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

[Hahklallah]

The Leopard 2, a worthy tank that hasn't received much mention lately - Leopard 2 Wikipedia page

[New Federation China]

The People's Liberation Army Ground Force operates and maintains the Type 96 Main Battle Tank as it's main armored vehicle; currently there are one thousand five hundred of these tanks in service with the PLA.

[St George of England]

No the type 10 is more advanced than the type 90.

Wasn't the Type 10 supposed to relegate the Type 90 to a supplementary role and not replace it completely?

[Hahklallah]

You know, if you have the balls to rush a tank, you can always toss a frag down the hatch

[St George of England]

You know, if you have the balls to rush a tank, you can always toss a frag down the hatch

Which is a good tactic, unless there's infantry with the tanks of course...

[Vassenor]

You know, if you have the balls to rush a tank, you can always toss a frag down the hatch

Which is a good tactic, unless there's infantry with the tanks of course...

Or whoever's manning the topside machine gun is actually on the ball.

[Senestrum]

Or the tank crew has like, closed the hatch, because you won't be getting through it without gear good enough to break a particularly tough safe.

[St George of England]

Or the tank crew has like, closed the hatch, because you won't be getting through it without gear good enough to break a particularly tough safe.

Close the hatch? What sorcery is this?

[Satirius]

No the type 10 is more advanced than the type 90.

Wasn't the Type 10 supposed to relegate the Type 90 to a supplementary role and not replace it completely?

Type 10 was supposed to be the only Japanese MBT, but it ended up second only to the K2 in unit cost and the Cold War/justification ended, so they used the Type 90 as a cheaper-yet-still-quite-capable tank to replace the remaining Type 74s.

[New Federation China]

Or the tank crew has like, closed the hatch, because you won't be getting through it without gear good enough to break a particularly tough safe.

Close the hatch? What sorcery is this?

Tanks have hatches that lock down over the compartment the crew is in.

I don't swear by that either.

[St George of England]

Close the hatch? What sorcery is this?

Tanks have hatches that lock down over the compartment the crew is in.

I don't swear by that either.

That was sarcasm...

[New Federation China]

Tanks have hatches that lock down over the compartment the crew is in.

I don't swear by that either.

That was sarcasm...

Sorry?

[Rusikstan]

Wasn't the Type 10 supposed to relegate the Type 90 to a supplementary role and not replace it completely?

Type 10 was supposed to be the only Japanese MBT, but it ended up second only to the K2 in unit cost and the Cold War/justification ended, so they used the Type 90 as a cheaper-yet-still-quite-capable tank to replace the remaining Type 74s.

Sure.

IMHO the type 10 just looks like a type 90 with that faux-slope armor (IDK the real name) like a Leo2A4 and Leo2A6 difference, which is true but the type 10 is still more advanced.

[L3 Communications]

Or the tank crew has like, closed the hatch, because you won't be getting through it without gear good enough to break a particularly tough safe.

M67 in the barrel is enough to fuck that tank's shit up, though. D:

The hard part is getting it in the barrel without behind lit up by the coaxial(s).

[Rusikstan]

Wait haven't we already had this "fuck a tank up" discussion, yes yes we have.

[Dostanuot Loj]

Wasn't the Type 10 supposed to relegate the Type 90 to a supplementary role and not replace it completely?

Type 10 was supposed to be the only Japanese MBT, but it ended up second only to the K2 in unit cost and the Cold War/justification ended, so they used the Type 90 as a cheaper-yet-still-quite-capable tank to replace the remaining Type 74s.

Type 90 was supposed to be the be-all MBT. But cold war ended and they lost justification to replace the Type 74 with it. Instead the started a high-low mix. They decided (Partly due to cost), to carry this over with the Type 10/Type 90 mix. Partly also because the Type 10 is designed very specialised for closed-terrain combat, like cities, and is still second to the Type 90 in open terrain. The plan, as I understand it, is to blanket upgrade both from now, with the Type 10 taking on closed-terrain duties and the ype 90 taking open terrain, replacing the front/rear mix they had with the Type 74.

Effectivly they swapped a cost/age mix with a use mix.

[Khazyan]

Or just drop an Anti-infantry mine in the treads from the top, then shoot the camera. Now you have a crippled, blind tank, and all you have to do is wait for the crew to come out.

[New Federation China]

Or just drop an Anti-infantry mine in the treads from the top, then shoot the camera. Now you have a crippled, blind tank, and all you have to do is wait for the crew to come out.

Assuming you don't get chewed up by the drivers MG...

[Noders]

[Charlotina]

Aside from the fact that almost no modern tanks in existence has a drivers MG due to it's limited arc, it is quite difficult for tanks to see incoming infantry sneaking up on you.

Which is why it is so bloody important that you use infantry and tanks in tandem, mutually supporting one another against their respective weaknesses.

[St George of England]

Aside from the fact that almost no modern tanks in existence has a drivers MG due to it's limited arc, it is quite difficult for tanks to see incoming infantry sneaking up on you.

Which is why it is so bloody important that you use infantry and tanks in tandem, mutually supporting one another against their respective weaknesses.

Could you not, instead, use Tanks in tandem with other vehicles such as IFVs?

[Charlotina]

Could you not, instead, use Tanks in tandem with other vehicles such as IFVs?

IFVs are best used to carry infantry to the battlefield, and support them as they, in their turn, support the tanks.

Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

[L3 Communications]

Which is why it is so bloody important that you use infantry and tanks in tandem, mutually supporting one another against their respective weaknesses.

Could you not, instead, use Tanks in tandem with other vehicles such as IFVs?

No because IFVs have the same weaknesses as tanks with regards to visibility.

[Noders]

Could you not, instead, use Tanks in tandem with other vehicles such as IFVs?

No because IFVs have the same weaknesses as tanks with regards to visibility.

*Infantryman walks in and looks around and walks out*

[Dostanuot Loj]

You guys are excessivly over exagerating the visibility issue on modern AFVs. This isn't the total-crap visibility of Shermans, modern tanks have excellent visibility systems. Not just in terms of periscopes and CITV, but button-up hatches where the hatch literally raises enough for the commander to peer through. Disabling tank visibility is not really an option for infantry, and has not been since Korea. The only way to really do it is to shell the tank with havy artillery, a lot, and you might do it then.

And really, the guy who said to shoot the cameras, that's a dumb idea. These things, cameras and periscopes, are made to take rifle and MG fire. It's common practice if, in the very unlikely event outside of jungles that a tank is swarmed with infantry, it's buddy tank simply sprays it with MG fire. And aside from that, hitting such small optics or areas on a moving vehicle is effectivly impossible without spraying automatic fire. Rumors of the Iraqi's doing it (Which are just that, rumors, and false ones at that), don't count because they don't exist.

And then we get into grenade dischargers and everything. So thi wole infantry sneaking up on tanks is a moot point, and at best fantasy.