Prev: Re: [OT] Korea was: Sea Leopard Next: Re: SG-1 RPG

Re: [OT] Sea Leopard

From: KH.Ranitzsch@t... (K.H.Ranitzsch)
Date: Wed, 24 Apr 2002 19:02:23 +0200
Subject: Re: [OT] Sea Leopard


----- Original Message -----
From: "Ryan M Gill" <rmgill@mindspring.com>
>
> Properly employed, you don't have to have armor on the other side for
> your tanks to be useful. Tanks in the purest sense are excellent for
> exploiting breaches in the line and making good on gains. They are
> the modern cavalry in every sense. So just because the Chinese didn't
> have anything heavier than run down WWI era armored cars doesn't mean
> that tanks weren't useful.

No, but you can do with a lighter tank, without a big-armour piercing
gun,
if you don't face heavy armour. Likely threats and theaters of war
should
always influence weapons design. In the Japanese case, poor road/bridge
infrastructure and closed terrrain dmay well have among the arguments
against heavy tanks.

Greetings


Prev: Re: [OT] Korea was: Sea Leopard Next: Re: SG-1 RPG