From an M1A1 gunner's seat Desert Storm perspective... every round I put on a T-72 was a full pen watch the tracer bounce off the ground behind them thing. The Pz IVs and Tigers didn't stand a chance, you wouldn't even need to break out the Silver Bullets (M829A1 APFSDSDU).
@jacksonzerillo2406
2 жыл бұрын
I want to be an M1 armor crewman, should I do it?
@anthonyhurst5898
Жыл бұрын
what unit ?
@LeonidasRex1
Жыл бұрын
@@anthonyhurst5898 C co 2/34 Armour with 1st ID.
@anthonyhurst5898
Жыл бұрын
@@LeonidasRex1 D co. 1/33 AD with 3rd AD
@keithmiller2122
Жыл бұрын
@@LeonidasRex1 I was TC of C-13 C 2/34 Armor 25th ID in Vietnam 69-70
@brandonwarwood3989
2 жыл бұрын
I LOVE that you chose the 6TH MLRS unit! I was 6/27FA BN from 2001-2007! STEEL RAIN!
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
Cool
@posthumousc4913
2 жыл бұрын
I knew that unit sounded familiar. I had to look it up but you guys were 75th BDE. I was 1-14 FA in 214 BDE 2001-2006. I think our battalion buildings were only a few buildings apart (ours was 3419).
@redleg3177
2 жыл бұрын
5/17 th FA 1993-95 6/37 95-96 then I went to WSMR as a 13 M loved it got to shoot the ATACMS most all variations and tons of live rockets both guided and standard along with a 12 pack of mine layers.
@redleg3177
2 жыл бұрын
GSRS Grid Square Removal Service also known as MLRS
@taun856
2 жыл бұрын
I didn't serve with the 6/27th but I did serve with the 56th FA BD. If DCS used them it would be a VERY short scenario - It was Pershing Missiles.
@scottr9900
2 жыл бұрын
As an actual Abrams driver, I would have been drooling uncontrollably. We would have needed LOGPAC to load more rounds. And it was probably warm, so crank the NBC unit and plug the hose in near your crank for max cooling. And the driver has the best position in the tank. If it’s snowing, the heater is right next to you. Driving in NVG’s sucks. But you’re a tank. Sorry about your barn/house/car/hydrant…
@jacksonzerillo2406
2 жыл бұрын
I was thinking about being an M1 armor crewman, should I go for it?
@literally_british_544
2 жыл бұрын
fill it all with MPAT too
@daddyrabbit835
2 жыл бұрын
@@jacksonzerillo2406 If you have normal color vision. My dream was to be on an M1... I ended up on the M109 😤
@streakshooter2357
2 жыл бұрын
Just as long as some German TC doesn't get lucky and damage your tracks
@s4ss.m8
2 жыл бұрын
@@jacksonzerillo2406 Go for it mate. You won't Regret it. Awesome job.
@ericsuter-bull1359
2 жыл бұрын
This is basically, will the abrams run out of ammo before Rommel runs out of tanks? Tune in next time to find out on the next thrilling episode of exactly what you think will happen will happen
@victorfinberg8595
2 жыл бұрын
Even a basic (now obsolete) Abrams carries 45 AT rounds, and will kill 80% of those types of targets per shot, out to 3 km. Do the math. Here's the math: One Abrams could wipe out the entire German tank battalion by itself.
@duthimer219
2 жыл бұрын
Also if they really needed they could use their .50 SLAP rounds bc on some parts of the Tiger it only has 25mm of armor and the SLAP can go through 34mm.
@wbertie2604
2 жыл бұрын
@@duthimer219 25mm on the roof. Hard for the Abrams to hit.
@RossOneEyed
2 жыл бұрын
As an old M60 tanker, heck, we could have done that with company of tanks and old school M109s. "Driver, stop, Gunner, HEAT, tank."
@nocount7517
2 жыл бұрын
@@victorfinberg8595 *Up to 3km _while moving._
@MWSin1
2 жыл бұрын
"How many Tigers can a single M1A2 take out?" "Well, an M1A2 carries 42 rounds of ammunition. So if the Tigers advance in line formation, 126 or so."
@andrewwetzel6036
2 жыл бұрын
And that's not using all the capabilities of the modern tank. Do it at night, using night vision and everything else, and run the Abrams into the German laager before they even move. Heck, you could replace the Abrams with M2 and M3 Bradleys and have one helluva fun run, too.
@utzius8003
2 жыл бұрын
As long as the fight is at night badically any modern armored vehicle equipped with rudimentary anti tank weapons could win against a WW2 force.
@SonsOfLorgar
2 жыл бұрын
CV9040s with 40mm/L70 bofors autocannons firing APFSDS...
@Gromit801
Жыл бұрын
These guys never do anything at night, which is where the US plays.
