Top Ten Tanks (1 Viewer)

Louis Badolato said:
I'm 100% with eborris on this one. Its all about survivability of the crew for me. I really don't give a dang what the purpose of a weapon is, once its on the battlefield, the only question that matters is does it get the job done, and keep the crew serving it alive.

It is pretty evident to me that during WWII, the best tank (i.e. the tank that best enabled its crew to survive) was the Tiger or the Panther. The last tank I would want to be crewing is anything the Allies built (especially an M3 Lee or Grant, a Matilda, a Crusader or a Sherman). Whatever the genius planners designed them to do, be "infantry support" in the case of the British tanks, or to exploit a "break out" in the case of the American Tanks, such intentions and strategies only work if you can impose your strategy on the other side. The Germans were able to force our tanks to fight theirs or to beat themselves to death on dug in 88mm gun emplacements, with horrible results for our tank crews. If it wasn't for the Soviets tying up 75% of the German forces, and our total air supremacy making it virtually impossible for the Germans to move during daylight hours, knocking out all of the Nazi's support vehicles and horse drawn conveyences (thereby stopping the german tanks by depriving them of fuel and ammunition), and pinning down and destroying any German tank they could locate, our tanks would have totally failed to accomplish any of their goals.

Today, the best tanks are clearly the tanks fielded by the NATO countries: the Abrahms (USA), the Leopard (Germany), the Merkova (Israel) and the British and French main battle tanks. The combination of Chubbum Armor and reactive armor, that German made 125mm main gun, and the speed and maneuverability of these tanks make them nearly impossible to defeat, as is evidenced by the unbeliveable kill ratio and crew survivability statistics from the Gulf War and the present conflict.
Click to expand...

Here, here Louis,

Great points, I couldn't have said it better.

Carlos
 
eborris said:
The Military channel delcared the t-34 as the all time best tank, of course those that decided didn't have to fight in it and go up against a Tiger. I think if I had a vote I'd vote for the tank that gave me the best chance for survival, but that's just me.
Click to expand...

Don't underestimate the power of Soviet propaganda. :D

The T34 had a host deficiencies including cramped crew space (particularly the turret), poor visibility, poor quality steel, poor quality assembly, The gun was unspectacular (even the 85mm version) and not nearly as accurate as it's opponents, poor optics, lack of radio in early models and overall reliability is often overstated.

Lets not forget that the Soviets produced these in the tens of thousands and they were destroyed in the tens of thousands taking many of their crews with them.
 
Yo Troopers, Ex Tank man coming in here. Ron has nailed this one sorry guys. I have said before the one thing you Tank guys must do before you leave this planet is visit Bovington Tank Museum in Dorset UK. Then you can judge for yourselves. All the German armour is lined up opposite the Allies junk lol, they are just different class. I remember being on duty as a 17 year old boy soldier in 1959, when they brought the first T 34 to the Tank Museum, they drove it in. I clearly remember to this day thinking what a load of junk it was. If we are talking the best Tank, and if only, and if what, and maybe it was a few years earlier being introduced the Centurion would have wiped the floor with them all in WWII. But then watched the Fort Knox documentary last week and saw the Abrams for the first time. One AWESOME machine. But think now would I still like to be a Tankie today with all the missiles etc they have and the answer is a big NO, you would be like a sitting duck on the Battlefield, would rather go back to the old Hussar days and be mounted on a horse lol. YO TROOPERS MOUNT UP.
Bernard.
 
fmethorst said:
Don't underestimate the power of Soviet propaganda. :D

The T34 had a host deficiencies including cramped crew space (particularly the turret), poor visibility, poor quality steel, poor quality assembly, The gun was unspectacular (even the 85mm version) and not nearly as accurate as it's opponents, poor optics, lack of radio in early models and overall reliability is often overstated.

Lets not forget that the Soviets produced these in the tens of thousands and they were destroyed in the tens of thousands taking many of their crews with them.
Click to expand...

True, but then there is plenty of American propaganda about the Sherman. Soviet tankers used the Sherman and the T 34/85 and the later was the preferred tank especially in heavier off road conditions which is the usual case in Russia.
 
I can't believe that the T-34 is number one. It should be M1 or Leopard.
 
OzDigger said:
True, but then there is plenty of American propaganda about the Sherman. Soviet tankers used the Sherman and the T 34/85 and the later was the preferred tank especially in heavier off road conditions which is the usual case in Russia.
Click to expand...

I've heard that too but what would you expect the Soviets to say. "The M4's we're getting from our ideological nemesis are superior to that triumph of collective design and enginneering built at Factory No. 183".

How many first hand Soviet tanker experiences have you come across?
 
They rated all the tanks, based on certain criteria, production, fear factor, years of service, inovation, etc etc etc. I imagine if there was one t-34 going against one Tiger, the fear factor if you were in the t-34 would have been real high. However, if you are a platoon of 3 or 4 Tigers and saw 100 t-34's coming at you, I would imagine you would suffer from loose bowels. The t-34 scored high in production and fear factor. On the other hand the Sherman nicknamed the Ronson wouldn't generate the same amount of fear, more like thoughts of a turkey shoot.
 
fmethorst said:
I've heard that too but what would you expect the Soviets to say. "The M4's we're getting from our ideological nemesis are superior to that triumph of collective design and enginneering built at Factory No. 183".

How many first hand Soviet tanker experiences have you come across?
Click to expand...

I've read a few first hand (post Perestroika) accounts by Soviet tankers on the internet and most appreciated the reliability of the M4A2 and its luxury fittings compared to the spartan style Russian tanks. It was also quieter to ride in because of the rubber blocks on its tracks. However being so high and narrow with narrow tracks it tended to tip over more easily than the lower/wider tracked T-34 and it did not handle wet/soft ground nearly as well. The rubber blocks also made it slide around uncontrollably in icy conditions.
 
.excuse my ignorance on modern tank design, but i do not understand all the support for the Leopard being the best tank. it has NO battle history to support such confidence. the Abrams wins hands down, no question. - lancer
 
lancer said:
.excuse my ignorance on modern tank design, but i do not understand all the support for the Leopard being the best tank. it has NO battle history to support such confidence. the Abrams wins hands down, no question. - lancer
Click to expand...

Challenger II has got the greater range.....:D;)
 
Yo Troopers, lets sum it up this way. If the Germans hadn't been spread out all over the planet, and it was a one to one with Russia it would have been a no contest. It would have been over in a few weeks, but as they say the Germans bit off more than they could chew, hence making the Russian T 34 look good. The Tigers would have chewed them up and spit them out man.
Bernard.
 
Cardigan600 said:
Yo Troopers, lets sum it up this way. If the Germans hadn't been spread out all over the planet, and it was a one to one with Russia it would have been a no contest. It would have been over in a few weeks, but as they say the Germans bit off more than they could chew, hence making the Russian T 34 look good. The Tigers would have chewed them up and spit them out man.
Bernard.
Click to expand...

Bernard, the vast majority of the German forces were pitted against the Russians even after D-Day and the Russians kicked their a$$ despite the Germans having plenty of Tigers. Tigers were mighty beasts but the Russians had heavy tanks such as the KV 1/2 and the JS 2 to match them. The T-34 was basically a medium tank.
 
According to Belton Cooper's memoir of his 3rd Armored Division service, the Shermans were "death traps"; the overall combat losses of the division were extremely high.

Cooper was the junior officer placed in charge of retrieving damaged and destroyed tanks.

As such, he had an intimate knowledge of the actual numbers of tanks damaged and destroyed, the types of damage they sustained, and the kinds of repairs that were made.

His figures are comparable to those given in the Operational History of 12th U.S. Army Group: Ordnance Section Annex.

The unit was nominally assigned by table of organization 232 Sherman medium tanks.

648 Sherman tanks were totally destroyed in combat, and a further 1,100 needed repair, of which nearly 700 were as a result of combat.

According to Cooper, the 3rd Armored therefore lost 1,348 medium tanks in combat, a loss rate of over 580%, in the space of about ten months.

Some World War II Army officers made similar arguments during the war.

Other officers disagreed with the negative assessment and Gen. George S. Patton argued that the Sherman tank was overall a superior tool of war.
 
OzDigger said:
Bernard, the vast majority of the German forces were pitted against the Russians even after D-Day and the Russians kicked their a$$ despite the Germans having plenty of Tigers. Tigers were mighty beasts but the Russians had heavy tanks such as the KV 1/2 and the JS 2 to match them. The T-34 was basically a medium tank.
Click to expand...

Yo Oz, your forgetting the allies where there cutting off supplies etc. I did say if it were a one on one.
Bernard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top