Leo 2/Abrams vs. Challenger 2

Leopard 2/Abrams vs. Challenger 2

  • Leopard 2/Abrams

    Votes: 16 76.2%

  • Challenger 2

    Votes: 5 23.8%
  • Total voters
    21
  • Poll closed .
OK, here, US tank crew in an Abrams/Leopard 2 against a US tank crew in a Challenger 2, who survives? Who fries?
 
Insight said:
Because that would make the thread even more inane than it already is. The whole discussion is based in school boy fantasy and the overly romantic notions of military equipment propogated through cheap novels and movies. It misses the essence of what turn a bunch of thugs with heavy equipment into a fighting force.
Click to expand...

School boy fantasy? If you don't like the thread then dont read it nor reply to it. I bet you're just posting to make a stir in this thread, really mature!
 
major liability said:
T-90? I thought it was a failure next to its western counterparts? The only Russian tanks I'd consider for the top slot are the T-80UM2 Black Eagle and T-95, but there's not enough data available on either to issue a proper judgement.

Oh well. If it's going to be a tie, why not include the Challenger 2? Most advanced armor ever.
Click to expand...

No, I was talking about the Japanese-made Type 90.
 
Damien435 said:
OK, here, US tank crew in an Abrams/Leopard 2 against a US tank crew in a Challenger 2, who survives? Who fries?
Click to expand...

Which ever gets the shot off first. The crew in the M1A2 may be able to do this faster with the x50 FLIR.

You must remember that tanks don't fight alone, they always fight in at least platoons
 
Koz said:
Which ever gets the shot off first. The crew in the M1A2 may be able to do this faster with the x50 FLIR.
Click to expand...
What's the maximum zoom on the Challenger IIE's thermal imagers?
 
Koz said:
Which ever gets the shot off first. The crew in the M1A2 may be able to do this faster with the x50 FLIR.

You must remember that tanks don't fight alone, they always fight in at least platoons
Click to expand...

Or they try to.
 
Doug97 said:
What's the maximum zoom on the Challenger IIE's thermal imagers?
Click to expand...

The TOGS II on the Challenger 2 can optical zoom x4 and x11.5. The M1A2SEP can x3 and x10 optical zoom but with the x50 digital zoom. The digital zoom gives a much higher resolution, making IDing targets faster.
 
No one really knows, during Desert Storm some Abrams recorded kills from distances that were supposed to be twice that of their true kill range.
 
AlexKall said:
School boy fantasy? If you don't like the thread then dont read it nor reply to it. I bet you're just posting to make a stir in this thread, really mature!
Click to expand...

Not at all. I'm bothered by the notion that military operations can be simplified down to some objective calculus of relative technological advantage. It diminishes what we do. Wars are fought by professionals for a reason. If it was merely a matter of "the best widget wins", then it would be a relatively simple endevour that is very easy to predict.

In light of the young minds that frequent this board, I see a small obligation to inject some reality into a very serious business. I do think that is mature, and I'm not being sarcastic which would be in violation of the forum rules, IIRC. (not that it's my place to say either way, just making an observation).
 
Insight said:
Not at all. I'm bothered by the notion that military operations can be simplified down to some objective calculus of relative technological advantage. It diminishes what we do. Wars are fought by professionals for a reason. If it was merely a matter of "the best widget wins", then it would be a relatively simple endevour that is very easy to predict.

In light of the young minds that frequent this board, I see a small obligation to inject some reality into a very serious business. I do think that is mature, and I'm not being sarcastic which would be in violation of the forum rules, IIRC. (not that it's my place to say either way, just making an observation).
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure everyone here knows that war is fougt not by the actual tank but the persons in it, but we're not talking about war we're talking of the lone tanks ability, tech vise against each other regardless of human ability from the different countries, to count in the human ability is imposible to compare and that is the reason why you dont take that into count, get it? :-D
 
Insight said:
Not at all. I'm bothered by the notion that military operations can be simplified down to some objective calculus of relative technological advantage. It diminishes what we do. Wars are fought by professionals for a reason. If it was merely a matter of "the best widget wins", then it would be a relatively simple endevour that is very easy to predict.
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone has or would argue the opposite.

That said, which is the best tank?
 
zander_0633 said:
Any idea How far can both tanks shoot?
Click to expand...

The M1A1's fire control system stops calculating at 4km. You can shoot farther with the auxilary sight though, you need to stationary and it takes a bit of time.

The Challenger 1 made a kill at 5100m with HESH. It was stationary on a stationary target. They also had a fair bit of time to aim.

Well, I think even the best tank crews can do a fair bit of damage if they use T-62s!
Click to expand...
This is true. In Sweden during war games new recruits in Strv-122s get clobbered by experienced troops using Centurions.
 
If you got that from me and i said 122 i should have said 121 (which is a slightly upgraded A4) 121 was taking over for the centurion

And it was quite a seious blow for those conscripts, as the centurion crew (instructors) used supperiour tactics, got behind them and took them out at the weaker rear of all tanks.
 
Last edited:
One of the most important aspects of Modern Tank Warfare is mobility.

Challenger II: Road speed 56 km/h (37 mph)
Leopard 2a6: 70 km/h road (43.5 mph), 50 km/h off-road (31 mph)
M1a2 Abrams: 67 km/h (41.5 mph)

What the Challenger II lacks is speed, otherwise its an absolutely great tank.
 
Seth.....If you read another thread on ths page called the Challenger you would not have to ask that question as it is all set out for, including cut away drawings
 
180 Challenger tanks were deployed to Saudi Arabia for the [persian] Gulf War. The Challenger 1 claimed 300 kills against armoured vehicles for no losses. It also has the distinction of the longest tank-to-tank kill in military history, destroying an Iraqi tank at a range of 2.5 miles (4 km).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top