Tanks once dominated the battlefield, and possessing a powerful and well-supplied
armored force was to win a war. But in an era of guerilla war and stand-off conflict,
the mammoth, history defining tank battles of World War Two a repeat of which was expected
if the Cold War ever went hot are seemingly a thing of the past. Nonetheless, the tank
remains a vital part of any modern military, offering unparalleled ground-based firepower
and remaining a symbol of the might of the world's great powers. Two of the world's
biggest tank arsenals belong to the US with around 5,800 and Russia, which has over 20,000.
But it is the condition and quality of these tanks that matter more than sheer numbers.
So, in what areas are Russian tanks better than American tanks.
Both tanks are good at what they are designed for, but the design goals are different. In general,
Russian tanks are designed for attack and American tanks are designed for defense. It doesn't mean
that American tanks can’t attack nor Russian tanks defend; it just means that some design decisions
were taken that prioritized one over the other. There are some considerations that make
Russian tanks better than American tanks. Number one. Gun depression and profile.
I include both here because they are connected; a low profile restricts gun depression because the
breach hits the roof of the turret. American tanks are typically tall with great gun depression.
Russian tanks are much lower with little depression. The advantage of gun depression
is that it allows you to take hull down positions where you only expose your turret.
Without decent depression, you have to expose your entire tank. The thing is, hull down is
important only if you are on the defense. If you are on the attack, it is less so because you
are moving at speed over open ground anyway. In those cases, a smaller tank is a smaller target.
Number two. Armor versus Accuracy. To a large extent, this is technologically driven so
American tanks have had an advantage here in both areas with the Abrams. But before that,
there was the M60 versus T64, where the T64 had at least twice the armor equivalent of the M60,
and since that there are the newer Russian tanks with active defenses that supposedly can protect
against APFSDS as well as missiles. Basically, Russians prioritize armor over the accuracy
or probably more accurately, Americans do not prioritize protection as much as the Russians.
Partially this is related to tanks sizes as shown in point 1.
A bigger tank needs more armor while a smaller tanks need less.
Number three. Auto loaders. Only the Russians use them. The main advantage of an auto-loader
is reducing the tank crew from 4 men to 3. This allows them to have 33% more tanks with the same
crew requirements. This is especially helpful because the man pool for tank crewmen is limited
because the small size of Russian tanks limits the crewmen to be physically shorter than median.
More tanks are required for the offense. Americans have kept the loader partially because of rate of
fire. While an auto loader can outperform a new, untrained or barely trained loader,
an experienced loader can easily beat the auto-loader (for a short duration at least).
The last one is Gun size. Russians typically have bigger guns than Americans.
Bigger guns have better penetration and better high explosive effect than smaller guns
but they have a disadvantage of bigger ammunition size
which means less rounds can be carried and a lower rate of fire.
So basically, Russian tanks are better in areas relating to going on the offensive
and maintaining a long, fast attack. While the American tanks are better in areas relating
to being on the defense and maintaining high rate of fire with pin point accuracy.
Thank for watching and we will see you in the next videos.