• Gucci_Minh [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    3 months ago

    It’s near impossible for modern MBT armour to stop a good hit from an equally modern ATGM or APFSDS round. The best way to survive is to not get spotted and hit in the first place. That’s why Soviet doctrine had it right, quick low profile tanks with “decent enough” armour. Hard and soft kill APS can help with RPGs and ATGMs but after seeing how the Trophy system of the IOF is absolute dogshit I don’t think it’ll be enough.

    I think if natoids wanted an effective combat platform over grifting money, they would develop a tank with good all around protection against autocannons, but just enough armour on the frontal arc to get lucky vs dedicated anti tank weapons. If you have a 70 ton tank that gets penetrated by Kornets, might as well make a 50 ton tank that gets penetrated by Kornets instead and can actually cross bridges.

    • SSJ2Marx@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      41
      ·
      3 months ago

      the Trophy system of the IOF

      In October 2023, Hamas used civilian DJI and Autel quadcopter drones, which dropped shaped-charge grenades to damage or destroy several Merkava tanks.

      When your half ton multi million dollar state of the art tank defense is consistently defeated by $150 quadcopters available at Best Buy.

    • Tankiedesantski [he/him]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      3 months ago

      if natoids wanted an effective combat platform over grifting money, they would develop a tank with good all around protection against autocannons, but just enough armour on the frontal arc to get lucky vs dedicated anti tank weapons.

      That’s just a Leopard 1 with ERA bricks.

      So yeah, you’re probably not wrong.