top 10 tanks in the world!!!

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title Newest to Oldest

Pages: PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 NEXT

joe6pack RE:Re:Top Tanks - Tanks are Obsolete! 1/20/2004 2:27:45 PM

"Tanks are Obsolete!" This is an old arguement (at least 30 years old). When the first man portable ATGM's were introduced.. That came up. However, tanks improved. (composite and reactive armor) and the Tank lived on. The circle will continue.. Anti Tank muntions will improve, sparking the need to improve the tank. Those people that go on and on about how these new Infantry ATGMs and better RPGs can kill tanks. That may be so. However, it ignores many of the major benefits of having tanks on your side. They scare the begeezus out of infantry, sure infantry will fight them... but to fight them effectively you have to have well trained and disciplined troops. 2) Tanks are still the most effective weapon at killing other tanks (if you want to talk cost, ask how much those ground attack aicraft cost and how much their munitions cost in comparison to a HEAT or AP rounds. Heck as nice as the Javelin is from an infantry standpoint, you could probably buy a used T-62 for the price of one round. Nothing lighter than an MBT has much of a hope of surviving the newer AT weapons.. so what do propose to use as armor support for infantry? I could go on.. but I think much of this has been said before.. The age of the tank is not over yet... and the next country to go war minus them is probably in for an unhappy surprise.

Quote Reply

TrueNorth RE: Tanks are Obsolete! 1/20/2004 3:18:32 PM

You're right joe6pack, the best opponent for a tank is another tank. But while they?re cancelling each other out on the battlefield, who?s actually securing the objectives? Even if newer tanks are more survivable, and certainly they mop up older tanks at even 10:1 odds, it all comes down to a matter of cost effectiveness. You can get some use out of them, but for the price you?d probably be better off investing in other weapon systems. Consider: Strategically tanks are demanding to work with. You need very long supply and service trains for them, more so than any other land weapon system. Getting them to the battlefield is also a difficult proposition. Practically speaking, the USA is the only country that can move large formations of heavy armour across oceans now. Its allies can hitch a ride sometimes (did Australia send any tanks to Iraq?), but everyone else can use them only for border wars. Also true, tanks provide good fire support for infantry, but that makes them subservient to the infantry. You wouldn?t want to send them alone against enemy troops, no matter how scary they are. And certainly not in any dense or urban terrain, even with infantry back-up. You can talk about the recent battle for Baghdad, but I don?t think it really counts since the Iraqi troops were so shoddy and demoralized to begin with. Consider instead the Russians in Grozny a few years back. Another point I?ll concede is that there doesn?t seem to be an alternative to the tank now, in terms of mobile fire support. LAVs are cheaper and easier to move around, but they won?t get blown up any less. Still, I?m going to put my faith in better equipped infantry and advanced artillery. New guided munitions will mean that you can use a howitzer like a sniper ? all you need is a guy behind a bush with a laser designator/comm system. Those electronics are getting so small that they might be integrated right into the guy?s rifle. As for mobility, I think troops are just as well off going to the other extreme: cheap 4x4 vehicles for every team. You don?t even have to go as rich as a HMMWV, when for the price you could get four pick-ups. They?re disposable! You lose one you get another. Protecting your infantry is one more question, but I think it would be cheaper and easier to apply all those advances in anti-ballistic materials to personal body armour. Sure there?ll be compromises, but envision ten guys in a buttoned-up Bradley vs. one Kornet. Not pretty. Finally, why talk about the top ten tanks, when there?s probably not more than ten distinct models in production now anyway?

Quote Reply

mike_golf RE: Tanks are Obsolete! 1/20/2004 3:33:26 PM

TrueNorth, everything you say is pretty and wonderful. I even agree that trying to create a top ten list is pretty silly. There are really the top 5 and everything else (Abrams, Leo2, Chally2, LeClerc, T-90). And I agree with you that tanks fighting infantry without infantry is a problem. On the other hand, infantry fighting tanks without tanks on their side is a problem. The ATGM is NOT the long term solution to infantry disadvantages vs. cavalry. Just as composite/ceramic armor is not the long term solution to cavalry disadvantages vs. infantry. What man can devise man can overcome. Military history is replete with examples of this. The machine gun made horse mounted cavalry obsolete. But it didn't make cavalry obsolete. Your argument is that, in effect, we no longer need cavalry, just infantry with high tech equipment mounted in 4X4's. And then along comes a lovely combined arms force with infantry, cavalry and artillery working together that rips the guts out of your infantry/artillery combination and that goes right out the window.

Quote Reply

mike_golf RE: What does cavalry do 1/20/2004 3:40:37 PM

Good God I'm getting sick of this. It is clear to me that there is a serious misunderstanding of cavalry, both on this board and in the military community in general. TrueNorth wrote: "You're right joe6pack, the best opponent for a tank is another tank. But while they?re cancelling each other out on the battlefield, who?s actually securing the objectives?" I wholeheartedly disagree with this. The only reason we have learned this "lesson" at all is because of Iraq 1 and 2. In reality, in most conditions, with a reasonably competent foe, the biggest killer of tanks should be combined arms. Well trained, well disciplined infantry should account for a much larger number of tank kills than they have recently. Historically, when the parity between infantry weapons and tank armor was much closer (WWII, 1973 Yom Kippur) this was true. The true misunderstanding here is what Iraq 1 and 2 and the weapons involved have demonstrated. They have simply demonstrated, very clearly, that if you are not a first line military state (US, UK, France, Germany, Russia) you have not got a hope in hell of prevailing in conventional manuever warfare against a first line state. The Rumsfeld/Toffler/stupid doctrine of infantry in 4X4's with PGM's supported by artillery and airpower is a recipe for disaster in a major power conflict.

Quote Reply

RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!! 1/20/2004 4:28:19 PM

My choice: M1A2 (USA) T98 (China) T90 (Russia) M1A1 (USA) Leopard 2A6 EX (Germany) Challenger 2 (UK) Merkava Mk4 (Israel) Type 90 (China) The other two, Im not so sure about. Lots of Soviet, Chinese, and Italian designs to pick from.

Quote Reply

RE:Testament to Challenger 2's Armour 1/20/2004 4:31:59 PM

The M1 family of tanks is, without argument, the best armored fighting vehicle on the planet. It is the only tank in existance which uses steel-encased depleted Uranium armor.

Quote Reply

gf0012-aust What does cavalry do 1/20/2004 4:33:06 PM

[The Rumsfeld/Toffler/stupid doctrine of infantry in 4X4's with PGM's supported by artillery and airpower is a recipe for disaster in a major power conflict] Which will lead to a 21st century version of warfighting on a "Rorkes Drift" model. Its almost as bad as MacNamara. High speed small combined ops have only worked because the enemy was not substantial in doctrinal knowledge, short of current warfighting knowledge, poor with resources and generation hardware disconnect. Against someone a bit more savvy and the results may have been very different. Economic theorists shouldn't try to apply a variation of that model to warfighting.

Quote Reply

TrueNorth RE: What does cavalry do 1/20/2004 4:36:12 PM

Gosh this is fun! Ok here?s my final rant, since I?m actually stuck in an office and have a mundane civilian report to write. First line military states (plus their surrogates like Israel), as you say mike_golf, are always going to prevail. That?s because of economics though, not their choice of hardware. America and a few other countries are always able to buy fancy and overpriced tanks or whatever to clobber third-world nations. If any of these states mix it up amongst themselves though, all those tanks and combined arms systems are going to be gone pretty quick. And that?s not considering nukes, which render most everything in war academic. That?s why cheaper, lighter, more flexible land forces do it for me. Your tanks may take the first few battles, but I?ll be smiling at the end.

Quote Reply

joe6pack RE: cavalry vs infantry Mike-Golf 1/20/2004 4:44:00 PM

I'm not so sure about infantry killing significant numbers of tanks. Maybe tanks used badly, the Russians on occasion have fallen prey to this.. World War II was ok for Infantry versus tanks because the AT weapons (at least from the German side) were more than capable of wrecking Shermans.. But tanks have lept forward in ability and AT weapons have been a little lacking.. Maybe as people are predicting things will swing back towards infantry... Combined arms works both ways... Infantry may be able to engage tanks at long range with portable ATGMS or call for fire (which is really the best idea I suppose) But armor can pop smoke and beat feet a lot faster than infantry can.. Which side is most likely to survive the other sides artillery barrage? From an infantry standpoint, my knowledge of fighting tanks has all been in training.. but to my disgust its never been very successful. Maybe that speaks to the skill and tactics used by US tankers... In 8 years, I managed one confirmed tank kill... An OPFOR M1 pulled up right next to our OP.. I managed to hit the TC in the chest with a "simulated" grenade that then fell into the crew compartment... We routinely got our teeth kicked in by tanks.. Although, we didn't play around much versus armor in infantry friendly terrain, such as urban areas... Think of it this way - until recently, infantry has had the following ways of killing a tank: Call for support (whether it be other tanks, aircraft, or artillery) this is without a doubt the best method. Engage with TOWs at long range (however, are you really ever gonna get the max range?) If an enemy is using a good overwatch and has some decent tank crews.. This is a very risky proposition. Engage with Dragons at shorter range (with in range of most of the newer T-series tanks).. Almost a death sentence for those AT teams if theres was competent OPFOR. And no guarantee of killing the tank from the frontol arc... At close range 300 meters or less.. AT-4's but you also have an angry tank in your face with its main gun and coax blazing away. And you are probably gonna need a couple of good hits or a lucky shot to actually kill it. laslty, blind dumb luck.... or blind dumb tankers... take your pick. Now the Javelin and some of the other new AT weapons.. particulalry the top attack rounds will certainly be nice.. But I think its gonna be a while before the infantry becomes the primary killer of good tanks, with good crews, using good tactics.

Quote Reply

RE: cavalry vs infantry 1/20/2004 8:08:07 PM

The Javelin is a fire and forget system with a top-angle of attack. It does not engage a tanks forward facing armor; it hits the turret. And because it is fire and forget, the crew is long gone by the time the tank operator decides to react. As man portable AA weapons systems continue to evolve, the tanks role on the battlefield is put in increasingly serious jeopardy. Eventually, the soldier as a tank will be a realized dream. DARPA is already looking into powered armor applications for the super soldier of tomorrow.

Quote Reply

PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 NEXT