[Ricky]

Yeah, export versions of Soviet tanks are generally far worse than those used by the Soviets themselves. Plus the Iraqi crews were not of the same standard as the US & UK troopers (it would seem).

So KBO, are Rheinmetall better than the Royal Ordinance Factory at tank guns?

[PanzerMeister]

[Castelot]

[Jeffrey]

It was more of a reaction of the first part of this reaction:

The Rheinmetall L/44 equipping the Leopard/Abrams and the Giat L/52 equipping the Leclerc are said to be the best tank guns nowadays.

I don't know sh*t about the L/52 but the L/55 has more range than the L/44 and can take/use better ammunition

[KBO]

[KBO]

The Giat 120mm L/52 gun is barely on the same level as the Rheinmetall L/55, but still not as powerful. The Giat L/52 gun is almost identical in performance to the Rheinmetall L/44 gun, although with some of the newer ammunition, it has surpassed it slightly.

Btw since were talking tank ammunition here, im pretty sure the Isreali's have some of the most effective Long rod penetrators in the world today !

KBO

[Grieg]

The thing about tanks that isn't apparent (and isn't sexy) is the whole command/ control/ communication infrastructure that goes with it. The M1A2s computerized digital link hookup and the air recon assets (not to mention satellite recon) that support it through the US military is second to none in the world. In fact no other country comes anywhere close in being able to call on those kinds of assets. An insurgency or guerilla conflict isn't where the MBT really shines. If a country had to field multiple armored Corps in opposition to the US forces none of the countries MBTs mentioned would live long enough to make a difference.
Sorry if this sounds arrogant but it is simply a fact.

[Jeffrey]

I can't call it arrogant, it sounds alot like pro-US, like US tanks are the best in the world...

But about that first part about communications, doesn't every country has that ability?

[KBO]

Grieg the Leopard has like the Abrams wich has borrowed its gun, borrowed the Abrams 'Gut's"=All the electronic gatches, plus the new generation of FLIR ! 'And' the L/55 gun and sighting system on the Leopard are also slightly more accurate ! Same goes for the Leclerc, wich has some even more advanced input then both the Leopard and the Abrams !

So U.S. tanks wouldnt have a better chance than almost any other European tank !

KBO

[Jeffrey]

Damn Grieg, you sound like one of the Abrams developers, don't believe all the things they tell you on Discovery Channel, Discovery Channel is PRO-USA all the way...

[Wspauldo12]

I think you mean History Channel. More than half the History Channel is about the military, or ammies, or weapons in general. Thats why I love it so much

[Grieg]

[KBO]

[GP]

[Jeffrey]

[Jens Knudsen]

The US dont have the capability to move a army corps, they always leasing ships from danish A P Møller and other companies, they did that in the first golf war in 1991 and they did that in the 2003 golf war......

The Leopard 2A5/A6 is just as good as the Abrams, and it cost less to buy and operate...

[Grieg]

[Jeffrey]

''situational data " = command and control. There is no single element in war fighting more important. The French do not possess the other elements of command and control to input good and timely data and to provide the level of support needed to support even a single armored division.''

Every country is trained in this, how can you tell other countries are not able to do this?

Any source?


''The SEPs system is not simply a GPS system. As to what will happen in the "near future" we can discuss it again, after it happens, if it happens.''

I know that, its a BCS, or Battle Command System, we already got it ready, just not installed yet because of the lag of space...
The STRV-122 has the most intellegend BCS of any MBT.


''Res ipsa loguitur Absolutely they are. When was the last time Germany or Sweden engaged in military conflict? ''

because the Swedisch or the Germans have never seen ''modern'' action before doesn't mean they aren't ready for it, i'm beginning to doubt your intelligence when you think that without war experience you can't fight a war, we are trained for it and when it comes to the point we must grap our guns (wich i hope is never) we are ready!


''Lol..this nonsense doesn't deserve a response.''

This is told by a Sergeant 1st Class instructor who has more years of experience than you probably live and even served 6 monds with a US Infantry Division in Bosnia, so don't call it nonsense.


''a superpower? One day yes, probably. Not yet and not for some time.''

Yes a superpower, it could be a dangerous thread, there landforces are as big or even bigger as the whole US army (army, navy, airforce, MP)


''They wisely make use of the most efficient and cost effective way to perform this most difficult and expensive undertaking. Do not assume that because that is the case that the capability does not exist to perform in another manner, even if it would be less efficient, slower and more difficult.''

What if, on someday nobody wants to give them ships


''The L/55 is even better than the M-256 overall''

Doh! The L/55 is the followup on the L44 (or M-256)


''Granted the L/55 is a better gun all other things being equal however since the M-256 is capable of killing any MBT in the world and from a considerable difference I don't see the need to upgrade the gun at this time.''

Ofcourse its capable of killig every MBT in the wordl ... from the back of hull/turret it is!
Frotnal armor, side armor?
If so, source please...


''Armor? What aspect of the Leopards armor do you think makes it superior to the Abrams? It does not have steel encased depleted uranium as does the M1A2. Exact details of armor composition are clasified so what are you basing your conclusion on.''

The Leopard2a5/a6 has hollow armor who are effective against some weapons, mostly older weapons, wich most of our ''enemies'' have

The DU in the armor is not an advantage on the ceramics that are in the Leopard, DU can be even dangerous for the crew...


''Abrams have been shot at and struck by Soviet suppled weaponry and have never been penetrated frontally or suffered a catastrophic loss. Has the Leopard been battle tested anywhere?''

The frontal armor on mdoern MBT's is so thick/strong that almost no weapon can penetrate it, thats why enemies don't aim the frontal armor

The Leopard is not battle tested, but it doesn't have to, you can test the armor just by shooting things on it at the training grounds, i've heard that the frontal armor of the Leopard2a5 can take up to 7 hits from the most powerfull AT-weapons in the world, true? maybe, maybe not...


''As to proven performance go back as far as the first Gulf War and read of the engagements in darkness, smoke, blowing sand etc and the sighting system has been impoved in the Abrams since that time.''

Yeah, thaks for fighting that war because we are allies, and because we are allie you give us information, and ofcourse researches look at the tank losses during Golf War 1 and 2, we look what destroyed the tank, if we know what it is, we gonna put improvements on our tanks

Darkness, smoke, blowing sand don't have any effect on the sightning system...

[Jens Knudsen]

When did Germany last fight a war? who do you think used armor warfare first??


The US army might be good at fighting an open 'normal' war, but winning the peace, they s*#K, just look at Iraq

You cant use a armoured corps to win the peace after a war, you need self thinking infantry on the ground, something the US army need alot......

An armoured corps is not good at fighting in cities, armor is for open ground, drive your tanks inside a city and......well you can ask Russia what happen in Grosnija(?) in Chechnya when they used tanks there, they lost alot of them...

Fighting a guerilla war is for infantry and special forces, not armor, the only westen country I know that have won a guerilla war in modren time is UK, in 1960s in Boneo where they used the SAS.

Peace-keeping: peace-keeping operation dont need armor, it need self-thinking infantry, something Europe is good at.....

war against terror: no use of tanks there, you need special forces and infantry and good intelligens

armor is good at one thing, to fight other armor and for that the Leopard 2A5/A6, the Leclerc and the Challenger 2 are just as good as the Abrams

DU is not something I would use, when you hit a target, the heat forms uraniumoxid, a fine white dusth that is toxic, uraniumoxid was found on the Iraqi tanks after the first golf war, tanks that was destroyed with DU ammo

[Roel]

People, this topic is about modern tanks, not about superpowers and international politics! If you wish to discuss the value of nations' armoured forces as a whole then please do so on actual information concerning training, OOBs, and combat records. Please also note how training has often come to simulate combat situations so closely as to almost count as experience "under fire", a point where NATO is very strong.