+Aleksi134 they sayed that d about cold war too... some times fear is a good thing, fear of nukes is kinda good thing because no major nations has been in war against other major country.
Bigb Trains That is just stupid, they are in no way going to be best tanks. They weren't even best in WWII, only reason we see many of them still is because so mane were built. They are absolutely obsolete tanks today as they lack the defensive and offensive capabilities of a modern tank.
@@nodzeratul no actually some were from museums which actually made ukraine go about and start deactivating a lot of tanks as did many other countries around as they didnt want people stealing fully functional tanks
@@deutsch-amerikanisch8281 Freshly built from where?? What factory is actively producing 75 year old pieces of equipment and ammo? And moreover why, a T-72B can be bought on credit for $500,000 from Russia and would trash a whole plattoon of T-34/85s.
RaymonTheFox While .50 cal could penetrate several dozen millimeters of some softer types of steel, there's no way any type of .50 cal ammunition could penetrate 47 millimeters of steel used on a WW2 tank.
I am talking about any type of ammunition. Even with something like M903 Saboted Light Armor Penetrator .50 cal rounds, the penetration does not quite reach high enough to deal with the frontal plate of T-34-85 and this isn't even taking into account the sloping of the plate..
RaymonTheFox Like I said, something like face hardened steel can be penetrated quite easily with 50. cal, but tanks use homogenous steel which is considerably tougher. Against that, 50. cal can only penetrate around 4 cm at close range, and even that is only with the aforementioned M903.
The only reason you see so much old Soviet armor around the world is that they produced so much of it during WWII (and the aftermath) and shipped it around the world as foreign aid. Germany produced only a small fraction of the number of tanks the Allies did in WWII. Still, some Panthers were used in the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. Tanks can only really be considered obsolete when compared to each other. Used as self-propelled, armor-protected artillery, even a T-34 could still be useful in some scenarios. Fighting against modern tanks would not be one of those scenarios!
Thomas Toups - The us shipped our “surplus” hardware all over the world and freely gave it to “free” leaning dictators and repressive governments that were friendly to the us and it’s interest of those countries resources.
yeah you're right I believed that these T-34 tanks that I only wish were be operational in our country philippines for reason we are still being colonized in mindanao for some terrorists.
Tadgh ÓCéirín remember they are all Russian tanks for the most part that means they can shoot anything you place in its casing. about as plum dumb as you can get with tanks fucking things don't die.
which usually only means the crew is going to have a bad day tho. Just clean up the remains of the old crew, put a new crew in and bam, up and running. Plus side is that you now have more ventillation in your tank :')
It's kinda ironic how places like America, Britain and France would see these tanks and things as museum pieces but third world countries see them as good fighting machines.
I also saw more modern tanks in a museum; like T-54, T-72 and Leopard 1 ;) The T-54 were used by Iraq in the war against USA, and were destroyed easily by USA.
I rode in a Sherman two years ago, and yes it feels even more strange. When I got in, it was obvious that it was a seventy years old war machine. When its engine gets turned on, it does a massive, thick smoke, that filled the hangar in a few seconds. And it consumes a lot too.
Finland is nothing in the present. Terrain is not a problem anymore, so Vietnam isn't either. Heat-seeking radars make it easier to find any target. And if you want to invade any country, just appeal to its leftist media and tell them you want to immigrate there...
The sloping of the IS-3 can probably still do a lot of good in modern day warfare, not to mention it has quite the thick slab of steel on the front of that turret.
Made to last? The combat life expectancy of tanks in that era were measured in hours. Maybe days. That was the whole point in spitting them out by the dozens every day if need be.
guys, don't make fun of it. they are local militias that formed after ukrainian government was overthrown. they took this tank of the monument. they had to do with what they had.
So they defiled a war monument to get a tank that is probably more trouble than its worth considering spare parts and ammo are probably impossible to find and its armour won't be good against any kind of anti tank weapons it might face and its gun would be good for nothing but destroying light buildings or cars, the best thing they could do with it is remove the gun reinforce the armour on the front and use it as an infantry tank
Kek Man t34 monuments are pretty much just tanks on a postument . most of them are operational, just need new bataries and new weapons. Even a shitty tank is better than no tank, especially if are selforganized militia
@@masrendra8625 heavy tanks do generally mean thick armor big gun but some heavy tanks in ww2 had standard medium tank guns on them. While alot of tank destroyers had thin armor, there were some that had thick armor, take the Jagdtiger for example, basically a tiger 2 with a fixed gun and thick ass frontal armor
Then we have these vehicles that are supposedly well known TDs while in reality, they were Assault and Breakthrough tanks. The Tortoise and T95 come to mind.
I mean, it can still be a great infantry fire support vehicle, good distraction or reconnaissance vehicle for the main armored cavalry. This country may also not need a MBT's due to terrain or environment.
Iceman Airsoft not saying it wouldnt be, probably pretty good where their actually using it. considering their probably no other better tanks around their.
The 75mm is fine against any of the other tanks used in neighboring countries. The only nearby country with real MBTs is Chile, and the 75mm with good AP or HVAP ammo can still kill one of those from the side/rear. Everything else is just APCs, scout cars with cannon mounted on them, or dressed up IFVs. Against people or light vehicles, far more likely targets in that part of the world, the 75mm is excellent. The M24 also has the advantages of being small (easy to maneuver in jungle/urban fighting), light (easy to transport), cheap to maintain, and is very quiet by tank standards (a big deal in dense foliage when you'll likely hear an enemy before you see them).
depending on what generation it is and gun it could be the 80mm or the 100mm wich would be rarer for the 100mm wich would only have around maybe 180mm of penertration so it wouldnt even pen anything that would be 20 years more advanced then it and the side armor is barely 80mm so anything like an RPG could probably blow it to pieces.
wouldnt even bother commenting about a T90 or an m1A1 or even the leopard 2's or M1A2's anything now days would take multiple hits from tank destroyers from 70 years ago because of reactive armor, armor that absorbs and disperses the impact over a wider surface due to the multiple layers of armor, and not to mention a tank destroyer from 70 years ago wouldnt even see an M1A1 or a T90 from 1.5miles away.
KTMPowa Latin America doesn't have the infrastructure for heavy modern armor. Most bridges and roads can't support MBTs, and these vehicles are still very cost effective for defending frontier regions.
I feel bad for retards firing a modern day TOW missile at a WW2 era tank destroyer. The missile costs at leas 2-3 times more than the thing they hit. Then again, TOW scored 0 direct hits on T-90, but a T-55 or T72 are a far better target for TOW.
Yeah. Pretty sure no one would fire a TOW at an SU-100. Although that 100mm should be able to pen the sides and back of the Abrams chassis. Correct me if I'm wrong.
I mean, that's where size and stength come in. If you wear a bulletproof jacket, even modern rifles (7.62 and lower) or pistol rounds of lower caliber won't get through. However, a cannonball, although old, will still kill you. Abrams armor againt New Jersey's/Mighty Mo's 16 inch will not be effective, although the armor is made to retaliate rounds made decades later. However, 100mm is not enough, if the gun is the same, to punch through the front. However, due to the size of the gun, it should be able to penetrate the sides of the hull, and the explosive filler capable of killing the crew
BaronofGermania Russia won't invade because they're scared of starting a world war 3. Instead they say they're not even in ukraine when in fact they're providing guns and supplies to Donetsk rebels to fight the Ukrainian Army. And that t-34-85 is being used by the rebels, not Ukrainian forces. The Ukrainian Army has a modernized T-84 Oplot which can stand its ground against Russian tanks.
@ the one in China or Paraguay? Not entirely sure, hell im honestly completely surprised to see them around nowadays. Possibly used in the role that Sherman's were made for, infantry support and exploitation tactics. Maybe? Ik when they were first made they used em in tank vs tank warfare, of course that was the beginning of the war
That is exactly what I thought. If the older tank still does the job, the army want´s him for - why not? I think in a fight against separatists or a semi-military organisation like rebels a Sherman or a T-34 is a good weapon. They can also used as mobile artillery like in syria.
This video was about 5 times longer than it should have been. Showing the same guy, standing outside the tank, pulling a lanyard to fire the main gun 50 times in a row is stupid. And you did it over and over. C c y
Someones still using the AK-47 of Tanks, the T-34? Hmmp, should be ok Someones still using IS-3s and Maintained Shermans? Hmmp, Nice Museum Someones still using Chafees? Hmmp, still ok. Someones still using M3s and M5s? Laughed my ass off
Well interesting you should say that! The owner of the t34 seen in Ukraine had the same thought! He creatively fitted it with a sort of steel mesh skirt. When an RPG hits this it would detonate the rocket several inches away from the actual armor meaning an anti tank rocket wouldn't hit with the same devastating effect.
kronic meerkat Having caged armor doesn't mean your invulnerable at the turret, which would make most sense to fire at since that would render the tank useless
Kubi Kameho it actually is harder to hit it from a distance especially with an RPG... the only things that will hit 99% are high precision weapons. but not an RPG aimed with iron sights
Y el Sherman del vídeo? De dónde carajo salió? Yo sé que los retiramos del servicio en la década del 70 pero la pregunta es que hacia andando por la calle?
TAM developed by Germany. There is also the TAM 2 but I dont know if Argentina has any of those (but its quite possible) The Argentine Navy uses a lot of German company Blomm and Voss's products (MEKO 360 - Almirante Brown class and MEKO 140 Espora Class Corvette) For the mid to late 1980s these were very capable...4 Twin Compact 40mm L70 Bofors for CIWS on the MEKO 360....even today thats a lot of firepower.
The frontal armor is only 47mm so yet if you get a gun caliber 3 times the armor thickness eg. 120mm gun on the M1A2 and the 105mm gun on the K1 Panther you can penetrate it easily,
Kevin Yang I meant that South Korean IFV K-21's 40mm machine cannon rapid-fires shells, and that penetrates 200mm, which is way over t-24/76's strongest armor. So, a South Korean infantry fighting vehicle that rapid-fires shells while running fast is stronger in tank-fight than a kind of TANK that North Korea still puts in service. Therefore, when it comes to a Tank, it's a literal hell to North Korea. Ba'Bye to them.
sepiw losyl Very true. Their naval destroyers have T-34/85 tank turrets as their main naval turrets. This is funny because even if we mount modern MBT turrets on the ships, that'll still be weaker than WW2 era naval turrets. And these funny guys mounted WW2 tank turrets. Also they still use open-top manual, magazined anti-aircraft guns. Those were already outdated during WW2.
The Ch33f panzer IV’s where used by Syria against Syrian forces in the Arab-Israeli war of 1967 as they’d purchased some post independence from Spain in the early 60’s as Spain upgraded all their out of date, donated German ww2 vehicles.
Its because of no longer having original ammunition so the ammunition they use has a higher change to misfire because its slightly bigger or smaller than intended
NYET!!! STRONK STALIN TONK LIVE FOREVER!!! GULAG WITH BOTH OF YOU, YOU MEASURE TIME IN YEARS AND NOT COUNT DOWN TO END OF DEMOCRACY??? YOU CAPITALIST SPI!
jhon doe Yes, but the IS-3 isn't an American but instead Soviet and thus follow Soviet tank doctrine. otherwise tanks such as the Panther would be a heavy tank because the US describes any tank above a certain weight to be heavy, but it's not. The Panther is a medium tank and the IS-3 is a Heavy Tank. as the countries that design them decide what they are, not the US.
This is just sad, these poor old tanks look so sad, all they want to do is go to rest in a museum, their barrels aching with pain as the 100mm snaps to action, firing its last... defiant... shells... this is so sad 😭😭 we need to help the poor tanks, also is3 is heavy tank not a TD but help these tanks guys, Ik something is better than nothing but come on! Also I was really surprised to see a stuart
Cyka blyat! No comrade. These glorious tanks either destroy or get destroyed. There is no retirement. And seeing as most of them are Russian tanks I think the 2nd option isn't what they are getting
I dont think these T-34/85 can be used against modern day tanks. Maybe against armored transport/fighting vehicles or against the enemy infantry but surely not against T-62s or T-72s.
PrinceSoviet Nowadays tank-against-tank battles are rare so with proper usage these tanks can perform pretty well against lighter-armored vehicles and uncovered infantry.
Given how many "low-tech" wars we actually have in the world at the moment, these tanks can definitely be useful. In a third world country, these things could serve the role of infantry support for 1/10th of the price of an actual modern tank. (just don't use them in tank v tank battles!)
SinerAthin depending what tank it was... if it was a t-34/85 I'd probably bet my money on the modern tank. if it was say an ISU-152 SPG (self propelled gun) or as most people call it, a tank destroyer, I'd bet my money on that seeing it served multiple roles such as infantry support, artillery barrages, and taking out German heavy tanks and Tank destroyers ( main reason it was developed for) also the armor was quite formidable. that paired with a 152MM cannon, freaking devastating piece of machinery.
That train of SU-100s and T-34-85s made me sad. Dont use those anymore they will get destroyed we only have a few left and need to keep all in good shape to stay that way.
That in my opinion is an infantry support tank, not a main battle tank since it was based on the german marder fighting vehicle. And its not as modern as you think.
Thermal Optics are around since WW2 (or even before that?) And the cannon is 105mm. The reason I say that it is not as modern is because it was based on the German Marder Schützenpanzer. But that vehicle was already replaced again by the German army.
no you're wrong in the first versions designed in the 70's had a 105mm cannon ... in tam2c) /2ip version the cannon has been changed to a l44 120mm and An automatic meteorological station was added to improve the ballistic calculations and a thermal blanket was installed in the barrel to increase its accuracy (thermal cuff). It now has the capability to launch the LAHAT missile by adopting a kit that gives it 8,000 m of range was added to the chassis a short-range thermal camera for the driver, which allows driving in night and daytime, fog and smoke. Thermal and television sights (double channel with continuous zoom) were incorporated for both the gunner and the commander, both with built-in laser telemetry. The old analog computer was replaced by a digital Honeywell. The intercom was replaced and a digital communications system with encrypted frequency hopping and IP 115 Kbyte / s bandwidth transmission with video transmission and information for the frame system (BMS) with hierarchy C4I (Battle Main System) that gives an accurate overview of the situation with cartographic display on LCD screens.A laser detector was incorporated, indicating the presence of enemy threats and being able to act accordingly either by attacking or taking an evasive maneuver according to the characteristics of the enemy since it has the ability to identify the origin of the threat. The intercom was replaced and a digital radio communication system with frequency hopping and IP transmission was incorporated. A BMS information system was added to give an accurate picture of the situation with cartographic display.An auxiliary external power unit (UPA) is included, which allows the vehicle to operate with its engine off, this feature is ideal for surveillance and stealth operations ... I am sure it is modern, and all this in only 31 tons..
It was of that era though, it was developed with the idea of WWII heavy tanks, before the concept became obsolete with the development of Main Battle Tanks.
I think the reason why there are t-34 tanks in Yemen is because the USSR gave a bunch of t-34s to the former communist south yemen, and when Yemen reunited in 1989 they probably kept the t-34s in the arsenal
Did you now seriously compare the IS-3 tank, that where made at the end of WW2, over 70 years ago, to a modern day tank, with modern technology? You need to read up on history. The IS-3 was one of the very best tanks of its time!
if you think the abraham is the best tank and that the russians suck go take a peek at a real modern tank, the russian t-14 armata or the real name the object 148
Lolindir Surion actaul it had manly faults and along prograda made it sound so good to the west plus the lack of info on the tank which lead to it being look upon as the best tank
the Stuarts for sure were the big surprise but it was cool to see the M24s as well... so shiney and running so well... awesome video thanks for the share
According to Wikipedia the T34 remains in service with Bulgaria, Mozambique, Namibia, North Korea and Yemen. Peru and Senegal retain the M8/M20 Greyhound armored car, Venezuela still has M18 Hellcats in reserve, and who knows who else still has what in some forgotten warehouse.
@@magicaldweebintheinternet9001 judging by sloped armor and round turret, at least it's still looks like something designed from 1960s (even though it came from WW2 era)
The old U.S. light and medium tanks in Latin America actually make sense, and are still useful, since the kind of terrain in those countries makes using a larger, more modern MBT problematic. And they can go places that those wheeled AFVs Latin American forces love so much cannot go.
they're pretty much useless. it's not a matter of "old outdated tech", i mean they straight up have HILARIOUSLY thin armor compared to any modern combat vehicle. all they're really good for is makeshift artillery.
I can't believe any nation would still use m-3 Stuart tanks. They sucked in ww-2 and obsolete just doesn't seem to convey how worthless they are today.
@@Tbig13002 Sherman wasn't that bad. It had infantry support role and it fairly did it's job. M4A3 with 76mm was one of the best from all WW2 medium tanks.
@@lovepeace9727 it's pure propaganda, it was one of the worst tank of WW2, you can hear their crews talking about it in this historry channel documentary. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Ns6l7sCoWX4.html
Actually most of the surviving German tanks were transferred to the Arab countries after WW2 and then were destroyed in the wars with Israel. If you look at pictures of the war in 1948 up to the 6 day war you see a lot of them but they start to peter out by 1972.
landfair123 You rarely see anything other than the earlier Panzer units, a few panzer 4s, and the occasional panther. Nazi germany judt didnt mass produce tanks to tge same scale as the other WW2 nations, so there arent mamy hand-me-downs to hand dowm
did you watch the video? Their were other country tanks as well. AS stated below, the t-34 was quantity over quality. The suspension was actually an American design.
It is very amazing to know and learned, that there some few World War 2 era battle tank's that has still working and still serving in some few Armed Forces on some deferent parts of the world. Those are the living proof that an old War machine's are still capable to serve in this modern day.
BIlly the SMall Bong thorton from india Interesting. Stgew44 were even rare during WWII. MG42 on the other hand are used even today by the Bundeswehr with some modifications as the MG3 and it seems to be a very common mounted mg all over Africa, middle east and Asia.
I was really surprised about the IS-3 and the M4 Sherman on patrol I haven't seen one in action in real life before yet so yeah that surprised me so much.
