BF2S Forums T-72 and T-80 tank is superior to the M1A2 in many things...

the only serious flaw the m16 has its lack of stopping power compared to the kalishnokov.  I hate hearing about dirt will fuck up an M16 while it wont an AK, yall need to quit watching movies man.  Although the AK can take a lot more mishandling than the m16 you get dirt or sand in the chamber you could kiss that rifle good bye after awhile no matter what kind it is.  The M16a4, can out shoot and out range any of AK counterparts, so what if you gotta shoot him three times, thats six holes he cant fix.


Something else about that standard Nato 5.56 x 45mm.  They call  it a tumbler round, as it leaves the barrel it spins top to bottom till it hits its target, once the round enters the body it will bounce around cartilage and bone and end up leaving a totaly different exit wound.  The purpose of war is not to kill but to keep your enemy from shooting and one wounded soldier is the same as 3 enemy dead because it will take two of his buddies to tend to the casualty, knocking 3 weapons out the fight.  They kept this is mind when they created the m16.

The ak is a peice of shit, thats why peice of shit countries (allies excluded) used that weapon as it standard, its a fool proof rifle for countries that have nothing but fools.

and lets not forget the m-14, still being used to today, if your gonna talk about weapons from the 60s.  m14 is a great powerful weapon ( man is it loud too) that would put any AK to shame.

I have fired the AK and the 16 and the AK is worthless fully auto, near worthless single shot.  It has got too much kick to be used efficiently.  Anfd one more thing, our ballistic armour is meant to stop any 7.62 round, and it has, but the 5.56 round is know to penetrate our OTV's because its more of a peircing round and not meant to knock someone on his ass.  SOVIET WEAPONS ARE CRAP, THATS WHY THE THIRD WORLD HAS THEM.


And dont even talk about the T- whatever the fuck, huge paperweights thats all they are.  I seen hundred and hundred of Iraqi (soviet) tanks lined up and abandonded.

i dont care whether you believe me or not. the fact is just a teen ager who is claiming hes an expert on weapons hes never even fired himself.

Longbow wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II
The only idea of your post is "America is the best" , nothing else .
I don't beliave you fired soviet-made AKM or AK-74 . Chinise and all another , made by soviet licence , are really bullshit , we know this .

Tanks... you saw handreds of tanks destroed by JETS AND HELICOPTERS , not by M1A1\M1A2 .
Your army tactics is like  "Jets-Jets-Jets-tanks-troops" . So your tanks simply hadn't to fight against large ammounts of our tanks , they were destroyed before by airstrikes .

Soviet weapons are used all over the world because they are cheaper , more reliable and somewhat better .

p/s When you will start listening to the opponent , then this debate will continue . Now I see that you hear only yourself .

lbow's right - if you are gonna bring what you've got to the table, please understand that the opponent may have something as well. We all need to admit to ourselves that NOTHING in this world is perfect and beats anything else in everything...

PS I'm not against the whole cussing thing, but simply cussing and name calling reminds me of how young you have to be to resort to profanity to get your immature point across... (the man thats bullshit, see www.somerandomlink.com to find out the truth is OK, but saying "you r dum and your country is shit go America" really accomplishes nothing other than showing us how uneducated you are

I am in a lecturing mode, and I want to bring this back in the direction of a topic about tanks.  That being said, I am going to describe 3 different systems.  HEAT rounds, Reactive Armor, and SABOT rounds. 

First, HEAT stands for High Explosive, Anti-Tank.  All HEAT rounds, whether tanks rounds, missiles, rockets, artillery rounds or landmines, all work on the same basic principle.  This principle is called the Monroe Effect.

In short, the Monroe Effect describes certain parts of high-energy physics.  If you take an inverted cone of metal (usually copper), put the OPEN end toward the target, pack lots of exploisves behind the warhead (aka loading the pointy side with stuff that goes boom), there is a predictable and very noticable effect.

The explosives cause the cone to compress; the open edge of the cone all around is forced to compress into a point.  As the metal compresses, it heats up.  At the optimum distance, the 'cone' forms a 'spearpoint' of molten metal traveling at high speed, and can very easily pierce armor.  ANd when it does pierce armor, it throws molten hot metal through the area past the armor as well as breaking off pieces of 'spall' from the inside of the armor.

The advantage of this is that it does not take a huge warhead to pierce armor, and it was not dependant on the speed of the warhead.  This means that missiles and rockets were able to be cheaply made to counter tanks.  In fact, this development nearly killed the concept of tanks.  When dealing with HEAT warheads, the most important consieration is the DIAMETER of the warhead.  The larger the warhead, the wider the cone, and the more explosives behind it.  Depth of armor penetration is DIRECTLY dependant on the diameter of the warhead.  This is why the Soviets went with a 125mm cannon, as oposed to the 105mm then used by NATO.

