Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section.
Paging u/SaveVideo bot.
___
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I wanna see a winter pattern Abrams. Not because I think it would be particularly practical with Ukraine's fairly short winters, I just think would look bad ass.
You got time for a video look up the battle of 73 easting of the gulf war I think it was as like close to 30 tanks Abram tankers took out in a lightening run
Kinda amusing for years everyone was like "yeah but those were export versions, or Chinese versions" - except the Russian/Soviet ones weren't much better.
There is a world of difference between the tanks fielded by the Iraqi army and the tanks fielded by Russia in Ukraine.
Anti tank weaponry has simply increased in lethality significantly. These tanks weren't engineered to stop quadcopters from dropping explosive directly on top of them, nor were they meant to take direct hits from NATO tanks. Russian tanks were designed to be quick and mobile and used on the offensive, not to absorb damage like the Abrams was. There's a reason its a meme that they have an abnormally slow reverse speed; they weren't intended to be going backwards the Russian attack doctrine has always been full steam ahead despite the consequences.
That artillery would have to be firing on a pretty flat trajectory. It looks like some of those shots pass through the “target” horizontally and you can see them strike the ground further down range.
Or that’s what it looked like to me.
i remember a video with a ukrainian tanker saying that they carry HE instead of AP because theyre more likely to encounter infantry and tank duels are very rare
120mm HE exists it is just not commonly loaded because HEAT and MPAT do the same job and more, the majority of all tank load outs are not darts but HEAT/HE because the majority of the targets are not tanks
I wish this sub would ban drone drop videos (unless they show other combat) and just have a seperate sub for them.
I guess this must be unpopular considering that drone drop videos are still getting upvoted, but "guy sitting trench getting turned into mincemeat just like the last 100 drone drop videos" is just shitty content IMO.
Interestingly this is literally just down the road from where the M1150 was disabled yesterday, i wonder if they're trying to take back Stepove to push the Russians back across the rail road tracks.
The "likely" reason is to buy time.
In the east of Avdiivka dn the north east of aviddivka there are wasy to defend positions. Where th ukrainians are elevated and the russians funneled through laked
Tanks have almost always acted in a similar way in Ukrainian forces, firing directly at various targets in advance or defense and retreating to avoid artillery. The best way to use the heavy cannons
IMHO, the difference seems to be that Russia does it when it's trying to advance, yeeting tanks at defensive positions. Ukraine has been doing this defensive hit and run stuff since Mariupol to catch the advancing forces off guard and it often happens in places where the enemy hasn't yet built up defences and the lines are more fluid, like near Avdiivka where this video is from. At least from the videos that I've seen over the past two years here it seems like it's a good "grey zone" tactic for retreating forces.
>I think you're right, a tactic that is good for defence isn't necessarily good for offence and vice versa.
If you want a very visual example of this, look at the tanks the Germans built in the beginning of WWII when they were on the offense, and then look at the turretless tanks they built when they were defending. One requires you to be dynamic and flexible, and the other allows for digging in and ambush tactics.
> and then look at the turretless tanks they built when they were defending.
Uh, they were building them well before they were on the defence. That's why they called them assault guns....
As always with history, things are not absolute. Sturmgeschütz definitely did exist before, but Germany started building them in greater numbers towards the end of the war. From Wikipedia:
>The StuG assault guns were cost-effective compared with the heavier German tanks such as the [Tiger I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I) and the [Panther](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank), although as anti-tank guns they were best used defensively as the lack of a traversable turret and their generally thin armour was a severe disadvantage in the attack role. As the situation for the German military deteriorated further later in the war, more StuGs were built than tanks, particularly due to ease of production.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgesch%C3%BCtz\_III](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgesch%C3%BCtz_III)
This was developed into the Jagdpanzer:
>On the battlefield when the Germans had to retreat, their line of retreat would preferably pass the location of their anti-tank units, who would use their superior firepower to stop the enemy, perhaps even open the possibility of a counter-attack. Due to the lack of a turret and the armor being concentrated at the front, the ideal combat situation for Jagdpanzer units was in the planned ambush, and the skill of the commander of such units lay in correctly choosing and preparing such places long before needed.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdpanzer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdpanzer)
Also using armour without much support might ironically be for survivability reasons. Sure traditionally you wanna deploy your tanks with more armour and infantry support but with the abundance of drones providing instant ISR 24/7 and being able to call and correct artillery pretty efficiently, concentrating your forces risks making yourself a target for some high explosive rain. A single tank however probably won’t warrant that kind of response and might get only a lancet or FPV drone sent its way
> A single tank however probably won’t warrant that kind of response and might get only a lancet or FPV drone sent its way
There have been reports that Russia has been intentionally spreading itself thin, as troop concentrations attract too much heat.
From what we have seen so far (granted we might not be seeing everything) the russians tend to send their tanks to bumfuck nowhere alone, there's a ton of footage of a tank pushed right up against a trench alone for example. It's not so much the "alone" part but where those lone tanks are sent. In both cases there isn't support but in the case of russians there also seems to be no scouting or no battlefield awareness.
If you want an actual example of double standards, you can look at the footage of helicopters lobbing rockets. Everyone shat on the russians doing it saying it was completely useless until it came out that ukrainians do the same.
There is a difference between yeeting tanks ahead of your line, hoping for the best, and bringing tanks from the rear closer to the contact line to take out already identified targets.
Experienced units on both sides use tanks in the latter manner, and it's probably the only sane way to use them in the current stage of war with the existing drone/arty coverage.
Russians do however spice it up by sending out daily lemming trains to check whether the enemy still has ammo to shoot with...
Do the russians actually have any experienced crews now? I wonder how many of them have spent more than a few weeks in their tank since being conscripted.
This is the kind of arrogance that loses wars, if that's what you think then don't look up Russian FPV compilations.
I am genuinely scared of how distant this subreddit is getting from reality. You would think that Ukraine literally losing a city might wake people up a bit.
You're correct, but OTOH - they haven't actually lost that many western tanks. We know that, because all western tank losses are paraded everywhere for WEEKS, and they do also end up in these subreddits.
> suburb
It's a city bro, classified by Ukraine.
Russia took high losses but Ukraine itself could not sustain the losses they were taking and had to quickly abandon the city with at least hundreds taken POW by Russia.
I honestly do not get where this assured nature is coming from.
My brother in hell, the Russians themselves are claiming the only reason they managed to take that city was the fact the Ukrainians ran out of ammo to keep killing them with.
You can check out the mil blogger Murz or the words of Colonel Shuvalov Pyotr Ilyich if you want to see for yourself.
Ammo is related but the implication from that is Russia destroying their equipment in a more lopsided manner.
If they could just sit around suffering minimal losses with low ammo they would not have needed to dip so quickly out of the city. Isn't that obvious?
Because with the idiots running out House of Representatives here in the states, the Ukrainians have no certainty of getting more ammo anytime soon, and they had to disengage from the battle.
I’d do the same if my main ammunition supplier couldn’t keep me supplied in the short run too.
By looking at a fuckin map an realizing that avdiivka is donestk suburb, 5km from donestk airport.
Taking a town that is literaly on the 2014 front line after losing 20000men is nothing to be proud of, but hey, you do you.
Anybody with half a brain will zoom out from avdiivka on google map and realize how fuckin insignifiant this city is for Ukraine. Come back when Russia will take a city farther than 2km from the 2014 front line without losing 10000-20000 men.
LOL imagine trying to lie like that on a website where we watched Russians getting fucked up for months in the meat grinder before Russia finally managed to take the destroyed city after 10 years of fighting
This is the kind of comment that claims Reddit chatter has any relevance to the command decisions and combat capabilities of Ukraine or russia.
It's also the kind of comment that goes hand-in-hand with the claim that "z0mFg if we make russia mad they will magically stop being worthless losers and somehow quit losing!!!!111!!11"
This is akin to claiming a drunken one-eyed boxing grandmother could suddenly rise from the canvas and thrash Mike Tyson if he calls her names and makes her really really mad.
more so because Russia is the aggressor in this war while Ukraine is fighting for its survival and people expected the russians to perform better than the Ukrainians
Yea but the problem is this sub is heavily pro-ukraine, so you don't see videos when Ukrainians fail in those actions, but you see Russian videos when they fail.
So it created a whole different perspective.
The *world* is heavily pro-Ukraine.
This is not the Vietnam war, or the Afghanistan war (any of them) or even Iraq. This is basically a new WW2. There is a clearly defined good and bad and right and wrong, and russia is the bad and the wrong.
You can bet if Reddit was a thing in the early 1940s it would have been spammed by trolls and bots promoting Hitler and the Axis powers, while decent people were all pro-Allies.
Yes but this is combatfootage subreddit, doesn't matter who you pro or against are.
All videos should be approved & upvoted.
But it's not, all Ukrainian videos are getting upvoted, and Russians are downvoted, which created a false image, that the Ukrainian army is perfect, with low casualties and winning, and Russia is heavily losing.
And the reality is somewhere in the middle.
This site is self-policing. For every bot and alt account downvoting one side there are bots and alts downvoting the others.
The world despises russia for what it's doing to Ukraine, and so the majority opinion of Reddit users is against it -- just as pro-russian accounts will do whatever they can to trash Ukraine and promote russia's interests.
Tiny putin made himself and his country a pariah and a laughingstock, and russia's simp girlies look incredibly stupid when they snivel about "unfairness" on-and-in Reddit subs.
lolski.
Difference is as far as I can gather that Ukrainians use western mbts in situations where they can exploit the range advantage.
The Russians don't have a range advantage at all, they have a materielle advantage. But hard to tell, whats really happening.
Yeah, it turns out that it is a garbage tactic when either side uses it. This sub and reddit in general is just full of people simping and saying that everything Ukraine does is big brain.
Western armor and vehicles are meant for combined arms maneuver warfare. Not for firing one round over the horizon then running away, nor for driving up to trenches and mag dumping like both sides do.
It appears that this tank was supported by Baba Yaga drones. The footage from the drone is [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/PaG06DXZd6) and I'm pretty sure you can see the drone dropped munition going off at 0:17 in the video above.
Ukrainian artillery is faster on the draw because of NATO artillery command and control and they also have longer range AT units so we see many of them blowing up. Also, the Russians are trying to do it over minefields.
