Challenger II tank

[Monk]

Originally posted by VOR
Autoloaders don't do so well when it comes time to help pull watches or change track or refuel/ upload ammo. They also don't make a very good cup of coffee. On the other hand, that's one less set of farts to put up with in the turret.

Hehe.....I see someone was a tanker.

Forget the discussion about armor thickness.  It's all about how much crap can I store in the bustle rack.  Where can I put the folding lawn chairs.

It's about - where can I park this beast so that I won't be seen.  Most importantly, by my own unit.

How can I -  NOT get it too dirty.  Don't want to spend more then 30 mins on the wash rack.

How fast can I go without losing all my wedge bolts.  You want to be the first at the wash rack.

many more, I can't think of them now.

[Suave]

Man... I don't know wtf I was thinking when I enlisted as a combat medic.

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Suave
Man... I don't know wtf I was thinking when I enlisted as a combat medic.

You prolly thought there were alot of cute combat nurses

[moot]

Was going to say the same thing before pizza rang the door bell ..

[GRUNHERZ]

Originally posted by Boroda
It's not true. T-72 is technologically simplified T-64, T-80 is a T-72 with a turbine, T-80 - improved diesel T-72.

Main difference is that tanks were designed and prodused in Leningrad, Kharkov and Nizhniy Tagil. Now Kharkov is in the Ukraine, and they made their own version of T-80.

No Boroda.  T72 and T80 are completely seperate families.

[VOR]

Originally posted by Monk
Hehe.....I see someone was a tanker.

Forget the discussion about armor thickness.  It's all about how much crap can I store in the bustle rack.  Where can I put the folding lawn chairs.

It's about - where can I park this beast so that I won't be seen.  Most importantly, by my own unit.

How can I -  NOT get it too dirty.  Don't want to spend more then 30 mins on the wash rack.

How fast can I go without losing all my wedge bolts.  You want to be the first at the wash rack.

many more, I can't think of them now.

That about sums it up! I'dd add to the list a nice supply of heater igniters, 110v convenience outlets in the turret (so I don't have to wire my electric shaver into the dome lights anymore) and some kind of turret self-cleaning feature like my oven has.

[Hangtime]

Being an infantryman, I had a lot of respect mixed with pity for the guys in armor. My attitute waz "yah, thanks, I'll walk.... would rather not be too damn close to the biggest target on the damn battlefield"...

Seems like everything we did in infantry, engineers, artillery and this goes for helicopters and fixed wing air support too... was to kill the tanks. They gave us all kinds of neat cheap tools that open up the spam cans pronto. In fact a tank unit in the open without air, artillery and direct (and considerable) infantry support was just meat for the infantryman's heavy weapons platoon.

Of course, this is back 30+ years now, and our few hundred aging M60's were facing a coupla thousand new T-72's and the planned battlespace was europe where theres plenty of cover for infantry, IR sights were unknown and the air support was more A-10's than you could shake a stiff german dildo at.

Nowadays I wonder how you'd get infantry close enough to pop 'em.. or enough punch on a TOW to get in there...

Mayhaps it is finally safe to ride in a track.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by GRUNHERZ
No Boroda.  T72 and T80 are completely seperate families.

"Family" here must mean a chain of designs by the same design-bureau. If so - it is true.

[expat]

Hang
That stiff german dil is still bigger than most our countries armed forces!!!!!!!!!!!!!(probably lesss std's as well ) hehehehehehe

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Seems like everything we did in infantry, engineers, artillery and this goes for helicopters and fixed wing air support too... was to kill the tanks. They gave us all kinds of neat cheap tools that open up the spam cans pronto. In fact a tank unit in the open without air, artillery and direct (and considerable) infantry support was just meat for the infantryman's heavy weapons platoon.

Heavy weapon infantry platoons?

According to Soviet infantry service regulations RPGs are used only to finish immobilised tanks.

PTUR - manually-guided anti-tank missiles - are useless because a tank attack usually scares people so that they can't aim it properly. It's usefull only for ambushes.

Land mines - tanks with trowls are used as well as fuel-air charges to make corridors.

CGS aviation - well, tanks on march or in combat order are covered by radar-guided AAA (Shilka and Tunguska), self-propelled SAM launchers and manpads (manpad is a company-level AA weapon).

What we have been told - the best anti-tank weapon is another tank.

BTW, do they practice carrying infantry on armour in the West? Here it is the main reason for not using muzzle compensators on tank guns - it will simply contuse infantry riding on armour.

[VOR]

Originally posted by Boroda
BTW, do they practice carrying infantry on armour in the West?  

It's in the books, but I've never seen it or done it in practise. It's considered too dangerous and unnecessary.

I was always amused at pictures of the Soviet troops in training with the BTR-70 (I think it was the 70). Imagining troops trying to jump out of the side door which was right between those huge tires and getting run over. It just seemed so "Soviet" to me.

"Don't worry, comrades. If you get run over the Motherland will find someone to replace you!"

By the way Boroda, we were always told that Soviet training doctrine would accept up to a 10% casualty rate in training. I always wondered if it was just a story that grew and got passed from soldier to soldier until everyone believed it or if there was some truth to it.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by VOR
It's in the books, but I've never seen it or done it in practise. It's considered too dangerous and unnecessary.

I was always amused at pictures of the Soviet troops in training with the BTR-70 (I think it was the 70). Imagining troops trying to jump out of the side door which was right between those huge tires and getting run over. It just seemed so "Soviet" to me.

"Don't worry, comrades. If you get run over the Motherland will find someone to replace you!"

BTR isn't a combat vehicle, for combat purposes we have BMP. BTR = armoured carrier. It is supposed to provide fire support in some cases, sometimes from specially-prepared position.

Originally posted by VOR
By the way Boroda, we were always told that Soviet training doctrine would accept up to a 10% casualty rate in training. I always wondered if it was just a story that grew and got passed from soldier to soldier until everyone believed it or if there was some truth to it.

10%? Where did you hear it? It's much less even during low-alt parachute landings from IL-76 in multiple streams.

90% of what you have been told about USSR and Russia is... hmmm... let's say "not true". It's interesting when in other thread Vad blows your bubble with pure digits, and you guys pathetically try to keep your illusions.

[indy007]

Originally posted by Boroda
What we have been told - the best anti-tank weapon is another tank.

That's pretty much a universally accepted truth.

[Hangtime]

Originally posted by Boroda....
What we have been told - the best anti-tank weapon is another tank.

Bzzzrrrrttt.

[indy007]

Originally posted by Hangtime
Bzzzrrrrttt.  

Great stuff in theory, but what happens if you lose air superiority? Can it drive through a building? Can it go hull down? Can it shrug off 20-40mm guns like they're just not there? How many Apaches have been lost in combat compared to M1A1s & 2s?

The best (not the only, just the best) weapon to kill a tank will always be a faster, more heavily armored tank, with a better gun platform