• Please make sure you are familiar with the forum rules. You can find them here: https://forums.tripwireinteractive.com/index.php?threads/forum-rules.2334636/

The Ageless Battle: ClownCar vs Tank - Topgear

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
#41
scuba22 said:
JET FUEL! come on, it runs on jet fuel..enough said
Click to expand...

Thats why is it likely the worst of all modern MBT tanks for large deloyments. If all things being equal 1on1 it just makes average, but in a large scale engagement it's retarded the amount of fuel it takes to kept it running.

M1 Abrams = average modern tank, not the worst, but nowhere near the best
 
Upvote 0
#43
so can jets, but it runs though alot of it.

as a tank is just as good as a challenger 2, leopard 2, etc. but the fuel problem puts it behind, considering how easy it is to maintain and repair a leopard 2. I don't know about the challenger other then it has great electronics.

in hard factors, all the MBTs are the same, but in soft factors they differ slightly with strengthes and weaknesses.
 
Upvote 0
#44
sharpshooterklj said:
That Brit dude disses on the M1 Abrams, that tank could own a Challenger II any day.

By the way nodachi, that BA-64 sig is amazing.
Click to expand...

The Challenger II currently holds the record for the furthest tank anti-tank kill.
I think all versions of the Abrams uses "Chobham" armour (a British invention), while the Challenger II uses the next generation, called "Dorchester". :p

Although I have just read that the Abrams can get a DU upgrade to it's turrent armour.:eek:

The Challenger II has the most uptodate fire control system fitted to a MBT. This was a major problem with the Challenger I.

The Abrams has lots of "kits" that can be fitted to the tank, to inprove it's capabilities in a specific role / combat enviroment. Specifically a kit for urban fighting that includes extra reactive armour and a modified mounting for the commander to allow him to aim and fire his MG without unbuttoning.

I think this is a little more complete than "could own". :D
 
Upvote 0
#46
While we are on the subject of Jet fuel here is some useful triva from
From Wikipedia


In 1942 the United Kingdom's Ministry of Aviation began a top secret project with Miles Aircraft to develop the world's first aircraft capable of breaking the sound barrier. The project resulted in the development of the prototype Miles M.52 jet aircraft, which was designed to reach 1,000 mph (417 m/s; 1,600 km/h) at 36,000 feet (11 km) in 1 minute 30 seconds.
The aircraft's design was revolutionary introducing many innovations which are still used on today's supersonic aircraft. The single most important development was the all-moving tailplane giving extra control to counteract the Mach tuck which allowed control to be maintained at supersonic speeds; this was the brainchild of Dennis Bancroft and his team at Miles Research. The project was cancelled by the Director of Scientific Research, Sir Ben Lockspeiser, before any manned flights were conducted. Subsequently, on government orders, all design data and research regarding the Miles M.52 was sent to BELL aircraft in the USA. There was an agreement for data exchange in both directions, but allegedly, after receiving the British data, the American government blocked the deal. Later experimentation on the Miles M.52 design proved that the aircraft would indeed have broken the sound barrier, with an unmanned 3/10 scale replica of the M.52 achieving Mach 1.5 in October 1948.

This story was also featured on TOP GEAR
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#47
Moz said:
so can jets, but it runs though alot of it.

as a tank is just as good as a challenger 2, leopard 2, etc. but the fuel problem puts it behind, considering how easy it is to maintain and repair a leopard 2. I don't know about the challenger other then it has great electronics.

in hard factors, all the MBTs are the same, but in soft factors they differ slightly with strengthes and weaknesses.
Click to expand...

The neat thing about turbine engines is that if they break (which they rarely do), you just pop it out and slap in a new one. As far as the fuel consumption rate, that is certainly a disadvantage for the Abrams in a massive WWII style confrontation. However, how common are those types of wars these days? In smaller scale rapid confrontations, the extra speed and quick maintenance time of the Abrams give it an edge that more than offsets the higher fuel consumption.
 
Upvote 0
#48
Heh, I find it amusing that the Americans so quickly defend their tank based almost entirely on foreign technology and equipment, British armour, German weapon systems and I doubt much if any of it is actually produced in the US - not like much is. Considering the near total lack now of proper heavy industry in the US, don't Americans worry that if they actually did piss most of the globe off enough they'd be utterly screwed for equipment - not to mention everyday consumer goods? Ironic that the US (and others) have become in a sense a resource colony for developing nations like China and India. Export leather, import shoes, export glass, import tv's!
 
Upvote 0
#52
Midshipman said:
The neat thing about turbine engines is that if they break (which they rarely do), you just pop it out and slap in a new one. As far as the fuel consumption rate, that is certainly a disadvantage for the Abrams in a massive WWII style confrontation. However, how common are those types of wars these days? In smaller scale rapid confrontations, the extra speed and quick maintenance time of the Abrams give it an edge that more than offsets the higher fuel consumption.
Click to expand...

I don't know about replacing the "power pack" on an Abrams, but the most impressive engine change is on the Leopard 2. It really is a "quick change artist", with the "power pack" being disconnected and rolled out the back, on a ramp, in about 15 minutes. :eek:

I don't know how long it would take a rally car's pit team to do the same, but I doubt it would be much less. :)
 
Upvote 0
#53
Already mentioned this down in the history section but can't let this one pass. My experience? 22 years as a mechanic in the British Army working on centurion, cheiftain,cheiftain stillbrew,challenger and challenger 2.
Deployed on Op Granby (Yanks called it Desert Storm)
Deployed On Op Telic (Yanks called it Iraqi Freedom or some such)

1. Turbine engine in Abrams uses 8 gallons just to start!!
2. Leopard pack comes out VERY quick.....but to split and repair the pack takes 180 man hours
3.Chally 2 pack out in 17 minutes (I've done it) and I know 1st line ftrs and FRG that can match that.
4. To split a Chally2 pack into its constituent parts: CV12 Engine,TN54 Transmission,Coolant Group and Fan Group 4 guys and 40 minutes. Done it and again no doubt there are others that can do it quicker.
5.Dorchester Armour (latest iteration of Chobham) is the BEST
6. HK sight system is great

I'm not dissing Leopard or indeed Abrams, they're both good tanks. A lot, as has already been mentioned, comes down to the crews. Chally has an enviable record in combat AND far less "blue on blues" by percentage than anything else.Sooo tank AND crews seem to be doing all right.

By the way, I have also examined a T72 up close and personal AND done a clutch change on a T55 ARV, all good fun.

http://www.redorchestragame.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11698 is the link for the earlier post about Chally.
 
Upvote 0
#56
NKatsyev said:
Heh, I find it amusing that the Americans so quickly defend their tank based almost entirely on foreign technology and equipment, British armour, German weapon systems and I doubt much if any of it is actually produced in the US - not like much is. Considering the near total lack now of proper heavy industry in the US, don't Americans worry that if they actually did piss most of the globe off enough they'd be utterly screwed for equipment - not to mention everyday consumer goods? Ironic that the US (and others) have become in a sense a resource colony for developing nations like China and India. Export leather, import shoes, export glass, import tv's!
Click to expand...

LOL, this is entire wrong....and I'm not even American. The US produces almost all of it's own military hardware inside the US. Patents and designs may be inspired or entirely from other countries, but in the US, thats how they get votes, bringing and and keeping the military industrial complex to congressmen's areas. And it's not a resource colony, it's called a global marketplace, borders don't so much matter in a free global market.
 
Upvote 0
#58
slyder73 said:
LOL, this is entire wrong....and I'm not even American. The US produces almost all of it's own military hardware inside the US. Patents and designs may be inspired or entirely from other countries, but in the US, thats how they get votes, bringing and and keeping the military industrial complex to congressmen's areas. And it's not a resource colony, it's called a global marketplace, borders don't so much matter in a free global market.
Click to expand...

But it isn't a free global market (this is one of the key contesting points within the Republican party and complaint against the administration), the US makes trade agreements with China to allow a $200 tarriff on American cars, but a $5 tarriff on Chinese cars. It's inept trade practices on the part of the US that's continues to develop a defecit so large it would be funny if it weren't so sad. And if the US produces the actual hardware internally, i'd still wonder how much of the component parts are produced externally.

Panzer Meyer said:
American hate is popular right now, anything american is ****, lets all all be cool and follow suit. yay
Click to expand...

I think it's largely based around the concept of American exceptionalism*. A couple hundred years ago the US did a couple things that set it apart from the mainstream (in practice as opposed to theory), and these were genuinely respectable and admirable things. The problem is, ever since then Americans have been so into themselves (and telling everyone else how they are so kickarse) when in the meantime they've lost much of what at one time was actually "exceptional" (in the positive sense anyway) about their society. That's not to say that the US has become any "worse", though the arguement could be made, but rather much of the world has developed and even possibly surpassed the US in the things that at one time made it "great". Which leaves the US with one thing it can always fall back on to try impress people, it's current military strength. Which I think in all our hearts is actually a contemptible thing to brag about due to the many implications involved. Militaries at the end of the day are only good for taking lives, it's a hollow thing to be the central focal point of a society. The current administration has gone to great lengths sadly to reinforce many of the views that focus on the more negative aspects of what it is to be "American", which implies as I mean it to, that there are also very many positive aspects.

That and I think it's human nature to find it often very amusing to make fun of the guy who runs around and boasts about himself. So sure it's popular, but it's popular for more reasons than "America hating" which I think is in most cases in terribly inapt. Even more sad is when watching CSPAN or something similiar and you have people accuse those who are critical of "America hating" when actually I think it's the opposite. People who are at heart actually proud and have a certain imborn adoration for their birthplace are embittered by the failure of this country of theirs to deliver, to live up to all this rhetoric of being "the greatest country in the world". I dunno, this has turned into rambling I suppose. But it's an interesting topic, sadly it's one that becomes emotional all too quickly.

*This is of course a gross oversimplification.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
#59
slyder73 said:
LOL, this is entire wrong....and I'm not even American. The US produces almost all of it's own military hardware inside the US. Patents and designs may be inspired or entirely from other countries, but in the US, thats how they get votes, bringing and and keeping the military industrial complex to congressmen's areas. And it's not a resource colony, it's called a global marketplace, borders don't so much matter in a free global market.
Click to expand...
as a fellow countryman i will inform u that (unfortunately) we make alot of equipment for the us military. optical scopes, laser scopes, and tracking systems to name a few items.
most americans dont know that alot of the oil they burn aint from texas, its from our oil sands.
i guess everyone is entitled to an opinion.
whats your opinion on the 5 billion in trade terrifs for softwood the us stole/owes us? in this so called free global market place should they have to pay?
i think that alot of people outside the us are getting tired of the foreign policies made up by people who cannot even find their home state on a map. what do you think about the thinly veiled wars waged upon countries who dont fall into line? is it becoming tiresome? it is hard to imagine, but if the rest of the free world closed their borders to americans and thier trade, the us would colapse within a week.
 
Upvote 0
#60
slyder73 said:
LOL, this is entire wrong....and I'm not even American. The US produces almost all of it's own military hardware inside the US. Patents and designs may be inspired or entirely from other countries, but in the US, thats how they get votes, bringing and and keeping the military industrial complex to congressmen's areas. And it's not a resource colony, it's called a global marketplace, borders don't so much matter in a free global market.
Click to expand...

you must have slept through global economy class.

The differences in killing power, protection and speed are all fairly equal between the M1 abrams, Leo 2 and the Challenger 2, but the M1 abram fails greatly in the logistical because it runs on ****ing jet fuel. Do you understand how retarded that is? Why oh why would you design a tank that takes 8 gallons to start? Sure you can stick diesel in the tank to, but you'd get better fuel efficency just pouring it onto the road and riding the current it makes.

While a jet engine may provide much more punch, what happens when the supply lines break down, get cut off or there is a shortage of fuel? What happens when my tank is as loud as a helicopter and is hot as a jet engine?

The advantages of the M1 abrams is that it is light, (can be airlifted) has alot of power and good killing ablity and battle provenness makes up for the massive fuel shortcoming, making it and average tank.

The Leo 2 is the best on paper, but it has never actually been in real combat while the challenger 2 trumps the M1 abrams in everyway except the cannon (most of them are still rifled!) and is battle proven.

but this is comparing apples and apples. in the end the only thing that makes these tanks different is how many nukes their country is sitting on.


Also, to the "OMG YOU GUYS HAT AMMERIKA!!" comment.

Reality sometimes has an anti american bias, deal with it.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Jump to latest Follow Reply
Community News
Forums
Merch
Menu