Tank Idea

[NVA Killer 0]

isn't the lynx fast though? like one of the fastest helicopters or something?

[Krull SGC 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from NVA Killer on 8:01 am on Nov. 25, 2001

whats so different about the WAH64 and AH64 that makes it better?

<a href="http://www.voodoo.cz/ah64/wah64.html

what" target="_blank">http://www.voodoo.cz/ah64/wah64.html

what</a> ever modifications made was done by boeing so says this site.

(Edited by NVA Killer at 8:05 am on Nov. 25, 2001)

<span id='postcolor'>

The only modifications I know of that GNK-Westland have made to the UK Apache are to the engines, in fact they have replaced the standard ones with nice new, and much more powerful Rolls Royce Turbomeca engines. Though Hawkeye, according to Westlands own page, it still uses the Hellfire.

And as for the Lynx NVA Killer, it is indeed the holder of the Absolute World Speed Record for helicopters, having achieved a top speed of 400.87 km/h in 1986. However the Lynx in question used a special BERP rotorblade system, and it has never been implemented in Combat aircraft.

Still the Lynx is a pretty cool copter, though it serves the same purpose as the Huey and I love the Huey, especially the UH-1N Twin Huey Gunship, two door mounted machine guns, and two side mounted rocket launchers, and more power than a standard single engine Huey, that thing is a wolf in sheeps' clothing.

[Satchel 0]

"I have heard of a tank class challenger or somthing like that. It can whip a T-80 pretty quick."

Hehehe, this is how the original Thread started...

As always the thread goes wild once equipment is involved, especially true for tanks, but i like it.

We now had everything in this thread, from russian and german WWII tanks, Fairchild manufacturing plant, Warrior look-a-like clone to the M2/M3 Bradley, the british version of the AH-64 (WAH-64), RPG-7´s- over to the Lynx helicopter....i think we covered it all.

[King Kong 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Scooby on 1:47 pm on Nov. 25, 2001

"Pffrt. It's easy for a tank to take that many RPG hits, RPGs suck. Read Blackhawk Down?

RPGs on the wrong angle would bounce off a Trabant.

Scooby - You said that the T80 takes 13 hits, or whatever.. then quote a different kind of RPG to blow up an Abrams? That's somewhat misleading, dont you think?

I doubt it. A 125mm sabot has trouble penetrating an abrams.. even from the side.

From the top, however, is a different story. "

I would say that chechens were using RPG-7's or LAW look alike RPG's to destroy that tank. I dont know and cant remember what type of the tank it was which was destroyed.

As far as I know there are different, less modern and more modern ammunition for RPG-7. Basic ammo would be about as effective as 66mm LAW round? (not claiming that I would know too much about RPG's)

I mentioned Apilas taking out M1 tank because you compared damage done on tanks by taking weapon from least effective end and almost most effective end totally forgetting weapons from the middle.

I'm certain that Apilas would be enough to harm it from side or rear sectors.

<span id='postcolor'>

The M72 LAW uses a 66mm SHELL wich is ment for bunkerbusting and against light infantry

The RPG-7 is a different story it uses a 40mm HE rocket propelled grenade wich is far more effective then the LAW, LAW is a throw away weapon

[NVA Killer 0]

lets get a LAW 80mm

[Guest Scooby]

66mm LAW we have has shaped charge... I'm pretty much sure that it is the same in the US LAW.

You were correct that it is used against bunkers but it is not used against infantry. It is used against APC's, IFV's and other lightly armoured targets.

Only reason I could see RPG-7 being more effective is possibility to use different ammunition for it if available. Though it weights alot compared to LAW's and in theory you would have to carry it around after you have used all the ammunition which isnt the case with LAW unless you want to get it reloaded.

(Edited by Scooby at 10:42 pm on Nov. 25, 2001)

[Aaron Kane 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Satchel on 8:44 pm on Nov. 25, 2001

"I have heard of a tank class challenger or somthing like that. It can whip a T-80 pretty quick."

Hehehe, this is how the original Thread started...

As always the thread goes wild once equipment is involved, especially true for tanks, but i like it.

We now had everything in this thread, from russian and german WWII tanks, Fairchild manufacturing plant, Warrior look-a-like clone to the M2/M3 Bradley, the british version of the AH-64 (WAH-64), RPG-7´s- over to the Lynx helicopter....i think we covered it all.

<span id='postcolor'>

Hey now, leave the folks at the former Fairchild plant out of this!

[NVA Killer 0]

warriors

[Krull SGC 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Satchel on 8:44 pm on Nov. 25, 2001

"I have heard of a tank class challenger or somthing like that. It can whip a T-80 pretty quick."

Hehehe, this is how the original Thread started...

As always the thread goes wild once equipment is involved, especially true for tanks, but i like it.

We now had everything in this thread, from russian and german WWII tanks, Fairchild manufacturing plant, Warrior look-a-like clone to the M2/M3 Bradley, the british version of the AH-64 (WAH-64), RPG-7´s- over to the Lynx helicopter....i think we covered it all.

<span id='postcolor'>

Thats the beauty of the OFP Forums Satchel, I consider it to be military brain-storming at its best, you get ideas from the whole spectrum, even though some can be considered very stupid and childish, and they invariably start the flames burning.

[Greg Dragunovski 0]

Hope you guys enjoy the comparison of the CHALLENGER2 and the PT-91 "TWARDY".....

CHALLENGER2 DESCRIPTION:

In 1974, Iran commanded(ordered) to the Royal Ordnance Factory de Leeds 125 Shir 1 and 1225 Shir 2. Shir 1 was essentially , in fact, one of the last alterations of Chieftain. The British army intended then to replace Chieftain by a German-British machine, but this one not having exceeded the stage(stadium) of project, United Kingdom realized its own project, baptized MBT-70. With the fall of Chah of Iran, the enormous commands(orders) of this country were cancelled, before the deliveries were not able to begin, although in this time Shir 1 is in production for the Royal Ordnance Factory de Leeds. Jordan commanded(ordered) afterward 278 MBT Khalid, who were practically identical to Shir1, and the deliveries began in 1981. They are at the moment ended. In 1980, the British ministry of the Defence announced that the project of the MBT-80 had been abandoned not only because it turned out too dear(expensive), but also because its date of starting was vague. In its place, an initial command(order) of 237 Challenger was crossed(spent) in Royal Ordnance Factory. It was about Shir 1 modified to adapt them to the European climate. The first copies were put back(handed) to the British army in March, 1983, and four regiments in post(post office) on the Rhine were equipped with this tank. In the middle of the years eighty, the Challenger will be endowed with a system of aim Pilkington EP (known also under the name of Therman Observation and Gunery System) which will allow the tank to improve its capacities of commitment and acquisition of targets in all weathers and of day as of night. The first produced vehicles were provided with a standard standard(cannon) L11A5 120 mm, realized by the Royal Ordnance Factory de Leeds, but it(he) was replaced by a new standard(cannon) of high technology, which was studied by Royal Armament Research and Development Establishment ( RARDE) of Strong Halstead. This standard(cannon), in better worked steel, possesses a new breech and can throw(launch) missiles having a bigger muzzle velocity, and this fact endowed with a capacity of penetration superior to that of the common(current) missiles. He can throw(launch) also, quite as L11A5, missile APFSDS of the Royale Ordnance Factory de Birley, capable of drilling all the known armour platings. A vehicle of repair was developed according to the frame of the Challenger, whereas at the same time, certain number of Chieftain was provided with a hydraulic crane intended to allow them to change  the driving block of a Challenger on the ground; So equipped, these armored cars will receive the naming ARRV (Armoured Repair and Recovery vehicle, " armored cars of recovery and repair "). There is also a Chieftain affected person of bridges which is also useful by the Challenger.  

Armament:

1 standard(cannon) of 120 mm, a coaxial machine gun of 7,62 mm, and a machine gun AA of 7,62 mm  Crew:

4 men(people)

Armour plating:

?

Weight:

65 000 kg  

User countries:

Challenger 1: user Countries: United Kingdom, Jordan, Iran.

