Quote:
I believe that all the modern MBTs Leclerc, Leo 2A6, M1A2, etc are basically much the same with some slight differences not enough to make a major impact on the battlefield.
|
I think the same, in fact from what happened in history, I would go further and say that the MBTs quality would not decide of the war...
BTW, in 1940, France has got B1 tank who where virtualy impossible to kill from german tanks... In fact there was a little point where german gunners could penetrate the tank, and you know what happened to France in 1940...
other date, 1944, battle in Normandy, sherman where a pure **** in comparison with Panthers, and allied did win: half of the german tanks destroyed in Normandy where not from allies but from breakdowns and fuel missings...
I tried an experiment in order to determinate which was the best MBT in SPMBT, the results are on the After Combat Repport section, but when trying it in areal battle, the tank type doesn't matter, and every tank can kill other tanks...
Quote:
You have to understand that what is utmost important in a tank is its crew. A motor and a whole tank can be rebuilt. Crews can't.
|
That's true, and I am not a specialist in tank armor, in fact determining tanks qualities when they didn't fight each other is really hard... So has proven by WW2,
the best tank is the one who never has breakdowns
Only one point wrong:
Quote:
you will notice that the Leclerc has as much advanced FC rating as other tanks (50), but a higher RFO, which can be considered to account for both the advanced targetting system (which by now also Merkavas, Abrams and Japanese Type-90 have IIRC) and the autoloader.
|
You seem to ignore that the ROF is only used in SP for determination of ROF for indirect arty fire, so it' totally useless in the case of a MBT, for which the ROF is only determinated by the experience of the crew...