tiro de centauro

es un tiro de un vehiculo centauro

Category:

Autos & Vehicles

Tags:

• tanques

[canariofrancis]

Mi vehículo como te echo de menos campeón

[canariofrancis]

Giovinco998 tu si ke eres una porca miseria jodio italiano de los cojones

[canariofrancis]

teneis que ver .....don´t forguet.....

[canariofrancis]

The centaur is an Italian tank but this one giving service in españa

[trupped]

eh ehe eh italian tecnology !

[Kenshiroit]

I think spain and italy have lot in common. both are beautyfull places. AND I think we all agree that redneckkilla is a loser ;)

[TheBlackdago]

@Mad69sur against a tank a soldier have advantages toward a tank destroyer.

a single man with a good missle as the spike , milan or the javeline

can hit destroy or seriously damage a mbt , a soldier can hide himself easier and better than a tank destroyer , the inconvenients are the ammunitions and the difficulties to move from a place to another .

[Mad69sur]

@TheBlackdago Using that argument even a local with a antitank bazooka/missile results as useful as the Centauro

[TheBlackdago]

@Mad69sur This is a your opinion

the Centauro is made to ambush against the mbt , and not for a direct engagement .

And after the first shell doesent matter anymore who is/was the crew of the mbt.

[Mad69sur]

@TheBlackdago in a combat scenario putting both the Centauro and the Leo2 in different roles so on, i would say that in 9 fights the leo2 would win in 7 or 8 depending on the crews, that´s not a big deal for a Centauro

[Mad69sur]

@TheBlackdago "obama legislation spend more on military than reagan".

Mr Obama is president since few months ago

When i talk of a forward move at war i mean in conventional wars, country to country, i wasn´t talking of terrorism, guerrilla and other low intensity conflicts

" a taliban have penetrate the armor of an challenger 2"

I haven´t said that the centauro can´t destroy the Leopard 2, of course maybe in a embush or at a hiden place and if the MBT crew is not well enough trained

[TheBlackdago]

@Mad69sur "Also you don´t say that since the fall of the USSR they cut most of their military expenses, as you can imagine to build 6000 tanks" this isn t true

write this word on google"obama legislation spend more on military than reagan".

"Say whatever but to make a forward move in a war theatre without MBT´s is suicidal" look about Astan , vietnam , or the operation market garden.

[TheBlackdago]

again do you know that a taliban have penetrate the armor of an challenger 2 , (a tank that is more heavy than a leopard 2) with the usage of an old milan, obviously no .

a tank destroyer is lighter more agile , quicker than a convetional tank consume less a c130 can transport it. It isn t make to fight directly a mbt it is make to ambushed it . it is make to be the first and the last to hit .

[Mad69sur]

@TheBlackdago What you don´t say is that they have over 6000 MBT and they upgrade them from time to time. Also you don´t say that since the fall of the USSR they cut most of their military expenses, as you can imagine to build 6000 tanks is not a matter of one decade, they make their armor thicker than required just because every new upgrade requires more space so they take away some armor each time

Say whatever but to make a forward move in a war theatre without MBT´s is suicidal