72 replies to this topic

[Eddy01741]

Tank, the Leopard 2A6EX all the way, better top speed than teh Abrams, diesel engine with multifuel capability, which also happens to guzzle less fuel, has about same armor, and a longer 55calibre gun instead of the 44 calibre gun the abrams has. The abrams is best if youconsider the amounts produced, but in a 1 on 1 comparison, imo, the Leopard 2A6EX is best.

Chopper (just a thing, the commanche program is frozen), Apache Longbow(AH-64D) or the KA-50/52 Black Shark.

[Lucid]

tank-T-34

the abrams is the best in proformence but as its so expenseve,if the enemy takes one out,its harder to replace than others.however the t-34 is easy to produce,and also acording to experts,its the best tank ever made,and i agree with them.

chopper-AH-1
cheap,fast,relible.

[Eddy01741]

THe T-34 is 60+ years old, it was revolutionary FOR THE TIME. No matter how many T-34s you throw at one abram, the abram will prevail as long as it has infinite fuel and ammo, as well as food for the crew and such. Because the 85mm shells simply can't do a thing to the Abrams Armor, and the abrams could take most of the first ones way out of the range of the T-34. T-34 was the best tank in it's time undoubtly, but it can't beat an modern tank, they simply can't be compared.

[Nuke General]

Just so everyone knows, the commanche project has been scrapped (I live near the Boing plant that produced them.

Tank- M1A2 Abrams
Helo- AH-64 Apache Longbow

Edited by Nuke General, 09 August 2006 - 23:03.

[Flying Tigers]

Too bad that the Comanche was turned into scrap
Then I should change my choice into Apache AH-64 (cool looking and lots of weapons)
If I wasn't wrong the KA-50 black shark got a very thick bullet protection and it was so heavy that they use dual chopper blades, right?

[Eddy01741]

 Dark Star, on 22 Aug 2006, 08:03, said:

Too bad that the Comanche was turned into scrap
Then I should change my choice into Apache AH-64 (cool looking and lots of weapons)
If I wasn't wrong the KA-50 black shark got a very thick bullet protection and it was so heavy that they use dual chopper blades, right?

No, the double blades isn't neccesary, i mean, the sea stallion is heavier, but it has single blades. There are three kinds of configurations for chopper blades, first kind is one main chopper rotor, and one tail rotor to balance the torque (so the main rotor blades spin, instead of the helicoptor itself spinning lol) It uses the tail rotor to turn around by speeding it up or slowing it down. The second kind is dual rotors, which is the chinnook, it has two rotors that spin in opposite directions, but the blades on the rotors are made so both provide lift even though they are spinning in opposite directions. I'm not really sure how they turn to tel you the truth. The last configuration is co-axial, two rotors are mounted on top of each other spinnning in opposite directions, again, both providing lift, to turn, it just makes one rotor go faster or slower so that the other rotor's torque turns the helicoptor, teh co-axial coniguration is a trademark of Kamov, hence, the Helix is also co-axial (it is made by Kamov in real life).

[Wanderer]

Did you know that the hind is the only helicopter in the world that can drop bombs?

[DerKrieger]

A good article on the best modern tank: http://www.strategyp...cles/200418.asp

[Eddy01741]

I already read that, theres one on the best attack helicopter, they said like the Hokum/Alligator/Black Shark (jeeze, so many names) aka KA-50/52 was the best in most physical means, but having a co-pilot means an extra se tof eyes and they said taht would bprobably be what put the Apache on top of the others.

[AllStarZ]

Apache doesn't have a co-pilot, it has a gunner. Still, its an extra load off the pilot's shoulders.

[Eddy01741]

You know what i mean, I mean, they call the freacking co-pilot of a F-14 (although out of service) a co-pilot even though all he does is select a weapon, lock and fire.

[=Hawkeye=]

my fav helicopter would have to be the commanche
not sure about tank though

[Mathias]

The KA-50 is totally badass. Insane maneuvrability, and thick armor. Too bad the avionics aren't as good as american attack choppers.

[BillyChaka]

And the autocannon on that thing is a killer.

[VertiGo-]

KA-50/52 FTW! IIRC, they have 4 auto cannons on their nose right?
for tanks, Chinese type-98, sports a 125mm cannon,where the abrams only 120, the same type of engine that the abrams uses, and a lower production cost... what else do you need?

[RI-Ravager]

Tank:
The russian T-3/85's. those mother fucker's pwned the shit outta the german tanks in late WW2

Heli:
Well, it would be the Comanche but the program was cancelled, so I have a tie between the Super Cobra and the Apache.

[Eddy01741]

 Bombs Away!, on 18 Nov 2006, 23:03, said:

KA-50/52 FTW! IIRC, they have 4 auto cannons on their nose right?
for tanks, Chinese type-98, sports a 125mm cannon,where the abrams only 120, the same type of engine that the abrams uses, and a lower production cost... what else do you need?

A difference of 5 mm, that's like saying... 88mm gun mounted on teh tiger is much better than the 76.2mm 17-pounder british gun. They were both great guns. And how about better armor for the abrmas (burlington armor ftw, which is based off of chobham)

[AllStarZ]

I just realized I find myself amused about how people debate over weapons they've probably never seen before or have even used.

[Eddy01741]

i doubt anybody has seen a hokum, apache, Abrams (well maybe abrams) leopard etc. it's just fun to idolize wepaons lol.

[DerKrieger]

 Eddy01741, on 20 Nov 2006, 04:07, said:

 Bombs Away!, on 18 Nov 2006, 23:03, said:

KA-50/52 FTW! IIRC, they have 4 auto cannons on their nose right?
for tanks, Chinese type-98, sports a 125mm cannon,where the abrams only 120, the same type of engine that the abrams uses, and a lower production cost... what else do you need?

A difference of 5 mm, that's like saying... 88mm gun mounted on teh tiger is much better than the 76.2mm 17-pounder british gun. They were both great guns. And how about better armor for the abrmas (burlington armor ftw, which is based off of chobham)

Iraqi T-72s armed with that same 125mm gun barely scratched the paint on M1A1s and Challengers while the the 120mm guns of the M1A1s and Challengers destroyed the T-72s...and the Type 98 was prototype for the more advanced Type 99 lives on

[Flying Tigers]

Isn't there a tank from germany that could submerged underwater?

[Wanderer]

It's not the gun, it's the round that matters

[Eddy01741]

It's both actually, put a DU AP round in a 9mm handgun and chances are it still can't penetrate a NATO standard combat helmet. THats like saying that a 30mm cannon will do better than a 120mm cannon because the 30mm has DU APFSDS rounds while the 120mm has just regular solid shot. And all modern tank guns use either tungsten or DU APFSDS rounds as the main 'modern tank killing' round.