MBT's

[Marcello]

Originally Posted by Imp

The ammo thing is crazy though especially if you are going to have 2 MBTs shared ammo has got to be a priority both logisticaly & development wise.

Actually two MBTs with different main gun is pretty manageable and in any case spares would be different, so you need a separate logistical line anyway.
A 60 tons (weights here are given as approximation), "western style" MBT could actually be a decent choice to supplement a fleet of 45 tons russian style MBTs, perhaps using the former for attritional armor vs armor battles, while ther latter could be used for infantry support, deep penetrations in the enemy rear or where terrain (bridge capability etc.) is unsuitable for heavy tanks.
Thing is, it would make sense to use a standard 120mm smoothbore, instead of some home brewed gun whose ammunition is not compatible with anything else in the world.

Coincidentally the results of the Challenger regunning tests have been published: the german smoothbore fit without problem, its ammunition however could not be stored without a very major internal reworking.
Bottom line, the existing tooling and supply contract will be used to ensure continued production, so that the british tankers will not be forced to shout "Bang" at the sight of enemy tanks.
But as far as developing and producing updated ammo... Well given the looming fiscal issues of the UK and military priorities it is likely to happen at some point between never and never.

[DRG]

Hi Marcello, do you have an internet link to the Chally Smoothbore tests ?

Don

[Mobhack]

Originally Posted by DRG

Hi Marcello, do you have an internet link to the Chally Smoothbore tests ?

Don

Tanknet thread here: http://208.84.116.223/forums/index.php?showtopic=31585

- The German S/B Gun fits the CR2 fine
- However the ammo stowage for single piece rounds would be a problem (big job)
- 120mm rifled ammo is still in production however. At least for now.

- New Con/Lib government in power, so everything is up for grabs, a very big axe is going to be swung on all public spending, to include defence.

Andy

[Wdll]

The whole thing is absurd. Defense spending is very low in all western countries, apart from USA. I don't know, perhaps it's just me who sees conspiracy theories against the West.

Cutting military spending (UK) is even more crazy with the UK actively engaged in conflicts. Meh.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Sorry I missed this but, ARJUN 12.7mm should have read 1KRds vice 3KRds.
Regards,
Pat

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

ARJUN making news again. Note para three that discusses it's performance versus the T-90, I found the 30% number interesting, though not so surprising at least for now, India's commitment to the T-90. If the performance was that good I'd be fixing some bridges regardless of the political issues involved with my "new friends". Also the mention of the MKII, as noted earlier.
http://www.defpro.com/news/details/15370/
I do feel it'll get to 500 units regardless within two years, but we'll see!?!
Regards,
Pat

[gila]

Originally Posted by Wdll

The whole thing is absurd. Defense spending is very low in all western countries, apart from USA. I don't know, perhaps it's just me who sees conspiracy theories against the West.

Cutting military spending (UK) is even more crazy with the UK actively engaged in conflicts. Meh.

It's all irevelant on how many tanks or how good they are anyway.
No.Korea has nuclear weopens and aggresivly sunk a ship today http://www.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/asiapc...ion=cnn_latest warning if retaliations are coming they will use them,then there is Iran flexing her muscles
Sorry for taking this to a political level.

[rfisher]

I'm certainly not defending North Korea here, but I think your comment feels a little one-sided. Firstly, the sinking was back in March, not today. And to call it aggressive suggests there is no precendent for the incident. The truth however, is that there are often scuffles between the two Koreas over this area, and it was only a matter before something like this happens. South Korea will defend itself by saying that its ship was on its side of the Northern Limit Line, but that is a meaningless statement for the North Koreans, as they don't officially recognise the NLL.
Opposing forces always bait each other across disputed borders for all sorts of reasons (testing defences for instance) and I'm sure the military on both sides know that stuff like this will inevitably happen (hell, it's often the reaction they are seeking!)
The political reactions in the press however, depicting aggressors and victims, is pure PR.
The BBC report includes this line:

"It was a "surprise military attack from North Korea [that came] while South Korean people were resting late at night", President Lee Myung-bak said. "

Really? I'm sure there are more military minded people here than me, but I find it hard to believe that a warship patrolling on one of the 'hottest' borders in the world would ever normally be as passive and vulnerable as that statement suggests.

[FASTBOAT TOUGH]

Hey, anyone for tanks with some small commentary?
Regards,
Pat

[Wdll]

Say what?