Which is the World's Best Tank??

[Winter]

The World's Best Tank came, saw and self-imploded. :frosty

On Australian M1A2s:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/19/1069027187696.html

For furthering this topic we need more and better material and statistics. Anyone...?

 

[gf0012-aust]

The World's Best Tank came, saw and self-imploded. :frosty

Australian M1A2s:
http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/11/19/1069027187696.html

We need more and better material and statistics. Anyone...?

The decision has NOT been made on which tank will be selected. The head of the defence forces, and the head of the army are interested in the M1a2

There is certainly a personnel preference for the Leo2's for a number of reasons. Mainly on issues of capability, force mix, parallel assets required, training, existing capability issues, current force structure etc...

Like all newspapers, they get excited and say things which are yet to be confirmed.

Personally my preference is for the Leo2.

 

[Winter]

Seperate from the Australia issue however, and avoiding specifics such as terrain, personnel and environment crudely, the best tank in the world is quite potentially the Abrams...hastily followed by several others...

:cat2

 

[gf0012-aust]

Seperate from the Australia issue however, and avoiding specifics such as terrain, personnel and environment crudely, the best tank in the world is quite potentially the Abrams...hastily followed by several others.

:cat2

That's for sure. It really has no all round competitors, is theatre tested and certainly has a high kill to loss rate.

In fact none have been lost due to a tank vs tank duel.

Still prefer the Leo2 though...

 

[Awang se]

I'm actually don't really satisfied with the performance of the T-72 and all of it's advance derivative. They are lighter alright but that give them little advantage against modern AT weaponry. This is not a WW2 era where gunners use their own naked eyes and judgement to shoot. This is an era of digitalized fire control system and ballistic computers. the gunners practically just push the button. What most tankers want is more protection, bigger more powerful guns and better targeting system. Take example of T-72 weapons rack. It's actually inside the crew compartment. i guess the russian tankers concept is that, when your tank died u must die with it. my country recently buy a PT-91 from Bumar Labedy of Poland which is a T-72 upgrade. I don't really agree with this purchase. I read the spec and i don't like it. The Army actually put a request for a Leopard 2 or a Leclerc MBT, but for political reasons the ministry purchase this junk instead.

 

[dabrownguy]

The best tanks in the world are: (not in order)
Abrahms=overall advantage
Type 98G=laser defence
Arjun=smooth bore rife
Leapord=speed and hunter killer ability

 

[gf0012-aust]

I would caution you on picking a gun just because it is "smooth bore".

Smooth bore and rifled bores both have their advantages and disadvantages. Smooth bore are cheaper to make (ie no rifling).

eg if you had a finned APSD round then you would use it in a rifled weapon. The brits and the germans probably have the best ballistics technology in the world, both have developed both systems. The trend to smoothbore is based also on ammunition issues, terminal velocity of some ammo types, specific ammo requirements etc.... There is no "best" solution as such.

Re laser targetting. Since the 1980's there was an agreement established by the US and (then) USSR that laser designators would not be used as weapons against humans. The technology has been used in "cold war combat" and hence the reason for the agreement being defined.

China's use of this as part of a weapons suite will raise some interesting issues. The US and Russian technology was probably more advanced in the early 80's as the Chinese tech is now. As there is no agreement between China and the other 2 powers, then the US and Russia may see that China is unwillinging to behave within the principles established long ago.

As a weapon it is limited, and in real terms it is effective against unsophisticated opfors. targetting has to be precise, and the current power restraints I think would see that the firing platform would be very compromised after 1 shot. I actually don't see it as a battle threat, the mere intent to use it as a weapon would see (certainly if a US or Russian opfor) some terrible violence visited on the army that used it.

China just does not have the capacity to implement this as a viable battlefield solution

 

[yutong chen]

How come so many votes for Al-Khalid, which is a older generation of Type 98

 

[Winter]

How come so many votes for Al-Khalid, which is a older generation of Type 98

Perhaps because those people specificed voted truly believe the Al-Khalid is 'the best tank in the world,' for various resons, such as bias, or a more in-depth knowledge of that partiular tank affecting judgement, or perhaps an arrival to a general well-reasoned decision that the Al-Khalid is in fact, the best tank in the world.

 

[gf0012-aust]

World's Best Tank - A Defence Consultancy Firms view...

http://www.ciar.org/~ttk/mbt/mbt/mbt.assessment.best-tanks-and-why.pdf

This still has relevance as armoured vehicle development has not done a quantum leap in progression in the last 4 years.

 

[elkaboingo]

the Iraqi's T-72 is a formidable tank with fearsome arsenal,

not compared to the m1. an m1 would take out t72 at 4km. this article is bs.

im suprised al khalid got so many votes i ak its good for pakistani territory where light/mobile tanks are needed, but outside pakistan it wouldnt be that good.

i voted for leopard because its a fairly good all rounder

 

[ullu]

I voted for abrams.

Tanks like arjun and alkhalid haven't seen battle field yet so one can only rely on their stats to see which one is better.

 

[gf0012-aust]

elkaboingo, yep, it was a tad optimistic, I don't think I'd want to come in the kill range of an Abrams, as per the Iraqi tank commanders comment when he lost 32(?) in 20 minutes.

Imagine the abrams using a LeoA6 long bore... you could go duck shooting...

I voted for abrams, its track reckord proves its ability. I would vote for the Leo next as I know the systems, but it has not been tested in battle. (seeing that the Abrams is using german and UK gear, its a known quantity)

 

[dabrownguy]

gf0012, Arjun has smooth bore rifle with a range of 4.6 km i think. Besides a tank that cost 6 mill can't be crap, plus it wieghs in at 59 tons.

 

[Gremlin29]

I agree with gf0012, Abrams followed VERY closely by Leo 2. Both tanks are vastly superior to anything else that's currently being fielded in the world.
Of interest with regard to the M1's turbine is the fact that it can burn Any form of petroleum based fuel including regular gas, diesel, AVGAS, JP4 JP5, Jet A, kerosene, white gas, you name it. There are limitations of course most of which stem from a higher EGT.

 

[gf0012-aust]

The big factor in this is also what round is used. The Brits have developed whats called a CHARM round. It was developed specifically for use in GW1. This round holds the record for a distance kill ( L27 fired by a Challenger) They registered a confirmed tank-to-tank kill at 5100 meters or 5.1km.

There has also been recorded a dual kill using an M829 round. This round also holds a record for killing 2 x T72's from one shot. It managed to pentrate and punch through the first tank, it then proceeded to travel on and hit the second.

It might have been a "gold shot", but it worked..

Currently the best guns, platforms, and round designs are on the abrams, chally 2 and Leo2A6's

 

[elkaboingo]

I agree with gf0012, Abrams followed VERY closely by Leo 2. Both tanks are vastly superior to anything else that's currently being fielded in the world.
Of interest with regard to the M1's turbine is the fact that it can burn Any form of petroleum based fuel including regular gas, diesel, AVGAS, JP4 JP5, Jet A, kerosene, white gas, you name it. There are limitations of course most of which stem from a higher EGT.

ufff, what ever fuel the engine uses it DRINKS it. lucky they were fighting the war in iraq
i picked leo. nothing comes close to that rheinmetall gun. the americans have tot but american machinery is not as precise as german.

ak and arjun(if it even works) are tailor made for a specific country. they are cheap, fairly fuel efficient, and have med tech. i cant imagine pakistan buying leo or abrams as its too expensive and it would get bogged down(esp as it doesnt look like it could cross a pontoon bridge)

a quick question, does leo have chobam armor? thats usually the deciding factor in a tank.

 

[elkaboingo]

another quick question, does leo have chobam armor? thats usually the deciding factor in a tank.

 

[gf0012-aust]

I agree with gf0012, Abrams followed VERY closely by Leo 2. Both tanks are vastly superior to anything else that's currently being fielded in the world.
Of interest with regard to the M1's turbine is the fact that it can burn Any form of petroleum based fuel including regular gas, diesel, AVGAS, JP4 JP5, Jet A, kerosene, white gas, you name it. There are limitations of course most of which stem from a higher EGT.

ufff, what ever fuel the engine uses it DRINKS it. lucky they were fighting the war in iraq
i picked leo. nothing comes close to that rheinmetall gun. the americans have tot but american machinery is not as precise as german.

ak and arjun(if it even works) are tailor made for a specific country. they are cheap, fairly fuel efficient, and have med tech. i cant imagine pakistan buying leo or abrams as its too expensive and it would get bogged down(esp as it doesnt look like it could cross a pontoon bridge)

a quick question, does leo have chobam armor? thats usually the deciding factor in a tank.

The abrams does use a german gun, its just that the US uses a shorter barrel and DU shells. The germans use the longer barrel and conventional armour. the penetration rates are supposed to be similar

as for chobham, the Leo's don't. They use a german version of RHA, plus are capable of adding plates.

I worked on an AFV program where we needed to assess the german armour against some competitors, they wouldn't even let us conduct the tests they were that paranoid about compromising the secrecy surrounding the plates.

The latest iteration of Chobham is better than anything else out there, the M1a2 would be a close second, the Leo-A6 is probably close to the Chally 2.

The Leclerc uses a french attempt at copying first generation chobham, and is not as good but certainly better than the armour on T-80's etc.. (well, the T series tanks that have been captured or bought on the clandestine market)

There is a rumour that the Ukrainians lost one of their latest T series tanks - for some money..

 

[dabrownguy]

elkaboingo,
The Arjun is not cheap, it costs 6 million and thats with Indian labour force!!!!!!!!! Arjun is compared to western tanks. I think the Arjun is a hybrid between western and soviet tanks. Arjun has a smooth bore rife and with afsds rounds can penatrate any nato armor at 2km distance and any soviet/chinese/pakistani armor at 3km! the 120 smooth bore rifle is like the leapords if i am correct! Yet because the indian media seems to critizize people think its not good! I'd call the Arjun a western tank standard or the big brother of merkeva tank. Arjun has accuracy and range, so its leathal. i'd say its the best tank in the asian contenient! merkeva cost what 2.6 mill! ak cost what 2mill. type 98 is the better and hiever ak but still 10 tons lighter! Arjun is going to be inducted in IA in 300 Arjun MK2, T-72 will be upgraded to Tank Ex(chasis of t-72 with turret of arjun), and 1000 t-90's upgraded by russians and isrealis! DRDO and France tried but were not compatable. 300 arjun mk2 is an effective force.