Say is a tank-class(around 60 tons or so with 120mm main gun) armored vehicle with 12 or so tires, probably double sets for each side, more of an armored car or a tank? Just wondering.
Yes. it sucks. It's a bunch of open doors and promises. As long they stick to a rifeled barrel, two piece ammunition and don't get near the reliability rates KMW and Rheinmetall come near to they are done.
WarThunders tank poem: Your track is dead, youre a fighting-position Your gun is dead, youre a pillbox Your tank is dead, youre... respawning in an AAA vehicle cause you have 250 spawnpoints.
the biggest weakness of a tank is the logistic chains. when your tank consumes 7L/km of fuel you have issues. after 100km you're just scrap metal. Your supply chain can't keep up or gets harassed by the enemy? no more big dangerous tank.
It is.. As even today. The tank is limited to about 250 miles. Something the Germans learned in WWII...They outran their supply line. Then become sitting ducks to air power and artillery.
master the germans never had that problem for the most part, only time i can think they had major supply issues was during the battle of the bulge but that was due to a massive fuel shortage in the first place. the rest was them stressing their supply lines but never out running it, german commanders was never that dumb.
I don't think you understood the problem.. Tanks need Maintenance. Ammo. Fuel. Food. etc... Today the same problem still exist.. Tanks have a range of about 250-300 miles. And without Infantry and a forward air base.. You're a sitting duck...
Well, I enjoyed your video. You're obviously knowledgeable and put a lot of work into this. A childhood friend of mine was a tanker in Viet Nam, and the way he expressed it was "Lose your engine/track, you're a pillbox. Lose your gun/expend all your ammo, you're a 60-ton portable radio."
@Delon Duvenage - Especially the dumb schmucks who are dragged from their farms and sent off to war. The best thing they can get out of it is to return to their farms...if anything's left, and their families...if anyone's left.
@@markdoldon8852 Perhaps couple of trees yes but there is no going through a forest. Real forest, 50 year old pines with diameter of half a meter each, every 5 meters. You just have to go around it. Or spend a day shooting the first couple dozen trees and then ramming hundreds of trees. At that point, you just made a barely traversable road in the middle of the forest. Instead of going around it using a road. If it's not absolutely necessary, going around is always easier. I bet those guys on the video were doing that just for the shit and giggles.
@@alaric_ You have to go out of your place and go to some tank museum. Check out what heavy tank means in REAL. Even a 40 tones and 850HP of T-72 will do it. Not to mention over 60t Abrams. Polish tank brigades were helping firefighters during fire in forrest. They were cutting off the places taken by the fire by ramming trees of all kinds and sizes they got. Such cut was two tanks wide. BTW Nobody rams a whole forrest if its not necessary.
Do you have any idea how inefficient recoilless rifles are at producing high projectile velocities? Do you understand that all of that propellant ejected out the back when you fire one has to go somewhere that isn't the inside of the turret? Do you realize that current tanks have no issues whatsoever with the amount of recoil produced by current standard ammunition loads?
Ryan Cauffman "Oh shit! We have no ammo left!" "Fear not! We still have tea!" *Cheers between the crew, but a AT round hits and destroy the boiler vessel* "No! We are done for!" D:
In my 20yrs in mech info I sent countless hour working on the tracks, & it’s components. Every man had to know how to fix the track, often enough experienced troops could fix a track quickly. If you a to have a track problem on the advance, you were left behind with one trooper to wait for recovery. Hats off to the unsung hero’s the REME’s.
It would mean that tanks would be more balanced in games rather than giving you a huge abundance of explosives just to level the playing field for anyone not in a tank
The biggest weakness of tanks is that they have to keep fragile human beings alive on the inside. Same is true of military planes. You can design a much better vehicle, land or air, if all you care about is maneuverability and protecting the weapon systems.
@@fakecubed Not really with tanks though. Aside from the fact that they could be smaller if they didn't need crew, pretty much anything that would injure people on the inside would also do a lot of damage to the tank itself. Although you are right about planes!
I still say vision is the biggest weakness of armour, you can be fully resupplied and mobile, but if you can't see the terrain or enemy, you're useless. Sure the crew can pop their heads out, but we all know how that goes when you're under heavy fire, I'd rather be a bunker with vision.
Experimental, as of now, IIRC. However, that sort of thing relies on sensors on the outside of the AFV, which (surprise) may well be damaged by shrapnel or other hits that don't actually damage the AFV itself. If that happens, you're back to the regular vision blocks.
80% of the time commander of the tank will be poping his head out (exception would be city combat) cuz no vision port or next gen camera monitor will provide you with the same understanding of battlefield as you popin your head out. Trust me its better to go into battle(or training ,whatever) with a blind tank rather than paralyzed tank...
Jochen Träm The panzer 2 has solved the problem with its later variants in 1943 with a 180° viewport glass installed on the top of the turret near the hatch
I agree with this since "Information is ammunition" But you have to remember that technology today isnt like it was back in WW2, it is constantly evolving. Taking the Abrams as an example, it has a GPS, a FBCB2 that allows the TC to track friendlies and overall increase battlefield situational awareness, has a CITV, a RWS/CROWS that can be used to scan for targets instead of sticking your head out and like any other tank out there, has periscopes. Of course, with all this said, it will still have blindspots. This is why there's Infantry and other support assets around to cover for these weaknesses
You all dissapoint me, internet generation. (who can't even use google) Out of commission, become a pillbox. Out of ammo, become a bunker. Out of time, become heroes
I´m writing a short novel about a tank crew that engages in battle, and thanks to your awesome explanations now I have the information I need in order to describe the combat and everything. Thank you so much, Matsimus.
Matias Gomez Janzen that’s why a downed tank is called a “casualty” as well. You’re not fighting for the objective, your just trying to stay alive in a war zone
What are you talking about, of course they have toilets. It's called the Commander's Commode and it's under the tank commander's seat with a round removable cushion segment and a chemical toilet underneath. The other option is to use the belly escape hatch to eliminate yourself and this is the more popular option. In an NBC environment you can't leave the tank, so a toilet became imperrative.
Quote "The Brits win this one. As someone actually training to use the Best of British armour, I can confirm the Challenger 2 has a toilet under the Loader's seat. It flushes the waste out under the tank, and can be used when hatches are closed. Now you understand why the Brits have the best modern Main Battle Tank. Other than the excellent tea making faculties. Incidentally, our Warrior troop carrier also has a toilet in the troop compartment, but that only has a bag that sits and stinks up the tank. So while the option is there, I'm sure"
Have a 5G bucket with *TIGHT fitting lid.* Or get used to DEPENDS which come in many sizes. Also buy your MOIST TOWELETTES *by the CASE.* Or just learn to HOLD IT till you get back to your FOB.
From an engineering point-of-view, I support all your weakness issues. Special the track ambivalence is key. The all terrain capabilities are best fulfilled with tracks, but the maintenance and repair, special at the battlefield are nightmare! Very good video, with extra point for realism! One can feel your experience with tanks, and there technical issues! Greetings from Germany!
Oh, please, both those games are unrealistic. (Though I love BF4) You could shoot the back of the tank, and it would do the same damage as if you hit it from the front. Take my word for it, I know a lot. You can't even bounce a shell.
its still a very friendly game that IS more of a simulator if you could say it without squirming. It has three types of vehicles, Land, Air and Sea. It has so much realism and isnt just point and shoot. BF III is still really good. And actually, my biggest complaint are the helicopters always raping the ground vehicles.
What's the biggest weakness on a tank? WOT player: oh it's gotta be the commander's cupolas. You can shoot it 20 times and it will blow up. That's why they got rid off them right? WT players: man don't listen to those kids playing around with HP bars. The largest weakness is the tank's gun shield. They are weak as hell. The M60 Patton has a super weak gun shield that can be penetrated by T-34/85 from 800 meters. Also, there are gaps on your turret ring that has no armor at all and you can always shoot them from 1km away.
The main source of tank casualties on the western front during WW2 was mechanical breakdown. The Canadian Armed Forces and the British Armed Forces estimated that around 50-60% of all losses where due to breakdowns. Source: Military History Visualized
I 100% agree! I still remember when the last driver in my plutoon took a hard turn in the deep mud tracks made when all of the other tanks in our company drove through the same spot. He didn't stop turning until he heard two LOUD noises only to find that he had ripped both tracks apart as well as ripping one of the tension wheels straight from its axle. We had to dig both tracks from under the damn mud and didn't find the tension wheel until the day after. Man that exercise led to a late night...
