paulobrito
Well-known member
Tank on tank? tell one.
Tanks and other Armoured Vehicles Image thread.
- Thread starter Duke Nukem
- Start date
Most have been early war and the last few offenses nit in Kursk.
Would have to dig them up.
@Marduk probably has more on hand
"First main battle" of Vuhledar was one.
Battle of Vuhledar - Wikipedia
And yeah, tank on tank fighting was most common early in the war:
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
"First main battle" of Vuhledar was one.
Battle of Vuhledar - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
And yeah, tank on tank fighting was most common early in the war:
There has been some tank on tank action but nothing like the sort of massive tank battles in WW2 or even Desert storm.
Of course, no one even has that many tanks anymore to begin with. For example the US light tank, Stuart, kinda old by end of the war, got something like 22k total built of it. That's not getting close to the most common tanks off WW2 like Sherman or T-34.
For comparison, whole US production of Abrams, all variants, including exports, is 9k.
Even after WW2, Poland and Czechoslovakia built a bit more T-54/55 variants than this. Each.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
My original point is that going past a 120mm to like a 140mm main gun with all of the weight issues that come with that just doesn't seem like a viable path forward. Especially when tank on tank combat isn't even that common and most tanks are destroyed by artillery or missiles.
Purely depends on types of warfare tanks are used in. If it's COIN, that will obviously skew the statistics towards missiles and explosives, as the other side doesn't even have tanks to fight against. Which is more of a design focus for Merkava than major power's tanks btw.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Problem is going to like a 140mm main gun is going to lead to 100+ ton tanks that are hell to transport and can't cross any bridges.
Not really. 75-90 tons with modern design, depending on armor. Armor still is the main contributor to weight.
Even with enlarged turret for ammo storage, take whatever tank you want to upgrade from 120 to 140, add 5-10 tons, we're not trying to put naval 8 inch guns on tanks.
T30 heavy tank - Wikipedia
For a modern example, the German Panther prototype went with 130mm, and it's in fact a bit lighter than some other Leo 2 variants while at it, though the ammo reserve suffered considerably.
Panther KF51 - Wikipedia
Last edited:
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Not really. 75-90 tons with modern design, depending on armor. Armor still is the main contributor to weight.
Even with enlarged turret for ammo storage, take whatever tank you want to upgrade from 120 to 140, add 5-10 tons, we're not trying to put naval 8 inch guns on tanks.
Here's a post-WW2 tank with a friggin 155mm gun and still doesn't weight 100+ tons.T30 heavy tank - Wikipedia
For a modern example, the German Panther prototype went with 130mm, and it's in fact a bit lighter than some other Leo 2 variants while at it, though the ammo reserve suffered considerably.
Panther KF51 - Wikipedia
That T30 you posted weighed 75 tons in 1950 with all of the bells and whistles of modern tanks it would very likely push over 100+tons. As for the KF51 Panther 130mm is arguably the maximum size a tanks main gun can reach before weight starts spinning completely out of control. Then again that is still a 60 ton tank right out of the gate which will likely only get heavier as time passes and upgrades are applied.
OTOH it did not have modern materials, electrics, autoloaders, steel armor only...
Meanwhile King Tiger with its "tiny" by current standards 88mm weighted 70 tons, this is how much of a difference tank design makes, as opposed to gun size.
Panther with its 59 tons is still 16 tons short of heaviest variant of Challenger 2. A Panther variant with 140mm would still not get there IMHO.
Will it even meet the current Chally 2 yardstick? Maybe, but doubt.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
A big issue with those larger shell sizes is you have to choose between exponentially increasing weight or having less ammo.
True... but let's keep things in proportion. Is doubling ammo storage space going to fatten a tank by 50% or more? Hell no. 5 tons, likely, 10 tons, maybe, 15 tons, that's getting sus.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
Problem is that bigger shells mean you need a bigger turret which also needs more armor more reactive armor blocks also you will eventually need a bigger hull for said bigger turret too. It all rapidly scales and increases in weight so 15 tons extra isn't that sus.
True... Still 5 tons gets you quite a bit of more turret volume. The trick is to have a decently expandable design, usually "stretching" the turret to the rear, and logically leading towards an Abrams style isolated ammo compartment in a long bustle. Then you only extend the area of relatively thin side and top armor, which adds little weight, while also avoiding the need for a bigger hull.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
The Leopard 2 A-RC 3.0 is looking interesting as a tank, Can definitely tell that the turret is heavily inspired by the Leclerc.
It's worth pointing out that Cold War era heavy tanks like the M103 and the Conqueror were running around with 120mm guns several decades before the modern NATO MBTs with 120mm, and they weren't necessarily heavier than modern MBTs either, both being roughly 65 tons.
Carrot of Truth
War is Peace
65 tons with a 120mm main gun and space for shells, So imagine what happens when you go up to 140mm and need space for shells of that size.