Beast from the east
- Thread starter Mr Evil
- Start date
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Sarcasm from a jarhead, despite the fact that I just pointed out that other tanks have these issues as well. Typical response, and American troops are invulnerable to IEDs too correct?
Wow....
A> I have more brains than a Marine, thank you.
B> I didn't ignore your statement that other tanks have that issue. It wasn't sarcasm and I apologize that Marines might have you beat in the brains department.
C> What do IEDs have to do with Tank on Tank warfare? The Type 99 has this feaking gap between where the turret meets the body, with a slight inward slope on the bottom edge of it. That's just ASKING for someone to put a sabot round right there.
A> I have more brains than a Marine, thank you.
B> I didn't ignore your statement that other tanks have that issue. It wasn't sarcasm and I apologize that Marines might have you beat in the brains department.
C> What do IEDs have to do with Tank on Tank warfare? The Type 99 has this feaking gap between where the turret meets the body, with a slight inward slope on the bottom edge of it. That's just ASKING for someone to put a sabot round right there.
Sauragnmon
Mongoose
What our dear Rogue failed to point out, is that not only does the Leopard II, and other tanks have this wonderful catch known as a Shot Trap, but if you look nice and close to the Abrams, with its massive heat signature from that engine, with its stereotypically weak top and rear armor, another often-seen tank soft spot, our dear friend the ~30 year old Abrams, has the exact same weakness you pointed out as the Type-99, in that it has a Shot Trap.
Now, you like to point out these shot traps. Let's point out a few that have dealt with this shot trap. The T-55, T-72, T-80 and T-90, Do Not have a shot trap. While the T-80 and T-90 may Seem to have a shot trap, this is actually a blast spacing in the armor, ventilated out the sides, formed in the placement of the Reactive Armor bricks.
Additionally, the Type-99 may indeed appear to have a shot trap. But you consider additionally, that the two forward pieces that slope on that turret, are not actually fixed parts of the turret, but applique bricks, designed for blast absorption. So, my friend, you find yourself at a loss for words with regards to that. Any explosive round directed at the apparent shot trap of the Type 99 (Please, be intelligent and use the Type in its fullness, that we don't mistakenly think you are speaking about some prototype Russian tank) would in fact find that the blast force is directed upwards, through path of least resistance, into these applique sections. If you doubt me, take a look at an up close turret shot that is not in a dark colour pattern, and you will notice there is a visible join on the front bricks.
Thankyou, and have a nice day.
Now, you like to point out these shot traps. Let's point out a few that have dealt with this shot trap. The T-55, T-72, T-80 and T-90, Do Not have a shot trap. While the T-80 and T-90 may Seem to have a shot trap, this is actually a blast spacing in the armor, ventilated out the sides, formed in the placement of the Reactive Armor bricks.
Additionally, the Type-99 may indeed appear to have a shot trap. But you consider additionally, that the two forward pieces that slope on that turret, are not actually fixed parts of the turret, but applique bricks, designed for blast absorption. So, my friend, you find yourself at a loss for words with regards to that. Any explosive round directed at the apparent shot trap of the Type 99 (Please, be intelligent and use the Type in its fullness, that we don't mistakenly think you are speaking about some prototype Russian tank) would in fact find that the blast force is directed upwards, through path of least resistance, into these applique sections. If you doubt me, take a look at an up close turret shot that is not in a dark colour pattern, and you will notice there is a visible join on the front bricks.
Thankyou, and have a nice day.
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Seeing that you have more brains than a Marine, and noticing that you have failed to address my point with a relevant comment, I somewhat doubt you are intellectually superior to them by much... Regardless, my point was that all modern battle tanks have issues; I brought out the IED because even they can destroy the perceived ‘invincible’ M1A2 Abram.
You’ve also agitated to me to point out that an IED can also make the M1 pop, just in a messier fashion however.
You’ve also agitated to me to point out that an IED can also make the M1 pop, just in a messier fashion however.
Okay? I believe I have been consistantly using Type 99, not T-99...
