Dont whant to put theyr precious tanks in the battle.
Sichartshofen, T-72 cannot be described as crap as M1 hasn't faced them. Very few T-72s were exported to Iraq. Iraqis used domestic Asad Babil, which was T-72 clone, with sustandard armor (no ceramics, not even sand rods) and substandard weaponry. See my previous posts about it.
Really? *words words*
Watch out USA russians still have a powerfull army http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2hvObzZt0g&mode=related&search=
what kind of aiming system is in this tankOh this threads reared its ugly head again
Best tank STILL Chally 2 (would be Chally 2E if anyone could afford it)
I'd just love to post meaningful facts and figures to show how good I am at looking up facts and figures, but my decision is based on being a soldier (a real one ) and working with it and on it and going to war supporting it.
Back to my earlier post though, it STILL boils down to the crew to get the best out of any armoured vehicle. Due to the size of our Army (comparatively small) and the frequent operational tours, our guys are very much up to speed on it.
Oh and You Tube....forget it. I did staff college demonstrations with Chally2 and spoke to the crews and support teams for Leo. Its all a con you can make a tank appear to be uber leet if you know how to present it. Other countries do it do it and so do we. The really funny thing is comparing notes and finding we both use the same dodges, and the media just lap it up.
Anyway, a good crew in a bad tank can defeat a crap crew in a good tank. Just as important as weapon technology is the tactical ability of the commander, the route skills of the driver plus his ability to get the best from engine,transmission and running gear. The gunnery skills and ability to manage in 'rev modes' of the gunner and finally the speed of the operator plus his close in defence and comms skills.
You can't make a valid judgement over what tank is best by reading books and watching vids, there are so many unquantifyable elements that separate a good tank from a great one. Carry on the debate though as I always enjoy a good one, just try to avoid the sweeping unsupported statements.
yes good post Bolt i did follow the war in Chechnya a lot, i seen many clips of that war and i am happy that Russia knocked the hell out of them in the end also guys you can see how fast the Leopard tank can go http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-9JoF5o5B4&mode=related&search= http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gyfFMaDN064&mode=related&search=2 Peter
You're talking from your point of view, which is - a mighty army will have the abilities to interfere to other countries' affairs and wage wars there, even if those countries are on other side of the globe. Example is the last decade - 3 wars in the Middle East (with 4th comming) and some smaller operations all over the world.
While Russia had only 2 wars (second one was started by terrorist formations, who attacked Dagestan, which is not Chechnya, but completely different region) on its own territory against band formations. It just doesn't have needs to go to, let's say, Chili and bomb the hell out of it, because it had tiran dictator. Russia's army is capable to complete missions in its own sphere of interests (which isn't the whole wide world).
What good does your army do to you?It's great that Russia has a good army, but unless y'all plan on heading through the Fulda Gap with it, or blowing down through your No-Longer-Subject 'Stans to get into Iraq, or unless you plan to have a repeat of your last failure in Afghanistan ... what good will it do you?
[...]
Cuddles said:Watch out USA russians still have a powerfull army
And you think that there wouldn't be guerrillas in Russia?
Whenever I hear US "interests" I'm close to vomitting - holding the world hostage, yeah great stuff. Russia is threat enough not to be ignored.
I'm happy that there is still Russia and China being some kind of counter weight.
yes good post Bolt i did follow the war in Chechnya a lot, i seen many clips of that war and i am happy that Russia knocked the hell out of them in the end
I don't think that Guerillas in Russia would be a problem for the US, because there's no reason for us to invade Russia. *shrug*
[...]
And please do recall, if you will, that a war with Russia would be a very different war from what's currently being fought in Iraq. It would not be an insurgency. It would be a flat-out balls to the wall conventional war. And that's the kind of war that the Abrams was designed to fight, and against the army that it was designed to fight.
You were the one talking about a war (the way you think it would be) in the first place not me. I only carried the thought a bit further.
yes i wont to know how can they make a [SIZE=-1]mistake like this ??? [/SIZE]if it was nothing whatsoever to do with aiming systems its the crew i hope they never drive a tank again also i was in the [SIZE=-1]Royal Engineers my self i just hate to hear things like this[/SIZE]I knew the peeps involved in that incident personally Stiner, if you have a point to make then do so. It was nothing whatsoever to do with aiming systems. You've crossed the line on this one. If you wish to get ACCURATE info on this feel free to PM me, but if you just wish to bump your gums using tabloid reports of incidents save us both some time eh and don't bother.