Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: top 10 tanks in the world!!!
Hong-Xing    8/12/2003 9:07:05 AM
i think it would be this t-90 (rus) m1a2 (usa) t-98 (chi) m1a1 (usa) Challenger 2 (bri) t-95 black hawk (rus) al khalid (chi) merkeva (bra) arjun (ind) t-90||| (chi)
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
oldbutnotwise    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/3/2003 2:05:28 AM
The design of the Leclerc was actually started before that of the Challenger II, the smoothbore gun in the leclerc whilst suprior to the US/german gun is inferior to the rifled gun in the Challenger the Callenger 2e is rated as 46KPH crosscountry an advanggtage to the Lecelrc of 4kph not a major difference since when does a M1 have to stop to reload? I think this is an advert for the Leclerc, when the Changer got its recent upgrade the choice was the canadian targeting system as fitted to the M1 or the french system fitted to the the leclerc, the decision whent to the canadian system despite the problems this involved in making it compatable with the french tactical system fitted, this would not suggest to me that that the french system is superior to the canadian system oe area in which it does not seem superior is protection, it is lighter and carries what is generally regarded as inferior armour. So whilst it is certainly one of the best tanks out there I do not think it has the right to be called the best.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/3/2003 2:08:34 AM
As I understand it the Merkava4 is not designed to carry troops into battle, it just has the facility, if its ammo is exhausted or dumped, to carry troops. This was designed in to enable it to act as a heavy rescue vehicle. but I will stand to be corrected.
 
Quote    Reply

Couac_Attack    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/3/2003 11:27:40 AM
" the smoothbore gun in the leclerc whilst suprior to the US/german gun is inferior to the rifled gun in the Challenger " Arrrgg .. plz stop it, its certainly the 10nth time that we talk about what os the best between a rifled and a smoothbore, and we saw that they were comparativ with all their weakness each ... " since when does a M1 have to stop to reload? I think this is an advert for the Leclerc, " I think its about the M1A1, but think that an autoloader permit to reload on every type of ground at every speed, whereas you must consider the main stabilization of the tank and be carefull on your driving with a human loader. So that why you get a clear advantage with the Leclerc on this point. Then the suspension of the Abram dont permit to get a good stabilization on bad ground, whereas the Leclerc's one can easily. " oe area in which it does not seem superior is protection, it is lighter and carries what is generally regarded as inferior armour. " About the weightof the leclerc armour, from what i saw on GIAT web site and other, that comparing to the Chobbam, it was much lighter for a better protection.. Then ou must consider that the Leclerc is smaller, so you get more armor by meters. To say that the amor of the Leclerc armor and the Chobbam 2, i think nobody can say it today, because its to secret to get some revelations. " The design of the Leclerc was actually started before that of the Challenger II, " Nothing matter with the ability of the 2 tanks, because when you see history of the Leclerc, the time to decide what king of tank would be made was very important, then all the research about the ability of the Leclerc in stabilization of the gun, the tank , the speed ..... Took a lot of time whereas the Challenger II never did ALL these research. And the Leclerc was made in the idear to outpass by far all the other tanks avaible. ( the Leo II and the M1A1 at this time, then the M1A2) " the Callenger 2e is rated as 46KPH crosscountry an advanggtage to the Lecelrc of 4kph not a major difference " Acceleration, and stabilization of the tank are very important also, because its the direct factor which decide of who will fire the other with a good percent of killing and not being killed.. " So whilst it is certainly one of the best tanks out there I do not think it has the right to be called the best " To reapeat, with all the information i saw about the avaible tanks today, i think Leclerc is the best.
 
