It is over, Russia defeated

Polen has a new tank. Plunger 1. Russia, you beter surrender while you still can.

defence-blog.com/army/poland-develops-new-pt-16-main-battle-tank.html

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=ZAGargyyIPQ&feature=youtu.be
youtube.com/watch?v=gswIQ3mCbqQ
youtube.com/watch?v=TSw6mqt2WIE
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

I miss when there was actually a race between nations for the best tank.

youtube.com/watch?v=ZAGargyyIPQ&feature=youtu.be

>pt-16-main-battle-tank
I am pretty sure that this is just a retrofitted T-72.

Look at the position of the the towing lugs, drivers position and the type, position and number of wheels!

They also have new Ammo

That was quick.

>Plunger 1
This a plumber joke?

At least it is not shooting out dildos like the Swedish one

what tank? i just see pavement and trees

No reactive plating. Where are the sensors? WTF is this

Looks like a huge plastic toy desu.

You see Kowalski, when you have SUPER ADVANCE DIGITAL CAMO you have not need protection because drunk Russian never see you!

Looks a lot shittier than the concept tank from 2013.

Wtf this QR code doesn't work

>I miss

a time you were never alive in? a time you only read about on an anime masturbation forum? I hope you're getting regular treatment for your autism

Well as long as we gonna fight in an old NES game the tank is invisible.

I dont see any tank

GOD DAMMIT KACZMAREK THAT'S THE 64x64 TEXTURE

I SAID USE THE OTHER ONE

Wtf I love Poland now

No one will buy that thing Poland. Why did you even build it when you plan to use Leo2s instead?

OH KURVA

Hey look it's another wooden mock up used for propaganda! This country is too poor to do some real development. We'd be better just buying 1000 abrams that burgers have stashed in their deserts.

with cool digital look i see
because rectangles are so common in the jungle

I miss the 70s and im only 23, now i know why im so fucked in the head its because i have autism thank you doctor user

Looks like it was desinged by plumbers, i wonder why.

Oh nooo Pooland has one tank. Will Russians ever recover?

Underrated

Germany your the brown one nigger

youtube.com/watch?v=gswIQ3mCbqQ

>Germany
>Ever having the best tanks
The only real arms race regarding tanks was during the Cold War when tanks were actually fairly equal in overall effectiveness but filled different battlefield roles to a small extent. During WW2 the only real consistency is that Germans are bad at learning lessons.

>Invade France in 1940
>Holy shit their infantry tanks are literally immune to our tanks and they have tanks killing several of ours in a day
>Hey we won because our army was more mobile and our officers had greater autonomy and initiative

>Invade the USSR in 1941
>Holy shit their heavy tanks are literally immune to our tanks and they have tanks killing several of ours in a day
>Hey we are winning because our army is more mobile and our officers have greater autonomy and initiative

>Lets make our own heavy tanks, with blackjack and hookers
>Lets abandon the idea of light, mobile, and reliable medium tanks in favour of over armoured and gunned tanks that are difficult to produce
>Oh no now our armoured forces have worse tactical mobility than allied tanks and our armoured divisions have less strategic mobility than infantry division

Comparing the Sherman to the Panther
>The Sherman was older
>The Sherman was cheaper to produce and maintain
>The Sherman was more reliable
>The Sherman could be armed with a 17 pounder which could greatly surpass the Panther in penetration when using APDS ammunition
>The Sherman had a partially stabilized main gun allowing it much greater accuracy while moving
>The Sherman could be easily modified with more armour or bigger guns
Even then by the end of the war tanks like the Centurion, T-54, and Pershing were coming out, all of which were much more advanced than the Panther.

Minecraft camo/10

If you say so

looks like polish copy of ukranian oplot.

their last "concept tank" was a cv90 with add ons

>he thinks that shitty grad will hit a specific target and not just indiscriminately bomb an area full of civilians like its intended purpose

>shitty
Wew lad

>Germany
>Ever having the best tanks
Yeah, thanks.

>Invade France in 1940
>Holy shit their infantry tanks are literally immune to our tanks and they have tanks killing several of ours in a day
>Hey we won because our army was more mobile and our officers had greater autonomy and initiative

>Invade the USSR in 1941
>Holy shit their heavy tanks are literally immune to our tanks and they have tanks killing several of ours in a day
>Hey we are winning because our army is more mobile and our officers have greater autonomy and initiative

>Lets make our own heavy tanks, with blackjack and hookers
>Lets abandon the idea of light, mobile, and reliable medium tanks in favour of over armoured and gunned tanks that are difficult to produce
>Oh no now our armoured forces have worse tactical mobility than allied tanks and our armoured divisions have less strategic mobility than infantry division

So you mean we didn't learn it the first 2 Times and the third time we did and we failed?

>The Sherman was older
One plus point for the Sherman i guess?
>The Sherman was cheaper to produce and maintain
If you have unlimited amount of Resources and Manpower i guess you can go for overwhelming Quantity instead of Quality
>The Sherman could be armed with a 17 pounder
This was almost never done since the Americans didn't like putting a foreign Weapon in their tank
>The Sherman had a partially stabilized main gun allowing it much greater accuracy while moving
Never heard of that before
>The Sherman could be easily modified with more armour or bigger guns
Yeah, if you count tossing Sandbags or Logs on your Frontal Armor.

tank?
i dont see anything 2bh

>that digital cammo

Hey at least it's not like camo is meant to make you hard to spot.

What are they going to war in MineCraft?

Fucking 32 bit edition tank of the year.

The phanter was bulid when everything already started going down, so many compromisses had to be made. Centurion and t 54 better than the panther no way dude also if you Look at the discribtion for which combat situations each was desinged it is near impossible to compare them. The Pershing is Ultra Heavy Tank, but there you are right it was far more advanded compared to the Panther.

I can only assume they ran out of budget when it came to doing the camo, so they hired a 5 year old to draw some low res shit in paint.

Don't hate Polska, I still love you.

Now we must station 6 battalions of these in Latvia.

Where do the horses go?

Fuck off faggot. This is why the world hates us, because we're obsessed with violating the sovereign rights of every other country in the world.

>So you mean we didn't learn it the first 2 Times and the third time we did and we failed?
No you missed the whole point. Tactical engagements are of no importance, what matters is strategic mobility, flexibility, and low level officer initiative. The Panzer III and IV would get raped by a Matilda or KV-1 in a battle but it didn't matter because they were more mobile and were more effective at supporting infantry. Killing tanks isn't the goal of tanks, it is the goal of artillery, anti-tank guns, tank destroyers, and specialized infantry weapons.

It is good if a tank can kill enemy tanks but at the end of the day the tank should be concerned more with mobility than firepower or protection. It is why modern tanks evolved from medium tanks and cavalry tanks. The modern US tanks can be traced back to the Sherman, British to the Centurion and before that the Cromwell, Russian/Soviet to the T-34 which evolved from the BT tanks.

>One plus point for the Sherman i guess?
If a tank from 1941 surpasses a tank from 1943 that is pretty impressive due to the rapid escelation.

>If you have unlimited amount of Resources and Manpower i guess you can go for overwhelming Quantity instead of Quality
Low costs are always good, as is reliability. The crippling flaw of the late German army was that it had no strategic mobility due to horrendous reliability largely due to their weight and complicated designs. A tank that breaks down is worth as much as a beached warship.

>This was almost never done since the Americans didn't like putting a foreign Weapon in their tank
British did it. Even then it didn't matter much since the US had dedicated tank destroyer units. The point was that the Sherman wasn't actually limited in terms of firepower and if desired could surpass the Panther.

>Never heard of that before
Well it had one, not to the extent of modern tanks but it helped to ensure overall accuracy.

>Yeah, if you count tossing Sandbags or Logs on your Frontal Armor.
There was the M4A3E2 which had an extra inch of armour on the front. Plus the Israelis fitted some Shermans with a 105 mm high velocity gun and called it the M-51. Tell me of all the highly specialized variants of the Panther utilized through the 1960s.

>Birth of Christ + 2015

>Thinking Polan still use horse

It's powered by hamsters on wheels. Poles ain't that backwater.

where I've seen it

The T-72 is literally one of the best tanks ever designed. For example, let's compare the T-72 to Abrams:

>mobility

This can be further broken down into two metrics, tactical and strategic mobility. Tactical mobility is how well a tank can maneuver in combat. It's determined by things like fast a tank can drive off-road, how powerful the engine is, and so on. Strategic mobility is things like operational range, ease of transport and airlifting, etc.

The Abrams has a small advantage in power to weight ratio, but it's strategic mobility pales compared to the T-72. The T-72 is easier to transport due to being smaller and lighter, it uses much less fuel, and requires less frequent maintenance than the Abrams' turbine engine.

A tank is no use when it can't get to the fight. Any slight advantages in the Abrams' tactical mobility is completely out weighted by it's crippling shortcomings in strategic mobility.

Verdict: T-72 wins in mobility

>firepower

In modern times, this is a tricky comparison to make, since advances in ammunition and fire control are being continually developed and fielded. However, there are some key differences inherent to the design of these two tanks.

1. The T-72 has an autoloader, the Abrams does not. Unlike human loaders, autoloaders will never fatigue, and can load while rapidly driving over rough terrain. This gives the T-72 a decisive advantage over the Abrams.

2. The T-72 has a larger caliber gun, allowing more potential for developing stronker ammunition.

3. T-72's ability to fire missiles from it's gun barrel gives it greater flexibility than the Abrams

4. Any American superiority in fire control and electronics are nullified by the new T-72 variants now entering service.

Verdict: T-72 wins in firepower

>protection

Once again, this is a difficult comparison to make, since new types of ERA and composite armor are being continually developed and fielded. However, there are still persistent inherent differences between these tanks, so let's compare them.

1. The shape of the T-72 is much smaller and lower than the Abrams, making it harder to hit in the first place and therefore more survivable.

2. The T-72's autoloader gives it a substantial advantage in ammunition safety. The turret can be made smaller and better sloped, and the ammunition is safely stored in the autoloader carousel close to the hull floor, whereas the entire back half of the Abrams turret is it's unsloped exposed ammunition storage.

3. The Abrams uses depleted uranium for it's armor. DU fragments and dust is fatal to humans. Crew survival is greatly compromised if an Abrams is ever penetrated.

Verdict: T-72 wins in protection

tl;dr T-72 is a better tank than the Abrams in every relevant way.

80 of those babies would be enough to take over Moscow
Putin BTFO
Sup Forums commie lovers on suicide watch

heh

>Centurion and t 54 better than the panther no way dude also if you Look at the discribtion for which combat situations each was desinged it is near impossible to compare them.
Not really they mostly fit in the same weight class and comparing them the panther was more poorly armed and armoured than any of the new allied tanks while in the case of the T-54 significantly slower. Not to mention the reliability issues the panther was prone to.

>The Pershing is Ultra Heavy Tank
It was designed as a heavy tank and eventually repurposed as a medium tank after the war. It weighed 3 tons less than the Panther. I think you may be confusing it with the T95 the bigass turretless assault tank that was planned, had like one prototype made and was abandoned.

>See Kazimir, if you pixel camofluage, russian invader will think this battlefield and you can shoot him while trying to type cheat

This is b8

That thing looks horrible.

Please say that this is just some fake propaganda tank. This can't be real.

the article says it is a T-72 hull

So why did the Battle of 73 Eating go so overwhelming in favor of the Abrams over the T72s when put head to head? Abrams were virtually unstoppable, and were casually one shotting T72s left and right to where entire armored divisions disappeared in less than a day.

Looks like somthing some nerd made in mine craft

But will it be at Russian hosted tank Olympics?

But russians have the Mammoth Tank. Which we all know is the best in red alert.

The Pershing was like the Tiger I, but worse. Similar firepower and armor except slower than a Tiger. It also had teething reliability problems and had to be withdrawn from Korea and replaced with Shermans.

