Battle Tank/APC Preference

[Gedis 0]

Its a wonder that thing is able to move with all the armour its loaded up with!

have you ever heared or watched MTV Pimp My Ride shou?

well, this shou is in U.S.

but in this case it's Pimp My Tracks in Iraqi lands - war without the end.

PMT(pimp my tracks) guys uparmored M-113 APC, maybe put new engine, supercharger/turbocharger and this thing is able to "fly"

I like M-113 APC as well, it's simple design attrackts nearly everyone... fastinating thing...

[oyman 0]

I like the mbt70

[tankieboy 0]

Frenchpoint's AMX 10 P has to be one of my all time fav.

[imported_bör 0]

My favourite tank is the Bradley with the T80 coming in second.

I can't argue why though. I just love it.

[stainer 0]

UKF Warrior.

Yep.

[SandVoss 0]

1. BW Leopard 2A6

2. SFP Strv 122

3. LLW Leopard 2A6

BW-Mod Leopard 2A6 is the undisputed number one, due to the addon quality, and reputation of the real thing. The number two is the SFP Strv 122, excellent model and skinning. The Lowlands Warrior Leopard 2A6 has the best config and sounds.

[breaker44 0]

Itsa shame then that the Bradley isn't a tank, it's an APC.

M1 Abrams, best tank ever.

BMP, Best AFV ever (the Bradley would win, but it's small carrying cpacity makes it second-best, though in APC v APC combat, the Bradley would win)

[SandVoss 0]

In real life the M1 series is a joke. Guzzles fuel like there is no tomorow and is maintaince intensive. It requires a supply line the size of a country to keep a couple of Abrams running during combat.

But are we talking about OFP addons, or the real thing?

[breaker44 0]

Oops, you are wrong.

-Breaker Out

[Jezza_NL 0]

Wrong in what?

[breaker44 0]

Oh, the m1 is a hog, blah blah blah. I have never heard anything but praise from tankers regarding the m1. Especially from the poor guys who have to operate Challengers, or those Russian tankers who have had their arms taken off by the autoloaders in the T-72.

Ill give you that the tank uses a lot of fuel, but what MBT doesn't?

As far as labor- intensity goes, well, that's a load of crap.

-Breaker Out

[Gedis 0]

load of crap?! well it seems you don't know much, critic man!

firstly, leopards, T-55/62/72/90s uses diesel fuel; abrams, T-80s uses cerosine(fuel similar for jets)

and you know what?

that cerosine costs at least 3 times more then 1l diesel, besides all tanks using that fuel eats it much, so fuel quantity in the tank is increased to save equal operational range comparing with diesel...

another thing, cerosine is very dangerous if it coughts fire...

yup everyone likes abrams and wants to be in it when tank war will begun, but...

as we know abrams rounds are with DU warheads, armor as well... so when armor is struck, crew gets it's dose from toxic materials, maybe their lives were saved for that battle, but not for 10 years of dying after that battle...

those DU rounds when fired polutes surrounding area...

well, most other tank crews wants abrams, but they forget what abrams is bad for... like it can be penetrated with RPG-7VR missile/RPG-29 missile against which any tank hasn't got a chance, even heavily ERA armored(3rd or 5th generation active armor) T-90M and many atgm missles...

keeping abrams on service costs as well much, this is not T-72, which parts are cheap and less vunruable for natures canditions...

tank crews should think once again which is better tank for them, but realy not the abrams

oh besides, most of you think that abrams is unbeatable tank... because crews from 1st and 2nd Gulf Wars were under fire from Iraqi's T-72s 125mm smoothbore gun armor piercing rounds which didn't made much harm for abrams... this theory will collapse people!

what you didn't know...

that Iraqi's T-72s used rounds which were put out of service in USSR in 1973, as i remember right, iraqis could buy in 1991 new, 2nd or 3rd generation armor piercing rounds for T-72s, but didn't...

you could say Leopard 2A-6 is best, i couldn't argue much, because T-90 is equal, but you didn't and again talks about abrams begun... how much times i need to prove it to everyone?

my favorite tank addons:

#1 ORCS T-72(hardest to winn against SEP, but most played)

#2 ORCS T-80

    RHS   T-80

#3 ORCS T-90(for tactics check against SEPs, with modern T)

#4 Inq/King Homers SEP Abrams

#5 DKM Challenger-2

    BW Leopard 2A6

   SFP Leopard 2A5

P.S. #4 are tanks to be blown off, other tank addons are just funn to play...

[Messiah 2]

*yawn*

seriously, is it not, just even for christmas, possible for you muppets to leave a thread alone with arguments about what tank is better, why its better, who would have won the cold war, who's cock is longer etc etc? Its a disgrace, and quite frankly makes you appear to be the age of 3, and the intelligence of a gnat.

