NATO tanks reload faster than Russians and Chinese tanks? - Page 4

~~ComradeHX~~ · 2014-06-20, 18:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ragnarok1775

I don't know about that, they were gonna put a new 140mm on it but the manufacturer decided it was overkill, but the K2 is still made compatible with the 140mm cannon in case things change in the future.

Considering how armored warfare works, I think "double penetration" (don't laugh guys) is not really worth it...you want the round to blow up inside the hull and kill some people and destroy the tank. Not just put a hole in it.

The ROK Army and Marines are no joke, I would not want to fight them even if they had no tanks at all. Conscripts get something like $80/month and there is a lot of corporal punishment, PT is pretty sadistic, and they really believe in the job.

IIRC SK army is more known for boasting about their legobuild of tank than actually have anything.

Chance of K2 being as good as advertised is as good as chance if Arjun being good tank...lol

Ragnarok1775 · 2014-06-20, 19:34

Well that gets into one of those Leclerc vs Leopard 2 vs Abrams debates...won't really know how good it is until it's combat-tested, tank on tank, not just as a portable shield for grunts to stand behind. Those are all pretty high-tech tanks, but none except the Abrams have ever been in any tank battles as far as I know. Hopefully PR will be the only action they ever see.

2014-06-20, 19:34	#32
Ragnarok1775 Join Date: Jul 2012 Posts: 153 United States of America	Re: NATO tanks reload faster than Russians and Chinese tanks? Well that gets into one of those Leclerc vs Leopard 2 vs Abrams debates...won't really know how good it is until it's combat-tested, tank on tank, not just as a portable shield for grunts to stand behind. Those are all pretty high-tech tanks, but none except the Abrams have ever been in any tank battles as far as I know. Hopefully PR will be the only action they ever see.