yeah sorry bro but like @FurinaBestArchon said its just too good to pass on.
“both sides are worth each other”, as in both sides are as bad as each other?
I stand by what I said - Germans claim the leopard 2 is the best tank in the world. I don’t think it is substantially better than the Abrams or Chally. Overhyped.
Yes, I am a britain main.
EXACTLY. Both sides have extremely bad takes from time to time, and what you’ve been doing today is an example of such. Why it took you so long to get that is beyond me…
I stand by what I said - Germans claim the leopard 2 is the best tank in the world. I don’t think it is substantially better than the Abrams or Chally. Overhyped.
And other mains aren’t calling their tanks the best, lmao? Old forum was a goldmine of mains overhyping their nation’s MBTs to the heavens, I’ve seen people unironically throw the made up “70 RPG” claim so many times (as an example).
This is just pot calling kettle black fallacy.
Granted, each time Chally 2 did face off against a Leopard 2 or an Abroomz in trials, it lost by a mile. Those two MBTs have a valid claim for being the best tanks in the world if we shrink the definition to just using technical parameters, and ignore everything else; from doctrine, to crew training, to ease of use etc.
2 Likes
interesting point to note is that all but the R-73 use fins to vector thrust while the R-73 appears to move the entire nozzle
its actually much less sophisticated lol
they just move those metal flappy-doo-dads into the exhaust
2 Likes
oooooooooh ok yeah that is less impressive
Yeah, except for the most recent time:
Mainly talking about trials like those in Sweden, Greece or SA - where people compare tanks to see which one is more worthwhile to acquire.
The NATO competition there is well, not that important tbh? It was more comparable to a friendly spar imo, but still seeing a Chally 2 take a W for once when it comes to competitions is a nice sight indeed.
The Challenger 2 wasn’t ready for the Swedish or Saudi tank trials, so I think it’s a bit harsh to judge it on those.
The Greek one they sent a tank that broke down, so it couldn’t complete most of the trials. That’s admittedly bad, but also unfortunate luck. Worse still was that because the Greek government didn’t permit the use of DU rounds, the crew were using old surplus L23A1s and charges from the Gulf war.
There is also more that goes into international arms procurement than just “what is best”. Cost and politics comes heavily into it. Especially when nations are bribing the officials and they get arrested for it years later https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/german-arms-firms-in-bribery-claims-over-sale-of-leopard-tanks-to-greece-9029546.html
That’s a stretch. Chally 2 was ready in every way but reliability (it failed them at home shortly before or after the Saudis trials), and it was pulled out of Swedish ones before it could even arrive.
The Greek one they sent a tank that broke down, so it couldn’t complete most of the trials. That’s admittedly bad, but also unfortunate luck. Worse still was that because the Greek government didn’t permit the use of DU rounds, the crew were using old surplus L23A1s and charges from the Gulf war.
Only the Brits can blame themselves there, since they didn’t properly integrate the EuroPP into the MBT. However in terms of other technical aspects it didn’t perform that well either;
- it was cited to only have comparable protection to the Leclerc
- it was using outdated shells (no, the Greeks didn’t outlaw that, the Abroomz was shooting DU munitions, as KE-W shell series didn’t exist yet).
- it had problems with both its PP (improper integration) & tracks (falling off after driving over obstacles).
There is also more that goes into international arms procurement than just “what is best”. Cost and politics comes heavily into it. Especially when nations are bribing the officials and they get arrested for it years later German arms firms in bribery claims over sale of Leopard tanks to Greece | The Independent | The Independent
This REALLY needs context. The bribes happened after the trials already concluded, and they mainly consisted of making sure that Greece orders as MANY vehicles as POSSIBLE. Leopard 2 beat other vehicles on pure performance alone.
Still not nearly as bad as the bribing Lockheed resorted to when selling the Starfighter to Germany (gimme muh Mirage 3C).
That would be the trial where it turned out France were using GPS jammers to disadvantage other nations?
Just how dependent ground forces can be on GPS was inadvertently revealed to Greek authorities in August 2000, when the U.S., Britain and France competed for a $1.4-billion tank contract. As each country’s tank entry demonstrated its prowess, it became clear that U.S. and British tanks could not acquire a GPS signal for navigation. Sometime later and to the amusement of Greek defense officials, reports the journal Military Review, it was revealed that French agents were remotely activating small, one-foot-high GPS jammers to disrupt the GPS signal when British and U.S. tanks were in the field.
1 Like
Yes :)
1 Like
Interesting pictures!
Look like:
- The Nato way of doing it is using fins to vector thrust.
- The Russian way of doing it is to move cover (“flappy-doo-dads”) over part of the exhaust to increase speed in the direction they want.
- The Chinese way of doing it is also using fins to vector thrust.
But look like those fins are directly connected to the aerodynamical fins at the bottom of the missile. While NATO use a differente system with independent fin for their thust vectoring. This is probably due to the fact that the LY-80 is a big sam missile so the fin migth be able to directly control the thrust while on lighter FOX2, it’s not possible.
Indeed the PL-10 TVC look alike the AIM-9X.
it’s 5V55 S-300 missile
Ly-80
couple months ago…
⟩ makes controversial thread name
⟩ Surprised Pikachu face every time someone mentions it
Could just ask a forum mod to edit the title and be done with it.
… said, who make a tackles at every threads on forum
I dont care about thread name