Drawing First Blood (Tank V.S Tank)

Two common misocnceptions are that Type 99 is developed from T-72, and Chinese 125mm gun is a copy of the Russian 2A46, but in reality, Type 99 has little to do with T-72 except for general arrangement, this can be easily seen as Type 99 has weld turrent, longitudinally placed engine, and much heavier weight. As to the Chinese 125mm gun, it has nothing to do with the Russian 2A46 except for the auto loader and 9M119, it is a development of the Chinese 120mm gun which is inturn derived from the Swedish 120mm gun.

about that laser, the question is can you do a manual control??? because when enemy laser is beaming at you, you could only destroy their laser optics, but how would you blind a person (from atgm) when there are 2 optics. (one for laser and one as a binocular)

Click to expand...

==I would assume that the laser thingy would attack gunners optical equipment above anything else, what's good having a laser range finder if you can't aim your weapon at you enemy?

autoloader? NO ONE has seen a picture of that. You do understand that the autoloader size directly relates to penetration rating, right?

it is a development of the Chinese 120mm gun which is inturn derived from the Swedish 120mm gun

Click to expand...

Njet...it was said by the engineers of the gun, that it isen't based on the Chinese 120mm, but actually it's continious development of the russian gun...
But there are already a thread about this issue so lets talk about it in there...

I would argue that the survival package of an Abrams such as crew protection is superior to Type 99.

The armor package may also be better in the Abrams.

Although the M1A1 design is neither "the best western tank" (but probably the western tank the Chinese army might be up against) however, given the enourmous cost difference as well as the not exactly limited experiences the M1A1 desingers(did you know that Israel made a really big buck of money by selling captured T-60s to the western nations?) had with soviet tanks, my bet in a "ringfight" is on the Abrams/Challenger/Leclerc/Leopard-2.

However, "Ringfights" dont tend to happen in reality.


P.S. A western Tank would propably try to set up a "ringfight" as it would be a situation which favours him.

Actually, maybe excluding Germany(new Troop Carrier and Artillery Gun), western nations do no longer upgrade their main battle vehicles (which are the main class mobile howitzer, the main Battle Tank and the main armed transport) as often as they did in Cold War, so catching up may be quite possible.

I'm not sure whether ATGMs could truly come into the equation. The Tank-Fired ATGMs within the Soviet system are really meant to down copters, not tanks.

I'm not sure whether ATGMs could truly come into the equation. The Tank-Fired ATGMs within the Soviet system are really meant to down copters, not tanks.

Click to expand...

Where did you come out with that?

I'll retract my statement; CDF is in a very interesting situation, and searching through is too labor-intensive.

chinawhite said:

A BMP-2 mission killed a abram from the side. that has a 30mm cannon.

FriedRiceNSpice i had a picture of the T-72 blown by a Bradley. It was all blown but you could see where it was hit. But i didn't save that picture.The bradley has a 25mm chain gun

Click to expand...

Mmm Iraq din"t had any BMP 3 oeff...:rofl:
Abrams taken out by a BMP 3 not posible.
Even the 125mm of the t-72 2a45m gun din"t hurt the Abrams m1a2 mutch.
And the chineese tanks have this gun allso.
Oldfasion stuff...
The US have lost in the conflict whit the formor regiem of Irak just a caple of hunderd man.
Becuse the can beat every eastern armt pretty simple.
The ASAF whit 7000 aircraft coult distroy every army in this world.

Demian.

Abradly can takeout the t-72 whit hit TOW what a range of 3700m.

I didn't cath you, Chinawhite (whome which you quoted) said BMP-2, not BMP-3...