11-04-2003 04:36									#61
	Comments to poll Full PM-box? Change here!

Germans more thought on its WWII history than about new tank design. Leopard I was entirely uneffective and awfull. Leopard II was improvement, but has much to do until T-80U. Armor about 1000 against standard amunition 1550 HEAT. IR less advanced than top notch Russian.

T-80 with its engine is more moneverable than his counterparts. Aprox 850 standard amunition 1300 HEAT.

T-90 with 1000 against standard 1580 HEAT could do better than leopard. less profile and bulkines. Both Russian tanks have kontakt-5 ERA. They couid fire higher variety of ammo from its 125 mm gun. From missiles to flechete. They could get Arena on top or other cheaper countermeasures. Russia have different ideology than is "standard US WW II ideology of selfprobeled AT vehicle". Their tanks are well all around versed and better suited for fight in difficult combined arms enviroment. Of course they were build with thought that they wouldn't have guaranted air superiority, and thats don't hurt either. With tonage less than 45 for T-80 and 46.8 for T-90 they have much less fear from bad bridges. BTW Russian military doesn't neccesary thing that bridges are first targets in campaign and they have lots of mobile ones. (you blowed bridge? And who cares.)

T-95 is best alternative towerless concept, low profile 152 mm gun. Again missile... Soldiers would be much better protected than in former Russian tanks. I would however redesign lower part of this tank to be more compact and I would like view its engine in front,

Merkava 4 has to high profile to be effective widely. Its another weaknes is 65 tones. Merkava closed more to M1A2 than would be nice. Big armor envelope outdated ERA and its looks like xxxx. Merkava have rather low penetration ammo. Merkava has high top armor, probably as attempt to protect itself against programmable amunitions and top atack antitank weapons.

Leclerc is French highend armored vehicle. It features high armor and is better than L 2. It has high quietnes of componets, but it would need to be in few wars to remove some of its quirks. One disadvantage is its turbine. Tt has higer fuel consumption than it should. Everyone with experience with computer game developing and weapons building could design better controls than they did. I think they should do something with characterstic parameters of that gun. You know they talk about it as tank thad was build too soon. This gun doesn't look so effective.

Chalenger 2 has high armor low anything else, other than steadines of crews.

M1A2 is big with high fuel comsumtion and its armor isn't everywhere reasonable. One of its problem is its turbine. It has high IR characteristic that alows to nice lock for every antitank missile that could lock on IR. Depleted uranium isn't smart thing. I wouldn't like to be close when M1A2 would be hit by some antitank fire. And I would stay rather far away from it for nex 5 minutes. US did some enchancedradiation weapons for use aginst Russia, but if they would be as as efficient against Russian tanks, it would be dissaster for M1A2. Even simple neutron blast could do nasty things with M1A2 armor. Low armor of M1A2 is not nice and back armor is simply bad. It needs a lots of fuel to do anything and its 65 tons wouldn't alow ride in some cities.

T-98 (chinese) Chinese tanks grows somewhat. Its armor is 800 against normal 1000 HEAT. Chinese had big Laser research and T-98 is likely to have its fruits. It looks like old T-80 however. Its electronic suit is better than early models T-80 electronice equipment.

Black eagle has tower that looks like its wester counterparts, its tower is more advanced however. Export model?

K1A1 is Korean copy of M1A2 with all its problems.

Ariete and Oliphant. I have included them just for conterweight. Every person with brains and creative talent could design better than this two types. I know that without long research you'd have no chance to have perfect armor, but PLEASE THIS? Do better. I think there is hope.

bananas are really dangerous. Some of them could be under your foot, barrel, or in ammo storage and eek.

Sorry for grammar faults too much text for too short time.

	11-04-2003 04:43									#62
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

so basically, "they all suck, I could do better with a cookie jar, a piece of rope, and a toaster oven"?

	11-04-2003 04:48									#63
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by Azazel how many rounds per minute does the best autoloader shoot?

Russian 130 mm twin 65/min
I would like to see it mounted on vehicle with nice fire control, in action.


Imagine group of M1A2. Then this gun would fire something with guidance on final part of trajectory.

99...100. Any survivors? We can continue...

BTW crosbows are better than muskets in AP.

	11-04-2003 05:13									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Azazel so basically, "they all suck, I could do better with a cookie jar, a piece of rope, and a toaster oven"?

Basically not. Company are scared to do something revolutionary. US gov doesn't know what to do with tankers that wouldn't be able learn new things. Russian gov don't have money. South africa doesn't have armor technology. Israel wont change its tank design until someone destroy a lot of Mercavas. China needs a lot to learn 5 years at least. Then they would chicken and build something traditional. They were very traditional lately, with exception of laser weapons. France have problems with marketing or style of presentation of leclerc. Germany is happy with what it has.

Did I missed someone?

Toaster oven is somewhat unusable for tank. I have graphic card repaired by wire. How did you guess I'm so skillful?

	11-04-2003 05:20									#65
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Russian 130 mm twin 65/min I would like to see it mounted on vehicle with nice fire control, in action.

65 per minute? totally unrealistic, me thinks, esp. since there is no point in such high fire rates, as there won't be enough time to adjust the turret to take a new target.

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t-90.htm

quote: Rate of fire 6-8 rounds/min

admittedly this is a t-90 specs list, but is there a new autoloader?
I don't think so.

	11-04-2003 05:27									#66
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Israel wont change its tank design until someone destroy a lot of Mercavas.

At the current rate of things, this won't happen for a long LONG time.

	11-04-2003 05:30									#67
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

I'm no expert, but the MIA1 or A2 seem to perform "adequately."

In the current war, all the tanks in Baghdad have driven 300+ miles through dust and sandstorms and are still performing flawlessly. Their crews have yet to lose even one tank to a hostile tank.

One can compare defensive armor, fire control systems, crew protection, but do tanks other than the M1 have the ability to perform flawlessly for long periods of time in such hostile conditions? If one recalls, the German King Tiger broke down so often as to be almost useless on the battlefield.

However, some points raised here deserve to be discussed. Some M1's have been knocked out by AT weapons that struck the M1 exhausts. It does look like the M1 has an Achilles heal.

Also, does simply having a bigger gun make the tank more effective? It seems to depend on the ammo. The US depleated-uranium rounds were effected against T72s even when fired by the Brandley's 25 mm guns.

Last edited by Ned on 11-04-2003 at 06:06

	11-04-2003 05:34									#68
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

I think we need MtG to answer those qustions.

MichaelTheGreat , where are you?!!

	11-04-2003 05:50									#69
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ned In the current war, all the tanks in Baghdad have driven 300+ miles through dust and sandstorms and are still performing flawlessly. Their crews have yet to lose even one tank to a hostile tank.

I don't think that's quite true. The US hasn't announced any attrition numbers for mechanical breakdowns. It's not hard data, but I can remember a news article where it was reported that about 20-30% of the Abramses of some division (it was one without embedded journalists) were missing from their count two weeks into the war, and none had been reported lost to enemy fire. That implies that there may be significant reliability problems in sandstorms with the Abrams.
All Bradleys were counted as present.

As for not losing any tanks to hostile tanks, I think that tells more about the Iraqi tanks than the Abrams. Note that several were lost to AT guns, Kornets and RPGs. Most were mobility kills, but some got penetrations into the crew compartment as well.

	11-04-2003 06:03									#70
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

M1A2
Merkava 4
Challenger 2
If I could vote, I would vote for the above.
No Challenger or M1A2 has been lost in a tank to tank battle. If that is also correct for the Merkava, than it to joins the ranks of the other two.
All of the others tanks have not see battle, therefore we cannot predict how they will fare, until they do see battle.
For Serb. The US had a 152 mm tank 30 years ago and did not like it. It was the M-60A2. It saw service in Vietnam.
There was a T-80 in the vote. In Gulf 1, the Marines with their M-60A3 met the Iraqi Republican Guard T-80s and destroyed all of them without a single loss.

	11-04-2003 06:15									#71
	Support Apolyton

re Ned It was problem, because it looks like Iraqi doesn't have ammo able to penetrate M1A2 from front. I mean tank ammo. So yes they weren't able to hit M1A2 from behind as far as is publicly known.

Re Azazel
Russian 130 mm twin is from Russian's CGs. It has nice 90 tons, but looks interesting. It has 25 degree / sec rotation.


I think normal tank loader do 8-11 (15) /min. Imagine 152 mm without autoloader. ( US tanks are rummored to get 140 mm, so we can expect autoloader for them too)

This site could be interesting. http://armor.vif2.ru/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html

Last edited by raghar on 11-04-2003 at 06:45

	11-04-2003 14:29									#72
	Full PM-box? Change here!

The Mammoth tank. BTW, why don't tanks have more than one guns? Big guns, not MG's and such.

	11-04-2003 16:27									#73
	Remove this text

What's the point in having them?

	11-04-2003 18:07									#74
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by BeBro Well, Leos are in service in a number of other countries too...

Well, yeah. Finland has some Leo 2s soon too.

	12-04-2003 00:12									#75
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

The bananaloader is more battle efficient than the autoloader.
If the banana misses it's target, it will boomerang back and be reloaded in no time.

	12-04-2003 01:05									#76
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by raghar This site could be interesting. http://armor.vif2.ru/Tanks/TRIALS/19991020.html

No wonder you think the Leo2 is inferior to the T80U

	12-04-2003 03:27									#77
	Suffering from ads?

And this is Leclerc



And this is cocpit.



You can see all componets are too far away. You need to do a lots of movement and displays are rather small.

Everyone knows that WIN users are lazy to move mouse just one pixel more. There is no reason why tankers should be discriminated.

	12-04-2003 03:34									#78
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Originally posted by BeBro No wonder you think the Leo2 is inferior to the T80U

I would like to see simillar tests on Leopard 2. It could be cruel.

What is armor composition of Leopard 2? Uranium oxide? It could be nasty for crew after repairs.

	12-04-2003 03:42									#79
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

I think, given the advancement of the A10's, the Apache's and of course of GPS and laser bombs, future tanks will have to be designed to withstand attack from above. Simply having armor to protect against enemy tanks is too WWII.

So, what I want to know is what tank can best defend/take out an A10?

	12-04-2003 03:47									#80
	Remove this text

that guy in the LeClerc looks like a space cadet!

	12-04-2003 03:48									#81
	Full PM-box? Change here!

And, btw, i think it is quite obvious that the Mammoth tacnk is the best! Twin 130 mm cannons adn rockets launchers... how can the soviets/GDI lose?

	12-04-2003 03:54									#82
	Suffering from ads?

Nice site BeBro, I found this awesome russian song there...

code:

The tanks were rattling like a thunder
The soldiers went to final fight
And here they carried young commander
With head all broken outright

His tank was hit by armor-piercer
So say goodbye my dear crew
Four silent corpses on the hillside
Will add to fair morning view

And now the vehicle is a-burning
Wait for the shells to detonate
You wanna live to see this morning
But you're too weak and it's too late

So they'll extract you from the remnants
They'll put your coffin on the clay
And fire & thunder from the mainguns
Will see you onto your last way

For now the telegrams are flying
To tell the friends and relatives
That their son is never coming
And never getting any leave

And there's that photo on the bookshelf
Collecting dust for years on end -
In uniform,
with shoulder-boards on...
And he will never be her man.
In unifo-orm,
wI-EEEEEEth
shoul-der-bo-ards OOOOOOOn...

And he will never be her man.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sad melody I guess...
They are good at making sad songs, the russians.

	12-04-2003 03:57									#83
	Tired of ads?

Re why don't tanks have more than one guns?

Multi gun tanks?

look at this.
http://www.battlefield.ru/t35_2.html

	12-04-2003 04:05									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I knew you would like that pictures. That guy looks like I whe I have my first computer MB beforme my very eyes. He is scared to push button.

	12-04-2003 04:43									#85
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Yeah, I guess it's a WW2 light battletank. They had many funny designs back then, and WW2 antitank vehicles could be similar to certain tanks in design. Modern tanks normally uses one huge barrel whose range matters...

Today, in addition to tanks and antitank guns, you have airdefense armored vehicles. One is the four barreled russian ZSU-23-4, Shilka. http://arms.host.sk/artillery/shilka.htm
Well, those nasty guns can be used to fire upon many things. It looks a bit like the WW2-tank in raghar's pic.

	12-04-2003 04:56									#86
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by raghar What is armor composition of Leopard 2? Uranium oxide? It could be nasty for crew after repairs.

Chobham - steel/ceramic.

And our tanks donīt have to be repaired

	12-04-2003 05:08									#87
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

So when its engine would have a little break down, you'll get new tank.

	12-04-2003 05:12									#88
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Yes, nobody likes driving with a second hand tank on the autobahn

	12-04-2003 06:01									#89
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

M1A2 is toe to toe the best tank in the world in every catagory hands down. Yes, when you throw lots of money at building something better you do in deed get a better (and much more expensive) contraption.

the real question is what is the second best tank in the world? At least there is some competetion for that spot.

	12-04-2003 16:44									#90
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Ned So, what I want to know is what tank can best defend/take out an A10?

ZSU-23-4 Shilka, perhaps? Well, it's not a tank actually... just looks like one, and it got four nasty AAA guns instead of cannon. Are they capable of shooting as well as the Avenger on the A-10 in a duel ? For defence the T-80s can fire missile decoys, and from above it fires automatically a directed charge of projectiles in direction of an incoming missile. A T-80 division accompanied by Shilkas including radar support from long range SAMs, all mobile and armored, should be well defended against airstrikes.


Our few Leopards and conscript infantry brigades would have no chance if Russians attacked Norway, perhaps we could have invaded Sweden, mainly by knocking on their tank hatches and throw in a grenade when they so stupidly opened it. But if such a T-80s division invaded we should have to go asymmetric.

I can tell you a secret... There is already a widespread home defence guerrilla on stand by, but they are mainly riflemen. Few AT-weapons in peoples homes, I guess. Most of it are placed in secret locations around. I can't tell you where they are, but I've found some, so I just need a lockpick! I guess there are many Carl Gustav RPG-launchers and shitloads of M72, which is neccessary for a guerilla to stay alive, including the H&K MGs and AG3 rifles many people have in their attics...