Meh... panther looks similar to Leopard.. AbramsX is much more modern. "While the Abrams X already has an unmanned turret, the panther is planning one for a future upgrade". Abrams has better 360 optics, better side protection and better top protection, better crew protection. Better hunter killer capabilities with its silent operation and reduced thermals. Higher main gun ammunition capacity ( 60 rounds vs 30 rounds for the panther ). switchblade drones and a 30mm chain gun .... Just sayin 😜
@@brain_tonic I wouldn't describe it as "sucky", but according to Rheinmetal the 130mm gun has a 50% higher range compared to a 120mm gun and that could be a game changer in battle.
Saying this in spite of myself... the Abrams X is extremely impressive! But this Panther looks like the new king of the MBTs. Comparing it to other 4th gen tanks (Armata) or even those still in development (Challenger 3) this Panther seems to outclass them all. Truly impressive!
in my opinion the AbramsX would probably be superior due to its superiority in its mobility, armour, and firepower but its multirole function is definitely lacking when compared to the Panther, so the AbramsX would be best suited to be supported by recon and battle stations while the panther would be able to act alone when in combat but it would be more vulnerable and deal less damage than the abramsX
@@h4per_txt565 "superiority in mobility" is a really relative thing to tanks. if you would compare the kf51 to the abrams x it wouldnt be much of a difference since we are talking single degrees when turning and some km/h when driving ON ROADS. the kf51 has higher effective range and NEARLY the same level of protection. at the end it doesnt matter but in a theoretic 1v1 situation the panther would win just by having the bigger caliber.
@@djneverblock7300 that may not be entirely true. The size of the gun isn't exactly indicative of its performance, for example the abrams x has the xm360 which uses electrothermal chemical technology. Note the xm360 is based off the previous xm291 which was able to achieve similar performance to that of a 140mm.
@@djneverblock7300 gotta remember the abrams x is a prototype it ain’t final so things can change I see the gun being 130mm eventually either way the tanks use the same stuff for the most part
The Panther can be eqipped with an unmanned 5.56mm Machine Gun Turret " Natter" which can be used to shoot down Drohnes or to defend against infantry . The Panther will be equipped with reconnisance Drohnes which enables the Tank to detect/shoot at Targets out of direct sight . I am sure that the 4 th Seat will become usefull in Future , may it be for an Drohne operator or for an Platoon Commander .
Actually no it’s not lol… Making something that looks cool or futuristic doesn’t equate to levels higher… many people said that about the Leopard tank before it got sent to Ukraine and got decimated
@@CR1T1KaL714 "decimated" is silly populism .. the western tanks in Ukraine prove their protection levels are superior given how most of their crews survive compared to russian tanks getting hit. Most complete losses of western tanks in Ukraine are just mobility kills which get blown up after they were left behind and in some cases it was rather comical how much effort it took to finish them off so that noone could recover these western tanks. Same cant be said about russian tanks doing their turret toss space program. As for operational success ... well, they are not used according to western doctrine, so its not surprising they dont make the splash they made in other wars. Alltho the Kursk offensive gave some insight to what happens when western doctrine is at least partially adopted. As for Rheinmetall, they aint particular ahead with anything ... KNDS, General Dynamics and other civilized competition have fairly similar developments right now. Only with the push for a larger caliber Rheinmetall makes a double step with the KF51, alltho they still give the option for the common 120mm.
Rheinmetall and GDLS should collaborate on the next generation NATO Tank. The Panther and AbramsX are both beasts but a hybrid of the two would be better than the sum of its parts. Not to mention the overall price would probably be drastically lower if all the major NATO powers were producing the same Tank.
Thats what I said choose one build it in every nato country providing jobs with 300 each nation you end up with over 3000 mbts train together parts are available in each country and are the same but these political nuts cant think that way.
@@TGTexan A road is the same world wide its made from Tar tanks like rifles are made to operate in cold and warm or sandy weather so I dont see your point its political control which is money thats what it boils too.
@deepdriller6030 they do. They have arguably the best planes, tanks, and ships. America has been said to have the best sea fleet and air force in the world. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen. But as the US spends more money on its military than every other country put together I'd say it's a well-deserved claim.
The KF51 will likly also come with something like a trophy system (module to be added) which can protect the system from incoming ATGM (top and side attack).
@@charger6634 Rheinmetall said the KF51 will have strike shield after it finished development and its not deadly for infantry moving nearby. All APS work after the same function of shooting a counter projectile to destroy the incomming attack.
@@DB5652-v3r xD how is this copied from the T14? They're totally different. The Russians have an entirely different MBT strategy. Just stop with your praisal of stupid russian paper tanks
@@DB5652-v3r the unmanned turret idea is good in concept, but as we know all know to well, Ruzzia just makes bad tanks and the components are just not as good as the west and the west's allies, hell most of the actually decent to good components of modern Ruzzian tanks are not from Ruzzia at all
Both amazing pieces of tech. I like the Pather's styling, so sleek. Happy to see that the Abrams X still very much looks like an Abrams. I grew up with Abrams and Leo 2's in Germany 😊. Now all we need is 80's camo, both these tanks have fugly paintjobs.
Except the KF51 isn't actually the designated successor to the Leopard 2. There is a separate development program called the Main Ground Combat System that several nations participate in (or are observer to).
I don't think that will ever happen though. And even if it happens it will most likely incorparate the Panther rather than using another MBT. Why wasting developement costs.
Almost any modern tank can be controlled remotely and not only modern, such stuff has been tested by majority of tank producing countries in late 60th, anyway, this only creates questions for reasonability of having huge combat compartment trading protection for volume.
@@SergeiSugaroverdoseShuykov One thing is being able to remotely control a vehicle, another is being able to do so while the enemy is trying to actively jam the signal or worse yet hijack it. There is a reason why all tanks are still manned.
Ich glaube, dass der KF51 Panther und alle anderen Geräte aus der Future Gun System Reihe zusätzlich voll autonom agieren und miteinander interagieren können. Da es aber nicht ethisch ist, eine Maschine über Leben und Tod entscheiden zu lassen, werden alle Systeme von Menschen bedient.
Can I just say...that I love them both?! Man it's freaking awesome that we're allies in this because I would hate to watch these two beautiful machines hammer each other into oblivion. Addendum- While I am an American and have to go for my Abrams X, I have nothing but respect for the KF51 Panther. I haven't watched the video yet but even if the Panther wins I'm okay with that. I can't wait to see the many revisions these two mean machines go through.
I’m an American and a history nerd and I am very interested in these types of things. But when I look at something like the f-35 or the abrams X I think to myself- we are never getting free healthcare are we?
@@Curry_Communist Well given that we are not a Socialist country one shouldn't expect socialized health care here. Personally I would rather have the ability to go into a hospital and be seen immediately for any problems I may face than be forced to wait in a que than can take years to get help. Further, I enjoy being in a country where even if you're too poor to afford medical coverage you will be taken care of, every time. Thankfully, most medical coverage one would need is free here in the states despite what others tell you. For reference- I'm am living proof of that. Despite growing up poor with a severe medical disability I was able to claw my way out in the most equitable, most free, and just society the world has ever known. In most countries I would never have made it past adolescence (8 neurological procedures so far, 5 surgeries on my stomach, blind in my right eye, and extensive nerve damage). Thanks to our access to incredible life altering medical techniques and technology I live a full active life. Lastly and finally on topic, when Communist nations like China decide to threaten you and your allies it helps to be ready with the best military hardware money can provide. When China decides to square off with the US (it's coming) the new tanks, jets, and carrier group will pay dividends. Hopefully, the people in China will be ready to remove their Communist shackles when the US/Chinese War kicks off.
@@Curry_Communist Probably not given that you blew your final chance with Bernie Sanders in the 2020 primaries. But hey, for someone that doesn't live in the US I'm very thankful for your exorbitant spending in the military sector. If the US wasn't playing world police, east Europe and South East Asia would look a biiiiiiit different now.
What future looking is this panther as tall a 4 story building? Abrams look more slim and low profile which is very effective for combat and panther is good for catwalk.
@@totoitekelcha7628 they are litteraly the same dimensions. Panther: Hull length ~ 7.8 m Width~ 3.7 m Height~ 2.5 m Abrams X: Length: ~7.9m Width: ~3.7m Height: ~2.5m And thats without the machine gun on top. I love how you say "looks more slim" and assume facts by just the looks of it. Also the Panther is an actual MBT and the Abrams is just a TTD. One is real one is not.
@@Darkbribe09 you seems to have not seen Abrams and Leapard tank in real life huh? Leapard 2 tank is much higher in profile than Abrams tank and also much louder sound. Now, the panther also seems to little taller than leapard 2 tank so either way panther tank will be much higher and louder than Abrams X if they both got into production. Tht turbine engine of Abrams is quiter than that of leapard diesel engine. Go and and see and feel in real world without garbage paper base theory.
@@totoitekelcha7628 Nono I do agree. The Leopard is taller than the Abrams. But the panther is not a redesign. It is a completly new model and has not a lot to do with the leopard. Also I do trust paper more than my eyes. Since both tanks are not really available yet and you can only tell by that. Also why would the paper have false information if the tank in real life would be much bigger? Makes no sense at all. But you compare last gen tanks with new tanks you have no info about? There is not even a common ground to discuss but the preview info we received from both manufacturers. I also dont see the point in comparing these two tanks - not even the last gen tanks. Abrams is a good tank but maintenance is a bitch. Leopard is a slightly worse tank but it just runs and can be repaired in every workshop. It is like back in the days: "The mighty Tiger tank - best tank ever. So much armor so big gun" Yes, it's true just from raw stats it shredded every Sherman tank but it was broken half of the times and could not be produced in numbers. Thats why for example in ukraine they prefer Challengers and Leopards because they dont have the logistics for the Abrams tanks. If you have the logistics it is a perfectly fine tank.
@@Darkbribe09 Panther will be more taller than Leapard tank. Germany does not make low profile tank. If you dont believe me go and see it personally. Their is no way panther will be low profile than that of abram X tank. I cannot tell you how software and tank guns will differ between Abrams tank and panther but definitely Abrams X will have a lower profile.
With the upgrades in drone tech. I expect to start seeing carrier vehicles with 10s to 100s of drones. I mean even if it’s just for recon, that would be crazy. Imagine having one vehicle stop in a safe location and launch a large amount of drones to provide attacking support or highly valuable reconnaissance info.
I thought about this too, and it already is happening to some degree. You can even just attach drone launchers to existing vehicles like Humvees, although a dedicated drone carrier can potentially carry a lot more, especially if the carrier itself is also unmanned. And yes, drones can destroy tanks if they attack its top and it uses a HEAT charge. Drone defense using large autocanons firing shells with proximity fuses would be necessary to defend against drones.
@@thuggeegaming659 yeah. I am thinking about the things like the sky shows they do with drones but instead have them programed for surveillance. So have 1 truck that had maybe 100 smaller drones and they just have a preprogrammed flight path with multiple drones flying over the same spot in order to provide a back up. And maybe attached to the truck would be immediate response attack drones that would use the collected information to go hit the target.
That would be interesting. A drone carrier that utilizes AI to control a drone swarm, perhaps fulfilling multiple roles like electronics warfare, recon, decoy, and even offensive roles.
The German tank KF51 Panther is definitely better, i.e. the better attacking version, so just talking about the 130mm gun that will dominate other tanks, and other things that will be added on the day we're talking about.
The caliber does allow it to have more penetration sure, but 120mm APFSDU would still beat a standard 130 round in terms of penetration. Depleted uranium tends to only be used by the US and UK.
@@michaelcraig58 Except that was the entire qoute for needing the bigger guns in the first place? The entire reasoning they had for the 130mm was wanting more penetration to defeat more modern tanks.
future,what future? more debt for the oppressed working-class people? Yes, because what they do not tell you is that the taxpayers are the ones that will going to pay for these.
Looking at both of these tanks it would be awesome if we could actually collaborate and build a tank together. So we could redeem ourselves from the last joint venture. 🇺🇸🤝🇩🇪
I think both countries tried that in the 1960s and 1970s. Since both sides wanted to implement their ideas, the result was a much too expensive and useless tank. However, the Abrams and the Leopard evolved from this collaboration.
This is like being back in my childhood when your Mum was going to buy you something, she would ask "which one do you want ?" To which I would reply, "can I have both of them ?"
Kf 51 Panther has 3 Man in the hull, with complete automatic turret and the option of a 4 th crew member. Where did you got the info from for it having 4 members distributed with 2 in hull and 2 in the turret? The official data video from 2022 states otherwise. And even informed why there is the option for a fourth crew member.
the Abrams is an "sneaky" MBT, where Panther is an "Bad ass I'M HERE !" mbt, both are next gen MBT, both are very good improvment, also wher is the EMBT from Nexter Group (France) that is also an state of art MBT ....
@@tonyman905 holy fuck, WE GET IT, and it IS and MBT. Its a tech demonstrator OF AN MBT. And it is next gen, it has everything which GDLS has which is next gen and is showing of what the next gen tank will be able to do.
@@kousand9917 A tech demonstrator only is for showing off tech so it cannot be used in duty since in a tech demonstrator the synergy between the systems dont matter
EMBT: RHEINMETALL, THYSSENKRUPP and then Nexter. You see? Again a german MBT. That project will surely fail, that’s why RM released KF51 Panther as their own MBT.
A combination of both Tanks in an attack seems to be the best way to use them. Panther with it's more powerful Gun especially on long range in combination with uav capabilities find and destroy enemy vehicles. Abrams with it's good protection and this autocannon would be nice for middle range Tank fights and close up fights against soldiers. Together with Himars and Rch155 for support... At least, both Tanks will have their own areas in which they perform best.
And then they will put the russian Armata in and make them absolutely overpowered because of russian bias, wich they MUST do, because russian government can and will punish them for bad propaganda about their vehicles. It’s the same reason why world of tanks has a huge russian bias. 🎉
@@GeneralGayJay i think maybe if hydrogen engines get developed to be better they might get used since they have incredible efficiency but ithink they right now they have less power
@@BraunBuxe I'm pretty sure the modern Abraham tanks have drone launchers already though. I saw a military channel about history of tanks and tank crews and they put it on some of the Abraham.
In my opinion, this is very far-fetched because the KF51 is a completely new development as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong). But maybe we can agree that the origin of modern mbts in both countries goes back to the MBT 70/KPz 70.
The abrams may have more features but also looks like much of that was an afterthought. While maybe being overall more capable the KF-51 seems like the more rounded/balanced option
@@qwertyqwerty-zi6dr the Abrams x got only 1 Drone.. the kf51 got 4 drones that can fly all at the same Time.. the Launcher can be also Used for Spike/hunter Killer missile.. Just saying xD
That might be very basic question, but how the super advanced camera will behave when hit by a large caliber ammunition? Edit: when I say a large caliber, I want to say a gun usually carried by a soldier, not a direct hit by a different tank. Edit 2:is there additional armor after the camera?
I suspect that the whole module is designed to rip away if hit by something significant, and otherwise designed to allow high calibre AP rounds to pass through it. With a spare stored somewhere, most likely?
Situational and tactical awareness is key; as they both can drive and shoot while having good protection; imo. Enjoyed the vid 👍 Greets from the Netherlands 🇳🇱, T.
Wenn die Menschen nur wüssten an welche "Kunden" Caterpillar gepanzerte Baumaschinen verkauft und was diese anrichten RIP Rachel Corrie, 23, 1979-2003, am 16 März 2003 Mohammad Ali Hasan an-Na’em, 27, im Februar 2023 in Gaza
Just keep in mind these aren't competitors unless it's competing with who gets the most kills against the same enemies. These are tanks of NATO nations and they'll be working together so no matter which is the best they'll complement each other on future battlefields. Oh the future looks like it's going to be an interesting one. Can you imagine driving into battle from either of these and seeing the other one working with you and shooting the bad guy you missed? Go get them fellas!
@@darrenskjoelsvold you didnt knew you were talking about them. Its a conter argument to show the validity of your claim that there is no competition between nato. Of course there is competition hence the french submarine example. Google "french submarine australia" to get on the loop. It is very naive to assume we are a bunch of friends in nato. "We" in nation states, are a bunch of geopolitical actors with alligning interest. friends in politics. a good one
@@BlackBoxEnte I never said that countries have friends. I merely said that they are both tanks from NATO nations and they are likely to be working together. NATO interests align which is why they are allies. In the future NATO nations might be against each other but that's not the case today and if we don't screw something up then it won't be the case. Honestly peace and stability is best for everyone. Wars are really poor means of getting what you want. Often you end up expending more resources than you gain. If you have to spend more than an acquisition is worth then it's a net loss. War is a net loss in today's world because the cost of equipment is so high. Think about it these machines and weapons are the pinnacle of our human achievement in killing each other. The caveat is that because the weapons and even the ammunition for these weapons are so advanced that means they are also very expensive and that increases the cost of war. We may be in a position where the weapons are so expensive that war is cost prohibitive. Truly the only people who would go to war are lunatics who don't care about the cost. So having alliances like NATO bring stability and stability is best. The nations of NATO are run by rational leaders and their interests are presenting a strong enough front to make even the ultra crazy take pause and reconsider aggression. Having the most advanced technology like tanks is more a deterrent than anything else right now and that's a more stable condition than we have had in the past. It's a lot like Cris Rock's suggestion concerning guns. Make the bullet exorbitantly expensive and that should stay the hand of a would be aggressor. So if war is too expensive for what you would win then that itself is a deterrent. And when you have alliances to contend with that increases the cost. So maintaining said alliances become a priority.
they are competitors...maybe not in the field, but whenever you make something the US also makes, even if you're in an alliance, even if you're supposed to work together, the US will turn it into a competition xD
so get a t-62 a great crew and set it against one of these beasts. crew and techonoly are both important or we would still be fighting with stone edge spears.
This is an interesting comparison. Thumbs up for posting. The narrator's presentation favors the KF51 and misses identifying some of the features that the Abrams has in common with the KF51. Both are heavily networked, carry drones, have many new sensors, including ones for addressing top-down attacks. This presentation has an error. It says the Abrams X will still use a turbine. This is incorrect. It will use a hybrid Diesel electric system. That is a major enhancement - reduce fuel use by 50% and enable the tank to move slowly for short distances on batteries with the engine off (stealth).
There is one big difference between the two designs. The Americans have money, hundreds of billions, to develop their projects... Germany currently does not have such funds. Last year, Scholz promised 100 billion euros to modernize the german army. Does anyone still remember that??? 😂 The Germans clearly bet on the development of Leopard in the A8 version. Perhaps someday, in 15 or 20 years, another country will decide to cooperate with Rheinmetall and then they will build something more than just a prototype. As for now, only the Americans, the French and the British are producing their own tanks and working on new designs. Japan and Korea also have new machines... and still working. Do you know any other countries that will be able to afford such a very expensive tank, so that the costs of introducing these new technologies will pay off??? Maybe the Persian Gulf states, I don't see any other takers. Kind regards - S
@@ColonelStanley Thanks for the reply. Yes I remember the 100 billion Euro promise. I think that was a pledge to be spread over a ten year span. Are you' saying Germany really ISN'T committing to development of a new tank? That would be news to me. I understand we have deep pockets for weapon expenditures, but I was disappointed to see that as relates to Ukraine, we've spent over $46.5 billion, which is more than three times the COMBINED weaponry of the rest of NATO. I want us to provide ATACMs, more Abrams, Javelins, Stingers, etc. But the European NATO members REALLY NEED to step up their 'game'.
