My favorite armor

[EPF]

As someone who rode one for 10 years, I can say without question that the M1 Abrams is my favorite....

The M1A3 is nasty. Unbelievable tech and capabilities.

[LittleLebowski]

Fuck maneuverability.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

[txdpd]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

When she looks great in pictures, but can’t get much done in the real world. Not being able to depress the muzzle and fire from defilade has been a major advantage to US and Israeli armor vs Russian armor. Still a sexy beast.

Interesting to see the Leo II suffer such losses in Northern Syria. For years it was touted as superior to the Abrams yet it's lack of crew survivability (large number of rounds stored in the crew compartment) makes it definitely take a back seat to it's American stablemate.

The Iraqi army has lost a lot of M1A1s, I don’t know the exact break down in combat losses. I wonder how many of those losses are just poor tactics and not a shortcoming of the tank. I’ve seen a lot of videos out of Syria where tanks are employed with zero support.

[Suvorov]

When she looks great in pictures, but can’t get much done in the real world. Not being able to depress the muzzle and fire from defilade has been a major advantage to US and Israeli armor vs Russian armor. Still a sexy beast.



The Iraqi army has lost a lot of M1A1s, I don’t know the exact break down in combat losses. I wonder how many of those losses are just poor tactics and not a shortcoming of the tank. I’ve seen a lot of videos out of Syria where tanks are employed with zero support.

Good point. I think it is both. The Iraqi and Saudi M1A1s do not have the depleted uranium armor packages and may have even less effective armor than the standard M1A1, combine that with piss poor use of the tanks and you will get catastrophic kills. Of course every tank has the shortcoming of the fact that its side and rear armor an be penetrated by lighter anti-tank weapons. That said, there is reportedly an M1 named "The Beast" that survived and was used to extremely good effect against ISIS. https://popularmilitary.com/lone-sur...aring-up-isis/

Where I think the Abrams really is best is simply in the crew survivability. The the crew is separated from the magazine through a heavy blast door which greatly increases their chance of survival in a catastrophic kill. The Soviet tanks store their ammo in a carousel under the turret which means almost certain death of the crew if the magazine is ignited. I was surprised to see how readily the Leo II's brewed up in Syria, apparently half of their ammo storage is behind blast doors while the other half sit to the left of the driver.

It is interesting to note that one of the key advantages of the new Russian T-14 is the fact that the crew sit in a well armored hull separate of the ammo and even gun, while I suspect this will result in many mechanical challenges there is little doubt that they have learned the lessons of past T series tank and are trying to improve crew survivability.

Those videos out of Syria of the T-72Bs fighting in the city are absolutely insane!

[UNM1136]

They all look WAAAAAY more comfortable than my ABA X-Treme vest...

pat

[Wise_A]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

If you want a lowrider, you don't need to go Swedish.



Actually, it's kind've funny how many tank designs just assumed there would be no advances in on-the-move gun stabilization. If I recall correctly, wasn't that the Abrams' Big Thing back in the day? I mean, aside from the classified armor.

[Baldanders]

Fuck maneuverability.



T-28 / T-95 prototypes.

Reminds me of an "OGRE" from the game of the same name...

[Dog Guy]

The Merkava is a good example of form following function. Israel can't afford high casualties so the layout of the tank with engine up front to absorb frontal fire, ammo storage outside the crew compartment, electrical turret drive to eliminate hydraulic fluid fire, and the like are pretty creative thinking. They're also optimized to work easily with infantry, based on experiences in Lebanon and Gaza.

[txdpd]

It is interesting to note that one of the key advantages of the new Russian T-14 is the fact that the crew sit in a well armored hull separate of the ammo and even gun, while I suspect this will result in many mechanical challenges there is little doubt that they have learned the lessons of past T series tank and are trying to improve crew survivability.

I wonder if the Armata is a tacit acknowledgement that current tanks can't survive on the modern battlefield with the current generation of antitank weapons. How long until the MBT becomes a miniature drone tank.

Those videos out of Syria of the T-72Bs fighting in the city are absolutely insane!

I’m always amazed how the Syrian’s seem to have zero concept that they don’t have to leave tanks sitting out in the open. Even if they can’t fire hull down they could do a better job having minimal exposure.

[jbrimlow]

I wonder if the Armata is a tacit acknowledgement that current tanks can't survive on the modern battlefield with the current generation of antitank weapons. How long until the MBT becomes a miniature drone tank.

.

Sort of? I think it's just more that it's a way to get the protection you need while also sorta kinda staying under the weight limits that you also need to be able to use Russian bridges. There were a lot of similar designs late in the cold war from the Soviets, West Germany, and America.

M1A2C is like 81 tons (american tons/'short' tons, not metric)