Military Review

МХNUMX "Abrams". Fighting

138
МХNUMX "Abrams". Fighting


Unlike its older brothers M48 and M60, M1 did not have a chance to fight on the battlefield. For the first time, Abrams sniffed gunpowder in 1982.

According to the story of a Soviet military adviser who was taking part in the training of Syrian tankers who had just arrived in Syria Tanks T-72, this incident occurred during a break-in march by three T-72 tanks in the region of Southern Lebanon shortly before the Israeli aggression against this country (Operation Peace Halle). The column, moving along the road, went around a large hill, and when the first tank, in which the narrator was located, began to leave the hill, he unexpectedly discovered at an distance of about 800 meters three unknown tanks that were not similar to Israeli ones. These tanks also moved in a convoy and, finding Syrian vehicles, quickly began to rebuild in line for the attack. Unknown vehicles were the first to fire, our third tank, which had just left the hill, got into the tower. The tank didn’t penetrate the projectile, however, due to a strong dynamic impact, the car died out. The crew at the same time received a medium concussion. The second enemy tank, firing almost immediately with the first shot, hit the T-72 medium tank in the convoy in the stern compartment, disabling the engine.

Seeing such aggressive behavior of strangers, the narrator, being the commander of the tank, gave the order to open fire on the rightmost tank and after its defeat on the middle one. Here, the adviser noted the high proficiency of the Syrian gunner, who did not allow any delay during aiming and firing. It was decided to use BPS. Having made two shots with an interval of approximately 7 seconds, we achieved two hits, both of which hit the towers. The third tank, which remained intact, retreated behind the two wounded, tried to evacuate the wounded and killed. However, I could not completely do this, since the T-72 opened fire from a coaxial machine gun. Having taken the wounded, the unknown tank quickly retreated. Arriving at the wrecked vehicles and making sure that no one was dangerous, the crew, getting out, inspected the tanks. Doubts that these were not Israeli tanks were confirmed, since they did not resemble the Centurion, the M60, or even the Merkava, which had just appeared, the adviser saw his photos and therefore could not confuse him. the form of the two killed tankers was also not similar to the Israeli one. They wanted to take one tank in tow, however, considering the remaining fuel (it was necessary to tow their tank), we decided to get to the unit and report to the authorities on the location of the enemy vehicle, and then take measures to evacuate. The contused crew, having regained consciousness, was able to start the tank, and the column moved back. However, the planned time for the route for technical reasons tripled, and the tanks arrived home only at night. Reported on the form of what happened, they decided to send intelligence immediately in the morning. However, there were many doubts that something would remain, which was confirmed the next morning. In the square where the battle took place, there were no wounded tanks, however there were many traces of wheeled vehicles, apparently tractors, which evacuated the tanks. Subsequently, when comparing photos of the identification of tanks with which the collision occurred, it was, surprisingly to many, identified the American МХNUMX Abrams. Apparently he passed the test in Israel in order to familiarize the Israeli specialists with the tank, but why it was necessary to start the battle, if the tank was secret, no one understood. Some suggested that having a faster tank and, as the Abrams ’crews believed, a more reliable booking, they wanted to impose a battle at distances that were favorable to them and, if possible, probably take the trophy, because T-1 is neither from the Americans nor the Israelis at that time was not. The outcome of this fight, which can be said with confidence, was up to the Syrians, raised to a higher level, the assessment of security and efficiency weapons new Soviet tanks.

Another more significant and well-known episode of the combat activities of the M1 tanks was the conduct of the land phase of the war against Iraq, which captured Kuwait in 1990. After the declaration of war to Iraq by a coalition of member countries, which in addition to the United States included Great Britain, France, Syria, and so on, a powerful tank group was assembled that comprised 5600 tanks. It was based on the American M1 series tanks. The first Abrams in the M1 and 1РМ1 modification from the 24 Mechanized Division arrived in Saudi Arabia in August 1990, where the main forces of the American expeditionary force were concentrated. By November their number was 580 tanks МNNUMX and 1 М123А1. However, the possible threat by the Iraqi side of chemical and bacteriological weapons forced the American side to reconsider its attitude to the further use of the M1 equipped with an 1-mm gun in combat operations. The latter had limited ability to protect the crew against weapons of mass destruction, as well as the low damaging properties of 105-mm guns during a possible meeting with tanks of the elite units of Iraq, which were Republican Guard armored units equipped with Soviet-made T-105М and T-72М72 tanks.

These machines are in 1988 — 89's. have been upgraded to enhance the protection of the upper frontal parts of the tank hull. This was achieved by welding an additional armor plate with a thickness of 30 mm with an air gap equal to the same 30 mm. This measure was taken by the Iraqis after studying the possibility of protecting tanks against various 120-mm ammunition of the British rifled tank gun L11A5 mounted on Iranian Chiften tanks captured by Iraq during the last war between the two countries. Carried out reinforcement of the hull, and the tower of the T-72 tank kept the English shells, allowed not to break through with the same shells at a distance from 1000 meters. Therefore, the US Army decided to use the arrived M1 tanks and its advanced IP model M1 in the second tier of the coming forces, relying on them to destroy secondary targets as well as outdated T-54 and T-55 tanks, which were used as long-term firing points . In the first echelon of the advancing forces, it was decided to use tanks in versions М1А1 and М1А1NA, as they had a more advanced system of collective defense against weapons of mass destruction, more effective 120-mm cannon and booking. For this, parts of the 7 Corps, which formed the basis of American forces in the Desert Shield and Desert Storm operations, as well as divisions of the US Marine Expeditionary Forces, were urgently re-equipped with the above tanks.



By February, 1991, the American troops in Saudi Arabia had 1956 tanks M1A1 (1223 M1A1NA and 733 M1HA1). As the arrival of new cars, which were mainly from West Germany, they were modernized. Knowing the low road performance of the T156 tracks, the tanks changed to the new T158. However, by the beginning of the land phase of the war, only 20% of all vehicles had undergone this retrofit. A great danger to the advancing units was the minefields set up by Iraqi troops in the front line of their defense. To solve such a complex task as breaking through such obstacles, a part of the Abrams, who entered tank anti-mine companies, was upgraded to install a plow-type mine sweeper. The decision to equip with just such a device for trawling was chosen after comparative tests with an Israeli-made wheel mine trawl, which in turn was created on the basis of the KMT-6 Soviet trawl. The official opinion on the mine plow was based on the fact that the former was lighter on 7 tons (4 versus 11 on a wheeled one).

Recently, however, in the press, there were reports that the cause was not only a smaller mass. During the explosion, which was accompanied during the trawling of a wheeled trawl, the front torsion bars and hydraulic shock absorbers of the Abrams did not withstand, and the car failed. The presence of a mine plow imposed restrictions on the tank when an enemy applied a WMD, since the design of the trawl provided for the driver to dismantle the periscope for wiring the hydraulic trawl control hose. To bring the plow into position, one of the crew members must get out of the tank and remove the safety checks. Although the presence of a plow-type trawl prevented the tank from exploding mines, however, there was an increased power consumption during trawling, which, in turn, in conditions of high temperatures in the desert caused the oil to overheat in the engine and transmission system, as the tank mass increased to 67 tons (in version М1А1NA). Therefore, the use of a mine trawl was limited and was used when the ground was loose. In other cases, elongated charges and regular mine detectors were used.

Launched on 17 on January 1991, the offensive air operation of the MNF continued on the 43 day. Its task was to destroy Iraq’s air defense systems, the country's strategic facilities and targets for the operational and tactical defense of Iraqi troops. In total, according to the American press, during the aerial bombardment near 500 tanks, over 500 guns were destroyed, almost all airfields, air defense radar stations, anti-aircraft missiles and 476 aircraft were destroyed. 24 February of the same year, fighting against Iraq entered the second phase of the air-land operation “Desert Storm”. The US forces were divided into three operational groups: the main one, as already mentioned, was the 7 corps, consisting of the 2 armored cavalry regiment, the 1 armored cavalry division, the 1 armored division, the 3 armored division, and XNUM th mechanized division. The second group was the 1 th airborne corps, which included the 18 th armored cavalry regiment and the 3 th mechanized division. On the coastal direction, there were expeditionary forces of the marines consisting of two tank battalions of marines and parts of the second tank division of the USA. The groups acted on three different directions: on the Central - 24, on the Western - 7, and on the Primorsky direction - expeditionary forces. The main attack was laid on the US 18 Army Corps, acting jointly with the British 7 Panzer Division. Their joint action was carried out from the area of ​​the junction of the borders of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and Iraq with the task of cutting off and surrounding Iraqi troops in Kuwait. 1 VDK attacked in the direction of the settlements of El-Shuba, Nasaria with the task of defeat in cooperation with 18 AK USA, 7 AK Iraq and on the fifth — eighth day to reach the line of the final task, to the Euphrates River. Another strike in the direction of Wafra, Al-Jah, and Kuwait was inflicted by expeditionary forces, with the task of defeating Iraqi divisions of the first echelon 7 AK and in conjunction with the airborne assault forces 3 of the United States and the Egyptian and Saudi troops by the end of the third day to seize the capital of Kuwait.



The ground group of Iraq in the south of the country and in Kuwait had the task of holding tight positions by holding a tough defense, inflicting tangible damage to the MNF on the offensive and forcing the leadership of the United States and its allies in this war to compromise acceptable to Baghdad. However, in the conditions of the seizure of the Ministry of Taxes and Duties of the strategic initiative and its complete domination aviation in the air, the solution to this problem was impossible. Having suffered heavy losses during 38 days of continuous MNS airstrikes, being cut off from the strategic rear and experiencing serious shortages of ammunition, fuel, water and other supplies, the Iraqi command nevertheless took a desperate step - to organize a centralized withdrawal of troops from the enemy surrounded areas, which in the end she succeeded. True, most of the equipment had to be abandoned due to lack of fuel, while the Americans presented to the press such an amount of allegedly destroyed equipment by the successful operation of their army and aircraft. To ensure the withdrawal of its main forces, the Iraqi command organized separate attempts to go beyond the line of its defense with the aim of counterattacking and holding in battle the advanced units of the MNF. On February 25, one of the motorized infantry battalions of the 12th Panzer Division of Iraq, equipped with T-59 tanks, entered into combat contact with 2nd Armored Cavalry Regiment, which was armed with M1A1 tanks and operating at the forefront of 7 US AK.

Despite the almost complete defeat, the Iraqis, however, were able to gain time for the withdrawal of the main forces of the division. Sometimes it happened that the Iraqi tankers in the fight against a strong opponent, who was, in particular, "Abrams", had to use the real miracles of fiction and courage. For example, the combat clash that took place last February 26 around 6 o'clock in the morning on the outskirts of Kuwait metropolitan airport. An 16 Iraqi motorized infantry division tank unit equipped with X-NUMX T-9 tanks and attempting to leave the encirclement used an unusual tactical maneuver against the 62-1 1 M battalion of the US Marine Corps. To put down the enemy’s vigilance, the Iraqis, turning the towers back and throwing out white flags, advanced in the direction of a breakthrough. American tankers, having bought a ploy, loosened control over the approaching enemy, for which they paid. When the distance between the cars of the opposing sides was reduced to 1 meters, the Iraqi tanks, unexpectedly deploying the barrels of their guns, inflicted a powerful fire attack on the enemy. In this fleeting battle 3005 X was destroyed and almost as much received various damage. The Iraqis, having passed through the orders of the Egyptian troops, joined the 1 AK units of Iraq. In general, in view of the fact that the Iraqi command in this situation put its main task in maintaining the combat units and withdrawing them to the operational depth of defense in Iraq, there was practically no serious resistance. As a result of this more or less large tank battles were few. The most noteworthy was the fighting between M 1А3 and Iraqi T-1 in the Iraqi military airbase Saman, in 1 km east of Baghdad According to the Soviet military attache in Iraq, Colonel V Potsalyuk, Americans lost 72 tanks in that battle, most of them these were the Abrams. In confirmation of this, photographs of the destroyed 300 M were sent to Moscow under the “secret” stamp.





The rest of the 2 battles took place at night in the Basrah area, the Americans' RNG Iraqi units were the opponents of the Americans. There was no exact information about the combat losses in those battles, but the Iraqi Defense Ministry representatives said they were very pleased with the military survivability of the T-72 Soviet tanks, which easily hit the Abrams "In confirmation of these words, we can say that the American units did not achieve their goals, in particular, to break up the RNG units and to assist the opposition government of Iraq to the Shiite rebels who were in the neighborhood The idea of ​​- confirms the validity of the views of the Iraqi side. In total, for all the time of operations in Kuwait and Iraq, American tank units irretrievably lost a little more than Abrams 50 tanks. Despite significant superiority over the enemy, who had mostly obsolete models such as T-54 / 55 / at that theater of operations. 62, such a number of lost cars can be considered large. Especially recently, environmentalists say that in the Arabian desert, at a place of hostilities, there are scattered around 20000 uranium cores from tank guns, threatening the environment With the help of uncomplicated arithmetic, it is possible to calculate how much ammunition each 500 shot down by T-72 accounted for; such expensive Abrams shells were hardly used for T-55, the initial statements of the Western press that no tank was lost, they were later refuted. A little later, it turned out that the Soviet 125-mm. The first-generation BPSs that existed in the Iraqi T-72 still pierce the armor of the Abrams tank, albeit at a distance of about 800 meters, and the technical reliability of the tank itself left much to be desired, which we wrote a little higher on. The “expelling” panels, which were intended to become a radical means of saving the crew during the detonation of the ammunition, also showed dubious significance; an example is the photo of the destroyed Abrams just because of an internal explosion of shots. Despite the departure of the plates, the hull of the turret of the tank cracked, and all the insides destroyed by the explosion, eventually the tank burned out.

The subsequent episodes of the use of the M1 tanks in Yugoslavia, Kosovo and Somalia, despite all the assurances of the Western press, can only be called combat fights. The use of tanks in the form of mobile firing points at checkpoints after what was tested in Iraq did not in any way confirm the opinion of the Americans about the “best” tank in the world. So the statement that only the German gun and the English armor are good at the M1 deserves the most serious approval.
Author:
Originator:
http://btvt.narod.ru
138 comments
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dust
    Dust April 21 2012 08: 09
    -19
    The article is basically about nothing!
    Perhaps this tank is the most mysterious machine in the history of tank troops, well. maybe it’s mysterious with Korean tanks ...
    The article collected almost all the tales that exist about this car, since its inception ...
    And maybe we will learn the truth in fifty years, if only this truth will be of interest to anyone?
    1. Kars
      Kars April 21 2012 09: 12
      +40
      Tank like a tank. Truth like a third generation tank.
      Now, and always, in principle, the main thing is an integrated approach - the axiom Tanks themselves do not fight, but armies fight.


      But still, this is my favorite photo of Abrams, I’ll be able to master the skills and make myself such a diorama.
      1. PSih2097
        PSih2097 April 21 2012 10: 30
        +27
        I like these more:

        1. 755962
          755962 April 21 2012 14: 58
          +26
          That is drawn, these are not ...
          1. Kars
            Kars April 21 2012 18: 39
            +9
            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7Sht-9mudc
            Always reassuring after watching Discovery
            1. Berkut_64
              Berkut_64 April 21 2012 23: 02
              +7
              Here's another balm for the soul. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CUvoaD6Vnkg&feature=related
          2. ecdy
            ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 40
            -2
            You can blind everything
        2. ecdy
          ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 39
          -2
          Judging by your fantasies, you need to see a doctor!
      2. Set
        Set April 21 2012 15: 32
        +7
        Two days ago I assembled such a model in a 1/35 scale, I think to paint as in the photo.
      3. ecdy
        ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 38
        -2
        And here is another one of your favorite photos
    2. Dust
      Dust April 22 2012 11: 29
      +1
      In the course of the overwhelming majority of people gathering here a total misunderstanding of the printed text?
      And what is the article about? A simple retelling of tales, sometimes unknown advisers, sometimes no less unknown "historians of Iraqi companies"!
      In the first case, Abrams fights according to the principle "in one fell swoop with seven beats", in the second, the Abrams went on a festive excursion "to amuse a violent hand, hurry the Saracen in the field" ...
      Abrams is therefore almost the most mysterious tank, because there is practically zero information about its real combat merits! Only fairy tales and fiction
      1. Joker
        Joker April 22 2012 14: 39
        +10
        Dust

        In my opinion, one can call a statement about Abrashi's invulnerability with regard to advantages and disadvantages (there are a lot of articles about shortcomings because of the large number of them), all of this exists, and in open sources. So learn the materiel.
  2. tronin.maxim
    tronin.maxim April 21 2012 08: 17
    +2
    Recent photos are such class good ny!
  3. itr
    itr April 21 2012 09: 16
    +8
    strange that the Soviet instructor could not get in touch in Syria and did not call for reinforcements
    It is incomprehensible all the same that in 82, communications on tanks were not installed ??? Why did you have to leave? And in general, what did these American tanks do there? In my opinion a fairy tale
    1. gor
      gor April 21 2012 09: 48
      -28
      and the most interesting thing is that there was only one tank left and knocked out 2)))))))))))))))))) and out of 3 abrams, not one guessed to shoot it, but everyone was waiting, but when I’ll think it’s true, and the Americans simply tested their armor for strength in real conditions and therefore did not knock out 3 tanks)))))))))))))))))))))))))))) ))))))))) if I am being minus for the truth, I will leave comments in the style of the gold-runners))))))))))))))))
      1. Num lock U.A.
        Num lock U.A. April 21 2012 12: 33
        +8
        an interesting way to test your own armor, who would tell about it to those two "testers" who did not manage to survive
      2. Фокус
        Фокус April 21 2012 13: 30
        +9
        When groups of tanks of the opposing sides meet during the war, no one thinks of any tests, everyone wants to survive in this clash, therefore the fact that the Soviet instructor was able to inspect unknown tanks speaks of victory.
        1. zlibeni
          zlibeni April 22 2012 00: 58
          -15
          Well, I'm talking about the fact that I'm completely serious about the trials)))))))))))))))))))))) Yes, all 3 72 would have been hit right away if it had been real)))) )))))))
          it turns out that it’s illogical. 3 abrams could knock out 2 t-72s, but 3 abrams couldn’t knock out one t-72. It’s illogical. And the more illogical that the remaining t-72 could hit 2 tanks at once and made to run))))))))))))))))))))) Oh, the instructor forgot that it was ours and killed them on the spot and their eyes were watery and the Abrams crews could not aim. the wind blew towards the abramsos already seems logical))))))))))))) by the way which confirms this version even more that the first abrams were rather poorly protected from
          1. Good Ukraine
            Good Ukraine April 22 2012 17: 57
            +10
            For zlibtni

            Yes Yes. Yes !
            In all articles and television programs, Americans still claim that they did not hit a single tank. And they must be trusted.
            They never lie. laughing
      3. valerei
        valerei April 22 2012 12: 46
        +5
        Judging by the interval of shots of 7 seconds, this is a long time required for reloading the gun, aiming and firing. At this time, the Abrams had at least two guns already loaded. Why didn't they shoot at our third tank? Hard to say. It is possible that anything can happen in war, perhaps something happened to the crews of the Abrams, in the sense that, seeing the defeat of one of their tanks, they were confused and did not know what to do about them: shoot or retreat quickly, the time was lost, and at that moment their second tank was hit. However, in order to approach and evacuate their tankers, the third Abrams spent not 7 seconds, but several minutes. Why didn't our tankers shoot at him? not known. One thing can be said: "Everyone imagines himself to be a strategist, seeing the battle from the outside."
      4. Midshipman
        Midshipman April 22 2012 18: 41
        -1
        Didn’t you listen to Zadornov? Dumb they are.
  4. chukapabra
    chukapabra April 21 2012 09: 22
    0
    Partially collected facts, partly rumors, partly tales from the Internet. I couldn’t even somehow connect it with one line. The article is weak and in no way.
    Photos class.
    1. Bear52
      Bear52 April 21 2012 10: 26
      -6
      Exactly! laughing And a few more times instead of "Abrams" - "Abram" - a sure sign of using "Adobe" drinks
  5. sedoii
    sedoii April 21 2012 09: 31
    +10
    The more I read (from various sources), the more I get the opinion that there are more "antlers" in "Abrams". He wins only ours
    on electronics.
    1. alexng
      alexng April 22 2012 16: 52
      +3
      And the Americans have them in everything like this: chatter and show-offs. Only with the weak can they stir up, but no more than that, and then with the NATO codla. Lately, they themselves have been afraid to meddle somewhere, only with Caudla. Especially touches the Georgian contingent to help us. and they communicate something like this:
      "Yanyke, the most incomprehensible Russian word is" sad "! This is not the sadness that is mushrooms, but the one that is melancholy. And it is not that melancholy that is a fence, but that one that is" sad. "
  6. lesnik
    lesnik April 21 2012 10: 48
    +5
    liked the fiction of Iraqi tankers good ... I remember the phrase of Mikhail Zadornov about "amers": well, stupid !!! on some site there was a photo of the knocked out Abrams in Iraq, if I am not mistaken, in the area of ​​\ uXNUMXb \ uXNUMXbthe rollers there was a breakdown of armor from SVD
  7. YARY
    YARY April 21 2012 11: 21
    +9
    I have not heard of this particular case. But I myself have seen the fact that the tanks of the "oilmen" are burning for a sweet soul, and, well, I took part manenko. And at the expense of "Abrashka" in my time there was not much need to understand there (1982) - they had to be fired. Yes and " There were more merkavoks.
  8. VIKING
    VIKING April 21 2012 11: 50
    -20
    Unlike its older brothers M48 and M60, M1 did not have a chance to fight on the battlefield. For the first time, Abrams sniffed gunpowder in 1982.

    Everything, you can not read further - B-R-E-D from bredyatin!
    Quote: Ardent
    I have not heard of this particular case. But I myself have seen the fact that the tanks of the "oilmen" are burning for a sweet soul, and, well, I took part manenko. And at the expense of "Abrashka" in my time there was not much need to understand there (1982) - they had to be fired. Yes and " There were more merkavoks.

    You can hang this not smart noodles for not clever kids in kindergartens and in the first classes of elementary school. laughing

    Quote: lesnik
    on some site there was a photo of a wrecked Abrams in Iraq, if I am not mistaken, in the area of ​​the rinks there was a breakdown of the armor from the SVD

    Gonevo is no less delusional than the participation of the "Abrams" in '82 in southern Lebanon. fool
    Quote: itr
    strange that the Soviet instructor could not get in touch in Syria and did not call for reinforcements
    It is incomprehensible all the same that in 82, communications on tanks were not installed ??? Why did you have to leave? And in general, what did these American tanks do there?

    It is strange that all this crazy nonsense was allowed to print! am After all, any sane sapiens with sober brains can see that this is NOT true! am
    Quote: itr
    In my opinion a fairy tale

    This is not a fairy tale - it is a PROPAGONOIDOUS LIE !!! am
    1. Kars
      Kars April 21 2012 12: 19
      +19
      Quote: VIKING
      Propagondoid Lies !!!



      It’s just like the US recruiters claim that Abrams is the best tank in the world.

      And as for their Discovery, everything is the same --- even in 2008 claimed that M1A1 is invulnerable to RPG 7 from any projection.

      Yes, and on the battlefield .. a great .. tank battle East 73 also for some reason, no photo, no video or trophy exhibition.

      And on the topic, Abrams has not yet met with a worthy adversary of his generation, and probably will not meet --- even though Egypt may arrange a war with Algeria, for example
      1. Kars
        Kars April 21 2012 13: 00
        +11
        And what are these three seropagonists noted?
        Well, one is gor (4) and who is the rest?
    2. lotus04
      lotus04 April 22 2012 05: 26
      0
      [img]http://forum.voinenet.ru/showthread.php?s=03780cf0d8fec33b0788b17e02c1be57&
      p = 146878 [/ img]

      But this is generally a song. David and Goliath. Abrams hit in the stern of the 25-mm "Bushmaster"! Just like a German tiger in World War II from an anti-tank rifle. It takes tremendous skill to fill this "mammoth" with such a weapon. Surely the Iraqis mounted the bed under the Bushmaster, on some pickup truck, insolently drove into his tail and stood up to the funeral from 200 meters to the stern
    3. lotus04
      lotus04 April 22 2012 05: 40
      0
      Work DShK.

      it is not a propaganda lie !!!
      1. lotus04
        lotus04 April 22 2012 05: 42
        +9
        This is not a fairy tale - it is not a propaganda lie !!!


