M1 Abrams Developments and News

uuh that not nesscairly true garyes place /wiki leaks
I can just about read necessarily in 'nesscairly´, I have difficulty understanding 'garyes place´.
that is the name of the website i am not kidding
Please give a link to that website? garyes place?
and besides that was very mean i can talk and type English dude i am from america.
I do not intend to be mean.
I am not from America. So far, your command of English makes me suspect neither are you. Please remove my suspicion. If you like answers to your questions, you should take more care in writing them.
 
Video confirmation:


Finished off by two FPV's after being immobilized with an RPG.

And M1150 video confirmation:

 
Last edited:
Third M1A1 destroyed with ATGM.
Video confirmation:
 

Attachments

  • cnjd7h4igdgncdcglk4g.png
    cnjd7h4igdgncdcglk4g.png
    933.1 KB · Views: 45
Last edited:
MBTs aren't wonder weapons and losses are to be expected over there regardless of common internet behavior saying how country X's tank is the best and country Y's tank is trash.

I can't log into my telegram account where I am so I can't see the videos, but it looks like the two M1A1s weren't catastrophic losses. Or at least they were not such when first disabled by a hit. Meaning surviving crew members had a chance to bail out before the Russians would start hitting the tank with whatever available to ensure it becomes a wreck beyond realistic recovery.

The M1150 is probably the worst lost since such vehicles are relatively rare and must be in high demand in a country now as littered with landmines as it now is. Hopefully Lima tank plant can pull some old M1 hulls from storage and convert more. I do wonder if there will be a need soon to start building entirely new vehicles. As far as I know the standard practice for the last two decades or so has been to take old models leftover from the Cold War days of a larger Army and rebuilding them to A1SA or A2 SEP standard.
 
that would need some testing.
MBTs aren't wonder weapons and losses are to be expected over there regardless of common internet behavior saying how country X's tank is the best and country Y's tank is trash.

I can't log into my telegram account where I am so I can't see the videos, but it looks like the two M1A1s weren't catastrophic losses. Or at least they were not such when first disabled by a hit. Meaning surviving crew members had a chance to bail out before the Russians would start hitting the tank with whatever available to ensure it becomes a wreck beyond realistic recovery.

The M1150 is probably the worst lost since such vehicles are relatively rare and must be in high demand in a country now as littered with landmines as it now is. Hopefully Lima tank plant can pull some old M1 hulls from storage and convert more. I do wonder if there will be a need soon to start building entirely new vehicles. As far as I know the standard practice for the last two decades or so has been to take old models leftover from the Cold War days of a larger Army and rebuilding them to A1SA or A2 SEP standard.
I have seen abrambs be destroyed over 20 times by ieds 1 time by a rpg 29 and a few times by drones
 
MBTs aren't wonder weapons and losses are to be expected over there regardless of common internet behavior saying how country X's tank is the best and country Y's tank is trash.
Agreed. The following article provides some possible insight into the situation here:


Now having posted that, let’s try to not turn this into a Ukraine War thread.
 
Very interesting. One minor detail that seems rather unusual to me is what must be some type of machine gun in its own sort of compartment (not sure what I would call it to be more accurate). I'd assume it is aligned coaxial to the main gun. Maybe there is no MG in the typical location for coaxial MGs.
 
Agreed. The following article provides some possible insight into the situation here:


Now having posted that, let’s try to not turn this into an Ukraine War thread.
You don’t have to discuss current events to understand that tanks aren’t suitable surrogates for tube artillery. Something like a M1A1 105mm offers 20 degrees elevation which limits it to line of sight. Not all that useful compared to a howitzer and probably worse in range than a modern heavy mortar.

I’d argue that a 105mm L7 could be very useful as a surrogate for artillery, albeit with 40-45 degrees of elevation and the right ammunition. The Belgians are offering a turret with 42 degrees of elevation and a claimed 10km range.

Of course a real problem in the current conflict is a lack of fuel logistics on both sides, which makes the worthwhile use of tanks a largely moot point. The MBT isn’t dead but it also isn’t of much use if you don’t have the logistics to make a massed armor breakthrough. Probably the best question to ask is how many horses does it take to pull a M777? Horse based logistics might also limit the rate of fire which would solve the ammunition issues as well.
 
Last edited:

One rather suspects that they have lost a fair number more than just five tanks to warrant such a drastic move.
 
You don’t have to discuss current events to understand that tanks aren’t suitable surrogates for tube artillery. Something like a M1A1 105mm offers 20 degrees elevation which limits it to line of sight. Not all that useful compared to a howitzer and probably worse in range than a modern heavy mortar.

I’d argue that a 105mm L7 could be very useful as a surrogate for artillery, albeit with 40-45 degrees of elevation and the right ammunition. The Belgians are offering a turret with 42 degrees of elevation and a claimed 10km range.

You'd just dig a hole and drive the tank into it to achieve necessary elevation.
 

Attachments

  • 1716623598606.jpeg
    1716623598606.jpeg
    24 KB · Views: 18
  • 1716623613410.jpeg
    1716623613410.jpeg
    20.9 KB · Views: 19
never trust the dod the have lied several times same thing with genral dynamics its a propagnda
You do know that Oryx is not even an American website, right? (IIRC, they're Dutch)



Centurions in Korea were driven up slight inclines where possible to improve elevation for fire support missions. 20 punder was the active ingredient.
US TDs did the same in WW2, predominantly in Italy.
 

Similar threads

Please donate to support the forum.

Back
Top Bottom