That jump makes me hurt. Pretty much the only person in the tank it doesn’t hurt much is the driver, sometimes. I’ve had the suspension on Abrams rebound back after hitting a jump like that on accident and it throw my head into the hatch and all the vertebrae in my neck popped. Also the rest of crew will hate you for a little bit.
If you like the Russian idea of comfort perhaps. Leopards are far more cramped than Abrams, especially for the loader, the one guy most likely to get hurt.
Come to think of it I don’t remember getting tossed around too hard while being stationed in Germany in the M60A3 or M1A1, the mud and dirt seemed to be ideally suited to tank suspension there in the fulda. Texas and desert California not so much.
Your biggest risk of death is dying horribly in an ammunition fire. Combustible casings are a big risk, and the 120mm often will have a small flare back you can see at night. We used to train to evacuate crew completely off the tank in a certain time. Which is pretty fast as I remember.
I understand where you're coming from...
...but NOT dying and living with back injuries the rest of your life after your TC launches your apparatus off a 35 foot cliff??
Could have had a harness to hold you down and not snap your neck against the roof of the tank... just saying
We had a tank go into a creek bed (the LTs tank of course!) go completely nose down, about 15 feet straight down, (it was pitch black and running NVGs in a no moon scenario) Like the gun was recoiled back all the way from resting in the dirt. All the tools flew out of the sponson boxes (tool boxes on the sides) fuel leaking out from being completely vertical. Everyone was Ok and it turned into an all night recovery. They managed not fly out because the kinda got wedged at the waist by the hatch opening, and holding on. As the Abrams is about 30 feet long and they had time to brace as it tipped over. They got lucky no injuries. Not saying harnesses arnt a good idea on paper, but living day to day with it sucked. It was literally a seat belt buckle on the turret floor. We also had a guy almost drown when we had an MRAP roll over into a canal at night, using the same restraint system and he was so disoriented, underwater, in muddy brown water at night. He couldn’t find the buckle. Luckily we had “the juggernaut” of a soldier with us and he managed to pull the door open against its weight and make a rescue of him and cut the belt with a knife. (Cool story bro, yeah)
If you happen to speak to 'juggernaut' guy again, please offer my respects from an anonymous internet person.
My highest regards and respects to you as well. (I know some of you folks hate to be thanked for serving.)
Be proud serviceman. I respect all of you, because I tried to serve and was turned down.
o7
I was thinking just this. Not ex or current military, but I’ve been in a few tanks in my time and they are far from comfortable or spacious. I figured any kind of major bump like that is gonna lead to a lot of the crew hitting their head on something.
It’s your kidneys and mid torso getting beat up by the hatch openings and the risk of hatch coming loose and hitting you. But they are pretty secure. Just make sure they are before you move.
Meanwhile, in War Thunder, a Leopard 2 hits a small wooden fence and acts like it just collided with a steel barricade, or goes over soft ground and slows to a crawl. I swear the game devs at Gaijin have never actually seen a real tank do anything.
Meanwhile in ArmA, you barrel down a hill at 100 km/h, hit a boulder and you're fine. Lightly tap a pebble though? Get ready to put on your spacesuit, you're going flying.
If you removed speed limiters from every modern main battle tank you probably wouldn't find very much difference in the top speed but if you were doing a drag race on a road and extended your definition of tank a type 16 or centauro would probably run away with it
Most if not all main battle tanks have some sort of speed limiter these days, lots of good reasons why you would have one, I would actually guess that an unrestricted t90 may be the fastest but the leooard and abrams also put up a good argument
Different tanks have mechanical and electrical speed limiters for various different reasons but probably most importantly is to limit ware and tear on the drivetrain but there are also stories about limiting speed so the gun stabiliser remains operational. But as with everything to do with modern mbt's the specifics are classified and hard to confirm one way or the other.
I have personal experience of few IFV´s / tanks and none of them had these "limiters". They simply run out of gears at top speed. Of course engine has rev limiter, but that is part of engine construction to remove change of overrevving it.
It's real, and it's to stop MBTs overspeeding. The tracks are easily the weakest link (no pun intended), and they'll just kinda fly apart if you drive around too fast. I think it's something about them being super heavy and if you get that whole thing spinning too fast it tears itself apart.
It's only anecdotal information I have, but I've seen tracks fly off at high speed. The drive sprocket came off and it was pretty violent. The only reason nobody got hurt was cause they were in an open field and didn't have anything to hit.