@streetcop157
2 жыл бұрын
I was at ft Knox on business and had a couple of hours to kill back when it was an armor base. I found a side road that led to an observation post overlooking a range…. Every couple of minutes two tanks would roll up and engage targets and sometimes between rotations cobras and apaches would pop up and engage targets….. really great show until the military police showed up and invited me to go elsewhere…there were harsh words and a memo….still a great way to kill some time
@greggstrasser5791
2 жыл бұрын
If we were Russians, we could have had drinks & enjoyed the show. Americans are uptight... for your safety.
@JoeMCool
2 жыл бұрын
"harsh words and a memo"! 😄 I dearly hope that memo was strongly worded. 😆
@streetcop157
2 жыл бұрын
@@JoeMCool it was but they sent it to my police chief apparently not realizing I was the police chief….I responded by smacking my self lightly on both wrists
@Ariccio123
2 жыл бұрын
@@streetcop157 this is an excellent story 👏
@michelestefanini5466
Жыл бұрын
I'm sorry I didn't understand, why did the military police gave you a memo?
@BBP081
2 жыл бұрын
The question is: how many tanks could the M1s annihilate before the barrel melted?
@lepermessiyah5823
2 жыл бұрын
it would be a lot. ive never been told there is a limit as to how many rounds the gun tube is limited to, only how many crew members can take and still be considered safe concussion levels
@randlebrowne2048
2 жыл бұрын
Knowing about the battle of 73 Eastings (from Gulf War 1), these results were not at all surprising. You guys should try this scenario again, but, with modern US infantry (with javelins and other ATGMs) instead of modern tanks and arty.
@daddyrabbit835
2 жыл бұрын
Our unit shot support for 2nd Cav. It's also called the Battle of Norfolk. It was a hairy few days, and a really bad night.
@randlebrowne2048
Жыл бұрын
@@robertcottam8824 That all supposes that the goal of the high-tech force is just regime change/pacification of the low-tech nation. If the US involvement in those conflicts had, instead, been simple extermination/replacement of the locals, the results would have been *very* different! The big handicap that the US faced was the fact that there was a local population (that we *didn't* want to kill) for the enemy force to hide among. We, effectively, had to fight with both hands (and leg) tied; not using most of our available firepower. We *could* have rendered both countries devoid of human life; but, that would have been counter-productive to our actual goals.
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
@@robertcottam8824Low-skill? The 'Murcans? Hmm... that's a bit of a underestimation here.
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
@@randlebrowne2048How could it have been anything else than counterproductive, anyway?
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
@@robertcottam8824Murca, not very good at war?? Then how come they are still the most militarily powerful of all the Western Hemisphere, if not of the world? Once again, you are underestimating them. It never did any good to underestimate the US military forces.
@thetwangler1805
2 жыл бұрын
The range on our Abrams was 5000 meters. I could laze out to that and any target at 1200 meters it felt like I was almost touching it so they never really felt far at all. My first training target shot was a moving tank at 3700 meters. It's just fun stuff
@andylimb
2 жыл бұрын
I had a wing tank hit at 7500, but it was at NTC and they had all the time in the world to bracket the target.
@arhumzia6360
2 жыл бұрын
Isnt effective firing range 2000 meters?
@thetwangler1805
2 жыл бұрын
@@arhumzia6360 no not at all they say for us 5000 is the max effective range but only due to the LRF not being able to go out but you can eyeball it if you really wanted to with the gas sight
@andylimb
2 жыл бұрын
@@thetwangler1805 that is what my wing tank did. Manually elevated and traversed using the GAS. 1-66 & 2-72 Armor.
@thetwangler1805
2 жыл бұрын
@@andylimb pretty wild shot but I believe it. NTC had pretty much no limits if you wanted to see or hit a target
@goldleader6074
2 жыл бұрын
The German tanks wouldn't be firing on the move because they didn't have gyro stabilizers back in WW2. The US infantry would be equipped with Javelins + Carl Gustaf recoilless rifles so the infantry alone could probably lay waste to the German armored battalion from range.
@robertcottam8824
Жыл бұрын
But then again, the US army being the US army.... They'd contrive a way to f*ck *p - as always... Plus ça change...
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
Didn't the first models of the M22 Locust have a gyro-stabilized gun?
@Cruiserfrank
2 жыл бұрын
If an Abrams can get bushwhacked at close range by a T72 and have the round bounce off (as told to me by the platoon sergeant whose tank it was), then even the '88 wouldn't have any effect.
@chuckjones9159
Жыл бұрын
My father fought in this battle and many others against Rommel. He was in the NG when the war started and eventually was sent overseas in the Army. At one point he was part of a group attached to a British Chemical Battalion but I am not sure how long this lasted. He lost many friends throughout his term of service. I remember him talking about reaching over to tell a friend it was clear and he pulled back a handful of scalp and brains. Dad was injured after a battle by a booby trapped rifle and his left hand was shattered. They did rebuild it but some fingers never worked quite right. Needless to say he suffered from PTSD that was never really monitored. If he was drinking thunderstorms caused extreme reactions and I was pulled down behind furniture many times because of "flashbacks".
