Is Merkava a Failure? Merkava Tanks Analysis

Thanks for another interesting and salient video!

merkava is still better than any Russian trash tank, stay mad commie

Tank losses happen, nothing is immortal. Failure is when a tank smears its crew, rather than helping crew survive after being knocked out....Failure is a Russian T-72/80/90.

I was waiting for you to do a vid on this and its plain to see that Isreali crews where caught by surprise and didn't turn on thier trophy APS. Some of the Merkava tanks which you pointed out are the older Merkava 3 tank which does not have the APS system.

A Trophy system can be disconnected by the tank crew in order not to be harmed when the crew is outside of it, therefore the system did not work in any of the cases! The video in which you see that the tank fires from behind, it is a controlled explosion of the tank by its crew! I am a tankman in IDF

And what does your mom say?

Oof

Bruh☠️

@@ThePunchOfJustice she says I'm doing fine, but she has a different opinion on the Merkava

Bro 💀

not fully true. people only call soviet/russian tanks a faliure, when a western tank gets destroyed they just either dont talk about it, or just say "well the crew got out". yeah tell this to the families of turkish leo 2 crews...

@@o-hogameplay185 I don't know where you have been but I have seen every western tank get called overhyped garbage and completely useless the second one gets destroyed and the videos + pictures are paraded around for weeks. hell I even saw a Ukrainian Leo 2 get recorded from 5 different angles and posted repeatedly as different tanks.

yeah nobody seems to be focused on how infantry are more vulnerable than ever and simultaneously more necessary than ever in warfare right now. small drones accurately relaying positions to mortar teams and even hitting soldiers directly with explosives has become a common sight. honestly I think the U.S military is going to have to have a very in depth plan for handling this if we are going to end up in any further small regional conflicts.

@@dominuslogik484 Both is correct. Strong opinions on both sides of the argument are the ones that gain the most traction on social media. In most real world instances it doesn't really matter what tank you're in, most have similar weaknesses. Some are more grave than others though (low reverse speed for the T-Series, no blowout panels on the Challenger 2)

@@o-hogameplay185 it's even worse. If a Soviet tank gets destroyed but it's being used by Ukraine it is what it is but if the same tank is being used by the Russians and it get destroyed it shows the incompetence of the Russian military. We are steeped in NATO propaganda.

Yes, because as any other type of unit its the best when used in combined arms warfare. But war is unpredictable, people get to be incompetent so that is not always done or possible

I get what you mean but funnily enough its the opposite in media. While tanks are portrayed as these impenetrable fortresses while they are quite easily destroyed by rpgs, at and other things you got knigts on the other side that are being killed with swords that slice to stab straight through breast plate which is akin to showing a tank get destroyed by arbitrary small arms fire 😂

This is so true, people also forget that there is confirmation bias. Nobody records an enemy tank killing 10 of their soldiers which I bet happens very often, tanks kill a shit-ton of things before they actually go down, IF they go down at all. Remember that even Tiger Ace Michael Wittmann was ambushed and killed, if you would see only the video of him dying you would think Tiger I was trash even though the guy already had the K/D ratio of a fucking legend. No matter how good a tank is, if you throw enough shit at it, eventually it will die but that's when Doctrine comes in to make sure this gets hard to do.

Lets not forget, armored vehicles that we see are all forms of compromises

The same about Politics 👍

Even cope cages wont save a tank from a PG7VR, even if the main warhead detonate on it the shaped charge will go threw a meter of air with ease

yeah literally

Exactly, making the claim that the tank is a failure because it got a damaged engine from a dropped at weapon is just ridiculous, as long as the crew lives after the weapon hits the tank, it's served its purpose.

@@lostinthesauce6409 Air has a RHA equivalency factor of ~ 0.15 so yeah, 1 meter of air counts as roughly off 15cm RHA. Thats less than half penetration of even the basic RPG 7 grenades.

False, the most modern upgrades of Russian tanks feature cage armor with heavy ERA, a 1 meter space followed with more heavy ERA, the roof armor and finally an aramid liner. That can definitely stop an rpg, even one with a tandem charge because the tandem charge isn't going to have enough penetration to set off the second layer of K5, not to mention the first layer will degrade penetration given its heavy ERA. The turret roof on Russian tanks is also thicker than western counterparts generally and makes up a much smaller area.

Well they used to be Covid experts before. Now they changed profession.

@@Genicksalto

Well, following your logic: 1. Don't complain about your government cause you are not a politician 2. Don't say anything about a restaurant's food cause you are not a chef 3. Don't complain if it's too hot or too cold. You are not a planet 4. Don't tell anyone how they look, whether ugly or pretty cause you are not a beauty expert. Kid, this is the "Freedom of Speech"

@@BnNoach that doesnt make you smarter than a person with expertise or experience in that field however Neither does it give you the right to give " valid facts" as many of these armchair historians think they do, which are just misinformed opinions. Prime example: DCS players thinking they know more than actual pilots, ignoring the fact they have never flown a real aircraft in their life.

@@YourSocialistAutomaton well, you just admitted you are against free speech. I am neither stating that I am an expert nor stating that I am smarter than the experts. If you don't like the content, then don't watch it.

Unlike other Active Protection System we're better than Trophy

This could only be said about the first two days of the Hamas invasion. Any further absence of Trophy work is either an indicator of low efficiency or poor staffing.

@@super-cat4781 first day only* after the first 12h if you have someone not knowing what to do, that is an failure on the IDF

But really the trophy system wasn’t turned on so it’s kinda invincible but can be destroyed by drones and sabot

It is better than most of the modern tanks, and it have the roof armor that other tanks didn't have

like all "western" tanks. Fixed it for you.

@@sexyitalian891 Do you have brain damage? Just asking before I go forward.

@@sexyitalian891 implying russain tanks are not suseptible to atgms?

Tanks are obsolete. They still have some purpose on the battlefield, direct support, but quite frankly they are not worth it.

it is overrated at best.

well, we have been seing the "End of the tank" since 1918. People after WW1 ended saw no use on tanks, however, doctrines like the Blitzkrieg or the soviet deep battle showed how tanks can be useful in modern warfare. after WW2 ended people saw no reason to keep using tanks thanks to the Nukes, but again, we saw how the soviets used tanks and we saw an exponential grow in tank warfare. In the 70's when ATGMs were created and were pretty common, People again started to question the existence of tanks, however wars like the Yom Kippur war showed why tanks are useful. Again, in the early 90's when the cold war ended and the soviet union collapsed, we saw people claiming that tanks had no use, however, the Iraq war showed them why tanks are useful, armour and weapon are evolving while we talk, but that doesn't mean that tanks are obsolete or useless, tank warfare is pretty much dead, yeah, tanks no long fight on huge battlefields with other tanks, but hell, sending infantry with no support like tanks is pretty dumb, you need to suppport infantry so infantry can support tanks. that's it @@bdleo300

​@@bdleo300 "Infantry is obsolete since everyone is running around with cheap anti-infantry weapons which can take out infantry with only a single hit" - Quote from somebody I couldn't find.

@@bdleo300 you real dont know how battle or tatics work in a battlefield it not just pushing with out a care in the world you got have infantry supporting with the tanks as you see in the video theres no boot on the ground as if there was the drones woude not be as affective .As just face it drone are loud.

Shh, they get mad af when you expose their hypocrisy. Treat them like children and say everything they do is the best.

​@@MGZettalol

They are copying the glorious indigenous Russian design.

​@@MGZettaHey man I want to let you know you are being extremely pretentious, as someone who never laughed at said Russian cage armor.

Is actually right.. Western tanks fanboys were making fun for Russia using very old tanks ,using cage armor on top against drones and making fun of how they explode at times.. but guess what ? Israel and NATO are sending very old tanks to their wars in Gaza and ukraine and now using Russian cage armor too.. and Israeli and NATO tanks are burning too , just like russian tanks.. The truth is now visible ,that western propaganda of the superiority of their tanks and other weaponos is over. Hezbola is showing videos of dozens of israel tanks destroyed , and so Russia of hundreds of NATO tanks destroyed by their drones. @@nesyboi9421

Recently saw a Ukrainian Challenger 2 with a "cope cage"

Even Ukrainians and now Israelis are using them. Who's laughing now. Eh? 😂 Cope.....

It was because russia was using it against javelins and Nlaws. These days drone nades are a threat and they can stop those.

People were laughing at russians because they put it on to protect from Javelins and this would never works so people called them cope cages, but further in to war so called cope cages found new actuall use of protecting from drone dropped explosive and loitering ammunitions. So now they should be addresed as anti drone roofs or cages imo its a stop gap till actuall countermessures againts drones will be implemented

@@blowbert9126 Nope the Russians were using the cages against drone RPGs and Mortars, they never claimed it was for top attack ATGMs.

Thanks for this very valuable info

Infantry are vulnerable too you know, they can get killed by enemy sniper, artillery, mines, grenades. It doesn't give the tank any better protection just because some troops follow behind it. What is the infantry supposed to do against drones? There's not really much they can do against drones or missiles coming from long range. Tanks have armor and other defense measures (like APS) to protect the tank against missile, mines and other hits. Infantry is not one of their defensive lines. The defensive systems need to get upgraded with some ability to intercept and stop top-attacks from drones, either by Electronic Counter Measure (ECM) or with a hard-kill system In fact there already are some systems with such capability (ARENA-M, AMAP-ADS) but these systems are not in active-service yet, only prototypes.

@@militaryanalysis5028 o, of course, I am not talking about following behind but being forward to the side around the tank during combat. The problem with modern fighting in many ways is that the tank, due to its operational ability and use, is best suited in assault and defensive screen line roles. When a tank is in a small squad formation or unsupported by others, it's open to destruction by man-portable munitions. Troops are easily killable by things you mentioned, but it's important to have troops forward or in support, even with metal detectors, to clear the way for heavy equipment. In this video, I commented that it seemed the tank was in position without support. In the United States, military vehicles are never by themselves.

But what normal people (including many people here) also don't understand is that a tank is still far more survivable than an infantryman with a rocket launcher. You MIGHT render a tank ineffective with a single rocket or whatever, but the average infantryman WILL be rendered ineffective after a single hit from any of the tank's weapons.

Um no, we should "blame them", why talk about things you know nothing about, next time maybe they should consider that before making themselves look like fools.

​@@Sveta7 Or being blatantly ignorant about "Yuh Media says Tanks were bad"

​@@jamesedwardladislazerrudo1378and being so smart to believe the said media in the first place. Let the media bs all they want but if you fall for it, its also your fault

@@Mirage-pz If you know why media should be blame for poor coverage and exactly what was wrong about that

Israeli doctrine is basically "lose the fewest amount of soldiers" and that doctrine is showing failure in strategy on the battlefield. They over rely on technology to do their job and it doesn't seem to be doing it well. The war in Ukraine has proven you need boots on the ground first and foremost. The majority of videos I've seen of their tanks, they were not supported by any infantry in sight. This isn't a one-time thing, it's consistent which shows they think that actually works. They don't want to engage in street fighting with infantry against infantry, and as a result their tanks end up like sitting ducks.

Israeli caring about killing civilians?? Are you dreaming?

They definitely aren't concerned by civilian losses, but infantry yes. But I thought they don't have the brains to support their tanks with infantry.

Lazerpig is in the uk which is very anti israel.

Finally someone understands

Leopard 2 is only overhyped by people who dont know that much about tanks. Still it is the best tank in the world..

All tanks are "overhyped" what nation is going to downplay their military equipment?

neither are more overhyped than the challenger 2, "never destroyed by enemy fire" "longest tank on tank kill" , mf got its turret tossed before it even did anything useful lol

@@bullsfan6965 "best tank in the world" its on par with the Abrams and challenger 2 and that is about it. there is no "best tank in the world" and the only tanks that can claim that title hold it for about 3 years at max when they are first introduced. for example the T-64 was the best tank in the world for a few years before better western tanks were produced, the T-62 was the better tank until the M60 came around as well. hell right now the K2 from south Korea is arguably a better tank than the leopard 2, its certainly a debatable topic.

I have said the same thing, the Abrams will soon join the rest and I'm waiting for that news article about it and all the Western Weaboos crying and saying "not everything is unstoppable" like they did when reports of the Leopards came out.

Imagine being so inbred as to think that no one else has made this observation before.

Its how you use it in combined arms that makes the difference and with no air support and drone defense,any tank is a sitting duck.

​@@mastermariner490every tank is sitting duck When hit by anti tank weaponry like the kornet Even with combined battle tactics It doesn't stop a tank from getting destroyed or damage when hit

@@subjectc7505 It's gonna to the modified M1A1 Abrams being destroyed in Ukraine and it's not the M1A2 SepV3 Abrams so take the L

i wouldnt say antiquated its just that drove warfare is new.

@@TheOnlyKingBee An immobile tank is a dead tank, putting the engine at the front was thought to be great at the time for survivability, but technology has progressed since that. Now the tank gets immobilized and pummeled.

I think most is because they get ambushed in confusion on the first day of the Hamas mass attack. In that situation, even the best tank would get badly damaged or destroyed no matter what anyway as those tanks are (mostly) alone and didn't even prepare to fight. However, the design certainly has some problems (just like everyone else).

@@DefinitelyNotEmma They did that for the crew survivability not the tanks survivability. They can replace a lost tank faster than a highly trained crew. Thats basically their thinking

​@@BKBCrAnKCrew survivability is at stake the moment a tank gets immobilized. You cannot "hold out" like it was 20 years ago. Not to mention that it just means you get captured alive, if you even survive. As fatalities occur anyway. That principle as a basis for design is fundamentally outdated.

May God guide you to Islam and cause you to repent for fighting on the wrong side, like that one IDF soldier on KZhead.

Very interesting info btw

When Saudi ABRAMS were getting clapped in Yemen, everyone was like "those are export variants, our tanks are better" now, with this and Ukraine, we all seem to have gotten a reality check

When Saudi ABRAMS were getting clapped in Yemen, everyone was like "those are export variants, our tanks are better" now, with this and Ukraine, we all seem to have gotten a reality check

So in reality, Russian tank is better than western tank😂

@@Brian-qj4kk Fields of Ukraine would beg to differ. My point was, the technical capabilities of an individual vehicle are not the deciding factor on a battlefield

@@syedabishosainrizvi7817the ones in ukraine are still exports… USA won’t ever send their abrams with the newest tech and add ons so that other country’s don’t find it and reverse engineer everything specifically the abrams hull front armour and I’m pretty sure they weren’t at all getting clapped in yemen but believe it I guess also ABRAMS is very OVERATED tank because people call it the strongest when many other tanks are stronger

So in reality, Russian tank is better than western tank😂

@@Brian-qj4kkbro your being pretentious this doesn’t have anything to do with western vs russia tank at all and it’s quite the oposite tbh russia is losing so many of their t-70 through t-90 tanks that they have started using t-55s that were made when pictures were still black and white no one brought up russia so stop causing arguments because you want to make something look better also to clarify IDF has lost only TWO of their Merkava.mk4

If i remember correctly, cope cage were used during the later first stage of the invasion of Ukraine. Russian tanks are vulnerable to Javelin top attacks, and warhead dropping drones are not used as extensively and still at its infancy. But then, turns out cope cages are good against drone top attacks. I would say cope cage is an example of right solution to the wrong problem

Its amusing how people either quickly forgot or were just ignorant about the reason cope cages were first installed, that is in an attempt to protect against western ATGMs with top attack capabilities ( Javelin and NLAW).

​​​​@@darnit1944no, it is effective against javelin too, if there is layer of active armor

@@darnit1944 Russians bring cages from Syria, where oposition extensively used drones

@@darnit1944 There have been instances where the cage has protected from javelins too though. You only (mostly) see the times it didn't work.

and yet they die

​@@BebyArteare you drunk

May i ask what is BOLO?

whats a bolos

​@@acr_master5594bolos deez nuts lmao

"You get what you fucking deserve"

​@@HolyNorthAmericanEmpiredeserve what? Murdered?

Afghanit on the armata probably? Idk it's not battle proven yet but on paper it can stop apfsds and tandem shaped warheads unlike trophy that can only stopped tandem shaped atgms which makes sense since Israel only fought bunch of militants with no tanks s

Actually pretty sure it can stop more than that, if we include the fact that the US also bought a lot of trophy APS, in this case i assume that the crew was in chaos and they turned the trophy system to late, explained by the fact that after the first two days, even after we saw confirmations of Israeli tanks engaging with Hamas ATGM’s we saw 0 confirmations of any merkava getting destroyed or disabled after this

Probably Afghanit or whatever system is employed on the K2 Black Panther from South Korea.

I dont think so. Its big but cover a lot well. I like Abrams very well too. They are very expensive but are what was asked for.

if only it was olny the size lmao

@@Zx17OPv57i it really is just the size lmao, keep coping

It helped😊

The best APS would be "infantry killing off enemy RPGs"

If you were forced be in a tank (that is fully operational) that was going to be hit with a ATGM which one would you choose? Would anyone here trust their life with Arena?

@@Redmist370Z from my knowledge trophy is the best but red alert said that there are better out there, I don't think so. If it were the case the US wouldn't adopt trophy for their Bradleys or Germany for their leopards

@@Paronak now you still have problem known as "long range attack" or "ambush"

@@02suraditpengsaeng41 onion effect. Don't get hit

i thenk there is destroyed leclerc tanks in the yaman war with the UAE army

@@ahmadaboshnnar2064 They've had one or two losses in Yemen. The videos are a bit blurry so you can't tell if its a complete loss.

Abrams never burned mate

@@littleshimmyboopag0921 What are you talking about? Plenty of Abrams burned in Iraq and Yemen.

@@burningphoneix are we talking about enemy fire or self destroyed as well

That's one of the most powerful ATGM in the history. Without APS I think there's little chance for any tank that are currently in service to withstand such a missile like that. Many tank can survive Konkur but Kornet? Definitely no.

no matter how good your armor gets there will always be a weapon designed to defeat it. WW1 tanks were invincible until steel core ammo and field guns/AT rifles came around, then the spanish civil war saw the 37mm AT gun then WW2 was a story of tanks going from invinvible to vulnerable every 6-12 months. its continued to this day.

With APS trophy they are but not all have it installed

​@@mastermariner490for now, I bet someone is gonna do something like RPG-30 for ATGM and well, I think I saw a Double barrel Iranian ATGM a while back

So what.

Also people like you don’t understand that it was a supposed attack, I’m not even sure if those merkavas they were destroyed were aware of enemies incoming or even when they knew it they were in chaos.

rpg 29 is it? has 23mm projectile that shoots first. not sure if its for triggering active protection or explosive armour. but in this cases something much older was used...

Ever had at. Thats they try so avoid that. They most like cover their weak spots with heavy infantry, airplanes and artilly. Tanks seldom are alone.

@@jebise1126 Dehlavieh - Iranian variant of Kornet. 2 Missiles are fired within 0.4 seconds, not giving Trophy time to reload after intercepting the first one.

⁠@@IndoSBthe trophy system doesn’t need to reload it’s not a one shot reload thing it’s multi shot

@@littleshimmyboopag0921 that dude just talking out his ass lol

Ukrainian tanks included in that as well. But to generalize armor used by both sides. Let called it Soviet tanks.

like 90% of tank losses in Ukraine Russian War were casued by artilery fire tank v tank combat can be counted on both hands

There was a video showing how it was striked by an atgm

It was taken out by a Kornet atgm. The artillery/Lancet version were the msm trying to do some damage control. Destruction by artillery is understandable but destruction by a common Russian atgm which the challenger 2 was previously known to be impervious to, well.

@@joeo2533 Yeah I saw that. The video wasn't clear. And it was hit from the side/back turret after it was immobilised by a mine. But it could also be finished off by artillery. That area was full of other vehicles perhaps destroyed by artillery too.

Glad they won't work.

Doesnt Isreal have a dedicated armored troop transport based of the merkava mk2 hulls that even has trophy ? I think a troop compartment is unnecessary in the MBT tank when they have so much of those APC variants

@@HolyNorthAmericanEmpire PG-7VR isn't the only munition these tanks would get attacked with. Cope cages would help against dropping mortar rounds or lesser powerful PG-7 rounds

@@icetea8946 it definitely makes it more versatile. I see how it can be useful in certain operations

For the merkava to be an APC you need to remove all of the ammo, it is very rarely used and even when it is used, in most of the cases it becomes an ambulance for emergency situations

its still a better tank... did u even watch the video?

​@@TheOnlyKingBeeBetter than what?

@@TheOnlyKingBee Yes

@@EmoBirb see? Already seething

@@EmoBirb Arjun

It's hunter killer anti journalist system is top in its own class

Do you have proof of this cause I think this never happened

Islam needs to be eradicated

@@littleshimmyboopag0921 do you think Gaza children civilian has armour are you f!cking kidding me

@@littleshimmyboopag0921 It's been a month and your comment aged worse than milk.

Lol Gaza is a besieged city, with homemade weapons and so far they have destroyed 500+ tanks and dozens of other vehicles. This tank would be a joke in the face of another country, or at least an organization that is not besieged.

@user-vu6vu7fp5s LOL, how old are you? (Seems like you are abit uneducated, The IDF didn't even bring 500 tanks into gaza.

​@@user-vu6vu7fp5sdude israel doesn't even have 500 tanks.

​@@Itsheat. I've heard that 589 IDF soldiers died, and most of them were in tanks 💀

@@FaketriangleFake0001 my guy knows nothing, 231 IDF soldiers died, and almost none of them are from tanks, if you actually see when the IDF post when a soldier died, they also say from what unit they are from

German overengineering on an Israeli(HSIWEJ) tank??? Austrian painter not so happy

i disagree. what costs more are people. if u have a shit tank youll die to more things more easily. its no use having a crap tank and no people to crew it

​@@TheOnlyKingBee define a "crap tank" because if anything, a loss = a loss. Merkavas get blown up just as easily as a Ukrainian T-64 or a Russian T-72. Yet the very former is 10 times more complex and expensive than the latter ones. Not to mention for every Merkava there are like 3 T-72s. For the crew situation, if your precious tank can get just as easily destroyed as a crap one. What's the difference then?

merkavas defenetly not blow up just as easily as t64/72 . sure there are ways to destroy one just as easily as the other but overall there are many considrble senarios where a merkava would survive perfectly and a T64/72 would not such as a hit to the ammo storage, where as seen in the video blow out pannels leave the tank perfectly fuctional, you can argue that even the ammo in the back may be abit more safe in those anti incindiery bins theyr stored at . it depends very much if you consider the trophy system a feature of the tank or just an addon .@@saucyinnit8799

@@saucyinnit8799 I'd also imagine in most cases a tank is disabled/totalled whatever killed the tank is probably going to kill disembarking crew if they have no infantry support. I mean you see it with the Merkava's they're surrounded by enemies with no support, doesn't matter if you survive the PG-7VR hitting your roof or the ATGM disabling your tank, if you have no infantry to cover your ass as you bail and escape, unless you were destroyed from an extreme range you're probably just dismounting into capture or death.

It was me

Keep crying brah

@@raven_ARKNETsWarfare Ain‘t my fault that Hamas can't be bothered to provide new images of actual destroyed Merkavas. Sure, part of that is owed to the hit-and-run nature of urban guerilla warfare, but at some point you'd want to confirm how much damage you're actually doing - both for the purpose of battlefield intel as well as propaganda. Say what you want about the Ukranians inflating the number of destroyed Russian vehicles, but at the end of the day they were able to provide more than enough footage of thoroughly perforated BMP‘s and T-72 turrets being launched into the stratosphere. I think even pro-Hamas accounts are slowly beginning to realize this, and adjusting their language accordingly (going from "the Resistance _destroyed_ X tanks" to "the Resistance _engaged / hit_ X enemy tanks").

