Wrighbrothers From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 1875 posts, RR: 9 Reply 6, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 18 hours ago) and read 3137 times:
I'd personally say, being in the military (hey cadets counts lol), that the Challenger 2 tank is (in my opinion) the best all round tank. Had a climb around a few of them and other tanks at REME (Royal Electrical Mechanical Engineers, bascially the army's engineers) and can confim, they are a pretty mean piece of machine, wouldn't like to see one of those coming for me..
Wrighbrothers
Always stand up for what is right, even if it means standing alone..
SandroZRH From Switzerland, joined Feb 2007, 3385 posts, RR: 51 Reply 7, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 17 hours ago) and read 3119 times:
You won't be able to get an unbiased answer here. Having served with these babies, i obviousely say tha the Leo2 is th ebest out there. They're probably all about equally good anyway.
MD11Engineer From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13368 posts, RR: 64 Reply 10, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 16 hours ago) and read 3092 times:
Quoting Helvknight (Reply 8): Now what time is it in Alaska? Or, to put it another way, how long have I left to live? Big grin
Don't worry about ANCFlyer. He currently seems to be inhabiting an Australian jail after doing some "fun driving" with what seems to be a souped up M113 or an AFW 432 in Sidney:
Quoting Helvknight (Reply 8): Or, to put it another way, how long have I left to live?
IMO, for whatever it's worth, I think the Challenger 2, Abrams and Leo are all on par wioth being the top of the line tanks in the world.
When you discuss "what is the best all around tank", you have to take everything about the tank into account. Firepower, Crew Survivability, Fire Control, Automotive Performance, etc.
For my $$$, it's the Abrams.
I am of course partial to my Abrams . . . but I know first hand the capabilites of that machine. I know none of the Soviet era/Russian built armor we challenged in the desert stood a chance in hell against the Abrams. I watched a couple of turrets fly off those things. I've been inside a T72, T64, and a T55. All equally worthless.
How fast will the M1 Abrams really go when the governor's disabled? I asked a guy who's a track mechanic recently returned from the mean streets around Ramadi and he laughed and said 'no comment'.
Fridgmus From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 1383 posts, RR: 11 Reply 18, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 9 hours ago) and read 2902 times:
T-72? Are you kidding? It was obsolete 20 years ago and like ANCFlyer said, "Piece of Shit"
While the M1A2 Abrams has my vote, a strong honorable mention should go to the Israeli Merkava 4!
Photo courtesy of zahal.org.
The Lockheed Super Constellation, the REAL Queen of the Skies!
MCOflyer From United States of America, joined Jun 2006, 8556 posts, RR: 14 Reply 20, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 8 hours ago) and read 2852 times:
40+ mph without the governor and i've heard the tracks will melt if any faster than 40.
The Abrams. Very good machine capable of delivering a large loud wake up call.
CupraIbiza From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 831 posts, RR: 7 Reply 22, posted (5 years 11 months 1 day 6 hours ago) and read 2806 times:
See below extract from Wikipedia.
The T-72 is common around the world in the armies of many potential enemies of the U.S. and other Western nations. Many Western analysts regard this as worrisome because, at least theoretically, its 125 mm 2A46 main gun is capable of destroying any modern main battle tank in the world today, including the M1 Abrams. On the other hand, on those three occasions when Soviet clients using T-72s have met Western armies that possessed modern main battle tanks —Lebanon in 1982 (against the Israeli Merkava), Iraq in 1991 (against the U.S. M1 Abrams and the British Challenger 1), and again Iraq in 2003— the T-72 did not show its abilities. After clashes in Lebanon in 1982, both the Israelis and the Syrians claimed their main tank's superiority, but there is no verifiable evidence of a T-72 meeting Merkava in battle. In the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi tank units were heavily defeated, although this might have more to do with the poor training and full air supremacy than with any deficiencies of the T-72 itself. Furthermore, while facing the most modern Western tanks, the versions the Iraqi army fielded were out of date at the time. The Iraqi T-72s were downgraded export versions that had not been significantly upgraded over time and were firing inferior ammunition (often with steel penetrators and half-charges of propellant).
Everyday is a gift…… but why does it have to be a pair of socks?
Authoritative source there, probably a quote from the sales brochure.
25 CupraIbiza: Haha very true. I like that. Good point.
26 ANCFlyer: I don't give two shits what Wikipedia says . . . I have first hand . . . read that COMBAT . . . experience against that piece of shit and I can tell
27 GQfluffy: Right. Wasn't there a report of an M1 that got stuck in the sand, and several Iraqi tanks started taking pot shots at it, only to be blown away by th
29 Fridgmus: Well, I guess that ends THAT debate! 72 mph? Oh Hell yeah! Hey BA, where can I get one of those? We could have some serious fun with them over here o
31 ANCFlyer: Well, I can't attest to that, but I can tell you if you 'track' an Abrams, you NOW have the baddest stationary gun platform on the Battlefield. I hav
32 MDorBust: Hey, while we have the attention of the tank brains... Can anyone tell me what the heck this thing is? It's been driving me nuts. It looks like the bu
33 ANCFlyer: It's a missile, not a tank round. that's my initial assessment. I'll look at longer, but I KNOW it's not a KE round from a panzer. Could be a Shillel
34 MDorBust: TOW had two sets of guidance fins. Maybe something akin to the guided missile the russians could fire from the main gun of a tank?
35 L-188: No way that is a 152 mm weapon. I suspect that somebody is working on a guided weapon for the 120mm. I would guess it is the 120mm that arms the Abra
36 ANCFlyer: Somewhere burind in my Hard Drive is a test video for an AT missile. . . . real killer weapon. I will lookfor it, and if I can figure out the technol
37 AirSpare: Not to nit pick...but it would be a high speed camera with a frame rate, I would guess from looking at it, a 100,000 frames per second. There is no e
38 Waterpolodan: ANC, cool to hear stories from a tanker with real combat experience! Can I ask, how many T72s did you guys actually engage in direct combat? I don't
40 SandroZRH: That's a so called Buffalo. A help and rescue tank built on a Leo2 chassis. Nothing too exciting
41 DYflyer: Leo1 not leo2. It is an engineer´s vehicle used to dig trenches etc. The help and rescue tank would be the bergepanzer witch is a bit higher and hav
42 MD11Engineer: Don't forget when the T-72 was introduced, in the early 70s, basically a counterpart of the later American M-60, the British Centurion and Chieftain a
43 ANCFlyer: " target=_blank>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_...sting The Battle of 73 Easting was the most 'flamboyant' battle of the Gulf War. The Russians s
44 Dougloid: My acquaintance did say that the...ahem...learning excursion....did bad things to the engine and it had to be changed the next week because it got si
45 Zak: calibre: around 120mm gun: certainly rifled, so the rheinmetall 120mm gun used by leo's and in license by abrams is to be ruled out warhead: i assume
46 ANCFlyer: More likely the the transmission got sick, not the engine. The engine - the turbine itself - isn't very large. The tranny on the other hand is the si
47 MDorBust: I think I found our mystery projectile. This is some really hi-tech stuff. http://www.defense-update.com/products/digits/120MRM.htm
48 MD11Engineer: Did you only have experience with the export models or also with the versions issued to the Soviet / Russian Army, which AFAIK where much better equi
49 ANCFlyer: In combat, only with export models. I have been aboard T72s that were "comandeered" from the Soviet army however. Yes, the Soviet doctrine was to ess
Sponsor Message: 
From Canada, joined Jun 2005, 1324 posts, 
From United States of America, joined Aug 2005, 2839 posts, 
From Australia, joined Feb 2007, 831 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2005, 1875 posts, 
From Singapore, joined Nov 2005, 1541 posts, 
From Germany, joined Oct 2003, 13368 posts, 
From , joined Dec 1969, posts, 
Printer friendly format 
