t1k

Ukrainian T-62BM2 with the 92nd Motorized Rifle Brigade, now called the 92nd Assault Brigade

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index What? The safety features is a huge point as to why it’s bad. Other reasons include it lacks a good selection of modern munitions, is overly heavy and a logistical nightmare. I’m not even an Abrams fan I much prefer the strv122 but it’s undeniable that the Abrams is a good tank

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index I done you over completely 🤣 You are going back to the delusional safety features talk when i have already proved you wrong . If Australia decide they want to buy challenger 2-3 , or the leopard tank you will be first to say the abrams is trash 🤣

🇩🇪🇪🇺 Europe’s most advanced tank is entering service. The Leopard 2A8 has now been showcased in live field trials with the Norwegian Army, marking a major step toward operational deployment. 🇳🇴 Norway will be among the first to field it, with deliveries starting in 2026 and running through 2028. Next gen armor. NATO firepower evolving.

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index I’m looking right now just to entertain you here and they have it all placed 5th with the Leclerc 4th,K2 3rd, Leo 2nd and Abrams first. So once again it is the worst mbt nato has with the only possible other option for worst being the Ariete as it also lacks these safety features

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index Not dellusional , You can just google your qustion and see challenger as top result 🤣

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index I’m not arguing the armour is bad. But armour is not the only safety feature modern tanks require. Drone’s purposely target location’s ammunition is stored. So without blowout panels and blast doors the crew stands little chance of survival as these areas are highly vulnerable.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index 1. Challenger 2 / Challenger 3 (United Kingdom) - Top ContenderWhy it's the safest: It is notoriously difficult to destroy. It features classified Dorchester/Chobham composite armor, which offers arguably the best kinetic and chemical protection of any Western tank- Google

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You are delusional to think the chally 2 is the safest nato mbt when it lacks basic modern safety features and is the only nato mbt to have a 100% turret detach rate while also always being catastrophically destroyed.50 year old tank and it still is more capable than the chally 2

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You are delusional , You think a 50 year old abrams tank is a modern battle tank 🤣📷

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index I’m convinced you’re not reading what I say. They are being used differently no shit they will have a different result. The reason they are used differently is because the chally 2 cannot do what the Abrams and Leo can without immediately having the tank and crew deleted.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index 14 challengers 2 donated in 2023 - only 2 destroyed in 3+ years 80 abrams tanks donated - All destroyed in the first month 😆👏 Hows that for survivability ?You are trying to Glaze the abrams when they got obliterated They are not even on the ukraine battlefield mate 🤣

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index Furthermore you’re just wrong about what the Abrams can reach. As the Abrams and other nato mbts have smoothbore barrels they statistically have better accuracy at long distance as they have less drop, less wind drift effect and more kinetic energy on impact.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The challenger 2 - $7 million compared to the $25 million abrams Challenger 2 can snipe a abrams from 5000km + distance without it even being seen More than double what a abrams can reach ,100% accuracy .

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index There are countless videos of these tanks taking hits from fpvs in key areas and living or at the very least the crew members surviving which is the most important thing. Yet the chally 2 literally cannot take one hit in a critical area like these tanks without the crew dying.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The only tanks that get oblterated by $300 fpv drones are the abrams tanks , The ukranians said the abrams tank was useless is modern warfare $25 million for a 50 year old tank that cant take a hit from a fpv (Abrams)

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The Abrams and Leo are being used completely differently from the chally 2 in ukriane and this is quite literally cause they are better. They allow crews to be used effectively in offensive operations. The chally 2 isn’t used to do this because of its lack in safety and firepower

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index USA/ australia donated 80 M1A1 Abrams tanks and they got destroyed by fpv drones

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index And despite its age it has these modern crew safety features that the chally 2 lack, has better ammunition, is far less of a logistical mess, far more manoeuvrable and allows for crews to survive critical damage. To say it’s dogshit is to say the chally 2 is worse than dogshit

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index 😆The abrams is the most dogshit tank of them all its 50 years old ffs 🤣🤣

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index Lmao no counter argument because you know I’m right the chally two is natos worst modern mbt. Not even just because of its lack in crew safety features but its ammunition and manoeuvrablity are all shit when compared to the Abrams, Leo and Leclerc. 100% turret detach rate too.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You are delusional 😆 Stick to anime/games mate

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The challenger two has a 100% turret detatch rate and is prone to catastrophic destruction when critically damaged. While mbts like the Abrams and Leo allow the crews to typically survive. Why because these tanks have modern safety systems which is why the chally 3 will have them

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You said "If anything the chally 3 is evidence the chally 2 was so dog shit." Where is the evidence mate ?😆

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index I said it has the worst in nato and it’s true. All modern nato tanks that aren’t ex soviet have safety features better than the chally 2 because they have these things like blast doors and blowout panels. They also use better munitions as they don’t have a rifled barrel.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index 😆You said it had the worst modern safest features, Google says it has the best in the world You got that so wrong 😀

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The challenger 3 is a tank that isn’t even in use yet so why would I be speaking about it? It is literally them admitting they fucked up and making a design that is like others seen from nato. If anything the chally 3 is evidence the chally 2 was so dog shit.

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index The Challenger 2 and the upcoming Challenger 3 are recognized as having among the best crew safety and survivability features of any main battle tank in the world. While not invincible, the Challenger design focuses heavily on keeping the crew alive, Try harder next time 😆🤣

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index Enlighten me where the misinfo is? What i said was all true,The chally lacks blast doors and blowout panels and its propellants are stored in bins that can take only light fragmentation. The tank weighs to much it can’t be used effectively for assaults when compared to other mbts

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index At least try do some research before you post misinformation 😆

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index How dense are you to not understand my reply. I said it lacks MODERN crew safety features. Having armour for a tank isn’t modern dip shit. The chally lacks blowout panels and blast doors. Its charges are stored in bins, that can handle just light frag. Tanks can also be TOO heavy

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index Well you just roasted yourself again , Its made with dorchester armour 🤣 "Lacks crew safety features " 🤣 "also weighing a fuck ton" So tanks shit because it weighs a fuck ton ? Dumb fuckwit 😆

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index What part of anything I said made no sense? The chally is shit when compared to modern nato mbts. It stands as natos only tank with a 100% turret toss rate and lacks basket modern crew safety features while also weighing a fuck ton. And that’s not even talking about its barrel

@spinningrat69 @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You dont make any sense . You wouldnt know whats good/bad being australian 🤣stick to anime

@Masteryoshix @Pyeholio @Defence_Index You were cooking until you brought up the challenger being “better”. Only reason we haven’t seen the chally destroyed more is because they aren’t being used like other mbts are. Because they can’t be used like the others. The chally is the worst nato mbt by far and it isnt close

@Pyeholio @Defence_Index Uk sent 14 challenger to ukraine in 2023 and only 2 got destroyed so it proves european tanks are better . Leopards and the swedish tanks can take a beating from the drones they have proved it on the battlefield . It takes heavy anti tank munitions to take one out

My tax dollars at work. (Australia paid for the Tiger/Hellfire integration)

Can Faker hold B site on Dust2? I don't think so