There are a couple downfalls of HEAT rounds, however.  The first is that in order to operate effectively, the warhead MUST be detonated at a very precise distance from the armor.  If the round detonates too close, the 'speartip' does not have time to form, and it does not penetrate.  If it detonates too far, the penetrator "bounces," and the 'speartip' rapidly spreads apart and quickly loses any effectiveness.  The need for this precise distance made the need for a stand-off fuse (that funny stick on the end of some rounds you see).  The second downfall is that if you SPIN a HEAT round, it loses quite a bit of effectiveness, as the spinning motion tries to keep the 'speartip' from forming.  That means if you have a rifled barrel on your tank, you need a ROTATING RING on your HEAT round.  The ring will rotate with the rifling, keeping the round itself stable.  That is why most of the cannons you see now are smoothbore cannon.

The second thing I want to present is Reactive Armor.  It is a really simple concept.  Take two plates of steel, and sandwhich explosives between the plates, then bolt the thing on the side of your tank.  When the HEAT round strikes the Reactive Armor plate, the explosives in the plate detonate.  That forces the plates apart, fast.  The outside plate flies toward the still-detonating HEAT warhead, striking the penetrator before hit develops the 'spearhead' and disrupts its formation.  The inside plate is forced HARD against the side of the tank, and bounces back out.  The inside plate then encounters the penetrator, STILL before the 'spearhead' is formed, and disrupts it even more.  That  being done, the penetrator now does not have the effectiveness needed to pierce the actual armor of the tank.  The problem with this armor is that it onlty works once in any particular location, and well... you are strapping EXPLOSIVES to the outside of your tank.  These things sometimes detonate from thunderstorms or other freaky reasons.  While they won't hurt anyone inside the tank, nobody would really like to hang around nearby a tank with reactive armor.

The last item is the SABOT, or rather the APFSDS (Armor Piercing, Fin-Stablized, Discarding Sabot) round.  Oddly enough, while "Sabot" is pronounced "Sa butt" by americans when referring to the shoes themselves, SABOT (the round itself) is pronounced "Say Bow." Nobody said it had to make sense.

The APFSDS round (I am describing the one for the M1A1 tank, which is the one I am familiar with) is a metal dart 62mm in diameter.  The round is described as a "Kinetic Kill" round, meaning it is relying on the energy of it hitting the armor to defeat it instead of any explosives.  The dart is made of Tungsten, or more recently, Depleted Uranium.  Now, you are firing a 62mm dart out of a 120mm cannon.  In order for this to fit, the round has 3 aluminum sabots, or shoes, that surround the round and boost the diameter up to 120mm.  The sabots fall away once the round leaves the barrell.  The dart if fin-stablized, so no rifling is needed inside the barrell.

Okay, the dart leaves teh tube FAST.  we are talking 1000 mps.  That is three times the speed of sound.  When this dart hits armor, all of the force of the cannon is concentrated into a VERY small area.  The SABOT round from an M1A1 will go through a T-72 LENGTHWISE. 

The hope for the HEAT and SABOT rounds is that when the round penetrates the armor, that is hits something vital.  Most HEAT rounds fired from cannon or shoulder fired missiles can only pentrate armor in certain places on tanks, so placement is critical.  HEAT rounds are also used for APCs.  SABOT rounds however, while they penetrate a LOT better, don't spread out nearly as much.  Almost all of thier damage is linear in nature.  It needs to hit something critical or it....just keeps going.  Fortunately, there is not a lot of spare room in a tank.

Okay, that is enough lecturing for now.  Questions, comments, threats, bitches, gripes, complaints?

I'm new to the thread, just wanted to post my own opinon. Here goes...

Anyway, my favorite tank of all times is the israeli Merkava! It's awesome. Here's some info and pics on [url=http://www.defense-update.com/directory/merkava4.htmMerkava MK4[/url]. It's a sexy beast... I'm not saying, however, that it's a jack of all trades. It might be a tad slower than some (60 Kmh on the road), and heavier (~70t), but none the less maintains superb maneuverability. That is because Israel puts the emphasis on protecting the crew of the tank, a valid design philosophy for a country with a limited populations surrounded by populous and aggressive neighbours.

That was, of course, just an opinion. In any case, when it comes to the topic of the thread, i.e. the comparison of a T-72 to a M1A2, it's plain old bullshit. Come on, one'd have to be retarded to put those two on the same level. T-90, I could understand. But a T-72, no matter of what modification, is a lame duck compared to the Abrams.

***PS i also think the AK ammo compatibility was not an accident - many of our battles and prospective conflicts of the future will involve this rugged weapon, and so the Army is adapting - quite a logical choice to include the use of AK ammunition

imortal wrote:

R0lyP0ly wrote:

***PS i also think the AK ammo compatibility was not an accident - many of our battles and prospective conflicts of the future will involve this rugged weapon, and so the Army is adapting - quite a logical choice to include the use of AK ammunition

I think it would be incredibly ironic if the U.S. adopted the calibre, since it was designed by their cold war enemies, the USSR.  I agree though.  It is a very impressive round. 

I would like to see an American company design a rifle for 7.62x39.  Okay, Someone better than Ruger.  Not a mod of an old rifle, not an AK clone.  Something nice and modern.  And, sorry Longbow, with American ergonomics.  I really, really REALLY hate the safety/ selector on the AK.  Or maybe H&K could come up with something.

EDIT:  faulty M8?  I didn't know there was a fault in the system.  I know it has been delayed, along with the rest of the OICW system.  But the rifle system itself looked pretty solild, since it was basically the G-36 system with a few cosmetic mods.

yea the project was dropped, but the underslung grenade launcher was made into a separate weapon. but otherwise the project was dropped

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

our modern ballistic armour will stop nearly all rounds of 7.62 x 39mm (at least the first shot).  Our kevlar helmets will stop that same round.

Actually, the IBAS vest will only stop the round if you have the Trauma Plate inserted.  But it will stop the 5.56mm round as well, don't think it won't.

Also, the people we are shooting at currently seldom are wearing body armor, so the point is moot.

If you want to equip the military only with stuff that will piece our armor... well, an infantry squad all with Barrett .50s would be a bit strange.

longbow negative, i posted this somewhere else.  I saw first hand account of my buddy getting hit by 7.62 on the lip of his kevlar above his eyebrow while he was laying in the prone with the 240.  His kpod flew up in the air and he took a concussion and was unconcious for a few moments.  he got the worst black eye ive ever seen in my life, and a few stiches on his forehead.  It looked like somebody took a bat to his face.  He was medivaced and given light duty for a week and then he was back in the fight.  He was big swol buff motherfucker with a big mouth, so best believe he had an even bigger head after this but hes a great fucking soldier and a good friend who still serves.

Everyone is going "stats" this, "stats" that...  The fundamental part of ANY army is the "fighting man."  The soldier of any country is the deadliest weapon if he believes in what he is fighting for!  It makes no difference if he is Russian, American, BF2-ian...  A well trained and well disciplined soldier will make good use of what ever he has available to him...T-90, M1a2, a damn wooden spoon.  You can have all the technology in the world but if your morale, support, planning and hearts are not there: you will loose whether it is abrupt or a lengthy defeat...  Americans, we have the technology but we also have the morale as well as military fortitude and planning/logistics and support to ensure battlefield domination. 
-NOTE - battlefield fighting is different than an occupying force (like Iraq.)  No country has EVER been successful as an "occupying force..." 
-Back to the text, if we were to loose the advantage of our air superiorty then we would be in for BIG trouble, all our current doctorine is based on it.  We keep trying to stay ahead of everyone for air superiority and some of you are right, it is costing the US.  Our defense industry fights with itself, the JSF was between our last two big air DCs(defense contractors) and the sum award to one would have killed the other so the award went to one but sub-contacting went to the other.  Not alot of people know/realize we are fragile on the stateside right now.  I know because I worked for one of these DCs.  Long story short, we are surviving.  We are doing far better than you guys in Europe, you get your money from selling arms and making trades to borderline countries.  Like when France sends troops for help...they sent... uh, no?...oh wait nevermind...
The chinese economy looks so great because it was NON-existent before, sure they are improving now they have absorbed Hong-Kong and they openly sell arms to small countries and groups whom oppose both Europe and the US...
-All this over tanks?  You can put monkeys in military vehicles, the US has(and Russia) but a competent fighting man will prevail with what he has to work with....
--
--
"Blubbering jackass spotted!"  Sorry, wont ramble on again.....

Oorah GunSlinger OIF II !!!!!!  Semper Fi!  You tell the "experts."  One vet to another, kudos!  Funny how some, NOT all, but some think because they read somewhere that something has certain stats it is far better than something else...  Or a tactic on a movie is what should or should not be done.  Or what they read in the liberal controlled media, even the GOP favoring media too, that it is gospel.... Hmmmmm
-Sgt. USMC 1991-98

correction not BIAP.  FOB flexible before they tore it down.

Salute to the People who actually know what they are talking about..

Off topic: CFD Jarhead  - from QC also.