For sheer killing power and reliability , one cannot go past the ZU-23/4 Shilka. It has been used in numerous , conflicts since the 1970's and is still going strong. Such is the utility of the ZU-23/2 gun , that it is still mounted on trucks , pickups or MTLB carriers and used as a fire-support and AA weapon. It should be top of the list.
Pantsir is the best in my view. Two high firing guns and twelve missiles. And before anyone comes on here screaming , 'Israel destroyed a couple of Syrian ones, which means they're useless', let me remind you that every single system in the video will get destroyed or damaged if attacked. The aim of all these systems isn't to drive around the countryside admiring the view and presenting themselves as targets, their aim is to protect something on the ground. Something like a power station, an airfield, an ammo/weapons dump, a radar station, protection for long range SAMs like the S400 etc. Oh, and oil refinery sites like in Saudi Arabia. The US Patriots did a great job there in September last year!!! Yes, they can protect themselves when absolutely necessary, but it is the ground asset on the ground that is the number one priority. If these systems get attacked, then the ground asset doesn't. It survives, though you may lose one or two AA guns in the process.
Pantsir is totally useless. Ask Turkish drones. :) 15 0f them are destroyed in Lybia. 7 where destroyed during one day. Two or three are destroyed in Syria. Its a crap
@@MrSay1981 Ha, ha, ha. All the ones in Libya got there via the UAE (United Arab Emirates). They are the older S1 systems. All those 'destroyed' are claims by the way. Nothing more. And where they have been 'destroyed', well according to Wikipedia, they are nothing more than damaged. Including the ones 'destroyed' in Syria. Not destroyed at all by the looks of it. I don't know what value you can put on anything going to places like Libya and the irregular forces that will get their hands on them. However, the point in my post, which seems have gone totally over your head, is that they are not designed to drive about the desert or countryside admiring the view and presenting themselves to all and sundry as targets, they are there to protect something on the ground. If Pantsirs are being attacked, and they are not invulnerable to attack (no system is), then it must be because they are doing such a formidable job protecting some important ground asset, they have to be taken out first - where possible.
@@vitalalive69 Yeah ok, I have no idea if all these even were Pantsirs. Most look no more than damaged, and only one or two were even operational. Look, no system is invulnerable to attack. If you have equipment moving around from A to B, they need some sort of protection. Hell, even I could dismantle a Pantsir covered in tarpaulin by driving a truck into it. In fact, I could do that with any air defence system. If that's all you got, it isn't the effectiveness of the Pantsir that is the problem, it's the level of protection they get when not in use or in the process of being moved around behind the lines. That is another issue altogether and one that is up to the forces using them to solve.
Erin Carson We aren't talking what the manufacturers are saying so are we? The guy narrating could till say shrapnel. In fact shrapnels not a shell type but a byproduct of the shell regardless of its warhead type.
Shrapnel is a type of projectile, fitted with steel balls and an explosive charge to scatter them over the target, splinters are produced by explosions of usual artillery rounds, they are the piecies of shell body destroyed by explosion of the shell itself, in battlefields artillery splinters are very, very, very dangerous.
Erin Carson I think you've read far to much into my comment. If yo gave to go find links to try to prove an irrelevant comment then mate, you need to get out a bit more. It's took me over two months to even think about writing this. Just saying, there's a whole world out there fella ok. Be lucky"
As a former PFC in a Missile Battery in the Royal Danish Arme, my battery had hoped tthat we could exchang our man carried missiles for the GEPARD. So that is still my no. one.
Well, this video didn't age well. Pantsyr failed in every regard whereas the 'outdated' and 'out-of-service' Gepard redefined No-fly-zones for Russian aircraft in the Ukraine. It has even been software upgraded to counter modern small drones, far more effectively and less cost intensive than using missiles.
@@ServusIchBins Thanks for the spelling corrections "Gepard and the tunguska" hoping for you to point out my further spelling mistakes. I am not German or Russian so i have to use what i have . 😎👍
Unfortunately the UK doesn't have vehicles like these. We use Javelin AAM's. We should build a vehicle like the Russian Terminator tanks, but with radar so it can do AA as well as ground fire. Use the Challenger 1 chassis's. Add some reactive armour, upgrade the engine
The closest the U.K got to a modern dedicated S.P.A.G. was the Marksman. Developed by Marconi it was designed to fit on various platforms including challenger 1. Only the Fins brought it though.
