I do find it funny how they say the Panzer 4 was a scary tank, couldn't be pen, and they only said this after the guy mentioned fury. So they mistaken the Panzer 4 for the Panzer 6 Tiger. i like that funny mistake honestly.
What's funnier is that was a real and a very common mistake IRL. When american crews arrived at Europe they often reported encounters with Tigers, which were in fact Pz.IVs
Funfact: Germany builds the gun system for the Abrams. It's basically the same gun, but build for another tank. Also the circles on the Leo2 are the cooler for the engine
@@RandomThingPosted then tell me, why did Rheinmetall send a delegation to Trump to exclude them from the import-bans he proposed? The 120mm L/44 is german in design and production
Slight amendment, the gun was developed by Rheinmetall for the Leopard 2, and the americans liked it. However the M256 is a license build of the 120 L/44 gun from america, whereas the Leos moved on to the L/55 guns with the A6.
As a war thunder player for more than 5k hours (mostly on japanese side) i have enjoyed the video and would like to add that the Type 5 Ho-ri has that hatch for the depression of its big cannon, and also has a ton of front armor, its specialized on sniping, and can take lots of hits from very far (or at least it used to, before they added soo many different rounds that ignores armor)
First time I saw the Ho-Ri it was ridiculous, and when I finally able to play it, blew my mind even more, like honestly that thing have no business being that fast for being so big, like wtf are the engineer feeding this monster
Ho-Ri was designed to be a defensive/bunker buster variant, inspired by the German Ferdinand, as the allies mostly used M4, or lighter M5 Stuart or M3 or the LVT, the Ho-Ri is able to puncture vehicles and even be used a naval deterrence. If it was used during 1945, it would still prove deadly to ground vehicles as the U.S mostly produced M4 short 75mm with a decent amount of the long 76mm.
"Reverse engineered Leo 2 gun"...The Abrams uses the german Rheinmetall 120mm L/44 gun and went into service a year after the Leo 2. Both tanks were designed to allow a greater standardisation and compatibility within NATO. Also, not every "Panzer" is a Tiger. The Panzer IV did NOT have thick armor.
As a old Abrams tank commander myself. And a big player of war thunder. I witch those gun sights were in the game and not as a mod. Bruh the Abrams uses a ATG1500 Turbine. And it’s not Rolls-Royce. It was designed by Chrysler
There was quite a bit of misinformation in this video...the bit about the Abrams engine, saying that the Leopard's gun was "reverse engineered" from the Abrams, saying that the canisters on the turret of the Leo were flares when they were clearly smoke grenades, saying that APFSDS somehow "sucks things through a small hole"...basically all of it was wrong lol
The MBT-70, is from 1970, its kinda in the name, it was an American/German test bed for different ideas, were produced more than prototypes but didnt really go anywhere, and with the Panzers, it was the Panzer 5, 6 and 7 that were the ones that scared allied tank crews, they are more colloquially known as Panther, Tiger and King Tiger, the later models of panzer 4 had a respectable but easily penetrated 80mm of flat armor
I would like to add that "Panzer 7" doesn't exist unless you would like to count the blueprint Lowe, since King Tiger's official name is Pzkpfw VI Ausf. B
@Tai lumis Panzer IV was never invulnerable to Allied guns, since the tank was ment to be for infantry support it only have 30mm of frontal armor at the start, it did get upgraded to 50mm and later 80mm once the Panzer IV started to took over Panzer III's job as the main tank
To be fair, thats a good thing. I would rather the military import from capable allies, than go for the more expensive and sometimes less effective domestic solutions
@@cuhgaming4943 On a seperate note, its wild how South Korea and Japan went from the countries they were in WW2, to the countries they are now. Pacific Asia as a whole are taking Ws this century. I just hope everyone stays wary of the CCP though.
They didn't start using autoloaders until the T-64. Before that, they had a fourth crewman. (However, in this case you're not wrong; since this is a T-80 it would have an autoloader.)
@@TheWabbitSeason doctrine in all nations in shifting towards this low profile. there isn't really a way to counter these atgms, so getting smaller and lighter is the way
@@Bitt3rh0lz The A5 was armed with the L44, same as the Abrams. You're not wrong, though... The M256 is a license-built copy of the A5's gun, not the A6's gun. Thanks for the correction. 😊
i find it funny how little he knows, despite working in tanks. The APFSDS was absolute bull where he said it acts like a black hole, no it doesn't. The tanks in game dont actually have flares either they have smoke launchers.
Once again, he's simplifying the effect of the sabot. If all hatches are sealed, yes, there is a pressure difference when we're engaged. It will fuck up your body to have a penetrator rod enter a sealed compartment at Mach velocity.
@@thanatosstorm there was the test where goats were loaded into a Bradley and after being shot with apfsds, the inside was bloody and the other side was gutty and mush
@@thanatosstorm That's a myth. Your body will be fucked up because you are getting hit by the shrapnel generated by a proyectile moving at 1700 M/S. There are a LOT of videos explaining how APFSDS shells work... You don't get destroyed by a pressure difference.
You mentioned the Leopard 2A6 "reverse engineering" the Abrams' gun, but it's actually the opposite lol. The M256 120mm smoothbore cannon used by the Abrams is actually a license built modification of the Rheinmetall L44 which is used by the Leopard. The earlier M68 105mm rifled cannon was a license built copy of the Royal Ordnance L7.
@@unclesam5733 That is actually a really controversial and interesting topic because the historical archives on japan are really hard to access there was actually a person u/MaiWaffentrager that helped Gajin do research on Japanese tanks and as for the production of the tank really little is known, the gun the tank has was actually built.
@@humanhuman5024 Youre confusing the Panzer IV with the tiger too. The Panzer IV could NOT survive a frontal shot from a 76mm (americans used the 76mm, germans and russians used the 75)
1. The MBT-70 program was from the 1960-70s 2. The Leo 2A6 does NOT use the same cannon as the Abrams. The 2A6 has a L/55 cannon, while the Abrams uses a L/44, being more inline with a Leo 2A5 or 2A4 3. The Abrams uses a Honeywell AGT-1500 gas turbine. It is similar, but NOT a jet engine NOR is it made by Rolls Royce. 4. The US uses depleted uranium penetrators for there APFSDS ammo, while export versions of the US's 120mm ammo and other nations use tungsten 5. The Ho-Ri uses a 105mm cannon. The top hatch opens because it allows for more gun depression. 6. The big circles on the back of the Leo are radiator fans 7. 15:02 They're not flares,. they are smoke grenades. No tank that I know of has a flare launch system.
There was a lot of inconsistencies and sometimes falsehoods in this video. Calling the Panzer IV a Tiger, Saying the leopard 2A6 had "flares" when they were smoke dischargers, saying the Leopard stole their gun from the US (The Abrams gun is actually a licensed copy of the older German L/44 gun) Calling the ATGM mounts on the Italian IFV "Missile launchers" and saying that sabot rounds create "black holes" which is physically impossible. APFSDS "Sabot rounds" have a tungsten penetrator (he got that correct) but the mechanism in which it damages a tank is by "spalling" in the vehicle. The projectile begins to break apart when hitting a tanks armor, and sends metal shards throughout the crew compartment, killing the crew. This is just nitpicking now, but the Tunguska doesn't have machine guns, it has auto cannons. A caliber less than 20mm is considered a machine gun, whereas 20mm and over is a cannon. I'm sure Mr. Chelby knows how to command a tank, but knowing how to operate a car doesn't mean you're a mechanic. I have respect for these individuals but I think it's better to let military historians evaluate and discuss topics involving historical equipment as well as the functions of modern armor and their development.
@@thewhiteowl9885 when you play WT you get burned out pretty cuz of the grind, atleast i do, also, i dont even count spent-hours-on-the-game anymore, i count by matches fought, which is at around 15.000 for me
"one of your favorite games: war thunder" *ah yes most definitely we love , the headache, depression, and anxiety inducing game with one of the hardest grind*
@@soupidmonkey oh, lmfao. Yeah i guess he doesn't have much time spent into WT, figures since he's not like the entire player base, he's a man who's gotten himself probably a decent life. he probably bought some tanka to start off, nothing against that.
@@rebinregi1990 Yeah... the amount of bullshit this supposed tank commander talked about even his own nations tank and especially things like APFSDS being a "Black hole" and shit had me questioning whether this guy ever actually saw a tank from the inside...
The tank commander probably understands operating a vehicle, though when it’s in regards to history or on vehicles outside his circle he doesn’t know much about that
Did the tank commander just call smoke grenades flares?! Also the 120mm of the leopard is longer in length then the Abrams. Well beyond the 2A6 that is. 2a5 and a4 have the shorter l44 cannon that is similiar to the abrams
They are defensive grenade launchers that could shoot flares, chaff, smoke or a combination. For instance there are radar guided missiles and so the chaff is mixed with smoke to help save the vehicle.
He's a tanker, not some military nerd. The guy can make mistakes, cause at the end of the day he's the one who's ACTUALLY operated a tank in combat IRL. Who cares about minor details other than other military nerds?
They were. To the point that most allied munitions couldn't pen it from the front. this changed later in the war as the germans started using more and more lower quality steel. in war thunder, it's stuck with piers rather than what it would normally go up against.
@@jaydeleon8094 He was talking about the specific model of the panzer iv. the f2 did not have the 80mm ufp of the g and h, it only have 50mm. Also in war thunder, the panzer ivs indeed has the worst armour compared to other vehicles in other countries of the same type
@@jaydeleon8094 even the french tanks with thuer 37mm guns could pen the early panzer 3s and 4s don‘t forget, the early war models were less well armoured than late war models. The panzer 3s and 4s were always medium tanks =>they were armoured just enough but not one bit too much. Speaking of them as if they were heavy tanks just feels wrong
@@anticlaassic buddy, buddy.. the F2 had the same hull armor because that is where people shot most often. the F2 existed for about 3 months, before it was upgraded to the G. Until the shermans came around, most shells could not and would not penetrate the hull at the usual ranges they had in combat. and even then, The germans had a range advantage that they knew how to use.
@@jaydeleon8094 Says who lmao, 75mm M3 mounted on the Sherman can reliably pen that, also the Panzer IV's armor goes from 30mm, to 50mm and later 80mm, which the 75mm can still reliably pen
Unlike standard tank design, the Merkava has the engine in the front and it acts as another layer of protection for the crew. The extra space in the rear can be used to carry more ammo, or a six man infantry squad. It has also been used to collect and transport casualties. Something reassuring about being in an "ambulance" that shoots back, am I right? I've read that the Abrams was actually designed to be used in Europe against the Soviets because they were the "big bad" at the time. Though, its use in the Middle East over the last twenty years probably has changed its development path toward that theater of operations.
Couple of things: -ERA (explosive reactive armor) on the T-72 is not meant to inverse the force of a high explosive round. It detonates itself on impact to trigger the round prematurely and stop it from hitting the armor plate. -APFSDS (sabot round) is not meant to create a “vacuum” to suck elements out. Is is made like that to maximize penetration of armor and minimize the ballistic curve. -The Panzer IV F2 is NOT a Tiger I. The Panzer VI Tiger was armed with an 88 milimeter gun, and the Panzer IV was armed with a 75mm gun. -The Italian Dardo has a different shape, smaller gun and missile launchers because it is not a tank. It is and Infantry Fighting Vehicle or IFV. Most IFVs are not armed with tank-caliber guns, and are meant to destroy light armored targets like APCs, armored trucks and other IFVs.
12:43 the hatch on the top is for the cannon breach because the breach for the tank is so massive a hatch had to be installed above the cannon breech so that the gun could depress to its full extent on the tank
To be fair to most tank commanders (and tankers in general), their tank knowledge probably only covers how to operate the one they use and how to knock out the ones they might get in a fight with. Tank history and development are where the historians and nerds know more. Or you're the Chieftain himself sitting in the overlapping section of the Venn diagram of tankers and tank nerds.
That's because it's not what they teach TC's. It's like saying "I know more about the history and development of trucks than a truck driver"... well yeah... the truck driver knows how to drive the truck and possibly how to fix minor issues with the engine and such.
As a former tank driver and history buff, I don't even know all that much. But I know enough on how to operate the Beast and how to play and recite plenty of old battles, tactics, and strategies. First rule: Find, fix, communicate, engage, report.
He said he worked in every position as a tanker. Unfortunately I don't think he repaired Abrams. Or maybe he happened to be in some Frankenstein monster of a vehicle
All in all, quite interesting. I don't want to judge too harsh but I would expect more knowlegde from a tank commander, especially when it comes to Abrams related questions (for example the engine).
@@g.williams2047 Yeah, that's what it actually sounds like. What also surprised me is that the 30mm autocannons were called "machine guns". If you are or were in the military, you don't call weapon systems with such a large calibre "machine guns". 😅
When you mentioned the Panzer, more particularly the Panzer IV, you mentioned that it was terrifying due to it's near impenetrable armor. The Panzers were different, as separate models and designs were used, with the Tiger and Panther taking most of the spotlight, while the Panzer IV was the most produced. Initially the Panzer IIs and Is weren't much more then training vehicles, but as World War Two began and progressed they moved into larger, heavier more powerful tanks. The Panzer III took over the role as the dominating Anti-Tank vehicle of Germany, however the Panzer IV was not used as an Anti-Tank vehicle. Rather, the Panzer IV, specifically the earlier models such as the Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf. C were more or less infantry support vehicles, carrying large, yet low velocity 75 Millimeter cannons. The Panzer III did it's job relatively well, until the Germans invaded the USSR and encountered the fabled T-34. The T-34 carried thick side and rear armor, nullifying the benefits of flanking attacks, as the Panzer III's gun, a relatively meek 50 MM cannon, was unable to penetrate the Soviet armor at ranges of 150-300 Meters. The Panzer III's small size meant it couldn't mount a larger turret, and thus a larger gun. The Panzer IV then took over the role as the primary anti-Tank weapon of the German Panzer Armee. Going from the Panzer III's 50 Millimeter Cannon and fifty millimeter armor to the Panzer IV's 75 Millimeter cannon and 50-80 MM of armor was helpful but didn't result in a superior tank to the T-34. The Tiger and Panther, the ones that the Allied Shermans, Cromwell's, and Fireflies were nervous about were rare but also deadly. The Tiger was far more menacing to fight then the Pz. IV, with over 150 MM of armor, an 88 Millimeter cannon, and often legendary crews, the Tiger was sometimes considered invincible, but the Panzer IV hardly ever earned that.
@@Anarcho-harambeism Exactly! I love this dude, but just because you know how to drive a car, doesn't mean you're qualified to work on it, or talk about its inner systems, history or doctrine, let alone for other vehicles or nations you aren't familiar with
I completely agree. The Tank Museum channel have fantastic rundowns of tanks from all eras and countries. Well worth a view. If you live or are in the UK, the museum itself is fantastic.
From what I remember, the MBT-70 is a joint project of Germany and the US in the early 70s before the Abrams. It ended up being a testbed for a lot of different designs such as using the 152mm smooth bore cannon from the Sheridan and M60A2 Starship. Other design features of the vehicle included hydraulic suspension, to tilt the tank for better gun depression, and the driver being in the turret not the hull. The driver in the turret was in his own isolated section of the turret that rotated with the hull so as to avoid confusing the driver as to where the tank was going.
There are Tungsten and DU shells available for the M256, although DU is definitely more economical. Also his explanation of APFSDS was pretty much 100% wrong lol
As much as I like him talking about modern tanks, please don't ask him to do WW2 tanks again, I'd rather you get a Military Historian in, or if possible an ex-tanker from that period, someone that has experience and an understanding of those vehicles
That thing with sabot round acting like a "small black hole" and sucking everything out of the tank was complete nonsense. It doesn't suck anything due to a very insignificant pressure difference between the inside of a tank and its surroundings. What APFSDS (Armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) actually does is punching a hole and pushing fragments of armor inside of a crew compartment. Those moving fragments of armor and APFSDS projectile due to their high speed and temperature act like shrapnel and do a significant amount of damage to the crew and tank's internal equipment. To everyone willing to know more about the physics of tank projectiles just search on YT smth like "tank shell simulation". That is a second appearance of this tank crewman on that channel, as I recall, and it's surprising how little he knows about tank physics and mechanics. I remember in a squad video he was saying smth about Abrams tank engine (which is a Gas Turbine engine) being something like a jet engine, which is just painfully wrong.
@@CareraDrift he's literally right though lol. APFSDS has nothing to do with pressure differential and there is a difference between a gas turbine and a turbojet engine, plus the tank commander says the engine was a Rolls Royce when it's actually a Honeywell. Almost everything he said in the video was wrong XD
And one should note that this gun was developed by the Germans (through Rheinmetall/Kraus Maffey) and then licensed by the Americans, not the other way around as these guys described it.
“Russians man, always bigger” - fun fact: russian armor tactics emphasizes not being seen or hit than having more space for the crew, so they’re usually smaller (or at least flatter) than the western equivalents. On the other hand, the Abrams is one of the biggest, most spacious MBTs, allowing better future modifications. Every time I see an American calling something bigger/ better, it makes me laugh- They literally have a much bigger or better version of it, they just don’t know yet.
