An update and quick run down/explanation of why a few well known tanks didn't make the list...
Chinese Type 99.
We're entering a strange period in military intel. Either they don't know much about this tank or they're not passing it along. This tank didn't hit the list because we don't know much about it. We can see the obvious. ERA Tiles. Angular sloping. Big gun (assumed to be a Russian model), but other than that, its pretty much a blank.
AMX 56 LeClerc.
I wanted to include the LeClerc. I really did. But name one thing it leads the pack on. Quite honestly I expected to see it at the top of my expeditionary list but it fell because the French did not include it in its latest combat ops in Northern Africa. So its not expeditionary. Firepower? Run of the mill. So is it capable in ways we don't know? We don't know. Its been in service for years but is still a mystery.
T-90.
This one is simple. I'll never trust Russian tanks until I see some type of move ahead in tech. Have you seen the insides of a tank that got penetrated but didn't burn out? Human goo. Its almost merciful when the Iraqi tank crews suffered catastrophic explosions of onboard ordnance. I need to see more before I hold these tanks in high regard.
Any others that should have made the list but I forgot about? I don't think so.
Which brings me to the juicy bits.
Don't be led astray by optics, guns etc. Take a look at the Altay MBT. Guess who is partnered with Turkish industry. BAE. Perhaps the number one armored vehicle house on the planet. Guess who is in Poland. BAE. Many of these new tanks like the Altay and armored vehicles like the Anders have a Brit/US pedigree.
Get over it guys. The little guys (meaning countries) are coming. And they're coming in well designed armor that will take the market by storm. Can't afford the LEO, Abrams or Challenger, but still need top line stuff? Check out the Toyota of armored vehicles coming from Turkey or Poland. The armored vehicle segment has been neglected by the Western traditional military powers and a new breed are going to take the reigns.
UPDATE:
I'm getting complaints about the CV-90120T being listed as the best expeditionary tank. I've gotten e-mails that call it a mobile gun system, others call it a APC with tank gun attached and others are simply calling it an enhanced IFV.
It doesn't matter.
We can do the "change" thing and call it all of the above, but if we were to flash back to the past, then a vehicle like the CV-90120T would be called an infantry support tank. Tank being the operative word. Anyway you slice it (in my opinion), if you have a vehicle mounting a tank caliber gun, operating in any of the tank classic roles then you have a tank.
CV-90120T? Tank. Commando 105mm wheeled vehicle? Tank. Anders 105mm? Tank.
Chinese Type 99.
We're entering a strange period in military intel. Either they don't know much about this tank or they're not passing it along. This tank didn't hit the list because we don't know much about it. We can see the obvious. ERA Tiles. Angular sloping. Big gun (assumed to be a Russian model), but other than that, its pretty much a blank.
AMX 56 LeClerc.
I wanted to include the LeClerc. I really did. But name one thing it leads the pack on. Quite honestly I expected to see it at the top of my expeditionary list but it fell because the French did not include it in its latest combat ops in Northern Africa. So its not expeditionary. Firepower? Run of the mill. So is it capable in ways we don't know? We don't know. Its been in service for years but is still a mystery.
T-90.
This one is simple. I'll never trust Russian tanks until I see some type of move ahead in tech. Have you seen the insides of a tank that got penetrated but didn't burn out? Human goo. Its almost merciful when the Iraqi tank crews suffered catastrophic explosions of onboard ordnance. I need to see more before I hold these tanks in high regard.
Any others that should have made the list but I forgot about? I don't think so.
Which brings me to the juicy bits.
Don't be led astray by optics, guns etc. Take a look at the Altay MBT. Guess who is partnered with Turkish industry. BAE. Perhaps the number one armored vehicle house on the planet. Guess who is in Poland. BAE. Many of these new tanks like the Altay and armored vehicles like the Anders have a Brit/US pedigree.
Get over it guys. The little guys (meaning countries) are coming. And they're coming in well designed armor that will take the market by storm. Can't afford the LEO, Abrams or Challenger, but still need top line stuff? Check out the Toyota of armored vehicles coming from Turkey or Poland. The armored vehicle segment has been neglected by the Western traditional military powers and a new breed are going to take the reigns.
UPDATE:
I'm getting complaints about the CV-90120T being listed as the best expeditionary tank. I've gotten e-mails that call it a mobile gun system, others call it a APC with tank gun attached and others are simply calling it an enhanced IFV.
It doesn't matter.
We can do the "change" thing and call it all of the above, but if we were to flash back to the past, then a vehicle like the CV-90120T would be called an infantry support tank. Tank being the operative word. Anyway you slice it (in my opinion), if you have a vehicle mounting a tank caliber gun, operating in any of the tank classic roles then you have a tank.
CV-90120T? Tank. Commando 105mm wheeled vehicle? Tank. Anders 105mm? Tank.
I agree. Until it is battle proven it cannot be declared the best. If you want to be the champ you have the beat the champ. I know the ANNA talked about how great the latest T-90 is and how it will beat an Abrams but I am not buying it. Too many T-90s were destroyed by the Chechans and the Indians have complained too much about theirs.
ReplyDeleteAre you on a drugs? T-90 never seen combat. T-72B1 (M1985/M1989) tank performed better than T-80BV in chechnya, domestic models superior to export variants.
DeleteSyrian T-72AVs is performing nice in such harsh contitions.
T-90 IS reported to have seen combat in Chechnya and is thought to have performed badly. want to hear some heart wrenching stuff? listen to a recording of a patrol that is cut off and surrounded by Chechens. listen to HQ attempt to send armor to rescue them and listen to how that armor gets chopped up.
Deletei've seen T-72 ripped out like cheap aluminum soda cans and i've read about modern Russian armor not standing up to combat.
There were no T-90 in Chechnya. The first Chechen war losses of tanks and their personal is actually severely overblown due to media that counted BMP's as tanks. And as far as the assault. You're speaking of an ill-planned execution(that goes for the entire campaign) with fresh barely trained crews that some even did not empty external fuel tanks and most importantly for city fighting as a rule rounds only in auto-loader and no extra rounds in the turret. Add barely any infantry support that themselves didn't know what to do, no recce, vulnerable communications, tanks without ERA fillings or without ERA blocks at all, fire extinguishing system was not filled up with chemicals, going into a fortified urban area which also in addition had underground framework of tunnels built by the Soviets back at the start of the 70's... that the Chechens used to good effect and where well aware off due to having Soviet civil defense and KGB in their ranks. Chechens themselves weren't amateurs either they had old timers in their ranks and vets who knew were the weak points were and had taking advantage of it ( example mostly shooting RPG's and SPG-9 at the top of the tank aiming at hatches.at5 that.) armed not only with small arms but heavy arms along with artillery and tanks support themselves actually.
DeleteYou know damn well even if they had Abrams from that decade - a tank I rate over other tanks and it is for a fact. Result would not have been all that different.
Now as far as the T-72 I'm taking it you're a Gulf War vet. Well the bulk of the Iraqi T-72 were lion of Babylon . Which was a knock of the T-72M1 and a poor one at that (it's composite armor composition wasn't same as of WarsawPac T-72M1 for one ) T-72M1 were export versions of early model /original soviet T-72A from 1979. Later T-72A's had tad better armor.
Also there is the fact that Iraqis were using 3BM15 rounds which were retired by Soviets in 1974 and only used as for practise from then on soley.
Now I'm not saying Soviet domestic T-72A especially the latter once would have turned the tied if Iraqi's had them and were competent instead of their pos lion of babylon. . They would have certainly dealt more casualties but in the end would have been fucked anyway. Heck not even the T-72B would have changed the outcome. M1A1 was simply a better tank and most importantantly had thermal sights. But please don't base your opinion on export versions and ones that time cuaght up and made outdated when they went into combat.
Like I said the top dog is the Abrams has been and is still and I said why. Rest of the tanks Leo's, T-90MS, etc don't really have an edge of eachother..
Like I said Tanknet is a great forum to start your research on Sov/Rus armour and if your interested i have a excellent site though in Russian on prototype armour vehiclesyou might find interesting.
Anyway have a good weekend.
i'd be interested in seeing your site. Tanknet doesn't interest me much unless its changed a great deal...but i'll take another look on your recommendation. site link please!
DeleteSolomon, Robert is right on the money.
DeleteIn Chechnya, the Russians told a bunch of half trainers conscripts to rumble into Grozny in tanks that were not properly prepared against trained veterans.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteSolomon here
Deletehttp://otvaga2004.ru/kaleydoskop/kaleydoskop-track/k-istorii-bmpt/
Heres an article is a short history of anti-infantry/tank support machines featuring the Soviet BMPT prototypes object 781 and 782 granddadies of BMPT's.
there is also on that site a nice write up on history of post war light tank prototypes and few other unknown vehicles. The forum is also nice treasure trove, the armoured section at least.
There was another site that featured all the prototype machines that didn't make it (due to cost, complexety or just pressure from compatitors OKB's.) and had photos of most of them. Can't seem to find it right now though. But i'll pop by and give you a link when I will.
BTW, KamAZ Typhoon familly MRAP - KamAZ-53949 finally done.
http://kamaz.ru/photos/news/2013/11/20131128-10.jpg
T90 did see action but in the 2nd Chechen war not the first in 1999 in Dagestan. A Moscow brief said one T90 survived 7 hits from RPG"s so Wiki says. What gets me if the T90 is so good why wasn't it used in the Russian- Georgian war in 2008. The Georgians used T72MI I think which they got from Poland. And the Russians used Upgraded T55, T62s, T72B and T72BM but no T90 tanks you think they would have rushed a few there to see combat.
DeleteHystory of chechen war have nothing to do with this thread.
ReplyDeleteNow about T-90, it never seen combat, all units envolved in to fighting vere equipped with older tanks, journalists mistook T-72BM and T-90, they are very similiar (both have same chassis and both with K5 ERA).
And that bias and assumptions again and again.
The French tank won a competition. It has less weight in part because of having an autoloader system. Less crew allows for less weight in the design. To date, the troubled M-1 has never won a tank competition. It has been FMS handed over to allies but that is it.
ReplyDeleteThose competitions are rigged from the start
DeleteThat French tank is 8.5 million Euros, and the production line is as dead as a doornail.
So I did not watch the 4/8th Cavalry win the CAT Trophy in 1987??? What is it with you and FMS? FMS is not a give away, they have to pay for the hardware, but get access to DOD training and support. Those are not available in a commercial transaction, and some tech is restricted to FMS only (think Crypto).
DeleteFMS = Foreign Military SALES. This is the US Government process for SELLING equipment on a Government to Government basis.
DeleteEDA - Excess Defence Articles. This is the process of GIVING defence equipment deemed excessive to domestic needs to foreign Government,
An exceeding complicated issue I know, Eric...
And yes M1A1 has won a competition. It beat the Challenger 2 and an upgraded Swiss Pz 87WE variant of the Leopard 2 to replace Australia's Leopard 1 tanks.
Its true M1 never wins a competition even when they buy it they do so after Germany refuses to sell Leopard 2.
DeleteFor Australia win came at the time when Australia was BF with US and you know people liek to buy friends with US .
When we were entering NATO we had to buy armored hummwes from US so US would support the Bid.
Some points about Leclerc :
DeleteFrance is poor, so it deployed it only in KOSOVO, and LIBAN, because shipping was paid by ONU.
Itdidn't make sense to deploy it in MALI, because :
-We needed C5 and Antonov 124 for all other stuffs
-Fuel : How many fuel truck need to follow them ?
-We have AMX 10 RC for this type of missions.
-The GALIX is a good feature of Leclerc
-The price is high because we made a bad FMS in UAE, and too few were built depite original goal of 1200 tanks...( exacly like F35 or Rafale)
@Mr. T: Australia didn't go Leopard 2 (Leopard 1 was to be decommissioned) because of the inherit risks with German politics. The moment you contravene or displeases the German government, they will slap an "embargo" of some sort. This means no spare parts, training, support for the Leopard.
DeleteChallenger was deemed too maintenance hog and the M1 was choosen because the US army were getting rid of surplus units.
fabsther, how is France "too poor" to use the Leclerc?
DeleteFrance DOES have a Navy after all....
We have only one Aircraft Carrier, because politics don't get enough interest in building a sister ship.LIBYA, retreat of afghanistant and soon RCA costs will be take from equipement budget.
DeleteThe leclerc is heavy to lift, and like all other MBT, costly to operate : Fuel, lift, fuel lift...
initial goal : 1 500 MBT, build 406, currently less than 300 in brigades..
We, in reality, have a smaller Defense budget than Poland or Swissland !
In our Fake 30 Billions budget, 10 Billions are used to pay Nuclear Forces.
Some Billions pay Soldier pensions... Some Millions pay our SWATs, ( GIGN, GIPN...)
So many old equipement were/are more expensive to operate than delayed new ones.
IE we build new frigates, FREMM aquitaine class, but because of politics felony, we build less from initial goal ( 17 -> 13 ) : Their price growed enough to meet the initial price of 17 ! But politics didn't admit their mistake and prefer keep some millions at buying time, to falsify country budget law...
So yes, in réality, we are too poor to operate our own MBT.
Did you that almost all our afghanistan soldier buy almost all their equipement ?
while i'll agree the M-1 has never won a tank "competition" the last few years, We know what happens when it gets to work against real targets, now those tanks may not have been Leopards, or Chinese Type 99's but we know it can take hits and slug them right back out. I am happy to say that most of the time Marine Abrams have a pretty high operational rate, but we dont have many to begin with
ReplyDeleteAbout the Leclerc, it's been deployed expeditionary to Lebanon for UN peacekeeping missions from september 2006 to december 2011 ( see for example the picture at http://idata.over-blog.com/0/07/64/28/liban/master10929.jpg), it's second deployement after going to Kosovo (French article on the topic : http://www.opex360.com/2011/01/03/les-chars-leclerc-ont-quitte-le-liban/). The Leclerc was taken out of Lebanon because of the arrival of VBCI that gave enough power and armor in theater for the mission for a smaller cost of operation. The old tracked artillery AUF-1 was also replaced in Lebanon by lighter CAESAR truck-mounted artillery, lowering the costs and improving the mobility. It seems, from reports, that tracks in Lebanon had to be replaced every 3 weeks from usure (they were patroling the border with the Leclerc, not keeping them static).
ReplyDeleteThe Kosovo operation was done with 15 tanks which stayed from 1999 to 2002.
Finally, one has to remember that while France has around 254 in its inventory, the UAE has no less than 388 in line.
France actually has about 380, but 100 or so are mothballed.
DeleteThe French White paper sets a target of 260 "heavy tanks" aka Leclercs
Can you please provide any information to support your assertion that the Altay is the product of a Turkish-BAE partnership? Because I can clearly and comfortably state that the BAE input in the Altay program is a big fat ZERO. Please stop spreading misinformation. You could perhaps start by researching how many patents OTOKAR (the Turkish manufacturer of the ALTAY) has registered for this program globally.
ReplyDeleteCould you also please direct me to any source that states that BAE produces an electric tank engine. Well the Altay (trache 2) will field an electric engine to reduce IR signature and increase stealth. Hence, why the Altay is the only 3+ generation tank out there.
P.S. The Turkish Land Forces is by far not a "little guy". It is the second largest Land Forces in NATO, second only to the USA!
Speaking of the Atalay, will Erdogan's anger at the Koc family hurt the in-service date for the Atalay at all?
DeleteOne thing every one seems to forget is that most russian tanks are medium tanks and for their weight they are incredibly well armored and armed ,(at least till the german 120mm came along) . Other factor is that most western tanks never faced a threat that was not at least generation or two older and mostly crewed by poor quality crews combine that with the fact that much of the fighting was done at a distance an at night when these older gen tanks are half blind. But not all wars happen in deserts and from what we hear the new Armata tank will also not be a heavy weigth as Russians are designing it to fight the Chinese not Fulda gap
ReplyDeletewell, if the Armata isn't canceled in a year or two.....
DeleteIf you are interested in a bit more deatailed comparison check out russian site its relatively honest and with some great details.
ReplyDeletehttp://btvt.narod.ru/
http://btvt.narod.ru/1/tank3.htm
Actually, the Leclerc does have a more powerful gun than the M1 Abrams - L52 instead of L44.
ReplyDeleteLeopard 2A4s are not unaffordable, the Germans are practically giving it away at this point. Look at the current list of operators in Asia and other places now. It is quite revealing.
ReplyDeleteThe Leo 2A4 is not in production and all stock have been sold off.
DeleteThe last order for them was in 2004 in Chile, I believe. Those tanks were the last of the Netherlands tanks.
Indonesia just bought a batch of 2A4s Ex-Dutch stock I think?
Delete