Ukraine's Armoured Front: An Update 

youtubes guidelines are shitty

Daring, indeed!

They allready used combat footage from ww2. What is new about that? They show and explain how destructive devices work, to use an US law word. So weapons of war. Only Warships are bigger than tanks.

They're crowdfunded, and have an established webstore. They don't need to have a monetized channel so much, since it's just advertising for the museum itself.

Giving us some nice turret tossing contestants.

Good for you mate :)

yeah, they could use hovercrafts...

@@MetapeterUndMetagreta Interesting!

Wehrmacht general ....amazing how cold Russia it is in winter , who would have guessed ! Nato adviser .... mines , naahh , nobody use those things anymore

​@@MetapeterUndMetagretathe hovercrafts that do actually exist are even more vulnerable,so unless hovercraft tech has a breakthrough, its unlikely they'll be used for land vehicles.

Or calling a T-14 a real tank? We already seen a T-14 get knocked out of a parade! Russian parades are like land mines to a T-14, Russian parades exposes a T-14s propaganda, plot armor. The T-14 was finally recovered….but it was hard! The tank recovering vehicle had trouble removing the T-14 off the parade roads….the T-14 crew made it out alive, and probably awarded with a Extended stay at Club Gulag. Question? Do T-14s come with the option to disconnect the final drive…..to move the parade shy T-14 off the road? Or maybe the Incompetent, tank crew forgot to bring the tool to do it? You would think a tool like that is kept in the tank.

@@ebperformance8436 I wouldn't know, I served on a Leopard 2A6. Also I don't see what a T14 has anything to do with my remark.

@@yesiamarussianbot3076 with so many Russian bots, it’s hard to tell these days….your RU-vid name is a tell tell sign, you’re a Russian bot….If you’re not a Russian bot….then you’re a liar’ based on your name’ No matter how you slice it….I either call BS on the Validity of your story, or you’re name. Soooo….Which one is it? The subject on this video is tank related? Is it not? Ok then! A leopard 2 is a superior tank….compared to the T-14’ Do you agree? Or disagree? let’s see where this goes.

@@ebperformance8436 The subject of the video is tank related but it's about the Challenger, not the T14 Armata. To be sure the T14 hasn't been at the front lines although the propaganda videos would like people believe otherwise, also the T14 seems to have many problems in its development. I think it's hilarious that people think that when someone disagrees with them they are a Russian bot. I actually used that as my Themtube name for a long time. If you don't know what a beakie is, well that's on you

@@ebperformance8436 Everyone is a Russian bot if you don't agree lol. Also most YT names got butchered (like mine) after some update.

Exactly. Any side needs tanks if they can get in play, but in this war it is rare that they get the opportunity.

That's been the case for the last century, nothing new here. Tanks do not fight tanks, that's not the idea, there are much better specialized anti-tank weapons, from helicopters to ATGM's.

I've read many reports on tank losses from WW2 and a few from other conflicts as well. In WW2 enemy tanks were only about 15-20% of the targets engaged by their own tanks regardless of whether the source of the reports were Allied or German. Artillery, mines, and infantry carried weapons each caused a similar percentage of tank losses in that conflict vs other tanks and far more collectively. This has been true in nearly every other conflict that I've read about. As to aircraft, they were responsible for only 4-8% of losses in WW2 regardless of theater or or side and were responsible for a far smaller percentage of tank losses than initially believed. This has also been true in every conflict since WW2 as well, even during the Gulf War in 1991 after precision guided weapons were used in large numbers. I think it's likely with the addition of drones this percentage will climb up vs prior conflicts once those statistics are known, but may once again be lower than initially believed. Regardless of source enemy tanks have been a less common source of tanks lost in every conflict I've read about and this one will be no different.

@@SuperIv7 Most of the average man out there, believes the image of Tank on Tank battles, they are very rare indeed, not even Kursk, where the majority of Tanks were not knocked out by other Tanks. The only Tank on Tank battle that I can think of was the Battle of 73 Easting.

This is why T-55 is still very useful tank despite west laugh about it. It can still destory anythink other than MBT and survive hits from everything that is not dedicated anti tank weapon. If they would be equipped with more modern optics it is almost a perferct solution for this war. Cheap, easy accesible, less resource hungy, and also mobile, protected sufficiently and poses enough firepower.

Ukraine can do neither. If you go slowly through minefields, Russian artillery - which has been meticulously mapped out just for this reason - will come to bear and take a terrible toll. Which is what has happened, over and over and over,

@@nickcharles1284 [EDIT: Removed unnecessary barb for intro.] Counter arty, drone strikes, interrupting logistics etc eliminates Russian arty. And Ukraine are doing a good job. Takes time though so it seems slow. This minimises losses. The second option. Going through a minefield without taking care of arty is the first option. Faster, lots of dead. Ukraine can, and is minimising losses by striking arty with precision strikes, hitting ammo dumps with HIMARS or cruise missiles. Nerfing the arty before the Ukrainians even move forwards. Hence delays. And those strikes have happened so much it's not even worth mentioning on daily updates anymore. Nice try though. Just for the final twist of the proverbial knife let's quote you. "will come to bear and take a terrible toll" Will? ... When? Even you admit it hasn't happened yet and the offensive is currently ongoing. Lines of defences have already been breached. When? You are waiting for something yet to happen.

@@Tuck-Shop my brother in christ its been nearly four months and they havent even reached the first line of defences.

​@@cerberus2373the first lines of defense have been passed for a month or two now in key areas. Give them more gear and they will do it in a day. At this point the west is just making fun of them by not providing more. "Boo hoo this will anger our buttslut putin" "

@@cerberus2373 False. By Russian definition they are just about over the first line and by Ukrainian definition they are just over the second one.

Nothing is indestructible, except time lol

Come rain, snow, sleet or hail, Field Artillery will always deliver the "hate mail."

And models of them have been made of them well before they where even considered

@@siy1580there’s models of many fictitious things . So what is the point from the pair of you .

@@alangordon3283 I think its because they find it funny to be able to buy a model of something that was fictional when it was made but is no longer fictional now. there is a level of Irony to it

​@@alangordon3283 Oh Alan, who tinkled in your porridge?

CAPITALISM BABY!

If you can believe the propaganda apparently the World’s first use of autonomous drones.

fell for the propaganda ?

The lancert is actually 100,000$l

​@@DrLoverLoverhello Ivan

@@DrLoverLoverwhat do you mean propaganda? Theres endless clips of Ukrainian drones with hand grenades and explosive charges terrorizing russian soldiers who can barely fight back against a such a target.

Just turn on BBC and you will never run out of content.

@@karmakazi101 Greetings King of Obvious

he talked about human wave tactics I think He is confused about the mostly fictional Enemy at the Gates. hoorah!

Unless you don't have loicense for that.

It gets even better when they showcase freshly received Western equipment for Ukrainian offensive with a full screen "Start praying ORCS!!!" caption while talking about their "meat wave" assaults on Russian lines.

True but you can't talk the enemy to death... Well, not very easily and not very quickly 😂

@@aymonfoxc1442 It's got less to do with beating the Russians with words and more to do with keeping Western populations at home compliant and supportive.

it is. wish our politicians were as level headed; prepared to listen to our armed forces and give them what they want.

Only worst than some that are still in storage

It likely was burned out and should be chalked up as destroyed, but the turret isn't dislodged. That's how it's supposed to look!

​@skepticalbadger that's a cope friend. Very obvious that the turret is hanging too far over the hull. 2/2 on turret pops for the chally 2.

@@skepticalbadgerchallenger 2 still uses 2 stage ammunition & can’t even be unloaded / re-packed once it’s in the breach. Challenger has no blowout panels and instead “fire resistant” ammunition containers within the hull. Sadly challenger has been left in the past & is IMO a very subpar tank with a doctrine that will not shine in a very fast paced conflict like UA vs. RU. Mobility & Crew protection must be key.

its like monthy python Black knight. *only torso and head left This is only flesh wound

Yes-no. Challenger and Leopard 2 carry primary warload in isolated magazines and additional round in the hull. Since T_64 in Soviet tanks, crew sits ON the primary ammo storage and is surrounded by secondary ones. Placement of autoloader carousel wasn't bad for the time but has it's consequences.

You must be confused by how soviet tanks store extra ammo and mixing it up with how western tanks do, wich is actually different from tank to tank, and generalizing it, the same mistake the presenter of the video made, as he also generalized how western tanks stow ammunition too. Both the Leopard 2 and Challenger 2 have different ways of stowing ammunition each, and neither is as you describe. The Leopard 2 has 2 main ammunition storages, on in the turret bustle with blowout pannels, the only one completely isolated from the crew, and one of even higher capacity in the front left hull next to the driver without any blowout pannels. The Challenger 2 uses 2 part ammunition and only the projectile parts are stored in the turret bustle with no blowout pannels, and the propellent charges are stowed entirely in the crew compartment mainly around the back turret floor without any separation from the crew and next to the driver in the front left of the hull. @@piotrd.4850

Right. Luckily the F-16's with good AA missiles can eliminate that threat to Ukrainian armour.

@@markus717 🤣

There could be as few as twenty five KA 52s total left now. This in part is due to recent use of longer range laser guided MANPADS that have been used to great effect against russias attack helicopter fleet. ⌛🍿😎🍿

@@paulking7019 well let’s see your proof to back that.. but even if it were the case, they have Mil-28 and mi-35 both being adapted to handle the new Vikhr ATGM’s that (so far) lets them engage out of range of western manpads

@@markus717 yeah once the pilots have learnt English, then finish flight training, then hedge hopped their way to where the KH-52’s are as it’s the only way to dodge the Mig-31/Su-35/S-400/Pantsir defences in their 1982 vintage F-16A’s..

You may want to Google "Fritz X". Yes, it is a glide vehicle, but still darn impressive for that time.

and strapping mortar rounds to flying drones...

It’s not if you can gain air supremacy. But Ukraine and Russia and equally matched so neither one is powerful enough to gain any advantage over the other in the air or on the ground or sea. Which is quite sad for Russia considering that their Navy and airforce are 10 times larger than Ukraine’s and supposedly more modern as well. The only modern equipment Ukraine has comes from the west and even that is sent in very low numbers

Drone detection is the highest immediate priority for everyone not currently under fire, I am sure. The issue is that while humans can be trained to be superb at drone detection as long as their senses are undamaged, (A) war is very hard on the senses, and (B) a decision has blatantly been made that information and materials for training to detect drones will not be distributed. Since all equipment for augmenting natural human senses is quite inexpensive and legal to buy and own anywhere in the world but requires a trained human user to use, what can you do? An EM rifle sells for €12,000, or can be built by anyone with access to HAM radio guides and equipment for 1/10th that, with a 5 km reach. Not enough to bag true top-shelf reconnaissance and surveillance drones; those you need either a high-energy laser or similar battlefield directed-energy weapon, or creative use of directional electromagnetic-frequency broadcast equipment and a real disrespect for the way things are supposed to be used, plus creativity. Artillery with no fire direction is no danger.

Level headed? Listen more carefully... He talks about Leopard 1's being donated to Ukraine, with no qualification about their condition or capabilities. He then talks about T55's and talks about their state, conditions and capabilities. Is that level? His commentary ''style'' though, was level headed.

@@tedteddington6223he did say the Leo 1s were being adapted to modern standards prior to being sent

Only a bigot would say that about the Western Wunderwaffen!!! They transcend the Law of physics don’t you know?

Look at Gulf War 1, months and months of Artillery and Air Force Bombing before the heavy units moved in, just a pity the US didn´t provide F-16 last year?

I mean, it has been slow, but that is part of their plan. They have decided against high-risk operations so that they can minimize their casualties while bleeding the Russians dry over time. And it's working. All one has to do is look at the daily losses for each side to see how well the Ukrainians are doing. They are on the offensive but the Russians are the ones taking more casualties.

You should surrender, Kievan elites are just throwing you into the meat grinder while buying expensive houses in Spain and elsewhere.

Cut the funding today and it will be over by next Friday.

Tell NATO that, they won't listen but y'know... Stoltenberg (head of NATO) even admitted they made this war inevitable and were pushing for it

russia could just go home, that would end it. lol.

@@Zarcondeegrissom Yeah more to it than that.

(((They))) want a regime change in Russia so they can exploit and strip mine it just like (((they’re))) doing to the USA as we speak

It is easy to predict: name a war of attrition that was won the the smallest country with the least soldiers and equipment and 1/100th the economic industrial base. Spoilers: none. Zero.

​​​​@@nickcharles1284Vietnam and Afghanistan (both times)

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

Didn’t age well though.

Same here, 12 year vet of the US military and nothing but respect for Ukraine.

As a former armchair general of 30 years, i must agree with the soldier above. It's a slogging match, no doubt.

