CNN report about Abrams in the Ukrainian Armed Forces

https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1796133992506216644
https://edition.cnn.com/2024/05/29/europe/ukraine-war-us-tanks-intl/index.html

Points raised in CNN report (in brackets, me paraphrasing or asking question)

>To heavy for Ukrainian soil (assume gets bogged down like every other tank)
>$500 attack drones are big problem
>Armour is not sufficient, doesn't protect the crew (what did they replace the DU armour packages with?)
>Drones dominate the battlefield
>As soon as Abrams is spotted, it becomes number 1 target for Russians
>Driver lost a leg recently after tank being perpetrated
>The Ukrainian tank crew’s are adding on active armour plate to improve armour
>Not enough shells and only shell type is for tank on tank battle (only sent APFSDS?)
>Tank’s are used more like artillery (assume stopping or supporting infantry)
>Fired 17 rounds into a house and was still standing (because only have APFSDS?)
>Still better then Soviet tanks
>Condensation easily fry’s electronics
>If disabled, it’s too heavy to tow away

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

LifeStraw Water Filter for Hiking and Preparedness

250 Piece Survival Gear First Aid Kit

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    That said, seems the U.S. has shipped out Dynamic Protection "ARAT-1" for the M1A1 SA-UKR’s to be installed on the forehead and sides of the turret together with "Kontakt-1".

    https://x.com/front_ukrainian/status/1796182554225041450

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Reminded me of the Act of Aggression RTS, I wish Eugen had managed to pull that one out, game had potential but the new original resource system turned a lot of people off and Reboot came too late, sadly Eugen never understood most people didn't want an RTT but hordes of tanks CnC style.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Armour is not sufficient, doesn't protect the crew (what did they replace the DU armour packages with?)
    they didn't
    in fact, they didn't give them DU armor at all

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They replaced DU with tungsten.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They replaced DU with tungsten.

      DU would do nothing they are not getting disabled by enemy tanks they are getting hit by drones. Engine or roof never had DU. All this proves is that every tank needs drone jammers or new APS that works on drones.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Every Bradley is getting funding for an Iron Fist upgrade, the Abrams should get the same…

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >only sent APFSDS
    fricks sake i knew it, no wonder they prefer the bong HESH

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Leo 2 bros... we won...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Well I mean every single military trial between the Leo 2 and the M1 has ended up with the Leo 2 getting adopted and this has happened like 10-20 times already so idk...

      I don't see how these complaints, especially those about the gun/ammunition, wouldn't also be valid for the Leo2.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I am going to assume it's a supply issue, because otherwise I don't see why they can't use German/Swedish HE shells otherwise.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >assume it's a supply issue

          Towards the end of the video the reporter asks him if there anything you would ask the Americans for now and he responds with “Why is this taking so long and why it comes partially?”

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Ukies have complained that without bubbaing 155mm shells can only be used with arty systems from the country that made those shells. I can definitely see the same problem with tank shells.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            one of the main additions to the M1A1 with the SA program was the updating of the FCS to accommodate the use of all NATO 120mm tank rounds.

            >assume it's a supply issue

            Towards the end of the video the reporter asks him if there anything you would ask the Americans for now and he responds with “Why is this taking so long and why it comes partially?”

            Well the US doesn't/didn't have a dedicated HE round for the Abrams so they can't really provide it. It would be up to Germany/Sweden to provide their HE to use in Abrams', but there's probably not enough to provide to M1 units in addition to the Leopard units. But yes, the US and other nations are just drip feeding them equipment.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Shouldn't it be all the same, but saying that, I do remember Ukies complaining about Italian mortar ammo not fitting in a mortar from another NATO country that was the same caliber and having to gride off part of the fins to make it fit!

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Mario. Giuseppe. In my STANAG office, NOW.

              >To heavy for Ukrainian soil
              Nowhere in the CNN article does it mention weight being an issue. You’re just copy pasting your shill talking points.

