Challenger tank is shit

Eli Roberts
Eli Roberts

Another piece of information revealed another Western tank bites the dust.

275mm RHA glassis
500mm RHA turret

MUH BLOODY INPENTRABLE CHOBHUM ARMOUR

Attached: 1242345475893268467967.png (565.1 KB, 540x750)

Other urls found in this thread:

steelbeasts.com/topic/10104-merkava-armor-layout-and-protection-estimates/
defence.pk/pdf/threads/arjun-ii-mbt-development-l-updates-discussion.292466/page-63
defenseindustrydaily.com/baes-lrod-cage-armor-03473/
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uniform
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_design
amazon.com/Design-Development-Fighting-Vehicles-Ogorkiewicz/dp/0356014614
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_European_Plain
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Plain
military-today.com/firearms/rpg_30.htm
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumerang-BM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M133_Kornet-EM
scienpress.com/Upload/JCM/Vol 4_1_9.pdf
quora.com/Can-you-destroy-an-enemy-tank-by-opening-the-hatch-and-dropping-a-grenade-inside

Brandon Jenkins
Brandon Jenkins

It could be a Land Rover with a mounted FN MAG and it would still beat Russian tanks.

Attached: Impenetrable.jpg (98.04 KB, 944x636)
Attached: Russian.jpg (106.29 KB, 800x599)
Attached: Armour.png (703.55 KB, 747x560)

Xavier Wilson
Xavier Wilson

Challenger III
Somehow I doubt the validity of your document from just one part
Also 630 RHA pen will destroy any Tank.

Attached: ClipboardImage.png (1.34 MB, 960x882)

John Peterson
John Peterson

That's Challenger I, it says right in the same sentence that Challenger II and III doubles that.

Jace Cook
Jace Cook

Doubles glacis to same 500mm RHA as turret

Also 630 RHA pen will destroy any Tank.
Pls. Westaboos not so long ago counted 700-800-900mm RHA kinetic protection on their tanks.
muh Challenger is most protected tank in the world!

Christopher Allen
Christopher Allen

Challenger 2
After various upgrades now equipped with
more armour than any other MBT in service
Electric drive system for turret and gun
ERA
Slat armour
now experimenting with installing hard and soft kill APS
It would need to be a block of solid armour plating a few dozen metres across to be better protected than it is.
Granted it would be nice to equip it with barrel launched ATGMs, and review the decision to keep the rifled gun, but what the hell does Denmark know about tanks anyway?

Attached: British-Tank-Design-Philosophy.jpg (51.76 KB, 480x480)

Michael Long
Michael Long

tonks
lel, they're just obsolete targets for aircraft

Get in tonk
Start engine
Get detected by CAS via heat signature
RIP
Tonks will go the way of the battleship friendos

Attached: an-air-force-agm-65-maverick-missile-on-an-a-10-warthog-attack-jet-the-maverick-is-an-air-to-ground-missile-designed-for-close-air-support-M9DA8T[1].jpg (92.72 KB, 1300x840)

Logan Edwards
Logan Edwards

Aircraft won't be too far behind them m8.

Nathaniel Butler
Nathaniel Butler

Now, now, not all tanks have helicopters reactors in them.

Matthew Campbell
Matthew Campbell

Nah, you have to carry the missiles into action somehow.

Luis Powell
Luis Powell

Except tanks are great for nations that have little or no air power, including North Korea.

IN;B4 THEY HAVE TONS OF AIRCRAFT!!!!1

EXCEPT NONE FROM THE MODERN ERA.

Austin Morgan
Austin Morgan

But user, with their An-2s North Korea can easily insert special forces teams behind our lines, causing our entire offensive to collapse.

Hudson Torres
Hudson Torres

Muh armor
[laughs in discarding sabot]

Cameron Edwards
Cameron Edwards

You laugh when your only air defense is a stinger crate per battalion and your airforce doesn't go lower than 10 000ft, even an An-2 becomes a problem…
Luckily Worst Korean takes war a bit more seriously than burgers…

Attached: 2011.5.3-육군방공학교-비호사격-(7633942120).jpg (186.25 KB, 2953x1459)

Grayson Perez
Grayson Perez

Is the Stinger even sensitive enough to reliably pick up an An-2 engine?

Asher Peterson
Asher Peterson

Nice gorillion dollhair kite you got there, would be a real shame if it got shot down.

Attached: yeah-money-well-spent.png (172.54 KB, 500x367)

Landon Hughes
Landon Hughes

Yeah, but an F-117 isn't an F-35. Stealth technology has come a long way since then, and as Israel has proven, the F-35 won't be easily taken out by an S-125, or even the S-200! Although it's destroyed by birds. So it's pretty much undefeatable. Lockheed does it again!

Attached: israeli-f35b.jpg (712.52 KB, 1183x900)

Nathan Perry
Nathan Perry

pic
inb4 some hungarian mongol comes sperging in

Carter Baker
Carter Baker

Is the Stinger even sensitive enough to reliably pick up an An-2 engine?
My point exactly.
I gonna go with "probably, but not at the same range as it would a jet".

Joshua Perez
Joshua Perez

To be fair, wasn't that 117 flown at the exact same time through the same passage consistently, escorted in the middle of several non-stealth aircraft?

Gabriel Hill
Gabriel Hill

and when the vehicle carrying the missiles gets shot down a few dozen kilometres before it gets anywhere close to firing range, what then?

Camden Sullivan
Camden Sullivan

DANI
A
N
I

Attached: Dani-Zoltán.jpg (125.9 KB, 418x507)

Elijah Evans
Elijah Evans

muh CAS

Good luck when you fight real war with equal oponent

Attached: 2s6-tunguska.jpg (87.81 KB, 600x375)

Brody Turner
Brody Turner

It could be a Land Rover with a mounted FN MAG and it would still beat Russian tanks.

Yeah, but only if you gave the tanks to arabs.

Hudson Brown
Hudson Brown

letting CAS even get remotely close to where you are

Attached: serveimage(3).jpg (175.38 KB, 1000x541)

Brayden Nguyen
Brayden Nguyen

Fucking beat me to it

Charles Rodriguez
Charles Rodriguez

Get detected by CAS via heat signature
< he actually believes this

Oh man, LOL. It's hilarious people actually believe this happens when you DON'T park your armour out in the open in the desert like the Iraqis did.
Thanks for the chuckle.

Chase Mitchell
Chase Mitchell

Hello Vlad

Cameron Wood
Cameron Wood

Challenger II is overrated, we all know that. But compared to the garbage that is the Leopard 2A5, 6, 7 and anything after, it is better armored. Not even the Abrams can compete.
However, I was always interested the kike tank. Have they even lost a single one yet? Do we have details on it's armor? How does it's armor compare to modern MBTs? Looks pretty thicc

Attached: 5.jpg (383.13 KB, 1280x960)
Attached: wallhaven-27759.jpg (404.05 KB, 1600x1200)

Elijah Cooper
Elijah Cooper

They keep flipping them over somehow

Jaxon Martinez
Jaxon Martinez

Oh nevermind, it looks good but it is actually a tincan. I forgot that the Jews make this and they would never waste precious shekels on stuff like this.
steelbeasts.com/topic/10104-merkava-armor-layout-and-protection-estimates/

Brayden Fisher
Brayden Fisher

500mm
armored

Attached: 1242345475893268467967.png (938.26 KB, 960x724)

John Jones
John Jones

Where the hell are you finding these supposedly "secret" documents?

Christopher Ward
Christopher Ward

had another overdose of semen?

Luke Young
Luke Young

In the google. Praise stupid Swedes.

Attached: b771cae640283305d0cd981730cdd475f5b11cc1139f6fd243530bcc66585b67.png (205.78 KB, 1600x1724)

Nolan Russell
Nolan Russell

Hm, now the real question:
are they real, leaked secret documents, or deliberate disinfo?

Lucas Stewart
Lucas Stewart

This is classified information.

Brandon Bailey
Brandon Bailey

This is classified information.
How could we possibly know for sure?

Attached: serious-thought.PNG (452.51 KB, 846x391)

Jeremiah Miller
Jeremiah Miller

All those upgrades and the poor thing is still stuck with a dead-end gun and no CITV for the ones in British use.

I wouldn't want to have to argue as to whether they are legit or not, but the numbers don't seem too out of the normal.

Attached: 1480536185823.jpg (136.28 KB, 800x658)
Attached: 1398211340491.jpg (112.62 KB, 800x554)
Attached: Leopard2A4-LOS.jpg (181.62 KB, 800x600)

John Murphy
John Murphy

Something that can be shot at by ground troops who are bored

Reliable means of transportation of special forces

You're pulling my leg!

Lincoln Anderson
Lincoln Anderson

Meanwhile in the real world the first two are what happens to Turkish Leo2 when hit by AT-7s (yes wikipedia is a sauce and says they're A4 but they're not, they bought old German A4 from west German surplus and then they were then refitted to be at A6 level of protection by a joint Turkish/German venture. Now I'll grant that roach quality is what it is but in theory at least those have a much more modern armor packages than A4s).
Last one is what happen when a real AT-14 hits…

Attached: id14086-05.jpg (238.64 KB, 1004x543)
Attached: id14286-04.jpg (228.82 KB, 1007x546)
Attached: id17120-04.jpg (95.35 KB, 1024x576)
Attached: id17120-06.jpg (74.79 KB, 1024x576)

Xavier White
Xavier White

Attached: 1242345475893268467967.png (378.33 KB, 1127x307)

Wyatt Morales
Wyatt Morales

Something that can be shot at by ground troops who are bored
Reliable means of transportation of special forces
<What is a helicopter?

Kayden Morales
Kayden Morales

Is the Stinger even sensitive enough to reliably pick up an An-2 engine?
This is classified information. But Russian declassified field manual for SA-7 is in the google. Yes even this ancient MANPADS with non cooled seeker can engage piston engine planes and helicopters.

Easton Brooks
Easton Brooks

Yeah and all the UAE Leclercs except 1 (well the tank itself survived, the crew not so much…) so far have shrug off everything threw at them (while Saudi M1A2S have ended up the same as Turkish Leo 2 even against bootleg Iranian AT-3s).

Oh and the UAE don't even have ordered the proper "urban kits" with added reactive armor, just basics rear cage armor and anti-molotov tiles on the engine…

Nathaniel Baker
Nathaniel Baker

What is context
Implying air assault infantry is not a horrible idea overall
Implying the defensive armaments make the helicopter an equal or worse design to a propeller aircraft, that neither has the capability to carry as many people as a helicopter, or its defensive armament.

Tyler Bailey
Tyler Bailey

Careful mate, you will make the kraut asshurt again. They still believe that the Leopards aren't literal tincans armor-wise

Carter Edwards
Carter Edwards

capability to carry as many people as a helicopter,
Except it can carry more, unless you're talking a CH-53E

defensive armament.
Rocket pods, bombs, napalm canisters, etc. I'd have to dig, but pretty sure it can carry more, and more weight too. With a minor upgrade, it copuld carry missiles as well.

Jaxson Rivera
Jaxson Rivera

Despite being a piece of garbage, the Leo 2A4 is the sexiest tank around.
Change my mind.

Attached: Leopard2.jpg (907.58 KB, 1920x1080)

Gavin Robinson
Gavin Robinson

Attached: Type-95-Ha-Go-in-Thai-service,-with-digital-camo.jpg (37.81 KB, 328x240)

Josiah Barnes
Josiah Barnes

Trash

Jason Watson
Jason Watson

Attached: FCM-36-Saumur.00045hyp[1].jpg (241.33 KB, 800x600)

Jacob Reyes
Jacob Reyes

Have they even lost a single one yet

Arabs have been blowing them up for ages.

Lebanon War:
In total, 50 Merkava tanks (predominantly Merkava IIs and IIIs) were hit, eight of which remained serviceable on the battlefield. 21 tanks suffered armour penetrations (15 from missiles, and 6 from IEDs and anti-tank mines).[40] Six were destroyed.[7]

Attached: 5Pd4d6K.jpg (49.69 KB, 950x810)

Kayden Roberts
Kayden Roberts

It's cute, not sexy

Jose Ramirez
Jose Ramirez

Why did I greentext this

Joseph Ward
Joseph Ward

Best IRST in the world is mounted on F-35, and it has a range of a few kilometers for detecting a tank with a TURBOSHAFT engine.

If you're seeing a tank on IRST, his organic air defense is sure as fuck seeing you, no matter how many billions of dollars your jet is layered in.

Yes but range is 5 times less.
So instead of engaging the An-2 at 3km (the stinger engagement range for jets), you're engaging him at 600m. That's a bit retarded.

Especially if they're crazy enough to fire a few flares from it.

Yeah, but an F-117 isn't an F-35.
Yeah, but an F-117 isn't an F-35.
Yeah, but an F-117 isn't an F-35.
Yeah, but an F-117 isn't an F-35.

No it's worse, picrel.

No it wasn't, don't try to lessen the failure.

Helicopters can carry less weight than planes, this includes weapons, armor, and personnel.

Attached: F-35-RCS.jpg (152 KB, 537x596)
Attached: f35-vs-f117.png (510.55 KB, 1904x817)

Eli Ortiz
Eli Ortiz

Westaboos not so long ago counted 700-800-900mm RHA kinetic protection on their tanks.
No they did not. That's against HEAT which somehow along the way got translated to being against SABOT but it is not. Against a Kinetic penetrator most Tanks will be lucky to score 500mm at max. If anything your OP document has done nothing but highlight the Challenger as being one of the best protected MBT's if it's scoring 500mm at it's minimum against a Kinetic penetrator.
The Merkava is one of the most overrated Tanks in existence and they've lost countless numbers of them. What it does have going for it though is that it's crew protection is ridiculous so the chances are that if when the Tank gets hit you will survive.
Roaches don't know how to use Tanks. More news at 11. Their M60's have actually been surviving better than their Leopard 2's but that's cause their Pattons are nothing but ERA and spaced armor

Overall though sage cause OP is a fucking cuckchan retard that does not know how to read at all and made a bait post.

Evan Perry
Evan Perry

That's against HEAT which somehow along the way got translated to being against SABOT but it is not. Against a Kinetic penetrator most Tanks will be lucky to score 500mm at max
L O L

Angel Evans
Angel Evans

Note: software is treating the entire aircraft and all of its parts as purely reflective metal surfaces

Dominic Roberts
Dominic Roberts

RAM doesn't reduce it by a whole order of magnitude mate. If it did, we wouldn't need the maths at all.

Samuel Hall
Samuel Hall

No it's worse, picrel.
I'm pretty sure he was being sarcastic there.
No it wasn't, don't try to lessen the failure.
Looking back at it, I can't see any direct mention of that being a factor in the shootdown, but rather NATO aircraft in general having that habit. I'm not entirely sure the details, since some sources claim that the 117 was only detected when it opened and others that the modified radar was able to reliably track it as it.

Jason Jenkins
Jason Jenkins

to be fair you can give them top of the line tanks and they still manage to fuck up

Evan Phillips
Evan Phillips

The abrams is such a gigantic piece of shit that even goat-fucking inbred sandniggers can blow it up with nearly a century old rpg-7's.

Attached: american-trash.jpg (85.94 KB, 888x565)

Alexander Hill
Alexander Hill

I know. Saudis abandoned fully armed and ready M1A2s after being engaged with DShK fire.

Jacob Clark
Jacob Clark

What it does have going for it though is that it's crew protection is ridiculous
<so the chances are that if when the Tank gets hit you will survive
That's what the kikes claim, but in reality every time something penetrates, the crew is as good as a pile of ash. The engine at the front isn't enough to stop a kinetic round. Sure it will stop ATGMs and make the tank useless in the process which defeats the whole purpose of armor in the first place but against any actual tank round, it won't do jackshit. The round will go through like butter and genocide the crew.

The Merkava only has good turret protection against ATGMs. The sides despite better than a Leopard's are still paperthin and you will have to be really lucky to not die from a side impact.
But despite all that, I still like the tank's aesthetics

ANYWAY
What do you lads think of the Frankenstein roach tank? Half German, half Korean and a little bit of everything else. From what I've seen it is a pile of garbage. Why would you waste money on a tank that can be frontally penetrated by everything your neighbors have? Then again I'd have to ask ourselves the same question.

Attached: roach.jpg (151.1 KB, 1000x666)

Camden Wood
Camden Wood

We really should have cast the entire project overboard, why the Pentagon thought it would be a good idea to field an MBT based on a German design is beyond me.

Attached: c2ooofzxeaisazv.jpg (49.08 KB, 605x336)

Brody Taylor
Brody Taylor

Let's discuss the spectic tanks. The Arjun 2, and the Tank EX. The Arjun 2 is a heavy MBT that is indigenously built actually tons of foreign made parts slapped together . It is the heaviest tank in service in the world today. It's composite armor can supposedly stop a 125mm APFSDS round at point blank. It's armed with a rifled 120mm gun that can fire HES rounds and LAHAT ATGMS. The tank EX is basically the Arjun's little brother. It's a t72 chassis with an Arjun mk1 turret. No further comments neded.

Attached: arjun-mk2.jpg (146.04 KB, 600x400)
Attached: Indian-Army-Tank-Ex-in-parade.jpg (30.32 KB, 394x253)

Luke Thompson
Luke Thompson

stop a 125mm APFSDS round at point blank
You seriously trust them on this? It uses one of the most utterly retarded armor layouts ever seen in history. Even a fucking WWII round would go through this like butter.
As for the rest of the tank, it doesn't seem any better than a Leopard 2A4. I would be surprised if it managed to stop anything other than some cheap ATGM. Against another tank this thing is as goof as dead unless it manages to get the first hit.

It truly drives me mad that countries can't be arsed with making a properly armored tank. We won't be fighting retarded shitskins armed with cheap RPGs and ATGMs forever. Sooner or later first world countries will go to war and it will be a proper war.What kind of subhuman is okay with putting his own countrymen in deathtraps that will blow up the moment any tank hits them? 2 centuries of tank research and development and for some dumb reason we have reached the conclusion that we need to make tanks that are less than 60 tons in weight and have only barebones armor at the front that may or may not stop old soviet ATGMs.

Attached: main-qimg-1eb4e1ae314baa4267dbfd3e169cee45-c.jpg (52.58 KB, 572x429)
Attached: Current-Arjun-Turret.jpg (50.36 KB, 600x600)
Attached: 2.jpg (161.31 KB, 710x774)
Attached: 3.png (242.13 KB, 602x401)

Justin Perez
Justin Perez

As with all things pajeet they made it even shittier than the tank they based it on
Big heavy (literally the heaviest mbt in the world) and fuckingslow (800hp)
shit inefficient engine
The singularly most retarded armor layout in the history of tank design
cut a big hole in the side for the gunsight so the gunner’s side is entirely unarmored
hilariously shit ammunition and exposed ammunition rack
pajeets say it is as good as the challenger 2 and outperforms the t90
it is so shit the real Indian army (busy stomping pakis with their t90s and t72s) refuses to use them
Sauce: defence.pk/pdf/threads/arjun-ii-mbt-development-l-updates-discussion.292466/page-63

Attached: F65AE8E9-7E81-4BCA-8331-9306B68349D1.jpeg (108.48 KB, 572x536)

William Gray
William Gray

Don't forget about the gun blowing up and the engine not being able to handle high altitudes.

Caleb Clark
Caleb Clark

Are you both retarded?
No tank will happily take ATGM hits to the side.

they were then refitted to be at A6 level of protection by a joint Turkish/German venture
Then where is the extra NERA armor an A6 would have?

Attached: 1398211188582.jpg (105.26 KB, 800x491)
Attached: 1439599901690.jpg (1.09 MB, 2514x2909)
Attached: 1439598286148.jpg (804.65 KB, 3369x783)

Cameron Stewart
Cameron Stewart

Waste millions per tank
Smelly 74IQ shitskin armed with $700 chink half a century old RPG shoots your tank at the sides and completely annihilated it
<dude are you retarded??! Every tank sucks therefore you shouldn't shit on specific designs!!!

Jason Long
Jason Long

We really should have cast the entire project overboard, why the Pentagon thought it would be a good idea to field an MBT based on a German design is beyond me.

Could be worse; without German influence, a pure(heh) 56%er tank would have performed worse than a t-72. Luckily, you won't have to use that tank against anything but sandniggers.

It's funny how streetshitters have billions for armament but not a single cent for a working sewage system.

Aiden Sanchez
Aiden Sanchez

btw why are you trolling this board like an infant retard, shouldnt you be busy paying back all the debts you made to the eu and other jewish banks

Andrew Gutierrez
Andrew Gutierrez

Nice SAM battery you have there. Too bad it can't track a target at any meaningful ranges without a network of high powered radars guiding it.

Attached: AGM-88E-HARM-p1230047[1].jpg (374.08 KB, 2395x894)

Cameron Price
Cameron Price

A simple "yes, I am retarded" would have sufficed.

Nathan Green
Nathan Green

why are you
There's 3 of us
trolling
The only people who use that term are literal normalfaggots or lefties. And no, I'm not 'trolling'. You're just so hilariously delusional that you think I'm actively trying to anger you. Just accept the fact that your tanks are garbage and your entire country in general. Germany died in 1945 and fuck off.
56%er
Oh nevermind, I stand corrected. A nuGerman faggot also happens to be a lefty. Hitler and the millions of white men who trusted in him are rolling in their graves.
zero arguments
Excellent work at explaining why modern tanks aren't piles of garbage that get taken out by literal sand monkeys.

Pic related a tank with alleged over 6 gorrilion RHA protection is taken out by shitty ATGMs because super powerful latest technology MBTs have all their armor at the front and leave their sizes thinner than a fucking WWII's tank.

Attached: 1.jpg (127.46 KB, 798x480)
Attached: 2.jpg (88.29 KB, 962x529)
Attached: 3.jpg (179.71 KB, 520x293)
Attached: 4.jpg (14.89 KB, 474x266)
Attached: 5.jpg (102.91 KB, 550x360)

Gavin Foster
Gavin Foster

It would've been different if the M1A2 was an M1A3, and the Leopard2A4 were a Leopard2A7. It literally doesn't even matter anyway, because the tankers were Arabs, or Turks, etc. and you don't even need armor on the sides. It's as useless as a tank being able to fire an ATGM. Checkmate, Russian troll!

Anthony Ross
Anthony Ross

we need to see out of the tank
ok lets install a periscope, that way we can see over the frontal armor
NO
WAIT
I HAVE IDEA
LETS CUT WINDOW DIRECTLY IN FRONTAL ARMOR!
but that would weaken it severel-
SHUT UP WE ARE DOING IT!

Logan Russell
Logan Russell

launch them from continental US. all of our wars will now be fought with hypersonic stealth cruise missiles that use genetic imaging to detect >56% genetic purity to make sure no american is killed, and will fly all the way from florida to whatever shithole without being detected or being able to be shot down.

Aaron Torres
Aaron Torres

No tank will happily take ATGM hits to the side.
I know of one.

Attached: serveimage.jpg (102.33 KB, 1024x448)

Juan Morris
Juan Morris

No, you don't know one.
Also take note of how it has the same hull-storage layout for ammunition as the Leopard 2.

Attached: 1433853725365.jpg (249.62 KB, 1410x588)
Attached: 1515913327299.jpg (123.47 KB, 900x777)
Attached: 1442967460594.jpg (209.78 KB, 1824x1368)

John Parker
John Parker

You do realize that a leclerc and a Leo 2 have virtually the same width?

And one as a turret that go all the way to the skirt and the other doesn't?
Yet the Leclerc turret has less side armor than even a leo2A4 (which also has storage on both side, have to put that shit somewhere)?

All the estimations for the Leclercs are for the turret armor, but all Leclercs have a NERA blocks array before that that is systematically ignored, because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor, while german/US tank design is 'put all the armor at the front".

Attached: leo-2s.jpg (114.64 KB, 800x533)
Attached: NERA-module-installation.jpg (943.15 KB, 1528x994)

Aiden Davis
Aiden Davis

How much does this extra armor affect the speed?
Elaborate on when the French decided to do this please? I'm interested to see the philosophy behind it
was it because the maginot didn't work and so this time yall fucks went a full line across the border this time?? Or was it because the use of the reverse gear is needed to engage the enemy?

Isaac Gutierrez
Isaac Gutierrez

How much does this extra armor affect the speed?
Extra weight reduces speed unless you add a more powerful engine
Elaborate on when the French decided to do this please?
When they realised that stale bread wasn't really a useful armour material on their MBTs.

Angel Perez
Angel Perez

Extra weight reduces speed unless you add a more powerful engine
I was asking for a estimate on how much it affected the speed. Pardon me.

Christian Carter
Christian Carter

Oh boy, look at all those sources!

Connor Powell
Connor Powell

because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor, while german/US tank design is 'put all the armor at the front'
Tank designers and even warship designers knew better than this over 100 years ago. Tanks with enhanced frontal protection will beat tanks with uniform protection 100% of the time. No amount of 300mm RHA coverage is as good as 1000mm RHA of frontal arc-only coverage. A literal uniformly-armored tank would be a deathtrap which any modern AT weapon could easily kill in any situation, so I can't imagine you meant this literally.

Aiden Murphy
Aiden Murphy

Fair point, the Leclercs only advantage was its speed, cutting a single kmph off that makes it basically worthless - considering that it's defenceless against a 1970's vintage Fagot (which seems rather apt).

Nicholas Baker
Nicholas Baker

How much does this extra armor affect the speed?
It doesn't it's not meant to be used without it.
It's purely semantics, it's not part of the turret armor, it's additional armor modules. But it's how the tank was designed from the get go (in fact the storage part is 100% designed to be even more armor modules if there is a need for it, that way you would have an ERA row before, the NERA row for example).
Same with the skirt. See all the bolted thin plates it's placeholders for ablative armor modules.

The Leclerc is simply NOT in the same generation of tanks as the M1 and Leo 2 the thing has been designed completely differently with the idea that armor material evolves faster than armor platforms and modularity in combat is a big fucking plus.
It has a core armor which is typically where it's specs come from and is literally the minimum, most of it's protection is on the parts that are removable from it and greatly varies depending the threat profile and mission assessment.
Has to move a lot? Dump the armor for more fuel efficiency.
Excepting T-90s? Add plates of ablative armor.
Excepting ATGMs? Add even more ERA.
Much better armor material exist? just make some modules.
Tanks is damaged? Remove the module, put a new one.
Explosive are expired? Remove them put new ones.
You don't have to drive the tank to the factory every time you can do it with a field workshop.

All future tanks will be like it (the armata is even a step further with crew/combat/propulsion modules). Modernized tanks have some elements of it (but are hindered by the legacy platform's design).
Tanks with enhanced frontal protection will beat tanks with uniform protection 100% of the time.
Sure.
Except for two little tiny tiny details.
==1. TANK DUEL ALMOST NEVER HAPPEN IN REAL WARFARE.== It's the bayonet charge of the cavalry.
2. When they do happen: the tank that fire first, usually touch, and the first to touch usually wins.

So you're gonna design a vehicle around the armor that is gonna be useful in 0.1% of the fighting it's gonna do?
Armoring tanks to fight against other tanks of the same generation is pants on head retarded. Tanks need to be armored against EVERYTHING ELSE but other tanks.
If they ever have to fight other tanks, that's what the metal masterwork gun, the ammo made of shit that is as rare as gold is for and the insane electronic suite to fire it accurately is made for.

Oh boy, look at all those sources!
Oh boy look at the burger that think his eyes aren't sources but shit someone wrote with paint before posting it to a forum is.
Tank designers and even warship designers knew better than this over 100 years ago.
That's the prime example of why US tank design is so wrong. A tank is NOT a warship. It never was.
The romance of great tank battle on vast plains is just that: a fantasy.
No. Not even in WWII. Tanks in WWII were overwhelmingly defeated by… AT weapons. Not other tanks. Because tanks not only evolve on terrain (meaning taking cover as a tank is a thing) they evolve in combined warfare as a result they will NEVER EVER intentionally engage in face to face with both side being aware of the situation.
Because it's as retarded as bringing your troops squarely to face each other and have them fight. It's against everything modern warfare is.

A literal uniformly-armored tank would be a deathtrap which any modern AT weapon could easily kill in any situation, so I can't imagine you meant this literally.
considering that it's defenseless against a 1970's vintage Fagot (which seems rather apt).
Except Leclercs have been engaged for YEARS now in Yemen and the houtis blew up at a least a dozen of M1A2S (which are M1A2 with the armor package of the M1A3 program), the kurds/IS blew up almost ALL the Leo2 the turks deployed, to the point the Turks withdrew them for their M-60 + heavy ERA and IS has basically killed all the M1 the US had left in Iraq.

Meanwhile the UAE reported 2 leclerc written off, 1 after the commander took a tandem HEAT to the torso, it was deemed repairable as no vital parts of the tank were damaged and it didn't burned out or anything (likely just spalling effect) and 1 that took a fucking ballistic missile (houthis flying trashcan) lucky warhead on it, in a base (empty but hatches open).

There was various detracking and multiple impacts of everything the houthis have but so far they're holding very, very well.
Hence why KDNS has presented the "Leo2 chassis with Leclerc turret" thing, they except to sell a fucking lot of those.

Attached: iraqi-M1-cemetery.jpg (175.27 KB, 1200x774)

Cooper Jackson
Cooper Jackson

Give me an RPG and a tunnel to hide in. I'll impregnate the bitch.

Gabriel Evans
Gabriel Evans

Give me an RPG and a tunnel to hide in. I'll impregnate the bitch.
No you won't.
Have you ever seen a leclerc from the back?

Attached: no-homo.jpg (75.22 KB, 640x427)

Cameron Cook
Cameron Cook

Have you seen one from underneath?

Lucas Jackson
Lucas Jackson

his eyes aren't sources
I'm sorry Frenchie; I don't have X-ray vision. I still see no proof that your expedient surrender vehicles have even armor distribution.

The romance of great tank battle on vast plains is just that: a fantasy.
Battle of 73 Easting.

Cameron Bell
Cameron Bell

Well there is an escape hatch under it that's for sure.

You can always IED it, no problem. You can IED anything.
Explosive and shovels are cheap.

Landon Green
Landon Green

Have you ever used an RPG facing up?

Angel Barnes
Angel Barnes

Battle of 73 Easting.
If a french men want to blow up a T-55 crewed by shitskins he uses a ERC-90 sagaie.
Anything else is a waste of resources. (French AMX-10 RC did the same against Iraq at a smaller scale, obviously. Does it mean an AMX-10 RC is equal to a M1A1? Or that the Iraqi were really really really shitty?).

William Taylor
William Taylor

Leclerc is actually the most modern, well armed, and well protected western tank. Which is pretty sad considering both Chinks and Russians came up with newer tanks after it.

That's only true up until the early cold war actually, which is why TDs and assault guns were still viable back then. Biggest predator of tanks today isn't another tank, it's a RPG, ATGM, bomb, a cluster bomb, an artillery shell, a missile, and an airborne autocannon. Even IFVs and stationary AT guns claim more tanks than other tanks.

All around protection helps you a lot more today.

The only major "tank vs tank battle" of the last 50 years was gulf war, where the enemy was stationary and using his tanks as pillboxes, which were underarmored and shooting training ammo

William Miller
William Miller

And daily reminder that pic related is more resistant to ATGM than a fucking chobham armor.

Attached: 61AruHBlS3L.jpg (77.81 KB, 500x500)
Attached: 051-ps-53201-bk--1.jpg (550.43 KB, 1300x1300)
Attached: chicken-wire-plant-cloche-xl.jpg (410.55 KB, 775x775)

Parker Morales
Parker Morales

nosources.pdf

Adrian Lewis
Adrian Lewis

Chinks and Russians came up with newer tanks after it.
They probably suck though.
The only instance I've heard of a challenger 2 being penned by an ATGM is when an rpg 28 hit the underside, where there was no composite armor, and it blew off the driver's foot.

Eli Ward
Eli Ward

Tank designers and even warship designers knew better than this over 100 years ago. Tanks with enhanced frontal protection will beat tanks with uniform protection 100% of the time.
Yeah, that must be why the Germans won WW2 against you, because they made tanks with most of the protection on the front.

"muh sources!"
Post sources proving your own claims, autist burger.

Tbh, the Brits hardly used their tanks in Iraq compared to the US.

Easton Moore
Easton Moore

The only instance I've heard
heard
TRAINING ACCIDENT
MALFUNCTION
PILOT ERROR
Could that have anything to do with the governments of America and Britain owning over 90% of internationally circulated media? RPG28 is like six levels down behind when it comes to HEAT warheads, even RPG7 comes with similar warheads nowadays.

HEAT penetration is directly related to caliber.

RPG7/29 is 105mm warhead.
Next in line was 120mm fagot and similar missiles.
Then 125mm RPG28 warhead, which can rekt any tank frontally, if they just aim to hit hull.
Then 130mm Ataka and others, which can rekt any tank from any angle.
And finally 152mm Kornets warhead, which is more than enough to assure penetration of any chobham armor.
Anything above that (like alas or hermes) is intended to penetrate from a ships hull to its engine through any obstacle.

And yet a chicken wire can stop all that shit. Anyone who thinks simple dumb armor is the future is a fucking retard and ought to 'ole yeller himself.

Asher Gomez
Asher Gomez

the burden of proof lies on the skeptic
Dumbass

chicken wire can stop all that shit
You don't understand how cage armor works.

Michael Mitchell
Michael Mitchell

No need for sources, it's obvious. ATGM would activate on contact with the mesh, but since there is no armor to defeat, it's essentially useless. These mesh sheets have been used as ATGM protection for quite a long time, and with great success. Reactive armor technology superseded air gapping technology.

Matthew Phillips
Matthew Phillips

HEAT penetration is directly related to caliber.
Wrong. It's a function of charge strength and projectile plate shape. Additional charges increase penetration linearly.

William Ward
William Ward

If you give M1 to arabs it could be defeated by a Land Rover too.

Adrian Lopez
Adrian Lopez

Dumbass
Cocksucker. You're claiming that decent protection levels in non-frontal arcs are not relevant, despite losing a significant number of tanks to threats from non-frontal arcs.
Considering there's a significant number of M1 Abrams tanks that have been blown to shit, both in US hands and in the handas of your allies, I'm skeptical of your claims.

Attached: destroyed-abrams-iraq-1.jpg (27.48 KB, 798x571)

Jacob Fisher
Jacob Fisher

Yeah, that must be why the Germans won WW2 against you, because they made tanks with most of the protection on the front.
Germany losing the war is PROOF BEYOND ANY DOUBT that everything they did is a bad idea
Your argument is singularly the stupidest thing in this entire thread. Germany also used the StG-44 and lost the war, guess it's time for every nation on earth to ditch their automatic rifles.
Every tank in WWII prioritized frontal armor, anyway, which makes you doubly braindead.

Brayden Watson
Brayden Watson

You don't understand how cage armor works.
Please tell me nigger I need a laugh.

In theory, you are correct.

In practice, charge strength, projectile material and projectile shape is similar across all warheads, even across nations, due to economy constraints and the fact that any new development is instantly copypasted by everyone else.

So the only remaining variable is caliber.

Xavier Evans
Xavier Evans

You don't understand how cage armor works.
Read: …and you may recall the use of mesh fencing in Vietnam as an anti-RPG screen.

misses the point and turns it into an ad-hominem, again.
<56%_face.gif
You even ever seen a tank from up close, Cleetus?

Attached: Saudi-aid-airdropped-to-ISIS-captured-in-warehouse-with-parachutes-still-attached..jpg (34.51 KB, 599x398)

Evan Garcia
Evan Garcia

No, I'm not claiming anything. I'm saying that I need evidence of Frenchie's claim that the leclerc has uniform protection levels from all qngles, and has protection from all angles that can "happily take ATGM hits from the side." That is an extreme claim, and extreme claims require extreme evidence.

Cage armor works by crushing the warhead between the slats and either shorting out the piezoelectric sensor that detonates the warhead or disrupting the shape of the copper liner so a proper jet can't form. That's not something that can be done with just chicken wire. That's also something that isn't as foolproof as you make it out to be. Cage armor has an effectiveness of about 50%.

defenseindustrydaily.com/baes-lrod-cage-armor-03473/

"Those of you thinking that screens aren’t 100% certain to prevent warhead detonation, depending on the angle at which the piezo-electric crush fuze hits it, are correct. Andres also points us to Russian equipment manufacturers external link who tout cage protection against PG-9S grenades, which use much the same concept. Claimed protection is “0.5 probability [DID: 50%] in the areas covered by grill screens.”"

make illogical argument
get called a dumbass
ad hominem

Julian Gutierrez
Julian Gutierrez

Frenchies words were:
french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor, while german/US tank design is 'put all the armor at the front".
This is a statement of design. Or in burger-friendly language, french design emphasises even 360-degree protection, while German/US design emphasises frontal protection.

Where is he wrong there?

"happily take ATGM hits from the side"
See his image at The lateral armour layout indicated is clearly a better design compared to the Abrams one we can see in my image, especially as it incorporates NERA or ERA within the basic design, unlike the Abrams, which at best can be fitted with the TUSK system as an afterthought.

And finally:
autistic screeching
< what is sarcasm, or did you miss it in my WW2 comment here:

…and again; have you ever seen a tank up close and in person, or not?

William Bell
William Bell

Forgot image ffs…

Attached: destroyed-abrams-iraq-2.jpg (171.78 KB, 960x717)

Aiden Ross
Aiden Ross

Where is he wrong there?
The part where he gives precisely zero sources.

incorporates ERA
And? ERA isn't magic space dust. Volume wise, it's inferior to hard armor because it can be completely defeated by tandem warheads. The only advantage of ERA is keeping weight down.

Ryan Harris
Ryan Harris

The part where he gives precisely zero sources.
And this is actually relevant when discussing an image of armour layout because?

ERA
Do you keep that brain as a paperweight or what? Look at the layout The storage box is set up to predetonate the precursor charge in a tandem warhead, the ERA is laid out to knock the teeth out of the main charge, and the composite armour is laid out to absorb any residual penetration from the jet.

