I feel like all the photos of Japans infantry I’ve seen, they’ve always be Aura farming.
1 Like
As someone who has the type 10 spaded and the t-80uk less that half spaded, id prefer the t-80 anyday. The type 10 has been butched since launch and should be fixed
T-62 is a medium tank.
T-55AD is a medium tank.
T-80UK is a 2nd gen - a gen1 MBT with enhanced protection.
Perhaps yes, autoloading should not affect generation, but it makes Abramses and Leos look oldies like they are compared to Leclercs or K2
it is not. It needs to hold 600mm KE - it holds 600 mm KE. Type 10 armor is not underpowered
I’m sorry, but the more you try to explain it, the more clear it becomes that it’s a meaningless exercise.
T-62 is most certainly an MBT.
T-55 Drozd has an active protection system, by your definition that makes it 3rd gen.
T-80UK has an active protection system/electronical warfare, that makes it 3rd gen.
its a big stretch between a lowly armored Leo 1s and T-62s and the modern-style heavy armored T-64/T-72 and Merkava 1/Challenger 1
well its base is oldschool so.
Still, its the first APS system that was deployed iirc which according to his claim it should make T-55 at least 3rd gen.
Where’d you get that, lmao
Medium tank is not an MBT. T-80UK doesn’t have electronical warfare or APS, it has optic-electrical supression system
sounds same to me
as much as i know, US counts it as MBT. USSR also has it under the name of MBT.
it did not. The T-64 was the first MBT.
The US is the US, they have their own system
well. It has strong frontal armor, good mobility, modern style universal cannon. All traits of MBT
Yes they did. The GRAU lists it as one, as much as several instructions
so then what`s the GENs about then? If its not universal, its debatable.
electronical warfare is something more about extensive interactivity with allied units using latest tech, hunter-killer system and so on.
As a concept of modern warfare yes, it is much more wide than that.
I don’t even know how it functions, and they are not certain by themselves.
IIRC, for them Centurion is 1st gen MBT, AMX 30 and Leopard are 2nd gen, T-72/Abrams/Leclerc are 3rd, and K2/T-14 are 4th. But they do not ever state what exactly differs them. Centurion is no different from later T-62, the latter is just more advanced of what former already has. That’s why them classifying common WW2-tech tanks as a new class is something illogical.
Soviet-Russian system starting with composite protection, then dynamic protection, then active protection, as well as other features, is more efficient.
Basic K2 is no different from Leclerc, only now there are talks about KAPS (Korean APS) that they can’t acquire, but for them, it is 4th gen. Oh yeah here we go, they classified them without a single source: List of main battle tanks by generation - Wikipedia
I need to correct myself. First years of production the T-62 is considered a Medium Tank by the USSR. Then later in production was re-classified as Main Battle Tank. The same as happened with M26 Pershing, but for a different reason