re: The destroyed Russian tank is the foremost symbol of modern warfare

quote:

---

don't know why you are blaming them for being invaded by a power hungry Kremlin thug.

---

...a power struggle between the Kremlin, Ukraine and power
hungry new world order elitists (WHO,WEF,CFR), which includes a large part or our own (US) political high-hats.

I’m guessing you meant “nerd alert”.

quote:

---

Just living their life, bombing Russians in Donbas

---

Bombing invading forces. That's like attacking the French for bombing Germans invading France during World War Two.

quote:

---

another symbol of american modern warfare.

---

Chaos is the ultimate fruit of the “Rumsfeld Doctrine” which has held sway over the Pentagon since the neocons have gained complete hegemony in determining the foreign policy agenda of the U.S. at the end of the Cold War:

quote:

---

Bombing invading forces.

---

Russians have lived in Ukraine for centuries.

Excellent info Darth.

The T 72 is self loading, as opposed to manual loading like the Abrams. This aspect may factor in storage placement, idk.

Not your best work, but stil reeling them in. Amazing.

quote:

---

The T 72 is self loading, as opposed to manual loading like the Abrams. This aspect may factor in storage placement, idk.

---

You are correct sir. The ammo storage you see in the pic I posted is the “carousel” that the T-72 auto-loader uses. On top of making the T-72 a death trap for its 3 man crew, it also has two rather significant drawbacks:

1. It’s far slower than a human loader. When I was a tanker, to be a qualified loader, you had to be able to load and arm the main gun in a minimum 4 seconds. The T-72 auto-loader is closer to 7-8 seconds. Thus the T-72 has a far lower rate of fire than the Abrams.

2. The T-72 auto loader can only load whatever round is next on the carousel. This means if the T-72 is engaging another main battle tank but has HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank) which is designed to engage lesser armed vehicles like APCs, up next in the carousel the T-72 would have to fire the less effective HEAT round at a tank. In fact he could not engage with a APFSDS (Armor piercing fin stabilized discarding sabot) until he’s fired enough rounds that a Sabot round comes up on the carousel.

The Abrams though, thanks to the human loader, can switch between HEAT & Sabot at will of the tank commander. So not only can the Abrams fire faster than the T-72, it is also far more versatile in ammo selection, which is a critical battlefield advantage. Couple these advantages with the fact the Abrams has superior fire control systems and a far superior gunner’s and tank commander’s sights, not to mention Chobham armor, and you see why anytime the Abrams has engaged the T-72 on the battlefield, which I have personally done 31 years ago, the result is abject slaughter of the T-72s.

The Challenger and Leopard are on par with the Abrams, they have virtually the same main gun, fire control, and armor. The Merkava I’d say is close.

quote:

---

Yup. The Russians aren't fighting the way we would. Either than can't or they don't but there is no argument that that aren't.

---

The Russian army has not changed in the past 150 years from a readiness and Stradegy standpoint. They’ve always been poorly equipped and poorly trained. We’re seeing the same thing play out again that’s played out over and over in every previous war Russia has fought since the days of the Czars.