WW2 German Tiger vs M1 Abrams Tank War - Who Will Win? - ARMA 3
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 05. 2021
- The M1 Abrams is a third-generation American main battle tank designed by Chrysler Defense and named for General Creighton Abrams.
The Tiger I was a German heavy tank of World War II that operated beginning in 1942 in Africa and in the Soviet Union, usually in independent heavy tank battalions. It was designated Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf H during development but was changed to Panzerkampfwagen VI Ausf E during production.
Arma 3 - Bohemia Interactive - arma3.com/
store.steampowered.com/app/10...
Mods -
RHSUSAF
IFA3
►►Like !!! 👍
►►Comment !!! 💬
►►Subscribe for more videos !!! 🔴
►► bit.ly/3vSf71Y 🔔
THANKS FOR WATCHING!!! :)
"This video was created using content of Bohemia Interactive a.s."
"Copyright © 2013 Bohemia Interactive a.s. All rights reserved."
"See www.bistudio.com for more information." - Hry
Yupee!!!!! Thank you!!😍😍
Welcome! ;)
@@GaMiNGSL515Thailand modern 🇹🇭 vs 🇯🇵 empire of Japan
@@B-zu3ee hmm....they using the russian tank which used in 1950-60?
Hhhhhhhhhhhh
Yes
the most unbelievable part. 20 tigers all operation at the same time.
IKR, underrated comment
Well at least they didn't say Ferdinands
Now lets see if the Abrams can get any kills while being airdropped.
Kursk probably.
Maybe D Day.
But yeah.
Dean B
Boom! Shots fired! ^^
You wouldn’t need 5 Abrams, you’d have the same results with just one. The Irony is the 120mm smoothbore gun on the Abrams is a German design!
Yep. Rhinemetal designed it.
While The 105mm Abrams was designed by british
And America redesign a copy of a M256A1
Now that I didn't know...I knew it was a 120mm smoothbore, but I didn't know it was German engineered.
@George Smith Patton Jr. Leopard 2 to be exact! Leopard 1 was independetly designed by Porsche
As a former tank crewmen trained on the M1 Abrams, those tank crews need to check their boresight. They needed far too many shots per tiger. Sabot ammunition would have taken the tigers out before they made it to effective range. Firing on the move would have made them more difficult targets.
And air dropping Abrams is a good way to lose both the tank and the aircraft.
That bit about air-dropping an Abrams really made me cringe; while the C-17A can indeed transport an Abrams, it would have to land in order to offload it. Also, that shaking of the GPS screen when the machine guns were fired was ridiculous.
I thought that Abram tanks could fire while moving because of Gyro scopic stabilization.
@@LateLost It can. When he said "firing on the move would have made them more difficult targets", he was talking about the moving Abrams being more difficult for the Tigers to hit.
Speaking as a retired Naval Officer who has actually fired an Abrams main gun, that was some pretty poor shooting on the part of the Abrams gunners. The tank commanders weren't much better. The Tigers shouldn't have landed a round in the same zip code.
That said, a realistic encounter would have made an incredibly dull video. 5:5
Also, no one us bailing out of a Tiger after being hit by a sabot round.....
This is like putting a 90 year old in a boxing match with a silverback gorilla
Hmm... except that even with a modern-day tank, I wouldn't underestimate the punching power of a AT 88 mm shell fired by one of these WW2 German tanks.
Edit:
I mean, the muzzle velocity and the shell's weight remain the same.
So even though modern armour could shrug it off for a considerable time, I'd still not let them take as many shots at they want at me with their WW2 cannons and I'd deal with them as I'd spot them.
Not poste-haste, but I wouldn't leave them alone.
@@Briselance Modern tanks are designed to withstand penetrating rounds with many times the ability of the 88mm KwK 36. The only real damage these shells could do would be the concussive/kinetic force.
@@Briselance At 100 meters against flat armor the Tiger manages roughly 200mm of penetration with APCR, its most penning ammo on flat armor. Modern kinetic rounds go through 500mm at least, the Tiger has no chance of scratching the paint off of the Abrams frontally, and the Abrams is way too mobile for the Tiger to ever get a side shot.
Leave Mike Tyson out of this
It's more like a 13 year old kid fighting an Adult Seasoned Undefeated Unbelted MMA fighter..
Love how the Abrams Commander POV is thermal imaging with zooming capabilities, then it switches over to the Tiger Commanders POV and hes just looking through Binoculars lmao.
Oh how far we’ve come in 80 years
As a former tanker in the US Army, the accuracy of the M1A2's was shockingly bad. A target the size of a Tiger, moving as slow as a Tiger going cross-country, should have been a one-shot kill just about every time. The only time a second round might have been needed is if the Abrams had used a sabot round and the projectile passed through one side of the Tiger and out the opposite without causing a catastrophic kill. The same going for the COAX machine gun engaging the dismounted crews of the knocked out Tigers. If the weapons systems had been properly sighted-in and calibrated, no self-respecting Armor or Cavalry (Heavy) unit would have accepted such a poor showing and wasting so much time and ammunition.
Second shot wouldve been needed the same reason that they were in OIF. The tanks kept moving after sabot round went through the tanks. Every crew I resupplied wanted heat and returned the sabot rounds.
Shut up boot 😂😂😂
Gulf War version 1. When we ran down the Medina division the tanks were scoring 1 round hits against moving targets at a long enough range that the opposing tanks sights couldn't target them.
A tiger moved a lot slower than a T-72.
The only thing that the tigers gun could have done is a mobility kill targeting the tracks. I found a tungsten sabot round post war from a soviet tank that hadn't penetrated but had the first 2 inches bent at a right angle.
At the ranges in the video it would have been 1 shot 1 kill while moving.
Its an honor to reply your comment sir
Ui99999090
Hell, you could have 1 Abrams against 20 Tigers and it still wouldn't be a fair fight
Right, we could have fought the entire war with just a single M1 and wouldn't have suffered a single casualty.
@@michaelgamble2848 I wouldn't go that far, an Abrams is far and away more effective than anything made 80 years ago but it's still just one tank
@@FerretJohn yeah, and they didn't have a single weapon or armament that could damage it, one would be more than enough.
@@michaelgamble2848 The M1 isn't made of Adamantium, it can't fly over mountains or barricades or rivers, it's only got so much fuel in the tank, only so many rounds in the weapons locker, and it can't fight airplanes. Drop enough bombs on it and it will be stopped
@@FerretJohn why would it need to climb a mountain? Don't they have roads? Don't rivers have bridges? What 1940's obstacle could it not just simply drive over? You act like they can't just put more fuel and ammunition in it if it runs low.... From what I know of the tank and the bombs of then time, none of them were powerful enough to destroy it, maybe knock a track off but that's about it. If modern armour piercing munitions can't damage it, certianly nothing from that era will.
1 against 20 would probably have been the same results just a little longer
Hmm not really tigers might have a chance to disable the abrams from the rear then destroy it track ultimatly shooting the abrams untill they have no more ammo or the crew gets heat stroke
@@Bababoy6969 how exactly would a tiger that is slower than the abrams get on it's rear? plus the abrams can shoot on the move, not to mention the therman and night vision.
@@xcd87 A lucky hit to the track could immobilize the Abrams, which could allow the Tigers to make a sacrificial push around the Abrams. They would take massive losses in the maneuver to maybe get a Pyrrhic victory.
@@nilok7 dude an Abrams can engage well out to 2 kilometers. The tigers don’t stand even the slightest chance
@@Constance_tinople Depends on the terrain, but I did say the gambit needs to start with a lucky hit. Never underestimate chance to screw up a good plan.
Abrams in the Gulf War: One tapping Soviet tanks left and right
Abrams in Arma: Struggles to hit a Tiger before it’s in firing range
The M1 gunners clearly all failed gunnery school. This would have been over in 60 seconds, without the enemy even knowing from where the shell came that killed them. These tigers seem to have done better than Iraqi T-72s in 1991-1993
It's a game🤦🏾♂️.
@@subjectc7505 and. It’s a shit game. Because I’ve seen what an M1 does in combat.
It can find, track and take out other tanks at 2 kms. I remember in 91. The M1’s were hitting T 55s and 72’s at 2kms while the Iraqis were behind berms and only had a 1300 meter MER. So, those 20 Tigers would have been waisted. And the US doesn’t expose its tanks except to shoot. And it can target two tanks at once and fire on the both in seconds.
Bingo. And they wouldn't even know what punched their ticket.
But the idea of seeing the Allies Collective Jaw Drop when one of those roll in. Inspiring morale boost.
@@mikebox it’s just a game. Cool your jets.
@@knightsaberami01 There is a old old kirk douglas film i saw when i was a kid when a modern 1980s aircraft carrier goes through a storm and finds them selves pre pearl harbour and find themselves deciding whether to interfere and intercept the Japanese with a fleet of f14 tomcats and give them the suprise of their lives and change history.
The tigers would not have lasted that long. The M1's would not have missed a single shot with their guidance systems.
i think this is where the video lacks, a M1 can hit a T72 from a mile away at full speed, ARMA doesnt really simulate this, remember the Iraqui T72's didnt even know what hit them in 91
@@StormHunter71 Both T72 and abrams have the same technology, it depends on the crew how experienced and how well trained they are.
@@Sw1ftFPS No the 72s didnt have the same tech. The M1 was able to shoot on the move and could see at night. The 72s failed in both parts and got obliterated as a result. 72s failed again in OIF again for the exact same reasons.
@@Sw1ftFPS Soviet T72s, maybe - the export models were often shipped with less capable systems.
@@drtidrowthe Soviet T72 was still a hand crank gun.
You can replace the M1 with pretty much any modern main battle tank for the same results. The Tigers would all be kaput before they even realized that something was going wrong. You actually made the M1s miss too much. It would have been far easier than this vid makes it look.
Was just about to comment on how horribly nerfed the Abrams' gunnery was.
True. With a muzzle velocity of 5,450 feet per second the M1s' rounds would be hitting instantly, and personally I'd have hit those Tigers with rocks. The gunnery was THAT bad.
Thermals and flir exist like just launch smoke
The problem is the player controlling M1 Abraham of firing target. 😂✌️
M1 can fire on the move they would never need to stop unlike the tiger. Also firing a Sabot round I dont think the you would need to hit the tigers more than once
Didn’t even need to run a sim. Stand-off, armor, and the ability to shoot on the move had the Abrams hands down
Stalin: Sometimes, quantity has a quality all it's own.
M1A1: Not today.
when facing an MBT with a heavy tank, the quantity you need is gonna be in the 3 digits
@@lilzenongene just use old soviet tactics and send one tank more than the enemy has ammunition lmao
The Tiger H1 carries 92 shells so sending 93 tanks ensures a win
@@otaviom6480 not if the 93rd tank throws a track.
@@bryonslatten3147 that's why the soviets would send 200 tanks and 50000 infantry with artiraly and anti tanks, doesn't matter what you kill, they can replace everything instantly.
@@abdes6234 well russia during ww2 believe it or not was suffering from a manpower shortage so they used civilians from the countries they "liberated"
Irony the 120mm smooth bore main gun in the Abrams is a German design.
"I always like to bring a little irony to a fire fight"
Pretty sure it's still produced in Germany.
I love my VW Jetta great design
It was actually co-developed by America and Germany, with America backing out to put their own spin onto the design. That's like saying a Ford Model T is a German design because Mercedes made the first car
@@saltyfloridaman7163 Sorry to burst your bubble man, but it was the MBT.70 TANK which was a co-developed by the USA and W. Germany, not the gun. The gun is the Rheinmetall Rh-120 L/44, designed and produced EXCLUSEVELY by the West German Rheinmetall-DeTec AG company. The current Bundeswehr Leopard 2A7 currently mounts the more powerful L/55 version, not adapted by the Abrams.
I taught people how to drive the Abrams at Knox in the 80's. An experienced crew on an M1 could get HEAT kills at better than 3 miles. Recruits could get 5/6 with practice SABOT rounds at 500m while moving on hardball. With war rounds and training (the cross country speed of a Tiger was what 25 Km/h?) would be like it was standing still even at a high deflection angle
Check your math. Better than three miles = 5,000 meters, the M1's computer only generated a ballistic solution out to 4,000 meters.
@@DK-ed7be Longest acknowledged shot is 5100m. With APFSDS. HEAT rounds go father and a Tiger is a bigger target than a T-72. Also, everybody trains for when the computer goes down.
Just curious did you know a Chrysler engineer named Glen Orourk (however its spelled
@@duanesamuelson2256 No, that name does not ring a...Wait...O'Rourke. (I had to sound out your original) It sounds familiar but I can't put a name to a face, so I am going to say no
@@MunDane68 Chrysler engineer that led the design team for the gun site/tracking system... sorry about you having to sound out his name lol.
I was just curious since you were involved in the early days and he did a lot a running around doing training in the late 70's early 80's.
I got a guided tour (along with a lot of others) of the factory because of him (friends with my dad, and previously had worked for my father when my dad was designing the drive for the GAU ).
Neat vid, so painful to watch the Abrams miss so much though. With the systems in the tank, the tank itself does *not* miss. The gunner does. All he has to do is aim center of mass, it does not matter how the tank or target is moving, it will hit. You do not have to apply lead or windage or anything in an Abrams, the computer does all the calculations for you.
Does Arma model that system?
@@GeraldMMonroe I do not know, it'd be cool if they did though.
As long as you get a good laser return.
@@patraic5241 That is correct! And also, as long as the gunner has the right ammo selected lmao. Watching that sabot fly way over the damn target, you cringe inside cuz you know "Damn, Its still on HEAT" and you wait for range control or your TC to come over comms with some smart ass remark and prob a smack to the back of your head. Good times
@@stonecyfer8225 Oh yeah. I've seen it happen. 😂
The amazing feat here would have been the Germans having 20 working Tigers in a single battle to begin with.
They had more than 20 at the battle of Kursk!
@@t.versteeg3723 Nice! What I said was more of a joke. The Tiger was notorious for being difficult to fix and maintain on the field as it was over engineered.
20 tigers in the same infantry would be like chainsaws in a pile of wood, would destroy the enemy formations in half.
@@frisk_tw6024 Except if they went up against a single M1 Abrams
@@AD-1138 true
In real life, each M1 would fire 4 rounds from beyond the Tigers’ range then head back to where the HETs were waiting.
or alternatively in real life you wouldn't be able to shoot 4km. houses, hills, forests,.. if this was in the German Rheinland you'd have only a few hundred meters unless you somehow end up shooting from one hillside to another
WWII tanks like the PzIV and IS faced more modern tanks like the Centurion in the Six Days War in the 1967 and were easily demolished by the 105mm. An M1 with the 120mm sabot rounds would be almost invincible against a Tiger. The Tiger couldn’t knock out the IS frontally even at close range.
Well obviously. But if you can flank it, you can still destroy a modern tank from sides and rear because the armour is like 30-60mm thick and Tiger 1 APCBC rounds penetrated up to 190mm. It's invulnerable, yes, but frontally. If you throw enough numbers you'll eventually get swarmed and killed.
Also metal fatigue is a factor, you shoot the plate long enough, it will eventually deform and break. Chip away bit by bit until it eventually penetrates. However obviously a Abrams or any modern tank can just outrun them even in reverse so landing shots on it would be extremely difficult. But still, everything can be destroyed with enough numbers. Nothing is invulnerable.
Also you can destroy an Abrams with HE rounds by attempting trapshots between the hull and turret, or shooting the upper hatches and the shockwave will cave in the top of the tank right on the crew - top being the least armoured part and even relatively small HE shells can do it.
Or... You just pepper the tank with HE until every external module - cannon, machine guns, optics, communications and tracks are destroyed. Sure the crew will live and tank will be intact but will be basically a bare metal bunker and nothing else.
@@egonieser the tiger is way to slow to flank a modern tank.... and makes way to many noises to not hear it flank. Plus many modern tanks even have to much armor on the side to survive at guns so i think the tiger would have 0 chance.
This match is kind of useless because you know who would win by not watching the vid
@@Rahayu.76 yes the Israeli M-51 Super Sherman. I love that tank. Imagine if those were around in 1944.
@@cedric9874 I'm talking in large enough numbers obviously not 1 Vs 1. Abrams can still only shoot one target at a time. The enemy can spread out enough to land shots from various angles. Also not all fights are in the open. In urban environment a Tiger fan flank an Abrams and you can't see them through buildings. Numbers will eventually win anyway. While Abrams engages tanks in front, there's nothing stopping some Tigers (or any tank for that matter) flanking it from around the building. The situations can be endless.
But obviously it's all only hypothetical, none of this would ever happen IRL, it's just for a bit of fun and speculation
@@egonieser 14 M1s destroyed a entire brigade in desert storm. Between 30-50 armored vehicles if memory serves. Your argument lacks real knowledge of the tank. Sorry, just my opinion.
dude a single M60 can wipe out the entire set lolz
Some of this is believable except for the multiple rounds fired at each PZKPFW 6. The tank tables at Ft. Hood, Texas would be more of a challenge to the Abrams. I personally witnessed the Abrams go through Iraqi armor like a hot knife through butter. Oh, I also think heavy dropping an Abrams by parachute is a bigger flight of fancy that finding a single operational PZKPFW 6 Tiger. I did enjoy the video though.....thanks.🌴
I'd take 5 M1s(that can be kept running/supplied) in WWII over 400 Tiger tanks.
the problem with that is, AIR POWER, once the enemy knows you have 5 SUPER ULTRA MEGA TANKS, those tanks are going to be PRIORITY #1 to eliminate, German Stukas could be fitted with 500lb bombs (which they used in WW2 to take out thousands of Soviet tanks) Pretty sure a Stuka dropping a 500lb bomb on an M1 is going to do some damage.
Just take 200 tigers to run at top speed and ram over the M1 will have a greater chance
@@tbirum 500kg*
500lbs is 220kg and those can ve carried by a Bf 109
The R2 Stuka could carry even a 1000kg (2200lb) bomb at the cost of basically not being able to lift off the ground from the weight and slightly underpowered engine
@@tbirum The Stukas would have been the tank killer variant with the big cannons on the side. They used them to great effect on the Eastern front against even better tanks than the US and British had through most of WW2.
@@tbirum Firstly, you would need a direct hit on top of it to do any damage, at most the tracks would get knocked off. There's video footage of Abrams going over giant IED's and surviving perfectly fine after getting flung into the air. You're also assuming the Abrams would be a stationary target for the stuka to be anywhere close to accurate. All WW2 tanks needed to be still in order to be remotely accurate. Abrams is deadly accurate at top speed. also you're assuming that the Germans would even be able to see them from over 2 miles away with their more primitive optics.
If you look at a tiger as a slower, bigger less heavily armed less armored t55 and then look at what abrams did to t55s in reality in 1991, it likely wouldn't have taken this long and the tiger's never would have gotten off a shot.
Yeah they never would have seen the Abrams before they were all destroyed
Here is one difference I will give to the Tigers vs the T-55s. The Tigers would have been professionally trained soldiers for the most part depending on the year the wehrmacht troops came from. The Iraqis in the T-55s? They probably barely knew how to drive the tank and fire the gun.
Waw murica comparing his tank to a WW2 tank what a fair fight🙄
@@kkjkkj2584 How about we put in a Leopard or a Challenger or a Merkava? Would that satisfy your idiotic comment about any modern tank going back in time and battling one of the strongest tanks of WW2. They picked the Abrams because they are one of the best tanks in the world. But the ending would still be the same with all the tanks I mentioned.
@@kkjkkj2584 Nazi sympathizer
yea right dropping a 70 ton tank out of an airplane and expecting it looks like a tank when it lands
And with the crew already buttoned up inside to boot.😹🤦♂️
It would have been a tank-cake.
The green screen sight-picture of the Abrams remains me of the 80's arcade game ' Battle Zone '.
Not much makes me smile after the army....this kinda warmed my old tanker heart and put a smile on my face. In real life though, this whole battle would have lasted about 60 seconds...vs just one single Abrams crew. #facts
The Abrams loader would deserve a medal for pulling that off
Average 3 seconds per shell, if you assume the breech is empty until they sighted the first Tiger.
@@roguevector1268 In 2009, my crew shot top top of my regiment. We had a 3 tank engagement all main gun that put us to those points for top tank. My crew killed 3 tanks in 10.3 seconds. That's a round out the barrel every 3.4 seconds. Yes our loader very much was putting up 3 second load times, but the whole crew made that happen in that time frame. We were all awarded ARCOMs and got aft cap trophies for it. yay us right?
And no Abrams runs empty breach in combat...that's silly. Most every crew will have SABOT or HEAT indexed, and change accordingly if needed. Not like the Tiger could even penetrate Abrams armor anyways...it would be a turkey shoot.
Next episode: Army of Spartans vs 1 Abram
Machine guns: hehe buayyyyy
If you take the largest contingent, sparta ever fielded, 5000 Spartan Hoblites, 10000 Perioikoi Hoblites, 200 Mounted Scouts, 36000 light armed consisting of Perioikoi Peltasts, Skiritai, Mercenaries and of the largest part, Helotes. The light armed troops armed with bows, slings, javelins, swords, daggers, axes and light shields, I would say the Abram has no chance to survive. It will cause enormous casulties but will be broken. As the greeks can see that it is an armed vehicle covered in steel, they will propably try to throw pots with burning oil on it. When that covers the air openings and other gabs, it will be soon a bad thing for the tank. And the tank has most likely not enough ammunition for such a large army. When we think about the fact that most bullets will not hit something. I think it is still realistic that Sparta will report zero casulties (Mercenaries and Helot slaves can't be taken as serious casulties). While the Americans kill maby 1-2000 enemies, maby more.
This scenario is of course in the rough mountainous regions of greece as the americans attack. It is most unrealistic for Sparta to invade other, larger powers. And in these regions it is easy for the lightly armed Lakedaimonian troops to surround that tank. They could even try to starve the tank crew. like the afghan did to the russians. In this chase the Abram is in an even worse situation, because even if they try, in ancient greece is no chance to refuel that thing. They run quickly out of food, water and fuel. Have to surrender and are most likely put into slavery. The soldiers in the tank don't even have a chance against the skirmishers of the Lakedaimonian State, when they are outside the tank. Arrows and sling leads don't give you a clear direction from where the enemy shoots, arrows show the general direction and lead and stones none. Arrowheads slid open Kevlar, like knifes do, too. And sling ammunition like lead and stones don't penetrate but smash anything under the armor. And a 200g lead ball is not funny when it hits with 300mps.
@@jarlnils435 I disagree.The Abrams would just have to drive through them at full tilt,those not killed outright would rout and be picked off by secondary armament and Mpat rounds
@@stevenbreach2561 you clearly have no idea how a battle works or how ancient armies work.
First: to muster an army of that scale, half of the Lakedaimonian male population of the right age, the spartan kings and elder council have to recognize and understand, what danger comes from the tank. So there have to be an early skirmish.
Second: When they have understood the danger, and mustered that army, they would know to not engage an for them clearly recognizeble artillery engine in a open battle and in phalanx formation but they would skirmish, trying to attack from multible points with light infantry, trying to throw pots with burning oil into the gabs, it is clear for them that there where hot air and smoke comes out a way into the war vehicle is. There they would throw their fire bombs at.
Third: they would never use their whole army at one time. But sneaky troops. Night attacks. They would make sure that the soldiers never have a time out. They would be under constant alarm, never sleeping. For days. Even if there is no attack, it needs only a few slingers to throw rocks at the tank every few minutes from their hiding in the hillsides, bushes and woods.
Fourth: At some point the soldiers have to try and leave the tank to get some water and maby food. And when they leave, they will get attacked and killed by hundreds of missles, shot at them without warning and without any sound.
@@jarlnils435 whatever
As an armor officer and having been at all positions, I think you're slightly off if I watched this correctly. There were alot of misses by the M1 crews. Given the LRF and ballistic computer, the first round hits would be alot higher.....Also, alot more engagements would occur using the daylight reticle. I think the distances were pretty accurate --couldn't judge as well but it looked like about 800-1200 meters based on some of the shots. I'm also interested if the simulation had stabalization built into the Abrams program...I saw alot of stopping to fire...not uncommon, but we trained to fire on the move and hit targets quite accurately. There's alot of comments here saying 1 tank could have taken all 20 out----That is possible, but, based on what I've seen here, it'd taken quite a few hits..and the issue you run into is the impact, while not causing a catrostrophic kill, would have probably taken its toll on the systems. However, if I were the platoon leader, the engagement would have lasted no more than a few minutes with more discipline in terms of fire and segmenting the opposing force out---little more organized maneuver--again the ability of the M1 to get good speed and fire on the move could have been optimized here. anyway, was good to watch
That's what I love the most modern tanks use a computer to figure out how to land a shot while the German crews did it without a computer go figure who has the more gun skills.
@@wulfthofengaming457 And guess how much that counts for when that APFSDU sabot smashes in one side of your turret, and out the other, leaving your crew splattered all over the inside of their wrecked tank. Just sayin’.
@@AMylander you want to know the funny part sure a american tank useing a german main gun to kill german tanks go figure. Just so if you have doubts The gun, known as the M256, was based on the L/44 tank gun, although manufactured at Watervliet Arsenal. Tanks armed with versions of Rheinmetall's gun produced under licence.
@@wulfthofengaming457 Ironic, yet irrelevant.
@@wulfthofengaming457 War is about winning and bringing your opponent to the negotiating table, it's not a sport or a videogame. Even modern day German Leopards utilize computers for firing. Also, complaining how America utilizes a german main gun is asinine considering how weaponry is exchanged and borrowed since the dawn of time. The panzerschreck utilized by Germans in the late part of the war was a reverse engineered American bazooka, the only difference is that they increased its size.
TUSK was a bit overkill. Not like the 88 would have ever got a chance to hit the abrams side.
That make The tank much cooler than regular one
@@enochvarga7570 Even if a tiger got into position to attack the side of an abrams, which it wouldn't, I'm pretty sure it still wouldn't get to the crew compartment. What you're thinking about with RPGs is ERA, which is an add-on on top of the sideskirts. Below that, there's still the equivalent of ~300-400mm of armor which an 88 doesn't have a hope of penetrating.
@@xavi.cat.4095 300-400mm....for HEAT proyectiles
@@enochvarga7570 Well we agree on the 88 then. Sure it would go through tusk like butter but be stopped by the armor. I didn't really say anything about MBT armor layouts though so I'm not sure why you wrote a whole text about it. I just said ERA is put on the sides because ERA is especially effective against HEAT projectiles like RPGs while composite has no special advantage against it because its focus is on stopping solid projectiles. There are other things I could reply to in your comment but it's pretty off-topic so I won't.
@@katze3659 the 300-400mm measurement is the composite armor translated to rolled homogeneous armor, HEAT shells are usually countered with ERA
the tigers would win, because there are no abrams tanks left, you can"t parachute those damn things in
Ah yep you can sorry, it's not done but is capable. Aircraft has to be at 150mph for drop. Stryker or Bradley for airdrop armoured support usually.
@@2566Conan nope, not in testing. Didn't work.
And do the crews supposedly parachute in seperately?
@@bdinaz Yes. In airdrops and LAPES, The crew parachutes individually. Riding the silk in the AFV is pure Hollywood.
@@HM2SGT M1A2 Abrams is close to 70tons
@@HM2SGT yeah, they tried doing an airdrop of an unloaded and unfueled m1 a long time ago with disastrous results.
There is no airborne drop capability for a 60 ton tank. LAPES, Low Altitude Parachute Extraction System is the only way aircraft can deliver an M1 Abrams to the battlefield.
Actually the Tiger 1 tanks win by default.
M1 Abrams are too heavy to be airdropped - so in this scenario the Tiger crews would be standing around 5 large craters, kicking in clods of dirt, and wondering W.T.F.
You got me in the first half ngl
only in a 56 v 1 can the tigers win, and thats bc the M1 Abrams would have run out of ammo
Ehh...40 v 1. Abrams magazine is around 40 rounds.
@@CombatIneffective so we talk about ~14-20 vs 1, because the Abrams accuracy will be ~33% to 50%
I would agree with that. This fight was 4 vs 1 since it was 20 vs 5.
@@oliverbecker8906 Even then, m1 abrams can sit just outside the tigers range. either that or get close at night since the tiger lacks any kind of optic enhancing technology
@@oliverbecker8906 with professionally trained crews manning them? I feel the accuracy would be 50% on the very low end or if by some chance, a tiger scores a hit on the optics of an Abrams. But that is if they can get in range to start with. The Abrams is confirmed scoring tank kills out to 2,500 meters. The tiger had kills scored out to 1,200 meters. That is more than double the range. How many rounds can an abrams crew fire during that massive distance before a Tiger even gets in range to score a hit? And not even a kill shot mind you. The armor of a tiger was 120mm thick at best. An Abrams has some spots at 350mm and that is low end.
I think the only factor is accuracy and precision of the crew firing the 120mm gun and ammo supply. Low end is 20 to 1 in my thoughts, but that is 50% accuracy.
The Abrams like sh*t through a goose. Those relatively low velocity 88mm sabot rounds from the Tigers aren't penetrating the Abrams Cobham armor even in the unlikely event they get within range to fire a shot on target.
Why wasn't the Abrams ability to fire at speed shown? Abrams don't have to stand still to get shots off unlike the Tigers who had to stand still.
Mostly a limitation of the game
This is War of Thunder. It isn't World of Warcraft.
@@cristsan4171 Its actually Arma 3, which doesn't have many limitations...
well its kind of doctrinal.
even tho, modern mbt with fully stabilised guns and sights can fire on the move at higher speeds, in general they perform a so called "Feuerhalt" a firing stop. this is part of the training and is there to ensure full accuracy the highest hit propability.
@@toasturself7228
Like you said, Army tree, not war of witchcraft
I would actually want to see if the Tigers could knock out an Abrams from an ambush. I mean, they'd still all die, I just want to see if they can knock one out.
Wondered the same thing. An ambush from a hull down position
Only thing to kill an abrams was another abrams
Good luck trying to penetrate that ERA (Explosive Reactive Armor)
It would not take more than 1 depleted uranium shell to completely eradicate a tiger from the earth.
LOL there is *no way in hell* that a Tiger would have a chance against an Abrams. Just set an egg timer and it's done. 😂
If a t-72 can’t beat it then why would an outdated heavy tank from 70 years ago could beat this well designed masterpiece? 😂
abrams: laughs in 120mm with 2 miles accurate range and chobham armor
Wouldn’t that be awsume if we could send our M1 Abrams tanks into 1940’s to help our boys.
Send em to singlehandedly demolish the Africa Korps.
would be a short event, M1 winning.... Until it ran out of 120mm ammo or out of Jet Fuel! then its just an armored box on the side of road/field.
The Final Countdown-The Ground War Sequel
@@Torthak stationary bunker that can shoot you with auxiliary power lol
@@Torthak Once it's sitting still though, it's a dead duck.
A single Abrams would literally withstand any engagement with any German Ww2 tank even if it was possible that if it were hit. However, there’s no way even the most experience German tank team would even know where it is before they turn into minced meat.
Specially a German tank crew that just marches into a open field valley and sacrifices themselves to a much more superior fire power.
Make it REALLY EPIC.....4 M1A2 SEPv3's platoons against The ENTIRE 7TH PANZER DIVISION!!!
Ok that is enough the Abrams will be just useless unless they use like an sniper attack but in an tank gun
I approve it
@@ssb2lostplayer926 16 vs 218
That would mean each Abrams would need to kill around 14 tanks. 18 rounds in the ready-rack and another 18 in the semi-ready.
MPAT, CAN, and OR would be the rounds you'd need. No need to bother with APFSDS, MPAT would be more efficient.
RIP to the loaders loading up all that at the ammo point and then loading in the engagement.
@@orangephoenixbrazier4978 then they attack them from afar with radar stuff and be reinforced by more tanks but I think the budget will be uhh idk
Nice action! I think a few things; 1, only one Abrams tank would have been enough in the above scenario and 2, with gun stabilization, radar and computer guidance, nearly every shot would be a kill. Due to infrared and light amplification, fighting at night would be an even greater advantage for the Abrams. Furthermore, the Abrams would have greater range and superior armor. Unlikely for a Tiger to dent an Abrams in this scenario. I could say more, however, I suspect that asynchronous threats/terrorists carefully read comments from videos like this.
Do 100 tigers vs. 5 Abrams, but do it at night with a 3km range of engagement. I imagine the engagement would be even more one sided.
The Germans would certainly recognize the familiar sound of the Browning machine gun mounted on those Abrams. Brownings been in service since WW2.
20 tigers against 5 T-72s would be more interesting.
Battlefield 2042 portals be like
fantasy scenario where the Tigers all have enough fuel, arent breaking down, and the M1A have a civilian aiming the gun
Even then, a civilian aiming the gun would have the targeting computer do most of the work for them and do better than ARMA 3 (which sadly doesn't seem to do the calculations).
A civilian named Stevie Wonder.
Oh, geez, with the Abrams defending from defilade? Modern T-72’s would have trouble with that scenario.
couldn't have gone any other way unless the tigers were able to spring an ambush
Really all this does is showcase the advancements of 75 years of battle tank technology. A Tiger tank round would likely do nothing but bounce off the depleted uranium armor of the M1 Abrams tank, while the M1Abrams is able to send a 120mm AP round right through the armor of the Tiger Tank like a hot knife through butter in one shot. No surprise of the result. Although this video failed to show case the M1 Abrams gyroscopically balanced barrel, and target tracking scope for automatic aiming adjustments for moving targets, and firing on the move capabilities. The real results should’ve been even more unfair. This video showed the M1 Abrams missing a lot of shots, and in real life, every shot would’ve been a direct hit destroying the Tiger in one shot kills easily. I know this is a simulation game, and it’s not going to be able to accurately do everything to real life, but it could’ve easily added the gyroscopically balanced barrel and target tracking, to the game. For it’s day, and time period of available technology the Tiger tank was indeed a very high tech superior battle tank. It and the King Tiger or Tiger 2 were the absolute most feared tank on the battlefield during WWII. The tank featured the thickest armor of all other tanks, and had the biggest most powerful main gun at the time. Also paired with the fasted shooting machine guns, the MG42, as a top of turret machine gun, and an MG34 in the hull. Also the Panzer divisions were the first tank division in the world to be linked together by radio, a game changer on the battlefield. This meant that multiple tanks could communicate back and forth, without exposing the tank commander.
The 88 couldn’t penetrate even the side armor of the abrams so as long as the tiger didn’t get a point blank shot to the rear of the abrams it’s unbalanced completely lol
@SchoolTerrorist No, because even the short 75mm Sherman has a chance at knocking out a Tiger frontally, and the 76mm Sherman reliably penetrates the front at distance. The Tiger wasn't a bad tank, but it is massively overhyped.
@@Theo-vn9hm haha it feels more like a t-26 vs a panther
I would THINK that with the M1's superiority ion firing range, and radar controlled thermal gunsights, the M1 would kill many if not all the Tigers before the Tigers ever knew what hit them. And not only that - the Tiger had one serious flaw - it could NOT fire when moving!!!
I really hope you aren't being serious about radar controlled anything on an M1.
@@Abrams-dq5fi Maybe "radar" isn't the correct term. It does have a much better targeting system than the Tiger.
they do not have radar controlled gun sights.
The Americans: _"Oh, how the tables have turned."_
this like in the novel of "america in another world" in the war of americans vs "nazielfs" tanks that had "magictigers" vs M1 Abrams.
Magipanzer
I guess...
@@krisyoung681 yea, it is, but i said magic-tiger to refer to a tiger tank of nazis but with magic. XD
@@josuereyeshernandez8180 you saw this novel in scribblehub?
Elf nazi
@@krisyoung681 lmao you guys read it too?
did Tigers score even a ssingle hit on Abrams? obviously M1 can hit Tiger before Tiger even sees it- so not a really fair fight. its like sending 100s of ww2 messershids/illushins vs a single modern Mig or F. modern jets would easily destroy all of ww2 counterparts miles and miles before they even detect them. i am wondering how would M1 do with a direct frontal/side/rear hit from Tiger or King perhaps even maus?
they cant pin an abrams from the front or the sides even at point blank range... in fact they probably couldnt pin any modern first world nations main battle tank.
there is some stuff floating around online of the results of old tanks verses the abrams, showing off that the most they can do is put a few dings in the armor. its frankly amazing how far we've come in 75+ years
Here is a difference. The piston engined fighters of the era would actually have a somewhat better chance if they get in close. While missiles provide the standoff ability, the quick closure rate with the different speeds means the radars and IR seekers might not lock the targets right. The piston engine aircraft could actually turn better in some cases too.
Alternative Title: War Thunder Matchmaking re-created in Arma 3.
Because of the Infrared tech. the Abram got shots off before the Tiger even saw them. Equip the tigers with Infrared and then lets see what happens. Pretty sure an Abrams can't deflect an 88mm shell from a Tiger.
The irony that the gun on the Abrams is German made.
To be fair, 20 tigers would struggle against a single Abrams.
The best chance they would have would be to go for a mobility kill on the tracks, damage the barrel or damage the commander’s optics, and then manoeuvre to go for a rear hit to the turbine. Nothing the Germans have to shoot can penetrate the DU and composite armour that the Abrams has front or side-on but they might be able to neutralise its ability to fight with enough pressure and peeking - the Abrams can only swing to bear on a single target at a time.
I'd like to see them rebuild the tiger tank with today's technology and see how it'd fair against today's tanks. I bet people would be surprised.
They were far ahead of their time when they were originally built and a better design than anything the allies had. If they could of produced them at the same rate as American M4s and Russian T34s the out come of the war may have been totally different.
@@Buttonssf The tiger was overpriced, had shitty fuel consumption, tendency for the tracks to freeze in ice and mud and was overweight so couldn't cross many bridges. You unironically hit the point there - they *couldnt* produce them at the same rate, because they were overengineered, as with most other german weaponry in the war (MP40 build time vs PPSh-42 or M3 is a similar example of german overengineering and special tooling costing them in production rate).
Sure, it had a mean gun and formidable armour, but how often were tiger tanks actually engaged by allied armour in the war vs immobilised by infantry or artillery? Almost as many Tiger tanks were lost due to non-combat losses than combat losses, (panzerworld.com/tiger-losses)
Modern tanks would beat a tiger due to ability to move and shoot accurately due to stabilisation and better optiics/ballistic computers, outperform it in range, outperfom it in speed and being able to absolutely penetrate it due to advancements in HEAT and APFSDS ammunitions. It wouldn't stand a chance.
@@TeeDubzz OH I agree, but it's also unfair to compare a tiger tank to an abrams. They both have different technologies. Now if they did like I said and rebuilt the tiger with today's technology and compared the two. It'd be a little more better of a comparison as they'd be equal technology wise.
I'd absolutely love for them to rebuild the tiger, king tiger, panther, M4 T34-85 and put today's technology into them. I bet they'd be cheaper to produce and would Excell. That's just what I think.
As gasoline is more pure today than it was back then. Steel and manufacturing procedures are definitely much better compared to world War 2 time.
I don't know, I think it'd be interesting to see.
@@Buttonssf well to be blunt if we made them today their designs would by necessity be completely different.
-Their conventional armor would have to be replaced by composite armor to even remotely stand a chance of surviving a direct hit from anything in service which takes up a hell of a lot more space and would be impossible to put on a tank even remotely shaped like a WW2 tank. While the frontal hull and turret armor of the Tiger 1 got up to a max of 4.1in (102mm) thick modern composite armors take up several feet of space.
-There are no modern tank guns small enough to fit any of their turrets either as 88mm guns like those on the Tiger are simply outdated and underpowered. Quite simply there's nothing advantageous about those WW2 designs if you tried to update them to modern standards using existing modern technology.
-The designs are grossly inefficient to protect from modern threats (especially air power, APFSDS, and HEAT) as their armor profiles were too boxy with no sloping to increase the effective protection (this only appeared by the time the Panther and Tiger 2 were introduced). This was a major downfall of the Tiger as for all it's vaunted "impenetrable armor" even in WW2 it could be penetrated even by the standard 75mm Sherman at 300m and by the 76mm armed Sherman from out to 800m with the standard APCBC shell and out to 1,100m with the HVAP/APCR shell. The likes of the M26 Pershing's 90mm gun and the T26E4's Long 90mm gun simply made a joke out of the armor found on the likes of the Tiger 1, Panther, and Tiger 2.
-To make the capable of surviving even a few hits from modern ammunition you'd need to increase the size and change the profile to allow the addition of sloped composite armor
-To make the tank capable of killing any of it's contemporaries it'd need the turret enlarged to fit a gun at minimum 105mm in diameter and optimally a 120mm gun.
To make any WW2 design work as a modern design you'd need to change the tank so aggressively as to completely divorce itself from the design you were arguing a point for in the first place. These designs never came up again for a reason, they're simply garbage by modern standards and the likes of Tiger 1 were already garbage and outclassed by late 1944 into 1945 when it started meeting opponents that could frontally penetrate it's once impervious armor at long ranges and more reliably resist it's once unstoppable gun.
inside certain ranges and at certain angles, the Abrams can move faster than the Tigers can traverse their turrets, while also firing on the move.
I don't know, how long time i searched this! THANK YOU!!!
The Tiger 88 should demolish the tracks of any modern MBT.
I knew that the M1A1 Abrams tank would win that fight.
Yeah this is interesting as a gaming meme, but actually pretty fucking stupid from a reality stand point. The M-1 Abrams has a first shot hit ratio of over 90% and your vid shows them missing time and time again, ALSO - in the real world the gunner would just lay the sights right on the target NOT LEAD IT and hope for a hit. Also - a hit ANYWHERE on a WWII German Tiger tank from a modern Sabot tank round would either be a catastrophic kill with the tank going up like a volcano, or a mobility kill. And I am pretty sure after the first couple of tanks exploded and went up, the rest of their buddies would be looking to run like hell the other way, because they were being engaged at ranges they could not return fire, hell they probably would not even know the enemy was even there, except their shit was blowing up. The M-1 eats modern Russian tanks as a snack.... anything Germany had in the 1940's is a fucking joke compared to a modern main battle tank.
I think we gave a bunch of them away for free to the Taliban
Next up: 5 F-22 fighter jets vs. 20 biplanes. But, you know, really good biplanes.
How about 50 shermans vs 5 German Leopard 2. That would be more fun. 🤣
Imagine this in war thunder ngl would be more realistic due the killing physics
You can set this up in WT and in DCS.
I kill a abrams With a Tiger 2 With a frontal shot at 500 meters
The Tigers' 88mm would barely scratch the paint on an Abrams. Whereas the Abrams would kill a Tiger on every direct hit. This would be true of most, if not all, modern MBTs.
@@mickd8490 Lol Gunners aren't that good enough to Hit that turret ring,this ain't warthunder my friend,
Abrams tank crews will just fire them at longer distances , they're all fucked before they would see an Abrams tank,that's what happened to the fxkn T-72's during the Iraq war LOL
@@mickd8490 Please, do go on. I want to know what you have to say.
@@mickd8490 what too much warthunder does to a mf:
Whenever it showed the guy with binoculars and he wasn’t seeing a thing. Then it showed the Abrams using thermal and watching them the whole time. I was just like d*nm.
I wrote a short story in college in the 90s, about a tank platoon in the late 80s on a NATO training exercise in France going back to 1944 by a freak of nature and taking on German tanks just like this...
Its what you would call a "Target rich environment" for the Abrams
if this was war thunder it would be the tigers win because of driver viewport
Target rich environmental for our M1 Abrams to shoot at.
*Puts tiger tank in park and walks away.
Abrams tank will definitely win. It can fire accurately at top speed. It has more than enough firepower to pierce the frontal armor of a tiger and doubt one single tiger will get a hit in and if it does the Abrams tank will just shrug it off.
How about Challenger 2 vs Tiger
Same result, Abrams is inspired by challenger
@@kim99jung not in the slightest was the Abrams inspired by Challenger, the Chobham armour is a British invention but that's as far as it goes.
As a former 19E aka Armored Vehicle Crewman for M-48A5/ M-60/ M-60A1/ M-60A3/ M-551 Armored Fighting Vehicles and Main Battle Tanks who also compared notes with 19K Armored Vehicle Crewmen M-1/ M-1A1/ M-1A2 and variations the game Abrams tankers used more ammunition than necessary. The Abrams has a decent thermal sight and a fantastic gyro stabilizer. Each of the five Abrams involved in this simulation should have only needed four rounds each. That is were there experienced gunners and tank commanders, working with experienced drivers and loaders, at the firing controls. As a 19E who served as a loader and as a driver on the M-60 and the M-60A3 Pattons the crew I served with on the M-60 would have shot from a hull down position then moved to the next hull down position stopping during movement only to shoot a sabot on a Tiger of opportunity. On the M-60A3 as a Driver I would be keeping my tank behind cover and concealment allowing my Gunner or Tank Commander a stable firing platform to augment the turret's gyro-stabilization system. On a modern battle field an M-60A3 is an ambush predator like a leopard where the M-1 series is a chaser like a cheetah.
What mod do you use for the Abrams cuz I have the WWll one with the tigers but I can't find a decent Abrams one and I like the M1A2's with the TUSK package in this
What about 15 Leopard 1s vs 20 T-14 Armatas?
Wouldn't that be unfair
You mean the opposite
Is there even 15 armatas?
Wouldnt even get near them in real life they would be destroyed before they knew what was shooting at them
Edit: pretty damn realistic
The other Panzer waiting around the corner:
Inside tiger
“Lead tank just blew up!! Aaaahhhh it’s firing again!”
Inside Abrams
Plink.. plink.. “lol they shooting again”
And now leopard 2 vs Sherman. You genius
I believe it would be 1 shot/kills for the Abrams, no 2nd shot needed.
Further the engagement range would probably be farther with the optics/computers of the Abrams.
The most realistic part: Tiger tanks just blowing up outta nowhere, because the Abrams is far outside the visibility range of the Tiger.
Pretty much what I expected. I was *Surprised though to not have seen even one Tiger break down of Mechanical problems :).
The Arbrams can't be dropped from the air.
Sure it can- once.
Now just imagine if the German army had 5 M1 Abram tanks.
forgot about Leopard tank?
Our tanks fought export-only versions of solid Soviet armor. In the event, the M1 scored hits at great distances, using laser guidance, GPS, etc. In other words, the poor outdated Tiger I would never have scored a hit on the M1 except in the Bocage country of WW2...
Tiger commander: where am I? Who’s shooting me? Who should I shoot?
M1 Commander: marking kill counts.......
Also Tiger commander: hacker! (rage voice)
Ooo- I wonder, will you be doing another D-Day / invasion style video?
But this time with Arma 3's NATO against WW2 Germans.
NATO will win because Britain and the USA is in NATO with nuclear warheads (except France because its not in NATO but in EU) if the NATO countries fight with the Germans the EU members will also join even if you are not in EU or you are EU for example Turkey is not in EU but its in NATO in result non EU countries will also join unless they are not in NATO or EU but they can use brexit lol
Lmao the German's would get crushed faster than a soda can in a hydraulic press.
There shouldn’t even been a chance for the tigers as the 105mm gun easily out ranges the 88mm on the Tiger. Game over!
Both the m1a1 and a2 have a 120mm smoothbore gun.
@@jesseservin4012 Thanks for the correction. My recollection was from the first generation M1 which had the 105mm. The point is still valid. This would out range the 88mm on the tiger easily.
@@RobertAndersonRALA true, wich is why I referred to the a1 and the a2 instead of the original m1.
@@jesseservin4012 the original Abrams are all updated
Should try 50 Sherman tanks vs 5 leopard 2 tanks
I would hate to be the mechanic who had to replace all the front idler arms on those air-dropped Abrams.
Conclution: Spelling Error
Conclusion: Almost accurate. M1 Abrams should be moving while firing.
5 abrams hands down. They have much greater stand off and targeting capability. And frankly we’ve already seen what Abrams can do when greatly out numbered by a slightly inferior tank. Battle of 73 Easting, 9 Abrams destroyed 28 Iraqi tanks and numerous other armored and wheel vehicles in about 30 mins. Zero casualties for the Abrams. It’s a tough old bitch and she’s got a mean bite. Most of the tigers would be destroyed before they could get within range of the Abrams. Abrams can kill tigers at 3000+ yards. Tigers 88mm Gun would have to get well inside of 500-600 meters to have enough punch to destroy an Abrams, which is knife fighting range for tanks. And even at that range the tiger can do is a mobility kill or a bent gun tube which is what the video showed, catastrophic kill would be extremely rare. Especially since the only other tank to get a catostrophic kill on an Abrams is another Abrams. T-62 and T-72 tanks in the gulf pitched a big ole “0 for”. Roosky’s didn’t like the optics of the gulf on their beloved 62s and 72s.
A Tiger's 88 cannot hurt an M1 even at point-blank range. An Abram's front armor is 600mm equivalent RHA(rolled homogeneous armor) and it's sides and rear are 300. The KwK36's APCBC shot can pen 122mm at 1km, APCR 185mm at same.
@@benlaskowski357 amount of armor covering the power pack in the back? 0…. Spent many a morning standing behind an Abrams warming up before we mounted up and rolled out.
@@nickbryan217 How much armor is there?
@@benlaskowski357 practically none in the rear where the power pack is. Frontal armor is tough nut, side armor is decent but after the number 1&2 skirts there’s not much armor protecting the track unless you have the TUSK. So like I said the Tiger could score a mobility kill (bust the track, road wheel, drive sprocket, torsion bars, etc.), maybe get lucky and take the gun out, or get really luckily and sneak behind and shoot it in the ass. Ass shot will most likely take out power pack, so definitely a mobility kill or they could get really lucky and get a catastrophic. But, and this is a huge BUT, the Abrams will identify, target, and destroy the Tigers before the Tigers will ever even see the Abrams. That thermal site makes it incredibly hard for anything with a major heat signature to sneak by. And I’m pretty sure tigers exhaust straight up into the air, nice heat bloom, they’re dead.
@@nickbryan217 Tigers do, and Abrams has a big but. 😁
A more interesting and plausible fight would be Centurions vs Tigers.
This prob means that if somehow and for whatever reason the Tigers (or really any old and outdated tanks or similar vehicles) are to be used they would need to be deployed in scenerios where there would at least be some assurance (or good luck) that pits them only against enemy infantry and similar scenerios. In this case they would still maintain some at least ok usefulness in a modern army, although their entire role would have to change just to make up for this. It is interesting just how much obsolescence can give way to being useful in lesser capacities. This is ofc ignoring stuff like air support and other factors.
1:10 that one tank in the background be like : “where is everyone? … Am I stupid?”
Fritz:Go around Hans!!
Hans: Ahhhh I was on my back