A handful of videos speculating on Upcoming technology are _Definitely_ “So Much” versus 8 years of russian arms simps saying the Armata making everything else obsolete. _Clearly_
@V V Both the US and Germany acknowledge that they're tech demonstrators. The T-14 doesn't exist outside of parades so there's no reason to replace the Leopard or Abrams.
video duration doesn't equate to amount of mistakes mentioned. there were a lot of jumps from different points in LP's video and RE went into depth about some of LP's mistakes.
Fair warning to anyone who’s going to read the comments it’s an absolute shit show between the red and LP fans and I’ve lost a bunch of brain cells reading both of them so proceed with caution
Another cool fact about the 1500 HP turbine engine of the Abrams is that it was developed from the engine on the Chinook helicopter. It is capable of producing 3,000 HP but is governed down to 1500 HP. If you un-govern it, then the transmission and drive train would not be able to handle the power and the fuel efficiency would drop to unacceptable levels.
Turbines are most efficient at full-speed, efficiency would go up, however the tank would have no use for that level of power and it would have reliability issues.
@@robertroot7237 Pig is a pig. Red is a Serbian. Of course I will support a Serbian guy instead of a pig. Whether his father is a war criminal or not 😂 just kidding.
@@robertroot7237tf are you talking about it’s clear that RedEffect has a far better and more complete understanding on the topic on tanks, just look at dude’s entire channel
The max speed of tanks is incredibly overstated. When i did my conscription, most of the time the tanks and IFV drove at around 30 kmh. A tracked vehicle is NOT comfortable at high speeds. Edit: The vehicles do work at their top speed, however the practicality is the issue. You cannot go top speed in terrain, the areas where tanks and IFVs will be used. Slamming 60 kmh down a highway does not count towards its practicality.
@@Grimshak81 I didnt say its not durable. I have driven ~65 kmh in a CV90, it rattles like crazy but it does work perfectly. Im saying its not useful to measure top speed because you so rarely use it.
As a person who used to be a mechanic. I did a double take when I saw that the engine weighs 4300lbs. I was like wait, what’s a 1200lbs more than what my car weighs.
Wait until you see how much ship gas turbine engines weigh... The General Electric LM2500 that's been used on a lot of United States Navy ships since the 1960s? They weight 50,000 pounds. Each. And each generates 30,000+ (LM2500+ is 40,000+) horsepower. And ships have multiple of these things.
To put it in perspective though, that's engine that weighs 10x more than a Chevy LS V8, powering a vehicle that weighs ~15-18x as heavy as a Chevy Suburban. Really quite light when you look at it like that.
I think the torque wouldn't matter that much in trains. From what I've read, most diesel locomotives are diesel-electric meaning the torque moving the train is provided by electric motors and the diesel engine providing only need to provide enough power (not torque) to power the electric motors. Diesel-mechanical locomotives are (I think) mostly smaller ones used in shunt yard duty, not for pulling trains.
@@v4skunk739 Maybe you missed a part of what I wrote? The torque to accelerate the train is provided by an *electric* *motor* and the diesel engine only spins an electric generator, not the wheels directly. Thus it doesn't need as much torque as long as it can provide enough power.
Was also considered for the M1 Abrams and the XM2001 Crusader in it's 1500hp configuration mounted to a GD automatic transmission, but that was cancelled in 2003. Also used in the Pak-sino Al-Khalid P2 prototype in it's 1200hp form with a French transmission. Another programme was for a 1000hp version to be fitted to Czech T-72's under NIMDA. I'm not sure how this project turned out.
Scrolling though the comments as I listen to the video, and as an avid LP viewer and only occasionally watch red effect. I am both surprised how everyone is just discussing in a civil and intellectual manner. I look forward to how this will go down.
I've seen a couple commenters being absolute d i c k s to LazerPig for basically no reason, so it's pretty annoying, but otherwise yeah, it's pretty good.
Mostly soy boy degenerates on both sides trying their best “arguements” to defeat one another with the use of “ukro-nahtzee” and “vatnik” knowing damn well they have nothing to contribute to their RUclipsr-Gods whatsoever
If pessimism means to not be bent out of shape by propaganda and a sincere attempt at arriving at a factual summation of their fields of interests, then we should all strive to be happy pessimists.
When people talk about Russian tanks, most of the time they use the age of the designs as an argument: very old, from the 60's, 70's and 80's... but no one mentions how most of the NATO counterparts have designs from almost the same age.
its because the meme of good ol' reliable russian equipment has been really popular. so people see that a design is old and just assume that they haven't changed jack shit since its first use. when if fact they have changed over time. not saying the kept up with nato tank development but they definitely did do SOME development.
@@stalkerentertainment3671ot only that but people memed russia bashed for their and hailed on abrams and leos for their so cool ,,blowout" panels wich are so good and what not yet those so awesome leos died instantly in ukraine wich led the us to withhold the abrams since ,,crappy old russian stuff" cant kill our stuff and i am myself german and happy thaz those ukrs got rekt in them tbh😂
@@homunculus3039 dont you think this is because there where only hanfdull of leos and THOUSANDS of soviet tanks? Ukranians use, like, 2-3 leos at a time.
Watching the video, and he must have been like: "There is so much bs in that LazerPig video", seriously, there are so many things Lazerpig got wrong there even the mistakes mentioned in the first 20 minutes of this video would have been huge.
you can tell theres a lot of moments where RedEffect's trying to be civil and not point out the obvious that lazerpig just completely made some of this shit up on the fly
Redeffect is honestly quite civil in how he’s dealt with RUclips drama in the past, like when he had that “beef”with Alpha Defence over the Arjun. They had a couple of back and forth videos but RE was usually quite polite in the response videos and they eventually did one together on the topic. I don’t think LazerPig would react the same way, his videos are more about entertainment or being memey and he’s into the internet bloodsports “debate me bro” style drama. There’s no point in RE trying to respond with insults and mockery because it will just encourage others to respond with the same thing. “Never wrestle with a pig because you'll both get dirty and the pig likes it."
You can instantly tell the difference. LazerPig is doing everything he can to fit the narrative to his beliefs. When he cites sources, he picks those with no credibility or just makes stuff up. Whereas RedEffect is factual and backs his arguments up. Basically this marked LazerPig as a total ass in the worst case, or a total idiot in the best case scenario.
28:17 I have a correction for you- I drove Strykers (yes, not an Abrams, but still has the same triple periscope setup with FLIR camera for the driver. We very much used that to drive in daytime as well, especially in combat scenarios because it allowed us to keep an eye out for opfor in our, forward, sector. (Thermals making it a lot easier to see people/tanks.) Given the position of screen, it made it very easy to look down and use that during daytime to, and sometimes necessary at Sunrise/Sunset. EDIT: Correction to my own correct: it being a drop-in replacement for a vision block. The Stryker has a dedicated camera that is in addition to all periscopes, instead of replacing one. Tank drivers would have to choose between Mk1EB and FLIR, but I suspect they probably would still choose the thermal because of the enhanced security it provides.
@@Livewyr7 I don't watch LazerPig's content anymore (the last video of his I watched was his F-35 video), but I can definitely see him saying something like that. LazerPig is a wealth of bad ideas from half-baked conclusions and assumptions. Which makes him more like Pierre Sprey than he realizes or would care to admit.
@@Livewyr7 ar 26:26 he state that t 14 having pariscope is bad because they can be damage and are a weakpoint, and are inferior to camera and why western tanks dont use pariscope.
Lazerpig is surprisingly very calm and collected during a debate with a super Z supporting Gonzalo Lira. This is a valid critique video not a direct attack. And I'm sure RedEffect and Lazerpig both are rational people.
Is this a debate? More like a debunk. I don't see how Laserpig can possibly "debate" this since this is literally pointing out all the inaccuracies, lies, and half-assed research in his video.
@@darnit1944 Lol did lazerpig really do research about what he's gonna make video about that topic??? He said the autoloader often got jammed but even the evidence from CIA said the opposite thing
As a LazerPig fan, I'm glad you treated things respectfully and that videos like this exist, as without them untruths can easily spread Edit: to clarify, I do think he should have taken down and then possibly reuploaded the video with all the corrections. I also feel like he downplayed the fact he got a lot of stuff wrong Edit 2: I do now know what to think of the "No you're wrong" video LazerPig focused. Figuring out if it's correct would require me to watch 3 videos at once and I only have 2 eyes. Also I'm sick of getting reply notifications for this comment. Perhaps I will say that it was maybe made in bad faith. I don't know anymore
Bro how the hell are you a fan of his content. He's either extremely biased about whatever he's talking about or just plain ignorant. Someone who spreads misinformation should not be praised, whatever his motives may be
The thing about engines is, the basic mechanical design hasn't improved much in the last 80 years. You can find high performance engines made in the WW2 time frame that mechanically look pretty close to what we have today. What HAS improved are things like engine management, material science, machining processes and optimizations through CAD. Heck the German DB-601 had OHC 4 valve per cylinder , direct injection with a mechanical computer for engine management. Sounds pretty familiar to things we have in cars now, except everything is electronically controlled and monitored. Basically the advancements in the last 80 years has let up take what would have been a very expensive, time consuming, large, and heavy engine. Make it smaller, lighter, with more HP per displacement, and bring the cost and production time into the realm that everyday citizens can afford it.
When a Ford fiesta can out torque a T-80 there's an issue there. The autoloader gives enough memes to make these tanks more deathtraps than anything. Either way Russia only has 8 T-14 since they can't access western imports needed for these tanks along with the Su-75
@@TheButcherHooks Did you watch the video? Even LazerPig stated that the whole torque thing was a complete mistranslation. Big 18 wheeler truck engines don't make more torque than MBTs, let alone small hatchback engines.
@@TheButcherHooks you clearly didn't watch either video in their entireties, as both state that that's incorrect. Lazerpig even put it in his pinned comment as well.
@@TheButcherHooks People make a big deal out of torque, but notice when companies talk about things like tanks, semi-trucks, tractors, heavy equipment. Many times they just say what the HP is. Sometimes you have to dig to find the to find the torque of the engine. Why is that? Because HP is how much work can be done in a given period of time. You can look at it as a unit of productivity. Torque is something that can be largely created through gearing. It's an important value, but it means nothing if you're not actually doing anything with it. As an extreme example an engine that produces 100ft-lbs (or lb-ft whatever you prefer) of torque at 100rpm is only 1.9hp but an engine that produces 10ft-lbs of torque at 2000rpm produces 3.8hp. Which is more useful? Stick in a gear reduction of 20:1 and you get an output shaft of 200ft-lbs and 100rpm. Of course there will be some losses but your still going to be ahead. So a quick Google search didn't turn up torque and rpm figures for the T-80 for me and I don't have time to go digging. But it's got like 1000hp so I'm pretty sure they can gear it for however much torque they need.
reminds me of an argument I got into with a friend where he said a V10 will always no matter what produce more power than a V8. He didn't last long at trade school
Imagine being a top Russian engineer at Uralvagonzavod, one of the most talented in his field, who spent decades in his job as an engineer, and you somehow come across Lazerpig's video. You learn that your tank has the engine of a WW2 era Tiger tank, which makes less torque than a Honda Jazz's engine, and it's unreliable anyways. You also learn that your tank is useless because it's thermal viewer is inferior to thermal cameras on cheap commercial drones, and it's a bad concept anyways because it's active protection is not working at all, and he also lectures you as an expert as why your universal platform is bad.
@@HarrDarr 1. Janitors wage is too dramatic 2. He has basically free gas, heat and electricity 3. Free medical care includin dentist 3. Free vacation tickets to Crimea for each year 😅 None of them have credits to pay in a bank for some reason 🤔 And yes, I know two engineers from "ural". Ah, and no they are not top engeneers in any way. Top is something entirely different :) But taking russian wage of any kinda and simply count it into dollars shows how you dont understand what you even talking about. Pure example of ignorant and selfentitled colonial nation thinking.
@@ardour1587 its' not very dramatic, engineers in the tank manufacturing industry of russia make less than 700usd/month compare to a danish janitor who gets 1800 USD/month, also gets free medical care, dentistry etc
I saw the LazerPig video and the errors were glaringly obvious even from someone who has a passing interest in military technology. I think the real issue is when you pick a side i.e the Russian Ukrainian conflict you will invariably let your biases dictate.
Or like... common sense? I'm not sure how big the gearbox would need to be to enable the Honda Jazz engine to get a 50t tracked vehicle to 50+kmh, but I would wager that there wouldn't be much room inside of the tank for anything else.
I mean i have a side and bias too, i'm against Russian aggression, but as a military hardware nerd it would never cross my mind to simply fucking lie about a Russian tank.
People in the west are treating this war like a football game, cope cope my sides winning!!. Meanwhile I literally couldn’t care less and it’s so fkn annoying when I just want to get accurate non-partisan information about the conflict.
@@abrahamlincoln920 that’s because you are a rational and level-headed person. I hate Russia, but it’s easy to disparage them without lying. I hate the lying about them because it makes it too easy to cover for actual issues with Russia, “they lied about our tanks, so they’re lying about this too,” kind of arguments.
Even LP admitted that was a mistake on his part. He thought the same too. The problem, as LP states, Is that Russians use a different method of measuring torque / different unit for torque. He got the original source, but messed up the unit by oversight or mistake. I believe this was on episode 1 of NAFO: even rounder table.
@@rulesofimgur Dude. You somehow still believe his lies. He did it on purpose , and thought you would just eat up on his lies, just like you eat up on every other lies. Because the first thing that I did after I heard it , as any sane person with any amount of grey matter that it just isn't possible, and I went on the internet and checked all the info myself. And it's not as hard as some people might think and it took me only a few minutes time. To realize that he is wrong by an order of magnitude (10 times). Ukranian propaganda is all based upon pure lies. They can't not lie because their glass house will break down immediately , so they just spewing bs nonsense over and over again , just like Goebbels , in order to convince people of their BS. As that notion of Russian tank using the T34 engine which is extremely weak and unreliable has been going on for 10 years (it is not new as westerns who only getting their dose of Ukranian propaganda now seem to think), this has been going on for 10 years and they are keep repeating the same thing. So that less torque lays perfectly in that convo of convincing you that that engine is "extremely old and outdated", and was done ON PURPOSE.
The problem with Lazerpig and with most "talking about tanks"-personas ist that he is incredibly biased and wanks about Western/Allied designs while shitting on anything else. In reality everything was done for a reason and a lot of things are easily explained/understood if you have a modicum of technical education. My favourite examples are: >Tigers being overweight and immobile >Allied tanks were all very reliable >Soviet tanks were incredibly good/incredibly shit >People shitting on interleaved roadwheels >Panther bad
@@wolfi9933 Yep, on top of all of that people always forget that the actual crew of the tank is more important than the tank itself, most of the time. Also they are forgetting the tactics which are also more important than the tank itself... But I get it... people want an isolated example of a particular tank... Then I don't get why they never compare actual numbers produced, and the cost of the tank on top of it's reliability of the tank. As an example one of how characteristics relate, you can always ( if you have the expertise ) turbo charge your engine, to increase it's horsepower, but it will take a hit on it's longevity and reliability of the engine. So you could sacrifice some raw performance for a lifespan (and there's always a golden middle too). So on paper your tank would look more powerful with more horsepower, yet it would be so unreliable that it would practically be not usable past a 100 km. The same thing could be said for the main artillery gun, as there are guns that can only withstand a few hundred shots , and guns that can withstand a few thousand... Also increasing it's shooting speed may reduce it's reliability and longevity again. etc. as well as people have no idea how reliable each mechanical component of each tank, as for example some thermal sights require constant maintenance , and some don't require any at all... etc And saying that this or thank tank is bad is idiocy in itself, because any moving gun on the battlefield is good ...and that gun also has some good armor ... Oplot potentially could be a good tank, that is if they could build it at all, but because they are not building it , and it seems like they can't , the previous ones they built with the help of Russia, and they are promising to start building new ones, but so far there were no proofs, and I will believe it when I see it, when they build at least a few of them, so there's no real point even discussing it now. While the Russian T90m exists and it's in full production and it has been spotted on the battlefield and in real combat. So it is a good tank by that measure that it exists and is used on the battlefield while the BM Oplot does not exist, and they can't even produce it.
A sidenote on gas turbines: This is not a correction per se, as tanks with gas turbines are very obviously less efficient than diesel tanks, but this is actually not the fault of the gas turbine, but rather how it is used. Gas turbines are actually extremely efficient, they just don't like step functions or idling. This is partly why we use them on airliners. They aren't just stronger than a piston engine with propellers, they're more efficient on long hauls where they sit at stable RPM for hours on end. If they weren't more efficient than piston engines in that use case, we frankly wouldn't use them.
