US Tests New ABRAMS Replacement To Combat Operations

[@nathanielwhite8769]

Whether an MBT has an Autoloader or not, and therefore potentially having a significantly less armoured turret, the main thing that really counts is that the Crew are separated in an enclosed heavily armoured crew compartment, and so will survive. It is the survival of the crew that matters above all else with Tank design.

[@billwhite1603]

No, it's green energy and running off batteries :)

[@CCM1199]

Actually we survived in the turret and I was deployed during the roughest times in IRAQ. the countless IED's we took and I left shook but no parts taken. Putting them in the Hull does nothing but expose them when the Autoloader malfunctions. Put a Sabot round through the hull and All 3 are dead that's a dead crew. Putting the two in the turret and you still have a chance. turns the tank into a pillbox and you can still fight until recovery operations can be completed. Dont fix what is not broke. Autoloaders will never be as fast as a human loader and thats a fact. my 18 years on the Abrams says so

[@BreacherUPTangoDown]

Whom ever is coming up with most of this BS was never a Tanker and if they were they freaking sucked. This is the stuff that’s gonna fall on its face. You want reliability.. get some salty ass E-4’s crew members maybe an E-5 gunner, with a couple salty as Tank mechanics to tell you what is shit! A Tank designed by Tankers for Tankers. Autoloader is horrible and slow. Nevertheless you can expect to have a good tank that’s designed by desk lizards 🦎.

[@vladpootin5973]

The AX looks so badass, a very impressive evolution building on the mighty Abrams M1 👍🏻

[@WaVeTECH-b9z]

Surviving the battlefield should always be the top priority in tank design-protecting the crew with a heavily armored compartment is essential, no matter the turret's specifics

[@Cptnbond]

I think reliability and the ability to make near-field repairs will be important. The lessons learned from the current conflict are that you can not have support and complex parts very far from action.

[@RadiantCataclysm]

Which the army is trying to screw up. The “new hummer” aka the JLTV, which is more advanced than the humvee, has no reliability, the suspension breaks down constantly under any condition that isn’t perfect, with no way to repair or replace it on the move, it has trouble maneuvering through mud because of how dang heavy it is, and the occupants can get trapped inside .

[@har8397]

This is the problem with relying on a military-industrial complex.The vendors are always addressing the previous requests which is why we're always fighting the last war. This system seems to be designed for the plains of eastern europe....

[@Dra741]

We have to find the solution for the drones, they almost make the tank obsolete a laser system would be the most important asset

[@Dra741]

The hybrid electric vehicle program is important because the heat produced by the Abrams tank can be observed from space and counter artillery attacks will be another serious threat on the battlefield

[@mosriteminioncause7741]

Step advancements in hyper velocity, precision guidance anti-materiel air- to surface and surface to surface projectiles will eventually antiquate these track platforms. (if not already available.)

[@Dra741]

As long as the auto loader can operate when the machine breaks down, that's what has to be incorporated into the design that if the auto loader breaks down it still could be manually loaded

[@jefferyhasselllikeo6804]

Tank needs a drone memory to remember enemies and friendly drones.

[@DarkRendition]

*CORRECTION - The boxy protrusions are not a feature or an upgrade. They are stand in weights to represent the added weight of additional armor.

[@MrNote85]

Great Video. Very current,

[@tomdarco2223]

Right On Go Army!

[@jamieharmer5654]

​@@dberry999666.....How many T 72 tanks have been destroyed?....

[@danwild6]

@@dberry999666 Even if true it proves nothing as anyone but fanboys know that tanks are destroyed and yes crews do get killed. You may be right that ONE M1 was destroyed with a crew loss but compare that to how vulnerable every Soviet/Russian designed and fielded tank is.

[@jamieharmer5654]

@@danwild6 ...that M1 was also stripped of alot of its Tech....

[@jamieharmer5654]

@@dberry999666 ....the T72 turret is setting records .....how high the turret can fly......but yes it is still a good tank in my eyes when You consider the Russian military budget verses USA budget

[@hiddendragon415]

@@dberry999666 Wow you are ignorant, the Marines got rid of Abrams because they are re focusing on what they were designed for, rapid deployment and costal attack. Any tank can be defeated but the Abrams is probably the best in the world and most survivable. It's battle proven with many years of evolution.

[@Agent77X]

Full color video capabilities! Wonder if the LED is still 480i resolution?

[@Numba1Man]

Sepv4? Ive been lucky enough to see a sepv3 and Im still on the sepv2

[@johndyson4109]

That'll be the day when they put the E-3 into production.. Don't hold your breath!

[@scarlettuwu9582]

The un-crewed Abrams X looks interesting, just from a space saving perspective with what they can potentially additionally fit onto the same platform. With drones, the external machine gun able to track, target and wipe hostile drones out of the sky are really the best defense and if you have multiple tanks in a column equipped with the systems plus other support vehicles, it’s quite effective at creating a wall of bullets in the sky. The trophy protection system is outdated at this point, mostly because it is a non - rapidly reloadable system , as an emergency backup it still works , but alternatives/ upgrades should be looked at Especially of interest being laser interception systems on multiple points of the tank giving it a 360° dome of protection The additional advantage of the un-crewed system would be being able to significantly reduce armor weight / reduce armor to critical areas of functionality so around the guns and around the computer /electronics If they’re able to reduce weight enough you can be looking at something almost entirely different with a much higher speed , Think of the difference between aircraft in speeds is the best example here. 120+ top speed while still of course being able to fire with the gyroscopic stabilization, is a very different thing in terms of mobility If you then combine this with an AI that can detect buried mines through a variety of instrument sensors and a kind of active signal scanning of the ground To where it can automatically steer around them or in the worst case with a heavily mined field throw ordinance out to pre-detonate the mines / clear a path

[@CCM1199]

Its not uncrewed. It will be a 3 man crew as you lose a loader and all 3 will be located by the driver which is a terrible mistake.

[@scarlettuwu9582]

Ah, all my comments were about the abrams X un-crewed option. It’s not in production yet.

[@johndyson4109]

I think the people who are saying the upgrades will not suffice are wrong.. So much has to do with the training of the tank crews. They are looking at a weapons & mobility standpoint. The new upgrades to the Abrams are great and with a well-trained tank, the crew will have no problem defeating the enemy.. One of the biggest things they need to do is have a countermeasure against drone attacks..

[@howardcf46]

A artillery mine in front and behind makes it a stationary cannon after the track comes off. It can then sit there awaiting destruction.

[@lazy-v2c]

ДИРЕКЦИЯ МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ ( СОБЕРЁМ МЕТАЛЛОМ) ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕТ ВСЕХ ПОСТАВЩИКОВ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕХНИКИ С НОВЫМ ГОДОМ! ПРИСЫЛАЙТЕ ЕЩЁ! УТИЛИЗАЦИЮ ГАРАНТИРУЕМ! НАДЕЕМСЯ НА ДАЛЬНЕЙШЕЕ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО! С УВАЖЕНИЕМ директор МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ Россия!

[@dw7094]

Anymore, the tank crew is irrelevant. The drone pilots will control the battle space from the skies.

[@3lullabies]

Needs drone swarm packages, offensive and defensive.

[@setildes]

Excellent video, very current,

[@michaeldowd8422]

Unless the drone defence system works really well, all tanks will be insanely vulnerable. Sorry for stating the bleeding obvious 😊

[@yulfine1688]

Everyone is aware of that, however fpv drones aren't enough to cause any real damage to a tank on its own at least not current nato tanks, and im pretty sure even the worse soviet tanks have been able to receive a couple fpv drones and even direct front fire hits without immediately going out, rather its larger drones and drones like the reaper that have more significant payloads or other infantry ground weapons and mines that are more dangerous as there are mines that basically shoot up and then look for the weakest section of tanks which is usually the top and back side, before deploying and exploding. FPV drones are much harsher against lighter vehicles and infantry also they exist more easily because neither side has air dominance or even air control to which the US it wouldn't be much of an issue to maintain air dominance and naval dominance meaning fpv drones wouldn't exactly work as well against the US the issue is cost effectiveness to destory those drones, they're so cheap that most systems are very expensive to use or difficult to hit and may not stop the drone, which is why laser weapon systems are being used, to which nato has been collectively sharing with eachother improvements we recently borrowed some ideas from the UK on their laser weapon system that was better than the publicly known systems we have. Laser weapons are very inexpensive to actually shoot but even currently take some time to stop drones so a swarm unless those can burn through in them less than a second will cause issues in general something nato is already working on, we've seen germany and the US make advancements in drone swarm systems and probably the rest of nato in europe.

[@Molten_Slugger]

@yulfine1688 to include: FPV drones are nearly vulnerable to EWS systems, the one were seeing being fielded in russia are extremely short-ranged and are used as modifications to be placed ontop the cages of russian armoured vehicles. EWS being utilized by NATO and the US itself might be able to nearly get rid of all FPV drones though not Vandal Optically-connected Wire drones(?). I doubt NATO would be facing these drones if they were attacking because they wouldn't be the one attacking Russia first.

[@unpob]

Like to see how one unit would handle five hundred drones simultaneously engaging it

[@Molten_Slugger]

@unpob since it's one unit specifically it's gone, if its a whole army the hundred drones would be gone in no time because of the active EWS systems.

[@OP-fd4lh]

Materials science is constantly evolving, so a 13 ton drop may not be as outlandish as previously believed. There are R&D projects out there where metals are having air pumped in as metal is formed to produce lighter but stronger metals. The main problem is not the strength of this new Dairy Queen ice cream type material but the same consistency throughout. It will take time but it's possible. As for the hybrid systems, I don't think it's sensible to go to that as a greener way. Now, as far as tactical advantage, yes, it could helo alot. As far as being able to squeeze every bit of fuel in combat operations, yes, that could alot. But the warfighting ability has to always come first. If the hybrid/battery becomes non-functional, the crews must have the option to "disengage " it from the fuel systems. Having never been in any type of tank much less a crew member, I truly believe our tank veterans' opinions need to be given the most attention and I have read in many articles, blogs and comments that they believe a human loader is the best way to go.

[@stuglenn1112]

In peer on peer warfare between industrialized countries tanks may be like battleships, obsolete.

[@paraweir]

I would still choose a Merkava...

[@CCM1199]

Not even close

[@raytaylor3077]

we don't need anymore combat operations. thanks

[@Paulftate]

america 1st .... maga baby maga 👍

[@joe2mercs]

Theses machines are very expensive canon fodder for very cheap FPV drones.

[@niweshlekhak9646]

They have anti drone systems, you missed half of the video.

[@vinrusso821]

Did you not watch the video?

[@ernietaylorphdjd3496]

WTF??!! Why are the developers of tanks much better at keeping their secrets? I’ve never heard of even one developer even being investigated for fraud or theft or espionage!!!💖❤️💖

[@henkvandervossen6616]

Australia has promised some 60 Abrams that they just put out of service. They are more generous than the US.

[@samiman5606]

Why they don't give it to Ukraine?

[@HenryWeems-kr9wr]

nobody cares.

[@bennuredjedi]

The MIC deliberately make it that the DOD is always 1 step behind and on time with the money

[@d.adrien7423]

The future belongs to drone swarms - land and air.

[@beebop4333]

SUGGESTION...just use drones. It will save millions

[@bobkohl6779]

Clickbait title. UPDATES

[@dw7094]

The M1 is now almost 50 years old. We are in a new age. A $100K drone can now destroy a $13 million tank. Do the comparative math.

[@wolverines5279]

Tanks still have a role to play

[@mikemcginley6309]

Great sales pitch, but not complete. Quiet tank? Even without an engine the tracks make plenty of noise.

[@mchrome3366]

TG there’s a different narrator. The narrator’s voice on most military channels started to sound too grating for my tastes.

[@jenifferschmitz8618]

we are going to need these to take canada

[@turkey0165]

MAGA and make Canada 🇨🇦 the 51st state!

[@383Iron]

Pretty sure the army’s climate strategy is done on Jan. 20

[@jasons44]

30mm needs armor

[@BlueFire015]

question is will Trump continue with all the climate proposals for the army continue? i kinda doubt it either way the most important thing is u dont want to lose any combat range the tank already has purely to virtue signal when it comes to future propulsion system one thing i am more or less certain of is that we will change it simply cause of the fact the current propulsion system is reaching the end of how much better we can make it and idk if hybrid is the best way to go to preserve or increase range or capabilitys cause with a hybrid system u dont have the biggest batterys which wont give u alot of range with how heavy a tank is atleast of any noteable speed i mean its better than pure electric. i think maybe hydrogen can be a good replacement if we can get to a point produce it cheaper and all that, but then we need cheap reliable energy cause of how much power it takes to make hydrogen i think either way its more fitting as it looks now to be used with tanks than normal cars cause with tanks u dont need to spend as much on fueling stations. ofc if we can make a hydrogen engine strong enough to power a tank and i dont think we have built even a prototype of that (might be wrong though)

[@Dra741]

Trump said we're trying to protect the environment while we're blowing up things, we knocked down a building with the Abrams tank but at least we kept the air clean the Democrats want to make all the tanks electric but they do have a little bit of a good idea we need to reduce the thermal signature of main battle tanks significantly

[@mech2711]

The war in ukraine has changed the way tanks fight...now they need countermeasures for drones since that is the main way they are being taken out....if they go all electric hiw are these vehicles gonna be charged if they are in a firefight unless they find a way to vharge them while its running cuz there is no way they are gonna be olugging these things in

[@lazy-v2c]

ДИРЕКЦИЯ МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ ( СОБЕРЁМ МЕТАЛЛОМ) ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕТ ВСЕХ ПОСТАВЩИКОВ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕХНИКИ С НОВЫМ ГОДОМ! ПРИСЫЛАЙТЕ ЕЩЁ! УТИЛИЗАЦИЮ ГАРАНТИРУЕМ! НАДЕЕМСЯ НА ДАЛЬНЕЙШЕЕ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО! С УВАЖЕНИЕМ директор МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ Россия!

[@bobbybooshay8641]

@@lazy-v2c --Dude, your army is getting wiped out every day. You Russians aren't anywhere close to a military power. More like a bunch of drunken conscripts who have no idea how to manage a battle.

[@Dra741]

We cannot Electrify the equipment on the battlefield like this it is absolutely ridiculous and absurd and I hope that Trump Stripes this down in fact the new secretary of defense will make an end to this cuz it's just a waste of money but the hybrid program is important but the batteries are so heavy they're going to contribute to possible fires breaking out if moisture gets on these batteries which is a serious problem, the hybrid solution must not use current Auto Battery Technology, it is susceptible to spontaneous combustion and the tanks are in the variety of conditions heat and moisture Gathering everywhere

[@charlesvandenburgh5295]

A small coordinated fleet of enemy drones could overwhelm the Abrams at a tiny fraction of the Abram's cost, and drone technology is progressing much faster than tank technology. But don't let that be a reason not to waste more money.

[@xxrustyxx_6977]

There is already many ways to deal with drones at a cheap cost and many more technologies on the way. Tanks will always be part of the plan. Anyone that says otherwise does not know what the hell they're talking about.

[@yulfine1688]

fpv drones are on their aren't enough to cause significant damage to current modern tanks, it usually takes a few dropping small ordinance even against soviet tanks to disable them, larger drones are the issue rather than smaller swarms, swarms are more of an issue against light armor and infantry..

[@charlesvandenburgh5295]

@@xxrustyxx_6977 That's what the Navy once said about seafaring tanks called battleships.

[@lazy-v2c]

ДИРЕКЦИЯ МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ ( СОБЕРЁМ МЕТАЛЛОМ) ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕТ ВСЕХ ПОСТАВЩИКОВ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕХНИКИ С НОВЫМ ГОДОМ! ПРИСЫЛАЙТЕ ЕЩЁ! УТИЛИЗАЦИЮ ГАРАНТИРУЕМ! НАДЕЕМСЯ НА ДАЛЬНЕЙШЕЕ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО! С УВАЖЕНИЕМ директор МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ Россия!

[@garygeorge9648]

An EV combat or support vehicle is a no go. Hard enough to get fuel to vehicles how in the world are you going to charge an EV during battle. Hybrid is the way to go.

[@TheSgtk9]

Can this tank handle a Top Attack from a AGM. What a about drones armed RPG warheads?

[@Breadman2024-us7fi]

I don't know about you, but I don't think any tank can handle that kind of attack unless they are equipped with an active protection system (APS).

[@hiddendragon415]

As mentioned in the video Abrams already has Trophy and the latest version being developed can defeat top down attacks.

[@yulfine1688]

@@hiddendragon415 which can help, the issue comes from well swarms and multiple attacks, of course tactics change as well, unlike russia other countries adapt how they use or do anything on the battlefield.

