1 Like
Clearly not and why do they fly at 1m?
Because of air defences, drones have massive RCS and even outdated systems like Gepard can detect and destroy drones so they fly low, which massively reduces FOV and the drone run low on battery and chose the next target usually some poor Soldier on a quad or in a trench while the camouflaged SPG/Tank is hiding in the woods untouched.
ven if the latest modification of the Abrams is used, it does not meet the standards of modern warfare and will have to be modified in a makeshift manner.
5 Likes
You swear the M1A1 could defeat a humble T72A? Who would have thought, right, Sherlock Holmes
Yes, they explode, they explode just like Leopards, just like Challenger, just leclerc if you hit ammo, so what a superiority from NATO wow
4 Likes
The number of tank is closer to 600, and that’s just counting tanks. There’s thousands of supplied vehicles. Including IFVs and so on.
Thousands of ATGMs xyz. It’s always easier to defend rather than go on the offensive. Aka why people camp so much in WT.
2 Likes
?
you know challengers dont have blowout panels right
and Leos only have blowout panels for the bustle rack
while abrams also has blowout panels for the hull ammo
This is the standard flight altitude for most drones.
Most modern radars and air defenses are useless against drones, as proven by hundreds of video frames.
3 Likes
These lasers would be destroyed by a barrage of FPV drones, fiber optic guided drones that are not affected by interference, and their production chain would be bombarded by geran 2, iskander m khinzal, kh101, kh59m
3 Likes
The Abrams is the only NATO standard tank that will truly protect its crew; the rest will explode like a good old T-62.
1 Like
Yet you ignore mine. Suit yourself. Have a nice day.
The Leclerc doesn’t carry hull ammo anymore.
However, France still operates many Leclerc S2 and S1 models.
Laser systems are most likely intended only for the protection of rear cities.
not really
russian tanks are still much more likely to explode, because the scatter ammo all around the tank and use more reactive propellants
There is something called not taking ammo in the hull willingly and crew initiatives. Something that the Russians clearly haven’t learned.
1 Like
Neither do Russians carry ammo outside the auto loader anymore.
2 Likes
It is still in the hull and will create the new class of cosmonauts
That’s correct, Russia itself didn’t hide this from anyone. UVZ (UralVagonZavod) has already conducted studies, and they themselves stated that the detonation was caused by the ammunition being outside the autoloader and by the propellants. The T90M solves this by placing the ammunition in a protected area behind the turret and adding extra armor to the carousel, which, remember, is located at the bottom of the vehicle. But it seems some people can’t use all their brainpower to understand this. I’m not saying it can’t explode; it can, just like many others can.
3 Likes
Drones aren’t cheap.
They are not using 100 dollar drones off Temu.
They need to be large enough to carry a payload, they need to have larger battery, they need EW protection and in some cases the ability to change aerials to get around jammers.
All of this technology costs money, yes you can 3d print the chassis but the key parts cost money Ukraine like Russia flat out lies about the cost of their drones Lancet as an example is on the 3rd variant and yet it was still offered at 25K when Lancet 1 was used in Syria. Since then Lancet has an upgraded engine, an upgraded thermal camera an upgraded DL and upgraded payload, upgraded control system and EW and an upgraded launcher. The Lancet cannot cost 25K it is probably closer to 60K The same cost as the much maligned Switchblade drone.
Back to Ukraine FPV drones Ukraine quotes 400 dollars per drone. It is simply a lie, Ukraines FPV drones are closer to 1500 - 3000 dollars because if you use off the shelf equipment Russia can track and jam them with ease and send a missile/artillery shell to destroy the operator and the stash of drones.
So we are at a point now where a Laser that has no expense per shot, has no moving parts, requires no maintenance and can reliably intercept threats at the cost of well nothing is going to somehow be inadequate.