@@LeonmitchelliGalette they're not, but there is context missing. The inefficiency of turbos has to do primarily with the way they're throttled: they change the temperature and/or pressure off the combustion chamber, which lowers the expansion ratio and thus destroys efficiency. On top of that, the less power you draw, the greater fraction of that power is wasted on an "oversized" compressor, drawing a bigger volume of air than needed for the low throttle, which is needed because else pressure tanks and that's as mentioned even worse. Start up and throttle isn't the most efficient either as spinning up the turbine isn't a matter of turning a valve but actually using up the engine's energy to accelerate the heavy blades to rotate even very-fast-er... One specific issue with Abrams is that they use an adapted chopper's engine, and it is governed way below top speed because tanks are not choppers lol and I'm pretty sure itd give a lot of trouble... For the aforementioned reason, efficiency is trash, though in general, tanks (which do need to throttle a lot) with a turbine aren't that efficient anyway... This is why the OP said that turbos are very efficient when used steadily and close to max power. Comparing with diesels is hard because diesels vary in efficiency just as much as turbos, with expansion ratio being the biggest metric, which itself is at odds with specific power, but indeed they are on a comparable range, with the most efficient turbos as good or better than the most efficient diesels (think turbines on power plants, or marine diesels). - For a given power density, turbos destroy diesels, simply because being more compact and allowing to trade that small size for a very high expansion ratio. This is stupid tho because it defeats the point of a turbine - For a given expansion ratio, diesels win, because their cycle and construction... this is stupid again because R is rarely a limiting factor. In practice it depends on the specific application. For aircraft, getting a jetliner's fan powered by a diesel would be ridiculously huge, heavy, complex, draggy and offer no real gain in efficiency if not a loss, thus it isn't done (there's a reason the few non-turbo aircraft there are are small, cheap and low performance props...). For a tank though the requirements in size, torque, throttle, etc impose a heavy price in gas for the turbo's performance and stealth...
@@antaresmc4407 "because tanks are not choppers." Counterpoint: every T-14 promo video, in which they're seemingly endlessly spinning their turrets to hide their lack of effective stabilization while on the move 😂
@@antaresmc4407 I think a good way to put it is that both diesel-piston engines and turbines are top tier choices for applications where the top two priorities are power and efficiency. Which one works better just depends on the details. Ie, boat engines are all diesel because diesels are far less expensive and almost as efficient, while any malus in power can be made up with displacement since boats don't care about weight, and as a bonus the engine suffering a catastrophic failure won't send metal shards through bystanders at the speed of sound when the engine is diesel-piston rather than a turbine, all on top of the fact that boat engines are expected to change revs often, albeit not as quickly as a car engine. The flip side to all this is that if we could make a tank (or even a civilian vehicle) that was a turbine-electric powertrain, the turbine would suddenly become almost ideal. Then the turbine would only run at full power (to charge the battery or capacitors) and be off otherwise. Though, this would introduce a host of other complications, both for military and civilian vehicles...
GTD-1250G/GTD-1400 is a good example of alleviating the idle issue where you use only enough fuel to be ready to "boost" once you actually want to drive. Power generation would be off of the included GTA-18A.
I love how lazerpig states the T-90's max speed is 32 kph and then later goes on to say it has the same maximum speed as the challanger which has a max speed of 37 kph
just to point out ... if you will compare engine weights then compare the engine weight... u compared the engine pack to an engine ... the actual engine of the leopard for example is the same weight as the russian engine but the main difference is that the germans/ americans include the gearbox,filters,... on their engines and thats why its called an engine pack and thus is 1 ton heavyer
@@zemstafreda nah its easy to missuse that info becouse the actual engine weight is still classified... some sourcess say 1200kg, some 1800kg, some 2200kg but none put the direct number becouse they arent allowed to... the dimensions of the engine are similar to the russian one and volumetrically shuld weight the same what bothers me is that he described the engine as "bulky"... dude the engine is one of the most compact tank engines in the world and its desighned that way so that the engine replacement just requires the crew to pull out the engine pack in one go... unlike the T series tanks that need to be totaly dissmantled(i operated on the M84... its a headache especially if you have big hands)
No he did not make a mistake. He used a figure for the MB 873 engine itself which is 2200 kg alone. Which makes total sense because the Leopard 1's engine, the MB 838 is also 2200 kg with less cylinders with no transmission. The full on weight of the powerpack is like 4000 kg. This is according to an MTU data sheet. There will be discrepancies as to whether it's dry or wet or it has or not has extra equipment but this figure does not include the transmission which is huge amount of weight. Almost or as much as the engine itself
@@zemstafreda that`s why there is no point watching channels like this, it is a bunch of minimum wage workers and teenagers with no specific education or knowledge or hands on experience, who just put together some Wikipedia data together, Google this and that and pass it as some sort of an expert opinion.
The problem with LazerPig, and really a lot of discussions related to many different industries, is the constant chasing of the next hot take, regardless of, or sometimes directly contradicting, what there is evidence for.
@@mikelelele7112 If you wish to point fingers point them at Putin, not the millions of people dragged into politics and being blasted (in every sense of the word) over one person's delusions of grandeur.
"Retractable" periscope was a feature from ww2 found on tank such as the sherman. indeed it "retracted" it's main or secondary periscope when the other one was not used, it was also used on german and British tank. It would not leave a hole as the periscope was still present in the "hole" or some door was fixed on top (such as on the sherman) to close off the hole. This was made to protect the periscope itself and always have one ready if the other one was destroyed so you could still see
@Alexander DiMaria Yeah quite cringe indeed, but I will say that some ww2 features are sometimes still on modern IFV, not sure if these periscope are though.
I don't remember "retractable periscopes" being a thing in WWII, and I've watched basically every Chieftains hatch and don't remember him pointing them out either. But maybe it was a thing and I'm just forgetting it. Armored covers however were absolutely a thing as you said, and IIRC like you also said periscopes could be replaced inside by the crew if need be. And periscopes are incredibly important in tanks still, don't know where Lazerpig got the idea they're archaic and obsolete. I've heard plenty of Vets that actually prefer them or even being open hatched compared to the cameras as you can't "feel" the environment through the camera or have as good depth perception.
Which periscope on the sherman (driver, gunner, etc)? Which station has a main or secondary periscope? Do you mean replaceable? I have never heard of this.
@@Ryan-ti4yv I think there has been a misinterpretation, the periscope present on all station except the gunner is the one that can be "retracted". If you look on the hatch of the driver and machine gunner right next to it is a little metal piece, that is the door that open up when the periscope is placed but also closes when the persicope is retracted by the crewman in order to protect it. The periscope can be moved thanks to the knob you can see on it (such as the m8 periscope on american tanks) that serves to place it up or down inside the tanks.
Topics tackled in order 0:00 Intro 1:11 Autoloaders 2:40 T-95 carousel autoloaders & T-14 3:13 T-95 and the new 152mm gun. T-90 and new 125mm ammo. Inferior to top 120mm NATO, but modern nonetheless. 3:55 T-95 and the 90s. Object 195 being effectively vapourware. Laserpig mixes up Objects 195 and 640 (Black Eagle). Russian media and others also collate the two together. 8:00 Why Objekt 195 got cancelled by 2010. 8:44 The Kharkov Model V-2 engine 9:40 "Kalashnikov" of engines 10:35 Specs for the B-92S2F 11:00 Tackling the age of the engine. Leo 2 engine comparisons. 60 years & going strong with little to no changes. Chally 2/3's development from 1918's Condor engine. 12:00 Honda Jazz has more torque than T-14.....NOT! 12:40 B-2 archaic in design, bulky and heavy 14:03 Diesel vs Gas turbine comparisons, for reasons 15:10 Top speed 32mph for T-14 15:35 Engine thirsty for Oxygen, and T-90s in mountains 16:35 T-90 is slower than heavier tanks 17:39 Copy of the German SLA-16 engine for T-14, "from" Porshe Tiger 18:20 Russian "reliance" on western imports 18:35 Copied engines & A-85-3A (T-14s engine)."based on" vs "copied" vs "neither" 21:25 A-85-3 was a commercial oil pumping, unreliable engine 23:06 T-14 broke down on Moscow Parade 24:03 T-14 built around "that" engine 25:27 T-14 larger than T-90, in spite of design to be smaller 26:30 Periscopes are still used for driver, rather than camera/screen combo 28:24 Periscopes retract into hull claim 28:52 KF-51 Panther's "view" 28:18 10s autoloader reload time 30:24 Ukrainian hackers found French optics in T-14 31:39 Optics "available to the public" 32:25 Spare 5k, gets you a UAV that has better IR/Thermals 33:04 Chinese interest in T-14 34:26 Modular design on the T-14 hull 36:29 IFVs and armour 37:25 BMP is made on tank chassis, uses V-2 engine and is thirsty 38:30 Artillery is based on tank chassis. Armour vs weight of cannon 39:13 Tanks able to track automatically in the 60s.... 40:24 Challenger Rifled Gun is more accurate at long range..... 41:33 Challenger has HESH...vs modern HE and programmable HE 42:49 Challenger 2 CLIP available since 2006.....and HAAIP. All prototypes 44:00 Challenger 3 updates vs upgrades 44:52 New turret & 360 awareness in the turret for Abrams X & Adaptiv Armour???? 47:00 Bradley autocannon can take out video cams 48:21 Conclusion: Lots of correct stuff, especially production issues. But a lot of errors.
@@nils-petergustafsson1064 Yes that's also why you're commenting to the wrong comment. Because if thousands of Armata tanks are rolling out, then thousands of people like you are actually intelligent.
Gotta remember though, red effect bases his video on what russia says. The T-14 is garbage until proven otherwise tbh. And the project is pretty much canceled.
What makes me feel sad is that not only Lazerpig putting out poorly researched videos but putting out these videos to a lot of people than ingrain it as actual knowledge.
The fans of his that are genuinely interested in learning about military hardware and hearing different perspectives will find their way to this redeffect video. 😉👍
@@nothere4089 The claim the UK is using a gay drunk guy who uses a stock image of a pig as their propaganda is the most insane thing I’ve ever heard lmao
he didn 't even bother to review the other 75% of what he said about the "ArmaPa" which was how it is bad due to the lack of expertize in manufacturing and and Putin
@@lowtier He did not go into politics. Red Effect very clealry said that in the begining of the video(1:05). Lazerpigs video was 70% about coruption in Russia and Putin this and Putin that and Russian equipment=bad. He made very little claims about T14 yet he was 90% corrected.
@@azrael9016 im certain the that thats the nomenclature for the whole power pack. the german page of the Rolls Royce Power Systems isnt really helpful in that regard unfortunately. I also could be absolutely wrong.
@@Keckegenkai The data sheet which states that the dry weight is of the engine itself is official by MTU. There is also a document by MTU which says the same thing. Also for comparison, Leo 1 that does not have a power pack and the engine (MB 838) is a "separate" thing and is on its own, its engine which is kinda a "smaller version" of Leo 2's engine (2 less cylinders and is thus overall shorter) weights 1920kg completely dry. Leo 2's engine, being larger weights 2200kg. But regardless of Leo 1 comparison, the MTU official information states that the engine itself is 2200kg.
Laser Pig definitely got one thing right, the T-14 is doing f-all to help Russia right now. Maybe it is the best tank in the world, but it's pretty useless if you're afraid to scratch its paint.
Well Russia in not the only one that is afraid to deploy it top edge tank at least for now, US isnt also gonna send its Abrams tanks with its enhanced armor and probably more secret technologies and until the British and German ones get first hammered. I doubt that the Abrams will face in anytime Ukraines frontlines
Quick question how does multiple engineers and officers not notice the parking brake is on? What did the parking brake even look like to accidentally engage it?
The whole parking brake is such a blatant panic lie that it really puts a cherry on top of the whole T-14 breaking down during a parade debacle. Looking at the comment section, fanboys and tankies know it was an embarrassing fuckup but they keep lying to themselves that it wasn’t as a coping mechanism.
easy answer, have you seen them going in to check? no? where they eventually able to move the thing? yes? if it wasnt the brake then how were they able to make it move eventually?
@@xxkairzzxx1994 yeah I see that I’m just curious why the driver himself didn’t check the parking brake first? I know tanks and cars are very different but the first thing people check if there engine is running and they’re not moving is if the parking brake is on. How did they go through all that trouble just for it to be the parking brake?
@@insulinslayer2413 Well , easy answer , new equipment , and the modern russian army isnt known for training properly its soldiers , so the guy was just given a new tank without proper training and he screwed up by engaging the brake.... Or thats at least the most sensible answer for me...
he corrected himself in his last video. The thing is russians for whatever reason measure torque using different units than the rest of Europe, so Lazerpig thought the torque was lower than it actually is.
@@aquila1290 Goes to show how little he knows about the topics he talks about. It should be obvious to anyone with a critical eye, but he just ran with it because it supported the narrative he wants to push.
@@LaVaZ000 So I guess if somebody tells you that a cart and F-1 have the same engine, you 'll genuinely believe it was "just a mistake" and cannot in any way be linked to a bias. LMAO
@@HippoBean if its not a t90m, which is probably one of indias best tanks, i dont think alpha defense can really have a definite say like he did with the arjun
Honest mistakes are fine, but when you see an outright blatant lie you can't take this person seriously anymore. For example, he stated that T-90M engine has slightly more torque than Honda Jazz. Sounds outrageous, right? Well because it is. Honda Jazz has 110Nm of torque, while the T-90 has 3920Nm of torque. I stopped watching right there. You simply cannot make a mistake like this, it has to be a deliberate lie in order to push a narrative.
Yeah i saw i think only one single comment discussing this under the original video, barely upvoted. No one gives enough of a fuck to verify every single claim he makes, he knows that and knows that he can get away with pretty much anything as long as it's not obviously false. I guess this one was too obvious so it prompted someone to actually look into it.
At this moment LazerPig even didn't watched original video. He's saying that monitors are working while nobody is inside the tank, but in the original video T-14 was working in unmanned mode. It even move forward while inside was only cameraman.
I'm no fan of lazerpig so it's kinda nice to seem him get called out on some of the stuff he says. Sometimes it feels like he just says things to get a reaction
He mainly caters to young western NAFO crowds, also he obviously has some issues with himself, that's why he calls himself a pig and projects so much onto the Russians.
The fact LazerPig thought a little ole Honda engine had *more* or equal torque to an engine designed specifically for tanks shows he knows absolutely nothing about tanks. I ain’t no tank genius, but.. wow, that was atrocious. You really can’t take him seriously anymore.
Still the main points hit home. No t14 marching towards Berlin. On paper red is certainly right. But on the battle field no t14 is seen. This feels like discussing mystical creatures.
@@Monsterpala Russia has a lot "on paper" capability. They have considerably less real one. Their "stealth fighters" can be counted on your fingers while west churns out F 35s by hundreds. Russia stating specs of their equipment way over what it actually can do is common thing too. Reason they refuse to use most of their modern equipment is they don't want the embarrassment of showing off how bad it is. Like the terminators they pushed to front, made real stink about it, then went awfully quiet. Oops, turns out they dont really work that well on the battlefield.
@@platysplatys3967 Stop with the bias. No matter what, if its sent to war. It will explode and die. The Terminator so far has been seen to be quite an effective vehicle. WarLeaks even released a video of an AFU Drone watching one shred literal treelines. ruclips.net/video/QxBkRcsSw9A/видео.html
I had a lot of people telling me lately that all the Russian tanks use the same engine as the T-34. Russians are obviously mentally inferior and don't realise how bad their engines are. Now I know why. Thanks Pig.
V2 is an old (1920) German aircraft diesel engine. the Russians used it because they dident had nothing better and use it today for the same reason. T90M uses that same old V2 engine. You can modify it but you cant radically change it.
@@viktoriyaserebryakov2755 okay then let’s get a little more detailed: the M1 gas Turbine is a Engine that uses 2 shafts meaning it has a low and a high pressure compressor/Turbines. It also uses an Radial compressor as the last compression stage. It has a total of 4 turbine stages (1 driving the high pressure compressor, one driving the low pressure compressor and 2 driving the tank itself) due to the fact that it doesnt use the air pushing as propulsion which means that it can and hast to take more energy out of the air flow. The Jumo 004 on the other hand is a one shaft engine with just one turbine stage which does nothing more the propelling the compressor which consists of 8 stages in total while all of them are axial compressors. It generates thrust by principal of recoil and pushing the air behind it. It’s a completely different system. Why more difference then between an Gas or Diesel engine for example
I mean, as the RUclips version of that one guy at parties who’s just going “Um actually” this is really good. I really like how it’s about the information which in hindsight may have been a slight “ooops” and less about Lazerpig himself. Great video.
Lazerpig's a racist idiot. How can you possibly believe that a car has less torque than a tank? Let alone fabricated claims he created out of thin air.
This isn’t an um actually, this is one guy making shit up, and another guy pointing it out. “Um actually” is correcting unimportant minutiae, like what I am doing right now, lol.
Sorry but saying that a Honda Jazz has almost as much torque as a tank engine really shows that lazerpig has not the slightest idea what he is talking about.
@@vanko325 "but he corrected himself in the description" The point should be that he genuinely believed, even for a couple of hours, that a 40 tons tank had less torque than a 1,5 tons car.
@@cojoes1423 i watched the response vid its just 40 min time waste 10 min of or even less of correcting rest political garbage and bla bla russian propaganda
I think LazerPig somehow got the retractable periscopes idea from yet another bygone piece of World War II tech which appeared on the early Panther variants and in the original designs for the Tiger III. That being the rotating driver's periscope which could be pivoted inward and was protected by an armor plate.
@@Delta-6501 The original name for the King Tiger was the VK 45.03 (H) Tiger III and was intended to be the design built after the interim VK 45.02 (H) Tiger II (which was an upgraded Tiger I with sloping armor and a King Tiger turret) had been rolled out.
@@tablesizeproductions4360I'd say that's a bit too niche- gives me the sense of being purposefully obtuse so you can flex, when you could just say tiger 2 and avoid the issue entirely, no one would take issue with it. That's just my read tho ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ not super charitable I'll admit
How can "The Honda Jazz (Which is 1 ton) has more torque than the T-90M(Which is 50 Tons)" be a minor mistake? Don't even get me started on the BT-7s MT-17T being used on the T-90M which is a blatant lie and misinformation. These are not mistakes but absolute dogshite lies.
@@Livewyr7 I'm curious as well. Heck, I'm curious at where he got the Honda Jazz torque bs from that he included it in the video. Common sense would say thats not physically possible.
@@pilotmanpaul But the thought is hilarious... which is probably why it made it in despite being easily disproved. I'm kinda surprised the pig didn't rail on and on about the no video proof of the gun firing while vehicle in movement. That's got to be the most damning thing about it.
As someone who loves both this channel and lazerpig's channel I have to say, I am really glad you made this video. It is Important to have correct info on subjects
What about him do you like? I tried watching his channel for a while. And I kept trying to rip my hair out watching his dog water garbage content. Hes an incredibly stupid guy that thinks he's extremely smart
I dislike him greatly. This video shows exactly why. Redeffect is too nice to say it but lazerpig just lied for many of these things. Stuff that is common knowledge no less. My biggest grief with him is how he acts authoritative when he speaks of things without considering even the most basic concepts of doctrine. And even then I wouldn't have such a problem with it if he was earnest about it the way I'm forgiving of the history Channel but he is snarky and rude and acts like anyone who he even is an iota out of line with his poorly constructed alternate reality, he tries to rip on them. He brings drama to the history, war, and geopolitics RUclips spheres and I despise him for it.
@@casematecardinal I noticed that too. Redeffect was WAY to nice! I'm guessing he didn't want to start a back and forth RUclips drama war and just wanted to talk about the tank. Fair enough. However someone needs to take the bullet and rip his content apart for the crap that it is. I watched about half a dozen of his videos and their all like this one more or less.
Red effect does make some good points but no one is infallable, not even lazerpig, so i agree with u on this one, LP should make some sort of video calling out his own mistakes as well as pointnout mistakes that Red may have made in a civil way, he himself say that not everything he presents was to the dot so take a pinch of salt
the ukraine stans in the lazerpig comment section make me doubt that. Open the comments on his video and sort by new and you'll immediately see comments along the lines of ''HAHAHAHA REDEFFECT RUZZIA TROLL!!!! SLAVA UKRAINA HAHAHAHAHA LOL PUTLER NAZI BOTS HAHAHA''. I'm sure there's also russia stans but the ones i've seen the most were (presumably)americans with ukraine pfps
While it's always better to have 100% accurate information and this is a good fact check; most of the corrections in the video seem to be instances where lazerpig is technically incorrect but his overall point is still valid (for example the "modern" ammunition used still being inferior to western modern ammunition). The design of the T-14 may not be as shit as LP makes it out to be, but if Russia can't actually produce them, it's not really strategically important. I think the overall theme of LP's video was that the T-14 is overhyped, probably doesn't perform as advertised by Russian media, and hasn't (and probably can't be) produced in significant numbers. None of the corrected errors really invalidate that overall point. Plus even if the Russians could make it in significant numbers and it was superior to western tanks, you can bet general dynamics could go running to the US congress and immediately get a budget that the Russians couldn't even dream of to fast track the Abrams X program, negating any advantage with the power of the ridiculous US defense budget.
@@Michael-uc2pn Right, there were many corrections that did needed to be made. There also corrections that felt very nitpicking. Also a good number between the two were, I spoke to someone therefore I’m right. I’m very interested to see what the response is going to be. Hopefully it’s not responding mainly to the Russian bots spamming him now.
@@Michael-uc2pn the wonder wepons Germany made was in small numbers and tactically useless.....same as some US secret projects.....but evry one points out how ahead of there time thay were and how well enginerd and the design capipality.......this video isn't about the usebeality or the strategic implementation of the tank......its about the indivisule charistarictes of the design......stop being so biast
@@justhere4637 Vatniks and Nafo. I’m not sure of anyone self proclaims themself as a vatnik but that’s the least insulting/cringe name I’ve heard them be called.
thank you for making this video, i watched the lazer pig video and noticed he really hasnt been given the benefit of the doubt upon any of his rant videos so seeing someone give an alterative perspective is very nice
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 yeah he tends to do very surface level research such as in his T-34 video he even admits it is full of misconceptions and misinformation.
@@e_sd That's not surface level. Surface level research would have been more charitable. He had to dig deep to find what he wants to see and ignore everything else along the way. Even his own sources contradict him.
But who in their right mind would genuinely believe the T-90M uses the same engine as the one the BT-7 uses? Like, his entire video is based on that notion hence why he thinks the T-90M is slow, bad weight to power ratio and all that. The moment he said that, his entire video was already wrong.
@@buckshot9113 we also have a bunch of evidence other vehicles including that of the us, germany and ukraine also just breaking down But i dont see people commenting how they are complete trash
Bro y'all just don't even think lmao u gobble up anything said by other people nd spit it out. "Oh russia did this, they suck ahahhaha" The T-14 is much more expensive, and it would also need the crews to be retrained for it. Which needs time and money. T-90s are more combat proven, cheaper, and soldiers have experience with it or with similar tanks. That and combine the fact that so few tanks are actually dying to other tanks compared to how many are just being blown up by FPV drones, it's better to produce the T-90 than to produce T-14s which need more time and even more money, and would probably die to an FPV drone before it saw any enemy armor
He just explained that for the modern war, T-90 is the most viable option instead of bringing a more developed tank that hasn't take any precautions against drone during production.
I would argue that. It's just that you hear more about misinformation. More people check things on their own, we have more than one sources. We care more about facts than opinions, and certainly back in the day people did not put such an emphasis on it.
Im half-convinced any sort of civil discussion regarding military technology is unachievable and has to be replaced with braindead snarky comments made by youtubers that reference decade old memes because "le passive-aggressive sassy personality is funny actually XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"
this is so true. lazer pig literally only responed to one point that red effect made about the engine being used in the bt7 and then proceded to complain about how people were using his name to gain clout for the rest of the video. like i expected to click on lazerpigs video and learn about features of the t14 not just get a sob story and accusatoins of russian proaganda
@@_cyantist honestly. i've loved this man's videos but strayed far from the community around him. his recent video made me realize theres probably a reason people like that are attracted to his channel.
@@_cyantistdid you watch the actual video? He complains about the clout thing first and then goes to show how discreditable all of what red effect said is. Can ya'll just learn how to hear
@@itstime6974 even if every statistic red effect used was russian propaganda theres still lots of points in his video that require just common knowledge, like how hesh rounds are basically useless against modern armour or that laserpig mistook the t95 for the black eagle that would still be just as valid and, by the way, laserpig completely ignored them in his recent video laserpig went after what he could, which was the legitimacy of secondary sources, and semantics about the bt7 engine so not only did i hear the video, i also thought about it too 🤯 and unless you’re gonna tell me that its Russian propaganda that hesh doesn’t work against composite armour i suggest you start doing some thinking too
@@_cyantist that would make sense. If he said anything about the HESH round other than it's showing it's age. The T-95/Black Eagle thing is literally a misunderstanding. I do not get how you can be so fanatical about supporting a propagandist and think you're so smart when you make shit up. I've been destroying Vatniks for months, you're not shit.
What kinda arguments are there to be dropped from Lazerpig's side? Most of the stuff he talked about was straight up pulled out of his ass or wrongly interpreted/modified to fit his agenda.
@@Sebastian-yl7nq the argument of petty. I’m waiting for this to devolve into the most degenerate, name smearing, Twitter level nonsense. Grab your popcorn
I mean... It's not that big of an ask. First of all, "brigading" LazerPig would require going to one of his videos and watching it. I mean, that's off the table right there.
"and interest in showing the truth and not make videos just for views" LazerPig: "But then I'd have no reason to make videos because it's just low-effort memes and shitposting..."
@@matchesburn damn shame lazerpig’s video has almost 2 million views. It’s funny how people rave on endlessly about how all Russians are brainwashed and they only watch propaganda, while literally watching and taking laserpig’s content with absolutely no regard for if he’s actually telling the truth. Being anti-Z should not interfere with common sense and citing legitimate sources. What a tool
@@odinbiflindi How to just hate on someone while completely missing the fact of this Video in the first place. He didnt make a video to hate on Lazerpig, he made one to defend the Tank (if he is right is sth Else.)
Im sure that my fellow lazerpig fans, who came here from a video inspired by annoying commentors saying how lazerpig was DESTROYED will show some level of self awareness and not just do the same stupid thing in the other direction. .......I-Im sure.........
LazerPig gets legit counter arguments for basically every vehicle he makes because this is not an isolated incident for him. He does this constantly. It's just that this is the first time a larger channel has been willing to make a video on it.
@@matchesburn ikr. people think that because LazerPig is funny he must be right about everything, but even I can point out so many holes in his videos whenever he makes one about a certain vehicle. I my opinion, LazerPig is not a good youtuber to go to if you want actual good facts and information. it just seems like he skim reads cherry-picked articles and just blurbs it out in his videos without actually backing shit up. he gets the immediately obvious stuff right (T-72 style tanks having the slow reverse speed for example) but otherwise he just lies all the time and it's annoying. the most annoying thing for me is that because he has such a large platform, people just think he must be right just by virtue of that and so when he spreads misinformation, SO MANY people get convinced by it and start believing it.
@CaptainIceberg I mean, him and animarchy both suddenly exploded and spout identical cia-sponsored political takes while also then collabing. It's like the glowies took a look at RUclips and said "which niche should we infiltrate this year". I love both their content for entertainment value if not educational value, but I'm fully aware it's only being promoted because of ideological approval by youtube and/or intelligence agencies.
@@gerfand Remains to be seen..rumors started to swirl in Jan, and was originating from RU. As of this moment Id say its possible. Not sure if we would get a confirmation anyway.
@@christopherchartier3017 i mean of you are in a war of attrition and have an already layed out production line of T80BVMs and T90Ms and T72B3s you might want to cancel the expensive vehichle that hasn't seen combat yet
@@irantu5509 Honestly Russia would just be better focusing everything on the T90 and upgrading the T72B3 into T90M’s. The T80 and T72 are basically just targets for other peer to peer nations rn
@@christopherchartier3017 Depends on which factors you take into account, the majority of people would put the T-90M above the T-80BVM. T-90A vs T-80BVM however, likely BVM is better. T-80 is the more expensive and fancier version of the T-72, The T-90 was the rascal child of when you take a T-72 and modify a T-80 FCS into it in hopes to make something sorta cheap but it still becomes more expensive than the T-72 but worse than the T-80
@@dmvsye At the end of the day, Russia needs to get their tank logistics in check. It’s not worth having like 5 different kinds of tanks in your inventory, whether it be old tanks you refuse to retire and salvage that you still hold onto for some reason(T-62/T-55/Older T-72s). or because you made too many upgrades of the T-72 and now you have a bunch of T-80 and T-90 variants. It just rests on what tank is better to develop. Personally I find the T90M to have more of a future than the T80, but that’s just me.
As I recall, the "Power Pack" of a tank includes everything from the Engine, Transmition, Cooling to the smaller pumps and servos. Basically, everything in the engine bay apart from the Fuel Tanks.
@@ravenouself4181 in this case its not talking about Power Pack but everything thats packed on the engine. Because transmission is the part of the Power Pack and the transmission alone of Challenger 2 weights 2390kg (official information). Here it refers to stuff like turbocharger and other "addons" to the engine itself. But V92S2F's weight is with all of those things too so yea, nothing RedEffect said is wrong.
@@ravenouself4181 Yes, I was making a conservative assumption because I thought an entire powerpack would weigh more than that. I'm not an expert on the matter though so I could be wrong.
47:56 Turret turning in the direction of incoming shot is actually a requirement for APS to work. Counter-projectiles are loaded in fixed tubes on the turret and cover a sector Infront of it (unlike Trophy being positioned all around the vehicle or Iron fist with tiny turrets on top). T-90 Has similar system to automatically deploy smoke to upset thermal and optical guided ATGMs.
I dont think a turret can move that fast. The projectiles aim themselves mid air after being launched and then they shoot a explosive formed penetrator at the target.(just my opinion)
@Filip Jurák no, as in the turret must be pointed towards the incoming threat. small corrective maneuvers are possible from the APS projectile, but not to the point an immobile launcher system can cover a wide enough area to protect the entire vehicle when mounted frontally on the turret
@@TwixSvK Average ATGM is launched from distace around 1000 to 2000m, average speed is 400m/s, which is 2.5 to 5s to react from launch, and whole eternity from locking in.
@@alphaplayzz1381 here are the statistics on the T-14’s APS, of which it has multiple types for different threats. One tracks 360 degrees to protect from attacks from the top, and the other more traditional system covers an 120 degree arc from the point the turret is facing. The T-14 Armata is equipped with the Active Protection System (APS) Afghanit which seems similar to the Israeli Trophy able to intercept and destroy incoming missiles and rockets. The system is designed to work against all types of anti-tank missiles and rockets, including handheld weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades. The Afghanit APS includes four sets of 12 launch tubes, two at the rear left side of the turret, and one on each rear top side of the turret. At the base of each side of the turret are five large and fixed horizontally arrayed launch tubes covering the 120° frontal arc of the turret. These tubes could launch unguided projectiles with HE warheads to counter incoming anti-tank guided missiles or RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenades). The Afghanit APS also includes two types of sensors mounted around the T-14's turret. The tank is also equipped with the NII Stali Upper Hemisphere Protection Complex, which consists of two steerable cartridges with 12 smaller charges each, and a turret-top VLS with two more similar cartridges, corresponding to the vehicle's soft-kill APS. Additionally, using the AESA radar and anti-aircraft machine gun it is possible to destroy incoming missiles and slow-flying shells. Two large sensors, believed to be electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR)-based laser warning receivers, are angularly mounted on the front of the turret providing 180° coverage, while four smaller sensors (covered but believed to be radars) are mounted around the turret providing 360° coverage.
Thank you for making such a great video to correct misinformation, youtube is now infected with videos saying all Russian tanks and equipments are terrible,without doing proper research! The engine part of the video is is an example of what I am talking about
I have seen a lot of Lazerpig videos.. At first i thought them to be entertaining and well researched.. until he once covered a topic of which i had knowledge about. It has prompted me to be very critical of what he publishes(its just too entertaining not to watch)... that being said.. I did eat every thing he said about the Amarta i swallowed raw... I am glad you took the effort to challenge it.
My first video of his i saw was the Armata because i'm a tank nerd. Bar horrible accuracy, i honestly fail to see where the entertainment was. I saw a person who mixed his political beliefs in a technical topic. The attempts at humor were him saying how bad at something Russians are in a "funny" voice. For the record, i disagree with those statements, but even if i agreed - where's the funny part?
M 84 autoloader never skipped a beat, it can load while tank rocking so violently we are holding for dear life inside and shell is just being loaded. It just works
1:38 lazerpig is almost certainly exclusively talking about the t-14 Armata's autoloader system - which, indeed, cannot be accessed from the crew compartment.
@@jammygamer8961 The auto loader is as reliable as any other auto loader. Which means that occasionally the cannon will jam, because jamming is a function of multiple parts not just the loader. But unlike NATO tanks, the crew can't clear the jam in the field. So a jammed tank cannon is functionally a mission kill in a T-14 while NATO equipment can be cleared within minutes at worst when jammed. Because NATO actually prepares for combat scenarios, not export propaganda.
I have one simple rule: don't trust people who always talking with mix political and technical topic, yes you can use one or the other as background knowledge, but mixing those 2 often means you can't even keep a objective view
redeffect is way more disingenuous when it comes to mixing politics with technical aspects. His IS-2 vs KT video is the best example, where he uses soviet memoirs as some sort of gospel to prove his points, all the while completely ignoring the same materials from the other side of the barricades. The problem with this video however is that T-14 Armata doesn't exist and any sensible discussion about this tank is a slippery slope either way, because no one will ever know what this tank is truly capable of. Lazerpig's video proves more than enough that a lot of propaganda surrounding T-14 is very inconsistent to the point of crew hatches varying in certain videos between manual and automatic types. You can't have a serious grounded discussions about mythical beings.
@@coupdegrace2767 what Soviet memoirs? I watched that video? What? Is it when he said the IS 2 could take out a KT with two consecutive blows? How is that a gospel? What did he say?
you can and often need to talk about both for the bigger picture see @Perun for example. Yet people like Lazer Pig don't realy have expertise in any of those fields, yet present their arguments as if they have. those people i don't trust!
He literally does that holy shit Ik it's his "jokes" And all, but he is one of those "haha I'm so quirky and sarcastic" Guys, that always comes off as self righteous ignorant pricks
My grandad after the 1956 revolution when the Soviets were heading home and selling off their equipment to locals to buy rations/food/water got himself a T-54 tank which also uses the V-2, he worked on it a lot and sold it off to a tank museum where I have been working for 6 years (Kecel), I have maintained a T-72 V2 engine, the only difference between the 2 engines is that the T72 has a turbocharger on it an better bearings, nothing else.
@kivi I mean yeah some verssof the engine will have bigger differences then others, the t54 and t72 might be close, but does the same go for the t80 and 90 or the t45? Maybe something that wouod be fun to look into :)
Here to let you know, the Ariete AMV isn't the last iterarion of the machine, apparently the final version Is gonna be called ariete plus among the differences a new /55 cannon and a hard kill system. I think you will find more info yourself. Cheers.
@@andythesaladgod4578 Gaejin has fucked up big Time with the Ariete AMV, not knowing that wasnt gonna be the final form of the machine. Once the plus show up they either rework the existing amv, or Will have to add a 4th ariete...
Thank you for your comments, with interesting, pros & cons. With this type of subject, one will never get info 100% correct, but I think you did a great job to put us all in a better light to all the history of the tanks we know today. Many thanks for your video.
You won't get it 100% correct but the least you can do is TRY. Just make an attempt to be honest and truthful, and to put effort in your research. You won't be 100% correct but you will be pretty close to it. On the other hand when half of your video is half-assed research and the other half are outright lies, you're pretty close to being 0% correct.
@@abrahamlincoln920 which one? People say this video is popaganda and others point to lazerpig. Especially giving the fact that both of them made videos critisizing Russian/West technology...
@@Gloverfield jesus christ. It doesn't matter what each of them did before. Both their videos can be dissected, each their claims scrutinized and verified. Laser pig video = half-assed and shitty propaganda piece. You can even tell by their tone which one of them mixed their political beliefs in there, and which one doesn't.
LazerPig's comments on the engine seemed odd to me right off the bat. For workhorse type diesels they tend to go with what works and modernize it as opposed to building something new. Reliability is paramount. So a 80 year old engine modernized should do the job. It might be "worse" than ultra modern engines, but it will likely be far more reliable and easy to fix.
Even on the high end performance side of things, Lamborghini used the same V12 design from 1964 right up until 2010, and the engine went from ~280 bhp to ~660 bhp in output. Engine design has come a long way and I can think of a few automotive examples like the Lambo V12 where you can take an old block design and squeeze a lot more juice out of it by bolting on newer equipment and increasing displacement. Having a eighty year old engine design is more a testament to how overbuilt it was originally rather than how it's necessarily outdated now.
@@unclesamlore Let's go over the things you got wrong, or rather, the things Lazerpig got wrong, that you are parroting: 1. The Porsche Tiger/Ferdinand didn't have a single engine - it had two. 2. The actual engines themselves weren't the source of the problem - the HL120 TRM was used in later versions of the Pz.3 and most of the Pz.4s, as well as the myriad of different AFVs that used those chassis, none of which had noteworthy engine issues. It was the complexity of the twin engine powerplant coupled to a petrol-electric drive that caused issues. 3. The T-14 doesn't use a twin engine design. 4. The T-14 doesn't use an HL120 TRM, nor any engine derived from it, nor any engine derived from Germany. 5. The T-14 doesn't use a petrol-electric drive, nor a diesel-electric drive, but rather a mechanical transmission. So by my count that's... carry the 2... literally nothing factually correct in your/Lazerpig's statement. For as much of an ass as I'm being, I don't necessarily find fault with you for assuming Lazerpig's video wasn't riddled with inaccuracies; he's a damn good script writer, and seems to do his research... most of the time. That being said, considering all the numbered points above are a single google search away, you should probably start to question the veracity of his claims, at least when it comes to technical stuff - geopolitics and history might be another story.
Think about it like this, if the 80 year old engine forces you to be several tonnes under the the modern engines, because they can't handle the performance requirement at that higher tonnage, then no amount of reliability will overcome the fact that it takes 3-4 shots to get the same results as a single one of theirs.
Never has so much been said about a vehicle that has been produced in such small numbers.
You mean kf 51 and abrams x? 🤣
@@VVV85650 Deflection at its finest😂
A handful of videos speculating on Upcoming technology are _Definitely_ “So Much” versus 8 years of russian arms simps saying the Armata making everything else obsolete. _Clearly_
@@killian9314 much more than a handful lol
@V V Both the US and Germany acknowledge that they're tech demonstrators. The T-14 doesn't exist outside of parades so there's no reason to replace the Leopard or Abrams.
ah yes this is gonna be the fast and furious of tank arguements
Can we get the Arjun man too?
this video is 50 minutes longs omg
@@tirushone6446 50 minutes is quite an achievement looking at how many mistakes Peppa pig made in those videos.
@@mr.waffentrager4400 Peppa Pig lmao
@@saucyinnit8799 because he makes joke videos for children
lazerpig's video duration - 1:02:14
RedEffect's corrections - 50:10
"Some corrections" he said
video duration doesn't equate to amount of mistakes mentioned. there were a lot of jumps from different points in LP's video and RE went into depth about some of LP's mistakes.
Lazerpig confirmed CIA psyop
@@fiyum333 very true, as true as i didn't claim this metric to be accurate.
That lying pig
He’s playing the mistake and his response lmfbo
Fair warning to anyone who’s going to read the comments it’s an absolute shit show between the red and LP fans and I’ve lost a bunch of brain cells reading both of them so proceed with caution
Thanks bro!
Im here to watch the shit show
All of these mf are warthunder players. That explains it
I have been reading them for the past 30 minutes. I am currently being sent to the hospital
@@killthemall55 TRUTH !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 🙂
Another cool fact about the 1500 HP turbine engine of the Abrams is that it was developed from the engine on the Chinook helicopter. It is capable of producing 3,000 HP but is governed down to 1500 HP. If you un-govern it, then the transmission and drive train would not be able to handle the power and the fuel efficiency would drop to unacceptable levels.
Turbines are most efficient at full-speed, efficiency would go up, however the tank would have no use for that level of power and it would have reliability issues.
That’s pretty cool ngl
@@ThatZenoGuy What about afterburner, is that the most fuel efficient?
@@fatfreddyfreekowtski6896
Afterburners basically throw fuel into the final stage of the engine. Not efficient at all.
One of the things that some tank crews during Desert Storm was to disable the governor
LazerEffect and RedPig are doing some cultural exchange here.
Just that one of those two guys has absolutely no idea what he's talking about. And .... It's not RedEffect 😂
@@markusplotz2259 they are both pretending to know what they talk about
@@robertroot7237 except one of them backs their claims with sources and at least tries to be truthful.
@@robertroot7237 Pig is a pig. Red is a Serbian.
Of course I will support a Serbian guy instead of a pig. Whether his father is a war criminal or not 😂 just kidding.
@@robertroot7237tf are you talking about it’s clear that RedEffect has a far better and more complete understanding on the topic on tanks, just look at dude’s entire channel
The max speed of tanks is incredibly overstated. When i did my conscription, most of the time the tanks and IFV drove at around 30 kmh. A tracked vehicle is NOT comfortable at high speeds.
Edit: The vehicles do work at their top speed, however the practicality is the issue. You cannot go top speed in terrain, the areas where tanks and IFVs will be used. Slamming 60 kmh down a highway does not count towards its practicality.
No it isn’t. You can drive a Dutch Leopard 2 with 100km/h on a German Autobahn. Yes it rattles, but it’s endurable.
@@Grimshak81 Me when I spread misinformation
@@Grimshak81 isn't the top speed of leopards like 70-80km/h?
@@Grimshak81 I didnt say its not durable. I have driven ~65 kmh in a CV90, it rattles like crazy but it does work perfectly. Im saying its not useful to measure top speed because you so rarely use it.
Reverse max speed is however.
As a person who used to be a mechanic. I did a double take when I saw that the engine weighs 4300lbs.
I was like wait, what’s a 1200lbs more than what my car weighs.
Wait until you see how much ship gas turbine engines weigh...
The General Electric LM2500 that's been used on a lot of United States Navy ships since the 1960s? They weight 50,000 pounds. Each. And each generates 30,000+ (LM2500+ is 40,000+) horsepower. And ships have multiple of these things.
@@matchesburn Because they're many hundred times heavier than cars and tanks
To put it in perspective though, that's engine that weighs 10x more than a Chevy LS V8, powering a vehicle that weighs ~15-18x as heavy as a Chevy Suburban. Really quite light when you look at it like that.
@@fantastikboom1094
I listed the weight of the engine. I'm aware of how much they weigh. You're not telling me anything I didn't know.
@@matchesburn I was talking about ships lol
The Challenger CV12 engine is/was also used in trains. Super reliable too and produces massive torque instantly.
I think the torque wouldn't matter that much in trains. From what I've read, most diesel locomotives are diesel-electric meaning the torque moving the train is provided by electric motors and the diesel engine providing only need to provide enough power (not torque) to power the electric motors. Diesel-mechanical locomotives are (I think) mostly smaller ones used in shunt yard duty, not for pulling trains.
@@seneca983 lol go look up the weight of a cargo train, thousands of tonnes. Torque is exactly what makes it move.
@@v4skunk739 Maybe you missed a part of what I wrote? The torque to accelerate the train is provided by an *electric* *motor* and the diesel engine only spins an electric generator, not the wheels directly. Thus it doesn't need as much torque as long as it can provide enough power.
@@seneca983 Either way it makes massive torque at 700rpm and powering a generator is tough on an engine.
Was also considered for the M1 Abrams and the XM2001 Crusader in it's 1500hp configuration mounted to a GD automatic transmission, but that was cancelled in 2003.
Also used in the Pak-sino Al-Khalid P2 prototype in it's 1200hp form with a French transmission.
Another programme was for a 1000hp version to be fitted to Czech T-72's under NIMDA. I'm not sure how this project turned out.
May the Tank-RUclipsr Beef begin!
haha love it!
Tanktuber
*Arjun saga flashbacks*
It's incomplete without making fun or atleast mentioning about Arjun MK1A tank lol
Beef? PORK!
Scrolling though the comments as I listen to the video, and as an avid LP viewer and only occasionally watch red effect. I am both surprised how everyone is just discussing in a civil and intellectual manner. I look forward to how this will go down.
I feel like the audiences for both channels are reasonably critical thinkers who care about facts. I don't see this getting vitriolic 👍
You smell . But seriously how did Lazer pig miss some off this?
I've seen a couple commenters being absolute d i c k s to LazerPig for basically no reason, so it's pretty annoying, but otherwise yeah, it's pretty good.
@@alexanderd6793 I think those are neither fans of LP nor of RE. Those are probably some regular consumers of Vladimir Solovyov.
Really I'm starting to see more comments being absolute dicks
Me looking through the comments to see what both sides have to say to each other
yes
Can't wait to see Red+CoA fan Vs Lazerpig fan
Common youtuber clout wars
Mostly soy boy degenerates on both sides trying their best “arguements” to defeat one another with the use of “ukro-nahtzee” and “vatnik” knowing damn well they have nothing to contribute to their RUclipsr-Gods whatsoever
@@enverhoxha545CoA?
the two ultra-pessimists collide in a battle to the death
If pessimism means to not be bent out of shape by propaganda and a sincere attempt at arriving at a factual summation of their fields of interests, then we should all strive to be happy pessimists.
i feel like realist would be a more apt term
🤖🤖🤖🤡🤡
@@cravinghibiscus7901 Except LazerPig spread propaganda.
An unstoppable force bs another unstoppable force.
Highly specific internet fandom debates are the best debates possible!
When people talk about Russian tanks, most of the time they use the age of the designs as an argument: very old, from the 60's, 70's and 80's... but no one mentions how most of the NATO counterparts have designs from almost the same age.
its because the meme of good ol' reliable russian equipment has been really popular. so people see that a design is old and just assume that they haven't changed jack shit since its first use. when if fact they have changed over time. not saying the kept up with nato tank development but they definitely did do SOME development.
Not even thinking about the fact that both the Abrams and the Leopard are still from the 80s...
@@stalkerentertainment3671ot only that but people memed russia bashed for their and hailed on abrams and leos for their so cool ,,blowout" panels wich are so good and what not yet those so awesome leos died instantly in ukraine wich led the us to withhold the abrams since ,,crappy old russian stuff" cant kill our stuff and i am myself german and happy thaz those ukrs got rekt in them tbh😂
@@LarryPigeon1 only a couple leos were destroyed in ukraine unlike the literal hundreds
of russian tanks
@@homunculus3039 dont you think this is because there where only hanfdull of leos and THOUSANDS of soviet tanks? Ukranians use, like, 2-3 leos at a time.
Red Effect: "He says some things that may be incorrect."
Me: Looks at time. 50 minutes. Makes popcorn.
Watching the video, and he must have been like: "There is so much bs in that LazerPig video", seriously, there are so many things Lazerpig got wrong there even the mistakes mentioned in the first 20 minutes of this video would have been huge.
@@werrkowalski2985what wrong?
I mean, he not even hide he's a NAFO
@@gerardsotxoa what’s wrong with that?
@@gerardsotxoa Closet wehraboo, "sigma", "true american patriot", "alfa male", pro ukraine and nafo *** to be precise lol
its actuly realy nice to hear someone disagree and contest, without screaming. lol
you can tell theres a lot of moments where RedEffect's trying to be civil and not point out the obvious that lazerpig just completely made some of this shit up on the fly
It's like the Pig likes to believe Russian people are idiots.
Redeffect is honestly quite civil in how he’s dealt with RUclips drama in the past, like when he had that “beef”with Alpha Defence over the Arjun. They had a couple of back and forth videos but RE was usually quite polite in the response videos and they eventually did one together on the topic. I don’t think LazerPig would react the same way, his videos are more about entertainment or being memey and he’s into the internet bloodsports “debate me bro” style drama. There’s no point in RE trying to respond with insults and mockery because it will just encourage others to respond with the same thing. “Never wrestle with a pig because you'll both get dirty and the pig likes it."
@@StalinTheSaintI see you've watched the roundtable debate he was in.
You can instantly tell the difference. LazerPig is doing everything he can to fit the narrative to his beliefs. When he cites sources, he picks those with no credibility or just makes stuff up. Whereas RedEffect is factual and backs his arguments up.
Basically this marked LazerPig as a total ass in the worst case, or a total idiot in the best case scenario.
@Lukáš Szabó Another victory for Russia
28:17
I have a correction for you- I drove Strykers (yes, not an Abrams, but still has the same triple periscope setup with FLIR camera for the driver. We very much used that to drive in daytime as well, especially in combat scenarios because it allowed us to keep an eye out for opfor in our, forward, sector. (Thermals making it a lot easier to see people/tanks.)
