English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It IS the challenger 2 tank which has got the best armour and gun range
give me some reasons not to think that this tank is not the best
Dont say the abrams is its not it gets knocked out by RPG's and they're only supposed to destroy bunkers

2006-07-09 02:21:27 · 10 answers · asked by HHH 6 in Politics & Government Military

The challenger 2 tank has knocked out loads of russian t-95's

2006-07-09 02:32:41 · update #1

I must of got this wrong about the T-95's but we knocked out tanks in the cold war with the same armour

2006-07-09 07:04:44 · update #2

10 answers

I'll have to call bullshit on this one. First of all, the Challenger 2 did not knock out ANY T-95s because the T-95 is not even past the testing stage with the Russian military, and even if it were, the most advanced tank the Iraqis had at their disposal was the T-72. Second, the tank I was on in Iraq (an Abrams), took about a dozen RPG hits while it was there, and all they did was scratch the paint. Third, there was an international armor conference and competition held in Canada sometime around 2001 or 2002, which involved tanks and tank crews from dozens of different countries. The Challenger 2 crew from the UK came in DEAD LAST! Listen to a tanker on this one. The Challenger 2 and the Abrams have the same type of armor, just different armor packages. They can both take an incredible amount of punishment and bring their crews home alive. The Challenger 2's 120mm main gun has the same armor piercing and bunker-busting capabilities as the 120mm main gun on the Abrams. The difference between the two is in the ammunition. The Abrams uses a one piece 120mm round, wheras the Challenger 2's ammunition is loaded warhead first, then powder charge, then the primer. It takes a good loader about 10-12 seconds to get the main gun on a Challenger ready to go. A good loader on an Abrams can do it in about 3-4 seconds. Your assumptions about the capabilities of both tanks are completely unfounded. It's obvious to me that you have never been in the presence of ANY tank, much less been inside one.

2006-07-09 05:16:27 · answer #1 · answered by Incorrectly Political 5 · 6 2

Well alot of these answers you have recieved are more like fantasy.....T56 being the best...c'mon now the T72 was a far more superior piece of armor than this old tank...hell the Patton A3 was a better metal monstrosity, ask the Israeli Defense Ministry they still use the Patton chassis to this day.

As for the Bradley, granted you might have tested them back in the 70's but i am a Cavalry Scout now, and we are not tankers...and we don't drive tanks...my M3A3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle is an APC or say it with me, "Armored Personnel Carrier", although it has a turret it isn't a tank...you can throw a turret on top of an M113 and it is still an APC.

Onto this T95......it might be a good tank, I will give you that...if it was real...the only thing we know about the elusive T80 or T95 some people call it is models and specifications. Until the real thing does some testing, it only looks good on paper.

Now our question wanted to know if there was anything better than the Challenger 2. That is a great tank and all, but you can't just count out the Abrahams based on some RPG's (which are armor piercing and doctored up to be anti-tank rockets, I have seen them). For onboard computer systems and tartgeting the Abrahams is still one of the elite's, but most main battle tanks from the main "Allied" forces are all good....there that is my two cents,


~C.S.

2006-07-09 12:00:57 · answer #2 · answered by craigshowers 2 · 1 0

The M-1A2 Abrams and the British Challenger II are very comparable. They carry the same armament and armor protection. The M-1 is faster because it uses a gas turbine engine. Both of these tanks are extremely lethal, and will probably be front line capapble for at least another 15-20 years.

Any vehicle can be knocked out by an RPG. in the case of the M1 and Challenger tanks, the electronics are very sensitive, and the force of the blast, while it may not penetrate the armor, may knock out the electronics, greatly reducing the tank's effectiveness.

There is always the golden BB. A lucky shot can kill you as easily as a well aimed one.

2006-07-09 12:15:53 · answer #3 · answered by The_moondog 4 · 1 0

First, no Challenger had any chance to knock a T-95. Because T-95 isn't fielded yet, even by the Russians - let alone being sold to other countries. IIRC, UK isn't at war with Russia right now, unless something new happened today, and I don't know about it yet.

Second, RPG is an anti-tank weapon by definition. It is what it was made for - killing tanks. Whereas you English-speaking people fulfill the abbreviation RPG as "rocket-propelled grenade", in fact it is "rucznyj protiwpancornyj granatomiet" ("hand-held anti-armor grenade launcher"), carrying shaped-charge armor-penetrating warhead (aka HEAT, which makes a poor bunker buster... but a good tank-buster). Most of the warheads the Coalition are facing in Iraq are obsolete designs, with penetrating power one or two steps behing current protection provided by modern tank armor. However, a well-placed or lucky shot can still be deadly.
Besides, there are more modern warhead designs, which are (theorethically, since no one had yet tested them in combat - at least, officially) capable of knocking out a modern tank, even, if it is protected by reactive armor. I know that Russians have those already, and other countries that use RPG-series weapons, are working on these as well.

Now, as for Challenger - my tactics instructor - a long-time tanker - had a chance to ride it, and he said he prefers a modified T-72 he spent most of his time in. I'm basing on his opinion here: Challenger is nice and roomy inside, but it's silhouette is too big (making it a big target!), and it lacks mobility - engine power to mass ratio is too smallto be satysfying.

2006-07-09 13:57:44 · answer #4 · answered by mat_wisniewski 3 · 0 1

Russia’s T-95 is the Best Tank in the World...

The T-95 is a new design. It will apparently carry a 152mm gun/missile launcher in a new turret designed to lower the silhouette even more than the current low slung T-72 series of tanks. The main gun will carry more of a punch than the 125mm gun used on current Russian tanks. This is a result of lessons learned from Desert Storm, when 125mm armor-piercing rounds bounced off M1A1 Abrams tanks, even when fired from as close as 400 meters. The other major advance will include systems designed to decoy anti-tank missiles (like the Hellfire, Javelin, and TOW). The goal is to jam the sighting systems and to confuse the aim. This also is intended to work against the sighting system for tank guns. Tanks often spend time fighting each other, and their sights work much like the sights used to target and guide anti-tank missiles. The real question is whether the T-95 will see production beyond a few prototypes. Its main competitor, the T-80UM2 “Black Eagle,” has the advantage of being cheaper and an upgrade of the T-80, which is currently in service.

2006-07-09 09:29:11 · answer #5 · answered by eggman 7 · 1 1

Leopard II main battle tank is superior to challenger 2.

M1Abrams, Challenger, L'Clair (sp), T-90S, Merkava Mk 4.....are the competitors

Abrams are fast, T-90s and Leclerc are faster. Merkava 3&4 are faster offroad.

All modern tanks can hit moving targets while they're moving. Leclerc and Merkava4 can do it even better through FCS-integrated autotracker and T-90 even much better through bore-launched ATGMs.

German Rh120mm/L55 tungsten, israeli-improved 120mm GIAT tungsten and russian 125mm BM-44 U-Ni-Zn-alloy rounds have the same power through higher velocity (1750-1800 m/s instead of Abrams 1650 m/s)

And in HEAT-rounds soviets always led anyway, their new tandem charge HEAT-round with DU-liner has 800mm RHA-penetration.

I think, what gives me the choice of Leopard, besides the german history of good tank design, is their ability to deploy infra-decoys and smoke screens to hide from enemy tanks and heat seeking missiles.

2006-07-09 15:07:20 · answer #6 · answered by Its not me Its u 7 · 0 1

The challenger 2 is obsolete.The T-56 russian made tank is the best.

2006-07-09 09:25:34 · answer #7 · answered by eminem197796 3 · 0 1

Bradley Fighting Vehicle...Not the best protected, not the greatest firepower....But it will get right into the middle of the fight in 7 seconds, kick a bunch of butt then get out to live another day. The Bradley was a joke when I was testing them back in the 70's along with the M1A, but now it goes out and can " Git 'er Done!!"

2006-07-09 09:26:47 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 1

The best tank would have to be when I use my Giant Eagle Rewards to get a free tank of gas.

2006-07-09 09:24:12 · answer #9 · answered by Dr. L 3 · 0 1

ABRAMS

2006-07-09 12:35:57 · answer #10 · answered by anitababy.brainwash 6 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers