M1 Abrams no die and kill everything

[pepin1234]

Wow!! I just was a while in MP moving the CA and my armor group was killed in few seconds. Why...?? I just made a test with the M1 Abrams and now this MBT no die easily and kill all like a machine gun :)

 

Here there are two tracks, there you can see the M1 killer in action, unstoppable!!

M1 Abrams the super power in DCS.trk

M1 Abrams the super power in DCS-2.trk

[Oldguy]

Just like real life, lol!

[Slazi]

That's why Russia has the Su-25 and the Ka-50. M1 eaters.

[Slazi]

Ground based ATGMs will also destroy M1s pretty easily - especially on flat terrain.

[SDsc0rch]

little bit of trivia for you...

 

how many M1 abrams tanks have been lost in combat due to enemy fire??

[SilentGun]

M1 Abrams no die and kill everything

 

little bit of trivia for you...

 

how many M1 abrams tanks have been lost in combat due to enemy fire??

 

 

Desert storm = 0 but I have no idea otherwise. A tank was just destroyed recently in Saudi.

[FSKRipper]

Desert storm = 0 but I have no idea otherwise. A tank was just destroyed recently in Saudi.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=26107&page=1370

 

#13695

[Skjold]

little bit of trivia for you...

 

how many M1 abrams tanks have been lost in combat due to enemy fire??

 

Do you count scuttle losses where repairs was technically possible but the crew decided to jump ship and scuttle the vehicle to save their own lives?

 

If you do, alot of them has been knocked out. If you don't, there is still a fair number that has been lost in Iraq & Yemen to ATGM systems.

 

Not sure if i can post liveleak stuff on here, so feel free to google "Saudi Arabian M1 Abrams Tank Cooks Off After Being Hit By Yemeni Houthi ATGM" for example.

[pepin1234]

The weapon used is a portable ATGM Konkurs 9M113 from the 70s. This is in Yemen and the Abrams are Saudis.

 

Edited August 26, 2015 by pepin1234

[Nerd1000]

I think DCS's simplistic tank modelling means that the M1 isn't much different from other MBTs as far as durability is concerned (at least when under fire from ATGMs). That said, it seems to consistently out-shoot Russian tanks, especially when the Abrams is stationary and the Russians are trying to assault its position. I suspect that the M1 can fire its gun over longer ranges, while Russian tanks seem unable to fire their ATGMs when moving. As a result when they are attacking an Abrams position they are out-ranged and get killed off in huge numbers.

[shagrat]

Actually, at least in the past it was the other way round. In DCS Russian tanks AND BMPs could fire ATGMs on the move and wasted stationary MBTs at 4000m, while the MBT guns would only fire at 3000m that only shifted a bit after the ATGMs were spent!

Need to recheck with current version. If this is fixed I'm more than happy!

The M1 Abrams as much as any modern tank isn't quite the near invincible Monster as often portrayed.

Any tank commander worth his salt can tell you more then a couple of ways how to disable or kill a tank no matter what.

What really makes a difference is the communication equipment in modern tanks, the Sat Uplink, more reliable radios, and information feeds. And of course the agility and capability to employ main weapons while moving at higher speeds. Yet, most modern tanks can do that.

 

Good tactics, enabled by far superior situational awareness and immediate communication between individual tanks in a platoon is far more important than armor. In general you might say when you need your armor to protect your life your tactic was flawed ;)

[OutOnTheOP]

The weapon used is a portable ATGM Konkurs 9M113 from the 70s. This is in Yemen and the Abrams are Saudis.