[@themuckler8176]

Turbine powered tanks have a huge heat signature. Easily detected and destroyed. They've failed miserably in Ukraine because of this.

[@turkey0165]

I don't care how new or advance this tank is, its as obsolete as a biplane is to a modern day jet! It cost millions of dollars and a couple thousand dollar $1000 drone will take it out.! Tanks or armor are the military equipment of the past ! Beware of the vast military industrial complex !

[@CCM1199]

What lessons from Ukraine? They never used the Abrams in the same Capacity as we always have done: In groups. Never is a Solo Abrams on the battlefield. 95% of the destroyed vehicles in Ukraine were solo and moving solo, therefore they were targeted. When we move we move in Sections, Platoons or Company/Troop, Never Alone. so that so called lesson is a garbage example. Leaders in todays military are weak and want to forgo the "Train as you fight" mentality to become a lethal fighting force. They want to get rid of scouts and now they want to complain about the Abrams when there was absolutely nothing wrong (other than the CROWS, which was the worst idea ever) with the tank. Don't fix what is not broke. I was on every iteration of the M1A1 (starting at the 105) and transitioned to the M1A1 and M1A2 and seen the tanks evolution. I retired on the SEPv2's in 2014 and I feel sorry for our tankers going into the future if they are deciding to go with the Abrams X Program. Autoloaders will never out do a Human loader. thats the Army saying we dont need another soldier. lets save money and toss an autoloader in there. Now tell me....whats going to happen when that said autoloader malfunctions, round gets stuck in the feed tray or turret goes out? You have 3 crew members in the hull which is an extremely terrible mistake that in of itself. That Abrams X tank is Dead. You might as well park the Abrams X right next to the T 14 Armada that still sitting on the parade ground waiting for it to be started. I hear the T 14 needs a friend.

[@lazy-v2c]

ДИРЕКЦИЯ МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ ( СОБЕРЁМ МЕТАЛЛОМ) ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕТ ВСЕХ ПОСТАВЩИКОВ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕХНИКИ С НОВЫМ ГОДОМ! ПРИСЫЛАЙТЕ ЕЩЁ! УТИЛИЗАЦИЮ ГАРАНТИРУЕМ! НАДЕЕМСЯ НА ДАЛЬНЕЙШЕЕ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО! С УВАЖЕНИЕМ директор МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ Россия!😅🤣😂😋😪😪😪😪😪😪

[@PBRstreetgang88]

100% taxes here we come!

[@logicae4096]

The Abrams is massively overweight already... if it gets fatter, it'll sink and get stuck in all the mud fields around the world.

[@peridoodle2644]

There is a lot of work going into lightening the Abrams as well. Like fiberoptic cables replacing metal wiring, stripping out old computer systems and replacing them with open architecture modern designs, and other such things.

[@FrankReddick]

Garbage.

[@Ilovegold]

If it ain’t broke don’t fix it. That hybrid crap is a waste and will fail in the battle field.

[@gmgrammer9851]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/iH-7mWR9dqulipY

[@alga_kz]

🤣🤣🤣🤣👎👎👎👎👎👎

[@shanetharle9211]

The M1 Abrams was only fit to fight countries like Iraq, it was never designed to take on the best army in the world, Russia

[@Bouncerboy33]

Your "Best Army In The World" can't beat Ukraine after 3 years and 150K dead Russian soldiers.

[@yulfine1688]

it was directly designed to counter russia actually... and i hope your comment is sarcasm because russia is struggling against old technology from the 90s..

[@Darkside-oz2bi]

Best Army in the world?? 😂😂😂😂

[@lazy-v2c]

ДИРЕКЦИЯ МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ ( СОБЕРЁМ МЕТАЛЛОМ) ПОЗДРАВЛЯЕТ ВСЕХ ПОСТАВЩИКОВ ВОЕННОЙ ТЕХНИКИ С НОВЫМ ГОДОМ! ПРИСЫЛАЙТЕ ЕЩЁ! УТИЛИЗАЦИЮ ГАРАНТИРУЕМ! НАДЕЕМСЯ НА ДАЛЬНЕЙШЕЕ СОТРУДНИЧЕСТВО! С УВАЖЕНИЕМ директор МЕТАЛЛОБАЗЫ Россия!

[@cerebralparasite9238]

another waste of money

[@alga_kz]

👎👎👎👎👎👎 США