This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - Philippa
6141
« on: November 05, 2011, 06:44:24 AM »
Anybody tried the Fiery Irn Bru?
Yep
What did you think of it?
6142
« on: November 05, 2011, 06:10:40 AM »
Anybody tried the Fiery Irn Bru?
6143
« on: November 04, 2011, 11:55:19 AM »
The results are scary cos its my birthday with my bot.
6144
« on: November 04, 2011, 11:38:17 AM »
Sorry, ACAMS beat you to it.
M1 Abrams =/= Challenger 2
Tanks are usually rated on firepower, mobility and protection, so I'll have a look at those stats on both tanks and compare-
The Challenger 2's main armament is very good, with plenty of potential to fire future natures. It can also do bombardments because of its rifled gun. Split ammo is safer, but takes longer to load than the M1 one-piece. The M1's smoothbore defeats anything at present, but would need a longer barrel to get faster projectiles.
Infantry suppression is poor on the Challenger 2, whereas the M1 has a total of three Machine Guns for dealing with close-range attackers, and may be fitting a remote weapon system for the commander.
The M1 wins hands down on mobility; it has a very powerful and reliable petrol turbine which consumes fuel like Smarties, but goes on and on, compared to the somewhat slower engine in the Challenger 2. On the plus side for the Challenger 2 however, it can go much further than the M1 on a tank of fuel, and even further with its extra fuel drums.
The front of the M1 seems more-or-less invulnerable to most weaponry, while the sides are are weak- numerous M1A1 were lost to RPG attacks. However, I remember a Challenger 2 that that took 8 direct RPG hits and a hit from a MILAN, but still fought on. In comparison, the only Challenger 2 lost to date was due to a friendly fire incident from another Challenger 2 (and even that was left a mess after what had happened).
The strength of the Challenger 2's front is questionable-hence the ERA (Explosive Reaction Armour), but has excellent add-on Dorchester/Chobham Armour on the sides. Plus, you're more likely to survive a turret strike in the Challenger 2, due to its split ammo storage and its electric gun kit- therefore, no Hydraulic Fluid to ignite.
So yes- from what I know, they've both got their advantages and disadvantages- the Challenger 2 specialises in reliability, crew safety and defence, whilst the M1 specialises in speed and attacking capability at varied ranges. Even still, I do see them both as great tanks to have, particularly considering they're both on the same side.
I do hope I haven't missed/misrepresented anything though, as it's been a while since I've last been near a tank.
(Although for me, Challenger 2 just wins out of the two, as it has a boiling vessel  )
Do keep in mind that the M1 Abrams has been in service since 1980 and the current Challenger 2 has only been in service since 1998. This means that comparing the losses of the M1 to just the Challenger 2 would be rather unfair, as it would not account for any losses of Challenger 1's in the Gulf War. Plus, you need to keep in mind that the US has been heavily involved with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and thus are put to the test a lot more than the challengers are (I'm not sure how involved the British got with those wars, but I'm going to assume that it wasn't nearly as much as the US).
In addition, only 800 or so Challenger 1's and 2's have been built whereas 9000+ Abrams have been built.
Umm... 
6145
« on: October 29, 2011, 11:10:47 AM »
Like the look of #4
6146
« on: October 19, 2011, 04:25:07 AM »
Please put it on the BotExchange.
6147
« on: October 17, 2011, 12:35:59 PM »
Super Mario Land for the original Game Boy. Second was Tetris and third was Tetirs 2. (Also for original Game Boy.)
6148
« on: October 17, 2011, 09:02:22 AM »
My tank is the best cos its multicoloured. 
(Image removed from quote.)
Tis a shame my tanks made out of pins.
Hahaha Mine shoots water bombs.
6149
« on: October 17, 2011, 04:23:13 AM »
My tank is the best cos its multicoloured. 
6150
« on: October 16, 2011, 03:20:07 PM »
Sorry, ACAMS beat you to it.
M1 Abrams =/= Challenger 2
I just meant  in general
6151
« on: October 16, 2011, 05:36:23 AM »
Tanks cant do wheelies.Here's my car... Even though I already posted my car and I only just figured out the flaw in my plan... 
6152
« on: October 16, 2011, 05:31:04 AM »
Go Somebody!
6153
« on: October 16, 2011, 05:10:55 AM »
Sorry, ACAMS beat you to it.
6154
« on: October 16, 2011, 04:56:51 AM »
The motor noise sounds like a rave.
6155
« on: October 15, 2011, 04:32:06 PM »
No, Techno is a lot better Kurt.
I meant it looks like it 
6156
« on: October 15, 2011, 04:20:18 PM »
Techno FS = Armadrillo
6157
« on: October 15, 2011, 04:14:45 PM »
That is Super Mario Galaxy, in the Toy Time Galaxy, if I'm not mistaken. The Launch Star throws you to the 2D Mario, where the green pixels vanish, the red pixels are lava, and I can't remember what the yellow pixels do. But the Star is at the top of 2D Mario's head, IIRC.
The yellow ones spin and you can fall through the gaps. Luigi is on the other side for the PURPLE Comet level.
6158
« on: October 15, 2011, 03:58:38 PM »
Dammit dammit dammit!!!
6159
« on: October 15, 2011, 12:43:49 PM »
OMG ITS INVISIBLE!!!  
6160
« on: October 15, 2011, 05:52:11 AM »
But NFX ranted once? Wew.
I had a rant with Joe in my second day being here. 
|
Show Posts