Greatest Military Hardware
- Thread starter Booner!
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
I'm sure it does, but that doesn't preclude it from greatness as the dictionary definition shows.
What is it with this thread and US hardwear? Ah hyeah, it's because it all features in films far more than other hardwear...
I'd beat that with a Challenger 2. Widly regarded as the best Main Battle tank ever made. In the second Iraq war one broke down and was attacked for a couple of hours by everything the Iraqi Militia could throw at it (including RPG's). Nothing penetrated it.
As for the F22 it may be arguably the most advanced fighter there is but it is still only slightly better than the Typhoon. In mock combat the F22 beat the Typhoon about 3 out of 5 times (with the Typhoon beating it the other 2). For a plane about 5x more expensive than the Typhoon that's not good odds. It may also go some way to explain the US governments reluctence to equip more than 2-3 squadrons with it.
I'd beat that with a Challenger 2. Widly regarded as the best Main Battle tank ever made. In the second Iraq war one broke down and was attacked for a couple of hours by everything the Iraqi Militia could throw at it (including RPG's). Nothing penetrated it.
As for the F22 it may be arguably the most advanced fighter there is but it is still only slightly better than the Typhoon. In mock combat the F22 beat the Typhoon about 3 out of 5 times (with the Typhoon beating it the other 2). For a plane about 5x more expensive than the Typhoon that's not good odds. It may also go some way to explain the US governments reluctence to equip more than 2-3 squadrons with it.
Soldato
- Joined
- 19 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 18,111
- Location
- Shakespeare’s County
Most are controlled by humans though.
They are unmanned as the name suggests. Dogfighting would involve combat so would be a UCAV, military acroynms tend to be quite specific
I'd have to go with the Submarine.
Since it's invention round about 100 years ago it has evolved from something akin to two bathtubs being welded together to the vehicle of choice for delivering conventional/nuclear weapons onto enemy territory and performing hunter killer ops on enemy shipping. Think the Falkands war, three mk 8 torpedoes fired from HMS conqueror against the General Belgrano stopped Argentinian naval operations dead, also it is rumored that another nuclear submarine had a firing solution on the aircraft carrier Veinticinco De Mayo but shortly before it was fired upon it was ordered to return to base as the Belgrano had just been sunk.
From what I've read the Argentinian Naval Command were unsure of the campaign as they were of the opinion that one British nuclear submarine could ruin the entire operation.
Since it's invention round about 100 years ago it has evolved from something akin to two bathtubs being welded together to the vehicle of choice for delivering conventional/nuclear weapons onto enemy territory and performing hunter killer ops on enemy shipping. Think the Falkands war, three mk 8 torpedoes fired from HMS conqueror against the General Belgrano stopped Argentinian naval operations dead, also it is rumored that another nuclear submarine had a firing solution on the aircraft carrier Veinticinco De Mayo but shortly before it was fired upon it was ordered to return to base as the Belgrano had just been sunk.
From what I've read the Argentinian Naval Command were unsure of the campaign as they were of the opinion that one British nuclear submarine could ruin the entire operation.
surely the solution to all these problems is getting say a 1-10Kt war head with a mile or so of the targets?
relatively easy, also i think the patriot has succeeded in shooting down a war head on re-entry but yes it is still very in effective, but a battery of rail guns firing nuclear shells could do a lot to stop it, and you only need to be able to stop so many, and then disable launch site, but as global thermonuclear war taught us, the only way to win is not to play.
I'd beat that with a Challenger 2. Widly regarded as the best Main Battle tank ever made. In the second Iraq war one broke down and was attacked for a couple of hours by everything the Iraqi Militia could throw at it (including RPG's). Nothing penetrated it.
did they fire back?
Wonder what it ws like for the crew.
Also why just fire stuff at it when you could pile shells and mortar round up all over/under it then set them off?
They lost all sights, so I doubt they would have fired unless they were in an open area, too much risk of hitting civilians.
Anyone who tried to get near the tank run the risk of being picked off by Infantry.
One Challenger II was hit with 70 RPG-7's (same one?), and working after 6 hours mechanical work, which is impressive. Would be interesting to see how it would do against an RPG-29 or whatever compared to T-90, Leopard, M1A2 etc.
Last edited:
How much is the F35 gonna cost? Clarkson summed it up in one of his books 'I know you got soul' (I think) that American fighters are becoming so expensive and pointless at the same time, and by 2035 it will cost so much the Air Force will have it in the morning, the marines in the afternoon, or something like that.
[DW]Muffin;10686538 said:
Probably, I think it was in (or around) Basra. As Tefal I think said on the previous page, in a fight between two modern tanks the one that fired first would win. There was an unfortunate friendly fire incident between 2 Challenger 2s at around the same time. The DU shell from one went straight through the armour of the other and destroyed it. The armour may be good but no Tank can withstand a shell from another at this point, and it's probably the same with modern misile systems.
Where did the shot hit?
Me!
More seriously the title is greatest, imo great doesn't mean popular, the wii is popular but my PC destroys it because it is great.
Because of this it doesn't matter if it is uber expensive.
I would have a fully equipped Aircraft carrier just because they are so big and expensive and if you have an army of planes that can reach anywhere in the world you are doing quite well.
but then I am not directly going to kill someone with this ship so I think it needs to be something that is great that does the killing itself.
Tanks are great but as said they can't withstand a direct hit from another tank which I think is really crap, considering they are supposed to be armour.
helicopters suffer the same problem but luckily are faster and can fly.
Planes are great because they are fast. so although not that tough you aint going to hit em.
But they need runways, so I vote Harrier.
More seriously the title is greatest, imo great doesn't mean popular, the wii is popular but my PC destroys it because it is great.
Because of this it doesn't matter if it is uber expensive.
I would have a fully equipped Aircraft carrier just because they are so big and expensive and if you have an army of planes that can reach anywhere in the world you are doing quite well.
but then I am not directly going to kill someone with this ship so I think it needs to be something that is great that does the killing itself.
Tanks are great but as said they can't withstand a direct hit from another tank which I think is really crap, considering they are supposed to be armour.
helicopters suffer the same problem but luckily are faster and can fly.
Planes are great because they are fast. so although not that tough you aint going to hit em.
But they need runways, so I vote Harrier.