yutong chen
New Member
I thought you run something else
elkaboingo said:darn, tech seems to have left me behind. lately, i havent had so much time to look at these new things. i'm still back in the mid-90's
yutong chen said:If a country that can design a ICBM similar to USSR and USA, why don't you'll think that it can't design a MBT better than India.
gf0012 said:yutong chen said:If a country that can design a ICBM similar to USSR and USA, why don't you'll think that it can't design a MBT better than India.
yutong, was this a rhetorical question or were you asking anyone in particular??
yutong chen said:What makes Arjun so SPECIAL?
elkaboingo said:to gf:
pak has two 'striker brigades' that as soon as pak is attacked they push into indian territory. we dont have enough land to be able to battle on it. we'd get divided in two. the two brigades are followed up by all the 2nd class things.
this is the general 'plan' or do you want something on a smaller company level?
from teh 60-70 pak and india had a screwed up doctrines. they involved everyone advancing in a line with tanks following closely. uffff what a bad plan.
anyways tanks WILL NOT be sent into battle without infantry. that would just be a massacre.
elkaboingo said:hey i just noticed, gf your a mod :eek
:smokingc: :australia good job!
yutong chen said:Can Al-Khalid beat a Arjun?
gf0012 said:yutong chen said:Can Al-Khalid beat a Arjun?
There's more to this than just comparing the specifications for the tanks, it gets down to issues of terrain, commanders discretion, armoured doctrine, crew training, logistics, maintenance, attrition, etc....
both tanks don't have any deployment history behind them, so its hard to determine factors such as the above, reliability, performance in a war zone (which is completely different to even the most rigorous of testing regimes)
Both tanks have been designed for usage in what is seen as the most likely engagement scenarios and yet both are very different in concept. That means that both design briefs have been determined by armoured doctrine that is dissimilar.
In short, its anyones guess. Look at the M1a1. It was originally designed as a tank to combat the Warsaw Pact in a European theatre, it has demonstrated that it has the clear capability to fight "kursk" type battles in desert conditions. - So it has demonstrated that the basic design was a very sound and flexible war fighting platform.
The T-98 and Arjun are also conceptually dissimilar to core western tank designs. Again that reinforces different war fighting doctrines.