Closed Thread
Page 3 of 8 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 119

Thread: Type 90(Japanese) vs. Type 98(Chinese)

  1. 02 Oct 03, 04:11 #31
    TopHatter
    TopHatter is online now
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar     TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    12,615
    Country: United States
    Well, my thought was for just the Chinese tank and the Japanese tank to square off, either separately or against each other with MILES-type gear.
    Obviously it wouldn't prove survivability, unless course they wanted to fire a live round or 3 against each other just for the hell of it
  2. 02 Oct 03, 05:24 #32
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    "sorry, but i experienced the difference between m1a1 and leo2a4 i don't say anymore that it is the same. it has the same caliber and can fire the same ammunition, but that's it. if i have to boresight the gun every 6-8 rounds i would never say the gun is equal to the german one."

    What planet is that on Axl?

    What an utterly ridiculous statement...
  3. 02 Oct 03, 08:13 #33
    axl
    axl is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    18 Sep 03
    Posts
    242
    my own experience, that's all. the usa licence produces the german gun. they did modifications and made something wrong. if you don't believe it, then just try official army or national guard simulators. even there you are forced to boresight. then go the german units and do the same there. the boresighting device is available for the leo2a4 (later models only), but normally you don't use it.

    but proof me wrong, c'mon, try it. show me your experience with that topic, no prob.

    regards
    axl
  4. 02 Oct 03, 22:22 #34
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    Ummm, US Tank crews couldn't even complete their table IV qualifications if they had to boresight every 8 rds.

    Certainly in ODS and OIF, this was not neccesary, nor was it neccesary for our IM-1's, nor for any of the M1A1HA's of the US 1st Cavalry division(i know this because two of my best friends were in the 1Cav- 1 as a gunner, the other as an M-1 turret mechanic.)

    I believe you have fallen victom to some disinformation friend.
  5. 03 Oct 03, 02:56 #35
    axl
    axl is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    18 Sep 03
    Posts
    242
    disinformation? sorry man, i trained on m1a1 last year.

    regards
    axl
  6. 03 Oct 03, 02:59 #36
    Praxus
    Praxus is offline
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    26 Aug 03
    Posts
    3,169
    Maybe the tank your were in had somethin broke.

    I don't think Sniper would be lieing about it.
  7. 03 Oct 03, 03:24 #37
    TopHatter
    TopHatter is online now
    Global Moderator
    Comrade Commissar     TopHatter's Avatar
    Join Date
    03 Sep 03
    Posts
    12,615
    Country: United States
    Axl
    Out of curiousity and no disrespect intended, what outfit are you with?
    I just saw a great show on the Discovery Channel (it was a rerun) on Marine Corps tankers going through the armor course at Fort Knox. Made me want to enlist and go armor! :8
  8. 03 Oct 03, 03:46 #38
    Officer of Engineers
    Officer of Engineers is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    06 Aug 03
    Posts
    21,433
    Country: Canada
    Trying to bridge some things here,

    Having served in VII Corps which included British, Canadian, as well as American units. It was always the case of the lowest common demoninator - one of the reasons why the Canadian Trophy is no longer runned - everyone wants to raise the bar to their standards.

    I was long gone when the M1s (never mind the Leo IIs) got introduced to VII Corps but one of the biggest complaints during the Canadian Trophy was the boresiting issue.

    Simulators are exactly that - simulators. They're based upon theoritical reqs which are also based upon real life scenarios - does not mean the sims are correct which is the difference here I suspect.
    Chimo
  9. 03 Oct 03, 04:30 #39
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    M1A1's eh?

    Well, you got a broke dick track cuz.

    How do you qualify when you can't shoot more than 8rds?

    Get out and boresight in the middile of the range session?

    LOL....

    What unit are you with?
  10. 03 Oct 03, 13:42 #40
    axl
    axl is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    18 Sep 03
    Posts
    242
    the time you need for boresighting depends on the experience of the gunner. i mean you don't have to go out. just switch the boresighting device on, align gun and sight, save it and go on with shooting.

    regards
    axl
  11. 03 Oct 03, 18:25 #41
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    How long does that process take?
  12. 03 Oct 03, 18:30 #42
    axl
    axl is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    18 Sep 03
    Posts
    242
    depends on the gunner, but not more than seconds.

    regards
    axl
  13. 03 Oct 03, 18:35 #43
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    Then i don't see it as a problem, since the reloading cycle is about 5 seconds anyway, which would explain why i've never heard a DAT say "These guns suck".
  14. 03 Oct 03, 18:59 #44
    axl
    axl is offline
    Patron
    Join Date
    18 Sep 03
    Posts
    242
    haha, theretical number shaking. first of all you never know when it is time to boresight, you realize that when you switch on the device.
    5 seconds for a reloading is a theretical value, it depends again on the loader. when i'm in an exercise and know that the targets come one after the other, the loader will stand beside the gun with the next round in his hand (as we did it). if you don't know when the next target will come up you will not do that. and never forget that you can expect constant loading times from a human loader.

    small note at the end. you only learn that your stuff sux, if you are allowed to experience another one. i always thought the propulsion systems of leo2 and m1 were somewhat equal. but then i learned that the experience is more than "one is engine, one is turbine".

    regards
    axl
  15. 04 Oct 03, 05:11 #45
    Bill
    Bill is offline
    Staff Emeritus
    Join Date
    03 Aug 03
    Posts
    16,429
    Country: Switzerland
    I take it you prefer the turbine?

    I was ALWAYS impressed how close an Abrams could get before you hear it. Whispering death.

    I know what you mean with human variables, believe me, they certainly existed in the sniping business.
« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. World Navies Listing (updated 3/29/05)
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 26 Apr 05,, 20:08
  2. World Navies(Completed)
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03 Apr 05,, 07:27
  3. World Navies
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 31 Mar 05,, 23:57
  4. World Navies (New Format)
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26 Mar 05,, 17:49
  5. Greatly Revised Rankings
    By rickusn in forum Naval Warfare
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 20 Mar 05,, 11:51

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts

Forum Rules