Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: C19fan

IMHO, the article stops circa the 1980s, and leaves at least a third of ‘tank history’ un-mentioned.

I think the ‘M1 family’ of tanks should definitely be mentioned. And by M1 family, I am generally referring to the armor. The sandwiching of varied materials between steel plates gives these tanks a distinctive angular appearance. Leopard, Challenger, etc. These tanks are also characterized by fully supported tracks, roadwheel skirting, separate ammunition compartments, and computerized fire control systems.

Currently, no nation would challenge a NATO country in an outright tank battle...possibly Russia, but I doubt that. This is because of the superiority of this family of tanks.


16 posted on 09/08/2014 12:22:47 PM PDT by lacrew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: lacrew

because of the M1 you see a lot of other countries producing tanks with a similar design

Because it “changed history”


26 posted on 09/08/2014 12:27:51 PM PDT by GeronL (Vote for Conservatives not for Republicans)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

To: lacrew

Not just the armor.
The turbine engine.
The mobility of 70mph (unrestricted) 70 ton monster.
The sighting/tracking/targeting system.
The stabilized smoothbore gun and incredible ammunition
Enhanced crew protection and survivability.
Etc., etc., etc..


73 posted on 09/08/2014 1:37:02 PM PDT by SJSAMPLE
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson