6/3 How many Panzers can the M1 Abram take out? How many ME109s can the
F22 raptor take out? Just want to see how much we have advanced in
the past 60 years...
\_ F22 will take out as many as it is possible to take out
with the amount of missiles it can carry, then go back to
its home base unharmed, refuel, rearm, repeat.. For that
matter, an F16 would probably do the same, and any older
generation fighter armed with missiles and radars.
\_ Actually, I've only heard one story of a prop plane
successfully taking out at jet after WWII. Something about
a patrol plane in 'nam where he strapped a missle to his
landing gear, and used it to shoot down a MiG that had been
harrassing him.
\_ M1a3 vs panzers: all of them until it runs out of shells. The
panzer can't penetrate the M1's hull at any reasonable range.
F22 vs ME109: all of them until the F22 runs out of ammo. The
ME109 can't see it, can't catch it, can't target it, and will go
down in flames while the F22 is still miles away.
\_ Furthermore, on the tank front, a lot of people don't
realize that WWII tanks couldn't shoot with any accuracy
while moving, and would have a pretty hard time hitting a
moving target. An M1a3, on the other hand, can hit a rat
from a mile away while going 60mph. So even if the pazers
got close enough, they'd still be toast.
\_ This poster is just right. Recall the two wars in Iraq.
They conclusively demonstrated that the side with the
better weapons, not the side with more, will win in open
warfare. Sadly, our gov't is buying more weapons rather
than investing in next-generation better weapons. Consider
a nation with effective battlefield lasers. Aircraft will
suddenly have to fly below the horizon or they'll be shot
down at the speed of light. Same with missiles. Shells.
Would you rather it be us with the lasers first, or China?
Write your congressperson.
\_ The US Navy is investing heavily in laser platforms for ships.
China has a long way to go to catch up to the US, I would say
20 years would be enough if the US stood still. America
learned the "R&D >>> production" lesson in WWII, when the
Tigers were pulling the "kill all Shermans until out of ammo"
trick on the Americans. The flip side of the coin is the
Russians, who lost 3 tanks for every 2 german tanks, but
were outproducing the Germans 10 to 1. -- ilyas
\_ The U.S. wants anti-cruise-missile tech. Whether it's laser
or not, we don't care, as long as it works. Heck, if we
could zap Osama from a Predator, I'm sure the military
guys would love that too.
\_ Training and professionalism also played a critical role.
T-72s and Mig-29s that Iraq possessed were considered to
be quiet formidable tanks and fighter planes respectively
when operated by well-trained crews (granted, most of Iraqi
weapons were much older than that). I read somewhere that
during the Iran-Iraq war the troops on both sides did no make
an effective use of the technology that they posessed. For
example, the Iraqis didn't use the advanced sights/targeting
on their Soviet-made tanks, reducing their effectiveness to
WWII era. Also, both sides tended to hole up their tanks and
use them as individual artilery pieces.
\_ Why do I feel like the Command & Conquer / Rise of Nations /
Empire Earth forum has suddenly moved here?
\_ Paradox forums >> all. Those guys know their history. -- ilyas
\_ Tank vs tank is measure of RHA. |