Quote    Reply

oldbutnotwise    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/4/2003 1:58:28 AM
you say that the giat web site says its armour offers better protection than chobham for less weight? this is pure advertisement, you cannot expect them to say, "oh our amour is inferior and we have less of it" you can only judge from third party reports, and these generally say that the lastest generation chobham is the one to have. smoothbore vs rifled? what??? a rifled gun is always superior to a smoothbore of the same caliber, there is no advantage to the smoothbore except that as more countries use it there is more development on the shells, this plus the fact that developing new rounds for the rifled gun is more expensive are the reason why more the smoothbore is in the accendency. At present the 120mm rifled gun is the best tank gun in the world(source Janes) whilst a lack of ongoing development is likely to lose it this position, for the moment it is the best. ps the reason the french 120mm smoothbore is better than the us/german one is its extra length, however it is still shorter than the rifled tube. look at the actual size of the Leclerc, its diemensions are almost identical to the m1/leo/challenger, a reason for this is that the modular armour is bulky. I have read on another site that the saudies have ben told not to operate the autoloader at more that 30kph on rough terrain as it can lead to failures? can you provide details on the comparative accelaration of modern MBt's? I cannot find this info so I cannot comment As to the stabilised gun, all MBTs have this, it was fitted in some ww2 tanks, the first all plane stabliser was fitted to cheiftains in the 80's from all the sites and reports it looks like the top 6 goes 1, M1a2 2, Leclerc 3, challenger 4, leo 5, T90 6, Merkava
 
Quote    Reply

Couac_Attack    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/5/2003 11:35:57 AM
"you say that the giat web site says its armour offers better protection than chobham for less weight" Its not really what i wanted to say .. Considering descrition offered on the GIAT web site, and after looking on other sites, i saw thatthe Leclerc armor was much lighter than the Chobbam 1 armor, for a largely better protectin. On some sites, i founded that it was 2 times stronger, but i think i must be careful by reading such things, and that the Leclerc armor has maybe not a such difference with the Chobbam 1 . Now to compare it with the chobbam2, i can just say that its much lighter, and that one of the resaon of the Leclerc weight, but i think nobody can say wich one is the strongest. And i have never seen specials anylisys saying that the Chobbam 2 was the best, ONE OF THE BEST, of course, but not the one.. I dont consider some generals quote, that for some, like to pass their time to say that what they have is the best. Now im still in the quest of good source that could say me which one is the best. About your other comments, im searching for English links.
 
Quote    Reply

Couac_Attack    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/5/2003 11:37:45 AM
Sorry, but i forgot to ask you .. You ranking at the end, is what you think logical, or a news paper rank .. plz say it. Now if its your opinoin, could you give me the principal reason of his first place ?
 
Quote    Reply

MikkoLn    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/6/2003 5:20:06 AM
I might have sometimes promised that I'll never take part in these kind of ratings, but heck, I have such a much free time now that I'd like to make a one. I choosed to compare 6 leading designs of today (M1A2, Leopard2A6, Merkava MkIII, ChallengerII, T90, Leclerc) in four important areas. For the winner of each round I'd give 6pt and the last 1pt to count at the end which could be my objective as possible "best MBT of the world". I.At-performance. Important role of MBT is fighting other armour. This contest takes into account tanks ability to fight others of it's kind - protection, armament, fire control etc. 1.Challenger 2.Leclerc 3.M1A2 / Leopard : 3,5pt each 5.Merkava 6.T90 II.General combat performance. Includes ability to engage infantry, other than "hard" targets, sustain damage from at-weapons and atgm's and other weapons etc. 1.T90 2.Merkava 3.Challenger 4.Leopard / M1 / Leclerc : 2pt each III.Tactical maneuverability. Tanks ability to move itself in different terrain, in different conditions (i.e. soft ground, low temperatures and snow, desert etc.) and general performance on tactical and operational maneuverability. 1.T90 2.M1 / Leclerc / Leopard : 4pt each 5.Challenger 6.Merkava IV.Stratecic maneuverability, ease of use, supply/maintenance needed. In other words, how big a burden it's to move specific tank over long distances. 1.T90 2.Leclerc / Leopard / Challenger : 4pt each 5.M1 / Merkava : 1,5pt each And so, the result and comments. 6th place with 10pts - Merkava. Though performing extremely well against it's intended enemies and having good protection, Merkava is left last because it's poor mobility and maneuverability. 5th 11pts - M1A2. Though performing generally well, M1 is suprassed in every area by some contestor. It's points were left pretty low in result of poor infantry and equivalent fighting capability and great fuel consumption. 4th 13,5pts - Leopard2A6. Performed equally strong in nearly all areas, not being the best but not the worst. The same reason as with M1, the second contest, dropped somewhat it's points. 3rd 15pts - Leclerc. Performed about similarly to Leopard - pretty well balanced throughout. Marginal difference was made up by it's slightly better at-fighting ability. 2nd 16pts - ChallengerII. In pure terms of fighting power, armament and armour, Challenger is throughout strong against all it's opponents. Very effective in countering different kinds of threats, and with good strategic mobility too. Only drawback is, as could be estimated, the slight lack of battlefield mobility. Winner with 19pts - T90. T90 wins three out of four contests, being the most mobile of the designs in differing conditions. It's high level of protection against missiles and good capability against infantry earns it another victory. Only in at-capability it's left last because inferior punishing power when compared with contestors.
 