@@gregparrott Yes, they need to step up... The Germans created a joint program to skin the tank of the future together with the French.... but a year or a year and a half ago they split up and now everyone works separately. However, Germany and France are currently unable to provide adequate funds to finance such a project. Perhaps it will be possible in 15 - 20 years. They're not even worth it now. Look at this - Germany has about 300 active tanks, so is France. The project of a new tank is currently unprofitable for them. So they will develop further versions of Leopard and Leclerc. I'm a Pole and my government will spend for the army 4% of GDP in the next year... and 5% in 2025. Poland will spend almost $500 billion on armaments by 2038, but i think it will be more. We have a border with the most dangerous (next to China) country in the world, and we do not intend to fight them for several years, as Ukraine does, we do not want our cities to be demolished... we must scare them away. Our greatest allies are USA and GB. Germans and French dream of returning to "business as usual"... with russia. They want Poland to be weak, to be dependent on the help of their small armies and to buy weapons only from them. Both countries are constantly blackmailing us and trying to influence the results of parliamentary elections in our country. This is the truth, that's why we cooperate with other countries... and not with them, even though we belong to the EU. We manufacture our own weapons and buy mainly from the USA and South Korea. We gave Ukraine circa about 70% of all post-soviet (and not only post-soviet) equipment of our army, now we are disarmed and slowly waiting for deliveries... from the USA and Korea. Kind regards - S.
@@ColonelStanley Thanks for a new reply, one which does not now appear here. (could be a RUclips bug). Yes, I know that at 4% GDP, Poland has committed the highest percentage of GDP of any NATO member, even more so if Poland then jumps to 5%. Kudos to Poland for addressing the threat. Poland led the way back when Lech Wałęsa led protest movements and later became Poland's president. I saw another RUclips forecasting that Poland (along with Turkey) will be the next superpowers among European NATO members. Weapon deliveries have been slow. I know Poland is awaiting quite a lot of 'items' from the U.S. I also hope the U.S. will belated provide Ukraine with more than 31 Abrams, even outdated Abrams, while Poland would get the latest variants with more sensors and advance armament. The ATACM missiles should have been provided, starting a long time ago. They would likely have a greater effect than F-16s because the logistical, maintenance, and hardened bunker/airport infrastructural issues for fighter jets are likely too complex to be introduced and addressed in the middle of a war.
France and Germany were working together for a replacement of the Leopart II and the Leclerc. Then Rheinmetal surprised everybody with the KF52 Panther, not only with the somewhat controversial name but what happend to the cooperation? Is Krauss-Maffei Wegmann still working on a competative model? What is the status of this Main Ground Combat System?
As far as I know, the MBT program is still in progress, scheduled to complete and produce its first unit around 2035. In contrast, the KF51 will begin production in 2024. It is an interim solution, it seems like.
KMW and the "super fast France-Guys" will be able to provide a new Tank in 2078. Forget about it and let us build it on our own. That would work and would be fast.
There is no such thing as a “shot trap” on modern tanks anymore, fgs. Learn about modern tank design and how it works and stop repeating outdated legends about tank problems.
love the many abrams x tech improvements that are very exciting, especially the ability to turn off the main engine and heat signature by using only auxiliary battery power that could will be stealth at a certain degree especially while waiting to ambush it's prey, that's pretty neat!
The Abrams Turbine engine is very powerful, but guzzles fuel like nothing else, and makes a ton of heat. Partially moving away from it is not going far enough, if you ask me. Logistics wins wars, and those engines put a lot of strain on any logistics system.
@@aldocarulli3054 You'd be surprised at how much of a difference 1 hours time stationary with the engines off makes when it comes to thermal signature. Running tanks glow bright as day under thermals but they quickly dissipate heat and become hard to notice after 2+ hours. Thermal sights make it extremely easy to see heated targets but much more difficult to see unheated targets vs optical sights. I spent a lot of time with opfor calling for fire using a puma drone but a stationary tank that's cooled down will frequently go unnoticed if it's part of a large battlespace. Sitting in a spot and waiting is a very common military tactic and the hybrid battery will definitely make that approach more effective imho.
Nice! The US just did it! They brought the Abrams to the Level of the Leopard 2A7V. The KF51 also has a fully working ADS. Besides an System to detect Threats like Infra-red guided missile launchers. It is fully digital, has the most significant armor worldwide. The Abrams just got an update on its Canon thats still less precise than the Leopards Maincanon. Its so sad to see, that this is the newest Tank from the US. Germany did it better, they allways do, maybe the US should just ask for some help again, like they to if they need something in the mikrotech sector.
@Kkk-cc1iy Vulnerable to drones? It has an Active Defence System, which also covers the top of the tank. And is able yo launch own drone attacks. And you really think an engine, designed to reach 100% efficiency only with jet fuel, is more flexible, than an engine designed to run at 100% efficiency with gas.
No you are not. But this is a weakness of every modern tank, be it german, american, french, russian or chinese. Opticals are always a very vulnerable spot that can end a tanks combat readiness when destroyed.
One the Ambrams X becomes an actual MBT, I think the KF51 and new Abrams would be Yin and Yang, complimentary to each other while also being a threat all their own
I think aventually, the kf51 panther will, because you forgot about its aim assist and remote controlled 12.7mm machinegun, it also has room for improvement to make the whole tank be controller by 2 crew aventually.
Wäre ich Verteidigungsminister, von Deutschland. Hätte ich sofort veranlasst das 100 Panther gebaut werden. Zur Truppe kommen, und trainiert wird. Zusätzlich hätte ich bestimmt das co2 neutraler Kraftstoff erzeugt wird um unabhängig zu sein. Und dann hätte man eine schlagkräftige Verteidigung aufbauen können. Und zusätzlich mehrere 100 lynx 120 bauen können.
Tja, nur da gibt es das Bundeswehr Beschaffungsamt. Die haben Jahre nicht mal Unterwäsche hinbekommen. Und jetzt 100 Panther? Das zu machen, die gehen eher in Pension
In what ways have tanks adapted to different terrains and environmental conditions, and how does this versatility contribute to their effectiveness in warfare?
Abrams X is not next gen. It’s a holdover concept being marketed by general dynamics until a next gen tank is developed. Also, it has two drone launchers. No idea how you missed that unless you intentionally left it out for some reason.
The modern Tiger will be no tank.. The modern Tiger stays a helicopter and I'll be damned if they don't modernize it to royal Tiger/Tiger 2 as it basically is a successful platform.
@der Ratze I can say the exact same. Half of the leopard is already American. Guess what that is? Microchips, semiconductors, and microchips are American invention, and the leopard is half American.
iirc, the KF51 panther has 2 crew in the turret and 2 in the hull Not 3 in the turret (also since that seating position for the driver and specialist would be in the turret's "nose cone")
it is using the Leopard 2 chassis for the prototype in the video footage. The Leopard is a joint product of Rheinmetall and KMW. The Panther however is a pure Rheinmetaill development for which they will have to build their own new chassis. Development is underway as Hungary has signed a firm order for the Panther.
Different combat doctrines and logistical requirements, and future upgrades would also branch off in different directions not to mention the German and American procurement process are very different as well, not to mention politics at the end of the day it won't yield anything except two separate tanks at the end of the day like how the MBT-70 lead to the Abrams and leopard.
The KF51 will be an incredible tank, no doubt. Probably equal to AbramsX, with one important exception. What the AbramsX see's will instantly be a target not just for the tank but for the entire might of US firepower. It will be seen by F-35s, drones, long-range MRLS, Excalibur Arty, and even ships. Now imagine one silently peeking around a corner and then silently backing away...
No, the KF51 will have also network capability. Both are capable tanks but objectively the KF51 will have the edge. Better defensive and offensive systems. This vid didn’t include several systems that can be added to the KF51 like the natter.
There is one big difference between the two designs. The Americans have money, hundreds of billions, to develop their projects... Germany currently does not have such funds. Last year, Scholz promised 100 billion euros to modernize the german army. Does anyone still remember that??? 😂 The Germans clearly bet on the development of Leopard in the A8 version. Perhaps someday, in 15 or 20 years, another country will decide to cooperate with Rheinmetall and then they will build something more than just a prototype. As for now, only the Americans, the French and the British are producing their own tanks and working on new designs. Japan and Korea also have new machines... and still working. Do you know any other countries that will be able to afford such a very expensive tank, so that the costs of introducing these new technologies will pay off??? Maybe the Persian Gulf states, I don't see any other takers. Kind regards - S
I'm a bit concern on the gap between the hull and the turret on the panther wouldn't be a shell be defected downwards towards the gap in the hull if the shell hits sa lower slope on the turret?
Its probably the same like on the Leo 2. The arrowhead is not the main armor, but ,,thin,, addon-armour against Heat and APFSDS. So normaly it won't deflect rounds.
@@chustingutiza6520 The Addon-armor detonates the Heat-Round. After that, the shaped charge jet have to travel through air behind the addon-armor until it reaches the main-armor. At that point it lost most of his penetration value. And APFSDS penetrates the addon armor, starts trundling an hits the main-armor at an angle. Atleast in an ideal scenario.
Are shot traps no longer an issue for modern tanks. I see some many huge shot traps on these two, but especially on the Panther. Why is this not an issue?
don't forget that the Abramx X's cannom is a ETC cannon (ETC standing for Electro, Thermal, Chemical) which uses plasma ignition to ignite ETC ammunition which gives far superior penetrator velocity over traditional casings, this means that a heavier and denser penetrator could be used while still maintaining a higher velocity over the 130mm cannon in thus more penetration over the 130mm.
When the soldiers look trought the open hatch in the Abrams X Tank you can see the low armour of the hull. Seems like its copied 1 to 1 from the old M1A Abrams. Compare it with the russian T14... Also the Hatch-Door itself is a lot thinner then on the t14. Seems like a pretty bad protection for the crew.
Abrams X is actually worse than M1A2 Sep V3, except for optics, better engine and targeting system. Its still has the same hull armor, which can be penetrated by 3BM60/3BM59 but... the whole crew is now in the hull, which is a death capsule. Plus, turret still weights a shit ton, and has good protection, but that protection wont even help the crew survive cuz they are in the fuckin hull... You might think it will help the gun stay active by protecting it, no it literally cant fuckin protect the gun either... The weight is still enormous, and no protection changes happened.
@@ignis4783 There is no picture from the Panther for comparison. So i had to compare it with the t14 because the t14 also has the same configuation (3 Men in front of the hull). There are plenty of Pictures from the T14 Armata with open Hatch. You can look for it and see the massiv difference yourself. That Abrams X crew protection must be very low. It also makes no sence to armour an unmaned turret. Its a really stupid concept Tank.
So basicly, the new Abrams is best situated on big battlefields to operate on wide frontlines on a strategic scale, while the KF51 is more suited for fast, regional operations on a more tactical scale. In which case I think, they complement each other in cooperated operations most efficient. While the Abrams control the overall battlefield, hold and press the front, the KF52 can use its reconnaissance to force regional breaches on weakpoints and destroy valuable enemy systems behind enemy lines, to push the enemies back.
What i wonder is... if the 130mm together with drones and the high range... might enable indirect fire. That is why they want the Larger shells.. auto loader and drones. When you can shoot targets that cant even see you. Would also make the huge range actually useful. Would also remove the need for unmanned crew. As other tanks wont even be able to fire at you when the terrain is in the way.
They both look great, but the Panther is lacking a more modern engine/ drivetrain, while the Abrams still uses the powerfull, but aparently finicky, hard to live with gasturbine. A smaller, but similarly powerful diesel ( hybrid) than the Leopard 2 engine used for the Panther is available and would be better than either option.
There's nothing modern about a noisy gasguzzling turbine engine. Abrams will likely have more torque to, which is more important than horse power in a tank.
Yes abramx does have a engine like this but the company behind the panther it must have planned for one after all how anyone can move it around without one I think the panther has a engine you a little sily on this no tank maker would created one if they had no engine to drive any battle tanks on to a warfare
The Panther is such a stunning looking piece of machinery.
Designed by the God of war ;)
The Panther was possibly the best looking tank ever made. The new KF51 Panther is also pretty decent looking.
Meh... panther looks similar to Leopard.. AbramsX is much more modern. "While the Abrams X already has an unmanned turret, the panther is planning one for a future upgrade". Abrams has better 360 optics, better side protection and better top protection, better crew protection. Better hunter killer capabilities with its silent operation and reduced thermals. Higher main gun ammunition capacity ( 60 rounds vs 30 rounds for the panther ). switchblade drones and a 30mm chain gun .... Just sayin 😜
It got a big hed.
@@avatarontheloose5462 looks like you are a patriot who doesnt know shit about tanks and is just quoting youtubers
You forgot to mention that the abrams x isnt a actual mbt concept but rather a tech demonstrator meanwhile thew kf51 is an actual mbt prototype
abramsx would be a beast if it were an actual tank put into service i bet tho
@@molstad182 AbramsX was already a beast for a concept, it would be a league higher if an actual prototype were to be made
@@xenomorph9114 its the same old sucky 120mm the 130mm on the kf is way better
@@warelite5368 Since when is a 120mm "sucky"? What armor is the 120mm having trouble penetrating that the 130 can do a better job of?
@@brain_tonic I wouldn't describe it as "sucky", but according to Rheinmetal the 130mm gun has a 50% higher range compared to a 120mm gun and that could be a game changer in battle.
Saying this in spite of myself... the Abrams X is extremely impressive! But this Panther looks like the new king of the MBTs. Comparing it to other 4th gen tanks (Armata) or even those still in development (Challenger 3) this Panther seems to outclass them all. Truly impressive!
Germans going the way of the Reich in tech. Small numbers of highly advanced weaponry. While Abrams can be mass produced
in my opinion the AbramsX would probably be superior due to its superiority in its mobility, armour, and firepower but its multirole function is definitely lacking when compared to the Panther, so the AbramsX would be best suited to be supported by recon and battle stations while the panther would be able to act alone when in combat but it would be more vulnerable and deal less damage than the abramsX
@@h4per_txt565 "superiority in mobility" is a really relative thing to tanks. if you would compare the kf51 to the abrams x it wouldnt be much of a difference since we are talking single degrees when turning and some km/h when driving ON ROADS. the kf51 has higher effective range and NEARLY the same level of protection. at the end it doesnt matter but in a theoretic 1v1 situation the panther would win just by having the bigger caliber.
@@djneverblock7300 that may not be entirely true. The size of the gun isn't exactly indicative of its performance, for example the abrams x has the xm360 which uses electrothermal chemical technology.
Note the xm360 is based off the previous xm291 which was able to achieve similar performance to that of a 140mm.
@@djneverblock7300 gotta remember the abrams x is a prototype it ain’t final so things can change I see the gun being 130mm eventually either way the tanks use the same stuff for the most part
"How expensive do you want this to be?"
"Yes."
Welcome to the future.
Actually not quite as expensive compared to their predecessor when they where new when you count in inflation
The Panther can be eqipped with an unmanned 5.56mm Machine Gun Turret " Natter" which can be used to shoot down Drohnes or to defend against infantry . The Panther will be equipped with reconnisance Drohnes which enables the Tank to detect/shoot at Targets out of direct sight . I am sure that the 4 th Seat will become usefull in Future , may it be for an Drohne operator or for an Platoon Commander .
He is totaly right
drones
The drone can intercept anti tank missles aswell
@@avarion9538 thats what the trophy system is for, the drones will be loitering munition type drones and reconaissance drones.
The natter is a 7,62 mm gun on the kf51
Rheinmetal is just 2lvls up always
Actually no it’s not lol… Making something that looks cool or futuristic doesn’t equate to levels higher… many people said that about the Leopard tank before it got sent to Ukraine and got decimated
@@CR1T1KaL714 "decimated" is silly populism .. the western tanks in Ukraine prove their protection levels are superior given how most of their crews survive compared to russian tanks getting hit. Most complete losses of western tanks in Ukraine are just mobility kills which get blown up after they were left behind and in some cases it was rather comical how much effort it took to finish them off so that noone could recover these western tanks. Same cant be said about russian tanks doing their turret toss space program.
As for operational success ... well, they are not used according to western doctrine, so its not surprising they dont make the splash they made in other wars. Alltho the Kursk offensive gave some insight to what happens when western doctrine is at least partially adopted.
As for Rheinmetall, they aint particular ahead with anything ... KNDS, General Dynamics and other civilized competition have fairly similar developments right now. Only with the push for a larger caliber Rheinmetall makes a double step with the KF51, alltho they still give the option for the common 120mm.
Hell yea they are!
@@CR1T1KaL714 leopard 2 its the best performing tank in ukraine^^
Rheinmetall and GDLS should collaborate on the next generation NATO Tank. The Panther and AbramsX are both beasts but a hybrid of the two would be better than the sum of its parts. Not to mention the overall price would probably be drastically lower if all the major NATO powers were producing the same Tank.
Last time they tried that it didn't work that's how the leopard and M1 happened...
Thats what I said choose one build it in every nato country providing jobs with 300 each nation you end up with over 3000 mbts train together parts are available in each country and are the same but these political nuts cant think that way.
Its because NATO countries have different weather and terrain. They build tanks based on their roads, terrain, and logistics
@@TGTexan A road is the same world wide its made from Tar tanks like rifles are made to operate in cold and warm or sandy weather so I dont see your point its political control which is money thats what it boils too.
@@thecurlew7403 roads are actually very different from country to country also different bridges and different ways of transport
German and American engineering never ceases to amaze
LoL famous american enineering...
What american engineering, they don't lead in quality in any technical domain
@@Cormano980 24 trillion gdp would say otherwise
@@andrewiRevere5711 I was talking about quality, like being the top product in a line, best car, best gun, best tv set etc.
@deepdriller6030 they do. They have arguably the best planes, tanks, and ships. America has been said to have the best sea fleet and air force in the world. Whether that's true or not remains to be seen. But as the US spends more money on its military than every other country put together I'd say it's a well-deserved claim.
It doesn't really matter which of these two is better. If anything, they will fight side by side, not against each other.
Imagine these things role up side by side on your defensiv position… game over
The KF51 will likly also come with something like a trophy system (module to be added) which can protect the system from incoming ATGM (top and side attack).
no it wont. trophy is an isreal system. rheinmetall invented its own active protection system called strike shield
@@wolflarsen1900 I dont think that strike shield can be installed on the tank(never saw), and it is deadly for the infantry moving nearby
so the tank has achievments ? nice
@@charger6634 Rheinmetall said the KF51 will have strike shield after it finished development and its not deadly for infantry moving nearby. All APS work after the same function of shooting a counter projectile to destroy the incomming attack.
the "trophy" system u ment is the taps i think and it also has strike shield
I like both tanks. Amazing.
concept copied from t 14 armata which is deployed already while these ones are just prototype
@@DB5652-v3r Oh no. You mean that Russian catwalk-tank? The tank mr. Putin only shows on parades and not at the real battlefield in Ukraine?
@@DB5652-v3r xD how is this copied from the T14? They're totally different. The Russians have an entirely different MBT strategy. Just stop with your praisal of stupid russian paper tanks
@@DB5652-v3r Wrong. The T-14 Armata is nothing more than a rip off of old, rejected U.S. technology from the 1980's called the M1 Abrams TTB.
@@DB5652-v3r the unmanned turret idea is good in concept, but as we know all know to well, Ruzzia just makes bad tanks and the components are just not as good as the west and the west's allies, hell most of the actually decent to good components of modern Ruzzian tanks are not from Ruzzia at all
Pather is ahead of everyone in my opinion, especially design just wooow
Both tanks are amazing. Usually winning boils down to training. Better training and support = 1st shot, 1st kill.
I believe a panther would survive if an abraham X hits him. But the panther could shoot first, 50% more range that the 120mm cannon.
I only see one tank here, the panther
They are both great MBT's but it all comes down to the crew, the ammo, the use of the tank and training, training and training of the tank crew.
And i think also who has the right info about the Battlefield. Situational awareness.
and ........training!
no shit
These upgrades make it a much better tool
@@honkytonk4465 ya that's why he said the crew smart ass
Thank You,I trust in German enginering♦️♦️♦️♦️♦️
Both amazing pieces of tech. I like the Pather's styling, so sleek. Happy to see that the Abrams X still very much looks like an Abrams. I grew up with Abrams and Leo 2's in Germany 😊. Now all we need is 80's camo, both these tanks have fugly paintjobs.
panther is literally leopard 2 hull + new turret and gun
I think both tanks are awesome
@@Cyril_2009 Abrams too.
@@Cyril_2009 panther's hull looks a lot different, but the armor composition is probably the same.
@@syrez156 Panther has an addon NERA module on the front hull, other than that it seems to be Leopard 2 hull with next-gen ERA tiles one the sides.
Except the KF51 isn't actually the designated successor to the Leopard 2. There is a separate development program called the Main Ground Combat System that several nations participate in (or are observer to).
The Abrams X is not a future replacement for the Abrams. It's a technology demonstrator.
@@classicgalactica5879 nobody wrote that
@@-Lazy It is mentioned in the video, you doof. :P
I don't think that will ever happen though. And even if it happens it will most likely incorparate the Panther rather than using another MBT. Why wasting developement costs.
@@Micha-qv5uf "Why waste X?" is a question no politician or bureaucrat has ever asked.
The KF51 Panther is prepared to be fully remote-controllable ie the crew does not actually have to be in the tank.
Almost any modern tank can be controlled remotely and not only modern, such stuff has been tested by majority of tank producing countries in late 60th, anyway, this only creates questions for reasonability of having huge combat compartment trading protection for volume.
@@SergeiSugaroverdoseShuykov One thing is being able to remotely control a vehicle, another is being able to do so while the enemy is trying to actively jam the signal or worse yet hijack it. There is a reason why all tanks are still manned.
Ich glaube, dass der KF51 Panther und alle anderen Geräte aus der Future Gun System Reihe zusätzlich voll autonom agieren und miteinander interagieren können. Da es aber nicht ethisch ist, eine Maschine über Leben und Tod entscheiden zu lassen, werden alle Systeme von Menschen bedient.
Can I just say...that I love them both?! Man it's freaking awesome that we're allies in this because I would hate to watch these two beautiful machines hammer each other into oblivion.
Addendum- While I am an American and have to go for my Abrams X, I have nothing but respect for the KF51 Panther. I haven't watched the video yet but even if the Panther wins I'm okay with that. I can't wait to see the many revisions these two mean machines go through.
I’m an American and a history nerd and I am very interested in these types of things. But when I look at something like the f-35 or the abrams X I think to myself- we are never getting free healthcare are we?
@@Curry_Communist
Well given that we are not a Socialist country one shouldn't expect socialized health care here. Personally I would rather have the ability to go into a hospital and be seen immediately for any problems I may face than be forced to wait in a que than can take years to get help. Further, I enjoy being in a country where even if you're too poor to afford medical coverage you will be taken care of, every time. Thankfully, most medical coverage one would need is free here in the states despite what others tell you.
For reference- I'm am living proof of that. Despite growing up poor with a severe medical disability I was able to claw my way out in the most equitable, most free, and just society the world has ever known. In most countries I would never have made it past adolescence (8 neurological procedures so far, 5 surgeries on my stomach, blind in my right eye, and extensive nerve damage). Thanks to our access to incredible life altering medical techniques and technology I live a full active life.
Lastly and finally on topic, when Communist nations like China decide to threaten you and your allies it helps to be ready with the best military hardware money can provide. When China decides to square off with the US (it's coming) the new tanks, jets, and carrier group will pay dividends. Hopefully, the people in China will be ready to remove their Communist shackles when the US/Chinese War kicks off.
@@Curry_Communisthehe, german generalized health insurance(basically free healthcare)
@@Curry_Communist Probably not given that you blew your final chance with Bernie Sanders in the 2020 primaries. But hey, for someone that doesn't live in the US I'm very thankful for your exorbitant spending in the military sector. If the US wasn't playing world police, east Europe and South East Asia would look a biiiiiiit different now.
Eww
I'm wondering whether the advantages of a hybrid drive in a MBT balances against the additional maintenance, repair and logistics challenges.
The panther literally looks like a future tank. The abrams x looks like the current abrams.
What future looking is this panther as tall a 4 story building? Abrams look more slim and low profile which is very effective for combat and panther is good for catwalk.
@@totoitekelcha7628 they are litteraly the same dimensions.
Panther:
Hull length ~ 7.8 m
Width~ 3.7 m
Height~ 2.5 m
Abrams X:
Length: ~7.9m
Width: ~3.7m
Height: ~2.5m
And thats without the machine gun on top. I love how you say "looks more slim" and assume facts by just the looks of it. Also the Panther is an actual MBT and the Abrams is just a TTD. One is real one is not.
@@Darkbribe09 you seems to have not seen Abrams and Leapard tank in real life huh? Leapard 2 tank is much higher in profile than Abrams tank and also much louder sound. Now, the panther also seems to little taller than leapard 2 tank so either way panther tank will be much higher and louder than Abrams X if they both got into production. Tht turbine engine of Abrams is quiter than that of leapard diesel engine. Go and and see and feel in real world without garbage paper base theory.
@@totoitekelcha7628 Nono I do agree. The Leopard is taller than the Abrams. But the panther is not a redesign. It is a completly new model and has not a lot to do with the leopard. Also I do trust paper more than my eyes. Since both tanks are not really available yet and you can only tell by that. Also why would the paper have false information if the tank in real life would be much bigger? Makes no sense at all.
But you compare last gen tanks with new tanks you have no info about? There is not even a common ground to discuss but the preview info we received from both manufacturers.
I also dont see the point in comparing these two tanks - not even the last gen tanks. Abrams is a good tank but maintenance is a bitch. Leopard is a slightly worse tank but it just runs and can be repaired in every workshop.
It is like back in the days: "The mighty Tiger tank - best tank ever. So much armor so big gun" Yes, it's true just from raw stats it shredded every Sherman tank but it was broken half of the times and could not be produced in numbers. Thats why for example in ukraine they prefer Challengers and Leopards because they dont have the logistics for the Abrams tanks. If you have the logistics it is a perfectly fine tank.
@@Darkbribe09 Panther will be more taller than Leapard tank. Germany does not make low profile tank. If you dont believe me go and see it personally. Their is no way panther will be low profile than that of abram X tank. I cannot tell you how software and tank guns will differ between Abrams tank and panther but definitely Abrams X will have a lower profile.
panther looks sick
Panther looks great.
@@augustusrex8150 great is sick. Sick is great
With the upgrades in drone tech. I expect to start seeing carrier vehicles with 10s to 100s of drones. I mean even if it’s just for recon, that would be crazy. Imagine having one vehicle stop in a safe location and launch a large amount of drones to provide attacking support or highly valuable reconnaissance info.
If im not mistaken those drones are also armed with a small warhead. Not enough to kill a mbt but enough to blow up a Car
@@RonsoLp no. Drones are destroying tanks man.
I thought about this too, and it already is happening to some degree. You can even just attach drone launchers to existing vehicles like Humvees, although a dedicated drone carrier can potentially carry a lot more, especially if the carrier itself is also unmanned. And yes, drones can destroy tanks if they attack its top and it uses a HEAT charge. Drone defense using large autocanons firing shells with proximity fuses would be necessary to defend against drones.
@@thuggeegaming659 yeah. I am thinking about the things like the sky shows they do with drones but instead have them programed for surveillance. So have 1 truck that had maybe 100 smaller drones and they just have a preprogrammed flight path with multiple drones flying over the same spot in order to provide a back up. And maybe attached to the truck would be immediate response attack drones that would use the collected information to go hit the target.
That would be interesting. A drone carrier that utilizes AI to control a drone swarm, perhaps fulfilling multiple roles like electronics warfare, recon, decoy, and even offensive roles.
The German tank KF51 Panther is definitely better, i.e. the better attacking version, so just talking about the 130mm gun that will dominate other tanks, and other things that will be added on the day we're talking about.
The caliber does allow it to have more penetration sure, but 120mm APFSDU would still beat a standard 130 round in terms of penetration. Depleted uranium tends to only be used by the US and UK.
@@Adierit No.
@@Adierit the new interest in larger caliber guns has nothing to do with needing more penetration but for longer range..
@@michaelcraig58 Except that was the entire qoute for needing the bigger guns in the first place? The entire reasoning they had for the 130mm was wanting more penetration to defeat more modern tanks.
@@Adierit “the larger caliber increases penetration and effective shooting range up to 50%” ~Rheinmetall
Slick designs on both the Panther and the AX
Can see through smoke and see thermal without engine on? Gaijin is not prepared to include these 2 in war thunder.
i honestly liked the kf-51 it looks so great can't imagine the what future brings to these combat vehicles
future,what future?
more debt for the oppressed working-class people?
Yes, because what they do not tell you is that the taxpayers are the ones that will going to pay for these.
Looking at both of these tanks it would be awesome if we could actually collaborate and build a tank together. So we could redeem ourselves from the last joint venture. 🇺🇸🤝🇩🇪
Leopard and Abrahms are exactly that, but Germany and the USA couldn't get together.
I think both countries tried that in the 1960s and 1970s.
Since both sides wanted to implement their ideas, the result was a much too expensive and useless tank.
However, the Abrams and the Leopard evolved from this collaboration.
This is like being back in my childhood when your Mum was going to buy you something, she would ask "which one do you want ?" To which I would reply, "can I have both of them ?"
Kf 51 Panther has 3 Man in the hull, with complete automatic turret and the option of a 4 th crew member.
Where did you got the info from for it having 4 members distributed with 2 in hull and 2 in the turret?
The official data video from 2022 states otherwise. And even informed why there is the option for a fourth crew member.
the Abrams is an "sneaky" MBT, where Panther is an "Bad ass I'M HERE !" mbt, both are next gen MBT, both are very good improvment, also wher is the EMBT from Nexter Group (France) that is also an state of art MBT ....
nah the abrams x isnt a next gen mbt its a tech demonstrator so its not actually a mbt
@@tonyman905 holy fuck, WE GET IT, and it IS and MBT. Its a tech demonstrator OF AN MBT. And it is next gen, it has everything which GDLS has which is next gen and is showing of what the next gen tank will be able to do.
@@kousand9917 A tech demonstrator only is for showing off tech so it cannot be used in duty since in a tech demonstrator the synergy between the systems dont matter
The EMBT is also an German Project.. france Just joined the Project a few years ago
EMBT: RHEINMETALL, THYSSENKRUPP and then Nexter. You see? Again a german MBT.
That project will surely fail, that’s why RM released KF51 Panther as their own MBT.
A combination of both Tanks in an attack seems to be the best way to use them. Panther with it's more powerful Gun especially on long range in combination with uav capabilities find and destroy enemy vehicles. Abrams with it's good protection and this autocannon would be nice for middle range Tank fights and close up fights against soldiers. Together with Himars and Rch155 for support... At least, both Tanks will have their own areas in which they perform best.
Yes, X to the frontline, while KF51 blasts away all from behind, so nothing left to do for X
All weapons designed by Germans are superior.
In fact the Abrams has a Rheinmetal canon.
Love the Abram tank. Both are great additions to NATO.
Here’s me just patiently waiting for it to be added to WT sometime
that will take a long time they both needed to be nerfed badly unless they would be way to OP
And then they will put the russian Armata in and make them absolutely overpowered because of russian bias, wich they MUST do, because russian government can and will punish them for bad propaganda about their vehicles.
It’s the same reason why world of tanks has a huge russian bias. 🎉
I think electric engines might be a thing in the future. The acceleration is just awesome
During WW2, Ferdinand Porsche was the first to pioneer the use of an Electric Engine in the early stages of the development of the infamous Tiger I.
Not with 60 tons it ain't 🤣
dont think so they have less efficiency and energy density
@@tonyman905 Maybe a hybrid then with the acceleration of electric- and range of diesel engines.
@@GeneralGayJay i think maybe if hydrogen engines get developed to be better they might get used since they have incredible efficiency but ithink they right now they have less power
In another video they mention that the KF-51 Panther also has a separate missile launcher
The drone pot can be also used as a missile launcher (e.g. spikes?).
@@ronaldotrumph8960 It can carry 2 types of drones. Either 4 scout drones or 2 larger hunter killer drones.
@@BraunBuxe I'm pretty sure the modern Abraham tanks have drone launchers already though. I saw a military channel about history of tanks and tank crews and they put it on some of the Abraham.
@@richardkim3652 I think the new tech demonstrator Abrams X or whatever its called has them but the M1A2 Sep doesnt have that.
Both looks to be spectacular Hi tech MBTs, and interestingly both share a common origin....
yeah abrams is using the rheinmetall gun
In my opinion, this is very far-fetched because the KF51 is a completely new development as far as I know (correct me if I'm wrong).
But maybe we can agree that the origin of modern mbts in both countries goes back to the MBT 70/KPz 70.
Do they have washer's available for the cameras? Nothing like going through the mud and all the camera's are blocked.
Doesn't the Panther also have a non coaxial machine gun? It's seen on some pictures in the video as well.
The abrams may have more features but also looks like much of that was an afterthought. While maybe being overall more capable the KF-51 seems like the more rounded/balanced option
Source: German arms manufacturers
panther looks to be better and have more defensive and offensive systems not present in this vid
KF51 🔥
The Abrams X looks badass
I like more the panther, but I believe the abram is better
@@qwertyqwerty-zi6dr why is that
@@qwertyqwerty-zi6dr Germany always made super good tanks and guns. I think the Panther might be better because of its engine and the drone launcher
@@jayb4667 Abrams also has drone launchcer and now diesel-electric engine
@@qwertyqwerty-zi6dr the Abrams x got only 1 Drone.. the kf51 got 4 drones that can fly all at the same Time.. the Launcher can be also Used for Spike/hunter Killer missile.. Just saying xD
That might be very basic question, but how the super advanced camera will behave when hit by a large caliber ammunition?
Edit: when I say a large caliber, I want to say a gun usually carried by a soldier, not a direct hit by a different tank.
Edit 2:is there additional armor after the camera?
I suspect that the whole module is designed to rip away if hit by something significant, and otherwise designed to allow high calibre AP rounds to pass through it.
With a spare stored somewhere, most likely?
@@Scapestoat yeah, that would make sense thank you! :)
No, not protected, if it gets hit (either by other tank round or by artillery) its gone...
Where can I order the kF51 with a host of ammo and spares?
Situational and tactical awareness is key; as they both can drive and shoot while having good protection; imo. Enjoyed the vid 👍
Greets from the Netherlands 🇳🇱, T.
Wenn die Menschen nur wüssten an welche "Kunden" Caterpillar gepanzerte Baumaschinen verkauft und was diese anrichten
RIP
Rachel Corrie, 23, 1979-2003, am 16 März 2003
Mohammad Ali Hasan an-Na’em, 27, im Februar 2023 in Gaza
@@harrison00xXx : yes. war is absolute horror. when in it to long, you will become horror. I'm so sorry for your loss.
@@tonnywildweasel8138 You think thats only a war?
What in israel happens is a GENOCIDE, and all western countries support this genocide!
Just keep in mind these aren't competitors unless it's competing with who gets the most kills against the same enemies. These are tanks of NATO nations and they'll be working together so no matter which is the best they'll complement each other on future battlefields. Oh the future looks like it's going to be an interesting one. Can you imagine driving into battle from either of these and seeing the other one working with you and shooting the bad guy you missed? Go get them fellas!
Tell that the french submarine producers
@@BlackBoxEnte but we're not talking about French submarines.
@@darrenskjoelsvold you didnt knew you were talking about them. Its a conter argument to show the validity of your claim that there is no competition between nato. Of course there is competition hence the french submarine example. Google "french submarine australia" to get on the loop. It is very naive to assume we are a bunch of friends in nato. "We" in nation states, are a bunch of geopolitical actors with alligning interest. friends in politics. a good one
@@BlackBoxEnte I never said that countries have friends. I merely said that they are both tanks from NATO nations and they are likely to be working together. NATO interests align which is why they are allies. In the future NATO nations might be against each other but that's not the case today and if we don't screw something up then it won't be the case.
Honestly peace and stability is best for everyone. Wars are really poor means of getting what you want. Often you end up expending more resources than you gain. If you have to spend more than an acquisition is worth then it's a net loss. War is a net loss in today's world because the cost of equipment is so high.
Think about it these machines and weapons are the pinnacle of our human achievement in killing each other. The caveat is that because the weapons and even the ammunition for these weapons are so advanced that means they are also very expensive and that increases the cost of war.
We may be in a position where the weapons are so expensive that war is cost prohibitive. Truly the only people who would go to war are lunatics who don't care about the cost.
So having alliances like NATO bring stability and stability is best. The nations of NATO are run by rational leaders and their interests are presenting a strong enough front to make even the ultra crazy take pause and reconsider aggression.
Having the most advanced technology like tanks is more a deterrent than anything else right now and that's a more stable condition than we have had in the past.
It's a lot like Cris Rock's suggestion concerning guns. Make the bullet exorbitantly expensive and that should stay the hand of a would be aggressor. So if war is too expensive for what you would win then that itself is a deterrent. And when you have alliances to contend with that increases the cost. So maintaining said alliances become a priority.
they are competitors...maybe not in the field, but whenever you make something the US also makes, even if you're in an alliance, even if you're supposed to work together, the US will turn it into a competition xD
I think they would work well together
Hard to be as thoroughly respected a legend as the Leopard 2. But there it is.
How do these two compare against that new French-German mbt project
A tank is just as good as the crew that operates it
so get a t-62 a great crew and set it against one of these beasts. crew and techonoly are both important or we would still be fighting with stone edge spears.
Wow, this Video is missing like half of the features of the Panther while desperatly trying to make the Abrams X look good in comparison. Ridiculous.
Man, so undermined the Russian tanks nowadays, Abrams X was pitted against the KF51 Panther. Can't blame it though
Bro modern Russian mbt’s are literally just t80’s/t-72’s with more ERA. Russia will always have inferior tanks if they don’t change.
How about comparing the Main Guns Range?
Isn't it a problem to use a different size cannon (130mm) ? If you have to use another tank's ammo cause you used all of yours ?
It's easy to see which one is European, vs American based on looks alone. They build them different.
These are beasts.
Maintaining an electric engine must be fun on the battlefield
This is an interesting comparison. Thumbs up for posting.
The narrator's presentation favors the KF51 and misses identifying some of the features that the Abrams has in common with the KF51. Both are heavily networked, carry drones, have many new sensors, including ones for addressing top-down attacks. This presentation has an error. It says the Abrams X will still use a turbine. This is incorrect. It will use a hybrid Diesel electric system. That is a major enhancement - reduce fuel use by 50% and enable the tank to move slowly for short distances on batteries with the engine off (stealth).
There is one big difference between the two designs. The Americans have money, hundreds of billions, to develop their projects... Germany currently does not have such funds. Last year, Scholz promised 100 billion euros to modernize the german army. Does anyone still remember that??? 😂 The Germans clearly bet on the development of Leopard in the A8 version. Perhaps someday, in 15 or 20 years, another country will decide to cooperate with Rheinmetall and then they will build something more than just a prototype. As for now, only the Americans, the French and the British are producing their own tanks and working on new designs. Japan and Korea also have new machines... and still working. Do you know any other countries that will be able to afford such a very expensive tank, so that the costs of introducing these new technologies will pay off??? Maybe the Persian Gulf states, I don't see any other takers. Kind regards - S
@@ColonelStanley Thanks for the reply. Yes I remember the 100 billion Euro promise. I think that was a pledge to be spread over a ten year span. Are you' saying Germany really ISN'T committing to development of a new tank? That would be news to me. I understand we have deep pockets for weapon expenditures, but I was disappointed to see that as relates to Ukraine, we've spent over $46.5 billion, which is more than three times the COMBINED weaponry of the rest of NATO. I want us to provide ATACMs, more Abrams, Javelins, Stingers, etc. But the European NATO members REALLY NEED to step up their 'game'.
@@gregparrott Yes, they need to step up... The Germans created a joint program to skin the tank of the future together with the French.... but a year or a year and a half ago they split up and now everyone works separately. However, Germany and France are currently unable to provide adequate funds to finance such a project. Perhaps it will be possible in 15 - 20 years. They're not even worth it now. Look at this - Germany has about 300 active tanks, so is France. The project of a new tank is currently unprofitable for them. So they will develop further versions of Leopard and Leclerc. I'm a Pole and my government will spend for the army 4% of GDP in the next year... and 5% in 2025. Poland will spend almost $500 billion on armaments by 2038, but i think it will be more. We have a border with the most dangerous (next to China) country in the world, and we do not intend to fight them for several years, as Ukraine does, we do not want our cities to be demolished... we must scare them away. Our greatest allies are USA and GB. Germans and French dream of returning to "business as usual"... with russia. They want Poland to be weak, to be dependent on the help of their small armies and to buy weapons only from them. Both countries are constantly blackmailing us and trying to influence the results of parliamentary elections in our country. This is the truth, that's why we cooperate with other countries... and not with them, even though we belong to the EU. We manufacture our own weapons and buy mainly from the USA and South Korea. We gave Ukraine circa about 70% of all post-soviet (and not only post-soviet) equipment of our army, now we are disarmed and slowly waiting for deliveries... from the USA and Korea. Kind regards - S.
@@ColonelStanley Thanks for a new reply, one which does not now appear here. (could be a RUclips bug). Yes, I know that at 4% GDP, Poland has committed the highest percentage of GDP of any NATO member, even more so if Poland then jumps to 5%. Kudos to Poland for addressing the threat. Poland led the way back when Lech Wałęsa led protest movements and later became Poland's president. I saw another RUclips forecasting that Poland (along with Turkey) will be the next superpowers among European NATO members. Weapon deliveries have been slow. I know Poland is awaiting quite a lot of 'items' from the U.S. I also hope the U.S. will belated provide Ukraine with more than 31 Abrams, even outdated Abrams, while Poland would get the latest variants with more sensors and advance armament. The ATACM missiles should have been provided, starting a long time ago. They would likely have a greater effect than F-16s because the logistical, maintenance, and hardened bunker/airport infrastructural issues for fighter jets are likely too complex to be introduced and addressed in the middle of a war.
France and Germany were working together for a replacement of the Leopart II and the Leclerc. Then Rheinmetal surprised everybody with the KF52 Panther, not only with the somewhat controversial name but what happend to the cooperation?
Is Krauss-Maffei Wegmann still working on a competative model? What is the status of this Main Ground Combat System?
As far as I know, the MBT program is still in progress, scheduled to complete and produce its first unit around 2035.
In contrast, the KF51 will begin production in 2024. It is an interim solution, it seems like.
KMW and the "super fast France-Guys" will be able to provide a new Tank in 2078. Forget about it and let us build it on our own. That would work and would be fast.
@@steffenschmidt1880 Huh. I have never seen such a hostile response to long-term planning.
Germany really like their shot trap turret designs
There is no such thing as a “shot trap” on modern tanks anymore, fgs. Learn about modern tank design and how it works and stop repeating outdated legends about tank problems.
love the many abrams x tech improvements that are very exciting, especially the ability to turn off the main engine and heat signature by using only auxiliary battery power that could will be stealth at a certain degree especially while waiting to ambush it's prey, that's pretty neat!
With modern thermals this is not happening, but they auxiliary battery is surely a welcome step forward that can be useful in a lot of situations
The Abrams Turbine engine is very powerful, but guzzles fuel like nothing else, and makes a ton of heat. Partially moving away from it is not going far enough, if you ask me.
Logistics wins wars, and those engines put a lot of strain on any logistics system.
@@aldocarulli3054 You'd be surprised at how much of a difference 1 hours time stationary with the engines off makes when it comes to thermal signature. Running tanks glow bright as day under thermals but they quickly dissipate heat and become hard to notice after 2+ hours. Thermal sights make it extremely easy to see heated targets but much more difficult to see unheated targets vs optical sights. I spent a lot of time with opfor calling for fire using a puma drone but a stationary tank that's cooled down will frequently go unnoticed if it's part of a large battlespace. Sitting in a spot and waiting is a very common military tactic and the hybrid battery will definitely make that approach more effective imho.
YEAH, above all will be very "exiting" in the raise of the public debt that you will have to pay.
Nice! The US just did it! They brought the Abrams to the Level of the Leopard 2A7V.
The KF51 also has a fully working ADS. Besides an System to detect Threats like Infra-red guided missile launchers.
It is fully digital, has the most significant armor worldwide.
The Abrams just got an update on its Canon thats still less precise than the Leopards Maincanon. Its so sad to see, that this is the newest Tank from the US.
Germany did it better, they allways do, maybe the US should just ask for some help again, like they to if they need something in the mikrotech sector.
M1A2SEPv3 is already better than Leo2A7V so calm down little one.
abraham ist Leopard schnallt ihr noch immer nicht
@@davideinzigeundderwahreinw9253 Das Chassis is ein anderes, der Motor ist ein anderer. Nur die Hauptwaffe is die selbe wie die, die der Leo hat.
@@xerxes02amstart47 The kf51 is less economically fesible and extremely vulnerable to drones.
@Kkk-cc1iy Vulnerable to drones? It has an Active Defence System, which also covers the top of the tank. And is able yo launch own drone attacks. And you really think an engine, designed to reach 100% efficiency only with jet fuel, is more flexible, than an engine designed to run at 100% efficiency with gas.
Is the m1e1 the AbramsX?
Dumb question, but couldn’t you just shoot out the cameras for the guns? Would that make them unusable? Or maybe I’m missing something
No you are not. But this is a weakness of every modern tank, be it german, american, french, russian or chinese. Opticals are always a very vulnerable spot that can end a tanks combat readiness when destroyed.
One the Ambrams X becomes an actual MBT, I think the KF51 and new Abrams would be Yin and Yang, complimentary to each other while also being a threat all their own
Wdym the Abrams X becomes a actual MBT? It's just a demonstration, while the KF51 Panther is an actual prototype
Abrams X looks cool.
I think aventually, the kf51 panther will, because you forgot about its aim assist and remote controlled 12.7mm machinegun, it also has room for improvement to make the whole tank be controller by 2 crew aventually.
I wonder if I can buy a Panther for the commute to work?
Is it right that the abrams x is a completly new development and the Panthers base is the old Leopard 2?
Bro forgot to mention the automatic machiene gun on the Panther.
