Main Battle Tank Battle

5CAV said:
My first-hand experience is dated. I qualified on a straight M1, the one with the 105mm Sheffield Rifle, not the M1A1 with the 120mm Rheinmetall Smoothbore. At the time (almost 20 years ago), nothing came close to the M1. The annual CAT Shoot was pretty much a contest between Bundeswehr Leopard IIs and US Army M1s.

That being said, there are three basic requirements for a good tank design: Lethality, Mobility and Survivability (in that order -- killing efficiency is highest priority).

Nothing beats the M1A2 in Lethality with its 120mm smoothbore, APFSDS round, and fire control system. Maybe a draw with the Leopard II, since they use a similar gun and similar FCS.

Nothing beats the M1A2 in Mobility -- power to weight ratio is about the same as the Leopard II thanks to its gas-turbine engine (the Leopard II gets to the same number with less armor, so less weight).

Nothing beats the M1A2 in Survivability. I think this is probably a draw with the Challenger (same armor).

Finally, the M1A2 is a COMBAT PROVEN design -- something none of the other contestants can claim. I would put my money on M1A2s and -- MOST IMPORTANT -- their combat-hardened crews.
Click to expand...

Depends on what the defination of combat proven is. Not all these tanks have been tested in Iraq or Kuwait but most of them have seen armed conflicts. Including the Leo. The Challanger was combat proven in the gulf war.

Also the STRV 122 is a big compettetor on the FCS (Fire Control System)
Aswell as the other things as its a upgraded version of the A5 which is considered superiour to the A6 (not by much though, mostly only the electronics).
 
The only tanks which have seen actual fighting is the Merkava, Challenger, Abrams, T-72, T-80, and M60.

And all western tanks have a similar fire control system, they all can hit moving targets at 4000m while moving with a 80 plus percent hit probability.
 
Guy100 said:
Ashes said:
Great links Guy100, especially the clips, first time i've seen film of the Shtora-1 or Arena.
I suppose it makes sense to have an active defensive system like that instead of just adding heavier armour all the time.
What's the latest on Russian tank design, any chance of something like the T-95 going into service in the future?
Click to expand...

I don't know much about the T-95, all I know is that: it's going to be stealth, very very low, it's going to have arena or shtora-1 or both and it's probably going to have a 152mm or a 155mm gun.
I also know that it will have very good crew protection, a new atomatic loading system and that the turret is anmanned, its controlled by the comander and gunner from inside the tank's hull. it is going to have the most powerfull armour and the most powerful shells, which could penetrate the abrams front hull from great ranges. It will probably have a crew of three like all modern Russian tanks (commander, gunner, driver).
I don't know when or if it will go into service any time soon, but probably the T-80UM2 "black eagle" will go into service first, and then the T-95.
The T-80UM2 "black eagle" is also a great tank and is much better then the abrams.
it's unknown what main gun will the T-80UM2 have (125mm or 130mm or 135mm or 145mm or 152mm or 155mm).
The T-80UM2 has the best armour of any MBT today. It will also have the arena or shtora-1 or drozd 2 systems, new atomatic loading system, and a crew of three. the T-80UM2 is 400mm lower than the standard T-80U

The T-95 and the T-80UM2 will have all the latests systems.
the T-80UM2 will probably be avalible to other countries as well, i don't know if the T-95 will be on sale.

Did you watch some other Russian military equipment in action on the site?
Click to expand...

The T-95 is going to have a 152mm gun fed from an unmanned auto-loader turret. It is just a conceptual prototype, and it might not even be fielded because of money issues. If fielded, and acutally works, it will probably be better then other tanks

The T-80UM2 has a 125mm gun, with a bustle mounted auto-loader. Whether it is better then the Abrams, NO know ones. How do you know it will have the best armor, and not just standard RHA? It has Kaktus ERA, do you know anything about that?
 
Very true about the FCS. Although they do set apart from each others in many ways at the same time.

Fighting yes, combat experience is another thing depending on what combat experience referes to.
 
Do you have to be shot at or just the posibility to be shot at?

Ie a enemy really getting a round off on you or a enemy that has the possibility to kill you but you happen to kill that person first?
 
About shot traps on the Merkava, someone mentioned that whenever you look at the Merkava 4 it just looks like one big shot trap waiting to happen... Does anyone know the details of why the bottom of the turret is sloped like that? Not knowing any better I would have thought that any incoming fire that hits that slope would end up slamming right down into the chassis or being directed to a very small point for penetration. Either possibility being, of course, a very bad situations indeed. I mean sure, if a tank shell or an RPG round hits the top of the turret no sweat, slope's perfect there. But not on the bottom...

However, the Israelis are hardly idiots when it comes to tank design, so I'm hoping there's a better explanation. Anybody know?
------------------
 
Hmmm, they usually dont tell you about those things...But most fire dosent hit the turret at that angle. I need to ask someone about that.
 
Ashes said:
About shot traps on the Merkava, someone mentioned that whenever you look at the Merkava 4 it just looks like one big shot trap waiting to happen... Does anyone know the details of why the bottom of the turret is sloped like that? Not knowing any better I would have thought that any incoming fire that hits that slope would end up slamming right down into the chassis or being directed to a very small point for penetration. Either possibility being, of course, a very bad situations indeed. I mean sure, if a tank shell or an RPG round hits the top of the turret no sweat, slope's perfect there. But not on the bottom...

However, the Israelis are hardly idiots when it comes to tank design, so I'm hoping there's a better explanation. Anybody know?
------------------
Click to expand...

Modern sabots don't deflect, they go straight in. Even if they did deflect, the rod would lose too much penetrating power to get through the glacis.

I would assume the "shot trap" area is well armoured enough too.
 
M1A2 SEP for firepower and armor

Chally 2 for armor

Leo 2A6 for firepower


From what I understand the Germans upgraded to L54 to use the new DM53, instead on the DM43.
 
Thought they used the L55?

"About shot traps on the Merkava, someone mentioned that whenever you look at the Merkava 4 it just looks like one big shot trap waiting to happen..."

Did you know that the same thing was said about Leopard 2 A5? And it was a false statement, don't you thing that this is another such false statement? I doub't after the experience of the Israelian forces and battles that they would make such a misstake, I can say to 99.99% that the comment is false!

And as Kozzy said, they don't deflect.
 
AlexKall said:
Thought they used the L55?

"About shot traps on the Merkava, someone mentioned that whenever you look at the Merkava 4 it just looks like one big shot trap waiting to happen..."

Did you know that the same thing was said about Leopard 2 A5? And it was a false statement, don't you thing that this is another such false statement? I doub't after the experience of the Israelian forces and battles that they would make such a misstake, I can say to 99.99% that the comment is false!

And as Kozzy said, they don't deflect.
Click to expand...

Ya I meant L55.
 
Yeah thought you did mean that, but you never know with those germans (hehe, take it as a compliment!) in one moment they use one gun in the next they use another, the 4 and the 5 is close to each others hehe
 
Just a thought, but in battle tanks don't operate by themselves especially American tanks. We operate in groups, though in the past 2 major conflicts with the Abrams we have been out numbered. Its been our communication systems on the A1, training at NTC, volunteer tankers, and most of all vast amount of combat experience thats constantly passed on! Its not always the tank (though that does make a good bit of difference its the operator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top