optimal standoff distance.)

[@pandeochas4719]

Thank you so much for adding the french audio option. Im currently studying French and being able to do so and watch one of my favorite channels at the same time is just amazing.

[@TheKrighter]

As a gemmologist, I have to say, excellent explanation of hardness (scratch) vs tenacity (impact). A steel/ceramic sandwich makes sense.

[@StealthyDead]

The survivability for the crew is a HUGE advantage. You spend years training these guys to be experts running that extremely sophisticated machine, and it's much easier to give them a new tank than to replace experts in operating it. It also gives confidence to the crew in knowing that they have both design and experience to back them up in their effort to get out of battle alive. In WW2 the Japanese and German air forces were decimated when their pilots were killed and they couldn't replace them with adequately-experienced replacements, turning the ordeal into a death spiral.

[@ThatAnnoyingGuyOnTheInternet]

I remember reading somewhere that in WW2 some of the USSR tank crews were so inexperienced that when their tank broken down, they had no idea how to fix it so they just left it there and walked away.

[@redmustangredmustang]

Most of these weapons, like the Abrams, Apache helicopters, F15 Eagle, even the M2 Bradley, etc most of these vehicles came out in the late 70s and early 80s and it's still just effective. They are so well made that they can be out there for 50+ years as long as they get updated with new electronics.

[@TheLanceUppercut]

That and the rest of the world's militaries are only just now catching up.

[@kevindownes9474]

At this point it's proven this is the optimal engineering route. Toyota proves it and so does the US military

[@SuperCatacata]

Developing new systems is stupidly expensive. It's much cheaper to use proven systems like this and keep retrofitting them to suit modern war.

[@ThePersonWhoKnocks]

This video is a great source of information about the engineering behind the M1 Abrams tank. It's impressive how the tank has been constantly updated and is still considered a top-tier ass-kicker even though it is technically over 40 years old. The production value of the video is fantastic, and the engine heat signature animation and the 3D model of the interior are particularly noteworthy. I also found it interesting to learn about the asymmetrical torsion bars and the hydraulic suspension. The M1 Abrams has many impressive features, but the fuel consumption and complexity of the turbine engine are potential disadvantages. Overall, this is the best informational video on the M1 family that I've seen, and it's fascinating to learn about the tank's history and evolution.

[@antoniomanuelcaetano6770]

Abrams tanks destroyed FLV

[@thelegend5257]

no offense, but why does this sound so much like an AI written comment, just a summary of all comments and sounding so much like a...school review essay

[@DragonChess]

The only the most accurate and the most detailed video of the Abrams tank I've ever watched.

[@sweatybotfn9982]

The insane engineering that is more harmful to the crew that to the enemy

[@UncleManuel]

I once saw an American convoy of 4 M1 and 8 HMMWV rumbling through a small German village, of course blocking all traffic. That was in 2002. It was dark and you could barely see these vehicles. It still amazes me that a 70 ton tank on rubber padded tracks can use a public road without making too much damage... 😲 Needless to say: With an Army base and an airstrip nearby you could see all sorts of military vehicles back then. C-130 and UH-60 regulary flew overhead and one evening I even could watch a night training of 4 Apache helicopters near my workplace... 🤟

[@Arltratlo]

you know why tank have tracks?? so the weight can be dispersed on a bigger surface.... or why do you thing German tanks in WW2 had Ostketten ( east tracks )

[@AbramsGunner]

*Grin... in the late 80's, we usually road-marched as a company; 14 Abrams plus maybe two HMMWVs and a Deuce and a Half. My favorite trip was during Operation Free Lion in Sept of 1988 near Hannover. Maneuver damage was usually pretty light... but I was told that there was a team following behind us paying the locals for anything we broke. Nothing like seeing the German countryside from the turret of an Abrams :)

[@ljt3084]

Great video. My only criticism is when mentioning the M60 MBT it shows images of the older M48 Patton MBT.

[@dangerousthoughts.1591]

The ending killed my😂 From technology designed to kill to technology designed to save lives.

[@cutback443]

As a 10 yr Army vet that spent 6 of those years on, or in -one of those MFers .. thank you for this! Great jerb

[@Shskshvshsnsvbsnsbsvhsjs]

hey Brian, I’m an American, who grew up with imperial measurements, jan of last year I joined my schools robotics team and realized the insane benefit of metric. It is my standard units know in onshape. it’s difficult to gauge scale in metric but I’m learning.

[@RealEngineering]

Welcome to high society

[@Pixilated]

Welcome brother.

[@Merennulli]

How dare you! You're a traitor to your unit system! 😛

[@Jackinacox]

if you want exact measurement metric is better, if you want ad-hoc measurement imperial is better :)

[@kalrandom7387]

It is easier to use, but as someone that grew up with standard, I still have to look up the conversion every time.

