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: FRENCH TECH VS UK
usajoe    8/10/2007 11:25:19 PM
LECLERC VS CHALLENGER 2 IN OPEN DESERT, WITH BTITISH AND FRENCH CREWS AND NO AIR SUPORT WHO WILL WIN, I THINK THE CHALLENGER WHAT DO YOU GUYS THINK.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   NEXT
boris the romanian       8/11/2007 6:39:03 AM
T-90 will give 'em both a run for their money!
 
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/11/2007 9:02:35 AM
Is this a joke? Leclerc can not remotely compare to Challenger 2 in any way , it was quite a disapointment from the frech , they could of made a much better Tank.
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe       8/11/2007 9:08:37 AM
T-90 will give 'em both a run for their money!
 
 
thats funny are you talking about the updated T-72, the same tank that out numberd the abrams and challengers and got
completly wiped out with  no losses to  the west. T-90 is a good tank but lacks the fire control, range, armor protection,
of the M1A2,Challenger 2, or even the Leclerc or the Leopard 2. hell  the isreali Merkeva mark 4 is a all around better tank.
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

flamingknives       8/11/2007 10:13:14 AM
 
"thats funny are you talking about the updated T-72, the same tank that out numberd the abrams and challengers and got completly wiped out with  no losses to  the west"

Which, in turn, is funny because the T72s faced in Iraq were the very definition of an unupgraded export model, lacking much of the equipment and technology of even the contemporary Russian vehicle when it was first procured. When they bumped into the latest Western armour over a decade later, they were badly led and had poorly trained crews, so it's not surprising that they were wiped out. If they had been in the latest M1 models the Iraqi army would still have been routed.
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian       8/11/2007 10:26:24 AM












T-90 will give 'em both a run for their money!

 

 


thats funny are you talking about the updated T-72, the same tank that out numberd the abrams and challengers and got

completly wiped out with  no losses to  the west. T-90 is a good tank but lacks the fire control, range, armor protection,

of the M1A2,Challenger 2, or even the Leclerc or the Leopard 2. hell  the isreali Merkeva mark 4 is a all around better tank.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



What's funny? This whole thread or the T-90 giving both Challenger and Leclerc a hard time in the scenario you specified...(i.e.5000m+LOS) ???
 
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe       8/11/2007 11:00:07 AM
Which, in turn, is funny because the T72s faced in Iraq were the very definition of an unupgraded export model, lacking much of the equipment and technology of even the contemporary Russian vehicle when it was first procured. When they bumped into the latest Western armour over a decade later, they were badly led and had poorly trained crews, so it's not surprising that they were wiped out. If they had been in the latest M1 models the Iraqi army would still have been routed.
 
Yes the iraq tank crews were poorly trained and led, thats not what i said, i said that the T-90 oops i mean the upgraded
T-72 same russian usles junk did not have the range, fire controls, or armor of the tanks that i was talking about. Oh yah
and us or uk were not using the same abrams or challengers i was talking about, still all that dosent mater about the iraqi
training because the us tanks were picking off the iraqis at ranges where there tanks could not see the abrams, and the same wold hapen now with the T-90 and the M1A2 IN iraq and any where in the world. oh yah two more things the
rare times in the gulf when the iraqis did fire on the  M1A1 they took there rounds with almost no damage, there was
not one time when a sabot round hit a T-72 that it did not light up like a christimas tree. And back to the question about
traing you think that the russian crews in the T-90 have that much beter training than the iraqis in 91, come on man be
realestic.
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/11/2007 11:05:18 AM












T-90 will give 'em both a run for their money!

 

 


thats funny are you talking about the updated T-72, the same tank that out numberd the abrams and challengers and got

completly wiped out with  no losses to  the west. T-90 is a good tank but lacks the fire control, range, armor protection,

of the M1A2,Challenger 2, or even the Leclerc or the Leopard 2. hell  the isreali Merkeva mark 4 is a all around better tank.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What the hell are you talking about T-90 is the most protected Tank in the world.
And there is no way you can say Abrams can beat it , they can simply not compare since they don't have comparable doctrines.

The best overall tank given the capability would be Leo 2A6 for me.

 
Quote    Reply

usajoe       8/11/2007 11:38:55 AM
The best overall tank given the capability would be Leo 2A6 for me.

what the hell are you talking about, M1A2 is a combat proven beast no tank
in this world is  in its league. and the challenger 2 is better than the leo 2A6.
And thats a fact.
 
Quote    Reply

boris the romanian       8/11/2007 11:41:16 AM













Which, in turn, is funny because the T72s faced in Iraq were the very definition of an unupgraded export model, lacking much of the equipment and technology of even the contemporary Russian vehicle when it was first procured. When they bumped into the latest Western armour over a decade later, they were badly led and had poorly trained crews, so it's not surprising that they were wiped out. If they had been in the latest M1 models the Iraqi army would still have been routed.


 


Yes the iraq tank crews were poorly trained and led, thats not what i said, i said that the T-90 oops i mean the upgraded

T-72 same russian usles junk did not have the range, fire controls, or armor of the tanks that i was talking about. Oh yah

and us or uk were not using the same abrams or challengers i was talking about, still all that dosent mater about the iraqi

training because the us tanks were picking off the iraqis at ranges where there tanks could not see the abrams, and the same wold hapen now with the T-90 and the M1A2 IN iraq and any where in the world. oh yah two more things the

rare times in the gulf when the iraqis did fire on the  M1A1 they took there rounds with almost no damage, there was

not one time when a sabot round hit a T-72 that it did not light up like a christimas tree. And back to the question about

traing you think that the russian crews in the T-90 have that much beter training than the iraqis in 91, come on man be

realestic.



Ok, I'm not sure whether to take this thread seriously or not, but supposing I am for argument's sake...
 
 
At 5000m T-90 would get 1st shot via Refleks, any subquent shot would determine the engagement, but, I wonder, would the folks in this thread know the difference between GPS and boresight engagements..............?
 
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe       8/11/2007 11:57:41 AM
At 5000m T-90 would get 1st shot via Refleks, any subquent shot would determine the engagement, but, I wonder, would the folks in this thread know the difference between GPS and boresight engagements..............?
 
 
Ok the T-90 Uses the reflex missile which has a range of 5000m , the M1A2 IS about to get MRM-KE munition
which have a range of 12km my friend do your homework.oh yah isnt 5000m 5km.
 
Quote    Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics