The funny thing is this is the SAME tank they used in the Walking Dead. The one where they guy jumped in and was able to crawl around and crouch inside it with quite a bit of mobility even with a dead body. All that non-sense.
I can't tell you how many times assholes disagreed with me that the tanks were that cramped and small and the Walking Dead was an accurate depiction of the inside of a tank and no less that the tank was American. The Chieftain is a British tank.
[img]http://watchmojo.com/film/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/the-walking-dead-tank.jpg[/img]
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y1Pw6JODjc0&feature=related[/media]
Nevermind there is a little hatch directly under the tank (Where a mine or some other explosive could detonate and kill the entire crew) that can just happen to be opened from the outside without any sort of lock on it.
fun fact, the chieften was made to survive a fallout and still keep fighting
if a mine can explode and kill the crew under the tank then its a shit tank
[QUOTE=XanaToast.;34232410]fun fact, the chieften was made to survive a fallout and still keep fighting[/QUOTE]
A lot of tanks are made like that.
[QUOTE=tittles650;34232905]if a mine can explode and kill the crew under the tank then its a shit tank[/QUOTE]
Because we're totally gonna tack on tons of raw material under a tank, cutting it's mobility, internal size (or driving capability if you expand outwards), and speed - all for one threat.
It makes a shit ton more sense just to install mine-clearing equipment.
Interesting that the tank doesnt use shells, and is more like an old musket or medieval cannon.
[QUOTE=tittles650;34232905]if a mine can explode and kill the crew under the tank then its a shit tank[/QUOTE]
Yeah, I suppose you could add another half a foot of armor under the tank.
Goodluck going over any sort of bump without bottoming the thing out though.
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;34236435]Interesting that the tank doesnt use shells, and is more like an old musket or medieval cannon.[/QUOTE]
Sounds like a shit job, what with the possibility of decapitation and all.
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;34236435]Interesting that the tank doesnt use shells, and is more like an old musket or medieval cannon.[/QUOTE]
It seems that it avoids needing to eject or store the shell casing, and they can store the charges in a material that helps avoid a propellant explosion if there's a fire or something. Probably leads to a massive hit in rate of fire, though.
I find it quite interesting that the British like rifling on the tanks, but most of NATO want smoothbore guns.
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;34236435]Interesting that the tank doesnt use shells, and is more like an old musket or medieval cannon.[/QUOTE]
Older tanks were all like that if I remember correctly.
Useless fact: My Grandfather was one of the designers of this tank
[QUOTE=Fish Muffin;34236435]Interesting that the tank doesnt use shells, and is more like an old musket or medieval cannon.[/QUOTE]
Not entirely certain, but I believe it allows for greater control over engagement distances and what not.
(Much like howitzers and self-propelled guns)
[QUOTE=Em See;34239791]Not entirely certain, but I believe it allows for greater control over engagement distances and what not.
(Much like howitzers and self-propelled guns)[/QUOTE]
World of Tanks should have this feature if it doesn't already.
Load the breach with enough propellant to power a round for a mile or so and than shoot someone from 50 feet away.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
