LtGeorge Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Well, if the US ditched the crappy M1, and bought leo 2 you could have your very own version...And do you go around opening boxes labeled "Pandora's - Don't touch" on them? :eek2: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha6 Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I'm not puting my hand on that but I do think we need a new tank, say, a Merkava mk4 or Mk3 baz the US should licence and mod the merkava into a US style tank like mixing a Mk4 with a M1A2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Companion Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 I'm not puting my hand on that but I do think we need a new tank, say, a Merkava mk4 or Mk3 baz the US should licence and mod the merkava into a US style tank like mixing a Mk4 with a M1A2.I think TUSK upgrade is good enough.And the name sorta reminds me of "Mammoth tusk missiles" of Mammoth tanks in C&C series RTS games... :debile2:...That said, will someone attach M202 flame rocket launchers on both sides of Abrams turret? Now we have true TUSK upgrade. :sonic: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 Why do we need a new tank? I don't see anything wrong with the one we have now.I do see some issues with TUSK...Mainly that all the crap on the turret makes it a damn big target to spot in tank on tank combat.I wonder if a better option than the remote weapons system would have been to replace the A1 style cupola with one that was fully motorized and perhaps at least partially stabilized....That said, will someone attach M202 flame rocket launchers on both sides of Abrams turret? Now we have true TUSK upgrade. :sonic:Ohhh, and how about a second set of grenade launchers loaded with HE/FRAG... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 15, 2008 Share Posted October 15, 2008 anyone seen future weapons on discovery channel? the UK MoD labs have come up with an EMS (Electro-Magnetic Shield). What it does is it sends out a static shield 2ft around the tank the system its fitted to and triggers the explosive warhead ie HE or HESH rounds and missiles. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outontheop Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I thought the whole EM protection was supposed to work by having a charged standoff skirt like old WW2 German Schurtzen, except electrically charged... something about the charge would arc when a round penetrated the outer skirt, and would therefore vaporize the round before penetrating the main armor.... that said, wouldn't it require a TON of generating capacity to run the damn things? And something makes me think that all that electrical potential surrounding your tank if a bit a hazard for the crew. Seems like there's a lot that could go wrong....but I'm no physicist, what do I know? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 Outonthetop, that's what I heard about it too. We're still away from meaningful "force fields" (if there will be any, ever). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moderators Volcano Posted October 16, 2008 Moderators Share Posted October 16, 2008 In regards to the original question, any tank or AFV between the years 1939-1945. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dejawolf Posted October 16, 2008 Share Posted October 16, 2008 I thought the whole EM protection was supposed to work by having a charged standoff skirt like old WW2 German Schurtzen, except electrically charged... something about the charge would arc when a round penetrated the outer skirt, and would therefore vaporize the round before penetrating the main armor.... that said, wouldn't it require a TON of generating capacity to run the damn things? And something makes me think that all that electrical potential surrounding your tank if a bit a hazard for the crew. Seems like there's a lot that could go wrong....but I'm no physicist, what do I know?you mean the british electrical armour?from what i've read, it should work by vaporizing the copper used in HEAT warheads.here's an article:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/digitallife/main.jhtml?xml=/connected/2002/08/21/ecnmod21.xmlhttp://www.wired.com/science/discoveries/news/2002/08/54641http://www.armedforces-int.com/categories/electric-armour/new-age-electric-armour-tough-enough-to-face-modern-threats.aspso basically, it has minimal, if any effect against Sabot. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Ssnake Posted October 16, 2008 Members Share Posted October 16, 2008 so basically, it has minimal, if any effect against Sabot.Makes it angry. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 you mean the british electrical armour?so basically, it has minimal, if any effect against Sabot. well theres that but it does stop enemy from using any other weapon on the tank, so essentailly it'll be a stand of with just tank on tank. it would take away that air support right out the picture and infantry support. after that i think tactics come into play. Id expect the crew would be insulated inside the tank, i think it would be safe for the crew but the question would be would anyone outside tank be safe? could they touch the hull without having a heart attack? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 ... that said, wouldn't it require a TON of generating capacity to run the damn things? And something makes me think that all that electrical potential surrounding your tank if a bit a hazard for the crew. Seems like there's a lot that could go wrong....but I'm no physicist, what do I know?i think they've adapted an electric engine to the already existing diesel engine, so it runs like a dyno. but sayin that the engine was fitted to a warrior testing vehicle. i think if it was to be armed it would be a 2 man crew due to space in the vehicle. a remote controlled turret and such i think would be fitted. a driver and commander/gunner. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted October 17, 2008 Share Posted October 17, 2008 it would take away that air support right out the picture and infantry support. Hmm, a 1000lb bomb going off 2ft further away doesn't make much of a difference methinks. could they touch the hull without having a heart attack? No pacemakers allowed within 2ft of this tank. Health and safety would have a field day :biggrin: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 ok ok maybe a 1000 lb bomb would probably do something but it would be difficult if its moving well i think i sign sayin, anyone with heart problems stay 5ft away from the vehicle lol though it would be funny if a terrorist would have a pacemaker and stopped dead before he can even achieve his goal lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha6 Posted October 19, 2008 Share Posted October 19, 2008 lol big red sign "do not come within 5ft of tank when large red light is flashing."or "ALLA-" "buzzztszz!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 lol if it was employed it would be a good weapon as well as a prevention 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alpha6 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 A-... never mind condom joke... but that would be funny "clearing the streets without firing a shot" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 ah lol well still could be an effective weapon but could still cause civilian loses aswell 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seraphim008 Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I could live with this one....CV90120 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 actually endless that does look the buisness. tis a very good looking tank. I've been keeping an eye on the CV-90 Family and they're looking really good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hedgehog Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 And it carries koopa troopers.Snnake, the obvious question....:biggrin::biggrin: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FletchRDG Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 I actually think the Swedes have done a good job with the strv and teh CV-90 both very good tanks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hodo Posted October 20, 2008 Share Posted October 20, 2008 Oddly enough... The Stryker.. and the Stingray (M8). BMP-2 and 3. And for fun...M901 ITV. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maj.Hans Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 CV-90/120? Yhea okay why the hell not. Looks interesting.BMP-2? Sure, but sooner the BMP-1 than the BMP-3.M901 ITV...Agreed 1000%!!The M8 is not the same as the Stingray, but I would like to see the Stingray in here someday. As for the striker...Please...No...We should be using M113's instead of that bloated POS... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outontheop Posted October 21, 2008 Share Posted October 21, 2008 Maj Hans, have you ever been in combat on a Stryker?I have. They are anything but a bloated POS. They're not a tank, they're not DESIGNED to be a tank, and they're not built to fight other tanks. But then again, neither are M113s. And when used properly, they are fantastic vehicles. If you'd like an objective assessment from someone that's actually ridden one of them in combat, send me a PM 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.