That strictly depends what rounds is it using and what protection the other tanks have... It's far more complicated than you think. Looking at what they fire it seems they are using HATFS not APFSDS, to which most modern tanks have very good ERA, some which react even with APFSDS. Not to mention all modern tanks have some sort of APS/Trophy system too. And range in those cases is completely irrelevant.
Egonieser Locman he’s speaking to the t-72 taking only one round of sabot. Because of the ammo storage in the turret ring they almost always blew up in one shot because of this plus the very weak armor comparably. Ex m1a2 sep tanker here and no very few modern tanks will take a sabot like it’s nothing. My dad fought in the battle of 73 easting and not a single t-72 stood up to a single sabot.
Also the T-72 couldn’t fire on the move due to lacking the stabilization system the Abrams had. The T-72 is no match for an abrams. You’re right about much of the commentary but he wasn’t speaking to modern tanks he was speaking to these tanks.
Nice job. But keep in mind: -Add some burning smokes randomly to give the battlefield effect on the horizon. -Increase the overcast. -Make it more blurry and not clear like Arma 3's gameplay. -And make it a bit more darker.
The T72s in the actual battle had no time to fire, the US met barely any resistance by the Iraqi army. This video is pretty realistic on how it went down
The thing that helped the U.S. win the turkey shoot in the battle of easting ( 73 ) was the depleated uranium ammo. A.P.D.S(T). Without this ammo it would have been much more harder.personally I think D U ammo should be banned
You are way off. 73 eating went the way it did because: 1. Iraqi tanks were poorly maintained 2. Iraq's military was poorly trained/led 3. They had no morale 4. Their equipment was 3 generations behind 5. Their command structure was horrible 6. They had bad tactics 7. They had no real combat experience aganist a well trained army. 8. They didn't know how to use their weapons/gear. 9. They didn't work as a team 10. Their communication was horrible.
You think DU ammo should be banned? You obviously have never been in a tank battle. Armor officers would disagree with you. If they were banned, then we wouldn't have them. But I'm sure the DPRK, Iranians, Russians, and Chinese wouldn't care about a ban... and they'd have a stockpile of them.
@@karimtemri1664 If you are in a fight, what is a more pressing problem: the possible risk of cancer later or dead Soldiers because the enemy had better weapons? #1. We are trained (several times, and always prior to deployment) NOT to go around vehicles that may have been hit with DU rounds. #2. You would have more deaths immediately if we didn’t have them (because our adversaries, like Russia and China, don’t care about rules). So, I’d focus more on keeping Soldiers away from destroyed vehicles, followed by clean up after the battle is won rather than the small percentage of POSSIBLE cancers later. You want to save lives on your side... win the battle, the more quickly and decisively the better.
![ไม่ต้องมีที่ที่ให้ฉันอยู่ แต่ขอแค่มีฉันอยู่ก็พอ (Spaceless) - getsunova [SHORT FILM]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/MuT0d_cvJkc/mqdefault.jpg)
At that range it would only take 1 DU round from the M-1A1s to kill those tanks.
That strictly depends what rounds is it using and what protection the other tanks have... It's far more complicated than you think. Looking at what they fire it seems they are using HATFS not APFSDS, to which most modern tanks have very good ERA, some which react even with APFSDS. Not to mention all modern tanks have some sort of APS/Trophy system too. And range in those cases is completely irrelevant.
Egonieser Locman he’s speaking to the t-72 taking only one round of sabot. Because of the ammo storage in the turret ring they almost always blew up in one shot because of this plus the very weak armor comparably. Ex m1a2 sep tanker here and no very few modern tanks will take a sabot like it’s nothing. My dad fought in the battle of 73 easting and not a single t-72 stood up to a single sabot.
Also the T-72 couldn’t fire on the move due to lacking the stabilization system the Abrams had. The T-72 is no match for an abrams. You’re right about much of the commentary but he wasn’t speaking to modern tanks he was speaking to these tanks.
Use your laser range finder!
Nice job. But keep in mind:
-Add some burning smokes randomly to give the battlefield effect on the horizon.
-Increase the overcast.
-Make it more blurry and not clear like Arma 3's gameplay.
-And make it a bit more darker.
iraqi shoot straight? damn i thought they were outranged and took a defensive static role
Legal muito top
Link to the mods ?
Balls or stupid? (Sub guns against armor)
ماشاء الله الدبابات الامريكيه لم تصب واحدة منها وهذا يعني نجاح وتفوق السلاح الامريكي بدليل انه اصبح خردة ف العراق واليمن على من تكذبون بهذه الفيديوات
في اليمن السعوديين يستخدمون نماذج استيراد
Map?
Ok
WTF T72 dosen"t Shoot or the tower is broken soooo bad my friend
The T72s in the actual battle had no time to fire, the US met barely any resistance by the Iraqi army. This video is pretty realistic on how it went down
There's something wrong with your programming...the M-1A1 can fire on the move, you show it stopping for each shot...what gives.
It’s arma 3.. it’s not a game the guy makes. Smart one.
The thing that helped the U.S. win the turkey shoot in the battle of easting ( 73 ) was the depleated uranium ammo. A.P.D.S(T). Without this ammo it would have been much more harder.personally I think D U ammo should be banned
You are way off. 73 eating went the way it did because:
1. Iraqi tanks were poorly maintained
2. Iraq's military was poorly trained/led
3. They had no morale
4. Their equipment was 3 generations behind
5. Their command structure was horrible
6. They had bad tactics
7. They had no real combat experience aganist a well trained army.
8. They didn't know how to use their weapons/gear.
9. They didn't work as a team
10. Their communication was horrible.
HI THERE MATT, I AGREE WITH WITH YOUR COMMENTS,SO FAIR PLAY TO YOU...😁😎🏴
You think DU ammo should be banned? You obviously have never been in a tank battle. Armor officers would disagree with you. If they were banned, then we wouldn't have them. But I'm sure the DPRK, Iranians, Russians, and Chinese wouldn't care about a ban... and they'd have a stockpile of them.
@@joesnuffy7310 many soldiers got blood cancer due to those rounds
@@karimtemri1664 If you are in a fight, what is a more pressing problem: the possible risk of cancer later or dead Soldiers because the enemy had better weapons? #1. We are trained (several times, and always prior to deployment) NOT to go around vehicles that may have been hit with DU rounds. #2. You would have more deaths immediately if we didn’t have them (because our adversaries, like Russia and China, don’t care about rules). So, I’d focus more on keeping Soldiers away from destroyed vehicles, followed by clean up after the battle is won rather than the small percentage of POSSIBLE cancers later. You want to save lives on your side... win the battle, the more quickly and decisively the better.
First in comments
মিরাকে ল
মিরাকেল
Подмахивает Абрамам уж сильно. В реальном бою они замечательно горят без поддержки авиации
В каком бою такое происходило?
Bzzzzzz
👎👎👎👎