/k/ - Weapons

>>533646

>russia

>military powerhouse

>regularly has massive problems at the infantry level

>is so scared of overwhelming US spy tech they have to resort to putting nuclear missiles on trains to avoid being BTFO in a nuclear war

>russian military too busy making conscripts suck dick and eat shit than actually making competent soldiers

>m-muh slavaboo tech

>regardless that it's been consistently BTFO in every conflict ever.

go away slavaboo. even your little ak fails with mud.

QTDDTOT

КВ were truly a great tanks. Too bad they didn't prevent those 26.6 million WW2 losses.

>>533646

>What is 73 Easting?

So uh, tank thread?

Wiesel 1 and 2 are best for paratroops with shoot and scoot tactics, as well as packmules. Prove me wrong.

Pro tip: You can't.

>>533649

>go away slavaboo.

That’s a thing? I thought that was a joke poking fun of STALKER fans?

>>533658

>>533649

Are those copy pastas?

>>533664

IS says no. The le Clerc may well be the best NATO.

>>533664

There is no "best" tank, only good tanks, and bad tanks.

T55 is a bad tank today, but it was a good tank back then.

Leo one is a bad tank today, but was a very good tank for it's time.

The PzIII was bad when it first rolled out into Russia, but after some time it was modified and improved to become a good tank.

>>533669

shit tactics (driving tanks into AT missle range of an enemy held city when you know they have AT missiles) can turn any tank into a very expensive grave of steel and fire.

>>533675

you can make tea in the Leclerc?

learn something new every day

>>533700

Funny.

>>533664

Because it has as much side armor as a land-mower that even a RPG-7 can get through?

The only major flaw the abrams has is that it has low bang for the buck. It has a base price of $9.17 million. Each time it got upgraded they blew 100k on it, plus every time they did an overhaul they re-made the hulls from new raw materials, which doubles or triples the price of each. Every Abrams in the service has in excess of $15-$20 million dollars invested in it. Compare it to Leclerc or Armata which are technologically superior in every way to Abrams and cost only $4 million.

Verdict:

It's not a huge drag on American fighting force because America is so wealthy, but if DOD put even an iota more effort into thinking about it they could definitely improve the Abrams in every aspect. Think of it, for the same price of the current fleet of 6,000 M1A2 we could have 30,000 superior M1A3. It's just a waste from an efficiency viewpoint.

>>533752

>this thread is a worthy discussion again

i've seen this thread several times. same exact order. the fact OP just linked to a normalfag jewtube vid should have been your red flag.

this is a template thread.

>>533747

Like all American equipment it's mostly a welfare program for low skilled workers.

Example: Abrams factories do deburring by hand, like literally give people a piece of sandpaper and tell them to gently rub it on a part. Everyone else does deburring with a power tool, which is 10,000 times cheaper and faster.

>>533649

>>533658

Even ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

>>533664

Not counting minor strange tanks that don't make the list, at present time:

>Armata is currently the best tank in the world, but Leclerc is a close second. Cheapest, most mobile, most sophisticated armor, longest range, hardest hitting.

>Then there's the Abrams, which has good armor (if inert heavy garbage) and an acceptable cannon, but great mobility.

>Then there's the Challenger, which is overarmored and a bit under engined, but makes up for it with a great gun and FCS.

>Then there's the Leopard and that Korean tank.

>Then the Jap tank with "nano" armor lol, the insane Chink T-55 upgrade that's basically more modern than Abrams, and the Ariete which is the worst major tank in service.

Although in reality there are so many Leopard variants it bleeds over into other classes of tank.

>>533754

His post is linked to mine here >>533755

I deleted to answer the brits question in one post. Guess it didn't work.

My approach to obvious troll threads is to make them better.

>>533755

i am disappointed with this feature. at least it beats the reddit edit vols who can't formulate a fucking post and have to painfully edit it.

>>533757

>make them better.

>>533725

Wrong

>>533755

The Leopard 2A6 shits on the Leclerc in pretty much everything anon.

>>533757

this is the cutest thing I've seen all day. This child's been raised right

>>533778

Does it run on shit?

>>533646

Comparing M1 to T90 is incorrect because they're built for different doctrines. T90 is tailored for zerg rush, i.e. blitzkrieg + overwhelming numbers. I have no fucking clue what M1 is made for but it's sure as fuck not highly mobile modern warfare. Is it's supposed to be a mobile pillbox? Is it's supposed to engage with other tanks? The only real benefit it has as a tank over T90 is that you need to get really close and personal to punch through its armor. Using kinetic munitions - or just launch a tandem warheat ATGM at it out of the barrel, which disables reactive armor and then goes through like 3 feet of rolled armor.

>>533755

Pretty sure your example is complete bullshit. I do however fully expect them to do shit like taking a 3 ton solid metal billet and then painstakingly machining it into a 2 lb part over the period of like 40 hours. Instead of, you know, just casting it into shape and only do machining on surfaces that's supposed to touch with other parts and otherwise need precision.

>>533795

>abrams

>era

abrams is shittalked because as a main tonk of leader of biggest alliance in the world it is considered baseline tank to which all others are compared, as in other tanks can be only better or worse and most are better

>>533811

it wass a joke. come on its 2 past midnight

>>533795

>>533799

>Pretty sure your example is complete bullshit.

>Gonna call bullshit on this til you show a source.

I delivered purolator stuff to a workshop that got shipped freshly machined M2 parts for humvees and turret ring parts for the bradley and abrams, to do the finishing work. My info is directly from workers who took smoke breaks out back with me while I waited for signatures/packages. They were told that deburring by machine would cause defects and would be too rough for parts to work properly together, so they did it by hand in lines of 30 or 40 people. One person would deburr at a grit, then pass it off someone with a lower grit, and by the time the part reached the end of the line it would be "deburred" and handed off to a packaging team.

They even had medieval-era guild ranks for deburrers. Apprentice deburrer, follower deburrer, master deburrer. If was funny and memorable.

Although it's sad this story is so insane sounding that two people, an American and a Russian, wouldn't believe it happened.

>I do however fully expect them to do shit like taking a 3 ton solid metal billet and then painstakingly machining it into a 2 lb part over the period of like 40 hours. Instead of, you know, just casting it into shape and only do machining on surfaces that's supposed to touch with other parts and otherwise need precision.

Wouldn't the casting process produce low quality steel? Also a 3 ton solid metal billet would be machined into like a hundred parts in series.

>>533814

*higher grit

It's late and I'm tired.

it's so overpowered in call to arms

>>533778

The new ones are even heavier than an Abrams, but can supposedly take a 125mm APFDS at point blank. Just hope the engine works.

>>533795

The Abrams is built more for conventional head on tank battles a la ww2, or the Gulf War.

>>533646

Because they don't know 3 guys in a Jeep armed with Javelins/Smaws/RPG's will shit on any tank being fielded.

>>533675

Go home, Pakistan.

>>533814

Well I don't believe it because I work at a factory and we all use power tools whenever possible. The only thing we're doing by hand is removing technical paint markings with a solution soaked rag, it only takes a second and you not gonna do it any quicker with a power tool.

As for their rationale, pretty sure that's bollocks too. Anyone with half a brain knows that machine does far better finishing than a man could, on top of doing it faster.

>Wouldn't the casting process produce low quality steel?

No. You can cast any metal just fine. The thing is, some metals don't like hammering so you can't bend them into shape from an ignot on a power anvil, you need to cast them into exactly right shape to begin with, and from there on the only way you can alter its shape is by removing metal by machining. Given limitations of the hammering process, this is how most metal parts are made nowdays.

>Also a 3 ton solid metal billet would be machined into like a hundred parts in series.

Haha no, I shit you not sometimes they do it. When they can't be assed to make a cast or something. They take a billet that's big enough to have the whole part fit inside of it, and then carve it out. And sometimes they use billets WAY bigger than the finished part, because they can't be assed to cut it up.

>>533836

I don't know anything about their rationale, this is just what they told me. Maybe you work for an contractor that does their business halfway right, like textron, but the guys at general dynamics were retarded.

>>533778

The Arjun isn't in service though.

http://cag.gov.in/sites/default/files/noddy_books/Report_36_of_2016_Union_Government_Defence_PA_noddy_0.pdf

(Last time one was operational was in 2013).

>>534393

>Makes a tank.

>Forget to make spare parts and repair facilities.

In cases anyone still quote a fucking indian source blaming "poorly made foreign parts" for maintenance issues, that's a perfect example the Indian army plan their logistics.

>Poo General 1: Logistics, what's that?

>Poo General 2: Isn't it what the item in the budget we get our bonuses from is called?

>>534394

Doesn't that fucking thing have parts from like 5 different countries.

>>533814

Oh please, do tell us where this "Abrams factory" is that you've delivered parts to.

>>533825

btw i highly recommend this game its free

sequel to MEN OF WAR, rts/fps hybrid with physics

>>533664

Tank-on-tank, I can see that turret design being a huge shell trap, disabling or killing the tank.

Granted, I'm pretty drunk right now, so forgive this leaf if necessary.

>>533675

Only reason they have that is because a bunch of Brits got massacred while making tea in WWII.

>>533799

Why do pregnant chicks eat peantbutter and pickles?

>>534408

>Doesn't that fucking thing have parts from like 5 different countries.

It doesn't help but it doesn't change the fact they didn't made any repair center for it (because T-72/T-90 are considerably different, especially weight/dimension wise, it's extremely unlikely you can use the same cranes and berth and whatnot when you need to dismantle the thing and change the faulty/old parts. And the only reason they have those is it was probably included pre-made in a Soviet/Russian care package).

Idk much about modern tank designs, but one thing I've always found absolutely retarded about the Abrams is it's turbine engine. It's like they went out of their way to find the most inefficient and illogical power plant possible.

>>534441

and now we know that the threat of being shot during a brew up is drastically reduced. But seriously, what sort of barbarian fires at another man while he's making tea. Savages the lot of them.

>>534468

IIRC the rationale behind it had more to do with politics than design decision (the US wanted to keep two companies making gas turbine power plant for helicopters/planes to sustain competitive designs… except Lycoming was gonna die because all the contracts were snatched by GE).

There has been at least half a dozen attempts by the army to get a diesel engine replacement funded since.

>>533646

>Why do normies think the m1 abrams a good thank?

I honestly don't know. When all else fails, M1A shills always resort back to the tired old "but it's super well armored to the point of it being nearly indestructible MUH CREW SURVIVABILITY" trope, disregarding the fact that plenty of M1As have been destroyed (and not just mobility kills which is another false trope) and crew members have been killed and wounded.

So to answer your question OP, I really don't know.

>>534474

>MUH CREW SURVIVABILITY

The amount of people that dies in M1 in non-combat condition is actually staggering.

Between the automated Halon extinguishers, no escape hatch (tank is on the roof in a puddle-> crew drowns, which happens far more than anyone thinks), faulty fuel bladders that douse the crew in kerosene, turret hydraulic reset that behead pilots, armor out made of a pyrolytic, toxic AND radioactive material, etc… it's like they were trying to top T-64 "literally auto-loading crew arms" for least safe design.

>>534483

None of this matters since the M1A has never been destroyed in combat® and whatever else the M1A shills come up with. Try talking to them once in a while, it's a fascinating experience.

>>534411

Michigan. And it's not an Abrams factory, it's a small business (<50 employees) supplier of GD. Don't be a faggot.

>>534393

India's current strategy is to quickly move it forces to launch points across the Pakistan border. But the infrastructure (bridges etc) near the border cannot support Arjun's weight. This adds to its lack luster performance which doesnt justify improvement in infrastructure. Also as this hodge-podge design is more expensive than T-90s so the Indian Army is also lukewarm about it. The Tejas is also following in its footsteps but this time the Air Force saying its too light.

>>534487

Read your own post fucknut >>533755

>Example: Abrams factories do deburring by hand, like literally give people a piece of sandpaper and tell them to gently rub it on a part. Everyone else does deburring with a power tool, which is 10,000 times cheaper and faster.

You're the faggot referring to a small General Dynamics contractor as "Abrams factories".

This bit is also a load of steaming horse shit;

> plus every time they did an overhaul they re-made the hulls from new raw materials, which doubles or triples the price of each

A new Abrams hull hasn't rolled off the line since 92', Anniston has been refubing them at JSMC since the 80's.

Please tell us more of your extensive third-party provided information on the Abrams, Mr. Fedex.

>>534490

Good thing that their other possible enemy is China. Surely, that MBT will be very useful in the Himalayas.

>>534492

Well ok I misspoke, but you really think buying from sub-subcontractors doing deburring by hand makes the Abrams CHEAPER you quad nigger? Really hate autists who nitpick one point while missing the forest for the trees.

>Anniston has been refubing them at JSMC since the 80's.

Go look up what a refurb entails, genius. They're refurbed by replacing parts to a zero mileage or zero hour wear. And that's not counting the fucking uprgrades! The base price for the original M1 Abrams was $4.3 million in 1986, or $9.4 million inflation adjusted. You think the M1IP, M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A1HC, M1A2, M1A2SEP, M1A2SEPv2, M1A2SEPv3, the D, FEP, AIM and SA tech upgrades, and the TUSK kit added nothing extra to the total price? Every hull in service today went through several of those upgrades brohime, meaning old shit had to be cut out and new shit installed, on top of refurbs, on top of new tech every tank is carrying, the price is easily $20 mil per tank sunk-cost.

And it's purolator, not fedex.

>>534493

It'll have to stop Beijing's new igneous based attacks; that's a tall order.

>>533646

M1 Abrams isn't slow, it's just weighted down by it's crew Otherwise it's the lightest tank in the world

>>534493

>put one in chokepoint

>now there is no way to pass

>even if they destroy it it blocks the path

it could work tbh

>>534507

Why not just build a wall with guns in it at that point?

>>534508

because that takes more time and with tank you can just drive in there

>>534499

At most points the Indian forces have the advantage of higher ground and the tank will have to use a few available passes which can be easily covered by ATGM. The Kargil war has shown the difficulty of taking such ground from well dug in infantry. Only LGBs and attrition via infantry assaults worked. The problem for China is that their airbases in the region are at much higher altitude than India so they have to carry reduced fuel and weapons and rely on aerial refueling.

>>534507

>Only one entry

>Clog it with shit tanks and troops

>Loo is overflowing with poo

A natural strategy for india.

>>533646

Because it's outdated, slow, and also pretty damn tough.

>>533658

>beaten

>>534528

That's true, in addition, I cycled through Tibet this summer. The road into tibet from the nearest industrial base (Sichuan) is constantly filled with landslides at several portions. In addition, there was a bridge called the large bridge of the Nu river, which we were not allowed to take pictures cause apparently that bridge is the only link into Tibet from Sichuan/Yunnan. In addition, the food supply in Tibet can only feed the population for a week (thats what the communist government said themselves soo….).

>bomb one bridge and their screwed. I must admit the original bridge is quite impressive when they built it with no machinery whatsoever

OTOH the snowfall has been a lot less (from what local tibetans tell me) than the 50s and 60s, it's now actually possible to pass the mountains by climbing them.

>>534650

>tank

>>534655

Anyone feel this could use a Finn edit?

>>534667

It needs two: a simple Finn edit for fun, and a spurdo one with the crew member saying benis.

Captcha: tnky FH

>>534655

not as good as Orange Leopard

>>534650

>tfw no UDES-19, UDES-XX-20 and Strv 120 T140/40 in our timeline

http://weaponews.com/weapons/735-the-project-of-a-light-tank-udes-19-sweden.html

https://warfaretech.blogspot.cz/2014/07/udes-xx20-tank-destroyer.html

http://www.tanks-encyclopedia.com/coldwar/Sweden/strv-2000-t140-40

>>534475

Girls und Panzer is shit and Japan deserves 2 more bombs

>>534528

That's true.

Although the Chinks have enough of a fleet to actually invade India from the sea now.

>>534761

At the very least to be honest.

>>534761

>nuke japan twice

>they create anime

>nuke them twice again

>???

Look at what anime has done to the young men of society, and ask yourself: will humanity survive whatever Japan creates next? Why do you think the US has maintained a constant presence in Japan since the war? It's not about force projection - they're defending humanity from the existential threat that will be created if Japan is nuked again.

>>534780

Not possible. Any invasion fleet will have to go through the Straits of Malaca which can be easily blocked.

https://geopoliticalfutures.com/chinas-maritime-choke-points/

Also Indian bases in Necobar allow them coverage of this route:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Collardeperlaschino.png

India's Air Force and Navy have qualitative parity with China and will enjoy numerical superiority.

All things said and done an invasion of India serves China no purpose after all India is a major market of Chinese goods what they can do and are doing is propping up Pakistan.

>>534821

Futa zombie plague.

>>534830

Sticking wings on poo does not a fighter jet make.

Same with sails.

>>534761

Girls und Panzer is amazing and Japan deserves 3 more bombs.

And I deserve Yukari.

>>533646

DELETE THIS