*chuckles at the comment that he's Rogue's mum*
Sorry, mate, not likely. We're on opposite sides of the continent. I live (albeit a little too close) near Quebec, while Rogue's on the west coast.
I'm a student of all forms of weapons technology by nature. And I'd have to argue with you on the concept that the Abrams is the best tank. The Abrams, while most other tanks in the world are using ERA, still relies on solid plating to my knowledge. Albeit very thick, very dense armor plating, but still, one solid plate that a good old 150mm Hollow Charge round could probably put a hole in. The Abrams also lacks any serious C3 systems. Now, let's look at the competition, shall we?
T-90: While admittedly the T-90 is probably one of the lowest, for its armor, it has the deflective plates hidden under the mounting of its Kontakt-5 bricks. The T-90 also has the SHTORA system, which detects laser designation and automatically deploys smoke charges to stop acquisition. Additionally, there's the Arena and Kaktus active protection systems which actively attack incoming missiles and such. Crew survivability has also been addressed, through an escape hatch in the bottom of the chassis, which addresses the common principle deployed by foreign troops of attacking the additional fuel supply drums that are mounted on the aft section of the chassis. Yes, these are Additional fuel, there are videos out there of the tanks operating Without them. Another point to be made, is that the T-72, T-80 and T-90, have the ability, from far longer ranges than other tanks can engage, to strike with the AT-11 Laser-guided ATGM, which does not wear on the barrel due to launch as it is fired from the barrel in a canister and engages its motor post-firing. This, in my opinion, is one of the few, if not the only, good thing to come from the mind of Nikita Kruschev, especially regarding tank warfare.
Type 99: While admittedly the chinese have not engaged first hand in armored combat since Korea and the Sino-Russian war, they have been able, thanks to the ingenious concept of journalistic war documentation, to study armored combat of potential enemy nations. This has led to the design principles seen in the Type 98/99 tanks, with the ERA, sloped turret armor, laser countermeasure system, and other such features. If there's one thing wonderful about the concept of putting journalists in the warfront, it's that the enemy doesn't have to do as much spying to find out where your design flaws are, and they don't have to fight you to learn them either.
Leopard 2: This tank is quite a formidable unit in and of itself, between the beautiful driver control system (likened by crewmen to driving a volvo for the simplicity and ease), and its well-thought of C3 system that not only shows the tank's position on a satellite GPS overlay, but that of other friendly tanks as well, and allowing realtime data relay between tanks, allowing coordination of tank attacks, they use the very same gun, built by Rheinmetall-Borsig, as the Abrams. The combination makes the tank quite formidable as an ACV.
Challenger 2: This tank's actually probably among the oldest of the currently operating MBT's. This can be seen in the fact it still utilizes a rifled barrel, which is subject to wear and requires replacement after a specific number of shots. The rifling does, however, provide an advantage in the fact that it stabilizes the round in flight, providing additional accuracy. The catch of the Challenger is in its problematic nature that it still has no autoloader, making crew attrition a higher problem.
Leclerc: I haven't seen this tank much, and from the images I have seen, it suffers from a bulky design, providing a massive silhouette. The gun also seems to be lower caliber, but I saw no signs of rifling in the images I have seen. I can only surmise that it has a low effectiveness in combat, since I don't remember hearing or reading about the French actually deploying them. Until it's fielded, I'll just wonder if its applique armor is of any use in saving another poor French tank design from humiliation.
Merkava: The "Do it yourself" tank as I have heard it mentioned, is actually, while high in sillhouette, rather an interesting design. To note a major weakness, though they have made an attempt at a defence against it, is the Rear shot trap, where a well-placed shell in the aft of the turret, with it facing forward would drive the shell's explosion most likely downwards, into not only the unwitting crew, but the tank's six passengers as well. Its forward shot trap is not as problematic, since it does have the forward mounted engine, which provides some measure of additional mass. It's a bit of a mixed bag, as I see it. Some interesting ideas, some potentially costly problems. Though the Merkava has seen combat, and they do continually improve it from lessons learned.
All told, those are the main tanks that compare against it. I can't comment directly on the Iranian tank, as I have only seen the images, and thus will decline comment until I've had a chance to review them more.
)