              They don't know that the US operates a lot of them at Ft Riley Kansas. If the Abrams had problems zooming across muddy sunflower fields Quarterhorse probably would have said something about it.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I know that Leo 2A6 has neen using US HEAT shells (ballistics are close enough for it to work), so i assume tmits possible both ways

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Send 500+ more Leo2

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Why would you even bother sending just AP rounds? It's not WW2 any more they're not having big open tank battles.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Armour is not sufficient, doesn't protect the crew
    This is a pretty bullshit thing to complain about since even if they had the latest M1s with DU armor packages it wouldn't make a difference. These tanks seem to be immobilized by mines/artillery de-tracking them, and then finished off with drones/lancets to the top/sides. DU armor only is applied to the turret face.
    >Fired 17 rounds into a house and was still standing (because only have APFSDS?)
    >Why would you even bother sending just AP rounds? It's not WW2 any more they're not having big open tank battles.
    Likely HEAT, since M1 has no dedicated HE shells until the adoption of M908 in 2021(?) which I guess haven't been set yet due to how new they are.
    >The Ukrainian tank crew’s are adding on active armour plate to improve armour
    They do this with most of their tanks, and since they are primarily defending positions tanks are held in rear to be react and be diverted to areas that they need to defend

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >no dedicated HE shells
      I understand that HEAT is dual purpose to a decree, but I thought it was strange that there is no proper HE shell. Why wasn't that made much earlier? What was the thinking behind it?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        In a military that operates under complete fire superiority from air and artillery, I guess the thinking is that more effective HE ordnance can be delivered by other means

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Well but also the Ukrainians insist on using literally fricking everything for indirect fires, including the cv90.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            might have something to do with all that artillery

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              did that moron ever post his source

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Because America operates under the (merited) assumption that they will have total air supremacy at all times, and never thought about the possibility that their equipment would be used by someone who DIDN'T have that.
        They should've gotten HE anyway. It's a big frickoff 120mm cannon, that's a lot of boom that it could be slinging.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >imagine the boom

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        We're surprisingly scared of throwing HE around.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          And oddly comfortable firing canister rounds

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Suffering from success, the USA only knows how to fight in a situation an airstrike can be called like its uber eats
        If they go to war with China they will have to adapt fast or die

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >One, parked under a tree, was almost immobile during CNN’s visit, due to an engine problem, the crew say, despite the vehicle having just been shipped in from Poland. They also complain of how, in rain or fog, condensation can fry the electronics inside the vehicle.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >They also complain of how, in rain or fog, condensation can fry the electronics inside the vehicle
      Aaah, that US veteran car feeling

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Poland
      Half of the parts stolen, other half repaced with used ones.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>Not enough shells and only shell type is for tank on tank battle (only sent APFSDS?)
    Probably HEAT and APFSDS and no general purpose HE

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's a result of its original doctrine to engage Soviet armor in a full scale invasion scenario. The US never developed a dedicated HE shell for the Abrams until very recently.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        It's incredibly silly tho.
        Even though it's smooth bore making a basic HE shell with some fold out fins ought to be piss easy.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Well I mean every single military trial between the Leo 2 and the M1 has ended up with the Leo 2 getting adopted and this has happened like 10-20 times already so idk...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The US has never particularly been aggressive about exporting the Abrams while the Germans were literally giving their Leo 2s away.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Giving them away in exchange for money...

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes, for far below market price because they were actively trying to offload their Cold War stockpiles after the USSR collapsed.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because until just recently everybody was only getting extremely nerfed export Abrams. Poland is the first country allowed to get the real thing.

      Leopards suffer from drones the same way.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Look up the Leo vs abrams original cookoff, the leo got dumpstered, and the army literally let the germans cheat on weight.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As we all knew, the abrams is a motor pool princess. Piece of shit.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Hiiiii
      Pakistan?
      Iran?
      India?
      Niu Dzherziy oblast?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I will strangle you with my white hands

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Good morning sir

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Post yours, turdie homosexualron

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          You will never be white, pidor.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >10 hrs of mx per 8 hrs of operation
      She's a dirty girl but damn fun to bounce around

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Seriously?