Given the position of screen, it made it very easy to look down and use that during daytime to, and sometimes necessary at Sunrise/Sunset.
EDIT:
Correction to my own correct: it being a drop-in replacement for a vision block.
The Stryker has a dedicated camera that is in addition to all periscopes, instead of replacing one.
Tank drivers would have to choose between Mk1EB and FLIR, but I suspect they probably would still choose the thermal because of the enhanced security it provides.
To be fair lazerpig state that pariscopes are bad and should be removed from such vehicles, which isnt a bright idea
@@wonkagaming8750 did he say they should be removed? I don't remember that
Didn't Strykers also have a newer generation thermal than Abrams do?
@@Livewyr7
I don't watch LazerPig's content anymore (the last video of his I watched was his F-35 video), but I can definitely see him saying something like that. LazerPig is a wealth of bad ideas from half-baked conclusions and assumptions. Which makes him more like Pierre Sprey than he realizes or would care to admit.
@@Livewyr7 ar 26:26 he state that t 14 having pariscope is bad because they can be damage and are a weakpoint, and are inferior to camera and why western tanks dont use pariscope.
This debate is hotter than cold war itself
Lazerpig is surprisingly very calm and collected during a debate with a super Z supporting Gonzalo Lira. This is a valid critique video not a direct attack. And I'm sure RedEffect and Lazerpig both are rational people.
Is this a debate? More like a debunk. I don't see how Laserpig can possibly "debate" this since this is literally pointing out all the inaccuracies, lies, and half-assed research in his video.
@@darnit1944 Lol did lazerpig really do research about what he's gonna make video about that topic???
He said the autoloader often got jammed but even the evidence from CIA said the opposite thing
not sure if a russian coping hard over their tank is a debate. it can't even enter service.
@@alansokelisatruehero8520 At least they don't making nonsense or clueless things about the tank
As a LazerPig fan, I'm glad you treated things respectfully and that videos like this exist, as without them untruths can easily spread
Edit: to clarify, I do think he should have taken down and then possibly reuploaded the video with all the corrections. I also feel like he downplayed the fact he got a lot of stuff wrong
Edit 2: I do now know what to think of the "No you're wrong" video LazerPig focused. Figuring out if it's correct would require me to watch 3 videos at once and I only have 2 eyes. Also I'm sick of getting reply notifications for this comment. Perhaps I will say that it was maybe made in bad faith. I don't know anymore
I don't like LazerPig at all, he is telling lies and anti russian propaganda. A disgusting pig.
calling yourself a fan, let alone a lazr pig fan? i predict your self delete within 2 years
Bro how the hell are you a fan of his content. He's either extremely biased about whatever he's talking about or just plain ignorant.
Someone who spreads misinformation should not be praised, whatever his motives may be
@@joaomiguelmoreira6363 seriously.....people need to call this grifter out
I'm not a big fan of pigs
The thing about engines is, the basic mechanical design hasn't improved much in the last 80 years. You can find high performance engines made in the WW2 time frame that mechanically look pretty close to what we have today. What HAS improved are things like engine management, material science, machining processes and optimizations through CAD. Heck the German DB-601 had OHC 4 valve per cylinder , direct injection with a mechanical computer for engine management. Sounds pretty familiar to things we have in cars now, except everything is electronically controlled and monitored. Basically the advancements in the last 80 years has let up take what would have been a very expensive, time consuming, large, and heavy engine. Make it smaller, lighter, with more HP per displacement, and bring the cost and production time into the realm that everyday citizens can afford it.
When a Ford fiesta can out torque a T-80 there's an issue there. The autoloader gives enough memes to make these tanks more deathtraps than anything. Either way Russia only has 8 T-14 since they can't access western imports needed for these tanks along with the Su-75
@@TheButcherHooks Did you watch the video? Even LazerPig stated that the whole torque thing was a complete mistranslation. Big 18 wheeler truck engines don't make more torque than MBTs, let alone small hatchback engines.
@@TheButcherHooks you clearly didn't watch either video in their entireties, as both state that that's incorrect. Lazerpig even put it in his pinned comment as well.
@@TheButcherHooks People make a big deal out of torque, but notice when companies talk about things like tanks, semi-trucks, tractors, heavy equipment. Many times they just say what the HP is. Sometimes you have to dig to find the to find the torque of the engine. Why is that? Because HP is how much work can be done in a given period of time. You can look at it as a unit of productivity. Torque is something that can be largely created through gearing. It's an important value, but it means nothing if you're not actually doing anything with it. As an extreme example an engine that produces 100ft-lbs (or lb-ft whatever you prefer) of torque at 100rpm is only 1.9hp but an engine that produces 10ft-lbs of torque at 2000rpm produces 3.8hp. Which is more useful? Stick in a gear reduction of 20:1 and you get an output shaft of 200ft-lbs and 100rpm. Of course there will be some losses but your still going to be ahead. So a quick Google search didn't turn up torque and rpm figures for the T-80 for me and I don't have time to go digging. But it's got like 1000hp so I'm pretty sure they can gear it for however much torque they need.
reminds me of an argument I got into with a friend where he said a V10 will always no matter what produce more power than a V8. He didn't last long at trade school
Imagine being a top Russian engineer at Uralvagonzavod, one of the most talented in his field, who spent decades in his job as an engineer, and you somehow come across Lazerpig's video. You learn that your tank has the engine of a WW2 era Tiger tank, which makes less torque than a Honda Jazz's engine, and it's unreliable anyways. You also learn that your tank is useless because it's thermal viewer is inferior to thermal cameras on cheap commercial drones, and it's a bad concept anyways because it's active protection is not working at all, and he also lectures you as an expert as why your universal platform is bad.
Dunning Kruger effect
@@jelly.212 on god
imagine being a top russian engineer at uralvagonzavod and making a janitors' wage in the US
@@HarrDarr
1. Janitors wage is too dramatic
2. He has basically free gas, heat and electricity
3. Free medical care includin dentist
3. Free vacation tickets to Crimea for each year 😅
None of them have credits to pay in a bank for some reason 🤔
And yes, I know two engineers from "ural". Ah, and no they are not top engeneers in any way. Top is something entirely different :) But taking russian wage of any kinda and simply count it into dollars shows how you dont understand what you even talking about. Pure example of ignorant and selfentitled colonial nation thinking.
@@ardour1587 its' not very dramatic, engineers in the tank manufacturing industry of russia make less than 700usd/month
compare to a danish janitor who gets 1800 USD/month, also gets free medical care, dentistry etc
I saw the LazerPig video and the errors were glaringly obvious even from someone who has a passing interest in military technology. I think the real issue is when you pick a side i.e the Russian Ukrainian conflict you will invariably let your biases dictate.
Or like... common sense? I'm not sure how big the gearbox would need to be to enable the Honda Jazz engine to get a 50t tracked vehicle to 50+kmh, but I would wager that there wouldn't be much room inside of the tank for anything else.
I mean i have a side and bias too, i'm against Russian aggression, but as a military hardware nerd it would never cross my mind to simply fucking lie about a Russian tank.
People in the west are treating this war like a football game, cope cope my sides winning!!. Meanwhile I literally couldn’t care less and it’s so fkn annoying when I just want to get accurate non-partisan information about the conflict.
@@abrahamlincoln920well u won’t lie for a private convo but a lot will for more likes n clicks lol
@@abrahamlincoln920 that’s because you are a rational and level-headed person. I hate Russia, but it’s easy to disparage them without lying. I hate the lying about them because it makes it too easy to cover for actual issues with Russia, “they lied about our tanks, so they’re lying about this too,” kind of arguments.
As a recent fan of Lazerpig due to the funny meme content he makes, the 'less torque than a Honda Jazz' claim really made me do a double take.
Even LP admitted that was a mistake on his part. He thought the same too. The problem, as LP states, Is that Russians use a different method of measuring torque / different unit for torque. He got the original source, but messed up the unit by oversight or mistake.
I believe this was on episode 1 of NAFO: even rounder table.
yeah i tought how would the tank even move lol that just sounds ridiculous
@@rulesofimgur Dude. You somehow still believe his lies. He did it on purpose , and thought you would just eat up on his lies, just like you eat up on every other lies.
Because the first thing that I did after I heard it , as any sane person with any amount of grey matter that it just isn't possible, and I went on the internet and checked all the info myself. And it's not as hard as some people might think and it took me only a few minutes time. To realize that he is wrong by an order of magnitude (10 times).
Ukranian propaganda is all based upon pure lies. They can't not lie because their glass house will break down immediately , so they just spewing bs nonsense over and over again , just like Goebbels , in order to convince people of their BS. As that notion of Russian tank using the T34 engine which is extremely weak and unreliable has been going on for 10 years (it is not new as westerns who only getting their dose of Ukranian propaganda now seem to think), this has been going on for 10 years and they are keep repeating the same thing. So that less torque lays perfectly in that convo of convincing you that that engine is "extremely old and outdated", and was done ON PURPOSE.
The problem with Lazerpig and with most "talking about tanks"-personas ist that he is incredibly biased and wanks about Western/Allied designs while shitting on anything else.
In reality everything was done for a reason and a lot of things are easily explained/understood if you have a modicum of technical education.
My favourite examples are:
>Tigers being overweight and immobile
>Allied tanks were all very reliable
>Soviet tanks were incredibly good/incredibly shit
>People shitting on interleaved roadwheels
>Panther bad
@@wolfi9933 Yep, on top of all of that people always forget that the actual crew of the tank is more important than the tank itself, most of the time. Also they are forgetting the tactics which are also more important than the tank itself... But I get it... people want an isolated example of a particular tank... Then I don't get why they never compare actual numbers produced, and the cost of the tank on top of it's reliability of the tank. As an example one of how characteristics relate, you can always ( if you have the expertise ) turbo charge your engine, to increase it's horsepower, but it will take a hit on it's longevity and reliability of the engine. So you could sacrifice some raw performance for a lifespan (and there's always a golden middle too). So on paper your tank would look more powerful with more horsepower, yet it would be so unreliable that it would practically be not usable past a 100 km. The same thing could be said for the main artillery gun, as there are guns that can only withstand a few hundred shots , and guns that can withstand a few thousand... Also increasing it's shooting speed may reduce it's reliability and longevity again. etc. as well as people have no idea how reliable each mechanical component of each tank, as for example some thermal sights require constant maintenance , and some don't require any at all... etc And saying that this or thank tank is bad is idiocy in itself, because any moving gun on the battlefield is good ...and that gun also has some good armor ... Oplot potentially could be a good tank, that is if they could build it at all, but because they are not building it , and it seems like they can't , the previous ones they built with the help of Russia, and they are promising to start building new ones, but so far there were no proofs, and I will believe it when I see it, when they build at least a few of them, so there's no real point even discussing it now. While the Russian T90m exists and it's in full production and it has been spotted on the battlefield and in real combat. So it is a good tank by that measure that it exists and is used on the battlefield while the BM Oplot does not exist, and they can't even produce it.
I can imagine you had to restrain so much frustration in making this video.
i literally cringed when i heared the fantasy based claims of pigs
the Arjun drama has made Red be careful with his words this time XD
A sidenote on gas turbines: This is not a correction per se, as tanks with gas turbines are very obviously less efficient than diesel tanks, but this is actually not the fault of the gas turbine, but rather how it is used. Gas turbines are actually extremely efficient, they just don't like step functions or idling. This is partly why we use them on airliners. They aren't just stronger than a piston engine with propellers, they're more efficient on long hauls where they sit at stable RPM for hours on end. If they weren't more efficient than piston engines in that use case, we frankly wouldn't use them.
You completely wrong.
@@LeonmitchelliGalette they're not, but there is context missing.
The inefficiency of turbos has to do primarily with the way they're throttled: they change the temperature and/or pressure off the combustion chamber, which lowers the expansion ratio and thus destroys efficiency.
On top of that, the less power you draw, the greater fraction of that power is wasted on an "oversized" compressor, drawing a bigger volume of air than needed for the low throttle, which is needed because else pressure tanks and that's as mentioned even worse.
Start up and throttle isn't the most efficient either as spinning up the turbine isn't a matter of turning a valve but actually using up the engine's energy to accelerate the heavy blades to rotate even very-fast-er...
One specific issue with Abrams is that they use an adapted chopper's engine, and it is governed way below top speed because tanks are not choppers lol and I'm pretty sure itd give a lot of trouble... For the aforementioned reason, efficiency is trash, though in general, tanks (which do need to throttle a lot) with a turbine aren't that efficient anyway...
This is why the OP said that turbos are very efficient when used steadily and close to max power. Comparing with diesels is hard because diesels vary in efficiency just as much as turbos, with expansion ratio being the biggest metric, which itself is at odds with specific power, but indeed they are on a comparable range, with the most efficient turbos as good or better than the most efficient diesels (think turbines on power plants, or marine diesels).
- For a given power density, turbos destroy diesels, simply because being more compact and allowing to trade that small size for a very high expansion ratio. This is stupid tho because it defeats the point of a turbine
- For a given expansion ratio, diesels win, because their cycle and construction... this is stupid again because R is rarely a limiting factor.
In practice it depends on the specific application. For aircraft, getting a jetliner's fan powered by a diesel would be ridiculously huge, heavy, complex, draggy and offer no real gain in efficiency if not a loss, thus it isn't done (there's a reason the few non-turbo aircraft there are are small, cheap and low performance props...). For a tank though the requirements in size, torque, throttle, etc impose a heavy price in gas for the turbo's performance and stealth...
@@antaresmc4407 "because tanks are not choppers." Counterpoint: every T-14 promo video, in which they're seemingly endlessly spinning their turrets to hide their lack of effective stabilization while on the move 😂
@@antaresmc4407 I think a good way to put it is that both diesel-piston engines and turbines are top tier choices for applications where the top two priorities are power and efficiency. Which one works better just depends on the details. Ie, boat engines are all diesel because diesels are far less expensive and almost as efficient, while any malus in power can be made up with displacement since boats don't care about weight, and as a bonus the engine suffering a catastrophic failure won't send metal shards through bystanders at the speed of sound when the engine is diesel-piston rather than a turbine, all on top of the fact that boat engines are expected to change revs often, albeit not as quickly as a car engine.
The flip side to all this is that if we could make a tank (or even a civilian vehicle) that was a turbine-electric powertrain, the turbine would suddenly become almost ideal. Then the turbine would only run at full power (to charge the battery or capacitors) and be off otherwise. Though, this would introduce a host of other complications, both for military and civilian vehicles...
GTD-1250G/GTD-1400 is a good example of alleviating the idle issue where you use only enough fuel to be ready to "boost" once you actually want to drive. Power generation would be off of the included GTA-18A.
If LazerPig was Pinocchio, by the end of this video his nose would definitely be able to fire the HESH rounds.
Not biased towards any side but this comment is 24 karat gold, had me wheezing lmao.
@@DevoxGaming Thank you kind sir.
I love how lazerpig states the T-90's max speed is 32 kph and then later goes on to say it has the same maximum speed as the challanger which has a max speed of 37 kph
okay thats just a small difference
@@speedman69420 Both of those numbers are wrong.
@@speedman69420Small ? 15%...and it's wrong
@@goodlife6277 and wrong, T 90 is lighter and goes much faster
@@plazmica0323 I know, it's a Very good tank
50 minute long RedEffect kino I will be watching in its entirety
@@besh7408 Stop spamming your lies, bot
@@a3cools115 vatnik
@@a3cools115 qué dijo? Parece que eliminó el mensaje
And you will be dumber at the end
Thank you for not just becoming another Propoganda channel. People will do anything for clicks these days
ironic that he uses thatcher on his thumbnail since she's the one putting nail on the coffin of Britain 's global relevance
the fact that the amount of propaganda are on youtube, reddit, twitter etc. makes me sick
just to point out ... if you will compare engine weights then compare the engine weight... u compared the engine pack to an engine ... the actual engine of the leopard for example is the same weight as the russian engine but the main difference is that the germans/ americans include the gearbox,filters,... on their engines and thats why its called an engine pack and thus is 1 ton heavyer
It is mind-boggling that he doesn't know that.
As he said in the beginning - "I do make mistakes". And he just made one.
@@zemstafreda nah its easy to missuse that info becouse the actual engine weight is still classified... some sourcess say 1200kg, some 1800kg, some 2200kg but none put the direct number becouse they arent allowed to...
the dimensions of the engine are similar to the russian one and volumetrically shuld weight the same
what bothers me is that he described the engine as "bulky"... dude the engine is one of the most compact tank engines in the world and its desighned that way so that the engine replacement just requires the crew to pull out the engine pack in one go... unlike the T series tanks that need to be totaly dissmantled(i operated on the M84... its a headache especially if you have big hands)
No he did not make a mistake. He used a figure for the MB 873 engine itself which is 2200 kg alone. Which makes total sense because the Leopard 1's engine, the MB 838 is also 2200 kg with less cylinders with no transmission. The full on weight of the powerpack is like 4000 kg. This is according to an MTU data sheet.
There will be discrepancies as to whether it's dry or wet or it has or not has extra equipment but this figure does not include the transmission which is huge amount of weight. Almost or as much as the engine itself
@@zemstafreda that`s why there is no point watching channels like this, it is a bunch of minimum wage workers and teenagers with no specific education or knowledge or hands on experience, who just put together some Wikipedia data together, Google this and that and pass it as some sort of an expert opinion.
The problem with LazerPig, and really a lot of discussions related to many different industries, is the constant chasing of the next hot take, regardless of, or sometimes directly contradicting, what there is evidence for.
He just wants to be edgy and ''funny'', panders to Russia haters
He's a low-IQ take machine, it's crazy how much nonsense he's able to spew.
@@spicesmuggler2452 Everyone should be a Russia "hater" in this day and age
@@mikelelele7112 Only if you are brainwashed by western media and politicians
@@mikelelele7112 If you wish to point fingers point them at Putin, not the millions of people dragged into politics and being blasted (in every sense of the word) over one person's delusions of grandeur.
"Retractable" periscope was a feature from ww2 found on tank such as the sherman. indeed it "retracted" it's main or secondary periscope when the other one was not used, it was also used on german and British tank. It would not leave a hole as the periscope was still present in the "hole" or some door was fixed on top (such as on the sherman) to close off the hole. This was made to protect the periscope itself and always have one ready if the other one was destroyed so you could still see
@Alexander DiMaria Yeah quite cringe indeed, but I will say that some ww2 features are sometimes still on modern IFV, not sure if these periscope are though.
I don't remember "retractable periscopes" being a thing in WWII, and I've watched basically every Chieftains hatch and don't remember him pointing them out either. But maybe it was a thing and I'm just forgetting it.
Armored covers however were absolutely a thing as you said, and IIRC like you also said periscopes could be replaced inside by the crew if need be.
And periscopes are incredibly important in tanks still, don't know where Lazerpig got the idea they're archaic and obsolete. I've heard plenty of Vets that actually prefer them or even being open hatched compared to the cameras as you can't "feel" the environment through the camera or have as good depth perception.
Strv 122 has a digital retractable periscope thingy
Which periscope on the sherman (driver, gunner, etc)? Which station has a main or secondary periscope? Do you mean replaceable? I have never heard of this.
@@Ryan-ti4yv I think there has been a misinterpretation, the periscope present on all station except the gunner is the one that can be "retracted". If you look on the hatch of the driver and machine gunner right next to it is a little metal piece, that is the door that open up when the periscope is placed but also closes when the persicope is retracted by the crewman in order to protect it. The periscope can be moved thanks to the knob you can see on it (such as the m8 periscope on american tanks) that serves to place it up or down inside the tanks.
14:17 - nobody comments on fact that LazerPig dreamed up 52 ton M1 Abrams? First variants were 56 I think....and hit 60 pretty much immediately.
And fully loaded it pushing 72 tons
You criticize Lazerpig but you aren't even confident yourself. Why would you make such an assertion if you don't even know?
@@chaosXP3RT lazerpig is someone that shits out long videos with a lot of „content“ but no facts.
@@123456qwful In short tons.
In fairness that actually kinda proves the point he was making further lol
Topics tackled in order
0:00 Intro
1:11 Autoloaders
2:40 T-95 carousel autoloaders & T-14
3:13 T-95 and the new 152mm gun. T-90 and new 125mm ammo. Inferior to top 120mm NATO, but modern nonetheless.
3:55 T-95 and the 90s. Object 195 being effectively vapourware. Laserpig mixes up Objects 195 and 640 (Black Eagle). Russian media and others also collate the two together.
8:00 Why Objekt 195 got cancelled by 2010.
8:44 The Kharkov Model V-2 engine
9:40 "Kalashnikov" of engines
10:35 Specs for the B-92S2F
11:00 Tackling the age of the engine. Leo 2 engine comparisons. 60 years & going strong with little to no changes. Chally 2/3's development from 1918's Condor engine.
12:00 Honda Jazz has more torque than T-14.....NOT!
12:40 B-2 archaic in design, bulky and heavy
14:03 Diesel vs Gas turbine comparisons, for reasons
15:10 Top speed 32mph for T-14
15:35 Engine thirsty for Oxygen, and T-90s in mountains
16:35 T-90 is slower than heavier tanks
17:39 Copy of the German SLA-16 engine for T-14, "from" Porshe Tiger
18:20 Russian "reliance" on western imports
18:35 Copied engines & A-85-3A (T-14s engine)."based on" vs "copied" vs "neither"
21:25 A-85-3 was a commercial oil pumping, unreliable engine
23:06 T-14 broke down on Moscow Parade
24:03 T-14 built around "that" engine
25:27 T-14 larger than T-90, in spite of design to be smaller
26:30 Periscopes are still used for driver, rather than camera/screen combo
28:24 Periscopes retract into hull claim
28:52 KF-51 Panther's "view"
28:18 10s autoloader reload time
30:24 Ukrainian hackers found French optics in T-14
31:39 Optics "available to the public"
32:25 Spare 5k, gets you a UAV that has better IR/Thermals
33:04 Chinese interest in T-14
34:26 Modular design on the T-14 hull
36:29 IFVs and armour
37:25 BMP is made on tank chassis, uses V-2 engine and is thirsty
38:30 Artillery is based on tank chassis. Armour vs weight of cannon
39:13 Tanks able to track automatically in the 60s....
40:24 Challenger Rifled Gun is more accurate at long range.....
41:33 Challenger has HESH...vs modern HE and programmable HE
42:49 Challenger 2 CLIP available since 2006.....and HAAIP. All prototypes
44:00 Challenger 3 updates vs upgrades
44:52 New turret & 360 awareness in the turret for Abrams X & Adaptiv Armour????
47:00 Bradley autocannon can take out video cams
48:21 Conclusion: Lots of correct stuff, especially production issues. But a lot of errors.
Yes and thats why thousands of armata tanks are roling of the asembly lines.
@@nils-petergustafsson1064 Yes that's also why you're commenting to the wrong comment. Because if thousands of Armata tanks are rolling out, then thousands of people like you are actually intelligent.
Gotta remember though, red effect bases his video on what russia says.
The T-14 is garbage until proven otherwise tbh.
And the project is pretty much canceled.
Lots of correct stuff or like 1 thing that's correct?
@@nagantm441 On whose part? Laserpigs?
What makes me feel sad is that not only Lazerpig putting out poorly researched videos but putting out these videos to a lot of people than ingrain it as actual knowledge.
NAFO gonna do NAFO things I suppose
@@nothere4089propoganda
@@nothere4089he's just stupid, there's a reason he's a former.
The fans of his that are genuinely interested in learning about military hardware and hearing different perspectives will find their way to this redeffect video. 😉👍
@@nothere4089 The claim the UK is using a gay drunk guy who uses a stock image of a pig as their propaganda is the most insane thing I’ve ever heard lmao
RedEffect: "He says some things that may be incorrect."
Proceeds by correcting 99% of what LazePig has said.
Love you Red, keep it up bud!
he didn 't even bother to review the other 75% of what he said about the "ArmaPa" which was how it is bad due to the lack of expertize in manufacturing and and Putin
so no, he only corrected about 25 % of what LP claimed
@@lowtier show work for math
@@lowtier He did not go into politics. Red Effect very clealry said that in the begining of the video(1:05). Lazerpigs video was 70% about coruption in Russia and Putin this and Putin that and Russian equipment=bad. He made very little claims about T14 yet he was 90% corrected.
Yeah, he's great ^^ Like his professional understatement.
13:32
to be fair; the MTU is a power pack with transmission and a few other things already included for ease of replacing.
MTU is an engine, MTU MB 873, the power pack is called "Euro Power Pack", the engine as engine, according to MTU themselves weights 2.2t
@@azrael9016 im certain the that thats the nomenclature for the whole power pack. the german page of the Rolls Royce Power Systems isnt really helpful in that regard unfortunately. I also could be absolutely wrong.
@@Keckegenkai The data sheet which states that the dry weight is of the engine itself is official by MTU. There is also a document by MTU which says the same thing. Also for comparison, Leo 1 that does not have a power pack and the engine (MB 838) is a "separate" thing and is on its own, its engine which is kinda a "smaller version" of Leo 2's engine (2 less cylinders and is thus overall shorter) weights 1920kg completely dry. Leo 2's engine, being larger weights 2200kg. But regardless of Leo 1 comparison, the MTU official information states that the engine itself is 2200kg.
I thought a power pack was the engine, transmission and cooling unitised for ease of replacing
bro the MTU is more heavy than my car lol
Laser Pig definitely got one thing right, the T-14 is doing f-all to help Russia right now. Maybe it is the best tank in the world, but it's pretty useless if you're afraid to scratch its paint.
Well Russia in not the only one that is afraid to deploy it top edge tank at least for now, US isnt also gonna send its Abrams tanks with its enhanced armor and probably more secret technologies and until the British and German ones get first hammered. I doubt that the Abrams will face in anytime Ukraines frontlines
Yep that is about it!
For an army that somehow has figured out how to make quantity over quality work, they sure have very little T-14's
nah it just had quantum invisibility technology that they are testing and they lost it because they can't find it again. /s
I feel like they were made just for parade
Could help improve Russian moral
Quick question how does multiple engineers and officers not notice the parking brake is on? What did the parking brake even look like to accidentally engage it?
The whole parking brake is such a blatant panic lie that it really puts a cherry on top of the whole T-14 breaking down during a parade debacle. Looking at the comment section, fanboys and tankies know it was an embarrassing fuckup but they keep lying to themselves that it wasn’t as a coping mechanism.
easy answer, have you seen them going in to check? no? where they eventually able to move the thing? yes? if it wasnt the brake then how were they able to make it move eventually?
At 23:40 you can see that the tank literally starts driving again.
Have you not watched the video?
@@xxkairzzxx1994 yeah I see that I’m just curious why the driver himself didn’t check the parking brake first? I know tanks and cars are very different but the first thing people check if there engine is running and they’re not moving is if the parking brake is on. How did they go through all that trouble just for it to be the parking brake?
@@insulinslayer2413
Well , easy answer , new equipment , and the modern russian army isnt known for training properly its soldiers , so the guy was just given a new tank without proper training and he screwed up by engaging the brake....
Or thats at least the most sensible answer for me...
This is Christmas come in April I swear. Never thought that one of my favourite youtubers would react to another of my favourites
Same here.
When LP said that the t14 engine has the same torque of the Honda jazz I started doubting and cringing at the same time
he corrected himself in his last video. The thing is russians for whatever reason measure torque using different units than the rest of Europe, so Lazerpig thought the torque was lower than it actually is.
@@aquila1290 yes, now I know because I’ve watched the second episode of the Even rounder table, thanks anyway
@@aquila1290 Goes to show how little he knows about the topics he talks about.
It should be obvious to anyone with a critical eye, but he just ran with it because it supported the narrative he wants to push.
@@Antiteshmis Nah he probably just made a mistake
@@LaVaZ000 So I guess if somebody tells you that a cart and F-1 have the same engine, you 'll genuinely believe it was "just a mistake" and cannot in any way be linked to a bias.
LMAO
>LazerPig is WRONG
Is this any news?
Revisiting this to remind myself just how thoroughly this dude embarrassed himself then doubled down anyway
The Chieftain was the last straw for his little ego.
@@kaboomvn201
@@hzmt12 you good bro see you comment here a lot
@@hzmt12 obviously lazerpig lmao
@@jaxonl7810Touch grass, goose stepper. :^)
If the arjun saga was part 1, this should be part 2
Hoping that we don't need an arbiter this time around like what Mastimus did during the Arjun saga.
Matsimus is also british😢😢😢
Edit:
Matsimus is a canadian now.
@PRIMO VICTORIA oh yeah, i forgot that. He is a perfect arbitrer, then
@@HippoBean if its not a t90m, which is probably one of indias best tanks, i dont think alpha defense can really have a definite say like he did with the arjun
@@HippoBean India has zero interests in T14. They have a FMBT prog for that
the t-14 will be able to fire 21 shovels per minute.
But don't forget they completely ran out of ammo 10 months ago, and ran out of food 3 days into the war.
UN should declare shovels weapons of mass destruction and ban them
@@olisk-jy9rz You don't understand
*Image of rpg7 with shovel loaded comes to mind
@@olisk-jy9rzthey have also taken 180,000 casualties which is pretty funny lol
Honest mistakes are fine, but when you see an outright blatant lie you can't take this person seriously anymore. For example, he stated that T-90M engine has slightly more torque than Honda Jazz. Sounds outrageous, right? Well because it is. Honda Jazz has 110Nm of torque, while the T-90 has 3920Nm of torque. I stopped watching right there. You simply cannot make a mistake like this, it has to be a deliberate lie in order to push a narrative.
Lazer Pig admitted to his mistake in his video.
@@voidtempering8700 Only because he was being called out and laughed at for such gross propaganda.
Yeah i saw i think only one single comment discussing this under the original video, barely upvoted. No one gives enough of a fuck to verify every single claim he makes, he knows that and knows that he can get away with pretty much anything as long as it's not obviously false. I guess this one was too obvious so it prompted someone to actually look into it.
@@voidtempering8700 Now all he needs to do is apologize for the other 100 "mistakes" he made, and stop being a pro-narrative, government shill.
I mean its funny and lots of russian equipment sucks so who cares
At this moment LazerPig even didn't watched original video. He's saying that monitors are working while nobody is inside the tank, but in the original video T-14 was working in unmanned mode. It even move forward while inside was only cameraman.
Lazerpigs entire reply was a shitshow tbh
True
If you look at LP's "noted errors" section in his video's description while watching this, it gets funnier every minute.
I'm no fan of lazerpig so it's kinda nice to seem him get called out on some of the stuff he says. Sometimes it feels like he just says things to get a reaction
He is biased. And therefore lacks nuance. You are right.
I mean plenty of stuff he says is very clearly meant to get a reaction and be jokes/provocations. Like look at all the dumb noises and dancing pigs.,
@@davidradtke160 there is that and than there is just straight up lies and bullshit that he say in his videos
To me it seems like blatant political propaganda . Charged by what ? Well everyone can think for themselves about that .
He mainly caters to young western NAFO crowds, also he obviously has some issues with himself, that's why he calls himself a pig and projects so much onto the Russians.
Its always good to see a well delivered and respectful response to something.
Even if it's completely wrong?
@@snow24121 wdym
@@snow24121 Specify?
@@levoderso7469we couldn’t explain it in a comment section, just wait for LP to make his response video
@@Dimandblade even lp himself said that he kinda failed with his sources tho
I'm starting to think there's more time and effort in putting to making videos of the T-14 than the engineers put into designing and making it.
careful, this guys life is on the line
The fact LazerPig thought a little ole Honda engine had *more* or equal torque to an engine designed specifically for tanks shows he knows absolutely nothing about tanks. I ain’t no tank genius, but.. wow, that was atrocious. You really can’t take him seriously anymore.
Still the main points hit home. No t14 marching towards Berlin. On paper red is certainly right. But on the battle field no t14 is seen. This feels like discussing mystical creatures.
@@Monsterpala Russia has a lot "on paper" capability.
They have considerably less real one.
Their "stealth fighters" can be counted on your fingers while west churns out F 35s by hundreds.
Russia stating specs of their equipment way over what it actually can do is common thing too.
Reason they refuse to use most of their modern equipment is they don't want the embarrassment of showing off how bad it is.
Like the terminators they pushed to front, made real stink about it, then went awfully quiet.
Oops, turns out they dont really work that well on the battlefield.
@@platysplatys3967 Stop with the bias. No matter what, if its sent to war. It will explode and die. The Terminator so far has been seen to be quite an effective vehicle. WarLeaks even released a video of an AFU Drone watching one shred literal treelines.
ruclips.net/video/QxBkRcsSw9A/видео.html
LazerPig is just the normal NATO bot. Know nothing and talks a lot
@@platysplatys3967actually terminator footages coming really often and working pretty well.
Going by LazerPigs logic the engine in the M1 Abrams is the same engine the Messerschmitt Me262 uses.
I had a lot of people telling me lately that all the Russian tanks use the same engine as the T-34. Russians are obviously mentally inferior and don't realise how bad their engines are. Now I know why. Thanks Pig.
V2 is an old (1920) German aircraft diesel engine. the Russians used it because they dident had nothing better and use it today for the same reason. T90M uses that same old V2 engine. You can modify it but you cant radically change it.
Lol, obviously you have no idea about gas turbines nor Diesel engines
@@fadfauziug8146 Obviously you're wrong and I'm right because I said so.
@@viktoriyaserebryakov2755 okay then let’s get a little more detailed: the M1 gas Turbine is a Engine that uses 2 shafts meaning it has a low and a high pressure compressor/Turbines. It also uses an Radial compressor as the last compression stage. It has a total of 4 turbine stages (1 driving the high pressure compressor, one driving the low pressure compressor and 2 driving the tank itself) due to the fact that it doesnt use the air pushing as propulsion which means that it can and hast to take more energy out of the air flow. The Jumo 004 on the other hand is a one shaft engine with just one turbine stage which does nothing more the propelling the compressor which consists of 8 stages in total while all of them are axial compressors. It generates thrust by principal of recoil and pushing the air behind it. It’s a completely different system. Why more difference then between an Gas or Diesel engine for example
I mean, as the RUclips version of that one guy at parties who’s just going “Um actually” this is really good. I really like how it’s about the information which in hindsight may have been a slight “ooops” and less about Lazerpig himself.
Great video.
Lazerpig's a racist idiot.
How can you possibly believe that a car has less torque than a tank?
Let alone fabricated claims he created out of thin air.
This isn’t an um actually, this is one guy making shit up, and another guy pointing it out. “Um actually” is correcting unimportant minutiae, like what I am doing right now, lol.
exactly. Feels very professional and honestly quite respectful.
Sorry but saying that a Honda Jazz has almost as much torque as a tank engine really shows that lazerpig has not the slightest idea what he is talking about.
@@vanko325 "but he corrected himself in the description"
The point should be that he genuinely believed, even for a couple of hours, that a 40 tons tank had less torque than a 1,5 tons car.
I swear most of these recent comments didn't pay attention to red effect's or lazerpig's recent video and only heard what they wanted to
Exactly this.
@@cojoes1423 i watched the response vid its just 40 min time waste 10 min of or even less of correcting rest political garbage and bla bla russian propaganda
I think LazerPig somehow got the retractable periscopes idea from yet another bygone piece of World War II tech which appeared on the early Panther variants and in the original designs for the Tiger III. That being the rotating driver's periscope which could be pivoted inward and was protected by an armor plate.
Stalin should 🤫🤡🐀💩🚽
Tiger III?
@@Delta-6501 The original name for the King Tiger was the VK 45.03 (H) Tiger III and was intended to be the design built after the interim VK 45.02 (H) Tiger II (which was an upgraded Tiger I with sloping armor and a King Tiger turret) had been rolled out.
@@tablesizeproductions4360I'd say that's a bit too niche- gives me the sense of being purposefully obtuse so you can flex, when you could just say tiger 2 and avoid the issue entirely, no one would take issue with it. That's just my read tho ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ not super charitable I'll admit
@@tablesizeproductions4360 wot tanks?
Lazer Pig is the epitome of the adage "you can compensate for not saying something accurately by merely saying in confidently."
Holy shit I thought you were gonna just point out some minor mistakes but nah this man just flamed LazerPigs whole video 💀
How can "The Honda Jazz (Which is 1 ton) has more torque than the T-90M(Which is 50 Tons)" be a minor mistake?
Don't even get me started on the BT-7s MT-17T being used on the T-90M which is a blatant lie and misinformation. These are not mistakes but absolute dogshite lies.
@@pilotmanpaul I'm not sure how he got the torque comparison as V2 has roughly 20x...
But the BT-7M (1938) used the V2 engine.
@@Livewyr7 I'm curious as well. Heck, I'm curious at where he got the Honda Jazz torque bs from that he included it in the video. Common sense would say thats not physically possible.
@@pilotmanpaul But the thought is hilarious... which is probably why it made it in despite being easily disproved.
I'm kinda surprised the pig didn't rail on and on about the no video proof of the gun firing while vehicle in movement.
That's got to be the most damning thing about it.
not realy, most of his video was pointed at corruption, he went little to far into technical details
Comparing the torque to a Honda Jazz isn't a mistake, it shows his understanding is superficial enough to not catch obvious impossibilities.
Most professionally delivered criticism to another RUclipsr. 👏
yes indeed
The LazerPig video is just some kind of stream of cheap anti-Russian propaganda for ordinary people.
@@user-pretender77 anti-russian propaganda is just reality!
@@joshuabacker2363 Proof?
@@rebelliousfew proof is 100,000 dead russian soldiers in Ukraine
As someone who loves both this channel and lazerpig's channel I have to say, I am really glad you made this video. It is Important to have correct info on subjects
What about him do you like? I tried watching his channel for a while. And I kept trying to rip my hair out watching his dog water garbage content. Hes an incredibly stupid guy that thinks he's extremely smart
I dislike him greatly. This video shows exactly why. Redeffect is too nice to say it but lazerpig just lied for many of these things. Stuff that is common knowledge no less. My biggest grief with him is how he acts authoritative when he speaks of things without considering even the most basic concepts of doctrine. And even then I wouldn't have such a problem with it if he was earnest about it the way I'm forgiving of the history Channel but he is snarky and rude and acts like anyone who he even is an iota out of line with his poorly constructed alternate reality, he tries to rip on them. He brings drama to the history, war, and geopolitics RUclips spheres and I despise him for it.
@@casematecardinal That's very strong feelings for someone who was mostly right in his video, but go on.
@@alexanderd6793 Hogwash.
@@casematecardinal I noticed that too. Redeffect was WAY to nice! I'm guessing he didn't want to start a back and forth RUclips drama war and just wanted to talk about the tank. Fair enough. However someone needs to take the bullet and rip his content apart for the crap that it is. I watched about half a dozen of his videos and their all like this one more or less.
Now this is a civil breakdown, thank you for making this one man! Here's hoping LP tackles and adresses the mistakes in civil ways too!
Red effect does make some good points but no one is infallable, not even lazerpig, so i agree with u on this one, LP should make some sort of video calling out his own mistakes as well as pointnout mistakes that Red may have made in a civil way, he himself say that not everything he presents was to the dot so take a pinch of salt
the ukraine stans in the lazerpig comment section make me doubt that. Open the comments on his video and sort by new and you'll immediately see comments along the lines of ''HAHAHAHA REDEFFECT RUZZIA TROLL!!!! SLAVA UKRAINA HAHAHAHAHA LOL PUTLER NAZI BOTS HAHAHA''. I'm sure there's also russia stans but the ones i've seen the most were (presumably)americans with ukraine pfps
While it's always better to have 100% accurate information and this is a good fact check; most of the corrections in the video seem to be instances where lazerpig is technically incorrect but his overall point is still valid (for example the "modern" ammunition used still being inferior to western modern ammunition). The design of the T-14 may not be as shit as LP makes it out to be, but if Russia can't actually produce them, it's not really strategically important.
I think the overall theme of LP's video was that the T-14 is overhyped, probably doesn't perform as advertised by Russian media, and hasn't (and probably can't be) produced in significant numbers. None of the corrected errors really invalidate that overall point. Plus even if the Russians could make it in significant numbers and it was superior to western tanks, you can bet general dynamics could go running to the US congress and immediately get a budget that the Russians couldn't even dream of to fast track the Abrams X program, negating any advantage with the power of the ridiculous US defense budget.
@@Michael-uc2pn Right, there were many corrections that did needed to be made. There also corrections that felt very nitpicking.
Also a good number between the two were, I spoke to someone therefore I’m right. I’m very interested to see what the response is going to be. Hopefully it’s not responding mainly to the Russian bots spamming him now.
@@Michael-uc2pn the wonder wepons Germany made was in small numbers and tactically useless.....same as some US secret projects.....but evry one points out how ahead of there time thay were and how well enginerd and the design capipality.......this video isn't about the usebeality or the strategic implementation of the tank......its about the indivisule charistarictes of the design......stop being so biast
this comment section seems to be full of 2 groups of people i despise. who gonna sell me some popcorn
What groups specifically?
@@justhere4637 Vatniks and Nafo. I’m not sure of anyone self proclaims themself as a vatnik but that’s the least insulting/cringe name I’ve heard them be called.
@@justhere4637the ones at the theatre selling them argh!!
just an average flame war
absolute mad lad. hope LazerPig sees this ngl.
NAFO gonna do what NAFO always does: will just dismiss this as "oink oink is a ruzzia shill orKKK bot oink oink"
And if he does, he’ll just get destroyed again with facts child
@gethoman02 I’m pretty sure LP accepts corrections.
@@gethomas02 Why? He corrected himself a lot.
@@mattseller148 Yes, he even himself stated that they shouldn't take everything for granted.
Lazerpig made a lot of mistakes, but the way he present his videos make it really difficult to have a serious discussion.
He just spends 1/4 of the video talking about himself
@@williamthebonquerer9181 yea also him saying pariscope are not needed in tanks is kinda dumb
He's gay and his ex was Russian.
Do not ask me how I know this.
@Breizh Rudie Lmao he mentioned that in one of his last videos. Why are you acting like it's some big secret? He's openly gay
@@breizhrudie4757 what’s wrong with being gay? 🤨
Nice to hear someone, stating pure, unbiased facts... and not screaming...
thank you for making this video, i watched the lazer pig video and noticed he really hasnt been given the benefit of the doubt upon any of his rant videos so seeing someone give an alterative perspective is very nice
I don't know if this is how factual LazerPig normally is. I watch him for entertainment.
@@hazzardalsohazzard2624 yeah he tends to do very surface level research such as in his T-34 video he even admits it is full of misconceptions and misinformation.
If he gains views he is doing the right thing 😂
Because he is a liar.
@@e_sd That's not surface level. Surface level research would have been more charitable. He had to dig deep to find what he wants to see and ignore everything else along the way. Even his own sources contradict him.
The Lazerpig video has currently whopping 1.8 million views.
There's currently a lot of demand for videos that trash Russian weapon systems.
But who in their right mind would genuinely believe the T-90M uses the same engine as the one the BT-7 uses? Like, his entire video is based on that notion hence why he thinks the T-90M is slow, bad weight to power ratio and all that. The moment he said that, his entire video was already wrong.
because number one, it’s funny. Number 2, there’s a very good reason for it, considering now we have a bunch of evidence why.
@@buckshot9113 The thing there is no direct evidence of Pigs claims mostly hes speculating
@@buckshot9113 we also have a bunch of evidence other vehicles including that of the us, germany and ukraine also just breaking down
But i dont see people commenting how they are complete trash
Corrupt congressmen make money off of their munitions stocks
50 minutes? This will be a treat ❤
upd: you're being extremely gentle in your phrasing
So good Russia just announced they're binning it and sticking with the T-90.
Bro y'all just don't even think lmao u gobble up anything said by other people nd spit it out. "Oh russia did this, they suck ahahhaha"
The T-14 is much more expensive, and it would also need the crews to be retrained for it. Which needs time and money. T-90s are more combat proven, cheaper, and soldiers have experience with it or with similar tanks. That and combine the fact that so few tanks are actually dying to other tanks compared to how many are just being blown up by FPV drones, it's better to produce the T-90 than to produce T-14s which need more time and even more money, and would probably die to an FPV drone before it saw any enemy armor
@@dmvsye So good Russia just announced they're binning it and sticking with the T-90.
@@navarog378 Lmao u aint read anything bro keep meat riding NATO
He just explained that for the modern war, T-90 is the most viable option instead of bringing a more developed tank that hasn't take any precautions against drone during production.
@@navarog378 Proof?
It's even harder to get unbiased information in this day and age
I would argue that. It's just that you hear more about misinformation. More people check things on their own, we have more than one sources. We care more about facts than opinions, and certainly back in the day people did not put such an emphasis on it.
"If maintained, will work properly" there is your problem
That’s true of everything lol
I can tell you've never been anywhere near an armskote or armoury in your life
Ah 50 min long redeffect video, my day cant be broken
The day is saved!
Im half-convinced any sort of civil discussion regarding military technology is unachievable and has to be replaced with braindead snarky comments made by youtubers that reference decade old memes because "le passive-aggressive sassy personality is funny actually XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD"
this is so true. lazer pig literally only responed to one point that red effect made about the engine being used in the bt7 and then proceded to complain about how people were using his name to gain clout for the rest of the video. like i expected to click on lazerpigs video and learn about features of the t14 not just get a sob story and accusatoins of russian proaganda
@@_cyantist honestly. i've loved this man's videos but strayed far from the community around him. his recent video made me realize theres probably a reason people like that are attracted to his channel.
@@_cyantistdid you watch the actual video? He complains about the clout thing first and then goes to show how discreditable all of what red effect said is. Can ya'll just learn how to hear
@@itstime6974 even if every statistic red effect used was russian propaganda theres still lots of points in his video that require just common knowledge, like how hesh rounds are basically useless against modern armour or that laserpig mistook the t95 for the black eagle that would still be just as valid and, by the way, laserpig completely ignored them in his recent video
laserpig went after what he could, which was the legitimacy of secondary sources, and semantics about the bt7 engine
so not only did i hear the video, i also thought about it too 🤯 and unless you’re gonna tell me that its Russian propaganda that hesh doesn’t work against composite armour i suggest you start doing some thinking too
@@_cyantist that would make sense. If he said anything about the HESH round other than it's showing it's age. The T-95/Black Eagle thing is literally a misunderstanding. I do not get how you can be so fanatical about supporting a propagandist and think you're so smart when you make shit up. I've been destroying Vatniks for months, you're not shit.
LETS GOOOOO LET THE ARGUMENTS FLOW FROM BOTH SIDES
What kinda arguments are there to be dropped from Lazerpig's side? Most of the stuff he talked about was straight up pulled out of his ass or wrongly interpreted/modified to fit his agenda.
Weirdo
@@Sebastian-yl7nq the argument of petty. I’m waiting for this to devolve into the most degenerate, name smearing, Twitter level nonsense. Grab your popcorn
Really appreciate you starting this video saying don’t brigade LazerPig. I think it’s common sense but it’s responsible and I want to recognize that.
I mean... It's not that big of an ask. First of all, "brigading" LazerPig would require going to one of his videos and watching it. I mean, that's off the table right there.
"NOOOO DONT BRIGADE MY HECKIN WHOLESOME CONTENT CREATORINO!!!!"
People already do and not just in this comments section.
Stupid pro russian haters man. Just watch Gonzo you filfths.
Pfft. looks like nobody here knows how to fucking listen when it comes to "Hey, don't harrass somebody online."
This video made me respect you 10x more for your knowledge and interest in showing the truth and not make videos just for views.
Nowadays people become experts on making videos on things they don't understand and misleading viewers fake experts
"and interest in showing the truth and not make videos just for views"
LazerPig: "But then I'd have no reason to make videos because it's just low-effort memes and shitposting..."
@@matchesburn damn shame lazerpig’s video has almost 2 million views. It’s funny how people rave on endlessly about how all Russians are brainwashed and they only watch propaganda, while literally watching and taking laserpig’s content with absolutely no regard for if he’s actually telling the truth. Being anti-Z should not interfere with common sense and citing legitimate sources. What a tool
Lazerpigs target audience are not serious people.
@@odinbiflindi How to just hate on someone while completely missing the fact of this Video in the first place.
He didnt make a video to hate on Lazerpig, he made one to defend the Tank (if he is right is sth Else.)
Im sure that my fellow lazerpig fans, who came here from a video inspired by annoying commentors saying how lazerpig was DESTROYED will show some level of self awareness and not just do the same stupid thing in the other direction.
.......I-Im sure.........
Yeah, sure
This is RUclips homie. The comments section has been a mess since 2005.
Always a great thing when there are more views on the same topic happy to see LazerPig finally gets some legit counter arguments
LazerPig gets legit counter arguments for basically every vehicle he makes because this is not an isolated incident for him. He does this constantly. It's just that this is the first time a larger channel has been willing to make a video on it.
@@matchesburn ikr. people think that because LazerPig is funny he must be right about everything, but even I can point out so many holes in his videos whenever he makes one about a certain vehicle. I my opinion, LazerPig is not a good youtuber to go to if you want actual good facts and information. it just seems like he skim reads cherry-picked articles and just blurbs it out in his videos without actually backing shit up. he gets the immediately obvious stuff right (T-72 style tanks having the slow reverse speed for example) but otherwise he just lies all the time and it's annoying.
the most annoying thing for me is that because he has such a large platform, people just think he must be right just by virtue of that and so when he spreads misinformation, SO MANY people get convinced by it and start believing it.
Honestly at this point I think Lazerpig is just a psyop
@CaptainIceberg I mean, him and animarchy both suddenly exploded and spout identical cia-sponsored political takes while also then collabing. It's like the glowies took a look at RUclips and said "which niche should we infiltrate this year". I love both their content for entertainment value if not educational value, but I'm fully aware it's only being promoted because of ideological approval by youtube and/or intelligence agencies.
@@thelordofcringe username checks out
Until this tank has been battle tested, everyone can only speculate of what it can and can't do.
well..thats happening right now so we should know this year
@@rpscorp9457 it is not
Yes but theres speculations and theres wanting something to be true.
@@gerfand Everyone wants to be the main character, "See I got it right"! IMO its going to be just like the BMPT 'Terminator'
@@gerfand Remains to be seen..rumors started to swirl in Jan, and was originating from RU. As of this moment Id say its possible. Not sure if we would get a confirmation anyway.
When a tank nerd is nerding you out.
Great video man. Since I watched his video I am looking for a second opinion on it.
Anyone else here after they announced the halting production of the T-14?
Wait three did? Oh boy that’s funny. Guess someone was correct after all…
@@christopherchartier3017 i mean of you are in a war of attrition and have an already layed out production line of T80BVMs and T90Ms and T72B3s you might want to cancel the expensive vehichle that hasn't seen combat yet
@@irantu5509 Honestly Russia would just be better focusing everything on the T90 and upgrading the T72B3 into T90M’s. The T80 and T72 are basically just targets for other peer to peer nations rn
@@christopherchartier3017 Depends on which factors you take into account, the majority of people would put the T-90M above the T-80BVM.
T-90A vs T-80BVM however, likely BVM is better. T-80 is the more expensive and fancier version of the T-72, The T-90 was the rascal child of when you take a T-72 and modify a T-80 FCS into it in hopes to make something sorta cheap but it still becomes more expensive than the T-72 but worse than the T-80
@@dmvsye At the end of the day, Russia needs to get their tank logistics in check. It’s not worth having like 5 different kinds of tanks in your inventory, whether it be old tanks you refuse to retire and salvage that you still hold onto for some reason(T-62/T-55/Older T-72s). or because you made too many upgrades of the T-72 and now you have a bunch of T-80 and T-90 variants.
It just rests on what tank is better to develop. Personally I find the T90M to have more of a future than the T80, but that’s just me.
13:16 it should be noted that the CV12's weight states that it's the weight of the package, this likely includes cooling among other things.
As I recall, the "Power Pack" of a tank includes everything from the Engine, Transmition, Cooling to the smaller pumps and servos. Basically, everything in the engine bay apart from the Fuel Tanks.
@@ravenouself4181 in this case its not talking about Power Pack but everything thats packed on the engine. Because transmission is the part of the Power Pack and the transmission alone of Challenger 2 weights 2390kg (official information). Here it refers to stuff like turbocharger and other "addons" to the engine itself. But V92S2F's weight is with all of those things too so yea, nothing RedEffect said is wrong.
@@ravenouself4181 Yes, I was making a conservative assumption because I thought an entire powerpack would weigh more than that. I'm not an expert on the matter though so I could be wrong.
There are probably 500 youtube videos of the T-14 for every Tank produced...
T-14 videos are in wide scale production and are highly reliable.
T-14s... not so much.
47:56 Turret turning in the direction of incoming shot is actually a requirement for APS to work. Counter-projectiles are loaded in fixed tubes on the turret and cover a sector Infront of it (unlike Trophy being positioned all around the vehicle or Iron fist with tiny turrets on top). T-90 Has similar system to automatically deploy smoke to upset thermal and optical guided ATGMs.
I dont think a turret can move that fast. The projectiles aim themselves mid air after being launched and then they shoot a explosive formed penetrator at the target.(just my opinion)
@Filip Jurák no, as in the turret must be pointed towards the incoming threat. small corrective maneuvers are possible from the APS projectile, but not to the point an immobile launcher system can cover a wide enough area to protect the entire vehicle when mounted frontally on the turret
@@TwixSvK Average ATGM is launched from distace around 1000 to 2000m, average speed is 400m/s, which is 2.5 to 5s to react from launch, and whole eternity from locking in.
@@iMost067 so the APS radar has range of 1000 m?
@@alphaplayzz1381 here are the statistics on the T-14’s APS, of which it has multiple types for different threats. One tracks 360 degrees to protect from attacks from the top, and the other more traditional system covers an 120 degree arc from the point the turret is facing. The T-14 Armata is equipped with the Active Protection System (APS) Afghanit which seems similar to the Israeli Trophy able to intercept and destroy incoming missiles and rockets. The system is designed to work against all types of anti-tank missiles and rockets, including handheld weapons such as rocket-propelled grenades. The Afghanit APS includes four sets of 12 launch tubes, two at the rear left side of the turret, and one on each rear top side of the turret. At the base of each side of the turret are five large and fixed horizontally arrayed launch tubes covering the 120° frontal arc of the turret. These tubes could launch unguided projectiles with HE warheads to counter incoming anti-tank guided missiles or RPGs (Rocket-Propelled Grenades). The Afghanit APS also includes two types of sensors mounted around the T-14's turret. The tank is also equipped with the NII Stali Upper Hemisphere Protection Complex, which consists of two steerable cartridges with 12 smaller charges each, and a turret-top VLS with two more similar cartridges, corresponding to the vehicle's soft-kill APS. Additionally, using the AESA radar and anti-aircraft machine gun it is possible to destroy incoming missiles and slow-flying shells. Two large sensors, believed to be electro-optical/infrared (EO/IR)-based laser warning receivers, are angularly mounted on the front of the turret providing 180° coverage, while four smaller sensors (covered but believed to be radars) are mounted around the turret providing 360° coverage.
Thank you for making such a great video to correct misinformation, youtube is now infected with videos saying all Russian tanks and equipments are terrible,without doing proper research! The engine part of the video is is an example of what I am talking about
I have seen a lot of Lazerpig videos.. At first i thought them to be entertaining and well researched.. until he once covered a topic of which i had knowledge about. It has prompted me to be very critical of what he publishes(its just too entertaining not to watch)...
that being said.. I did eat every thing he said about the Amarta i swallowed raw... I am glad you took the effort to challenge it.
Can you mention which video? Just curious
@@Emel_unlegit Yeah me to.
My first video of his i saw was the Armata because i'm a tank nerd. Bar horrible accuracy, i honestly fail to see where the entertainment was. I saw a person who mixed his political beliefs in a technical topic. The attempts at humor were him saying how bad at something Russians are in a "funny" voice. For the record, i disagree with those statements, but even if i agreed - where's the funny part?
@@Emel_unlegit i dont remember... i can try do some digging.
Edit: I think it was the one in the defense of the crusader
@@Ph33NIXx well what was your issue with it?
M 84 autoloader never skipped a beat, it can load while tank rocking so violently we are holding for dear life inside and shell is just being loaded. It just works
Noooo, stop praising autoloader, machine break and bad, man stronk, nooo you cant praise it.
Based Yugoslav M-84 could take an APFSDS round center mass and still keep reloading.
Yugoslav quality
Kuwaitis like thier M-84s as well.
Is it just me or does the M-84 look sexier than the T-72?
1:38 lazerpig is almost certainly exclusively talking about the t-14 Armata's autoloader system - which, indeed, cannot be accessed from the crew compartment.
you missed the point that the Autoloaders aren't unreliable but actually the opposite
The loader is almost never the issue. Its almost always how the ammo is stored.
@@jammygamer8961 The auto loader is as reliable as any other auto loader. Which means that occasionally the cannon will jam, because jamming is a function of multiple parts not just the loader. But unlike NATO tanks, the crew can't clear the jam in the field. So a jammed tank cannon is functionally a mission kill in a T-14 while NATO equipment can be cleared within minutes at worst when jammed. Because NATO actually prepares for combat scenarios, not export propaganda.
@@jammygamer8961 You missed the part where RedEffect said 'if maintained', so yeah it's gonna jam if it's run by russians lmao
@@Dohnutninja1337 can't argue against that.
But any device will fail with out proper care
It doesn't surprise me. LazerPig is wrong about a lot of things. And, smugly so.
I’m only offended anyone takes him seriously
This is as NAFO as you get
Get in the cube
@@Maynarkh dilate
Though to be fair the alternative as it stands is Russian propagandists... Not. Including genuine guys like this.
Lazer Pig's sources: "trust me bro".
I have one simple rule: don't trust people who always talking with mix political and technical topic, yes you can use one or the other as background knowledge, but mixing those 2 often means you can't even keep a objective view
redeffect is way more disingenuous when it comes to mixing politics with technical aspects. His IS-2 vs KT video is the best example, where he uses soviet memoirs as some sort of gospel to prove his points, all the while completely ignoring the same materials from the other side of the barricades. The problem with this video however is that T-14 Armata doesn't exist and any sensible discussion about this tank is a slippery slope either way, because no one will ever know what this tank is truly capable of. Lazerpig's video proves more than enough that a lot of propaganda surrounding T-14 is very inconsistent to the point of crew hatches varying in certain videos between manual and automatic types. You can't have a serious grounded discussions about mythical beings.
@@coupdegrace2767 what Soviet memoirs? I watched that video? What? Is it when he said the IS 2 could take out a KT with two consecutive blows? How is that a gospel? What did he say?
@@coupdegrace2767 how is it mythical if they actually built it?
The technical and Political goes very much hand in hand when it comes to the USSR.
you can and often need to talk about both for the bigger picture see @Perun for example. Yet people like Lazer Pig don't realy have expertise in any of those fields, yet present their arguments as if they have. those people i don't trust!
The fact that we don't see this tank designed in 2014 on the battlefield is the biggest prove that this tank isn't what they claim it to be.
OH C MON ...the dude see's ''empty spaces'' at the western tanks...leave him be HE'S A NERD ! :d
The reason it isnt on the battlefield is because there isnt a enough of them.
@@RazgrizWing That is bullshit, it is just too expensive for Russias crap economy to lose it.
Do we see the latest generation of Western tanks in Ukraine? No we don't, because a handful of tanks won't change a damn thing in a war like this.
@@BGVassil if tanks won't change anything... why use them in the first place.... ?
I don't know who lazerpig is but it seems he is the kind of guy to argue that AK is a Stg 44 copy
He literally does that holy shit
Ik it's his "jokes" And all, but he is one of those "haha I'm so quirky and sarcastic" Guys, that always comes off as self righteous ignorant pricks
i dont think he ever talked about infantry guns, he usually only talks about tanks, controversial thing he did is claim the t-34 was shit
@@dement_tf2maybe It was. Everyone who is not blinded by Nazi post-war and Soviet propaganda knows it is.
@@dement_tf2maybeBrother the t-34 is shit objectively
@@mikaeljensen4399 i agree with it, i think at that point i derived that claim from my friends who thought it wasnt
My grandad after the 1956 revolution when the Soviets were heading home and selling off their equipment to locals to buy rations/food/water got himself a T-54 tank which also uses the V-2, he worked on it a lot and sold it off to a tank museum where I have been working for 6 years (Kecel), I have maintained a T-72 V2 engine, the only difference between the 2 engines is that the T72 has a turbocharger on it an better bearings, nothing else.
T-14 Engine has more than 3 times the power of the T-54 engine
@julia j
Which has nothing to do with his comment and is completely without substance, since the T14 does not use a variation of the same engine.....
@kivi
I mean yeah some verssof the engine will have bigger differences then others, the t54 and t72 might be close, but does the same go for the t80 and 90 or the t45?
Maybe something that wouod be fun to look into :)
@@homesteadlegion4419 the point is, that lazerpig claims that T-14 armata uses the same engine as soviets did in 1930s..
He said it used a variant of it which is technically true but would be like saying the original 737 airliner is the same as a modern 787
Here to let you know, the Ariete AMV isn't the last iterarion of the machine, apparently the final version Is gonna be called ariete plus among the differences a new /55 cannon and a hard kill system. I think you will find more info yourself. Cheers.
It is for now
Italy literally "abandoned" it now with buying German Leo2s
@@radonsider9692 no the solution proposed Is gonna be 125 ariete plus + 125 Leopard 2 as gap filler situation waiting for an MBT of new generation.
@@andythesaladgod4578 Gaejin has fucked up big Time with the Ariete AMV, not knowing that wasnt gonna be the final form of the machine. Once the plus show up they either rework the existing amv, or Will have to add a 4th ariete...
@@lanfrancoadreani9212 125 Ariete + 250 Leopard 2 in the talks now.
Thank you for your comments, with interesting, pros & cons. With this type of subject, one will never get info 100% correct, but I think you did a great job to put us all in a better light to all the history of the tanks we know today. Many thanks for your video.
You won't get it 100% correct but the least you can do is TRY. Just make an attempt to be honest and truthful, and to put effort in your research. You won't be 100% correct but you will be pretty close to it. On the other hand when half of your video is half-assed research and the other half are outright lies, you're pretty close to being 0% correct.
@@abrahamlincoln920 which one are you talking abuot?
@@Gloverfield i think it's pretty obvious which of the two videos was well-researched and which was a political propaganda piece.
@@abrahamlincoln920 which one? People say this video is popaganda and others point to lazerpig. Especially giving the fact that both of them made videos critisizing Russian/West technology...
@@Gloverfield jesus christ. It doesn't matter what each of them did before. Both their videos can be dissected, each their claims scrutinized and verified. Laser pig video = half-assed and shitty propaganda piece. You can even tell by their tone which one of them mixed their political beliefs in there, and which one doesn't.
LazerPig's comments on the engine seemed odd to me right off the bat. For workhorse type diesels they tend to go with what works and modernize it as opposed to building something new. Reliability is paramount. So a 80 year old engine modernized should do the job. It might be "worse" than ultra modern engines, but it will likely be far more reliable and easy to fix.
Even on the high end performance side of things, Lamborghini used the same V12 design from 1964 right up until 2010, and the engine went from ~280 bhp to ~660 bhp in output. Engine design has come a long way and I can think of a few automotive examples like the Lambo V12 where you can take an old block design and squeeze a lot more juice out of it by bolting on newer equipment and increasing displacement. Having a eighty year old engine design is more a testament to how overbuilt it was originally rather than how it's necessarily outdated now.
@@uummmnocoolnamesbased lambo
It’s the Ferdinand tiger engine. Do you know how unreliable that is? Anything based on it is going to suck immediately
@@unclesamlore Let's go over the things you got wrong, or rather, the things Lazerpig got wrong, that you are parroting:
1. The Porsche Tiger/Ferdinand didn't have a single engine - it had two.
2. The actual engines themselves weren't the source of the problem - the HL120 TRM was used in later versions of the Pz.3 and most of the Pz.4s, as well as the myriad of different AFVs that used those chassis, none of which had noteworthy engine issues. It was the complexity of the twin engine powerplant coupled to a petrol-electric drive that caused issues.
3. The T-14 doesn't use a twin engine design.
4. The T-14 doesn't use an HL120 TRM, nor any engine derived from it, nor any engine derived from Germany.
5. The T-14 doesn't use a petrol-electric drive, nor a diesel-electric drive, but rather a mechanical transmission.
So by my count that's... carry the 2... literally nothing factually correct in your/Lazerpig's statement.
For as much of an ass as I'm being, I don't necessarily find fault with you for assuming Lazerpig's video wasn't riddled with inaccuracies; he's a damn good script writer, and seems to do his research... most of the time. That being said, considering all the numbered points above are a single google search away, you should probably start to question the veracity of his claims, at least when it comes to technical stuff - geopolitics and history might be another story.
Think about it like this, if the 80 year old engine forces you to be several tonnes under the the modern engines, because they can't handle the performance requirement at that higher tonnage, then no amount of reliability will overcome the fact that it takes 3-4 shots to get the same results as a single one of theirs.
Arjun Tank moment. Red Effect beat Cynical Historian, Alpha Defense News, and now... LazerPig.
Not to diminish RedEffect's efforts, but... beating LazerPig isn't actually that difficult.
When he mention arjun tank, my first thought was he would correct lazerpig while trashing that poor tank in the process. Boy i was wrong
Glazing