2 Abrams tanks vs. 10,000 Chinese cavalrymen: Who would win?

[Mrvile]

Originally posted by: nweaver
Besides, we don't send our tanks in without a pair of Apaches and a Kiowa. You do realize the can slave pretty much anything to Kiowa targeting systems and just sit back several miles and rain death down. The Chinese would be wondering what that black ball sitting on the mountain is.

I don't think the OP said anything about regulation deployment...I think he just meant two tanks.

 

[Lash444]

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

 

[UpGrD]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.

I think that's the key right there. I'm guessing that if they were determined enough it wouldn't take more than a fraction of the 10k to actually immobilize the tank. The turbine engines in there are protected, but pretty easy to disable if you could get to them. With that number of people it's only a matter of time and will.

Question for you - is the turret motor driven off of accessory power from the engine? If the engine is nuked, can you still operate the turret?

In my day (1987-92), there would not have been power for the turret if engine/hydraulic or battery power was lost. But now I believe almost all M1A1/A2 's have A.P.U.'s.
But the APU in only a lightly armored generator on the outside of the tank. Again easily tampered with.

As for the people thinking that the tanks can just drive around until all the attackers are dead. Remember the Abrams gets about .6 mile per gal. That would give you about 6hrs of combat movement before you are dead in the water. So you would want to stop well short of that to make a stand in good defensive positions.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

and even then, that 15 seconds was someone who knows what they are doing, knows the weakness and machine, and wasn't stopped from climbing up on it.

 

[vi edit]

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

I just think some people have played way too many video games and have no concept of reality.

- Tanks aren't invincible.
- Even if you have unlimited ammo you can't fire non-stop.
- In a normal engagement a tank is a part of an attacking unit. It has ground and air support to prevent infantry from getting close and disabling.
- An army of 10,000 is a lot of freaking soldiers

 

[UpGrD]

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

A man with a rifle for the most part can not take out a tank, but a man on the engine deck can easily. I'm not going to go into details (There are tanks in combat as we speak).
At some point in this situation the tanks would be swarmed. Its all over for the tanks at that point. Remember we are talking 10,000 here. I would rather go up against 30 T72's than that many troops.

As for the unlimited ammo and fuel. Why not say the tank has lasers and can just kill everyone in 1 360 deg rotation of the turret.

 

[olds]

Your subject is too broad. One calvary man can take out two tanks if equipped with anti tank weapons.

If all they have are small arms, I go with the tanks.

I have seen what these tanks can do up close and personal. They are impressive to say the least.

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: LS20

Originally posted by: MmmSkyscraper
IDDQD.

IDISPISPOPD

damn you beat me to it.

//you have an extra 'I'

 

[Vonkhan]

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Only post that makes any sense.

Also, don't forget the setting. If it's set in the ME, you'll need some intensive maintainace for the engines (specifically the engine rotors).

The issue of overheating MG barrels is a huge one. I've not had any experience with .50 Brownings, but plenty with the 7.62mm GPMG and having a quick change barrel can be critical in combat.

"No tank movement with infantry support, no infantry movement without tank support"

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

This is the only worthwhile response in this thread (and not only because it backs up what i wrote on page 1 )

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: UpGrD

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

A man with a rifle for the most part can not take out a tank, but a man on the engine deck can easily. I'm not going to go into details (There are tanks in combat as we speak).
At some point in this situation the tanks would be swarmed. Its all over for the tanks at that point. Remember we are talking 10,000 here. I would rather go up against 30 T72's than that many troops.

As for the unlimited ammo and fuel. Why not say the tank has lasers and can just kill everyone in 1 360 deg rotation of the turret.

Interesting. Do you think 10,000 infantrymen shooting at a tank from afar could take out the tank? Edit: Like they all aim for some specific part of the tank together? The treads perhaps?

 

[Lash444]

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

I just think some people have played way too many video games and have no concept of reality.

- Tanks aren't invincible.
- Even if you have unlimited ammo you can't fire non-stop.
- In a normal engagement a tank is a part of an attacking unit. It has ground and air support to prevent infantry from getting close and disabling.
- An army of 10,000 is a lot of freaking soldiers

Heres the thing. You can't look at this in a purely realistic way. In the real world you aren't going to be facing infantry using only rifles. You will have breakdowns. That is not the point. The point is, whether 2 Abrams tanks could kill 10,000 cavalrymen with unlimited ammo, and unlimited fuel, and doesn't have to stop firing. I'm assuming that the OP doesn't want to take into account breakdowns.

Sure, it may be unrealistic, but that wasn't the question given. I just don't see how the cavalrymen could ever get close to the tank in this situation. By all means, explain to me how infantry could get to a tank GIVEN the situation that the OP provided.

 

[puffff]

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
cavalry. Eventually, they surround the tanks and kill the guys inside. aren't abrams tanks' rounds anti tank piercing rounds as opposed to explosive?

How do you propose they open the tank even if they got close?

Knock on hatch.
"Hallooo... Ming's chinese food delivery!"

 

[ultimatebob]

Originally posted by: Safeway

Originally posted by: yllus

Originally posted by: Hacp

Originally posted by: DrPizza
uhhh, what weapons do the cavalrymen get to use?

Chinese so probably swords?

And chopsticks.

Okay, that was a little racial.

Can the calvary take dry rice and throw it at the tanks, and then add water to activate the shear explosive and expansive power of the rice? I'd like to see the callies eat their way out of that.

Tonight. We dine. On rice.

THIS IS MADNESS!!

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

I just think some people have played way too many video games and have no concept of reality.

- Tanks aren't invincible.
- Even if you have unlimited ammo you can't fire non-stop.
- In a normal engagement a tank is a part of an attacking unit. It has ground and air support to prevent infantry from getting close and disabling.
- An army of 10,000 is a lot of freaking soldiers

Heres the thing. You can't look at this in a purely realistic way. In the real world you aren't going to be facing infantry using only rifles. You will have breakdowns. That is not the point. The point is, whether 2 Abrams tanks could kill 10,000 cavalrymen with unlimited ammo, and unlimited fuel, and doesn't have to stop firing. I'm assuming that the OP doesn't want to take into account breakdowns.

Sure, it may be unrealistic, but that wasn't the question given. I just don't see how the cavalrymen could ever get close to the tank in this situation. By all means, explain to me how infantry could get to a tank GIVEN the situation that the OP provided.

But the people who are taking the tank's side are beyond unrealistic. You guys are basically saying that the tank's turret will be spinning like a tazmanian devil nonstop spraying machinegun fire nonstop everywhere mowing everyone down while the calvarymen just stand there like retarded dummies. I don't think tanks work this way. I think UpGrD's assessment is the best. A tank isn't some magical unicorn of death.

 

[nweaver]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

I just think some people have played way too many video games and have no concept of reality.

- Tanks aren't invincible.
- Even if you have unlimited ammo you can't fire non-stop.
- In a normal engagement a tank is a part of an attacking unit. It has ground and air support to prevent infantry from getting close and disabling.
- An army of 10,000 is a lot of freaking soldiers

Heres the thing. You can't look at this in a purely realistic way. In the real world you aren't going to be facing infantry using only rifles. You will have breakdowns. That is not the point. The point is, whether 2 Abrams tanks could kill 10,000 cavalrymen with unlimited ammo, and unlimited fuel, and doesn't have to stop firing. I'm assuming that the OP doesn't want to take into account breakdowns.

Sure, it may be unrealistic, but that wasn't the question given. I just don't see how the cavalrymen could ever get close to the tank in this situation. By all means, explain to me how infantry could get to a tank GIVEN the situation that the OP provided.

But the people who are taking the tank's side are beyond unrealistic. You guys are basically saying that the tank's turret will be spinning like a tazmanian devil nonstop spraying machinegun fire nonstop everywhere mowing everyone down while the calvarymen just stand their like retarded dummies. I don't think tanks work this way. I think UpGrD's assessment is the best. A tank isn't some magical unicorn of death.

neither is 10K of old school people.

 

[PurdueRy]

M1A1 or M1A2 OP? Big difference

Then if we start including the recent M1A2 deal to include CROWS...the Chinese cavalry men are screwed

 

[Phokus]

Originally posted by: nweaver

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: vi_edit

Originally posted by: Lash444

Originally posted by: Mrvile

Originally posted by: UpGrD
As someone that spent the better part of 5 yrs on a M1A1. I have some insight. As usual its all in the details.
- Will the tanks have the new Anti personnel canister rounds (M1028 canister round contains approximately 1,100 tungsten balls)
- Will all 40 rounds be the M1028 canister (42 for the M1A2)
- RANGE, the most important detail. The more the better. 1200m is about max for the M240 COAX, loaders M240 much less.
- How good is the loader at both M240 marksmanship (Not easy) , loading main gun, keeping 50cal loaded (only 100 rounds per box), and changing barrels.
- Speed of the Chinese, tactic's and how determined are they

Having said all this, if the attackers are determined, unless the tanks can make the attackers break and run, there is no way 2 tanks could fight them off.
A company of tanks (14) absolutely. For the most part the 50cal would have limited use, only 100 ready rounds and not easy to aim at moving personnel.
I was a gunner in the first gulf war and after the war in order to get the tank ready for shipment back, we had to fire off all unboxed ammo. It took all day to fire the ready load of COAX rounds (I want to say 10,000 ???). Most of that time was spent letting the barrels cool. It only took about 3 min of firing before the barrels were red hot. In about 5 min they would actually begin to melt. That would be a real problem in this situation.
You do have a spare barrel, maybe 2, but still.....
As for the issue of could infantry with only small arms take out a tank. With out a doubt. Give me access to an engine deck and in 15 seconds that tank would have no power and burning within minutes.
The crew can still engage targets pretty effectively manually but not well enough.
Not a situation I would want to be in.

Wow thanks for the info. I think this clears up a lot of confusion in this thread

I think this creates more confusion. I would like some explanation how anyone with just a rifle is going to be able to take out a tank. Especially when you have the ability to flee any situation. Remember, you are in a barren wasteland with unlimited fuel and ammo. If someone gets on top of your tank and is able to stay there, you weren't realizing the strength/advantages that you had at your disposal. You also mean to tell me that the tank is designed so horribly that anyone with a rifle can disable it in 15 seconds? Thats a lot of bullshit for me to choke down.

Sure, in real life I am sure there are lots of anti-tank weapons that could disable it in short work. Thats why we have constraints in this situation.

I just think some people have played way too many video games and have no concept of reality.

- Tanks aren't invincible.
- Even if you have unlimited ammo you can't fire non-stop.
- In a normal engagement a tank is a part of an attacking unit. It has ground and air support to prevent infantry from getting close and disabling.
- An army of 10,000 is a lot of freaking soldiers

Heres the thing. You can't look at this in a purely realistic way. In the real world you aren't going to be facing infantry using only rifles. You will have breakdowns. That is not the point. The point is, whether 2 Abrams tanks could kill 10,000 cavalrymen with unlimited ammo, and unlimited fuel, and doesn't have to stop firing. I'm assuming that the OP doesn't want to take into account breakdowns.

Sure, it may be unrealistic, but that wasn't the question given. I just don't see how the cavalrymen could ever get close to the tank in this situation. By all means, explain to me how infantry could get to a tank GIVEN the situation that the OP provided.

But the people who are taking the tank's side are beyond unrealistic. You guys are basically saying that the tank's turret will be spinning like a tazmanian devil nonstop spraying machinegun fire nonstop everywhere mowing everyone down while the calvarymen just stand their like retarded dummies. I don't think tanks work this way. I think UpGrD's assessment is the best. A tank isn't some magical unicorn of death.

neither is 10K of old school people.

old school people?

Regardless, i'll take the word of UpGrD, i think he best knows the tank's strengths and weaknesses far better than us peons do.

 

[Atheus]

The Chinese still use cavalry?

 

[UpGrD]

Unless the tank is swarmed, small arms (7.62mm) can not take out a tank. Yea if the tank was touched by GOD and had unlimited fuel, all the maneuvering space it wanted, unlimited ammo and mechanically perfect. Sure it could kill 1 billion screaming Chinese if given the time. Why even have the conversation?
But it the non make believe world, two tanks can not fire enough bullets to kill 10,000 troops in the time it would take before they were swarmed. The weapon of choice in this scenario would be the COAX, and you have to kill one troop for every 2 bullets (+/-). I cant see that happening. With 3-5 round burst's the math just will not work.

 

[olds]

Originally posted by: Atheus
The Chinese still use cavalry?

The US still uses cavalry.
http://pao.hood.army.mil/1stcavdiv
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Cavalry

 

[SoulAssassin]

Originally posted by: Phokus
A tank isn't some magical unicorn of death.

Ok, new comparison...10,000 chinese soldiers (in spacesuits) vs the Gunstar's Death Blossom from the Last Starfighter.

 

[benzylic]

Originally posted by: puffff

Originally posted by: Scouzer

Originally posted by: IAteYourMother
cavalry. Eventually, they surround the tanks and kill the guys inside. aren't abrams tanks' rounds anti tank piercing rounds as opposed to explosive?

How do you propose they open the tank even if they got close?

Knock on hatch.
"Hallooo... Ming's chinese food delivery!"

No, it would be the Landshark off that SNL skit.

CANDYGRAM

Everyone knows you can't pass up a candygram

 

[UpGrD]

Define spacesuits.

 

[OutHouse]

tanks win hands down.


2 120mm cannons
2 50 cal machine guns
2 7.62 machine guns
30 mph cross country speed
plus there is no way that the crew inside can be hurt at all.

if both tanks work together and cover each other 10,000 horses and men would be dead in very short time.