@plushiie_
2 жыл бұрын
A very good demonstration of why symetric warfare is no longer a thing.
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
Having symetric warfare abilities will always be a must. It's the armed forces' core job, after all. It's just mainly about deterrence, nowadays. I guess.
@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL
2 жыл бұрын
35/40 years of technology difference. Obviously the cold war ended so we don't push as hard and the US just upgrades the M1 but its staggering how much tech evolves in such a short time.
@gareththompson2708
2 жыл бұрын
I still wouldn't want to take a circa 1989 M1A1 Abrams up against a circa 2022 M1A2 SEPv3 Abrams. There have still be some pretty significant technological leaps in the last 30 years.
@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL
2 жыл бұрын
@@gareththompson2708 Ah 100% 120mm vs 105 and the improvements in networking and fire control plus all the stuff that we aren't allowed to know.
@gareththompson2708
2 жыл бұрын
@@AJPMUSIC_OFFICIAL The M1A1 had a 120mm gun. It was the original M1 that had the 105mm. But the M1A2 SEPv3 has better ammunition. And of course better fire control, thicker armor, thermal optics for the commander (M1-M1A1 only had thermals for the gunner), a more efficient engine, etc...
@dwwolf4636
Жыл бұрын
@@gareththompson2708 engine is the still same . It just lacks the APU.
@amazin7006
Жыл бұрын
Don't be so sure about that Cold War ending just yet... we might be getting a part 2
@superflyguy4488
2 жыл бұрын
I would imagine that the germans having to stop to fire accurately doesnt help. How about flipping it and having the US attacking and the Germans static.
@readhistory2023
2 жыл бұрын
Whitman could shoot on the move and I'm sure other German TC's figured it out but they weren't trained for it. It was the same for Sherman crews. Most of the US tanks crews never took advantage of the Sherman's stablized gun's ability to shoot on the move.
@victorfinberg8595
2 жыл бұрын
Won't make much difference. Drive the Abrams up to 3 km from the Germans. Sit and watch all the German rounds bounce (half of them will miss). Meanwhile you are killing the German tanks at the rate of several per minute.
@accountname9506
2 жыл бұрын
@@readhistory2023 whitman was killed by a shoemaker lol
@robertcottam8824
Жыл бұрын
@@readhistory2023 That's true. The US Army was pretty useless during WW2.
@persh7306
Жыл бұрын
@@robertcottam8824what kind of copium are you smoking
@truthseeker9454
2 жыл бұрын
I want to thank the Grim Reapers for your entertaining videos, and all you veterans for your service. Freedom isn't free!
@blakeparry1983
2 жыл бұрын
Even if Zee Germans had guns that could penetrate the M1 Armour, all the Abrams would have to do is begin moving (while still being able to fire)
@rpontonjr
Жыл бұрын
And the artillery would shoot-and-scoot, too.
@robertcottam8824
Жыл бұрын
True. But in order to do that, the US would need adequately-trained servicemen. That is VERY rare.
@robertelder164
Жыл бұрын
@@robertcottam8824 Bull shit. Ask the Republican Guard...
@Av-vd3wk
2 жыл бұрын
Short Answer: *YES!*
@dubya85
2 жыл бұрын
No shit!
@GrandHeresiarch
2 жыл бұрын
At the end of this mighty battle a bunch of the lowest ranked enlisted were given brooms and told to "now go clean all that up".
@Spider2point0
2 жыл бұрын
Now imagine how this would go down in real life, with dynamic action, and infantry equipped to fight armor; portable ATGM launchers are no joke, either! (Obviously, I know that can't be modeled in DCS; just fun to think about.)
@Briselance
Жыл бұрын
Why can't that be modelled in DCS? 😢
@Neymoiiii
Жыл бұрын
@@Briselancemoney, lag
@charlietheunicorn5383
2 жыл бұрын
The M1A2 is a truly amazing tank. You don't get a true appreciation for this beast until you stand right next to one. In the spirit of this video, perhaps GR could test out a JU87 D/G Stuka (or similar WW2 equivalent) tank buster aircraft out on the M1A2 and see if they could knock them out routinely?
@streakshooter2357
2 жыл бұрын
Top down attack? probably.
@hailexiao2770
2 жыл бұрын
With its cannons? Probably not. With 250 kg bombs? Absolutely.
@lontongstroong
Жыл бұрын
@@hailexiao2770 What about mounted 40mm rounds coming on top of the Abrams' turrets?
@caliado
2 жыл бұрын
M1A1 -the AMP is to be effective against bunkers, infantry, light armor, and obstacles out to 500 meters, and will be able to breach reinforced concrete walls and defeat ATGM teams from 500 to 2,000 meters
@ComfortsSpecter
2 жыл бұрын
“You carpeted them” “You didn’t even use a bomber” “But you still carpeted them!”
@spikymikie
2 жыл бұрын
Patton would have loved this! I know I did. I always wonder what just one squadron of modern fighters would have done in the hands of the allies . Hell, just 35 F-4E's with sufficient fuel for 3000 sorties. 1500 GBU-15's. 100,000 rounds for the gun, and craploads of AIM7 and AIM9 missiles. I think we could have wiped out the Nazi war machine in about two weeks. Maybe less. A nice dream......
@chrisrees8842
2 жыл бұрын
could we see yourself vs growling sidewinder that would be epic, 2 great sim pilots facing off what a showdown
@drrocketman7794
Жыл бұрын
If you've never been near a 155mm howitzer firing...it's an experience. That earth-shaking *thud* when it goes off....
@mrsickukxx1332
Жыл бұрын
Only discovered your channel a couple of weeks ago and I’d only seen naval sims till now. But now I’m seeing a land battle which makes the channel twice as awesome 👍
@jameshewitt8828
2 жыл бұрын
Ohh man this is beautiful, beautiful just like that B1 strike you did on the enemy convoy. Love this. GET SOME
@soppdrake
2 жыл бұрын
That german camouflage would be the colour of my underpants if I was in one of those tigers
@readhistory2023
2 жыл бұрын
ICM works fine on modern tanks so it would slaughter the WW2 junk. Their top armor was less than a inch thick.
@claireledesma3040
2 жыл бұрын
Imagine its 2050 and SU-57, SU75, F-22, F-35 , J-20 and J-31 fighters team up and do a formation on the sky to fight aliens, man that'll be so cool and awesome to watch
@mill2712
2 жыл бұрын
In 2050, we'd probably have some better planes than even those.
@ExSpoonman
Жыл бұрын
SU-75 doesn't exist. Su-57 is, like, 4 planes. And anything starting with a J is a Chinese piece of shit. Tell me: what the fuck does China make that's considered "quality"? It's a nation of cheap ass knockoffs.
@Shadow-1949
Жыл бұрын
Ahhh this is first time I’ve seen this! Very cool I just learned the 155’s don’t have to hit targets , getting close is pretty much the same as direct hit! The Missiles are Amazing and if these are close to how they work I’ll be buying a lot of those .
@John_SlideRule_Bullay
5 ай бұрын
Agreed, overly one-sided yet very satisfying to watch! Video Valued by Valued Viewer - Fly Army! 🚁
@void870
2 жыл бұрын
I'm surprised that the Paladins didn't have their sister vehicle along for the ride. The M992, also known as the C.A.T. was the unarmed (though, with crew served weapons on the top) track vehicle that carried the rest of the gun crew's ammo, and they would have realistically resupplied the gun as they were firing. They would typically be carrying an additional 95 rounds for the gun, in addition to the propellant charges to make them go boom. lol
@dereknielsen9857
2 жыл бұрын
Yes! There is some 88 damage to the Abrams. A couple of dents in the armor and needing of the new paint job.
@austinhughes1924
2 жыл бұрын
I pretty much already knew.The Abrams and the M270.Were going to win the battle.
@16randomcharacters
2 жыл бұрын
How about just inf with javelins?
@gromm93
2 жыл бұрын
Alternate title: how a zombie apocalypse is patently ridiculous.
@ajac009
2 жыл бұрын
Tank destroyers should have been replaced with bradleys or m901s. Tow missiles FTW lol
@Maverickf20
2 жыл бұрын
Hey cap, got a cool video idea. Its’s sorta Like the birds and the bees, but one side gets helis and one side gets fighter jets. The helis have to get from one airbase to another airbase, but can be attacked by fighter jets. However, the fighter jets can only use unguided and laser guided bombs to hit them.
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
Oooo I like it!
@Maverickf20
2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers Happy to help! Ill be flying with you guys too. You can load up 10 a10s with 16cbu87s each. It’ll be hilarious
@trostorff1
2 жыл бұрын
The DPICM that the MLRS units were firing might not have been very effective against the German tanks, but a 155mm HE round, if it were to score a direct hit, would have wrecked them. Would have been interesting also to give the Paladins Excalibur ammunition, if that were possible. Finally, as a former 13B myself, who crewed on a M109A6 Paladin...rockets aren't real artillery. Hahaaaa
@Raycheetah
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you for your service! =^[.]^=
@SonsOfLorgar
2 жыл бұрын
But both will do a such a number on an open topped half track that it's not even funny, just tragic...
@trostorff1
2 жыл бұрын
@@SonsOfLorgar Oh, hell yeah. DPICM would be absolutely brutal against soft targets and lightly armored targets.
@trostorff1
2 жыл бұрын
@@Raycheetah It's one of those things you don't miss until you stop doing it, is the best way I can explain. Hope you have a good day.
@trostorff1
2 жыл бұрын
@@johncee853 Well, the earlier versions of Excalibur didn't do anything any differently than your plain Jane HE rounds, except for they were a hell of a lot more accurate. I had read where US troops had called for artillery fire where Excalibur rounds were dropped to within something like 150 or 160 feet of their positions. Excalibur S though has tracked and defeated moving targets in testing though. I found this on a Defense News website... "The Army is also aiming to compete for Cannon-Delivered Area Effects Munitions this fiscal year, which would upgrade the Excalibur airframe with an armored target seeker and will be able to defeat “moving and imprecisely located armored targets at long ranges” and will be fully compatible with the Army’s howitzers as well as ERCA and the M777 Extended-Range version, according to fiscal 2020 budget documents."
@aaronp8293
2 жыл бұрын
CAP, you mention in your assessment at the end, what if anything a WWII tank could do to a modern tank. I'm a former Armor Officer and current MI officer and I often think through different equipment mixes and how much obsolete force would be required to overwhelm a modern force. How well would a M1A2, Leopard2A6, Challenger2, hold up against a PLT/CO of Tigers or Panthers in a scrum? A few recommendations have been posted below, but here is my recommendation: Determine what the absolute minimum force would be required for a modern armored combat team to destroy the 10th Armored BDE in this scenario? I think, you must run the scenario during daylight to preserve historical accuracy of the German force, but decrease the modern force size to 1x M1A2 Plt (4x tanks x 40rds = 160 shots) and 2x M2A2 Mech Plts (25mm + TOW2 Missiles). Then to keep them from getting completely overwhelmed by sheer numbers, have a AH-64 flight (2x 16 Hellfires) on call to reinforce as necessary. The other quick scenario would be 4x Tigers (dispersed) vs 1x M1A2 starting at 500m and see if the platoon of Tigers can get any penetration shots on the Abrams as it maneuvers to engage.
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
Thanks Aaron, will investigate.
@joselynalicemay6225
2 жыл бұрын
Can you do thisfor both german and Russian against modern like you did here for the battle of kursk
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
rgr
@Glittersword
2 жыл бұрын
I think halfway through that the American tanks should have charged ahead. IRL that would have been a morale killer.
@christaylor6654
2 жыл бұрын
1 company of Abrams could have stopped that attack on their own. The panzers would be destroyed before they were close enough to even fire
@AuraKnightTheLucario
2 жыл бұрын
Perhaps some AH-64 air support to the rescue.
@djzoodude
2 жыл бұрын
There's vanishingly few weapons systems capable of penetrating the frontal armor of an Abrams, even on the modern battlefield. There's no way a WW2 tank, at any range, is doing it. The Germans never stood a chance. It was just a matter of how fast the Abrams could kill a target and move on. Most one sided tank battle since the Battle of 73 Easting in the first Gulf War.
@stephenmorrish
2 жыл бұрын
Are infantry shouldered ant-tank weapons modeled in DC? If so, can we see a play through where the WWII US infantry are equipped with NLAW and or Javelin's??? Topical sort-of-ish...
@92HazelMocha
2 жыл бұрын
It would be a joke, the Javelin can out range most WW2 tanks.
@LAV-III
2 жыл бұрын
Some say the turrets of some destroyed panzer 4s and 6s are still in orbit to this day.
@blahblah14u
2 жыл бұрын
This was pretty good. Cap. Can you do this again with just half the Abrams. Would love to see what that would look like.
@waltermachnicz5490
2 жыл бұрын
Using modern communication and tactics would easily win.
@barrettson1028
Жыл бұрын
The Abrams sitting in a line like that in the clear open is very unrealistic, they’d be hidden from view in a desert camo. They can see the enemy but the enemy can’t see them. But it is very realistic that the all powerful Tiger would never stand a chance against an Abrams. And the ammunition the Tigers used would only leave a few removable scratches on the Abrams armor (that’s if the Tiger even manages to get close enough to hit a shot). The Abrams is the best, strongest tank in the world. And that is a fact.
@kenhelmers2603
2 жыл бұрын
Luv these hypothetical battles :) Thanks GR!
@matsv201
11 ай бұрын
I want to see current Swedish army with CV90 and Archer with bonus shells doing this
@saltyjack5662
2 жыл бұрын
Could they win? Will the AI jank? Entertainment will be witnessed.
@bradleypotts9865
2 жыл бұрын
Should have armed that infantry unit with Javelins :D Then maybe the Germans would have had a tougher time with them.
@jochentram9301
2 жыл бұрын
This surprised y'all? Tiger has 80mm front/turret armour. 120x530mm is designed to go through 600+mm, depending on the exact round.
@robertyoung3992
2 жыл бұрын
The Abrams has depleted uranium armor
@jochentram9301
2 жыл бұрын
@@robertyoung3992 Late-model M1A2 and M1A3 do, yeah. Not that it matters, any WWII tank going up against an Abrams is likely dead long before they can test that armour.
@yourgetinbit7711
2 жыл бұрын
An Abram would have been enough fire power to overwhelm anything Germany could deliver. So yes quite easily.
@Pitchlock8251
2 жыл бұрын
The rain is falling through the mist of sorrow that surrounded me. The sun could never thaw away the the bliss that lays around me. Let it rain, let it rain, Let your love rain down on me. Let it rain, let it rain, Let it rain, rain, rain.😁😁📜
@christopherjenkins2373
2 жыл бұрын
If it only could have happened this way. I grew up with two friends one of which had a grandfather killed at Kasssere and the other had his father wounded there in a Sherman.
@XXelpollodiabloXX
Жыл бұрын
Now give them some air support, too. Lets be kind and do only four Apaches.
@Rachniax
Жыл бұрын
I use to be in an MLRS unit, 1/27 FAR, 41st BDE (Germany) and 75th Artillery (Ft Sill). They didn't call us "Gridsmashers" for nothing. I'm guessing that you didn't consider the ATACMS missiles. Paladins have a "18 mile" range, 36 miles if using copperheads. The unclassified range of the M270A1 is 180 miles. Did you use the DU/Sabot rounds on the Abrams?
@timrogers2638
Жыл бұрын
Not sure if it's been mentioned already, but one of the players commented that the MLRS was using "dual-purpose incendiary cluster munition". If he was referring to "DPICM", he's incorrect in his description. "DPICM" means "dual-purpose improved conventional munition". They weren't incendiary munitions, but rather a mix of submunitions that included anti-armor and ant-personnel capabilities. Some also had submunitions that, if the fuse wasn't activated by a target, then is essentially became a mine.
@DoomsdayIsComing73
2 жыл бұрын
There’s no way on God’s green earth that the 1940s Africa Korps would stand a chance against the Abrams, MLRS, Paladin, or towed 155. It would literally be an absolute slaughter. As witnessed here…
@drtidrow
Жыл бұрын
HEAT rounds would probably be a better choice for these types of targets, as the penetration is independent of range.
@BrendenMulhern
3 ай бұрын
I was actually in the 6/27th field artillery MLRS/ATACMS I was in Desert Shield/Storm we were the only unit with ATACMS at the time because literally we were in White Sands, New Mexico field testing ATACMS and when we returned to Ft. Sill within like two weeks is when Sarah Hussein was threatening to go into Kuwait. They decided that we should take it over there since we were the only unit with it and to get actual combat experience with it and we were there months before anybody knew we were there
@snidecommenter7117
Жыл бұрын
With that level of destruction happening so fast the armored assault would have been called back in no time. No one throws a whole unit away when they watch them going up in flames.
@GeraldWalls
9 ай бұрын
15:30 A driver that crested that hill and saw all of those funeral pyres would either turn around or jump out and start running away.
@Glittersword
2 жыл бұрын
What type of fire missions were the artillery doing? Just traditional or where the angle is changed with each shot so the rounds all impact at the same time?
@dadinkle
2 жыл бұрын
HEATFS would be better for taking out ww2 tanks
@92HazelMocha
2 жыл бұрын
Beat me to it; WW2 tanks are steel with no era and heat doesn't lose penetration at range. Every 120mm heatfs hit would be a kill. Although it looks like it wouldn't matter; there's litteraly no way for the germans to win that one.
@lewisvargrson
2 жыл бұрын
On top of the range and armor superiority the Abrams would have on these guys, the Abrams cam fire effectively while moving without trouble. So just turn around before the enemy gets close enough to fire on you and drive away while still annihilating them.
@bendalton5221
Жыл бұрын
yes you would have a line of modern tanks like that. They would sit there, line abreast, out of range of the enemy tanks, and shoot them apart. It's exactly what the US did during the first Gulf War, at the fight at 73 Easting.... just spread out, line abreast, and shot the enemy apart. I know, I was there. Our single troop shot apart and entire brigade, equipped with T-72's, for no losses. This scenario here? would have been even worse. In the M1 we were scoring hits at 4000meters. I could be mistaken, but German WW2 tanks didn't quite have that range. So, yeah, in this scenarios the US would score hits at almost a 100% hit rate, with a 100% kill rate for each hit. If your scenario didn't work out like that, it is because you put in unreal parameters or programmed the scenario wrong, or have wrong data. It wouldn't have even been this close. Your data sucks. MLRS and paladin fire would have done even more devastation than that - I saw what they did to T-55 and T-62 tanks, and none of the German tanks here are anywhere close to the capabilities of those soviet tanks, not even the tiger. The German tanks would have all been destroyed long before they were able to engage the American M1's. And even if, by some miracle, the germans were close enough for their fire to reach the M1's, from that range no German round, not even an 88, would have penetrated an M1, not in a million years. You are kidding yourself when you were talking about the deadly German fire in this scenario. I think you spend too much time playing war-games, and are completely removed from real capabilities. Here's what would have happened: the moment the German columns began moving, and the infantry line called in artillery, the MLRS and paladin fire would have obliterated the front ranks of German vehicles, including tanks. The top armor of WW2 tanks was complete shit, and small airplane fired rocket from that era could penetrate, so the modern rounds from MLRS and paladins would be insanely deadly. Then, the M1's would open up on anything moving, easily scoring hits from 4000 to 4500 meters, long before the germans even reached the US infantry lines. And that would have been that. I doubt, if this scenario were truly gamed out, that the Americans would suffer even a single infantry casualty, let alone any vehicle casualties. The Germans would have suffered 99%+ casualties, the only survivors would have been some of the rear echelon types (maintenance, HQ, stuff like that) - and if the Abrams decided to close in, then it would be 100% German casualties, none would have gotten away, the Abrams are way too fast for the German vehicles. In short, your videos kind of overly strengthen the older enemies in these scenarios, which I imagine you are doing on purpose for effect and to keep viewers more engaged
@bradthackston5217
Жыл бұрын
Imagine being in a king tiger and come if yo against some of these Abrams’s they will come up point blank to you and you baby shells bounce off they take one shot and it’s done for you
@JohnSmith-ch9sm
2 жыл бұрын
These videos are flippin' fantastic. I literally shouted out loud when the first MIRV came out "Holy $@%!!"
@iancampbell4984
2 ай бұрын
MIRV? I didn't see any thermonuclear weapons...🤫
@joelcueto2460
Жыл бұрын
From what I understand with the battle of kasserine pass, Patton mostly utilized more of his artillery and anti tank units( Half tracks with anti tank gun) against Rommel's tanks. They've taken out most of German units from distance using their long toms(155mm) and those guns did the most of the damage to the Germans before the anti tank units have engaged German armor. Nice video and keep it up.
@castlebravocrypto1615
Жыл бұрын
This sounds like Fort Hood tank training in the 90's on any given day/night of the week
@john-mf1qm
2 жыл бұрын
It would be no contest! The modern stuff would totally destroy the desert fox
@samanazimi5087
2 жыл бұрын
Remember that winwing technology is your ultimate hardware solution :) 81
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
yes
@jefferynelson
2 жыл бұрын
0:16 I guess yes, modern vehicles win at Kasserine pass
@KimLind
Жыл бұрын
What a great video. More tanks please. U all doing a great work and so entertaining to watch.
@christaylor6654
2 жыл бұрын
The dismounted infantry woulda been only challenge for company of tanks and that would only be because barrels heating firing that much as Germans had nothing that could damage anything on an abram accept LRF or optics
@leonardmichaelmarkrandrup2375
2 жыл бұрын
Any German commander would have ordered a withdrawal if the advamce units were decimated.
@adodgygeeza
Жыл бұрын
In the 1991 Gulf War the Iraqis failed to make a single main gun hit on a Challenger tank. Despite 1st British Div chewing its way through 4 Iraqi divisions. That is the effect of Ti sights and the unyielding environment of the desert.
@singletrack29349
2 жыл бұрын
Image if you let the M270’s reload to unitary and fire a second volley onto that hilltop as the tanks were rolling over. Also, will DCS allow for time on target missions? It was always glorious to watch all the launchers fire at once. 6/37 (2009-2011) 5/3 (2011-2014)
@lachlanbaker9487
2 жыл бұрын
I want to see this
@ChaffyExpert
Жыл бұрын
"See they have limited ammunition, so i sent wave after wave of tanks until they ran out". Strategy.
@conmcgrath7174
2 жыл бұрын
Just good old-fashioned fun. More please!
@Julian-fy6si
Жыл бұрын
It’s really nice seeing tigers get absolutely thwapped
@Palmerrip
2 жыл бұрын
MLRS is a typographical error. It's actually MRLS.
@NobleSteed00
Жыл бұрын
8 units of 270 is a small battery? who are you kidding? 1 unit of 270 is a beast, 8 is pure carnage.
@zhenlan07
2 жыл бұрын
Minor part where every shot fired by the M1 would over penetrate cleanly and likely not even knock out the tank for long. However, firing HE would be ineffective vs armor. A similar problem was seen when German tanks engaged Wolverine and other light American vehicles - they had to use HE or the rounds would simply pass through without damage.
@Pupil0fGod
2 жыл бұрын
DU is pyrophoric, it will over penetrate and flash fry the crew before potentially knocking out a tank behind the first.
@zhenlan07
2 жыл бұрын
@@Pupil0fGod Per gulf war data, we had roughly 20 vehicles penetrated by DU in blue on blue incidents. 13/125 crew killed for a 10% fatality rate and an unknown casualty rate. DU is not a "flash fry entire crew" either. There is no reason why it would be considering it's still a very small sub-calibre projectile that's passing clean through for 1/100th of a second that it takes to transit the entire fighting compartment. There'd probably be more danger from the ejected plug from the armor bouncing around that would KO the tank as the crew would bail, but that small of a plug is unlikely to cause enough damage that it could not be recrewed in short order. Also... behind it? What kind of attacking armor formation would line up and advance?
@Pupil0fGod
2 жыл бұрын
@@zhenlan07 Wow, that low of a casualty rate? I have only heard of stories of entire crews being torched from a penetration. Makes you wonder if soldiers are as bad at exaggerating as fisherman, or we have safer vehicles overall from a fire and explosion resistance standpoint than the Iraqi crews. As far as penetration to a second vehicle, when you have enough armor, some shots are going to line up two. How effective a sabot is dealing with a second vehicle after a light pass is anyone's guess
@zhenlan07
2 жыл бұрын
@@Pupil0fGod Many of our modern weapons are essentially "Wunderwaffe". Soldiers exaggerate a lot, it's sort of a way to mentally cope with some of the things that happen, eg: it might be 2-3 guys shooting at you but your mind will think it's 30+. and that's how you will tell the story. Western MBT are somewhat safer due to large hulls allowing for ammunition to not be stored in the turret which is the most likely place of a hit/penetration. Compare this to Russian tanks where they have some 20 or so rounds in the turret (6 in auto loader, above turret ring) and their tendency to simply explode from penetrating hits (Ukraine currently). However, if western MBT are hit, penetrated and ammunition is involved, the tank is done (google Saudi M1 cookoffs). Our tanks are slightly safer due to designs but everything in war is down to luck, a hit in a bad area = cookoff. Last but not least, we don't actually know how good our tanks are as we've never operated in an environment where we had to face modern AT munitions. Israeli tanks faced some RPG27s and were easily penetrated. If our tanks were to be hit by things like Javelins or Nlaws they'd probably be no better than the Russian ones currently.
@gatling216
2 жыл бұрын
The fun part is, those M270s are at least a generation or two behind the cutting edge. We don't even use the DPICM anymore, because we've found new and more inventive ways to erase grid squares without having to worry about a bunch of dud submunitions after the fact. It's hard to believe having seen that slaughter, but it could have gone so much worse for the Germans.
@kellycleveland
2 жыл бұрын
Hey, question. Who designed the bigger bullet rounds for each theater over wars up to know. can you give one over your classic breakdowns for us? Maybe .50 and up. maybe some people see inside those rounds to understand their effectiveness and how and when the used in a fight Thx Cap huuoaa
@williampremo2197
Жыл бұрын
Abrams would have rounds on the enemy tanks before the Germans would even see the Abrams.
@BobH809
2 жыл бұрын
Great video, well executed destruction of the German ground forces. Just an aside, Cap, have you heard of the Mach Loop? You can see lots of videos about it on here. Not as good as an airshow, but it is free.
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
I;ve seen the vids but never been.
@BobH809
2 жыл бұрын
@@grimreapers I planned going there over two years ago, but as we know something got in the way. One day I will go there just for the day, hoping some of what we see in the videos arrives. Funny thing is I'll be passing through there tomorrow going to Barmouth.
@felixschrider9037
2 жыл бұрын
You would think that realistically the infantry would be behind even some form of rudimentary cover and firing their own AT weapons too. realistically just the modern infantry would probably put a significant enough dent in that sort of formation. though i guess it depends on weather or not they are expecting to fight a battle like this... if they aren't they may need to tank support. if they are, the tanks might be redundant with in all likelihood guided missile platforms being setup on elevated positions targeting the tanks while lighter infantry weapons deal with the mechanized troops. Of course modern SABOT rounds would probably not actually kill a ww2 tank at anything near their kill rate against modern vehicles because they risk the round simply traveling though the vehicle and out the other side.... seeing as those things are made to pierce depleted uranium armour... they would probably have no problem with even 1000 mm of steel. which is more akin to shooting through 4/5 tigers from the front....
@hailexiao2770
2 жыл бұрын
Even with a through and through penetration the crew compartment and ammo storage would be filled with supersonic hot metallic dust, and in the case of DU penetrators, supersonic combustible radioactive metallic dust.
@ndnj13
3 ай бұрын
Hey I used to work on the MLRS system! Awesome to see it used in simulation.
@jameshewitt8828
2 жыл бұрын
Challenger 2s next please. Make lizzie happy putting some HESH rounds down range.
@grimreapers
2 жыл бұрын
k
@JimToby-x1o
7 ай бұрын
Every video is amazing, keep it up lads.
@13mike27
2 жыл бұрын
Artillery is the king of battle but the MLRS is the God of Artillery! 1/33 FA Golden Lions " STRIKE DEEP "
Пікірлер: 762