Only the default (TGN Light) theme for now. Dark them is also coming back soon. Then CSN. Then Wrestlin' Nation. A lot of WIP stuff right now. There are a couple of things still not working either. Sorry.
actually the french leclair (forgive spelling) is competition for the abrams. im surprised that didnt make it.
The Challenger 2 is the better tank than both the M1 and the Leclair. Better armour, gun and mobility. Though it is being touted as the last of the true MBTs.
You idiots, it clearly states that it takes in factors such as fear and production rating. The M1 *may* be the best tank in your *world* now, BUT it is a top 10 from every tank ever made, not what is the best tank right now. The Abrams shouldn't even be 2nd, the Tiger owns it on the fear factor.
What are you getting all upset about? The people were just repeating what the show said. Not sure how you can sound so positive about something as subjective as fear anyway. Dispite its popularity the Tiger had little impact on the war when you look at the big picture. Plus it was heavy, slow, expensive and somewhat unreliable. I think the panther was an all around better tank when you look at the war as a whole, but I imagine the Tiger was pretty mean 1 on 1.
As far as the modern MBTs are concerned they're all really similar. I'm sure they all get the job done. You could probably argue the little differences for weeks but I think the most important part is the crew inside. Can't really argue that the M1 crews have a heck of a lot of combat experience. In the end the little squishy part inside called the "human" is usually what matters most.
I saw this :P Was on a few days ago. I was suprised Russia got first place
Im russian so it made me happy :P Russia getting first place somewhere is rare these days lol
Also Military Channel rocks my world. I love its programs. Its always something interesting.
Well according to the criteria the only reason it won was the insane amount they could produce, and it basically won ww2 really (unlike the current american thinking that they won the war for us all... and yes im Brittish). It decimated the german panzer devisions through sheer numbers, simple mechanics, ease of operation and repair. Zerg rush anyone ? :)
Quite suprised at the ww1 as well but nice to see 3 UK entrys :)
I'm most surprised about the WW I tank making it in that list.
Have a top speed of 4 mph on flat land (speed?) The ability to turn sharply at top speed The ability to climb a 5-feet parapet The ability to cross an eight feet gap A working radius of 20 miles (mobility?) A crew of ten men with two machine guns on board and one light artillery gun. (firepower?)
1 cm - 0.8 cm armour?
nice read though :)
That doesn't sound like it meets the above requirements whatsoever..
You have to remember though, the show wasn't camparing tanks to each other in its analysis. The analysis was based on how it was viewed at the time in history when it was produced. And yes, the tank was rediculous by today's standards (or even those for WWII), but at the time it was the most terrifying thing on the battlefield.
As for the Tiger, it scored very high on fear value, but very low on production value and dependability -- it's not very scary when it's broken down on the side of the road.
As to the Abrams being ranked higher than other modern MBTs, yes, there are many comparable and some say better ones out there, but hardly any have seen actual combat.
I like the ranking shows that they do. There's also one on fighter aircraft that's very good.
They would have put the M1A1 Abrams number 1 but there isnt a tank out there like the M1 that has had head to head combat or something like that i cant remember what exactly it was but in those general lines
According to them, Challenger (UK), Leclerc (France) and Leopard (Germany) would be competitive on the battlefield against an M1. The issue would be decided by the training of their respective crew members.
The M1 is good tank but its even greater when used in massive formation since they share battlefield informations with each other. Some other tanks may have that kind of system but not as effective as the US version.
To give you an idea, during Desert Storm more than 3,500 Iraqi tanks were destroyed (mostly T-55 and T-72). Only 4 M1 were lost :)
Also, the M1 lost a lot of points on the mobility because of its thirsty gasoline engine.
I have read about the german frustration from seeing shells bounce off the sloping armor of the T34
T-34 was so innovating that Panzer divisions would run captured russian units on their ranks. With the Svastika painted on the top of the hull to avoid being bombed by Stuka Dive Bomber.
I was also suprised by the absence of the T-72, but the T-54/T-55 was used in a much longer timeline (still in use today). From post WWII era to Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. It was much more used in combat than the T-72.
