Your Nation's Main Battle Tank (No Mechs) [Part 1]

[Mikedor]

The RPG-29 is an advanced rocket launcher fielded by Russia, the RPG-7 used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan is unable to penetrate the advanced British tank's armor.

The little buggers could probably count their RPG-29 stockpile on one hand. Point still stands 80 M1 Abrams tanks have been lost in Iraq. 3 Challenger 2s have been lost in Iraq.

1 to another Challenger 2.

The other two, going by what I've found away from wikipedia, were damaged but repaired.

And the loss of that single Chally 2 proves that HESH is still viable provided it hits the open turret hatch

[Krakadarek]

The RPG-29 is an advanced rocket launcher fielded by Russia, the RPG-7 used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan is unable to penetrate the advanced British tank's armor.

The little buggers could probably count their RPG-29 stockpile on one hand. Point still stands 80 M1 Abrams tanks have been lost in Iraq. 3 Challenger 2s have been lost in Iraq.

1 to another Challenger 2.

The other two, going by what I've found away from wikipedia, were damaged but repaired.

And the loss of that single Chally 2 proves that HESH is still viable provided it hits the open turret hatch

Wich is verry rare in battle aye?

[Krakadarek]

I posed an interesting question here!
viewtopic.php?f=20&t=68765&start=50

quote="Schwabenreich";p="3141522"]

What if saddam had won the 1st gulf war?

Comments?

No idea really, pehaps a lot more dead kurds?

Well he would controll 20% of the worlds oil so.......

I mean the war of 1991!

Bump!

Despite being an Australia I really have very little knowledge of that war so sorry.. I can't provide much input earnestly![/quote]

[The Anglo-Saxon Empire]

The RPG-29 is an advanced rocket launcher fielded by Russia, the RPG-7 used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan is unable to penetrate the advanced British tank's armor.

The little buggers could probably count their RPG-29 stockpile on one hand. Point still stands 80 M1 Abrams tanks have been lost in Iraq. 3 Challenger 2s have been lost in Iraq.

1 to another Challenger 2.

The other two, going by what I've found away from wikipedia, were damaged but repaired.

And the loss of that single Chally 2 proves that HESH is still viable provided it hits the open turret hatch

And that torpedoes are viable if they hit the open thermal exhaust port.

Still, with HESH fired from a rifled gun are amazingly accurate, and hitting an open turret hatch isn't that hard, it is still rather difficult, but no where near pure luck, or nearly impossible.

[Mikedor]

The RPG-29 is an advanced rocket launcher fielded by Russia, the RPG-7 used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan is unable to penetrate the advanced British tank's armor.

The little buggers could probably count their RPG-29 stockpile on one hand. Point still stands 80 M1 Abrams tanks have been lost in Iraq. 3 Challenger 2s have been lost in Iraq.

1 to another Challenger 2.

The other two, going by what I've found away from wikipedia, were damaged but repaired.

And the loss of that single Chally 2 proves that HESH is still viable provided it hits the open turret hatch

And that torpedoes are viable if they hit the open thermal exhaust port.

Still, with HESH fired from a rifled gun are amazingly accurate, and hitting an open turret hatch isn't that hard, it is still rather difficult, but no where near pure luck, or nearly impossible.

Especially as nearly every child has used an X-box/Playstation controller at some point, which is very very similar to the aiming controls of a Chally 2 and Abrams.

[Strykla]

Why am I calling bull**** on that?

On what?

The Abrams thing. [Please do not assume it is because I believe the thing is invincible; it simply isn't.]

To say the Abrams is "invincible" is silly, not tank is "invincible". As for the statistic, it seems all scenarios where an M1A1/2 was put out of action were lumped together. Some of these were towed back and returned to service, some could not be towed back and were scorched up by their crews, and most of these were mobility kills. I asked how many crew were killed because in all likelihood few crew were killed or seriously wounded in proportion to the number of tanks put out of action. Even when knocked out, one thing the Abrams does well is protect its crews. You see burned out Abrams hit by IEDs with the crew pushing their way out with a fire extinguisher and running away from the hulk, feeling shaken up and pissed off.

Most Abrams tanks were lost due to friendly fire, actually.

I have been wondering why the Abrams doesn't use double-penetrating (DP) rounds? The ones that can defeat explosive reactive armor. I read that the Americans use a missile called the Javelin, and that has a double penetration warhead, so why can't the M1A1 or M1A2 use a 120mm DP shell?

It's called a tandem warhead. The tandem charge it designed to defeat reactive armor, and it's actually quite bulky on the Javelin. The 120mm APFSDS does just fine. The 120mm HEAT would be too big to fit a tandem charge on it.

[Strykla]

The RPG-29 is an advanced rocket launcher fielded by Russia, the RPG-7 used by insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan is unable to penetrate the advanced British tank's armor.

The little buggers could probably count their RPG-29 stockpile on one hand. Point still stands 80 M1 Abrams tanks have been lost in Iraq. 3 Challenger 2s have been lost in Iraq.

1 to another Challenger 2.

The other two, going by what I've found away from wikipedia, were damaged but repaired.

And the loss of that single Chally 2 proves that HESH is still viable provided it hits the open turret hatch

And that torpedoes are viable if they hit the open thermal exhaust port.

Still, with HESH fired from a rifled gun are amazingly accurate, and hitting an open turret hatch isn't that hard, it is still rather difficult, but no where near pure luck, or nearly impossible.

Rifling works on paper in big guns, but not in practice. The grooves wear down after a few shots. Most modern rounds are fin-stabilized. The 120mm Rheinmetall gun is smoothbore, and considered one of the best guns.

[Dostanuot Loj]

The above two pages of modern tank discussion is pretty fail.

For one, the western world is not the world leader in tank design or development anymore. The Abrams is a child of the 1970s, and very much suffers today because of this. The heaviest development, and most interesting area of the world for the tank right now is Asia. And that is where we are seeing, and will continue to see, the major developments. It should be telling that in a decade, South Korea has made up more then three decades on western tank development, and continues to make gains. Japan is not far behind, nor is Turkey or China.

LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete. Its hay day was in 1991. At this point all modern tanks are protected against it. But it, exemplified by the M829A3 for example, is still more then effective against anything coming out of Russia, or any former Soviet tanks, and this includes the T-90 (Which really is worthless), which are all that any western force (Especially the US) expects to fight. The US doesn't need better rounds, it will never fight anyone with better tanks, at least for now.

So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

So yea, the discussion is lulzy.

[Varayusha]

(snippage)
LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete.
(more snippage)
So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

In your opinion, then, what would be filling the role of the more-advanced anti-armor round?

[Dostanuot Loj]

(snippage)
LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete.
(more snippage)
So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

In your opinion, then, what would be filling the role of the more-advanced anti-armor round?

KSTAM, LAHAT, so on.

[Ramsetia]

(snippage)
LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete.
(more snippage)
So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

In your opinion, then, what would be filling the role of the more-advanced anti-armor round?

KSTAM, LAHAT, so on.

And what do those acronyms stand for, and how do they work, for the lay(wo)men in the audience?

[Dostanuot Loj]

(snippage)
LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete.
(more snippage)
So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

In your opinion, then, what would be filling the role of the more-advanced anti-armor round?

KSTAM, LAHAT, so on.

And what do those acronyms stand for, and how do they work, for the lay(wo)men in the audience?

KSTAM is a top attack submunition, and LAHAT is a gun launched ATGM.

Really, with the frontal arc of modern MBTs so well protected, and limits on LRP penetration rapidly being reached, the day of the APFSDS is over. And the day of the smoothbore is coming to an end with newer slip rings and full bore rifling removing velocity, wear, and spin issues from rounds that don't need to be spun.

[Yellow Zone 20-A]

(snippage)
LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete.
(more snippage)
So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

In your opinion, then, what would be filling the role of the more-advanced anti-armor round?

KSTAM, LAHAT, so on.

And what do those acronyms stand for, and how do they work, for the lay(wo)men in the audience?

KSTAM is a top attack submunition, and LAHAT is a gun launched ATGM.

Really, with the frontal arc of modern MBTs so well protected, and limits on LRP penetration rapidly being reached, the day of the APFSDS is over. And the day of the smoothbore is coming to an end with newer slip rings and full bore rifling removing velocity, wear, and spin issues from rounds that don't need to be spun.

Than we fully agree!

[Anemos Major]

KSTAM is a top attack submunition, and LAHAT is a gun launched ATGM.

Really, with the frontal arc of modern MBTs so well protected, and limits on LRP penetration rapidly being reached, the day of the APFSDS is over. And the day of the smoothbore is coming to an end with newer slip rings and full bore rifling removing velocity, wear, and spin issues from rounds that don't need to be spun.

Fool children. My tanks have no smoke dischargers; they have Javelins.

And the main gun is a four tube Eryx launcher.

This is why we never lose.

[Anemos Major]

I wonder, how easy would naval based anti-ship missiles be converted to tank-based anti-tank missiles?

Pointless. The former uses different systems for different objectives; after all, if you hit the hull of a tank, it won't sink, will it?

[Wikipedia and Universe]

I have been wondering why the Abrams doesn't use double-penetrating (DP) rounds? The ones that can defeat explosive reactive armor. I read that the Americans use a missile called the Javelin, and that has a double penetration warhead, so why can't the M1A1 or M1A2 use a 120mm DP shell?

It's called a tandem warhead. The tandem charge it designed to defeat reactive armor, and it's actually quite bulky on the Javelin. The 120mm APFSDS does just fine. The 120mm HEAT would be too big to fit a tandem charge on it.

Concerning tandem warheads, what Strykla said. Please, PLEASE from now on refer to them as tandem charges or tandem warheads; "double-penetrating" has NOTHING to do with tanks, in fact it has a VERY different context, which I will not discuss here. I saw you have said before that English is your second language, so I understand what you meant, but in polite conversation others might think you are deliberately attempting to make a lewd joke. Seeing as you said you were 21 in other threads, you are more than old enough to look up to what "double-penetrating" actually refers.

[Satirius]

I wonder, how easy would naval based anti-ship missiles be converted to tank-based anti-tank missiles?

Absolute overkill mirite

Tbh just use a top-attack and you'll do fine, or just use Paveways

[Strykla]

I wonder, how easy would naval based anti-ship missiles be converted to tank-based anti-tank missiles?

Absolute overkill mirite

Tbh just use a top-attack and you'll do fine, or just use Paveways

You're right. AS missiles shouldn't be used in AT ways.

[New Caldaris]

I have been wondering why the Abrams doesn't use double-penetrating (DP) rounds? The ones that can defeat explosive reactive armor. I read that the Americans use a missile called the Javelin, and that has a double penetration warhead, so why can't the M1A1 or M1A2 use a 120mm DP shell?

Can i Double Penetrate you with my rounds?

I apologize for not contributing anything with this post.

[Satirius]

So I decided to use Wiesel AWC for my light tank, self-propelled mortar, TD, SPAAG, and arty spotter roles

The really lol part is that I'm probably using only a fourth of the Wiesel's variant's irl

[Albrante]

The above two pages of modern tank discussion is pretty fail.

For one, the western world is not the world leader in tank design or development anymore. The Abrams is a child of the 1970s, and very much suffers today because of this. The heaviest development, and most interesting area of the world for the tank right now is Asia. And that is where we are seeing, and will continue to see, the major developments. It should be telling that in a decade, South Korea has made up more then three decades on western tank development, and continues to make gains. Japan is not far behind, nor is Turkey or China.

LRP, aka APFSDS to the rest of you, is old tech, and getting obsolete. Its hay day was in 1991. At this point all modern tanks are protected against it. But it, exemplified by the M829A3 for example, is still more then effective against anything coming out of Russia, or any former Soviet tanks, and this includes the T-90 (Which really is worthless), which are all that any western force (Especially the US) expects to fight. The US doesn't need better rounds, it will never fight anyone with better tanks, at least for now.

So really, this discussion about the Abrams being the best, or the Chally, and over HESH and LRP is pretty lulzy, because it's based on obsolete ideas and the past. We would be having this same discussion in 1936, except it would be the Soviets, British and French we would be talking about, and the US and Germany would be as ignored as Asia is now. And we'd be comparing HE to solid AP, with APC and APCBC pretty much ignored.

So yea, the discussion is lulzy.

Its easy to catch up on technology in the information age, just because Asian nations have caught up with the west doesn't mean much. No if they were to develop a tank that was miles ahead of the M1A1 and CR2 then it would be worth noting.
From a quick bit of research on the K2 Black Panther, it doesn't seem much different than the current western models, which is unremarkable considering Korea is good friends with western nations.
Also it was my understanding that the British, French and Russian tanks in '39 were better than their counterparts, just that their doctrine and use was inferior to the Nazis

[Mewsland]

It's the FT Mewsland's equivalent of a tank.


Voyager-class starship for the win.

[Ramsetia]

It's the FT Mewsland's equivalent of a tank.


Voyager-class starship for the win.

Ahem, I direct you here.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Ess ... nutes.html
tl;dr anything star-trek < anything else sci-fi (specifically Star Wars)

Yes. Star destroyers are big.

But guild Heighliners are bigger. How many other starships can you have a fully-blown tank battle on?

[Mewsland]

The picture is the only relation the ship has to Star Trek. The stats are totally different. For one thing, the name of the ship type isn't even the same. In canon Star Trek, that's a Constitution-class. For Mewsland, it's a Voyager-class.

[Albrante]

It's the FT Mewsland's equivalent of a tank.


Voyager-class starship for the win.

Ahem, I direct you here.
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Ess ... nutes.html
tl;dr anything star-trek < anything else sci-fi (specifically Star Wars)

Yes. Star destroyers are big.

But guild Heighliners are bigger. How many other starships can you have a fully-blown tank battle on?

And for ground engagements