russians out-gunned ?

[Wobble 1]

comparing the abrams and T-80 is like trying to compare a helicopter with a airplane.. they are both tanks but that is where the similarity stops..

Abrams: very good armor (classified), very very very accurate main gun with extreme range and fast reload time.. very vert powerful engine, top speed unknown (officially 45mph (laff).. very good for killing the enima long before they can even fire at you.. but only if the terrain suits this..

T-80 good armor if has ERA.. if not armor is similar to T-72.. still effective but not against multiple hits, very very powerful gun with less range and pretty deacent accuracy, really reliable and beefy desal engine.. not as fast as abrams but good torque for climbing shit.. very good tank for close in knife fights.. where surviving 1 hot is enough to let you kill the enima... maxim power is the key, accuracy and range are not a primary concern.... .. but only if the terrain suits it..

I know the M1A1 can be fitted with ERA (pretty much anything can).. but seldom chooses to use it.

they are 2 different tanks.. depending on their enviroment either could have the advantage or disadvantage..

in desert storm the T-80 would have great problems with the abrams.. the abrams could target and enguage it at ranges far greater than the T-80... and even if its ERA managed to deflect a SABOT the speed of fire and extreme accuracy of the abrams would make a 2nd hit to the now non ERA defended T-80 a probability.

in Vietnam T-80 would be more at home.. the strong low end of the desal would be better for crunching through trees and climbing hills than the high spooling jet engine the abrams uses, also the abrams advantage of long range and extreme accuracy would be almost void.. it would pretty much be a matter of who gets the first shot off.. I would imagine at close rane either tank could disable the other with one shot, even with their best armors..

so which is better? well depends on the circumstances.

[SpaceAlex 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Wobble @ Feb. 12 2002,23:09)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">comparing the abrams and T-80 is like trying to compare a helicopter with a airplane..  they are both tanks but that is where the similarity stops..  

Abrams: very good armor (classified), very very very accurate main gun with extreme range and fast reload time.. very vert powerful engine, top speed unknown (officially 45mph (laff)..  very good for killing the enima long before they can even fire at you..  but only if the terrain suits this..

T-80 good armor if has ERA.. if not armor is similar to T-72.. still effective but not against multiple hits, very very powerful gun with less range and pretty deacent accuracy, really reliable and beefy desal engine.. not as fast as abrams but good torque for climbing shit..   very good tank for close in knife fights.. where surviving 1 hot is enough to let you kill the enima... maxim power is the key, accuracy and range are not a primary concern.... .. but only if the terrain suits it..

I know the M1A1 can be fitted with ERA (pretty much anything can).. but seldom chooses to use it.

they are 2 different tanks.. depending on their enviroment either could have the advantage or disadvantage..

in desert storm the T-80 would have great problems with the abrams.. the abrams could target and enguage it at ranges far greater than the T-80... and even if its ERA managed to deflect a SABOT the speed of fire and extreme accuracy of the abrams would make a 2nd hit to the now non ERA defended T-80 a probability.

in Vietnam T-80 would be more at home.. the strong low end of the desal would be better for crunching through trees and climbing hills than the high spooling jet engine the abrams uses, also the abrams advantage of long range and extreme accuracy would be almost void..  it would pretty much be a matter of who gets the first shot off.. I would imagine at close rane either tank could disable the other with one shot, even with their best armors..  

so which is better? well depends on the circumstances.<span id='postcolor'>

Nice story.

[Charlie_McSheenie 1]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (DigitalCenturion @ Feb. 12 2002,22:54)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Russia may have the largest LCACs in the world, but America still has more of them.

USA is more wealthy=more material can be bought if war brakes out. Like in WW2... then the production of war material was REALLY high. How many bombers did a plant churn out per week?

Russia does not have that kind of extreme production capability...

And i find the tought of a fight fough on american soild to be totally rediciolous. Europe or Asia will be the battleground,<span id='postcolor'>

Like in WW2...

Think about that, just because the americans could supply shermans and some other tanks to the allies fighting on the western front, the russians were able to produce tanks to fight on the eastern front (remembering how about 70% or something of german tanks got sent to the eastern front). Despite being taken by suprise and completly obliterated for a long period the russians were able to cope with the huge numbers of germans super tanks thrown there way by producing loads of tanks. Despite the fact they had a much higher proportion of troops and equipment on the eastern front, the germans couldn't cope with the massive numbers of troops and tanks thrown their way and eventually the russians went on to win the allies the war.

In WW2 they had some extreme production capability, they were producing tanks and planes while being shelled and bombed and invaded. The us had no such trouble so they could produce stuff relativly easily without fear of death.

If anything the russians had shitloads more production power in WW2, in 5 years their industries evolved into a massive efficient system when before they sucked. They beat the germans with numbers, the americans, british, french etc.. couldn't thats why it was pretty much a stalemate on the western front for ages.

The fact that russian factorys were actually being attacked while producing probably balences out that whole ''well the americans had to get the tanks across the ocean'' argument.

[Sir Smokes Alot 0]

I alway play Russian online.