Zephyr Net

Looks like the poll is tied between Assault rifles and Tanks/APCs...

I prefer the Abrams myself... unstoppable!

Artillery is easy to transport though, all you need is a helicopter.........for field artillery that is.

a cargo plane can only hold 1 M-1 at a time IIRC. They're not very easy to transport on the go.

While artillery can be flown to the front and dropped off to troops that need it.

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Hell you can also tow it to the field or you have the self propelled kind.

And lets not forget the 57mm and 127mm rocket atillary. MY FAV.

_________________


August 2nd 2003
The 110th Anniversary of Yugolsaivan Aviation!
St. Elias the gardian of the Fighter pilot.

If I had to choose a tank I would definitely tank the M1A2 Abrams. there isn't a thing that can kill her! Hell after we dropped a 2000 LB. GBU on one that was nailed in Iraq it was still in one piece. It took 7 RPG hits to the same spot on the tred to kill her. The metal had actually fused to the tred and thats what disabled her.

_________________
"Smile, AMRAAMs love you!"
"May the PATRIOTS down the FROGS!"
1Lt. Centurian57_76/369th

For all your FA needs and Game Remod 6 visit

That's just plain freaky.

It's a shame we sold the M-1 to the Saudis. Especially considering the fact that they support terrorism and kidnap Americans.

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Yes that is quite true Big, but fortunately for the US Army the Saudis did indeed buy the M-1A2... Because congress could not get their act together and fund the A2 conversion/production program for the Army and if the Saudis had not purchased the tank then the production line would have been closed and we would not have had any...

And we gave them the F-15 as well, yet another mistake. Seeing as how they spawned OBL.

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Not to worry about the Eagles, they have downgraded avionincs and other systems and are not really a threat to US or Israeli airforces. Especially the F-15S... their version of our Strike Eagle...

Turkish and Swedish tests declared the Leo2A5 superior to the M1A2 (and we already have the 2A6) :p

Ooooh that's a lot of voices there.........

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Yea, to bad it has never been tested in combat. It is quite a potent tank, with a much superior design over the original Leopard II.

However there is no battle record for it(To site an example of how Big qualifies weapons, no combat record, then no known success!)

I just think that it's premature to say that a plane will be able to kill this and this, and so and so and win a war for us before it's even gone through the assembly line. Cause that's all theory.

Though the specs for the JSF and F-22 look promising (due to flight models tested), you never know how they'll do in combat until they actually go in.

Twas the case with the F-117 in its first mission (a song and a prayer).

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

Yes and I assume the only way anyone would be able to determine if the Leo II was indeed superior to the Abrams wouyld be if war broke out between the US and Germany (or other user of the modern version)...

Bring em on. They can't fight anyway, just like the french.

_________________


allah no longer exists, for I have killed him. You must worship me instead.

LOL I wouldnt say that da big, I have seen how some NATO nations fight (of course the French might act differently in a life or death situation)

Leo 2A4 (possibly the A5, too) has been in a few firefights, but only against soft targets in Yugoslavia.

The Leo2 and the M1A2 are very similar designs. As the M1, M1A1 and M1A2 have shown their effectiveness in battle I dont think its wrong to say that the Leo would be very effective, too.