About Which of these tanks can perform the best? Page 2
|October 16th, 2008||#11|
| || |
A-10 Thunderbolt II
I've seen modern armor. I've worked along side modern armor. I respect modern armor. But I sure as hell love air support.
Oh yeah... modern armor is great until a GI on the back of a jeep/hmmv armed with a Javelin or a AT4 hiding behind the bend of a roadway or a bush is also a great equalizer. That is the killer of modern armor. That GI might die but in terms of numbers it's a win. Tank (Millions of dollars plus crew) vs jeep/hmmv (couple of thousand dollars plus two. Driver and gunner or if they're really gutsy. Driver/gunner.)
The world hasn't seen two modern day armies bump heads yet. When that day comes, and it will. The great tank on tank battles will be a thing of the past.
|October 16th, 2008||#12|
| || |
^^^I'm with this guy^^^
Good reliable tank busters are much more affordable than their targets, crews are also smaller, more flexible, cheaper and far easier to train. The tank is well on it's way to being a "non event" on the battlefield in the event of a major war, their day has passed them by.
They will go the same way as the battleship.
"I am totally responsible for what I write,... however I cannot be held responsible for your complete inability to understand"
Last edited by senojekips; October 16th, 2008 at 05:17..
|October 17th, 2008||#14|
| || |
Doesn't the Zulfiqar 3 look a lot similar to the M1A1? Here is a comparison
pic: The top part of the pic is the M1A1 and the bottom one is the Zulfiqar, I see a lot of similarities in the design.
The original Zulfiqar 1 body design was similar to the M-60/48
The Zulfiqar 2 looked a lot like heavily upgraded t-72/m-60
The Zulfiqar 3 seems like the Iranians based it on the M1A1.
But if I had to give it to the best tank I would say the Leopard 2A6 and the T-95 which is suppose to go into mass production in 2009 as stated by Putin. These 2 tanks seem to be the best when it comes to overall advantage in armor, mobility, tech, range, and fuel. What lets the M1A2 down is the fact that it needs a huge fuel and maintenance convoy to continuously operate them, and if a nation does not have the huge supply capability to operate the M1A2 in huge numbers the tanks fails to make an impact on the battlefield.
|October 18th, 2008||#15|
| || |
that A-10, can be killed more easily than a tank, just a SAM, and they cost 40 million dollars plus all the weapons abroad. Also you can add reactive or active armor to make the javelin not work, plus those are also almost a million dollars a missle.
|October 19th, 2008||#17|
| || |
Way back when I was in the Marines the first time I saw an A-10 we were on a road caught out in the open it was ugly if that was a real situation I would have been dead as hell.
I have to say the A-C130 is about useless if the enemy has any air defense at all.
Somewhere a True Believer is training to kill you. He is training with minimum food or water, in austere conditions, day and night.
The only thing clean on him is his weapon.
|October 19th, 2008||#18|
| || |
OK back on toppic.
Yes they look similar but it means nothin. I donwt know what engine, protection, or fire controll system the Zulfiqar uses. Good looks count for exactly zero points in tanks.