brams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to sI'm testing a video game and would like the tanks to be as realistic as possible in their weapons damage power and armor defense. We have US Abraham's (most current configuration) vs. Russian's T-80 (also most current version). The ranges are less than 1000m. I don't believe there are realistic armor zones (the rear is not less armored than front and the tracks will operate until total destruction). Any hit would be considered direct to the turret.

How many shots should it take to kill each other w/anti-tank rounds? Currently the programmers have it set at 4.Is there a difference in the destructive power of the two cannons, inside 1000m?

Inside 1000 m the destructive power of the two cannons are roughly comparable, maybe giving it a slight edge to the M1 due to better ammunition.

The number of rounds required to kill off another modern MBT is a very complex question. Its all about where it hits. To answer your question, 1 - 6 Armor piercing long rod penetrators. Its all about where you hit. 1 in the engine = stop but the turret still moves. 1 in the turret the tank still moves but the gun might be disabled = pop smoke and evade.

The rear is of course less armored than the front of the tank and that is less armored than the turret. Most hits have been determined to hit the turret (according to a survey of WWII battles if I recall correctly) since the crew aim to cover the hull as often as possible.

I also have heard a new tank MBT 2000 by Pakistan/China/Ukraine has came out in the MBTs arena. So how good is it? Can it be listed with the likes of M1A2, Merkeva 4 and leopard?

My opinion is that if you put a monkey behind the steering wheel of a Ferrari and a human on a tri-cycle. The human will most likely finish first.

The MBT 2000 is from a technical point of view very good, probably the best ever manufactured in Asia.

I would not rate it together with Leopard 2A6, M1A2 SEP or the Merkava 4. It would most likely place itself in a second group with tanks like Leopard 2A4/5 & M1A1.

But it all comes down to crew training and tactics. The MBT 2000 is clearly capable of defeating better tanks with the use of better tactics.

But from a technical POV, not as good as the ones you listed.

I had thought that the Abrams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to s

re a difference in the destructive power of the two cannons, inside 1000m?

Inside 1000 m the destructive power of the two cannons are roughly comparable, maybe giving it a slight edge to the M1 due to better ammunition.

The number of rounds required to kill off another modern MBT is a very complex question. Its all about where it hits. To answer your question, 1 - 6 Armor piercing long rod penetrators. Its all about where you hit. 1 in the engine = stop but the turret still moves. 1 in the turret the tank still moves but the gun might be disabled = pop smoke and evade.

The rear is of course less armored than the front of the tank and that is less armored than the turret. Most hits have been determined to hit the turret (according to a survey of WWII battles if I recall correctly) since the crew aim to cover the hull as often as possible.

I also have heard a new tank MBT 2000 by Pakistan/China/Ukraine has came out in the MBTs arena. So how good is it? Can it be listed with the likes of M1A2, Merkeva 4 and leopard?

My opinion is that if you put a monkey behind the steering wheel of a Ferrari and a human on a tri-cycle. The human will most likely finish first.

The MBT 2000 is from a technical point of view very good, probably the best ever manufactured in Asia.

I would not rate it together with Leopard 2A6, M1A2 SEP or the Merkava 4. It would most likely place itself in a second group with tanks like Leopard 2A4/5 & M1A1.

But it all comes down to crew training and tactics. The MBT 2000 is clearly capable of defeating better tanks with the use of better tactics.

But from a technical POV, not as good as the ones you listed.

I had thought that the Abrams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to s

and evade.

The rear is of course less armored than the front of the tank and that is less armored than the turret. Most hits have been determined to hit the turret (according to a survey of WWII battles if I recall correctly) since the crew aim to cover the hull as often as possible.

I also have heard a new tank MBT 2000 by Pakistan/China/Ukraine has came out in the MBTs arena. So how good is it? Can it be listed with the likes of M1A2, Merkeva 4 and leopard?

My opinion is that if you put a monkey behind the steering wheel of a Ferrari and a human on a tri-cycle. The human will most likely finish first.

The MBT 2000 is from a technical point of view very good, probably the best ever manufactured in Asia.

I would not rate it together with Leopard 2A6, M1A2 SEP or the Merkava 4. It would most likely place itself in a second group with tanks like Leopard 2A4/5 & M1A1.

But it all comes down to crew training and tactics. The MBT 2000 is clearly capable of defeating better tanks with the use of better tactics.

But from a technical POV, not as good as the ones you listed.

I had thought that the Abrams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to s

tri-cycle. The human will most likely finish first.

The MBT 2000 is from a technical point of view very good, probably the best ever manufactured in Asia.

I would not rate it together with Leopard 2A6, M1A2 SEP or the Merkava 4. It would most likely place itself in a second group with tanks like Leopard 2A4/5 & M1A1.

But it all comes down to crew training and tactics. The MBT 2000 is clearly capable of defeating better tanks with the use of better tactics.

But from a technical POV, not as good as the ones you listed.

I had thought that the Abrams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to s

brams M1 was essentially invulnerable to something like an RPG but last week a USMC track was reportedly struck and disabled by this shoulder-fired weapon. Any idea how that may have occurred? Everything is possible since nothing is invulnerable. The M1 is a much protected tank and can withstand almost everything fired against its front arc. But as with all armored vehicles the weight sets limits and therefore the vehicle cannot be equally protected all around. So therefore it is possible to get a penetrating hit in the roof or rear with a RPG. But the shooter needs to show tremendous courage to get such a shot. But it is possible.