Without a shadow of a doubt a Merkava or a Leopard 2.
what would be your choice, lets have a tank war in my field...
2007-03-07 08:18:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by BUNGLE!! 5
·
1⤊
2⤋
The extreme element is group high quality and group coaching. With a large form of the outstanding tanks so close in high quality, the only that has the main experienced group who gets the 1st around off often is the winner. the reality with regard to the M1A2 SEP is of the tanks reported it has the main huge and terrific checklist in tank to tank engagements. there have been very few tank to tank engagements outdoors of 1991 Gulf conflict and 2003 Iraqi Freedom. i be responsive to that the Leopard II and the British Challenger have good reputations. The British MBT has had greater wrestle adventure than the Leopard II, yet no tank has withstood the attempt of conflict like the Abrams sequence. certainly, one tank it is equipped for his or her specs and has an outstanding recognition for installation their armor doctrine is the IDF's Merkava III. I even have heard of no attempt the place each and all the tanks have been taken by using intense high quality crews and positioned by using an entire variety qualification and a three week field exercising for direct assessment. Even after something like that, it nonetheless does not experience the attempt of conflict.
2016-10-17 12:20:54
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Challenger 2. One got ambushed in Iraq, was hit with RPGs and an anti-tank missile (Milan, I think) and was barely damaged.
Leopard 2 hasn't been proven in battle.
M1A2 has a huge heat signature and 1 was destroyed in Iraq by an RPG that hit the back and went into the engine.
2007-03-07 10:02:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by ukdan 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
#1 - Leopard2 A6 (New upgunned version beats out all others)
#2 - M1A2 (Battle proven, new TUSK upgrades help with combined arms operations).
#3 - Challenger 2 (Very similar to M1A2 on paper but slightly behind on the electronics). (Someone else put Chieftain on their list, I think they forgot that it was retired a long time ago).
#4 - Merkava 3 (Best crew protection around but lacks mobility of other modern MBTs. Designed specifically for action on Golan Heights, maybe a bit too overspecialized. Does have its own mortar for fire support. How well does that work?).
#5 - Leclerc (I just had to come up with fifth to make a top 5, only western tank to have an autoloader. Not battle tested).
2007-03-07 08:32:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by Pooky Bear the Sensitive 5
·
4⤊
2⤋
If the war was in the desert . A water tank.
2007-03-07 08:18:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by katrinasfather 3
·
3⤊
1⤋
M1A2 Sep, is still by far the most advance tank in the market today.
2007-03-10 23:59:34
·
answer #6
·
answered by smitdawg971 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
it depends..the Abraham's sounds like a mean fighting machine. But i like the challenger and would like to try both out before deciding, the Challenger had air intake problems in the first gulf war so I presume that's been sorted out now, as opposed to the American Abraham's which presumably has been tried and tested in US deserts. Either way I would want one with rear facing cobham armour to protect myself from redneck A10 pilots.
2007-03-08 04:33:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
The British Challenger 2 because it's the best armored and has a rifled down turret for better accuracy.
A lot of the Challenger 2's equipment is still top secret.
2007-03-07 09:54:29
·
answer #8
·
answered by HHH 6
·
1⤊
2⤋
a fish tank. Not so great on armour, but has fantastic all round visibility. But if it had to be a metal tank, i'd like a T-34
2007-03-07 08:37:41
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
Thomas the Tank. His cheerful smile and the toot of his whistle would persuade both armies to put their weapons down and enjoy a nice day out together on the island of Sodor.
2007-03-07 08:20:18
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
4⤊
2⤋