Quote[/b] ]Oh, the m1 is a hog, blah blah blah. I have never heard anything but praise from tankers regarding the m1. Especially from the poor guys who have to operate Challengers, or those Russian tankers who have had their arms taken off by the autoloaders in the T-72.

one of those 'poor' guys who operates a chally is a friend of mine, and has sung nothing but praise for it - so im not sure where you get your info - unless you've used every type of armour in the battlefield today, your arguments are irrelavant and pointless as you're basing them off what you read on some website a year ago. And this isnt just a rant at breaker, this is aimed at all of those persons who insist on doing the same, time and time again.

Quote[/b] ]Oops, you are wrong.

what, may i ask, did you aim to achieve with that? Who cares? these are addons, are they not? If you're so annoyed that someone may have said something slighty incorrect, IM them, or better still, find a wall, shout at it, and leave the rant there. You've single handedly caused the start of the disintegration of this topic just by posting something so pointless and unneeded, like you have done in many threads before. Why... please... why do you feel the need to do so? If you can logically, and appropiatly argue and convince anyone why that comment was needed in this thread, i'll be amazed indeed.

All these silly comments (from others as well) pulls a very simple, and enjoyable topic off course and locked - congratulations, you're the cancer of these forums - spreading from topic to topic, getting things locked because you insist on arguing over nothing - live with it, just state which addon tank, or BIS tank you feel is best, and piss off.

Moderators, I'm not about to appologise for what I've written - in my eyes its something that you probally should have said a long time ago, and if you did, its obviously going unheeded.

[franze 196]

Tank? APC?

They all seem to make nice big yellow & orange puffs when hit by my M230.

[Pathy 0]

STFU Messiah you n00b! M1A1 Abr4mz r0x0rz!!!!!!1111111 OMFG!

[Messiah 2]

[breaker44 0]

Kay-whatever you say, pal.

Just to clarify, am I benign or malignant?

-Breaker Out

[Bazzer 0]

Itsa shame then that the Bradley isn't a tank, it's an APC.

M1 Abrams, best tank ever.

BMP, Best AFV ever (the Bradley would win, but it's small carrying cpacity makes it second-best, though in APC v APC combat, the Bradley would win)

It's an Infantry Fighting Vehicle actually.

An APC is one of those steel boxes on tracks that are quicker and safer than walking, although the difference is marginal in some cases...

M1 Abrams; best tank ever? OK, considering the Challenger II has its rifled gun and Chobham armour - something the Abrams has neither of - and the Leopard has its speed and reliability, I think your arguement is slightly undermined by the presence of facts in this case.

[breaker44 0]

Actually, the Abrams has Chobham.

Ok APC. Sorry. And, there are advantages to smoothbores, though I'm sure you already quoted FAS on why Rifled is somehow "better".

-Breaker Out

[SEAL84 0]

Meanwhile....................

The BIS M113, although hideously out of scale, has endeared itself to me in many a CTI match as a faithful little mule - it's fast, mobile, and usually Johnny on the spot with the fifty-cal.

Once I was holding Provins for about an hour - me, a rifle squad, a truck to spawn ammo crates and our M113 - against what amounted to at least a company of infantry and some armor. That M113 was mowing dudes down left and right from the hidey-hole I parked him in to avoid the tanks...but they finally got him.

[David 0]

I'm sure you already quoted FAS on why Rifled is somehow "better".

-Breaker Out

Of course it is. Rifled = Rotation of the projectile = Increased accuracy.

[breaker44 0]

Fine. Here's why:

"The other type of smoothbore that has come into use over the last part of the 20th century is the tank gun. Practical rifling can only stabilize projectiles of a certain length to diameter ratio. To reliably penetrate the thick armor of modern armored vehicles, a very long, thin kinetic energy projectile is required—too long to stabilize with rifling. These rounds are instead formed into a dart shape, using fins for stabilization (see kinetic energy penetrator for information on how this works). With the fins for stability, rifling is no longer needed and in fact the spin imparted by rifling will degrade the accuracy of a finned projectile."

Happy? Yes I quoted it.

-Breaker Out

[Pathy 0]

I assume you have extensive experience in MBT warfare then, breaker?

[breaker44 0]

Maybe because it's late and I'm tired, but I dont understand your question. Have I researched it? Definitely. Have I participated in a force-on-force engagement? No.

-Breaker Out

[Pathy 0]

Have you ever been in a tank, used one, had any sort of training in one.....have you even seen one infront of you with your own eyes...?

Basically, i'm asking; do you have any reason why i should listen to the crap you are spouting and read it as if it were an informed opinion?

Or can i just continue assuming you to be just another internet googlite who likes to force his own opinion on others, and declare them all downright wrong when they disagree about it with him?

If so, then there is no need to continue this discussion, as unless you've any sort of qualification of what you are saying, your word is worthless.

Just to give you some sort of example of what i mean. I know someone who was a Chally 2 crewman, and i recall him once telling me it's in his opinion, the best tank in the world. I don't come on to forums spouting that at people then going "Oops. You're wrong" when they disagree with me. Why? Because the closest i've been to seeing a tank with my own eyes (i mean, actually having it there in front of you) was seeing some on tank transporters on a motorway as we drove past. I am not qualified to say which tank is the best, i've never been trained in one, driven one, gunned one, been to war in one. Get my point now?