|
|
|
Subject:
RE:Top Ten Armies in Europe jacques
oldbutnotwise
9/26/2003 8:02:36 AM
|
| 1rst i think that you didnt read all my comments on the best MBT discussion board.
i did just dissagree with them
" one on one its usually the tank with the better gun and bigger armour that wins "
--> that was the old MBT concept abotu what i was talking. ( Its was true in WWII but it changed, and to take an exemple, the B1bis was the only " heavy tank " of the begining of the war( the Panzer IV was a very good medium one, but hadnt the same protection, and the same gun), but because of it worse targeting mecanic system, the low range of the tank, the B1bis had some problem during battles )
what?
you are compairing the small differences between modern MBTs to the huge diferences during ww2?
its more like sherman vs panther shermans had more speed the panther had better armour/gun and who won that little engagement?
" as for the leclerc being able to beat the challenger, they would be well matched, the longer range of the challenger gun would require the leclerc to take hits before it could return fire, it then would have to get close to penatrate the armour of the challenger "
The challenger isnt abble to shoot a fast moving target over 3000 m. Whereas the Leclerc has a 95% killing percent on a 60 KmH moving target, with a range superior than 3000 m, while it is moving at more then 60 KmH, so if the Leclerc stay between 1500-3500 m from the challenger 2, it can destroy the challenger 2 without having any risk to be shooted.
the range of the leclerc gun is less than that of the challenger - fact, so you are wrong in this assertion as to the targeting system i dissagree that the challenger cannot shoot moving targets, it has confirmed kills in this regard
and based on known armour tests it is very unlikely that the leclerc could penetrate a Challenger at ranges over 1000m
About the best gun: are you talking about the Rifled superior than the Smoothbore?? if its what you are saying, its to supid to be commented..
why? rifling has always produced a superior gun it make the round more accurate and increases its effective range.
secondly the reason the french 120mm gun is superior to the german/us one is it increased caliber which incidently is the same as the british gun !!!!!
the "too stupid" comment is a copout and implies that you cannot provide a counter argument
" where do you get this from? the challenger is as modern as any mbt, carries the best gun, has the best targeting system "
Unprooved
the challenger is proved in combat the leclerc isnt so you could use your own arguement to say that a T72 is a better tank than the leclerc as its systems have all been proved while the only bits in the leclerc that has been proved are those that are also fitted to the challenger.
" the best battlefield system(the same as the leclerc) "
Agree but all depend of the Version of the Challenger/Leclerc.
of course, but compair latest with latest
" the speed advantage is not a good one as the turret of a tank can turn quicker than a tank can move. "
The Lecerlc turret is largely better then the Challenger one in this domain, and can fire at more than 60 KmH.
alledgedly - not proven in tests against its competition. the stabilised gun in the challenger can be fired at speed and has actual kills whilst moving something the leclerc hasnt got whilst stationary
your belief in the superority of the french targeting system is a bit difficult to understand as its unproven, the assertion that the system fitted to M1's & Challenger can not be fired at speed is a falacy both systems are fully stablised and computer controlled as per the french system, and as i have stated before why did the british choose the french battlefield control system and the canadian targeting system and then spend a small fortune getting them to communicate with each other instead of buying this super targeting system that is already intergrated????????
please explain
" as the leclerc carries inferior armour"
How do you know this ( do you work at GIAT ), and abotu all i have seen, it is better than the lastest Leo 2 A6 armor.
the latest A6 is chobban type 1, the latest M1 uses type 2 and the challenger 2e's use thatchham regarded as the best armour currently availible by most defence analysts
and unless you work at bristish ordenace factory near chobham how can you say it infererior to giat
all we can go on is the stuff they release, and in just about every report i have read says that the Challenger is the best protected MBT in current service
" and less of it "
Absolutely wrong!!!
The Leclerc armor is much lighter than the Chobbam 2 one, than the Leclerc turret is much smaller than all the other MBT ones, so if you consider the armor/space factro, the Leclerc has got a better protection .
lighter = less protection
as you cannot provide factual evidence that a lighter french armour is supperior then i will go for the heavier your opinion is no more fact than mine and no more |
| |
|
|
|