    [...]

    hasn't even been archived and you thirdie Black folk are already spewing bullshit? Frick me, you truly are shit on the boots of civilization.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's all subjective opinions from people using the stuff dude.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      literally from guys that use the shit and not 4chins

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Condensation easily fry’s electronics
    i heccin love yellow journalism

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >CNN
    Try getting your news from real journalists and not a propaganda factory.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >CNN is totally russian propaganda guys

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Well op is a Vatnik or something

        The guy being interviewed goes on to explain that they aren't using the tank the way it was designed.
        Then he talks about the issues they are having
        He finishes saying it's not the tanks fault it wasn't designed to function the way they are using it. It's meant to have artillery, air support and drone support. Russians have put "huge" bounties on them so they are the first target because anytime it goes against any armor it crushed them.

        So he's stating the issues
        He realizes it's not the tanks fault
        It's being used for artillery mainly
        They need to adapt
        Op just skipped that part

        And the guy joker is being very rational about it and we should send them ways to make it better

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Russians have put "huge" bounties on them so they are the first target because anytime it goes against any armor it crushed them.
          We are going to get some cool sagas from this.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Stop coping, he directly reported that the armor wasn’t sufficient. Which is true. In fact there isn’t a tank on the face of the Earth that has sufficient protection in that environment. Tanks in general in their current form are flat-out obsolete, the copes are over. There’s still coping over APS but the fact is if they can’t make them reliable and good by now they NEVER will be.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            You are actually moronic. Merkavas perform great in similar drone heavy environment. And every fricking country is investing in tanks.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >It's not designed to fight in a transparent battlefield with drones
          As opposed to soviet union tanks ?

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >The guy being interviewed goes on to explain that they aren't using the tank the way it was designed.
          Tanks are usually designed to take some hits before being engulfed in flames. Thats like saying it isnt desinged for war. Horrible cope

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Tanks are usually designed to take some hits
            From RPGs not drones

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >To heavy for Ukrainian soil
    Nowhere in the CNN article does it mention weight being an issue. You’re just copy pasting your shill talking points.

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Drones dominate the battlefield

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Cyberukraine 2024

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        And it's fricking comfy. Frick EWhomosexuals for ruining the fun

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Sounds like the ukies would benefit more from a ton of the new booker light tanks with HEAT and Anti personnel rounds. Maybe top the things with jammers and more armor since they're using them as glorified field guns.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >perpetrated
    Browner than my shit.

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You need to know how to fix a fricking jet engine when the thing breaks down

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Uh... all those T-80BV mechanics in the Ukrainian Army just maybe might know how to fix those.
      Also, it's a powerpack. If it gives you shit swap it out and ship it to depot for repair.

  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >I give your thread approx 2 mins before deletion
    8 hours now
    maybe if you weren't brain dead zigger you'd be able to understand the difference between discussion and russian propaganda spam

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You guys need to stop with the kneejerk reactions.
    This isn't reddit.

    Every vehicle has it's flaws, M1 included.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>Tank’s are used more like artillery (assume stopping or supporting infantry)
    Can we just go back to cheap assault guns?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I eagerly await the day we reject modernity and return to STVG

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Be Abrams
    >Be worst NATO tank in theatre
    Why bros

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Challenger is still there so not the worst. Leo is the best though

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Leopard 2 is objectively worse than the Abrams, and also lacks a useful HE round

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Wrong they have HE for a long time.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Captured Leo had DM11.

            DM11 is about as shit as MPAT, just look at the photos in the official brochure. Literally the same yield as a Soviet 82mm mortar and the Ukrainians know this.
            https://www.rheinmetall.com/Rheinmetall%20Group/brochure-download/Weapon-Ammmunition/B195e0423-Rheinmetall-120mm-system-house.pdf

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              This is pure cope DM11 is very good. They have less charge than Soviet HE but more frag. And can also be used as massive shotgun.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                You are completely fricking moronic. DM11 is far more effective than any vatnik 125mm HE. 13kg of frag and high yield filler with programmable fuse.

                [...]

                This shit literally has less HE than most small bore mortar rounds. "13kg" my ass, that's the weight of the entire projectile. Krautaboos are as delusional as vatniks

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              You are completely fricking moronic. DM11 is far more effective than any vatnik 125mm HE. 13kg of frag and high yield filler with programmable fuse.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Captured Leo had DM11.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Best western tank for tank on tank battle in Ukraine.
          >Abrams
          >Leopard 2
          >Challenger 2

          Best western tank for what's really happing on the ground in Ukraine, blocking infantry assaults, supporting infantry, good EW defence against drones.
          >Challenger 2
          >Leopard 2
          >Abrams

          Best western tank in Ukraine for ease of maintenances, supply of parts and low logistical footprint.
          >Leopard 2
          >Challenger 2
          >Abrams

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thing is though they had nothing but praise for the Challenger they complained about the weight and the Hesh though. They never questioned its protection unlike the Abrams which is upsetting.

        The Leopard 2 is objectively worse than the Abrams, and also lacks a useful HE round

        I think given the reports its Leo2>Ch2>M1
        The ammunition and weight are complaints made about all three.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          They actively use the abrams and not the challengers. And we can’t forget that these are m1a1s vs top of the line chally 2s. Challenger is just not that good

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >They actively use the abrams and not the challengers.

            "One, parked under a tree, was almost immobile during CNN’s visit, due to an engine problem, the crew say, despite the vehicle having just been shipped in from Poland. They also complain of how, in rain or fog, condensation can fry the electronics inside the vehicle."

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            > Challenger is just not that good
            Compared to abrams and Leo that may be true but they BTFO russian tanks

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Hmm sounds like emotional response. I wonder how the guy lost his leg.

          • 3 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Well maybe if the Challenger was given to the 47th brigade we'd be seeing a lot more of them.

        • 3 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Leo2 and M1 use pretty much the same ammo so putting one above or below the other because of that is moronic. Where they slot relative to each other highly depends on the model.

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    t. paid vatnik shill. the abrams is the best tank in the world

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Did the USA really not send HE shells with the abrams ? That's some out of touch shit if true
    I would send them with only HE shells, the idea that a tank can be usable after getting a 120mm shell right at it's center just because it wasnt penetrated is some boomer shit

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Read the thread. The US doesn't have a 120mm HE round.

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >zigger complains about threads being deleted because he's pro-russian
    >other thread doesn't get deleted because it has actual discussion and isn't just a zigger malding in a glass ball.
    >N-NO IT'S NOT FAIR, Y-YOU WERE SUPPOSED TO DELETE THIS ONE OTHERWISE MY FANTASY OF ME BEING PERSECUTED IS OVEEEER
    fricking embarrassing meltdown ziggy, maybe next time, before you post, consider if what you may be posting is spam or trolling.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Dang so the secret to blow up panels is to not have ammo that blows up in the first place ?
    We got outsmarted by the American MIC again thirdie bros

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Armour is not sufficient, doesn't protect the crew
    Armor is irrelevant
    >Too heavy for Ukrainian soil
    Everyone knew that, including people who made it
    >As soon as Abrams is spotted, it becomes number 1 target for Russians
    That happens when you only send 2 digit numbers of them after coming up with tons of made up claims
    >Driver lost a leg recently after tank being perpetrated
    Tankers aren't very valuable.
    >Not enough shells and only shell type is for tank on tank battle
    True
    >Still better then Soviet tanks
    Weird thing to write right after claiming that they quite literally serve different purpose, since they don't have HE

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They have HE for a while. Ukraine probably got older ones without digital link so they can't use programmable ammo.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If you're talking about AMP, it hasn't entered full scale production yet. The US and Co. are using MPAT, which is a fricking firecracker because it's a saboted 80mm HEAT round.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Forgot pic

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >If you're talking about AMP, it hasn't entered full scale production yet. The US and Co. are using MPAT, which is a fricking firecracker because it's a saboted 80mm HEAT round.
          They will find even the AMP underwhelming, soviet 125mm fires 3OF26 he-frag shells which have nearly 6kg of TNT worth of energy in their explosive filler.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's still a big improvement judging by test footage, but yeah, Ukraine is still going to largely have to rely on 125mm guns for direct fire support.

            >I guess France is also using "WW2 style Soviet crap", because they're the only country in NATO with a real fricking HE round. It is literally a critical requirement for a tank, but most of NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years. A little bit of extra frag is not going to help you demolish buildings or fortifications. I want to make it clear that I'm not a vatnik, but why does /k/ loses all ability to think critically when you criticize western weapons
            Will the m1 turret bustle and blowout panels still work if you fill it with 20+ HE shells?

            Frankly probably not, and I think this is part of NATO's obsession with insensitive and low yield explosives. But even under ideal circumstances blowout panels aren't foolproof. It's just one countermeasure of many, and if you're risk averse and use your tanks sanely you shouldn't be getting hit or penetrated in the first place.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Frankly probably not, and I think this is part of NATO's obsession with insensitive and low yield explosives. But even under ideal circumstances blowout panels aren't foolproof. It's just one countermeasure of many, and if you're risk averse and use your tanks sanely you shouldn't be getting hit or penetrated in the first place.
              The downside to the western turret bustle ammo storage is it's even more vulnerable to FPV drones and top attack. If the isolation isn't enough to save it when carrying HE rounds it's going to be an even bigger death trap than soviet tanks.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's one of the reasons I'm a big proponent for autoloaders. People get the impression they're deathtraps because of Soviet carousels, but none of them mention that they allow you to completely isolate the crew from the ammo in an armored capsule. The US really should've adopted the M1TTB. Hopefully we get the Abrams X in some form

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            LMAO you moronic vatnik trash they have 3.4kg TNT and more modern F82 rounds T-90M use have 3kg.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >LMAO you moronic vatnik trash they have 3.4kg TNT and more modern F82 rounds T-90M use have 3kg.
              They use hexal not TNT, so it's about the same as 5kg TNT rather than 6kg.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      better then Soviet tanks
      >Weird thing to write right after claiming that they quite literally serve different purpose, since they don't have HE

      Abrams gets hit, tank disabled, crew evacuate, live to fight another day and share experience.

      Russian tank gets hit, crew forcibly evacuated, get added to ROSCOSMOS memorial for cosmonauts who didn’t make it back from space.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Weird how the Ukrainian tank force is largely made up of T-64s and T-80s and they work perfectly fine...

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >T-64s and T-80s
          Ukrainian tanks explode with big fireballs too, I saw that in few lancekek videos.
          Soviet design is a death trap.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I don't see how that's unique to Soviet tanks, when literally every tank in the world with the exception of the Abrams and Leclerc XLR have a massive ammo rack in the hull. And even then, if the blast door is open, the bulkhead is penetrated, or you're carrying actual HE frag and not APFSDS, blowout panels will not save you. Ukraine's Soviet armor is naturally going to have far worse losses because there's thousands more of them. That said, I still think bustle storage is better because it's less likely to be hit than the tank's center of mass where a carousel is. But again, the majority of tanks aren't like this.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              And yet western tanks don't explode. Soviet ammo is two piece so you have bags of unprotected explosives waiting inside. Western ammo is not only more heat resistant it's also inside a shell and hull ammo also has protective tubes.

              In fact Abrams having all ammo in the weakly protected turret back is proving to make it very vulnerable to drones.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I literally posted a video of a western tank exploding

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Ah yes garbage turk L2A4 probably filled with some shitty domestic ammo. None of the western tanks in Ukraine exploded.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Because none of them have real HE? What kind of cope is this

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Is this the latest cope? Programmable HE is way more effective than WW2 style Soviet crap.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                I guess France is also using "WW2 style Soviet crap", because they're the only country in NATO with a real fricking HE round. It is literally a critical requirement for a tank, but most of NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years. A little bit of extra frag is not going to help you demolish buildings or fortifications. I want to make it clear that I'm not a vatnik, but why does /k/ loses all ability to think critically when you criticize western weapons

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >I guess France is also using "WW2 style Soviet crap", because they're the only country in NATO with a real fricking HE round. It is literally a critical requirement for a tank, but most of NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years. A little bit of extra frag is not going to help you demolish buildings or fortifications. I want to make it clear that I'm not a vatnik, but why does /k/ loses all ability to think critically when you criticize western weapons
                Will the m1 turret bustle and blowout panels still work if you fill it with 20+ HE shells?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Anon once again forgot that desert storm happened

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That was predominantly won by air power, ground forces did very little by comparison. I would argue that the last real "peer" war the US had was Vietnam, because that actually had contested airspace. Most of NATO has had zero combat experience since WW2. Sending token forces to US conflicts doesn't count, as evidenced by how much of a useless liability euros were in the GWOT

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >ground forces did very little by comparison
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_73_Easting
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Norfolk
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Medina_Ridge
                https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Rumaila

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                ok now post the number of sorties flown

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >nooooooo dont use airpower its cheating noooooo
                is this a new cope getting ready for f16's?

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He's just telling you that your comparison isn't useful. Russian Ground Forces don't have the greatest airforce in history flying constant interdiction and tactical strike missions. The closest thing they have are lancets and glidebombs that can only hit building sized fixed targets. No one is saying not to use airpower, stop being a moronic gay.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He flat out claimed

                https://i.imgur.com/8e3dcaT.png

                I guess France is also using "WW2 style Soviet crap", because they're the only country in NATO with a real fricking HE round. It is literally a critical requirement for a tank, but most of NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years. A little bit of extra frag is not going to help you demolish buildings or fortifications. I want to make it clear that I'm not a vatnik, but why does /k/ loses all ability to think critically when you criticize western weapons

                >NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years.
                and that some of the largest tank battles since 1945 don't count because our air forces are competent.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Why would a turkey shoot against Soviet rust buckets count? The main purpose of a tank is to provide heavy direct fire support for infantry, and NATO has completely forgotten that because air supremacy has made them complacent. What the frick are you going to do against fortified infantry? Fire APFSDS at them? Low yield MPAT? We've heard firsthand from Ukrainian and IDF tank crews that it's shit

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Most of the combat in Ukraine is Soviet era rust buckets. The fact Russia has been ruined just as hard as Iraq vs a weaker foe shows how terrible Soviet designs are and how incapable Russia is at replacing them with working platforms.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                The sortie numbers were quite low, as those battles only lasted a few hours.

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao when was the last time a French leclerc saw action? Thats right NEVER. No one cares what the French think about combined warfare because they have never done it, the last time they tried (Gulf War) they had a small force tacked onto the Americans.

                He flat out claimed [...]
                >NATO hasn't fought a real war for 80 years.
                and that some of the largest tank battles since 1945 don't count because our air forces are competent.

                Most people also forget about the Korean War which was the first time the UN coalition was assembled in history (Desert Storm was the 2nd time): https://youtu.be/CoZexC7M4hM?si=jPuTCmjBEFoXCwRY

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao when was the last time a French leclerc saw action? Thats right NEVER. No one cares what the French think about combined warfare because they have never done it, the last time they tried (Gulf War) they had a small force tacked onto the Americans.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                He doesn’t know

                ?feature=shared

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >He doesnt know
                Can you read you deluded frog
                >Mali
                >5k soldiers carried by allies
                >0 Leclercs
                How does this in anyway contradict what i said.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >He doesnt know
                Can you read you deluded frog
                >Mali
                >5k soldiers carried by allies
                >0 Leclercs
                How does this in anyway contradict what i said.

                Warriortard turning his attention on the frogs will always be pathetic

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Cannot refute
                >Falseflags warriorturd instead
                Bruh

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Jordan and Lebanon

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Lmao when was the last time a French leclerc saw action? Thats right NEVER. No one cares what the French think about combined warfare because they have never done it, the last time they tried (Gulf War) they had a small force tacked onto the Americans.

                Also Yemen

              • 3 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                [...]
                Also Yemen

                So...never? Ok

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Yes Leclerc is well known to have outdated ammo.

            • 3 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Aside from the fact that this video was never relevant in the first place, the use Leo 2s in Ukraine has proven without a doubt that issue has been solved.
              Neither man portable ATGMs, Air to surface ATGMS, RPGs, AT mines or artillery caused such a catastrophic failure in Western tanks.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Was
          Was largely made
          They barely show up anymore because they all fricking died

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Just watched the report, not good to say the least.
    >Bad protection
    >Faulty electrics due to condensation
    >Too heavy to move
    >Crew critically injured while using the tank
    Bruh, the abrams is a pile of shit isnt it? Why have the reports from the Leopard and Challenger been no where near as damning.

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It’s crazy to me that the Bradley is so good and the abrams is so bad

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Tank not invincible
    Yeah, everyone with a brain knew that.
    >Tank venerable to air attack
    Yep, like every tank ever.
    >Tank being used as artillery
    That is the moronic Soviet WW2 shit that should not be done. Ukraine left the USSR, but the USSR mindset remains in Ukrainians.
    >only sent APFSDS
    That is what they really really wanted. The Abrams were supposed to help stop Russian tank attacks, not direct artillery support.
    I look at Ukraine fighting the war, and it just makes me doubt their intelligence.
    -They use Soviet tactic, just like Russia
    -They are always head first attack. They fortify and get surrounded. They want fortress cities and no maneuver warfare.
    -They don't know haw to use artillery, and that is why they want to due the soviet numbers game. They always want more numbers, while also using what they have in a shit way.
    -They are mostly too lazy to relocate tube artillery.
    -They improperly fuse artillery shells and throw those on the ground in a big pile next to the artillery
    -They seemingly don't do anything against Russian GPS jammers.
    -They seemingly don't know the concept of counter battery artillery fire nor direct artillery support.
    -They seemingly do not know what a counter attack nor a flanking attack nor a spoiling attack means. They want to plan in advance headlong attacks. That does not work in maneuver warfare. Local commanders need to counter attack on the flank and do spoiling attacks within hours, not week nor months.
    Dumbshits need to start fighting smarter, not soviet attritional.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Cope

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >To heavy for Ukrainian soil (assume gets bogged down like every other tank)
    its got less surface pressure then a t-72 per square meter. journalism nig cant into physics, go figure

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      even T-72's are getting stuck man, ukraine's soil hungers for more than just blood. it's why it's so good for farming.

  32. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    None of the abrams destroyed in Ukraine have had a popped turret yet. The challenger killed had a popped turret. Just from that alone I know the abrams is superior

  33. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    unless they shipped the Abrams with the canister shot, in which case they were shotgunning the commieblock with tungsten rain

  34. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >all of them except one have the turret attached still and not ripped open like a tin can like the soviet tanks after ammo rack detonation.

    homosexual.

  35. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Fired 17 rounds into a house and was still standing (because only have APFSDS?)
    Sounds like a great use for HESH.

  36. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    send more HE shells?

  37. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >errrr sorry but they aren't designed to be used like this!
    >The US Army would use 'combined arms warfare™'
    >Why aren't they doing fire and maneuver or operating in pairs! Are they stupid!

    There are so many annoying people who seem to believe that 'combined arms warfare' is when you destroy everything from the air with overwhelming air power.
    Yes sure, your tanks will do better if aircraft with laser guided bombs have done 90% of the work for you already, this is the case for pretty much any force with any tank, because if you get to that point you have effectively already won and are just doing mop up.
    Neither side in this fight has got anywhere near that point and probably never will.

    The Abrams was not actually designed for that! It was designed to fight Soviet heavy brigades in west Germany where air support would be far from guaranteed.
    A borderline apocalyptic battlefield where nothing could be taken for granted; part of the reason that the M1 uses a turbine engine is so that it could burn any type of fuel in the absence of reliable logistical support.
    The highly curated battlefield of the Gulf war was not actually the baseline that the M1 was designed for.
    Indeed many lessons that went into the M1 came from the Arab Israeli wars, where the IDF saw almost half of their thousands strong armor force disabled within a couple of weeks.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The M1A1s that the Ukrainians have received are not especially well protected compared to other tanks in this fight.
      T-64BV, T-80BV, T-72B ect all have similar levels of armor protection.
      Their optronics and imagers are good as these were updated, but Ukrainian T-64s and T-72s also have considerably updated thermal imagers.
      One issue with NATO tanks generally in this war has been a lack of good anti-personnel ammunition, both qualitatively and quantitatively.
      Originally there never was a dedicated anti-personnel round for the 120mm, Abrams crews were expected to use HEAT as a general purpose round, after all there would have been no shortage of AFVs for them to shoot at.
      Experience from actually fighting wars showed that this was stupid, but even still there are no mass produced HE-FRAG rounds for them to use, only boutique anti-structure rounds, airburst and canister shot that only exist in Homeopathic quantities.

      In practice, Ukrainian T-64s and T-72s are rolling with loadouts made of 90+% HE rounds with only a couple of emergency APFSDS incase they encounter a tank.
      This is the polar opposite from a typical Abrams loadout, that would be 90% APFSDS and HEAT, with a couple of anti-structure rounds or canister.
      This is a real problem for these tanks in Ukrainian service and it's very annoying to see people blow it off.

      • 3 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        canister shot is truly god's gift to tankers

  38. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  39. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    is not sufficient, doesn't protect the crew (what did they replace the DU armour packages with?)
    M1A1M models, tungsten
    lost a leg recently after tank being perpetrated
    also happened to a challenger 2 driver in afghanistan
    >>To heavy for Ukrainian soil (assume gets bogged down like every other tank)
    sadly to be expected, it weight 60tons while T72 are only 45, meanwhile most euro tanks are sitting around 55 tons max
    >>If disabled, it’s too heavy to tow away
    now you understand why the crew always have thermite grenades with them

    overall it's good tank, but it's clearly not adapted for all kind of enviroment either, surely the reason why the US started looking into smaller tanks at the cost of lower firepower.
    still, if they only send it with AP shells, that's a bit stupid.
    the US should have focused on building their own shells compatible with the other tanks ukraine has even if it's soviet relics and send only a few abrams for specialised crew.
    still, they surely have enough tanks and shell to use them as static AT guns if needed and use the other vehicles for assault

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Chally 2 driver lost his foot after an RPG-29 bounced under the LFP I believe, it was absolutely miraculous that it happened

  40. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >simple humid weather already disables the big american iron
    muttbros.. not like this

  41. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Leo2 bros..

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The M1A2 in the trial is without DU IIRC although it's not a huge difference like 5-10%.

  42. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

  43. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    this entire board shits on American equipment, what do you mean?

  44. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >what did they replace the DU armour packages with?
    Tungsten
    >only sent APFSDS?
    HEAT is also an anti-tank round

  45. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    did they slap an American flag on a Ukrainian tank?

  46. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >To heavy for Ukrainian soil
    Not really

    >T-72 ground pressure: 12.8 psi
    >M1A1 ground pressure: 13.8 psi

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      that extra 1 psi makes all the difference

  47. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >they don't carry explosive ammo
    Guess what the "e" in "HEAT" stands for

  48. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >too heavy
    Look up ground pressure versus Russian tanks. Abrams are also climate controlled so the condensation note is bullshit as well. CNN talking out of their asses.

  49. 3 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You guys notice this lagged behind government approval for Uke modifications, and also the big interview which dispelled the weight thing?

    It's not the only subject that lagged behind. Even commentators who would usually be on the ball have released videos that were irrelevant the next day. Ukrainian and European political and military systems are getting faster and more reactive than the news.

    Kinda crazy.

    • 3 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      once they get inside the enemies decision making cycle its all over for them

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *