The battle for Avdiivka is probably one of the most vivid instances that show the war has changed to be a matter of attrition, logistics, and morale at least as much as it has been of the use of tanks and guns. After a few months of stalemate, the Russian leaders made up their minds to force a breakthrough in the city, trying to flank and alter the situation in the region. Their concept was based on nothing but numbers – they did several times the number of troops that were scarcely trained and equipped, and most of the witnesses referred to those offensives as “human wave” attacks. As U.S. officials at that time reminded, Russia was prepared to continue deploying vast numbers of inadequately trained troops directly into the frontline and was not concerned about the casualties.

Those casualties were overwhelming. Ukrainian commanders put the number of Russian soldiers killed or wounded at almost 47,000, with up to 17,000 dead. Nevertheless, the city was eventually captured by Russia. The win came at such a price that a lot of people have doubted its worth. Britain’s defense ministry estimated Russian tank losses at over 400 in the fighting, well above the population of Avdiivka before the war. The analysts said that Moscow had to take units from other fronts just to keep the offensive going, an indicator of the Kremlin’s determination to hold ground no matter what the cost.

Ukraine’s version of events was no less complex. Avdiivka’s defense was impeded by ammunition shortages, diminishing Western aid, and—most unexpectedly—poor fortifications. Satellite imagery indicated that the trench lines to the west of the city were shallow and rudimentary, nothing at all like the multiple-layered defenses Russia had established in the south, complete with tank traps, dragon’s teeth, and interlocking trench systems. American officials in private admitted concern that Ukraine had not spent enough on defensive positions in the early going, a shortage painfully clear after the Russian attack broke through.

The difference with Russian engineering was stark. Close to villages such as Verbove, Russia’s defenses were virtually impregnable in Ukraine’s counteroffensive. Along Avdiivka, Ukrainian lines were exposed and underprepared by comparison. Kyiv officials acknowledged resources were thin and much of the attention had been given to offensive action and not digging in. Establishing solid defenses was regarded as costly and less immediate—until it came too late.

The equipment losses highlighted the war’s ugly math. The Ukrainian intelligence stated that Russia has lost more than 7,200 tanks and nearly 14,000 armored personnel carriers since the invasion began. In Avdiivka alone, Ukraine lost some 50 combat vehicles, but Russia lost nearly 700. That kind of ratio cannot be maintained indefinitely. Moscow turned to deploying lightly armored vehicles to transport troops, a last-ditch improvisation that says much about the strain on its inventory.

Western aid has been the key to Ukraine’s capacity to continue the combat. American and European deliveries of ammunition and air defenses have maintained their front lines, but setbacks in new appropriations took a heavy toll during fighting. Shells and interceptors dwindled, and American officials openly threatened that not keeping the support could have implications far outside of Ukraine. Most in Kyiv felt that the loss of Avdiivka was not because of low fighting spirit, but because important supplies were trapped in a political deadlock.

Manpower is also an issue. Russia has relied on minorities, convicts, and conscripts from poorer areas to make up its numbers. Ukraine’s troops, on the other hand, tend to be older, better educated, and more motivated, but the average age on the front lines has now risen over 40. Hundreds of days have passed since many of them have had a break from combat, and the toll is obvious.

There is discontent among Russian troops as well. Footage has been leaked of troops griping about suicidal missions, inadequate leadership, and substandard equipment. The Kremlin’s ability and willingness to accept enormous casualties in pursuit of incremental advances further undermined morale, even if threats of punishment keep most compliant.

Tactically, Avdiivka’s capture does create new avenues for Russian advances, but no one imagines that Moscow can drive much further. Its soldiers are weary, and reserves are thin. Ukraine, meanwhile, is digging fresh defensive lines outside the city, but short of a surge in Western aid, additional city strongholds might be in jeopardy. European factories are ramping up production of ammunition, but the pace of acceleration has been glacial. The U.S. has already prepared weapons to be shipped, but politics have held them back from reaching the front lines.

Fundamentally, the war has become less a matter of maneuver and more one of endurance. Russia has taken awful losses in men and equipment, yet it retains reserves and the ability to continue at this rate for years. Ukraine, by contrast, must depend on the stream of Western supplies and the will of its soldiers to remain in the contest.

The Battle of Avdiivka encapsulates the spirit of this war: high cost, modest returns, and results determined as much by political choice as by fighting. It was a Russian victory in name only—a battle which can be expected to end up costing more than the territory it gained.

More images you may be interested in:

For over 100 years, the outcome of tank battles was mostly determined by sheer power, the tanks’ heavy armor, and their high speed. Bigger cannons, tougher armor, and faster engines were always the leading characteristics of armored engagements, but the battlefield has changed. A new actor has arrived who is small, cheap, and aerial. The drones are changing the rules by launching their attacks from positions that tank crews have never even thought of. Although armored vehicles are still the backbone of the ground forces, the latter now have a bigger problem in changing their tactics.

Here’s a countdown of the world’s top 10 tanks in active use today, and how each is standing its ground in this new era of aerial threats.

10. T-90 — Russia’s Workhorse

The T-90 marries an upgraded Soviet chassis with new armor and firepower. Its 125mm smoothbore cannon and reactive armor make it deadly against conventional opponents, and its light weight provides acceptable agility. But as recent wars have demonstrated, even a heavily armored T-90 can be defeated by a $1,000 drone with the proper targeting.

9. Type 99 — The Contender

Equipped with a 125mm cannon, composite armor, and computer fire control, the Type 99 is the Chinese response to NATO’s heavyweights. Active protection systems enable it to resist missile attacks and drones, but with UAV technology moving so rapidly, safety requires frequent upgrades.

8. Leclerc — France’s Digital Brawler

France’s Leclerc carries a 120mm smoothbore gun, modifiable armor, and a very high rate of fire. Its advanced electronics enable rapid target pickup, but as with all tanks of this type, its initial designers never expected a battlefield swarming with weaponized quadcopters.

7. K2 Black Panther — South Korea’s Tech Tank

The K2 is among the world’s most advanced tanks. Its 120mm gun, sensor technology, and networked systems are combined with active protection that’s designed to combat drones as well as missiles. Agile enough to complement its firepower, the K2 is built for today’s drone-heavy battlefield.

6. Type 90 — Japan’s Agile Striker

Japan’s Type 90 was designed to be fast and accurate. Its 120mm cannon and high-powered engine provide it with superior agility, and its computer systems improve crew effectiveness. Even this agile platform, however, needs to continue to adapt to remain superior to hordes of FPV drones.

5. Merkava Mk 4 — Israel’s Fortress on Tracks

The Merkava Mk 4 reverses the conventional tank design by placing its engine at the front, protecting the crew. Its 120mm cannon, modular armor, and advanced active protection are specifically designed for asymmetrical battlefields where drones pose a daily threat.

4. Challenger 2 — Britain’s Heavy Hitter

Renowned for its strength and precision, Challenger 2 has a 120mm rifled gun and heavy armor. It’s been upgraded with improved sensors and anti-drone technology, but increased use of UAVs is compelling even this battle-hardened veteran to change.

3. Leopard 2 — Germany’s Balanced Champion

Usually referred to as the world’s greatest all-around tank, the Leopard 2 provides a combination of pace, firepower, and protection that few can equal. Its 120mm smoothbore, powerful engine, and reliable design have made it a NATO darling. Now, new electronic warfare systems and active defenses are keeping it in the running against drones.

2. T-14 Armata — Russia’s Next-Gen Gamble

With an unmanned turret, 125mm gun, and heavy armor, the T-14 Armata is a daring advance in tank technology. Its sensors and battlefield networking are designed to counter both conventional and drone dangers, but its absence of a tested combat record leaves some things to guesswork.

1. M1 Abrams — The American Benchmark

The M1 Abrams has been the gold standard for decades. Equipped with a 120mm smoothbore gun, composite armor, and a steady stream of upgrades, it is still a force to be reckoned with. Newer variants are receiving top-of-the-line active protection and advanced sensors to deal with drones, so the Abrams is not losing its crown yet.

The Drone Factor

The conflict in Ukraine has demonstrated how much of a disruption drones can cause, sometimes only costing hundreds of dollars, but able to incapacitate million-dollar tanks. FPV drones, loitering munitions, and AI-controlled UAVs are turning the tables, compelling tank crews to reorganize or face annihilation at the hands of drones. Electronic warfare may be able to jam certain drones, but AI-controlled models can fly signal-free, rendering jamming futile. It’s an arms race where evolution means survival.

Lessons of the Past

Legends such as the Tiger I, T-34, and Sherman M4 continue to influence the design of tanks today. The sloping armor of the T-34 changed survivability forever, while the Tiger I established new levels of firepower. These lessons of balance, versatility, and protection remain the foundational principles for tanks today.

Rolling Into the Future

Tanks no longer battle only other tanks. Their foes now fly, swarm, and think. The greatest tanks in the world will be those that remain connected, remain armored, and remain mobile—whatever the battlefield becomes.

The T-72B main battle tank is not merely a tank, but also a wonder of robust and versatile design. It was a long time since its creation, referring to the Cold War era, yet the tank is still very effective. Its history is a gradual one that traces the development of armored fighting vehicles from different times to hours of change in their combat demands, thus combining the aspects of attack, protection, and mobility in the almost unpredictable war terrains. From the 1980s manufacturing lines to its current use in Ukraine, the T-72B has been a demonstration of its capacity to survive modern wars and stay lethal.

The T-72 was created as a less complex, less expensive companion to the sophisticated yet problematic T-64. It was manufactured in 1973 as an attempt to be rugged, mobile, and easy to operate, even for poorly trained operators. The initial models were plagued by approximately primitive fire control, microscopic nighttime vision, and armor that could only withstand low-caliber guns. As the advanced anti-tank guided weapons, such as the TOW and MILA, came into action, all these weaknesses soon surfaced and compelled the designers to upgrade their performance.

The 1984 T-72B introduced solutions to the majority of these shortcomings. Its enhanced composite armor has been referred to as “Super Dolly Parton” because of the typical turret cheek plates. KONTAKT-1 explosive reactive armor (ERA) mounting provided it with extra protection against modern anti-tank ammunition, providing it with approximately 700–900mm of equivalent armor protection against most threats. No tank is ever completely invulnerable, but it made the T-72B much more survivable in intense combat.

Not every T-72B was built the same. Export models, such as the T-72S ‘Shilden,’ included lighter ERA and other trade-offs. The tanks supplied the majority of armor to Polish, Czech, and East German units. Each country operated in its own way: Polish crews preferred aggressive assault, Czech units used large formations for morale, and the East Germans were very well trained in strict, accurate breakthroughs. These tanks were phased up over the years and thus remained operational even after several decades. To this day, the T-72B remains extremely sought after.

The fact that it is still being used in Ukraine attests to the versatility of the platform. The U.S., for one, paid for remanufactured Czech-produced T-72Bs for the Ukrainians because it realized that it would be too expensive, too time-consuming, and would require extensive training to bring completely new tank systems into the battlefield.

Ukrainian officers already accustomed to the system would have no problem adapting to these tanks, and they would have a disadvantage relative to Russian troops using the same tanks. War is different.

Drones, electronic warfare, and high-capability weapons now present persistent threats. Some predicted that tanks like the T-72B would be obsolete, but modernization like ERA, urban armor kits, and counter-IED technology helped keep them alive.

In the meantime, guns remain the “God of War,” and while FPV drones are commanding the headlines, they’re still beset by technical maladies, jamming, and the skill level of their operators.

Mortars and light guns are stable, consistent, and still not affected by these new guns. Despite modernization, the brutal realities of extended war have seen both sides deploy more old reserve tanks, some with no new optics or thermal imaging.

Russian forces, for instance, started equipping tanks with SOSNA-U thermal sight units from 2022, but battle forced older variants to be rammed back into action, where their varied capabilities were all muddled in a mess. In such situations, fire control equipment, optic quality, and crew training can be as controlling as the armor itself. The still-active use of the T-72B confirms the value in simplicity and heavy-duty platforms.

Though Western tanks like the Leopard 2 or M1 Abrams offer advanced technology, complexity, and logistical needs undermine forces committed to Soviet design to extend power quickly. The T-72B, on the other hand, integrates simplicity of design with incremental development, giving it versatility and reliability in attack as well as defense.

Into the future, the T-72B—and the concept of main battle tank—only improves. Drone swarms, electronic warfare, and precision-guided weapons will continue to compel armored forces to adapt. But what history shows us is that with the right adjustments and plan, the tank is far from archaic. The T-72B proves that tough, well-designed armor has its place on the battlefield today.

In case you are a lover of such things as high-stakes drama, use of technology at its best, and international tension that is quite similar to the plot of some Hollywood blockbusters, then you might want to know about the recent American B-2 Spirit stealth bomber attacks on Iran’s nuclear facilities, since they had every element of these things.

In the dead of night on June 21, a squadron of B-2s—each a $2 billion marvel of engineering—flew out of Whiteman Air Force Base in Missouri. Their target: three of Iran’s most heavily defended nuclear facilities—Fordow, Natanz, and Isfahan.

This wasn’t business as usual. The B-2s dropped their entire payloads at Fordow before heading back home, all safely. The strike wasn’t merely a military action—it was a massive escalation of the Israel-Iran confrontation, with Washington openly joining in along with its closest Middle East ally to deliver a direct punch to Tehran’s nuclear program.

So what made the B-2 the go-to weapon? For one, it’s the only plane on the planet that can deliver the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP)—a 30,000-pound “bunker buster” intended to smash underground targets once considered beyond reach.

Fordow, which is located inside the mountain, was built to withstand normal bombs. The B-2, however, as having one of the most stealthy radar-dodging flying wing designs, can go beyond the enemy’s protection and deliver the bunker buster in the exact spot.

And although brute power is part of the equation, the B-2’s real advantage is stealth. Its radar cross-section is so small it’s likened to a bird, rendering it nearly invisible to cutting-edge air defense systems.

With a radius of more than 6,000 nautical miles—and even more with in-flight refueling—it can hit anywhere on the planet from its Missouri base.

Its two-person crew depends on advanced automation and concealed weapons bays, allowing it to possess a one-of-a-kind capability of up to 40,000 pounds of bombs while remaining almost invisible.

Preparing such missions is as amazing as the attacks themselves. All 19 B-2s are home-based at Whiteman, but the Pentagon forward-deployed six of them to Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean earlier this year—a deployment that caused a stir when satellite imagery captured the bombers queued up on the runway.

Cedric Leighton, a former Air Force colonel, said the deployment was designed to send several messages to Iran: cease supporting proxies such as the Houthis in Yemen, and realize the repercussions of not coming to the negotiating table regarding nuclear matters.

The B-2’s resume is already filled with combat history. It’s flown missions over Kosovo, Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, and now Iran—demonstrating time and again that it can deliver crippling strikes anywhere on the planet, no matter what the defenses. When the B-2 Spirit engages the battle, it’s an airstrike on steroids—it’s a statement.

Just picture a place or a region in which the Cold War got worse to the point that a fight broke out, the sound of the jet engines being very loud could be heard, and the pilots were doing things that took very little time, it was about 700 miles per hour that the speed was.

It is a place called MiG Alley, the infamous line of the sky over the Yalu River in Korea, where the fight between MiG-15 and F-86 Sabre has combined the conflicts in the air. Forget the Hollywood portrayal of dogfights—what were fated were brutal, raw, and death-or-life.

MiG Alley was not just a nickname—it was a warning sign. MiG-15s, built in the Soviet Union, flew by pilots who were Russians in disguise, ready to lie in wait for UN troops. The pilots sported North Korean or Chinese uniforms, mime insignia, and even attempted to communicate in the local languages over the radio—though when tensions ran high, Russian crept through again.

The MiG-15 was revolutionary. Designed by Artem Mikoyan and Mikhail Gurevich, it went to war first as a swept-wing fighter and was able to outperform the American jets in dive, climb, and acceleration of all kinds. It was powered by a reverse-engineered Rolls-Royce Nene engine and carried a heavyweight punch with one 37mm gun and two 23mm guns—sufficient to knock a B-29 Superfortress out of the sky with one pass. Its appearance in November 1950 shook UN air forces to their foundations, making propeller-driven Mustangs and bombers exposed as never before.

