I do know for a fact that the challenger its more accurate while the abrams have slightly more power. I would say any fight between TBH is down to the element of surpise and who gets the opening hit armour and fire power wise it would be close. On a note tho I noticed the OP's post mentions ZERO facts about the challenger 2 MBT as oppose to ALL about the abrams MBT so as an point of debate its a very poor post. All modern MBTs are updated versions of their 80's concepts.Pretty much this, MBT have a role in war but the days of WWII style tank battles are a thing of past. That's why there really hasn't been much progress on the MBT front in the last 2 decades. It's like compairing jet-stats to estimate who'd win in a dog-fight whereas in reality, so many others factors play a role.
Basically all modern MBT battles would be 1-shot kills.
#Mh4u auxl vs challenger 2 full
That said, it is my understand that no tank can take a full impact of a SABOT round. Hypothetical fights are the only ones they'll be involved in for the foreseeable future. Main Battle Tanks are and outdated concept anyway. But its still very sad because its a good tank. These cuts mean that the current UK Army is weaker then the Dutch army of 1999 (which had 330 Leopard 2 at the time).Īlthough this itself says nothing about its quality. Weaker then current Greece, France, Germany and Spain and comparable to Italy. Most sad about the Challenger 2 is that the UK is cutting on them drasticly. However when looking purely at combat performance the Abrams is the best tank. So you get the best tank for each Dollar or Euro your spend (The Leopard 2 is cheaper to buy and operate). Which conclude that the Leopard 2 A6/A7 is the best tank for the price. Most discussions/comparisons about the best tank are between Abrams and Leopard 2. So while the US Abrams has better armor for sure, it could very well be that in armor protection the export Abrams is equal or maybe even less then the Challenger 2. The export Abrams does not have the DU armor package. It most however be noted that there is a diffirence between the American Abrams and the export Abrams. I have no information regarding the Challenger 2 about this but I asume that it can do this too. The Abrams can destroy a T-90 or T-80U at 4km with a single shot. So the Abrams wins on protection and mobility. It only has a 1200hp engine compared to 1500hp on Abrams and Leopard 2. The Challenger 2 can be regarded as the second best protected tank behind the Abrams. The ammo is seperated but there are no blow-out panels. There have been instances where they have been penetrated by other Challengers (freindly fire). The Challenger is also very well protected but not as much as the Abrams (no DU armor). When the ammunition is hit (which is at the rear turret) these panels blow out forcing the blast upwards instead of towards the crew compartment. The Abrams also has ammunition blow-out panels. So the Abrams performed very well in an urban environment (which is usually a bad place for tanks) before it even had an urban warfare kit.
This required 2 Mavericks and a Hellfire (which are very heavy anti-tank missiles). As other tanks can't penetrate Abrams the abandoned tank it was taken out with an air strike to prevent it falling into enemy hands. The (uninjured) crew was unable to get it out and had to leave it behind. The fuel got into the engine and caused fire. The only one knocked out was a lucky shot which hit a drum of fuel at the rear turret. With the versions after that (M1A1 HA, M1A1 HC, M1A2, M1A2 SEP, M1A2 SEP TUSK) protection has become even better.ĭuring Thunder Run (armored assaults into Baghdad) Abramses were hit to up to 15 anti-tank weapons and kept going. When Abrams tanks had to be abandoned and destroyed when stuck in mud or were disabled (blown track, engine failure) other Abrams were often unable to do so. Not just of obsolete T-72's but also pointblank 120mm 'Silver bullet' rounds from other Abrams which pass straight trough a T-72 or T-80. The older M1A1 Abrams in Desert Storm could survive hits at the front and side turret. It is a very dense material which gives a lot of extra protection against kinetic energy (sabot) projectiles.
But in the case of the Abrams it is improved with a layer of steel encased depleted uranium (DU). Like the Challenger 2 it has a variant of Chobham/Burlington armor.
0 kommentar(er)
