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.

 

New asian tanks

page: 3
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
The price of an Abrams tank is not much, an M1A1 costs 4.3 million dollars compared to the Leclerc which costs in upwards of 8 million dollars.




posted on May, 3 2004 @ 06:54 PM
link   
What?!

No mention of the Merkava?




MERKAVA MK 3 BAZ MAIN BATTLE TANK, ISRAEL



seekerof



posted on May, 3 2004 @ 06:56 PM
link   
The Merkava Mk 4 is the sexiest tank out there.


D

posted on May, 4 2004 @ 02:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
the abrahms are ok but too pricey
challangers can do thier jobs at a better price


Yeah, I reckon the Challenger is a better all-round tank. You should see the crap the government in Australia is getting right now for buying a heap of second hand Abrams from the US.



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 03:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by devilwasp
the abrahms are ok but too pricey
challangers can do thier jobs at a better price



Total 386 Challenger tanks have been delivered for UK army. Those 386 Challengers costed 2.2 billion . It is around 4 billion $. A little math and one Challenger 2 costs more than 10 milion dollars. SO STOP TALKING IT IS CHEAPER THAN ABRAMS!



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 06:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by longbow


Originally posted by devilwasp
the abrahms are ok but too pricey
challangers can do thier jobs at a better price



Total 386 Challenger tanks have been delivered for UK army. Those 386 Challengers costed 2.2 billion . It is around 4 billion $. A little math and one Challenger 2 costs more than 10 milion dollars. SO STOP TALKING IT IS CHEAPER THAN ABRAMS!
actually they cost $1,793,694 per unit and i might add that money figure you got di u forget to count spare parts, fuel, ammo ?
so in respponse you stop talking the m1 costs 4.3 million a piece and the abram costs 2.6 million a piece so it is still cheaper ! ha stitch that!



posted on May, 4 2004 @ 11:53 AM
link   
The Challenger I'd say has a slightly better armor and gun. But it's C3 abilities are lacking when compared to the M1A2.



posted on Jul, 14 2004 @ 08:14 PM
link   


The better tank is ultimately the Panzer because the T34s just beat them out of sheer numerical advantage.

Considering you're pitting a medium tank vs. a heavy the outcome is given, however the JS series tanks worked the tiger and king tiger tanks with ease. Also a T-34 85 is at least on par with the panther, if not better.

And plus. The Germans during ww2 were trying to develop a tank that could withstand the t-34 and t-40. A t34 shell blew holes through tigers and panzers while their shells bounced off the t-90s.

Please stop talking you're making it worse the tanks in question were made 5 dacades apart they were never in the same war.

I do think that the Russian tank competes for best tank, especially given price and weight considerations. I'm thinking that the leo 2 is probably first though, Merk is just different built for a very specific enviroment.



posted on Jul, 20 2004 @ 07:07 AM
link   
T-34/85- Very simple & reliable, cheap to build- ideal for a relatively uneducated & peasant society. Excellent innovative design but ultimately, not as technically good as the Panther. A great deal better than the Panzer IV, however!! However, the US Army was extremely good at getting its damaged/KO'd tanks back into combat, whereas the Soviet & Wermacht tended to discard theirs.
WRT modern designs- who can tell? It relies so much on individual crews- motivation, communication, leadership etc. The posts about KE rounds are correct. Purely based on the transferable energy from a well-manufactured APFSDS round striking ANY armour plate, (Chobham, Dorchester) there is not a lot you can do to stop them....




top topics



 
0
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join