Same with us but we mostly rely on our air support but there should definitely be something for closed in air support we did hav the m163 vulcan 20mm an m6 linebacker . now we use something called avenger an also shorad that can be used for air and ground it uses Hellfire missiles
I have to say as an American, it's shameful we don't have a good mobile AA weapon. It was shown multiple times in multiple wars how useful they are. They can also double as infantry support, imagine dual 35mm guns firing explosive rounds into buildings.
Last I heard there was ,2,000 M1s in storage, why can't some be used for anti air craft system with a new turret? You already have the tracked vehicle that is more powerful than the Sgt. York. Our allies have some really good system an already proven. I'm sure the could come up with a new to turret to house the guns an the radar systems. It'd be cheaper an a whole lot better than the Sgt York was an the M1 chassis could keep up with other M1s an other vehicles. But no the US would rather spend billions on useless systems than get state of the art systems that are already in use. An I'm sure an agreement could be made to license build them here.
@@michaelmaddy278 Yeah Beyond me why they can't take an M1 hull and put a Bofors 57mm AA gun turret on it and then slap on like a bigger, longer range Stinger missile on the sides of the turret. Easy. Systems already work.
You don't need one when you're on the invading side. Plus by that stage USAF and USN, two largest air forces in the world, probably already swept enemy air force.
@@AaronShenghao They are still useful, like I said, the guns can be used as infantry support against "soft targets" (meaning anything weaker than a MBT or armored bunker) Also, drones are becoming more and more of an issue, as the war in Ukraine is showing, so we need it for that too.
@@Cruor34 This. You want them as a defence against drones and cruise missiles. The CIWS is a bit in that direction. Imho what the US needs the most is something similar to the gun on the CV90. It can be mounted on an armored car or on a Bradley style vehicle, but a crew carrier with antidrone AA capability that can also be used against any target softer than an MBT is very useful.
That is a contradiction....... Even if you have the volume of putting 1 million rounds in tge air but without hitting because of inaccuracy its still nothing.... Volume is nothing without accuracy,. ....and volume is not needed if it is accurate! Mantra of AAA defence!!
@@tembot6363 traditionally speaking AA was about peppering the target because accurate fire wasnt as easy. As accuracy increased the rate of fire can be lowered but even today air defense systems use high rate of fire and precision.
@@tembot6363 Most AA gun systems do not hit and destroy enemy aircrafts. Their main purpose is to disrupt the aircraft's aim. Accuracy is very low on the totem pole.
@@majungasaurusaaaa brother , the main purpose of anti aircraft artillery is just it , to destroy aircraft , thats the very purpose of the system ..........IT SO HAPPENS THEY DISRUPT THEIR AIM IN THE PROCESS when they are being shut at .........
They are all basically the same turret with the locally produced radar and chassis. The Gepard is based on a leopard chassis and the polish one on a t-72 chassis.
@@nervsouly Sadly Armenia don't have them, or any modern ones... Didn't ask Russia for help either. I don't know what's the deal there. Perhaps they wanted a shot at nato or something. idk. Look at the armament of Armenia, it's a bit sad, while Turkey is helping Azerbaijan with modern weapons.
@@vladimirgusar4468 yeah I guess history repeats itself. Many nations got obliterated because they failed to recognize the importance of a new technology or type of warfare.
The Sim actually the A-10 and the Su-25 were made to survive to 30mm auto-canons mounted on the Shilka and similar system which is why the tunguska was made with a gun - missile tandem system. Basically, what the guns cant do , the missile will do which is why of all those systems, only a few *Missile / Canons tandem systems* like Pantsyr S1, 2K22, Flakpanzer Gepard A2, Type 95 (PGZ-95) or Type 09 (PGZ-5) as well as *higher calibers SPAAG* such as 2S38 (57mm), LVKV (40mm) or B1 Draco (76mm) might stand a chance (that is we dont take EW, ECM / SEAD / terrain or Surprise Factor into account).
The Sim they were damaged, not shot down, that thing can take a hell of a lot of punishment and stay alive. Few were lost however, to manpads and heavy SAM.
The Flakpanzer 1 Gepard can fire a various range of ammunition, the 40 35mm armour piercing rounds is correct, but this weapon system can fire more then just Sabot as this is it's armour piercing round. It can also fire HEIF-T (High Explosive Incendiary Fragmentation Tracers, self destroying by the way), and HEIF-PF (High Explosive Incendiary Fragmentation Proximity Fuse) rounds. The Sadam 25 has 4 crew members, otherwise, where is the Radar Operator? Its crew consists of Driver, Commander, Radar Operator and Gunner.
I wanted to see the Gatling that was in the thumbnail. Also, you forgot Kurkut that does't looks different and more modern unlike those similar systems.
@@mortenlund1418 It's a concept and technology demonstrator. Army doesn't have them. But idea is pretty good, as its shells are not only more lethal, but have a much bigger range. Its main targets must be modern drones with flight attitude up to 7km. All other guns won't work there. But as said it's only a concept
@@mortenlund1418 150-180 rpm. Maximum range is some 8 km. Good against drones, helicopters, CAS. Cons is that against a fast and agile target the rate of fire is really low. And AFAIK only a few entered service with the Russian PVO. It's just a BMP-3 with an old S-60 gun and some sensors after all (I'm oversimplifying).
Seems to me these things exhaust all their ammo in about 1 minute I'm sure to reload them is not easy. Not to mention the supply chain it would take to keep one firing for any length of time let alone three or four of them. I'm the battlefield in the heat of action I do not see how it would be possible
Short controlled bursts plus the fact that flying things need to get rather close to these things form them to be effective with their guns. Which probably the main one reason why most of them carry missiles aswell. Also if you just pulled a magdump with these they will shoot all their ammo well under one minute :'D What comes to reloading these I'm pretty sure that they have a way to reload these vehicles in reasonable amount of time.
These systems are as good as they are portrait. If you ask current defence expert then its South korean Biho that has dual radar. Even if its radar is counter measured, it has CCTV camera that can track the target and fire. Its is one of the youngest system among all shown here.
poor video. first point the chinese type 09 is in service and replacing type 95. second point they had four systems that were pretty much the same the gepard and its clones, they could have mention all four systems as one system on this list. thy could have included the chinese LD-2000 a SP 35mm gattling type weapon, its also mounted on another system the ZBL-08. they should have mentioned the ZSU-23-4 upgraded versions with added missiles. could have mentioned USA M163 VADS, also the serbian PASARS-16 armed with a 40mm bofors + missiles either mistral or R-13M vympel. also a mention of ZU-23-2 mountd on various platforms with upgrades such as radar guidance, upgraded fire control systems etc + added missiles such as Igla, strela-10M, or grom, such a system called the Hibneryt-KG of polish design. Russia has mounted these systems on MT-LB but could easily mount it on BMP-2 or BMP-3 chassis even mount it on BTR-80/82. even Egypt did a couple of versions of the ZU-23-2 called Nile-23/Sinai-23. so instead of having four systems the same they had plenty to choose from and to be honest some of these systems are better than some that made it onto their list
So, basically, apart from the Russian vehicles, all the rest are just Oerlikon guns mounted on different chassis...
And china but yea
Half the video was about the Gepard and it's copies.
and still it looks the most badass!
in a nutshell, yes
different radar n sensor
Why would you deny us the sound of these beasts??
This is a must for multiple layer of defence and with mountains and hilly terrain. Also good for an ambush for low flying air vehicles
For sheer killing power and reliability , one cannot go past the ZU-23/4 Shilka. It has been used in numerous , conflicts since the 1970's and is still going strong. Such is the utility of the ZU-23/2 gun , that it is still mounted on trucks , pickups or MTLB carriers and used as a fire-support and AA weapon. It should be top of the list.
But you can't always control who how many rounds are fired.
It's also outdated doesn't have good defense against AGM and it doesn't keep a low profile making it an easy spot easy kill
Pantsir is the best in my view. Two high firing guns and twelve missiles. And before anyone comes on here screaming , 'Israel destroyed a couple of Syrian ones, which means they're useless', let me remind you that every single system in the video will get destroyed or damaged if attacked. The aim of all these systems isn't to drive around the countryside admiring the view and presenting themselves as targets, their aim is to protect something on the ground. Something like a power station, an airfield, an ammo/weapons dump, a radar station, protection for long range SAMs like the S400 etc. Oh, and oil refinery sites like in Saudi Arabia. The US Patriots did a great job there in September last year!!! Yes, they can protect themselves when absolutely necessary, but it is the ground asset on the ground that is the number one priority. If these systems get attacked, then the ground asset doesn't. It survives, though you may lose one or two AA guns in the process.
Pantsir is totally useless. Ask Turkish drones. :) 15 0f them are destroyed in Lybia. 7 where destroyed during one day. Two or three are destroyed in Syria. Its a crap
@@MrSay1981 Ha, ha, ha. All the ones in Libya got there via the UAE (United Arab Emirates). They are the older S1 systems. All those 'destroyed' are claims by the way. Nothing more. And where they have been 'destroyed', well according to Wikipedia, they are nothing more than damaged. Including the ones 'destroyed' in Syria. Not destroyed at all by the looks of it. I don't know what value you can put on anything going to places like Libya and the irregular forces that will get their hands on them. However, the point in my post, which seems have gone totally over your head, is that they are not designed to drive about the desert or countryside admiring the view and presenting themselves to all and sundry as targets, they are there to protect something on the ground. If Pantsirs are being attacked, and they are not invulnerable to attack (no system is), then it must be because they are doing such a formidable job protecting some important ground asset, they have to be taken out first - where possible.
Do they come with batteries?
@@limedickandrew6016 ruclips.net/video/5q6rPkKJKuw/видео.html
@@vitalalive69 Yeah ok, I have no idea if all these even were Pantsirs. Most look no more than damaged, and only one or two were even operational. Look, no system is invulnerable to attack. If you have equipment moving around from A to B, they need some sort of protection. Hell, even I could dismantle a Pantsir covered in tarpaulin by driving a truck into it. In fact, I could do that with any air defence system. If that's all you got, it isn't the effectiveness of the Pantsir that is the problem, it's the level of protection they get when not in use or in the process of being moved around behind the lines. That is another issue altogether and one that is up to the forces using them to solve.
Those dudes who underestimate these beauties are just missile maniacs
Artillery shell splinters? You mean shrapnel?
Erin Carson We aren't talking what the manufacturers are saying so are we?
The guy narrating could till say shrapnel.
In fact shrapnels not a shell type but a byproduct of the shell regardless of its warhead type.
Shrapnel is a type of projectile, fitted with steel balls and an explosive charge to scatter them over the target, splinters are produced by explosions of usual artillery rounds, they are the piecies of shell body destroyed by explosion of the shell itself, in battlefields artillery splinters are very, very, very dangerous.
Erin Carson I think you've read far to much into my comment.
If yo gave to go find links to try to prove an irrelevant comment then mate, you need to get out a bit more.
It's took me over two months to even think about writing this.
Just saying, there's a whole world out there fella ok.
Be lucky"
@@gangstar8652 shrapnel is a specific shell, loaded with lead balls
As a former PFC in a Missile Battery in the Royal Danish Arme, my battery had hoped tthat we could exchang our man carried missiles for the GEPARD. So that is still my no. one.
Missiles ? For roland maybe
1:31
the way he said gerpard hurt me it was so off of it
Actual use - crowd control
Geneva convention starting to look more like a checklist
@@no898 😂😂😂
That would make the Mk19 a less than lethal alternative...
true
thankyou for making this video. I decided to bought the tunguska for home defense
Bapak kau home defense
Well, this video didn't age well. Pantsyr failed in every regard whereas the 'outdated' and 'out-of-service' Gepard redefined No-fly-zones for Russian aircraft in the Ukraine. It has even been software upgraded to counter modern small drones, far more effectively and less cost intensive than using missiles.
Just don t say "jepard" it s "gepard" hurts the ears
Gepards pronounced "Gep(Get with a p instead of t)Ard(as in car but you kno the rest)
Think so atleast.
Not everyone know you language
@@nuruddin1991 But everyone that does informational videos should atleast learn the proper pronunciation for the topic they're doing.
So do Tangaska
Self propelled guns - Guns that fly like rockets by generating lift via bullets
You missed the DRACO 8x8, 76 mm, SPAAG and C-RAM sistem by Leonardo - OTO Melara.
Good and informative video. You are right that K 30 biho is the no.1 . Thank you from India🇮🇳🇮🇳❤️
I think that the Russian types which combine automatic cannon and SAM's are better than types which have guns alone
And by Israel 😏...
@Malazgirt 1071 yup 👌🏻👍🏻... :-)
I've herad rumors, that Tunguska can split heli in half just within 1 second)
If it can hit one unlikely of hitting a US bird or uk
Swedish CV90 with the modification LVKV?? Autofire 4-5 rounds 40mm rapid fire. No shit.
I love anti aircraft guns for some reason
Everyone 500 to 600rds per minute
Russia hold my Vodka 5,000rds per minute
Lmao
hi P...
'
ussr russia drink too much heavy vodka and short time
SHILKA, the best gun ever!!!
Got outclassed by Tunguska
I liked the jepard and the Russian tangusta.
You didn’t write one name correct
@@ServusIchBins Thanks for the spelling corrections "Gepard and the tunguska" hoping for you to point out my further spelling mistakes. I am not German or Russian so i have to use what i have . 😎👍
Gepard* 2S6 Tunguska*
@@barriewright2857 I thought you misspelled them to sound like how Mr. Facs said them.
@@ServusIchBins I tend to think it was a crack on the mispronunciation of the narrator?
Formidable weapons.
Would they be, or are they viable today against A-10s?
hi G B...
'
respect support A-10 and keep service...
better against any ussr russia airplanes as ANs / HINDs / MIGs / SUs
A10 are not stealth if you want to destroy this anti aircraft weapons you must deploy scrambler jet first then brrrrrtttt
@@bestamerica even better at dogfighting with Su-35?
@@Kalashnikov413
hi G F P...
'
wrong word - dogfight -...
must be right word - AIRFIGHT -...
oh poooor ussr russia su-35 from su-27
Some of these were designed to counter the range advantage the A-10 had over the Shilka.
The Marksman can do the exact same thing as I described with the Flakpanzer 1 Gepard also as a result of it's cannons
Unfortunately the UK doesn't have vehicles like these. We use Javelin AAM's. We should build a vehicle like the Russian Terminator tanks, but with radar so it can do AA as well as ground fire. Use the Challenger 1 chassis's. Add some reactive armour, upgrade the engine
The closest the U.K got to a modern dedicated S.P.A.G. was the Marksman. Developed by Marconi it was designed to fit on various platforms including challenger 1. Only the Fins brought it though.
Same with us but we mostly rely on our air support but there should definitely be something for closed in air support we did hav the m163 vulcan 20mm an m6 linebacker . now we use something called avenger an also shorad that can be used for air and ground it uses Hellfire missiles
The best anti air artillery/drones/munition system today is the german Rheinmetall MANTIS
Которая горит в Украине, уже,, Ланцет,, самонаводящийся снаряд,, краснополь,, уничтожили Западное дерьмо, на камеру. Уже сотни видео в,, Телеграмме,,.
Gepard is a beast.
the dutch PRTL is like the gepard but has in my opinion a better radar system
K30 Biho is my choice
I have to say as an American, it's shameful we don't have a good mobile AA weapon. It was shown multiple times in multiple wars how useful they are. They can also double as infantry support, imagine dual 35mm guns firing explosive rounds into buildings.
Last I heard there was ,2,000 M1s in storage, why can't some be used for anti air craft system with a new turret? You already have the tracked vehicle that is more powerful than the Sgt. York. Our allies have some really good system an already proven. I'm sure the could come up with a new to turret to house the guns an the radar systems. It'd be cheaper an a whole lot better than the Sgt York was an the M1 chassis could keep up with other M1s an other vehicles. But no the US would rather spend billions on useless systems than get state of the art systems that are already in use. An I'm sure an agreement could be made to license build them here.
@@michaelmaddy278 Yeah Beyond me why they can't take an M1 hull and put a Bofors 57mm AA gun turret on it and then slap on like a bigger, longer range Stinger missile on the sides of the turret. Easy. Systems already work.
You don't need one when you're on the invading side. Plus by that stage USAF and USN, two largest air forces in the world, probably already swept enemy air force.
@@AaronShenghao They are still useful, like I said, the guns can be used as infantry support against "soft targets" (meaning anything weaker than a MBT or armored bunker) Also, drones are becoming more and more of an issue, as the war in Ukraine is showing, so we need it for that too.
@@Cruor34 This. You want them as a defence against drones and cruise missiles. The CIWS is a bit in that direction.
Imho what the US needs the most is something similar to the gun on the CV90. It can be mounted on an armored car or on a Bradley style vehicle, but a crew carrier with antidrone AA capability that can also be used against any target softer than an MBT is very useful.
What about the U.S.?
Look up "M247 Sergeant York". It had twin 40mm Bofors guns.
Looks all similar just by different manufacturers?! 🤔
Same goes to tank right
Nah bro Every detail thing on Anti aircraft is usefull
First principle of anti aircraft warfare is volume, not accuracy 😁
That is a contradiction....... Even if you have the volume of putting 1 million rounds in tge air but without hitting because of inaccuracy its still nothing.... Volume is nothing without accuracy,. ....and volume is not needed if it is accurate! Mantra of AAA defence!!
@@tembot6363 traditionally speaking AA was about peppering the target because accurate fire wasnt as easy. As accuracy increased the rate of fire can be lowered but even today air defense systems use high rate of fire and precision.
@@tembot6363 Most AA gun systems do not hit and destroy enemy aircrafts. Their main purpose is to disrupt the aircraft's aim. Accuracy is very low on the totem pole.
@@anewstarttoabrokenlife8662 right bro
@@majungasaurusaaaa brother , the main purpose of anti aircraft artillery is just it , to destroy aircraft , thats the very purpose of the system ..........IT SO HAPPENS THEY DISRUPT THEIR AIM IN THE PROCESS when they are being shut at .........
Imagine these firing at soldiers
Wow! Can't hide from that!
Hehe the fact Japan, Finland and Germany till now still partnership especially in military equipments, interesting
Sidam looks like saddam project
It seems oerlikon has a corner on the market
They are all basically the same turret with the locally produced radar and chassis.
The Gepard is based on a leopard chassis and the polish one on a t-72 chassis.
@@CS-zn6pp ahhhhhh that makes a lot of sense. Why change something thats already one of the best from the sounds of it
@@dilflanders صديقي انا فقط اتساءال في اى بلد هاذه الاسلحه
The way is said JAYPERD and BUNDESWEHR YIKEESSS
Korian selfperpoid gun good 👍👍
Nice stroke you got there
Stunning video, thanks for share!!!
"Artillery shell splinters" 🤣😂 watch out for those wooden rounds coming in! 😅😂
The Loara also fires the exact same rounds as the Flakpanzer 1 Gepard.
Reason? Well, you get the idea.
That's what allies do yo...
This is why no Zombie apocalypse will ever happen!
Can you even imagine what this weapons system will do if it be used against the zombie horde.
It's "Toon-ghooz-kah" (the name of a river in Siberia, as well as Shilka)
And while we're at it Ghe-parrrrd x'D
Do those systems work against modern armed drones?
Most do, yes.
@@vladimirgusar4468 okay good to know. How these drones made Aserbaidschan win so swiftly was really scary.
@@nervsouly Sadly Armenia don't have them, or any modern ones... Didn't ask Russia for help either. I don't know what's the deal there. Perhaps they wanted a shot at nato or something. idk. Look at the armament of Armenia, it's a bit sad, while Turkey is helping Azerbaijan with modern weapons.
@@vladimirgusar4468 yeah I guess history repeats itself. Many nations got obliterated because they failed to recognize the importance of a new technology or type of warfare.
I like the American and the German ones the most
"Tunguska here!"
"Where did you need us?"
