Tweet
[quote=CJVercetti][quote=ooozmin][quote=CJVercetti]
ooozmin always has the long posts that no one reads 
The Al-Khalid surpasses every tank, ever
Not the Abrams, sorry.
Enough with the tanks, both of you. Seriously.
No, more tanks. But yeah the M1A1 are crap now a days.[/quote:ec65d]
Al-Khalid > M1A1 in every aspect, except the M1A1 has more cup holders...[/quote:ec65d]
If we pit the M1A1 Abrams against the Al-Jazeera the M1A1 would come out on top.
I will give you the fact that it's lighter though.
It's like, the MBT 2000 is Underoos and the M1 is boxers. Your tank is cool looking and all but the big boys use the M1;)
By the way the M1A2 TUSK is MUCH better than your precious MBT 2000.[/quote:ec65d]
First of all, the tanks name is Al-Khalid (meaning eternal). Al Khalids have Auto Loading (3 Crew members) & ABRAMs don't have this Capability (4Crew members). This is a Major Disadvantage ABRAMS have. Also AL Khalid has a 125mm Smooth Bore Gun & ABRAMS have 120mm. Abram Is Heavy. It Overheats In Deserts. Made For Specifically For Cool countires Not For Warm Countries. Al-Khalid Is Light. Doesn't Overheat In Deserts. Made For Warm Conditions & Cool. Abram Is Fuel Hungry. AK Is Perfectly Economical. Al Khalid is capable of being totally submerged in to water, M1s cannot go into water that deep. AL-khalid can fire with deadly accuracy at ranges of 4kms.
AK advantages:
1)fast and more manouverable in open areas.
2)Auto-loader
3)Lighter (less likely to get bogged down in the desert...BTW Abrams was rejected by PA during Zia's time because it was too heavy, and not well suited for Rajastan desert)
4)125mm smoothbore with DU capability ( 125mm still probably has the capabilities of punching through M1's armor)
5)AK has just hit all targets at 4,000m with 100% accuracy, and at 3,000m (on the move) with 100% accuracy, in a test carried out by KSA.
I can go on all day if these two tanks were to go 1 one 1 the AK would be the victor. The only reason the sluggish Abrams are any good is due to the air support that they receive, and the satellite technology system that supports them. If the Abram was by itself, it would get destroyed by an AK, no doubt
Originally posted by Vespasian
Originally posted by CJVercetti
Originally posted by "ooozmin":ec65d
Originally posted by "Zafa":ec65d
Originally posted by "CJVercetti":ec65d
The Al-Khalid surpasses every tank, ever
Al-Khalid > M1A1 in every aspect, except the M1A1 has more cup holders...[/quote:ec65d]
If we pit the M1A1 Abrams against the Al-Jazeera the M1A1 would come out on top.
I will give you the fact that it's lighter though.
It's like, the MBT 2000 is Underoos and the M1 is boxers. Your tank is cool looking and all but the big boys use the M1;)
By the way the M1A2 TUSK is MUCH better than your precious MBT 2000.[/quote:ec65d]
First of all, the tanks name is Al-Khalid (meaning eternal). Al Khalids have Auto Loading (3 Crew members) & ABRAMs don't have this Capability (4Crew members). This is a Major Disadvantage ABRAMS have. Also AL Khalid has a 125mm Smooth Bore Gun & ABRAMS have 120mm. Abram Is Heavy. It Overheats In Deserts. Made For Specifically For Cool countires Not For Warm Countries. Al-Khalid Is Light. Doesn't Overheat In Deserts. Made For Warm Conditions & Cool. Abram Is Fuel Hungry. AK Is Perfectly Economical. Al Khalid is capable of being totally submerged in to water, M1s cannot go into water that deep. AL-khalid can fire with deadly accuracy at ranges of 4kms.
AK advantages:
1)fast and more manouverable in open areas.
2)Auto-loader
3)Lighter (less likely to get bogged down in the desert...BTW Abrams was rejected by PA during Zia's time because it was too heavy, and not well suited for Rajastan desert)
4)125mm smoothbore with DU capability ( 125mm still probably has the capabilities of punching through M1's armor)
5)AK has just hit all targets at 4,000m with 100% accuracy, and at 3,000m (on the move) with 100% accuracy, in a test carried out by KSA.
I can go on all day if these two tanks were to go 1 one 1 the AK would be the victor. The only reason the sluggish Abrams are any good is due to the air support that they receive, and the satellite technology system that supports them. If the Abram was by itself, it would get destroyed by an AK, no doubt
[/img]
Comment