tanks (moved posts)

Completely not true!

 

 

 

...in 1982 but Soviets introduced their ALCMs of KH-55 type in 1984.

 

 

 

Basic M1 (1980) was inferior to T-80B (1978 ), M1A1 (1985) was slightly worse than T-80BV (1983) and significantly worse than T-80U (1985).

 

 

 

Soviets deployed RT-2PM "Topol" ICBMs in 1985 in bases located both in Europe and Far East. So what is your point?

 

 

 

In fact Soviets and their Warsaw Pact allies had more aerial PGMs and PGM capable aircrafts in Europe than NATO aviation combined in 1980s. Soviet Army would be first to agree on using PGMs in Afghanistan due to decreasing of ground troops losses.

 

 

 

For example: rebel bases, convoys, known strongholds located in caves. Moreover there were plenty of Mujaheedin bases in Pakistan. Also more advanced Soviet planes (Su-24M, MiG-27K/L, Su-17M4) thanks to fairy good FCS could use even unguided weapons with greater accuracy from high altitudes than Hinds and Frogfoots.

How can a T80 be better than an M1A1? M1 is combat proven it is the king of all tanks 80s,90s and now. A good example of why Soviets would have lost a conflict with the west is how easily Iraq was beaten in the Gulf war. Soviet tactic put the conscripts at the front and keep your elite units to the rear. Gulf war was really a wakeup call for the Soviets as the tactics Saddams forces used were what the Soviets used throughout the cold war and it was very easily beaten. Another wakeup call was Chernobyl which proved to everyone nuclear war ain't the way to go.

T80

Weight 46 tonnes

Length 7.01 m

Width 3.60 m

Height 2.20 m

Crew 3 (driver, gunner, commander)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Armour composite armour

Primary

armament 125 mm 2A46 smoothbore gun

Secondary

armament 7.62 mm PKT coaxial machine gun

12.7 mm NSVT anti-aircraft machine gun

Engine gas turbine

1,250 hp (930 kW)

Power/weight 27 hp/tonne (20 kW/tonne)

Suspension torsion bar

Operational

range 335 km,

600 km with extra tanks

Speed 70 km/h (road)

48 km/h (off-road)

Recently, the Russians seem to be abandoning the T-80. Because of the turbine-powered tank's high fuel consumption, and the poor combat performance of older T-80BV tanks in Chechnya,

 

Due to the low turret roof, the lowest gun elevation is a few degrees below zero and so it is more difficult to find hull-down positions that the tank can fire from

M1

Type Main battle tank

Place of origin United States

Service history

Wars Gulf War, Iraq War

Production history

Designer Chrysler Defense

Produced 1979–

Variants M1A1, M1A2

Specifications

Weight 61.4 tonnes (67.7 short tons)

Length 9.76 m (32.02 ft) (gun forward)

Width 3.66 m (12 ft)

Height 2.44 m (8.0 ft)

Crew 4 (commander, gunner, loader, driver)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Armor Chobham,

RHA

Primary

armament 120 mm M256 Smoothbore Tank Gun,

40 rounds

Secondary

armament 1× .50 in (12.7 mm) M2 BMG machine gun,

2× M240 7.62 mm machine guns (1 pintle, 1 coaxial)

Engine AGT-1500 multi-fuel turbine engine, Honeywell LV100-5 turbine engine

1500 hp (1119 kW)

Power/weight 24.5 hp/tonne

Transmission Allison DDA X-1100 3B transmission

Suspension torsion bar

Operational

range 465.29 km (289 mi)

With NBC system: 449.19 km (279 mi)

Speed Road: 67.72 km/h (42 mph)

Off-road: 48.3 km/h (30 mph)

M1A1/M1A2 can survive multiple hits from the most powerful tank munitions (including 120 mm depleted uranium APFSDS) and anti-tank missiles

In the Persian Gulf War, Abrams tanks survived multiple hits at relatively close ranges from Iraqi T-72s and ATGMs. M829A1 "Silver Bullet" APFSDS rounds from other M1A1 Abrams were unable to penetrate the front and side armor (even at close ranges) in friendly fire incidents as well as an incident in which another Abrams tried to destroy an Abrams that got stuck in mud and had to be abandoned

 

The Abrams is equipped with a ballistic fire-control computer that uses data from a variety of sources, including the thermal or daylight Gunner's Primary Sight (GPS), a laser rangefinder, a crosswind sensor, a pendulum static cant sensor, data on the ammunition type, ammunition temperature, and a muzzle reference sensor (MRS) that determines barrel drop due to gravity and temperature. The fire-control system uses this data to compute a firing solution for the gunner. The ballistic solution generated ensures a hit percentage greater than 95 percent at nominal ranges. Either the commander or gunner can fire the main gun. Additionally, the Commander's Independent Thermal Viewer (CITV) on the M1A2 can be used to locate targets and pass them on for the gunner to engage while the commander scans for new targets

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M1_Abrams

I suggest you to take a long nap, after waking up to learn ANYTHING about Soviet tanks, Soviet Army versus Iraqi Army in the Gulf War (except stupid Western propaganda B$ aimed at getting rid Soviet weapons off from arms market as you quoted above) and then come back here.

 

If and only if we can start talking! :D

The US equipent has better electronics and overall better capability I think the combat records speak for themselves. Its not propaganda its a fact that the T80 is not a better tank than an M1A1. M1s have been hit by alot of different missiles and projectiles and still been able to continue fighting. Not only that the guns computer will allow it to pick off a T80 from a greater distance than the T80 can engage. And during the 80s especially the west had far better TI and infra-red than the Soviets. They can also see them from further away at night. If you're comparing the earlier 105mm gun thats probably the only thing that made the earlier versions less capable than the M1A1. T80s a smaller tank but what good is it if it has trouble firing hulldown?

Have a look at this:

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=ApacheCobra

Scroll down to the M1A2 Abrams technology video

One thing I like about the T80 is that it could fire missiles I wonder though why missiles haven't been added to the M1 maybe in future they might add a Tow launcher or Javelin.

Because it's quite a bit faster to fire the gun, move, reload, and then fire again...

A T-80 has NO hope against an M1 Abrahams or a UK challenger.

Of course in 1991 M1A1s were hit by Soviet projectiles but unfortunately these rounds were dated back to 1960s and withdrawn from Red Army arsenal twenty years before Gulf War. Franky speaking nothing more modern never hit Abrams.

They've been hit by Tow missiles, hellfires, other M1A1 rounds and have still managed to protect the crew. Thats not including the 125mm rounds by Iraqi tanks which were only able to damage them eventhough they are older ammunition types.

During an early attack on Baghdad, one M1A1 was disabled by a recoilless rifle round that had penetrated the rear engine housing, and punctured a hole in the right rear fuel cell, causing fuel to leak onto the hot turbine engine. After repeated attempts to extinguish the fire, the decision was made to destroy or remove any sensitive equipment. Oil and .50 caliber rounds were scattered in the interior, the ammunition doors were opened and several thermite grenades ignited inside. Another M1 then fired a HEAT round in order to ensure the destruction of the disabled tank. The tank was completely disabled but still intact. Later, an AGM-65 Maverick and two AGM-114 Hellfire missiles were fired into the tank to finish its destruction. Remarkably, the tank still appeared to be intact from the exterior

Its combat record is proof its a better tank than the T80 how can you say it is equivalent to a T64 when it clearly had no trouble beating T72s in Iraq?

Not being a fanboi of any site ( russian or american ) but US Technology could be very overrated because so far they never fought against russian 1st line troops and vice versa.

 

So when somebody tells you M1A2 is best tank in the world his opinion is based on what ? Bashing old tanks in Iraqi desert ? Jest remember this one :D

Theres always competition between the different tank types in the world other tanks not yet mentioned in this thread that do rate highly on that list include:

Challenger2

Leopard

Merkava

They base it on best armour, gun and overall tank. The Leopard has rated highly in the list with its gun as has the Merkava with its layout for crew protection. My opinion on the M1 is based on its combat record.:thumbup:

Yes! It means accidental fire by US troops. Very useful and neutral combat record! :megalol:

No if you read up on it you will find a couple of cases where they had to destroy M1s rather than let them fall into Iraqi hands as the M1s were stuck in mud. In one incident 4 M1s engaged 1 M1 and were unable to destroy it so they tried a hellfire and Tow missiles. They can take alot of punishment I have yet to hear of any such storys about the T80 surely there must be some good ones out there from their time in Cheneya?

Of course, but you missed one crucial point: All above tanks were modernized for thirty years and thus they had many variants which differ considerably. Look at Leopard-2 A1-A3/A4/A5/A6, Merkava-1/2/3/4, Challenger-1/2.

 

So it is very important to explicitly underline what type you compare with respective Soviet tanks.

 

As for Abrams combat experience analysis: I told you it is a vain effort because Abrams fought only museum tanks.

Thats ture it pretty much changes every year but overall chobham is the best armour and alot of those tanks use that. Don't forget the M1 has fought 2 wars in Iraq they also tangled with the upgraded T72s of the Iraq army.

I watched this international tank competition on the Discovery Channel each country used their best tank and the Russian tank came in 3rd or 4th, The scoring was based on speed, accuracy and motorbility.

You can download that tank competition on piratebay.org or mininova.

I watched this international tank competition on the Discovery Channel each country used their best tank and the Russian tank came in 3rd or 4th, The scoring was based on speed, accuracy and motorbility.

 

You can download that tank competition on piratebay.org or mininova.

Oh LOL, it's just a propaganda...

Oh LOL, it's just a propaganda...

Nope, It's a competition that was run by all the military forces participating, and was done on time not personal views. Time has no discretion.

Either way it's a very dangerous job being a tank crew memeber these days.

So if USSR hadn't have fallen

But it did.

Russian tanks were very slow in aquiring targets in the competition, That I do remeber, the Russian tank was'nt rated much at all, dont beleive me download it and watch it for yourself, it's all done on time.

If I had to sit in either tank in a real war my first choice would definatley be either the M1 or the Challenger2. I would not like to sit in any Russian tank in a real engagement.

I forgot to say that your wrong about the Armour it is widely agreed that the 2nd generation Chobham armour on the Challenger 2 is the strongest known, it's even stronger than the M1's Chobham armour, Challenger 2 E also uses depleted uranuim shells. A challenger2 would pawn any Russian tank.