Best Infantry Fighting Vehicle

Best IFV

  • Combat Vehicle 90 (Sweden)

    Votes: 1 33.3%
  • Type 97 (China)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • AMX-10P (France)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Dardo (italy)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Type 89 (Japan)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • M2 Bradley (United States)

    Votes: 2 66.7%
  • BMP-3 (Russia)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Puma (Germany)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Ratel (South Africa)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • MLI-84 (Romania)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • FV 510 Warrior (United Kingdom)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Tulpar (Turkey)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Lazika (Georgia)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ASCOD (Austria)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • K-21 (South Korea)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • BVP M-80 (Serbia)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • ELVO Kentaurus (Greece)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • BMP-23 (Bulgaria)

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    3
Nobody has claimed 100% kill with any weapon....duh

You said a TOW could rip the face off of anything. Like I said, only if it hits it in the same section of armored plating several times. Reactive armor has made ATGM ineffective, while Active Protection Systems have rendered it all but obsolete.

Yep kiddo, I'll stick with my 40mm autocannon with instant penetrating abilities.
 
Nobody has claimed 100% kill with any weapon....duh

You said a TOW could rip the face off of anything. Like I said, only if it hits it in the same section of armored plating several times. Reactive armor has made ATGM ineffective, while Active Protection Systems have rendered it all but obsolete.
Think Hellfire missile. Makes a TOW look like a cap pistol.
 
His claim is ludicrous that reactive armor totally overcomes ATGM.....it doesnt

Despite the science, military trials, and combat encounters proving me correct.

Reactive armor responds to impact and absorbs the explosion. As long as the armor plating is capable of storing energy, then the chassis is going to stay intact. It's just basic science.

Let me put it this way. Your muscles are a form of reactive armor. If I were to stab you with a pencil in the chest, your muscles would immediately tense up and absorb the blow. It wouldn't penetrate your flesh. However if I stab you in the exact same place with a pencil 20 times, then your muscles will give out and the pencil would eventually tear through your flesh. Now what if I stabbed you with a sword? The kinetic energy would be too much for your muscles to absorb, and it would penetrate your flesh in the first blow.

The same logic applies to ATGM vs Sabot. If you keep striking an armor plate with a HEAT missile, then after several strikes it will absorb the maximum amount of energy and give out. However if you shoot a 120mm APFSDS shell at a tank, then the kinetic energy will exceed what the armor plating is capable of storing, and penetrate instantly.

The difference between ATGM and Sabot is the difference between stabbing someone 20 times with a pencil and 1 time with a sword.
 
That's the last time I am going to explain why ATGM works poorly on reactive armor. Just remember that almost no tanks carry an ATGM weapon, while every tank has a cannon that shoots Sabot rounds. :bye1:
 

Forum List

Back
Top