12 best tanks in world

[WAQAS119]

i think it's a biased list of world top tank. i think the person who made this list is,he must be pakistani or chinese. because he added al khalid at 11th place he placed t-90 at 10th place and placed type-99 at 9th place. every one know that t-90 is the one of the best tank of the world. there is a question on my mind how he prepare the list of the tanks. he do not provide any link who prove it. so it's a wrong list.

,,,, this is called true addiction of self praising.

 

[Jackal]

Theres no way I'd put the Abrams M1A2 at number one, yes of course its a pretty good tank buts far from the best and its far from "All American". German gun, British armour, (not the same kind on the Challenger 2) as well as a few other things etc, which isn't a bad thing, and not to mention its rather silly gas turbine engine that drinks fuel like a fish drinks water and has to go a fair old lick-fast-to be economical, and also not to mention it has to have a tanker truck to support it where ever it goes, of which I'd like to point out, isn't even armoured neither....Clever...And I just don't like the design of it. Like for example, take a look at where the drivers hatch is, when its open. the armour round that area looks quite thin & not well protected.

I'd rate the likes of the German Leopard, British Challenger 2 & French Leclerc before the M1A2. Germany have always had a reputation of producing fantastic tanks, although during WW2 they were overcomplicated but that was then and the latest version of Leopard of today is probably the perfect example of a tank, although personally I'm a little suspect of its armour-I'm sure its top notch but I'd like to have the assurance of what it can withstand. Deep down, if I were in combat in the Leopard I think I'd feel more than safe.

I say the same for the Leclerc as I do for the Leopard but I'd choose the Leopard if they were parked up together, saying that, if I asked for a Leopard & got the Leclerc, I think I'd be fine with that.

As for the British Challenger, we all know it has its reputation for its first class armour of which in my opinion is best protected and best designed tank in the world, reliability-which according to a lot of reliable sources is the most reliable tank in the world-very accurate and powerful gun which has a very proud reputation in its own right and not to mention that very long range tank kill during the first Gulf War. (Although was a Challenger 1 with a slightly different & less advanced gun). Probably, its only downside is the engine, I don't think theres nothing wrong with it, its a solid engine with renowned reliablity and performance in battle it (and the tank itself too) might be a little slower than the likes of the Leopard, Leclerc, M1A2, but at the end of the day thats not the most important thing, its very good off road and to a lot of people, even to the chaps that operate it, regard it as perfect. Speed is okay to have, but the fastet tank will never out run, out turn a 120mm projectile heading into its general direction.

So, my personal conclusion; if those four tanks I've mention were all lined up alongside eachother, I'd take the Challenger 2...Everytime. Yes, I'm British & I'm guesing some of you are think: 'Yeah! He would say that wouldn't he. He's a Brit'. But putting where I'm from & what country the tank comes from aside, I'm going by what the tank is and how capable it is & by its track record, which you must admit, is rather jolly splendid. A British officer once said; "The Challenger isn't designed for competition, its designed to fight and win wars and thats exactly what it does."

On a final note: I'll need to do some research on the others that are listed.

 

[sturmgewehr99]

Extensive combat footage shows that the M1 Abrams isn't worth squat in urban warfare thus the US military's reliance on fast moving and tough Bradley IFV's Now I know both products are entirely different all I am saying is that all American weapons have ever faced was out dated Vietnam era equipment or upgrades thereof.....my money is with the Challenger or Merkava....tried tested and extremely tough platforms where the crew has a very high possibility of survival.....as for Abrams crews.....I have seen enough crispy critters to know otherwise.......with the Americans its a whole lotta hooey and chewy and tishoo ratatatattta......its the air power man....its always been the air power....their Jammer 16 cant take down niswar swilling talibs....

 

[sturmgewehr99]

as for that idiotic 'wounded enemies cost more to tango command then dead ones' idea, it was only valid back in NAM where Victor Charlie and Nathaniel Victor actually treated their wounded and had doctors and surgeons on standby in border regions of Laos, Cambodia and China....I am certain there were some Soviet Doctors there too.....as I do know that extensive medical and resupply facilities were present through out the region for both American and Arvn and tango forces......today in Afghanistan if tangos get wounded...their boss simply leaves em there to die, be captured and treated by Americans [lol now who is paying for his treatment] and then later killed or freed during a huge prison break.....its just Oligarchy of Jane's defense weekly and GD, and GE and whatnot.....and water boarding grunts for top secret plans is pretty much useless and time consuming...so now you loose precious special operator man hours.....

 

[ThePublicMenace]

isnt al-khalid better then the t-90 ?

 

[ptldM3]

isnt al-khalid better then the t-90 ?

That is what most people here claim, when armor protection (mm estimates), Sabot round penetration in mm, and range is taken into account it's clearly inferior.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

That is what most people here claim, when armor protection (mm estimates), Sabot round penetration in mm, and range is taken into account it's clearly inferior.

Exactly the niaza round isn't as good as the new AP round for the 2a46m-5 RAPIRA gun.Niaza has penetration of around 550mm.
Plus t-90 armour is superior especially as there i no pakistani answer to relikt era or arena/shtora-2 APS.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Real TOP 12.

1]Leopard 2a7.First revealed in 2010.It has all the modular armour imrovements of leoa4 revolution,plus lot more.

It can fire at targets behind buildings and cover with new programmable he round,has one of the fastest acceleration of any tank,Immune to IED and RPG from 360 degrees.Very high rate of fire.Perforated ceramic armour plus modular add on armour.Armour was impenetrable in test to all known rpg and atgms in NATO inventory.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Below,some of the improvements that leoa7 has from leoa4 revolution.The tank below is leo a4 revolution.The add on armour package is whats installed with even more advancements in a7.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

2.K2A2 BLACK PANTHER.[costliest tank ever,best acceleration of all tanks,very high rof]

3.M1A2 abrams.[at 3 because lack of aps,Or new modular armour/era over normal armour,gun and accuracy slightly inferior to leoa7,and engine is gas guzzling,
for strengths it has the best APFSDS round in the world,And only tank to deploy DU mesh in armour]

4.Challenger 2.
Only tank never to be destroyed despite being hit astonishing times in iraq and afganisthan.Probably best base armour.Mechanically reliable.Rifled gun has legendary accuracy.
Downside too heavy and slow,engine less powerful and no aps.

Apart from this 4.

5,6,7,8 will be any between.

Merkava mk4,leclerc,t-90ms and japanese t-k-x.

After that
will be between t-84 oplot,type-99,al khalid etc.

All 3 of these ,and all soviet style mbts for that matter except t-90ms suffer from 2 critical flaw,no seperate compartment for ammo means crew is at extreme danger in case of even small penetration.
And carousel type autoloader means length of apfsds KE pentrator is limited and can't match western rods.

 

[sturmgewehr99]

Austerlitz

My point exactly albeit with stats........what do you think of my comments up there.....

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Extensive combat footage shows that the M1 Abrams isn't worth squat in urban warfare thus the US military's reliance on fast moving and tough Bradley IFV's Now I know both products are entirely different all I am saying is that all American weapons have ever faced was out dated Vietnam era equipment or upgrades thereof.....my money is with the Challenger or Merkava....tried tested and extremely tough platforms where the crew has a very high possibility of survival.....as for Abrams crews.....I have seen enough crispy critters to know otherwise.......with the Americans its a whole lotta hooey and chewy and tishoo ratatatattta......its the air power man....its always been the air power....their Jammer 16 cant take down niswar swilling talibs....

I wouldn't say worth squat,it survived many rpg hits in multiple cases,but it isn't as good as MERKAVA MK 4,leopard a7 or challenger 2 in street combat.So after taking a few losses like this.


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
They have introduced the new ABRAMS TUSK[tank urban survival kit].Notice the addition of ERA tiles exactly where earlier abarms was destroyed.Still it isn't as good in urban warfare as the new leopard which is near foolproof,just check the upgrade package pic i posted earlier and lack of APS.



Uploaded with ImageShack.us
The merkava mk 4 faced problems in lebanon to IED and KOrnet atgms.It has now introduced trophy APS and new anti IED system similar to leopard and is a much improved machine.Plus kornet destroyed even abrams,a 152 mm tandem heat warhead is very difficult to stop wihout APS when it hits anything else than frontal armour.
Challenger's positive side is it has literally massive base armour[its composite armour ceramic tiles are old fashioned and thus overweight but very effective.It holds record for surviving most RPG hits.But the lack of APS is major problem.

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

A common belief is merkava mk 4 performed poorly in the lebanon war,it was actually isolated tank attacks by tanks and isrraeli overconfidence that performed poorly.

52 Merkava tanks were damaged in all.45 of them by ATGMS,the only atgms that had effect were the metis and kornet new gen ATGMS.22 of the 43 tanks had their turret armour penetrated,but due to the ingenious merkava design only 5 were permanently destroyed.Rest were apparently repaired or recovered by IDF.If this was soviet style design every single one would have been blown to bits.
Another misconception is all were merkava mk 4 tanks.The bulk of losses were merkava mk 2 and 3.Only 5 merkava mk 4 had been penetrated out of 22 such penetrations.
Due to ingenious design.Despite 53 tanks being damaged.Only 23 armoured corps members were killed.There were more losses in soldiers carried in APCs.
So in effect the crew protection design proved its worth.Especially now with trophy its even better,so i think merkava mk4 and leo a7 are top 2 contenders for urban warfare.
But merkava has one weakness in conventional warfare,due to its unconventional design of putting engine in front its frontal armour isn't as good as leopard,abrams or challenger.

 

[sturmgewehr99]

Austerlitz

Indeed the Merkava was made to look the fool due to command incompetence and every system has its limits there will be a few casualties in war....I am still not buying the hyped up pep that's the Abrams I mean a few 3500 rupee rockets did that to a multi million dollar platform [not the Kornet of course].....aircraft yeah America rules the skies but where tanks and rifles are concerned....my opinion is over engineered costly and usually developed due to interest group pressure.....of course precision surgical options are yet again entirely their domain.....with the UK in close competition.....If I was asked which tank I want to pilot into combat....I would tap a Challanger any day.....what say you?

 

[sturmgewehr99]

How do you think ATGM's will evolve to counter this ADS development.....if this keeps on going then the infantry man will have absolutely no chance against armored vehicles....and where do you think electronic warfare packages are going for infantry units as I am certain they need jammers to counter laser signature tracing by enemy armor....the engineers job is getting tougher by the day...wish we made giant robots and battled it with them....these new tanks would shoot a gundam down like a heap of rubble sad really....I was hoping to see mech's enter warfare before I grew old and died....

 

[AUSTERLITZ]

Two things have rapidly changed the survivability of the tank.
The combined active protection systems that use both soft kill and hard kill modes.Soft kill is sensor based system that interferes or jams,disrupts the incoming weapon's target designator/seeker.Hardkill actually destroys the warhead either by direct impact or fragmentation.When combined along with sensors like radar warning reciever and laser warning reciever these will drastically increase survivability.

The other improvement is NERA or non explosive reactive armour.As u know the main counter to explosive reactive armour is tandem warhead that has 2 charges,the first one to explode the ERA and the next to kill the tank.But NERA doesn't explode,and thus makes tandem warheads obsolete.Most new tanks are switching to NERA.It also has the advantage of not having the problem of exploding fragments to nearby infantry.One drawback of NERA is it offers slightly less protection against KE penetrators.[the main tank to tank battle round]
But on the other side it way more lighter and unlike ERA can be placed almost anywhere in the tank.
What this means is we will see not far from now Tanks with welded composite armour that already offers superb protection,covered with ERA perhaps only in the frontal arc for tank to tank battles.NERA.aplique modular armour packages and slat armour covering the rest and an APS,plus RWR and LWR.This offers very high protection.
The advent of improved APS means the days of the RPG are numbered.The only way an RPG can go through are if they hit the tank from very close range,thus not giving the APS enough time to react.Or hits it from an elevated position say a roof on top,which will require the APS to intercept almost vertically against gravity.This makes the RPG's life very hard.
Same for ATGM.But ATGM's have a way out.The ultra new ATGMS like javelin,spike and trigat have a coded algorithm that ensures effective top attack mode.This makes it difficult for APS to intercept it due to vertical angle,but more easier than an RPG from a roof because that is simulataneously close and vertical meaning low reaction time plus vertical angle.While ATGms will be launched from a distance giving more time to react.
So yeah infantryman's life is getting harder.But i'm sure they will come up with something new.
The tank i would be in is leoa7
The mech thing won't happen,because of weight mostly.Above 70 tons is logistically unfeasible.And anything less won't be armoured enough to be a cost effective threat at that size.What we could see is automated robotic vehicles the size of ICV say BMP-T terminator without a crew,kind of like what we saw in the terminator 3 rise of the machines movie.Main problem is lack of technology advancement and enemy could jam communications with automatic vehicle.And then what?


Uploaded with ImageShack.us
A bigger souped up armoured version of this is possible in some point in the future.