And no, I don't find myself at a loss for words. I've looked at the pictures of the Type 99, and I don't see the any visible joints. There's a sloping edge leading right into the place where the turret joins the rest of the tank. The Leopard Mk2 has the same deal. Shots hitting there have the chance of popping right into the hull from above.
And no, I don't find myself at a loss for words. I've looked at the pictures of the Type 99, and I don't see the any visible joints. There's a sloping edge leading right into the place where the turret joins the rest of the tank. The Leopard Mk2 has the same deal. Shots hitting there have the chance of popping right into the hull from above.
Rogue Soldat said:
It has to be a pretty serious IED, Rogue. And no, I did respond to your comment with a relevant point, and again I didn't ignore your point at all. I was talking about the turret design on the Type 99 is one of those 'Hey, wait a minute' points that should have been thought of. Hell, even the Leopard's got the downward slope on its turret.... It runs the risk of having a round bounce into the main body of the tank, thus the bottle top analogy.
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
We’ve been consistently using the Type 99, or T-99; both of which is the same thing since we’re discussing the main battle tank, and not the light tank. I’m unsure to why you have brought this up, since it is irrelevant.
Since the Leopard MK2 has the same deal, there’s no reason to point out that issue unless you had a point to make.
Since the Leopard MK2 has the same deal, there’s no reason to point out that issue unless you had a point to make.
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Hardly, two sarcastic comments in a row?
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Actually, you’ve cracked two sarcastic comments before I got agitated. At least I’ve managed to draw you out into a serious discussion.
In any case, I think my friend’s about to blast your argument out of the water…
In any case, I think my friend’s about to blast your argument out of the water…
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Not backup, this is merely a conversation; nothing hostile at all.
Sauragnmon
Mongoose
Well, gentlemen... you can continue, but I think I will clarify and finish a point here.
Hino, are you blind? Have you been looking at the same tank I have? Here, let me show you first, the Type 98, its predecessor, that you may see what is generally the base line of this tank.
That's the Type 98 MBT, note the rearward slant on its forward turret armor, no sign of a shot trap because it goes rather seamlessly from hull to turret, with significantly far less overhang than your precious Abrams.
Now, to clarify, here's a few images, courtesy of Sinodefence, that I acquired, cropped, and doublesized, so that we can get a real nice clear shot of the joins that you quite obviously missed.
First, a full side-on shot. Pay attention, they're hard to miss, I know, being nice and dark on such a light colour scheme..
Here, let's see another shot, head on, even larger, and up closer. Look, there's so many lines, I don't know HOW you could have POSSIBLY missed them. Aww, poor american... need some beer to soak up that pain? Oh, sorry, you're American... need some poorly flavoured water, since you don't know how to brew beer, just like you don't know how to analyze a tank?
Hino, are you blind? Have you been looking at the same tank I have? Here, let me show you first, the Type 98, its predecessor, that you may see what is generally the base line of this tank.
That's the Type 98 MBT, note the rearward slant on its forward turret armor, no sign of a shot trap because it goes rather seamlessly from hull to turret, with significantly far less overhang than your precious Abrams.
Now, to clarify, here's a few images, courtesy of Sinodefence, that I acquired, cropped, and doublesized, so that we can get a real nice clear shot of the joins that you quite obviously missed.
First, a full side-on shot. Pay attention, they're hard to miss, I know, being nice and dark on such a light colour scheme..
Here, let's see another shot, head on, even larger, and up closer. Look, there's so many lines, I don't know HOW you could have POSSIBLY missed them. Aww, poor american... need some beer to soak up that pain? Oh, sorry, you're American... need some poorly flavoured water, since you don't know how to brew beer, just like you don't know how to analyze a tank?
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
Well, I tried to keep it peaceful =(
Rogue Soldat
Mongoose
None, I have no country ;D I just pay taxes and stay out of trouble.
Sauragnmon
Mongoose
Oh yes, and for the record, he didn't Bring me to this shin-dig. I'm not some poor sap who hangs on. He pointed me here, I saw my friend was having some problems, and, being a good friend, without even letting him know until too late, gave him some support.
