Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Best Tank Poll & Opinions

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    I can't rember where i saw this... so if someone can confirm it, i'd appracate it.

    During the recent war with Iraq, US M2 Bradleys had engaged Soviet built tanks and had destroyed them... is this true
    Fuck being a hero. Do you know what you get for being a hero? Nothing! You get shot at. You get a little pat on the back, blah blah blah, attaboy! You get divorced... Your wife can't remember your last name, your kids don't want to talk to you... You get to eat a lot of meals by yourself. Trust me kid, nobody wants to be that guy. I do this because there is nobody else to do it right now. Believe me if there was somebody else to do it, I would let them do it. There's not, so I'm doing it.

    Comment


    • #62
      Don't know if it's true, but as they're armed with TOW missiles, it's most certianly possible.
      If it moves, shoot it, if not push it, if it still doesn't move, use explosives.

      Nothing happens in isolation - it's called "the butterfly effect"

      Mors ante pudorem

      Comment


      • #63
        From what I recall, Bradleys were given TOWs specifically so they could defend themselves from enemy tanks. a big fear was that some commmanders might then think of them as tank destroyers and get them wasted trying to kill tanks. But overall, yes they certainly could kill Iraqi tanks if needed

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by natehale1971 View Post
          I can't rember where i saw this... so if someone can confirm it, i'd appracate it.

          During the recent war with Iraq, US M2 Bradleys had engaged Soviet built tanks and had destroyed them... is this true
          I was a Bradley gunner back in the early 90's - didn't go to the first war though. I heard lots of talk when I was in about the Bushmaster 25mm penetrating the front of T-72's from short range, but I'm skeptical. I haven't seen any evidence of this to date.

          On the Bradley Wikipedia page, they do state: "The tungsten APDS-T rounds proved highly effective in Desert Storm being capable of knocking out many Iraqi vehicles including several kills on T-55 tanks. There have even been reports of kills against Iraqi T-72 tanks (at close range).", but there is no citation. A T-55, I'd have a better time believing.

          It also used to say that the Bradley was responsible for more armor kills than any other weapons system. Assuming they mean everything from armored truck to tanks, I might believe that one.

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by cavtroop View Post
            I was a Bradley gunner back in the early 90's - didn't go to the first war though. I heard lots of talk when I was in about the Bushmaster 25mm penetrating the front of T-72's from short range, but I'm skeptical. I haven't seen any evidence of this to date.

            On the Bradley Wikipedia page, they do state: "The tungsten APDS-T rounds proved highly effective in Desert Storm being capable of knocking out many Iraqi vehicles including several kills on T-55 tanks. There have even been reports of kills against Iraqi T-72 tanks (at close range).", but there is no citation. A T-55, I'd have a better time believing.

            It also used to say that the Bradley was responsible for more armor kills than any other weapons system. Assuming they mean everything from armored truck to tanks, I might believe that one.
            You can nail most Russian-built tanks from T-72 and below with newer generations of the TOW missile -- and definitely all of them from the side. But I've read in many sources that experiments with up-gunning the Bradley were put on indefinite hold after the invasion of Iraq since the 25mm M-242 autocannon proved to be much more effective than they thought it would be against vehicles and bunkers, and with HE rounds it was effective as an antipersonnel weapon as well.
            I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes

            Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com

            Comment


            • #66
              I voted for the M-60 primarily because that was the MBT we used in the National Guard battalion to which I was assigned.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by pmulcahy11b View Post
                You can nail most Russian-built tanks from T-72 and below with newer generations of the TOW missile -- and definitely all of them from the side. But I've read in many sources that experiments with up-gunning the Bradley were put on indefinite hold after the invasion of Iraq since the 25mm M-242 autocannon proved to be much more effective than they thought it would be against vehicles and bunkers, and with HE rounds it was effective as an antipersonnel weapon as well.
                The TOW-IIB is a flyover weapon, and attacks the top armor of the tank - I would doubt if there is a tank out there than can stand up to that (short of ARENA type defenses). Maybe something with reactive armor on top.

                I've heard the same about the 25mm Bushmaster - that it works very well. I still can't believe it'll penetrate the front armor of a T-72, even at short range, though. T-55 I might believe though, but I want to see that referenced somewhere.

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by cavtroop View Post
                  The TOW-IIB is a flyover weapon, and attacks the top armor of the tank - I would doubt if there is a tank out there than can stand up to that (short of ARENA type defenses). Maybe something with reactive armor on top.

                  I've heard the same about the 25mm Bushmaster - that it works very well. I still can't believe it'll penetrate the front armor of a T-72, even at short range, though. T-55 I might believe though, but I want to see that referenced somewhere.
                  from what I know it was a flank shot on a T-72.
                  "There is only one tactical principal which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wounds, death and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
                  --General George S. Patton, Jr.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by Dog 6 View Post
                    from what I know it was a flank shot on a T-72.
                    I've heard everything from front glacis at 200m, to flank shot, to rear shot, etc. I still don't believe any of them OK, the rear shot, maybe, but I'm still skeptical. I'd love to see a pic of this - you have to believe they'd have taken them had this really happened.

                    Now the TOW will do it at any range

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Yeah, but can it be fired from orbit I'll have to look it up, but for a time the US was knocking around the idea of essentially dropping a guided tungsten rod from orbit to knock out deep bunkers and other high-value targets. (A tank would actually NOT be considered a high-value target in this scenario.)

                      Here's a link:


                      Here's the Google Search I used:


                      They're called Rods from God.
                      Last edited by pmulcahy11b; 09-09-2009, 07:37 AM.
                      I'm guided by the beauty of our weapons...First We Take Manhattan, Jennifer Warnes

                      Entirely too much T2K stuff here: www.pmulcahy.com

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        Originally posted by pmulcahy11b View Post
                        They're called Rods from God.
                        AKA Ortillery. During the terrifying final day of an excellent Gunmaster:2020 campaign that I ran the PCs were the targets of an ortillery strike. Scared the crap out of them but they survived. Well, survived that event anyway.
                        sigpic "It is better to be feared than loved" - Nicolo Machiavelli

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by pmulcahy11b View Post

                          They're called Rods from God.
                          I seem to remember the aliens using them to take out a US armoured formation in Footfall by Niven and Pournelle.
                          Chuck Norris can kill two stones with one bird.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Has anyone checked out the relatively new "Duel" series by Osprey Publishing They've got an edition devoted to the M1A1 vs. the T-72 c.'91 and another on the way about the Centurion vs. the T-55 c.'73. Both would help make a more informed decision regarding the original poll question.

                            I haven't seen either one yet but I do have Panther vs. T-34 c. '43and Panther vs. Sherman c. 44 and they're both good.
                            Author of Twilight 2000 adventure modules, Rook's Gambit and The Poisoned Chalice, the campaign sourcebook, Korean Peninsula, the gear-book, Baltic Boats, and the co-author of Tara Romaneasca, a campaign sourcebook for Romania, all available for purchase on DriveThruRPG:

                            https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...--Rooks-Gambit
                            https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...ula-Sourcebook
                            https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...nia-Sourcebook
                            https://www.drivethrurpg.com/product...liate_id=61048
                            https://preview.drivethrurpg.com/en/...-waters-module

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              I think the Merkava is really the best

                              I voted M1, though I really think that the Merkava MK3 or 4 are the better tanks from a T2K point of view. The Merk's are very versatile, durable, and have some very usefully features for game play (internal capacity for 8 Infantry soldiers or extra ammo, 60mm mortar, etc.)

                              As for the M1 and T2K it would be quite possible in my mind as a GM to allow players to remove the turbine engine and replace it with a heavy duty diesel engine. A whole game could be created with finding the parts and tools necessary to complete the conversion. Though some may scoff at this idea, you only have to look back to WWII and all the field modifications that were made by Allied and Axis soldiers to improve their equipment or just keep it functional with what was available at the time. Maintenance wise, any MTB class tank requires 6-10 hours of maintenance for every hour of running time. Of course regular routine maintenance can hold this off, but eventually something major will break or wear out.

                              Finally in regards to the Bradley knocking out a T-72, I would definitely consider it possible for a few reasons. First, the T-72 was developed from the start as an export market tank only. The Soviets 's point of view was always that the tanks they sold to other countries would be inferior to what they maintained in their armies, so that if military action was ever required in those countries they should have the upper hand. The T-72's that Sadam bought were definitely not the latest versions, nor did the Iraqi Army do much, if anything, to upgrade them. Secondly, if the Bradley was engaging the the T-72 with DU rounds, as I would assume, there is additional pyrophoric reaction that occurs as the DU penetrator pierces the steel armor. Essentially the DU and steel armor begin to react and 'burn', melting the armor. This additional effect increases penetration on small caliber munitions, and creates significant secondary damage upon penetration. Even still, I would guess that the shots were flank or turret shots unless the Bradley was firing down on the T-72 there by reducing the effects of the slope of the frontal armor.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by Benjamin View Post
                                I went with the T-34 because its fairly easy to maintain and it's a decent all around combat vehicle. Besides it was designed by an American, Walter Christie!

                                Benjamin
                                Umm, no. It wasn't.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X