America replied with the F-86 Sabre, a jet designed to take on the MiG. It had swept wings, a General Electric J47 turbojet, six .50-caliber machine guns, and a radar-ranging gunsight that made high-speed shooting a matter of precision, not luck.

The ensuing dogfights were unlike any during World War II—violent, short, and on the brink of the sound barrier. MiGs got up to superior altitudes and increased their speed more effectively, while Sabres were tailored to more aggressive control at lower altitudes and to winning by dive-and-glide tactics.

The aviators adjusted their tactics by utilizing clouds, sunlight, and even gunfire from the enemy’s ground as protection.

To defy an intensely firing barrage of his comrades’ anti-aircraft guns, Soviet ace Sergei Kramarenko dived through it only to escape his chasing Sabres, thus proving the war had never been more dangerous.

The competition was personal as well as mechanical. Soviet pilots Nikolai Sutyagin and Yevgeny Pepelyaev notched dozens of kills, and U.S. aces James Jabara and Joseph McConnell turned into legends. Many instances in history were not disclosed for a long time.

First of all, I can mention the instance of Royce Williams battling seven MiGs in a “dogfight” which was only revealed after fifty years. The two opposing forces would usually keep these skirmishes a secret due to the high tension, as they thought that such a disclosure would lead to the conflict escalating.

MiG Alley was definitely not just a battlefield but a fracas of the air war that was being tested. As the tactics were changing at a very high pace, pilots had to figure it out on their own that altitude, surprise, and coordination were the main things. The Americans managed to turn technology and their training to their advantage by the use of antigravity suits and radar gunsights. The Soviets were dispatching their elite pilots through a tough routine in Korea, practically training them in a war that was their continuous camp for sharpening their skills.

The training from MiG Alley still applies in different scenarios. That is the very reason why today, every single thing about aerial combat, starting from the fighter design to the pilot training, deeply depends on what was learned in the Korean skies. The Cold War era was very different from the current one, which was much more intimate, fought at supersonic speeds, and had an uncertain winner. However, the Cold War period stories of aviators who vanished in thin air, secret burial grounds, and aircraft becoming legends are still recounted.

The first thing that comes to mind for people is the Lockheed P-38 Lightning when they think of the most outstanding World War II aces. Not only one of the most outstanding aerial fights, but also the peculiar twin-boom design of the aircraft established it as one of the most famous and also the most distinguishable among the rest of the sky. The Lightning was a mere car; it was the cleverness and the guarantee of the USA’s flight, and it left an imprint on both the wars in Europe and the Pacific.

The P-38 legend began in the late 1930s when the U.S. Army Air Corps was seeking a speedster interceptor to serve as a high-altitude plane. Lockheed returned with an unorthodox design. Hall Hibbard and the legendary Clarence “Kelly” Johnson led the company through the process of designing a twin-engine, twin-boom fighter with a cockpit nacelle between the booms. The setup was unconventional by any pilot’s definition, intriguing because of its aggressive looks and leading-edge technology as well.

The P-38 was more than a flashy show. It was the first American fighter to fly at over 400 mph on level ground, a speed record-breaker unprecedented. Turbo-superchargers gave it improved performance at high altitude, making it a prime contender for long-range escort and intercept sorties. The plane also included some other pioneering technologies of the era—counter-rotating propellers to offset torque effect, tricycle undercarriage to improve capability in ground operations, and a steering yoke instead of the classical stick—innovations which were novel to make it as efficient.

Its firepower was all focused in the nose, with four .50-calibers and a 20mm all crammed into one place. This permitted pilots to shoot from long distances without needing to alter their target, providing the Lightning with a deadly dogfighting advantage.

Early operational service did have its challenges, however. The P-38 had engine problems in cold weather in Europe, and the absence of cockpit heating made flight at high altitude uncomfortable and stressful. Except for twin-engine-accredited pilots, pilots struggled with the plane to take off, and early flight tests showed a “compressibility” flaw on dives, which resulted in temporary loss of elevator control—a flaw later fixed by the use of dive flaps.

Over the Pacific, the P-38 was supreme. Its range and range-at-altitude made it possible to escort bombers deeper into enemy country than any other aircraft. Its most famous mission was likely Operation Vengeance in 1943, the daring intercept and murder of Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto, architect of Pearl Harbor. The 1,000-mile flight to do that attested to the Lightning’s range, dependability, and strategic value, and cemented its status as a war machine.

In the Pacific, it was sometimes referred to informally by Japanese pilots as “two planes, one pilot,” a description of its twin-boom configuration and murder capability. German North African and European forces referred to it as “der Gabelschwanz-Teufel,” or fork-tailed devil, a reverent and fearful moniker that it acquired from enemy pilots.

The P-38 carried some of America’s best aces. Major Richard Bong, piloting the Lightning in the Pacific, downed 40 credited enemy aircraft and was awarded the Medal of Honor. Other top pilots, like Major Thomas McGuire and Colonel Charles MacDona, compiled high scores, illustrating how capably the airplane could fly with capable pilots onboard.

While the P-38 performed so badly in Europe—especially in close combat against the quicker German and Italian aircraft and in cold winter weather—it was eventually redesigned, better trained, and better armed to counteract most of these weaknesses. The Lightning was also extremely versatile and was an excellent reconnaissance airplane, taking most Allied air photographs in Europe, and served as a light bomber, ground-attack fighter, and pathfinder, showing the plane’s flexibility in many varied functions.

Over 10,000 P-38s were built at the close of World War II. They saw over 130,000 hours of combat time and destroyed thousands of hostile aircraft. Few remain airworthy today, but their memory lives on—to museums, histories, and veterans’ recollections, their pilots and their opponents in combat.

Retired Colonel Richard Heyman, a combat veteran pilot of the P-38, said that piloting the Lightning was a test and honor. It was concentration, guts, and skill, but it paid off in unbelievable power and performance and left its mark on every pilot who ever flew it.

There are only a handful of firearms that have influenced infantry combat so profoundly in the modern era, and the M60 machine gun is one of them. In both those instances, the M60 was referred to by the troops, one as “the Pig” and the other as “the Pig” – in a loving and a somewhat reluctant way. The M60 was “American death” and “American indomitable spirit” all made into one by the users during the Vietnam War. Its doom sing, clunky bulk, and bottomless hunger for cartridges made it familiar as a twice-edged tool for those who had to take it to battle.

The history of the M60 starts after WWII, when the U.S. Army was looking for a lighter, more universal replacement for the aging Browning M1919. Engineers were inspired by the designs of the German MG42 and the FG42 paratrooper rifle and took the best of both of them to create a new general-purpose machine gun.

Constructed around a stamped steel receiver to save weight and reduce production complexity, the M60 had a gas piston-operated action, was fed ammunition on the left side through disintegrating links, and fired from an open bolt to make it easier to operate and cool.

With an unloaded weight of around 23 pounds, the M60 was hardly light. Top it off with a full 7.62x51mm NATO belt of ammunition, and the weight easily neared 26 pounds—a serious endurance challenge for the troops forced to lug it about. But that weight served a purpose: sustained firepower at 550–650 rounds per minute, capable of silencing enemy positions and shielding comrades.

The design had its quirks. The bipod, mounted at the barrel’s end, added stability but extra weight, while the quick-change barrel system was essential in long firefights. The gas system occasionally needed field fixes, like safety wiring, to keep it functioning under high fire rates. Still, when the Pig ran well, it was formidable. Its .30-caliber rounds could tear through jungle foliage, walls, and enemy positions alike.

For those who bore it with them in Vietnam, the M60 was a lifeline and a faithful companion. Victor Renza, an infantryman in the 4th Infantry Division, remembered learning to use the weapon blindfolded, committed to depending on it as his best friend in battle. “No. 1 Gun became my very best friend,” he explained. Enemy troops dreaded its presence so intensely that gunners were frequently primary targets, with an average life expectancy of just seconds once a firefight had commenced.

The tactical role of the M60 was well understood: deliver suppressive fire, pin down enemies, and provide space for riflemen to move. Infantry companies usually had eight M60s, with each platoon relying on their gunners to man defensive positions and beat back attackers.

The psychological impact was as significant as its lethal firepower; even hearing its bursts could keep enemy heads down. Renza related a firefight outside Tuy Hoa when shooting 200 rounds up a riverbank kept enemy forces back, even though no visual contact with the targets had been established.

The gunners had to carry an extremely heavy load. They were transporting the gun, a couple of hundred rounds of ammunition, and sometimes additional barrels, through the sun, which was burning, and over the thick and rough ground. Renza’s portrayal of a battle that was fought for survival near the Cambodian border is full of these excruciating moments: being shot while crawling across a river, reloading the new belts, and shooting on top of their people to protect the injured or to get back the dead soldiers.

It is often said that the M60 is not only famous for the wars in which it was involved but also for its distinct silhouette. Its outline was even quite well-recognized among the uneducated people, thus making it popular in movies like “Rambo: First Blood” where it was considered as one of the on-screen characters. But to those who carried it, the Pig was nothing else but a life-saving instrument, a symbol of the common bond, and at times, a sign of death. By giving it over to a new one, he got a feeling of relief as well as a little bit of affection, thinking what was going on with his “No. 1 Gun” after the fight.

The M60 has been replaced by the M240 in most departments; however, some upgraded versions are still being used in a few units. The design of modern weapons and infantry tactics is still influenced by its heritage, which serves as a milestone of the continuous demand for portable, durable, and easily-operated firearms on the battlefield. The M60, which was very difficult to handle, heavy, and harsh with its gunners’ mistakes, was, if in the hands of a skilled gunner, the backbone of American firepower in Vietnam.

The YF-12A is no doubt among the quickest, highest-flying, and most innovative technical aircraft ever made. The YF-12A, as well as the SR-71 Blackbird, had the same parent and have similar stories, with the former being a Cold War-era interceptor that merged breathtaking performance and unconventional technology.

The story of its design and development is an amazing one, combining technical genius, secrecy, and grand vision, which, in fact, are still influencing aerial warfare and space flights after all these years.

The YF-12A was never just a high-speed interceptor. Near the end of the program, the aircraft itself proved priceless as research vehicles to NASA and the Air Force. Flights during this period directly impacted the design of the Space Shuttle and were contributors to current developments in high-speed aerodynamics.

Beyond its experimental use, the YF-12A also proved to be a contributor to future military technology. Its missile and radar technology led to the development of the AIM-54 Phoenix missile and AWG-9 radar, subsequently installed in the F-14 Tomcat, providing it with a lasting technological legacy in multiple generations of aircraft.

The YF-12A was heavily classified from the outset. It was built during an anxious period of the Cold War, and its actual purpose was revealed to very few individuals in the government. When it was then revealed officially in 1964 under the cover title “A-11,” the disclosure otherwise well covered up the fact that there existed a yet more secret A-12 spy project operated by the CIA.

All aspects of the project were under tight wraps: the engineers were told not to speak about what they were doing, and the procurement of key materials was channeled through covert sources, so that the plane was under cover from potential enemies.

Technically, the YF-12A was impressive. Its Hughes AN/ASG-18 fire control radar, the first pulse Doppler radar ever installed on a U.S. aircraft, was capable of detecting bomber-sized targets over 100 miles away. With an infrared homing system, the YF-12A could home in and destroy low-flying targets—a capability few fighters of the era had.

Its weaponry was impressive too. With three AIM-47 Falcon missiles with a Mach 4 capability, the plane was lethal in tests, such as when it destroyed a drone bomber flying barely 500 feet above ground level after one was fired from 74,000 feet at Mach 3.2.

It was designing an aircraft that can maintain speeds of over Mach 3 that presented unique challenges. Titanium had to be able to resist the blistering heat produced at such speeds, but acquiring sufficient amounts of it in the United States was an enormous hindrance.

In a maneuver that seemed straight out of a Cold War spy novel, most of the metal was acquired through sophisticated, backdoor deals, smuggled into the program quietly to supply the critical material for an airplane capable of pursuing enemy bombers at unprecedented speeds.

At the core of the YF-12A legend, though, was its performance. It established world records in 1965 by cruising at a speed of 2,070 mph and climbing to altitudes above 80,000 feet. The speeds were unbelievable during those times.