Challenger 2: user Countries: United Kingdom, Oman

Speed:

56 kph

Autonomy:

450 km

Equipment:

-

PT-91 "TWARDY'' DESCRIPTION:

PT-91 Twardy This Polish variant of the T-72 has a number of improvements over the earlier T-72M1. The major improvements include: Polish-developed explosive reactive armor Type ERAWA-1; four laser warning receivers, which warn the crew if they are being targeted by a laser rangefinder or designator; new computerized fire control system, with thermal sight; new passive night sights; improved automotive components including 850 hp engine, rubber bushed tracks, and a modern fire detection and suppression system.

For several years Poland builds Russian armored cars under license, as the main tank T-72 and its variants, for national custom(usage), as well as for the export. Further to a development of the tank T-72, is appeared a new version, knew under the name of PT-91, who also has as reference name (hard) Twardy. The first prototype of the vehicle was ended in 1992, and a first series of copies were delivered to the Polish army. The configuration of PT-91 is identical to T-72 with the driver in front centre, turret in the center of the hull(shell), the engine and the transmission system behind. The gunner sits to the left in the turret and the leader of vehicle to the right. The turret can revolve on 360 ° with the possibility in rise of - 6 ° in + 13 °. The improvements of equipments with regard to T-72, are a new reagent armour plating developed by Poland, placed in front of the hull(shell) and of the turret, a system of defence against aims laser, a system behaviour(canal) of shot assisted by computer, a series of 12 throws(launches) smoke grenades placed to the left and to the right of the turret, the armour plating strengthened on the bottom of the hull(shell), and the more powerful engine. A machine gun of 12,7 mm rose on the right hatch on the roof of the turret. The standard(cannon) has a thermic muff and a sluice of smoke. The train of movement of the vehicle is protected by patches of reagent armour plating.

Armament:

1 standard(cannon) of 125 mm, 1 coaxial machine gun of 7,62 mm, 1 antiaircraft machine gun of 12,7 mm

Crew:

3 men(people)

Armour plating:

?

Weight:

45 300 kg

User countries:

Poland

Speed:

60 kph

Autonomy:

650 km

Equipment:NBC protection system, rangefinder laser, fire control

REMEMBER,A TANK CAN BE "BETTER" BUT IF THE CREW SUCKS THEN IT'S PRETTY EASY TO TAKE IT OUT OF ACTION-challenger2 or pt-91 destroyed by a t-34LOL;)

JUST WANTED TO KNOW HOW TO PUT IMAGES ON THIS FORUM(HTML IS OFF)

[Badgerboy 0]

A Warrior which had a huge recognition flag on the back, specifically because we knew you sodding Yanks were cruising round. I'm in the RAF, training as a pilot, and the Americans (respected, and a bloody good laugh) DO have a bad rep for friendly fire incidents. (Kosovo/Gulf).

Oh, and pls don't joke about our guys being toasted by A10's. I find it a bit distasteful. -Thanks

[Badgerboy 0]

Errr, see page 5 to get a clue what I was talking about.

[PV 0]

If I am looking at the correct pic for a warrior, I can see how it could be confused with a Russian tank at distance or at a glance.

[pzvg 0]

Mistake nothing, At low level, moving around 300KIAS,

you can id something as man-made in the time you have to shoot, period.

That's why they ask if there are friendlies in the AO, an armored box is an Armored box on first glance.

And let's not be too hard on the USAF folks, the only reason your nations aren't known for bombing the wrong target is due to a relative lack of bombing of any kind whatsoever in recent history, dig?

P.S. 66mm LAW is old crap, same RPG7V, neither one is worth a d*amn against ANY MBT built after 1979.

Oh and Russian tanks do have better gas mileage, trouble is the tracks don't last long enough to make that mean much, although they're improving in that field too.

[VIIL Max 0]

Challanger? I think we are forgetting the one that is for sure the best "west tank": Merkawa III of Israeli Army. It's a powrful tank heavily armed and... for what I know, the only tank able to survive to almost everything. Despite it has been used in many war actions it has never been perforated... and this one is the best warranty we can have I guess...

[NVA Killer 0]

the guys wasted by the A10 in the gulf wondered into its kill box, not really a way to tell who is enemy or friendly.

[Aaron Kane 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Badgerboy on 5:48 am on Nov. 26, 2001

Errr, see page 5 to get a clue what I was talking about.

<span id='postcolor'>

*Pulls out collar*

Tough crowd.... tough crowd....

Sorry, I didnt mean to offend anyone with that post

[Greg Dragunovski 0]

....hmmmmm a Jewish tank....Israel is not a Western country....they are arabs with diff. faces LOL.Jewish equipment is such d*amn crap that a man armed with a 9mm pistol could destroy a whole platoon of jewish KOSHER TANKS!

I don't see why you love the challenger so much but hey it's your choice OHH and the guy who talked about the black eagle.....many experts say that the Black Eagle is the "best" tank(everything is "tip-top")in the world.

AND GUYS PLZ RESPOND THIS TIME lol

[Greg Dragunovski 0]

no it's not crap(last post,jewish tanks) because all they have(99.9%) is stuff from the......uhmhmh AMERICANS(rifles,APCs,tanks,choppers,planes)for example:m-16,abrams,f-15,f-16................and if they wouldn't have got those things from the Americans then there would be no Israel at all after the conflict between the israelis and arabs......

[King Kong 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Quote: from Greg Dragunovski on 4:12 pm on Nov. 27, 2001

no it's not crap(last post,jewish tanks) because all they have(99.9%) is stuff from the......uhmhmh AMERICANS(rifles,APCs,tanks,choppers,planes)for example:m-16,abrams,f-15,f-16................and if they wouldn't have got those things from the Americans then there would be no Israel at all after the conflict between the israelis and arabs......<span id='postcolor'>

No, they copy and improve American things

[Stinger 0]

look at it this way the US and Russia Have enough nukes to destroy the WORLD 6 times over.... kinda makes tanks look punny huh?

[Guest]

nukes=terrible

also alot of the stuff given to them are given by the US, but what they do is modify it to their likings and then sometimes they take the original, modify it, then build the modified versions themselves.

[Greg Dragunovski 0]

Ok, first of all, Israel gets stuff from Americans because 99.9% of the American(U.S.A not Canada) governement is jewish(donald RUMSFELD for example !JEW!)Almost all of the ministers are jewish and the only ppl that are not jewish are Colin Powel(l?),that black chick and "Curious" George W Bush.And as you know when ministers group up then you are sure that the PRES becomes a puppet at their will.AND WE ALL KNOW JEWS "help" JEWS KILL ARABS.........VOILA! IT IS MORE SERIOUS THAN IT LOOKS HERE!

Second of all NUKES can't be used anyway and anywhere you want!If, for example, the USA nukes Afghanistan then it is 100% sure that Iraq or Iran (or maybe even China or Russia) will respond with a nuke of their own.Iran or Iraq(yes they have nukes) would respond with a nuke because USA is their #1 enemy and they attacked an arab country full of civilians(duhhh!) and Russia or China could respond with a nuke because a nuke on a country normally means a large WAR(WWIII for example) and don't think for a second that Poutin(with extra cheese...poutine=quebec food lol)

or Mr.Ping Pong(CHINA'S BIG DADDY)wouldn't attack the USA if they had an excuse...........................GOODBYE MY FELLOW READERS

[NVA Killer 0]

saying 99.9% of the US government is jewish is just bull s**t, alot of them are not jewish, such as people in the congress.

[Badgerboy 0]

I see Zionism is still alive and well in the US Government, and your tax dollars are being put to work. In fairness though, the US gives a #### of a lot of equipment and funding, and Israel keeps 'b*tchslapping' the US in return.

Frankly the hardline, 'crusading' goverment is pretty worrying. The Minister that got topped recently, wanted to kick all the Palestinians off the disputed land with force, not to mention his other deranged ideas.

Hmm.... in need some extra Lebensraum do we? (Look it up)