What went wrong?
What could have been?
>>28500851
The french thought that MBTs were obsolete due to ATGMs and attack helicopters and they could not justify the cost.
How is French armour generally regarded?
Are they decent tier, or pleb tier?
The world she might have ushered in...
>>28500851
It's a fine Idea that got design creeped.
> originally planned with 100mm gun, high speed, acceptable armor, high firepower
> OHSHIT IS-3
> Tank needs to kill IS-3
> Crams much larger 120mm gun in the turret
> Turret now too large, too heavy, too vulnerable
> Turret can not be NBC protected due to huge gaps
> project scrapped because everyone "knew" a 50's fight would go nuclear and a non NBC protected tank was worthless.
The concept worked fine in the smaller scale AMX-13, which was a fine light tank with good firepower
>>28501003
>literally delivering dirty bombs to friendly lines: the vehicle
>>28500945
That's a funny way of saying HEAT
>>28501051
Explain?
>>28500977
Good enough most of the time, but far from the best... Like modern Russian tanks
>>28501056
Heat wasn't new. What changed was the delivery method. Helicopters with guied missiles and man portable rockets that were accurate at longer and longer ranges.
>>28500851
The French wanted to do their take on the King Tiger and made it a medium.
Then the IS-3 appeared and it became a heavy.
Then the heavy became obsolete.
Life's hard.
>>28501076
Nuclear tank.
>>28501076
It's got a nuclear reactor in it.
What do you think happens when the tank goes pop?
>>28501097
That's not the same timeframe, recoiless rifles, RPG's, and cannons were the main HEAT delivery methods Helicopter launched ATGM's, and even ATGM's in general came after the AMX-50 was cancelled.
AMX-30 was put into production before any tanks were lost to ATGM's.
>>28501144
The SS 10 was in devolpment by 1948 and the french thought atgms would make big well armored tanks obsolete. The french also believed that helicopters would be the ideal platform to launch them from. As such there is were most of the money went and big expensive soon to be obsolete tanks got canceled.
>>28501144
The french only made the AMX-30 in response to germany developing a tank of its own. Otherwise they would have been content with their nukes and outsourced tanks such as the m4.
>>28501213
>The french also believed that helicopters would be the ideal platform to launch them from
Not even close to true, now you're just backtracking to try and prove yourself right.
>>28501095
Vatnik spotted
>>28501138
Oh I see. But dirty bombs aren't really that dangerous. They could just send in a cleanup crew and problem solved
>>28501138
Ultimate IED detergent
>>28501428
I meant both Russian and French tanks are far from the best... Sorry for bad Engrish grammar
>>28501564
Yea you worded that weird. The way you said it implies that modern Russian tanks are the best in the world.
So should be something like
> Like most modern Russian tanks, French tanks are good enough most of the time, but far from the best.
Leclerc is a fine vehicle, it's just really expensive compared to already pricey tanks like Leopard 2A6 and M1A2, both of which are favored over Leclerc in a standup fight, but pay in other areas.
>>28501454
what
How does an oscillating turret even work?
>>28501690
>Yea you worded that weird. The way you said it implies that modern Russian tanks are the best in the world.
bretty sure I understand that as >>28501564
but what do I know, I'm ESL too.
>Leclerc is a fine vehicle, it's just really expensive compared to already pricey tanks like Leopard 2A6 and M1A2, both of which are favored over Leclerc in a standup fight, but pay in other areas.
There is nothing out there that suggests the Leclerc is noticeably worse in any parameters over the Leo 2A6 and M1A2 in combat. Same is true with cost effectiveness ration; in fact a Leclerc surpasses them: a comparable model M1A2 SEP V2 costs $8.5 million whilst a Leo 2A6 costs $ 10 million dollars- both numbers pale in comparison to Leclerc's $4.8 million dollar pricetag!
>>28504885
http://lmgtfy.com/?q=oscillating+turret
>>28500851
moving goalposts, until goals were impossible to achieve
>>28501454
Nigger, do you not know how radioactive fallout, half lives and how radiation works in general?
>>28501138
>you see Ivan
>enemy will not shoot tank
>for fear of Chernobyl
actually Chernobyl hadn't happened, but you get the idea.
>>28500977
mobile tier.
Focus on strategic mobility, heavy dependency on HEAT and virtually no armor.
French expected their main opponent to be Soviet paratroopers, when Germans, British and Americans would fight off land offensive through West Germany.
>>28505258
if you compare prices, use prices from same timeframe, not 90's Leclerc price with 2010+ Abrams price.
Leclerc series XXI was €6.5mil, so around $7mil, in 2003.
M1A2 SEP was €6.2mil in 2004.
>>28505928
They put the SS11 on this too.
>>28505942
>not operating in NBC capable vehicles
Who the fuck cares? Motherfucker's probably shooting mini-nuke shells out the fucking barrel.
>>28501454
>nuclear material cleanup crew
>on an active battlefield that's so dangerous that MBT's are being blown up left and right
Go away kid.
>>28506255
>NBC capable vehicles
Lol I bet you think that this means "a vehicle that's totally invulnerable to radiation"
You should look up what NBC warfare is all about so you won't make such a stupid comment in the future.
>>28506255
>Motherfucker's probably shooting mini-nuke shells out the fucking barrel.
![File1128_WEB[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/HwCMh4w.jpg "File1128_WEB[1].jpg")
Not enough money, even with lend-lease programs, combined with decolonization wars everywhere making them focus on other fields.
They didn't even (eh) have enough money for the ELC, which was cheaper, closer to the prevalent herisson doctrine at the time, and would have been more effective than heavy tanks in the various conflicts fought by the french in africa/asia.
>>28501343
Not him, but the french began thinking about assault helicopters during the Indochina War (45-54). The first use of an helicopter in combat role in the french army was a Bell 47 with two 24/29 LMGs in 55 (in Algeria). After that they began experimenting with various rockets and eventually guided missiles. I think the first AS.11 on a helo is from '57, still before the AMX-50 was cancelled.
And you have HEAT rockets, too. Which were already a thing during ww2.
Also, no need to use an helo to deliver an ATGM.
>>28506238
The SS.11 was put on nearly everything.
>>28507042
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
>>28507042
what could have been
>>28500851
Oscillating turrets don't scale up well
>>28507795
Should've gone with the Moto.
>nuke deployed-deployed-deployed-deployed-deployed-deployed-deployed
>muh you-cant-catch-me-gay-thoughts-nuke-outrunning-speed
>>28507836
I really like Rattler, then hornet just looks like the tank the image
>>28504885
When an autoloader in fitted to a tank, the barrel must return to a repeat position for the next shell to be pushed home.
In an oscilating turret the Auto loader has smaller magazine and the entire auto loader is attached to the breech and elevates and depresses with the breech, this means you never need to move your bore picture from your target, theoretically allowing for more accurate follow up shots.
>>28507908
That's not an answer to his question...
>>28504885
The cannon is fixed to the roof of the turret, and the whole top of the turret moves up and down, rather than just the gun.
>>28505947
strategic mobility is just a meme when any tank can drive itself somewhere
>>28508559
>strategic mobility is just a meme
So what you have no idea what strategic mobility is.
>>28505946
>Chernobyl hadn't happened
Nigga u dum
>>28509234
He meant at the time the tank was designed, retardo.
When exactly do you think that Chernobyl happened?
>>28509269
Oh shit I'm dum
>>28508559
Not efficiently, fast, or across water.
>>28501138
> be rollin, rollin, rollin through the Commonwealth
> see old tank stuck in mud
> hey, everything else is nuclear-powered... this probably goes boom, too
> expend all kinds of ammo on it because drunk
> doesn't even spark
> mfw fuck that.... it should have taken half the map with it
>>28509472
>shooting at a nuclear reactor to make it explode
>>28506353
cool shit, huh anon?
>>28512580
No because that's complete bullshit.
>>28501138
Nuclear reactor =/= nuclear warhead
This needs to stop.
>>28514459
>nuclear reactors explode like nuclear bombs when shot
Kill
Yourself
Immediately
>>28514584
I don't think he meant that nuclear reactors explode like bombs when shot
>>28514584
Implying that taking out the cooling system in a nuclear reactor wont cause a meltdown and then an explosion.
>>28515399
>the cooling system in a nuclear reactor wont cause a meltdown and then an explosion.
dude weed lmao
>>28515399
>meltdown and then an explosion
If there is no coolant left to vaporize and expand no I dont think there would be an explosion.
The meltdown however that would be a problem.
>>28509774
Never played Fallout I take it?
>>28501514
>detergent
>>28518800
Don't get all your information from videogames, kid.
>>28515399
>a meltdown and then an explosion.
>a meltdown
>and then
>an explosion
>mfw there are people who think nuclear reactors are exactly like nuclear bombs
>mfw they think a nuclear reactor would explode when you shoot at it and not immediately be sealed by self sealing outer ablative walls or any number of automatic containment procedures that goes into effect when there's a breach or cause radioactive coolant water to leak
>mfw conventional nuclear reactors are basically industrial sized steam cookers
The best way to disable a nuclear powered vehicle is to disable whatever condenser system its using and all of its backup condenser systems or if the steam generating system is complete self contained, then you have to disable the cooling systems. And even then there are redundancy and auxiliary power systems backing all of it up to hell and back.
That is the only way anyone is going to engineer a nuclear powered vehicle.
>>28520579
Wow what an embarrassing post
>>28520579
>the only way to disable a nuclear powered vehicled is to have backup systems
Did you proofread this post before you made it? What you've written doesn't actually make any sense.
>>28515399
The "explosions" are pressure based because of steam buildup
Not nukes
