Jump to content


Which WWII tank would survive the longest on a modern battlefield?


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
123 replies to this topic

Sqn Ldr B #21 Posted 05 October 2015 - 09:05 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 6141 battles
  • 18,352
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 05 October 2015 - 04:20 PM, said:

Wait, I had an idea: A panther would survive the longest on a modern battlefield. Surely people have better things to do than to shoot up abandoned tanks on the side of the road that have broken down?

 

I see what you did there. Maybe still a target for aircraft though? Even during WW2 they were lovely targets for Typhoons.

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life" ~ Cecil Rhodes

Click For a Compilation of My Ideas


Comjam1998 #22 Posted 06 December 2015 - 05:16 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 5342 battles
  • 2,048
  • [6THPD]
  • Member since:
    03-23-2014

View PostUranprojekt, on 01 October 2015 - 02:45 PM, said:

 

The current French MBT, the LeClerc, is the "youngest" out of all the modern western MBTs. It's comparable to the Challenger 2, which is only a few years older than the LeClerc, and could certainly give an IS-7 (of which only one exists and I do believe that it doesn't work) a run for its money. The LeClerc has the far more accurate gun and would be able to see the IS-7 long before it sees the LeClerc. The LeClerc will get the first shot off and that shot will punch through the armour of the IS-7 like it wasn't even there.

 

All of which brings me on to my answer to the OP; none of them. Modern MBTs are designed in such a way that they're supposed to be able to defeat anything the enemy, perceived or real, can currently field or may field in the future. What chance does a WWII-era tank, with it's comparatively primitive technology, stand against the most modern of AT weapons?

 

Not to mention the Leclerc has a laser rangefinder to help with accuracy and a gun stabilizer, which provides much improved accuracy while firing on the move. Even if the Leclerc somehow missed its first shot, which is highly unlikely, it has an automatic loader which allows for a rate of fire of 12 rounds per minute. The IS-7 on the other hand is a very slow vehicle, and it would probably have to stop in order to fire accurately. In short, the IS-7 wouldn't stand a chance against the Leclerc.
signature.png

Metalrodent #23 Posted 06 December 2015 - 05:26 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 10186 battles
  • 14,433
  • [KMD]
  • Member since:
    02-12-2014

When the Chieftain comes that would have a fighting chance, one of the first tanks to get the modern technology that current tanks get.


<a data-cke-saved-href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/sCeAbYa.gif</a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...sCeAbYa.gif</a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...bYa.gif</a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s...gif</a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'><a href='http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>' class='bbc_url' title='External link' rel='external'>http://i.imgur.com/s.../a></a></a></a></a>

There’s a mask upon my face
I can’t live without
So you won’t recognize me
When I am in the crowd


Comjam1998 #24 Posted 06 December 2015 - 05:29 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 5342 battles
  • 2,048
  • [6THPD]
  • Member since:
    03-23-2014

View Postkiller etzi0, on 01 October 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:

While some WWII tanks have incredibly thick armor...... I do not think any of them stand a chance vs modern anti tank weapons. Heck a A-10 pilot would have a field day with WWII armor.

 

Yes I think even the Jagtiger, with 250mm at the frontal superstructure could easily be penetrated by modern weaponry
signature.png

ghost cowboy 99 #25 Posted 06 December 2015 - 05:30 PM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 6412 battles
  • 380
  • [47R-2]
  • Member since:
    03-01-2014

View PostGyrfalcon 642, on 01 October 2015 - 07:45 PM, said:

Title says it all.  Which WW2 tank would have the best chance of surviving on the modern battlefield.

 

I'll start the fun, I'm going with the M24 Chaffee. 

 

I'm no expert, but I'm going on the assumption that NO WW2 tank had armor that could stand up to modern guns.  So I'm going with the tank that I'm guessing would be the hardest to hit.

 

Debate and lets have some fun.

elc amx


Signature made by METALHELLIONx84


Comjam1998 #26 Posted 06 December 2015 - 05:41 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 5342 battles
  • 2,048
  • [6THPD]
  • Member since:
    03-23-2014

View PostGyrfalcon 642, on 01 October 2015 - 01:45 PM, said:

Title says it all.  Which WW2 tank would have the best chance of surviving on the modern battlefield.

 

I'll start the fun, I'm going with the M24 Chaffee. 

 

I'm no expert, but I'm going on the assumption that NO WW2 tank had armor that could stand up to modern guns.  So I'm going with the tank that I'm guessing would be the hardest to hit.

 

Debate and lets have some fun.

 

I'm going to have to go with the T-44 because of the fact that:

1. It had a long service history with the Soviet Army until the end of the 1970s

2. As a predecessor to the T-54/55, the T-44 was a very versatile AFV the could easily be modified to meet the needs of modern tank warfare.


signature.png

tbown2 #27 Posted 07 December 2015 - 03:17 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 3199 battles
  • 5,244
  • Member since:
    07-12-2015

View PostComjam1998, on 06 December 2015 - 12:41 PM, said:

 

I'm going to have to go with the T-44 because of the fact that:

1. It had a long service history with the Soviet Army until the end of the 1970s

2. As a predecessor to the T-54/55, the T-44 was a very versatile AFV the could easily be modified to meet the needs of modern tank warfare.

 

Same concept, it'd have zero chance of penetrating any MBT, meanwhile easily being penned by any MBT, at distances far greater than it can spot or hope to hit anything. 

Minister of Propaganda for Rebel Alliance

 


Matthew J35U5 #28 Posted 08 December 2015 - 06:37 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostComjam1998, on 06 December 2015 - 12:41 PM, said:

 

I'm going to have to go with the T-44 because of the fact that:

1. It had a long service history with the Soviet Army until the end of the 1970s

2. As a predecessor to the T-54/55, the T-44 was a very versatile AFV the could easily be modified to meet the needs of modern tank warfare.

View Posttbown2, on 06 December 2015 - 10:17 PM, said:

 

Same concept, it'd have zero chance of penetrating any MBT, meanwhile easily being penned by any MBT, at distances far greater than it can spot or hope to hit anything. 

Take a T-54. Upgrade it with ludicrous amounts of money, so that it has the same kinds of electronics, optics, etc as modern tanks. Spend a ludicrous amount of money on developing a ATGM that could be fired by said T-54, that could defeat the armour of modern main battle tanks. 

 

Question why you aren't just buying a modern mbt instead. 

 

Like I said before, its a pretty bad idea, but probably better than any other WWII tank. (Since people actually did make upgraded T-54's with upgraded electronics, and ATGM's)


KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Section47ABH #29 Posted 08 December 2015 - 07:02 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 12126 battles
  • 1,849
  • Member since:
    08-08-2015

View PostSqn Ldr B, on 01 October 2015 - 08:54 PM, said:

I think you'll find the stalwart of British tank design, the Matilda would survive well. The Matilda is literally and totally indestructible, and can withstand nuclear weapons up to 20 megatons. Failing that the Vickers Medium Mk. I would fair very well indeed.

 

It was the Centurion that was tested against nuclear attack: the tank they used lost its side skirts and was pushed back a few yards.  The blast didn't even stop the engine - it was running out of fuel that did that.  The tank carried on in service until Vietnam.  http://io9.com/the-a...to-w-1542451635 for the full story.


Terranis Holds.  FOR THE EMPEROR!

Matthew J35U5 #30 Posted 08 December 2015 - 07:09 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostSqn Ldr B, on 01 October 2015 - 03:54 PM, said:

I think you'll find the stalwart of British tank design, the Matilda would survive well. The Matilda is literally and totally indestructible, and can withstand nuclear weapons up to 20 megatons. Failing that the Vickers Medium Mk. I would fair very well indeed.

 

"Literally indestructible. A little slow"—Soviet testing reports

KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Sqn Ldr B #31 Posted 08 December 2015 - 07:21 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 6141 battles
  • 18,352
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 08 December 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

 

"Literally indestructible. A little slow"—Soviet testing reports

 

You can't have everything, honestly...

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life" ~ Cecil Rhodes

Click For a Compilation of My Ideas


theflash52 #32 Posted 08 December 2015 - 07:27 PM

    Captain

  • Players
  • 26004 battles
  • 1,866
  • [-UNL-]
  • Member since:
    03-05-2014
Which ever remains unseen the longest. Not a single bit a ww2 tank tech would have a chance on a modern battle field once any of it was recognized as a threat it would be destroyed immediately.

 

 

Follow the lemming, farm the potato.


Uranprojekt #33 Posted 08 December 2015 - 07:31 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,437
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View Posttheflash52, on 08 December 2015 - 07:27 PM, said:

Which ever remains unseen the longest. Not a single bit a ww2 tank tech would have a chance on a modern battle field once any of it was recognized as a threat it would be destroyed immediately.

 

It's a bit difficult to remain unseen with all the laser rangefinders, thermal equipment, UAVs and so on that modern armies use these days.


War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


Comjam1998 #34 Posted 08 December 2015 - 10:47 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 5342 battles
  • 2,048
  • [6THPD]
  • Member since:
    03-23-2014

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 08 December 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

Take a T-54. Upgrade it with ludicrous amounts of money, so that it has the same kinds of electronics, optics, etc as modern tanks. Spend a ludicrous amount of money on developing a ATGM that could be fired by said T-54, that could defeat the armour of modern main battle tanks. 

 

Question why you aren't just buying a modern mbt instead. 

 

Like I said before, its a pretty bad idea, but probably better than any other WWII tank. (Since people actually did make upgraded T-54's with upgraded electronics, and ATGM's)

Unfortunately, the question being asked was which WWII tank that was mass-produced.


signature.png

Matthew J35U5 #35 Posted 09 December 2015 - 01:40 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 14028 battles
  • 12,033
  • [GIRLS]
  • Member since:
    09-09-2013

View PostComjam1998, on 08 December 2015 - 05:47 PM, said:

Unfortunately, the question being asked was which WWII tank that was mass-produced.

 

Oh?

View PostGyrfalcon 642, on 01 October 2015 - 02:45 PM, said:

Title says it all.  Which WW2 tank would have the best chance of surviving on the modern battlefield.

 

I'll start the fun, I'm going with the M24 Chaffee. 

 

I'm no expert, but I'm going on the assumption that NO WW2 tank had armor that could stand up to modern guns.  So I'm going with the tank that I'm guessing would be the hardest to hit.

 

Debate and lets have some fun.

Point to me where. 

 

Its perfectly valid to say that a heavily upgraded WWII vehicle doesn't really fit the spirit of the question, but the T-54 is a WWII tank. 


KeystoneCops, on 14 June 2015 - 12:51 PM, said:


Comjam1998 #36 Posted 10 December 2015 - 02:39 AM

    Major

  • Players
  • 5342 battles
  • 2,048
  • [6THPD]
  • Member since:
    03-23-2014

View PostMatthew J35U5, on 08 December 2015 - 07:40 PM, said:

 

Oh?

Point to me where. 

 

Its perfectly valid to say that a heavily upgraded WWII vehicle doesn't really fit the spirit of the question, but the T-54 is a WWII tank. 

 

True, but I think he was asking for a mass-produced vehicle, the T-54/55 was a mere prototype at the time.
signature.png

Pedro Lopez 253 #37 Posted 13 December 2015 - 10:08 PM

    Private

  • Players
  • 1110 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    05-10-2014
What about a Sturmtiger? If, of course, it had more modern ammunition, a slope to aim higher and if there was a nice big hill between them...I don't care what tanks they field nowadays, they can't hit that bad boy through a hill...

Sqn Ldr B #38 Posted 13 December 2015 - 10:18 PM

    Major

  • Players
  • 6141 battles
  • 18,352
  • Member since:
    02-14-2014

View PostPedro Lopez 253, on 13 December 2015 - 10:08 PM, said:

What about a Sturmtiger? If, of course, it had more modern ammunition, a slope to aim higher and if there was a nice big hill between them...I don't care what tanks they field nowadays, they can't hit that bad boy through a hill...

 

They can hit it over a hill though.

"Remember that you are an Englishman, and have consequently won first prize in the lottery of life" ~ Cecil Rhodes

Click For a Compilation of My Ideas


Uranprojekt #39 Posted 13 December 2015 - 11:50 PM

    Major

  • Beta Tester
  • 8338 battles
  • 3,437
  • Member since:
    08-19-2013

View PostPedro Lopez 253, on 13 December 2015 - 10:08 PM, said:

What about a Sturmtiger? If, of course, it had more modern ammunition, a slope to aim higher and if there was a nice big hill between them...I don't care what tanks they field nowadays, they can't hit that bad boy through a hill...

 

You bring a Sturmtiger, I'll bring a PanzerHaubitze 2000; Germany's modern day Sturmtiger.

 

Failing that, a CAS run by any number of suitable aircraft.

 

Failing that, a helicopter gunship or two should solve that pesky Sturmtiger problem.

 

Just because I can't go through the hill doesn't mean that I can't go over it.


War does not determine who is right, only who is left - Bertrand Russell

 

I write things, things which can be found in Historical Discussions. Things like this article on the Soviet invasion of Manchuria in 1945 and this article on the Spanish Civil War.

 

To those of you who don't molest the English language, I salute you. For everyone else, there's this handy link; http://www.reverso.n...elling-grammar/


Pedro Lopez 253 #40 Posted 14 December 2015 - 12:00 AM

    Private

  • Players
  • 1110 battles
  • 3
  • Member since:
    05-10-2014
Dang, and I [Sturmtiger commander] would have gotten away with it too, if it weren't for you meddling kids and your modern warfare. Well if that doesn't work, I would use a Panther II maybe, there was one built by the end of the war...but really this is an unfair comparison, it's like asking a Pz. II to find a Maus' weak spot and one shot it.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users