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.

 

best MBT

page: 2
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 08:21 PM
link   
In my oppinion I would say the best battle tank in the world right now is the M1A2 SEP with the Challenger 2 in a close second. All in all the Abrams and Challenger are pretty equally matched from crew to equipment, if they ever met on the battlefield there would only be one determining factor, numbers. There are too few Challengers.




posted on Mar, 12 2006 @ 08:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by PaddyInf

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by Teknikal
This will probably be closed but I would say the best Main Battle tanks in the world are

#1 Challenger 2
#2 Leopard 2
#3 Leclerc
#4 Merkava
#5 T-90

No doubt peoples opinion will differ and I suspect some will froth at the mouth I have not included the Abrams.



Are you nuts? Baed on what? A stat sheet?

Cold hard FACT: The M1 Abrams has the best ACTUAL BATTLE record of any tank in the history of modern combat. Not one tank on your list even comes close is actual combat performance.

This post has been done so many times its silly. I dont have the energy to post the links to the REAL STATS on combat performance, look up an old thread.

You guys can SPECULATE all you want, but actual fighting record in real live combat is what counts, and no tank has a better record than the Abrams. FACT.


Always makes me chuckle when I see these threads, they tend to be filled with Americans quoting stats about the superiority of the M1, usually taken from American sources. Vagabond has the right idea - horses for courses.

Can't say I like this type of thread, it brings nothing to the forum.


lol u make my laugh we base our opinions based on stats not jus opinions dont forget the M1A 2 and chally 2 ahve exceptional armor the chally 2 uses 2nd gen chobham armor and the m1A2 uses a similar armor with DU plates on the sides and good DUnrounds russian tanks are what im scared off due to their armnament superiority look im indian and maerican and admit russian tanks have better guns and russian SAMS are better besides got any proof our stats are rong its easy to ay it but no proff plus if i apply the same logic the same could go for ur stuff


[edit on 12-3-2006 by urmomma158]



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 12:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
russian tanks are what im scared off due to their armnament superiority

I tread lightly on this point because I've already mentioned the lack of realism in testing, but in test firings the T-80 couldn't kill the Leo2A4 at ranges over 1200 meters. That doesn't exactly scare the hell out of me.


russian SAMS are better

Slightly off topic, but I'll take the bait. Which Russian SAM to you put forward as being superior? Say S-300, I double-dog dare you. They designed it as a clone of the patriot.

Yes, the Russians appear to be getting a. of us in ramjet missiles courtesy of several years of strategic complacency in the white house after the cold war (and I'm not so sure that's 100% over). Yes the current forces are not that inequal. Yes we need to take Russia and China seriously and keep developing. No they're not going to slaughter us. It also bears mentioning that America has this nifty habit of just sitting on new hardware and not telling anyone. The SR-71 was a senior-citizen in aircraft years before we were privy to its existence.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
In my oppinion I would say the best battle tank in the world right now is the M1A2 SEP with the Challenger 2 in a close second.



in reply


“We are not converting all the M1A2s into SEP,” Szydloski noted. A few years from now, the 1st Cavalry Division, 4th Infantry Division and 3rd Armored Cavalry Regiment will be the only ones to have the SEP, he said.


The majority tank of the US army is and will be the M1A1



The US Army planned to procure a total of 1150 M1A2 SEP tanks but the US Army has decided to cancel future production of the M1A2 SEP from FY2004.



There are about 240 M1A2 SEP tanks in service.

The rest will all be M1A1D AIM.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Actually your numbers are slightly off, in 2005 the US army ordered a further 60 tanks to be converted to the SEP version, this will give it a total of 300 SEP and over 600 M1A2’s with some 4000+ M1A1’s. Also, by 2007 the MOD is planning on reducing the 386 Challenger 2 force to about 286.


M1A2 Abrams
Challanger 2



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 08:37 AM
link   
EDIT:
Double Post, damn computer!


[edit on 13-3-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Vagabond

Originally posted by urmomma158
russian tanks are what im scared off due to their armnament superiority

I tread lightly on this point because I've already mentioned the lack of realism in testing, but in test firings the T-80 couldn't kill the Leo2A4 at ranges over 1200 meters. That doesn't exactly scare the hell out of me.


russian SAMS are better

Slightly off topic, but I'll take the bait. Which Russian SAM to you put forward as being superior? Say S-300, I double-dog dare you. They designed it as a clone of the patriot.

Yes, the Russians appear to be getting a. of us in ramjet missiles courtesy of several years of strategic complacency in the white house after the cold war (and I'm not so sure that's 100% over). Yes the current forces are not that inequal. Yes we need to take Russia and China seriously and keep developing. No they're not going to slaughter us. It also bears mentioning that America has this nifty habit of just sitting on new hardware and not telling anyone. The SR-71 was a senior-citizen in aircraft years before we were privy to its existence.


im talking about the S400 the B 2 will slaughter it but u gotta dsmit pretty sick twice the range of the patriot i do agree with u about MAricas secret aircraft i can just imagine what they have now maybe antimatter propulsion or electromagnetic/magnetic proplusion/darkmatter/nuclear we just dont know but when it comes to the M1A2 vs the challenger which 1 can really fire farther?/ any body got any answers



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 01:28 PM
link   
The answer is obvious, the Challenger 2 has the longest recorded kill at 5km.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 02:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
The answer is obvious, the Challenger 2 has the longest recorded kill at 5km.

Shattered OUT...


That´s not an answer, thats an ARGUMENT



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 03:50 PM
link   
how about the chinese ZTZ-99?

they have like a laser defence system or something.....


read the "ACTIVE LASER COUNTERMEASURES" section

www.sinodefence.com...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   
can i aska question can a tandem war. penetrate multiple layers of Era armor like a lyer of ERA and another layer behind it



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:27 PM
link   
alrite to end this thread lets comapre the top tanks from the USa,Britain,Russia, israel,and china we will compare armnament,firing range,armor,defense,technology etc ok so everyone please give a good comaprison heres what i have ina rmor penetration and the challengers max range isnt 5km its 205 miles a mil aint 2 km. please indstead of opinions e need facts.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 05:57 PM
link   
The clear winner is the Challenger 2's it has the ability to brew tea for the crew from inside the tank


I love a good cup of tea

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by urmomma158
alrite to end this thread lets comapre the top tanks from the USa,Britain,Russia, israel,and china we will compare armnament,firing range,armor,defense,technology etc ok so everyone please give a good comaprison heres what i have ina rmor penetration and the challengers max range isnt 5km its 205 miles a mil aint 2 km. please indstead of opinions e need facts.

1)Lone, yes that is a fact, the Challenger 2 has the longest kill shot ever taken by a tank.

2)urmomma, 205 miles? Do you have any idea how far that really is? Here I thought only Iowa class battleships could lobby rounds at 15 miles with their 16 inch guns.

As I've said, the longest recorded tank kill was with a Challenger 2 tank against an Iraqi T-72 at 5 km.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 06:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShadowXIX

Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV


It's hardly "battle", but I would say the Merk is fairly well combat tested...



It all depends on what you consider combat


I'm not getting into this argument with you, because we pretty much happen to agree. I can't personally see the point in targeting students in the palyground with the main gun.

But, having said that, rocks aren't the only thing that have been lobbed their way...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 07:02 PM
link   
urmomma must be talking about operational range rather than firing range.

Either A. He misinterpreted 5km kill as 5K miles operational range and thought we were crazy

or B. He thinks we're complete idiots and thought that we meant 5km as its operation range.

I have a hard time imagining that he really believes the Chally can hit something from 205 miles away.



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 07:28 PM
link   
The Challenger 2 tank has an operational range of 400 miles over land and 250 miles cross-country.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 07:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
The Challenger 2 tank has an operational range of 400 miles over land and 250 miles cross-country.

Shattered OUT...


i think youll find thats kilometers not miles

www.army-technology.com...

scroll to bottom



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 07:37 PM
link   
Hmm, I think I confused the two again, my bad, the British do everything in kilometers, it's km people, not miles.

It's hard distinguishing distances when you use km, miles, and nautical miles.

Shattered OUT...



posted on Mar, 13 2006 @ 07:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by ShatteredSkies
Hmm, I think I confused the two again, my bad, the British do everything in kilometers, it's km people, not miles.

It's hard distinguishing distances when you use km, miles, and nautical miles.

Shattered OUT...


thats right i get confused myself ,as a general rule of thumb i think the british army like every thing to have around a 200 miles range as a minimum, or so .



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join