M1A1/M1A2 Tanks in Action

Can someone get this moron a fully functional brain instead of a meat sandwich?

can some1 get this F*g out of youtube?

Sick and tired of this "best tank" S**t Tanks don't fight on their own - aircraft owns tanks (yes, even the T-90), and the "best tank" is the one you can keep alive & functioning in a war to do it's job in combination with other forces. So f*ck this theoretical bullshit, and accurate info, especially on armor, is top secret anyway! These comments are just a smattering of information & propaganda bullshit. Glad to have the NATO partners, because combined strength is what matters in the end.

Guys, not even the Hulk destroyed the M1A. He did hammer throw one though, ripped the top off of one. But since the US isn't fighting him they should be okay.
Does anyone have any stats on Tanker survivorship and casuality data?

some corrections to you comment

the MRM-CE (believe to also be called the XM1007) has a range of 8600 Meters

and the M830 HEAT-MP has the ability to take out both lowflying helicopter and tanks and the TUSK package for the Abrams increases the armor to vital areas and adds ERA to the front and side of the tank

The velocity of HEAT rounds makes no difference. Its the chemical energy on initiation that matters. Muzzle velocity is just a factor in delivering the explosive to the target.

P.S. I wouldn't brag about an auto loader

Armor.
Leo2: Composite armor.
M1A2: Composite armor + ERA over tracks.
T-90: Composite armor + all sides protection by Kontakt-5 ERA.

Active protection systems (APS):
Leo2: No APS.
M1A2: Anti radar/infrared missiles jammer. (Noname)
T-90: Anti radar/infrared missiles jammer "Stora". ATGM destroyer "Arena".

Comparison Leopard 2, M1A2Abrams and T-90:

Main gun:
Leo2: 120mm smoothbore L55.
M1A2: 120mm smoothbore L44.
T-90: 125mm smoothbore with capability of firing 9M119M anti tank/aircraft missiles and an autoloader.

Max attack range:
Leo2: 3500m
M1A2: 3500m
T-90: 6000m (using 9M119M Reflex missile)

Capability of attacking helicopters and low-flied aircrafts by antiaircraft missiles.
Leo2: No
M1A2: No
T-90: Yes (9M119M Reflex)

there beast :D go USA

F**king ass

its the best job in the army

P/T-4
All your left with is national pride and that each countries MBT is better than the others because its built in that country, IE the M1 because its from the US, the Leo2 because its from Germany..... Blah blah lol, you know the rest

P/T-3
Composite is designed to defeat KE weapons and shaped, which are more powerful. A rifled cannon is more accurate than a smoothbore, but loses KE. But then the M1 uses a gas turbine engine, S**king air in and damages it in desert environments and needs refuelling 3x to every 1x of a diesel in the Chall2 & Merkava so is less reliable. There is no best MBT. Every advantage has a disadvantage.

P/T-2
I don't think speed is critical to survivability. The M1 or Leo2 do 10+ km/h faster than the Chall2, when you consider the muzzle velocity of a APFSDS is 5700 ft/sec neither 3 MBT's will be able to out run one! It's down to armour firepower. Composite armour is the best. Spaced armour on the Leo2 is designed to defeat HEAT rounds. These are the slowest type of rounds

P/T-1
There is no best MBT in the world, its impossible to have one. There are too many factors to ensure survivability. Firepower, armour & mobility. You beef one up, you lose the other. Then there is reliability, adaptability & productabilty. The Russian tanks are S**t , but they made over 95000 T-55's, exc T-64, T-72, T-80's, we would have run out of shells before they ran out of tanks.