Which is the World's Best Tank??

[gf0012-aust]

woot i guess so far the Al-Khalid ROXORS!! just like i thought

and from wat ive heard thier one of THE most deadliest tanks in the world, because they have this type of radar that can detect enemy tanks..which only France and Pakistani tanks can do.

French tanks are good? Thats news to me, they're so successful that they are closing down the factory as they can't get any additional buyers. The French tanks had significant problems in Iraq with their gun stabilisation systems and had to slow down to 20kph to fire on the move, as opposed to Challengers that were acquiring, firing and targetting at speed.

As for a FCS that can spot other tanks - targetting and acquisition systems have been around for a long while. If the French have managed to convince you that they made something special, then maybe I could interest you in buying sand. (another words, its bollocks)

The record for a long distance kill is with both an M1a2 and a Challenger.
the only record that the french have managed to break with their tanks are:

1) self promotion
2) cost per unit
3) self promotion (again)

They (the french) may make the best hypersonic missiles in the world, but they are far from having anything special in the MBT arena. Its in the top 5, but its nowhere near the top 3.

btw, I've dealt with French weapons/ballistics manufacturers - so my exp is based on 12 months of frustration at their absolute arrogance that everything they did was the best in the world - with no empirical proof to substantiate their claims. (the Rafale being another classic example of french arrogance about technological superiority) - Buy a Mirage 2000 - its cheaper and can do just as much to within 5% at a fraction of the Rafales cost

 

[Majin-Vegeta]

hehe kool..i guess i was wrong o well

 

[gf0012-aust]

no worries, didn't , mean to sound so harsh, I've just had some bad experiences and issues of broken trust with some French companies...

 

[Aussie Digger]

I know what you mean, gf, it's a little bit off topic but not ALL French equipment is the best surprisingly... The Australian Army openly admitted that it went for the Tiger ahead of AH-64D, because the AH-64D was too capable for our requirements, ie: too expensive for us... The Tiger won because it best met the essential value for money criteria, not because it was the best. I think the Leopard 2 will be selected for Australia for the same reason, particularly with the flood of second hand Leopards on the market. My bet is for the Aussie Army going for second hand Leopard 2 A4's that will be refurbished to A6 standard. I hope they buy enough to equip an ENTIRE regiment for a change. I've heard reports that they will only be able to get 60 or so, enough for a combined arms battle group but that's about it. Not enough for a mechanised brigade, which is what the army is supposed to have...

 

[elkaboingo]

not all french equipment is the "best" the guys who designed leclerc need a good kicking. but the only thing good about the tank is its electronics besides that its pretty bad.

@ gf
for the 'best' tank thing i was kinda responding to all those who say, "oh my country's tank is the best in all conditions."

i was also talking about those who say "oh its not the tank, its the crew. those t-72's really posed a threat to us." its really hard to say its the crew when your tank is invincible to the enemy.

 

[gf0012-aust]

not all french equipment is the "best" the guys who designed leclerc need a good kicking. but the only thing good about the tank is its electronics besides that its pretty bad.

@ gf
for the 'best' tank thing i was kinda responding to all those who say, "oh my country's tank is the best in all conditions."

i was also talking about those who say "oh its not the tank, its the crew. those t-72's really posed a threat to us." its really hard to say its the crew when your tank is invincible to the enemy.

- understood. I guess I was giving some latitude in the fact that tanks of similar capability will see an end result that (outside of the fog of war issues) will be determined by crew training, capability and the soundness of the combined arms doctrine (if a theatre action) and armoured doctrine (if fighting outside of a combined arms event.

eg an M1A1, Challenger, Leclerc, Leo2A6, Japanese Type 90, Russian T-90 could come down to crew training - especially if the M1a2, Chally 2 and Leclerc had not destroyed an enemy before the opfor could get within an effective and sustainable killing range.

Its hard to have some technical discussions without treading on national pride - which is not my intent

 

[yutong chen]

About how many tanks are in a regular tank division?

 

[gf0012-aust]

a russian armored division of about 9500 men has 325 tanks

a U.S. armored division of approximately 16,500 men has 324

 

[Aussie Digger]

It is much like I posted the other day. The Australian Army is actively "shopping" for upgraded Swiss Leopard 2A4's. Hopefully at least 100 would be purchased to enable 1 Armoured Regiment to be completely equipped and brought back to 3 Sabre Squadrons. The supportability issue could be resolved easily by the government actually buying sufficient spares to support the tanks for years if needs be. Major conflicts seem to be getting shorter in duration and higher in intensity as the years go by, so hopefully the logistics "problems" shouldn't be too bad.

 

[gf0012-aust]

It will be interestimng to see what we do with our Leo 1's when we get our new tanks. I'd rather keep some as infantry support. But I'd bet that we give them to the Philippines. We could always give them to NZ as staff cars...

 

[Aussie Digger]

I wouldn't be surprised to see them given as a gift to help support the "war on terror" or some such. Either that or they'll be put into war storage. I don't think you'll see them retained in any sort of service. It would be difficult to justify politically why you bought a new tank when you still used the old one in our current political climate. Apparently you can't even contemplate purchasing a defensive surface to air missile system in this country without creating "controversy" and creating allegations that you're "sparking an arms race"...

 

[dabrownguy]

Worlds best Tanks 1 2 15!

Ok i am the refree for this open debate about the worlds best tanks. And i'll change the ranking when some one gives a good proof of one tanks superoirty. ok? (no old tanks, newest varietions of families)
Ranking,
1.Leapord 2 (with out a doubt)
2.M1A2 (proven)
3.Challenger (heavy and expensive, can't go wrong with money)
4.Lecrec (looks pretty good)
5.Markeva 4 (newest tank)
6.T-90 (Japanese)
7.Arjun (rifled gun and lahat)
8.That tank the South Koreans have...for got the name.
9.Type 98 (avtive laser defence)
10. T-90 (newest russian tank)
11. T-80 (proven)
12. Zabra (good tank)
13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)
14.....
15....

 

[The Watcher]

7.Arjun (rifled gun and lahat)

13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)

:lol another misinformed or should I say bias opinion... I don't know why you even put arjun at #7, it should have been #1. Anyway, some stats on Al-Khalid.

GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS
[/b]


Combat Weight - 46 - 48 Ton

Crew 3

Cruising Range 400 Km

Gross Horse Power to Combat Weight Ratio 25 HP / Ton

MMP 250 KN / m2

POWERPACK



Power  1200 HP

Cooling Water Cooled

Fuel Diesel (Multiple Fuel)

Transmission Fully / Semi Automatic

Turning Pivot / Skid

Final Drive Planetary Type </p>
<p>RUNNING GEAR



Tracks Rubber pads (replaceable)

Suspension Type Shock Absorber & Torsion bars

Bump Stop Hydraulic </p>
<p>PERFORMANCE



Max. Speed 70 Km / hr

Acceleration 0 - 32 Km / hr in 7-9 Seconds

Trench Crossing 2.7 m

Obstacle Crossing 0.85 m

Gradient / Side Slope 60 % / 40 %
ARMAMENT



Main Gun 125 mm Smooth Bore, Chrome Plated, Autofrettaged

Projectiles APDS - FS, HE - FS & HEAT - FS

Ammunition Type Separately Loaded (split type)

Co - axial MG 7.62 mm

AA MG 12.7 mm, Remote Firin</p>
AMMUNITION



Main Gun 39

AA MG 500

Co - axial MG 2000

Grenades 16 (12 Smoke, 4 HE) </p>
AUTOLOADER



Type Circular Carousel (Cassette Type)

No. of Rounds 22

Rate of Firing 6 - 8 Rds / min
FCS / GCS



Type Image Stabilized (3rd generation director type stabilization),
Hunter - Killer System

Optics Laser Protected


More here
http://www.depo.org.pk/products/hit/alkhalid.htm

And if Al-Khalid was so inferior that it had to be below some tanks you can't even name then why would countries like Turkey and Saudia show high interest in the tank and its development. :roll

 

[gf0012-aust]

My Top XX list: (and this is for use by Australia as there is no point in having a generic top "10", lists have to be relevant to the host nation, its warfighting doctrine and its likely theatre of operations)

1.a Leopard 2 A6
1.b Stridsvagn 122 (Swiss Leopard II A5)
2. M1A2 SEPD
3. Leopard 2 A5
4.a MIA2 Turbine
4.b MIA2 Diesel Europack
5. Leopard 2 A4
6. M1A1
7. Challenger 2 (Dorchester)
8. Challenger 2 (Chobham ser 2)
9. Challenger 1
10 Japanese T90. Italian Ariete
11 Leclerc

 

[Indus]

Top 10 tanks and their makers.

1. Leopard 2 (Germany)
2. M1A2 Abrams (USA)
3. Merkava MK-IV (Israel)
4. LeClerc (France)
5. Challenger 2 (U.K.)
6. T-90 (Russia)
7. Al-khalid (Ukraine-China-Pakistan)
8. Type 98 (China)
9. Arjun MK1 (India)

 

[mysterious]

interesting line up there...but i would put Al-Khalid just a lil higher owing to its specifications :smokingc: and what is this thing I'm reading on n on about Arjun tank and ppl putting it in their best tank of the world list... LOL I've read a lot about it and my straight forward opinion is that its a huge failure, an expensive one! So I really dont know how it got to the top 10 list

 

[saraab]

13.Al-Khalid (can't think of unquicity)

:lolol
btw there is another unquicity for Arjun, its competing to be the heaviest tank in the world :lol

man how biased can this workd get !!!!

 

[mysterious]

yeah! Lets see when it comes to the marshy areas of sindh and lower punjab in warfar as to which tank survives and battles best. A 48 ton Al-Khalid or a 55.8 ton Arjun :smokingc:

 

[SHAKTI]

yeah! Lets see when it comes to the marshy areas of sindh and lower punjab in warfar as to which tank survives and battles best. A 48 ton Al-Khalid or a 55.8 ton Arjun :smokingc:

actually, al-khalid is rather slow for its really light weight.. Arjun is actually much more mobile even despite its behemoth weight.. which brings me to the fact that al-khalid is lacking in armor..

Arjun: on-road spd: 72km/hr
off-road spd: 40km/hr
24 hp/ton
http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/LAND-FORCES/Army/Arjun.html

al-Khalid: on road spd: 70 km/hr
off road spd: 37 km/hr
25 hp/ton
http://www.depo.org.pk/products/hit/alkhalid.htm and globalsecurity.org

 

[mysterious]

I really dont think speed matters a lot when u're engaged in combat in the marshy n soggy land mass of sindh and punjab! If u're telling me India made a tank that would do good in Iraq, then that would hardly impress me as i dont think india wants to make its equipment with countries thousands of miles away from it in mind, rather than its neighbours and the land situation there