@@freshfrozen3035 Around 6 others are sent back in, and if JDAMS hit them again another 6 is also sent in again, and theres a limit to how many JDAMS can be dropped so
@@yatokami7907 damn, been a year since i posted this comment. Well, I don't know, I was just saying that you can't spam JDAM's, but you could spam Abrams
@@brianv1988 pretty late response but it is treated with nitroglycerin or a similar chemical which allows it to burn up quickly and cleanly. Now, for safety reasons insensitive propellent and munitions are used with combustible casings which almost entirely eliminates ammo cook off's for most situations unless there was a direct hit by a kinetic energy penetrator such as APFSDS.
It’s not that, at least not primarily; they’ve changed their mission, and the Abrams tank does not quite fit anymore. after 20 years of static warfare fit more for the army in remote fire bases in Afghanistan or patrols in Iraq, they’re reevaluating what the role of a marine is. they charge in, kick ass, and they roll hard on targets and in every sense of the phrase are the first in the door. they must be flexible, light, as all-purpose as possible, and amphibious. a light tank or light armored weapons-capable vehicle would be more appropriate to the role, such as a LAV-25. this having been said the Abrams could not classify as anything BUT a heavy tank, and as such requires enormous logistical backing, repairs, and an adjustment in tactics to match its speed and requirements, which i and has always been at odds with the marines’ mission. it i extremely capable, just in a different role.
@@saibot7218 potentially, yes. if an autoloader malfunctions, its technically possible to operate manually, but a massive pain in the ass. see the T72 for example
Probably not very many. I was a loader on an M1A1 when I was in the Army. (I also served as a driver, and briefly as a gunner, but loader was my favorite position). We were trained to ram the round into the breech using a closed fist, but I always socked it home using the heel of my hand. That made it easy to raise my loading arm up out of the way of the breech as it slammed closed. Anyway, about the only way to lose fingers in the breech is if you're really clumsy and incompetent; and if you were, you probably wouldn't last long enough on the tank to lose your fingers.
I was a Bradley driver in the army and so much of our training was the same, move to fighting position, briefly move up and fire a few rounds, move back into defilade, rinse and repeat.
It's actually up to the loader to close the gun breach of the 120mm M256 via a lever, he can also on some newer M1A2 Abrams-SEP(V3) models use the automatic breach lock which will close the breach after use. If the breach closes slow, that's the loaders fault on pre M1A2 Abrams-SEP(V1) models
@@saibot7218the challenge has smaller and lighter but more awkward rounds but slightly worse ergonomics. Both the leopard and abrams have blow out ammo racks so that makes them slightly slower. The leopard also has worse ammo placement and is more cramped than the abrams so probably. 1. Challenger 2 Abrams 3.Leopard
Cool air freshener 00:15
Wunderbaum 😂
Lol
Gotta make the inside smells good
ruclips.net/video/FYY8ECTbSqk/видео.html🤦♂️
Crew is looking real aesthetic
This machine can liberate 6 oil wells a minute!
And then get Obliterated by and JDAM dropped by SU25
@@freshfrozen3035 Around 6 others are sent back in, and if JDAMS hit them again another 6 is also sent in again, and theres a limit to how many JDAMS can be dropped
so
American speed standard
@@Peno547 You think it's easier or cheaper to produce an Abrams than 1 JDAM?
@@yatokami7907 damn, been a year since i posted this comment. Well, I don't know, I was just saying that you can't spam JDAM's, but you could spam Abrams
I timed the first load at 5.9 seconds, and the third at 7.38 seconds.
The shells are about 54 pounds each, my dad was a loader in the M1A1/A2 Abrams in the Persian gulf war.
Do it while tank is running over terrain.. not on flat deck :D
That's failing the loader is supposed to load rounds from 3-4 sexibda in the first 3 shots
@@xmeda "do it while the tank is upsidedown and near a blackhole" 🤡
That breech needs a little TLC, but understandable in that type of environment.
I'm intrigued by how the shell casings burn up and leave nothing but the butt of the casing
It’s a cardboard and gelatin casing, the electronic firing pin is all that is left after the shell fires off
How does it burn up so quick does that leave a lot of residue in the breach
@@brianv1988 pretty late response but it is treated with nitroglycerin or a similar chemical which allows it to burn up quickly and cleanly. Now, for safety reasons insensitive propellent and munitions are used with combustible casings which almost entirely eliminates ammo cook off's for most situations unless there was a direct hit by a kinetic energy penetrator such as APFSDS.
Marine fire commands are weird. In the Army, it's just "Load Sabot."
And what they said?
Marines don’t have tanks.
USMC Armor, a pity they are disbanding, but that's the cost of doctrine changes and a limited budget
It’s not that, at least not primarily; they’ve changed their mission, and the Abrams tank does not quite fit anymore. after 20 years of static warfare fit more for the army in remote fire bases in Afghanistan or patrols in Iraq, they’re reevaluating what the role of a marine is. they charge in, kick ass, and they roll hard on targets and in every sense of the phrase are the first in the door. they must be flexible, light, as all-purpose as possible, and amphibious. a light tank or light armored weapons-capable vehicle would be more appropriate to the role, such as a LAV-25. this having been said the Abrams could not classify as anything BUT a heavy tank, and as such requires enormous logistical backing, repairs, and an adjustment in tactics to match its speed and requirements, which i and has always been at odds with the marines’ mission. it i extremely capable, just in a different role.
Love the tree air freshener lol
A hundred of these would end the Ukraine war in a week.
They load by hand ?
That's right. Most NATO tanks do not use auto-loaders.
The only tank from the Western-NATO countries that uses an autoloader is the French Leclerc.
@@kutter_ttl6786 why is that?
Autoloaders too fragile to trust in combat?
@@saibot7218 potentially, yes. if an autoloader malfunctions, its technically possible to operate manually, but a massive pain in the ass. see the T72 for example
Is it me or does the gunner’s eyes look fake?
all you
Can't help but wonder how many guys have lost a few fingers from those.
Probably not very many. I was a loader on an M1A1 when I was in the Army. (I also served as a driver, and briefly as a gunner, but loader was my favorite position). We were trained to ram the round into the breech using a closed fist, but I always socked it home using the heel of my hand. That made it easy to raise my loading arm up out of the way of the breech as it slammed closed. Anyway, about the only way to lose fingers in the breech is if you're really clumsy and incompetent; and if you were, you probably wouldn't last long enough on the tank to lose your fingers.
I was a Bradley driver in the army and so much of our training was the same, move to fighting position, briefly move up and fire a few rounds, move back into defilade, rinse and repeat.
The driver, that I just got smacked in the grill moment? Priceless
That breech closes pretty slow.
It's actually up to the loader to close the gun breach of the 120mm M256 via a lever, he can also on some newer M1A2 Abrams-SEP(V3) models use the automatic breach lock which will close the breach after use. If the breach closes slow, that's the loaders fault on pre M1A2 Abrams-SEP(V1) models
I'm used to gun breeches closing in such a way they would eat a careless loaders fingers.
Variable closing looks like Good idea!
The abrams doesn't have spent shell casing?
The casing is burnt during firing, the only thing left is the end cap, which falls down into a basket i assume after it fires
Only the old M1's do. The 105 cannon. The 120mm only has the afcap that ejects.
UP !
No eye pro huh lol.
Can someone tells what he is talking on 0:48?
I didn't know that tank rounds chucked the entire body, I thought it just worked like a big bullet
The case burns up in there when it fires, only the primer end is left after the gun fires
I tought it was all automatic to be honest.
NATO mostly uses auto-loaders in self-propelled artillery. Tank loading mechanisms are manual.
@@ShellCrater it's safety reasons
where the ammo catrdige go ??
Ist semi ceaseless so most of the case burns up.. Only the base of the case is left which is thrown out the tank out a hatch
RIP tanks :(
*sad rah*
@Number7Red USMC is divesting their tank fleet and reorienting back to "marine" warfare.
Best loading?
Abrams, leopard or challenger?
Abrams crew has better training
@@cheesefoodxii3091 I’m talking about mechanic
@@saibot7218the challenge has smaller and lighter but more awkward rounds but slightly worse ergonomics. Both the leopard and abrams have blow out ammo racks so that makes them slightly slower. The leopard also has worse ammo placement and is more cramped than the abrams so probably.
1. Challenger
2 Abrams
3.Leopard
@@cheesefoodxii3091 NATO did three tank competitions in 2016 to 2018 and the Germans were ahead of the Americans every single time.