Which is the World's Best Tank??
- Thread starter Red aRRow
- Start date
- Status
Personally i think that al-khalid is a very capable tank and the best for pakistan's needs. also, the m1a2 abrams is a beautiful piece of technology. the merkava is just too heavy and with a large capacity. if you ask me the merkava might have the firepower and strength but once another force gets a kill on it your talking about a big kill.
Different tanks are made for different requirements and conditions so too difficult to analyze like this.All above listed are good tanks and all have edge on others in some field in some specific conditions.I rate AK high when we talk of tough hot desert conditions of subcontinent.One of its very good thing beside manyothers i like is its speed to weight ratio.
:help
Its interesting to see all these chest thumpings about the best tanks in the world.
The largest modern tank battle since Kursk has involved M1a2's, Challenger 2's, T80 series, T72 series and T90's.
It was a tank on tank battle, no anti-tank missiles, no air support.
The M1a2's consistently outshot, outranged and were faster across the desert than the Iraqi tanks.
The M1a2 has the most accurate gun in the world and it can be fired AT speed. M1a2's were typically outranging T series tanks by up to 200 metres.
Maybe thats why the Saudis, Kuwaitis, Egyptians have got them as well and why the Australians will get them instead of Leopard 2's.
The M1a1's were designed for a war in Europe. The M1a2's are improved models as a legacy of the Gulf War in 1991. They are combat proven.
Proof on the battlefield is all that counts.
The largest modern tank battle since Kursk has involved M1a2's, Challenger 2's, T80 series, T72 series and T90's.
It was a tank on tank battle, no anti-tank missiles, no air support.
The M1a2's consistently outshot, outranged and were faster across the desert than the Iraqi tanks.
The M1a2 has the most accurate gun in the world and it can be fired AT speed. M1a2's were typically outranging T series tanks by up to 200 metres.
Maybe thats why the Saudis, Kuwaitis, Egyptians have got them as well and why the Australians will get them instead of Leopard 2's.
The M1a1's were designed for a war in Europe. The M1a2's are improved models as a legacy of the Gulf War in 1991. They are combat proven.
Proof on the battlefield is all that counts.
yutong chen
New Member
<Proof on the battlefield is all that counts.>
On the battlefield against Iraqis. How many Iraqis actually resisted? You need a real war to prove it, like Russia vs. US or China vs. US or Pakistan vs. US
On the battlefield against Iraqis. How many Iraqis actually resisted? You need a real war to prove it, like Russia vs. US or China vs. US or Pakistan vs. US
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
You don't need a "real war" to prove anything. You need to look at how a tank performs in battle. Both the Challenger 2 and M1A2 (and Challenger 1 and M1A1 in the Gulf War) repeatedly engaged Iraqi tanks at extreme ranges (with a Challenger 2 recording the longest range shot in warfare that resulted in the destruction of another tank) and destroyed them. An Australian Military journalist was "embedded" with the British 7th Armoured Brigade (the 'Desert Rats') in Gulf War 2 and saw Challenger 2's take repeated hits from enemy ATGW without any damage caused whatsoever. These weapons were fired at the British tanks during battles with Fedayeen, Special Republican Guard etc who DID resist strongly. Without any evidence to back up a claim, how can a tank be claimed to be the best?
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Oh and gf, whay are you so sure Australia WILL get M1A2's? Our Defence Minister, the Chief of the Army and the head of the Royal Australian Armoured Corps are on publice record stating that they personally prefer the Leopard 2 A6? Plus we could afford to replace our Leopard AS1's on a one for one basis with the Leopard 2's. We could only afford around 60 of the M1A2's. I would rather have 100 Leopard 2A6's, than 60 M1A2's, any day of the week. Cheers.
Aussie Digger said:
Hey AG, my pref is for the Leo, I just don't hold much hope of that happening. I'm resigned to the Abrams getting the gong.
Given up on strat page? They are very parochial in here matey. I feel a bit like an :alian2
Its a good thing that these blokes only have access to keyboards, if they had access to triggers World War 3 would have broken out by now...
Wouldn't want the Mods job!
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
Sorry GF, which one is the Strat page?
Aussie Digger said:
Mate, I feel a bit of a dick, I though you were AussieGunner from strategypage.com
My stuff up...
A
Aussie Digger
Guest
That's ok. Don't tell me there's another of us Aussies here is there?
hey guys
its not the tanks that win the battles its the courage and training of the personals that work on these killing machines make them deadly.and also the combined arms stratigy which is the key point :smokingc: soooooooo its useless to say ARJUN is batter than AL KHALID or vice versa.
its not the tanks that win the battles its the courage and training of the personals that work on these killing machines make them deadly.and also the combined arms stratigy which is the key point :smokingc: soooooooo its useless to say ARJUN is batter than AL KHALID or vice versa.
shamayel said:gf0012 said:
Oh come on gf0012 that was unnecessary. This is a place for discussion backed by sound argument. Nobody is being parochial here (ok maybe some members :roll ). But it is nice to have diversity since it is our strength.
shamayel, look at the tone and thrust of some of the posts throughout this board. I have no problem about diversity, I have no problem with patriotism. I strongly object to data that is somewhat suspect, and where there is a contumelious disregard for even a notional display of fact.
maybe the standards are more flexible here, but the pak-india, india-china, pak-US stuff is a bit uneccessary.
If you want a place that is about discussion with sound argument, then there are a few that haven't been picked up yet. and there are substantial "flexible" discussions throughout this forum.
That doesn't mean that I don't enjoy discussion, I just have somewhat of a disconnect to excessive and dangerous examples of nationalistic fervour.
It's what can cause wars.
Come on gf0012, don't be like this. this is an open discussion in the net and there is all kind of peoples that posted here. so there is a possibilities of unreasonable and unsound peoples (talk about myself...). unlike Australians who only just recently being threaten by terrorism, most of the people here (i think) have lived their lives under the shadow of conflict since they are a baby. of course there is a little effect on their mind. furthermore even if we are fencing word in here, i still welcome u, aussie or no aussie. Don't let some of this unreasonable guys (especially me) get in to you.
Awang se said:
I don't have a problem with anyone on this board, and yes, even though I am an Australian, I have seen terrorism up close and personal, I have travelled to numerous countries in this region and overseas and seen the effects first hand.
I certainly am not in here to pick an argument, if you have seen it that way then I apologise.
I'm in here for the same reasons as everyone else.
Hi there gf and aussiedigger. I just wanted to let you know that i am a Pakistani-Australian citizen...well more Australian since i lived there more than in Pakistan. However, i love both countries and am proud of both. So don't change anything in the thread just ignore what you disapprove or dislike. I personally enjoy discussions that give praise to the aussie or pak forces but it is also interesting to know the criticism from those that think different about my nation(s)!!
so chill mates!!!
so chill mates!!!
- Status