Once more again, ANSWER THE QUESTION:
Have you ever physically had contact with an actual modern MBT, or not? My money is on no, and you're just an armchair "expert".

Ryder Young
Ryder Young

And this is actually relevant when discussing an image of armour layout because?
Because the image doesn't indicate that the tank has uniform 360 degree protection. The statement is also dubious, because that would be pants-on-head retarded tank design. So, given that the claim is dubious and there is no evidence provided, I'm gonna need some proof.

the storage box will detonate the precursor warhead
Doubt.jpg

you're just an armchair expert
You mean like you are?

Juan Parker
Juan Parker

Why don't we make a tank that can never die?

Attached: 1.png (484.09 KB, 1280x720)

Jacob Gutierrez
Jacob Gutierrez

What is a design philosophy and how is it different to actual engineering design.
Perhaps more importantly, why is it you cannot tell the difference?

It's clear even from the few images available, that the Leclerc has more emphasis on lateral protection than an M1 or Leo2 (or pretty much any other design for that matter). Now, you can argue whether that's a good thing or not, but there's no way you can deny that they showed more emphasis on side protection than the US/DE.

You mean like you are?
You mean that I, a former tank crewman, magically have less idea what I'm talking about than you because you keep demanding sources? Cool story bro.

Caleb Edwards
Caleb Edwards

that sophistry
The Frenchie claimed that the leclerc has uniform 360 degree protection. I want a source for that, or I will have to conclude he's talking shit, as per usual.

former tank crewman
I would ask for whatever the Australian form of a DD-214 is for proof, but that's besides the point since tank crewmen aren't engineers. Got any engineering experience?

Liam Roberts
Liam Roberts

Heh, based Vietcong

Oliver Williams
Oliver Williams

The Frenchie claimed
*buzzer sound*
His EXACT words were: "french tank design"
Not the same thing, and you know it. You're just shitposting now.

I would ask for whatever the Australian form of a DD-214 is for proof
< implying I would ever put anything that could personally ID me on a chan. ever.
engineering experience
Like you have any? LOL

Gonna have to see some sources on your claims there amerifat.

Andrew Parker
Andrew Parker

The two issues punishing weight are power demands, stress on the powertrain and suspension, and bridge crossing abiliry.

This isn't 1945 or evem 1980. Western engineering can deliver a powerplant and drivetrain capable of handling literally any level of power imaginable tjat fits within the confines of a tank's engine bay. Metallurgy and mechanical design has also progressed to the point that suspension issues are easily solved should militaries bother to reach out to their consumer market vehicle manufacturers. The last hurdle is that of river crossing capability which becomes less of an issue with each passing year as the world upgrades its infrastructure. Any country worth fighting has had to enter the 21st century in terms of over the road heavy transport capability. Asidd from countries like NK that are too mountainous for tanks to begin with, every major road in the world is able to support 80+ ton tanks. If they blow the bridges, so what? It's not like fording in a 60 ton tank is any easier than in an 80 ton one.

Joseph Young
Joseph Young

his exact words were…
…"because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor"
FTFY

that backpedaling
what is shooping out identifiable information
So you're not a former tank crewman then. Good to know.

like you have any
Did I ever claim to have any experience engineering tanks? Can you show me where I made that claim?

Lucas Garcia
Lucas Garcia

Still talking shit and not understanding basic english even as well as the frog did.
56% burger education
SAD!

backpeddalling
Whatever floats your boat burger. Why not post your driver licence and credit card on here? I'm sure youre happy to do that since you can remove identifiable info, amirite? It's not like there's a small pool of Aussie tankies to begin with in the first place compared to burger ones.

experience engineering
You sure "backpedalled" fast on that one now didn't you? Gonna whine about me not being an engineer again? It doesen't take a degree to notice the obvious.

Jace Edwards
Jace Edwards

y-you just don't understand English!
The words are clear as day:
"because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor"

why not post your drivers license and credit card
If there was a pertinent reason to and I had the opportunity to black out all my personal information, I would.

gonna whine about me not being an engineer
Show me where I did. I asked you if you did have engineering experience, because that would lend credibility to your claims.

notice the obvious
That the tank has some ERA panels on its side? That is not equivalent to:

"because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor"

Thomas Myers
Thomas Myers

The words are clear as day:
Yes, our frog friend stated that the French design philosophy is to provide reasonably even protection all round as much as possible. It is you who doesen't understand basic english.
It is not the same thing as it actually being designed to have equal protection all round.

If there was a pertinent reason to … I would.
And there is no pertinent reason for me to, so I won't, because it's stupid.

that would lend credibility to your claims
As would you having experience serving in armour or doing engineering. Since you have neither, *shrug* you have no credibility, ESPECIALLY since you don't understand nuances in basic english.

That is not equivalent
Nuance is a difficult thing, isn't it? Design philosophy went from all-round aircraft up to about 1950, then threw itself headlong in the pursuit of speed above all else, until this was shown to be a bad idea a decade or two later.

In the same way, a balanced philosophy of tank design which is cognisant that linear conflicts are unlikely in the future, and that providing reasonable all-round protection is a better choice than almost exclusively preventing frontal attacks, is superior to the existing paradigm.

Now, I can't condense that down to ebonics, and I don't know spanish, so unless you can somehow remove from your head the fictional and groundless belief that the frenchman said that the Leclerc's protection is identical all round, I can't help you overcome being a nigger. Soz.

Ian Nguyen
Ian Nguyen

our frog friend stated that the French design philosophy is to provide reasonably even protection all round as much as possible
"BECAUSE FRENCH TANK DESIGN ARMOR IS UNIFROM 360° ARMOR"
UNIFORM 360° ARMOR
UNIFORM
UNIFORM
Do you not understand the definition of the word "uniform?"

And there is no pertinent reason for me to
Yes, there is. It could lend your statements some degree of credibility. Rather than being some random user, you'd be someone with at least some experience with tanks. But since you won't post it, you have no greater credibility than me.

Since you have neither, *shrug* you have no credibility
I have exactly the same amount of credibility as you do, since I am simply a civilian like you are.

Nuance is a difficult thing
There's not much nuance about:
"because french tank design armor is uniform 360° armor"

groundless belief that the frenchman said that the Leclerc's protection is identical all round
You know, there's a word that describes that. Identical all round… identical all round… identical all round… I wonder what it is… oh, that's right! The word is:

UNIFORM

Jacob King
Jacob King

he still doesen't understand
he never will understand
he's still shitting up the thread
Americunts, not even once.

Attached: autistic-screeching.jpg (54.32 KB, 1280x720)

Mason Watson
Mason Watson

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uniform

Henry Bennett
Henry Bennett

You even ever seen a tank from up close, Cleetus?
I've been to the Kubinka tank museum in Moscow, which by itself means I've probably seen fifty times as many tanks as you have. Your arguments are still stupid, and so are you.

Benjamin Watson
Benjamin Watson

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_design

amazon.com/Design-Development-Fighting-Vehicles-Ogorkiewicz/dp/0356014614

The French have a different design philosophy than you, no need to be so autistic when you don't understand this.

Attached: American.jpg (92.12 KB, 480x640)

Luke Hill
Luke Hill

The French have a different design philosophy than you
So where's your proof that it's a

UNIFORM

design philosophy?

Nicholas Torres
Nicholas Torres

Where is your proof that the protection is designed to be equal over the 360deg?
You are claiming the frog stated the protection level is identical all round. That's not what he said.
muh uniform

L O L
O
L

Attached: american-autistic-screeching.png (372.84 KB, 980x922)

Ethan Adams
Ethan Adams

Where is your proof that the protection is designed to be equal over the 360deg?

merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uniform

Josiah Thompson
Josiah Thompson

points to a dictionary
Ghee whiz, batman, I didn't know the frenchie wrote that dictionary.
It was blindingly obvious what he MEANT, as opposed to what you autistically ASSumed he said.

mfw

Attached: wasbinichsehend.gif (800.58 KB, 250x195)

Robert Bell
Robert Bell

i-if I can't prove something, I'll just claim he wasn't really making the claim he made!
i-it's just a metaphor!
merriam-webster.com/dictionary/uniform

Angel Turner
Angel Turner

Can you too retards stop sperging at each other for a second? I want to discuss the armor on this tank.

Attached: 1453171844713.jpg (272.57 KB, 1600x949)

Luis Mitchell
Luis Mitchell

Can you too retards stop sperging at each other for a second?
No.

Gavin Stewart
Gavin Stewart

i-i-if i s-s-stutter in text it proves my misinformed point is right!
i-i-if I keep pointing to the dictionary to justify why my literal understanding of something that only an actual retard could have taken literally is true, I'll win the argument!

Nope. Still wrong. Let's see if your autism will keep you replying until we hit bump limit, shall we? I'll be back after work to see if you can be baited.

Attached: thumbs-up-(2).gif (686.46 KB, 300x200)

Juan Robinson
Juan Robinson

misunderstanding
He specifically said uniform 360 degree protection. That's pretty fucking clear cut.

only an actual retard could have taken literally
No, only an actual retard could have assumed it was true. So I asked for evidence.

Michael Martin
Michael Martin

Read:

I didn't say you "misunderstood". I stated you took a figurative term as literal. Subsequent events showed you refused to correct your error. That's not misunderstanding by this point, it's wilful idiocy, which is pretty clear-cut.

Keep bumping the thread though autist, theres only a few hundred more posts to go!

Attached: Matt-Preston-reacts-to-you.gif (2.05 MB, 480x245)

Nathaniel Parker
Nathaniel Parker

Read:
Doesn't say anything about the non-uniformity of leclerc armor.

took a figurative term
There's no other way to take "uniform 360 degree armor" than the literal meaning.

If I make a table, and I say it's uniform height, and someone says it's not really, it's sloped at a 45 degree angle, would it make any sense to say "well, when I said it was all the same height that was just a figurative term!"

Isaiah Bailey
Isaiah Bailey

If I make a table, and I say it's uniform height, and someone autistic like you measures it and starts screaming that "it's got a 2 degree slope, that's not UNIFORM!", and I tell them they're a faggot and should kill themselves because it was intended to be level but for various reasons it isn't, does that make you or me wrong for making a broad statement?

Also, yeah, you really should kill yourself autist.
Now, I actually have to go.

Attached: kys-3.jpg (67.46 KB, 456x557)

Chase Cox
Chase Cox

it's got a 2 degree slope
So what you're saying is that when Frenchie said that the armor was

UNIFORM

What he actually meant that it wasn't exactly

UNIFORM

But slightly off from

UNIFORM

by such a small margin that it doesn't make any actual difference as far as the armor being of

UNIFORM

thickness is concerned?

Elijah Morales
Elijah Morales

RPG 28 can penetrate 1000mm of RHA. That's pretty good considering the Kornet can do 1500mm.

Sebastian White
Sebastian White

Hermes
1000mm RHA penetration
AlAS
800MM RHA penetration
"intended to penetrate from a ships hull to its engine through any obstacle."
Is this just normal leaf shitposing, or are you this stupid?

Attached: �-�-�.png (535.18 KB, 964x543)
Attached: 4b11c095859a286b1a1df2c705ba96976706d012a27917d208260ab66de01bee.jpg (101.49 KB, 839x833)

Samuel White
Samuel White

and well protected western tank
lol.

Attached: 1242345475893268467967.png (1.04 MB, 1124x834)

Christian Davis
Christian Davis

Slat armors only good vs specifically HEAT threats, primarily RPG-7 family who have nose fuse defeated by slats.

Gavin Ward
Gavin Ward

Read nigger, that's base armor. It's like comparing T-72 base armor, which is 350-400rha.

It also works by getting the RPG to bounce off it.
That's also something that isn't as foolproof as you make it out to be.
Slat armors only good vs specifically HEAT threats
HEAT threats are the modern battlefield.

Let me make this perfectly clear for you niggers:
IF I WAS IN A TANK WITH ONE METER STEEL EQUIVALENT ARMOR, I WOULD HAVE MORE TO FEAR ON A MODERN BATTLEFIELD THAN IF I WAS ON A JEEP WITH SOME CHICKEN WIRE WRAPPED AROUND IT.

Jayden Long
Jayden Long

that's base armor.
No. Its all they got.

Slat armors only good vs specifically HEAT threats
HEAT threats are the modern battlefield.
There was misspelling
specific HEAT threats
Many HEAT threats have fuses designed to negate slat like protection. RPG-26 and AT-5 are such examples revealed for public.

Cooper Carter
Cooper Carter

not using your superior Canadian water armor :^)

Michael Jenkins
Michael Jenkins

Excessive mobility is not a good thing, remember the BT serries? Unfortunately It HAS to be this way as everyone fell for the air superiority meme. A major issue imho is the fact that most western nations also have to fight everywhere for (((NATO))).
I wonder how the Type 10 would hold up, for inside japan/mountainous areas it seems well, but once again its only gonna be fielded in the low hundreds probably. It's very interesting to see the Leclerc with Hydro suspension given the fact that the only other country with it (partially) hydro appears to be Russia? I am not familar with the geography of france but does it contain many large rolling hills/mountains like Japan/China The latter should really have hydro suspension but they're going for the meme of numerical superiority and probably can't build it anyways lol?
spoiler
You do realize that the large, sweeping tank battles like Kursk are unlikely to happen without some sort of Third world conflict right Although I'd love to see some niggers face off in T72 or T55 variants for maximum luls
HEAT threats are the modern battlefield.
I thought the majority of rounds still carried are HE or was that a WWII meme?
**I feel retarded but APHE would still work for side shots or do current era MBT's also have ERA between the tracks and the chasis?

Jordan Cox
Jordan Cox

Reading threads like this makes me realise we need another world war so you fuckers will finally stop arguing impotently over what weapon systems are better.

Nathaniel Diaz
Nathaniel Diaz

If they could make a tank that was faster than an air-launched ATGM then that could work, I'm not sure a human crew could react fast enough to drive that anywhere but into the first building/ravine/tree they came across.

everyone fell for the air superiority meme
tbf aircraft can be incredibly useful against armoured targets.

Jace Foster
Jace Foster

WWIII breaks out
modern military equipment deemed prohibitively expensive and time consuming to manufacture for conscript armies
most modern military equipment ends up being mothballed in favor of older, cheaper and simpler systems
once the war ends Zig Forums bickers about the pre-war weapons because they were never used extensively

Jason Reyes
Jason Reyes

Does that mean we'll get to see knee-mortars, anti-tank rifles, and battleships again?

Evan Gonzalez
Evan Gonzalez

Exactly what soviets thought when they adopted two tank doctrine.
Cheap,upgradable T-72 thats easy to mass produce and maintain
Expensive T-80 for elite regiments

minus the bickering

Attached: Massed-Tank-Charge.webm (2.81 MB, 1280x720)

Austin Cox
Austin Cox

*Hell March plays in the background*

Until, three years into the war, all that is declared too expensive and armies start dusting off the plans for the Land-Pattern musket.

Grayson Cook
Grayson Cook

They can. But remember the US bombing campaign in Jugoslavia?
I'm not saying its worthless. But the way the current Air defenses are progressing we might have a cavalary situation again

need grinder not hells march

Gavin Phillips
Gavin Phillips

muskets in jet age
Whould this please The Murdercube?

Better?
almost anything Frank Klepacki would do

Attached: Glorious-Motherland.webm (3.73 MB, 550x270)

Jaxson Collins
Jaxson Collins

grinder
If we're sticking to Frank Klepacki then machines collide would work, does anyone have a 4 minute vid of Russian massed tank exercises?

remember the US bombing campaign in Jugoslavia?
It's what always happens when someone tries to 'win the war from the air'. You'd have thought that they'd have learned by now.

If that wasn't Politburo sanctioned propaganda then it should have been.

Jaxson Jenkins
Jaxson Jenkins

knee-mortars
Rifle grenades would be cheaper.
battleships
Monitors would be better.
Land-Pattern musket
For a moment I thought that's a w40k reference.

Attached: Magos-Arkhan-Land.jpg (412.08 KB, 800x1228)

Robert Lewis
Robert Lewis

While monitors are alright, there's just something majestic about battleships. To have this huge ship with huge guns be the pride of your navy.
The late 1800s to mid 1900s was the best time period for war.

John Brooks
John Brooks

Not making a spike trap full of RPG's
or
Not making an extensive tunnel network complete with kitchens, comfortable living quarters, a movie theater and a room to make moonshine in just so you can fire your RPG completely vertical from underground
No wonder you American piggos lost the war.

Samuel Phillips
Samuel Phillips

Fuck off with the shitty RA3 Slave to the system or killing machine would be better I think Or just take a shitty MMBN tune
win the war from the air
Good ole infantry, doing some of the killing but the majority of the dying. I'm pretty sure the US populace wouldn't tolerate a white on white war back then as opposed to now
Not rushing the tanks with a crap ton of explosives on your chest
The chinese created gunpower, we we're also the first to invent read, apply in retarded fashon suicide bombing. God damn sandnigger stole MY technique!

Ryan Reyes
Ryan Reyes

Why do we need tanks to be under 60 tons? To me this seems like a turbo-retarded limitation. There's only so much armor one can add to his design before it reaches 57-60 tons. Why not pump the limit to 70 - 80 tons? We could then have a vehicle with enough armor all around to stop both tank sabots and modern ATGMs.

Sure, old shitty bridges would be a problem but who fucking cares, we can build our own in <40 minutes and most of Turkey is dessert and mountains anyway, we won't meet a lot of bridges. The tank will get really expensive, but it is worth it when everyone else puts rounds into it to no effect and the tank shoots back once and blows them up. What will the average infantry unit do when they realize that their biggest, heaviest and meanest ATGM isn't even scraping the paint of the enemy tanks? My guess is they will shit themselves and run away like hell. You would normally lose 20 millions per every tank destroyed - and judging from the failure of everything that wasn't a Leclerc, against non-shitskins you will lost a fucking lot of them. But with an absurdly well armored and 80 ton heavy MBT you will win more engagements no matter what kind of AT weapon hit you. Add a fucking APS on the bitch and the only thing that can kill it is a nuke or a really fucking expensive missile that has to be launched from an aircraft.

Attached: 140mm.jpg (3.19 MB, 3771x2121)
Attached: thicc.jpg (223.2 KB, 1200x675)

Brandon Fisher
Brandon Fisher

this is your brain on crack

Anthony Russell
Anthony Russell

Sure, old shitty bridges
It's not just bridges it's roads, riversides, cities streets.
60 tons is already reaching.

Zachary James
Zachary James

Your tanks are shit
The Tiger II was 70 tons and had no problem with roads.

Attached: CyRHhk9WEAA9D8t.jpg (266.79 KB, 955x990)

Brody Miller
Brody Miller

Modern day <60t tanks fuck up roads, specially asphalt ones, I would imagine the Tiger II did as well.

Luis Bailey
Luis Bailey

This is not intended to shitpost

I have a serious question for leafs and burgers, I only ask Zig Forums because true hunters, I assumed as is here, along with the regular and logical minded people have a respect for life. How come you keep your animals, especially dogs in cages at night? It makes no sense whatsoever. Where I come from, they are either respected members of the family that guard and protect you and are free to roam and come and go as they please, or (if you're a nig) just a possession. It bothers me that white people in the western world put animals with the intelligence of a 3 year old in cages as a means to keep them sound. I just don't get that. Maybe it is farm life that make me dispute this fact, but it seems to be a very odd thing for us back here. I didn't mean to stir but I can't get my head around it and I always see it on american shows as if it is the norm to keep your doggos in a cage at night. Seems a tad cruel and unnecessary. Is it a new thing? Maybe it's like their inability to be parents and discipline their kids as well? .

Benjamin Gomez
Benjamin Gomez

muskets in jet age
Would this please The Murdercube?
How could it not?

I think a lot of the people who do that probably don't think about what they're doing and hold the second view of dogs that you mention in your post. They're also unlikely to have the opportunity to let the dog wander as it pleases (cities tend not to like that). If you can't keep a dog without caging it then you shouldn't keep a dog, but as you say, if they can't manage to raise their own kids properly how can you expect that person to understand anything that isn't themselves?

Liam Fisher
Liam Fisher

dogs
in a cage
w0t? The entire point of owning a dog is to have them protect your property against albanians and shitskins. They can't do that locked inside a cage. The only people who do that are literal retards or they have useless nu-dogs that are smaller than a cat.

Isaiah Cooper
Isaiah Cooper

I think your pic is the old mk 1
800HP
It has a 1400hp diesel. I agree that it's probably shit, but I don't think a Pakistani armchair general forum is an accurate, non-biased source

Aaron Jones
Aaron Jones

I agree fully with you but I remember watching some show where it seemed to be the norm for merican suburbians to put their small - medium sized dogs in cages to sleep in at night and I found that rather alarming.

(checked)
Lol, we don't have albanians here, albania seems like a wonderful country compared to here. But then again, not sure as i've never left the country and I try to absorb as much info as possible. I'm assuming they're libshits or /lefty/pol that do that kind of shit but trust me, they tend to do that kind of shit. I no longer own dogs as I live in a high-rise but I judge a man on the way they treat animals. Dogs are man's best friend and cat's are great company nonetheless. Kitty sits with me as I type these words. May God bless them all.

Hunter Brooks
Hunter Brooks

again, not trying to shitpost so polite sage for this msg

How is Greece these days? Is unemployment really that bad? I had an opportunity to move to cyprus for (((cheap))) but had to have like 2 million in the bank which is a stretch. I'm in digital, and family is involved in munitions, teaching and culinary arts. Not looking to flood the place, just looking for a better life and a comfortable life. Could we make it in a place like that without speaking Greek, being of Huguenot ancestry, and having a never-give-up attitude. I mean, I believe we could really add value. I just sigh when I see your country taking in shits from you know where. Have to watch what I say here these days but I think you get the picture. Godspeed Greek user. p.s. Growing up, I had a best friend named Archie, a Greek Cypriot. He was rich and we were v. different but had great fun as kids.

Attached: 423de2ce49233e679ccdb0d0a9da2e6e83e74f1b83b72b046cd3ada34bfe06c5.jpeg (15.11 KB, 580x300)

Jayden Robinson
Jayden Robinson

Why not pump the limit to 70 - 80 tons?
Merkava weights 70 tons. Past that tank needs to increase its tracks size past EU railroads loading gauge limits. Germans had narrow transportation tracks for their Tigers tanks.

Jonathan Ramirez
Jonathan Ramirez

it's a commie shithole so yes it's pretty bad. It's been more than a decade so people have naturally learned to cope with it, but the situation is only getting worse.
Could we make it in a place like that without speaking Greek
Absolutely not. People will scam you daily the moment it becomes known that you're foreigners. Your children will be bullied pretty badly and no one will hire you. It would be like wanting to live in China or Japan without knowing their language. Simply not happening.

Robert Butler
Robert Butler

Thankyou buddy, stay strong and hang in there. Don't let the faggots kill you. I appreciate the honesty and I appreciate You! Look after yourself, I cannot help but feel this entire world is going commie. We'll be there for one another in spirit. SHTF daily here, just this morning I got thrown at. Anyhow, that is not important. Hang in there and never. ever. give. up. Godspeed.

Attached: Christiaan-de-Wet.jpg (20.25 KB, 255x443)

Dominic Murphy
Dominic Murphy

p.s. Tis not that we would not wish to assimilate or wish to learn greek. It's just, a period of learning and how one would adjust. That's the kak with most of us back here. The aussies are full, the USA is full of shit and too expensive, UK is reserved for non-whites and France is pozzed. Any other nation doesn't want us, despite wishing to assimilate. But I do see your point Mr. Greece, welcome to our world. I believe it'll get worse before it gets better, but at least you're suffering with your bretheren and have no been overpassed just yet. :-) Cheers friend.

Carter Barnes
Carter Barnes

meant for

the silent war by peter stiff

Not quite a full experience but should give you an idea should you be interested in /pol/ related matter.

Zachary Russell
Zachary Russell

So, forgive me if my question sounds rather dumb, but you mean to say the 60kg limit is mostly a bureaucratic matter, imposed just as to not fuck up the roads and rails in Europe? Well, certainly there should be a practical upper limits to the tanks weight, but is the 60kg thing merely a (peacetime) legislative/ bureaucratic consideration?

Hunter Stewart
Hunter Stewart

60kg tank

Attached: Sdkfz302elektr.jpg (420.9 KB, 1920x1280)

Robert Jones
Robert Jones

Fucking hell! I have no idea why I wrote kg instead of tons. I fully deserve to be called a dumb nigher for the rest of my life.

John Edwards
John Edwards

nigher
*nigger.
Fuck, I think I should stop posting now and go to bed.

Owen Flores
Owen Flores

Bigger tank needs bigger tracks. Including width (you can't make tracks just long, tank would have bad turn capability). Wide tank can't be loaded and transported across EU rail, it would not fit in the tunnel and stations infrastructure. Modern MBTs have width at the limits already
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loading_gauge

Elijah Jackson
Elijah Jackson

60kg tank

Attached: tiger-1-3030b.jpg (154.32 KB, 600x396)

Nathan Bell
Nathan Bell

infantry, doing some of the killing but the majority of the dying.
As ever it was. I'd imagine that the average cost to train a member of the chairforce is significantly higher than the price of training a doorkicker - if one of them's going to die then in the interests of the taxpayers investment it should be the unfortunate bastard in the muddy boots. :^)

Nolan Edwards
Nolan Edwards

Bridges are also a factor, ideally you want to have as much freedom to maneuver as possible so being able to use existing bridges helps a lot.

Anthony Harris
Anthony Harris

60kg tank

Attached: M4-Sherman.jpg (146.12 KB, 1600x1043)

Kevin Morales
Kevin Morales

60kg tank

Attached: tank.jpg (105.8 KB, 800x800)

Justin Bennett
Justin Bennett

I think you mean 60 tonnes.

And most bridges in Europe can't handle more than 50 tonnes, so you're going to get outmaneuvered and buttraped with the 60 tonne tank.

Although retards in USA were going to make an 80 tonne IFV before someone threw a doughnut at the general.

Grayson Thomas
Grayson Thomas

If they could make a tank that was faster than an air-launched ATGM
thats about 40-50kph

Luke Allen
Luke Allen

What are bridge supports
What are portable bridges
It's not like you give a shit about whatever's under the bridge at that point.

Thomas Cox
Thomas Cox

europe isnt like our country, there are very few large plains, most shit is mountains, canyons, etc.

thats why armored car doctrine was so success.

Lucas Butler
Lucas Butler

Is this like those 1kg AR15s?

Charles Fisher
Charles Fisher

There are very few large plains

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_European_Plain

Landon Hughes
Landon Hughes

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Plain

Brandon Flores
Brandon Flores

There are 3600 seconds in an hour, therefore 1m/s equals 3600m/s, or 3,6km/h. 40-50km/h is therefore around 11,1-13,8m/s. I've never heard of a working ATGM that is slower than 80m/s, or 288km/h.

Noah Young
Noah Young

1m/s equals 3600m/s
Read that again.

Brayden Baker
Brayden Baker

I believe he meant "1 m/s equals 3600 m/ht." I understand that it's difficult to keep track of silly things like units of measurement when you're riding with the rest of the Hunnic horse archers on your way to burn down the nearest civilized town.

Attached: Incredible-Huns-Facts-770x437.jpg (78.19 KB, 770x437)

Jeremiah Diaz
Jeremiah Diaz

*3600 meters per hour

Noah Jenkins
Noah Jenkins

The Brimstone missile travels at 450mps (approximately 1620 kmph). Is there some beautiful, retarded, supersonic, MBT design somewhere out there that I haven't heard of yet?

Attached: Supersonic-MBT-1-second-after-meeting-a-slight-bump-in-the-road.jpg (16.01 KB, 400x300)

Isaiah Bennett
Isaiah Bennett

between three massive mountain ranges and a sea
Also it's literally a subset of:
although a number of highlands are identified within it.
So there's exactly 1 plain in Europe and it's covered in canyons and mountains.

Actually 50km/h is 13m/s. Most ATGM fly at 250m/s, so at their engagement ranges a tank can travel a quarter to half a kilometer before the missile reaches that range. And there's basically nothing stopping the tank from driving behind a tree, hill, building, or some power lines as long as it detects the missile at launch.

But nothing that you or I calculated has any bearing on the question, this post was a tongue in cheek joke because the thing that would matter to avoiding a missile using mobility would be acceleration not speed. A tank can have ridiculously low top speed, but if it can shift location fast enough the missile won't be able to stay on track.

Also ignores that the modern defense against ATGMs is to shoot them down with APS or have them bounce off cage armor.

Connor Ross
Connor Ross

This was actually used successfully to defend tanks against ATGM's even from the first conflict they were used. If the tank could get to cover in time before the strike it could avoid the missile entirely. Anecdotes of Isreali tanks that avoided such missiles during the early learning period and high tank loss rates in some cases would come out of battle with ATGM guide strings draped over them because they were able to avoid the missiles behind hills and other cover might be a tall tale, maybe true, but people forget that tank crews were adapting to the new weapons even at the beginning.

The other issue the guided ATGM had with its slow, slow missile speed is that main tank guns and machine guns are far faster than the little ol bumble bee missile. If a tank detects the missile in time, firing a shot back during that travel time might get lucky and kill or wound the operator, even if the tank gun round just gets the guy to flinch it'll throw the shot off. This also became an early ATGM defense strategy

That slow speed is a real disadvantage of the missile. It works well enough, but its a disadvantage that can be exploited.

Christian Scott
Christian Scott

have them bounce off cage armor
50% effective, and that's a manufacturer's claim.

Tyler Butler
Tyler Butler

You could try your luck in Shenzhen or something teaching english. There are enough foreigners to generally not get scammed in the expat areas. Hell, there most of the workers speak chinese.
If you want to deal with shit pollution doh

Justin Mitchell
Justin Mitchell

I'm sure that the issues you mentioned are still things, but there are a few ways most modern ATGMs have gotten around two of the things you mentioned.

First, hiding behind obstacles. A top-attack ATGM could potentially hit a tank hiding behind a hill or other object so long as there's no overhead cover. This can be negated by hiding under a bridge or tunnel, but in open terrain without much overhead cover it's a problem.

firing a shot back during that travel time might get lucky and kill or wound the operator, even if the tank gun round just gets the guy to flinch it'll throw the shot off
That's an issue with SACLOS designs, but a fire-and-forget ATGM wouldn't be affected by operator death.

Luke Foster
Luke Foster

What's your point? Chobham is 0% effective.

Luis Scott
Luis Scott

Chobham is 0% effective
stillnosources.jpg

Dominic Reed
Dominic Reed

Nigger if your chobham armor has 800mm RHA resistance against HEAT and I hit you with a 1500mm RHA penetration warhead, you're not going to be surviving 50% of the time. You're going to be surviving 0% of the time.

Whereas if you have 0mm RHA armor and a cage, you will still survive a HEAT warhead more than 0% of the time.

This is what makes it good armor, even before considering the weight/cost difference.

Matthew Brooks
Matthew Brooks

and I hit you with a 1500mm RHA penetration warhead
Well, I suppose if you consider that every threat you will ever face is a Kornet or a Javelin.

And if you forget that stated RHA penetration features aren't a good way of determining if a round will penetrate, because composite armor isn't a uniform block and is tailored to defeat specific threats, so that a given piece of armor may have 800mm RHAe when hit by one warhead but 1500mm RHAe when hit by another…

And the fact that simply poking a hole in armor isn't necessarily going to put the tank out of action, and that the after-armor effects of a warhead are denuded both by altering the warhead to penetrate through greater armor and actually penetrating through armor.

Then you also have to consider that, like the user said, HEAT warheads can be designed to negate cage armor, in which case cage armor falls to near-0% protection.

Then there's the fact that cage armor doesn't do jack shit against APFDS.

And considering the last two points, there's the fact that even if you developed super-amazing 100% effective cage armor, if you just relied on cage armor the enemy would merely increase his efforts to develop HEAT warheads that would defeat cage armor or reintroduce anti-tank guns, completely defeating your super-effective cage armor. Because enemies aren't always static entities that stubbornly use the same weapons over and over again, they're dynamic and will react to you overusing one armor type in particular by developing weapons that are capable of defeating that one armor type in particular.

I guess if you completely ignore all that, what you say makes sense.

Then again, I'd assume you're the retard in the other thread that thinks a Textron Scorpion would be a good CAS aircraft and not Pantsir bait. Between that and the times ITT that you've been caught saying horseshit, I'm not even sure what the point is of arguing with you. You're clearly retarded.

Zachary Martinez
Zachary Martinez

M8, you could've saved the time you spent writing that up by justig looking at the retard's flag and moving on.

Henry Kelly
Henry Kelly

Large ATGM are already fully proliferated, with even small bands of terrorists using them. There's no cause to believe they're not going to be used by a state foe.

tated RHA penetration features aren't a good way of determining if a round will penetrate, because composite armor isn't a uniform block and is tailored to defeat specific threats, so that a given piece of armor may have 800mm RHAe when hit by one warhead but 1500mm RHAe when hit by another…
Kind of covered that with
800mm RHA resistance against HEAT
pretty well.

poking a hole in armor isn't necessarily going to put the tank out of action
The way a HEAT jet works is that when it exits the confinement of armor, it actually breaks up and turns into millions of little droplets. That's why chobham armor is spaced, to allow better defense against HEAT….. the problem is that it still isn't enough.

Bentley Russell
Bentley Russell

Large ATGM are already fully proliferated
Which of course means that they are 100% of the threats that are faced.

Kind of covered that
No, you didn't. Not all HEAT warheads are identical. Different warheads will react differently to different kinds of armor. Similarly "Chobham armor" is also not all identical. Different armor will react differently to different kinds of HEAT warheads.

it actually breaks up and turns into millions of little droplets
That's not actually what happens, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you're just referring to general after-armor effects. In which case I'd still point out that just penetrating armor doesn't guarantee the tank will be knocked out. I will also reiterate what I said in the previous post:

"And the fact that simply poking a hole in armor isn't necessarily going to put the tank out of action, and that the after-armor effects of a warhead are denuded both by altering the warhead to penetrate through greater armor and actually penetrating through armor."

Lincoln Allen
Lincoln Allen

60kg tank

Jonathan Kelly
Jonathan Kelly

ATGMs are the only threat you aren't likely to see before they fire, and the only threat that can knock on your hatch from outside your effective range.

Everything else can be defended against by using the main gun. I realize this is counter-instinctual to a british person, but please try to wrap your head around it - if your commander is good, your cannon is going to protect you far better than your armor.

Attached: wot-screens-tanks-britain-at-2-image-03.jpg (574.64 KB, 1680x1050)

Luke Sanders
Luke Sanders

ATGMs are the only threat you aren't likely to see before they fire
Source?

Everything else can be defended against by using the main gun
Not sure how you're supposed to defend against an APFDS hitting you with your gun. I guess if it hits the gun instead of your armor, maybe?

Also you aren't even mentioning all the other points about cage armor being marginally useful.

Hunter Lee
Hunter Lee

smaller, portable things are harder to see than larger, vehicle mounted things
SOURCE!?
FUCKING PROOF YOU LIAR!!
WOW NO EVIDENCE AT ALL HUH??
lol

Not sure how you're supposed to defend against an APFDS hitting you with your gun.
Now this is actually very funny considering the insults I posted up here

I'll let the audience field this question. How can you stop a nigger shooting you with his hipoint, if the only defense you have is a hipoint yourself? No body armor aloud.

Lucas Peterson
Lucas Peterson

Before you go even deeper into the mysteries of ATGMs and APFSDSs, remember that you have the best of both words if you strap a rocket motor and a guidance system to a metal rod.
inb4 it's expensive
You want to fire it only at expensive targets.
inb4 it has a minimum range
It's not like you'd want to use it as a support weapon in a bayonet charge. Just design the weapon and its tactics together.

Brayden Rogers
Brayden Rogers

Why do you bother responding to the inbreeded islander?

Attached: harmless-retard.webm (934.31 KB, 480x360)

Matthew Jenkins
Matthew Jenkins

Question should be
How do you protect your self from a nigger with semi-reliable armor that might fail let's say, 50% of the time when you have a hi point.
Why do you bother responding to the inbreeded islander?
Cancuck fetish of being dominated by their british overlords like the indians fucking anglosphere man

Julian Stewart
Julian Stewart

My mother was one, although she did take off to India to "find herself" and do salvia when I was 12.

How do you protect your self from a nigger with semi-reliable armor that might fail let's say, 50% of the time when you have a hi point.
You shoot him before he shoots you. God. What the fuck are you doing here.

Cooper Jackson
Cooper Jackson

smaller, portable things are harder to see
Which, of course, directly translates to "ATGMs are the only targets you will ever face."

Now this is actually very funny considering the insults I posted up here
Given that your "insults" prove fuckall I'd say the point still stands.

Oh hi baguette. Are you going to chime in about the SOOPER-DOOPER STRONK ROSSIYAN CAGE ARMOR that is 250% effective and can cause M829A3s to harmlessly bounce off from point blank range?

Carter Rogers
Carter Rogers

"ATGMs are the only targets you will ever face."
Not what I said, and you're a dumb cunt for lying when someone just has to scroll up and see evidence of your pathetic attempt to trick people.

Jordan Brooks
Jordan Brooks

Not what I said
So why are you trying to claim that they're the only threat you need to have armor to stop?

Benjamin Cox
Benjamin Cox

Which, of course, directly translates to "ATGMs are the only targets you will ever face."
You do know that every APC of a soviet style army has, at least, one (in NATO it's more 1 per Platoon).
Meaning that for every tank there is 10 ATGMs (at least, more like 50).

You guys are getting insulted because you have exactly 0 knowledge of the subject and you still run your fat mouths when if it was IRL you would have been smacked in it 25 posts ago.

Attached: you-do-not-belong-here.webm (1.7 MB, 640x360)

Ryan Rogers
Ryan Rogers

I'm not, you faggot. I don't see myself saying fucking anywhere that ATGM are the only threat, it's just the main threat we're talking about because other threats don't apply to a discussion of why MBTs are so fat.

Modern battlefield has these ground-based threats to armored vehicles:
1. Cannons mounted on other armored vehicles.
2. Autocannons and heavy machine guns also mounted on vehicles.
3. EFP roadside mines.
4. RPG
5. ATGM
6. Mine or IED.

Threat #1 is large and obvious, it cannot surprise the tank. The tank commander can see it coming, and order it countered with the tanks main cannon. If you have to rely on armor for this, it is because your commander is retarded and your tank crew need more training.
Threat #2 is usually vehicle mounted and countered same as Threat #1. However single anti-materiel units of it can hide very well so some armor is needed just in case the tank is surprised.
Threat #3 is very well hidden, and can mostly only be countered with armor. This is the main reason why armor is needed on a tank, maybe a few hundred millimeters RHA equivalent.
Threat #4 is well hidden and mobile, but can be taken out with machine guns on the tank, if the spotter or commander is alert enough. Cage armor or ERA also doubles as good protection against this.
Threat #5 shoots at the tank from beyond the range of any weapon mounted on the tank, so it can't respond with its weapons, it has to respond with armor. This threat is usually well equipped enough to be able to penetrate the heaviest armored tanks from any angle, so increasing composite armor seems pointless to me, and cage/ERA seems to be a lighter and more effective solution.
Threat #6 is countered by situational awareness, and certain toys like jammers or magnetic signature throwers. Also a lot of support by other vehicles.

So what kind of tank is the future? Tank with all around 100mm-500mm RHA composite armor protection, ERA bricks on top of that, and cage beyond the ERA bricks. And a really good cannon.

It's a modular/layered type of defense we're seeing on tanks like Leclerc and Armata, where the cannon will deal with symmetric threats, the cage will deal with asymmetric threats, and the ERA will deal with a bit of both.

Attached: Tank-MBT.png (14.79 KB, 872x470)

Adrian Morales
Adrian Morales

You do know that every APC of a soviet style army has, at least, one
Which, of course, directly translates to "ATGMs are the only targets you will ever face."

You guys are getting insulted
More like the Canadian is being retarded as per usual, and you're jumping in to defend muh beloved Rossiya muh beloved Shitlerc.

you have exactly 0 knowledge of the subject
Yeah, and I'm sure a random baguette does.

if it was IRL you would have been smacked in it 25 posts ago
"Just try saying that to my face and see what happens kiddo!"

I'm not, you faggot
So you agree that a tank with only cage armor would be retarded? Sounds like we're in agreement then.

Threat #1 is large and obvious, it cannot surprise the tank
<What is cover?

but can be taken out with machine guns on the tank
Yeah, you'll just have to accept one or two losses for every RPG the enemy has. That's like, totally alright man!

This threat is usually well equipped enough to be able to penetrate the heaviest armored tanks from any angle
I will point you to . Please try to actually read that post, in particular the first two points, and attempt to understand it better.

Tank with all around 100mm-500mm RHA composite armor protection, ERA bricks on top of that, and cage beyond the ERA bricks
…which would be easily destroyed by ATGMs designed to defeat cage armor, with tandem warheads to defeat ERA.

Attached: hahaha.webm (182.73 KB, 480x360)

Joseph Gutierrez
Joseph Gutierrez

I have to disagree with you on point 1. Good positioning can easily lead to a enemy tank getting the drop on your own tank. As far a point 5, I've looked into how long the average engagement range is for ATGMs but haven't been able to find much. While some ATGM systems list a range of 8km, I personally doubt that's accurate in combat scenarios without some form of secondary guidance.

Luke Bennett
Luke Bennett

each tank with two machine guns and two cupolas
four tanks per platoon
eight pairs of eyes looking in all directions and ready to kill RPG teams
other vehicles like IFVs and helicopters supporting for the same reason
fires rpg
it bounces off cage armor 50% of the time
shaped charge jet gets deflected by era the other 50% of the time
Yeah those RPG guys are a real nightmare.

Tandem warheads worked against first and second generation ERA also known as light ERA. Third generation or heavy ERA countered it in the 80s, then we had multiplate ERA which could defeat EFPs as well as fourth generation, then fifth generation rod ERA like on the Leclerc, and finally sixth generation radar triggered ERA. Good luck with your ATGM.

Disagreement is fine and I welcome it. There are other low-weight solutions to countering KEW, such as the new proximity fused ERA.

As for range, there are some good videos of Kornets being used in real combat scenarios on Youtube. Here's a video of a Kornet with 15 pound thermobaric warhead and 10km range, engaging a helicopter at its max range envelope.
Yes its difficult, but not impossible, and it only has to fire from about 3km before a tank is going to have trouble firing back. We're getting some new 120mm munitions to counter this though, so that 3km value is probably pushed to 4 or 5km now.

Daniel Jones
Daniel Jones

And it looks like you're full of shit on the "one ATGM per APC" claim, as per usual. Every source I can find says that according to Russian TO&E, a motor rifle brigade contains:

3 motor rifle battalions, with one anti-tank platoon (containing six ATGMs) each for a total of 18 ATGMs
3 motor rifle companies per battalion, with 3 AT-7s each, for a total of 27 ATGMs
one anti-tank battalion, containing one or two ATGM batteries each containing 9-12 ATGMs, so no more than 24 ATGMs total.

That's 69 ATGMs for an entire brigade, and that's assuming it has the heaviest anti-tank battalion.

For a US Army Brigade combat team, the number of ATGMs is:

3 infantry battalions, with 3 rifle companies each, each of which has a weapons section with three ATGMs for a total of 27 ATGMs

One weapons company per battalion, which has a two anti-tank sections. Each anti-tank section has two squads, each with two fireteams, which each have two ATGM units, for a total of forty-eight ATGMs

This gives a US Army BCT a total of 75 ATGMs, slightly more than the heaviest-armed Russian brigade. Although I'll concede that the difference is not massive.

w-we have guys looking for the RPGs!
You have guys looking for the ATGM teams too, and ATGM teams are easier to spot. You're contradicting yourself, nigger.

it bounces off cage armor 50% of the time
Unless it's got a warhead which has been designed to defeat cage armor, like the RPG-28 does.

shaped charge jet gets deflected by the era
Whoops, it's got a tandem warhead.

Tandem warheads worked against first and second generation ERA also known as light ERA
SOURCES NIGGER?

And good thing tandem warhead design has been stagnant since the moment it started!

Good luck with your ATGM
Good luck with your magic ERA.

Charles Mitchell
Charles Mitchell

You do realize I was implying the obvious right?
God you leafs make the rest of us anglosphere bad at this shitposting game

Christian Morris
Christian Morris

Discussion is about mechanized infantry.
Post Light Infantry orbat.

What about the ATGM on the the APC/IFVs?
BMP-1s and AT-3? BMP-2 with AT-5?
TD battery of an infantry battalion with BRDMs with quad launchers of the same shit?
Nope never heard of that?
Protip there aren't anti-tank platoons in mechanized infantry at battalion level, because everyone has ATGMs…
However there are tank destroyers squadrons at brigade level.

Again you have 0 knowledge of what you speak of but you still want to talk about it.

FUCK OFF.

Jaxon Gonzalez
Jaxon Gonzalez

Discussion is about mechanized infantry
It was?

Post Light Infantry orbat
It's a BTR brigade. You're being full of shit again.

what about the ATGM on the APC/IFVs?
In that case, I'll also include the ATGM on the Bradleys for the American estimation.

Protip there aren't anti-tank platoons in mechanized infantry at battalion level, because everyone has ATGMs
Then maybe you can find me a source for "everyone having ATGMs". I'm waiting.

Again you have 0 knowledge of what you speak of
I seem to have more than you, given that I've found that more than a few things you've said have been full of shit.

FUCK OFF
Awwwwww, what's wrong? Am I contradicting your worldview again?

Nicholas Lopez
Nicholas Lopez

You have guys looking for the ATGM teams too
Yeah except RPGs are 100-300m away, and ATGM are 5000-10000m away. Fucking idiot, not worth responding.

he thinks tandem warheads work
Is that why Russians try to build TRIPLE TANDEM warheads before giving up? Fucking moron.

Seriously your summary of
a motor rifle brigade contains:
3 motor rifle battalions,
Is retarded, that's less than 1000 people per brigade, it doesn't make sense.

And a Russian motor rifle company of ten vehicles each would have 30 missiles if it had 3 per vehicle. Nor does it contain three missiles from the 70s. The motor rifle company has an anti tank platoon of four BTR vehicles, which each have eight missiles and four konkurs launchers, for a total of 32 missiles per company and 96 per three companies.
And then there's the anti tank BATTALION which has a dozen Kornet-T destroyers, which each have 16 Kornet missiles, for a total of 192 missiles.
That's total 288 missiles in a single motor rifle brigade.

Not to mention a Russian motor rifle brigade would have artillery and tank battalions attached, and air support battalions, and scouting companies, all of which may or may not be equipped with an ATGM system, depending on funding and other circumstances….

Gabriel Bennett
Gabriel Bennett

ATGM are 5000-10000m away
Because of course all those helicopters and APCs and infantry units are going to be bunched up in a tight circle five feet from the tank.

he thinks tandem warheads work
You got proof they don't?

Is that why Russians try to build TRIPLE TANDEM warheads before giving up?
Russians include tandem warheads in several RPGs and ATGMs
ONE experimental design didn't work out
OMFG ROSSIYAN ENGINEERING PROVES TANDEM WARHEADS USELESS!
That was even more illogical than the time that you said Germany losing WW2 proved that concentrated tank armor was worse than distributed armor.

Is retarded, that's less than 1000 people per brigade
Considering that a brigade is 4900 people, it does.

if it had 3 per vehicle
It has three per company, like I explicitly stated. Stop being willfully ignorant.

Nor does it contain three missiles from the 70s
Actually, it does. Not every Russian ATGM is a Kornet, in case you were deluding yourself that was the case.

which each have 16 Kornet missiles, for a total of 192 missiles
I'm counting launchers not missiles, because the number of launchers is what matters, because it's what determines how much you can put downrange at any given time. By your logic a single Javelin CLU with a pile of 1,488 missiles behind it would be equivalent to an entire mechanized division's worth of anti-tank units.

Not to mention a Russian motor rifle brigade would have artillery and tank battalions attached
…just like a US Army Brigade Combat team.

all of which may or may not be equipped with an ATGM system
…just like a US Army Brigade Combat Team

Seriously, you're just being willfully ignorant, disingenuous, and grasping at straws at this point. Try a little harder, for fuck's sake.

Alexander Foster
Alexander Foster

'Murrican autist who takes everything ever said literally strikes again!

Attached: McCain-lies.jpg (236.89 KB, 1043x540)

Aiden White
Aiden White

He seems to be some kind of brit, and hes accusing me of being in a WW2 discussion?

Jason Gomez
Jason Gomez

Tank threads will never not be great

Attached: 1416608031103.jpg (78.33 KB, 639x595)

Colton Taylor
Colton Taylor

no argument

Hudson Hughes
Hudson Hughes

Jesus christ danes can't fucking read.

Those numbers are Challenger 1 not II

Carter Ward
Carter Ward

no points or citations
Shit, wanna keep going? Seems the canuck has your goat and I seem to piss you off too when I point out you sperg out a lot.

Attached: 0-out-of-10.png (202.7 KB, 471x400)

Samuel Bailey
Samuel Bailey

pointing out that you're making shit up with no sources
I'm still waiting for proof that tandem warheads are ineffective against ERA. You and the canuck seem to think that you can just make shit up to fit your beliefs and that people will just nod their heads in agreement.

Thomas Bennett
Thomas Bennett

Fake ass wannabe bitches, do your worst. 519-362-0011 LOL

Isaac Richardson
Isaac Richardson

two of the worlds most prolific shitposters are just making shit up and rolling with it
Did you expect anything better?

Joshua Rivera
Joshua Rivera

It's amazing how much of a shitstorm precipitated because as ever and always, OP is a faggot.
Also I'm fair sure that dane is in fact a burger on a VPN.

Grayson King
Grayson King

You seem to think that screaming "SOURCES! SOURCES!" validates your point of view while flipping between US and UK VPNs.

Meanwhile, the canuck has made a number of decent, if overstated, points, and all you can do is continue to give in to your autism and make logical fallacies such as whataboutism.

Instead of demanding he provide sources, provide your own if you wish your counterclaims to be taken seriously despite your extreme autism. This isn't a philosophy class.

Encouraging spergs and retards
Well done, fag.

Samuel Carter
Samuel Carter

The burger address could be the VPN, and dane real.

Hunter Perez
Hunter Perez

Like I said, tank threads will never not be great

Grayson Allen
Grayson Allen

Meanwhile, the canuck has made a number of decent, if overstated, points
You mean he's made wild assertions that he has done fuckall to back up?

and all you can do is continue to give in to your autism and make logical fallacies
Asking for sources is a logical fallacy?

In that case, here is my proof that the leaf is talking bullshit:

Cage armor has -50% effectiveness.

The M1 abrams has all-around armor coverage equivalent to 5000mm RHAe

The Kornet actually has 50mm of RHA penetration.

Remember, you can't ask me for sources on any of that, or else you're an autist making logical fallacies.

provide your own
He is the one making claims. He is the one claiming that the only kind of platform that must be defended against is an ATGM, that tandem warheads don't work, etc, etc.

The only claim I ever made was that cage armor is only 50% effective against RPGs, which I provided a link to a manufacturer's claim.

Caleb Gray
Caleb Gray

(1)
You shifty fucker.

You mean he's made wild assertions that he has done fuckall to back up?
A claim made without evidence can be refuted without evidence. You started with the claims not me.

We have a lot of retarded people here who are 40-50 years old but they behave like 12 years old. Putting a dog in a cage sounds like something a child does, thinking the dog is like a bird.
Also a lot of people live in apartments which is why cat-sized dogs are popular.

That cage is just something I found in bing pictures, I don't know. The only two dogs I ever owned were waist high and outdoors guard dogs.

Attached: brazil-flag-7.jpg (454.91 KB, 1920x1080)

Dominic Hughes
Dominic Hughes

Remember, you can't ask me for sources on any of that
BTW I don't need to, I'm not a lazy fuck, I can google and easily disprove you retard. Maybe you should consider doing that for my claims, put some effort into your posts so we can have a discussion.

Mason Brooks
Mason Brooks

wild assertions that he has done fuckall to back up
Pot, meet kettle.

Asking for sources is a logical fallacy?
You have yet to disprove anything at all yourself.

YOU are the one making claims. YOU are the one claiming that slat armour is "merely
" 50% effective, when YOU were the only one who mentioned slat armour in the first place here The canuck was talking about mesh armour, which has been useful against HEAT rounds since 1944 or so [picture related], AND STILL IS. Your link to the manufacturer's claim about slat armour specifically, is not relevant to the conversation you autistically took part in.

Attached: T-34-85-berlin-1945.PNG (1.21 MB, 719x945)

Gavin Lee
Gavin Lee

You started with the claims
Where?

you are the one claiming that slat armor is 50% effective
AND I PROVIDED A SOURCE, YOU DUMB FUCK!

you have yet to disprove anything
And he has yet to prove anything. As he has proven nothing, I have nothing to disprove.

Jose Watson
Jose Watson

AND I PROVIDED A SOURCE, YOU DUMB FUCK!
Easy there, sperg. Your source had nothign to do with the subject others spoke about, therefore irrelevant.

I have nothing to disprove.
You have your own claims to prove in the first place, since you refuse to stop autistically posting, retard.

Isaac Perez
Isaac Perez

Your source had nothign to do with the subject others spoke about
Maybe try reading the thread.

You have your own claims to prove in the first place
Show me. And I'm still waiting for proof on:

- tandem warheads are ineffective
- the only platform used in anti-tank warfare is the ATGM

Charles Ward
Charles Ward

tandem warheads are ineffective
Against heavy gen 3+ ERA.

the only platform used in anti-tank warfare is the ATGM
ahurr durr
I made a giant fucking post WITH DIAGRAMS to explain how that wasn't my point, you pathetic low-effort liar.

Attached: 522px-Femen-Logo.svg.png (85.4 KB, 1211x765)

William Young
William Young

Against heavy gen 3+ ERA
Source?

WITH DIAGRAMS
O shit nigger, you had diagrams! That makes everything you say right, even if there's not a single shred of proof in your post!

Ian Lopez
Ian Lopez

Do you want basic information on heavy ERA?

Tandem jets work in 3 ways:
1. Against simple single feed plate ERA where there is a single percussive trigger in the corner, the precursor charge penetrates the cover plate, bore a thin hole through the explosive mixture without detonating anything, and then the secondary charge is free to go all the way through.
2. Against double plate ERA where there is a feed plate and the whole second plate is the trigger, the precursor charge triggers the ERA so it wastes 30 or 40% of the feed plate before the primary charge hits it. This reduces the effectiveness of ERA but it's still destroying a hell of a lot of penetrating ability of the HEAT jet.
3. The precursor charge acts as a standoff probe which improves the chance that the primary charge will form properly before it hits the armor. Same reason why the warhead on a Kornet is in the back of the missile, right next to the control wire spool bobbin.

As I just pointed out it works against the first generation ERA and the second generation ERA.
Third generation also has two plates, but they're much thicker, so the fact that the precursor charge wasted 35% of the feed plate doesn't matter since the feed plate is 200% thicker.
Fourth generation ERA has multiple feed plates, or off centre feed plates. Sometimes the feed plates are connected, so they'll come out like one of those toy snakes when the explosive goes off.
Fifth generation ERA is rod based ERA which cuts projectiles apart as well as
Sixth generation ERA is proximity triggered, a tandem warhead has no effect on it because it goes off BEFORE THE WARHEAD HITS IT.

You're asking me to find a source that will give you a complete history of a defensive system, and then find another source that will explain, as if to a child, the basic physics of why tandem warheads have had their effect reduced over time and wiped out. These sources aren't going to be present in English, and I'm likely going to have to pay hundreds of dollars for the source texts. Take my word for it, or don't, but quit lying about what I said when it's so easy to check on it you shameless numale idiot.

Here's a diagram anyway, if you can't figure out why tandem charge is useless, it's not on me.

Attached: ERA-gen.png (53.54 KB, 628x1492)

Joshua White
Joshua White

Question, could say a tandem MISSILE defeat modern ERA?
Decoy missile flies in, triggers proximity.
Once ERA has been expended, second missile with the actual warhead, heads for the gap in the armor.
Of course this would require a very accurate guidance system to even be possible. With timing being insane to keep the second missile from flying into the fragmentation cloud.

Ryder Martin
Ryder Martin

That's how the RPG-30 works.

Attached: РПГ-30-Крюк[1].jpg (51.52 KB, 550x250)

Cameron Thomas
Cameron Thomas

Russians are literally the first to come out with an active protection system centric tank and they're already testing decoys, jamming and signature reduction to defeat modern APS systems.

Brandon James
Brandon James

Sorry, didn't see the post. But yeah RPG-30 is one of the first RPGs designed to fuck with high tech defensive systems.

Cameron Clark
Cameron Clark

Russians already did that:
military-today.com/firearms/rpg_30.htm
Of course it's yet to be tested against an enemy vehicle with an active protection system. And I'm rather sure that they put the Kornets on pairs on their vehicles to fire them in salvos against vehicles with APS:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bumerang-BM
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9M133_Kornet-EM

Still, I think that if you really want to go all out, then you should use a high-calibre autocannon that fires fin-stabilized laser-guided HEDP shells. HEDP means that it's a HEAT warhead that also has a frag sleeve, so it works as a normal HE shell too. Now, never variants of the M72 LAW have a 66mm HEAT missile that can penetrate 450mm of ERA. Make a 66mm autocannon that fires a shell with an equally capable HEDP warhead that also covers the target in fragments, and keep firing that on the enemy tank. Or be more traditional and up the calibre to 75mm. Even if the penetration is not enough to go through the armour, it should active the APS and the ERA, and the frags should damage everything that's not wrapped in armour, including things like the optics, sensors, weapons and antennas. It wouldn't be capable of combat, and you would be free to target it with ATGMs.

Jose Flores
Jose Flores

being a leaf

Attached: A-FUCKING-LEAF.png (268.39 KB, 1861x1081)

Angel Ward
Angel Ward

Damn, neat shit. Thanks guys.

Juan Mitchell
Juan Mitchell

it's yet to be tested against an enemy vehicle
It's going to be 2050 before it is, at this rate. No western power wants to do jack shit about improving its army, it's all about the navy and air force sucking up trillions while pissing out stillborn projects like zumwalt and lightning.

James Walker
James Walker

Maybe the Chinese or Iran will somehow accidentally get the plans for the RPG-30, or develop a surprisingly good copy, all of it without any Russian involvement whatsoever, naturally. Then it will ends up in the hands of Hezbollah or some other group, and then they test it on the Anal Iron Fist system of Israeli tanks.

Nathaniel Perez
Nathaniel Perez

Jordan has a variant.

Samuel Lewis
Samuel Lewis

Iron first is prety retarded, trophy is a bigger threat.

Asher Phillips
Asher Phillips

Third generation also has two plates, but they're much thicker, so the fact that the precursor charge wasted 35% of the feed plate doesn't matter since the feed plate is 200% thicker
Source?

Fourth generation ERA has multiple feed plates, or off centre feed plates. Sometimes the feed plates are connected, so they'll come out like one of those toy snakes when the explosive goes off
Source?

Fifth generation ERA is rod based ERA which cuts projectiles apart as well as
SOURCE?

Sixth generation ERA is proximity triggered, a tandem warhead has no effect on it because it goes off BEFORE THE WARHEAD HITS IT
SOURCE?

You're asking me to find a source that will give you a complete history of a defensive system
No, I'm asking you to find a source showing me that anything you're saying is actually true and not bullshit you've pulled out your ass.

John Russell
John Russell

Thinking CAS will actually be relevant in a conflict between 2 big nations.
Enjoy getting fucked over by SAM systems for the enitre conflict.
scienpress.com/Upload/JCM/Vol 4_1_9.pdf

Attached: Muh-F-35-1.png (65.21 KB, 513x530)
Attached: Muh-F35-2.png (25.95 KB, 758x298)

Robert Walker
Robert Walker

quora.com/Can-you-destroy-an-enemy-tank-by-opening-the-hatch-and-dropping-a-grenade-inside
Is it possible to lock-pick a tank?

Nolan Murphy
Nolan Murphy

that pic
Source? And no, the pdf is not a source. I read through it, and all it ever does is post that pic and then "a think tank claims this is true."

Juan Brown
Juan Brown

Why don't you make the research yourself on how """stealth technology""" is ineffective against low frequency radars from the cold war era?
High frequency radar
Wins against jammers but loses against stealth
Low frequency radar
Loses against jammers but wins against stealth

Inb4 Source? xDdDDdDDdDDDDDDDDDdddDd

Jace Foster
Jace Foster

Just put some Thermite grenades on it over the crew compartment and let it burn through.
Watch the hatches and shoot anyone that comes out.

Evan Richardson
Evan Richardson

If you get that close to an Abrams you can just pull the emergency shutoff handle. Stops the engine and fills the tank with halon, it's hilarious.

Ryan Gonzalez
Ryan Gonzalez

Isn't the gassing handle meant to extinuish fires once the crew is out?

Angel Lopez
Angel Lopez

Right, but there's no "please dont gas me" button in the tank, so any time the handle is pulled everyone dies and the tank becomes a paperweight.

It's like encouragement for the crew not to let enemies that close.

Juan Barnes
Juan Barnes

Tanks have periscopes and episcopes, shoot them to break the covers/plexiglass then pour fuel down to it and set on fire. On some a grenade will go through too.

A tank swarmed by infantry than can't GTFO and isn't immediately assisted by other forces, is always fucked.

Oliver Miller
Oliver Miller

substantiate your claims

Attached: proofs.jpeg (10.06 KB, 255x249)

Jayden Gonzalez
Jayden Gonzalez

You're the "Vietnamese" autist from the underslung shotgun thread ages back, aren't you?

Zachary Lewis
Zachary Lewis

You're the "Vietnamese" autist from the underslung shotgun thread ages back, aren't you?

Christian Thomas
Christian Thomas

what are ids

Caleb Gomez
Caleb Gomez

what is a VPN?
what is a dynamic IP?

Adam Sullivan
Adam Sullivan

This is common knowledge for SAM systems.
High frequency radars have literally been developed because of this issue and the F117 has been downed because low frequency radars fuck up stealth.

I will just constantly ask for sources and when some are provided I will just call them fake
Are you and the brit part of some German government think tank trying to shill for refugees on Twitter? Because this is exactly how they act.

Mason Sanders
Mason Sanders

anything
winning against jammers

Attached: JzZE0lql.jpg (26.06 KB, 422x640)

Jose White
Jose White

Year 7 of WW3 and we're back to manual controls and bi-plains.

Attached: 3e624c985524b960e38496b6653545f33411e66ce2f023902cb5f75f8bf6bed6.jpg (23.34 KB, 226x259)

Brody Morgan
Brody Morgan

What is home on jam?
What is triangulation?

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Disable AdBlock to view this page

Confirm your age

This website may contain content of an adult nature. If you are under the age of 18, if such content offends you or if it is illegal to view such content in your community, please EXIT.

Enter Exit

About Privacy

We use cookies to personalize content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyze our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our advertising and analytics partners.

Accept Exit