From C&C Generals Russian Tunguska
@Kenes Assylov I mean C&C Genarals just a strategy game. However...russia military seriously badass
@Kenes Assylov USE MOD HAHAHAH GO TO MODDB.COM AND SEARCH CC MOD AND WONLOAD SILENT DEATH USA VS RUSSIA U HAVE TO TRY THAT MOD
IT’S PRONOUNCED GEE-PARD
And tun-goo-ska
They all are nice.
Tunguska and Pantsir didn't have 4 guns, they have 2*2-barrel gun.
These look like the older ZSU guns on newer tracks
6:39 yay the Tunguska is in the video
May come into play at some point.
The author, what kind of music plays in this video? Tell me please.
I don't know what the track name is but I think the artist is Resonance.
Ukrainian forces could use one of these!
It’s pronounced
Gep-ard
0:38 these tanks has minecraft’s camo
We call it digital camo
Victor Medina 🤨
Victor Medina stupid 9yo kid that just play fortnite 😟
Victor Medina 😂
Victor Medina 😉
My favourite choice pantsair gun
The best is that soviet truck boi with maxim
I'd be curious to see how a couple of A-10's would do against those.
Bad
The Sim actually the A-10 and the Su-25 were made to survive to 30mm auto-canons mounted on the Shilka and similar system which is why the tunguska was made with a gun - missile tandem system. Basically, what the guns cant do , the missile will do which is why of all those systems, only a few *Missile / Canons tandem systems* like Pantsyr S1, 2K22, Flakpanzer Gepard A2, Type 95 (PGZ-95) or Type 09 (PGZ-5) as well as *higher calibers SPAAG* such as 2S38 (57mm), LVKV (40mm) or B1 Draco (76mm) might stand a chance (that is we dont take EW, ECM / SEAD / terrain or Surprise Factor into account).
@@themax9913 A10 was shoot down by serbian army with praga gun
The Sim they were damaged, not shot down, that thing can take a hell of a lot of punishment and stay alive. Few were lost however, to manpads and heavy SAM.
@@themax9913 shoot down actually
World's best - Cousin Tommy with a Lee enfield .303 standing on a willys jeep
Closely followed by a Bren fired from the shoulder.
Oerlikon everywhere
War thunder fans sure do love the gepard
Some of these AAs are in War Thunder and are super OP.
Like the Tungska.
Its pronounced "Grr-pad" not "Jepard".
Also where's the OTOMATIC.
otomagic you mean
Otomatic is hot trash compared to how it preforms in warthunder
It is pronounced tun goose Ka
Ah yes my new grr pad
OTOMATIC never entered service. Only in WT.
The Flakpanzer 1 Gepard can fire a various range of ammunition, the 40 35mm armour piercing rounds is correct, but this weapon system can fire more then just Sabot as this is it's armour piercing round.
It can also fire HEIF-T (High Explosive Incendiary Fragmentation Tracers, self destroying by the way), and HEIF-PF (High Explosive Incendiary Fragmentation Proximity Fuse) rounds.
The Sadam 25 has 4 crew members, otherwise, where is the Radar Operator? Its crew consists of Driver, Commander, Radar Operator and Gunner.
I wanted to see the Gatling that was in the thumbnail. Also, you forgot Kurkut that does't looks different and more modern unlike those similar systems.
Check out Matsimus' channel, he has a video about the rotary cannon.
You mean the Vulcan! M163A1 self propelled American antiaircraft gun. It is impressive and very noisy too!
@@joseortega5407 And was withdrawn from US service in '94.
If there was M1AGDS it would be in top of the list
A-10 warthog: Anti air? sorry what? *laughs in titanium armour*
earlikon is is best!!
ধন্যবাদ...
thanks
MANTIS - the German anti-aircraft weapon system.
A 35mm revolver cannon
57mm that's something else!
Would like to hear some more pro's and con's to a 57mm anti air gun. Rate of fire must be pretty low.
@@mortenlund1418 It's a concept and technology demonstrator. Army doesn't have them. But idea is pretty good, as its shells are not only more lethal, but have a much bigger range. Its main targets must be modern drones with flight attitude up to 7km. All other guns won't work there. But as said it's only a concept
@@mortenlund1418 150-180 rpm. Maximum range is some 8 km. Good against drones, helicopters, CAS. Cons is that against a fast and agile target the rate of fire is really low. And AFAIK only a few entered service with the Russian PVO. It's just a BMP-3 with an old S-60 gun and some sensors after all (I'm oversimplifying).
Boy, screw every single vehicle on this list except the tunguska
Warthunder players know why
Of you play warthunder then you will know that the GAZ-AAA (4M) is obviously the best
Best system is Pansir-S2 M system.
However, it could not see the Turkish war drones in syria
and was destroyed
Yeah, definitely. I mean it is unproven the best...
@@yelbegentuna6269 ** and Libya
"the best is the one with the really poor combat record"
Seems to me these things exhaust all their ammo in about 1 minute I'm sure to reload them is not easy. Not to mention the supply chain it would take to keep one firing for any length of time let alone three or four of them. I'm the battlefield in the heat of action I do not see how it would be possible
Short controlled bursts plus the fact that flying things need to get rather close to these things form them to be effective with their guns.
Which probably the main one reason why most of them carry missiles aswell.
Also if you just pulled a magdump with these they will shoot all their ammo well under one minute :'D
What comes to reloading these I'm pretty sure that they have a way to reload these vehicles in reasonable amount of time.
1. 286 TUNGUSKA 2. PANTSIR-S1 3. LOARA
Oh mannnn....this is human invented things simply to split another person into pieces.....
Or save themselves from being split into pieces
0:2:20 that's not PZG-95 I THINK is Polish Loara on PT-91 CHASE pr type 97 JSDF
Ngl playing golmud railway with someone who knows how to use the type 95 kinda pisses me oh
These systems are as good as they are portrait. If you ask current defence expert then its South korean Biho that has dual radar. Even if its radar is counter measured, it has CCTV camera that can track the target and fire. Its is one of the youngest system among all shown here.
South Korean , Biho anti aircraft system is best in d world 💪💪💪💪
Ediot
The 2S6 Tenguska is how you pronounce the 2S6.
Awesome weapons
Please be clear for every one which country manufactured it
Ads in youtube insanely getting intens. Who will pay those with data paid? Million of viewers?
I know i wont.
poor video. first point the chinese type 09 is in service and replacing type 95. second point they had four systems that were pretty much the same the gepard and its clones, they could have mention all four systems as one system on this list. thy could have included the chinese LD-2000 a SP 35mm gattling type weapon, its also mounted on another system the ZBL-08. they should have mentioned the ZSU-23-4 upgraded versions with added missiles. could have mentioned USA M163 VADS, also the serbian PASARS-16 armed with a 40mm bofors + missiles either mistral or R-13M vympel. also a mention of ZU-23-2 mountd on various platforms with upgrades such as radar guidance, upgraded fire control systems etc + added missiles such as Igla, strela-10M, or grom, such a system called the Hibneryt-KG of polish design. Russia has mounted these systems on MT-LB but could easily mount it on BMP-2 or BMP-3 chassis even mount it on BTR-80/82. even Egypt did a couple of versions of the ZU-23-2 called Nile-23/Sinai-23. so instead of having four systems the same they had plenty to choose from and to be honest some of these systems are better than some that made it onto their list
The "djeperd"... Yep sounds about right
The Type 87 can fire the exact same rounds as I described with the Flakpanzer 1 Gepard.
Of course both Germany and Japan share weapons...
@@franktank4360 ggeke oom
Hey the m163 USA 20mm gun m61 Vulcar 2,100 rounds
The GEPARD uses a marksman turret
how nice , BUT on the 2:22 is NOT the Gepard but that was a PRTL ... just saying ;-)
What are the medieval angels going to do when a pansear S1 pulls up
tunguska !
I love the jepard
Gepard
Sgt York best gun
You missed CV9040 LV...
Pantsir S1 by far superior. Also transportable by Cargo or Freight A.C.
Panzer*
What about artillary ?
Drone is.the.best...many tank destroy with drone in war Armenia vs Azerbaijan.
Maybe now with all the drone attacks Germany will develop a Gepard II? Or modernize and deploy the Mantis?