China's GPS: Military Threat?

[Doctor Destiny 41]

p.s. ima check ZH froum then im gone

Forever?

We can only hope.

[BWare 0]

I'll E-mail SoulJa to get on and tell you himself

Oh man... I am just scared to DEATH about what he'll tell me, you know, online. Yeah. I'm sure he talks really tough from behind his computer :lol:

[Doctor Destiny 41]

I'll E-mail SoulJa to get on and tell you himself

Email me too. Picking up bull**** is my specialty.

[BWare 0]

You do excel in that area, it's true

[Doctor Destiny 41]

You do excel in that area, it's true

I'm thinking of writing a book on the subject.

[TheBlackOut 7]

You do excel in that area, it's true

I'm thinking of writing a book on the subject.

 

I'd buy it.

 

lol China... Its tough to see really. Military wise they'll not come close but economic wise they will. (But see, if our economy fails, so does there's, haha win freaking win. )

 

 

Also, badger your lower class? You got internet and a computer, I'm sorry, I don't consider that lower class, bud.

[gammyleg 0]

I love couch generals...

 

as usual bware and shocker are the only two who sound like they have backup for what they are saying.

 

tsbo - china actually has a larger military that the united states, and is obviously fairly well equipped. training on the other hand...

 

anyway my question here - is there any truth that the Chinese plan if they get invaded is to mobilise their reserve, and have the whole lot surreneder (therefore causing a rediculous amount of pows, which have to be fed, clothed, looked after etc thus requiring such a big logistics nightmare that the attacking force is screwed)?

[Luk3us 63]

Chinese plan if they get invaded is to mobilise their reserve, and have the whole lot surreneder (therefore causing a rediculous amount of pows, which have to be fed, clothed, looked after etc thus requiring such a big logistics nightmare that the attacking force is screwed)?

 

Now that would just be totally unfair....

[gammyleg 0]

Now that would just be totally unfair....

Yeah, if its true, then its pretty damn clever.

 

who has the biggest tanks (us, but thats beside the point)

Challenger II > M1

 

Now, before I get in trouble - this is heresay, but it is qualified heresay, being from British and Australian armored officers. Their argument being that there has only ever been mobility kills against Challys. 2 RPGs and an ATGW didnt even result in crew fatality in Iraq. All owing to the fact that they are smart enough to have internal fuel tanks, and are the most heavily armored tank about.

[Alphabear 11]

Well size wise the Challenger 2 is longer than the M1 by roughly 3.5 metres. Its combat weight is also much higher.

 

As for which one is better its hard to say exactly as they each have their pros and cons. Armor wise its hard to compare as the exact makeup of the M1 armor is classified. Being heavier the Challenger 2 has a shorter maximum range and speed than the M1. The M1 still has many engine problems and more than half of all abrams lost in Iraq have been to engine malfunctions and external fires. The Engine in the M1 is also is extreamly noisy and emits a lot more heat than most tanks in operation which makes them easy to detect on the battlefield

[gammyleg 0]

Armor wise its hard to compare as the exact makeup of the M1 armor is classified.

Challys armor is still classified too

[Alphabear 11]

Armor wise its hard to compare as the exact makeup of the M1 armor is classified.

Challys armor is still classified too

 

it uses Second Generation Chobham armor

[gammyleg 0]

*shrugs* Just a name.

 

Dirty old wikipedia:

 

The latest version of Chobham armour is used on the Challenger 2 (called Dorchester armour), and (though the composition most probably differs) the M1 Abrams series of tanks, which according to official sources is currently protected by silicon carbide tiles.

 

Both pretty much the same armor, both classified.

[Alphabear 11]

Did the Wiki article mention anything about the use of DU in challenger armor? I know its used as armor in the M1 but as far as i know the Challenger 2 armor doesnt include this.

[Renegangsta 0]

If this is for all C&C games what why are you talking about otherstuff?

[gammyleg 0]

Did the Wiki article mention anything about the use of DU in challenger armor? I know its used as armor in the M1 but as far as i know the Challenger 2 armor doesnt include this.

To be honest, I have no idea. I dont think so.

[Renegangsta 0]

K your da boss

[gammyleg 0]

If this is for all C&C games what why are you talking about otherstuff?

What?!?!

 

Look, please refrain from spamming the boards with nonsense, and butting in on conversations you obvously dont understand.

 

40 nonsense messages per day is rediculous.

[Renegangsta 0]

:shock: k

[Cygnus X-1 12]

Ok, you proved my wrong, and Im fine with that.

 

Yes, China's ground army is bigger than ours. Granted, farmers in uniform with guns (generalizing here). Training is a huge factor here. And I garuntee if China is equiping a 5 million person force they are taking shortcuts somewhere in manufacturing.

 

Their navy is growing stronger. So is ours *looks at fresh new carriers ready to be loaded with F-35Cs*

 

Their airforce.....well we'll give them a few years. Growing stronger, yes. But F-22's are still invisible to any/all radars currently in use on Earth. And that means no missiles can track them. The heat signature of hte engines is aslo quite low.

 

Good luck trying to shoot that down. 8)

[gammyleg 0]

Ok, you proved my wrong, and Im fine with that.

 

Yes, China's ground army is bigger than ours. Granted, farmers in uniform with guns (generalizing here). Training is a huge factor here. And I garuntee if China is equiping a 5 million person force they are taking shortcuts somewhere in manufacturing.

 

Their navy is growing stronger. So is ours *looks at fresh new carriers ready to be loaded with F-35Cs*

 

Their airforce.....well we'll give them a few years. Growing stronger, yes. But F-22's are still invisible to any/all radars currently in use on Earth. And that means no missiles can track them. The heat signature of hte engines is aslo quite low.

 

Good luck trying to shoot that down. 8)

Yeah, I certainly agree that the States would win in a 1on1 with China. Training (which of course includes actual modern war experience) and probably most importantly quipment favors the yanks.

[Cygnus X-1 12]

In a fight yes, but an invasion would be out of hte question for both of us.

[TheBlackOut 7]

Already knew China out numbered us. Never said they were small in numbers. (Overpopulation for the win)

 

Really we shouldn't be worried about China. They're gonna crack from the inside. People are pissed with communism. lol just works in theory lololol.

[Shocker 0]

Their airforce.....well we'll give them a few years. Growing stronger, yes. But F-22's are still invisible to any/all radars currently in use on Earth. And that means no missiles can track them. The heat signature of hte engines is aslo quite low.

 

Good luck trying to shoot that down. 8)

Remember that stealth technology isn't infallible, and it certainly doesn't make a plane invisible -- if you can see it with your eyes, you can shoot at it. During the Kosovo conflict, the Serbs took out an F-117 with a pretty archaic surface-to-air missile system.

 

I don't know if the F-22 suffers the same problems as the B2 and the F-117, in that rain dramatically reduces the effectiveness of the radar countermeasures, but it would be a mistake to think of stealth technology as some of kind of Star Trek cloaking device.

[Alphabear 11]

Exactly there are other ways to shoot down a plane other than locking onto its radar signature.