I allow me to add it also has a good fear factor. Ugly is a relative.

tbh the centurions used by the IDF were more good looking than the Merks

its still a good tank and it was tested multiple times. Its just a modern vulnerability that all tanks have

"great against kids" and with that statement everything you say can be thrown out a window because all you can do is appeal to emotion and you consciously displayed your political bias.

In lebanon the early merkava went up againts syrian T-72s were it came out the victor

@@dominuslogik484 Deboonked!

@@dominuslogik484 He's not wrong though. The Merkava is mostly used by the Isn'trealis for urban operations against non-conventional opponents.

Engine block is iin front of the tank just with old german tank destroyers it gives additional protection to the crew. A problem is it gives a huge heat signature

Abrams are better in crew survivability.

I think the problem is that it was designed roughly in same threat space as all other "modern" MBTs, the AT threats grew exponentially lately and we are currently in the stage of high "attack" advantage, give couple of years and the inevitable response from the "defense" or protection side of the argument catches up. This is just good old swing between threat-protection going on, like it always did since the dawn of warfare.

@@megalamanooblol No it's not designed for the modern threat space. It was designed for an obsolete threat space before Western nations produced composite armour in any quantity so it was designed for a sabot-less, MCLOS battlefield that already didn't exist by the time it was fielded.

Tanks are either going to evolve to overly complicated and expensive systems with active protection or light very mobile spg kind of systems. Probably a bit of both

​@@jackdaniels6536unmanned platforms like the Stryker are the future.

No tank is designed to withstand a damn konet missile to the side. Did you even see the video? Also on all of them but one was the APS turned off. SO whats your point?

Thank you! I don't necessarily hate the Abram and I think it's a unique piece of engineering but the over exaggerating of its capabilities is hilarious! Operation Desert Storm and so on, The Abrams faced no real threats except from friendlies or itself, and every since then aside of exported variants haven't seen modern conflict. Until now, we'll see if the Abrams can stand in Ukraine.

Keep drinking that Russian Kool aid.

Well put. I don't think our politics align but I agree with basically everything you've said. Thanks for providing some experience and insight.

This. Also I doubt any Abrams will actually see fight, we're into mud season now and it will just sink to the sides of the hull in earth the second it moves. Maybe on some roads where they will be easy target, though I doubt it too because its weight will collapse 95% of ukr bridges...

You're right that a lot of people attribute some kind of invincibility to Western equipment, and they are completely wrong for that. You're also right that in a peer war there will definitely be losses of even M1A2SEPv3, because that is the nature of a war. The Abrams and the King Tiger are not comparable though. The King Tiger was plagued by many issues that the Abrams avoided with decades of technological improvement. The weight is a serious issue when it comes to crossing a bridge, and the reason for this is that across its service life the upgrade packages for the Abrams have been "Strap-on" improvements, which aren't exactly efficient in terms of weight usage. The eventual M1A3 (currently M1E3) in development is tasked with addressing the many inefficiencies. This means taking all of the upgrades that were previously strapped onto the M1A2, and integrating them with the turret systems. You're also pretty stupid to discount how superior these pieces of equipment are compared to Soviet systems. They have been modernized more thoroughly, less corners have been cut, and crew survivability is actually emphasized. If you need a demonstration for that, look at pictures of Russian advances that have been stopped, look at the abandoned vehicles and how many dead bodies are covering them. If the US attacked Ukraine under the same circumstances, there would have been potentially very heavy equipment losses. But at least the crews will have a chance. In the end you have addressed the fact that equipment losses are the very nature of large scale combat operations. You have not addressed the fact that given a choice any sane tank crew would decide to be in an Abrams or a Leopard over a T-72 or a T-80. I mean this with absolute sincerity, there has been no T-72, T-80, or T-90 that has been modernized to the same standard as the M1A2SEPv3, and there has been no T-72, T-80, or T-90 that is as survivable.

Those beard dude wearing sandal and having RPG on the shoulder is such a nasty force to fight with.

a lot of them were lost while being empty Hamas took Israel by surprise and caught them with hand in their pants

all of them were empty