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: Russian T90 vs. US M1A2 Abrams
achtpanz    6/14/2004 3:59:14 AM
Russian T90 vs American M1A2 Abrams - Which is better? If these tanks fought in battle, which would suffer more casualties, which one is superior? What are their advantages? Any information would be helpful.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
SantaClaws       4/1/2011 4:46:23 PM
More specifically you can go to gunner school without being a tanker. Strykers have a gunnery school for their .50 and 105mm systems. They are not tankers. They are infantrymen.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 4:47:21 PM
Again, your time would be better spent actually finding information to prove me wrong instead of writing essays to defend an untenable position.
taking YOUR OWN WORDS, and demonstrating that even YOU acknowledge bore diameter, expressed in calibers IS a measure of barrel length...as to evidence, You missed the 155mm L/39 155mm L/52 references, from CURRENT, non-naval artillery!?!  You missed my PAK 37 reference, barrel length measured in CALIBERS????  The Wehrmacht measured barrel length in CALIBERS?  So we have multiple sources, discussing NON-NAVAL heavy weapons, where barrel length is discussed in CALIBERS, multiples of....the only way to know the ACTUAL length is to know the CALIBER. 

 

And the L/39 v. L/52 discussion is a real, current, valid discussion of artillery characteristics.  The Bundeswehr has adopted a 52 caliber barrel for the Pzh-2000, the US has adopted the 39 CALIBER barrel for it's, or it's non-defunct, current SPH the FCS Non-LOS Cannon.  Many felt that the Bundeswehr made the better choice, but the answer was not so clear-cut.  So see discussions of barrel length, as a FUNCTION OF CALIBER, short-hand caliber=barrel length, are real, current, and involve non-naval weapons.

 

It's NOT difficult, it is, to use the SNL reference, both a dessert topping AND a floor wax...caliber IS the bore diameter, and multiples of the bore diameter describe barrel length....HENCE barrel length is measured in calibers....see logical, easy....

 

And if it ISN'T why did you mention the L/55 M-256, incorrectly?


 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Herald reply   4/1/2011 5:35:12 PM
H, names?  I got nuthin' you don't see in my links.  My 1960 EBs (and the yearbooks, which included the B-58 - oh how cool - sex on wings) are far in time and space.  Vellum-scented memories, ahh. 
 
And I don't recall the pieces being authored, any gate.  I suppose you could dig into the site.  I've read one or two Hoggs and cannot commit to say other than that he makes mention of 'calibre/s' in both senses.
 
Wouldn't proper current or historical authority be gov't docs?  Surely there is a US or UK field manual or the like.  Or maybe a mfgr's sheet.
 
I don't get the fuss.  L44/L55 obviously refers to 'calibers' and is as significant as whether your Python .357 Mag is the 3" snubbie or the 8" Hunter model. Not so much in accuracy as in MV.  This reminds one of the saying about academe: "the fights are so vicious because the stakes are so small."
 
To sum:
 
caliber - bore dia.
 
calibers - barrel length expressed as multiple of the bore dia. or "caliber"
 
And Wiki seems quite clear:
 

In artillery, caliber or calibre[nb 1] is the diameter of a barrel, or by extension a relative measure of the length.

The length of the barrel (especially for larger guns) is often quoted in calibers. The effective length of the barrel (from breech to muzzle) is divided by the barrel diameter to give a value. As an example, the main guns of the Iowa-class battleships can be referred to as 16"/50 caliber. They are 16 inches in diameter and the barrel is 800 inches long (16 × 50 = 800). This is also sometimes indicated using the prefix L/; so for example, the most common gun for the Panzer V tank is described as a "75 mm L/70," meaning a barrel 75 mm in diameter, and 5,250 mm long.

The bore to barrel length ratio is called caliber in naval gunnery, but is called length in army artillery. Before World War II, the US Navy used 5"/51 caliber (5"/L51) as surface-to-surface guns and 5"/25 caliber (5"/L25) as surface to air guns. By the end of World War II, the dual purpose 5"/38 caliber (5"/L38) was standard naval armament against surface and air targets. All three had a bore diameter of 5 inches (not 5.51 or 5.25 or 5.38 as often misread).

Further, the Canadian artillery PDF used as source in the wiki makes frequent use of the term "calibers" as a multiple of caliber or bore dia., e.g., that max length of a stable artillery shell is 5-6 calibers.

Now that my interest has been utterly exhausted...if anyone would like to provide some useful info that is vaguely topical I have a coupla Qs:
 
What are diffs Burlington/Chobham/Dorchester?
 
Why doesn't the US have access to Dorchester tech or, having access, use it?
 
What is the US doing instead?  Burlington-plus?  Burlington plus DU plates?
 
Generally feel free to expound upon or link to details re: Herald's,
Hint: the M1A1 originally did NOT use Chobham armor (1980) which is later than Burlington (1971). Just many of the principles and concepts of the British developed Burlington for the later American developed armor modules for the Abrams. We've since gone through at least TWO serious and different upgrades from the British armor module schemes on our little Abrams since 1990.
What's next (in passive)?
 
Who's excited about Israel's Trophy ADS?
 
Has not the Stinger in fact been adapted for air-to ground or for use on ground targets?  Since when or in time for which
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 5:40:49 PM
h**p://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_MOS_would_you_join_to_drive_the_Stryker_combat_vehicle
 
Both of you need to read that.
 
"Although a few different MOS's use the Stryker vehicle, the primary MOS to have the most chance of driving it would be 11B infantryman.

 
There are no tankers in Stryker Brigades. They are INFANTRY UNITS. You guys are about as clueless as Buzz. Seriously just shut up. When real Army people tell you that you are an idiot and just need to shut up, they are doing you a favor. I am doing you a favor and have been for the past 10 pages.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 5:43:54 PM

 
Has not the Stinger in fact been adapted for air-to ground or for use on ground targets?  Since when or in time for which war/s?


 

And what WAS that with the padlock on the Stryker?  A tow hitch? Locking the field phone box?  What?  It sure looked like a padlock.  I am VERY reluctant to believe that it is a substitute for dogging the hatches to keep terrorists out.


No. That's what hellfires are for.
 
Could be used to secure gear, trailer hitches etc. It's not for the door. The door is locked from the inside similar to the locking mechanisms on connexes.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Thx u for responses...   4/1/2011 5:59:07 PM



 


Has not the Stinger in fact been adapted for air-to ground or for use on ground targets?  Since when or in time for which war/s?






 



And what WAS that with the padlock on the Stryker?  A tow hitch? Locking the field phone box?  What?  It sure looked like a padlock.  I am VERY reluctant to believe that it is a substitute for dogging the hatches to keep terrorists out.







No. That's what hellfires are for.

 Can you absolutely confirm that?  I had thought we were looking for smaller cheaper answers with lower collateral damage that could be carried in greater numbers.  Anyway I'm pretty sure there's an air-launched version, and some block upgrade or other is supposedly able to do without "superelevation" making it suitable for ground attack.  But I am just googlefishing.

Could be used to secure gear, trailer hitches etc. It's not for the door. The door is locked from the inside similar to the locking mechanisms on connexes.

I accept that it is NOT for securing the hatch; wondering what for it IS.  But thank you.

 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 6:05:22 PM







 






Has not the Stinger in fact been adapted for air-to ground or for use on ground targets?  Since when or in time for which war/s?














 







And what WAS that with the padlock on the Stryker?  A tow hitch? Locking the field phone box?  What?  It sure looked like a padlock.  I am VERY reluctant to believe that it is a substitute for dogging the hatches to keep terrorists out.

















No. That's what hellfires are for.



 Can you absolutely confirm that?  I had thought we were looking for smaller cheaper answers with lower collateral damage that could be carried in greater numbers.  Anyway I'm pretty sure there's an air-launched version, and some block upgrade or other is supposedly able to do without "superelevation" making it suitable for ground attack.  But I am just googlefishing.




Could be used to secure gear, trailer hitches etc. It's not for the door. The door is locked from the inside similar to the locking mechanisms on connexes.





I accept that it is NOT for securing the hatch; wondering what for it IS.  But thank you.





The Stinger is IR guided so it's not suitable for ground targets. We can equip hellfires with different types of warheads, some that can kill individuals without much collateral.
 
There is no way to know what that specific one was for without having to ask the crew. Chances are it was to secure their gear.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 6:06:23 PM
And yes I can absolutely confirm that about the stinger. I'm a 60 pilot. It's my area of work.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/1/2011 8:34:15 PM

I don't have to change any facts.  Most important of which is that life is so bad in Russia that your population is shrinking and eventually you will be overrun by your savage neighbors. 
Wow... you are a badass kind of Nostradamus arent you...
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/1/2011 8:35:33 PM

And yes I can absolutely confirm that about the stinger. I'm a 60 pilot. It's my area of work.

What do you think of IGLA? Do you think Apache pilot would do that flashing knowing someone in an area might have it?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics