Best Tank

[Zardnaar]

From what I've read, the "gasoline causes fires" point has been leveled at M4 Shermans a lot, but studies found most fires were ammunition fires. Later Shermans had improved ammunition stowage for fewer fires, and according to a Russian Sherman commander, American propellant was less dangerous than Russian propellant during fires.

This was due to ammo storage and the T-34 was cramped due to sloped armor. Sherman's ended up with wet ammo storage and they didn't store it in places where the tank got penetrated.

That's a big flaw if Russian tanks going back to WW2. Tank gets penetrated le boom.

The Sherman had the best armor out of equivalent tanks like PZIV or T-34. Sherman gets a bad rap but any other similar tank in the same position wouldn't have done any better and probably worse in the T-34 case.

Russians convinced themselves the T-34 was Uber but a lot if T-34 tank crews didn't come home from the war.

 

[cardgame]

Tanks have its rol in modern war no doubt, but if the enemy owns the sky tanks are going to be the first victims after SAM sites. I doubt any armor can have much chance against a Hellfire, not to mention much more powerful missiles launched from fixed-wing aircraft like Maverick and such, or Hi-Tech cluster bombs capable of destroying all tanks in a wide area. Probably a few tanks could survive such situation long enough to face enemy land forces, but it would be anecdotic.

The best tank is an F-15

 

[Lexicus]

The best tank is an F-15

I thought it was an MQ-1 Predator

 

[Broken_Erika]

I thought it was an MQ-1 Predator

An MQ-1 Predator can't carry a 1000lbs bomb

 

[Commodore]

I think the point that the Abrams requires a logistical train to be effective stands, though. Being able to "live off the land" as far as fuel is concerned doesn't make up for that.
I am however pretty skeptical that other tanks are capable of operating while cut off from logistical support, so I don't think that's a deficiency of the Abrams per se.

True. Such is the reality of industrialized warfare.

 

[Commodore]

World War 3 - Black Gold.
It's old RTS, interesting because it used existing military vehicles as units (Abrams, Leclerc, T-80, Shilka, Apache, Mi-28, Patriot, different mobile artillery units, etc.)
But the controls were really weird and inconvenient.

I remember that game. It was a good concept that was poorly executed since it was the only RTS of its kind that required you to maintain logistics supply lines for both fuel and ammunition for your army. But like you said, the controls were weird and made it really difficult (not in a good way) for the player to manage all the different things they needed to manage to fight successfully.

I really liked all the cool little features of the game though. Like Humvees or Bradleys that weren't equipped with anti-tank weapons couldn't cause any damage to tanks no matter how much they shot at it, just like real life. And how you could toggle a vehicle's headlights on and off in night missions. Keeping them on gave vehicles their normal sight range at night while turning them off reduced sight range but made them invisible to the enemy.

 

[r16]

multi fuel is a big NATO game designed to make things accepted by committees and thus making big players aka companies winners , as if tanks are any longer a business that you can have competition . But Vodka on Abrams is still short of MiG-29 having NATO standart gear to expressly operate from captured NATO fields , despite it had to range to reach France form peacetime bases already . And , oh my , ability to use the Sparrow shape ...

new Turkey's tank , named after a cavalry general after American fashion is South Korean , which was then the once American that lost to the M-1 , like in the 1970s . It's to become the most expensive tank in the World or something and because New Turkey is a pal of Qatar , the Qataris have been given the factory that's most likely to produce it . It's a political debate that never ends these days .

and of course it's like a 60s thing that if the Germans could manage to put as many 88s on the Western Front , as they did against the Russians , none of the American tank attacks would succeed either .

edit : And uh , stuff from the 1950s ... T-77 something maybe from some Hunnicutt , like posted in the 2010 elsewhere

 

[hobbsyoyo]

I know that during WW2 German tanks running on gasoline were notorious for going up in big fireballs and roasting the crew. Soviet tanks running on diesel were generally safer if they got hit. The Soviets also used a few aircraft with air-cooled engines that did well in the winter air which mostly froze liquid coolant.

Lots of American aircraft were air cooled. I'm not sure that cold winters would have been much of a con against liquid cooling for any air force other than the Russian one during WWII. Warming up or keeping a plane warm on the ground wouldn't be a big issue for an airbase - it's not like tanks out on the front lines which have to run their engines to keep warm. The tanks on the front are farther removed from their supplies so constantly burning through gas. Plus, running the tank engine wears it down over time and potentially gives away their position.

For planes, you're already at an air base with other vehicles (like trucks) or other support infrastructure to keep the planes warm without running the planes themselves. You're also right there with a massive stockpile of gas and the enemy already knows where the airfield is in all likelihood so making noise while keeping the engines warm wouldn't give anything away.

I do sort of think air cooling would have been best for the Russians as I get the impression that they were way more likely to use unprepared dirt runways without a ton of infrastructure than anyone else. Though maybe it was more widespread; I always got the feeling the Germans used big, prepared air bases for the Luftwaffe. Most other countries weren't operating that far north so it was a moot point.

 

[Lexicus]

I'm not sure that cold winters would have been much of a con against liquid cooling for any air force other than the Russian one during WWII.

The Germans. The Luftwaffe spent a lot of time in the winter grounded because the planes could not fly either because of wind and snow or because the coolant was frozen in the pipes.

Though maybe it was more widespread; I always got the feeling the Germans used big, prepared air bases for the Luftwaffe.

Not inside the Soviet Union. The thing about the eastern front is that the German logistics train, already not super-amazing to begin with, broke down almost immediately when they crossed the border in '41. The campaign was referred to as one dirty improvisation after another.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

Thanks for the correction

 

[r16]

the airfields were practically always grass . Germans laid runways whenever they could , like in the break between the "end" of France and the official beginning of the Battle of Britain , ı think maybe 50 airbases or something , giving some amount of thinking to the Spitfire pilots keeping tabs on their own personally allotted pieces of French soil to observe . In Tunisia they were superfast , they operated during the winter and stuff while the mudstuck USAAF and RAF could not . Kept Germans going until the weather got warm . But as said , Russia was too big to lay runways ...

 

[Zardnaar]

Derp.

 

[r16]

curses of internet bans and stuff , that bans many imagehosts . ı will have to go proxy instead , but what 's derp , foolish ?

edit: so , no image unseen either ?

 

[Zardnaar]

Derp means I screwed up.

 

[r16]

ah thanks , ı was otherwise wondering this was a challenge to how the French took the entire Panther , made an AMX-50 , developed an oscillating turret for it , found it too big but Panther's gun lived on on the AMX-13 and Americans had stuff testing the same and the like .

 

[Zardnaar]

Oscillating turrets never really caught on. The American one was T-57,T-69, iirc.

 

[hobbsyoyo]

What is an oscillating turret?

 

[Broken_Erika]

What is an oscillating turret?

It's a turret that's whole top moves to change elevation of the gun.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oscillating_turret

 

[hobbsyoyo]

but why tho

 

[Broken_Erika]

but why tho

They can be made smaller and lighter, and they can carry larger guns. However, they are also pretty much impossible to NBC seal, and the guns usually have to be loaded by magazine, and often the crew has to go outside the tank to change it.