        But this is generally a song. David and Goliath. Abrams hit in the stern of the 25-mm "Bushmaster"! Just like a German tiger in World War II from an anti-tank rifle. It takes tremendous skill to fill this "mammoth" with such a weapon. Surely the Iraqis mounted the bed under the Bushmaster, on some pickup truck, insolently drove into his tail and stood up to the funeral from 200 meters to the stern


        http://forum.voinenet.ru/showthread.php?s=03780cf0d8fec33b0788b17e02c1be57&p=146

        878
  9. Mr. Truth
    Mr. Truth April 21 2012 12: 32
    +18
    In my opinion the most overrated tank in the world. And one of the most vulnerable.
    The first frontal armor of Abrams did not change with the A1HA modification, the source is American blueprints, where it is clearly visible that the size of the armor has not changed, and they did not change the filler according to the tankmen.
    2nd 3,14zhezd about a giant resource of guns. In their marriage, the gun comes with a wear of 5 mm, we have a marriage of 3 mm and they still shoot.
    The 3rd best SLA installed on Leclerc.
    4th is security. "Knock-out" panels, a favorite argument of the airsoft liberal youth, were designed for 105 mm BK, not 120 mm. This also explains the absence of land mines in the BC.
    And also in terms of security, Abrams is refueled with aviation kerosene, I will not write anything about it.
    1. Kars
      Kars April 21 2012 12: 57
      +15
      Quote: Mr. Truth
      In my opinion the most overrated tank in the world. And one of the most vulnerable.


      As for the reevaluated, this is certain, but one should not go to extremes claiming the most vulnerable.
      Quote: Mr. Truth
      1-e frontal armor of Abrams did not change with the modification A1HA

      This is not an indicator of vulnerability, it shows that its reliability suits the Americans, if they are weak, then they hang it with DZ containers, and, in principle, it’s very possible - if someone tells us that in Iraq 3ВБМ-8 is the nail from the people who were shot in Iran-Iraq guns, or Assad Babil from his Iraqi-pierced Abrams forehead do not believe it.
      Quote: Mr. Truth
      In them, the gun goes into marriage with wear in 5 mm, we have a marriage of 3 mm and they still shoot.

      I would really like to know what kind of method for assessing the wear of a barrel of smoothbore guns.
      Quote: Mr. Truth
      It was designed for 105 mm BK, and not for 120 mm. This also explains the absence of landmines in the BC.


      Well, why did M1 have three knockout panels, on A1 they were re-arranged and there were two of them. As for the landmines, they only use the German OFSs in Iraq that have been renamed.
      Quote: Mr. Truth
      Abrams is fueled with aviation kerosene, I will not write anything about him.

      What an abrams, that the T-80 and their turbines are positioned as multi-fuel. And about the fire hazard, then the main thing is the placement of tanks and anti-fire systems.

      He wrote many times - it’s not worth throwing a probable .. friend .. with hats this is not good.
      1. Mr. Truth
        Mr. Truth April 21 2012 14: 06
        +11
        Quote: Kars
        This is not an indicator of vulnerability, it shows that its reliability suits the Americans, if they are weak, then they hang it with DZ containers, and, in principle, it’s very possible - if someone tells us that in Iraq 3ВБМ-8 is the nail from the people who were shot in Iran-Iraq guns, or Assad Babil from his Iraqi-pierced Abrams forehead do not believe it.

        This is an indicator, the Americans are talking about a meter of armor, and there in the tower there will be no more 800 mm. The frontal part is even smaller —600 mm maximum.
        Board 25-30 mm front section of side screens 70 mm maximum. On the side of the tower they talk about 200 mm in the front part, only there is a raznesenka, which also does not have such a dimension.
        Quote: Kars
        Quote: Mr. Truth
        In them, the gun goes into marriage with wear in 5 mm, we have a marriage of 3 mm and they still shoot.
        I would really like to know what kind of method for assessing the wear of a barrel of smoothbore guns.

        To Fofanov on Courage for this.
        Quote: Kars
        Quote: Mr. Truth
        Abrams is fueled with aviation kerosene, I will not write anything about him.
        What an abrams, that the T-80 and their turbines are positioned as multi-fuel. And about the fire hazard, then the main thing is the placement of tanks and anti-fire systems.

        Moreover, fire fighting, kerosene explodes, and the diesel, which refuel all our tanks including the T-80, only flows and burns. all the more so for a gas turbine, the flow rate is large, complex, and the heat dissipation is very, very strong. It is not worth the quick start and compact size. Our T-80 only remained because of a quick start in the winter.
        Quote: Kars
        Well, why did M1 have three knockout panels, on A1 they were re-arranged and there were two of them. As for the landmines, they only use the German OFSs in Iraq that have been renamed.

        You do not understand, the tower was designed for 105 mm. including this 45 mm "armored propeller" of which the ammo rack is separated. It will not survive a blast. This has been refuted many times. This does not help; complete isolation of the BC is needed.
        Moreover, in the abrams and in the tower there is enough BC, which is pushed into the corners.
        I haven’t heard that something is currently being used in Iraq, maybe in Afghanistan? The Marines recently dragged their junk there, there was news.

        Quote: Kars
        He wrote many times - it’s not worth throwing a probable .. friend .. with hats this is not good.

        Not worth it. But to invent his omnipotence is also not necessary. You need to know the disadvantages and advantages.
        And its advantages are advanced SLA, good BOPS and trained crews. Nothing more supernatural.
        1. Kars
          Kars April 21 2012 14: 31
          +6
          for starters, there’s no need to minus it - I’ve set up the provocation of seropogonniks.
          Quote: Mr. Truth
          This is an indicator, the Americans are talking about a meter of armor, and there in the tower there will be no more 800 mm. The frontal part is even smaller —600 mm maximum.
          1. Kars
            Kars April 21 2012 14: 47
            +1
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            Board 25-30 mm front section of side screens 70 mm maximum. On the side of the tower they talk about 200 mm in the front part, only there is a raznesenka, which also does not have such a dimension.


            All the same, the 40 mm board, and pretty decent side armor, but if you take into account the DZ hitch at the modern level, but I wrote and so wrote that the Americans did not work on board.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            To Fofanov on Courage for this.

            I was hoping for a link to shovel Courage on the eve of reluctance.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            Moreover, fire fighting, kerosene explodes, and diesel, which

            Who told you this? This legend still comes from the T-34, it’s just the tanning beds that tend to be detailed, and if the salyarka was hard to light with a match, this does not mean that the cumulative jet or the hot BPS core can do the same.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            all the more so for a gas turbine, the flow rate is large, complex, and the heat dissipation is very, very strong.

            This is already a privacy, if it doesn’t disrupt the Americans, they will deliver a diesel engine, even the same German one.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            She can't stand the blast. This has been disproved many times.

            By whom and where? Why can’t it withstand? Especially if there are few SFCs in the Abrams BC or aren’t there at all? The explosion is distributed according to the law of least resistance, if the WWTP burns the turret it doesn’t particularly affect the crew’s survival, the shells are oriented towards the stern,
            And ammunition isolation is the dream of tankers,
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            Moreover, in the abrams and in the tower there is enough BC, which is pushed into the corners.

            This is a common practice, but Abrams’s unitary ammunition in the hull is stored in an armored container, and three on the tower’s shelf are the first shots.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            I haven’t heard that something is currently being used in Iraq, maybe in Afghanistan? The Marines recently dragged their junk there, the news was

            In Iraq, they mainly stand at bases, and in Afghanistan, Canadians requested Leopard 2 tanks and successfully operate them there.
            Quote: Mr. Truth
            But to invent his omnipotence is also not necessary.

            Find such statements from me.
            1. Mr. Truth
              Mr. Truth April 21 2012 15: 33
              +2
              Quote: Kars
              Quote: Mr. Truth
              To Fofanov on Courage for this.
              I was hoping for a link to shovel Courage on the eve of reluctance.

              I don’t remember looking in Google, I read about the degree of wear and tear before rejection or replacement, and there was something about breech, somewhere in the PDF format on the Internet.
              Quote: Kars
              And ammunition isolation is the dream of tankers,

              Let's bet that they’ll gash it on the armature.

              Quote: Kars
              In Iraq, they mainly stand at bases, and in Afghanistan, Canadians requested Leopard 2 tanks and successfully operate them there.

              did the amers leave Iraq? PMCs and marines remained in the embassies, and the black-backed locals armed the monkey version of the abrams there.
              The Marines are definitely using tanks in Afghanistan. News archives must be viewed.


              Quote: Kars

              Who told you this? This legend still comes from the T-34, it’s just the tanning vapor tends to be detailed, and if it is hard to light a salyarka with a match, this does not mean that the cumulative jet or the hot BPS core can do the same

              Nevertheless, the diesel engine is not so dumb as kerosene, and still cheaper. On planes, by the way, on waste of fuel, argon is pumped into the tank, or even inert, why, by the way, in the tank, by the way, do this?


              Quote: Kars
              Find such statements from me.
              That's not for you. I'm sorry.
              1. Kars
                Kars April 21 2012 15: 43
                0
                Quote: Mr. Truth
                monkey version of abrams

                As for the fact that the amers left Iraq, this is greatly exaggerated, but the Abrams were put into service by the Iraqis A1.
                Quote: Mr. Truth
                Still, the diesel engine is not so dumb as kerosene, and still cheaper

                Well, this is just debatable, why do you think the most common type of explosives is ammonium silitra with salyarka?
                Quote: Mr. Truth
                why by the way in the tank by the way not to do this?

                In theory, I heard somewhere that they are pumped with exhaust gases, but I won’t say that, maybe I’m confusing it.
                Quote: Mr. Truth
                Let's bet that they’ll gash it on the armature.

                I'm waiting.
                but while I'm paired with an inhabited tower, the AZ from Leclerc or Yatagan suits me.
                1. Mr. Truth
                  Mr. Truth April 21 2012 16: 05
                  +1
                  Quote: Kars
                  ammonia silitra with salyarka?

                  Because it’s cheap and collecting IEDs is safer)
              2. zlibeni
                zlibeni April 22 2012 10: 59
                -8
                okay, what’s the matter to you how much this tank is booked? The main thing is that the Americans are happy and it proved that it’s a cut above the fully booked T-72. It’s not easy to book and have no analogues
                1. Kars
                  Kars April 22 2012 11: 07
                  +2
                  Quote: zlibeni
                  above fully booked t-72

                  All that he proved, he is superior to the second-generation tank in export configuration, with reduced armor and simplified SLA, while Iraqi tanks were intensively operated in the Iran-Iraq war and needed spare parts.
                  This is not such a feat for a third generation tank --- it is a given, but how it was sung for this should be taken into account - the children were so bombed that there was nowhere else to go.
                2. ecdy
                  ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 50
                  0
                  T 72, which has no analogues in the world
                  1. Vitaliy_78
                    Vitaliy_78 9 June 2012 00: 42
                    0
                    You at least find a photo of another tank, otherwise the characters are different, but the tank is the same request
          2. Mr. Truth
            Mr. Truth April 21 2012 15: 18
            +1
            "This is fantastic" ©
            At least they don’t measure in meters, the Germans promise all 2 meters on Leo 5A1,5. AD99 is good but not so much.
            Jews are also given a half-empty mask on the tower for a solid envelope.
            I do not believe in such tablets. I'm sorry. Moreover, the armor from A1 to A2 in size in the drawings has not changed.
        2. mkpda
          mkpda April 23 2012 12: 54
          +3
          A small clarification, fuel vapors explode, not the liquid fraction. Therefore, when hit, a half-empty tank will explode with gasoline, and with kerosene, and with diesel fuel.
      2. ecdy
        ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 46
        -1
        Upgraded Abrams
    2. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 44
      -1
      The best tank Leopard 2!
      1. Vitaliy_78
        Vitaliy_78 9 June 2012 00: 46
        0
        Not a fact, but personally your subjective opinion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvwp&NR=1&v=sGNauvBe6IA
  10. VIKING
    VIKING April 21 2012 12: 45
    +16
    I will not post a "story" about the combat use of "Abrams" in Lebanon - I will just quote from the book of M. Baryatinsky: "Abrams" Enemy No. 1.

    After reading this story, you don't know what to do - cry or laugh. I just want to exclaim in the style of Mikhail Zadornov: "Well, what are they stupid, these Americans!" Seriously speaking, the above episode is not just a fiction, it's excuse me, wandering the gray mare! It painfully resembles the fables of "Soviet military advisers" about the battles between T-72s and "Merkavas" during the 1982 Lebanese war. But here the matter is more serious - the battle between T-72 and "Abrams" in peacetime!
    So, if you follow the flight of thought of the "Soviet military adviser", the three newest tanks, just beginning to enter the US Army, crossed the border between Israel and Lebanon and moved deep into the territory of the latter. Just like that, with American crews, in the form of the US Army (the "adviser" testifies to this), without any cover and support, one might say they invaded foreign territory. Note that the hostilities have not yet been conducted, the "Peace of Galilee" operation (in the interpretation of the "adviser" - "Peace for Hallee") has not yet begun. In a word, there is an undisguised fact of American aggression against Lebanon. It should be recalled that the case takes place in the spring of 1982 (Operation Peace for Galilee began on June 6), when the "adviser" does not specifically report, but this does not matter at all, since since 1978 there have been units of the Palestine Liberation Organization in southern Lebanon , Christian militia and UN troops. But there were no Syrian troops in southern Lebanon. They were located in the Bekaa Valley, quite far from the border with Israel. As for the latter, in the spring of 1982 it already represented not so much a border as a front line, entangled in barbed wire, studded with checkpoints and artillery positions. So you can imagine the picture - Israeli soldiers at the checkpoint are opening the slag baum and waving their hands to the American tankers in greeting, they say, let's guys kick these Muslims! To the applause of the UN soldiers, the Abrams move on! It's just that some kind of idyll appeared in the brain of the "Soviet military adviser" inflamed with alcohol. By the way, all the ranges of the Israel Defense Forces are located in a completely different direction, in the Negev desert. And if we assume that the "Abrams" were tested in Israel, then surely it was there. But why, there are deserts in the USA, or what? Here, of course, the "adviser" may argue - the Americans are stupid! Perhaps, but Jews are not stupid! There are no stupid Jews! And if the Americans were impatient to test their tanks in action, then for this purpose a special support unit with means of repair, evacuation and combat cover would be created. And so it turns out that three "Abrams" rolled to visit the Palestinians - it is difficult to come up with a faster way to deliver the latest American tank to the range of the 38th Research Institute in Kubinka. Perhaps a special flight from Detroit!


    If, after this fragment, someone else continues to believe in the "true story of the Soviet military adviser," let them substantiate their position in detail. And the presence of "minuses" for this post will only convincingly prove that, "Well, stupid ..." fool - not Americans. wink
  11. ZAVET
    ZAVET April 21 2012 13: 06
    +1
    QUESTIONS guys, who knows: in some articles they write that supposedly the states have not produced new Abrams tanks since the late eighties, they are only modernizing (previously this was written including on Wikipedia, they’ve corrected them).
    However, a message flashed recently that since all the tanks in service were built over the past five years, the American defense industry will not buy new ones in the coming years.
    If so, where did the tanks built earlier go?
    EVERYTHING destroyed in wars (90x 00x)?
    9000 pcs?
    1. Mr. Truth
      Mr. Truth April 21 2012 16: 11
      +3
      ZAVET,
      Quote: ZAVET
      built over the past five years

      This is a temporary paradox, the plant in Lyme has not built a single abrams for 10 years, only rem kits.
      They wrote off almost 3000 thousand abrams for wear.
      In the army, the marines, the national guard and 2000 tanks, the states will not be typed. see 25 heavy brigades of the army and NG (56 tanks each) 2 tank battalions in separate brigades (58 vehicles each) 1 separate armored cavalry regiment (most likely from 72 to 132 tanks are known)
      4 tank battalions of the marine corps (58 tanks each) + training. not so much turns out.
  12. schonia06rus
    schonia06rus April 21 2012 13: 29
    -5
    The most important advantage of Abrams is that the Americans experienced it in battles!
    they know what to expect from this car! and our vaunted t-90 participated in some sort of war?
    1. Gendalf
      Gendalf April 21 2012 15: 09
      +4
      for sure, like we wage few wars, there’s nowhere to even test the technique ..... did you mean to say that?
      1. ecdy
        ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 53
        0
        As it is nowhere, in Chechnya for example. T 90 is a deeply modernized T 72
    2. pinachet
      pinachet April 22 2012 14: 54
      +5
      The most important advantage of Abrams is that the Americans experienced it in battles!
      they know what to expect from this car! and our vaunted t-90 participated in some sort of war?



      you will know that the t-90 is a modernized t-72bu, and 72ka believe me already fought!
    3. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 52
      0
      Exactly
      Leopards 2 participate in Afghanistan, for example
      1. Vitaliy_78
        Vitaliy_78 9 June 2012 00: 55
        0
        That's right, there they trample the poppy and hemp fields laughing
  13. crossbow
    crossbow April 21 2012 15: 41
    +5
    How much can you rape claudia and raise blood pressure for yourself and others, breaking spears out of the blue — there were no indestructible tanks, no and never will be, and what is a tank in the end is just a gun, yes self-propelled, yes armored, Yes, with a circular sector of fire. The experience of recent wars has shown that if there is no air cover, all tanks are only expensive coffins and the saturation of modern armies with anti-tank weapons markedly reduced their role in military operations. And all these examples from the wars with Iraq are incorrect by the way in due to outdated Iraq’s technology, absolute superiority in the air of coalition aviation and superiority in general.
  14. nekromonger
    nekromonger April 21 2012 15: 43
    -5
    in which battles? with t-55?
    1. Mr. Truth
      Mr. Truth April 21 2012 16: 12
      +4
      With abandoned and buried like a firing point. Also a sealed attack aircraft. wink
  15. uladzimir.surko
    uladzimir.surko April 21 2012 16: 26
    +9
    In the world there are two schools of tank engineering of the USSR and Germany the rest is a hat! Although Britain was the first.
    1. kosmos84
      kosmos84 April 21 2012 17: 26
      +1
      I WHERE THAT READ THAT ABRACHA A MUCH MUCH MUCH SUCCESSFULLY 2 = - TRUE OR NO?
      1. Kars
        Kars April 21 2012 17: 30
        +6
        Well that's said too much.
        Leopard 2 and Abrams are the result of a joint MVT-70 project, so they have a lot in common. And the 120 mm gun M1A1 is licensed German
      2. saturn.mmm
        saturn.mmm April 21 2012 18: 50
        +3
        For kosmos I would say that a joint project for the Americans is not so unsuccessful. The tank is still fulfilling its mission and the campaign is being modernized. This link more or less really describes the defeat of the tank
        http://btvt.narod.ru/spec/iraq/abrams_2003_demage.htm
        And also the data on modernization:
        The next version of the tank M1А2 is a further development of the existing machine. The complex of improvements, united under the name “Block-2”, consists of an independent thermal sight, which was received by the tank commander, the driver’s thermal imaging device, the on-board information system with means of displaying the situation and new laser range finders.

        Urban Survival Kit - TUSK • An independent thermal imaging sight made it possible for the commander and gunner to work simultaneously. While the tank commander can search for new targets in smoke or darkness, the gunner can fire on previously discovered targets. The thermal imaging sight is located on the roof of the tower in front of the loader’s hatch, the terrain image (the device can be rotated 360 degrees) is received on the screen located in front of the tank commander. The use of a new on-board information system, which replaced the fire control system with a single electronic complex, including a processor for processing signals from all sensors, weapon control units, and situation display indicators, significantly reduced the preparation time for the tank to fire.

        • According to Western experts, the Abrams M1A2 tank added 54% to attack efficiency compared to the base model, and 100% to prepared defense. Combat rate of fire increased 2 times. In the course of further upgrades of the machine, it is planned to use a new 120-mm gun (lightweight) and new ammunition, to equip the tank with an automatic loader, a new MSA, an automatic search, target detection and recognition system and a more advanced suspension, possibly hydropneumatic.
        You can't throw such hats. It is necessary to take "partners" more seriously
        1. kosmos84
          kosmos84 April 21 2012 19: 04
          +1
          And from thunder, the PG-15 is frozen due to the range of 1300
  16. TRUVOR
    TRUVOR April 21 2012 18: 29
    +1
    THE FUTURE WILL SHOW WHICH TANK IS BETTER
  17. anton107798
    anton107798 April 21 2012 19: 28
    +10
    But how do you like this photo?

    or so ... and they say mud tanks are not afraid ... American even very)))

    eh ... it looks like our roads))))
    1. Ulfgar
      Ulfgar April 26 2012 23: 09
      0
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mym3p_zTpQw Как видно из этого ролика,наши танки то-же к нашим дорогам не адаптированы!:)
    2. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 01: 57
      0
      This machine weighs 62 tons, and the Russian one 46 tons,
      and stuck, the same yyyy .. judging by the video.
  18. alex86
    alex86 April 21 2012 20: 24
    +2
    But someone who is literate will say: all the time there is talk, they say, aiming at the upper armor plate, everything will come in pursuit. So I have a 2-part question: is it possible to get into a moving tank from a moving tank not just into a projection, but into a specific place? and if possible, then the OFS, driven under the tower, must tear it down, despite the weight of 29 tons? Forgive in advance for the amateurish approach.
    1. kosmos84
      kosmos84 April 21 2012 20: 29
      +2
      2A28 HAS BUT ALWAYS IN DIFFERENT PLACES (TARGET LAYOUT)
  19. valery dv
    valery dv April 21 2012 20: 53
    -5
    Iraq fought with Iran for several years. Iraq usually won the battle. America needed 6 days to destroy the entire Iraqi army. Americans lost 4 tanks. About 450 t-55; t-64 t-72 were destroyed. But I want something else. Today in the evening they will talk about the great battle, the biggest in the history of mankind, the tank battle near Kursk. Leading John Batchelor will talk about the courage and heroism of Soviet soldiers; he will give a share of respect to all Soviet soldiers who defeated such a strong enemy as the Wehrmacht; why on the site in Russia there is a lot of ridicule and abuse to the Americans, and here they say a lot about the valor and glory of the Russian army and the people? Who will explain? I give the address where you can listen. The program will begin at 5 am Moscow time: www.WABC / radio.com
    1. sas
      sas April 21 2012 21: 25
      +6
      You rushed from the t-64: this tank was in service only with the Union Army. In Iraq, it could not be in principle.
    2. Kars
      Kars April 21 2012 21: 36
      +3
      Quote: valery dv
      Tonight they will talk about the great battle, the biggest in the history of mankind, the tank battle near Kursk. Lead John Batchelor will talk about the courage and heroism of Soviet soldiers.



      I don’t know what kind of broadcast it is or what kind of presenter. But those broadcasts and documentaries that I saw from the discovery, the history of .. the tail end .. always left behind a slightly negative impression (I can’t find the right words) minor errors. Inaccuracies-- - but in principle it may be a bad translation.
      1. zlibeni
        zlibeni April 22 2012 10: 55
        -8
        and I didn’t look at the great tank battles from the discovery? so there is a series about the Kursk battle and what’s wrong there? so you would tell the scriptwriters. small mistakes))))))))))))))) and when the real participants those fights about it tell it as if not reckoned. you in the course know better)))))))))))))))
        1. Kars
          Kars April 22 2012 11: 08
          +5
          Quote: zlibeni
          about the Kursk battle series and what is wrong there


          I turned off at 30 minute, could not bear such holtory.
    3. felixis69
      felixis69 April 22 2012 08: 45
      +7
      Valera, because, well, honestly, your documentaries in the Rimbaud style, where either your pilots (planes) or tankers (tanks, infantry fighting vehicles) play the role of invulnerable. Even about Vietnam, where everyone knows the gigantic losses of American aviation equipment (which fell into the enemy's territory - therefore, the losses cannot be overlooked) and then films with invulnerable aircraft! ... Let them also make ends meet about Iraq! An example of 1941, ours lost most of their ground equipment not because of direct actions of the German ground forces, but because, with overwhelming air superiority, the Germans destroyed echelons with ammunition, fuel, and the same weapons on the way to the front. And what do you do with Iraq .... the aviation pounded every day (and not only the American ones) - it turns out that they couldn't do nichrome? So what? Then, ground clashes, no matter what the film, one gets the impression that the Iraqis do not see the Americans at all, moreover, in those conditions when they do not depend on the technical perfection of optics. The Americans must be the first to spot the enemy and shoot him at point-blank range ... Well, it just becomes funny: the Iraqis in their defensive positions did not notice, as from the front !!! an American "Bradley" drove into their location !!! .... Well, they also call the "Abrams" invulnerable, but excuse me, but the "Bradleys" that walked with them cannot be called an invulnerable monster! We wouldn't have reached the point of absurdity!
    4. zlibeni
      zlibeni April 22 2012 11: 03
      -4
      Well, the notion of honor and dignity is simply valery for everyone. They’re pouring mud on something. Yes, because they can’t give an intelligible and intelligible answer and all these comments in this style are something out of envy and their own impotence. Such dwarfs with megalomania.
    5. vorobey
      vorobey April 22 2012 15: 03
      +3
      Valera, what do you want from us? Respect? I respect the same Chechen with whom I am dealing either with a Dagestan or an Armenian neighbor who does not teach me how to live and does not shout that his way of life is better than mine.

      Recognize that Abrams is better? I wrote below. But exclusively for the American people, I can say that Abrams is a good powerful comfortable car.

      The trouble is that its citizens pay for the state’s policy and the benefits that you get on the site are not our attitude to the American, but the attitude to the policy pursued by your government. The average Russian in American stereotypical thinking is also far from an Angora rabbit.
    6. Good Ukraine
      Good Ukraine April 22 2012 18: 28
      +5
      For valery dv

      I watched a lot of TV shows on Discovery. And about the best American planes in the world, and about the best tanks, and about the best helicopters, the best small arms, the best missiles, torpedoes. And of course about the most courageous American soldiers who won the Second World War, and today with peaceful step they bring peace and democracy to all countries.
      But the television channel was mistaken with the Battle of Kursk. Although I think another twenty years later I will make a new film, where the true story of an American tank that decided the course of the battle in the Battle of Kursk will be described.
      And if it's no joke, then watch this film again, and you will understand that the thought runs through the whole film like a red line - "The USSR defeated the Germans near Kursk by accident - they were just lucky", and near Stalingrad as well, and near Moscow, and Leningrad. And won the Second World War - guess who yourself ...

      : request: Like this


      1. ecdy
        ecdy 17 May 2012 02: 00
        0
        In World War II, the Americans had completely shitty tanks!
    7. 101
      101 April 22 2012 19: 07
      +1
      Really only on the sites of Russia chuckles and swearing Cheeks less inflate further obscenities ------------------------------------- --------------
    8. mkpda
      mkpda April 23 2012 13: 07
      +1
      Iran and Iraq were at the same level of development of the armed forces. Iraq had no chance of successfully fighting the United States or the USSR with proper preparation on their part for such a war.
      Iraq fought without air and intelligence, which predetermined the defeat. It’s another matter that the United States changed the regime by force and solved tactical tasks, but on a global scale even greater problems with radical Islamists are possible in comparison with which the late Sadam is a very convenient partner.
    9. uladzimir.surko
      uladzimir.surko April 24 2012 12: 47
      0
      for some reason, the states fell !! A good mine with a bad game
    10. dema46
      dema46 13 November 2012 13: 12
      0
      who whispered to you about four tanks? did you yourself count? or read Sokolov, Lopukhovskiy, Beshanov? Do you have the State Department reports on the table? Or are you an adherent of Israeli analysts? There are a lot from Goebbels.
  20. savelij
    savelij April 21 2012 21: 19
    -13
    Russian tanks also burn no worse, and even better than Abrams wink

    Here is an example!
    1. lotus04
      lotus04 April 22 2012 10: 45
      +1
      Actually, this is a Georgian tank. Taken in Ossetia.
      The work of our military.
      1. savelij
        savelij April 22 2012 14: 03
        -9
        Just do not say that these are also tanks of Georgians and the work of our military! As they say Ssy to you eyes and all of you dew of God!
        1. lotus04
          lotus04 April 22 2012 14: 55
          +2
          No, burning is still better than abrams!
          And they shoot worse!
        2. lesnik
          lesnik April 22 2012 15: 03
          +3
          August 1996 was signed, what Georgia ?!
          1. lotus04
            lotus04 April 22 2012 15: 10
            -2
            The photo above, which he slammed with his "classmates".
            In the lower right corner is an icon.
            1. lesnik
              lesnik April 22 2012 15: 15
              0
              yes no, the next photo, like signed. such a feeling Savely is a representative of the "political academy" of the Georgian troops from the French embassy
              1. lotus04
                lotus04 April 22 2012 15: 25
                -2
                Judging by his rating, he’s completely trolling here.
        3. tut ya
          tut ya April 22 2012 21: 32
          0
          I would agree in a city battle, put you in the abrashka and with a partner from different angles would make a couple of shots))) and do you agree?
      2. zlibeni
        zlibeni April 23 2012 13: 43
        0
        in fact, it’s a Soviet tank. and that the Georgians that the Russians fought among themselves almost the same machines, or do you think that changing the flag adds thickness to the armor?))))))))))))))))))))) )
        1. lotus04
          lotus04 April 27 2012 17: 19
          -2
          Actually, this is a Ukrainian tank. Ukraine supplied them to the Georgians. Kharkov development.
  21. 16
    16 April 21 2012 22: 53
    +8
    Abrams, of course, the machine is primarily for the man !!!!!!! but t-72,90 ----- first of all -------- are designed for quick production and ease of maintenance !!!!!! !!! and with the same crew level ------- still ours is preferable !!!!!!! whatever they say !!!!!!!!!
    1. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 02: 01
      0
      Cheap and cheerful, for crew members in a plywood chair 20X20 cm
      and go!
  22. flukked
    flukked April 21 2012 23: 06
    +3
    For the sake of excitement, the author put in 2 Iraqi tanks that were blown up on roadside mines, which have nothing to do with the Desert Storm.
    1. lotus04
      lotus04 April 22 2012 05: 33
      0
      [img]http://http://forum.voinenet.ru/showthread.php?s=03780cf0d8fec33b0788b17e02
      c1be57 & p = 146878 [/ img]
    2. Gendalf
      Gendalf April 22 2012 11: 16
      +4
      What are some interesting land mines that don’t leave funnels and do not destroy the chassis. At least see what you write about.
    3. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 02: 04
      0
      One of the disadvantages of the T 90 is the poor protection of the bottom,
      I would look at them if they were blown up by HE
  23. Lustrator
    Lustrator April 22 2012 00: 56
    +3
    Serve a tank with a gas turbine engine, stuffed with electronics - hemorrhoids in a cube. But if the Abrams are used, it means that they are paying for themselves. But then I wonder how the expensive Leo-2, Leclerc, Challengers 2 also pay off? ..
    1. Landwarrior
      Landwarrior April 22 2012 10: 18
      -2
      Well, people are buying all sorts of "Bentleys", Ferrari ", Bugatti" .... there is probably the same picture. lol
    2. old rocket man
      old rocket man April 22 2012 14: 46
      +3
      Lustrator,
      What is the payback? You are talking about a tank, like any military equipment, in principle, it’s not worth it. From the moment of creation to the write-off, it’s a sheer cost, we can talk about efficiency if, before failure, it knocked out at least one enemy tank, but not
  24. vylvyn
    vylvyn April 22 2012 01: 01
    0
    May the Americans never have invulnerable tanks, nor fearless tankers.
  25. Professor
    Professor April 22 2012 11: 22
    +3
    According to the story of a Soviet military adviser ...

    I also had a fishing case ...
    Well, how much can you reprint this balcony? There were no Abrams there. Dot.
    1. Num lock U.A.
      Num lock U.A. April 22 2012 13: 50
      +1
      yes, now it is no longer important whether they were or were not (my opinion is another "bike"), but the reason to once again "jazz up" the performance characteristics of the opposing (and just interested) parties, yes laughing people love such a "show" and participate with pleasure bully
    2. savelij
      savelij April 22 2012 14: 12
      -1
      The storyteller wrote an article!
      We decided to hit from the flank! I led my squad through the swamp, my horse stumbled and we began to sink in the quagmire! What to do? Not a rope or a pole at hand! And then it dawned on me! HEAD! The head is always at hand gentlemen! I grabbed my hair and pulled out of the quagmire ..... together with the horse!
  26. vorobey
    vorobey April 22 2012 14: 24
    +7
    A good car Abrams and burns well and is invincible like that. Already 3000 pieces were written off as a result after Kuwait and the Iraqi company. Once again I read a similar opus and admire .... Lord seropogonniki. when discussing the Kuwait Prokhorovka, I asked a question ... Nobody answered me .. I will repeat .... Discovery is silent about this and the article briefly indicates ... Attention is a question .. Why on the eve of a desert storm, the coalition urgently transferred from M1 on M1A1? and gentlemen seropogonniki. photos burned 72 on the network a lot. Present at least one with traces of breaking through the frontal projection of a tower or hull (a characteristic defeat from a tank gun). Amazed 72 mainly aviation and TOU, and then with a range of 3000m because they were afraid to come closer. And I saw 72 with my own eyes after shelling from an RPG. The mechanic is ashamed, but alive.

    Yes, I’ll add a little more


    To the question of survivability of T-72B

    It was thought that in connection with the previous post, it would be nice to dig out this old text from ru_armor.
    ---
    As an epigraph - extract from comments:
    I served in a tank battalion in the 2nd tank company 506 SMEs. Participated in hostilities in the period 1999-2000, and I know about the many pros and cons of the T-72B. I can say that the tank is good, with numerous hits in the tank, it saved my life, many thanks to the designers for this!

    The post is an extract from an article by Gennady Zhilin, published in the February 2006 issue of Weapon's Word magazine.

    ... As an example, we can cite a couple of vehicles from a tank battalion (total for the state - 31 T-72B) 506 Guards. MSR 27 Guards the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Volga Military District (since September 1, 2001 - the Volga-Ural Military District), which took an active part in both the first and second Chechen campaigns. The photographs of the tanks were taken in June 2000 in a field park in Khankala, where preparations were being completed for their transportation by rail to the place of permanent deployment (most of the towers were turned back, the barrels of the guns were fixed "in a marching way" - u_96)

    In mid-December 1999, during the hostilities in the 15th town of Grozny, 2 tr of the 506th Guards Tank Battalion. MSP received a combat mission, along with attached motorized rifles, to unlock the encircled unit of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of the Russian Federation and ensure its access to the location of federal units.
    After successfully completing the task and after receiving a radio command to retreat, tank 623, which had previously rushed forward, began to retreat, not reversing, but turning around. Thus, he put his stern under fire from the enemy.
    Over the next short period of time, the car received 3 hits of anti-tank grenades from RPG-7:
    -first - into a metal barrel at the stern for additional fuel (in a combat situation on tanks, these barrels were always "dry"). The cumulative jet pierced the barrel through and through, but could not pierce the body of the tank.
    -second - on board the hull; It was neutralized by elements of mounted dynamic protection mounted on rubber-metal screens;
    -the third - in the lower part of the stern sheet, while the firing militant was "cut off" by a burst from a tank machine gun; the cumulative jet, having pierced the stern sheet, also pierced the lower part of the engine crankcase and "stalled" at the partition in the fighting compartment.
    Nevertheless, the tank under its own power with a broken engine crankcase (!), Walked another 300 m at high speed and took refuge on a neighboring street in the location of federal units. There the crew left the car and quickly left it. Tankers reported that oil-fuel fog had begun to accumulate inside the tank and that a fire and explosion could occur. Soon the engine stalled. But nothing caught fire and did not explode. During the day, the engine was replaced, the inlet from the cumulative grenade was brewed, and the tank again went into operation.

    At the beginning of January 2000, during the fighting to liberate the city of Grozny, 1 tr of the battalion was assigned as service forces to assault detachments of motorized riflemen of the 506th Guards. msp. In two days of fighting in the area of ​​the railway depot, the tank with side No. 611 was hit three times by the Fagot ATGM and six times by RPG-7 grenades.
    The hits occurred in the following parts of the tank.
    ATGM - to the left under the tower (all):
    - two - in the fuel tanks on the fenders under the tower, which during the fighting tankers always kept "dry". The tanks swelled and exploded, then the elements of the mounted explosive reactive armor on the tower worked, there was no armor penetration;
    -one - on board under the tower; it is reflected by the activated element of the mounted dynamic protection mounted on rubber-metal side screens.
    Grenades from RPG-7:
    -one - on top of the commander's hatch of the tower; a cumulative jet pierced the hatch and, without hitting the tank commander, went into the aft wall of the tower;
    -two - to the left in the upper frontal part of the tower; neutralized by triggered elements of mounted dynamic protection;
    -three - to the side of the hull, 2 on the left and 1 on the right; all are reflected by elements of dynamic protection, fixed on rubber-metal side screens (I would like to note that in much newer American Abrams, RPG grenades hitting the side screens covering the sides above the road wheels had sad consequences: both side screens and hulls , after which the tanks usually burned out - u_96).
    As a result, not a single hit led to the loss of combat capability of the tank.
    1. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 02: 07
      0
      No need to tell tales! They probably shot the tank from slingshots
      Usually T 72 after hitting looks like this
      1. Vitaliy_78
        Vitaliy_78 9 June 2012 01: 00
        0
        I understand in the foreground you fellow
  27. savelij
    savelij April 22 2012 14: 29
    -12
    62 tanks were destroyed in the first month of fighting in Chechnya. I wonder how many tanks Americans lost in Iraq in a month of fighting? You also need to consider that the Americans fought against a well-armed and powerful enemy, and Russia against Chechen shepherds and collective farmers !!!
    1. vorobey
      vorobey April 22 2012 14: 40
      +8
      Savely, it's probably hard to be smart. Do you know how this war began? What happened on New Year's Eve. God was merciful to me, but classmates at the school told me many things later. not for all ears. And the shepherds and collective farmers didn’t measure those 72 how many do you know? And in whose army did the shepherds and collective farmers serve, and who taught them? And we studied together in the same schools, the beds stood next to each other and fathers fought in Afghanistan together, we gained experience. But you also did not answer the question.

      Sava, do not take out the brain. you tanks are only in the internet but have seen through the discovery.
    2. Joker
      Joker April 22 2012 14: 46
      +3
      Quote: savelij
      And Russia is against Chechen shepherds and collective farmers !!!


      Do not carry with balcony:
      The Khattab army was first-class armed from the warehouses of Soviet military bases stationed in Chechnya before the collapse of the alliance. Most of the separatists served in the SA. If we take Grozny, then it was a "fortress" well prepared for defense.

      The conditions for the use of armored vehicles were also completely different.
    3. old rocket man
      old rocket man April 22 2012 14: 51
      +7
      savelij,
      You, along the way, were a collective farmer himself, the losses were in city battles, in Grozny, the tanks could not be used there at all, it’s amazing only that they weren’t lost even more
      1. valeri51d
        valeri51d April 23 2012 01: 19
        +1
        Well, you have all the collective farmers, etc. only you are the most, the most, and you know absolutely everything, I probably ate something in childhood. How do you know how and where to use the tanks? You’re like a rocket launcher, you can use tanks in the city, but under cover of motorized rifles, which unfortunately didn’t exist in Grozny, etc.
    4. felixis69
      felixis69 April 22 2012 18: 02
      +5
      It was a time when the Soviet Army was no longer there, and the Russian Army was just getting on its feet! ... And believe me, with all the controversial attitude in Russia towards Chechens and Caucasians in general, these are warriors from birth! And one Chechen shepherd is worth hundreds of Iraqi troops !!! And I would not wish the Americans to encounter any North Caucasian unit in battle! Vietnam will seem like a flower!
      1. savelij
        savelij April 22 2012 18: 25
        -4
        Therefore, the Russians pay tribute to these Chechen soldiers to this day, because the Russians are Bukharas, cowards and drug addicts!
        1. Joker
          Joker April 22 2012 20: 16
          +2
          Quote: savelij
          Therefore, the Russians pay tribute to these Chechen soldiers to this day, because the Russians are Bukharas, cowards and drug addicts!


          - speak for yourself, ChMO. We seem to talk about the tank? The arguments are over, a liberal debate has begun. Oh well.
      2. zlibeni
        zlibeni April 28 2012 09: 58
        -2
        Now I understand your logic. You aren’t from yet .... it’s good that you don’t respect anyone. But how you get it. Then you admit that you are not the best. As far as I understand, Chechens are cooler than you in spirit and in all respects .My opinion they are really higher than you in these indicators
  28. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 22 2012 16: 25
    -4
    What a cool discussion you have! "Abrams" -! And the pictures are cool. To the point.
    True, I also really like these.

    Or for example.

    And this one is also picturesque.
    1. Joker
      Joker April 22 2012 20: 21
      +1
      Scharnhorst

      They have already said that there are no invulnerable tanks, but Abrashi has quite a few shortcomings.

      Question, do you have the Russian flag on the avatar for the show-off? At least you discovered your country, you wouldn’t be ashamed of it.
      1. Vadim555
        Vadim555 April 22 2012 20: 51
        0
        Quote: Joker
        Joker Today, 20:21 new 2
        Scharnhorst

        They have already said that there are no invulnerable tanks, but Abrashi has quite a few shortcomings.

        Question, do you have the Russian flag on the avatar for the show-off? At least you discovered your country, wouldn’t be ashamed.


        For such punctures matzo can be deprived. laughing
  29. anton107798
    anton107798 April 22 2012 16: 35
    +1
    but completely .... Abrams ..... smashed
  30. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 22 2012 16: 39
    -4
    T-72
    In Iraqi "camouflage".
    1. Tan4ik
      Tan4ik April 22 2012 17: 44
      +1
      Look, he has no DZ!
  31. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 22 2012 18: 06
    +1
    Well now it’s gone.
    Does this one have?

    T-80 in its natural state.

    About the DZ.
  32. Scharnhorst
    Scharnhorst April 22 2012 18: 08
    -4
    Well now it’s gone.
    Does this one have?
    1. felixis69
      felixis69 April 22 2012 18: 19
      +1
      Perhaps that is why the tank remained virtually intact, and the chassis of any tank can be damaged!
      1. Scharnhorst
        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 18: 40
        -9
        Well, you and I know that Russian tanks can’t be damaged in principle, but this photo, like all the other State Department installations! Only two things — manuscripts and Russian tanks — do not burn in the world! Because for forty years they have no analogues in the world.
        After all, only our tanks have a unique tower bailout system. Envy the dumb Yankees!
    2. TiRex
      TiRex April 22 2012 21: 38
      +3
      a landmine bomb or mine
      1. valeri51d
        valeri51d April 23 2012 00: 30
        +2
        Ammunition exploded ...
  33. savelij
    savelij April 22 2012 18: 17
    -4
    captured tankmen in Chechnya
    1. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst April 22 2012 18: 42
      -5
      Captive "eighty" in Chechnya.
      1. felixis69
        felixis69 April 22 2012 19: 01
        +3
        Strange some kind of running on eighty, I'm with such a stranger! Although he served on the T-80, apparently something else was called eighty! ... Well, Savely sold his homeland for money! And what are you doing orgasm ???? Did he even serve?
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 23
          -6
          And in order to ejaculate in your pants at the sight of a broken "Abrams" you have to serve in the army? And if so, which one?
          I hope not in this.
          1. felixis69
            felixis69 April 22 2012 19: 33
            0
            ... So you still served !!!!
            1. Scharnhorst
              Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 55
              -3
              Did you recognize the photo from your demobilization album?
        2. valeri51d
          valeri51d April 23 2012 00: 29
          +2
          Bandages on rinks burned ...
    2. Eugene
      Eugene April 22 2012 18: 47
      +3
      and why are you happy?
      The fact that they put the Maykop Brigade there is not the fault of the boys, but of those freaks who set such a task for them without providing support and sending them without normal intelligence.

      And any tank takes to the RPG-7 roof; tanks in the city are hard to fight.
      1. Scharnhorst
        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 08
        -1
        And who is arguing! The command was incompetent, the guys were not shot,
        the weather was nasty, the wind was blowing in the wrong direction, the tilt of the earth's axis prevented aiming, the Mayan horoscope was an unlucky day, the tsunami passed in the Indian Ocean, the sun shone in our eyes, and the commander Savin was bitten by wasps. Everything was absolutely rubbish and feces. And against the backdrop of all this stench, menacing Russian-Soviet tanks shone with sparkling diamonds! Our military equipment is generally the best in the universe!
        Only it must be applied correctly.
        In dry, clear, calm weather at plus 15C on a level terrain as a table, in the absence of an enemy. It is advisable not to leave the factory floor at all. Better yet, in a computer simulator.
        Then our technology will show itself!
    3. Good Ukraine
      Good Ukraine April 22 2012 19: 00
      +2
      For saveliy

      YES HELLO GOOD FRENCH ARMY !!! URA-A - AA !!!

      Tell us more. And then we never heard anything about you.
      request
      1. savelij
        savelij April 22 2012 19: 06
        -2
        Fear and repent of the sinner!
        1. eJik
          eJik April 22 2012 19: 44
          0
          Leclercians will be nice to glow and add scenery in Paris to the ancient city of all sorry-tutoks from Algerian RPGs
          1. Good Ukraine
            Good Ukraine April 22 2012 20: 15
            0
            Leklerki can only start from lightning.
        2. Good Ukraine
          Good Ukraine April 22 2012 19: 50
          0
          Fear and repent of the sinner!

          For saveliy
      2. felixis69
        felixis69 April 22 2012 19: 23
        +2
        As it was not heard ... this is the army that since the days of Bonaparte did not know what "Victory" is! Either the Russians pulled it out, or the British! And as some turned out to be running from Vietnam and from Algeria!
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 33
          -3
          Especially the Russians "pulled" her into the Crimean war. Yes, so dashingly that even the Russian tsar, out of fright, moved his horses. By the way, after serving in the army, are you really unable to find the T-80 in the picture? Then the number 69 in your nickname is very symbolic.
          If anything, then how much did I buy and sell it.

          http://topwar.ru/10122-ekspluatacii-i-boevoe-primenenie-t-80.html
          1. felixis69
            felixis69 April 22 2012 19: 56
            +5
            No! Then the British pulled out the French ... then it was not our turn!
            Do you know how to distinguish driving wheels? If you know how, then compare them in your photo and in the photo of eighties ... And then I'm used to hanging out at gunpoint! It is necessary to look at the wheels.
          2. Good Ukraine
            Good Ukraine April 22 2012 20: 02
            0
            Then the number 69 in your nickname is very symbolic.

            For sharnhorst
            You, "Dear", put durex on the wrong head.
      3. eJik
        eJik April 22 2012 19: 49
        0
        The French army - this is the army that is "removed" during military campaigns as a marching brothel
    4. eJik
      eJik April 22 2012 19: 28
      +1
      It's funny to look at these trolls who see no difference in what conditions our T-72,80 fought (in the photo from the window of the house to the tank no more than 10 meters)
      and at what distances abrams burned in open deserts
      I’m sure that a Frenchwoman would be tempted to approach abrmams with RPG-7 in the desert
      1. zlibeni
        zlibeni April 28 2012 10: 02
        -1
        but in general there is a tactic of application simply. and if you had the mind to throw tanks into the city without the support of infantry. Respect to your squad)))))))))))))) here, many gathered around the world to hang. The only question is what is such an army? ))))))))
  34. Eraser
    Eraser April 22 2012 18: 55
    -5
    Expired by aluminum.
    1. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 17
      -4
      Not lumine, but oil. Not expired, but pacified.
      Holy Nanotank.
      1. Dimedroll
        Dimedroll April 22 2012 19: 39
        +2
        Scharnhorst is just a trolloid cock shit, as well as Savely. (Yes, on purpose with a small letter!)
        It is a pity that the Russian flag is marked at the first fag.
        Put you there, chmyrdyai, would just fight on the march, not counting the contact!
    2. felixis69
      felixis69 April 22 2012 19: 26
      +1
      Your brother Malyshevsky .... Perhaps this is from the eraser brains flowed!
      1. Eraser
        Eraser April 22 2012 19: 38
        -3
        You turn everything upside down.
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst April 22 2012 19: 58
          -4
          Your post upsets Rosoboronexport ...
        2. Kars
          Kars April 22 2012 20: 11
          +5
          What are these demonstrations for? The network is full of photos of Iraq’s lined equipment, there are several monographs. I have only one Iraq Files folder: 300; folders: 14 of such photos.

          But until now there is not a single monograph with damaged US equipment in the Iraqi company. I have a monograph Tanks in the battles for Grozny with a detailed description of the places and type of damaged equipment and means that caused these damage - but there is no Abrams monograph in the battle for Baghdad.
          There are pictures that got into the network and data about the write-offs and the decrease in the number of Abrams in service. There is a dock. Abrams repair film --- based on it, all the photos of T-72 from Chechnya or Iraq using American technology will pass as damage that needs to be repaired. The US generals cannot determine how many tanks they lost in Iraq,

          This is the very thing that is negative ---- all this against the background of incessant tirades --- Abrams is the best tank in the world, it stuffs the teeth and irritates a rather good tank.

          My first tank model was Abrams M1A1NA
          1. Scharnhorst
            Scharnhorst April 22 2012 20: 29
            +1
            The Yankees have a rather complex system for assessing the combat effectiveness of equipment. Plus, the Abram is considered a relatively easy tank to repair.
            In most cases, apparently damaged machines can still be returned to service.
            The percentage of irretrievable losses of these machines is unfortunately difficult to assess without accurate data on hand.
            But shkolota, who lives on this forum, cannot overtake such an idea.
            But in general, you are right. The lack of a decent monograph on the use of M1
            a really annoying omission.
            1. Good Ukraine
              Good Ukraine April 22 2012 20: 40
              +1
              Well no.
              Americans praise everything, even if it is frank shit.
              But OUR "Patriots" - all manage to hait.
              In which country can you still see yourself and your flag obsessed?

              This is for you - Scharnhorst
              1. Scharnhorst
                Scharnhorst April 22 2012 20: 46
                0
                I’m at least haying my flag. And it’s strange for me to hear you extol someone else’s flag.
                1. Good Ukraine
                  Good Ukraine April 22 2012 20: 53
                  +2
                  For Scharnhorst

                  I never sold my flag

                  And he took the oath under the flag of the USSR

                  And again I repeat - only a schnick and a traitor can hait his country
                  1. Scharnhorst
                    Scharnhorst April 22 2012 21: 13
                    +1
                    He gave the oath to one country, received another citizenship, serve the third.
                    And you, my friend, are a renegade. And not ashamed?
                    1. Good Ukraine
                      Good Ukraine April 22 2012 21: 18
                      +2
                      I am ashamed only of those freaks who are obsessing their house
                      1. Vadim555
                        Vadim555 April 22 2012 21: 32
                        +1
                        Quote: Dobryak Ukraine
                        Kind Ukraine Today, 21:18
                        I am ashamed only of those freaks who are obsessing their house


                        The flag on the avatar is not yet a member of the country, a puffed-up stuffed animal can also sit under a German proxy, all the more shame is unknown to them.
                      2. Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 21: 44
                        -3
                        You better answer which country you serve. Rather, what country do you consider home. If Russia, then a welcom. Or are there other options? With regards to shame, it would be better to be ashamed of the president of the criminal and the former prime minister, who is now culturally resting on the bunks.
                      3. Vadim555
                        Vadim555 April 22 2012 21: 51
                        +1
                        My Homeland is the USSR
                        He gave the oath once, refused to re-take.

                        Still have questions about the cutter?
                      4. Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 21: 57
                        -7
                        Is.
                        First question: why didn’t you take the heroic death for the USSR’s Motherland on the barricades in 1991?
                        The second question: how often do Maksuta Kalashnikov and Sirozh Kurginyan come to you in erotic dreams?
                        Third question: by 282st. sat? If not, is it mentally prepared?
                      5. Vadim555
                        Vadim555 April 22 2012 22: 17
                        +3
                        Quote: Scharnhorst
                        Third question: by 282st. sat? If not, is it mentally prepared?


                        By "circumcised" I meant lobotomy, and you yourself stupidly burned laughing
                      6. Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 22: 35
                        -3
                        You never answered me. Why didn’t you give your life for the Great USSR?
                        Point? By the way, what do you have against the Jews.
                        The weapons on which you are so fiercely fap are often created by them. Lozino-Lozinsky, Gurevich, Severin, etc. Personal motives? Fired from work?
                      7. Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 23: 03
                        -4
                        Something not to hear.
                        Looks like Aryan was blown away. Or I went to watch an evening fairy tale.
                      8. Vadim555
                        Vadim555 April 22 2012 23: 22
                        +2
                        Quote: Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst Today, 23:03 new 0 Something not to hear.
                        Looks like Aryan was blown away. Or I went to watch an evening fairy tale.


                        Oddly enough, on your part, but I have nothing against the Jews, among them there are many worthy people.
                        But as for the Jews and Judaism, there are a lot of questions.
                        That's it. Get out. laughing
                      9. Scharnhorst
                        Scharnhorst April 23 2012 19: 36
                        0
                        You still have not answered my basic question. The drain is protected. Good luck
                      10. Good Ukraine
                        Good Ukraine April 22 2012 22: 00
                        +2
                        Once again for those who think slowly.

                        I was born and raised in the USSR. And I recognize only one Great State.
                        And you are a "patriot" for some reason, when you communicate with your compatriots, you always say "your country"
                        And yours, which one?

                        So, grind your troll skill EXTENDANT (read ZASR_NETS)
                      11. anton107798
                        anton107798 April 22 2012 23: 44
                        -1
                        it’s like you’ve been cleaned ... Putin is on the third and fourth quarters, and there you look and will sit until death! So what? is it by law? or above him the halo of the holy spirit to shine? and you pulled tongues in the ass and see the return of totalitarianism! you must first look after yourself, and not to blame your neighbor!
            2. Eugene
              Eugene April 22 2012 21: 22
              -1
              I always got the impression that the amers are pulling the Abrams out literally from the other world (judging by those some photos of those who will go for repairs). And ours, when the T-72 / T-80 was knocked out, were pulled out of storage more or less alive and introduced / built-in, if possible, using electronic equipment, but knocked out "on needles".

              Therefore, Amer such half-dead tanks do not consider for irretrievable losses. Something like that.
          2. vorobey
            vorobey April 23 2012 10: 14
            +1
            Andrew, wrote above. After Kuwait and Iraq, about 3000 cars were decommissioned completely.
            And here is a link to an interview with General Tucker. truth in Aglitsky, if you own. There, he also makes a reservation in numbers.
            http://www.armytimes.com/legacy/new/0-ARMYPAPER-693226.php
  35. viruskvartirus
    viruskvartirus April 22 2012 19: 35
    +7
    As the respected Kars Abrams wrote, "A tank is like a tank." And the tanks are burning, the heavy Merkava is burning, the T-72 is burning and the Abrams is no exception. It is full of shortcomings that the Amers themselves admit ... here http://engine.aviaport.ru/issues/22/page28.html. But personally I don't like Abrams, I like the Leopard, the Merkava commands respect ... and the Abrams embodies a purely American approach ... an engine that does not eat into itself, expensive to maintain and very large ...
  36. Vadim555
    Vadim555 April 22 2012 19: 55
    +2
    For-
    Scharnhorst
    savelij
    Eraser

    and other ......

    In which cracks of cockroach
    You have been sitting for 70 years!
    With what impatience they waited
    To get out together in the light!
    Oh how tired you must be
    Dressing up in innocent lambs
    Storing in a crowded sting
    Over the years, accumulated poison.


    A small amount of slightly damaged equipment in Iraq.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k7Sht-9mudc
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=CUvoaD6Vnkg&feature=endscreen
    1. Scharnhorst
      Scharnhorst April 22 2012 20: 06
      -3
      For vadik.
      "Unusual adventures of" kolyanov "in Ossetia".
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbasoRqpmM&feature=related

      And a bit more.
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4mRJ8ASD5o&feature=related
      1. Vadim555
        Vadim555 April 22 2012 20: 09
        +4
        Quote: Scharnhorst
        Scharnhorst Today, 20:01 new 0
        For vadik.
        "Unusual adventures of" kolyanov "in Ossetia".
        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sVbasoRqpmM&feature=related


        Best comments
        funny 58 army, and equipment with a peacekeeper badge that stood near the buildings) mixed with lined Georgian tanks and infantry fighting vehicles, which I don’t catch the essence) the author burns, at least watch your video in the future)
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst April 22 2012 20: 22
          -5
          This is what I am saying that the Russian army is invincible. And even if she was victorious, then all circumstances were against us! It is clear that if the picture shows a damaged tank, then it can only be Georgian! And in the MC there was no military equipment at all. It was inflatable and therefore does not count as a loss. Anyway, I suggest by default that all damaged tanks placed in this thread are considered Georgian, including the Abrams. How is the idea? Like? I give.
          1. felixis69
            felixis69 April 22 2012 20: 50
            +9
            There are no unsinkable tanks, just as there are no unsinkable ships! ... I, at least, have never seen, read, or heard from our techies, the military, that it is basically impossible to knock out Russian tanks! But for some reason amers about their "Abrams" are pushing the idea of ​​their invulnerability .... They like to shoot films about it.
            But why I am delighted with the knocked-down equipment of Russian production, I do not understand.
            I remember an episode from a book about the first days of the Patriotic War of 1941-1945. A correspondent for one of the central newspapers tried to photograph a damaged Soviet tank. A simple private soldier jumped up to him and shouted, "" What are you doing !!! I'll shoot you !!!!
            So you will be somewhere in the company, or you never know people, do not expand on your hobby - "everything Russian", people are different, suddenly you run into the descendant of that soldier!
            1. Scharnhorst
              Scharnhorst April 22 2012 21: 01
              -4
              Should I consider this a threat? About the descendant of a soldier? But hardly. This descendant is probably now drinking beer in a parade. Or a hero moves through a vein.
              The episode brought by you is very characteristic. That is why Russia will never bury all those who fell in that war. You will continue to rake the bones of the dead into the trash with one hand, and with the other tie a GEYorgievsky ribbon to yourself. The people of hypocrites. But the wrecked technique of reproduction does not delight me. As well as any other. It makes you choke with saliva from anger.
              But this just delights me.
              1. felixis69
                felixis69 April 22 2012 21: 18
                +1
                Well then, do not be a hypocrite, if you distance yourself from the Russian people, then tie your flag to yourself, Tricolor - then why are you hiding?
                1. Scharnhorst
                  Scharnhorst April 22 2012 21: 50
                  0
                  "Well then, do not be hypocritical, since you distance yourself from the Russian people, then tie your flag to yourself, with the Tricolor - why are you hiding behind?"

                  "Russian people"? And who is it? And I don't want to change the flag. He's you ov
                  drives into cognitive dissonance. So a good, right flag.
              2. vorobey
                vorobey April 23 2012 09: 45
                +2
                Scharnhorst, where are you so messed up? He would not touch the holy and would answer for himself. This is just the hardest. Change your nickname, because you will end badly like both Scharnhorsts, but you are not dragging on the role of a reformer.
                1. Good Ukraine
                  Good Ukraine April 23 2012 14: 40
                  +3
                  He has a nickname named "durex" - gond_n. He is g_ndong. He just put it on the wrong head.
      2. Good Ukraine
        Good Ukraine April 22 2012 20: 09
        +2
        For sharnhorst

        YES YES YES
        There is still there, as the most important and most courageous Georgian, was also the fastest, running from his plane.
        I ran faster than the plane. laughing
      3. lotus04
        lotus04 April 22 2012 20: 20
        0
        What are you happy about ur-od, they removed one BMP from different sides, yes UAZ. All the equipment of the peacekeepers. Good trolling. Go sit in "classmates".
        1. Scharnhorst
          Scharnhorst April 22 2012 20: 40
          -4
          "It's good to troll. Go sit in your classmates."

          Said lotus04 and proudly headed for contact.
  37. tut ya
    tut ya April 22 2012 21: 36
    +1
    An interesting answer is the experts: what is the percentage of survival was in the 2nd world and now a tank unit in the first 10 minutes of the battle ?!
  38. 89651544551
    89651544551 April 22 2012 21: 57
    +1
    посмотрите классное видео http://rutube.ru/tracks/66631.html?v=71aabedc818c70420eedbf3ffb129ba6&page=index
    r & answer = 1
    1. Good Ukraine
      Good Ukraine April 22 2012 22: 44
      +4
      Trolls do not watch such films.

      There is another indicator.
      Americans shove all kinds of shit into everyone, including Abrams.
      But Russia now has no opportunity to push the T-90. And nevertheless, the T-90 scatters around the world like hot cakes.
      1. Scharnhorst
        Scharnhorst April 22 2012 23: 00
        -4
        T-90 Is this the child prodigy that received the T-72BU index at birth?
        Very good and powerful tank for the CIS countries and other musorostanov.
        That's just for Russia as it is not very.
  39. igor67
    igor67 April 23 2012 00: 00
    -2
    Troll is an Anglo-Saka ethnic group, the Slavs still have a goof. about tanks: recently I watched a film about an Israeli tank that was not beloved by everyone, but there was an inscription in another tank: MAN HAS BEEN MADE FROM STEEL, AND TOTAL IS ONLY FROM IRON.
    1. valeri51d
      valeri51d April 23 2012 00: 43
      0
      Hello hello. For a long time nebylo was not visible. Not tired of fighting with the gold-chasing ala patriots?
  40. igor67
    igor67 April 23 2012 00: 53
    +3
    GOOD EVENING, AND WHAT THEY FIGHT WITH THEM, THEY BELIEVE OR WANT TO BELIEVE. HEAVY SEEED FOR REALITY. Here our tank is the best and it can’t be different, I also believed in it, and when I go to the Golan heights and look at the wrecked cars. .... they were beaten by the Centurions (the beginning of release 43-44). So there is reason to think and not yell URYA
    1. Kars
      Kars April 23 2012 01: 18
      +1
      Quote: igor67
      Centurions (beginning of release 43-44 year).



      Well, why exaggerate so ---- especially not to tell the truth?
      this is not talking about the fact that they beat a very deep modernization.
      Shot is a very decent tank of its time period.

      can read for educational program
      1. igor67
        igor67 April 23 2012 01: 43
        +2
        I know that they were modernized, the first centurions and the engine were gasoline and a different weapon about. there are so many centurions scattered around here, that’s not the point, the enemy’s underestimation, it’s overwhelming for all armies, living with the victories of the past. 2006 Israelis also did not underestimate hezbola. The acquaintance of 2006 was called up to the partisans in Sevetsky, the driver of the tanker / came to refuel the tanks and they stand in the mountains in an open area, the officer ordered to refuel the tanks naturally he refuses to obey the stupid order, the multi-ton tanker received 6 days of arrest under RPG fire. And this is stupid the man decided to refuel the tanks himself, but several breaks sobered him up. So the tanks also lose because of stupid
      2. igor67
        igor67 April 23 2012 02: 39
        +1
        Centurion, A41 (Eng. Centurion, A41) - British medium tank of the second half of the 1940s. According to the western classification, it belongs to the main battle tanks of the first generation. It was developed in 1943-1944 to counter the German heavy tanks, in the framework of the concept of a “universal tank”, which was supposed to replace the previously existing infantry and cruising tanks. The first serial "Centurions" entered the army in 1945, after the end of hostilities in Europe. Repeatedly modernizing, Centurion was in mass production from 1945 to 1962. A total of 4423 tanks of this type were produced, not counting vehicles based on it.
      3. igor67
        igor67 April 23 2012 11: 46
        0
        Kars,
        such they are tanks
        1. Kars
          Kars April 23 2012 12: 31
          0
          Really?
          Quote: igor67
          Designed in 1943 — 1944 to counter German heavy tanks

          The first model appeared in 1945, and the main model MK 3 adopted by the 1947

          A MK 10 adopted by the 1958

          So ring the bananas dumb.

          And so the T-54 prototype is also made in 1945 and the modernization of the T-54A 1951

          so all your pathetics are not clear where it is directed. (T-55 characterizes only the presence of protection against WMD)

          Simply put, learn the math part, or how much do you say in AOI there were cinturions with 20 pound guns?
          1. igor67
            igor67 April 23 2012 13: 05
            +1
            Quote: Kars
            So ring the bananas dumb.

            goodbye mani your bananas belay ce perche. And the second, I don’t pretend to do anything. I was engaged in repairing helicopters. And I look at all the discussions of the fan of tanks. And 3 on the centurion, my son and I climb

            but I'm not special in tanks
            1. igor67
              igor67 April 23 2012 13: 07
              0
              here's another tank
          2. igor67
            igor67 April 23 2012 13: 13
            +1
            frontal hit
            1. igor67
              igor67 April 23 2012 13: 19
              +1
              the tower burst
              1. Kars
                Kars April 23 2012 13: 25
                -1
                only in the photo are not cinturions.
                And to know the difference between Centurion MK1 and MK 13 does not hurt, so that such comments do not leave
                Quote: igor67
                I look at the padded carcasses ..... they were beaten by the Centurions (the beginning of the release of 43-44 year). So there is a reason to think and not yell URYA

                And then another photo of the T-34-85 leads.

                A SU-100 photo no?
                1. igor67
                  igor67 April 23 2012 13: 29
                  +1
                  read carefully, I didn’t special in tanks, I just took equipment out.
                2. igor67
                  igor67 April 23 2012 13: 53
                  0
                  Quote: Kars
                  A SU-100 photo no?
                  somewhere there. if you have a desire I will look
                  1. Kars
                    Kars April 23 2012 14: 07
                    0
                    If it does not, then please.

                    And as for the special, not the special - it’s just that your comment did not succeed, and acquired a rather controversial meaning.

                    And in the first photo you have Centrion MK 10 in theory, only trucks, as I understand it, Vikersovskie.

                    And this photo would fit your comment, but he couldn’t cope with the T-54
                    1. igor67
                      igor67 April 23 2012 14: 48
                      0
                      here with other trucks. And why did you need the SU100 photo
                      1. igor67
                        igor67 April 23 2012 14: 55
                        0
                        inside view
                      2. Kars
                        Kars April 23 2012 15: 05
                        +1
                        And this is Shot MK13 which showed mebla better than American M48 and M60.

                        And I just like Su 100 and I collect their photos.

                        And Centurion with Blazer is even better looking, with such a T-62 it was not sugar to fight.

                        a little about the story
                        The richest experience in the combat use of the Centurions was gained by the Israelis. For the first time, the Centurions of the Israeli army took part in the fighting in November 1964. Fights were, as a rule, artillery duels and were fought only in the Golan Heights. The Israelis used the latest Centurion tanks, while the Syrians used the T-34 / 85 and the German PzKpfw IV Ausf.H. So twenty years later, the Centurions had the opportunity to measure their strength with German tanks. German tanks were delivered to Syria through the efforts of France and Spain. Along with tanks, Syria also bought StuG III assault guns. The Centurions were armed with 105 mm cannons, and their crews made full use of superiority in firepower; the outcome of the artillery duels was in their favor. The battles of 1964 prompted the Syrians to turn to the Soviet Union with a request for supplies of T-54A tanks that exceeded the Centurions in their characteristics.

                      3. igor67
                        igor67 April 23 2012 15: 22
                        0
                        X-NUMX didn’t help in 73. Arabs. 54 versus 1300 tanks. Taches had a night vision scope. They weren’t on the Centurions
                      4. Kars
                        Kars April 23 2012 15: 51
                        0
                        Quote: igor67
                        X-NUMX didn’t help in 73. Arabs. 54 versus 1300 tanks. Taches had a night vision scope. They weren’t on the Centurions


                        It is not true.
                        The externally modernized Centurion was distinguished by an increased MTO height and the presence of an air purifier located on the fenders. The first modernized Centurion was handed over to the troops in May 1970, where it received its own name Shot (Knut); unofficially, the tank was called Ben Gurion. By the beginning of the 1973 war, most of the Israeli Centurions were converted into the Shot variant.

                        Subsequently, Blazer dynamic protection was installed on the Shot tanks (850 kg protection mass; it is reported to be equivalent in effectiveness to 10 t steel armor), a laser rangefinder and night vision devices. In total, Israel received approximately 1100 Centurion tanks of various options.
                        Centurions ”, most of which were modernized at Shot, fought in the Golan Heights. The 7th Armored Division, armed with the Centurions, suffered heavy losses during tank battles in the El Cuneitra region, in the so-called “Valley of Tears”. In three days of fighting, the division was almost destroyed: only seven of the 105 tanks survived. However, the tank crews managed to maintain their positions and, in turn, destroy 260 Syrian and Iraqi tanks. On the Sinai Peninsula, the Centurions were often used as part of small maneuver groups of several tanks and trophy tracked armored personnel carriers BTR-50 or OT-62.

                        Speaking about the participation of tanks in the Arab-Israeli wars in general, it is necessary to note approximately equal losses in tanks on both sides. So, in the war of 1967, according to Western data, the Arabs lost 1100 tanks, Israel - 900 (loss ratio 1: 1,2); in the 1973 war, Arabs lost 2400 vehicles, Israel lost 2500 (approximately 1: 1), in the 1982 war 250 to 450 (1: 1,8 ratio). Amid the total loss of the struggle for air supremacy (especially in the 1967 war), these numbers are impressive. It should also be borne in mind that a significant part of the Arab tanks was destroyed by aviation, so the ratio of net losses of tanks to tanks will clearly be in favor of the Arabs, which completely debunk the myth of the technical superiority of Western tanks. The worse trained tankers of Syria, Egypt, Iraq on the T-54, T-62 and T-72 were able to win the confrontation with the Centurions, Super Shermans, M60 and Merkavas.



                        and about the losses, they are due to the low moral qualities of the Arab crews, and poor training.
                      5. igor67
                        igor67 April 23 2012 15: 57
                        0
                        well so I thought about it. hands from the wrong place. And I took off all these centurions in the Golan. I tried to count 20 pieces along the way.
                      6. igor67
                        igor67 April 23 2012 16: 01
                        0
                        Quote: Kars

                        And I just like the Su 100 and I collect their photos.

                        with my height 178, it was very crowded inside the self-propelled gun. For 5 years, I went with my son in tanks to climb. But this year, everything did not want to grow. And I like the child
                      7. Kars
                        Kars April 24 2012 21: 45
                        0
                        What’s the minus for this? We communicate normally.
                3. igor67
                  igor67 April 23 2012 13: 58
                  0
                  Quote: Kars
                  A SU-100 photo no?
                  1. Kars
                    Kars April 23 2012 14: 44
                    0
                    Cool coloring, I like it.
                    1. igor67
                      igor67 April 23 2012 15: 01
                      0
                      and another such
                  2. igor67
                    igor67 April 23 2012 15: 25
                    0
                    and this is a triple
  41. wars1991
    wars1991 April 23 2012 00: 57
    +3
    The article is complete nonsense mixed with lies and tales ...
  42. sasha.28blaga
    sasha.28blaga April 23 2012 06: 33
    +3
    Our tanks are the best in the world, it’s indisputable, since the Second World War. All other tank builders try make either something similar or an improved version. But all attempts by common sense should be unsuccessful. Since no one in the world has such experience in tank building. In general, military construction for Russia is the same as Mercedes for Germany. Photographs of the wrecked Russian tanks prove once again that only a RUSSIAN TANK can resist any tank, any weapon.
  43. AK-74-1
    AK-74-1 April 23 2012 12: 48
    0
    The article is not straightforward. There are many unsolved questions. More interesting comments.
  44. leon-iv
    leon-iv April 23 2012 13: 56
    +4
    We all love to talk about tanks without understanding their concept.
    Once again, I’ll tell a common truth, but there are two schools of the USSR / RF / Ukraine and Germany / USA / France / Small shaving. Everything else is derivative.
    now let's continue to reason.
    1 Application Concept.
    T-64/72/80/90 is a strike ram of the Armed Forces and the main GOAL is the destruction of infantry and pillboxes. Therefore, a lot of OFS, MOH, etc., etc.
    Also small size
    KURV
    And all of them should work in the conditions of nuclear weapons

    Western concept
    How correctly KARS said ALL western tanks grew from MBT-70. And their main task is the destruction of Soviet tanks. Everything is directed there. And thick foreheads and half-board sides and the lack of a normal OFS that changed the whole concept of booking.
    Just 1 question than abrams can pick out a normal DOT BPS COFS or shrapnel. Or the infantry that dug in.


    In Iraq, all the myths have a couple of nuances.
    1 tanks were POLISH of disgusting quality
    2 shells. There were no normal BPSs being pulled by our old ones.
    3 The main losses were from aviation
    4 Most of those shitty T-72s have been preserved.
    1. ecdy
      ecdy 17 May 2012 02: 13
      0
      He can destroy everything with a cannon, but what he cannot,
      he will crush
  45. korvin1976
    korvin1976 16 June 2012 23: 02
    +1
    For a long time I was looking for the comparative dimensions of our tanks and Western ones, and here I have a photo right away. Stunned! Looking at the photo, which is the very first in the article, I recall the German "Tiger" and our T-34. Almost one to one wink ... The Germans considered the same "Tiger" invincible, though they were a bit mistaken. So in this controversial situation, no matter how much they praise the Abrams, it is for our T-72 or T-80 just like the Tiger for the T-34. The larger the cabinet, the louder it falls. Only you do not tell anyone about this, otherwise the closet will be ashamed.
  46. Nubia2
    Nubia2 15 July 2012 19: 22
    0
    How long can you believe and write tales about "the battle at the Saman base, which is 300 km east of Baghdad" ..
    are people looking at the map or not? At this distance is the territory of Iran.
    This alone does not allow seriously considering this story.
  47. kov
    kov 18 July 2012 09: 09
    0
    Abrams in the Mud) - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IfqLCw5AO8I
  48. Plamya77
    Plamya77 7 June 2014 23: 12
    0
    Wonderful article!