Good thing that the woke europe and us will fight till the last ukranian. At least russia is not running unlike some from afganistan, vietnam, laos, combodia, iran with tail between the legs

Ukraine second poorest country in Europe doing alone what some believe Nato as a whole would struggle with

It's hard for anyone with the slightest bit of military experience or knowledge not to admire the Ukrainians as a people and their armed forces. They've done extremely well - magnificently - despite western governments who seem to be want them to have to fight the hardest, dumbest way. Slava Ukraini!!! 🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦

Getting destroyed is its job?😂

​@@alphana7055Keeping the crew alive you melon.

It’s just strange that you have such a double standards, if there were 100 challengers hit and all crew were fine, your logic could be accepted, but first challenger went to fire line and was hit immediately by kornet, directly in the front plate with big angle and still it was enough to get tank destroyed, so what are you proud about ? Maybe there is a video where crew went out unharmed, but I didn’t see it, or it just what Ukrainians told you ?

​​@@user-bf3dv7hu7cYou just blindly believe everything Kiselyov tells you, don't you.

@@AWMJoeyjoejoe Actually I’m not watching tv for 8 years and was supporting Navalnyi, participating demonstrations. But I was serving in army and have many mates on the frontline in 200 brigade of Northern Fleet in Artemovsk ( Ukrainians named it after Bakhmut ) so I have all news from first lips, let’s say. Yes, there are problems in Russian army, but they are way far from what you’ve been told in Ukrainian propaganda and western media, by the way send hello to mister Arestovich, we love his show, always keeps us in shape of good and funny mood.)

It allows the 60 year old conscripts to return to their youth.

It's unfortunate that the way things are going the Tank Museum may end up having most of the surviving tanks. They certainly have more tanks than the British Army.

I think this conflict is the one which will be remembered as when drones came into there own on the battlefield. Just wondering when they will have a fully autonomous hunter/killer version ? I would say that could be reality within @10years

Nothing changed the battlefield as much as advancements in reconnaissance and communication

Drones in co-operation with mobile artillery have to a degree taken over the role tanks used to have in positional warfare.

​@@kez0o9there is some evidence that some of the drones were self guided

@@kez0o9 Ты удивишься, но они уже лет 5 как есть

Do you mean resolving problems at a table instead of turning places we grow food into toxic wastelands?

​@@truthsRsungThat's up to the Russians. Only they have the power to end the war tomorrow

Ukraine is dead in the water. Western idiots governments are either ignoring this or simply don't care.

Mainstream media already acknowledged the offensive failed while only yielding high losses for the afu. Even more hilarious is the 'russia running out of chips (or insert anything else)' myth still getting repeated while also mentioning the ever increasing amount of lancets.

They said they would reach Sea of Azov by October, its October already and there is still combat going on near Robotyne that way the starting point. I knew things were bad when they started making excuses for the failed attacks as simple probes.

There's also the factor of parts embezzlement by Russian officials - the tanks that see the greater number of exports are more likely to have had more demand for spare parts, resulting in cannibalisation for personal profit

Good Point 💰

Yeah but sheds cost money and I already used the funding I received to buy sheet metal to provide kickbacks for my supply officers.

@@ThePurplePassage Absolutely. We'll probably never know how much that has affected readiness.

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

Has there been even one documented tank battle in this war? I haven’t seen any video

​@@ruinerblodsinn6648look up Weeb Union and Red Effect. I'm sure you can find more.

@@ruinerblodsinn6648 yes, video emerging last week of a leopard 2 mauling a pair of Russian tanks.

@@DeeEight links please

And if Lancet touches it, it's toast. It's got practically no armor and mine protection...

also, a lot of stuff never happened that was discussed last year, like training for F16's for one. so much political feet dragging.

The Ukrainian plan in the south is to destroy as much Russian men and materiel as possible, especially including Russian logistics systems, before committing enough forces for a big push to Azov.

Also the Russians were severely low on troop numbers in 2022. Putin basically relied on bluff to win the war in the first few days. The army he sent in Feb 2022 was far too small and under-supplied to win the war if Ukraine fought back, especially as the West flooded Ukraine with weapons, ammo, money, reconnaissance & intelligence, etc. He apparently thought Zelensky would panic when he saw a few hundred tanks and missiles coming at him, and either surrender or run for his life. He probably thought “I’m ex-KGB and he’s an ex-TV comedian, this will be quick!” Obviously that’s not how things turned out. In 2023 the Russians are taking the war much more seriously and are doing better. This is a recurring theme in Russian history. They tend to do badly in the first few months of wars and then begin to get their act together after a year or so. This seems to be happening in 2023 and will probably be much more apparent in 2024. I actually believe Russia will outright win the war in 2024 or early 2025.