From June 1980-January 1982, I was a tanker on M60A1 tanks. Most of that time, I was platoon leader of 1st platoon, A. Co. 1-77 AR, 4th ID (MECH) US Army. i was saying to myself before you were 45 seconds into the video that it was the tracks. Your video is pretty much spot on. We did not roll up tracks, but your video brought back many memories. Thank you.
I was TC of a (factory new!) M-60A1 in the FULDA GAP, (14th AC) in 1964-65. Lots of comments here from non-tankers. It's good to see so much interest in armored warfare ("gamers", for better or worse) but at least it's "education". I've had to repair tracks on snowy winter nights, and scorching summer days. In a perfect world, we would place a call to Ordnance, and they'd rush out to help.... As I'm sure you're aware, it's just not so easy for some footslogger to "knock a track off" by jamming a steel bar into the track (while it's moving??). As far as "vulnerable spots", readers must realize that, in the heat of battle, the TC seldom (if ever) has the luxury of placing those textbook shots. As soon as you "acquire the target", you can assume he's probably also "acquired" you too. Then you've about 15 seconds to live, unless you can get off a relatively accurate round. Try for 'center of mass'. If you can hit him before he hits you, he'll either be dead, or at least shaken enough to give you time for a second shot. IIRC research has shown that the tank that gets off the first round most often wins the encounter. First priority is to shoot the SOB and hope you get lucky, and have that next round "up!" and "on the way!" ASAP.
-_- Most soldiers around the world are 18 to 25 years of age. That's the age militaries generally look for. In fact people are strongest in their 20s and 30s.
My father told me that the tracks were the biggest weakness of tanks and it made them vulnerable. He served in an engineer unit, laying/clearing mines and demolitions and never feared an enemy sending tanks (in Yugo there were tensions over Trieste being assigned to Italy but Tito didn't go to war over it).
my great uncle was in the German army during ww2 on the eastern front, and from what he told me and reading his books you never want to throw a track on a tank with overlapping wheels its a total nightmare, there pz4 wasnt bad, but the panthers they had in there units took at least two crews to get them moving again and parts were hard to get.
Overlapping wheels give a great cross country performance, the Panther probably has the best ride of any tank in WW2. From the viewpoint of a theorist it is the perfect solution, in the field not so much.
The Beast, at about the 1 hour 33 minute and 50 second mark: "Out of commission become a pillbox, out of ammo become a bunker, out of time become heroes"
The British Army banned the use of spare tracks as additional armour during WW2 as it was found to help shot hits to dig in on sloped and oblique impacts that would otherwise have skated off. Manganese steel track links are pretty soft when compared to Nickel-Vanadium-Chromium-Molybdenum-Iron-Carbon alloy armoured steel.
Like Andy Reid was saying it renders sloped armour essentially, flat armour. With the track being 'ridged' for grip if you slap that on the front of sloped armour, it'd grip the shell! Essentially working you own armour against yourself. Maybe on flat armour it could provide a small amount of protection but other than that I'd say it is a bad idea.
You were so right, tracks are relatively weak and WILL come off if you ever are part of an armoured force. The last tank should have cleaned off all the rock from the inside of the track as it got caught in everything and screwed it. My mate tore a final drive off a 55 ton tank and it got stuck above the next road wheel creating a bulge in the tank guards...gas torch job. At about 12 months into service in the Aust Army I rolled a track off at night so it was jammed as well as off. I had to fix it without lights, full tactical and wanted to punch the troop commander complaining about why we couldn't move into the correct position. We has no night vision so driving was all by feel and shadows. (Australian Amy Cav)
Why do the games have the ridiculous repair button and don't throw tracks left and right? Because replacing tracks takes a long time and it's not fun. Nobody wants games that have long periods which are not fun :D
There is a line, for example no one wants to be told that their Tiger just broke down because of a leaky gasket or in a RTSr that one of their platoons won't be fighting because their lieutenant got lost.
Tanks knocking or otherwise damaging trees is an environmental issue in the USA because tanks, especially state national guard armor groups often use state and federal forest lands for training. In my part of FL the military is last I heard going to use our local Blackwater River State Forest land for training.
I really think it was because of the extremely great engineering, the bearings of the bogey wheels were great, and, yeah its not engaged to the engine/drive wheel so its basically tons of steel, rolling on big bearings
Sir , a very good analysis. I was not a tanker ( I crewed a Chinook '70-'71 in the delta) but I have studied armor for years. The first Tigers went into action in the forests near Lenengrad. The Russia anti tank crews shot the tracks.
Fabulous, fantastic video, absolutely right about this, we were taught to go for the tracks and finish the tank off after it was sitting there immobile.
I can't say I had any desire to scream at my screen about the turret n gun still working. I found this vid really interesting and educational, you made your points well, in a clear and logical fashion and I loved the accompanying video which was something I'd never seen before and was well worth watching. That video alone was enough to get my to subscribe,, watching those guys fix their tanks or cripple them in another case, that was very cool, thank you, much appreciated.
Quick question Matsimus. I'm really passionate about tanks and would like to serve on tanks. Someone recommended going in as a Armoured Corps Officer, any thoughts/suggestions?
How long do you want to serve on them for? If you enter as a soldier (and get selected) then you can spend 15+ yrs on vehicles. If you enter as an Officer (and get selected) then you'll a couple of years on a vehicle as LT but as you move up, vehicle time decreases.
This is why we have things like Strykers (1126). You can lose a few wheels and keep rolling. Four is the minimum , just as long as they are not all on the same side. Awesome and insightful video.
Holy fuck as a US Army tanker myself. When it comes to breaking track and a driver throwing track if you have a really good crew, you can get that shit done in 45 minutes. But christ it is agonizing . That’s why you always PMCS.
largol33t1. The road wheels and definitely the sprocket or idler need a shell hit or mine to cause substantial damage - they're pretty tough. Replacing a track pin or getting a tank back on it's track is an absolute pain but not too time consuming with 4 guys and the right equipment & taining.
I had to smile at 13:20 and the use of a T-bar and socket. After leaving Vietnam (1970) I sent my crew a 3/4” drive ratchet. I hope they enjoyed using it.
Good video, my fire engine driver had been an Abrams driver for the Army. From what I gathered, the Army thinks you should all be Superman when it comes to track maintenance and track repair. Destroyed his back having to do it by himself!!
SaVAgE OG, you've never worked with a heavy machinery, have you? This track weighs more than all the people around combined and is very unstable. At every moment it can topple or start rolling which would result in a heavy injury or even death. There countless sad stories of people why tried to play with things that deserve caution, the saddest part of which is that most of these stories are true and repeat themselves over and over. Some people learn, some weren't so lucky. You can play stupid when it is safe, you just don't if there is a real danger. Safety rules are written in blood.
So you want your tax money to be spent on morons, who got mutilated due their own stupidity and can not work now, don't you? How kind of you, good sir! :}
Poland is a 2nd World country stil is using 60t Leopard 2PL tanks and PT-91 Twardy tank = 44t + train cart for each underinth. And all the brigfes are fine :)
Heroes&Generals dipicts the track problem quite well. The onely way to repair a destroyed the track is to get out take your wrench and fix the track. If you get shot in the proces the Tank is lost. And you will get shot because most of the time your track got taken out by some guy with a Panzerfaust ore a other tank (altough the mine scenario is also possible).
MrKansai1 teghe Not necessarily true. The chally that took the RPG 29 to the lower plate and only injured the driver, not even killed. Considering how weak that lower plate is for the challenger, I can imagine the turret and front plates being able to mostly stop a frontal shot.
@@andrewcarpinella1217 If it was RPG 29 then I wish all Leo, Abrams, Chally, K2 Leclerc, Type10, etc could take it the way this Challenger 2 did. But I don't think it is a common case. The warhead of this "grenade" is a fcukin huge thing and it is just as potent when does its job. Don't remember exactly but I think Challenger 2 in Iraq was a battlefield ready - heavily up-armored. like such: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Challenger_2_Main_Battle_Tank_patrolling_outside_Basra%2C_Iraq_MOD_45148325.jpg Opposite to regular one: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Challenger2-Bergen-Hohne-Training-Area-2b.jpg RPG 29 makes a hole equal to 500mm of RHA - the one from the '90s
They're going to be hit by RPG's and IED's long before a HE shell goes anywhere near them. But yeah, they don't sound very reliable. Though I'm not an expert so just don't know.
From the company making these rubber tracks "Rubber Band Tracks are made with grade 5 rubber and reinforced with Kevlar fibre, a lightweight and non-flammable compound that protects against RPGs and high temperatures in harsh environments. Their carbon nanotubes confer twice the durability of steel tracks."
I think that the big problem with rubber tracks will be repairing them, or more to say, replacing them. With the current linked track system when the track is damaged all you have to do to repair is remove the damaged section(s) and replace it/them with new ones. With a one piece track if the track is damaged you're likely going to need to replace the entire thing. Granted that with current tracks there's still a lot of work involved in getting the track hooked back up but logisitically it seems to me that it would be easier to carry a bunch of spare track links rather than entire tracks, as it is, a tank can carry several spare links but I don't think that they'd be able to carry entire spare tracks.
If they talk about using rubber, then it's probably some super advanced, complex composite material. Seems to be the way to go whereever steel or other metal alloys fail.
@riceball it could be linked rubber sections. who knows. would make logical sense to do so at least, also putting on a whole track would be a maintenance nightmare
The biggest weakness of any tank is logistics. MBTs use on average 1000L of fuel each day. Not only is it easier do destroy a fuel tanker, but that one tanker will supply a full squadron of tanks every single day. Five fuel tankers destroyed and an entire tank regiment is grounded. Destroy the supply line & there are no tanks, hence why UK & US are scrapping tanks in favour of helicopters
I'd argue a tanks biggest weakness is its crew. A tank has many weak spots is its tracks, its barrel and top hatches the rest tends to be quite well armored and well designed. However a poorly trained crew or cowardly crew can lose without ever being fired upon or worse fire upon its allies. A trained and supplied crew can repair its tracks and hold despite being surrounded and outnummbred. But nowadays I don't know how modern tanks really would fare in a "fair" fight. A modern MBT can eat RPG-7's and other explosives all day , but what happens to it if it gets hit by a NLAW, Javelin or other modern day RPG /ATGM? Will it be a hole and the crew bails from smoke and fear or will it be Sherman M4's all over again , fuel cooking crew alive or ammo blowing the turrets sky high? I know a lot of people say that the shield between the loader and the ammo storage is good enough to save the crew but I have my doubts of how well a modern MBT can handle a penetrating hit in the ammo rack or internal fuel tanks , its probably one of the things that haven't changed since the days of 1940's.
Hitting the cupolas/top hatches would barely do anything, also I wouldn't wan't to be outside a tank repairing the tracks when outnumbered, especially not while being fired upon.
A shot into the commander cupola/hatch from a elevated position would prob kill all the crew. People tend to think of tanks fighting on even ground ,its often one side attacking up/downhill into a prepared kill zone unless its a complete breakthrough that shatters every one.
Seeing that final abrams with mine atachment got me thinking. If you had a remote activated minefield without the enemy knowing and know exactly its boundarys it should be easy to lure tanks into in and blow them up, because they didnt know there was mines there, they havent exploded. Yet.
Sure, if you have really dumb tankers, who cant recognize a potential minefield location. Mine fields are seldom detected by mines exploding, but by detection equipment, after the first tank encounters and evaluates the terrain.
I crewed an M270 in the US Army. You are absolutely correct. The tracks can be at times worst than woman. Sensitive and finicky. By in large, tracks are primarily meant to go forward and backwards. The stresses a track suffers when turning is serious. In fact, we actually had to track how many turns we would take during training exercises. Typically, if you had more than 100 turns in a training exercise, when we returned to base, we replaced the tracks. I was blown away by how expensive and how weak they are. In effect, we didn't go out for a spin. Treat with kit gloves and pray its nice to you.
I've always thought that the track was a big weakness and wondered why it wasn't shown more. Movies are not realistic but just what the viewer accepts. I didn't know any of these details. Thanks for a good video.
This may be a dumb question, but, since a tank steers by varying the power output between the two tracks, wouldn't having a track destroyed cause it to constantly turn, as opposed to only being able to go back and forth?
Lose a teack on one side of a traditional drive system and all the power will go to the final drive that has lost a track, you have to brake the final drive on the side that has lost a track and that allows you limited forward or backward movement but no ability to turn.
liam sargo remember that the damaged track still causes friction with the ground, drive wheels dont work así regular wheels, look at it like limping, but while draging a lot of weight
I think a combat invincible Track would be one constructed out of 3 tracks per side one after the other where each segment consists of a double roadwheel bogey and a return roller/tensioner ( think Sherman ) and every roadwheel is actually powered by an electric motor inside with those being fed juice by an Engine Generator Powerpack combo. If you hit a mine you'll you'll only lose 1/3 of the track available to you on one side though I'm not sure how a turning radius would be affected. Well... If you go that far you could go with active suspension allowing for the first and last roadwheel to be lifted thus creating a more 1:1 length to width ratio instead of a 2:1 one? Just a thought.
It used to be the underbelly and sides but the tank has seen improvements over time including increase in armour thickness and the introduction of reactionary armour plates
Joseph conrad SA those still are weakspots. Tracks are just big weakspots because they can be shot from any side. The russians used to shoot the track of a moving tiger with one tank to jam it and get it to expose its flank against its will to another russian tank
Joseph conrad SA, with research of better armour protection, will also lead to research of better weapons/ways to go past that protection. I mean, now you had said reactive armour, there is a AT weapon or round where it "uses" the reactive armour's ability against itself. Like a two step detonation. One for "activation" of the armour, then second one to move the "round" through that armour. No matter what research you will do to protect the crew in a tank, will there still be someone to find a way to go around it
If an equal force engages you, the old weakness are still pretty similar as you never have infinite weight/armor capacity. Just as armor changed munitions followed, reaction armor had multi warheads developed as a result which destroy it.
Surprised this didn't become a scandal in the media. The ADF has been touting their environmental policy to the general public for as a long as I can remember. They are in violation of their own policy: www.defence.gov.au/estatemanagement/Governance/Policy/Environment/Default.asp INB4 - not triggered
Relatively old footage. The vehicle just on the left of the screen is an M113A1 (as shown by the headlights), so the footage predates the introduction of the M113AS4. But yeah, Australian armour training is all about driving through trees. The M1A1 has a thermal sight for the crew commander's weapon (the 50cal). They cost about half million each so I am told. In US service they are just there. In Australian service they designed and fitted steel protective covers because the crews kept destroying them with trees.
You're right. They really gotta work on that. And as a Filipino aspiring to design an indigenous, Philippine MBT, I will include that to the potential challenges that I'll face. Anyway thanks for the vids. I learned a lot from it.
An Abrams comes across an immobilized Abrams. Running Abrams Driver: How are you guys doing? Disabled Abrams Driver: Oh, just sieging. Go on, my boy, have fun.
I predict that in the near future, MECHs will almost completely replace tanks. They will use thick graphene or something similar to lightly, but heavily armor these manned or unmanned robots and they will have all the destructive firepower as a tank. They will use micro-fusion or fission batteries eliminating the need to refuel. We are soon at the point where lasers will be powerful enough to burn through thick steel at a high rate, so I predict that some will be equipped with those, and others will be equipped with guns and explosive projectiles. Of course, with an element like graphene, the light armor may be subject-able to powerful lasers (no one can be sure just yet), so others will simply be armored with thick, layered titanium alloy or a heavier metal like-well-I'm not sure which but just open the periodic table and find heavy+abundant. They may just layer the graphene even thicker. The weaknesses will be the MECHs joints, and of course the small thick glass eye sockets. Modern science fiction is the future of warfare.
Very good description why tanks on the battlefield will be done, the moment drones are able aiming at this weakness. Just a detail about combat drones. =)
The biggest weakness of a tank is it track, just a goddamn mine and we will have 3-5 human BBQ inside an expensive BBQ oven with a flame made by RPG and others anti tank missile :V
i think that earlyer if you had no repair kit researched in simulator battles, and someone blew you'r track off, then you'r only option was to repair on captured point, basicly gg at that point
No instant repair, takes substantially less time than an actual track replacement, and you don't lose your entire crew when something decides to spray your position with machine gun fire during repair.
Things that come to mind: There was that one M1A2 that defeated an Iraqi tank platoon turning in circles after one track was knocked out. That is not a situation you want to be. There was part of a documentary showing a Tiger II tank being moved and restored in modern times. One of the things they had to do was some battlefield repair. Cut away some damage from the hull. Remove a 75 mm round from the between the hull and track. De-track the road wheels. Finnish cutting the spur of metal away from the hull. Re-track the road wheels. This was accomplished so the old tank could be pulled into the restoration garage. Their final goal was to restore The Tiger II to running order. Labor of love. :-D
I would have to agree with the author of this article. I have some experience in testing military tracked vehicles, including long-term durability testing on a rubber track system and testing various track configurations on other vehicles. The first incident I witnessed was an M113 variant which dropped a track at high speed, then travelled about 50 ft, turned 90 degrees to the left as directional control was lost, drove through a ditch, and into a chain-link fence. I was also testing a Leopard I which dropped a track twice one day, as the coupling bolts were not adjusted properly. The instant the track drops, directional control is lost and the vehicle is immobilized. Tracks are fragile and everything depends on them.
Im an infantryman but I’ve worked closely with tanks in the past. I always thought that if I needed to disable a tank I’d go for the optics and antennas.
There are auxiliary sights that don't require power. There are also iron sights aligned with the cannon or barrel axis. Without an antenna, radios can still transmit pretty decent range. At least to the next tank in the platoon which shouldn't be too far away. Your best bet would be to disable it's suspension or fire some type of anti-tank missile that could disable the turret movement. You are pretty much toast if they crew sees you out the periscopes.
Like this video????... Check out the new Challenger 2 upgrades coming to the British Army! th-cam.com/video/tK2y2dt8v38/w-d-xo.html
Matsimus you’re intro dope af
Say is a tank-class(around 60 tons or so with 120mm main gun) armored vehicle with 12 or so tires, probably double sets for each side, more of an armored car or a tank? Just wondering.
Yes. it sucks. It's a bunch of open doors and promises.
As long they stick to a rifeled barrel, two piece ammunition and don't get near the reliability rates KMW and Rheinmetall come near to they are done.
I LOVE THAT TANK, MAN! :) :) It's just...I don't even know how to say it - IT IS AWESOME!! :D
MATSIMUS,Could you make a review on the French"LECLERC"Tank and the Russian"MERKAVA"with the power-plant placed in the front.Thx
WarThunders tank poem:
Your track is dead, youre a fighting-position
Your gun is dead, youre a pillbox
Your tank is dead, youre...
respawning in an AAA vehicle cause you have 250 spawnpoints.
There is usually only two spawn points in war thunder for each side.
Carbon 12, i think he meant points that allows you to respawn, and not points where you can respawn
@@carbon1255 he's talking about realistic
^_^
Carbon 12 oh my god...
90 for me flack panther
"Out of action, become a pillbox. Out of ammo, become a bunker. Out of time, become heroes"
that is from the movie the beast
True.
Thanks for the bunker as weak as a T-34 hull.
@@HanSolo__ It was a T-55
@@vaclav_fejt Talking about The Beast tank? It was not T-55.
the biggest weakness of a tank is the logistic chains. when your tank consumes 7L/km of fuel you have issues. after 100km you're just scrap metal. Your supply chain can't keep up or gets harassed by the enemy? no more big dangerous tank.
91plm that’s what I thought the video was going to be about. Fuel consumption
It is.. As even today. The tank is limited to about 250 miles. Something the Germans learned in WWII...They outran their supply line. Then become sitting ducks to air power and artillery.
master the germans never had that problem for the most part, only time i can think they had major supply issues was during the battle of the bulge but that was due to a massive fuel shortage in the first place. the rest was them stressing their supply lines but never out running it, german commanders was never that dumb.
I don't think you understood the problem.. Tanks need Maintenance. Ammo. Fuel. Food. etc... Today the same problem still exist.. Tanks have a range of about 250-300 miles.
And without Infantry and a forward air base.. You're a sitting duck...
For some reason I still remember my tank had 504 gallons of fuel and took 8 gallons to start.
Well, I enjoyed your video. You're obviously knowledgeable and put a lot of work into this. A childhood friend of mine was a tanker in Viet Nam, and the way he expressed it was "Lose your engine/track, you're a pillbox. Lose your gun/expend all your ammo, you're a 60-ton portable radio."
Delon Duvenage that’s one sick story
@Delon Duvenage - Especially the dumb schmucks who are dragged from their farms and sent off to war. The best thing they can get out of it is to return to their farms...if anything's left, and their families...if anyone's left.
"Not even trees can stop the firepower of a tank."
Redwood : "Say what?!"
Well, to be honest, with modern fire control a decent modern take could take out EVEN a REDWOOD in a few rounds of well placed HE
@@markdoldon8852 Perhaps couple of trees yes but there is no going through a forest. Real forest, 50 year old pines with diameter of half a meter each, every 5 meters. You just have to go around it. Or spend a day shooting the first couple dozen trees and then ramming hundreds of trees. At that point, you just made a barely traversable road in the middle of the forest. Instead of going around it using a road.
If it's not absolutely necessary, going around is always easier. I bet those guys on the video were doing that just for the shit and giggles.
@@alaric_ You have to go out of your place and go to some tank museum. Check out what heavy tank means in REAL. Even a 40 tones and 850HP of T-72 will do it. Not to mention over 60t Abrams. Polish tank brigades were helping firefighters during fire in forrest. They were cutting off the places taken by the fire by ramming trees of all kinds and sizes they got. Such cut was two tanks wide.
BTW Nobody rams a whole forrest if its not necessary.
MrKansai1 teghe why would you ram some trees with a tank in the first place?
MrKansai1 teghe why would you ram some trees with a tank in the first place?
biggest weakness = mong at the controls.
photonman54 the biggest weakness of the tank is the main gun
we should replace tank cannons with recoilless rifles, vastly reducing the recoil
The problem with tanks isnt the recoil...
Do you have any idea how inefficient recoilless rifles are at producing high projectile velocities? Do you understand that all of that propellant ejected out the back when you fire one has to go somewhere that isn't the inside of the turret? Do you realize that current tanks have no issues whatsoever with the amount of recoil produced by current standard ammunition loads?
Callum Gledhill where will the back blast go?
photonman54 that was the joke mate
The only problem Challenger 2 has is it may run out of tea in the middle of battle
With a good supply line and that onboard boiler vessel, no problems!
Never run out of tea, its impossible
I'm an American, and I'd still prefer running out of shells to running out of tea.
Ryan Cauffman
"Oh shit! We have no ammo left!"
"Fear not! We still have tea!"
*Cheers between the crew, but a AT round hits and destroy the boiler vessel*
"No! We are done for!" D:
I heard the crews remove about 6 shells in the ammo storages to add tea boxes so it would take longer for the tea to run out :D
In my 20yrs in mech info I sent countless hour working on the tracks, & it’s components. Every man had to know how to fix the track, often enough experienced troops could fix a track quickly. If you a to have a track problem on the advance, you were left behind with one trooper to wait for recovery. Hats off to the unsung hero’s the REME’s.
Bill Sandford thank you
*talks about how repairing tracks is a living hell*
“We should incorporate this aspect into our video games that we play to have fun!”
Well it's a pain for those repairing it, you wouldn't really get to do that
It would mean that tanks would be more balanced in games rather than giving you a huge abundance of explosives just to level the playing field for anyone not in a tank
0:42 having to go outside the tank to grab you and the boys another beer out of that blue cooler...clear and present weakness
The biggest weakness of tanks is that they have to keep fragile human beings alive on the inside. Same is true of military planes. You can design a much better vehicle, land or air, if all you care about is maneuverability and protecting the weapon systems.
@@fakecubed Not really with tanks though. Aside from the fact that they could be smaller if they didn't need crew, pretty much anything that would injure people on the inside would also do a lot of damage to the tank itself.
Although you are right about planes!
Try repairing the track with air burst mortars raining down.
Bradley Anderson thats hardcore repair men right there
www.badassoftheweek.com/index.cgi?id=64071327108
Not air burst mortar, but this lady did similar thing to what you said.
That's what loaders are for tho. Fix track then force them to ground guide.
Loaders are the bitches of the tanking world. Poor guys
WOT and WT knows how
Magic
Bradley Anderson be Russian and drink vodka :D
I still say vision is the biggest weakness of armour, you can be fully resupplied and mobile, but if you can't see the terrain or enemy, you're useless. Sure the crew can pop their heads out, but we all know how that goes when you're under heavy fire, I'd rather be a bunker with vision.
Experimental, as of now, IIRC.
However, that sort of thing relies on sensors on the outside of the AFV, which (surprise) may well be damaged by shrapnel or other hits that don't actually damage the AFV itself. If that happens, you're back to the regular vision blocks.