Quote    Reply

crna_zvezda    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!!   11/6/2003 5:38:49 AM
The classification seems realistic to me but there is some thing that I still don't understand. Said that the T90 (please consider the latest s type not the early T90's produced) has an edge on protection (Arena-E considered?) but lacks AT, shouldn't we look at this as a compromise between AT and protection in order to gain on weight and mobility? Let me show an example(maybe a stupid one!) : So according to the classification our little T90s can take out an M1A2 on a single shot(ATGM or with some luck main gun). It can also sustain the M1A2 response without being seriously affected by the hit. All this when being far more cheaper and lighter.That is what I call an important advance. But how does it comes then that the T90 is said to be a outdated design produced from an outdated doctrine? How can this be possible?
 
Quote    Reply

Thomas    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!! MikkoLn    11/6/2003 6:58:44 AM
Many point to You for trying to point out the different aspects of armour. Where i beg to differ is the relative weight given to each aspect. Don't take it as a critisism, but support to yuor attempt to move this thread in a positive direction. From what i've gathered on this board, is there is not much to choose from between the say the 4 highest rated - it is a matter of taste, bad taste, perhaps; but taste never the less. As the advantages tend to cancel each other out, they seem to be irrellevant, because it comes down to the tactical management of the tank and the training of the crews. This brings us from the tactical aspect into the quagmire of operational quality, where accurate figures are difficult to obtain: Basically a tank that can neither move or shoot is not a tank, how much time does your tank spend not being a tank? 1. Maintenance: The old Centurion was a nightmare to maintain, which Denmark realised to the full extend when they got the Leo1. Relevant measure: Man-hours pr. running hour? 2. Supplies: A fuel-hog like the Abrams is to penalised heavily in comparison to a miser like the Leo. But again, this depends on the fuel and maintanence economy of your TRUCKs as well. Relevant question: How many men does it take to keep the tanks supplied? Not man-hours, as the problem is capacity not actual labour, as most of the time supply personel does not do to much. Cost: Theere the relevant question is the realistic resell value of the tank. just a couple of thoughts.
 
Quote    Reply

crna_zvezda    RE:top 10 tanks in the world!!! MikkoLn    11/6/2003 7:14:00 AM
The resell cost isn't the only thing to look at, the acquiring cost also needs to be regarded. Then by turning quetion on that particular aspect, i think that soviet/russian armour is very easy to produce and maintain (and destroy). So on that peculiar question the fuel consumption depends also on the supplies a country/army can use. An example russia can afford a huge armored army 'cos of it's oil reserves( not as huge as some middleeastern countries but good enough)! European countries like(UK, France, Germany) can't afford huge armour armadas so they have to produce high quality armour. The same thing is to be said about USA they rely to much at the middle eastern oil wells, that aren't (and you all know it) free of trouble! Now that is a more important matter; What are the ressources you are about to put on the table in order to obtain the best armor possible (and victory)?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics