- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Poland's new tank...are we dumb now?
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:05 am
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:05 am
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:06 am to StuntmanAnderson
No rail gun, no care
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:07 am to StuntmanAnderson
Naw, Poland only has about 100 Leopard tanks and a reserve of combloc junk. The Abrams is still the king of the hill and we can field thousands. We have similar/better concepts and the actually ability to manufacture them.
All in all, I hope Poland fields something new or at least purchases more Leopards as they are the new front line against the Russian threat, Cold War aint over. You can thank a weak administration for making that clear.
Its also time for the European nations to defend themselves anyway. The US has spent the time and money doing so since 1945. Unfortunately the EU has descended into socialist paradise and their military strength is weak.
Also, the US uses the Depleted Uranium round while the EU said no due to PC issues. Hell, when it comes time to do battle I think I want the most potent tool in the box.
All in all, I hope Poland fields something new or at least purchases more Leopards as they are the new front line against the Russian threat, Cold War aint over. You can thank a weak administration for making that clear.
Its also time for the European nations to defend themselves anyway. The US has spent the time and money doing so since 1945. Unfortunately the EU has descended into socialist paradise and their military strength is weak.
Also, the US uses the Depleted Uranium round while the EU said no due to PC issues. Hell, when it comes time to do battle I think I want the most potent tool in the box.
This post was edited on 3/30/14 at 7:15 am
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:16 am to StuntmanAnderson
They still can't screw in a lightbulb
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:18 am to StuntmanAnderson
The birds may quit flying upside down over Poland now since there is something worth shiting on.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 7:50 am to StuntmanAnderson
Maybe they can keep the Germans away now
Posted on 3/30/14 at 9:19 am to StuntmanAnderson
Right, because Poland has always been the world leader in military might.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 9:20 am to StuntmanAnderson
The adaptive infrared camouflage makes it a very big leap forward.
It says it can mimic the heat signature of a smaller car or even the background.
Interesting if it works.
War games against an Abrams tank..make it happen.
It says it can mimic the heat signature of a smaller car or even the background.
Interesting if it works.
War games against an Abrams tank..make it happen.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 9:55 am to StuntmanAnderson
1. It has an auto-loader. Two huge drawbacks to an auto-loader. (1) Auto-loaders are slower than human loaders. And (2) you cannot quickly switch between shell types when using an auto-loader. Auto-loaders use a carousel system where the ammo is stored in a circular component. Whatever round is next in the carousel is what you have to fire. This mean that if the next round coming up is a HEAT (High Explosive Anti-Tank)but you've got a MBT (main battle tank) in front of you, you will have to first fire that HEAT Round (which will do little to nothing to a MBT) while he on the other hand fires the correct round (APFSDS round) at you. What's worse, he will also be able to fire off a second round at you before you can get off your second shot... that's if you even survived his first shot.
2. It's weight. It's too light. It only weighs 30something tons. This tells me that while it's armor may be advanced, it's thin as shite. The ceramic armor they describe in the article is not light. It's heavy as shite. The Abrams that I served on had a lot of it and that's what makes the Abrams both so heavy and so hard to kill. Simply put, this thing will not be able to trade blows with things like a T-90, Leopard, or Abrams.
3. They do a lot of talking about active cammo and making it's infra-red signature. They even discuss how it takes measures to lower it's temperature. This is actually to try to lessen it's thermal signature. You see, modern MBT's use thermal sights. We even used thermal sights during daylight hours when I was a tanker. And while I'm sure they can somewhat lessen this thing's heat signature, they cannot eliminate it. That thing is still a big giant hunk of metal that will absorb the sun's thermal energy. And it does not have to be "hot" to be seen by the thermal sight's of a MBT. Even cool items like trees and shrubs show up quite nicely on the thermal sights that we had on the M1A1 back in the 90's.
4. Look at the tracks on that tank. Notice something? They're narrow. This means it will bog down in soft waterlogged ground. Considering where this tank will be deployed, this will be a huge issue. I'm surprised they have forgot the lessons the Germans learned back in WWII about narrow tracks when their tanks fought over the very same ground this tank will see.
Another issue with the undercarriage is the guards over the road wheels. There appears no quick way to move them out of the way. This will prevent caked up mud and debris from working it's way free of the undercarriage. This will both speed up the wear on the undercarriage and make field repairs more difficult. It's quite common for tanks to throw tracks in the field. This thing will probably throw a lot of tracks due to shite being caught in the undercarriage. Even in the best circumstances it's a difficult repair. On the Abrams our side skirts were on hinges that we could open to access the tracks. On this tank, it looks almost impossible to do in the field.
Bottom line is this thing looks like it might be able to be used as a scout vehicle but it should not be used as the main battle tank of any army.
2. It's weight. It's too light. It only weighs 30something tons. This tells me that while it's armor may be advanced, it's thin as shite. The ceramic armor they describe in the article is not light. It's heavy as shite. The Abrams that I served on had a lot of it and that's what makes the Abrams both so heavy and so hard to kill. Simply put, this thing will not be able to trade blows with things like a T-90, Leopard, or Abrams.
3. They do a lot of talking about active cammo and making it's infra-red signature. They even discuss how it takes measures to lower it's temperature. This is actually to try to lessen it's thermal signature. You see, modern MBT's use thermal sights. We even used thermal sights during daylight hours when I was a tanker. And while I'm sure they can somewhat lessen this thing's heat signature, they cannot eliminate it. That thing is still a big giant hunk of metal that will absorb the sun's thermal energy. And it does not have to be "hot" to be seen by the thermal sight's of a MBT. Even cool items like trees and shrubs show up quite nicely on the thermal sights that we had on the M1A1 back in the 90's.
4. Look at the tracks on that tank. Notice something? They're narrow. This means it will bog down in soft waterlogged ground. Considering where this tank will be deployed, this will be a huge issue. I'm surprised they have forgot the lessons the Germans learned back in WWII about narrow tracks when their tanks fought over the very same ground this tank will see.
Another issue with the undercarriage is the guards over the road wheels. There appears no quick way to move them out of the way. This will prevent caked up mud and debris from working it's way free of the undercarriage. This will both speed up the wear on the undercarriage and make field repairs more difficult. It's quite common for tanks to throw tracks in the field. This thing will probably throw a lot of tracks due to shite being caught in the undercarriage. Even in the best circumstances it's a difficult repair. On the Abrams our side skirts were on hinges that we could open to access the tracks. On this tank, it looks almost impossible to do in the field.
Bottom line is this thing looks like it might be able to be used as a scout vehicle but it should not be used as the main battle tank of any army.
This post was edited on 3/30/14 at 9:59 am
Posted on 3/30/14 at 11:01 am to StuntmanAnderson
Pardon my ignorance, but couldn't we just drone the shite out of those tanks? Even if they're stealth, when they fire, they are going to give up their position.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 11:24 am to StuntmanAnderson
Fascinating, but complicated. Sometimes, simplicity rules.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 11:47 am to StuntmanAnderson
That thing looks fragile as frick.
The slop on the front is great for misdirecting projectiles, but the sides are the size of barn houses.
Side note: These tanks look like the ones for the video game Battlezone.
The slop on the front is great for misdirecting projectiles, but the sides are the size of barn houses.
Side note: These tanks look like the ones for the video game Battlezone.
Posted on 3/30/14 at 12:29 pm to StuntmanAnderson
What about your 6? Pollacks
Posted on 3/30/14 at 1:13 pm to StuntmanAnderson
It will be interesting in seeing what Jane has to say about it. Our Abrams and the Israeli Merkava became obsolete the moment the AT-14 Spriggan Russian anti tank missile was introduced on the battlefield.
Both were shut down cold on the front lines.
We clearly needed a lighter more defensible armored vehicle that could deliver the TKO and the Bradly just never was up to the task.
I am sure we have something coming on par with this concept. Putting a jet engine in a tank was just downright stupid.
Both were shut down cold on the front lines.
We clearly needed a lighter more defensible armored vehicle that could deliver the TKO and the Bradly just never was up to the task.
I am sure we have something coming on par with this concept. Putting a jet engine in a tank was just downright stupid.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News