Rank the Tank!

Whispering Death said:
rOk said:
And about the bands too...
Click to expand...

bands? :rock:
Click to expand...

No, no :D not that kind of bands...the way he divided them in band1 and band2 and the Leo2 was put in band2.

Just read doppleganger's post a above for further clarification (if needed).
 
stryker:

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2004/1/28/151543.shtml

Quote:
http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2003/030906-stryker01.htm


"The Strykers are the first new combat vehicle in 20 years and a cornerstone in the Army's efforts to transform itself into a new, 21st-century fighting force. Critics say the eight-wheeled vehicles each costing an average of $1.5 million may be a costly misstep on that path. The Army recently discovered flaws in the Stryker's ceramic composite armor and is racing to fix it. The vehicle's remote weapon systems can't be fired accurately on the move, and soldiers must get out of the vehicle to reload, exposing them to enemy fire."

"Each vehicle is covered with 132 plates designed to protect against up to 14.5-mm fire, slightly bigger than a .50-caliber bullet. But a subcontractor hired to provide the armor apparently deviated from the standards and at least one variation failed in a test firing, Army officials said.

The full extent of the plate problem is unknown, but it's serious enough that the Army has launched a top-priority test of all plates at the Aberdeen Proving Ground in Maryland, with replacement tiles expected to be put on the brigade's vehicles later this month.

The Stryker brigade also is heading off to Iraq without a separate outer layer of plates designed to protect against rocket-propelled grenades, which insurgents have used again and again to deadly effect against U.S. troops in Iraq. "
Click to expand...


The Stryker and Gavin are essentially equal in armor protection, and in the types of weapons they can carry, Sparks said. But the Gavin is vastly superior in strategic and tactical mobility, he said.
Click to expand...

http://www.post-gazette.com/nation/20020320mobilenat4p4.asp

i couldnt find the website that i was referring to...


M1A1:

I recall when the American M1A1 Abrams Main Battle Tank, then in first production, using a turbine engine, was failing in every phase of its construction. It sucked up sand, its suspension could not take the punishment, its bearings ate sand, its firing systems on the run were inadequate, etc. Then they called upon Israel's General Israel Tal, who had fathered the Merkava, to assist in de-bugging the M1A1 (denials by the US manufacturers notwithstanding).
Click to expand...

why is it so unbelievable? every single weapon producing country has had some sort of fault in atleast one of there weapons... eiether way, even if they were not redundant from the begining, they would usually only take a short period before being owned by something newer and better.
 
the m1a1 i dont have solid evidence, so lets not get into it, but lots of people say the styrker is a waste of tax payers dollars... it would have been cheaper just to upgrade the m113's to modern day standards like all the other countries have, rather than build the styrker,which has less mobility, and cant even suit the purpose it was built for, which is fitting into a C-130... the thing needs to stripped of parts, and when landed, rebuilt again... not the fast deployment it was supposed to be for... why no fast deployment, because tit needed to be uparmored as it was vulnerable to everying bigger than .5 cal bullets.
 
(rocco, watch the double posting, the mods wil sort it but they wont be happy, use the edit button top right corner of your posts)

Theres probably nothing between any of the top european, israeli and american tanks but i dont know about the chinese, russian or japanese tanks. So my personal favourite is Challenger 2, followed by Leopard 2A6. Anybody have any info on Irans tanks? especially there recent one theyve made themselves, ta.
 
Just gimme my Wrangler, a SAW and a couple pipe bombs...take care of any tank on the field :shock:

No really, I'm an Abrahms guy....when you have to dump some hurt on someone, call in the big boys...
 
Kozzy Mozzy said:
AsianAmerican said:
Time said:
Challenger 2
Leclerc
M1Abrams-A2 version
Leopard
Type99
Click to expand...

I like your list. THe challenger 2 is one incredible machine as well as the Leclerc, Abrams2, Leopard, and Type 99. Though i know all of the specs about the first 4 does anyone have the specs for the Type 99. Nobody seems to have credible evidence of this new tank and its abilities. How good is this thing?
Click to expand...

It's basically a T-72 with a dazzler laser on top. Plus it can fire a mean DU APFSDS with 800+mm of penetration.

And rocco did you just call the M1A1 a flop?
Click to expand...


basically a T-72????????/
does t-72 has 1500 horse power engine as a T-99G has? does it has a reliable automasitcal reloader as T-99G does? does it weight as heavy as T-99G does? does it even looks like t-99G? does it has a modern on-board computer like t-99G does? can it shoot DU rounds? T-72's armor is as good as T-99G's????
 
It's based on a T-72. Just because a tank doesn't look like another tank, doesn't mean it's similar to it. The Black Eagle is based on the T-80, but looks nothing like it.
 
Kozzy Mozzy said:
It's based on a T-72. Just because a tank doesn't look like another tank, doesn't mean it's similar to it. The Black Eagle is based on the T-80, but looks nothing like it.
Click to expand...

Arn't all tanks based on a former tank? Why lose the goods in an old tank when you can take good bits from former tanks into a new tank, right? Been done since after the first tank that saw action :p

So I don't really see your point in that remark ;)
 
Shadowalker said:
(rocco, watch the double posting, the mods wil sort it but they wont be happy, use the edit button top right corner of your posts).
Click to expand...

sorry, i have a habit of doing that, when i adress different points, because i feel there is less confusion that way...

shadow, i think iran is atleast 30 years behind everyone in tank design, unless russia is helping them (same for if china helps)...

other tanks of the world which we can consider are:

Ariete
Olifant
K1A1
Arjun
 
Hey, thats ok, is the Olifant still in service? i read somewhere they were being decommissioned but dont know if thats true or not
 
olifant is basically like a sho't... i would assume they would be commisioned, because the centurion hulls are not able to contain all the needed parts of a modern MBT... unlike the M60 which can, and is still being used and upgraded
 
Hard to choose between the Western tanks in tank on tank duel, whoever gets the first shot in from the side I guess.

The Challenger and M1 have been tested in battle, albeit against pathetic opposition.
I like the autoloader on the Leclerk, can fire 12 rounds a minute.
If I had to go for one, I think it would be the Swedish version of the Leopard 2A5, they designate the 2A6.
 
Ashes said:
Hard to choose between the Western tanks in tank on tank duel, whoever gets the first shot in from the side I guess.

The Challenger and M1 have been tested in battle, albeit against pathetic opposition.
I like the autoloader on the Leclerk, can fire 12 rounds a minute.
If I had to go for one, I think it would be the Swedish version of the Leopard 2A5, they designate the 2A6.
Click to expand...

The Leclerc's autoloader isn't any faster then a human loader. It can load a round in 5 seconds while a human loader can load a shell in 3 while stationary and 5 while moving, some even faster. The Swedish version of the Leopard isn't the 2A6, it's called the Strv-122. The Leopard 2A6 is the latest tank deployed in the German army.
 
The STRV 122 and Leo 2 A6 are simular though, the STRV 122 is considered (by many) better then the A6. Only the cannon and engine is considered better in the A6 :)
 
If you're looking for old equipment still in action look from the Africa conflicts, I've seen pictures of insurgents holding StG-44 assault rifles :D

About that tank ranking, personally I would rank western tanks over east and my list looks something like this

Leopard 2A6
Challenger2
M1A2 Abrams
Merkava mk4

I believe merkava 4 hasn't seen much action but it can't be any worse than its previous model.
The reason I rank Leo2 and Challenger over abrams is because of fuel efficiency, I may be wrong about the abrams A2 but the A1 is one freaking gas hog.
 
M1A2 Cruising Range: 265 miles (426km)
Challenger 2 Cruising Range: 280 miles (450km)
Not much of a difference, eh? Factor the M1A2's higher speed and better acceleration I would give the M1A2 the mobility category against the Challenger.
Leopard 2 Cruising Range: 341 miles (550km)
Winner.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top