Main Battle Tank Battle

L

Lieutenant

Active member
American tanks:

M1A2 Abrams
m1a2.jpg


M1A1 Abrams
m1a1.jpg


British tanks:

Challenger 2E
challenger2E.jpg


Challenger 2
challanger2(4).jpg


Russian tanks:

T-90
t90tank.jpg


T-62
T-62%20russiantank.jpg


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

Pretty easy to work out the most likely to win this battle, Challenger 2E & M1A2 Abrams. Me, personally i'd go for the Challenger 2E simply because i believe that it would come out victor, not any other way. The M1A2 is a formidable adversary with heavy firepower but the Challenger 2E with it's improved performance could just slip under the rope & come out best of both. M1A2 is a tank on level with the Challenger but to me, just comes short of the victory.

Also i'd like it more if you could provide information & explain why you think the tank you choose is better than the rest. If you could, don't be biased on the tank you choose, being American you might choose M1A2 disregarding the information behind the machine, you might choose Russian if you're Russian. It would be better if you could purely choose the tank which is best rather than choosing the tank your country produced.
 
We did a poll not too long ago about which was the best tank. You might want to post your opinion there. We included all these and French, German, and Israeli tanks.
 
yes

Those are nice pictures. the Best Tank poll is in the poll section.it was my post,its nice to hear a Challenger man(your the first), since we had mostly A1M2 people(my money is on the new Israeli Merkava Mk4...But their all so close)
 
beaut

Those tanks are beautiful. They can do some real damage if they were in the position to do so. I wish I could drive those things!
 
IRaq Freedom

During the war the tanks were ambushed. They were taken by suprise and srrounded. It was a good thing we had more advanced technology. They would have killed us all. The right type of tank has to be equipped with what it needs to do the job right.
 
Definatly one of the latest western designs. So that would short it down to M1A2(SEP) Abrams, Challenger 2, Leopard 2A6, Leclerc and Merkava 4.

When it comes to most effective ammo, the US wins hands down with its M829A3 round, the only round that comes close is the German DM53 fired from the new L55 gun on the Leo 2A6. Protection wise they are pretty equal, the Challenger 2 got a bit stronger than the Leopard 2A6 and M1A2(SEP). Pure gun power the L55 on the Leo 2A6 is the most powerful.

These are the numbers i have found for tank rounds from various nations:
(All are estimates, and should be viewed as sutch)

US M829A3 = Estimated 960mm RHAe@2000m
German DM53 fired from L55 gun = Estimated 810mm RHAe@2000m
UK Charm 3 = Estimated 700mm RHAe@2000m
French OFL120E2 = Estimated 640mm RHAe@2000m

Have not found any numbers for Israeli 120mm rounds.
 
Well which tank is the prettiest? Maybe pretty isn't the right word. :twisted:

I would have to say the Challenger. That doesn't mean the Abrams couldn't kick its butt though.
 
It's a real "Steel Beast"
A fortress on tracks..
Great pictures there :D

And I must admit that it's real good looking too...
But a bit too heavy for us here up in the North.. :wink:
 
Re: common

sherman105 said:
common...You all know this is the pretiest!

Really.It is!

http://www.israeli-Weapons.com/weapons/vehicles/tanks/merkava/MerkavaMk4.html
Click to expand...

I went to that web page and checked it out. Looks sharp.

I got a question. On that web page, it shows a photo of a five-cylinder revolving auto-loader, that is called a 10-shot (obviously 2 rounds per cylinder, end-to-end). I can't figure out how to download and then upload the picture, so I hope this description is good enough. It says "An electrically operated revolving magazine contains 10 ready-to-fire rounds."

My question is; does the revolving auto-loader assembly recoil together with the barrel when firing? You would think so, wouldn't you?


[/img]
 
My understanding is that its not an autoloader, but rather a magazine with 10 rounds easily accessible to the loader, as the crew lists a loader.
 
OK, THIS is a debate I HAVE to get into.

Of all the tanks listed so far, the M1A2 SEP would definitely come out on top. The M1A1 Tank is already battle proven twice over, so the platform is obviously one of the best in the world. While the Merkava is a VERY good tank, FOR THE ENVIRONMENT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR, it would get chewed up when fighting in a European/Grassland environment. All aroun, pound for pound, the M1 series tank is the best in the world.

I'm not trying to take anything away from the CHALLENGER 2E. It's an excellent tank, but it has two very significant drawbacks.

1. The big boxy sight on top of the main gun mantlet is a thermal sight. Tank thermal sights are notoriously sensitve, and being the main engaement sight, it's PROBABLY not the samrtest thing in the world to put it so high, and so close to the shock of the main gun recoiling. I've talked to some British Tankers, and they agree the design is a little crazy.

2. The Brits don't use NATO standard ammunition on thier tanks, chosing instead to have a projectile and seperate propellant bags. This makes life difficult for them, as they can't draw off the same stocks as other Coalition vehicles.

Now, the reasons I would choose the M1A2 SEP:

1. Improved armor package over the already near-invulnerable M1A1.
2. Improved sights, to include a 2nd Gen FLIR, that increases engagement ranges from 4000m to 5000m.
3. Improved magnification on sights, from 10x maximum to 40+x maximum.
4. Increased ammunition payload.
5. Increased range (operational).
6. Increased crew situational awareness due to satellite-tracked vehicle information system.
7. Dual-redundant utility and data buses.
8. Independent thermal sight for the tank commander, enabling him to acquire and engage targets independent of the gunner.
9. Improved automotive performance.
10 "Smart" vehicle, troubleshoots itself and send status to higher headquarters.
11. Improved US Depleted Uranium ammunition.
 
Why

What are the Merkavas drawbacks in a europian area?Not that it matters, after all, we have nothing to look for over there?
 
The Merk is a great tank, don't get me wrong. I think ANY tank designed BY tankers FOR tankers is an exceptional concept. General Tal was on the right track. I've looked at the stats, and the Merk is designed for desert and urban environments. It lacks the mobility of tanks in the Leo/ Challenger/ M1 class. By class, I don't mean levels of effectiveness, I mean purpose. The M1 and Challenger 2E are good ALL AROUND tanks, designed for various environments and types of combat.

I have a question on the Merk, though. The FIRST design, with the uniqe shaped turret, offered EXCELLENT armor protection, as well as significantly reducing the target profile when in the hull down posture, due to the innovative shape of the turret glacis... in the later models, you defeated this by adding armor/stowage on the sides...why?

Still a GREAT tank. The benefits of carrying infantry/own mortar are too numerous to mention.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top