80% of the time commander of the tank will be poping his head out (exception would be city combat) cuz no vision port or next gen camera monitor will provide you with the same understanding of battlefield as you popin your head out.
Trust me its better to go into battle(or training ,whatever) with a blind tank rather than paralyzed tank...
Jochen Träm The panzer 2 has solved the problem with its later variants in 1943 with a 180° viewport glass installed on the top of the turret near the hatch
Jochen Träm Thus enabling the tank commander to view outside without having to be exposed to enemy fire.
I agree with this since "Information is ammunition"
But you have to remember that technology today isnt like it was back in WW2, it is constantly evolving. Taking the Abrams as an example, it has a GPS, a FBCB2 that allows the TC to track friendlies and overall increase battlefield situational awareness, has a CITV, a RWS/CROWS that can be used to scan for targets instead of sticking your head out and like any other tank out there, has periscopes.
Of course, with all this said, it will still have blindspots. This is why there's Infantry and other support assets around to cover for these weaknesses
We lose mobility, we are artillery we lose gun, we are pilbox
We lose machine gun, we are bunker
We lose lives, we are heroes.
tamenga88 its a russian saying I believe
No, it's "We lose tracks, we are artillery. We lose gun, we are pillbox. We lose machine gun, we are bunker. We lose armor, we are Russian."
How about this:
T95 - the driver - the engine = a bunker with a big a** gun
that cant rotate
wait thats what a bunker with a big ass gun is shit
You all dissapoint me, internet generation. (who can't even use google)
Out of commission, become a pillbox.
Out of ammo, become a bunker.
Out of time, become heroes
I´m writing a short novel about a tank crew that engages in battle, and thanks to your awesome explanations now I have the information I need in order to describe the combat and everything. Thank you so much, Matsimus.
Loved the repair videos you posted. Very relevant and truly pushed the idea of the difficulty of track repair through.
So if you lose your tracks you are like a soldier with wounded legs, you are now just trying to survive until someone can drag you out of there
Matias Gomez Janzen that’s why a downed tank is called a “casualty” as well. You’re not fighting for the objective, your just trying to stay alive in a war zone
Not that much, a downed vehicle may still provide fire support and watch the advancing force rear. This however is not valid un urban warfare
The amount of time you spend on these videos is impressive. Thanks for taking the time :)
Stealth17 Gaming well thank you good sir! Nice to see a familiar tuber here :-)
Sounds like this content isn't for you then.
shut up hes amazing
i always appreciate ural 3750 fixing my tracks magically in 30 secs while also rearming and refueling
but what about a hovertank? no tracks!
The biggest weakness of a tank is the lack of a toilet
What are you talking about, of course they have toilets. It's called the Commander's Commode and it's under the tank commander's seat with a round removable cushion segment and a chemical toilet underneath. The other option is to use the belly escape hatch to eliminate yourself and this is the more popular option. In an NBC environment you can't leave the tank, so a toilet became imperrative.
Not quite true. A guy who served in the first Gulf War said they had to use plastic bags as toilets and there were none inside the tank.
Quote "The Brits win this one. As someone actually training to use the Best of British armour, I can confirm the Challenger 2 has a toilet under the Loader's seat. It flushes the waste out under the tank, and can be used when hatches are closed. Now you understand why the Brits have the best modern Main Battle Tank. Other than the excellent tea making faculties.
Incidentally, our Warrior troop carrier also has a toilet in the troop compartment, but that only has a bag that sits and stinks up the tank. So while the option is there, I'm sure"
I would not call bunging a bag of poo out the waste hatch flushing, that's if you have bothered to grease the hinge during servicing ????
Have a 5G bucket with *TIGHT fitting lid.* Or get used to DEPENDS which come in many sizes. Also buy your MOIST TOWELETTES *by the CASE.* Or just learn to HOLD IT till you get back to your FOB.
From an engineering point-of-view, I support all your weakness issues. Special the track ambivalence is key. The all terrain capabilities are best fulfilled with tracks, but the maintenance and repair, special at the battlefield are nightmare! Very good video, with extra point for realism! One can feel your experience with tanks, and there technical issues! Greetings from Germany!
I like the guys in the end that roll the track - they did not read the safety manual....LOL.
Umm , can u enlighten me about the disengaged tank tracks safety manual?
@@bravomike4734 - Only do this with a tracks roll-up and tote machine.
Why is it dangerous to do otherwise?
100% false, tracks only take 1/4 damage while rear takes 50%+ dmg, battleifled 3 science.
Is that true? Where do tanks take the biggest damage on BF3?
Vincent Sluga i remember that un BF4 you also had to consider the horizontal angle of the impact
Oh, please, both those games are unrealistic. (Though I love BF4) You could shoot the back of the tank, and it would do the same damage as if you hit it from the front. Take my word for it, I know a lot. You can't even bounce a shell.
next you'll tell me a welding torch cant blow up a m1 Abrams.
its still a very friendly game that IS more of a simulator if you could say it without squirming. It has three types of vehicles, Land, Air and Sea. It has so much realism and isnt just point and shoot. BF III is still really good. And actually, my biggest complaint are the helicopters always raping the ground vehicles.
What's the biggest weakness on a tank?
WOT player: oh it's gotta be the commander's cupolas. You can shoot it 20 times and it will blow up. That's why they got rid off them right?
WT players: man don't listen to those kids playing around with HP bars. The largest weakness is the tank's gun shield. They are weak as hell. The M60 Patton has a super weak gun shield that can be penetrated by T-34/85 from 800 meters. Also, there are gaps on your turret ring that has no armor at all and you can always shoot them from 1km away.
"What's the biggest weakness on a tank?".........Airpower.
InsanoBinLooney nah air power could miss...ATGMs dont
ATGM's are useless against modern vehicles because all of them use anti-chemical weapon armor appliques like ERA.
Anti chemical weapon armor? Thats new.
Chemical is mean for shell that contain explosive material to destroy the tank, opposite to kinetic round
The main source of tank casualties on the western front during WW2 was mechanical breakdown. The Canadian Armed Forces and the British Armed Forces estimated that around 50-60% of all losses where due to breakdowns. Source: Military History Visualized
yeah, tanks tend to break down a lot when there is a 72mm hole through the engine block. Did they drive the rest of them off a bridge or something?
I 100% agree! I still remember when the last driver in my plutoon took a hard turn in the deep mud tracks made when all of the other tanks in our company drove through the same spot. He didn't stop turning until he heard two LOUD noises only to find that he had ripped both tracks apart as well as ripping one of the tension wheels straight from its axle.
We had to dig both tracks from under the damn mud and didn't find the tension wheel until the day after. Man that exercise led to a late night...
armanian war ended the tank, and it may not be just tanks, [drones]
From June 1980-January 1982, I was a tanker on M60A1 tanks. Most of that time, I was platoon leader of 1st platoon, A. Co. 1-77 AR, 4th ID (MECH) US Army. i was saying to myself before you were 45 seconds into the video that it was the tracks. Your video is pretty much spot on. We did not roll up tracks, but your video brought back many memories. Thank you.
I was TC of a (factory new!) M-60A1 in the FULDA GAP, (14th AC) in 1964-65.
Lots of comments here from non-tankers. It's good to see so much interest in armored warfare ("gamers", for better or worse) but at least it's "education".
I've had to repair tracks on snowy winter nights, and scorching summer days.
In a perfect world, we would place a call to Ordnance, and they'd rush out to help....
As I'm sure you're aware, it's just not so easy for some footslogger to "knock a track off" by jamming a steel bar into the track (while it's moving??).
As far as "vulnerable spots", readers must realize that, in the heat of battle, the TC seldom (if ever) has the luxury of placing those textbook shots.
As soon as you "acquire the target", you can assume he's probably also "acquired" you too. Then you've about 15 seconds to live, unless you can get off a relatively accurate round. Try for 'center of mass'. If you can hit him before he hits you, he'll either be dead, or at least shaken enough to give you time for a second shot. IIRC research has shown that the tank that gets off the first round
most often wins the encounter. First priority is to shoot the SOB and hope you get lucky, and have that next round "up!" and "on the way!" ASAP.
I thought this was about the biggest weakness of the armor but amazing video, new perspective!
Reddy23 thanks for watching!!
It is, there is a lot of armor covering the tracks, so the only way to take out a track is a well placed grenade or an AT mine.
would probably the shot trap under the turret front on the abrams and on russian mbts just the side would work
15:34 ”In russia, tank don’t push you, you push tank!”
yea but in usa you can't move tank like this will need 100 soldier
You can do the same with M1 Abrams. No where near a 100 soldiers but you do need more because it weighs more.
but Russian don't need that much soldier for m1 abrams they are strong. in this video Russian are young 22 y old
-_- Most soldiers around the world are 18 to 25 years of age. That's the age militaries generally look for. In fact people are strongest in their 20s and 30s.
Neurofied Yamato and the jokes just fly over his head like planes lol 😂
Press R for Repair :)
Franz Heger Hold F for 3 seconds
Franz Heger pilupino
Gone With The Wi
Press F to pay respect for all the tracks lost.
My father told me that the tracks were the biggest weakness of tanks and it made them vulnerable. He served in an engineer unit, laying/clearing mines and demolitions and never feared an enemy sending tanks (in Yugo there were tensions over Trieste being assigned to Italy but Tito didn't go to war over it).
The nice part about rubber tracks is that you can use 'fix a flat' on them.
Just stop at 7/11 and ask for KY and trojan.
my great uncle was in the German army during ww2 on the eastern front, and from what he told me and reading his books you never want to throw a track on a tank with overlapping wheels its a total nightmare, there pz4 wasnt bad, but the panthers they had in there units took at least two crews to get them moving again and parts were hard to get.
Then it would be a world end if it was on a Tiger XD I had read about those overlapping wheels. What the heck did they thinking on?
its that they wouldnt be disabled in the first place
kinda failed in that aspect
Overlapping wheels give a great cross country performance, the Panther probably has the best ride of any tank in WW2. From the viewpoint of a theorist it is the perfect solution, in the field not so much.
True
your right, he said they backfired and like to set themselves on fire, and the driveline was a nightmare to work on and maintain
The Beast, at about the 1 hour 33 minute and 50 second mark: "Out of commission become a pillbox, out of ammo become a bunker, out of time become heroes"
Gareth Thompson that’s the one! My mistake thanks for the correction sorry!!
You're welcome. To be fair you were trying to recite it from memory while I cheated and looked it up on my downloaded copy of the movie.
But Tracks are very good as add-on armor on my Panzer IIIM and Panzer IVH...
well in War Thunder
The British Army banned the use of spare tracks as additional armour during WW2 as it was found to help shot hits to dig in on sloped and oblique impacts that would otherwise have skated off.
Manganese steel track links are pretty soft when compared to Nickel-Vanadium-Chromium-Molybdenum-Iron-Carbon alloy armoured steel.
Like Andy Reid was saying it renders sloped armour essentially, flat armour. With the track being 'ridged' for grip if you slap that on the front of sloped armour, it'd grip the shell! Essentially working you own armour against yourself. Maybe on flat armour it could provide a small amount of protection but other than that I'd say it is a bad idea.
Fku world of tanks is better
Soo, how do you feel about the M1 comming to WT? :D
Mike Liu Let this crap finnaly die.
You were so right, tracks are relatively weak and WILL come off if you ever are part of an armoured force. The last tank should have cleaned off all the rock from the inside of the track as it got caught in everything and screwed it. My mate tore a final drive off a 55 ton tank and it got stuck above the next road wheel creating a bulge in the tank guards...gas torch job. At about 12 months into service in the Aust Army I rolled a track off at night so it was jammed as well as off. I had to fix it without lights, full tactical and wanted to punch the troop commander complaining about why we couldn't move into the correct position. We has no night vision so driving was all by feel and shadows. (Australian Amy Cav)
Tanks didn't learn from Achilles it seems
This video is absolutely right on.
Why do the games have the ridiculous repair button and don't throw tracks left and right? Because replacing tracks takes a long time and it's not fun. Nobody wants games that have long periods which are not fun :D
Vojtech Pribyl I know I know. But some games that claim “realism” need to be better at depicting this realistic action
No games with repair button should claim realism. That should be outlawed!
And that there is something that arma gets somewhat right over everyone else
There is a line, for example no one wants to be told that their Tiger just broke down because of a leaky gasket or in a RTSr that one of their platoons won't be fighting because their lieutenant got lost.
thats why they have something called a mobility kill
At 2:12 little tree owns tank. What a badass little tree.
Tanks knocking or otherwise damaging trees is an environmental issue in the USA because tanks, especially state national guard armor groups often use state and federal forest lands for training. In my part of FL the military is last I heard going to use our local Blackwater River State Forest land for training.
@David Parry
That's some pretty funny words right there!
Thanks for the laugh!
15:30 I'm surprised that those guys where able to push that tank!
They were on steroids. Lot of steroids😂😂😂
They re russian what do you expect
Russiand are strong,more Vodka blyat!
I really think it was because of the extremely great engineering, the bearings of the bogey wheels were great, and, yeah its not engaged to the engine/drive wheel so its basically tons of steel, rolling on big bearings
they are Russians what did you expect
Sir , a very good analysis. I was not a tanker ( I crewed a Chinook '70-'71 in the delta) but I have studied armor for years. The first Tigers went into action in the forests near Lenengrad. The Russia anti tank crews shot the tracks.
There's a reason overlapping road wheels aren't around anymore...
Stones and mud and wood jam in, harder to inspect and repair. More parts required adding to costs.
189 likes and 0 dislikes, good job!
Let me ruin your childhood memories))
For now, 4 mongs disliked this...
Check back more often. *Try 5.8K LIKES and under 300 Dislikes.* As of May 8, 2018
"no such things in games"
Mat ! THESE ARE GAMES ! THEY ARE MEANT TO BE FUUUUUUUUUUN !
Otherwise, buy a tank...
Fabulous, fantastic video, absolutely right about this, we were taught to go for the tracks and finish the tank off after it was sitting there immobile.
I can't say I had any desire to scream at my screen about the turret n gun still working. I found this vid really interesting and educational, you made your points well, in a clear and logical fashion and I loved the accompanying video which was something I'd never seen before and was well worth watching. That video alone was enough to get my to subscribe,, watching those guys fix their tanks or cripple them in another case, that was very cool, thank you, much appreciated.
I did not know that Canadians accept former UK soldier into their army reserves....
So do the Australians. It's an ex-empire thing.
jakekillify Oh, I did not know that. Thank you...
And US army accept Irish soldiers too ;)
Sami Sund: Well that explanation answer my question, thank you....
The British Army accept any commonwealth national and also Irish nationals
Quick question Matsimus. I'm really passionate about tanks and would like to serve on tanks. Someone recommended going in as a Armoured Corps Officer, any thoughts/suggestions?
The Standard Gopnik go for it man!! If it’s your passion
How long do you want to serve on them for? If you enter as a soldier (and get selected) then you can spend 15+ yrs on vehicles. If you enter as an Officer (and get selected) then you'll a couple of years on a vehicle as LT but as you move up, vehicle time decreases.
whya2ndaccount Thing is I'd really like to lead a tank platoon and vehicle time is nice but I'd do what I'm needed to do.
:) Given that you spelt "Armoured" the way you did, you should also call it a "Troop", not a "Platoon" - the recruiter then might start to help
whya2ndaccount Yeah probably should stop watching American vids.
Absolutely love your videos mate!!!
Dániel Kolonyi thanks man! Glad you like them!! Have a great day!!
first video i have seen for a long time that i "did not skip" any parts of.great job!
This is why we have things like Strykers (1126). You can lose a few wheels and keep rolling. Four is the minimum , just as long as they are not all on the same side. Awesome and insightful video.
Holy fuck as a US Army tanker myself. When it comes to breaking track and a driver throwing track if you have a really good crew, you can get that shit done in 45 minutes. But christ it is agonizing . That’s why you always PMCS.
Physically gruelling, and as you might expect nearly always happens in the worst possible terrain too.
45 minutes? Wow, that's fast. I thought it's mostly a 1-2 hour job depending on how mangled the wheels and sprockets are...
largol33t1. The road wheels and definitely the sprocket or idler need a shell hit or mine to cause substantial damage - they're pretty tough. Replacing a track pin or getting a tank back on it's track is an absolute pain but not too time consuming with 4 guys and the right equipment & taining.
Without watching this. I'd say an M kill by taking out their Tracks or resupply.
the weakest point of a tank is the point where there is no spaced armour or the point with the biggest angele,and the point where the ammo rack is
too much armor too
"what’s The Biggest Weakness on a Tank?" The meat sitting in/on the turret!
Why?Or what if tank dont have crew in tower?:)
I had to smile at 13:20 and the use of a T-bar and socket. After leaving Vietnam (1970) I sent my crew a 3/4” drive ratchet. I hope they enjoyed using it.
Good video, my fire engine driver had been an Abrams driver for the Army. From what I gathered, the Army thinks you should all be Superman when it comes to track maintenance and track repair. Destroyed his back having to do it by himself!!
"Don't ever do this" what you gonna stop me from rolling up several tons of tank tracks that I found at the road side?
I laughed at the warning @ 16:27 I was thinking the exact same thing.
Jason Reynolds no idea who made them do this but they are dumb.
Ah well... a fine warning, but over 35 years too late for me to heed.
it's painful to watch them
SaVAgE OG, you've never worked with a heavy machinery, have you? This track weighs more than all the people around combined and is very unstable. At every moment it can topple or start rolling which would result in a heavy injury or even death. There countless sad stories of people why tried to play with things that deserve caution, the saddest part of which is that most of these stories are true and repeat themselves over and over. Some people learn, some weren't so lucky.
You can play stupid when it is safe, you just don't if there is a real danger. Safety rules are written in blood.
So you want your tax money to be spent on morons, who got mutilated due their own stupidity and can not work now, don't you? How kind of you, good sir! :}
if it's over 40 tonnes then it's any bridge in a 2nd or 3rd world country.
Poland is a 2nd World country stil is using 60t Leopard 2PL tanks and PT-91 Twardy tank = 44t + train cart for each underinth. And all the brigfes are fine :)
Heroes&Generals dipicts the track problem quite well. The onely way to repair a destroyed the track is to get out take your wrench and fix the track. If you get shot in the proces the Tank is lost. And you will get shot because most of the time your track got taken out by some guy with a Panzerfaust ore a other tank (altough the mine scenario is also possible).
A: Any British tank's weakness is lower plate.
No its when they ran out of tea
Or an rpg 29 (back in 2005, that is)
@@captainshinysidesofthehmsb8900 None tank can take direct hit from RPG 29
MrKansai1 teghe Not necessarily true. The chally that took the RPG 29 to the lower plate and only injured the driver, not even killed. Considering how weak that lower plate is for the challenger, I can imagine the turret and front plates being able to mostly stop a frontal shot.
@@andrewcarpinella1217 If it was RPG 29 then I wish all Leo, Abrams, Chally, K2 Leclerc, Type10, etc could take it the way this Challenger 2 did. But I don't think it is a common case. The warhead of this "grenade" is a fcukin huge thing and it is just as potent when does its job. Don't remember exactly but I think Challenger 2 in Iraq was a battlefield ready - heavily up-armored. like such:
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Challenger_2_Main_Battle_Tank_patrolling_outside_Basra%2C_Iraq_MOD_45148325.jpg
Opposite to regular one:
upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/7c/Challenger2-Bergen-Hohne-Training-Area-2b.jpg
RPG 29 makes a hole equal to 500mm of RHA - the one from the '90s
Better be a pillbox than completely knocked out.
Da comrade?
Fantastic video. Great footage and commentary!!!
Very informative
I like the concept of rubber tracks, but wouldn't HE shells completely devour them?
They're going to be hit by RPG's and IED's long before a HE shell goes anywhere near them. But yeah, they don't sound very reliable.
Though I'm not an expert so just don't know.
From the company making these rubber tracks "Rubber Band Tracks are made with grade 5 rubber and reinforced with Kevlar fibre, a lightweight and non-flammable compound that protects against RPGs and high temperatures in harsh environments. Their carbon nanotubes confer twice the durability of steel tracks."
I think that the big problem with rubber tracks will be repairing them, or more to say, replacing them. With the current linked track system when the track is damaged all you have to do to repair is remove the damaged section(s) and replace it/them with new ones. With a one piece track if the track is damaged you're likely going to need to replace the entire thing. Granted that with current tracks there's still a lot of work involved in getting the track hooked back up but logisitically it seems to me that it would be easier to carry a bunch of spare track links rather than entire tracks, as it is, a tank can carry several spare links but I don't think that they'd be able to carry entire spare tracks.
If they talk about using rubber, then it's probably some super advanced, complex composite material. Seems to be the way to go whereever steel or other metal alloys fail.
@riceball it could be linked rubber sections. who knows. would make logical sense to do so at least, also putting on a whole track would be a maintenance nightmare
M1 Abrams: Aahh, I lost my tracks!
M88 Hercules: Someone called for a tow truck?
The biggest weakness of any tank is logistics. MBTs use on average 1000L of fuel each day. Not only is it easier do destroy a fuel tanker, but that one tanker will supply a full squadron of tanks every single day. Five fuel tankers destroyed and an entire tank regiment is grounded. Destroy the supply line & there are no tanks, hence why UK & US are scrapping tanks in favour of helicopters
the soft meat of the crew or the tracks
I'd argue a tanks biggest weakness is its crew. A tank has many weak spots is its tracks, its barrel and top hatches the rest tends to be quite well armored and well designed. However a poorly trained crew or cowardly crew can lose without ever being fired upon or worse fire upon its allies. A trained and supplied crew can repair its tracks and hold despite being surrounded and outnummbred. But nowadays I don't know how modern tanks really would fare in a "fair" fight. A modern MBT can eat RPG-7's and other explosives all day , but what happens to it if it gets hit by a NLAW, Javelin or other modern day RPG /ATGM? Will it be a hole and the crew bails from smoke and fear or will it be Sherman M4's all over again , fuel cooking crew alive or ammo blowing the turrets sky high? I know a lot of people say that the shield between the loader and the ammo storage is good enough to save the crew but I have my doubts of how well a modern MBT can handle a penetrating hit in the ammo rack or internal fuel tanks , its probably one of the things that haven't changed since the days of 1940's.
Hitting the cupolas/top hatches would barely do anything, also I wouldn't wan't to be outside a tank repairing the tracks when outnumbered, especially not while being fired upon.
A shot into the commander cupola/hatch from a elevated position would prob kill all the crew. People tend to think of tanks fighting on even ground ,its often one side attacking up/downhill into a prepared kill zone unless its a complete breakthrough that shatters every one.
A modern MBT should have effective APS. below-the-turret-ring.blogspot.com/2017/01/hardkill-aps-overview.html
Seeing that final abrams with mine atachment got me thinking. If you had a remote activated minefield without the enemy knowing and know exactly its boundarys it should be easy to lure tanks into in and blow them up, because they didnt know there was mines there, they havent exploded. Yet.
How do you think I.E.D.'s work? Just one phone call away of a imobilized armored collum.
Sure, if you have really dumb tankers, who cant recognize a potential minefield location. Mine fields are seldom detected by mines exploding, but by detection equipment, after the first tank encounters and evaluates the terrain.
I crewed an M270 in the US Army. You are absolutely correct. The tracks can be at times worst than woman. Sensitive and finicky. By in large, tracks are primarily meant to go forward and backwards. The stresses a track suffers when turning is serious. In fact, we actually had to track how many turns we would take during training exercises. Typically, if you had more than 100 turns in a training exercise, when we returned to base, we replaced the tracks. I was blown away by how expensive and how weak they are. In effect, we didn't go out for a spin. Treat with kit gloves and pray its nice to you.
I've always thought that the track was a big weakness and wondered why it wasn't shown more. Movies are not realistic but just what the viewer accepts. I didn't know any of these details. Thanks for a good video.
This may be a dumb question, but, since a tank steers by varying the power output between the two tracks, wouldn't having a track destroyed cause it to constantly turn, as opposed to only being able to go back and forth?
liam sargo you can have one side in neutral. So you can go straight, till you can't.
Lose a teack on one side of a traditional drive system and all the power will go to the final drive that has lost a track, you have to brake the final drive on the side that has lost a track and that allows you limited forward or backward movement but no ability to turn.
Ah, thanks. Have a great day.
liam sargo remember that the damaged track still causes friction with the ground, drive wheels dont work así regular wheels, look at it like limping, but while draging a lot of weight
Lock your differential.
tank has a power wheel on the rear which is not in contact with the ground so if the tracks are damaged it cant go nowhere.
unless you have cristie suspension
Thanks for stating the obvious Adolf.
In Legoland we're able click the wheels into each other like gears, in case the tracks failed. too bad you're not from there...
Lol, 9:06 was the Abrams at Tankfest NW, i remember watching the new modern tank breakdown while the 70 year old ones ran fine
They don’t really push the old ones like they do the modern ones
I think a combat invincible Track would be one constructed out of 3 tracks per side one after the other where each segment consists of a double roadwheel bogey and a return roller/tensioner ( think Sherman ) and every roadwheel is actually powered by an electric motor inside with those being fed juice by an Engine Generator Powerpack combo. If you hit a mine you'll you'll only lose 1/3 of the track available to you on one side though I'm not sure how a turning radius would be affected. Well... If you go that far you could go with active suspension allowing for the first and last roadwheel to be lifted thus creating a more 1:1 length to width ratio instead of a 2:1 one? Just a thought.
It used to be the underbelly and sides but the tank has seen improvements over time including increase in armour thickness and the introduction of reactionary armour plates
Joseph conrad SA those still are weakspots. Tracks are just big weakspots because they can be shot from any side. The russians used to shoot the track of a moving tiger with one tank to jam it and get it to expose its flank against its will to another russian tank
Joseph conrad SA, with research of better armour protection, will also lead to research of better weapons/ways to go past that protection. I mean, now you had said reactive armour, there is a AT weapon or round where it "uses" the reactive armour's ability against itself. Like a two step detonation. One for "activation" of the armour, then second one to move the "round" through that armour. No matter what research you will do to protect the crew in a tank, will there still be someone to find a way to go around it
Or, you could have a camera recognize the missile as tandem and tel the blocks to activate the second or third time
Joseph conrad SA Actually side armor of MBTs are extremely weak but tracks are just easier because you can take the tracks out from any direction.
If an equal force engages you, the old weakness are still pretty similar as you never have infinite weight/armor capacity.
Just as armor changed munitions followed, reaction armor had multi warheads developed as a result which destroy it.
Tank's biggest weakness: Tracks
BT-5: *Wait*
Hahahahah finally
drones
Mat what do you about adding skirt armor for side? Like in ww2 where panzer 4 had skirt armor for sides and hull
BerserkJasonVoorhees Like many still have
Several AMAP and RUAG side armor solutions are already in service in many militaries.
Chaz t i mean like skirt armor that would cover whole side with rlly rlly thick armor
1.bp.blogspot.com/-8GpR7h6sUbc/WCtmUnLkjzI/AAAAAAAAATc/4ZyE-Kt223gtTSH92nApDqXJ7IImLZYJgCLcB/s1600/Panzerung%2BAMAP%2Bgegen%2BRPG.png
Jonny thats i said whole side. Including tracks
Thank you and appreciate the effort to transfer knowledge to others. Cheers.
incredible repair job nice improvisation
A bigger tank
We have to build ERA tracks ! xD
So they detonate on their own? What.
Jonny how about NERA
Lol...maybe you should tell it to da Russkis, I am preetty sure they are more than likely to eat up yuo idea, without any hesitation :P
YEAH MATE, AUSTRALIA MATE WE DESTROY THE TREES
That Guy triggered much??..... lol
Nahhhh....... I just don’t like trees.
Surprised this didn't become a scandal in the media. The ADF has been touting their environmental policy to the general public for as a long as I can remember. They are in violation of their own policy:
www.defence.gov.au/estatemanagement/Governance/Policy/Environment/Default.asp
INB4 - not triggered
Except it’s an American crew. The aussies train the American crews all the time.
Relatively old footage. The vehicle just on the left of the screen is an M113A1 (as shown by the headlights), so the footage predates the introduction of the M113AS4.
But yeah, Australian armour training is all about driving through trees. The M1A1 has a thermal sight for the crew commander's weapon (the 50cal). They cost about half million each so I am told. In US service they are just there. In Australian service they designed and fitted steel protective covers because the crews kept destroying them with trees.
You're right. They really gotta work on that. And as a Filipino aspiring to design an indigenous, Philippine MBT, I will include that to the potential challenges that I'll face. Anyway thanks for the vids. I learned a lot from it.
An Abrams comes across an immobilized Abrams.
Running Abrams Driver: How are you guys doing?
Disabled Abrams Driver: Oh, just sieging. Go on, my boy, have fun.
Fix to the biggest weakness: Christie suspension
OK before I watch this video I'm gonna try and guess...
Gunner view, Back of the Hull, Under the gun or shot trap.
I predict that in the near future, MECHs will almost completely replace tanks. They will use thick graphene or something similar to lightly, but heavily armor these manned or unmanned robots and they will have all the destructive firepower as a tank. They will use micro-fusion or fission batteries eliminating the need to refuel. We are soon at the point where lasers will be powerful enough to burn through thick steel at a high rate, so I predict that some will be equipped with those, and others will be equipped with guns and explosive projectiles. Of course, with an element like graphene, the light armor may be subject-able to powerful lasers (no one can be sure just yet), so others will simply be armored with thick, layered titanium alloy or a heavier metal like-well-I'm not sure which but just open the periodic table and find heavy+abundant. They may just layer the graphene even thicker. The weaknesses will be the MECHs joints, and of course the small thick glass eye sockets. Modern science fiction is the future of warfare.
From my experience in 2nd AD. Fuel is the largest limitation, you have to have a good refuel supply or your unit grins to a halt.
drones finished the tank
Very good description why tanks on the battlefield will be done, the moment drones are able aiming at this weakness. Just a detail about combat drones. =)
The biggest weakness of a tank is it track, just a goddamn mine and we will have 3-5 human BBQ inside an expensive BBQ oven with a flame made by RPG and others anti tank missile :V
Wasnt it something that the german soldiers called the M4 Sherman for "petrol cookers" during the war?
khang nguyen good that abrams has a good compartment for the ammo and a fire extinguisher in case of fires.. would help
Clinton Walsh IIRC, fire suppression system of Abrams use halogen gas... It is poisonous.
Daniel Jensen
*tommy cooker
war thunder is ok at dealing with a damaged track as it will take a long time to repair there's no instant repair
Takes about 40sec
depends on what you're in
i think that earlyer if you had no repair kit researched in simulator battles, and someone blew you'r track off, then you'r only option was to repair on captured point, basicly gg at that point
No instant repair, takes substantially less time than an actual track replacement, and you don't lose your entire crew when something decides to spray your position with machine gun fire during repair.
Tank Repair ... great idea for a new computer game.
Tank Repair Simulator 2018
:D
2/10 would rather repair a real tank than playing this lol
Things that come to mind: There was that one M1A2 that defeated an Iraqi tank platoon turning in circles after one track was knocked out. That is not a situation you want to be.
There was part of a documentary showing a Tiger II tank being moved and restored in modern times. One of the things they had to do was some battlefield repair. Cut away some damage from the hull. Remove a 75 mm round from the between the hull and track. De-track the road wheels. Finnish cutting the spur of metal away from the hull. Re-track the road wheels. This was accomplished so the old tank could be pulled into the restoration garage. Their final goal was to restore The Tiger II to running order. Labor of love. :-D
I would have to agree with the author of this article. I have some experience in testing military tracked vehicles, including long-term durability testing on a rubber track system and testing various track configurations on other vehicles. The first incident I witnessed was an M113 variant which dropped a track at high speed, then travelled about 50 ft, turned 90 degrees to the left as directional control was lost, drove through a ditch, and into a chain-link fence. I was also testing a Leopard I which dropped a track twice one day, as the coupling bolts were not adjusted properly. The instant the track drops, directional control is lost and the vehicle is immobilized. Tracks are fragile and everything depends on them.
One day we will be able to am,e them hover, like the hover tanks in “Hammers Slammers”. Great novel. SciFi.
Why were german soldiers marching behind an SU-85
probs captured
Initial Thicc have thought of that but there were no markings on the tank that show it was german
Im an infantryman but I’ve worked closely with tanks in the past. I always thought that if I needed to disable a tank I’d go for the optics and antennas.
That would really makes sense as it's just like blinding a beast, although the commander can still peek out the hatch.
Its pretty hard to hit them
There are auxiliary sights that don't require power. There are also iron sights aligned with the cannon or barrel axis. Without an antenna, radios can still transmit pretty decent range. At least to the next tank in the platoon which shouldn't be too far away. Your best bet would be to disable it's suspension or fire some type of anti-tank missile that could disable the turret movement. You are pretty much toast if they crew sees you out the periscopes.
I'm not in the military but if I ever am I probably wouldn't feel comfortable trying that if I wasn't operating a sniper or sharpshooter.
Even then I wouldn't take a second shot, probably.
An immobilized tank just becomes a bunker with artillery and a machine gun nest.
Awesome! I wrote this before you brought up this point lol