Yeah you're pretty much right. Russia fumbled the start of this conflict, and then sorted itself out (honestly surprised how quickly they did that, considering the rampant corruption) and has conducted itself pretty successfully since. Without massive commitment (and quality training) we can't expect what is basically a heavily armed militia to remove Russia from its position.

Russia also had barely mobilized during the offensive last year. Now they have a numerical advantage that only grows more and more.

It was called the Spring offensive when western journalists started crapping on about it in February.

Hence, the title Schrödinger’s offensive.

@@petert2481 I wasn't being critical, it was merely an observation

@@petert2481 I was being critical.

How many lepords Ukraine lost so far?

Well the real question should be "are T-55's needed now, today"? If they are needed then they will be upgraded. Who would use them? What role would they be used for? If they are needed as fire support or for militia's they will be sent because those units can adopt them fast and get a lot of practice using them before T-90's replace them.

Given a choice you take the leopard every day of the week and twice in Sunday over a T55

@@Shoelessjoe78 Leopard ones were not maintained. It is a piece of junk. There are no spare parts. T-55 were maintained and were kept well. Choose again...

The Danes are sending their Leo1A2´s, they have been is use until quite recently. Their rifled 105mm guns can be used very easily as mobile Artillery, much more versatile in fact than Leo2 or even Abrams 120mm smoothbore guns. The Belgian Leopards have always been held in warehouse buildings with the intension of being sold on, most Russian T-55 and T-72 tanks were in fields let to rot. Big, very big difference.

​@@gaptaxi most doesn't mean all. I've seen some preserved machinery. You put it deep into oil, split some parts if you have to. It can stay the same for 100 years. I've seen videos of Russians just removing the outer layers of rusted metal from T-72's and replacing a part here or there. Those get restored fast. The problematic T-72's from the start of this war were DPR and LNR tanks. Those were captured from Ukraine in 2015. 4-500 of them. Those were in worst shape. As for the survivability of Leo1 as mobile artillery, well there was already a lot of it in the field. It gets blown away every single day. It vastly inferior to real artillery. If you send them in battle as tanks, they have thinner armor than BMP's. They are outdated. There are videos of T-72's surviving 8 hits and still going. Leo-1 is a laughing stock at this point.

At first it cleared the German trenches, later they knew how to knock them out, they were a great Propaganda tool for the British, but the reality was quite different, look up Beutepanzer.

I agree. Artillery (and machine gun fire) made it nearly impossible for troops to advance across open ground. Without the tank the troops would never have been able to leave the trenches, but the tanks alone could not win the fight. It took a long time to make tanks effective through new tactics and combined arms. Modern ISR and precision targeting have made tanks less effective and artillery is still doing the biggest job. The same assets making tanks more vulnerable are also making artillery, and everything else for that matter, more vulnerable as well however. Perhaps manned platforms of any kind are becoming obsolete or perhaps more effective counters to drones and missiles will be devised and the trend will go partially back to manned platforms again. There is always a counter to everything. Interesting times.

For supposed geniuses Ukrainians are claimed to be, they sure seem to have lot of trouble converting T-55s and BMP-1s to modern equivalent of Hobbart's Funnies.

Something like the rocket-propelled engineering mine-clearing sleds, but you need, what, three of them to clear a single lane for one kilometer? So figure on ten of them to provide even minimal room for avoidance maneuvers, in case of artillery, for each kilometer, and deploying each 100-kilogram sled of high explosives while under both direct and indirect fires. Or, mounting mine rollers or flails on every armored vehicle. Option 2 sounds better since it increases survival for every single vehicle, and probably it's cheaper. Didn't Ukraine have a lot of such engineering kits, or did the Soviet Union not think they needed them to deal with N.A.T.O. minefields?

A couple weeks ago I saw an interview with a Leopard 2 crew and they specifically mentioned that they use this tank primarily between dusk and dawn due to its excellent night fighting abilities and to protect it from death from above. But that does nothing to mitigate the extremely extensive minefields they have to overcome...

Doesnt matter if its day or night. Infact drones see you better at night... only part of day a tad less dangerious is dusk or dawn

There are Thermals equipped KA-52s and Mi-28s hovering in the dark...

You can take the officer out of the cavalry, but...

Being that we've already seen a challenger 2s turret pop I'd say theyre better then nothing but theyre certainly no superweapon.

​​@@NeilHawkins-zq7bm the challenger ran into mines and the crew had time to bail, no different to many many T-tanks throughout this war The challenger 2 has no blowout panels, stores ammunition everywhere and is 2-piece so the gun cannot be unloaded in battle, not to mention it's around 70-tons which is extremely heavy sinking it into the ground and breaking bridges other tanks wouldn't It's pretty subpar in reality and is only kept around because we can't afford to replace them Ideally we'd have gotten rid of them by now but the ever dwindling budget says no

Chobham was the earlier version on Challenger 1 IIRC? The UK offered Chobham and Dorchester to the UK to use them on Abrams. What are Allies for? ;)

Armata was in Ukraine tested in indirect fire, it was later moved from the line.

@@interpl6089 Nope

It could be both; if the new 125 mm gun is as-claimed it could be well inside Russia and firing field-test missions across the border.

Chieftain in the 1970´s, I was using the new Laser sight about 1976, I was faster with the .50 Browning to be honest, come a long way since then. The German`s might have an impressive RU-vid Video with a Maßkrug full of beer, but our gun was stabilised just as well.

What? Name them.

Which WW1 tanks were still in use in WW2? None.

Leopard 1 was 1960s desig with virtually zero armour, yet we clap and wave flags

Could you give some examples? I think the main concern here is the age of the T-55 and how vastly technology (particularly fire control systems) has evolved. At the beginning of WW2, tanks from WW1 would not have seemed out of place on the battlefield and they remained an exotic luxury or ambition for many countries. The T-55 is both commonplace and generations behind current production models but it can still be useful in infantry support, urban / ambush combat, and as maje shift artillery (plugging holes in Russian defensive lines). WW1 era tanks likewise filled these roles during the interwar era.

@@jamesgornall5731 Ukrainians are happy to get Leopards 1, it is still better than nothing.Beggars can't be choosers.

Yes

Not if a dam got blown up

@@radekmajcher7431 Northern part of the Crimea gets so little rain that it is very close to being classed as a desert. Most of the water which turned it into good agricultural land came via canal from the Dnipier river. Following dam being blown up Crimea is not getting that water and so slowly turning back into semi-desert. Not sure if this will have any effect on tanks apart from all the extra dust but its really bad for farming.

So it's ok that one nation dictates how other souvereign nation has to live?! These nation Poland,Baltics etc are no Russian colonies aren't they?! Russia knows quite well NATO will not attack, or do you think they would expose their borders now with just 20% of material left there???

That has never been agreed upon on paper. Nevertheless, it were the individual countries that decided to join, in contrast to the Soviet Union that persuaded countries to join and violently suppressed its peoples.

Remember when Russia guaranteed Ukraine’s territorial integrity in exchange for its nuclear arsenal? no? strange…

Помним

@@renaudrodier6059 Тоже помним

Sorry that goes against the narrative only the Russians can look bad lol

No need - you just did 😂

Current versions of the turbines have the problems sorted. I would even go as far as saying the turbines are better than the Perkins in the Chally 2 even though I am a Chally 2 fan. I also love diesel engines but the turbine will run on that too. And jet fuel. Petrol. Methylated spirits. Vodka. If it is a liquid and it burns, it can be fuel.

Turbine engines aren t a problem to Ukraine!!!! Russians are!!!! Slava Ukraine 🇺🇦🇵🇹💙💛🇪🇺💪🏼🇬🇧🇺🇲

@@Tuck-Shop That's all great, but even americans themselves do mention that Abrams turbine engine is awful thirsty. Ukraine does not have that logistical power behind tank battalions US does and the same amount of resources to keep the Abrams fuelled. I am not saying Ukraine won't be able to run Abrams tanks. But the larger fuel consumption would definitely be a strain for logistics.

Quite agree I suspect the Russians are quite satisfied bleeding Ukraine white on its defence. I think it's too late in the year for a major assault. A slow steady creep is my guess

But with the help of T55s (slovenian M55S) or equally outdated leo1s they will be able to break through 😂

or a combination of stuff via "combined arms" yeah.

T-80BVM had this. It was too dangerous to be used with friendly infantry nearby. The single prototype was knocked out months sgo.

@@MugdornaThere are hundreds of new T-80BVM. They were built / upgraded like 4 years ago.

"Australian cardboard drones."

lol, no

The video doesn't mention the 9K121 Vikhr missile that has a greater range than MANPADS.

Этот метод называется: пуск ракет с кабрирования. Современные прицельные системы вертолётов очень хорошие. На видео украинский пилот вертолёта как раз выполняет пуск ракет с кабрирования. Я понимаю, что украинский пилот для тебя тоже Иван и тебе радостно, что Иваны убивают Иванов.

It might work if you have air superiority. Bit difficult against Russian air defence

@@Doomer1984 This is - partly - what I mean. Combined arms warfare is a difficult thing to pull off under good circumstances. And here? we have basically seen both sides fail at it. And I am not sure any western military would fare much better.

@@catriona_drummond Ukraine is still able to penetrate Russia's air defenses and they barely have an air force (although that is going to change pretty soon). They've taken out multiple s400s, the jewels of Russia's air defense network, in just the past couple months. They've launched strikes on Russia and Russian-occupied territories that have destroyed strategic-level assets (strategic bombers, a submarine, a landing ship, radars for their SAM defense system) and killed high-ranking officers. This has all been done with the limited equipment that they have been provided. And what we do provide to them always comes with restrictions, eg., storm shadows cannot be used within the borders of Russia proper and we only send them the short-range variants. The Russian air force has not been able to achieve air superiority because they are a second-rate air power with severe corruption problems. You are smoking something if you think that the massive and well-equipped air forces of the West would not totally devastate the Russian military. There might be a fair amount of casualties at first, but their air defenses would eventually be overwhelmed.

@@catriona_drummond Interesting thing that. Russian pilots sucks at DEAD and SEAD missions. they should have been able to crush ukrainian air defences, yet they still persist, and if anything, expand through western supplied systems. Why is this? Lack of flight hours in their combat aircraft, means a lack of experience. And different training priorities certainly doesn't help matters. Ukraine, meanwhile, is limited on both airframes and pilots. But has proven capable of both SEAD AND DEAD missions by combing the assets they have with artillery systems, with evidence of such in Crimea recently and the success of hitting important, downright critical targets that WERE protected there (Certain headquarters facilities, among others). Again however, they are limited in scope. Particularly america, and nato as a whole? Specifically trains for, and has the equipment to carry out both SEAD and DEAD missions via air power alone, let alone artillery. And while yes, america is a massive military power. Alone, there is a good bet they could wipe out every single air defense system currently restricting ukrainian airspace. I would put good odds on the polish airforce being able to do the same, albeit with casulties greater than the US.

Far as I can tell, American combined arms is just overwhelming firepower from everything you can get. It works

2 have been destroyed, the videos are online. 🤣

How is that an understatement? For comparison, when Russians claim "a drone was downed by AA fire, only it's wreckage fell on an airfield" it means - a drone got through and damaged something, when they say "aircraft was slightly damaged by Ukrainian drones" it means total loss of at least one Russian aircraft.

​@@chadimirputin2282 there is only one confirmed loss. There was one additional rumoured loss, but the video used as proof most likely was showing a different type of tank as (whilst it was very grainy) it didn't have the same features. It was also on a different front than where the other challenger's was shown to be working in.

buff right out.

@@pluemas- No, both Western and Neutral experts confirmed at Least 2 Challenger 2 are destroyed. 3 more are reported destroyed in another area but not neutrally confirmed.

LMAO

I dont understand,what's the problem? Ukrainians received their guns, they need just to go there and reconquer territories and then each of them receives ten russian untermensches as slaves and money and glory and european citizenship and do on, they mist just go there , ruzzians are "stupid cowards with poor genetics with stupid leaders and dont deserve to live" - this is what you were t told many years , is it no true? Ukrainians , you must just go there , is it so really hard to understand?

(you forgot the sarcastic emogie for the final sentence ;)

I love to know how to add the sarcastic emoji. However I wonder when Extinction Rebellon will chime in and do some footwork to prevent the war and it's CO2 production@@thezone5840

@@ookiemand They'll glue themselves to T-72s and plant some trees in a minefield no doubt.