TankNutDave's Armour Discussion Forums

Welcome to TankNutDave's Forums where Armour enthusiasts from all over the world can come to discuss and chat about Tanks and other Armoured vehicles !


    Armour First

    Share

    Armour First

    Post  2ndTankie on Sun Feb 01, 2009 5:19 pm

    Many different countries design and build their tanks around battlefield doctrines, A Balance between adding to much armour and weighing the tank down, Effecting mobility. Favoring less and often lighter armour results in less protection however greater speed and more maneuverability.

    Few Tanks have this balance and great all rounders are born. We can guess as to which doctrine a country favors by looking at its MBT's

    CR2 (UK) = Renown for being the best protected in the world however the heaviest and one of slowest tanks in service today. Balance= Firepower+Protection

    T-72-80-90 (RUS) These small devilishly fast tanks are some of the lightest and fastest on the battlefield. However lacking in the heavy safer protection seen by the west. Balance= Mobility+Firepower

    M1A2 (USA) Another Favoring Firepower and mobility over protection. Although a heavyweight in the MBT class it still remains nimble and agile. Balance= Mobility+Firepower.

    Aside from the United Kingdom the vast majority of countries wave the balance towards raw speed and agility to compensate for lighter armour. This could be explained due to the British being the leaders in the Armour world and to rightly exploit their technological advantage over other countries.

    I know which tank i would pick if push came to shove, But which doctrine and balance would you?.
    avatar
    Bisley_Bob
    Staff Sergeant
    Staff Sergeant

    Re: Armour First

    Post  Bisley_Bob on Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:11 pm

    At the end of the day, with modern gunnery systems and AT missiles, i don't think going at 60mph is going to make you significantly safer than going at 40mph. So if the round is going to hit me i'd rather have the best armour there is protecting me. And obviously i would want a massive gun, no point in my rounds bouncing off the enemy, so Armour and Fire-power it is for me. I'm in the right country for it then!

    Re: Armour First

    Post  2ndTankie on Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:49 pm

    I agree AND i concur (opps officer on the radio in BATUS 2008)

    FIN= 1750m/sec against a 40mph and a 60mph target are gonna have similar endings !

    Re: Armour First

    Post  M1A2AbramsSEP on Sun Feb 08, 2009 8:58 pm

    I'm going to have to disagree with one thing, You say that the M1A2 goes for Mobility and Firepower; however, i would say Firepower and protection. I mean 1st Gen Burlington Chobham 3rd Gen D.U. RHA and Kevlar that in some places are 12+ inches thick hardly can say Armor wasn't inmind when we built the M1A2 Although 42 Governed and 60MPH+ ungoverned is good too. would love to see what the new LV100-5 with a Hydrogas suspension could do.

    E-man 122
    Lance Corporal
    Lance Corporal

    Re: Armour First

    Post  E-man 122 on Sun Feb 22, 2009 9:25 pm

    I am true believer that anything in this world requieres balance and MBT's are no different. Sacraficing one for the other is simply poor decision making Doctrine or not. Those of you saying that it doesn't make a difference are very incorrect. Yes missles can travel at thousands of feet per second but don't forget those things can't turn on a dime and a tank can. With proper warning and good timing the missle can miss. Lets not forget that you could have all the Armour possible on a tank that you want but I highly doubt it can with stand an air strike from a raptor or hornet, mobility and speed would be its only chance for survival and the right amount of armour would allow it to survive should the strike land near that tank as oppose to a direct hit

    Sponsored content

    Re: Armour First

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Sep 25, 2018 11:06 pm