Military Review

A video appeared on the Web with a hint of the superiority of the Abrams tank over the T-14 Armata for stabilization

108
A video appeared on the Web with a hint of the superiority of the Abrams tank over the T-14 Armata for stabilization

A video footage has been published on the network, which shows footage of the firing shots from the main weapons of armored vehicles. In this case, we are talking about armored vehicles (tanks), which are in service with the armies of different countries of the world.


The author of the video focuses on the stabilization of guns when firing. For clarity, a red line is drawn on the frames, which corresponds to the average position of the tank gun barrel. Based on it, you can visually track how much the barrel of an armored vehicle deviates from its original position.

Shots of the firing of tanks M1A2 Abrams (USA), T-14 Armata (Russia), K-2 Black Panther (South Korea), Type 96 and Type 99 (People's Republic of China) are presented.

The video itself is built as if the author of the publication on the Web is trying to indicate the "superiority" of American-made tanks over others. The stabilization option during the shot is demonstrated as a given, while no associated information is given on such important in this case comparative characteristics as the mass of the tank, the mass of ammunition used.

Take at least a comparison of "Abrams" and "Almaty." The author clearly gives a hint that the stabilization when firing the M1A2 Abrams is better than that of the T-14. But the mass of these tanks is by no means the same, so that one could draw a conclusion about the stabilization parameters and talk about the "advantage" of American armored vehicles over Russian ones.

108 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Doccor18
    Doccor18 April 14 2020 09: 43 New
    -3
    Hussites in Saudi Abrams are burned by Soviet anti-tank guns.
    Armata is a new generation of tanks.
    Abrams is nothing else, therefore we use it.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 14 2020 09: 49 New
      45
      Quote: Doccor18
      Hussites in Saudi Abrams are burned by Soviet anti-tank guns.
      Armata is a new generation of tanks.
      Abrams is nothing else, therefore we use it.

      Give up.
      Someone who is not very smart posted a video without possessing minimal knowledge in the materiel. Why be offended?

      All this does not affect the combat capabilities of the tank. Because the gun after the shot still goes into the loading position. Trying a stabilization system to stop disturbances is a futile activity.
      1. svp67
        svp67 April 14 2020 09: 53 New
        12
        Quote: Spade
        Trying a stabilization system to stop disturbances is a futile activity.

        So why not, because the shell has long been on the road, when recoil begins to affect the suspension of the tank and lift the barrel ...
        1. Gogia
          Gogia April 14 2020 17: 56 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          So why not, because the shell has long been on the road when recoil begins to affect the suspension of the tank and lift the barrel

          But actually, with a variable stiffness of the suspension, it’s logical, before shooting from a place, to somehow bring it from a standing state;)))
          1. svp67
            svp67 April 14 2020 19: 26 New
            +2
            Quote: Gogia
            But actually, with a variable stiffness of the suspension, it’s logical, before shooting from a place, to somehow bring it from a standing state;)))

            And the point is to complicate the design so if this does not affect the accuracy of the shot?
            1. Liam
              Liam April 14 2020 19: 32 New
              +1
              Does it affect the rate of fire and the pauses between shots?
              1. svp67
                svp67 April 14 2020 19: 34 New
                +2
                Quote: Liam
                Does it affect the rate of fire and the pauses between shots?

                No. It goes out before the start of the loading cycle ...
                1. Liam
                  Liam April 14 2020 19: 39 New
                  -14
                  And therefore, the American Negro charging provides a higher rate of fire than the machine gun on Russian tanks. He does not have to wait until the pitching settles down, and the gunner needs to aim again. These problems are the same for firing a pistol / machine gun. For those who have greater recoil, they shoot less often and worse.
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 April 14 2020 19: 46 New
                    10
                    Quote: Liam
                    He does not have to wait until the pitching settles down, and the gunner, aim again

                    In Russian (Soviet) tanks, this TEM no longer has to wait, the mechanism (automatic) of loading this rolling "on the drum", and the gunner's sight does not have a rigid connection with the gun and has its own stabilization system in the vertical plane, and partly in the horizontal one. So that you have this argument by ...
                    Quote: Liam
                    Who has a greater return, shoots less and less.