[@Dominator2930]

The license built 120mm the M1 uses is also a higher pressure design. The Leopard 2 went with a longer barrel to increase penetration, the Abrams uses hotter rounds. Also I believe M829A2 & A3 are the main APFSDS rounds, with A4 replacing those two soon

[@mauricelinton5867]

Heard the A4 trophy system is rolling out here in Bliss

[@mauricelinton5867]

@HoPP'n&PoPP'n gonna have to dig deeper to be able to conceal that sucker. Sheesh lol That hydraulic system is gonna be down more often than not now lol

[@shmallkine]

any of y’all happen to know what the name of those smoke launchers are at 16:24?

[@noneofyourbusiness4133]

What does hot rounds mean?

[@DoktorBayerischeMotorenWerke]

It means he is just some kid that has no idea what he is talking about@@noneofyourbusiness4133

[@MrUploader14]

I was a Corpsman in the Navy and served with marines on occasion. I never operated a tank but i did get to sit in one that was baking in the sun and good god i don't envy the operators. And i thought a aircraft carrier was bad.

[@Amphetamemes]

"so do you want ceramic armor, reactive armor, or depleted uranium armor?" "yes"

[@SuperGeronimo999]

Even the M1A1SA (which will be delivered to Ukraine) weighs 61.3 tons. If we take out the engine (1.1 tons) and the main gun (3.8 tons) it still weighs 56.4 tons. Just for comparison, the Leopard 2A4 with same cannon and heavier engine weighs 55 tons with all of it attached. A stripped M1A1SA is heavier... that tells you enough about the armor. And even if we compare it with the Leopard 2A6... this one weighs more than the Abrams with 62.3 tons but also uses a heavier engine (2.2 tons) and heavier (longer) cannon (4.2 tons) so if they're stripped, the whole thing weighs just 54.9 tons, again less than a stripped M1A1SA.

[@ryanj610]

Really top notch information; most other sources tend to get things wrong when it comes to HEAT or armor packages, but this touched on some advanced concepts accurately and understandably.

[@Marahute0]

Well done researching this to the point of being able to, and then making such clarifying animations! The animations for this one were vital for easy understanding ❤

[@looony]

"abrams can run on most types of fuel" lmao. The engine needs jet fuel. And jet fuel only.

[@averagegameplay619]

not only is crew survivability good, but the reliability of this tank is amazing

[@WilhelmKarsten]

Not really...the U.S. GAO published scathing reports that the M1 has a long history of poor reliability and low combat readiness rates. The M1 has a serious fatal flaw in its design that makes even more vulnerable to attack today than ever before.

[@averagegameplay619]

@@WilhelmKarsten i see, i will go research abt it. However all tanks are pretty vulnerable. The m1 is also very hard to maintain.

[@WilhelmKarsten]

@@averagegameplay619 The M1 Abrams is known to have several flaws relayed to its gas turbine engines that make it particularly more vulnerable than most tanks... The M1 Abrams uses the Chassis. Suspension and tracks from the Leopard 2 as well as the same gun as the early Leapard 2s... compared to the Challenger 2 they are relatively easy and quick to maintain and repair.

[@averagegameplay619]

@@WilhelmKarsten yes , the challenger 2 has a smaller suspension system and is easier to maintain or replace. the m1 abrams takes its parts directly from a failed joint program between US and Germany

[@WilhelmKarsten]

@@averagegameplay619 The Challenger 2 has a very complex hydroneumatic suspension system and is notorious for high maintenance and low combat readiness, the MoD stated that the Challenger 2 is officially obsolete but will remain in service with reduced capability. The PzK-70 program continued development as the MX805 and MX815 programs until it was renamed the XM1 program. The Leopard 2's and the M1 Abrams are essentially the same tank with different turrets and interchangeable powerpacks

[@girlfriend677]

Astonishing. Thanks for the attention to detail.

[@AlRoderick]

The use of the turbine in the tank is interesting because when the Sherman came around in World War II, it had multiple different engines including one that was a radial airplane engine. (And one that was five Chrysler straight 6s stuck together around a common crankshaft). This isn't unique to the Abrams but the fact that they can take the entire engine out and replace it relatively quickly is extremely useful.

[@uku4171]

Kinda funny to imagine a radial plane engine in a tank.

[@raphaelsantiago9387]

At one point the Firefly Sherman was fitted with 5 car engines.

[@geekmechanic1473]

​​@@raphaelsantiago9387 that's the one he was talking about. It wasn't 6 but 5.

[@martijn9568]

​@@uku4171 It's also why American WWII tanks tended to be on the taller side, which can be both an advantage or a disadvantage.