Watching this I just lost my mind when he said that the Panzer IV F2 is impenetrable. Imma say them boys are squishy af. Nearly as squishy as the Bradley in the game, but the F2 gun is hardcore pain
The first tank, which is the MBT-70, was a collaborative project between the United States and Germany during the Cold War. The MBT-70 utilizes a 152mm gun/launcher, designated XM150E5. The XM150E5 was capable of firing APFSDS, HEAT, and as a launcher, was capable of firing the MGM-51 missiles that the M551 Sheridan used. Alongside this, the tank also had a turret Rh202 20mm autocannon and a 7.62 MG. The KPz-70, which was the German equivalent, shared a lot of similarities, however this vehicle had a different engine in it. The MBT-70 featured a three man crew, which was a Driver, Gunner, and Commander, and had an automatic loading mechanism as opposed to a manual loader. After the program was initially cancelled, America attempted to revitalize it with the XM-803. This however went nowhere, and Germany moved on with lessons learned from their own program to create the Leopard 2, and America moved on with lessons learned to begin the XM-1 program, which would lead to the M1 Abrams.
I already said it in the last video with this guy.. no the Abrams has no fking jet engine and especialy not the same as the one in the Apache. I dont know what they are teaching tankers in the US army but the Abrams has a gas turbine wich is a huge differnce and its especialy not a damn helicopter engine... also nice how he treats the Merkava as if its the only tanmk that can elevate its gun to a lower degree, sounds very educated.
Fun fact, no Germany didn’t steal the design of the Abrams gun or reverse engineer it. The abrams uses a license built and modified Rheinmetall L/44 Tank cannon, a German gun. The Americans based their gun off it because of its great performance
@@Kwisss L/44 has the same pressure tolerance then the m256, m256 uses a simplified design that reduced to number of parts and it changed the recoil mechanism L/44a1 has better pressure tolerance.
I hear that the German army is the most fun to do training with because of the small arms they have. Also the panzer 4 doesn’t have thick armor, only the panzer 5 (tiger 1) and beyond had the thick armor, it focused on the early war doctrine of large numbers of reliable tanks.
I don’t think Germany’s focus was to have larger number of tanks during the early stages of WW2.Look at how small their production rates were compared to late war levels.Almost 80% of all total 8,500-8,800 Panzer IVs were built and used in 1943-1945.Tanks and armored cars were only a small part of German military during first half of the war.I heard that AFVs only used 5% of whole German military expenditures.Though they were key elements for their success.
Javelin is a lot different bc it has a 2 warhead layout that strikes directly. In fact, the Javelin is more like a helfire since it just smashes into the top not over the top.
12:45 this is pretty clever- the flap is for gun _depression_. The breech will hit the flap, move it, and thus the gun can be depressed further when pointed down. (They were talking about this concept with the merkava) It could definitely serve as ventilation too!
Imagine warfare like this where it can be remotely controlled precisely like the game. Military would start hiring professional War Thunder players by then.
Been playing War Thunder for 10 years. It's definitely as real as it gets as far as combined arms combat in video games. I hope they add infantry someday though as it would open up all sorts of possibilities for gameplay.
@@Smokey348 While I too think that it would be a bad idea to add infantry in War Thunder, they created enlisted to prove that they were capable of getting the infantry and vehicle mechanic together. Now I don't think that they have disclosed of if it's one of their project to bring some type of infantry other than the already existing AI infantry but it wouldn't really fit other than to "spot" people.
the first tank you guys were playing is the MBT 70 or i’m pretty sure some people called it the KPZ 70 or something. It was a tank that the US and Germany made for a collaboration. Eventually the germans cancelled it because it was too expensive. But it did inspire the tanks that were the prototypes for the Leopards (Leopard 1 etc).
It wasn't too expensive Germany and America couldn't agree on what the tank should have at all for example I think the Germans wanted a fast tank while the Americans didn't
14:39 "The primary armament for production versions of the Leopard 2 is the Rheinmetall 120 mm smoothbore gun-the same gun later adapted for use on the M1 Abrams" Not the other way around! 15:05 - Those are smoke grenades. 16:27 - It is meant to take out AIRCRAFT, it IS anti-air. 17:55 - Abrams uses Honeywell AGT1500, not Rolls Royce.
"That was a scary tank. It's armor was so thick." As a German Army main, my Pz. IV felt like wet tissue paper compared to most US and Russian tanks of the same BR. Even the Churchill had a big enough gun to pen.
Nice to see War Thunder being appreciated around. It's by far a perfect game, but it does have amazing damage models to vehicles and it fits well between Arcade and Simulator types of gameplay. Some more combined battles would be nice to be shown as well (like in the Tunguska clip) plus some gameplay with a bomber or even torpedo bombing, which - from my point of view - it's one of the few games that allows you to do it and comes closer to accuracy on how you do it.
@@thiccchungo1041 well, it is a Free-to-play so grind is a factor. Not the worst though, there are more F2P games out there with worse grind and cash'n'grab mechanics. I used to play stuff like Armored Warfare and World of Tanks as well, compared to them the unlocking of vehicles is easier, modules are cheaper (since you don't have to buy additional stuff to make your vehicle effective), a trained crew on a vehicle will keep it's training and you're not forced to sell your vehicle in order to manage garage space.
14:30 yes the abrams uses the Leopard 2's barrel not the otherway around it's the ''Rheinmetall'' 120mm which is from a German company just like the Leopards are German orgin. L/44 or L/55 barrel on abrams and L/55 barrel on Leopard 2A6 edit: 14:45 those circles are the holes for the radiator 15:01 those aren't flares those are smoke pods, there's no need for 16× XXXL countermeasures on a tank
I liked how the Panzer 4 F2 was fighting the Shermans, but I wished there was gameplay involving it fighting the Russian T34 and KV1 because in real life, it was upgraded to be equipped with the long-barrel 75mm KwK 40 L/43 cannon to help the Germans deal with those 2 enemy tanks. The Panzer 4 was originally equipped with the short-barrel 75mm KwK 37 L/24 cannon to be used against enemy infantry, but when the Germans started encountering the T34 and KV1 on the Eastern Front, it was upgraded for the anti-tank role. The tank that was originally designed for the anti-tank role was the Panzer 3, but its short-barrel 50mm KwK 38 L/42 could only penetrate the T34's 40 to 45mm of sloped armor at close range and couldn't effectively penetrate the KV1's armor because the KV1 had 75mm of armor all around it. Even though the Panzer 3 would be upgraded to be equipped with the long-barrel 50mm KwK 39 cannon, the Panzer 4 was officially chosen to be upgraded for the anti-tank role because the Panzer 3 couldn't handle the intense firepower of the long-barrel 75mm gun.
Something interesting I've learned from playing war thunder is you can use AA guns to combat jets helicopters and tanks would have been interesting to see some use of the AA guns Like m134 AA gun for example
Sorry but, the MBT-70 was a joint U.S., West German project that was supposed to find a replacement for the Leopard I and the M-60. The program was dropped after both nations decided to just make their own tanks which were the Leopard II and M1 Abrams.
Warthunder is only just now getting into 2000s veichles, with the graphics update, the game looks great, it's atmosphere is amazing. German players less so.
Correction* the t72’s don’t react well to modern missile systems because they are poorly maintained and are practically falling apart and they get given no infantry support put any nato tank in the exact same position and it’ll get disabled as well
14:38 the reason the Leo looks a lot like the Abrams is because years ago the Americans and Germans were in a project to make a new MBT but Germany dropped out from cost but that project led to the xm1 which led all the way to the M1A2 Abrams
Fun fact: When the MBT-70 was undergoing production.. there was 2 sides of the name.. the US called it the MBT-70.. and the germans called it KampfPanzer 70
Yea but still slightly even used different parts. So it's not only different names for the same tank. For example Both could use usual shaped charged warhead (HEAT) and APSDF (APCR) shells, but the american one could also use ATGM (Misiles) while the german one couldn't but could use pure HE. Also the german used to test one 1100 HP engine with 2 turbocharger which was still a little bit faster in acceleration and max speed. It's weird, the american used to test 2 smaller engines which actually had 1500HP- means 3000HP, it was more powerful but still slower. Dunno why is that.. Anyway, another things like tracks and other small things on the same frame were the difference.
Is kinda funny to watch as someone who studies tanks for a living. As those "canisters" on the leopard 2A6 are smoke launchers. And the gun is German made, also the panzer 4 had some of the weakest armour out of all German medium tanks that they had during WW2. Not to mention the only ww1 tank in the game is the fcm.1. Edit: oh hey I got highlighted 👍🏻
If I remember correctly, the US and West Germany joined hands to create the MBT70, but the project felt apart, and both sides took what left of it to create their own new MBT, which led to why the Leopard 2 and Abrams are so similar in many factors.
It's always great to hear a serviceman's opinion on War Thunder, glad you guys are having fun! Thanks for the awesome video
No way
give me golden lion
Should have asked if he ever got uptiered out in the field
Plz add the bob semple
Nice War Thunder saw the video
You should've asked him if they sometimes go into battle without carrying parts or fire extinguishers
Or ammunition that is actually useful.
Clearly he gotta research them first after losing 20 battles
@@asu5735 lol 😂
Where do they store the extra crew members?
@@GrimaceTheMask just some random house happen to site one trained crew. The crew, "whaddup, stranger"
War Thunder X-Ray Cam is STRAIGHT Dopamine! Lmao
Funny seeing you here
Hey Odd o/
agree
Hi oddbawz I lab you
ODD??? Shhhh we don't tell them about the X-ray cam!
I do find it funny how they say the Panzer 4 was a scary tank, couldn't be pen, and they only said this after the guy mentioned fury.
So they mistaken the Panzer 4 for the Panzer 6 Tiger.
i like that funny mistake honestly.
What's funnier is that was a real and a very common mistake IRL. When american crews arrived at Europe they often reported encounters with Tigers, which were in fact Pz.IVs
@@alfgart yep, more tigers were claimed to have been destroyed than were ever actually sent to the western front.
The t26e4 predator which is supposed to counter the king tiger reportedly claimed to destroy a king tiger and was found out that it was mere panzer
@@victorsy7063 Lol overkill much.
@@alfgart That's because they looked similar on range. They got mistaken as Tank IV for this often.
Funfact: Germany builds the gun system for the Abrams. It's basically the same gun, but build for another tank. Also the circles on the Leo2 are the cooler for the engine
Designed, not built. America builds the gun under license for the Abrams
As a Strv 121 main, I thank you XD
@@RandomThingPosted then tell me, why did Rheinmetall send a delegation to Trump to exclude them from the import-bans he proposed? The 120mm L/44 is german in design and production
Slight amendment, the gun was developed by Rheinmetall for the Leopard 2, and the americans liked it. However the M256 is a license build of the 120 L/44 gun from america, whereas the Leos moved on to the L/55 guns with the A6.
the american version is actually modified quite a bit, though it is the same basic design
I'm guessing he's gonna be impressed with the game, but he also knows the playerbase and their brainpower
Brain power? You mean lack of braincells?
@@schmeatgaming853 Lack of a Brain, exactly
@@schmeatgaming853 AB players are the worst offenders .
@@abemigos9281 nah it is sb players who shoot their own tank
And the lack of funds.
As a war thunder player for more than 5k hours (mostly on japanese side) i have enjoyed the video and would like to add that the Type 5 Ho-ri has that hatch for the depression of its big cannon, and also has a ton of front armor, its specialized on sniping, and can take lots of hits from very far (or at least it used to, before they added soo many different rounds that ignores armor)
First time I saw the Ho-Ri it was ridiculous, and when I finally able to play it, blew my mind even more, like honestly that thing have no business being that fast for being so big, like wtf are the engineer feeding this monster
Ho-Ri was designed to be a defensive/bunker buster variant, inspired by the German Ferdinand, as the allies mostly used M4, or lighter M5 Stuart or M3 or the LVT, the Ho-Ri is able to puncture vehicles and even be used a naval deterrence. If it was used during 1945, it would still prove deadly to ground vehicles as the U.S mostly produced M4 short 75mm with a decent amount of the long 76mm.
Ah yes. A man of true pain. Nice to see there is a number of us.
@@jezuznevweraz8800 yessss, been a painfull long journey, but i love how bizarre japanese vehicles are :D
@@AHappyCub the power to be driven by anime girls in the future... :|
"Reverse engineered Leo 2 gun"...The Abrams uses the german Rheinmetall 120mm L/44 gun and went into service a year after the Leo 2.
Both tanks were designed to allow a greater standardisation and compatibility within NATO.
Also, not every "Panzer" is a Tiger. The Panzer IV did NOT have thick armor.
thankfully at least someone knows that all box shaped tanks aren't Tigers
Yeah dude i understand if he misunderstand the different variants of panzer but seriously with tiger? That's a whole different tank
le epic tank expert
My man served in germany and doesnt know that panzer means tank
50mm of armor was pretty damn thick.
In 1941, at least.
15:02 *Looks at smoke grenade launchers*
Both of them: "Ah yes flares"
it can shoot flares
it can shoot flares
it can shoot flares
damn didn't know it can shoot out flares...
so I guess they are good against heat seeking missiles ?
@@adriancoric1721 they can also launch chaff to counter radar guided missiles.
As a old Abrams tank commander myself. And a big player of war thunder. I witch those gun sights were in the game and not as a mod. Bruh the Abrams uses a ATG1500 Turbine. And it’s not Rolls-Royce. It was designed by Chrysler
Be happy you can use it as a mod :D
I can’t I’m on ps
@@WarDaddy66 F
There was quite a bit of misinformation in this video...the bit about the Abrams engine, saying that the Leopard's gun was "reverse engineered" from the Abrams, saying that the canisters on the turret of the Leo were flares when they were clearly smoke grenades, saying that APFSDS somehow "sucks things through a small hole"...basically all of it was wrong lol
@@gabrielchad447 the thing about the flares is true they can shot flares some other stuff and smoke grenades
The MBT-70, is from 1970, its kinda in the name, it was an American/German test bed for different ideas, were produced more than prototypes but didnt really go anywhere, and with the Panzers, it was the Panzer 5, 6 and 7 that were the ones that scared allied tank crews, they are more colloquially known as Panther, Tiger and King Tiger, the later models of panzer 4 had a respectable but easily penetrated 80mm of flat armor
Note panzer 7 refers to the Lowe tank its was a prototype that never saw mass production
I would like to add that "Panzer 7" doesn't exist unless you would like to count the blueprint Lowe, since King Tiger's official name is Pzkpfw VI Ausf. B
@Tai lumis Panzer IV was never invulnerable to Allied guns, since the tank was ment to be for infantry support it only have 30mm of frontal armor at the start, it did get upgraded to 50mm and later 80mm once the Panzer IV started to took over Panzer III's job as the main tank
MBT-70 is the prototype predecessor to the Abrams
@@michaelusswisconsin6002 MBT-70 > XM-803 > XM-1 > Abrams
I have been waiting for gamology to review Warthunder for so long
Agreed
Same I absolutely love the game.
Same
Me too
"That looks like a good idear" said the Abrams engineer while stealing the german gun 😂
Edit: It's a joke dear Americans put your guns away jesus
RIP spelling 😪
If you have a problem with it, take it up with Rheinmetall AG. They're the ones who sold the license to build the M256 to General Dynamics.
@@ItsDaddyChill it’s accurate to Americans
Idear is how british people say it
@@HighExplosiveShell Ummm, no
"design stealing" he said as the Abrams' gun is a license build copy of the Rheinmetall 120mm
To be fair, thats a good thing.
I would rather the military import from capable allies, than go for the more expensive and sometimes less effective domestic solutions
And it's not just America, South Korea uses a Rheinmetall on their K-2, which is just a modernized Abrams essentially, but still
@@cuhgaming4943 On a seperate note, its wild how South Korea and Japan went from the countries they were in WW2, to the countries they are now. Pacific Asia as a whole are taking Ws this century. I just hope everyone stays wary of the CCP though.
I knew it was inevitable that a youtube video with war thunder in its title there would be at least one person, most likely a guy, with an anime pfp
Also, the US illegally copied a lot of features from a leopard 2 they exported for testing.
18:00 Russian tanks have always been lower and smaller than western tanks due to having auto-loaders instead of a forth crewman
doctrine emphasizes small profile
@@yeethappymeta I doubt that doctrine will be kept much longer wtih the Javelin and similar AT missiles flying around.
They didn't start using autoloaders until the T-64. Before that, they had a fourth crewman. (However, in this case you're not wrong; since this is a T-80 it would have an autoloader.)
@@TheWabbitSeason doctrine in all nations in shifting towards this low profile. there isn't really a way to counter these atgms, so getting smaller and lighter is the way
@@TheWabbitSeasonThe doctrine of low and compact is worth it, but more emphasis needs to go into APS and similar systems to defeat projectiles.
that moment when he calls the leo 2a6 s gun a reverse engineerd gun from abramz ....
Hate to say it, but Tamir is right. Sorry, Chellby, but it's the other way around. The Abrams M256 is a license-built copy of the Leopard 2A6's gun.
@@SpearM3064 Not even the A6's
A5 and upwards have the L55 lengthened barrel version of the gun, while the Abrams still uses the shorter L45
@@Bitt3rh0lz A5 was armed with the L/44.
@@Bitt3rh0lz The A5 was armed with the L44, same as the Abrams. You're not wrong, though... The M256 is a license-built copy of the A5's gun, not the A6's gun. Thanks for the correction. 😊
They even teach this to lol
GHPC would be awesome to have the TC react to the crew communicating and and combat in game would be great for a review!!
agreed
They would love GHPC!
Especially the sound bites when they start freaking out
GHPC way more realistic then suffer thunder
@@marshalzhukov4782 We all suffer
i find it funny how little he knows, despite working in tanks. The APFSDS was absolute bull where he said it acts like a black hole, no it doesn't. The tanks in game dont actually have flares either they have smoke launchers.
Ik and Isreal never seems to have much military knowledge especially when it come to equipment and vehicles but the guy was SF it doesn't make sense
Yeah, he sounds pretty clueless for the most part lol
Once again, he's simplifying the effect of the sabot. If all hatches are sealed, yes, there is a pressure difference when we're engaged. It will fuck up your body to have a penetrator rod enter a sealed compartment at Mach velocity.
@@thanatosstorm there was the test where goats were loaded into a Bradley and after being shot with apfsds, the inside was bloody and the other side was gutty and mush
@@thanatosstorm That's a myth. Your body will be fucked up because you are getting hit by the shrapnel generated by a proyectile moving at 1700 M/S.
There are a LOT of videos explaining how APFSDS shells work... You don't get destroyed by a pressure difference.
You mentioned the Leopard 2A6 "reverse engineering" the Abrams' gun, but it's actually the opposite lol. The M256 120mm smoothbore cannon used by the Abrams is actually a license built modification of the Rheinmetall L44 which is used by the Leopard. The earlier M68 105mm rifled cannon was a license built copy of the Royal Ordnance L7.
15:05 did he just call the smoke dischargers flares…
yep and the Ho-ri's cannon a 155mm
@@V3lka Getting the canon wrong isnt such a mistake as a "flare". Also Hori was a wooden mockup not real tank.
@@unclesam5733 they are still able to pop flares
@@unclesam5733 That is actually a really controversial and interesting topic because the historical archives on japan are really hard to access there was actually a person u/MaiWaffentrager that helped Gajin do research on Japanese tanks and as for the production of the tank really little is known, the gun the tank has was actually built.
Ik ;-;
The 75mm was actually powerful enough to penetrate the front plate of the Pz.IV
He confused the Panzer IV with the Tiger.
No not the front hull plate just the front turret plate
@@humanhuman5024 Youre confusing the Panzer IV with the tiger too. The Panzer IV could NOT survive a frontal shot from a 76mm (americans used the 76mm, germans and russians used the 75)
@@Bitt3rh0lz the americans also used 75mm, i don`t know why you didn`t mention it except for the 76.
@@Bitt3rh0lz the American 76mm was a 75 mm they just called it 76 to differentiate it from the 75 mm (same projectile different case)
1. The MBT-70 program was from the 1960-70s
2. The Leo 2A6 does NOT use the same cannon as the Abrams. The 2A6 has a L/55 cannon, while the Abrams uses a L/44, being more inline with a Leo 2A5 or 2A4
3. The Abrams uses a Honeywell AGT-1500 gas turbine. It is similar, but NOT a jet engine NOR is it made by Rolls Royce.
4. The US uses depleted uranium penetrators for there APFSDS ammo, while export versions of the US's 120mm ammo and other nations use tungsten
5. The Ho-Ri uses a 105mm cannon. The top hatch opens because it allows for more gun depression.
6. The big circles on the back of the Leo are radiator fans
7. 15:02 They're not flares,. they are smoke grenades. No tank that I know of has a flare launch system.
don't care+ratio
@@bobgaming6074 Hes not lying though
Thank you, with all the wrong things he said it was getting a bit annoying.
Thank god someone took the time to say these things. Saves me from doing it.
@@bobgaming6074 no u
There was a lot of inconsistencies and sometimes falsehoods in this video. Calling the Panzer IV a Tiger, Saying the leopard 2A6 had "flares" when they were smoke dischargers, saying the Leopard stole their gun from the US (The Abrams gun is actually a licensed copy of the older German L/44 gun) Calling the ATGM mounts on the Italian IFV "Missile launchers" and saying that sabot rounds create "black holes" which is physically impossible.
APFSDS "Sabot rounds" have a tungsten penetrator (he got that correct) but the mechanism in which it damages a tank is by "spalling" in the vehicle. The projectile begins to break apart when hitting a tanks armor, and sends metal shards throughout the crew compartment, killing the crew. This is just nitpicking now, but the Tunguska doesn't have machine guns, it has auto cannons. A caliber less than 20mm is considered a machine gun, whereas 20mm and over is a cannon.
I'm sure Mr. Chelby knows how to command a tank, but knowing how to operate a car doesn't mean you're a mechanic. I have respect for these individuals but I think it's better to let military historians evaluate and discuss topics involving historical equipment as well as the functions of modern armor and their development.
Yeah agreed i cringed so hard multiple times this video.
If i remember correctly anything over 15mm is a cannon, the german ww2 mg151/15 was called a cannon
@@Ropetor That's a good point, I forgot about the MG151
What makes it more cringy is that he said he plays War Thunder all the time lol sure he said pz4 has a crew of 4…
@@thewhiteowl9885 when you play WT you get burned out pretty cuz of the grind, atleast i do,
also, i dont even count spent-hours-on-the-game anymore, i count by matches fought, which is at around 15.000 for me
"one of your favorite games: war thunder" *ah yes most definitely we love , the headache, depression, and anxiety inducing game with one of the hardest grind*
Sometimes you just gotta embrace the grind.
I don't think he's gotten to that yet. It sounded like he didn't know what he was talking about, so I think he is still newish and low tier.
@@soupidmonkey who you talkin bout
@@keiyoshi5232 The tank commander. Although I think I read your comment wrong lol
@@soupidmonkey oh, lmfao. Yeah i guess he doesn't have much time spent into WT, figures since he's not like the entire player base, he's a man who's gotten himself probably a decent life. he probably bought some tanka to start off, nothing against that.
im not a tank commander, but some of things he said about other tanks gave me a aneurysm.
"those are actually flares on the side of the tank" during the Leo 2A4
I felt like I knew more about tanks than these two
@@rebinregi1990 exactly
@@rebinregi1990 Yeah... the amount of bullshit this supposed tank commander talked about even his own nations tank and especially things like APFSDS being a "Black hole" and shit had me questioning whether this guy ever actually saw a tank from the inside...
The tank commander probably understands operating a vehicle, though when it’s in regards to history or on vehicles outside his circle he doesn’t know much about that
The Abrams uses a Honeywell AGT 1500, which is a multifuel turbine, but isn’t a rolls Royce
Beat me to it
He was probably thinking about the Mustang with its Merlin engine
15:00 those aren't flares😭😭😭 those are smoke grenades
literally paused the video to come to the comments just to make sure I wasn't hearing things
@@rarejavelin6547 i mean can't it technically fire flares? Same caliber and stuff
@@kajmak64bit76 Yes. They can also shoot chaff plus smoke against radar guided missiles and duel sensor missiles like the Brimstone.
@@orlock20 can't tell if you're serious or not... but... radar missile for ground target? That must be rare?
@@kajmak64bit76 The Hellfire has a radar guided version that works with the Apache's FCR. The Brimstone II can be radar guided along with the JAGM.
Did the tank commander just call smoke grenades flares?!
Also the 120mm of the leopard is longer in length then the Abrams.
Well beyond the 2A6 that is.
2a5 and a4 have the shorter l44 cannon that is similiar to the abrams
yes yes he did
They are defensive grenade launchers that could shoot flares, chaff, smoke or a combination. For instance there are radar guided missiles and so the chaff is mixed with smoke to help save the vehicle.
He's a tanker, not some military nerd. The guy can make mistakes, cause at the end of the day he's the one who's ACTUALLY operated a tank in combat IRL.
Who cares about minor details other than other military nerds?
@@PBRatLord Well said kind sir who actually has common sense on the internet
@@PBRatLord I'd roll Table 8s with him, nuff said.
The MBT-70 was a 60s prototype. It’s design choices and lessons from the prototypes were used in the Abrams and Leopard 2 if I’m not mistaken
Correct it was a testbed concept vehicle.
Ok, i‘m not mad but calling a panzer 4 well armoured is just funny.
