M1

At 02:39 PM 7/18/99 -0400, you wrote:
>Brian Burger wrote:
>
>Or the M1 - lots of people in the mid-80s were supposed to be slagging
>the
>thing every chance they got - now it's probably the best MBT
>going...and
>it's expensive as hell, compared to, say, russian MBTs.
>
>** Eh? Maybe second or third best. It's a great tank - don't get me
>wrong - but I was under the impression that the armour on the
>Challenger II was actually a bit better (though the tank was a tad
>slower)

It's arguable which is the better advantage; I'd say that since the
Challenger is designed to be slightly more edged towards the defensive,
they're both better suited towards their intended role.

 and the multi-axis fire stabilization system on the Leopard II
>was actually better than the American FC.

The M1 rarely missed in desert storm... there comes a time when 'good
enough' really IS 'good enough!'

 Maybe I'm on drugs, but I
>don't think the M1 (even the current variant) is the *best* tank in
>the world - just the *best* one that we get to see in action very
>often.

Perhaps 'best suited to its role' would be more accurate?

*****

thewolkes@earthlink.net
http://home.earthlink.net/~thewolkes

*****