 

 

And yet, neither of those appear to be K-kills (that is, not a catastrophic loss). It is clear that the ammunition burned off, which looks spectacular, but considering that the ammo is bunkered in a bustle rack with blow off roof panels, the vehicle itself could be returned to duty in several days by a competent recovery crew, and the vehicle crew itself clearly survives, as they can be seen running from the vehicle. The fact that the video fails to show any aftermath beyond the initial impact, nor does it show the destroyed vehicle after it has burned out, leads me to believe this is the same standard Islamofascist propaganda technique as when they take a video of some bloke tripping and falling when exiting a HMMWV (the doorframe sucks!), superimpose crosshairs on the video, and add a gunshot sound and the aloha snackbar laugh track, and claim they killed the guy. Never mind that if they let the video roll another ten seconds, you'd see the guy get up and dust himself off *rolls eyes*

 

Unless the Saudis are such fools that they leave their ammo doors open even when not actively loading the next round, those vehicles suffered fairly minor damage: in the first you can clearly see it hits the turret at the very rear, from the left side of the turret. Nothing back there but ammo bunker; not going to kill the vehicle that way- but I suppose it LOOKS like it, so it makes sense they'd think that was the best place to aim. Appears to hit the same spot, from the right of the turret, in the second clip. The last isn't even an Abrams; it appears to be an AIFV (the 1970s proto-Bradley that was declined by the US and subsequently sold to Turkey and UAE)

Edited August 26, 2015 by OutOnTheOP

[OutOnTheOP]

I think DCS's simplistic tank modelling means that the M1 isn't much different from other MBTs as far as durability is concerned (at least when under fire from ATGMs). That said, it seems to consistently out-shoot Russian tanks, especially when the Abrams is stationary and the Russians are trying to assault its position. I suspect that the M1 can fire its gun over longer ranges, while Russian tanks seem unable to fire their ATGMs when moving. As a result when they are attacking an Abrams position they are out-ranged and get killed off in huge numbers.

 

As it should be; the Abrams simply has a better fire control system (and perhaps more importantly, better target acquisition sensors- see the factors Shagrat mentioned, above) than any Russian-built tank, up to and including the T90.

Edited August 26, 2015 by OutOnTheOP

[RoflSeal]

 

Unless the Saudis are such fools that they leave their ammo doors open even when not actively loading the next round, those vehicles suffered fairly minor damage.

 

 

I wouldn't be surprised to be honest if that happend. Here we see classic usage of tanks by Arab nations. Absolutely no tactics or plan, just drive them out in the middle of field, park them there and wait till somebody flanks them.

 

Vehicles seems to be used as a single separate entity, rather then part of a unit with supporting fire from other vehicles or infantry.

 

 

Seems ME countries are more interested in getting cool glitzy equipment then learning to train on it.

 

 

But yeah, side turret armor of an Abrams (or any tank) won't withstand a heavy ATGM like Konkurs, with or without the DU armor package that only US tank use; they would need the armor upgrades like the TUSK kit with the added ERA panels.

Edited August 26, 2015 by RoflSeal

[pepin1234]

Ok after see the video lets go back to the game guys.

 

What I see in the tracks the Abram was hit a couple of time and just got a half of damage life remaining. Also after two hit the reaction seem to be the same as a new brand unit.

[shagrat]

Yes, but as OutOnTheOP explained very well, especially the M1 and similar western tanks like the Leopard 2 or Challenger are purpose build to survive such hits, relatively intact, with the crew surviving, and even able to move unless the track is badly damaged.

When the video started my first thought was "why is he sitting in that field?" The second "Where is the second M1 that is covering him?" until I realized this is not western military and possibly untrained in armored warfare.

[pepin1234]

until I realized this is not western military and possibly untrained in armored warfare.

 

I don't think that matter if they are western or northern people. just search in YouTube and you will see the Abrams cooked in others battlefield and operated by another crew nationality.

 

I just not sure if such hit at the front turret is enough to knockout the Abrams

[Exorcet]

It's anything but invincible. I have a mission where a single T-72 often mows down three columns of M1, Challenger, M2, etc.

 

The ground combat AI is simplistic, and small details can have huge effects on outcomes.

 

I think overall, the Russian tanks are stronger unless things changed at some point without me noticing.

[Empennage]

I agree. I find myself outgunned and outranged in the Abrams by ATGM firing Russian tanks in CA all the time.

[pepin1234]

the RU ATGM are very dangerous. I did not use them, I just used the cannon and seem useless agains the Abrams. Please remember ED do change in every update. Just test the 1.2.16v, now you can see the Abrams does not die easily with cannon round.

Edited August 27, 2015 by pepin1234

[Nerd1000]

Actually, at least in the past it was the other way round. In DCS Russian tanks AND BMPs could fire ATGMs on the move and wasted stationary MBTs at 4000m, while the MBT guns would only fire at 3000m that only shifted a bit after the ATGMs were spent!

Need to recheck with current version. If this is fixed I'm more than happy!

The M1 Abrams as much as any modern tank isn't quite the near invincible Monster as often portrayed.

Any tank commander worth his salt can tell you more then a couple of ways how to disable or kill a tank no matter what.

What really makes a difference is the communication equipment in modern tanks, the Sat Uplink, more reliable radios, and information feeds. And of course the agility and capability to employ main weapons while moving at higher speeds. Yet, most modern tanks can do that.

 

Good tactics, enabled by far superior situational awareness and immediate communication between individual tanks in a platoon is far more important than armor. In general you might say when you need your armor to protect your life your tactic was flawed ;)

 

 

 

On second thought, most of what we're seeing is probably mostly happening because the ground combat AI is suicidally stupid. Tanks that come under fire when traveling on a road will often simply drive around their dead allies to keep moving along the road at walking pace:doh:. They will shoot at the enemy vehicles, but moving tanks are quite rightly less accurate than stationary ones, and as such tend to lose.

 

One of the Ka-50 scenarios asks you to support a pair of T-80U columns that are assaulting a town defended by Abrams, Bradleys, some assorted other vehicles and one of those stinger spamming Avenger Humvees. The T-80s have a numerical advantage and will cut through the Bradelys like a hot knife through butter, but if you let just a couple of Abrams live long enough for your tanks to make contact all of the T-80s will die attempting to drive over the top of a hill at 20 km/h.

[Exorcet]

you let just a couple of Abrams live long enough for your tanks to make contact all of the T-80s will die attempting to drive over the top of a hill at 20 km/h.

 

Very similar to the T-72 vs dozens of M1 issue I have. The T-72 is hidden by a hill that the M1's drive by. What happens is, the T-72 is looking at the road the M1's are on so when they drive by, they get shot and die. The M1's are looking ahead and can't shoot the T-72.

[pepin1234]

Very similar to the T-72 vs dozens of M1 issue I have. The T-72 is hidden by a hill that the M1's drive by. What happens is, the T-72 is looking at the road the M1's are on so when they drive by, they get shot and die. The M1's are looking ahead and can't shoot the T-72.

 

Did you see the second track, is basicly the contrary situation. Anyway the M1 stay alive after two hit.

[Exorcet]

I didn't watch the tracks. I wasn't trying to say that the M1 is too weak or too strong, just that the AI can perform very poorly or strangely in certain situations.

[esb77]

All of the more modern MBTs in DCS can survive multiple hits to their frontal turret armor.

 

To be sure of a kill you need at least 4-5 direct hits with 120 or 125 mm rounds.

 

On the other hand with the Russian 125 mm AP rounds it's also sometimes possible to get a single hit kill with a frontal aspect shot on an M1, but it is not reliable.

 

Hit from the side or the rear though, and 70-110 mm RPG or cannon rounds from the Russian APCs and IFV will often produce single round kills, especially if you hit the rear of the hull and set the engine on fire. I think engine fires are probably easier to start and more lethal in DCS than in real life.

 

It's all about employment. If you shoot the strongest part of the tank, it's much more likely to survive than if you shoot it somewhere else.

 

As long as your ground units have something heavier than anti-personnel or anti-aircraft weapons, they should be able to kill M1s effectively if they're in an advantageous position.

 

 

Getting the AI to fight intelligently on the other hand, is often an exercise in frustration unless you're willing to do a lot of work.

Edited September 1, 2015 by esb77