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.

 

The Abram Tank is Best in the World

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 10 2006 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by deltaboy

Originally posted by planeman
Possibly better than the Abrams....
The future Turkish MBT project:
[ats]http://i3.tinypic.com/xm3mty.jpg[/at]


Where you get the idea that the pic you put there is Turkish. Looks more Frenchie to me. Looks Leclerc in 2020.


We're both right, but it is the Turkish MBT program model. The turks are being assisted by GIAT, the makers of the Leclerc so there's no coincidence that it looks just like the Leclerc.

PS> If you look closely at the turret of the Korean XK-2 MBT I posted in the same post, it too shows GIAT influence but has the L55 gun instead of the GIAT gun.




posted on May, 10 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   
Black Eagle is better then the Abrams BUT there are only a few of them and against a hellfire they'll fare the same as an Abrams. I just hope they make more of those Black Eagles.



posted on May, 10 2006 @ 03:32 PM
link   
I think most people forget that the Abrams was designed in the 70s and tested in 1976... Thats 30 years ago!!! Hardly cutting edge compared to many new tanks however it has obviously has helped set standards around the world in targeting technology , gun stabilization and ammunition/crew safety.

The success in the Persian Gulf War with Iraqi tank forces was not just from the Abrams alone but also from good US and British intelligence and an enemy that was under trained , under supplied , had bad moral and poor leadership.. Even the old M60A3 would have had similar success against Iraqi Tanks. Aside from the success in Iraq there isnt really any other argument that can say "the Abrams is the best in the world"

With continuous upgrades the Abrams has been a very successfull tank platform and will continue to be so but I dont think its justified to say that it is the best tank in the world.

While allot of people like to point out that the Abrams is a gas hog and imply "those Americans just couldn't build powerful diesels" The fact is that tank platform design is over 30 years old!!!! Of coarse with a turbine engine that was designed in the 60s it is going to be a gas hog just as a diesel engine from the same era would be underpowered.


Would it be worth re-engining the Abrams with a modern diesel or hybrid engine?


There are modification plans and engine replacement plans for a more fuel efficient and easier to maintain power plant in the works already.


The PROSE process is expected to improve reliability by 30%. The benefits of the new engine are much more dramatic - the Army could achieve a 4-5 fold improvement in reliability, hopefully a 35% reduction in fuel consumption, a 42% reduction in the number of parts, and a 15-20% improvement in vehicle mobility. Life cycle engine O&S costs are projected to drop from 16 billion dollars over 30 years with the current engine to 3 billion dollars with the new engine.


www.fas.org...



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 01:58 AM
link   
Interesting project that Turkish MBT. Never heared about it before.

I still think that theres no best MBT in the world. There is no Panther or T34 currently. All tanks seem to be rather equal with each having some slight advantages over the other tanks. In a situation like that the only thing that can really win tank battles is better trained crews.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   
I agree with tomcat ha.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 08:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by Heckman
I think most people forget that the Abrams was designed in the 70s and tested in 1976... Thats 30 years ago!!! Hardly cutting edge compared to many new tanks however it has obviously has helped set standards around the world in targeting technology , gun stabilization and ammunition/crew safety.



Same applies to most other MBTs...



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:06 AM
link   
The problem is all these tanks are open country for the best results. In urban settings they are heavily restricted and prone to ambush. Once you knock out the lead tank in an ambush thats when the real problems arise. I've seen quite a few videos taken from frontline troops in Iraq where RPG rounds have done some pretty crazy damage to the rear of the Abram. They'd be better off scrapping enough tanks to give better armour to the humvees.

The MBT doesn't have much of a future outside of the open country. The future for urban environment is vehicles like the striker. You can have many outfitted for different roles and still have equal firepower as the Abe and iwth a few bodies to ward off ambushes. Far better use of resources in my opinion.

Unless of course your using the Abe in a part of the city where it isn't so closed quarters. But thats the most I would give it.



[edit on 11-5-2006 by Crazy_Mr_Crowley]



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 09:28 AM
link   
I wouldn't say the abrams is the best tank it's the crew's training that makes it a good tank. We don't know if the first M1A1 armor was upgraded,we don't know how effective DU armor is, and we don't know the penetration of the latest DU rounds only an estimate. We can't really find out.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 10:45 AM
link   
Stryker cant really defend itself against more modern rpg's. If it faces a dualwarhead rpg it will penetrate.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 11:12 AM
link   
The Stryker has proven in Iraq that it can take quite a bit of damage. It has withstood enormous IED’s and direct fire. By the way, regarding Stryker’s and RPG’s, check out the Trophy System.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Also, the modern Abrams is a lot different the the first-generation Abrams. The current Abrams has a more powerful gun, much more sophisticated electronics and communications systems, more advanced armor, etc....soon a more advanced engine most likely.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 12:08 PM
link   
.....Sit back....feet up......few beers..........watchin my ATS points just rise..............troll, troll, troll, troll....de dum, de dah!

Spacemunkey



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 12:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
The Stryker has proven in Iraq that it can take quite a bit of damage. It has withstood enormous IED’s and direct fire. By the way, regarding Stryker’s and RPG’s, check out the Trophy System.
It certainly has done very well. But against a T-54's 90mm main gun... no contest.



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by planemen
It certainly has done very well. But against a T-54's 90mm main gun... no contest.


Umm... I don't even know why you would bring that up, I know that you are aware of what I’m about to say, hence my puzzlement. The Stryker is not designed to be an MBT, it’s designed to be a highly mobile and armored fighting vehicle capable of rapidly deploying infantry and offering overwhelming firepower. Its armor is very good but quite frankly I don't know how it would fare up against an anti-tank round. I can say though that a T-54 will not survive a hit from the Mobile Gun Variant.



M1128 Stryker



posted on May, 11 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   

Same applies to most other MBTs...



The Challenger 2 , T90 , Type 95 ,Ariete, Leclerc just to name a few were all first tested in the late 80s and early 90s ...



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join