They were. To the point that most allied munitions couldn't pen it from the front. this changed later in the war as the germans started using more and more lower quality steel. in war thunder, it's stuck with piers rather than what it would normally go up against.
@@jaydeleon8094 He was talking about the specific model of the panzer iv. the f2 did not have the 80mm ufp of the g and h, it only have 50mm. Also in war thunder, the panzer ivs indeed has the worst armour compared to other vehicles in other countries of the same type
@@jaydeleon8094 even the french tanks with thuer 37mm guns could pen the early panzer 3s and 4s don‘t forget, the early war models were less well armoured than late war models. The panzer 3s and 4s were always medium tanks =>they were armoured just enough but not one bit too much. Speaking of them as if they were heavy tanks just feels wrong
@@anticlaassic buddy, buddy.. the F2 had the same hull armor because that is where people shot most often. the F2 existed for about 3 months, before it was upgraded to the G. Until the shermans came around, most shells could not and would not penetrate the hull at the usual ranges they had in combat. and even then, The germans had a range advantage that they knew how to use.
@@jaydeleon8094 Says who lmao, 75mm M3 mounted on the Sherman can reliably pen that, also the Panzer IV's armor goes from 30mm, to 50mm and later 80mm, which the 75mm can still reliably pen
Unlike standard tank design, the Merkava has the engine in the front and it acts as another layer of protection for the crew. The extra space in the rear can be used to carry more ammo, or a six man infantry squad. It has also been used to collect and transport casualties. Something reassuring about being in an "ambulance" that shoots back, am I right?
I've read that the Abrams was actually designed to be used in Europe against the Soviets because they were the "big bad" at the time. Though, its use in the Middle East over the last twenty years probably has changed its development path toward that theater of operations.
Couple of things:
-ERA (explosive reactive armor) on the T-72 is not meant to inverse the force of a high explosive round. It detonates itself on impact to trigger the round prematurely and stop it from hitting the armor plate.
-APFSDS (sabot round) is not meant to create a “vacuum” to suck elements out. Is is made like that to maximize penetration of armor and minimize the ballistic curve.
-The Panzer IV F2 is NOT a Tiger I. The Panzer VI Tiger was armed with an 88 milimeter gun, and the Panzer IV was armed with a 75mm gun.
-The Italian Dardo has a different shape, smaller gun and missile launchers because it is not a tank. It is and Infantry Fighting Vehicle or IFV. Most IFVs are not armed with tank-caliber guns, and are meant to destroy light armored targets like APCs, armored trucks and other IFVs.
12:43 the hatch on the top is for the cannon breach because the breach for the tank is so massive a hatch had to be installed above the cannon breech so that the gun could depress to its full extent on the tank
12:23 That hood is for the breach to move so that the gun has more depression.
When you know more about tank history and development than tank commanders
To be fair to most tank commanders (and tankers in general), their tank knowledge probably only covers how to operate the one they use and how to knock out the ones they might get in a fight with. Tank history and development are where the historians and nerds know more. Or you're the Chieftain himself sitting in the overlapping section of the Venn diagram of tankers and tank nerds.
That's because it's not what they teach TC's.
It's like saying "I know more about the history and development of trucks than a truck driver"... well yeah... the truck driver knows how to drive the truck and possibly how to fix minor issues with the engine and such.
Yeah i see it now makes sense
As a former tank driver and history buff, I don't even know all that much. But I know enough on how to operate the Beast and how to play and recite plenty of old battles, tactics, and strategies. First rule: Find, fix, communicate, engage, report.
@@SSDConker2 See also: "Yukari is my spirit animal".
I don't know of any Abrams tank using a Rolls Royce jet engines, far as I remember it was the Honeywell AGT1500
You'd be right.
I think he's mistakenly assuming "turbine = jet engine"
He said he worked in every position as a tanker. Unfortunately I don't think he repaired Abrams. Or maybe he happened to be in some Frankenstein monster of a vehicle
All in all, quite interesting. I don't want to judge too harsh but I would expect more knowlegde from a tank commander, especially when it comes to Abrams related questions (for example the engine).
Yeah this is like watching two guys who flunked out of military tank school and also don’t know much about history. Kind of sucks.
Especially the Abrams engine is quite unique, because it is a gas turbine which sounds like an airplane if it's riding around.
@@g.williams2047 Yeah, that's what it actually sounds like. What also surprised me is that the 30mm autocannons were called "machine guns". If you are or were in the military, you don't call weapon systems with such a large calibre "machine guns". 😅
@@KamichamaTechstarify The T-80 has a gas turbine engine as well and the production begun 5 years before Abrams.
@@KamichamaTechstarify Abrams are quiet
When you mentioned the Panzer, more particularly the Panzer IV, you mentioned that it was terrifying due to it's near impenetrable armor. The Panzers were different, as separate models and designs were used, with the Tiger and Panther taking most of the spotlight, while the Panzer IV was the most produced. Initially the Panzer IIs and Is weren't much more then training vehicles, but as World War Two began and progressed they moved into larger, heavier more powerful tanks. The Panzer III took over the role as the dominating Anti-Tank vehicle of Germany, however the Panzer IV was not used as an Anti-Tank vehicle. Rather, the Panzer IV, specifically the earlier models such as the Panzerkampfwagen IV Ausf. C were more or less infantry support vehicles, carrying large, yet low velocity 75 Millimeter cannons. The Panzer III did it's job relatively well, until the Germans invaded the USSR and encountered the fabled T-34. The T-34 carried thick side and rear armor, nullifying the benefits of flanking attacks, as the Panzer III's gun, a relatively meek 50 MM cannon, was unable to penetrate the Soviet armor at ranges of 150-300 Meters. The Panzer III's small size meant it couldn't mount a larger turret, and thus a larger gun. The Panzer IV then took over the role as the primary anti-Tank weapon of the German Panzer Armee. Going from the Panzer III's 50 Millimeter Cannon and fifty millimeter armor to the Panzer IV's 75 Millimeter cannon and 50-80 MM of armor was helpful but didn't result in a superior tank to the T-34. The Tiger and Panther, the ones that the Allied Shermans, Cromwell's, and Fireflies were nervous about were rare but also deadly. The Tiger was far more menacing to fight then the Pz. IV, with over 150 MM of armor, an 88 Millimeter cannon, and often legendary crews, the Tiger was sometimes considered invincible, but the Panzer IV hardly ever earned that.
Ok whearaboo
@@pakratmiz4487 1) You spelt it wrong. 2) I don't think knowing a bit about German armor In the second world war makes me a Nazi so- yeah, no.
@@wolkrieth2394 Go back to playing WOT kid. You know nothing!!
@@wolkrieth2394 Ma man ;)
@@pakratmiz4487 wehraboo*
minor spelling mistake, you lose
I wonder if their gonna have a guy who launched a nuke on the channel to review games with nukes in them.
My dudes reviving oppenheimer for some modern warfare 2 review
@@benjaminaltube8731 I would say he would not be to pleased.
each time a mw2 player earns a nuke they'll just say its no good, not enough civilians in the blast zone.
You might want to bring in historians instead of tank commanders to talk about WW2 tanks, and just War Thunder in general
Get The Chieftain to talk about World of Tanks.
@ "I am a tanker", "this means nothing"
@@Anarcho-harambeism Exactly! I love this dude, but just because you know how to drive a car, doesn't mean you're qualified to work on it, or talk about its inner systems, history or doctrine, let alone for other vehicles or nations you aren't familiar with
I completely agree. The Tank Museum channel have fantastic rundowns of tanks from all eras and countries. Well worth a view. If you live or are in the UK, the museum itself is fantastic.
@@eiv-gaming yet here in Missouri, the closest tanks are an m60 at a shopping mall or breaking into a nearby national guard area
From what I remember, the MBT-70 is a joint project of Germany and the US in the early 70s before the Abrams. It ended up being a testbed for a lot of different designs such as using the 152mm smooth bore cannon from the Sheridan and M60A2 Starship. Other design features of the vehicle included hydraulic suspension, to tilt the tank for better gun depression, and the driver being in the turret not the hull. The driver in the turret was in his own isolated section of the turret that rotated with the hull so as to avoid confusing the driver as to where the tank was going.
“It pulls everything out of a small hole”
That’s not at all how apfsds works😂
Also all U.S. apfsds projectiles are depleted uranium, not tungsten
🤓
depends on the shell. Most US Abrams use the depleted uranium rounds, but tungsten ones do exist for the export market.
There are Tungsten and DU shells available for the M256, although DU is definitely more economical. Also his explanation of APFSDS was pretty much 100% wrong lol
@@gutter1 weak argument to use an emoji
@@gutter1 🤓💭
Wasn't the M1 designed for Eastern Europe in the 70s and 80s?
Yes, it was designed for European combat.
Yes it was 😄
As much as I like him talking about modern tanks, please don't ask him to do WW2 tanks again, I'd rather you get a Military Historian in, or if possible an ex-tanker from that period, someone that has experience and an understanding of those vehicles
Just like what the big man Nicholas "The Chieftain" Moran said, "I am a tanker, and this means nothing"
Trust me, i dont know how much you know about modern vehicles but this guy got almost every fact wrong lol
14:30 - technically it's not the same gun! The Leo uses the improved 120mm/L55 while the Abrams still uses the "old" (= shorter) 120mm/L44
That thing with sabot round acting like a "small black hole" and sucking everything out of the tank was complete nonsense. It doesn't suck anything due to a very insignificant pressure difference between the inside of a tank and its surroundings. What APFSDS (Armour-piercing fin-stabilized discarding sabot) actually does is punching a hole and pushing fragments of armor inside of a crew compartment. Those moving fragments of armor and APFSDS projectile due to their high speed and temperature act like shrapnel and do a significant amount of damage to the crew and tank's internal equipment. To everyone willing to know more about the physics of tank projectiles just search on YT smth like "tank shell simulation".
That is a second appearance of this tank crewman on that channel, as I recall, and it's surprising how little he knows about tank physics and mechanics. I remember in a squad video he was saying smth about Abrams tank engine (which is a Gas Turbine engine) being something like a jet engine, which is just painfully wrong.
Thank you Mister Wikipedia General you must know better
@@CareraDrift based on what that guy said, I do. Btw, if you can point out anything I'm wrong about and he's right, I'm happy to hear it.
@@CareraDrift he's literally right though lol. APFSDS has nothing to do with pressure differential and there is a difference between a gas turbine and a turbojet engine, plus the tank commander says the engine was a Rolls Royce when it's actually a Honeywell. Almost everything he said in the video was wrong XD
@@CreateAccountPlease Didnt i say you must know better? cat you read? why u so pressed about it kiddo?
@@CareraDrift wow… Remember to take your medicine and have a nice day!
Lol, “Pnz 4 was a scary tank. Impenetrable.” *Laughs in Sherman Jumbo*
Welcome to war thunder, where you can definitely feel the repair costs if your vehicle gets destroyed
Love this duo love that you guys read feedback
"The armor was so thick" while discussing the Pz4.
Me: Chuckling while using my 50Cal to take them out from the sides.
Leopard a6 has L55 120 mm main gun. Abrahms has shorter L44 120 mm Same gun but shorter a bit lower velocity.
And one should note that this gun was developed by the Germans (through Rheinmetall/Kraus Maffey) and then licensed by the Americans, not the other way around as these guys described it.
And both guns are from Rheinmetall which is in Düsseldorf,Germany.
Would also add that the Breech on the abrams is built to take higher pressures than the german equivalent L44
“Russians man, always bigger”
- fun fact: russian armor tactics emphasizes not being seen or hit than having more space for the crew, so they’re usually smaller (or at least flatter) than the western equivalents. On the other hand, the Abrams is one of the biggest, most spacious MBTs, allowing better future modifications.
Every time I see an American calling something bigger/ better, it makes me laugh- They literally have a much bigger or better version of it, they just don’t know yet.
Biggest thing for me with Warthunder is the history and the amount of detail they put into this game is wild Aircraft Tanks Naval so much fun
Watching this I just lost my mind when he said that the Panzer IV F2 is impenetrable. Imma say them boys are squishy af. Nearly as squishy as the Bradley in the game, but the F2 gun is hardcore pain
He saw a german box and thought it was a tiger...
Just like in world war II he saw a p4 and said it was a tiger
@@samholdsworth420 Traditions
Sometimes the Pz.4 can be abit trolly with the ad on track armor. Keyword sometimes
@@nigelwigglwattle Not in real life
The first tank, which is the MBT-70, was a collaborative project between the United States and Germany during the Cold War. The MBT-70 utilizes a 152mm gun/launcher, designated XM150E5. The XM150E5 was capable of firing APFSDS, HEAT, and as a launcher, was capable of firing the MGM-51 missiles that the M551 Sheridan used. Alongside this, the tank also had a turret Rh202 20mm autocannon and a 7.62 MG. The KPz-70, which was the German equivalent, shared a lot of similarities, however this vehicle had a different engine in it. The MBT-70 featured a three man crew, which was a Driver, Gunner, and Commander, and had an automatic loading mechanism as opposed to a manual loader.
After the program was initially cancelled, America attempted to revitalize it with the XM-803. This however went nowhere, and Germany moved on with lessons learned from their own program to create the Leopard 2, and America moved on with lessons learned to begin the XM-1 program, which would lead to the M1 Abrams.
Also different autoloader, and IIRC there was suppose to be a version with 120mm or something
You have to get this guy to react to gunner heat pc. Has great vehicle and physics mechanics along with some awesome voice acting for the tank crew.
I already said it in the last video with this guy.. no the Abrams has no fking jet engine and especialy not the same as the one in the Apache. I dont know what they are teaching tankers in the US army but the Abrams has a gas turbine wich is a huge differnce and its especialy not a damn helicopter engine...
also nice how he treats the Merkava as if its the only tanmk that can elevate its gun to a lower degree, sounds very educated.
Fun fact, no Germany didn’t steal the design of the Abrams gun or reverse engineer it. The abrams uses a license built and modified Rheinmetall L/44 Tank cannon, a German gun. The Americans based their gun off it because of its great performance
"design stealing" lol, we bought the L/55 gun on the Abrams from the Germans and license build it
US don't use the L/55, its the L/44
@@AHappyCub still a german weapon ;D
@@reportflap well, the base design IS German but US use a different recoil system, idk why
@@AHappyCub Because of the propellent of the rounds we use it needs a different breech/mechanism system to handle the higher pressures.
@@Kwisss L/44 has the same pressure tolerance then the m256, m256 uses a simplified design that reduced to number of parts and it changed the recoil mechanism
L/44a1 has better pressure tolerance.
I hear that the German army is the most fun to do training with because of the small arms they have. Also the panzer 4 doesn’t have thick armor, only the panzer 5 (tiger 1) and beyond had the thick armor, it focused on the early war doctrine of large numbers of reliable tanks.
panzer 5 is the panther and panzer 6 is the tiger
I don’t think Germany’s focus was to have larger number of tanks during the early stages of WW2.Look at how small their production rates were compared to late war levels.Almost 80% of all total 8,500-8,800 Panzer IVs were built and used in 1943-1945.Tanks and armored cars were only a small part of German military during first half of the war.I heard that AFVs only used 5% of whole German military expenditures.Though they were key elements for their success.
What the Dardo was firing was a Tow-2B, or what is known as a top attack munition. Very similar to what you see with the NLAW and Javelin in Ukraine.
Javelin is a lot different bc it has a 2 warhead layout that strikes directly. In fact, the Javelin is more like a helfire since it just smashes into the top not over the top.
12:45 this is pretty clever- the flap is for gun _depression_. The breech will hit the flap, move it, and thus the gun can be depressed further when pointed down. (They were talking about this concept with the merkava) It could definitely serve as ventilation too!
Imagine warfare like this where it can be remotely controlled precisely like the game. Military would start hiring professional War Thunder players by then.
Been playing War Thunder for 10 years. It's definitely as real as it gets as far as combined arms combat in video games. I hope they add infantry someday though as it would open up all sorts of possibilities for gameplay.
They have enlisted. They aint gonna add inf in wt because it would be trash imo
@@Smokey348 While I too think that it would be a bad idea to add infantry in War Thunder, they created enlisted to prove that they were capable of getting the infantry and vehicle mechanic together. Now I don't think that they have disclosed of if it's one of their project to bring some type of infantry other than the already existing AI infantry but it wouldn't really fit other than to "spot" people.
Captain the game is 9 years old it turns ten this november
the first tank you guys were playing is the MBT 70 or i’m pretty sure some people called it the KPZ 70 or something. It was a tank that the US and Germany made for a collaboration. Eventually the germans cancelled it because it was too expensive. But it did inspire the tanks that were the prototypes for the Leopards (Leopard 1 etc).
It wasn't too expensive Germany and America couldn't agree on what the tank should have at all for example I think the Germans wanted a fast tank while the Americans didn't
@@firewolf5605 oh.
Get this guy to react to “GUNNER, HEAT, PC”, I’m sure he would love it
14:39 "The primary armament for production versions of the Leopard 2 is the Rheinmetall 120 mm smoothbore gun-the same gun later adapted for use on the M1 Abrams" Not the other way around!
15:05 - Those are smoke grenades.