Wäre ich Verteidigungsminister, von Deutschland. Hätte ich sofort veranlasst das 100 Panther gebaut werden. Zur Truppe kommen, und trainiert wird. Zusätzlich hätte ich bestimmt das co2 neutraler Kraftstoff erzeugt wird um unabhängig zu sein. Und dann hätte man eine schlagkräftige Verteidigung aufbauen können. Und zusätzlich mehrere 100 lynx 120 bauen können.
Tja, nur da gibt es das Bundeswehr Beschaffungsamt. Die haben Jahre nicht mal Unterwäsche hinbekommen. Und jetzt 100 Panther? Das zu machen, die gehen eher in Pension
Eher 1000, wie Polen. Die Russengefahr ist ja gegeben.
Glaube du hast nicht ganz so die Ahnung davon wie schwierig umsetztbar, teuer und unnotwendig das alles wäre
I can't wait till they make a MBT and name it the Schwarzkopf.
Abrams X is modular. Meaning they can add on new systems and concepts at will. It's lighter and will have better range.
In what ways have tanks adapted to different terrains and environmental conditions, and how does this versatility contribute to their effectiveness in warfare?
Abrams X is not next gen. It’s a holdover concept being marketed by general dynamics until a next gen tank is developed. Also, it has two drone launchers. No idea how you missed that unless you intentionally left it out for some reason.
6 drone launchers for Switchblade SB300s. Can carry more.
Reinmetal should make a modern tiger tank
Well the Panther in 2. world war was a Medium Tank and the tiger a heavy tank. So what would a modern tiger now look like?! It would be insane i guess
@@jayb4667 100 ton tank with a battleship gun
@@vast634 you talking about the schwerer gustav? XD
The modern Tiger will be no tank.. The modern Tiger stays a helicopter and I'll be damned if they don't modernize it to royal Tiger/Tiger 2 as it basically is a successful platform.
American made and German made two great engineering
But geman engineering on top as always
@@tonyman905 Keep dreaming.
@@classicgalactica5879 Leo 2a7v is the best tank in the world
The current Abrams is already half German.
@der Ratze I can say the exact same. Half of the leopard is already American. Guess what that is? Microchips, semiconductors, and microchips are American invention, and the leopard is half American.
iirc, the KF51 panther has 2 crew in the turret and 2 in the hull
Not 3 in the turret (also since that seating position for the driver and specialist would be in the turret's "nose cone")
yeah I noticed that, annoyed me so much.
Turret will be unmanned like T-14 Armata.
@@muroxy352 Thats Abrams X is.
K31 new from ground up ? I thought it used leopard 2 chassis
it is using the Leopard 2 chassis for the prototype in the video footage. The Leopard is a joint product of Rheinmetall and KMW. The Panther however is a pure Rheinmetaill development for which they will have to build their own new chassis.
Development is underway as Hungary has signed a firm order for the Panther.
Panther is absolutely amazing, fire power and completely new desine
Imagine both companies developing a tank together...
Idk about that idea, look at the MBT-70. Too many hands can be a bad thing
Different combat doctrines and logistical requirements, and future upgrades would also branch off in different directions not to mention the German and American procurement process are very different as well, not to mention politics at the end of the day it won't yield anything except two separate tanks at the end of the day like how the MBT-70 lead to the Abrams and leopard.
i need to try it for myself before i buy one
The KF51 will be an incredible tank, no doubt. Probably equal to AbramsX, with one important exception. What the AbramsX see's will instantly be a target not just for the tank but for the entire might of US firepower. It will be seen by F-35s, drones, long-range MRLS, Excalibur Arty, and even ships.
Now imagine one silently peeking around a corner and then silently backing away...
No, the KF51 will have also network capability. Both are capable tanks but objectively the KF51 will have the edge. Better defensive and offensive systems. This vid didn’t include several systems that can be added to the KF51 like the natter.
There is one big difference between the two designs. The Americans have money, hundreds of billions, to develop their projects... Germany currently does not have such funds. Last year, Scholz promised 100 billion euros to modernize the german army. Does anyone still remember that??? 😂 The Germans clearly bet on the development of Leopard in the A8 version. Perhaps someday, in 15 or 20 years, another country will decide to cooperate with Rheinmetall and then they will build something more than just a prototype. As for now, only the Americans, the French and the British are producing their own tanks and working on new designs. Japan and Korea also have new machines... and still working. Do you know any other countries that will be able to afford such a very expensive tank, so that the costs of introducing these new technologies will pay off??? Maybe the Persian Gulf states, I don't see any other takers. Kind regards - S
@@ColonelStanleythe KF51 is a privat project so germany as a country has nothing to do with financing that tank.
I'm a bit concern on the gap between the hull and the turret on the panther wouldn't be a shell be defected downwards towards the gap in the hull if the shell hits sa lower slope on the turret?
Its probably the same like on the Leo 2. The arrowhead is not the main armor, but ,,thin,, addon-armour against Heat and APFSDS. So normaly it won't deflect rounds.
@@TheTaker88 i see so how does it defend against such threats?
@@chustingutiza6520 The Addon-armor detonates the Heat-Round. After that, the shaped charge jet have to travel through air behind the addon-armor until it reaches the main-armor. At that point it lost most of his penetration value. And APFSDS penetrates the addon armor, starts trundling an hits the main-armor at an angle. Atleast in an ideal scenario.
Are shot traps no longer an issue for modern tanks. I see some many huge shot traps on these two, but especially on the Panther. Why is this not an issue?
They are still prototypes eventually these issues will be taken care of
don't forget that the Abramx X's cannom is a ETC cannon (ETC standing for Electro, Thermal, Chemical) which uses plasma ignition to ignite ETC ammunition which gives far superior penetrator velocity over traditional casings, this means that a heavier and denser penetrator could be used while still maintaining a higher velocity over the 130mm cannon in thus more penetration over the 130mm.
3:54 this isn't TAPS, and just saying the APS on the abrams covers for TAPS.
the abrams X also has lesser visibility on thermal sights due to the hybrid electric powerpack,
Russia HAS to be shitting their pants after seeing some of these features on working concepts of these two tanks.
I think the two are the best ☺ tanks made
08:50 Something seems to be not right with the track. It's wiggling too much.
What if those optical/sonsors get targeted and shoot at by (something like) 50cal.-sniper fire (to disable them)?
German has always been the king of tanks since ww2 so ofc they win. It looks so fucking menacing.
When the soldiers look trought the open hatch in the Abrams X Tank you can see the low armour of the hull. Seems like its copied 1 to 1 from the old M1A Abrams. Compare it with the russian T14... Also the Hatch-Door itself is a lot thinner then on the t14. Seems like a pretty bad protection for the crew.
Abrams X is actually worse than M1A2 Sep V3, except for optics, better engine and targeting system. Its still has the same hull armor, which can be penetrated by 3BM60/3BM59 but... the whole crew is now in the hull, which is a death capsule. Plus, turret still weights a shit ton, and has good protection, but that protection wont even help the crew survive cuz they are in the fuckin hull... You might think it will help the gun stay active by protecting it, no it literally cant fuckin protect the gun either... The weight is still enormous, and no protection changes happened.
Т14 🤡🤡
@@ignis4783 There is no picture from the Panther for comparison. So i had to compare it with the t14 because the t14 also has the same configuation (3 Men in front of the hull). There are plenty of Pictures from the T14 Armata with open Hatch. You can look for it and see the massiv difference yourself. That Abrams X crew protection must be very low. It also makes no sence to armour an unmaned turret. Its a really stupid concept Tank.
@@christianschellbruck9788 They literally said at the convection the Armour is not implemented it is better than sep V3
@@KashtanGreg The aromur is more effective then sep v3
Can anyone explain to me what is advance knowledge explosive is?
That moment when General Dynamics builds the AbramsX just to show up the T-14
cant wait to see this guys in war thunder
So basicly, the new Abrams is best situated on big battlefields to operate on wide frontlines on a strategic scale, while the KF51 is more suited for fast, regional operations on a more tactical scale. In which case I think, they complement each other in cooperated operations most efficient. While the Abrams control the overall battlefield, hold and press the front, the KF52 can use its reconnaissance to force regional breaches on weakpoints and destroy valuable enemy systems behind enemy lines, to push the enemies back.
Basically Abrams is not suited for war at the moment, it is best suited at a mech shop
Монстры🔥🔥🔥🏅
What i wonder is... if the 130mm together with drones and the high range... might enable indirect fire. That is why they want the Larger shells.. auto loader and drones. When you can shoot targets that cant even see you. Would also make the huge range actually useful. Would also remove the need for unmanned crew. As other tanks wont even be able to fire at you when the terrain is in the way.
Wow. Both of these systems pay homage to the MBT 70. Its all nice until somebody knocks out all the cameras and sensors.
They both look great, but the Panther is lacking a more modern engine/ drivetrain, while the Abrams still uses the powerfull, but aparently finicky, hard to live with gasturbine.
A smaller, but similarly powerful diesel ( hybrid) than the Leopard 2 engine used for the Panther is available and would be better than either option.
There's nothing modern about a noisy gasguzzling turbine engine. Abrams will likely have more torque to, which is more important than horse power in a tank.
I think that KF51 panther is going to have a better Hull the leopard is just to show their new turret protype system model not Hull just yet
The Abrams X uses a hybrid diesel/electric engine.
Yes abramx does have a engine like this but the company behind the panther it must have planned for one after all how anyone can move it around without one I think the panther has a engine you a little sily on this no tank maker would created one if they had no engine to drive any battle tanks on to a warfare
@@gjna5143 Gasguzzling? eh, all tanks are gaz guzzlers, noisy? Not at all, close in yes, far away, no.