RaspberryTuba [he/him]
It’s mostly just large. 4 crew instead of 3 and an auto-loader, and they focus on extra thick composite armor instead of a mix of that and reactive armor. And meanwhile, the t-72’s an extension of old Soviet philosophy that a smaller tank was that much harder to hit, so everything’s packed as tight as possible, while you could almost have a small cookout in the abrams.
/Edit - And as mentioned elsewhere, the abrams is stupidly heavy at this point and has even gained something like 20 tons over the years. A smaller, lighter tank has less problems crossing softer terrain and getting over rickety bridges.
That’s one of those things where it’s really hard to tell. They all claim different capabilities but the proof is classified (and even somewhat untested). Composite will give you almost no-gap coverage though, and any nearby folks will be happier if you aren’t waltzing around with outward facing explosives all over your tank. But, many Abrams in Iraq added reactive armor all over the less protected sides to help counter RPG’s, so…
I’d mainly say it’s just easier to retrofit an older tank with ERA blocks than it is to design and produce a whole new one with thicker integrated armor.
Seeing this I’m wondering how much the Moscow Times’ distribution got hurt in all this considering it’s very much a foreign-run, pro-western paper.
This was always the plan because they scheduled the convention too late to get their nomination in in Ohio, and they don’t trust them to make an exception. Just now you’ve got the (probably dead) thrust to remove Biden on top of it. One of the recent trueanons covers it a fair bit, and I was trying to figure out when they’d do it the other day as they hadn’t actually scheduled it yet. (And still kinda haven’t.)
I forget people would actually take these guys seriously and trust millions of dollars with them.
I need to measure it. I got back into doing long bike rides but my current seat’s the wrong width for me and that shit hurts.