[QUOTE=Hunt3r.j2;20998676]Besides, tanks can easily be raped.
[img_thumb]http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRTypen/Fotos/boeingmi/AH-64DV.JPG[/img_thumb]
:smug:[/QUOTE]
But helicopters can get easily raped too.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVHQehcqIBo[/media]
:smug:
[QUOTE=camper182 V2;21013382]Alright who wants to make a simillar thread but then with helicopters? I think i lack the knowledge about the helicopters to be the OP[/QUOTE]
I know quite a bit about helicopters, but I seem to be too lazy to even update this thread. Plus I'd dwell into the shit no one cares about like the Pkz-2.
[QUOTE=Tac Error;21017762]Not exactly. While the MoD was already planning on replacing the Challenger 1 due to its poor fire control (wasn't it just lifted directly from the older Chieftain?) as early as the mid 1980s, it missed Desert Storm if you don't count its early cousin as a Challenger 2.
[/QUOTE]
You can't claim the Challenger 1 and 2 tanks to be separate but then consider the M1, M1A1 and M1A2 to all be the same. The M1 went through a number of changes in it's history, which included a change from the M68 rifled cannon to the M256 smoothbore cannon.
[QUOTE=David29;21019960]You can't claim the Challenger 1 and 2 tanks to be separate but then consider the M1, M1A1 and M1A2 to all be the same. The M1 went through a number of changes in it's history, which included a change from the M68 rifled cannon to the M256 smoothbore cannon.[/QUOTE]
But the original M1 never saw service in Desert Storm. Besides, the Challenger 2 is a 95% new tank while the major real difference between the M1A2 and the older M1A1 is the CITV, among many other things.
[img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/2379937288_323362707e.jpg[/img]
found this
[QUOTE=Pvt. Martin;21020217][img]http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2359/2379937288_323362707e.jpg[/img]
found this[/QUOTE]
There is a large amount of design flaws with this tank.
[QUOTE=lolwutdude;20931571]Mr. tank experts, please review my home country's tank
[IMG]http://www.armyrecognition.com/Asie/Coree_du_Sud/vehicules_lourds/K1/K1A1_South_Korea_news_31012007_11.jpg[/IMG]
[URL]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/K1A1[/URL]
we literally took every advanced hardware and placed it inside
why do I worry that it won't perform [B][I]that[/I][/B][/QUOTE]
Because this isn't fucking starcraft
[QUOTE=Monkey pie;21017969]Wait what.
You think the brits aren't dedicated to the war in the middle east?
Then're wrong.[/QUOTE]
No, I don't think they're as dedicated to the war as the Americans are.
Just saw this video of a tank. I don't know the performance of it yet but it looks kinda' cool.
[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BukkrjTc370&feature=grec[/MEDIA]
Quality thread props to the OP learned allot here.
[QUOTE=Ninja_Duck;21022334]Just saw this video of a tank. I don't know the performance of it yet but it looks kinda' cool.
[MEDIA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BukkrjTc370&feature=grec[/MEDIA][/QUOTE]
Call me stupid but what's with the room? The spikes serve a purpose I presume.
You know the future of tanks is going to revolve around tanks that can work without electronics.
Because if you think about it. If you can disable the electronics in a tank; it won't function as well. This would be especially useful if it didn't affect your side's tanks.
EMP tank rounds anyone?
[QUOTE=mastermaul;21018536]I know quite a bit about helicopters, but I seem to be too lazy to even update this thread. Plus I'd dwell into the shit no one cares about like the Pkz-2.[/QUOTE]
I'd love to read about helicopters, especially those that aren't that famous :)
Go for it!
[QUOTE=CaptainSnake;21024059]You know the future of tanks is going to revolve around tanks that can work without electronics.
Because if you think about it. If you can disable the electronics in a tank; it won't function as well. This would be especially useful if it didn't affect your side's tanks.
EMP tank rounds anyone?[/QUOTE]
Electronics can be hardened against electromagnetic radiation, and tanks like the M1 are designed to operate within a nuclear environment.
Besides, I hope you like shooting things accurately without a fire control system.
My tank beats all of your tanks
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Tsar_tank.jpg[/IMG]
[QUOTE=Orkel;21016668]M50 Ontos. A tiny tank with massive firepower.
[URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL]
[URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=hmcpwkU1_8Y[/URL]
[URL="http://www.facepunch.com/#"]View YouTUBE video[/URL]
[URL]http://youtube.com/watch?v=wrg00gRRLog[/URL]
[IMG]http://i42.tinypic.com/2usbiqa.jpg[/IMG]
Used in vietnam and shit.[/QUOTE]
Too bad you had to go outside of it to reload. Of course, if you manage to get off 6 shots without hitting the target, you probably are dead anyway.
Hey guys, we've got treads too, can we join the club? :3:
[img]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/34/Bundesarchiv_Bild_101I-725-0184-22%2C_Russland%2C_Soldaten_auf_Kettenkrad.jpg[/img]
[QUOTE=gbtygfvyg;21026675]My tank beats all of your tanks
[IMG]http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Tsar_tank.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
I've already covered that.
Plus your tank is a piece of shit from a practical standpoint and never made it out of testing.
[QUOTE=mastermaul;21028026]I've already covered that.
Plus your tank is a piece of shit from a practical standpoint and never made it out of testing.[/QUOTE]
Lol, way to crush his dreams!
[QUOTE=Furioso;21027953]Hey guys, we've got treads too, can we join the club? :3:
Kettenkrad][/QUOTE]
I always wanted one of those things.
[QUOTE=Hellghast;20931173][IMG]http://i209.photobucket.com/albums/bb87/muharred/leman-russ.gif[/IMG]
Leman Russ Battle Tank.
You have to admit, if it existed, you'd shit kittens. Fucker has an engine that'll burn ANYTHING.[/QUOTE]
Why do Imperium Tank Commanders look like hitler?
[QUOTE=Tac Error;21017762]
Exactly, and in fact certain US Army units like the 82nd have been seriously lacking in light armor support ever since the retirement of the M551. Its successor the M8 AGS was canceled due to peace dividend budget cuts, unfortunately.[/QUOTE]
It was decided that with US air supremacy and Anti-Tank power being as it is, there is no need for paratrooper armor, and they in general can operate better without it.
Also, this is why you don't fuck with an Abrams
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gnm2mhY4NtQ[/media]
The Challenger can't do that anywhere near as effectively because of the rifled barrel. They have to use these expensive ass casings that are perfectly lubricated and what not and have little ball bearings in them that keep the canister from tearing out the rifling. So even though they can theoretically use the rounds they're the most expensive one so they never get assigned to the tanks, and have many problems on top of that. Smoothbore all the way fuckers.
[img]http://firstworldwar.com/photos/graphics/cnp_tank_french_01.jpg[/img]
Here come the french
[QUOTE=red pan;21034598][img]http://firstworldwar.com/photos/graphics/cnp_tank_french_01.jpg[/img]
Here come the french[/QUOTE]
Toward the front line or away from it?
[QUOTE=Linelor;21033885]It was decided that with US air supremacy and Anti-Tank power being as it is, there is no need for paratrooper armor, and they in general can operate better without it.[/QUOTE]
While it's not an issue now, I believe that there might be some problems in the future if American ground forces rely too much on external assets like air support to bear the weight of combat for them. Battles should not be just won by the French way of saturated firepower, but by maneuver as well.
[QUOTE=Zackin5;21035146]Toward the front line or away from it?[/QUOTE]
Obviously those soldiers are trying to push it away.
[QUOTE=Linelor;21033885]It was decided that with US air supremacy and Anti-Tank power being as it is, there is no need for paratrooper armor, and they in general can operate better without it.
Also, this is why you don't fuck with an Abrams
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gnm2mhY4NtQ[/media]
The Challenger can't do that anywhere near as effectively because of the rifled barrel. They have to use these expensive ass casings that are perfectly lubricated and what not and have little ball bearings in them that keep the canister from tearing out the rifling. So even though they can theoretically use the rounds they're the most expensive one so they never get assigned to the tanks, and have many problems on top of that. Smoothbore all the way fuckers.[/QUOTE]
As of next year all Challengers will have the same (superior) smoothbore gun used on the L2A6.
[img]http://www.army-technology.com/projects/leopard/images/leopard2tank-14.jpg[/img]
The Leopard 2, one of worlds finest Tanks ever build.
Made in Germany.
[QUOTE=LordLoss;21037605]As of next year all Challengers will have the same (superior) smoothbore gun used on the L2A6.[/QUOTE]
Some call it the best tank gun in existence, L2A6's L/55 with some features from the British L/30(?).
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
