- Joined
- May 26, 2010
- Messages
- 31,122
- Likes
- 41,042
Some good details with excellent editing....
Last edited by a moderator:
kunal ji can we buy this tank like atleast 500 of 'em i am in love with this tank .. i like the remote weapon station. your head won't be a sniper trophy anymore
Some good details with excellent editing....
T-90MS is good but have a deign flaw than Indian T-90S..kunal ji can we buy this tank like atleast 500 of 'em i am in love with this tank .. i like the remote weapon station. your head won't be a sniper trophy anymore
Indian T90 already have remote weapon station unlike arjun Mk1kunal ji can we buy this tank like atleast 500 of 'em i am in love with this tank .. i like the remote weapon station. your head won't be a sniper trophy anymore
i like the remote weapon station. your head won't be a sniper trophy anymore
Yup, T-64 series, T-80B and T-80UD series, T-90 series (besides T-90MS) and T-84 series (besides BM Oplot) have tank commander cupola with machine gun that can be controlled from inside of vehicle with hatch closed.Indian T90 already have remote weapon station unlike arjun Mk1
All MBT's can "jump", even the heavier ones.I call this the "Flying Tank" for it likes to leap into the air.
T-34 was really flawed design, there were better cheap, simple, still well made medium tanks, like M4, also very liked by Soviet tankers. T-90 and in general view all post T-34 Soviet tanks were beter quality ones, at some time period Soviet tanks were also most advanced in the world.This tank is still very much in the doctrine of the T-34, simpler, lighter, easier to maintain and used more effectively in swarming attacks. This is not the best but it will get the objective done.
Yes, I have seen that, I dont know how abt Anti-sniper suppression fire when sniper is free to fire..12,7mm is effective in anti sniper and anti material roles, this is why M2 is still used on US tanks, hah to get it even better, not only TC have M2 in hist CWS or RWS but also it is sometimes mounted on gun mantled and connected to tank FCS as second coax machine gun.
Its not possible to deduce the situation on ground, In US lead conflicts, US enjoy a well supported logistic chain, Unlike in other parts of the world like in Asia its not the case, The more ammo you have better it is, As i said 50cal and 7.62nato more or less doing the same job on the ground, So better have that weaponry which carry more rounds..So on M1 You can have such configuration (from what I seen).
3x M240 7,62 machine guns (1 coax, 1 loaders and 1 for TC in CWS, flex mount or RWS).
1x 40mm Mk19 Mod3 for TC (flex mount or RWS but I also seen concepts for mounting such in CWS), 2x M240's (1 coax and 1 loaders).
1x M2HB for TC (CWS, flext mount or RWS) and 2x M240's.
2x M2HB for TC and as second coax and 2x M240's.
Or any combination of these, even standard ammunition quantity in M1 for it's machine guns is impressive. 11,400-12,000 7,62x51mm ammo, and at least 1,000 12,7x99mm ammo.
BTW why so much ammunition for machine guns? It's simple, read about for example conflicts in Iraq, the decision made in Cold War to provide tank with enough ammo so crew can just spray it to hords of enemy infantry was good decision, that is usefull also these days in assymetric conflicts where there is more infantry than enemy AFV's to encounter.
From what angle? T-34 was a ground breaking tank with sloped armour. Comparing that tank with all the other tanks during WW2, I must disagree with you. Yes, you can say the German Tanks were more technologically advanced, but the point is better technology does not necessarily make a tank a winner. Tank is a war machine, and what matters most is success in battle, and T-34 proved that.T-34 was really flawed design, ...
Allmost any.From what angle?
Myth, learn about history of tanks, earlier there were also tanks with sloped armor, for example the ones made in France.T-34 was a ground breaking tank with sloped armour.
You can disagree because Your knowledge base on myths and propaganda.Comparing that tank with all the other tanks during WW2, I must disagree with you.
German tanks back then were mostly primitive, flawed designs that have the only advantage over other ones in armor thickness and caliber of main gun. Do You ever read any book about this subject, and I mean good book.Yes, you can say the German Tanks were more technologically advanced, but the point is better technology does not necessarily make a tank a winner.
Do You know what were costs of these "success"? How many Soviet tankers died in these coffins? How many of these "briliant" designs were lost?Tank is a war machine, and what matters most is success in battle, and T-34 proved that.