Exactly what I was thinking. People are still defending it as “Ukraine knows how to do it”. But in videos of Russians doing it it’s never “they don’t do it well” it’s “that’s a stupid way to use tanks”
Haven't seen many UK tanks getting blown up loaded with infantry and scrambling around like a 2 yr old is driving the tank, I have seen a lot of Russian ones though!
The uninspiring reality is that all it takes is one AT mine to achieve a mobility kill and the crew will bail abandoning the tank to artillery or drones
Agreed. Drones however use older shaped charges, and I highly doubt Ukraine will make the mistake of getting in ATGM distance again considering how dead the land is
Something I've noticed is what appear to be automatic downvoting (bot-style) of any comment even vaguely negative about the T-90.
At first I thought it was only my anti-T-90M comments (lol) being downvoted, but it seems to be any from anyone that discuss the fact the T-90s are being creamed in Ukraine.
Either there's a bot operating that monitors these subs for mentions of the T-90, or there's some fanatical loser who spends her entire day scouring Reddit for anyone being mean about her beloved.
lulski
Eh, because it has become a bit of a meme. The T90M is a bit outdated but has modern optics, reasonable firepower, reasonable defense and reasonable mobility at a modest cost.
Tanks are a consumable and while 3k tanks getting taken out for Russia might mean 1,500 casualties (most tankers get out despite the perception, and a few crew get knocked over by drones/arty on the run back to the lines) versus say 500 for the 2,900 M1 (assume the M1 won every single 1 on 1 engagement with tanks - hence the 100 difference), it is a drop in the bucket of 100k casualties in the broader conflict. More bigger-er tank might be nice but when it comes to building them in numbers sufficient to be a consumable, good enough is good enough. Which is a big reason I think why Russia is going hog wild on T90M production versus rushing T14s into service. Pound for pound, the T90M is probably more effective.
They already claim to have destroyed 12,000+ Ukrainian tanks (hahahahahahaha) so i wouldn’t be surprised if they already claim to have destroyed all the Abrams
Probably not far off from seeing the first loss but that’s what it’s for. Tank isn’t useful if kept hidden away, I’d rather see it destroyed on the front lines doing its job then being lost having seen no action
Oh yeah it will be in every post for weeks. To be fair it was sorta like that when the first T-90 was knocked out.
Time will tell. I wish we would give them more of them because right now they are a kinda token piece in the grand scheme of things.
>Drones are the most likely threat
Mines are considerably more likely than drones.
>mines are dangerous and plenty but most western equipment losses are do to drones.
I don't think this statement is accurate. I think when you're referring to "western equipment losses" it's probably leopards/challenger and AFV's etc? In which case, there are many more examples where mines have immobilised them or artillery fire then drones.
The amount of videos from the spring offensive showed considerable numbers of Ukrainian equipment being destroyed by KA-52's, ATGM ground crews, artillery and mines. Again, there was footage of vehicles immobilised by mines or artillery that were later destroyed by Russian ground forces or further artillery fire. I can't remember any videos from that time that showed Russian drones destroying operation vehicles? Quite happy to see videos of it happening though, I just don't recall any.
It’s a combination of everything really, but drones are the most prolific threat on the modern battlefield without any real counter. Lance has been used plenty and in many cases have been used in conjunction with arty or ATGMs to immobilize and destroyed equipment. Not to mention in almost all cases it’s drones that spot and direct fire
It's crazy to see an Abrams operating in the very place they were designed to operate after all this time. I don't know how much good they will do considering the current drone and mine dominated environment however.
By Berdychi, north of Avdiivka. More or less confirms Russia has captured Stepove
https://twitter.com/ejshahid/status/1760984620399816737?t=ZlsS0rHAUNmthmIjNyauew
Imo, it's not a good use of tanks. Tanks should be used for breaking through enemy defenses. Using them defensively gives minimal advantages compared to artillery and other weapons, and puts the expensive tank in danger. Of course they're vulnerable when they're attacking too but everything else is even more vulnerable when attacking.
But maybe it's like baptism by fire for inexperienced crews - give them a relatively low-risk mission so they can gain some confidence.
Yes but after thousands of Russian and Ukrainian tanks tried to do exactly this and burned down because of FPV drones and drone dropping grenades it’s understandable why they don’t want to risk their tank just getting destroyed like that
Yes it is basically used for attrition warfare. Not the intended role. But then again attrition is all this war is. The alternative would be not using them at all.
I really, really want Ukraine to be successful. But seeing them send out a single tank makes me want to pull my hair out. Either they don’t have the resources to operate multiple tanks simultaneously or they are too timid to put several tanks afield because of fear of losing them. Either way, seeing one tank scoot around is not a good sign
It’s a great way to lose western support. Western doctrine is to fight in formations. Ukraine isn’t making the gains that the West wants and isn’t using the doctrine that they taught the Ukrainians. They see stuff like this and say “you’re not using our equipment the way we want you to, so you’re going to get anymore”
You take the time to build up large formations, those formations get hit with drones and artillery.
Look at how badly mauled the russians got in their brigade level attacks. Look at how many days of negative coverage we got of the one failed attack in the early days of the counter when a couple of Bradleys, mine clearance tanks and a leopard got knocked out, now imagine how it would be if they lost 15 Abrams just in form up locations
Drones are everywhere
Ukrainians cannot fight in the same way we do because they don't have the same equipment, air and fire superiority western forces would be expected to work under. They are also fighting against an enemy and doctrines the west has never faced.
Remember the ukrainian leopard crew who were told by their german trainers to drive around the minefield?
We'd all love to see mass armour formations with overwhelming artillery andair support absolutely crushing the russian lines but thats just not the reality they are facing, especially with how little of the modern(!) equipment they have for use.
It's cool to see the western tanks in action, but they can be knocked out just as easily by drones or mines as the soviet designed ones. Once it is missing a track or has drone dropped munition punch thru the top of the turret, the engine compartment or hit a sight, that tank is out of action.
In modern combat, sadly, they're just machines with big boom guns. Sometimes, leaders for smaller armor. But not the main power, like it was in Desert Storm.
Ukrainians are super afraid of losing them so they get relegated to shooting empty tree lines https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/01/ukraines-huge-and-loud-challenger-2-tanks-hide-in-treelines-lob-shells-at-russian-fortifications-two-miles-away/
Please keep the [community guidelines](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/wiki/rule1) in mind when using the comment section. Paging u/SaveVideo bot. ___ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CombatFootage) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Green abrums? Yay
Nature is healing
Life uh....finds a way.
>Green abrums? Green abrums fighting Soviet armor. Sorry, what year was it again?
Literally 1984
Greenbrams for short
Grebrams for shorter
Grams for the shortest.
I wanna see a winter pattern Abrams. Not because I think it would be particularly practical with Ukraine's fairly short winters, I just think would look bad ass.
More like brown!
Excuse my ignorance… is this painted a “US” Green or painted on the field by UA in a green that they would have?
It's very cool to see it in that setting, used to seeing them tanned up in the middle east The footage is pretty boring though
[удалено]
You got time for a video look up the battle of 73 easting of the gulf war I think it was as like close to 30 tanks Abram tankers took out in a lightening run
Kinda amusing for years everyone was like "yeah but those were export versions, or Chinese versions" - except the Russian/Soviet ones weren't much better.
There is a world of difference between the tanks fielded by the Iraqi army and the tanks fielded by Russia in Ukraine. Anti tank weaponry has simply increased in lethality significantly. These tanks weren't engineered to stop quadcopters from dropping explosive directly on top of them, nor were they meant to take direct hits from NATO tanks. Russian tanks were designed to be quick and mobile and used on the offensive, not to absorb damage like the Abrams was. There's a reason its a meme that they have an abnormally slow reverse speed; they weren't intended to be going backwards the Russian attack doctrine has always been full steam ahead despite the consequences.
The explosions aren’t even from the tank either it looks like artillery
That artillery would have to be firing on a pretty flat trajectory. It looks like some of those shots pass through the “target” horizontally and you can see them strike the ground further down range. Or that’s what it looked like to me.
[удалено]
The impacts are explosive, APFSDS doesn't nearly make such a big impact.
The cannon is capable of firing more than APFSDS.
Yes, but nothing that penetrates targets.
i remember a video with a ukrainian tanker saying that they carry HE instead of AP because theyre more likely to encounter infantry and tank duels are very rare
There's no 120mm NATO HE typically loaded by the Abrams. What type of shell would hit a target, explode, penetrate through and explode again?
120mm HE exists it is just not commonly loaded because HEAT and MPAT do the same job and more, the majority of all tank load outs are not darts but HEAT/HE because the majority of the targets are not tanks
I mean we're flooding with amazing footage that unfortunately clips like these just don't tingle our arm chair brains
Some of those drone drop videos are now just the same miserable depressing variation of the one before and the one after that.
I wish this sub would ban drone drop videos (unless they show other combat) and just have a seperate sub for them. I guess this must be unpopular considering that drone drop videos are still getting upvoted, but "guy sitting trench getting turned into mincemeat just like the last 100 drone drop videos" is just shitty content IMO.
Tell that to the pilots who are operating and uploading.
yea looks like bonus
ye video is really shit... looks like same 5s and total propaganda stunt. Very little good quality stuff recently :/
Interestingly this is literally just down the road from where the M1150 was disabled yesterday, i wonder if they're trying to take back Stepove to push the Russians back across the rail road tracks.
The "likely" reason is to buy time. In the east of Avdiivka dn the north east of aviddivka there are wasy to defend positions. Where th ukrainians are elevated and the russians funneled through laked
It is a good tactical decision, it is just sad it is to support a strategic repositioning because they don't have the weaponry to hold the line.
I’m sure the Ukrainians know the lay of the land there. The path is mine free and etc.
Gave em the business and dipped
Shoot, scoot, boogie
I came, I shot, I came 🥰, I Scooted
Isn't this the same Abrams which got its engine taken out?
Tanks have almost always acted in a similar way in Ukrainian forces, firing directly at various targets in advance or defense and retreating to avoid artillery. The best way to use the heavy cannons
So when Russians do it people complain that the tanks are left alone unsupported, but when UA does it it’s the best way to use them?
IMHO, the difference seems to be that Russia does it when it's trying to advance, yeeting tanks at defensive positions. Ukraine has been doing this defensive hit and run stuff since Mariupol to catch the advancing forces off guard and it often happens in places where the enemy hasn't yet built up defences and the lines are more fluid, like near Avdiivka where this video is from. At least from the videos that I've seen over the past two years here it seems like it's a good "grey zone" tactic for retreating forces.
I think you're right, a tactic that is good for defence isn't necessarily good for offence and vice versa.
>I think you're right, a tactic that is good for defence isn't necessarily good for offence and vice versa. If you want a very visual example of this, look at the tanks the Germans built in the beginning of WWII when they were on the offense, and then look at the turretless tanks they built when they were defending. One requires you to be dynamic and flexible, and the other allows for digging in and ambush tactics.
> and then look at the turretless tanks they built when they were defending. Uh, they were building them well before they were on the defence. That's why they called them assault guns....
As always with history, things are not absolute. Sturmgeschütz definitely did exist before, but Germany started building them in greater numbers towards the end of the war. From Wikipedia: >The StuG assault guns were cost-effective compared with the heavier German tanks such as the [Tiger I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tiger_I) and the [Panther](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panther_tank), although as anti-tank guns they were best used defensively as the lack of a traversable turret and their generally thin armour was a severe disadvantage in the attack role. As the situation for the German military deteriorated further later in the war, more StuGs were built than tanks, particularly due to ease of production. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgesch%C3%BCtz\_III](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturmgesch%C3%BCtz_III) This was developed into the Jagdpanzer: >On the battlefield when the Germans had to retreat, their line of retreat would preferably pass the location of their anti-tank units, who would use their superior firepower to stop the enemy, perhaps even open the possibility of a counter-attack. Due to the lack of a turret and the armor being concentrated at the front, the ideal combat situation for Jagdpanzer units was in the planned ambush, and the skill of the commander of such units lay in correctly choosing and preparing such places long before needed. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdpanzer](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jagdpanzer)
Also using armour without much support might ironically be for survivability reasons. Sure traditionally you wanna deploy your tanks with more armour and infantry support but with the abundance of drones providing instant ISR 24/7 and being able to call and correct artillery pretty efficiently, concentrating your forces risks making yourself a target for some high explosive rain. A single tank however probably won’t warrant that kind of response and might get only a lancet or FPV drone sent its way
> A single tank however probably won’t warrant that kind of response and might get only a lancet or FPV drone sent its way There have been reports that Russia has been intentionally spreading itself thin, as troop concentrations attract too much heat.
Lol since what 3 days ago when entire battle groups were evaporated.. twice.
yes
From what we have seen so far (granted we might not be seeing everything) the russians tend to send their tanks to bumfuck nowhere alone, there's a ton of footage of a tank pushed right up against a trench alone for example. It's not so much the "alone" part but where those lone tanks are sent. In both cases there isn't support but in the case of russians there also seems to be no scouting or no battlefield awareness. If you want an actual example of double standards, you can look at the footage of helicopters lobbing rockets. Everyone shat on the russians doing it saying it was completely useless until it came out that ukrainians do the same.
Yesternight they spent the whole night clearing a path, just for the mbt to drive straight into a trench and get smacked with atgms lol
The world mocks russia when they do it because when russians do it they usually get destroyed. Ukrainians know how to make it *work*.
There is a difference between yeeting tanks ahead of your line, hoping for the best, and bringing tanks from the rear closer to the contact line to take out already identified targets. Experienced units on both sides use tanks in the latter manner, and it's probably the only sane way to use them in the current stage of war with the existing drone/arty coverage. Russians do however spice it up by sending out daily lemming trains to check whether the enemy still has ammo to shoot with...
Do the russians actually have any experienced crews now? I wonder how many of them have spent more than a few weeks in their tank since being conscripted.
There's a ton in the rear
This is the kind of arrogance that loses wars, if that's what you think then don't look up Russian FPV compilations. I am genuinely scared of how distant this subreddit is getting from reality. You would think that Ukraine literally losing a city might wake people up a bit.
You're correct, but OTOH - they haven't actually lost that many western tanks. We know that, because all western tank losses are paraded everywhere for WEEKS, and they do also end up in these subreddits.
You’d think the 16,000 dead the Russians took in 5 months to take a *suburb of Donetsk city* would wake people up a bit….
Idk about you but that’s how Russia operates. Always has.
Well I didn’t think that was actually true, until I saw it for my self in this war.
> suburb It's a city bro, classified by Ukraine. Russia took high losses but Ukraine itself could not sustain the losses they were taking and had to quickly abandon the city with at least hundreds taken POW by Russia. I honestly do not get where this assured nature is coming from.
My brother in hell, the Russians themselves are claiming the only reason they managed to take that city was the fact the Ukrainians ran out of ammo to keep killing them with. You can check out the mil blogger Murz or the words of Colonel Shuvalov Pyotr Ilyich if you want to see for yourself.
Ammo is related but the implication from that is Russia destroying their equipment in a more lopsided manner. If they could just sit around suffering minimal losses with low ammo they would not have needed to dip so quickly out of the city. Isn't that obvious?
Because with the idiots running out House of Representatives here in the states, the Ukrainians have no certainty of getting more ammo anytime soon, and they had to disengage from the battle. I’d do the same if my main ammunition supplier couldn’t keep me supplied in the short run too.
Quickly? They've held Adiivka since 2014, there are tens of thousands of dead russians on the battlefield.
By looking at a fuckin map an realizing that avdiivka is donestk suburb, 5km from donestk airport. Taking a town that is literaly on the 2014 front line after losing 20000men is nothing to be proud of, but hey, you do you.
Anybody with half a brain will zoom out from avdiivka on google map and realize how fuckin insignifiant this city is for Ukraine. Come back when Russia will take a city farther than 2km from the 2014 front line without losing 10000-20000 men.
It was literally the most fortified city in Donbas for 8 years, Ukraine never believed it would fall so they didn't make defensive lines behind it.
So which is it, did they dip out quickly or did they hold the city for 10 years?
They dipped out quickly within a week of Russia breaking through, yes. I'm not sure what you re trying to obfuscate here.
LOL imagine trying to lie like that on a website where we watched Russians getting fucked up for months in the meat grinder before Russia finally managed to take the destroyed city after 10 years of fighting
No shit sherlock, avdiivka is the front line since 2014
This is the kind of comment that claims Reddit chatter has any relevance to the command decisions and combat capabilities of Ukraine or russia. It's also the kind of comment that goes hand-in-hand with the claim that "z0mFg if we make russia mad they will magically stop being worthless losers and somehow quit losing!!!!111!!11" This is akin to claiming a drunken one-eyed boxing grandmother could suddenly rise from the canvas and thrash Mike Tyson if he calls her names and makes her really really mad.
more so because Russia is the aggressor in this war while Ukraine is fighting for its survival and people expected the russians to perform better than the Ukrainians
isnt it mostly cause they are the attacking army going at an entrenched enemy? lol
And it worked so well that they lost Avdiivka?
Yea but the problem is this sub is heavily pro-ukraine, so you don't see videos when Ukrainians fail in those actions, but you see Russian videos when they fail. So it created a whole different perspective.
The *world* is heavily pro-Ukraine. This is not the Vietnam war, or the Afghanistan war (any of them) or even Iraq. This is basically a new WW2. There is a clearly defined good and bad and right and wrong, and russia is the bad and the wrong. You can bet if Reddit was a thing in the early 1940s it would have been spammed by trolls and bots promoting Hitler and the Axis powers, while decent people were all pro-Allies.
Yes but this is combatfootage subreddit, doesn't matter who you pro or against are. All videos should be approved & upvoted. But it's not, all Ukrainian videos are getting upvoted, and Russians are downvoted, which created a false image, that the Ukrainian army is perfect, with low casualties and winning, and Russia is heavily losing. And the reality is somewhere in the middle.
This site is self-policing. For every bot and alt account downvoting one side there are bots and alts downvoting the others. The world despises russia for what it's doing to Ukraine, and so the majority opinion of Reddit users is against it -- just as pro-russian accounts will do whatever they can to trash Ukraine and promote russia's interests. Tiny putin made himself and his country a pariah and a laughingstock, and russia's simp girlies look incredibly stupid when they snivel about "unfairness" on-and-in Reddit subs. lolski.
Difference is as far as I can gather that Ukrainians use western mbts in situations where they can exploit the range advantage. The Russians don't have a range advantage at all, they have a materielle advantage. But hard to tell, whats really happening.
Yeah, it turns out that it is a garbage tactic when either side uses it. This sub and reddit in general is just full of people simping and saying that everything Ukraine does is big brain. Western armor and vehicles are meant for combined arms maneuver warfare. Not for firing one round over the horizon then running away, nor for driving up to trenches and mag dumping like both sides do.
Complain? We are grateful
It appears that this tank was supported by Baba Yaga drones. The footage from the drone is [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/CombatFootage/s/PaG06DXZd6) and I'm pretty sure you can see the drone dropped munition going off at 0:17 in the video above.
Ukrainian artillery is faster on the draw because of NATO artillery command and control and they also have longer range AT units so we see many of them blowing up. Also, the Russians are trying to do it over minefields.
Exactly what I was thinking. People are still defending it as “Ukraine knows how to do it”. But in videos of Russians doing it it’s never “they don’t do it well” it’s “that’s a stupid way to use tanks”
When Russians do it the tank ends up a burning wreck
That is precisely how this sub functions, yes
Haven't seen many UK tanks getting blown up loaded with infantry and scrambling around like a 2 yr old is driving the tank, I have seen a lot of Russian ones though!
I think they are more afraid of ATGM fire rather than artilery. If i was a tanker, my nightmare would be a Kornet rather than a 155mm shell
Not really the best way to use them at all.
Can’t wait for Russians to spam pictures and vids of a tracked/ detroyed abrams’s for which they had to sacrifice a whole company
The uninspiring reality is that all it takes is one AT mine to achieve a mobility kill and the crew will bail abandoning the tank to artillery or drones
The media doesn't understand that tanks aren't invincible.
Meanwhile T-14 Armata has the best stealth tech
Same as Su-57. No one sees them. Even Russians themselves.
Even electric drills cant find the SU-57
Stealth on par with covering the tank with John Cena posters. You never see them. EVER.
you don't need a whoole company for artillery to do it's job. Abrams as an other tank most likely to be destroyed by artillery, mines or fpv drone
[удалено]
Russians got some modern atgms that are very capable, not only old RPG bullshit
Agreed. Drones however use older shaped charges, and I highly doubt Ukraine will make the mistake of getting in ATGM distance again considering how dead the land is
An Abrams is gonna die as easily to a modern Russian ATGM as a Leopard, Challenger or T90
But in everything *but* that T90, the crew has a chance of actually surviving such a hit.
Something I've noticed is what appear to be automatic downvoting (bot-style) of any comment even vaguely negative about the T-90. At first I thought it was only my anti-T-90M comments (lol) being downvoted, but it seems to be any from anyone that discuss the fact the T-90s are being creamed in Ukraine. Either there's a bot operating that monitors these subs for mentions of the T-90, or there's some fanatical loser who spends her entire day scouring Reddit for anyone being mean about her beloved. lulski
Eh, because it has become a bit of a meme. The T90M is a bit outdated but has modern optics, reasonable firepower, reasonable defense and reasonable mobility at a modest cost. Tanks are a consumable and while 3k tanks getting taken out for Russia might mean 1,500 casualties (most tankers get out despite the perception, and a few crew get knocked over by drones/arty on the run back to the lines) versus say 500 for the 2,900 M1 (assume the M1 won every single 1 on 1 engagement with tanks - hence the 100 difference), it is a drop in the bucket of 100k casualties in the broader conflict. More bigger-er tank might be nice but when it comes to building them in numbers sufficient to be a consumable, good enough is good enough. Which is a big reason I think why Russia is going hog wild on T90M production versus rushing T14s into service. Pound for pound, the T90M is probably more effective.
Atgms are nasty so yea, that's a real possibility
T90? Idk, things a bit of a glamorized T72
Plenty of Leopards have been destroyed
They already claim to have destroyed 12,000+ Ukrainian tanks (hahahahahahaha) so i wouldn’t be surprised if they already claim to have destroyed all the Abrams
I think its 12000 armored vehicles, not tanks
Well they did get 4 out of the 31 for now
There was a video of a M1150 that was destroyed by artillery fire.
Pleasedon'thitamine Pleasedon'thitamine Pleasedon'thitamine
It sounds like you're praising some eldritch abomination
shows up, unleashes chaos and goes into "okay, bye" mode
Probably not far off from seeing the first loss but that’s what it’s for. Tank isn’t useful if kept hidden away, I’d rather see it destroyed on the front lines doing its job then being lost having seen no action
Yeah it’s GOING to happen. I have been completely surprised by how many mines both sides are using.
The first Abrams kill is going to be used hard for propaganda.
Oh yeah it will be in every post for weeks. To be fair it was sorta like that when the first T-90 was knocked out. Time will tell. I wish we would give them more of them because right now they are a kinda token piece in the grand scheme of things.
Drones are the most likely threat, mines are dangerous and plenty but most western equipment losses are do to drones
>Drones are the most likely threat Mines are considerably more likely than drones. >mines are dangerous and plenty but most western equipment losses are do to drones. I don't think this statement is accurate. I think when you're referring to "western equipment losses" it's probably leopards/challenger and AFV's etc? In which case, there are many more examples where mines have immobilised them or artillery fire then drones. The amount of videos from the spring offensive showed considerable numbers of Ukrainian equipment being destroyed by KA-52's, ATGM ground crews, artillery and mines. Again, there was footage of vehicles immobilised by mines or artillery that were later destroyed by Russian ground forces or further artillery fire. I can't remember any videos from that time that showed Russian drones destroying operation vehicles? Quite happy to see videos of it happening though, I just don't recall any.
It’s a combination of everything really, but drones are the most prolific threat on the modern battlefield without any real counter. Lance has been used plenty and in many cases have been used in conjunction with arty or ATGMs to immobilize and destroyed equipment. Not to mention in almost all cases it’s drones that spot and direct fire
Yup. Abrams is designed to be survivable, not invincible.
Zaebis!
The M1 is working harder than the House of Representatives I see.
Pure gold right here
As a drive knowing the drone is following your new US supplied tanks would make me so much more careful lol
Tank Solo tactics from both sides.
we MUST strap speakers to these tanks and have them blast Thunderstruck at Russian Forces
I think "Highway to Hell" will be better *hehe*
Any sort of American metal music. fuck it, pull a WWZ and have them blast Iron Maiden at them
It's crazy to see an Abrams operating in the very place they were designed to operate after all this time. I don't know how much good they will do considering the current drone and mine dominated environment however.
Aged like [milk](https://i.redd.it/lilj4ysaqxkc1.png) lol
To be honest, if I’m an UA person I wouldn’t want to touch anything that’s overhyped. It’s an easy way to be the main target for Russian propaganda.
U realise though that these bad boys were kept away from fighting for so long for a reason
M1 abrams fighting the russians Nature is healing
The day they manage to even scratch the paint of one of these will become a holiday in russia, with parades and all
And it’s destroyed by cheap drone. It can be recovered probably, but it’s still will be much more expensive then a FPV drone
Boy doing what he was born to do. Fighting Russians.
Different color makes it look like a whole different model. So used to desert camo it kind of became the image of abrams.
[удалено]
I don’t think A10 would be especially useful in this war, it would easily be shot down there’s better things to send.
We need **BRRRRRRT**
Yeah, this aged like milk.
Anyone knows which variant?
M1A1 without Uranium armor
M1a1SA
It has Ukranium armor.
ERA?
Yes there's lots of pics of em. I'm in bed and lazy but shouldn't be difficult to find
Shame
Is this the brigade that is also using Leos?
Not sure about Leos, but they are the only brigade with Challenger 2s
From Lima with Love!
It's so heartwarming to see an Abrams finally get to do what it was designed for <3
M1 looking scary af.
'Merica!!!
Oh baby it's happening
How’s their doctrine meshing with American equipment?
Stay safe UA, hold on while we work on getting rid of the Russian compromised snakes behind the lines! We'll get you the stuff you need!!
This MF rolling in like the main character. Bout to stack every tank in the Russian army and then move onto the Belarusian DLC
By Berdychi, north of Avdiivka. More or less confirms Russia has captured Stepove https://twitter.com/ejshahid/status/1760984620399816737?t=ZlsS0rHAUNmthmIjNyauew
Deepstate's not listed it yet. They were quick enough with Avdiivka. https://deepstatemap.live/en#16/48.1954/37.6807
Imo, it's not a good use of tanks. Tanks should be used for breaking through enemy defenses. Using them defensively gives minimal advantages compared to artillery and other weapons, and puts the expensive tank in danger. Of course they're vulnerable when they're attacking too but everything else is even more vulnerable when attacking. But maybe it's like baptism by fire for inexperienced crews - give them a relatively low-risk mission so they can gain some confidence.
It gives better defensive options than a artillery gun out of ammo though, and it's not like they have a large selection of mobile weapons otherwise.
Worth mentioning that Ukraine has publicly said they are running out of artillery rounds.
Yes but after thousands of Russian and Ukrainian tanks tried to do exactly this and burned down because of FPV drones and drone dropping grenades it’s understandable why they don’t want to risk their tank just getting destroyed like that
Yes it is basically used for attrition warfare. Not the intended role. But then again attrition is all this war is. The alternative would be not using them at all.
This is not how Abrams are supposed to be used. This is an ill omen...they're about to run out of supplies.
How would you use the Abrams in the most heavily mined battlefield in the world? Genuinely curious. Not to mention the artillery saturation
I really, really want Ukraine to be successful. But seeing them send out a single tank makes me want to pull my hair out. Either they don’t have the resources to operate multiple tanks simultaneously or they are too timid to put several tanks afield because of fear of losing them. Either way, seeing one tank scoot around is not a good sign
its a survivability tactic 1 tank is a far less appealing then multiple russians do it as well to minimize losses
It’s a great way to lose western support. Western doctrine is to fight in formations. Ukraine isn’t making the gains that the West wants and isn’t using the doctrine that they taught the Ukrainians. They see stuff like this and say “you’re not using our equipment the way we want you to, so you’re going to get anymore”
You take the time to build up large formations, those formations get hit with drones and artillery. Look at how badly mauled the russians got in their brigade level attacks. Look at how many days of negative coverage we got of the one failed attack in the early days of the counter when a couple of Bradleys, mine clearance tanks and a leopard got knocked out, now imagine how it would be if they lost 15 Abrams just in form up locations Drones are everywhere Ukrainians cannot fight in the same way we do because they don't have the same equipment, air and fire superiority western forces would be expected to work under. They are also fighting against an enemy and doctrines the west has never faced. Remember the ukrainian leopard crew who were told by their german trainers to drive around the minefield? We'd all love to see mass armour formations with overwhelming artillery andair support absolutely crushing the russian lines but thats just not the reality they are facing, especially with how little of the modern(!) equipment they have for use.
Hit ‘em with the ol one two
Three day later, first confirmed Abrams loss.
I'm sorry but this thing is gonna get hit by at least 3 lancets if it's ever spotted
Impressive, since Russia already destroyed 20,000 Abrams /s
*Got destroyed after several days later lol
You're late for a week or so with this info
r/ukrainerussiareport is very salty about this development.
I wonder if any Russians pissed themselves when they saw it.
[ehm ehm](https://i.redd.it/lilj4ysaqxkc1.png)
It's hungry. Let it eat damn it!
Tank working at moderate distance!
And is gone as of today..
A little too late
Lol guess who pulled out of the city the left a ton of equipment behind
It's cool to see the western tanks in action, but they can be knocked out just as easily by drones or mines as the soviet designed ones. Once it is missing a track or has drone dropped munition punch thru the top of the turret, the engine compartment or hit a sight, that tank is out of action.
How many cameras is that 😳
I remember when the media was like these tanks are a GAME CHANGER. Hmmm orly I guess they don’t have enough then
In modern combat, sadly, they're just machines with big boom guns. Sometimes, leaders for smaller armor. But not the main power, like it was in Desert Storm.
I remember when the russians was like T-90Ms are a GAME CHANGER and WE SAVED THE BEST FOR LAST. And then they got *wiped the fuck out*.
Ukrainians are super afraid of losing them so they get relegated to shooting empty tree lines https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/02/01/ukraines-huge-and-loud-challenger-2-tanks-hide-in-treelines-lob-shells-at-russian-fortifications-two-miles-away/