16:27 - It is meant to take out AIRCRAFT, it IS anti-air.
17:55 - Abrams uses Honeywell AGT1500, not Rolls Royce.
The Panzer is not that so tough as advertised, its a pain to use because everyone will kill you even with the british 2 pounder
I think they mistaked the Panzer IV with the Panzer VI Tiger
It’s very tough when it comes to it’s gun though.Much more powerful than 75 and 76mm mounted on Shermans and T-34s.
Experts Play, please oh lord can we get an experts play for this. Chellby is brilliant, can't get enough of the guy.
i've been waiting for war thunder so long! Great to see some expert reacting to it.
"That was a scary tank. It's armor was so thick."
As a German Army main, my Pz. IV felt like wet tissue paper compared to most US and Russian tanks of the same BR. Even the Churchill had a big enough gun to pen.
as the Chieftain once said just because someone was a crewman in a tank doesn't mean that he knows whats best
Next: Adolf Hitler reacts to Wolfenstein new colossus i’m from arizona
@12:40 thats no artillery. its a ww2 105 tank destroyer. the roof opened to allow the breech to clear the top and get more gun depression.
looked like he figured it out as the video went on, but to be fair not sure why they would show this vehicle since it never even existed.
@@failtolawl I think cause they use some random footage from the official channel
Pretty sure it also never left the prototype stage lol
@@gabrielchad447 The whole Design was made up around the gun
15:02 not flares, smoke grenades
The Abrams Im pretty sure USED a license built L44, but the new ones use a newer modified version that can probably no longer be considered a L44
@@nuke_jr i never mentioned the 2a6, I’m saying that the M256 is a L44, just not sure about the new M1A2s
@@eco_normie3633 sorry I answered the wrong comment.
@@nuke_jr oh your fine haha
The Merkava is an amazing tank, and they were smart to put the engine in the front to act as another layer of armor.
to be fair, it probably doesn't help with the heat signature from the front, but it was designed before thermals were commonplace
The only point they missed was show the armor values and types of rounds and penetration
Wonder what they think about the 279 since it's one of the more peculiar/unique designs
That it's a fucking space project. XD
Nice to see War Thunder being appreciated around. It's by far a perfect game, but it does have amazing damage models to vehicles and it fits well between Arcade and Simulator types of gameplay.
Some more combined battles would be nice to be shown as well (like in the Tunguska clip) plus some gameplay with a bomber or even torpedo bombing, which - from my point of view - it's one of the few games that allows you to do it and comes closer to accuracy on how you do it.
Server Not Responding
The biggest problem with WT is that people play it too much, dont play it for a week and come back, you will have fun for sure
By far a perfect game? Nah
The progression is the worst in any game I’ve played
@@thiccchungo1041 well, it is a Free-to-play so grind is a factor. Not the worst though, there are more F2P games out there with worse grind and cash'n'grab mechanics. I used to play stuff like Armored Warfare and World of Tanks as well, compared to them the unlocking of vehicles is easier, modules are cheaper (since you don't have to buy additional stuff to make your vehicle effective), a trained crew on a vehicle will keep it's training and you're not forced to sell your vehicle in order to manage garage space.
14:30 yes the abrams uses the Leopard 2's barrel not the otherway around
it's the ''Rheinmetall'' 120mm which is from a German company just like the Leopards are German orgin. L/44 or L/55 barrel on abrams and L/55 barrel on Leopard 2A6
edit: 14:45 those circles are the holes for the radiator
15:01 those aren't flares those are smoke pods, there's no need for 16× XXXL countermeasures on a tank
Maybe XXXL countermeasures for Spikes? 😂 (Although IR Smokescreens already do that)
I liked how the Panzer 4 F2 was fighting the Shermans, but I wished there was gameplay involving it fighting the Russian T34 and KV1 because in real life, it was upgraded to be equipped with the long-barrel 75mm KwK 40 L/43 cannon to help the Germans deal with those 2 enemy tanks. The Panzer 4 was originally equipped with the short-barrel 75mm KwK 37 L/24 cannon to be used against enemy infantry, but when the Germans started encountering the T34 and KV1 on the Eastern Front, it was upgraded for the anti-tank role. The tank that was originally designed for the anti-tank role was the Panzer 3, but its short-barrel 50mm KwK 38 L/42 could only penetrate the T34's 40 to 45mm of sloped armor at close range and couldn't effectively penetrate the KV1's armor because the KV1 had 75mm of armor all around it. Even though the Panzer 3 would be upgraded to be equipped with the long-barrel 50mm KwK 39 cannon, the Panzer 4 was officially chosen to be upgraded for the anti-tank role because the Panzer 3 couldn't handle the intense firepower of the long-barrel 75mm gun.
Best total recoil so far. Izzy does a great job asking questions and leading the discussion to relevant topics. Super interesting
Something interesting I've learned from playing war thunder is you can use AA guns to combat jets helicopters and tanks would have been interesting to see some use of the AA guns Like m134 AA gun for example
My man Bragg! One of my former Soldiers. So proud of this young man!
Sorry but, the MBT-70 was a joint U.S., West German project that was supposed to find a replacement for the Leopard I and the M-60. The program was dropped after both nations decided to just make their own tanks which were the Leopard II and M1 Abrams.
Make them play this game please
But beware of the PE 8 bomber
Warthunder is only just now getting into 2000s veichles, with the graphics update, the game looks great, it's atmosphere is amazing. German players less so.
I bumped into a hetzer player, and he backed up and didn't even notice me. German players are really in another dimension.
@@meerbee2910 I've played america till 8.0 and rn am trying germany at 5.7, my God, it so hard to win.
@@Anarcho-harambeism they have the best lineup at 5.7 but the worst team
@@grikkajunior I've had a ton of great 4.0 teams but as soon as you hit 5.0 it all goes down the drain
Not really surprising, I bet 70% of new WT players rush for the tiger as their first tier 3
As we've seen recently in the Ukraine the t72s don't react to well too modern anti tank missile systems.
They don't, weren't designed to be driven around brainlessly
No vehicle is going to react well to a weapon designed to counter them
Correction* the t72’s don’t react well to modern missile systems because they are poorly maintained and are practically falling apart and they get given no infantry support put any nato tank in the exact same position and it’ll get disabled as well
14:38 the reason the Leo looks a lot like the Abrams is because years ago the Americans and Germans were in a project to make a new MBT but Germany dropped out from cost but that project led to the xm1 which led all the way to the M1A2 Abrams
bro seeing “Cookie Monster” on a tank is actually scarier than seeing “Dragon Slayer” imo
Fun fact: When the MBT-70 was undergoing production.. there was 2 sides of the name.. the US called it the MBT-70.. and the germans called it KampfPanzer 70
Yea but still slightly even used different parts. So it's not only different names for the same tank.
For example Both could use usual shaped charged warhead (HEAT) and APSDF (APCR) shells, but the american one could also use ATGM (Misiles) while the german one couldn't but could use pure HE.
Also the german used to test one 1100 HP engine with 2 turbocharger which was still a little bit faster in acceleration and max speed. It's weird, the american used to test 2 smaller engines which actually had 1500HP- means 3000HP, it was more powerful but still slower. Dunno why is that..
Anyway, another things like tracks and other small things on the same frame were the difference.
@@KamichamaTechstarify From what i know on the Kpfz 70 is the shells it could use were APCR (APFSDS or that round you said) HEAT/ATGM and normal HE
Is kinda funny to watch as someone who studies tanks for a living. As those "canisters" on the leopard 2A6 are smoke launchers. And the gun is German made, also the panzer 4 had some of the weakest armour out of all German medium tanks that they had during WW2. Not to mention the only ww1 tank in the game is the fcm.1.
Edit: oh hey I got highlighted 👍🏻
it also shoots flares, en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_protection_system
the edit unhighlited you :/
Yeah, kinda ironic too
If I remember correctly, the US and West Germany joined hands to create the MBT70, but the project felt apart, and both sides took what left of it to create their own new MBT, which led to why the Leopard 2 and Abrams are so similar in many factors.
The gun on the abrams is actually an idea they got from the german company rheinmetall which developed it for it's leopard 1 and 2 platform tanks
Nothing beats going against an Abrams as a L3/33 CC.
Ironically, it's the L3/33 CC that kills you and not the M1A2 Abrams. DON'T underestimate the Tankette.
15:05 those are not FLARES LOL
Those are smoke grenades LMAO
No shait sherlock.
it's not just a tank commander, no they went all in and got a tank commander that plays war thunder, good job fr
Israel is very good at asking questions. he keeps the show rolling even though he knows most of the answers already
Neat to see them react to Battlefields tanks, especialy the BF3 tank mission.