I missed the the Top Ten Fighters, i hope to catch it somedays. A Top Ten Assault Rifles would be awesome too.
yeah the russian tanks were the best though i would argue about that now i think the M1 and the Challenger are the best tanks ever even though the M1 could use some up grades a new toys lol
Well according to the criteria the only reason it won was the insane amount they could produce, and it basically won ww2 really (unlike the current american thinking that they won the war for us all... and yes im Brittish). It decimated the german panzer devisions through sheer numbers, simple mechanics, ease of operation and repair. Zerg rush anyone ? :)
Quite suprised at the ww1 as well but nice to see 3 UK entrys :)
You dickheads always bring that one up "those fookin yanks fink they won world war 2 hurhurhur." In American history they teach that we took part in the war and achieved VICTORY, that is...our military set out to accomplish a goal and it did just that, they surrendered and we didn't, we were victorious. So you can open up any old american history textbook point out a sentence and say "haha look it says they won the war!" but that's not what is meant. I got a book from a bargain sale called Great Battles of World War 2 and all the battles it covers are British operations, turns out the book was written in England so I guess all the great battles in WWII only involved brits? Obviously not.
lmao calm down man we played a part in world war II and without us who knows what could have happend but its not like we walk around sayin without us germany would have won well just dont look at our text books lol
I was also suprised by the absence of the T-72, but the T-54/T-55 was used in a much longer timeline (still in use today). From post WWII era to Korea, Vietnam and Iraq. It was much more used in combat than the T-72.
The T72 has some major drawbacks to it, the first being the abysmal crew conditions and comforts. Whether it be the rather poorly designed crew spaces which include the tendancy of the autoloader loading the gunners arm into the breach to the less than impressive protection they receive, no level of Western style crew protection and comfort. They also have issues with some reliabilty problems and they are rather crude. One on one the T72 would lose out to many tanks from the saem era but the fact of its numbers more than made up for this. Its not a bad tank but is not designed to the same standards that the Western Allies prided themselves on (and for that matter nor did it cost the same).
I think in terms of seeing action you can't beat the Centurion, it lasted all the way from post WWII to the first Gulf War in front line service with many nations. A remarkable tank that learnt from all the lesson of WWII and added some new innovations too.
You dickheads always bring that one up "those fookin yanks fink they won world war 2 hurhurhur." In American history they teach that we took part in the war and achieved VICTORY, that is...our military set out to accomplish a goal and it did just that, they surrendered and we didn't, we were victorious. So you can open up any old american history textbook point out a sentence and say "haha look it says they won the war!" but that's not what is meant. I got a book from a bargain sale called Great Battles of World War 2 and all the battles it covers are British operations, turns out the book was written in England so I guess all the great battles in WWII only involved brits? Obviously not.
My rant of WWII in school textbooks is that many of them compress the whole thing down to one section/paragraph and make the American Revolution 1-3 chapters. I know the American Revolution is the most important event in the U.S. history, but should give more recognition on Civil War, Great Depression, WWII, and Cold War.
I don't know about you guys, but did school's history class ever get into the Cold War? In all my history classes, we have rarely ever hit the Cold War section. Heck, it was only last year did the History class ever get in-depth to the Cold War era but it was only paper thin.
Sad to say this, but I learned more about WWII by playing Medal of Honor: Frontline than the textbooks from 3rd to 10th grade. We actually SKIPPED WWII last year and went directly to Cold War but didn't get into details about it.
wheres the leopard tank, (leopard 2 loader was my job when i had to do dutch national service, im a private 1stclass :) ), i thought it was almost as good as abrams tank.
t34 has explosive armor thats why shells bounce off, the leopard ke shell will go right thru coz of its speed, thats what instructors told me backthen
We process personal data about users of our site, through the use of cookies and other technologies, to deliver our services, personalize advertising, and to analyze site activity. We may share certain information about our users with our advertising and analytics partners. For additional details, refer to our Privacy Policy.
By clicking "I AGREE" below, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our personal data processing and cookie practices as described therein. You also acknowledge that this forum may be hosted outside your country and you consent to the collection, storage, and processing of your data in the country where this forum is hosted.
Comment