Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: THE THREAD!!!

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: THE THREAD!!! Page: <<   < prev  497 498 [499] 500 501   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:06:34 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

BTW, not all current generation main battle tanks have smooth-bore cannon. Challenger 2 has a rifled piece.


Ahh...nice little tidbit to know. Does it shoot sabot rounds or some special AP round?

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14941
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:09:58 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
New page!

A quick google shows it uses a HESH round. Interesting concept.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14942
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:10:21 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Also fires sabot.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14943
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:14:06 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		More on the RPG vs. Chally 2 front. The most interesting story I've been able to corroborate was callsign Two-One, of 2 Troop, C Squadron, Scots Dragoon Guards, which fought near Basra on 30 March 2003.

Whilst disengaging from RPG attacks that has knocked out both driver and commander vision blocks, it drove into a ditch and shed both tracks. While stationary, it was hit by a further eight RPGs and a Milan ATGM, without penetration of the fighting compartment. The tank was eventually recovered and repaired.

None of the crew members were more than lightly wounded.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14944
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:14:19 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Fin-stabilized sabot apparently. Wonder if that HESH round is useful against soft targets, e.g. trucks......


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14945
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:15:26 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Up late enjoying your 'Glorious Weekend' T?


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14946
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:15:40 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Fin-stabilized sabot apparently. Wonder if that HESH round is useful against soft targets, e.g. trucks......



It is. That, and its ability against structures, is why the British Army keeps using it.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14947
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:15:51 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

No idea.

On one hand, the Challenger 2 has Dorchester armour (Chobham v2) and ERA blocks, but on the other hand, it's a lot of RPG's.

Since I've failed to track down corroborating facts, the story could be apocryphal.


interesting. Reminds me of the Chetznen thing. The alleged poor preformance and large losses of Russian tanks during the city fighting was touted as alleged proof that all Russian AFV's were "crap". Never mind that the fighting conditions were unsuited for tanks, the lack of infantry support, the poor tactics and leadership involved, enemy guerilla tactics and last but not least the fact that many AFV's were assaulted from window and rooftops pointing down at the tank's top armor.

oh no....the battle proved that Russian tanks, including the newer ones....were all CRAP!





_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14948
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:16:20 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Up late enjoying your 'Glorious Weekend' T?



It's only a quarter past eleven in the PM. Not late at all when tomorrow's Saturday.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14949
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:16:42 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Fin-stabilized sabot apparently. Wonder if that HESH round is useful against soft targets, e.g. trucks......



It is. That, and its ability against structures, is why the British Army keeps using it.


Structures....hmm.....yes, I think I can see how it would be quite effective there.

_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14950
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:18:07 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Speaking of which....what do these smoothbores use? Roundshot?

Tumbling HE?


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14951
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:19:42 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Speaking of which....what do these smoothbores use? Roundshot?

Tumbling HE?



APDS and HEAT, mainly. The US Army has a few specialized rounds.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14952
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:20:55 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		HESH can be used against soft targets. I think the standing record for longest range 1st shot 1st kill hit was a HESH against an APC.



_____________________________


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14953
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:21:31 PM   
Mynok


Posts: 12108
Joined: 11/30/2002
Status: offline
Against structures I meant.....and soft targets.


_____________________________

"Measure civilization by the ability of citizens to mock government with impunity" -- Unknown

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14954
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:25:24 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Yes it can.....much more so than APDS. I think thats one of the principle reasons why the UK prefers it.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14955
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:26:03 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

No idea.

On one hand, the Challenger 2 has Dorchester armour (Chobham v2) and ERA blocks, but on the other hand, it's a lot of RPG's.

Since I've failed to track down corroborating facts, the story could be apocryphal.


interesting. Reminds me of the Chetznen thing. The alleged poor preformance and large losses of Russian tanks during the city fighting was touted as alleged proof that all Russian AFV's were "crap". Never mind that the fighting conditions were unsuited for tanks, the lack of infantry support, the poor tactics and leadership involved, enemy guerilla tactics and last but not least the fact that many AFV's were assaulted from window and rooftops pointing down at the tank's top armor.

oh no....the battle proved that Russian tanks, including the newer ones....were all CRAP!






The Death Ride of the Maikop brigade didn't prove anything. I think the proof of the lousy quality of Soviet AFV's has been displayed many times elsewhere.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 14956
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:26:29 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikademus

Yes it can.....much more so than APDS. I think thats one of the principle reasons why the UK prefers it.


I could have sworn somebody already said that...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 14957
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:29:43 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline 		Don't recall any real fair wartime comparison. I recall a comment from an Israel tanker when asked to comment on the (then) new M60's sent to them.

"They burn"




_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14958
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:33:11 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		The Soviet concept of quantity over quality has been proven false in combat against Western weapons for decades, on the ground and in the air. Ask the IDF.

And I think you may be misquoting that Israeli tanker. The quote I heard was about the Syrian T-72s encountered in Lebanon in 1982, "The T-72 burns just like any other Soviet tank".

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 14959
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:36:45 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline 		Challenger 2 is a fantastic tank. I really do not know why it did not get big export orders. The Abrams seemed to hoover up all the contracts that the Challenger 2 was in for. Abrams is faster, but that gas turbine is thirsty. On every other score the Challenger 2 is actually a better design. The rifled main gun and two piece ammo are seen in some quarters as an anachronism, but as T has pointed out, in combat it has an amazing record, incuding the longest range kill in history (apart from the extremely long range direct fire that Israel indulged in during the war of the waters, but that was not against AFVs).

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14960
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:45:34 PM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

The Soviet concept of quantity over quality has been proven false in combat against Western weapons for decades, on the ground and in the air. Ask the IDF.

And I think you may be misquoting that Israeli tanker. The quote I heard was about the Syrian T-72s encountered in Lebanon in 1982, "The T-72 burns just like any other Soviet tank".


Soviet tanks from what i've read were not built to be deliberately poor. T-54/5 was a good decent tank at the time of it's build. Just because it was built in huge numbers and kept in service long after it was eclipsed doesn't make it junk in terms of the design. T-62 was a disapointment with the exception of it's excellent gun. T-64 was impressive but expensive. T-72 was a dumbed down version but improved over time. post Soviet tanks get the poor tag label but i've yet to see an unbiased Western account not colored by the Desert Storm experience.

No...the quote i mentioned concerned the M60. They were particularily vulnerable to SAGGER's. The lopsided preformance during the Israel/Arab wars i'd attribute more to the poor quality and inexperience of the crews manning the tanks. Like i said, I can't recall a truely fair wartime comparison.

From a tech standpoint, the West had a big edge in the 80's thx to Thermal imaging and targeting.

_____________________________


(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14961
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:54:08 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Nobody builds a weapon to be "deliberately poor". The Soviets designed their AFV's for mass production and use by soldiers of low training standards to employ in the steam-roller attacks that their doctrine called for. Said doctrine was debunked in 1973 on the Golan Heights.

I don't have much respect for the T-55. There was an incident in Bosnia in 1994, when Bosnian Serb T-55s attacked Danish Army Leopard 1s from ambush, scoring several non-penetrating hits from concealed positions before being destroyed in turn. I think we can agree that the Leo 1 is not exactly a "heavy" tank.

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14962
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:54:22 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline 		The MiG 29, helmet mounted sights and high aspect missiles came as a rude shock when the East Germans became Germans. The West learned that they were lucky that a war had not been fought because they had been out thought. The realisation triggered the defection away from ASRAAM and the development of Iris-T and AIM-9X. The silly thing is that the UK developed and wanted to use SRAAM, which was an all aspect IR missile. They were persuaded not to by the Americans and are now stuck using ASRAAM when the US doesn't. The same thing happened when the UK was forced to drop the 7mm round because the US favoured 5.56mm. Afghanistan has proven the folly of that and US SOCOM has developed their own 6.5mm round and weapons to get over the low stopping power and poor effective range of the 5.56mm round...

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Nikademus)
Post #: 14963
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:55:24 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Nobody builds a weapon to be "deliberately poor". The Soviets designed their AFV's for mass production and use by soldiers of low training standards to employ in the steam-roller attacks that their doctrine called for. Said doctrine was debunked in 1973 on the Golan Heights.

I don't have much respect for the T-55. There was an incident in Bosnia in 1994, when Bosnian Serb T-55s attacked Danish Army Leopard 1s from ambush, scoring several non-penetrating hits from concealed positions before being destroyed in turn. I think we can agree that the Leo 1 is not exactly a "heavy" tank.


To be fair the tanks in that scenario were a generation apart.

_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14964
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 10:57:38 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		About the 1973 war:

The Syrians were admittedly poorly led, though the individual Arab soldier was brave enough, but they had been trained in Soviet armoured tactics by the Soviets themselves, and they suffered hundreds upon hundreds of vehicle kills attacking their vastly outnumbered enemy in prepared positions, whilst attempting to bring that flawed doctrine into operation.



_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 14965
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 11:00:07 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Nobody builds a weapon to be "deliberately poor". The Soviets designed their AFV's for mass production and use by soldiers of low training standards to employ in the steam-roller attacks that their doctrine called for. Said doctrine was debunked in 1973 on the Golan Heights.

I don't have much respect for the T-55. There was an incident in Bosnia in 1994, when Bosnian Serb T-55s attacked Danish Army Leopard 1s from ambush, scoring several non-penetrating hits from concealed positions before being destroyed in turn. I think we can agree that the Leo 1 is not exactly a "heavy" tank.


To be fair the tanks in that scenario were a generation apart.


So? Challenger 1 destroyed T-72 in the 1991 war. Merkava 1 destroyed T-72 in the 1982 war. Centurion destroyed T-62 in the 1973 war. Upgunned Sherman (90mm) destroyed T-55 in the 1967 war. Apocryphally, Bradley destroyed T-72 with 25mm fire in the 2003 war (Okay, I probably don't buy that one either).

< Message edited by Terminus -- 2/5/2010 11:15:58 PM >

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 14966
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 11:03:27 PM   
Terminus


Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Either way, log-sawing time...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14967
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/5/2010 11:28:23 PM   
goodboyladdie


Posts: 3469
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Rendlesham, Suffolk
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

quote:

ORIGINAL: goodboyladdie


quote:

ORIGINAL: Terminus

Nobody builds a weapon to be "deliberately poor". The Soviets designed their AFV's for mass production and use by soldiers of low training standards to employ in the steam-roller attacks that their doctrine called for. Said doctrine was debunked in 1973 on the Golan Heights.

I don't have much respect for the T-55. There was an incident in Bosnia in 1994, when Bosnian Serb T-55s attacked Danish Army Leopard 1s from ambush, scoring several non-penetrating hits from concealed positions before being destroyed in turn. I think we can agree that the Leo 1 is not exactly a "heavy" tank.


To be fair the tanks in that scenario were a generation apart.


So? Challenger 1 destroyed T-72 in the 1991 war. Merkava 1 destroyed T-72 in the 1982 war. Centurion destroyed T-62 in the 1973 war. Upgunned Sherman (90mm) destroyed T-55 in the 1967 war. Apocryphally, Bradley destroyed T-72 with 25mm fire in the 2003 war (Okay, I probably don't buy that one either).


It was T-55s that were taken out through their side armour by 25mm chain guns. I am not saying that a generation gap makes a tank ineffective, I am just saying that in your Bosnian scenario, if the ambushing tanks had had anything bigger than the 100mm gun that the Leopard I was designed to be immune to, they would have been as deceased as a Norwegian Blue Parrot...


_____________________________



Art by the amazing Dixie

(in reply to Terminus)
Post #: 14968
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/6/2010 12:53:29 AM   
witpqs


Posts: 26087
Joined: 10/4/2004
From: Argleton
Status: offline 		You mean they would have been sleeping?

(in reply to goodboyladdie)
Post #: 14969
RE: THE THREAD!!! - 2/6/2010 2:50:43 AM   
scott64


Posts: 4019
Joined: 9/12/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mynok


Against structures I meant.....and soft targets.


How about against watermelons.

_____________________________

Lucky for you, tonight it's just me


Any ship can be a minesweeper..once !! :)

http://suspenseandmystery.blogspot.com/

(in reply to Mynok)
Post #: 14970
Page:   <<   < prev  497 498 [499] 500 501   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> The War Room >> RE: THE THREAD!!! Page: <<   < prev  497 498 [499] 500 501   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.688