Inside the T-72! - Soviet MBT 

Thank you for watching!

Great way to describe it lol

He might Still be giggling, every time he thinks of it... I probably would.

Thanks!

Was there anything said in this video you think is incorrect?

@@zackoroni6483 Yes. 1. "Gun needs to be center and horizontal for the autoloader to load" - The gun only needs to elevate to the loading angle; loading can be done with the turret facing any direction in terms of azimuth. 2. "The gun had to leave target" - The gunner's sight is independently stabilized in the vertical plane, so when the gun elevates to its loading position, the gunner's sight is still on the target and the gun will still point to the target in azimuth. Its also noteworthy that both the Leopard 2 and Challenger tanks also elevate their gun to reload - they employ and automatic 'loader's block' which elevates the gun for the loader to have an easier time ramming in a new round. 3. "The autoloader is 'slow'" - not really true, the autoloader can load a projectile in 5-6 seconds which is similar to comparative and modern Western tanks with human loaders. However, if the gunner selects a different ammo type, the carousel must rotate all the way around to a shell of that ammo type, this can take a few extra seconds as the carousel can only rotate in one direction. 4. "Losing an arm in the autoloader" - I don't know who invented this myth, but unless the gunner and commander high-five each other during the autoloading cycle, your arms will be nowhere near the path of any moving parts of the autoloader barring pure negligence. The gunner will have both hands on the main turret control and the commander will have his on his cupola handgrips. 5. "Having a 3 man crew is worse than a 4 man and autoloaders caused this great tragedy" - Is it slightly more convenient to have a 4th crewmember go grab you lunch when you're cleaning the barrel or tensioning the track? Probably, yes. But what about the benefits of needing less people to man the same amount of tanks? Why not go back to using the bow machine gunner and get a 5th crew member along for the ride? A two crewmember turret with each man sharing their respective halves of the turret to themselves improves ergonomics in the realm of legroom, something many a M60 gunner can tell you about. It also allows each crewmember to have their own hatch. The gunner can open his hatch and stretch his legs on a long march which no Western tank can boast aside from the M60A2. The general aversion to the autoloader is quite a strange thing for me. I'm not sure why people don't like it when its just the natural progression of the advancements of tanks. We used to have to input range manually but the laser rangefinder and ballistic computer did away with that. The driver used to have to change gears manually but the automatic transmission did away with that. The admonishment of the T-64/72/80 autoloaders probably started when the NATO responses to these tanks had to forego any form of autoloading to make a tank in response to the new Soviet threat. The Abrams prototypes had an autoloader planned, but it never came to fruition because of the ballooning budget of the tank. The MBT-70 program also had an autoloader but that project was cancelled entirely. I wonder what these people will think when they find out that the Abrams X and KF-51 are both planned to have autoloaders and 3 man crews...

@@vasanth7 Autoloaders generally get a lot of hate from us westerners/NATO military nerds but they are probably the future due to increasing size and weight of projectiles as well as future turrets mostlikely being entirely unmanned.

@@nucleus691 They don't know how to do anything. By God, they are a world of slugs.

@@vasanth7 Don't forget the extra eyeballs that loaders bring, i'm pretty sure SEEING the enemy is ALWAYS a necessary condition BEFORE engaging the enemy