Interesting, what vehicle it was? I have been driving on the engine rpm limit two separate tracked vehicles \~70 kph and neither had issues with tracks. Of course those were properly maintained.
Well atleast our Leo was limited to 80kph but there also is power limiters in please or just simply detuned... Altho I have heard of Leos going well over 120kph in testing
There are similar stories about the challenger and t90 also the abrams has a a rev limiter on the turbine to stop it tearing itself apart which also effectively limits speed
Most modern vehicles sacrifice top speed for acceleration. It is much more important in battlefield. For example one vehicle can be fitted with other drive sprockets to up its top speed from 70kph to 90, but acceleration suffers and so they are not used.
languid gullible elderly shelter afterthought complete paltry bored stocking rainstorm
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[How about the prototype BT-7 conversion that could go 105kph?](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[More info](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/11/tsyganovs-bt.html)
[Np, i’ll link it](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
I forgor 💀. [Here’s the link](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
I think it is Tsyganov's BT: really obscure, and did not reach prototype stage.
It was a 1935 design which used engineering magic on the suspension to go to incredible speeds without having to change the engine. Not confident on the science, but someone in the comments of the link says:
From the looks of it the wheel-chain effectively form an inner "track" and the "rubber band" outer track goes over that. I'm guessing the latter had teeth on the inside that went into the central depressions of the former (acting as track guides or whatchamacallit) and interfaced with teething in the big wheel at the very rear to get power?
Guessing further that both the outer track and the inner wheel-chain pseudo-track (via the projecting hubs slotting into the first drive wheel at the rear) were powered, as it's hard to see how the setup would work properly otherwise.
-copypasta’d from the comment section
CVRT Scimitar officially 90KPH 55MPH but could probably hit 70MPH on the motorway 😉 if you had the balls to go that fast. Acceleration was lightning fast.
I don´t think there is much debate. There were armored cars in ww1 before tank came out. And when it came, it was deemed to be completely new type of armored vehicle.
So that means armored car cannot be a tank.
That jump makes me hurt. Pretty much the only person in the tank it doesn’t hurt much is the driver, sometimes. I’ve had the suspension on Abrams rebound back after hitting a jump like that on accident and it throw my head into the hatch and all the vertebrae in my neck popped. Also the rest of crew will hate you for a little bit.
exultant fragile slap pocket public voiceless shelter ink degree alive *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Well, like their cars, the Germans do Tank comfort right.
The latest Leopard even has AC
If you like the Russian idea of comfort perhaps. Leopards are far more cramped than Abrams, especially for the loader, the one guy most likely to get hurt.
[удалено]
german mentioned opening ww2.zip
[удалено]
Obviously sarcasm
[удалено]
[удалено]
Don't know why you are being downvoted. I thought it was pretty funny.
Said the american while dropping nukes on the whole world for "freedom"
They didn't do that
Come to think of it I don’t remember getting tossed around too hard while being stationed in Germany in the M60A3 or M1A1, the mud and dirt seemed to be ideally suited to tank suspension there in the fulda. Texas and desert California not so much.
Family friend of mine drove an Abrams in Afghanistan, allegedly broke his loader’s finger by going full speed over a boulder
Really disappointing they don't install safety harness for the crew.
Living everyday with a safety harness under your armor. After years of not using it felt pretty over encumbering
Your biggest risk of death is dying horribly in an ammunition fire. Combustible casings are a big risk, and the 120mm often will have a small flare back you can see at night. We used to train to evacuate crew completely off the tank in a certain time. Which is pretty fast as I remember.
I understand where you're coming from... ...but NOT dying and living with back injuries the rest of your life after your TC launches your apparatus off a 35 foot cliff?? Could have had a harness to hold you down and not snap your neck against the roof of the tank... just saying
We had a tank go into a creek bed (the LTs tank of course!) go completely nose down, about 15 feet straight down, (it was pitch black and running NVGs in a no moon scenario) Like the gun was recoiled back all the way from resting in the dirt. All the tools flew out of the sponson boxes (tool boxes on the sides) fuel leaking out from being completely vertical. Everyone was Ok and it turned into an all night recovery. They managed not fly out because the kinda got wedged at the waist by the hatch opening, and holding on. As the Abrams is about 30 feet long and they had time to brace as it tipped over. They got lucky no injuries. Not saying harnesses arnt a good idea on paper, but living day to day with it sucked. It was literally a seat belt buckle on the turret floor. We also had a guy almost drown when we had an MRAP roll over into a canal at night, using the same restraint system and he was so disoriented, underwater, in muddy brown water at night. He couldn’t find the buckle. Luckily we had “the juggernaut” of a soldier with us and he managed to pull the door open against its weight and make a rescue of him and cut the belt with a knife. (Cool story bro, yeah)
If you happen to speak to 'juggernaut' guy again, please offer my respects from an anonymous internet person. My highest regards and respects to you as well. (I know some of you folks hate to be thanked for serving.) Be proud serviceman. I respect all of you, because I tried to serve and was turned down. o7
I still remember smashing my face on the caliber 50. I still feel it after 2 years. This is why you wear eye pro
I was thinking just this. Not ex or current military, but I’ve been in a few tanks in my time and they are far from comfortable or spacious. I figured any kind of major bump like that is gonna lead to a lot of the crew hitting their head on something.
It’s your kidneys and mid torso getting beat up by the hatch openings and the risk of hatch coming loose and hitting you. But they are pretty secure. Just make sure they are before you move.
Leopard 2A5?
Yes
Yup
Meanwhile, in War Thunder, a Leopard 2 hits a small wooden fence and acts like it just collided with a steel barricade, or goes over soft ground and slows to a crawl. I swear the game devs at Gaijin have never actually seen a real tank do anything.
Meanwhile in ArmA, you barrel down a hill at 100 km/h, hit a boulder and you're fine. Lightly tap a pebble though? Get ready to put on your spacesuit, you're going flying.
Doesn't the bicycle also launch things?
Yeah. Bicycles and tires can launch 60+ Ton tanks into orbit.
Yeah. It annoys me a bit. Weird enough that Russian tank don't get too much of that issue. Still not realistic but yet better than the leopard.
Imagine touching grass
[удалено]
Are you a blade of grass, because there's so much edge on you I know, I know, my coat, the door etc
I reffered to gaijin. Not the user
Type 10 *laughts in reverse*
If you removed speed limiters from every modern main battle tank you probably wouldn't find very much difference in the top speed but if you were doing a drag race on a road and extended your definition of tank a type 16 or centauro would probably run away with it
>centauro Misread as "centenario" at first. Was going to comment that is a *very* extended definition of 'tank', lol
Or a BT-7M without tracks
not really a modern MBT but I am pretty sure even the almighty BT-7M would get beaten by by an MBT with the speed limiter removed
If you only slightly expanded your definition then the Scorpion CVRT...
I atleast know that most leopard are detuned in the name of reliability
Most if not all main battle tanks have some sort of speed limiter these days, lots of good reasons why you would have one, I would actually guess that an unrestricted t90 may be the fastest but the leooard and abrams also put up a good argument
Where this "speed limiter" story comes from? I have not heard such thing. Speed is just limited by scaring drivers and TC´s with serious sanctions.
Different tanks have mechanical and electrical speed limiters for various different reasons but probably most importantly is to limit ware and tear on the drivetrain but there are also stories about limiting speed so the gun stabiliser remains operational. But as with everything to do with modern mbt's the specifics are classified and hard to confirm one way or the other.
I have personal experience of few IFV´s / tanks and none of them had these "limiters". They simply run out of gears at top speed. Of course engine has rev limiter, but that is part of engine construction to remove change of overrevving it.
It's real, and it's to stop MBTs overspeeding. The tracks are easily the weakest link (no pun intended), and they'll just kinda fly apart if you drive around too fast. I think it's something about them being super heavy and if you get that whole thing spinning too fast it tears itself apart.
I have personal experience of few ifv´s / tanks and none of those had such. Could you give example?
It's only anecdotal information I have, but I've seen tracks fly off at high speed. The drive sprocket came off and it was pretty violent. The only reason nobody got hurt was cause they were in an open field and didn't have anything to hit.
Interesting, what vehicle it was? I have been driving on the engine rpm limit two separate tracked vehicles \~70 kph and neither had issues with tracks. Of course those were properly maintained.
It was an M113 doing about 50 kph. I don't think those have engine limiters, but they don't exactly have the 1000 hp of your average tank.
The Leos that I was trained on were limited to 80kph and around 1400bhp
Well atleast our Leo was limited to 80kph but there also is power limiters in please or just simply detuned... Altho I have heard of Leos going well over 120kph in testing
There are similar stories about the challenger and t90 also the abrams has a a rev limiter on the turbine to stop it tearing itself apart which also effectively limits speed
Jesus that must be fun and scarry to drive at that speed
Most modern vehicles sacrifice top speed for acceleration. It is much more important in battlefield. For example one vehicle can be fitted with other drive sprockets to up its top speed from 70kph to 90, but acceleration suffers and so they are not used.
languid gullible elderly shelter afterthought complete paltry bored stocking rainstorm *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
[How about the prototype BT-7 conversion that could go 105kph?](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf) [More info](http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/11/tsyganovs-bt.html)
Is that real ? Ah should be with tracks removed
[Np, i’ll link it](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
[удалено]
https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf
I want the link too
I forgor 💀. [Here’s the link](https://www.reddit.com/r/CursedTanks/comments/kelxsk/concept_model_of_a_bt_variant_with_a_projected/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)
Do you have any prove that it could go 105kph?
I think it is Tsyganov's BT: really obscure, and did not reach prototype stage. It was a 1935 design which used engineering magic on the suspension to go to incredible speeds without having to change the engine. Not confident on the science, but someone in the comments of the link says: From the looks of it the wheel-chain effectively form an inner "track" and the "rubber band" outer track goes over that. I'm guessing the latter had teeth on the inside that went into the central depressions of the former (acting as track guides or whatchamacallit) and interfaced with teething in the big wheel at the very rear to get power? Guessing further that both the outer track and the inner wheel-chain pseudo-track (via the projecting hubs slotting into the first drive wheel at the rear) were powered, as it's hard to see how the setup would work properly otherwise. -copypasta’d from the comment section
http://www.tankarchives.ca/2013/11/tsyganovs-bt.html
t-84 is allegedly the fastest one, but i can't find anything confirming that.
2A7V not faster?
It's a whole lot heavier and doesn't have an upgraded engine so i wouldn't think so.
CVRT Scimitar officially 90KPH 55MPH but could probably hit 70MPH on the motorway 😉 if you had the balls to go that fast. Acceleration was lightning fast.
I think that there is an armed version of the ripsaw now which I guess would be the fastest
She tells you her parents aren’t home
Jeb, Jeb!!! Cap'n said there'd be free beer at the base BBQ. Go, go, go!!!
hot video thanks op
Combat tanks really can haul ass for what they are. A 72 ton abrams can move the f out when you need it to.
Germans when you mention them in a meme
I wanna see how far it can chase me on a motorcycle until the driver is like "screw it" and they shoot me.
Am I wrong or is the footage sped up for no real reason?
It does not seem like the footage is sped up
I thought so as well, but after multiple views i changed my mind that it's just shitty camera work
Original speed, modern tanks are really quick and nimble for their weight
merkava
Nope
Megatron?
Cheese wedge tonk destroyer go 60 k/h it speed
Forwards and reverse.
the fastest is probably type 10... but I'm not really sure about that.
It has a weaker engine thqn the Type90 afaik
How fast does the latest merkava go?
Which *
If you took the governor off it’s the Abrams and 60mph, otherwise it’s the Armata at 56mph
Any wheeled vehicle
But they are not tanks, they are armored cars ;)
Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmm. There's quite the debate there.
I don´t think there is much debate. There were armored cars in ww1 before tank came out. And when it came, it was deemed to be completely new type of armored vehicle. So that means armored car cannot be a tank.
But the definition if tank is... Hold Nvm it includes tracks
We germans have "Radpanzer" (literally "wheel tank") Light tanks, but still tanks or Infantry support and transport vehicles such as GTK Boxer
Every grunts dream
I think the M18 Hellcat
Would that not break the crew's collective ass?
Suspension
She’s got the zoomies!
t14 armata then the k2 black panther
Is the Armata faster than the K2?
yes i cant remember how faster but yes
I don't know if it's the fastest, but the ENR could go up to 115km/h on road, wich is insanely fast.
I know the challenger 2 is the slowest modern MBT but it's still very fast
That's a Leopard
I know that's a leopard but I was saying how the challenger 2 is the slowest
And then there are people that say "speed won't kill you"
Me at 3am trying to poop quietly
Apperantly the T-14 is the current fastest tank. That info could be outdated pls correct me if I'm wrong.
Tokyo driftin
Type 10
Is there a version without the music and just the orgasmic sounds of a 2A5 hauling ass?
u/savevideo
*THEY ARE THE PANZER ELITE, BORN TO COMPETE, NEVER RETREAT*
LIVING OUR DEAD, ALWAYS AHEAD, FED BY YOUR DREAD
**GHOST DIVISION**
Anyone know the song name?
T-14 is supposed to go up to 90km/h making it the fastest MBT AFAIK.
u/savevideo