K2 Black panther
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
>It's good don't judge amerifats
>>28412955
Well what can it do? Tells us about, can it defeat glorious made in best korea original design do not steal T-54?
>>28412964
It's proven to take a shot from its own gun. Shitty slavcrap 125mm can't do shit.
Plus it has active protection system so RPGs or missile can't do shit.
L55 > Any pathetic Russian gun.
>>28412979
apart from the gun and chassis
your tank is full of slavshit technology though
patton forever!
>>28412979
>It's proven to take a shot from its own gun
>Shitty slavcrap 125mm can't do shit
What round was fired?
>>28412964
Slav shit can't handle based L55
>>28413012
Oh boy, is it better then the 120 L44? Why wont americans change to the L55?
>>28413015
Higher muzzle velocity and penetration. It's proven take put targets more than 4miles away and a target of your moms ass. M1A3 is going to have it. Buttblasted Slavs cannot handle.
>>28413015
they already have best ammunition.
latest silver bullet is stronger than any DM-shits fired in L55
>>28413028
silver bullet has lower muzzle velocity than dm-shits but it has longer, heavier, superior penetrator.
>>28413028
hey, I posted that picture.>>>28412983
>>28413015
>>28413008
Stop derailing every MBT thread. This is in every MBT thread.
The Abrams is the most lethal tank in the world. The American M256 with the M829 Super Sabot is a step ahead of Germany and its L55. Which is in turn is a step ahead of the UK's L30A1. After a gap, you find guns like the 2A46 and 2A82 etc on russian tanks that are prone to pressurization issues and firing lesser quality ammo, that will still kill anything that's not an MBT. If they can hit it.
>inb4 30 replies of Igor saying Burgerclaps can't accept their tank is bad
>inb4 60 comments of butmad burgerclaps proving them to be wrong
>inb4 100 comments of ad hominem inbetween them.
>30 pictures of unrelated tanks destroyed in battle.
It's almost like I can see the fucking future. I am beggining to also think OP is the same person, can we ban him already? There's a new "my tank is better than your tank" thread every other day, and its the same guy.
>>28413050
Geez now I feel sorry that Finland bought the Leo2s from Netherlands.
>>28412955
>GOOD
>NOT GLORIOUS AND ADVANCED POKPUNG-HO
UPPERMOST KEK! ENJOY BEING SHIT FUCK LAPDOG OF FILTHY WESTERN IMPERIALIST AMBITIONS AND SELLING OUT TRUE KOREAN CULTURE!
>>28413078
The consequence of you spouting memetic bullshit is that you are going to be put into your place.
The Abrams is not the most lethal tank in the world.
The M256 is inferior to the L55, simply because it is a L44 copy. It offers comparable penetration but less accuracy with harmful ammunition (ammunition that everyone else can produce as well if the need arises mind you). Hell even the 2a82-1M of the T-14 is very probable to be a better cannon. If you can't accept that a new cannon developed in 2010 is going to be better than your 90's stuff, you are a jingoist.
The do fire lesser quality ammo, but it will kill everything, including MBT.
>>28412979
>It's proven to take a shot from its own gun. Shitty slavcrap 125mm can't do shit.
Most tanks can take what they can dish out.
Important however is what kind of foreign round they used- Western and Eastern armor technology follow quite divergent optimization paths for their armors, so what anti-armor measure made for one isn't exactly going to be as effective in another.
>Plus it has active protection system so RPGs or missile can't do shit.
Funnily enough its a derivative of Russia's ARENA-E system. go figure.
>What round was fired?
most definitely a Mango- Its the most widespread round in time of T-80 export to Korea in the 90 and at the same time there isn't much production of newer rounds taking place for domestic needs let alone export one, albeit debt relief.
>>28413028
>Higher muzzle velocity and penetration. It's proven take put targets more than 4miles away and a target of your moms ass. M1A3 is going to have it. Buttblasted Slavs cannot handle.
There is no such thing as an M1A3 yet, so you are talking out of your ass. Same as with the possibility of reaching out and touching effectively yet alone penetrating modern tanks with an unguided round at up to 4 miles, not even to mention if it was moving, talking out of your ass.
>>28413151
>Igor types angrily on his keyboard given to czar Putin to be in the SIDF
American tank a shit.
xbox hueg, but only 650mm armor kek.
Even Russian 80s penetrators can defeat them head on.
>>28413028
Why would the M1A3 have a heavier gun when they've already said reducing weight was a key feature? Not to mention the XM360 is the clear front runner as its lighter than the L44, has ADL as standard and supports a substantially higher chamber pressure than the L44/L55.
>>28413183
Stop talking out of your ass you retard.
Americans have sub par tanks and everyone knows it. My country is further away from Russia than yours is probably. In between the cook offs, frontal pens, shitty mileage and sub par gun the abrams is getting shit all over nowadays. Seems like you can't handle it.
Leopard 2 Pzkpfw 4 life.
>>28413202
Works better if you remove the armored warfare logo
>>28413209
>abrams
>cook off
>>28413215
AW is based on real life data. If you dont want to believe them, go to their forums and you will find enough murrican fanboys raging and pressuring the devs in making American stuff god-tier all around. But even then, they couldnt make them use their own made-up fanboy stats for the Abrams, Thus, the 'brams is realistically portrayed.
>>28413215
>>28413222
>>28413209
>>28413208
>>28413202
>>28413155
>>28413151
Nothing in any of these comments wasn't already in the
>What does /k/ think of the T14
>why is the M1 Abrams so bad
>/thg/ thread
>why is everything russia prodces shit
threads.
Except for maybe the XM360 argument but that's a different reply for a different day, you guys need to stop replying to shit that's already been discussed 30 times, in each thread. This shit is already looking like I am right or something >>28413078
We need an info-graphic or copy-pasta to rule them all. Cause this shit is getting fucking ridiculous that Igor can troll you all so fucking easily.
>>28413202
>dat Type 99
A good, solid tank.
>>28413078
>Stop derailing every MBT thread. This is in every MBT thread.
>The Abrams is the most lethal tank in the world. The American M256 with the M829 Super Sabot yada, yada.
BS to nth. turn on the trips TankSgt/Engie, I know its you with your signature "much M829 > DM-53" spiel. Man for one who purports to know his stuff and well you seem to forget vanilla M829 is older 20 years than a DM-53 and would not perform as well- or maybe you do know what your saying is BS and just priming your audience against the foreign counterpart.
Anyway, you had my autism triggered yet again so, for the nth time, the 2A82-1M is not just a 125 mm 2A46 improved. Its a wholly new weapon in the same vein as the XM291 bicaliber gun- you know the gun they made as a response to the whole "this FST needs 20 MJ of gun potential to defeat" thing of the late cold war. The only difference however is that the Russians limited the gun to just one caliber option but retained other characteristics made for a bigger caliber gun, most especially the higher pressure limits and extended chamber volume in addition to the much bigger projectiles. Speaking of projectiles their latest rounds are straight up monsters- basically DM-53 rounds extended to A3 length as Ive read.
>It's almost like I can see the fucking future. I am beggining to also think OP is the same person, can we ban him already? There's a new "my tank is better than your tank" thread every other day, and its the same guy.
thing is you didn't exactly break the pattern either- you just bitched about your own koolaid when given the chance. so no, you don't deserve to right call out others while at it, not that it would matter since you are far into drinking your own koolaid that it doesn't matter.
>>28413183
>Someone gets this butthurt over factual information
>>28413103
They're in a good home now, though. Pic related, their big sisters in their habitat.
here we go
>>28413215
It's accurate though...
>>28413300
But it doesn't have an effective APS...
>>28413335
Why don't you point out what he is wrong about instead of going into an autistic fit of impotent rage?
>>28413300
HURRR EVERY CRITIQUE AGAINST AMERICAN ENGINEERING IS BUZZWORD BAIT DURRRR
childish as fuck
>>28413202
>xbox hueg, but only 650mm armor kek.
>Even Russian 80s penetrators can defeat them head on.
No they can't, btw im the one shilling the hardest for the Russians here so inb4 murifat.
>AW is based on real life data. If you dont want to believe them, go to their forums and you will find enough murrican fanboys raging and pressuring the devs in making American stuff god-tier all around. But even then, they couldnt make them use their own made-up fanboy stats for the Abrams, Thus, the 'brams is realistically portrayed.
Its not, its a videogame that relies on speculations of tank characteristics same as SB or any other sim that ever was or to be.
Even if the data is accurate they can't exactly model these things to look like real life results and happenings. Heck for example in penetrator to armor interactions most ive seen of modeling is 1-D only- the famous longrods site that everyone loves is a good example. In real life its 3-D interactions between the two not to mention some wild unpredicted interactions like say ERA not detonating or the composite armor caving in from earlier hits. etc.
>>28413345
Why don't you stop same fagging in every thread with the same stale counter arguments?
>fact
>you: misconception, outdated fact or unreliable source here
>the rebuttal
>rinse and repeat
which ends with
>you: desperation is too intense
>anon stops replying
>you: u r so wrong mr american
or
>you: desperation intensifies
>you: western tanks are shit
>but thats wrong because
>you: butthurt merifats can't accept reality
I am not going to give you what you want. The game you're playing is really old now. >>28413078
>>28413222
You can remove these meme arrows newfriend.
There is a thing called google now https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S0nDHV_mkiY
>>28413276
Thank you for at least being informed and not making bs claims.
>>28413202
No 80's penetrator can pen a m1a2 up front from <500m. All 90's penetrators can >1000. And the new 20's munitions will be able to penetrate from 4-5 km. Keep in mind that the US has enjoyed a 700m~ penetration gap in which they could but the russkies couldn't penetrate for over 25 years. By no means anything to laugh at. The Abrams just aged bad.
>>28413345
I'd even go as far to say you're the guy who posted the
>why do tanks store ammo, do they want to die? x6 in 1 hour
>this thread
threads,
exclusively for the art of tryhard trolling. Even if you're not. Do you really have nothing else to do? Besides be the cancer that's killing /k/
>>28413300
> Challenger 2 and Abrams had the same armour in the 90's so Challengers armour is better today.
Abrams (1980) Chobham armour
Challenger (1983) Chobham armour,
M1A1 (1988) improved Chobham by adding DU
Challenger 2 (1998) uses Dorchester armour.
M1A2 (1992) Uses a third generation of Chobham
The differences between Chobham and Dorchester are classified but it is reasonable to assume that in the decade after M1A1 the armour was improved until it was implemented on Challenger 2, M1A2 was then produced which shared this development.
It is also worth bearing in mind that both tanks have access to more or less identical standards of appliqué active and passive armour.
However even with M1A2 SEP V3 there is still no option for frontal hull mounted appliqué armour on Abrams.
All this means that the type of armour that Abram's and Challenger 2 use is pretty much identical - however Challenger 2 has more of it.
Does that mean Challenger 2 is better protected in all situations ? No.
Does that mean that Challenger 2 is better protected in some situations ? Yes.
Does this this also mean that there are no situations where is Abrams is better protected than Challenger ? No.
It all depends on what hits you and where.
Whoever made that image must have been blinded with butthurt at even the idea that his precious tank has a feature that's on par or even potentially inferior to another tank.
>>28413875
I also realised that I put M1A2 out of order.
But the point remains, the later the tank the more modern the armour.
>>28413274
Its like a Leopard 2 hate banged a T72 and had a child
>>28413530
>unsourved isis video
>>28413875
Chobham and Dorchester are the same. Chobham is its trade name and Dorchester it's actual name. Challenger 2 uses Burlington and the M1 series abandoned Chobham for a carbide silicate with the first AIM series.
>>28414298
Not even close. Even the shitty wiki pages on the subject are more accurate than your post.
>>28412955
>K2 Black panther
Only mildy better than the m48 patton
>Vatniks are behind all tanks but the M1 abram.
Really?
Please explain further why.
>>28414649
both countries improved on their current designs in their own ways, what the Abrams has is different than the Challenger.
![tamiya-1-16-leopard-2-a6-main-battle-tank-kit-56020-34[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/3biXuWE.jpg "tamiya-1-16-leopard-2-a6-main-battle-tank-kit-56020-34[1].jpg")
>>28412955
did...did they upgrade the sprocket to the one for the Leopard 2 A5?
