It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Modern Day Tanks

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 06:28 AM
link   
here is a link to armour levels

members.tripod.com...




posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 07:04 AM
link   
Interesting site...here is the Type-99/98G in comparison to western tanks.. Interestingly enough the Type-99 is armored well enough to the level where it is around as high as the T-90. HEAT rounds will be a problem, but engineers are probably trying to improve the tank now.


Armor in mm:

Chinese Type-99 w/ERA
KE - Turret: 845 Glacis: 450-630
HEAT - Turret: 1070 Glacis: 560-1300

T-90M
KE - Turret: 850
HEAT - Turret: 1900

M1A2 SEP
KE - Turret: 940-960 Glacis:560-590 Lower front hull:580-650
HEAT - Turret: 1320-1620 Glacis:510-1050 Lower front hull:800-970

Challenger 2
KE- Turret: 920-960 Glacis:660 Lower front hull: 590
Turret: 1450-1700 Glacis:1000 Lower front hull: 860

Arjun (Has significantly less armor than thought,around T-80's armor.)
KE - Turret: 500-570 Glacis: 410
HEAT - Turret: 650-830 Glacis:730


Gun Penetration in mm:

Chinese (Type-98) 125mm 640mm at 2km

Russian (T-90M, 2004) 125mm BM-44M tungsten 660mm at 2km

Russian (T-72, 1980s) 125mm BM-29 DU 450mm at 2km

Indian (Arjun, older 1997 gun) T-2A 125mm tungsten 500mm at 2km

German (Leopard 2A5/6, 2001) 120mm/L55 DM-53 810mm at 2km

UK (Challenger 2, HESH round) Charm-3 L-27 120mm DU 720mm at 2km

US (M1A1/A2) M829A3 120mm DU 960mm at 2km (2000s)

From this you can see that the Western ammunition are superior, especially the guns in the M1A1/A2, Challenger 2 and Leopard 2A5/6. In combat, my guess is that for the western tanks above, the chance of a 1 shot kill against a T-90 or Type-98 would be around 90-95%, while for a T-90 or Type-98 to kill one of the western tanks above, the chance would be around 60-70%. All tanks' armor are rougly equal, western ones being slightly better, but with ammunition, it becomes apparent that the western guns and ammunition are better, with more penetration ability. I am waiting for the DU round for the Type-98 to be tested, even with an additional 150mm of penetration, that would already be a lot, matching some of the western guns' penetration.


[edit on 15/6/05 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 07:52 AM
link   
i dont think china should use DU. think about where they gonna use them... In our ownbackyard. i dont want some little chinese kids getting posined by DU shells.

High quailty tungsten rounds can match DU rounds in penetation(except that crazy american one)

German 120mm/L55 DM-53 810mm at 2km (2001)
German 120mm DM-53 tungsten 730mm at 2km (1996)
US M829A3 120mm DU 960mm at 2km (200x)
UK Charm-3 L-27 APFSDS 120mm DU 720mm at 2km (1998)
US M829A2 120mm DU 730mm at 2km (1994)
UK L-28 120mm APFSDS 770mm at 2km (200X)

also the chinese rounds are at a disadvantage becuase they are shorter.(because of that shiet russian style autoloader)



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:07 AM
link   
Why is the Merkava’s barrel like 3 feet long? Is there an advantage in having a long or medium size barrel compared to a short one?



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 08:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Why is the Merkava’s barrel like 3 feet long? Is there an advantage in having a long or medium size barrel compared to a short one?


it looks like its three feet long in the pic but its not, its just like the Leopard 2 tank with the added front armor that makes the gun look too short for the tank.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 09:08 AM
link   
Wow good dicussion is coming out of this! Once I have more time, I'll be adding to this thread.



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
Why is the Merkava’s barrel like 3 feet long? Is there an advantage in having a long or medium size barrel compared to a short one?


If we are talking about guns, then a longer barrel means a better accuracy at range. For tank guns though, I am seriously unsure, but I believe it has the same effect.

Btw chinawhite, DU rounds are actually quite safe compared to other ammunition, just that it is still uranium, thats why people think that it is dangerous. Of course, inhailing uranium particles are dangerous, but that is a problem with all other ammuntion too. Other than that, DU emits less radiation than a banana.


So, DU penetrators are actually quite safe, and with proper handling, there will be little or no problems with them.

Another question, what is the Ariete? I need more information on the tank, how well does it fare against other tanks etc. For now, I don't even know where that tank comes from
Could any tank experts enlight me on this tank?

[edit on 15/6/05 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:33 AM
link   
A Challenger 2 with British electric reactive armour would be nearly invincible!



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 11:36 AM
link   
If you need information... I surely recommend that you try to look what google has to offer... (I'am no tank specialict, only aircrafts)... But look up what you find about my favourite, the "Bradley" and please tell me then what you think of it...



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 12:03 PM
link   
M2 Bradley? Here:

M2A2/A3 Bradley
KE protection - Glacis: 130 Front turret: 100-110
HEAT protection - Glacis: 150 Front turret: 126

It is relatively well armored compared to most other APCs/IFVs. Still quite vunerable to RPGs from all sides though.

For me, I prefer the BMP-3. Thats just me, I'm pro russian
.It has a crew of 3, can carry up to 7 passengers, a 100mm rifled gun, especially good against other IFV/APCs, a 30mm cannon, a laser rangefinder, and can carry the AT-10 found usually on Russian tanks. Front armor protection is about 100mm against both HEAT and KE, has 6 smoke launchers.

It weighs 18 tons compared to the 30 ton Bradley, has a max road speed of 70 km/h, swim speed of 10 km/h, giving it a hp to weight power of 26hp/t, having a better off road and amphibious capability than the Bradley. There are many other IFVs, but google yourself if you want to find them


[edit on 15/6/05 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
XK2 Korean Future Main Battle Tank

The XK2 Main Battle Tank is a next generation of main battle tank to replace the older K1 and American M47/M48 tanks. It will be fitted with German MTU 1500 hp Europowerpack for the engine, and a new 120mm cannon with autoloader. New armor and sensor system are intended to be comparable to M1A2 and LeClerc

The Korean Future Main Battle Tank is under development as a indigenous tank to meet 21C digital battle field on the basis of development experiences of K1 and K1A1 tank. Important considerations in the tank are battle management system, automatic tracking system, automatic ammuition loading system, active defense system (soft-kill and hard-kill), navigation system, semi-active suspension unit, NBC overpressure system etc. The tank will be the main battle tank of the highest technical level all over the world.

Illustration



posted on Jun, 15 2005 @ 04:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
XK2 Korean Future Main Battle Tank


Illustration


that looks just like the M1a2 Abrams tank.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 12:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by NWguy83
XK2 Korean Future Main Battle Tank

It will be fitted with German MTU 1500 hp Europowerpack for the engine, and a new 120mm cannon with autoloader.
Illustration


Funny, half the world´s MBTs seem to run on german or german-inspired engines. Apart from the obvious countries with Leo1 and Leo2 fleet, Indias Arjun has an MTU engine, chinese type 98´s is derived from one, Merkava 4s engine is basically an MTU 883 only assembled together by General Dynamics (thus the name GD 883), and even the new Challenger 2 model E is switching to the MTU Europowerpack....

Following this trend you could capture the enemies mechanics and put them to maintenance work on your own tanks



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 01:13 AM
link   
lol good idea.

german engineering




posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 01:21 AM
link   

Originally posted by W4rl0rD

Btw chinawhite, DU rounds are actually quite safe compared to other ammunition, just that it is still uranium, thats why people think that it is dangerous. Of course, inhailing uranium particles are dangerous, but that is a problem with all other ammuntion too. Other than that, DU emits less radiation than a banana.


So, DU penetrators are actually quite safe, and with proper handling, there will be little or no problems with them.

[edit on 15/6/05 by W4rl0rD]


if DU is so safe why are those irais complaing about on the news about radioatoin sickness.


what type is this. i throught urainium had a half-life of over 4.5billioin years
www.americaheldhostile.com...
www.informationclearinghouse.info...
www.truthout.org...



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 03:00 AM
link   
The DU rounds are only safe unit they melt of burn and contaminate the air and ground with radiated particles, I think.

Also can’t forget the one and only tank that use originality for its engine the M1 Abrams with its Turbine Engine.



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 03:22 AM
link   
actually the russian t-80 also uses a gas turbine engine



posted on Jun, 16 2005 @ 03:45 PM
link   
Using gas engines are expensive, and they also guzzle a lot of gas. That was one of the problems with the Abrams, but it had the best hp to weight ratio, that of 29hp/ton, the same as the Leopard 2.

As for the XK2, I think it will be at least on par with the T-90s that the North Koreans are using. It seems to have quite a few advanced fire control systems and digitalized optics.

On German engineering, they have been making the world's best tanks from WWII onwards. They still manufacture a lot of tank components, like the gun on both the Chally 2 and M1A1/2, and the engines on most of the tanks.

[edit on 16/6/05 by W4rl0rD]



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 12:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by W4rl0rD

Arjun (Has significantly less armor than thought,around T-80's armor.)
KE - Turret: 500-570 Glacis: 410
HEAT - Turret: 650-830 Glacis:730



Indian (Arjun, older 1997 gun) T-2A 125mm tungsten 500mm at 2km


omg... i never saw that one.. stealth spy mentioned some indian Chobham type armour that was ment to be superior to the t-98/G armour.

lol its almost on par with a t-59D

Chinese Type-59D w/ERA

vs KE (mm)
Turret: 200-520
Glacis: 200-490

vs CE (mm)
Turret: 200-800
Glacis: 200-600



posted on Jun, 17 2005 @ 01:01 AM
link   

Originally posted by W4rl0rD

For me, I prefer the BMP-3. Thats just me, I'm pro russian
.It has a crew of 3, can carry up to 7 passengers, a 100mm rifled gun, especially good against other IFV/APCs, a 30mm cannon, a laser rangefinder, and can carry the AT-10 found usually on Russian tanks. Front armor protection is about 100mm against both HEAT and KE, has 6 smoke launchers.

It weighs 18 tons compared to the 30 ton Bradley, has a max road speed of 70 km/h, swim speed of 10 km/h, giving it a hp to weight power of 26hp/t, having a better off road and amphibious capability than the Bradley. There are many other IFVs, but google yourself if you want to find them


[edit on 15/6/05 by W4rl0rD]


Yes I've heard of it... In my oipinion it's a good tank... And it looks good too...





[edit on 17-6-2005 by Figher Master FIN]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join