Chinese T-98 MBT vs American M1A1
Uncle_Sam said:Same with that also....
OK can u PROVE me that M1 is better then T-90????
http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t-90.htm
Uncle_Sam
Active member
If you have a platoon of M1A2s moving to contact with a platoon of T-90s, with well trained Russian crews. The M1A2s have a great advantage with their highly superior optics, gun, ammo, communications, armor. If you have a platoon of M1A2s vs. a platoon of T-90s doing stuff like we are in Iraq, the tanks are more equal
I would pretty much say so too. In tank vs. tank fights, even most radically refitted russian tanks are well behind western standards and can't cope with them on direct firefight with standardized crews. On all-around battlefield tasks the gap will be more narrow and due to the price and certain robustness difference (M1 just is a plain high tech tool too advanced to be used by all) T90 can be easily favourable however.
For the russian tank tree and development, mike said all necessary. It's strictly two pronged from the end of 60's, with T64/80 and T72/90 lines, of which T72 line takes more from basic T62 design (though I still woudn't say they belong to the same "batch". In that case the conclusion can be nearly made all the way through T54, T34 and BT and subtypes of all these right to the Christie, all being more or less direct successors and developments of each other).
I think the M1A2's Chobham/DU armor gives it a better edge, and the T90's protection only gets on-par with the additional armors (ERA and applique).
There are few MBT vs MBT combat examples of the capability of Russian KE rounds against western tanks (this shapes my decision favoring western armor protection ability), as there are western KE rounds performance against Russian armor (Abrams and Challenger vs T-72 in Gulf War).
Personally, I seriously doubt even an M1A2, Challenger 2, or T-90 would stand a chance against against the Leo2A6's 120mm L/55 firing latest German KE rounds.
The US has been slower in the field of tube-launched guided weapons (like TERM), especially compared to Russian 125 mm developments (current Russian research has brought the technology down to prototype 85mm rounds)
Aside from the Israeli LAHAT, it seems the US is finally developing a (promising) capable 120mm system, currently named MRM-KE
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04l.html
with a proposed range of 7 miles or more....
If you have a platoon of M1A2s moving to contact with a platoon of T-90s, with well trained Russian crews. The M1A2s have a great advantage with their highly superior optics, gun, ammo, communications, armor. If you have a platoon of M1A2s vs. a platoon of T-90s doing stuff like we are in Iraq, the tanks are more equal.
Ok for starters unless Pakistan some how gets an M1A2 these two tanks wont face each other, by the time US tanks face Russian tanks the US will be using something totaly different and Russia will have the T-95. Ok The US currently uses one of the most powerful guns in the world, the 52cal 120mm, second it uses DU and Chobham armor, thrid (but probaly first) the US has highly trained crews and some of the est elecronics to assist them. forth the M1 is faster then the T-90. Ok the T-90 has the most advanced ERA in the world, an anti missle system and electronics equivilent to the origonal M1(remeber the US uses for more advanced stuff) The problam which kills the T-90s is the poor quality of the gun(Russian manufacturing is inifior to the US) that means less propelent and thus a lower velocity, and second is the Autoloader, well how t is arragned in the tank with live ammo in the crew area(I think the autoloader itself is fine the US considered using on in the A2). Ok well now we can say the M1 will win hands dow? No. you can't it depends on the crew and the battle conditions(though the M1 can function any where) and the M1A2 is not invincable. It depends on the crews, take an Iraqi crew and put them in an M1 and put a US crew in a T-72, the end result the T-72 wins, why? well the training of the US crews, as well as been tought about their own equipment they also learn about the enemy tanks(the need to know their strengths and weaknesses in order to take advantage. ok thats combatwise, tech wise M1A2, not even the T-95 will beat the M1A@ in electronics, so that sais it for the T-90.
The Abrams pretty much kicks the ass of the T-90 in everything except being lighter, so it might be able to get to the battlefield faster and more. Plus, the missile defense systems give the T-90 maybe an advantage against modern ATGMs, but the Marine M1A1 has one too, so it's probably not much time before the M1A2 gets one
I would pretty much say so too. In tank vs. tank fights, even most radically refitted russian tanks are well behind western standards and can't cope with them on direct firefight with standardized crews. On all-around battlefield tasks the gap will be more narrow and due to the price and certain robustness difference (M1 just is a plain high tech tool too advanced to be used by all) T90 can be easily favourable however.
For the russian tank tree and development, mike said all necessary. It's strictly two pronged from the end of 60's, with T64/80 and T72/90 lines, of which T72 line takes more from basic T62 design (though I still woudn't say they belong to the same "batch". In that case the conclusion can be nearly made all the way through T54, T34 and BT and subtypes of all these right to the Christie, all being more or less direct successors and developments of each other).
I think the M1A2's Chobham/DU armor gives it a better edge, and the T90's protection only gets on-par with the additional armors (ERA and applique).
There are few MBT vs MBT combat examples of the capability of Russian KE rounds against western tanks (this shapes my decision favoring western armor protection ability), as there are western KE rounds performance against Russian armor (Abrams and Challenger vs T-72 in Gulf War).
Personally, I seriously doubt even an M1A2, Challenger 2, or T-90 would stand a chance against against the Leo2A6's 120mm L/55 firing latest German KE rounds.
The US has been slower in the field of tube-launched guided weapons (like TERM), especially compared to Russian 125 mm developments (current Russian research has brought the technology down to prototype 85mm rounds)
Aside from the Israeli LAHAT, it seems the US is finally developing a (promising) capable 120mm system, currently named MRM-KE
http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04l.html
with a proposed range of 7 miles or more....
If you have a platoon of M1A2s moving to contact with a platoon of T-90s, with well trained Russian crews. The M1A2s have a great advantage with their highly superior optics, gun, ammo, communications, armor. If you have a platoon of M1A2s vs. a platoon of T-90s doing stuff like we are in Iraq, the tanks are more equal.
Ok for starters unless Pakistan some how gets an M1A2 these two tanks wont face each other, by the time US tanks face Russian tanks the US will be using something totaly different and Russia will have the T-95. Ok The US currently uses one of the most powerful guns in the world, the 52cal 120mm, second it uses DU and Chobham armor, thrid (but probaly first) the US has highly trained crews and some of the est elecronics to assist them. forth the M1 is faster then the T-90. Ok the T-90 has the most advanced ERA in the world, an anti missle system and electronics equivilent to the origonal M1(remeber the US uses for more advanced stuff) The problam which kills the T-90s is the poor quality of the gun(Russian manufacturing is inifior to the US) that means less propelent and thus a lower velocity, and second is the Autoloader, well how t is arragned in the tank with live ammo in the crew area(I think the autoloader itself is fine the US considered using on in the A2). Ok well now we can say the M1 will win hands dow? No. you can't it depends on the crew and the battle conditions(though the M1 can function any where) and the M1A2 is not invincable. It depends on the crews, take an Iraqi crew and put them in an M1 and put a US crew in a T-72, the end result the T-72 wins, why? well the training of the US crews, as well as been tought about their own equipment they also learn about the enemy tanks(the need to know their strengths and weaknesses in order to take advantage. ok thats combatwise, tech wise M1A2, not even the T-95 will beat the M1A@ in electronics, so that sais it for the T-90.
The Abrams pretty much kicks the ass of the T-90 in everything except being lighter, so it might be able to get to the battlefield faster and more. Plus, the missile defense systems give the T-90 maybe an advantage against modern ATGMs, but the Marine M1A1 has one too, so it's probably not much time before the M1A2 gets one
FlyingFrog
Active member
FI is not GOD, anyway their ranking of Global maintank TOP 5 (by FI):
1. M1A2 SEP Abrams (System Enhancement Package) / General Dynamics Land Systems Division / USA
2. Merkava Mark IV / The Israel Ordnance Corps / Israel
3. Type 90 / Mitsubishi Heavy Industries / Japan
4. Leopard 2A6 / Krauss-Maffei Wegmann / Germany
5. Challenger 2 / Vickers Defence Systems Division / United Kingdom
http://www.forecast1.com/press/press121.htm
1. M1A2 SEP Abrams (System Enhancement Package) / General Dynamics Land Systems Division / USA
2. Merkava Mark IV / The Israel Ordnance Corps / Israel
3. Type 90 / Mitsubishi Heavy Industries / Japan
4. Leopard 2A6 / Krauss-Maffei Wegmann / Germany
5. Challenger 2 / Vickers Defence Systems Division / United Kingdom
http://www.forecast1.com/press/press121.htm
The problem with the Abrams is the lack of upgrades for it. Basically all that's been done to the original model is adding a big gun and some more advanced sighting equipment. Whereas the Russians seem to put out a new upgrade every few weeks. 1985-1991 the Abrams was at least one of the top 2 tanks, now it might rank 5th. It is a pretty good tank, but it needs some changes to the armor to make it more suitable to current battlefield threats(especially increase the side and rear armor!). It at least has good crew survivability, but if the tank is damaged and unoperable what good is it?
Snauhi sir.....
Where did you find all those burned out Abrams? I have only read about some burned out tanks. Any links? :?
FlyingFrog sir.....
Are the ATGM system on the pictures the new HJ-8E Red Arrow system?
And one thing more - any news about the Chinese new generation IFV programme? Based on the Russian BMP-3 concept?
LINK:
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/armour/ifv2g.asp
T-2000 that tank sent shivers up my spine
Any more pictures? (screen saver nerd)
Another cool tank is the Type 99 amphibian tank :m1:
Uncle_Sam sir....
Gulf War:
One more thing about the US tanks - Well the tanks are great no question about that one. But the ammunition that your military industrial complex government are using kills your own soldiers and other people even long after they have burned out an T-72. It might also be mentioned that the versions these armies fielded were, in either case, at least 30 years out of date at the time, had not been significantly upgraded, were firing inferior ammunition (often with steel penetrators and half-charges of propellant), and they were faced with well-equipped forces using the most up-to-date cutting-edge equipment. The crews and soldiers that have been killed long after Gulf War. One cannot help feeling sorry for those guys.
Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
Where did you find all those burned out Abrams? I have only read about some burned out tanks. Any links? :?
FlyingFrog sir.....
Are the ATGM system on the pictures the new HJ-8E Red Arrow system?
And one thing more - any news about the Chinese new generation IFV programme? Based on the Russian BMP-3 concept?
LINK:
http://www.sinodefence.com/army/armour/ifv2g.asp
T-2000 that tank sent shivers up my spine
Any more pictures? (screen saver nerd)
Another cool tank is the Type 99 amphibian tank :m1:
Uncle_Sam sir....
Gulf War:
One more thing about the US tanks - Well the tanks are great no question about that one. But the ammunition that your military industrial complex government are using kills your own soldiers and other people even long after they have burned out an T-72. It might also be mentioned that the versions these armies fielded were, in either case, at least 30 years out of date at the time, had not been significantly upgraded, were firing inferior ammunition (often with steel penetrators and half-charges of propellant), and they were faced with well-equipped forces using the most up-to-date cutting-edge equipment. The crews and soldiers that have been killed long after Gulf War. One cannot help feeling sorry for those guys.
Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
FlyingFrog
Active member
Are the ATGM system on the pictures the new HJ-8E Red Arrow system?
Sir Doc,
No it is HJ-73
Yeah http://www.sinodefence.com is a source which is good but not very quickly updated.
And a problem with Chinese govenment is that they normally releases info about their key weapons only when they are deployed in batches :evil: So we can only get a bit by bit info from web :lol:
FlyingFrog
Active member
Oh yeah maybe you mean this one, it is indeed HJ-8E
And there is just too few pics of T-2000 at this moment.
While if you can read Chinese, here is a big collection of Chinese tanks, connection speed maybe not that fast though cuz it is in China
http://pic.tiexue.net/dirs.aspx?page=1&dirid=2290
Click to see:
T-99 upgrated version:
http://pic.tiexue.net/picinfo.aspx?id=60846
T-99 goes water in:
http://pic.tiexue.net/picinfo.aspx?id=25427
And there is just too few pics of T-2000 at this moment.
While if you can read Chinese, here is a big collection of Chinese tanks, connection speed maybe not that fast though cuz it is in China
http://pic.tiexue.net/dirs.aspx?page=1&dirid=2290
Click to see:
T-99 upgrated version:
http://pic.tiexue.net/picinfo.aspx?id=60846
T-99 goes water in:
http://pic.tiexue.net/picinfo.aspx?id=25427
FlyingFrog
Active member
@Uncle_Sam:
I guess you are right, it is good suggesion
But this time please excuse me cuz I just found some more T-2000 pictures for Sir DOC.S from Sweden
T-2000
Click here, there are more T-2000 pictures:
http://pic.tiexue.net/dirs.aspx?page=1&dirid=2291
I guess you are right, it is good suggesion
But this time please excuse me cuz I just found some more T-2000 pictures for Sir DOC.S from Sweden
T-2000
Click here, there are more T-2000 pictures:
http://pic.tiexue.net/dirs.aspx?page=1&dirid=2291
Thanks FlyingFrog
Yeah I did suspect that it was the HJ-8E ATGM - Well I don´t want to be in a tank when that rascal fires in anger. Maby if I would be in a T-90M with Shtora-1 defensive aids suite or the Type 98 with active self defense system mounted on the turret roof. The LWR (Laser Warning Receiver) Then you have a little chance of survival. In a tank without Shtora? "Well then I just abondon the tank if I am facing a couple of HJ-8E groups in the terrain." :lol:
These pictures will be on my screen for a while :lol:
Dubble thanks FlyingFrog!
Can´t help it.... Chines and Russian - Ukraine armour is like candy for my eyes
"It´s sick...." Machines for mass destruction and I am dreaming of them. :lol: On my planet there would be a loot of fields of tanks to walk around, polish and admire. I don't care what people think about these machines or nations in general. I care about well done designs. As people that have older cars from the 50-60s that they polish and admire. My thing is foreign tanks and equipment.
Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
Yeah I did suspect that it was the HJ-8E ATGM - Well I don´t want to be in a tank when that rascal fires in anger. Maby if I would be in a T-90M with Shtora-1 defensive aids suite or the Type 98 with active self defense system mounted on the turret roof. The LWR (Laser Warning Receiver) Then you have a little chance of survival. In a tank without Shtora? "Well then I just abondon the tank if I am facing a couple of HJ-8E groups in the terrain." :lol:
These pictures will be on my screen for a while :lol:
Dubble thanks FlyingFrog!
Can´t help it.... Chines and Russian - Ukraine armour is like candy for my eyes
"It´s sick...." Machines for mass destruction and I am dreaming of them. :lol: On my planet there would be a loot of fields of tanks to walk around, polish and admire. I don't care what people think about these machines or nations in general. I care about well done designs. As people that have older cars from the 50-60s that they polish and admire. My thing is foreign tanks and equipment. Cheers:
Doc.S
:viking:
Big_Z
MilForum Recon
I know the M1 cannon was designed in Germany i thought it was made there too. The M1 is an old ass tank, you guys are trying to compare it to brand new tanks. Americas new tank will be rolling out in the not to far future. No other current tank has come even close to proving itself like the M1. And wow im shocked you mean to say that an M1 has been destroyed?!?!?! Pretty much any tank will be destroyed if you hit it under the turrent from the side like the pcitures you showed. In desert storm I believe Iraq lost somthing around 3700 tanks and we lost 4, and i know one of them the driver had a siezure and it rolled off a cliff killing the entire crew. Also the Abrams uses a 1500 hp turbine engine pretty much all other tanks use diesels. Its the most powerful as well, its top speed is 45 mph only because anything fater then that and the tracks fall off. And to the guy who said Russia is constantly updating their tanks and America rarely updates, maybe its because we get the updates right the first time. The tank even being considered as the best in the 21st century from the 1970s is pretty impressive..... You guys are talking about tanks no older then the 90s some not even in production.
"The M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). The first M1 tank was produced in 1978, the M1A1 in 1985 and the M1A2 in 1986."
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/abrams/index.html
"The M1A1/2 Abrams main battle tank is manufactured by General Dynamics Land Systems (GDLS). The first M1 tank was produced in 1978, the M1A1 in 1985 and the M1A2 in 1986."
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/abrams/index.html
Uncle_Sam said:
No Russias military economy is rising now you all think it is like in 1991, but its not... and Sam have u ever wondered how much USA is wasting only on the war ,and then how much on repairs of the armoured vechicels that have been damedge, because its not cheap to repear a M1, and then how much money USA is wasting on those new projects..