                    No, it's all about the mass of the projectile. As soon as the "Negro-loading" will begin to "throw" in the pie shells of the same weight, as we have the COP and the OFS, the speed of its loading will fall sharply BOPS ... And so it is certainly ... "feathers" is easier to throw than " cast iron"
                    1. Liam
                      Liam April 14 2020 19: 49 New
                      -13
                      We assume that the laws of physics and mechanics do not apply to Russian tanks)
                      1. svp67
                        svp67 April 14 2020 20: 08 New
                        +5
                        Quote: Liam
                        We assume that the laws of physics and mechanics do not apply to Russian tanks)

                        But I analyze your logic and more and more understand that you are from Ukraine ...
                      2. Liam
                        Liam April 14 2020 20: 23 New
                        -10
                        About how. And what are the features of the logic of the Ukrainians?
                      3. svp67
                        svp67 April 14 2020 20: 24 New
                        +7
                        Quote: Liam
                        About how. And what are the features of the logic of the Ukrainians?

                        As much as possible to spoil everything Soviet and Russian ...
                      4. Liam
                        Liam April 14 2020 20: 38 New
                        -12
                        This is a promising direction for receiving the Nobel in the field of psychology, sociology and racial theories)
                        And why is it necessary only Ukrainians?. Baltic states, Georgians, Moldova, Poles, Czechs, Germans and other Americans are different than that?)
                      5. svp67
                        svp67 April 14 2020 20: 59 New
                        +4
                        Quote: Liam
                        And why necessarily Ukrainians only

                        And now they have a period of exacerbation ...
                    2. The comment was deleted.
                  2. mister-red
                    mister-red April 15 2020 15: 13 New
                    +1
                    YES! Today in the morning I argue with one such on YouTube, the logic is simply excellent. In the sense of a brilliant lack of any logic, except "we want" and "we owe."
              2. tracer
                tracer April 15 2020 19: 07 New
                -3
                And it was not you who accidentally laughed at our "bast shoes" who made the caliber of the machine gun 7.62 × 39 and not 45ACP? Then it's clear. This is a clinic ... then the laws of understanding information do not apply to you. Although if then even you were not about understanding information, this is about you.
          2. Lopatov
            Lopatov April 15 2020 09: 28 New
            +2
            Quote: Liam
            And therefore, the American Negro charging provides a greater rate of fire than the machine gun on Russian tanks. He does not have to wait until the pitching settles down

            laughing
            Matrimony
            Remember how the bus drove. When they went to the exit, grabbed the handrails? And the bus rode on smooth asphalt, but not on an intersection ...
            He has to wait.
            And not only "calmed rolling" The simple movement of the tank creates problems for its operation.
          3. Range
            Range April 15 2020 17: 58 New
            +1
            It was just that a stabilist came to Abrams and knocked on the hatch, and then this began ...
  • chenia
    chenia April 14 2020 09: 55 New
    +7
    Quote: Spade
    Why be offended?


    That's for sure! The projectile leaves the barrel when it goes into a recoil of 2-3 cm. So there is no way for accuracy. But the "kit" is yes, and it is essential.
  • Genry
    Genry April 14 2020 10: 17 New
    +4
    Quote: Spade
    Someone who is not very smart posted a video without possessing minimal knowledge in the materiel.

    The video was uploaded either by the author of the article, or someone with his knowledge - this is understandable by the number of views (72 at 10:18).
  • grandfather_Kostya
    grandfather_Kostya April 14 2020 10: 42 New
    +5
    The buildup of the tank after the shot can only affect the rate of fire.
    1. Polymer
      Polymer April 14 2020 11: 18 New
      +4
      Quote: grandfather_Kostya
      The buildup of the tank after the shot can only affect the rate of fire.

      The rate of reloading also affects the rate of fire. And here Abrams is definitely the loser.
    2. shonsu
      shonsu April 14 2020 11: 37 New
      +3
      This is if you shoot in lines then yes. laughing
      1. grandfather_Kostya
        grandfather_Kostya April 14 2020 11: 42 New
        +3
        Even if the reload gun manages to drive the next round in 1 second, you won’t do the second shot until the crosshair of the sight settles down on the chosen target.
        1. shonsu
          shonsu April 14 2020 11: 53 New
          +6
          Grandfather, this is what we are talking about. After the shot, the tank stabilizes for 1-2 seconds, and the rate of fire is 6-10 v / m. That is 1 shot in 6-10 seconds. This is if for the same goal hollow. And if the goal is different? When I watched the tank biathlon, then while you wait from some crews for the shot, I managed to go make some tea. laughing
        2. Lieutenant colonel
          Lieutenant colonel April 15 2020 09: 54 New
          0
          Grandfather Kostya - Do you know exactly how the SLA is arranged on tanks? Or at least a sight with a stabilized field of view?
          1. grandfather_Kostya
            grandfather_Kostya April 15 2020 10: 02 New
            +1
            The designer and the fitter know exactly.
    3. svp67
      svp67 April 15 2020 18: 31 New
      0
      Quote: grandfather_Kostya
      The buildup of the tank after the shot can only affect the rate of fire.

      How so?
      1. grandfather_Kostya
        grandfather_Kostya April 15 2020 18: 34 New
        0
        My comment yesterday is 11:42
        1. svp67
          svp67 April 15 2020 18: 40 New
          0
          Quote: grandfather_Kostya
          My comment yesterday is 11:42

          But there you wrote nonsense. As they say now: "You are just not in the subject." Want to know why, read my comment yesterday at 19.46
          1. grandfather_Kostya
            grandfather_Kostya April 15 2020 18: 45 New
            0
            read my comment yesterday at 19.46

            I read it 9 hours after my own. But we are discussing footage in the video, where the "Armata" is clearly swinging along with the barrel.
            1. svp67
              svp67 April 15 2020 18: 52 New
              0
              Quote: grandfather_Kostya
              But we are discussing footage in the video, where the "Armata" is clearly swinging along with the barrel.

              So what? How did it undo what I said? The gunner’s aiming line has independent stabilization and a short buildup is not a hindrance to him. The only thing that interferes is the smoke from the burnt gunpowder and the dust raised during the shot
              1. grandfather_Kostya
                grandfather_Kostya April 15 2020 18: 55 New
                0
                I will not argue that in my military profession I am an antediluvian tank destroyer with rockets of the first generation.
                1. svp67
                  svp67 April 15 2020 19: 14 New
                  0
                  Quote: grandfather_Kostya
                  I will not argue that in my military profession I am an antediluvian tank destroyer with rockets of the first generation.

                  Well, then what kind of dust rises when fired should know. hi
                  1. grandfather_Kostya
                    grandfather_Kostya April 15 2020 19: 18 New
                    +1
                    must know.

                    I saw with my own eyes at the Luga missile and artillery range in the mid-70s.
  • loki565
    loki565 April 14 2020 11: 26 New
    +5
    I agree, its main task is to stabilize the barrel before a shot, and not after.
  • Cananecat
    Cananecat April 14 2020 11: 58 New
    +7
    Go to YouTube and put a minus to the author of the video. Let him think next time with his head. And then they will run into a computer, and then they imagine themselves as Experts ...)))
  • Alekseev
    Alekseev April 14 2020 12: 03 New
    +4
    Quote: Spade
    Someone who’s not very smart posted a video,

    That's right!
    On modern tanks, the accuracy of stabilization of the aiming line (optical elements in the sight) is of primary importance. The gun is not rigidly connected with the aiming line, and through the sensor and the barrel itself it stabilizes much more coarse, which is harder to do, because the mass of the swinging parts of the gun is about 2,5 tons.
    The shot takes place at the moment when the gun practically coincides with the aiming line (it is at the aiming angle with a permissible deviation). There is such a concept - the resolution zone of a shot about which the author of the video, see, forgot or did not know.
    It happens that the STV is somewhat misaligned, it holds the gun poorly and when the electric trigger is pressed, there is some delay (fractions of a second) until the moment of the shot. This LMS "waits" for the barrel to enter the shot resolution zone.
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 14 2020 12: 16 New
      +3
      Quote: Alekseev
      There is such a thing - shot resolution zone

      Here is another.
      The author of the video is excited because the barrel is swinging after a shot. Before leaving for loading.
      Only this does not affect accuracy at all.
      1. Alekseev
        Alekseev April 14 2020 12: 30 New
        0
        Quote: Spade
        The author of the video is excited because the barrel is swinging after a shot.

        No need for him to get excited. How can he not rock, when the tank body itself is swinging from the recoil quite noticeably, and the barrel of the gun tries to maintain a position in space? That swings relative to the body.
    2. Evil Booth
      Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 45 New
      0
      for half a kilo of mono and technical fry for 2 .. so in Europe the usual range is 0,5-1,5 with such a range tank sorry I can SEE without suo and others
  • Zoldat_A
    Zoldat_A April 14 2020 12: 38 New
    +8
    Quote: Spade
    Someone who is not very smart posted a video without possessing minimal knowledge in the materiel. Why be offended?
    [...]
    Trying a stabilization system to stop disturbances is a futile activity.

    This is about how to give AKMS to Dana Borisova, see how and where he will jump in her hands and on this basis conclude that he has the most powerful return in the world and it is impossible, in principle, to get anywhere.
    Although I’m not a tanker, the technology of comparing stabilization in the video amused me pretty much ...

    But is there any kind of art that remains stationary after the shot (ideal system, according to the authors of the video)? I think that if the caliber is 45 mm, and the mass of the gun is 200 tons, then the authors of the video will quite like it ...
  • Evil Booth
    Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 52 New
    +1
    fellow this gun is swinging under the AZ taking a new shell. if you charge in a straight tower will be more and then the armor is not enough. as always in the us direct forgery. hi
    1. Lopatov
      Lopatov April 14 2020 18: 56 New
      0
      Quote: Evil Booth
      the tower will get bigger

      Coordinator is needed, as in self-propelled guns
      1. Evil Booth
        Evil Booth April 15 2020 01: 17 New
        0
        hyh and why !? how was everyone usually mistaken?
        1. Lopatov
          Lopatov April 15 2020 09: 24 New
          0
          Quote: Evil Booth
          hyh and why !?

          To take a shell from the feed line of the ammunition and move to the line of sending guns
          Quote: Evil Booth
          how was everyone usually mistaken?

          The majority use "non-contaminating" as the coordinator. We decided that the coordinator was an unnecessary detail. And you have to bring the barrel to the loading position.
          1. Evil Booth
            Evil Booth April 15 2020 12: 37 New
            0
            for an extremely alternative gift I repeat first you read then you write the answer am here and read why you did it maybe you will understand the third way once not trading already. but this is not straightforward. you still attach the landing ramp to the submarine for armored personnel carriers it is very necessary there. at the same time try to register a new acck.
            1. Lopatov
              Lopatov April 15 2020 15: 24 New
              0
              Something from this verbal diarrhea did not understand anything.
              Could you write in Russian?
  • They are
    They are April 15 2020 23: 23 New
    +1
    If we take into account that the weight of Abrams is 62 tons, and Armata 55 with similar calibers of 120 mm and 125 mm, respectively, then the difference in the recoil effect is more understandable.
  • RVAPatriot
    RVAPatriot April 15 2020 23: 23 New
    +1
    And compare the weight of the tank, with the same power of the gun ... if the armature weighed like abrams, it would not be in favor of the latter even by this comparison ...
  • knn54
    knn54 April 14 2020 10: 32 New
    -1
    ALL hints yes hints ...
  • Lopatov
    Lopatov April 14 2020 09: 44 New
    +9
    The video itself is built as if the author of a publication on the Web is trying to indicate the "superiority" of American-made tanks over others.

    Superiority in weight laughing
    The heavier the tank, the better it can "utilize" the kinetic energy of the rollback.
    1. Starover_Z
      Starover_Z April 14 2020 09: 54 New
      +5
      ... and maybe "Armata" firing from NEW guns, shoots in the same way with new shells, in which the shot is more powerful, which means that the range is greater and the armor penetration is better! And in the end, the barrel sways after the projectile comes out and does not interfere with the automatic charging process! So do not convince!
  • Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 April 14 2020 09: 45 New
    +1
    Clearly, with a hint.
  • Andrey Mikhaylov
    Andrey Mikhaylov April 14 2020 09: 45 New
    +3
    Show the Iraqi army that they don’t know what a beautiful, American Abrams, when they refused them, in favor of the t-90, and there are a lot of such examples to take Yemen.
    1. BREAKTHROUGH READY
      BREAKTHROUGH READY April 14 2020 11: 28 New
      -3
      By your logic, Syria also abandoned the t90 in favor of the t55)
  • svp67
    svp67 April 14 2020 09: 47 New
    19
    Stupidity this video, in the form in which it is shown. If the author really wanted to show the accuracy of the shot, then it was necessary to show not how the "barrel" is held on the "red line" during the shot, but how the projectile flying out of it adheres to this line, that is, the video should be slowed down ... , pure profanation
    Look at similar shots at the T-9OSM, at what point the recoil momentum from it is transmitted to the suspension, when the tank begins to swing and where the projectile is at that moment ...
  • Prisoner
    Prisoner April 14 2020 09: 55 New
    +3
    Looks like sales of the "super-duper" tank have gone to naught. So they turned on Hollywood. They are trying to match their used and flabby girl to someone else. laughing
    1. abrakadabre
      abrakadabre April 14 2020 11: 32 New
      +3
      Looks like sales of the "super-duper" tank have generally gone "to naught".
      They have long gone. Otherwise, the tank factories in the United States would not close and would not have to fight to beat money out of Congress for sluggish and small-scale upgrades. Just to keep the last plant afloat and not let it close. Otherwise, then, when the time comes, it is more expensive to restore production. Most of the supply of this tank around the world seems to be from B / U.
      About the video. Comparing gun stabilization AFTER a shot would make sense only about the rate of fire like a ship AK-130 or something similar. That is, if the time between shots would be less than the damping time of the oscillations of the gun between them.
  • Ros 56
    Ros 56 April 14 2020 10: 03 New
    +3
    This is for whom the video, the main thing, is not how the barrel swung, but where the projectile hit. Someone wanted to lick this striped backside with this video, well, this is his choice.
  • Thompson
    Thompson April 14 2020 10: 03 New
    +3
    Apparently a schoolboy wrote. All this in practice has almost no effect on the accuracy of the shot. Because All these deviations are taken into account when hovering over the target. And in the process of reloading, everything returns to its original position. Moreover, the main deviation of the barrel occurs after the shell leaves the barrel. Oh, these Experts
  • sanik2020
    sanik2020 April 14 2020 10: 19 New
    0
    And since when, the tank that swings less when fired is called the best?
    Is there such a measure in evaluating tank effectiveness?
  • Chingachguk
    Chingachguk April 14 2020 10: 24 New
    -1
    Hollywood alone ... Military Mattresses what do they think that if a war suddenly breaks out, they will sit in front of the TV and watch Bruce Willis defeat Moscow along with Schwartz and other "heroes" of America? Clowns live alone across the ocean. EVERYTHING WILL BE WRONG.
  • Norbert
    Norbert April 14 2020 10: 27 New
    0
    let the Saxons take part in the tank biathlon
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek April 14 2020 11: 03 New
      -1
      It all depends on the rules of this biathlon. Do not throw caps.
      1. Norbert
        Norbert April 14 2020 13: 49 New
        0
        Well, the rules are drawn up normally and what does the hats have to do with it. they refuse to participate, just like NATO, simply because they are afraid of losing and that their "authority" will suffer, and besides, it is simply not a thrill to participate in our idea. although these competitions are made not to support someone else's authorities, but to establish cooperation and increase the moral and ethical relations of soldiers to each other. but the Saxons cannot understand this, they have everything according to authority.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek April 14 2020 14: 02 New
          -3
          There is no shooting on the move, no night shooting ....
          1. Norbert
            Norbert April 14 2020 14: 47 New
            +1
            if you don’t know what you’re talking about, then better keep quiet. shooting on the move there.
            there is no shooting at night, but how does its absence affect "It all depends on the rules of this biathlon"?
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek April 14 2020 15: 37 New
              -4
              The fact that in these disciplines the NATO tanks are better ... as they have since the 90s ... SLAs at the T90M level
  • blackice
    blackice April 14 2020 10: 34 New
    -2
    It looks like it has become a trend in movies and cartoons to fight with a likely "friend".
    I am waiting for these "experts" to start giving examples from game situations in "Armata" as proof.
  • Emphasis
    Emphasis April 14 2020 10: 46 New
    -4
    As for me, the video itself is a provocation: just to talk about something. News for the sake of news. Here and materiel and the very meaning of the topic, and the selection of samples. All wrong and all wrong
  • Ingenegr
    Ingenegr April 14 2020 10: 58 New
    +7
    There is no stabilizer work in the video. The video shows the effect of recoil on the installation, which is a tank. This has nothing to do with stabilization. None of the advantages or disadvantages of this stupid cut can be judged. The video is absolutely uninformative. According to the principle "Vaska's weight is 80 kg, and Petka's is 90". So what?
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek April 14 2020 11: 02 New
    +1
    Interesting fact. But, I think, an important factor here is the ratio of the power of the gun and the weight of the tank .... in the video, the deviation of the barrel after the shot occurs due to the oscillation of the entire tank, and not the barrel (maybe I didn’t notice).
  • Grigory_45
    Grigory_45 April 14 2020 11: 12 New
    +5
    The author clearly gives a hint that the stabilization when firing the M1A2 Abrams is better than that of the T-14.
    the author does not understand at all what stabilization of a gun is.
    This is the work of the stabilizer, and you need to check it in a completely different way. At least - by the accuracy of returning the gun barrel to the line of sight after loading and removing from the stopper. Or by the accuracy of holding the line of sight when moving the tank over rough terrain. The roller bears no informativeness, except for the obvious fact that the larger the mass, the more efficiently the recoil energy is absorbed
    1. BREAKTHROUGH READY
      BREAKTHROUGH READY April 14 2020 11: 49 New
      -4
      On the contrary, in this case the author is not mistaken at all.
      You confuse the speed of the gun’s guidance and stabilization (which is exactly the same as designed to prevent the deviation of the barrel from the line of fire.
      1. Grigory_45
        Grigory_45 April 14 2020 12: 05 New
        +5
        Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
        You confuse gun aiming speed and stabilization

        I do not confuse at all. Stabilization - the ability to maintain the position of the gun with disturbances (movement) of the platform

        Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
        in this case the author is not mistaken at all

        what is the author not mistaken? explain

        Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
        stabilization (which is precisely designed to prevent the deviation of the barrel from the line of fire

        just not after the shot. The stabilizer does not have enough speed and power to respond to a powerful short-term pulse. What you saw on the video (supposedly gorgeous work of the stabilizer Abrams) is just a consequence of its greater mass.
        1. BREAKTHROUGH READY
          BREAKTHROUGH READY April 14 2020 12: 20 New
          -7
          Stabilization - the ability to maintain the position of the gun with disturbances (movement) of the platform
          that's it, and regardless of what caused these "disturbances", movement on the ground or the force of recoil.
          just not after the shot.
          Why is it suddenly, simply because domestic stabilizers are not capable of this?
          Okay, 60 ton Abrams, but watch the video of a 20 ton Striker firing from 105mm, and also the barrel does not deviate from the firing line.
          Probably, unlike domestic, foreign stabilizers for some reason have enough speed to respond to a powerful short-term impulse. The author of the article tried to convey this idea either to refute or to refute.
          1. Lopatov
            Lopatov April 14 2020 12: 48 New
            +3
            Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
            that's it, and regardless of what caused these "disturbances", movement on the ground or the force of recoil.

            Why "independently"?
            If the disturbances associated with the movement of the tank are stopped, this is a useful stabilization.
            If associated with a shot, useless.

            Quote: BREAKTHROUGH READY
            Probably, unlike domestic, foreign stabilizers for some reason have enough speed to respond to a powerful short-term impulse.

            And they don’t know how to fry eggs ...

            Backfill question: Do you know what happens to a tank gun after a shot?

            1. BREAKTHROUGH READY
              BREAKTHROUGH READY April 14 2020 13: 29 New
              -9
              If associated with a shot - useless
              Indeed, why increase the efficiency of shooting if you can launch shells where God sends.
              Well mattresses, well stupid!
              Do you know what happens to a gun after a shot?
              What do you mean: barrel oscillation, removal of powder gases, or some sort of recharging process?
              1. Lopatov
                Lopatov April 14 2020 15: 45 New
                +2
                Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
                Indeed, why increase the efficiency of shooting if you can launch shells where God sends.

                What shells?
                There are no shells after a shot in the barrel.

                Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
                What do you mean: barrel oscillation, removal of powder gases, or some sort of recharging process?

                laughing laughing laughing
                That is, you are not in the know.



                Here is a video for you, enjoy.
              2. Grigory_45
                Grigory_45 April 14 2020 16: 15 New
                +5
                Quote: READY FOR BREAKTHROUGH
                If associated with a shot - useless
                Indeed, why increase the efficiency of shooting if you can launch shells where God sends.
                Well mattresses, well stupid!

                yes not mattresses)
                After the shot of the shell in the gun is not. It is required to charge the gun, for which it is put on the stopper. When setting on the stop, the stabilizer is turned off. And it turns on after removing the gun from the stopper - i.e. before firing a new shot. During this time, disturbances caused by the force of bestowal already cease to exist.
                That is why there is simply no point in stabilizing the gun after firing a shot) And it doesn’t affect the accuracy of the word from the word at all)
                1. Evil Booth
                  Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 54 New
                  -2
                  By the way, so the mass of the gun and eats recoil =)
          2. Evil Booth
            Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 44 New
            -1
            the even striker breaks more often than it shoots) astopyat it 90 degrees each as well as a square on the plane that square 2 stupidly overturns.
  • shonsu
    shonsu April 14 2020 11: 24 New
    +3
    I just read the name and immediately thought, because Abrams is heavier by almost 20 tons! And the caliber of the shell is smaller. And if even a sub-caliber shot and Armat is not, then the difference in projectile weight will be two times. Consequently, the recoil momentum can also differ by a factor of two. So the author is right, it’s impossible to draw a conclusion about such a characteristic from the video. These are arguments for housewives.
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 April 14 2020 11: 29 New
    -3
    T-14 Armata - is already in service?
    And it’s worth it, it’s not worth it, it’s worth it, it’s not worth it, it’s worth it again ... (no kidding about the sexologist!)
    And that the tanks are all different, they used to know ....
  • BREAKTHROUGH READY
    BREAKTHROUGH READY April 14 2020 11: 38 New
    -1
    An article revealing on a video with a hundred views, is that some kind of new way to increase popularity?
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Minotavrik
    Minotavrik April 14 2020 11: 52 New
    0
    Quote: svp67

    Look at similar shots in the T-9OSM, when the recoil momentum from it is transmitted to the suspension and where the projectile is at that moment ...

    I guess it says "good evening" target =)
  • The comment was deleted.
  • Professor
    Professor April 14 2020 12: 00 New
    -5
    The video itself is built as if the author of the publication on the Web is trying to indicate the "superiority" of American-made tanks over others. The stabilization option during the shot is demonstrated as a given, while no associated information is given on such important in this case comparative characteristics as the mass of the tank, the mass of ammunition used.

    So where is the refutation? Where is the "passing information"?
    1. MMX
      MMX April 14 2020 14: 08 New
      -6
      Quote: Professor
      The video itself is built as if the author of the publication on the Web is trying to indicate the "superiority" of American-made tanks over others. The stabilization option during the shot is demonstrated as a given, while no associated information is given on such important in this case comparative characteristics as the mass of the tank, the mass of ammunition used.

      So where is the refutation? Where is the "passing information"?


      And she will not be. Both the author of the article and the commentators, no one knows what the rollback of the gun exactly affects ...
      The only thing you can see from the video is that Abrams’s situation is much better.
      1. Professor
        Professor April 14 2020 14: 17 New
        -7
        Quote: MMX
        Quote: Professor
        The video itself is built as if the author of the publication on the Web is trying to indicate the "superiority" of American-made tanks over others. The stabilization option during the shot is demonstrated as a given, while no associated information is given on such important in this case comparative characteristics as the mass of the tank, the mass of ammunition used.

        So where is the refutation? Where is the "passing information"?


        And she will not be. Both the author of the article and the commentators, no one knows what the rollback of the gun exactly affects ...
        The only thing you can see from the video is that Abrams’s situation is much better.

        good
      2. Ratmir_Ryazan
        Ratmir_Ryazan April 14 2020 14: 43 New
        +4

        And she will not be. Both the author of the article and the commentators, no one knows what the rollback of the gun exactly affects ...
        The only thing you can see from the video is that Abrams’s situation is much better.


        You don’t know what the rollback of the gun affects))) But most understand that it does not affect anything. Admiring the shooting process is the same as admiring the size, shape of the tank))).

        The accuracy of Russian tanks is no worse than the NATO ones, as well as accuracy, but the fact that the tank pumps after a shot is physics. Or does the return of the machine surprise you too? Give the machine to a healthy man under 90 kg and a person weighing 60 kg and see who swings harder when standing and try to draw conclusions.

        NATO tanks are under 60 tons of weight, and Russian tanks in the region of 45 are naturally the lighter the platform and the more powerful the gun, the more it pumps it. But our tanks do not miss the target, at least trained crews and no more often than NATO ones.
  • shonsu
    shonsu April 14 2020 12: 02 New
    0
    By the way. Has anyone watched a tank biathlon? So there, from some crews, while you wait for the shot, I managed to go make some tea. So the buildup is a strong argument. laughing
    1. papalazer1973
      papalazer1973 April 14 2020 12: 33 New
      +2
      Yes, nothing like that - time was spent not on damping the buildup but on aiming and adjusting the fire. Watch the video - the tank buildup lasts no more than 2,5-3 seconds. And everything else depends on the skill of the crew and on the vertical stabilizer. Our tanks have it
    2. Evil Booth
      Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 55 New
      0
      better see how in leopard2 the eo cannon staggers their pressure that the crew can cripple it in motion. but of course of course leopard2 oh how cool (no)
  • papalazer1973
    papalazer1973 April 14 2020 12: 30 New
    -1
    But why the hell do you need this stabilization. If at the end of reloading the barrel of Almaty is aimed at the target
  • universe1
    universe1 April 14 2020 14: 12 New
    -11
    Abrams currently has absolute superiority in quantity.
    1. Ratmir_Ryazan
      Ratmir_Ryazan April 14 2020 14: 45 New
      +6
      Abrams currently has absolute superiority in quantity.


      Are you being irradiated with something in Ukraine? Why do you deny the obvious things? Russia has more tanks than the USA + NATO.
      1. Evil Booth
        Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 42 New
        -2
        all abrams active 1000 proofs while the United States posted BMPD.
  • Ratmir_Ryazan
    Ratmir_Ryazan April 14 2020 14: 34 New
    +3
    The main thing is not the process, but the result. Does anyone have doubts about the accuracy and reliability of Russian tanks ?! Well then, you should get acquainted with how the tender was held in India and why India chose the T-90.
  • ioan-e
    ioan-e April 14 2020 15: 04 New
    +3
    The author clearly gives a hint that the stabilization when firing the M1A2 Abrams is better than that of the T-14

    And yet this may indicate a lower propellant charge power and, as a result, less armor penetration. It has long been said that the T-14 cannon is 17% higher than the best Western models in muzzle energy, plus the T-14 is 10 tons lighter, hence the buildup after the shot. For me, this is not an indicator at all, because during the reload time the gun manages to return to its original position.
  • Andron59
    Andron59 April 14 2020 18: 23 New
    +2
    Well, dumb, dumb. They even give back after a shot (tank buildup) for stabilization of the gun.
  • Evil Booth
    Evil Booth April 14 2020 18: 40 New
    +2
    weak cannon with a wide base .. but the armature pumps current; this cannon cannon pumps for lighter mass)) the T14’s combat rate of fire is higher both from a standstill and on the move, and the speed itself is higher. and this is fraud) PS and so it pumps the body and not the gun)))))))))) not? on the go, it still doesn’t so much pump on the Katkai body and the suspension is already flying)
  • Rusfaner
    Rusfaner April 15 2020 11: 55 New
    0
    Comparison of "warm with soft".
    Despite the dislike for "mattress makers", we must admit for the time being that Abrams is massively in service, it is constantly being modernized, adjusting it to modern times, and there is a practice of its combat use. There is practically no armata.
    1. Evil Booth
      Evil Booth April 15 2020 12: 35 New
      0
      belay and this nebot is still unaware of what Iranian missiles are? Abramsolv only 1000 with connecting you other rusty junk. from the armor there is the current forehead of the tower. he T72 on the body still can not master the 88th year of release. with a current of T72B3 of 2000 pieces, and he will not overpower them over the tower and the hull, they are still full of it through the hull. no fit? this tank of the next generation it can finally will not be what is the difference? modernization of the abrams so far that it became like a T64 with DZ and the tour more precisely imitators thereof. and vabsche in t14 gun swinging to connect with AZ and not just like that. in Ayubrams, 40 crews were poisoned by viraka by uranium nishtyaks; they still didn’t shoot at them. Goiart, these Abrashas are exactly like everything in the same Yemen or Iraq. Iraqi utpo all burned out)) like leopard2 in Syria, right perfectly. normal shells like OFZ there will not be modernization tongue
  • Procyon lotor
    Procyon lotor April 15 2020 12: 49 New
    -1
    a stable gun is needed primarily for firing on the go ... well, and for fun
  • Alexey from Perm
    Alexey from Perm April 15 2020 22: 13 New
    0
    who cares about the mass of tanks, the main result
  • impostor
    impostor April 16 2020 08: 13 New
    0
    When tanks are taught to shoot in bursts - then it's time for this discussion