Russian Black Eagle Surpasses America's Abrams

[Balamut]

Back to our discussion. About hollow-charge projectiles and it's jet. Resistance to jet of 10 mm of air equals to 2 mm of steel resistance. Such screen can protect tank's rear only from old projectiles (about 150 mm of steel). Well, this suits for Iraqi conditions. Easy to calculate, if you know an exact thicknes of the rear plate( which I don't know - not very much info in the net; most probably, sometning about 50 -70 mm. ) , depth of the penetration. Tank's back will be saved, if thickness of air layer between screen and steel will be about 30 cm (on photo looks like it is so). That's very good for US troops, that there are no modern rounds in iraq.

It looks like Russian engineers are working on Abrams at the moment. :-) Such things have been used in Chechnya since 1995.
It really helps to protect tank from old shells which Chechens and Iraqis are using. Do you want an advice? You can use tank tracks for the same purpose. They are cheap and can be installed by crew.

By the way, we’ve lost a topic. Comparing T90 and Abrams, I tried to emphasize Abrams’ weaknesses and mentioned RPG without reason, so discussion went in wrong direction. I said Abrams has no chance against T90. And it’s true. But T90 (and EVERY tank in the world) is vulnerable for RPG as well (even active defense can’t protect every square inch of tank), especially if one fires from behind (in city area tank’s top armor is also a weak point).

[USMC_ReCoNSnIpeR]

the t90 may be better. butthe us is known for the largest and most modern planes in the world. if there ever was a problem a plane take out a t90 and it wouldnt no what the hell hit it. we would only send in abrams after everything is basically destoryed. and i garuntee you in like area51 or some place that theres a tank being considered being adopted. the us has incredible **** such as the new leviathan. besides thats why theres tanks called FCS that are small and very fast tanks but pack and punch. and big tanks just wont be able to deal with these powerfull small and fast tanks.

[Balamut]

First:
"butthe us is known for the largest and most modern planes in "
size doesnt mean everything
Second: If planes can do everyting why the hell do us need abrams then?
Third: Science fiction is more related to Literature&art section.

[limey_defence]

Abrams are used as a presence and internal security. If it was an open field conflict with other tanks on the field, aircraft would be the deciding factor. The T-90 would not be able to withstand the A-10 or AH-64 flying over-head. The fact is, if Russia and the U.S did go to war a tank on tank battle would be highly unlikely without air support.
Tanks are obselete, and as I said are only used as presence and internal security. You want to go into this Iraq war, what were the Abrams doing? Internal security. The only tank on tank battle in this Iraq war that was enough worth mentioning was the British Challengers coming up against the Iraqi T-55s, this was the biggest tank battle since Kursk. I wonder why the British didn't call in air support then, is that because they didn't need to.
Anyway, the T-90 might be amazing but the fact is tanks are obselete and the Air Force would deal with them. All the radar defence equipment can't turn away the rounds from the A-10s cannon.

[Balamut]

You mentioned Kursk, but planes were flying above tanks there and tanks were burning. Still , no one refused to use it as a decisive weapon.

BTW I only answered to not very smart post of usnsniper. It was a little irony.

[limey_defence]

In Kursk the planes had to actually fly within a few hundred metres of their target to hit it. In that space of time the enemy had his own fighters in the air to combat the ground strike aircraft. There would be a ground battle and an air battle at the same time. In any case the amount of tanks at Kursk is far more than any in a modern conflict.

The aircraft and missiles now give aircraft the capability to hit from kilometres away. This would not give the tanks or the enemy a chance. Todays war is fought in the air and mopping is done on the ground. You cannot compare the usage and capibility now to the usage and capibilty of aircraft in the second world war.