Greatest Ever Tanks - Centurion tank (5)

Greatest Ever Tanks - Centurion tank (5) British 105 mm L7 rifled gun Korean War Vietnam War

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Greatest
• Ever
• Tanks
• Centurion
• tank
• British
• 105
• mm
• L7
• rifled
• gun
• Korean
• War
• Vietnam

[kevinkards1]

Operational

range 280 miles (450 km)

[truffyt]

@TS0G0 Actually not. The work on the Centurion began back in 1943, they used some parts that were already used on other vehicles and modified them, and built other parts before the war was over. It was completed a short while before the end of the war, sent to Europe weeks after that, and were superior to essentially all other tanks in the world at that time.

[TS0G0]

@swatdiver1

Of course got it right after the war coz they had the German recipe at hand by then!

[afreshstartedl]

1:53, his face! WTF?!?!?

[swatdiver1]

The British tanks during WWII were pretty poor but when they finally got it right boy did they get it right.

[USB740]

The only times the Iraqis came out victorious out of a pure tank battle, was with the help of US advisories who assisted them in planning/coordinating armored assaults, plus providing Satellite imagery of the terrain -- which gave them an upperhand.

[USB740]

In a pure tank engagement, the Iranian Chieftain was too superior, and came out on top nearly everytime -- many more Iraqi T series got destroyed in comparison to Iranian Chieftains and M60s. The issue was that Britain and the US had placed an embargo on Iran preventing the replenishment of tanks and other heavy equipment, which in turn forced the Iranians to employ human wave assaults, and sometimes repelling whole Iraqi armored columns with just RPG-7.

[USB740]

@redneck10ivan Yes you are an idiot. Did you serve in that conflict? NO! But what can i expect from a kid who can't argue with facts, bye bye.

[redneck10ivan]

@USB740 With you all clear, I do not argue with idiots.

[USB740]

@ I dont know what you're rambling about little Ruskie. The facts are that Iran destroyed plenty of Iraqi tanks and were winning gradually (that's when EU/US, Arabs, and Soviets made a commitment to prevent Iraq from losing). The problem was that Soviet sent equipment at a constant rate -- if Iranians destroyed 3 T-72, then Iraqis recieved 5, if 5 then they recieved 8 and so. Not with their own money (Iraq was virtually bankrupt, no oil output), they were given arms and placed in debt.

[redneck10ivan]

@USB740 There is a saying bad dancer interfere with large eggs. "this is about your findings".

The conflict 1980-1988 virtually all of Iran's tanks Chieftains were destroyed. The losses T72 tanks were minor. As a result, Americans plunge in conflict in 1991, caused serious damage to the troops of Saddam Huseyin.

[USB740]

@redneck That had to do with one side maneuvering on good terrain while the other got stuck in bad terrain -- in other words, good vs bad tactics. Sometimes the Iraqis out smarted the Iranians, other times the Iranians beat the Iraqis. Also, must take into accouns the attrition caused by the use helicopters in anti-tank role. Both sides were equally skilled tankers. As a matter of fact, the Iranian Chieftans were technologically better than the Iraqi T-54/55, T-62, T-72 all were export versions.

[Yonnu1992]

@Normacly You're wrong.The Tiger II's glacis had 150mm armor sloped at 55 degrees,the sides and rear armor was 80mm.The turret front had 180mm sloped at 8 degrees,and the sides and rear of the turret had 80mm armor.

[DuckXT]

@redneck10ivan I would hope so. The T72 didn't go into service until 1967. That's 22 years after Centurion lol.

[Normacly]

@tomburley Problem is you have to get really close to do that. The Firefly range is limit due to the length of the 17 Pounder. German optics are superior to that of the Allies. The German also tend to miss less.

[tomburley]

@Normacly A number of Allied tank crews used a technique of "bouncing" their shells under the German tanks where armor was thin. They'd aim just short of the tank so that the shell would ricoshade up into the thin belly armor.

[Normacly]

@tomburley The 17 Pounder is able to penetrate a Tiger I over one thousand yards. However, you have to be lucky to damage a Tiger II. Tiger II have 180mm of slope frontal armor and 160mm of side armors. Only the Tiger II rear armor is under 100mm. On the other hand, the Tiger II 88mm could destroy most Allied tanks over 2000 yards.

[redneck10ivan]

@MitchofSmeg (Another hit in the balls)) England America and germanium, fought for the military market in India for a long time. But in the end T-90S tanks "Bishma" began to serve in the armed forces of India. T 90 surpasses all its rivals in tests of 1999. a Western tanks could not pass these terrible trials. T90 has earned the name "Bishma" in honor of Indian hero. :)

[redneck10ivan]

@tomburley We are talking about first-Pakistan's armored division, equipped with tanks (NATO) the largest tank battle of the Indo-Pakistani Asal Uttar September 10, 1965 In combat met, American tanks "were mostly" M48, against Soviet tanks T54-T55 (In some Western media says that the Indians had better tanks, and in the American editions of the type of tank is not specified.) it was the T-54-55)) LOL

[tomburley]

@Normacly And yet the Sherman Firefly had the same 17 pounder and could kill Tiger I & II - to the extend that the Germans tried to target the Firefly at the onset of each engagement as they feared its firepower.

[tomburley]

@BattlestarDamocles So I guess that being battle proven in Korea, where it proved more accurate that heavy artillery and successfully held a key area known as "the Hook" throughout the conflict - despite numerous attempted assaults by the Chinese, doesn't prove the ability of the Centurion or the troopers that manned them? Read up on every engagement that Ceturions were involved in - they have an excellent record.

[tomburley]

@redneck10ivan You need to check your facts on this since India used Centurion and Sherman firefly (along with the French AMX13) - all of which were older design than the Patton used by Pakistan.....and the Centurion carried the day big time.

[redneck10ivan]

@MitchofSmeg How do you explain that Indian troops have lost only a hundred T55, and Pakistan has lost thousands of tanks of American manufacturing? If you think that this statistic determines the combat characteristics of the tank, then you are naive idiot. =)

[MitchofSmeg]

@redneck10ivan

I think you are being a little silly mate....

We can both rattle off "but this tank kicked ass here..." all we like, but the numbers heavily side with the centurion and british design not that the t55 was a bad tank, it was great for what it was to do(ddi i say it wasnt great? A clue, no.), oh and fyi, india also had a large assortment of centurions.... (the tank is the only 1 to fight itself in a full war iirc....)

As for going the chinese tanks well, l2history

[redneck10ivan]

@MitchofSmeg The Indians set fire to your British tanks on the old T55 history or see a documentary film. At the cemetery, Patton Neger not just American tanks but British Centurion. All of them were destroyed. Pakistan in 1974 instead of tanks, NATO began to use Chinese tip59. T55 is a renowned tank and shit not take away his military achievements.