Military Thread V10, Merry X'Mas and Happy New Year 
Sep 26 2013, 10:40 AM
QUOTE(MilitaryMadness @ Sep 26 2013, 01:39 AM)
Any internal combustion engined vehicle can also generate smoke by injecting fuel into the exhaust system.Those small airplanes that write sky messages do it all the time. Hell,you can do to your car if you want.
Anyway,no need for tanks or the crew to dig proper trenches,just pile up an earth embankment in front of the tank can also put the tank in a hull-down position and offer good defense from attack,also a trench can be hard to reverse for a tank,an earth embankment can protect the front of the tank and if in trouble,the tank can reverse easily to another position.
But I think you all got the tactics backwards,Soviet doctrine is for full armored attack with speed and maneuverability,that's why Soviet-designed tanks are smaller,lighter and ride lower,to make a small target for enemy defences. Meanwhile NATO doctrine dictates tanks must fight defensively, that's why NATO tanks are bigger and more armored for more survivability and taller so it's easier to deploy in hull-down fighting position. So NATO tanks should be the ones fighting from defensive position and Soviet tanks are the ones charging an enemy in overwhelming numbers.
M2 Bradley hull-down position behind an earthen embankment
Difference in size between M1 Abrams (Blue) and T-90 (Red)
Err did i miss something.Anyway,no need for tanks or the crew to dig proper trenches,just pile up an earth embankment in front of the tank can also put the tank in a hull-down position and offer good defense from attack,also a trench can be hard to reverse for a tank,an earth embankment can protect the front of the tank and if in trouble,the tank can reverse easily to another position.
But I think you all got the tactics backwards,Soviet doctrine is for full armored attack with speed and maneuverability,that's why Soviet-designed tanks are smaller,lighter and ride lower,to make a small target for enemy defences. Meanwhile NATO doctrine dictates tanks must fight defensively, that's why NATO tanks are bigger and more armored for more survivability and taller so it's easier to deploy in hull-down fighting position. So NATO tanks should be the ones fighting from defensive position and Soviet tanks are the ones charging an enemy in overwhelming numbers.
M2 Bradley hull-down position behind an earthen embankment
Difference in size between M1 Abrams (Blue) and T-90 (Red)
I did not mention tank doctrine at my post.
And yeah nato always design their tank based on defensive doctrine.
While soviet were based on attack doctrine and spamming horde of tanks. Their warsaw pact were holding the major influence on their tank design.
Not surprise they design their tank with less protection since warsaw pact is all about nuking enemy front lines. Lolz.
Quote
0.0299sec
0.52
5 queries
GZIP Disabled