GSX Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 AIUI, one CR2 had an RPG-29 go through the lower front hull, injuring the driver, and another had a large EFP mine go through the underside of the hull, again injuring the driver. One CR2 has been k-killed, after a HESH round from another CR2 hit an open hatch. This set off a stowed round which took the turret off. AIUI, the stowage of reactive rounds in the turret was a bit naughty So then it still stands that no CR2 has been destroyed by anything other than another CR2. Chobbam 2 is better than Chobbam 1, I dont know by how much but it wouldnt have been applied to the latest tanks if it wasnt. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 What's the beastie next to the jackel? Looks like a dozer blade - is it an engineering vehicle? And the surprise by BFT is that it works? Ok ok just trying to raise expectations to unreasonably high expectations. Can't wait for it to come out. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sdp Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 it's the bulldog! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 4, 2008 Share Posted December 4, 2008 Yes, the Bulldog - the up-armoured and improved version of the FV432, the base version of which can be seen immediately to the right of it. The first British vehicle to mount ERA. Protection is supposedly comparable to an up-armoured Warrior. As for the CR2 K-kill, any decent size explosive round would have done it, just bad luck. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inkompetent Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 And well, the Leopard is listed over the Challenger and Abrams because it is much more maneuverable. Only a fraction of the world's battle zones are flat desert, and in more rough terrain the speed and agility is valued higher than the heavy armour extreme range capability of the above tanks. It's also easier to repair, maintain and modify. However urban combat is getting more and more important, and admittedly it underperforms there compared to its heavier armoured brothers against close range tandem warheads and stuff like that. I'm definitely looking forward to the Britts though! Can't wait to get my hands on Landies. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 I'd doubt that the Leo2 has that much more mobility than either the Abrams or the Challenger 2. Granted it has chosen mobility over protection, but it is still fundamentally a 60 tonne tank. Where it really scores is as a well-put-together tank with massive commonality - post-cold-war fire sales coupled with a good diesel engine, superb upgrade paths and a gun used by pretty much everyone put it well ahead of the Challenger 2 with its rifled gun and the Abrams with its gas turbine. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Pfft. The greatest tank of all time is this 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 Sergi, Sergei, Sergei, have i taught you nothing? The greatest tank of all time is this: http://www.jedsite.info/tanks-bravo/bravo/misc/bob-semple/bobsemple-intro.htm Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted December 5, 2008 Share Posted December 5, 2008 At 12 metres high (and 60 ton weight), my Lebedenko surely is the GREATEST. Your Sempley might be the scariest, though... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 To move back to matters CMSF Brit: shame the Saxon isn't there. Are they used in the same way as the Marines MTVR? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 7, 2008 Share Posted December 7, 2008 I suppose that there would be comparison between the Saxon and the MTVR, but the Saxon is primarily road-bound. Off-road performance is very limited and armour protection is somewhat worse than the much derided Landrover Snatch. I've yet to find someone who has used one who will say nice things about Saxon. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sivodsi Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 I suppose that there would be comparison between the Saxon and the MTVR, but the Saxon is primarily road-bound. Off-road performance is very limited and armour protection is somewhat worse than the much derided Landrover Snatch. I've yet to find someone who has used one who will say nice things about Saxon. Thanks for the input! From that I guess its reasonable not to include it. The Saxon sure is one ugly s of a b, and from a visual point of view I would love it to be in the game. How on earth do you actually see anything from inside it? Are there cameras or periscopes or something? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flamingknives Posted December 8, 2008 Share Posted December 8, 2008 The driver has armoured windows and a hatch, as does the vehicle commander. Some versions have side windows, but the British Army has never been big on letting the dismounts know what's going on. Another good reason to not include Saxon is that it has been out of service with the British Army for a year or so. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.