Reminder that if you think the Abrams is obsolete or unable to stand up to other modern MBTs you are retarded

Reminder that if you think the Abrams is obsolete or unable to stand up to other modern MBTs you are retarded

Attached: CA8D6632-F242-46C3-A6B9-8D526D00D914.png (500x566, 121K)

Other urls found in this thread:

zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-09/us-gets-its-ass-handed-it-world-war-iii-simulation-rand
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>no active defense system on most of them
>many lack even era
>marines still using m1a1s
>turbine engines are a massive logistical pain in the ass for armored divisions
>will get slaughtered by top attack atgms
>can’t launch atgm from their barrel like T-90

Attached: 8BDB6549-BE53-46A6-A6D3-FF3C7EF3A6A0.png (905x606, 494K)

>Making a thread for the express purpose of summoning HIM
Why you gotta do this OP

Attached: m1a2c.jpg_large.jpg (2048x1365, 350K)

Attached: A5E80206-DFE2-4ED2-9D74-D2CEB2C3AC99.jpg (1024x576, 114K)

Because I wanna see a flame war

Attached: 3E6797C7-3FE1-4C6C-9982-8D5A5377B667.jpg (480x360, 35K)

ooga booga I’m right here

Attached: 442D0129-D998-48A4-9439-E468613C2148.jpg (300x300, 24K)

For me, it's the K2 Black Panther.
It's engine-less export derivative also looks cool.

>fires atgm out of your APDSDS range and curves it into your side armor, heat shell does nothing to t90 due to era and active defense system

What now fatass overweight 70 ton bitch?

Attached: 624CF0E1-DB7F-4CD2-AF9A-0F92C09620D0.png (740x556, 64K)

>flamewar
armatard will just like always go full vatnik and this thread will be 300+ posts that will turned into why everybody hates russians (becasue of their shitty attitude) while armatard calls everyone butthurt

>outside of APDSDS range
Not with those optics.

>Wargame Red Dragon

Fucking based.

Attached: D6E8B232-9231-4BDD-AC66-813E6A103797.jpg (809x463, 64K)

active defense and era = not healthy for friendly dismounts. Infantry's sole purpose is to support armor, and don't let any of them squeaky fuckers tell you different

M1A1's will still kick your ass...

Turbines suck fuel = gives the remf's a purpose in life

top attack ordnance = been around forever and are the spawn of Satan... but life is like that sometimes

barrel launched atgm's = jesus man, that shit's for apc's. Leave them something to feel good about.

Don’t forget the new T-14 which Russia can only afford twelve this year

Active defense and ERA are extremely important. Most things tanks will run into are heat weapons like rocket launchers or atgms. Top attack atgms can be defeated by thermal smoke, flares, active defense, era on top, jamming, etc. Tank will also greatly outrage a javelin. The infantry screen the tanks, but don’t stand right next to them on foot where they can get blasted by active defense. They should be far ahead of the tanks while the tanks lay down fire support. If there is one thing learned from the Ukrainian War by western analysts is that Tanks are still OP and almost unstoppable outside of cities and Cluster Artillery with Thermobaric warheads, Anti-Tank munitions, and air launched mine laying capabilities can knock out an entire battalion in a single volley. Also Air Superiority is a meme against a determined force with ground based air defense capability.

>He fell for the "Gun-Launched ATGM" meme
>Also Air Superiority is a meme against a determined force with ground based air defense capability
Exactly how you got to that claim when this is Ukraine we're talking about is beyond me.

zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-09/us-gets-its-ass-handed-it-world-war-iii-simulation-rand

U.S. has many weaknesses.

>not enough cluster and rocket artillery, a lot of the artillery is basically stationary and will be rapidly counter batteried. If you are not a self propelled artillery like a Paladin you are basically worthless

>bad air defense, completely reliant on stingers and Patriots, no mid range aa to deal with stand off helicopters. Not enough of the aa it does have, us bases will get swamped with cruise missiles that they don’t have enough patriots to shoot down

>tanks only good at gun duels with other tanks, will get their shit kicked in by infantry atgms unlike Russians

>U.S. air spam will be negated by s-400, air power neutered

>pathetic tier cyber warfare capability

I could go on. You would be better off reading the report.

Attached: D8DDF19E-F554-4997-AD67-2984A49B9E8D.png (1056x777, 709K)

Bump

Attached: E4E8AB44-A0AB-4497-9A74-DEAF1677869D.jpg (737x366, 51K)

Is this a surprise? Did mutts really think they could beat Russia and China at the same time on the opposite end of the globe? Just fucking lol at Amerilard delusion.

>sprays deterrent
Also ITT:
Vidya knowledge
Asinine claims
Demands of proofs
Hohol calling
Half assed false flags

I don't miss the times of Georgia War era vatnik propaganda, it had the stench of Lenin's carcass. But the current state of underpaid IRA trolls ain't the fucking Chanel N°5 either.

Attached: 1552391018477.png (1850x355, 72K)

Tanks behind the infantry laying down support fire? The hell you say. Crunchies belong in their tracks behind the armor.. dismount to mop up what is left, and take possession of the smoking ruins... and guard bridges. (Ok, I'll admit... I'm from the Cold War Heavy Armor Division era (2AD FTW!)... my opinion might be a little biased)

I can not refute the "King of Battle" argument. Some things are simply true. (exploding turds raining down from the sky)

Air superiority .. LOL, I'm sorry, if the other side owns the sky, it doesn't matter how much air defense you have.. you're eventually fucked.

Infantry in front to screen because infantry are more expendable, they supress enemy atgm and can clear mines, and they prevent someone hiding in a bush sneaking up close and firing a rocket into your side. Infantry should dismount the second they make contact with the enemy, afv are death traps. IFVs will support and also defend the tanks. Under smoke infantry can close the distance after the enemy has been shelled prior. You are right that the Tank is still the primary offensive tool, but without an infantry screen they can be quite vulnerable, as seen in the battle of Grozny.

Awe I'm just fucking with you man... it all depends on what you are trying to accomplish.

In armored warfare, infantry is too slow to be out front (that's mounted scout's job).

In more of a defensive posture, or stalemated position.. sure, send them out there.

Just don't tell them they are more expendable... they hate that.

I agree with you. Mechanized infantry are pretty mobile but they can’t keep up with armor in a flanking maneuver breakthrough if they have to keep dismounting. If you are attacking a weak point in their line just blow past them with the tanks and let the infantry follow.