Page 351 of 353 FirstFirst ... 251301341348349350351352353 LastLast
Results 7,001 to 7,020 of 7043

Thread: Tank porn [NSFW]

  1. #7001
    Paradox's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 24, 2011
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Devonshire
    Posts
    8,643
    The biggest issue I see with the current crop of NATO MBTs isn't the guns or optics or armour but the readiness rate.

    Less than half of the world's extant Leopard 2s are capable of combat. And even fewer Challengers.

    The trend of larger, heavier more complex and less reliable tanks in NATO service has been steady for decades and if the next generation doesn't remedy it then the only purpose any of this serves is to employ people at Rheinmetall

    The new 130mm gun will not support HESH so British brass will probably resist it until there are no more challengers left to use it at which point they'll probably abandon MBTs altogether just like the US Marines have


    Poland treats me like shit and I hate them as a result of it

  2. #7002
    Dogbeast's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 12, 2011
    Location
    NW Territories
    Posts
    2,731
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    The biggest issue I see with the current crop of NATO MBTs isn't the guns or optics or armour but the readiness rate.

    Less than half of the world's extant Leopard 2s are capable of combat. And even fewer Challengers.

    The trend of larger, heavier more complex and less reliable tanks in NATO service has been steady for decades and if the next generation doesn't remedy it then the only purpose any of this serves is to employ people at Rheinmetall

    The new 130mm gun will not support HESH so British brass will probably resist it until there are no more challengers left to use it at which point they'll probably abandon MBTs altogether just like the US Marines have
    Don't forget transportation of said vehicles. It's nice if you have the vehicles on paper, but you gotta get them to the front quickly, effectively, and in such numbers to matter. ...Unless you plan on driving them there? Not to mention bridges, roads, and water bodies.

  3. #7003
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    8,228
    *Laughs in Panther*

  4. #7004
    Paradox's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 24, 2011
    Location
    Deepest Darkest Devonshire
    Posts
    8,643
    Tanks peaked with the Sheridan don't @ me


    Poland treats me like shit and I hate them as a result of it

  5. #7005
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    8,228
    What the fuck did you just say to me you little scout tank?


  6. #7006

    Join Date
    July 3, 2014
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by Dogbeast View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy Crush View Post
    The 130mm is currently aimed at the MGCS project, but France, Germany's partner in MGCS, is testing its own 140mm gun. The future of the 130mm is not yet secured, and so we are not likely to see tanks with a 130mm or 140mm until the 2030's.
    Problem with the 140mm is the number of rounds that a even a large tank can hold. It can be as low as 12.
    How can it be that low? Even WWII/Cold War tanks with 152mm type guns had at least 18. Are they avoiding the 2 part ammo (projectile + propellant)? Still insisting on having some poor loader man handle ammo that large/heavy?

    Also, why the need to upgrade the gun at all? Don't they normally try to upgrade the ammo instead as a cost-cutting measure? Or has that already been attempted?
    NATO MBT are old platform, is cost effective to start with a new platform then upgrade existing one. Beside they can't resist to 2A83 152 mm tank gun from Armada.

    Gun makers like Rheinmetall and IMI, for example, could not introduce more powerful ammunition until the guns they made were also more resilient.
    Making a more dense and powerful propellant is rather easy for the industry. The problem is with the gun and its ability to take it.
    An APFSDS is considered a supercharged round, one that drastically exceeds the limitations of the gun. So firing more than just a few at a time can be dangerous, and it wears the gun much faster.

  7. #7007
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    8,228
    The Armata that is being serially produced amirite? Lmau, how many rubbles are you being paid for your postses.

  8. #7008
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    15,583
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox View Post
    The biggest issue I see with the current crop of NATO MBTs isn't the guns or optics or armour but the readiness rate.

    Less than half of the world's extant Leopard 2s are capable of combat. And even fewer Challengers.

    The trend of larger, heavier more complex and less reliable tanks in NATO service has been steady for decades and if the next generation doesn't remedy it then the only purpose any of this serves is to employ people at Rheinmetall

    The new 130mm gun will not support HESH so British brass will probably resist it until there are no more challengers left to use it at which point they'll probably abandon MBTs altogether just like the US Marines have
    Half the Leopards not ready for service sounds about right for the Bundeswehr.

    But does that include stored tanks? Because if so, I'm surprised the number is so low.
    The Bundeswehr had 2250 tanks during the Cold War and reduced them down to 330. All the others went into storage, were upgraded to A4 and about half got sold as far as a quick wiki read tells me.
    That means about 500-700 tanks are still in cold storage.

    Tapapapatalk
    nevar forget

  9. #7009
    Movember 2012 Elriche Oshego's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 21, 2011
    Posts
    8,228
    I'm assuming the only numbers being accounted for are current service tonks. Which - as has been said - have as awful an active record outside the shops as CF-18s.

  10. #7010
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    15,583
    Quote Originally Posted by Elriche Oshego View Post
    I'm assuming the only numbers being accounted for are current service tonks. Which - as has been said - have as awful an active record outside the shops as CF-18s.
    If you only look at the Bundeswehr numbers, combat readiness probably approaches 0.
    nevar forget

  11. #7011
    Liare's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    14,628
    you can't really use that as a benchmark, the Bundeswehr has, since the end of the cold war, considered maintence something that happens to other people
    Viking, n.:
    1. Daring Scandinavian seafarers, explorers, adventurers, entrepreneurs world-famous for their aggressive, nautical import business, highly leveraged takeovers and blue eyes.
    2. Bloodthirsty sea pirates who ravaged northern Europe beginning in the 9th century.

    Hagar's note: The first definition is much preferred; the second is used only by malcontents, the envious, and disgruntled owners of waterfront property.

  12. #7012
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Joe Appleby View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Elriche Oshego View Post
    I'm assuming the only numbers being accounted for are current service tonks. Which - as has been said - have as awful an active record outside the shops as CF-18s.
    If you only look at the Bundeswehr numbers, combat readiness probably approaches 0.
    Could be worse, you could be the Netherlands which had 445 Leo 2, sold all of them, then realized "hey maybe we should retain some MBT expertise in our military" and leased 18 Leo's from Germany only 5 years after selling the entire tank inventory.

    https://www.defensie.nl/onderwerpen/...6-gevechtstank
    Last edited by Approaching Walrus; August 3 2020 at 09:19:53 AM.

  13. #7013

    Join Date
    May 6, 2011
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    1,349
    Quote Originally Posted by Approaching Walrus View Post
    Could be worse, you could be the Netherlands which had 445 Leo 2, sold all of them
    Thanks!

    Regards,
    Finland

    Now we have more things to put outdated AA-turrets on.

  14. #7014
    Sarp's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 13, 2011
    Posts
    988
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy Crush View Post
    The 130mm is currently aimed at the MGCS project, but France, Germany's partner in MGCS, is testing its own 140mm gun. The future of the 130mm is not yet secured, and so we are not likely to see tanks with a 130mm or 140mm until the 2030's.
    Problem with the 140mm is the number of rounds that a even a large tank can hold. It can be as low as 12.
    RM's 130mm has been put on a Cr2 hull for a reason.

    It's a sales pitch based on sound logic - in as far as it makes sense not that the British Army will see sense - which gives the CR2 overmatch until the next heavy ground vehicle evolution. MGCS would run in parallel until the the tech is secured and the French bail and do their own thing like they always do...

    This is very much a look at what we can do to your old Tank, do you want ?

    Points made about readiness , forward basing etc are all valid but don't detract from the need to upgrade the actual hulls themselves.

  15. #7015

    Join Date
    July 3, 2014
    Posts
    5,299
    Brits just got ARES
    I'm confused,. an amoured reconnaissance vehicle- OK, but also troop carrying variant?

    Last edited by Candy Crush; August 3 2020 at 12:22:23 PM.

  16. #7016
    Joe Appleby's Avatar
    Join Date
    April 9, 2011
    Location
    in front of the class
    Posts
    15,583
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarp View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy Crush View Post
    The 130mm is currently aimed at the MGCS project, but France, Germany's partner in MGCS, is testing its own 140mm gun. The future of the 130mm is not yet secured, and so we are not likely to see tanks with a 130mm or 140mm until the 2030's.
    Problem with the 140mm is the number of rounds that a even a large tank can hold. It can be as low as 12.
    RM's 130mm has been put on a Cr2 hull for a reason.

    It's a sales pitch based on sound logic - in as far as it makes sense not that the British Army will see sense - which gives the CR2 overmatch until the next heavy ground vehicle evolution. MGCS would run in parallel until the the tech is secured and the French bail and do their own thing like they always do...

    This is very much a look at what we can do to your old Tank, do you want ?

    Points made about readiness , forward basing etc are all valid but don't detract from the need to upgrade the actual hulls themselves.
    The French aren't going to their own thing this time around though.
    Nexter (French tank builder) and Krauss-Maffei-Wegman (German tank builder) formed a joint company to build Germany's and France's new MBT.

    KMW+Nexter Defense Systems
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KMW%2B...efense_Systems

    They will build the new tank and SPG for both the French and German armies.

    The tech demonstrator put a Leclerc turret on a Leopard chassis.

    Tapapapatalk
    nevar forget

  17. #7017
    Kai's Avatar
    Join Date
    December 2, 2012
    Posts
    7,428
    I don't really understand the logic of a new MBT killing tank.

  18. #7018
    VARRAKK's Avatar
    Join Date
    September 27, 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    6,933
    Does MBT's even have a role any more?

    Even infantry can now kill one with a missile launcher.
    Future tanks will need some really potent defensive systems.
    Why is it called earth, when it is mostly water???

  19. #7019
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by VARRAKK View Post
    Does MBT's even have a role any more?

    Even infantry can now kill one with a missile launcher.
    Future tanks will need some really potent defensive systems.
    The Merkava can defeat ATGMs with it's point defense system so no they can't.

    MBTs definitely still have a role.


  20. #7020
    Approaching Walrus's Avatar
    Join Date
    March 8, 2013
    Posts
    9,775
    Quote Originally Posted by Candy Crush View Post
    Brits just get ARES
    I'm confused,. an amoured reconnaissance vehicle- OK, but also troop carrying variant?

    Literally a British Bradley

    Pentagon Wars sequel: MOD Wars?

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •