Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Wars and ConflictsΒ  permalink

Modern day Armour

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by uberduff (U13844503) on Wednesday, 25th February 2009

  Sorry if this has been touched upon before,just like to hear what you think is the most effective tank out there today? by effective i mean most devastating gun, turret roation, ground clearence , speed, power, etc.

  Link to this forum: Modern day Armour

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by RSS_643_IKWIG (U13662597) on Wednesday, 25th February 2009

  Wednesday. 25th February, 2009. 10:57GMT
  Re. uberduff
  NB. With respect, I'd prefer to engage a full Armoured Division in the field (either in a 'night laargar' or extended DRAW, ie. 'razor') with a single or multiple ground - strike missile system whose warhead had a 3.2 mile diameter circular hemispherical 'burn', albiet none - nuclear / non - radioactive...
  In the old days of the so - called COLD WAR; that would have meant a 'battlefield nuclear weapons system' such as the LANCE: with the attendant radioactive fall - out...
  However, if the PEACEMAKING and the attendant PEACEKEEPING is 'sanctioned' by the UN (United Nations) Security Council; then the old fashioned idea that still holds sway is 'armed response': ie. that the opposition has to be forced to negotiate, which usually justifies the expense of an 'armoured element' to support the 'mechanised infantry'. In which case; I personally would invest in a 'bloody good' SPG (self - propelled gun). Something like the existing SA90 / SPG (or better) may fit the bill, particularly where the existing 155mm shell is seen uncharacteristically, in level flight; inotherwords: in the horizontal anti - tank role.
  Towards the end of the 2nd World War (prior to the so - called July Plot) the REICH invested in the large calibre / heavy tank barrel. Not just the 8.8cm but the 128mm; at which point 'the word on the street' was; 'What did happen at CAMBRAI?'. This was answered with bewilderment as the GERMAN survivors of Cambrai, 1917 were 'few and far between'. The 'weird Detail' as far as the NAVAL DIVISION was concerned; was the 6pounder HOWITZER: developed by the NCD (Naval Construction Division) of the BRITISH NAVY. Two each; in individual 'battleship style' sponsons: on each 'Mother I' and 'Mother II' HMLS (His Majesty's Landship), AFV (Armoured Fighting Vehicle) or TANK. Used as an SPG as well as a TANK; the 'supporting artillery fire' of the 'Mother II': was exceptional. Whilst some 360 TANKS were available for the proposed 'offensive ACTION'; the 'armoured thrust' was in the form of three colums of 30 TANK's each: whilst the BATTERY of 'supporting artillery fire' was supplied by 'the balance' from behind the BRITISH reserve - line. Note the length of shot from the 6pounder and the explosive yield at the target and you will begin to understand that several observers such as PATTON put their money into the 76mm side sponson of the later inter - war M3 Grant / Lee AFV.
  ps. Please remember that 'the bone of contention' with the contemporary SPG is the forward engine compartment and the 'armour shield' which is 'a moot point' with contemporary APC's (Armoured Personnel Carrier's) such as the WARRIOR APC and the BRADLEY APC and indeed the IDF (Israeli Defence Force) MAKERVA AFV...
  For a real 'bewildered Detail'; take a good look at the 'old hat' but still rather 'good - looking' VICKERS 105mm ABBOT SPG and point out where the fuel tank is located.

  Link to this forum: Modern day Armour

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by Steelers708 (U1831340) on Wednesday, 25th February 2009

  Dear RSS_643_IKWIG,
  
  Why can't you ever just answer the question being asked instead of always coming out with your long winded giberrish?

  Link to this forum: Modern day Armour

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by stalteriisok (U3212540) on Friday, 27th February 2009

  i bought a book called MBT (Main Battle tanks) which was published at the time the Challenger was new
  
  what made me laugh was the preamble which said something like "Britain has always led the way in tank design apart from the brief period of the second world war"
  
  now thats a pity lol - we ruled Bovington but battlefields were above us
  
  the conclusion was the Challenger was going to be the best but the Leopard was the best at the time(even tho the israeli Merkava was the only one tested in combat - it also had a rear door so tank crews could have an escape route)
  
  st

  Link to this forum: Modern day Armour

  Report message4

Back to top