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
Couac_Attack    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/11/2004 4:54:00 PM
About the C2 and M1A2 dorchester armor, i think that the only comparison we can do with the Leclerc armor is in weight, the GIAT one is lighter, now about protection we would need classified informations. just to answer to the question, why the Leclerc hasnt choosen a Chbbam Du, or a dorchester, i think that its because of weight, the Leclerc's conception is in a nimble medium MBT.
 
Quote    Reply

RM-Nod    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/11/2004 5:30:02 PM
So? The CR2 has been acknowledged as the best protected tank in NATO, I think it's safe to assume that it's very well protected. Given how long chobham has been developed and rifined for compared to the GIAT system I think it's safe to assume Chobham will be better. Now considering this we can then look at the fact that the leclerc is lighter than the CR2 so I would assume it is not as well protected. I think that's a pretty safe assumption.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/11/2004 6:24:58 PM
Couac, let's assume for a moment that all four of the leading MBT developers (US, UK, France, Germany) have rough equivalence in armor protection for a given thickness. I think that's a reasonable starting point, since we don't actually know. We can play guessing games all day long and not get anywhere. So, instead of me saying "no, GIAT's armor can't be as good because the US and UK have been doing it longer" and you saying "yeah but France has good technology too", we'll just say they are all equal. Okay, great. Now, we can look at what that means when you actually apply it to the the C2, M1A2, Leo2A6 and LeClerc (I don't know what version you're on). Well, the C2, M1A2 and Leo2A6 are all nearly the same weight, give a thousand kilograms or so. Since they all use a 120mm gun, have about the same amount of ammo, engines are about the same weight, etc. we can come to the conclusion that they all carry about the same armor weight as well. This means that, to all intents and purposes these three tanks will have roughly the same amount of armor protection. Here's where the LeClerc has a problem. Since it is a smaller tank, and we are agreeing that the LeClerc armor is on par with the other tanks for a given weight and thickness, the LeClerc can't carry as much armor. All the other components are going to weigh the same, there's no getting around it. Given that, the LeClerc, to keep it's weight so much lower than the M1A2, C2, and Leo2A6 has to have less armor. Yes, it does have a weight savings due to the auto-loader reducing the turret size and so forth. But this is not going to account for all of the weight difference. So, even if we give you equivalence in armor the LeClerc still isn't as well protected. The only way we could consider the LeClerc as well protected is to suppose that the GIAT armor is significantly better than the best that the US and UK (who have 30 years of working on composite armor) can produce. I think you have to admit this unlikely, at best. So please, stop telling us that LeClerc is better protected than other MBT's.
 
Quote    Reply

Rubicon    Bringing knives to a gun fight   2/11/2004 6:49:46 PM
Come on guys, Le Clerk was not made to standup to Russian Armor. It's good in a supporting role but that's that. If you are going to compare Le Clerk compare it with Bradleys not Abrams. Le Clerk is an ok, note an ok, medum tank. But it has no business comparing with the heavies.
 
Quote    Reply

mike_golf    RE:Bringing knives to a gun fight   2/11/2004 11:08:21 PM
Well now, I have to disagree with this a bit. I agree that the LeClerc is not in the same class as the heavy MBT's of Germany, the US and the UK. It is a medium tank, and, if all performs as advertised, probably a good one. I think that, utilized properly, it would perform well vis a vis the Russian tanks. It's probably more or less on par with the latest T80 variant. I was trying to point out to Couac that he really can't compare the protection of the LeClerc with the M1A2 or C2 because it is simply not able to carry as much armor given its size.
 
Quote    Reply

jacques    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/12/2004 4:52:25 AM
The M1, CHALLENGER, LECLERC, LEOPARD2, ARIETTE, and MERKAVA4 they all use the same armor. The different is the LECLERC use modular armor which mak it upgradable therefore better than all the other tanks out there in the long run. Currently their armor are all the same. Why do I have to repeat myslelf so many times. Don't you people know how to read english ?.
 
Quote    Reply

Kozzy    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/12/2004 5:34:27 AM
The Merkava Mk 4 and the Ariete don't use the same armor as the others, I'm not saying it's inferior it just isn't the same. Also, the Abrams, Leo, and Chally's armor is upgradable over the long run, it just costs more and takes longer.
 
Quote    Reply

Horsesoldier    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/12/2004 10:58:55 AM
>>The different is the LECLERC use modular armor which mak it upgradable therefore better than all the other tanks out there in the long run. Currently their armor are all the same. Why do I have to repeat myslelf so many times. Don't you people know how to read english ? << Well, I suppose you will have to keep repeating yourself until such a time as the US and other powers stop making improvements to tank armor. The M1's armor kit has been upgraded several times since its introduction, same thing for Leo2, whereas LeClerc's armor has been upgraded how many times?
 
Quote    Reply

Couac_Attack    RE:Chobham 30yrs old?   2/12/2004 11:16:14 AM
Rubicon you just dont know the Leclerc so dont talk about it ( its Leclerc and NOT Le Clerc or anything else ) 1rst: Russian tanks hasnt got a chobbam type, the Leclerc yes, so there is no comparison possible about the protection. 2nd: The protection is maybe the 2nd or 3rd most important thing for a tank. Speed, range, guns/range, ROF, aglity, power of the gun ( the 120 mm smooth is largely better than the Russian 125 one ), electronic, stabilisations system ... And in all of this the Leclerc is one of the best, and if i had to count all these one, it is certainly the best. A tank is not only made to take shots but to hit strongly the ennemy. Now you will take a tank more or less nimble/Fast , with more or less protection depending the theatre.
 
Quote    Reply

Shirrush    RE:Jacques & the Offense Duck.   2/12/2004 11:57:25 AM
I think that this board's favourite two French writers must be complimented as their tenacity in supporting the Leclerc is nothing short than admirable! They are, however, beginning to oversell. Slightly. For their information, modular armor is far from being unique to the Leclerc's design. I don't know for sure who should be credited for the initiation of this approach, but I think it stems from the combat use of ERA slabs, by the IDF in the 1982 Lebanon campaign. As these could easily be replaced in the field, the Israelis went on developing other types of armor elements aiming at matching advances in penetrator technology. All Israeli armored vehicles are fitted with additional armor modules. The MAGA"H 7 c, for instance, is an upgraded M60 A3, with a new engine, suspensions, FCS, thermals etc, but it's turret and glacis are fitted with easily replaceable spaced-composite armor slabs. Turkey has ordered the "Sabra", a similar, but upgunned upgrade for it's M60's from IMI. It does the same job as a Leclerc, but comes at 1/7th the price. Any buyers here?
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics