1. What is the oldest heavy tank, medium tank or main battle tank that would be a practical front line tank as is?2. What is the oldest heavy tank, medium tank or main battle tank that would be a practical front line tank with minor refits(applique armor packages, modern ammunition, anything that does not require significant modifications to the structure or main weaponry)?3. Out of all of them, which medium tank or heavy tank(specifically not main battle tank) would be most effective given a suite of minor refits?
>>65533020Do your own homework, Ivan.
>>65533024It doesn't seem likely that the tanks that meet any of these criteria are russian or practical for the russians to buy in large numbers from international sellers or purchase from at all. Unless you're really confident in old russian tank design?The suitable tanks likely exist purely as museum exhibits or have no existing examples anymore.
>>65533024Missed opportunity to tell them to use the T-26.
>>65533020>Heavy TankNone of them offer anything over 3rd generation western MBTs, which combine their armor (and weight) with actual mechanical reliability and a speed faster than a golf cart, which is the entire reason they got replaced in the 80s. They suck.>MediumMost late war allied medium tanks like the Sherman and Comet are essentially identical to modern IFVs in performance and protection sans the ability to stuff a squad of guys inside of them. >MBTDepends on the situation. For African bush wars, the T-55 and Chieftain remain useful, practical vehicles as long as they are maintained and given after-market optics and sensors. If you mean a peer, modern battlefield stuffed to the gills with drones, than the only thing really equipped for that seeing field use today are the later marks of Merkava while everyone else is working on retrofitting/replacing their machines to a higher standard.
>>65533020Dependes what you are up against and what are you trying to achive because if you are facing an enemy with no at weapons a old WW2 tank is good enough if you are up against a force with more modren at weapons well you use the tank that is either impervous to it or protected good enough for most of the threats you are facing if you have limited amount of money
M48A5Denmark M41 DK-1
>>65533046>ChieftainYou meant to post Centurion, right?I dont think there were many users of the Chief outside of Iraq, Iran and the Brits.
>>65533020Bob SempleBob SempleBob Semple
>>65533076Ayep I get those two confused all the time.
>>65533081that was a light tank tho
>>65533020Any light/medium tank is better than no light medium tank except if your enemy has RPG-7s or better or you can't support them logistically.
>>65533094None lost to enemy fire makes it a pretty good tank imo. ;)
>>65533020M3 lee.
IIRC I saw an old soviet AFV being used in Yemen about two years ago, I cant remember which type, I think it was a SU-100. It was only used as artillery, and the gunner was standing outside and yanking a rope to fire the gun, as the yemenites had their doubts about the safety of these fossiles. Here is a T-34-76 being hit by an ATGM in yemen. The yemenites doesnt know that these ancient relics are worth money if exported. It was even in running condition too. Its worth money even with a heat jet hole in it.
>>65533097>Any light/medium tank is better than no light medium tank except if your enemy has RPG-7s or better or you can't support them logistically.A T-34-85 was killed by 1 guy with a rifle launched HEAT grenade in yugoslavia. Single layer steel armor isnt particulary effective against shaped charges, which plenty of sherman crews found out when they encountered their first panzerfaust or panzerschreck. Or for that matter, humvee crews in Iraq. There is one thing that is a constant trough history and that is that the people who join the officer class are normies and normies never think ahead in terms of what if. They just repeat what they have been told to and then go ahead and get blown up because the enemy had his own ideas. F.e the terrible vulnerability of humvees and in particular the machine gun gunner was brutally exposed in Somalia 1991, but despite that, the invasion of Iraq in 2003 began with identical humvees being pushed into the role as direct fire support vehicles for infantry as if they were panzer 1s (a much better armored and armed vehicle). It took a couple of years before the 100% exposed turret gunner got a gun shield. Then it took another couple of years before he got an open topped turret. Then it took another couple of years before he got a semi covered turret. Meanwhile turret gunners kept getting popped. And, because normies cant do hypotheticals, the latest retardedness out of the US army is a gigantic totally open dune buggy with a super cool .338 machine gun mounted up top. It has done away with even environmental protection, so you can not only just shoot straight trough it, but also aim straight trough it. The normie answer to such what-ifs are always "its supposed to be use in theater but not as front line transport". Just like the humvee was until it wasnt.
>>65533670Extremely bitter midwit take
>>65533670Extremely bitter low wit take.
>>65533670Extremely bitter high wit take.
>>65533670I think MIC profits also has something to do with it. You can scam taxpayers and congress about how much jets, ships, tanks, planes cost because they have no frame of reference. When you try to claim adding a simple turret and door armor to a humvee costs millions each, even normalfags question it.
>>65533020Leopard 1
>>65533086Cent is the one that actually worked, Chief is the one that looked and sounded badassed (when it worked).Thats how I tell them apart.
M60 has been in continuous service and still has upgrade packages available.
>>65533020>in the yugoslav wars.pngI swear to god every picture from the Yugoslav Wars was taken in one big photo shoot that occurred in the same town/village. It all looks like the same place, I instantly knew that was gonna be some place in the Balkans.
Leopard 1.No extra weight spent on armor, because it would be useless.They should add a much more powerful engine, to make then move a lot faster.
An M48 Patton or T-54
>>65535081>to make then move a lot faster. >teleports in your path
>>65533046>Most late war allied medium tanks like the Sherman and Comet are essentially identical to modern IFVs in performance and protection sans the ability to stuff a squad of guys inside of them.also sans optics and fire control more advanced than what a civilian hunter had 70 years ago.
>>65535201You can just shove that stuff into the turret as needed.
>>65535248How'd the israelis fit a high velocity 105mm gun into the sherman when the americans and british could barely fit a high velocity 76mm gun.
>>65533020The age of the tank is over... anything that is cheap, somewhat reliable and will stand up to small arms fire will fill the role more or less the same.
>>65535281The gun the Izzies mounted did not exist in 1941.It was built upon lessons learned in WW2.
>>65535281>>65535285For one thing, they managed to massively shrink the breach size compared to the 105s of the 40s.
>>65535081Leo I umis ugly as Hell and I am tired of everyone pretending it is not.
>>65533024I keked
>>65535593Leo 1a5 is one of the best looking tanks ever
>>65533046>Sherman and Comet identical to modern IFVsreally? MBTs are the logical continuation of the medium tank. >ChieftainWhat african bush wars was the Chieftain used in? You're not making stuff up are you?>>65533073M48A5 my beloved
>>65535281Was it a high velocity?
>>65535833Yes. It's a modified version of the gun used on the AMX-30.
>>65535797No. The squashed, elongated umbrella turret is in no way aesthetic.
>>65535843Tastelet probably likes conehead tanks like the t34/76
>>65533020I know it's a light tank, but if I ever find myself at the head of a dirt poor African nation or a somewhat organized 3rd World rebel army, I'd try to get my hands on some AMX-13s and their variations
>>65535854God no. Angles like early WWII German/Abrams or Pershing/Patton style.
>>65535831Depends on the country. US MBTs were derived from the Pershing before the Abrams came into being: Sherman and other medium tank-derived projects were seen as superfluous when contemporary light tank designs could offer comparable firepower and mobility.Krauts themselves went the opposite direction where they decided that in a world of shaped charges armoring a tank past the point of being able to deflect autocannons was pointless and built the Leopard 1 with the idea of speed and mobility in mind. The French AMX-30 was then made on the notion that the Leopard 1 was sacrificing too much protection in the name of mobility after both nations initially attempted the first of many failed pan-European procurement cooperatives. British kept building up on what was essentially the Comet chassis into the Centurion, Chieftain, and finally Challanger, each with more armor (and weight) than the last.And the Soviets were best described as a clusterfuck of competing bureaus which alternated between genius like the T-64 which is probably the best exemplar of a "medium MBT" when it comes to balancing weight and protection, and politically-induced incompetence like the T-72 and all attempts to replace it.Fast forward to today and on average they're 60-70 ton monsters which suffer major tactical and occasionally strategic mobility issues due to how heavy their armor is; it isn't for nothing that most countries that deploy them do so with a lighter tracked vehicle to act as a complimentary machine. Japan and China just straight up manufacture two different weight classes of tank and group them based on region of operation: the lighter models like the vaunted Type 10 are made to work in mountainous terrain where the extra tons of protection the Type 90 offers are deemed to be a hindrance. >What african bush wars was the Chieftain used in? Probably thinking of the Olifant, the Chieftain's lighter-armed, estranged cousin model whose existence came about due to politics.
>>65533073I see this as having room for upgrades. Really any tank with a turret far narrower than its hull could be viable. Simply because you have enough freeboard to weld many additional onion layers, without the vehicle colliding with itself.
>>65535936Cool concept
>>65535081Beautiful and kino
>>65533020There was a T-34-85 being used by Don Cossacks in Luhansk, around May 2014. Pretty sure it survived, incredibly enough.
>>65536154Forgot pic.
>>65535281>How'd the israelis fit a high velocity 105mm gun into the sherman when the americans and british could barely fit a high velocity 76mm gun.IIRC it fired a french 90 mm cartridge necked out to 105 mm, it had a smaller chamber than the NATO 105 mm gun. The primary ammunition was shaped charge shells, not armor piercing. The Sherman could accept the Pershing turret including the 90L50 gun but that didnt happen because all 90 mm guns were allocated to flak batteries.
>>65535593Leo 1 looks like a Panther made for nato.It looks good!
>>65536507Okay but the panther doesn't look good. Honestly the only good looking German tank was the Tiger I- which was the best looking tank of the war and that's not up for debate- and everything else was pretty mid
If anything the new drone age makes me think of even earlier models like the Renault FT as a better model for new warfare in a direct fire role. As a basis it is more ideal due to cost and replaceability. I'd want something cheap, with a 1 or 2 person crew. Unmanned 25MM or 30MM autocannon. Programmable airburst ammunition. Lots of thermals and other cameras. Passive drone detector. Electronic-warfare capability. Armoured only against small arms, grenades, and small drones rather than dedicated AT weapons. Limited fuel and engagement time. chatge in, blow shit up and run away/hide. Too fast to enagage on foot or easily call in support for. I bet it could work. Like a mini tank. I bet you could keep it under 5 to 10 tons.
>STFU numbnut
>>65536548Oh hush
>>65533081Bob Dole
>>65536562>It's been a long road, getting from there to here>It's been a long time, but my time is finally near
>>65534948For a country, you're just better off purchasing old stock of m1a1s or new m1a2s than that weird thing.
>>65537767Aren't the turbine engines very difficult to maintain and spare parts hard to source compared to the M60's diesel engine? The turbine engines also consume fuel much more quickly.
VVVVGH
>>65533020M4 Sherman with the 100mm cannonIt would suck, but it would be practical if the people using it aren't retarded and the people they're trying to kill don't have AT weapons.Any older than that and you don't have to worry about getting shot at because the tank won't actually make it to the front lines.
>>65537932Anyone that can afford a drone has AT weapons.
>>65538058You need to get a functional RPG head to tape it to and those are becoming a hot commodity.
>>65538255You just need a large enough explosive charge, more or less depending on where you hit.
>>65535833No, it was a medium-pressure version of the AMX-30's gun designed to fit on AMX-13 light tanks. The casing for the shells was shortened and the velocity reduced, which didn't really matter for anti-tank purposes because it fired HEAT.
Are fin-stabilized HE shells for smoothbore tank guns being widely used in Ukraine?
>>65536711checked, wouldn't want to see this headed towards my location
>>65533024I know the separatists in Donetsk reactivated a IS-3 in 2014, but I want to see the Russians use one
The M48 is my answer. This "Super" M48 seems to have hit the scene just too late (cold war ended).Sexy thing though
>>65542325>retrofitting 1st gen tanks with modern cannons, FCSs, armor etcMy nigga.
>>65535081Honestly they should slap the L/44 in all the remaining 1A5s and just call it a day.
>>65544239I really enjoy them, modernized old tanks I mean
>>65533020There's basically no tank that wouldn't be useful as a crude IFV if you're fighting non Americans with an engine upgrade. Non Americans are like 50-100 years behind Americans.
>>65537808It's like Jenga, but with tracks
>>65533670>normieshello newfriend
>>655330201.>Heavy TankIts a dead concept, but probably an M103. It would not do well at all though.>Medium TankProbably a T-34-85 since that is what some countries or insurgents have today.>MBTT-54/552. >Heavy tankProbably an IS-2. But I am using combat effectiveness liberally here. This thing would get fucked up by anything in service by even what the poorest nations who can field tanks have.>Medium / MBTLikely a Sherman. Aside from being too tall for the modern day. They are way easier to make and apply upgrades to than the T-34 and there are so many ways you can modify them to fit any roll.>MBTUh a Pershing? But with the same reasoning as the Sherman.3. The T-34-85 or Sherman since they are or at least where still in service until recently by a small handful of countries.
>>65550800>Aside from being too tall for the modern dayA sherman is no taller than a leopard 2.
>>65544383M60 upgrades arouse me like nothing else. I still hold out hope that Brazil or Taiwan will make some form of the M60-2000 happen.
>>65533670Genuinely retarded, did your wife get fucked by a dude driving a hummer or something? At what point were you convinced you had a single salient point in that entire waste of fucking time? "Tanks are bad because uhhh the utility vehicle up armoring cycle." Fuck off moron
>>65542275What a pile of shit.
>>65553333WHO GOT THESE DAMN DIGITS
>>65533020>would be a practical front line tank as is?None. The armor protection is irrelevant beyond resisting small arms. The lack of FCS and low cannon velocity means only HE and canister type rounds have any value. But the lack of modern optics and FCS means that the weapon is too inaccurate, too slow and too blind.At this point you're better off with an ATV that carries drones for infantry fire support.
>>65533670Extremely brilliant and correct low-IQ take.Autonomous and semi-autonomous remote turrets are the answer and should be mounted on most military vehicles. UGVs have proven themselves as effective in both logistic and combat roles. While human vehicles don't need auto-drive (although they should), they do need automated turrets to identify targets and fire accurate lead and ranged shots.
>>65553398Fool. That is just running parallel to the enemy's advancement The real answer is to make the entire vehicle out of people, then the enemy's sensors will be confused.
>>65553387Fitting those onto an old tank has gotten pretty trivial given that those need to fit in the cramped turret of a Humvee.
>>65540965>Are fin-stabilized HE shells for smoothbore tank guns being widely used in Ukraine?yes
>>65533081based
