throw the bridge at them?

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

throw the bridge at them?

That is how the Russians fight in a conflict, everything is a weapon including the kitchen sink.

Desperate times call for drastic measures.

All I can say about the bridge layer is... SMACK! SMACK SMACK SMACK!!!

I personally like that the T-90 weighs 46.5 tonnes (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-90) compared to the M1A2 Abrams SEP, which comes in at 67.6 tonnes. And, the Abrams unfortunately generates a lot of heat from the rear due to it's jet engine.

However, being a future Canadian armour crewmen, I wouldn't mind serving on a Leopard 2A6, seeing how that's the best we got (and it is a fine vehicle).

less wirght is less protection.

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

less wirght is less protection.

This is not strictly true as layered and composites offers more protection with less weight, even boxed and spaced armor increased protection without a corresponding increase in weight.

Plus the fact that weight can be saved from other components as well, not just armor. Weaponry, engine, transmission, etc

This is not strictly true as layered and composites offers more protection with less weight, even boxed and spaced armor increased protection without a corresponding increase in weight.

Yes, but im assuming that the Russians do not have such superior technolgoy as to build a tank 20 tonns lighter and yet at the same level of protection.

Originally Posted by SHERMAN

Yes, but im assuming that the Russians do not have such superior technolgoy as to build a tank 20 tonns lighter and yet at the same level of protection.

That of course would depend on the over all displacement of the vehicle.

While I agree that it is unlikely they have shaved a third off the weight and size of the vehicle I would imagine that their experiments with smaller more automated turrets would offer some major weight and profile changes.