Military Review

"Abrams" burn in Yemen more often than other tanks

74
The war in Yemen differs from many recent military conflicts in recent years. tanks different generations, including those released more than 70 years ago, writes Rossiyskaya Gazeta.


"Abrams" burn in Yemen more often than other tanks


In the south of the Arabian Peninsula, for the first time, the Leclerc tanks acquired by the UAE from France passed combat tests. They performed quite well. For all the time of the conflict, not a single car was lost. True, the other, more previously brainchild of the French tankoprom - AMX-30 - was easily tweaked by anti-Hussites.

“Things are much worse for Abrams.” We can say that the American car - the record for losses. In total, according to various sources, the Saudi army has lost more than two dozen tanks supplied from the United States. In this regard, M1A2 even surpassed its “countryman” M-60-3, as well as T-72 of various modifications, T-80BB and even the “old man” T-34-85, ”the article says.

By the way, the latter are still actively used in combat operations - images of these tanks released during the Great Patriotic War regularly appear on the Internet. Previously published staffon which the T-34-85 is firing at the forces of the Arab coalition.

Nevertheless, according to experts, despite the tarnished reputation, the Abrams continue to be “a very dangerous opponent on the battlefield, and the Saudi tank crew’s lack of professionalism, as well as their low morale, do not allow them to fully realize all the possibilities.” cars.

As for the “thirty-fours,” they survive due to competent application. Crews, in fact, use guerrilla tactics: “they open fire and in time leave from the enemy’s retaliatory attacks”. As a result, to date, data on the destruction of T-34 in Yemen have not been reported.
Photos used:
https://lytkin-pavel.livejournal.com
74 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Saburov
    Saburov 24 January 2018 14: 36
    30
    Not tanks fight, but people.
    1. Sharky
      Sharky 24 January 2018 14: 39
      20
      Not tanks fight, but people.

      And yet, the performance characteristics of the tank is an important aspect hi.
      1. 210ox
        210ox 24 January 2018 14: 42
        11
        In skillful hands, this “Abrams” is a serious opponent.
        Quote: Sharky
        Not tanks fight, but people.

        And yet, the performance characteristics of the tank is an important aspect hi.
        1. Anarchist
          Anarchist 24 January 2018 14: 57
          24
          Did they ignore Hitler’s order so that they wouldn’t enter the battle with the t-34?
          1. Viktor.N.Aleksandrov.
            Viktor.N.Aleksandrov. 24 January 2018 15: 08
            18
            In my opinion, the order concerned the IS-2, not the T-34
          2. Omskgasmyas
            Omskgasmyas 25 January 2018 09: 34
            +2
            The invulnerability of the T-34 and KB-1 was greatly exaggerated by propaganda. Even for the 41 year.
        2. Alex777
          Alex777 24 January 2018 17: 34
          +1
          Yes, IMHO, the Saramis have much more Abrams than other tanks. Here are the statistics and skewed. hi
          1. Berkut-UA
            Berkut-UA 25 January 2018 01: 33
            +3
            There are no statistics here.
            1. If there are 2 or 3 T-34s and 50-60 Abrams in this variety of different tanks, then it is clear that 20 Abrams will kill and 34 matches not.
            2. Americans constantly repeat that Abrams are better than T-72 (on the war in Iraq)
            But then again - it’s not the tanks who decide which is better, but the crews. Land American tankers with a reserve of 400 hours of trainings per year on the T-64 - T-55 and Arabs with a train of 40 - 45 hours a year on the Abrams and Leopards - and the Arabs will lose
            So the point is not in the T-34 against Abrams but in the training of crews
            1. Metallurg_2
              Metallurg_2 25 January 2018 20: 36
              +4
              Americans constantly repeat that Abrams are better than T-72 (on the war in Iraq)

              Let us recall that in 1991 the Iraqi tankmen in their ammunition had only 3BM9 - a whole-cast-iron horror on the wings of the night, which in the SA was used only as training ammunition and was withdrawn from service in 1973.
              If the Iraqis would have had modern at that time cumulative ammunition and guided missiles - oh, the Yankees would not have said hello. True, after evaluating the results of all the Arab-Israeli wars, our high strategists at the General Staff decided that giving the Arabs something more modern than 3BM9 just wasn’t necessary - because, as they say, how many Arabs you don’t arm, but you won’t be able to make them brave .. In general, then the stupid ones mercilessly merged the illiquid assets and saved on disposal.
      2. The black
        The black 24 January 2018 14: 42
        +3
        Everything that contains organic substances burns well .... apparently the crew poops a lot for themselveswassat
      3. NEXUS
        NEXUS 24 January 2018 14: 46
        16
        Quote: Sharky
        And yet, the performance characteristics of the tank is an important aspect.

        He’s not breaking through! wassat There uranium armor and the thickness of the frontal sheets under a meter! wassat Yemenis apparently have a laser or they invented plasma weapons. laughing
        1. Sharky
          Sharky 24 January 2018 14: 53
          +7
          He’s not breaking through!

          Will you go on a frontal attack on the T-34 against the Abrams? I think the answer is obvious.
          And the side armor of any tank is weaker than the frontal. I also don’t like the Yankees, but their tank breaks into the forehead weakly, that's a fact. And to go on board or in the stern - this still needs to be managed hi.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 24 January 2018 14: 56
            14
            Quote: Sharky
            Will you go on a frontal attack on the T-34 against the Abrams?

            And why, if there is a Cornet?
            Quote: Sharky
            And the side armor of any tank is weaker than the frontal.

            A steamed abrash with “impenetrable” armor also turns out to burn no worse than 72-ek. At the same time, I remember the first time the wounded Abrams in Iraq were evacuated very quickly, so that God forbid that the secret of their armor would come to us.
            1. Sharky
              Sharky 24 January 2018 15: 04
              +5
              Why the hell

              Well, you cheated on my phrase: and yet, TTX is an important aspect, as it seemed to me (you highlighted it). Therefore, I gave you a corresponding example.
              1. Dreamboat
                Dreamboat 24 January 2018 15: 29
                +3
                If Abrams has no shells, easily. .. soldier
        2. Warrior with machine gun
          Warrior with machine gun 24 January 2018 15: 16
          +8
          hyperballoid engineer Al-Garin)))
        3. Kent0001
          Kent0001 24 January 2018 16: 35
          +3
          Well, yes, it’s called RPG-7, among other things.))) wink
        4. akribos
          akribos 24 January 2018 21: 32
          +1
          In fairness, it should be noted. The Arab Abrams lacks uranium armor.
      4. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 24 January 2018 14: 53
        16
        Quote: Sharky
        And yet, the performance characteristics of the tank is an important aspect hi.

        No performance characteristics helped the Iraqis: in the last century they gave them the T-72 — they abandoned them, in this century they gave them “abrams” —and they abandoned them.
        1. Sharky
          Sharky 24 January 2018 14: 56
          +5
          I didn’t write anywhere that learning and the will to win with the crew is not important. Simple, you always need to add that a good crew needs a good car good.
          1. Orionvit
            Orionvit 24 January 2018 16: 32
            +3
            Any technique is only as good as people own it.
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 24 January 2018 14: 54
      +8
      Quote: Saburov
      Not tanks fight, but people.

      Saudi tankman said. leaving burning abrams
      1. Sharky
        Sharky 24 January 2018 18: 16
        0
        Saudi tankman said. leaving burning abrams

        Or simply, leaving the Abrams worker, because it is crippled after the rebound of the blank laughing.
  2. The comment was deleted.
    1. marline
      marline 24 January 2018 14: 39
      +5
      Quote: Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
      to date, data on the destruction of the T-34 in Yemen have been reported.

      So the T-34 is cooler than Abrams?

      The article also says: the whole thing is laying between the levers and the seat. smile
      1. Aristarkh Lyudvigovich
        Aristarkh Lyudvigovich 24 January 2018 14: 42
        +4
        Quote: merlin
        it's all about laying between the levers and the seat

        Yes, the Arabs are still those warriors.
    2. Chertt
      Chertt 24 January 2018 14: 59
      0
      In the video, the Uzbek mother swears laughing laughing
      1. Razvedka_Boem
        Razvedka_Boem 24 January 2018 16: 46
        +3
        In the video, the Uzbek mother swears

        Where? Show that frame. Or apologize.
        1. Chertt
          Chertt 24 January 2018 16: 53
          +2
          Quote: Razvedka_Boem
          Or apologize.

          Sorry
        2. The comment was deleted.
  3. 210ox
    210ox 24 January 2018 14: 40
    +4
    Arabs can vulgarize any technique ..
    1. NOMADE
      NOMADE 24 January 2018 14: 50
      +4
      What can’t you say about t-34-85)) The Arabs are smart there, they want to live and are not in a hurry to go to the guri, so they don’t rely on “armor”. Life and the camel will teach hi
      But Leclerc surprised, despite the cost and problems with the electrics, a good tank turned out. Although .., maybe there are "laying" others, or the cost is holding back. According to the abrams, you can rely heavily on the frontal armor and the stigma of the “best tank” and throw it on your forehead without thinking? From that and the consequences?
      1. marline
        marline 24 January 2018 15: 09
        +4
        Quote: NOMADE
        Although .., maybe there are "laying" others, or the cost is holding back.

        I read the opinions of Western experts that the Emirates protected the tanks, and the direction in which they operated was less saturated with anti-tank systems ...
        So yes ... the whole thing is in the "laying".
        1. Orionvit
          Orionvit 24 January 2018 16: 36
          +2
          Quote: merlin
          So yes ... the whole thing is in the "laying".

          Excuse me, but tactics? A "competent" staff officer, alone, can expose at least a hundred tanks, even with good crews. However, I agree, among the Arabs, even the most modern technology either works poorly or does not work at all. This was told to me by my father's classmate at a military school, who in the late 80s was an adviser in Yemen.
      2. Paranoid50
        Paranoid50 24 January 2018 15: 12
        11
        Quote: NOMADE
        But Leclerc surprised

        Duc, the Emirates as they entered Yemen, they left, moreover, very quickly. They simply did not manage to lose a single Leclerc. Something like this. request
      3. Sanichsan
        Sanichsan 24 January 2018 16: 50
        +4
        Quote: NOMADE
        But Leclerc surprised, despite the cost and problems with the electrics, a good tank turned out.

        Not certainly in that way. he just almost never participated in battles smile It was used as an art installation with a maximum distance and it seems to be only 1 time. that’s the whole secret of survivability. hi
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 24 January 2018 14: 54
      +2
      The ambush is that in this case, the Arabs are just burning “Abrams”. smile And the hodgepodge is fighting for the coalition.
      It is not only a matter of nationality, but also of motivation and combat experience.
  4. Dzmicer
    Dzmicer 24 January 2018 14: 48
    +1
    It's not about the performance characteristics of the machine, but about how it is used. The Saudis are still “warriors”.
  5. Alexey RA
    Alexey RA 24 January 2018 14: 50
    13
    Abrams’s situation is much worse. We can say that the American car is the record holder for losses. In total, according to various sources, the Saudi army lost more than two dozen tanks delivered from the United States. In this regard, M1A2 even surpassed its "countryman" M-60A3, as well as T-72 of various modifications, T-80BV and even the "old man" T-34-85

    To the absolute figures of losses, it would be nice to know the figures for the availability of equipment of each of the types on the theater.
    Otherwise, it turns out that the tank will be the most invulnerable, the whole conflict standing in the hangar at the base. smile
  6. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 24 January 2018 14: 55
    +2
    Yes, at the striatum - wherever you poke ... If you use one measure at all, it seems to be great, but as an adequate adversary - so a nose from your nose. And this applies to technology.
  7. san4es
    san4es 24 January 2018 14: 57
    +2
    “Things are much worse with Abrams. We can say that the American car is the record holder for losses.

    ... These read the article and rushed to sculpt DZ bully

    ... US Army in Germany
    April 2017
    1. NOMADE
      NOMADE 24 January 2018 16: 10
      +1
      Xs, I’m not special, but apart from the “boxes” that were mounted in the area of ​​the building under the tower, I didn’t see it, they hung screens. Yes, and there are doubts about the boxes, in view of their thickness and weight, they are similar to the passive protection of composites (sandwich ceramics, polyether)
    2. ronnon
      ronnon 25 January 2018 13: 42
      +1
      Abrasha himself, the tank is not easy, but there will only be more than a ton of bolts and fasteners, if you hold it wherever you are at the block post like a bunker, it’s just hard to imagine “crossing the river” to force it
      1. Conserp
        Conserp 25 January 2018 15: 59
        0
        Abrams in Iraq failed to weigh the concrete bridge.

        http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com
        /article/2003/Mar/26/ln/ln11a.html

        And how many times he paved the way and fell into a ditch - the entire Internet with pictures was clogged.
  8. Piramidon
    Piramidon 24 January 2018 14: 58
    +6
    Well, Duc, in terms of advertising, striped ahead of the rest. We with our - "Fly Aeroflot" and "Keep money in a savings bank" - kindergarten-pants-on-straps.
  9. Egorovich
    Egorovich 24 January 2018 15: 00
    +5
    laughing That's why the "best" tank in the world, like the Abrams, burns better and brighter than all its competitors. good
  10. san4es
    san4es 24 January 2018 15: 03
    +5
    Reservation RPG-7 vs M1 Abrams
    1. SASHA OLD
      SASHA OLD 24 January 2018 17: 46
      +3
      alkonaftera why here ..? a monarchist and a lover to take on what he absolutely does not cut
      1. san4es
        san4es 24 January 2018 18: 20
        0
        Quote: SASHA OLD
        ... he absolutely does not cut

        ... And who beats? .. Who do you recommend?
        1. SASHA OLD
          SASHA OLD 19 June 2019 14: 58
          +1
          Quote: san4es
          ..And who beats? .. Who do you advise?

          serious channels are not a reviewer of this, it is better with a technical orientation, I don’t know which ones exactly, but definitely not Alco
    2. The comment was deleted.
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. The comment was deleted.
  11. BAI
    BAI 24 January 2018 15: 05
    +4
    In this regard, M1A2 even surpassed its "countryman" M-60A3, as well as T-72 of various modifications, T-80BV and even the "old man" T-34-85 ",

    And in percentage terms? How many Abrams are there and how many T-34s? If there is 1 (ONE) T-34 and he survived, what is it after that invulnerable?
  12. Herculesic
    Herculesic 24 January 2018 15: 13
    +2
    They are not so simple Hausites, since they learned to fight at T34 without losing more than one tank!
  13. _Ugene_
    _Ugene_ 24 January 2018 15: 15
    +3
    Well that’s it, they will now argue that the Abrams are worse than the T-34-85. Maybe Abramsov just fights the most, so they beat him the most?
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 25 January 2018 00: 39
      0
      Quote: _Ugene_
      Well that’s it, they will now argue that the Abrams are worse than the T-34-85. Maybe Abramsov just fights the most, so they beat him the most?

      Those. unequivocally only Soviet / Russian tanks can be bad, what kind of "excuse" only Israeli Jews can come up with ....
      1. _Ugene_
        _Ugene_ 25 January 2018 09: 23
        +1
        no, you just need to try to assess the situation objectively, otherwise all these screams like “Abrams bullshit, its RPG7 is easy to beat, and the T-72 is cool” look very childish
  14. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 24 January 2018 15: 18
    +7
    Amrams (up to the latest markups: “protective set” (Tank Urban Survival Kit -TUSK) and “trophy”) -
    good anti-tank agent. For the counter-guerrilla struggle
    he does not fit well.
    1. Incvizitor
      Incvizitor 24 January 2018 16: 22
      +3
      For counter-guerrilla warfare, it is not suitable.

      For other purposes, they don’t seem to be using them now, for a long time there were no tank battles and are unlikely to be, there everything will be decided by aviation.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 24 January 2018 22: 22
        0
        In 2003 were. And in them the Abrams showed themselves excellently. Since they were prepared for the oncoming battle. It will be difficult to guess whether or not. There were tank shootings in the Donbass, as
        Aviation was not used. In 1973, tankers were in the Golan in general: only tanks and nothing else. Also - er. aviation was occupied against Egypt and did not help the tankers.
        1. MOSKVITYANIN
          MOSKVITYANIN 25 January 2018 00: 36
          +1
          voyaka uh
          In 2003 were. And in them the Abrams showed themselves excellently.

          Can you link about tank battles with the participation of "Abrams" in 2003?
    2. Alexey RA
      Alexey RA 24 January 2018 19: 11
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      Amrams (up to the latest markups: “protective set” (Tank Urban Survival Kit -TUSK) and “trophy”) -
      good anti-tank agent. For the counter-guerrilla struggle
      he does not fit well.

      Duc ... it was made for another war - in which the hordes of T-64 and T-80 were supposed to rush through Fulda Gap to Europe.
    3. ronnon
      ronnon 25 January 2018 13: 47
      0
      It’s just a comfortable bunker wherever you are at the checkpoint, but as a tank for maneuver and breakthrough, it’s unlikely that with such weight, but in the swamps ...
  15. Alexander 3
    Alexander 3 24 January 2018 15: 34
    +9
    Oh, right now, I’ll shoot from the sofa .......
    1. san4es
      san4es 24 January 2018 16: 17
      +4
      Quote: Alexander 3
      Oh, right now, I’ll shoot from the sofa .......

      ... Caution ... that the bottom does not knock wink
  16. Altona
    Altona 24 January 2018 15: 52
    +3
    Quote: Saburov
    Not tanks fight, but people.

    ----------------------------
    Well, there are a lot of fans on the forum who measure steel phallus. And with rapture to paint than one finger stick will be able to beat another.
  17. Altona
    Altona 24 January 2018 15: 53
    +1
    Quote: _Ugene_
    Well that’s it, they will now argue that the Abrams are worse than the T-34-85. Maybe Abramsov just fights the most, so they beat him the most?

    -----------------------------------
    In your opinion, the T-34-85 still remains the best tank of all time. laughing laughing
  18. Altona
    Altona 24 January 2018 15: 55
    +4
    Quote: voyaka uh
    Amrams (up to the latest markups: “protective set” (Tank Urban Survival Kit -TUSK) and “trophy”) -
    good anti-tank agent. For the counter-guerrilla struggle
    he does not fit well.

    --------------------------------
    But do not care. Tactics must be properly developed and applied. And that was a lot of universal enthusiasm for the fact that Russian tanks were knocked out in Grozny, although many tanks received several hits from the RPG and still managed to get out of the battle.
  19. Altona
    Altona 24 January 2018 16: 00
    +2
    Quote: BAI
    And in percentage terms? How many Abrams are there and how many T-34s? If there is 1 (ONE) T-34 and he survived, what is it after that invulnerable?

    ---------------------------------
    This means that the tankers are working on it correctly, have developed good tactics, skillfully hide and how our grandfathers beat Abrashka in the barrel like our grandfathers of the Tigers 75 years ago.
  20. Nemesis
    Nemesis 24 January 2018 16: 48
    +1
    At Leclerci today is one of the best artillery pieces in the world, but armor is still in question ...
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 25 January 2018 00: 32
      0
      Quote: Nemesis
      At Leclerci today is one of the best artillery pieces in the world, but armor is still in question ...

      Apparently to the armor, there are just no questions, because not one has yet been knocked out ....
      1. Nemesis
        Nemesis 25 January 2018 10: 08
        0
        Well, the T-34, too, has not yet been knocked out, and not at all because of the strength of their armor ...
  21. NF68
    NF68 24 January 2018 18: 00
    +1
    Maybe the reason that the Abrams often burn is also because the Abrams are used more often than other types of tanks. Or this is due to the large total volume of fuel tanks.
    1. MOSKVITYANIN
      MOSKVITYANIN 25 January 2018 00: 32
      +4
      Quote: NF68
      Maybe the reason that the Abrams often burn is also because the Abrams are used more often than other types of tanks. Or this is due to the large total volume of fuel tanks.

      Well, tank cemeteries, according to you and NATO experts, can only consist of T-72, but no matter how tanks of empirialist powers, it’s only a pity that the Hussites do not know about this with their old Soviet TCP ...
      1. Conserp
        Conserp 25 January 2018 16: 10
        +3
        As the T-72 was knocked out somewhere, they screamed at once on the entire Internet that "teshki shovel shit!"

        As the Abrams began to knock out - howling at once that "only the training of crews is important!" etc.

        The double standard is the support and hope of every liberal and Americanophile.
  22. MOSKVITYANIN
    MOSKVITYANIN 25 January 2018 00: 29
    +2
    T-34-85

    A tank of all time ...
  23. Slon_on
    Slon_on 25 January 2018 08: 50
    +1
    You can talk as much as you like about the superiority of some tanks over others and compare their poles and minuses. The question is the motivation of those in the "beyond space", the Hussites of this motivation above the roof - the life or death of the entire population. The Saudis, being Wahhabis fiercely hate them, much more than us - "infidels". Yes, and do not discount the wit and luck in the war. D. Loza in his memoirs wrote how two "Matilda" with 40 mm guns punished the "Tiger".
  24. Karnaval tm
    Karnaval tm 25 January 2018 18: 54
    0
    You watch the Abrams so hard laughing