>monkey models and arab crews
>indicative of actual performance in any meaningful way
Top kek

KV 2 is enough

Why is this tank 8-bit

kek this

>new tank
>its a T72 stuffed in plastic
>just like the PL-01 is a CV90 in plastic

Who cares, the Chinese have the Overlord. It has a goddamn propaganda tower on it, so they can even brainwash Ivan to fight for the Middle Kingdom

that camouflage is horrible

>naming a tank after a toiletry item

I loved Generals. Wish I had a working copy.

At least it's not shooting out money for refugees like the german one.

This is our PT-91 aka T-72 modification. We still have a lot of them. This is our new tank. Where is your Croatia?

>nice layout
youtube.com/watch?v=TSw6mqt2WIE

>new tank
>based on a IVF

Why the barrel shroud on the main gun? Just seems like useless extra weight to me.

Where is this tank you're talking about?

Russian tanks have been the standard for 75 years. Even Americans aren't too stupid to understand that.

>Propaganda tower on a double barreled tank

>Battle of 73 Easting

oh_boy_here_we_go_again.jpg

Kebab crews weren't even inside their tanks while battle started. They don't even knew who attacked them, from which sides and had literally no communication with higher comand.

In that battle won intelligence, not tanks.

Plus we still buying Leopards and modernize them.

...

73 Eastings is one sided since the US came from a direction that nobody thought possible. Crossing the desert like that would seem to be suicide for most since GPS was still a classified technology.

>Its a modified T-72 episode

>Thinking about all the great minds of the soviet era that defected to the west

>were they really smart or did they steal all that tech from the germans

>look at Russia now, nothing of value, even China is progressing far quicker than them to even remotely catch up

It could be Putin stealing all the R&D money or everyone with talent moved out already.

This desu. Why sandniggers couldnt destroy a t90, a t72 variant (russian 90s version btw, russians new t90s are way better) at syria.

There is literally nothing wrong with modifying the T-72. It's the best tank design ever created.

>He wears modified T-72s to the battlefield

Yeah Im a fan of the T-72, but this tank isnt anyhting nmajor, its just some polish majic on an old hull.

Now, when Poland design their own completely indigenous tank, Ill be listening.

Meanwhile arabs m1a2 are getting ripped a new one. Daily reminder that when american crews faced rpg29s at iraq they were getting owned so badly that american forced the iraqi goverment not to buy rpg29 due to the danger they posed at the battlefield. If any, see jews gettting ovened when hezbollah used kornets at lebanon. Yids had to go and cry to putin. My 2 cents

Iraqi and Saudi Abrams don´t have DU armour though, the American ones do. That, along with typical Arab incompetence, leads to fairly large losses.

>T-72. It's the best tank design ever created.

>T-64 wants to have a word with you
>basically same tank just released 8 years earlier.

T72 are shitty cheap mass tanks, if you want to pop a boner for russian tank tech, then at lest for the better T-64 line.

WHAT has happened to camo these days? It now looks like a shit 8-bit video game.

what's the worth of the French Leclerc tank ?

delete this

>still doesnt explain US opossition to rpg29 sales
>still doesn't explain zionist tanks getting burned, which are said that are better protected than the Abrams.
>mentioning this, the Russians already experienced what a rpg 29 can do. See Chechnya

But i agree. Arabs armies are shit

Pretty much all your points are wrong. Take point 2, for example. You claim the auto loader gives substantial ammunition safety yet t-72s are well known for their turret to blow clean off and kill the entire crew from the carousel detonating.

The m1s ammo is stored in a heavily armored bustle in the back of the turret. Providing the tank gets hit and the ammo is detonated several panels blow off and diver the energy away from the fighting compartment and the tank usually operable enough to retreat with the crew alive.

What if Germany simply mass produced pic related from day one (so PIV with the long high velocity 75mm cannon)? Could've steamrolled the USSR as well I 'd wager. If they'd combined it with mass produced STG44's from day one, they would've been unstoppable in '41.

Suck it, Ivan

Oh shit m8, it's only our new vodka dispenser...