Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: top 10 tanks in the world!!!
Hong-Xing    8/12/2003 9:07:05 AM
i think it would be this t-90 (rus) m1a2 (usa) t-98 (chi) m1a1 (usa) Challenger 2 (bri) t-95 black hawk (rus) al khalid (chi) merkeva (bra) arjun (ind) t-90||| (chi)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
cwDeici       2/8/2010 3:36:57 PM
The article does contain some nationalistic bias though, and you should have written some info on the other tanks of the list. Also I am a bit suspicious of the Brit-Ger-USA pattern being repeated after the Merkava... seems a bit too orderly to me.
 
Anyway I am suspicious of the Leapoard. Good rugged design, but it lacks combat experience.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/8/2010 3:42:48 PM

The Leo 2a6. The top dog period. I've trained on the M1a1, Challanger, M-60, and Leo 1's. Nothing else that I've seen comes close.


Those are very good credentials, better than the above guy. I note you seem not to have been in a Merkava though.
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/8/2010 3:48:59 PM

Hello there, first ii would like to say high as i am knew here and this is my first post. 'credential-wise' i have been serving in the IDF armour corps so most of my knowledge is based around the merkava. Namely the Merkava 3 Baz D. I have tried reading up upon the Abrams, challenger and Leopard, and there seem to be quite a few things that stand out with the Merkava.

I notice howl little the merkava is mentioned so i will try to make a case. fisrt of my case will be around the Merkava 3 Baz because it is already a world ranking tank that can most definitely be along side the latest abrams and challenger and leo. Bear in mind the merkava mk3 came into service in 1990. So what ever a "gloat" about with regards to the mk3 just look at the mk 4's standing as going even farther beyond.

Lets first addres the most obvious part the armour sine that was the first priority in designing the merkava. Survivability of the crew was the utmost importance for this small country, second was survivability of the tank itself. THe armour on the merkava, i am personally sure is if nothing else is the most advanced and protective in existence today. THe tank's shell is composed of an israeli designs super steel which is secret in its metallurgy (Israel as a country struggling to stay alive is very big on secrets for almost everything on the merkava but the "basic idea" of how/what it is is known). on top off that is a armor called "random steel" which exists today on other tanks. It is like a plate made of wafers layers that are intricitly woven to disrupt the peneration of tandem and piercing projectiles. (maybe that is the saame thing as you call compostie but i'm not sure, all the names of thing i know in hebrew!) THis wafer made armour is covers the tank but is mostly recognized on the 'bazooka plates'. On top of that and in the b-plates is melding of the most advanced reactive armour in the world. Israel leads in this feild, well, because they invented this thing. The b-plates alone have an equivalent protection of over a meter of steel. On the sides of the turret are 'wings' of armour developed after the Peace in the Galilee war (bear in mind that Israel is the most experienced coutry in the world in modern tank warfare) is was discovered the is war time conditions (i.e. a tank now sitting in the middle of an enemy town where ATm/atgm can come from a window in any diretion) the 70-80% of ALL hits were on the sides of the turret. these 'wings' are called by the israli's "migun lebanon" ['lebanese armour'] as it was developed from lessons learnt in that lebanon war. THe most unique property of the merkava was the placement of the engine in the front of the tank. THis provided incredible protection to the as any a tank usually fights its enemy head on (Urban warfare side). Anything that does not hit the turret will hit the front of the tank and will have to go through the entire engine block to get to the crew. The rest of the guts of the tank were arranged in a similar fashion. Equipment boxes, computers, even the fuel tank were wrapped around the crew to increase protection. THe engine being hte the front made the back of the tank empty. THere ammo placed heavily protected in individual protective heat resistant casings. Also a back door is avaible to the tank giving the crew a safe place to ente and exit as well as a place to load nad hold up to 8 infatry or 2-3 wounded. THe entire tank was built in a modular design. Any part of the tank is hit in hours the section of armour can be replaced and the tank is good as new a ready to re-enter the battle instead of having to sit it out most of the war. This also make the merkava 'forver young' as when new armour upgrades are developed the old armour can be easily removed without any problems or hassels at all. (I have spent time in Gaza with the thev merkava and numerous RPG's have come our way, while it is not pleasant we dont duck and dodge as the merkava just yawns them off). THe last thing to the protective design of the merkava is the sleek look the design was made by gen. tal based on creating high probabilities that a prohectile or missile will reach the tank at a very sharp angle and skitter off the surface. This has already been seen many times with sagger missiles fire by hizbullah. Bear in mind that the Merkava mk4 can out in 2001-2002 so its design had all these recent technologies such as 'megun lebanon' in mind from the out start.

Well i think that is it for know i will go into other stuff like electornic protection, armament, engine and etc later.


Excellent article! Really!
 
But uhm I would like to ... hmm
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/8/2010 3:50:28 PM
not that I have a right to complain about technical presentation around here, hur hur hur...
 
Quote    Reply

cwDeici       2/8/2010 3:52:46 PM
but yes...
 
truly informative article!
 
I'm 'a study the Merkava more to see if these proven ideas you've presented indeed work that perfectly, but dang... so much innovation!
 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    cwDeici tnx very much   2/9/2010 3:04:54 PM
thank you for your comments im glad i helped a bit, as for your concerns about my list going brit, german , usa it was purely coincidental, i did not really realsie until you pointed it out. nothing was meant by it, it was my judgment on what i considered the oder of the worlds top ten best tanks to be. it would make sense that the mark 1 tanks followed the order of the mark 2 tank if you look at it that way.
as for information about other tanks i guess you are right as there was not too much info regarding the others.
also your comments about hte leopard 2 seeing limited service are true to an extent however i believe they have been deployed extensively by candian forces in afghanistan so have seen considerable action, but no to the extent of the Challenger or abrams
i am also quite certain the th US has not aquired dorchester and is still using the older chobbam design.
as for information about other tanks ill provide you with some
the mark 2 abram aka M1A2 abrams has almost 1500 bhp compared the the 1250 of the Challenger however the abrams uses a turbine engine so eats fuel like a plague of locasts in a crop field, whereas the Challenger uses a diesel engine which gives it a far greater fuel economy and range. the fuel source is also readily avaliable so is not a logistics nightmare like the abrams.
now both the abrams, Challenger and leopard use the same gun, albeit the British version has undergon some modification.
previously the Challenger used to fire DURs (depleted uranium rounds, sounds impressive right) now it will fire the larger selection of standard NATO ammunition.
it is true to say that the abrams has better antipersonel protection than the Challenger. this point has arisen constantly in this form of debate about which of the two is better. in saying this the Challenger has recently (within the last 3-4 years) been through a refit and upgrading program in which i now believe most if not all Challengers now carry a remote commander operated 7.62mm machine gun (may be.5 caliber)
when talking about protection you can say many things about all the tanks.
Leopard 2 has independently manurfactured armour made by a german company, the israelis spent large amounts of money developing their own armour which may partially explain why each Merkeva costs so much.
the abrams has an older version of the new British dorchester armour.
but this armour can be added to with slab armour/ reactive plate armour. this adds much more protection to the tanks.
Do not quote me on this but it has been rumoured that the MOD with the government and army have been developing electrically reactive armour which uses a charge to vapourise incoming HEAT weapons. if this is true then it would make each Challenger tank all but invincible. this would most likely be sold to other nations, which would mean that new ammunition would need to be developed in order to counter this new armour.
still on the subject of protection the Merkeva is considered to be one of the safest tanks for a crew to be in. not only is the armour good but many easily accesible exits have been placed on the vehicle to allow for an emergency escape. its low profile makes it far harder ot hit, and the unique shape of its hull and turret makes it difficult to hit with a frontal attack. i believe it is also one of the best tanks for crew comfort.
the abrams is said to be one of the most technologically advanced tanks in the world, it is almost an armoured computer with a big gun. it has advanced sights day/night and thermal imaging systems that make night vision look out of date. its communication systems are very advanced allowing to easily intergrate with other battelfield systems, and also allows for excellent versatility in the battle operations plan. The upgrade on the Challengers computers was done because of the abrams internal systems capabilities (the Brits had the tech when they first built the Challenger but didnt put it in at first, why would you do that?)
however, with most of the tank being run by computers, what were to happen if they fought an enemy with EMP devices. the tank is not proof against such an attack (at least to my knowledge)
The Challenger is!. i believe this is an advantage of the new dorchester armour. i seem to recall that the tank is both nuclear attack proof (radiation/ not full central explosion) and EMP proof, so all the electrical equipment within the inside of the tank is protected, and most of the onboard systems have a manual setting anyway. i may be wrong about the EMP thing.
most modern tanks today offfer some form of NBA protection (nuclear biological attack), including abrams leopard and merkeva.
finally what you mentioned about the abrams seeing far more action is tr
 
Quote    Reply

Spritie       2/9/2010 4:32:34 PM
How can one place the Leopard II in the number two position when the tank has not seen any combat. It looks great on paper, but battles are not fought on paper, they are fought in the deserts of the Middle East, the Jungles of South east Asia or the plains of Europe. It should be placed at 8th.
 
Quote    Reply

LB    Rubbish   2/9/2010 10:05:24 PM
With all due respect your list below contains quite a bit of rubbish.  The first four are fine in any order anyone prefers given the lack of public data to make a proper comparison. 
 
Leo I is a generation behind and should not make this list and putting it ahead of the M1A1 is complete rubbish.  Both the T-90 and Polish PT-91 are just improved T-72's and do not belong on this list either.  Lastly the  Shir is the name of an improved Chieftain ordered by the Shah that ended up being purchased by Jordan- they bought around 274 and call it the Khalid.  Putting the Leo 1 five places ahead of a significantly improved Chieftain is also rubbish.
 
What you have left off your list is the Leclerc, Ariete, Type 90, K1, K2 (also to be produced in Turkey), and China's Type 90.  All of these are far superior tanks to any model of the T-72 or Leo 1.  Indeed the K2 beat out the Leo 2 and Leclerc to win Turkey's competition.
 
Both the Leo 2 and M1 entered service in 1980 followed shortly by Challenger 1.  The T-72 is a decade older and a generation behind.  The Leo 1 was the NATO standard MBT for years but it's in fact lighter and less protected than a German WWII Panther.
 
All this aside quality of main gun ammunition, crew training, doctrine, and leadership are together more important the exact model tank one uses within one's tank units.  Combat experience should also be seriously considered both in terms of the actual tank and crew/unit.  In any case any list that places the Leo 1 over the M1A1 really needs to be considered rubbish.  Just my opinion.  Have a great day.
 
 
 


1. (British) Challenger 2

2.(German) Leopard 2

3 (american) M1A2 abrams

4. (israeli) Merkeva

5.(British) Challenger 1

6.(German) Leopard 1

7. (american) M1A1 abrams

8. (Polish) PT 91

9.(Russian) T-90

10.(British) Shir Khan

 
Quote    Reply

JTR~~    your facts abput the leopard are wrong   2/10/2010 8:40:11 AM
it has seen more than enough action over the years, as for the PT 91 is far more advanced than you give it credit for. it is also fairly modern having been first built in the mid 1990s. as for the Shir being an improved cheiftan im afraid once again slightly mistaken. the shir was a revloutionary new design and formed the base of the new challenger mark of tank.
you are right in saying that the crew make the tank but we were not answering the question of which tank has the best crew.
the leo 1 is just as combat proven as any other tank, and to say that it has comparable armour to the ww2 panther is frankly foolish, they are two different types of armour the panther has plate armour whereas the leopard has an alloy armour
regards
 
Quote    Reply

buzzard       2/10/2010 9:58:53 AM
So who exactly has taken a Leopard 2 into action? I'm not quite sure the Germans( Dutch or Canadians maybe) have brought any to Afghanistan and if they haven't been used there, they really haven't been used.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics