Comment History  (0 - 30 of 509)
tanker1408 Jan 6 2015, 11:02pm replied:

Actually, not. In fact, quite the opposite. Who would have thought things turn out like this? Now it's not Urkain vs Germany, but Ukraine (+ Germany and USA) vs Russia instead... very conspiring.

I see a dark future for Europe, if the European people don't unite with Russia against the capitalist warmongers.

+1 vote   mod: Point of Existence: 2
tanker1408 Oct 8 2014, 9:58pm replied:

i know man, me too.

+2 votes   mod: Forgotten Hope: Secret Weapon
tanker1408 May 15 2014, 3:35am says:

Merkava IV turret on T-90 chassis? Disgusting perverts! lol jk xD

+1 vote   media: Modded MOW:AS tanks
tanker1408 May 15 2014, 3:33am replied:

Sorry I kinda repeated myself there twice lol. Sorry for the long comment xD

+1 vote   media: Modded MOW:AS tanks
tanker1408 May 15 2014, 3:24am replied:

Yes indeed, modern KE penetrators (APFSDS) are so strong, they never simply "bounce off" an angular armor plate, that's not possible, because they are simply too powerfull. They have such a poweful penetrating potential that they will always penetrate the first layers of the composite armor (the surface). That's why such thing as "shot-trap" doesn't exist on modern MBT's anymore. Because the point of modern composite armor is not to delfect/ricochet a APFSDS penetrator, but to slow the penetrating KE rod down so much, that it will lose its potential penetrating power and eventually stop completely, so that it will get stuck in the armor itself - but it won't fully penetrate and so the crew will not be harmed. Whether a composite armor "works" (as it is intended) or not depends on many different factors, but that's another story to be told. But the fact remains, that a APFSDS penetrator will never bounce off an angulare armor. It will always penetrate the first layer and if the armor works as it is intended, then the penetrator gets stuck in the armor and it won't go any further. So that the crew will not be harmed and the tank is not destroyer and it is still operational. But as to how much it penetrates into the armor depends on the individual armor applique itself. Sure, the tank will be damaged to some degree, but that can be repaired after the battle in a few hours. It is at least much cheaper to only repair a part of the tank, than to built another one entirely from scratch again.

+1 vote   media: Modded MOW:AS tanks
tanker1408 Nov 8 2013, 7:56pm replied:

me neither :o

+2 votes   member: tanker1408
tanker1408 Nov 8 2013, 6:37pm replied:

The british Challenger 2 MBT is a copy of the Russian post-war tank IS-7.

+1 vote   media: Mindblown :o
tanker1408 Jul 31 2013, 10:38pm says:

The T-90 is much more in the need of some major upgrades, as it is far behind, and more outdated than the M1 Abrams, or any other western MBT for that matter. Since after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russian tanks have not been modernized to modern standards. Unlike western MBT's which have continuously been upgraded and redesigned throughout the last years.

The T-90 has the worst protection, because it still uses the outdated Kontakt-5 ERA from the 1980's, which is outdated by now. It may have been very effective back in the 80's, but it's insufficient for today's protection standards. Now, the M829A3 and DM53 (used by the Abrams and Leopard) are both able to penetrate the Kontakt-5 ERA (and of course the basic armor of the tank). In fact, even the earlier M829A2 from the early 90's was already credited of being able to penetrate the K-5)

On top of this, the 125mm gun that is used by all Russian tanks, has not received any upgrades or any new tank rounds capable of penetrating the front armor of the Leopard 2A6 or the M1A2 SEP. At least not the turret front. Maybe it could penetrate the lower hull front of the western MBT's, at close range, but I'll leave this open to debate.

Although the Russians did come up with a few new prototypes recently, such as the T-95 (with an impressive 152mm gun), or the T-90AM presented in 2011, which has the new developed Relikt ERA armor. But neither of them have entered service yet, and probably will remain as such for the next few years.

0 votes   media: M1A1
tanker1408 Jul 29 2013, 7:12pm says:

lol nice, is that a E-100 twin barreled flak tank "Krokodil" with twin 88mm guns that I spot in the upper right corner?

+1 vote   media: Wot tanks in Men Of War
tanker1408 Jul 28 2013, 2:14am replied:

i know, but MBT's are the modern working horse of the Armed Forces today, hence the reference..

+8 votes   media: Old vs New
tanker1408 May 20 2013, 8:46pm says:

Is there a way that you could add the prototype tanks such as Maus, KV-3, T29 and T-95 from the mod FHSW (Forgotten hope Secret Weapons)?

Because the FHSW mod doesn't work with CO-OP bot support, so if you could add those tanks, that would be very nice.

0 votes   mod: Forgotten Hope Revisited
tanker1408 Nov 3 2012, 7:45pm replied:

You don't say!

+1 vote   media: We future now
tanker1408 Aug 17 2012, 12:28am says:

All I'm askinng for is one thing: Could you please at least import the Noah Battleship from the game Nexus? This is the only ship I care about, I don't care about all the other Nexus ships. Only the Noah Battleship is important to me, because it is my favorite ship of all time. It really means everything to me. If you could add only this one ship to your mod, that would be super awesome and I'd be very satisfied! if it isn't too much work for you that is... but it would definitely be worth your effort. And don't worry about not having the permission, Nexus is dead game since more than 8 years, they won't complain. Trust me. You are totally free to use their models. It's only up to you my friend...

+1 vote   mod: EVE: RTS
tanker1408 May 15 2012, 1:42pm says:

I really like the idea of making a strategy genre game out of the models from W.o.T.

Some of the prototype tanks deserve more recognition in other games too.

+1 vote   mod: Command and Conquer: Tank Warfare
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 11:30pm replied:

But it does.

+1 vote   media: Electric Armor
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 11:18pm replied:

this comment was totally uncalled for. the person you responded to wasn't even talking about the L2.

+2 votes   media: Tanks, old and new
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 10:54pm replied:

Nope, both the m5 and M4 would most porbably lose in a head-to-head fight against the Hetzer. Maybe the hetzer isn't facing it YET in this photo, but it is just about to turn.

The stuart's tiny 37mm gun can not penetrate the Hetzer's front armor, which is about 100-110mm effective because of good slope. Neither can the Sherman penetrate it with its short 75mm gun which penetrates only like 80mm with standard APBC ammo. Although the Hetzer has only 50mm thin armor plating but it's sloped @60° and that doubles the effect.
The M4 or M5 typically can't destroy it from the front. On the other hand, the hetzer's 75mm gun could theoretically penetrate both American tanks from over 1,100m still...

tl;dr Stuart and Sherman are pretty much screwed. :P (except if they out flank the hetzer, then he will be screwed)

+1 vote   media: Hetzer, Marsch!
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 10:47pm replied:

Read again, I didn't say it has 100mm thick armor plating, I said the armor is about 100-110mm EFEFCTIVE because it is angled at 60°.

Can you do the math? 50mm armor plate at 60° angle = 100mm LOS.

+1 vote   media: Hetzer, Marsch!
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 10:40pm replied:

Oh noes he made me look bad on the internet, i'm gonna go cry in the corner now :P

astounding how could I possibly have missed the details during my analysis back then... anyway, i give you +1. Gj

0 votes   media: A well-camouflaged Conqueror
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 10:30pm replied:

What is your point? Of course this is the 2nd Royal Tank Regiment (Cyclops Squadron) that was ambushed in the town "Az Zubayr" which is near Basra. This drawing just shows the figh. So what exactly are you trying to disprove?

And we know that not a single CHR2 was ever "destroyed" by enemy fire. we never claimed otherwise. However we only discussed about that one CHR2 that was penetrated through the lower front armor in al-Amarah. That's all.
So once gain, I don't see your point. What are you trying to dispriove here? The CHR2 probably has got the most successful combat history of any other modern MBTs so far.

+1 vote   media: Challenger 2 meets RPG-7 in Iraq 2003
tanker1408 Feb 9 2012, 9:46pm replied:

hmmm. Are you sure? This is not to be confused with the other image here

Same battle - but different images ;)

+1 vote   media: King Tiger winter battle in Hungary
tanker1408 Feb 2 2012, 11:51am replied:

nope. Chr1 and Chieftain are two whole different tanks. For example, it's more like Tiger I to Tiger II. Or Pz III to Pz IV. Also different tank types with new shaped body/turret.

+1 vote   media: M-95 Degman
tanker1408 Feb 2 2012, 11:33am replied:

and by "modern armor" i meant regular composite armor design. Other armor types like Reactive armor works differently again.

+1 vote   media: CHr2
tanker1408 Feb 2 2012, 11:23am says:

If the Leopard 2 had an obvious shot-trap like this, do you not think they would have noticed and fixed this problem by now? Do you seriously think it would be one of the world's best selling MBT if it had such an obvious shot-trap? Please think a little and use your logic before making such arguments.

people who still speak of these shot-traps tend to make their conclusions from WW2 era tanks, not realizing the differences in both armor and penetrator tech between now and then. People like that are lacking or missing GREAT amount of newest informations of modern tank warfare. Modern APFSDS rounds, as a general rule, don't deflect like in WW2.

Modern long-rod kinetic energy penetrators (APFSDS) behave in a different way than old traditional solid shot armour-piercing rounds used in WW2.

Modern penetrators are so powerful in penetrating capabilities nowadays, they don't just "bounce off the armor and leave a scratch on it" they will now always penetrate in the first place and "go inside the armor package" anyway, they can not be stopped from penetrating the first layers. BUT, modern armor is designed to stop it from reaching the base armor. That's how it works today.

That's why the Leopard 2A5/ A6 with edge-shaped turret front does not form a shot-trap since it doesn't deflect the penetrators outwards to hit the hull or turret ring.

+1 vote   media: CHr2
tanker1408 Jan 30 2012, 9:54am replied:

lol I was joking when I said it's "1980 ish". Sure, having no blowout panels is a drawback but it's still one of the TOP 5 best protected MBTs today. And there already are solutions available to increase protection against mentioned threats.

Best solution would be APS (Activ protection System) working both in Soft and Hard Kill way, which will be very effective to defeat HEATs, APFSDS, ATGMs and even top attacks from high trajectory like Javelin or EFP warheads from artillery ammunition like "BONUS".

+1 vote   media: Challenger 2 with up-armor kit
tanker1408 Jan 29 2012, 9:37am says:

WW1 battlecruisers

+1 vote   media: ship battle in ww1
tanker1408 Jan 29 2012, 9:13am says:

Depends on the right circumstances, crew training, and a little bit of Luck. Since they can all destory each other, it wins the crew who detects the enemy first and makes the hit. I know you didn't seriously ask for a debate, i'm just rolling with your comment :) Re-post all the comments!

+4 votes   media: ARL-44
tanker1408 Jan 29 2012, 8:54am replied:

Seriously, i don't understand why they don't upgrade CHr2 with cased ammo and "blow-out panels" like the Leopard and M1 have. (the panels that would blow out forcing the blast upwards instead of towards the crew compartment). Even if the ammo is seperated but putting it with the crew exposed is dangerous.

Modern Western MBTs without blowout panels is so 1980-ish.

+2 votes   media: Challenger 2 with up-armor kit
tanker1408 Jan 20 2012, 10:54pm says:

there, changed.

+3 votes   media: Kleinstpanzer (little tank)
tanker1408 Jan 19 2012, 8:34pm replied:

i don't get it. are you asking for the source?

+1 vote   media: T-90A armor penetration test
tanker1408 Jan 18 2012, 8:04pm replied:

i edited their faces out of the photos. why does it matter so much? the picture isn't about the soldiers anyway, it's about the tank.

+1 vote   media: T-90A armor penetration test
tanker1408 Jan 13 2012, 8:46pm replied:

For the Germanz it sure is, since they were outnumbered like 3:1, 5:1, they had to compensate with something, be it better quality/armor protection etc. If they lost a tank, they couldn't replace it so easilly like the Americans did with the mass produced Sherman.

And honestly, by this time (44/45) the panther's armor wasn't that good anymore. Even a T34-85 or Sherman 76w could already penetrate the front armor at 600-800 m distance, let alone the side armor at 2km+ o.O

Tiger II was the only "well" armored tank at this time :/ and that's exactly the tank that broke down the most

+1 vote   media: Flakpanzer Panther
tanker1408 Jan 13 2012, 8:15pm replied:

lol, i even wrote this line "should NOT be compared" at the end. ^^

Yes, the design of ARL44 was obsolete indeed, still doesn't change the fact that it was built after the war = post-war tank. That's the point. And yes, Tiger > everything else.

I think everything has been said now. Let us now close this discussion, shall we? :)

+1 vote   media: ARL 44 and Char B1
tanker1408 Jan 13 2012, 4:10pm replied:


dl;dr you repeated my comment in a more detailed way ;)

I just wanted to add some things, the ARL 44 has actually 120mm front armor plate, sloped at 45° = it's almost 180mm effective... strong enough to resist the old 88 gun of the Tiger I. ;)

And the tiger's side "protection" really isn't any better, let's be honest, what is it gonna stop exactly? 80mm is still a joke :P

I prefer the Russian IS-4 and IS-7 heavy prototypes which had both 170-200mm effective protection from the sides and even more from the front... but then again these tanks were built two years after WW2 and should not be compared to the Tigers.

+1 vote   media: ARL 44 and Char B1
tanker1408 Jan 13 2012, 2:56pm replied:

since it's a post-war tank, of course it outclasses the Tiger I, nothing to be proud there, even the IS-2 outclassed him in 1944 already.

the Tiger II on the other hand is still Boss. ;)

+2 votes   media: ARL 44 and Char B1
tanker1408 Jan 13 2012, 1:49pm replied:

Just modular composite armor, no era.

+2 votes   media: AT-14 vs Merkava IV
tanker1408 Jan 12 2012, 11:31am replied:

no, no, don't be fooled by the stubby gun, it fires rockets.

+1 vote   media: Sturmtiger.
tanker1408 Jan 12 2012, 9:54am replied:

but we do already have something like this in WOT, it's called T54 and Type-59.

Only USSR driver can have these main battle tanks tough :(

+1 vote   media: T-80U
tanker1408 Jan 12 2012, 4:05am replied:

maybe, if the commander is lucky, he manages to quickly close the hatch, and the missile hits one of the ERA tiles on the turret roof, which forces the explosion away from the tank and the crew may survives...

+9 votes   media: "What's that noise coming fr... Oh shi-"
tanker1408 Oct 25 2011, 4:07am replied:

Sorry i'm late, but anyway...

any Russian built tank with the 125mm gun and newest ammunition can indeed destroy a regular Leopard 2, Challenger 2 or M1A2 from the sides or rear, as they have only 200-300mm RHA protection against KE at these points.

Modern Russian rounds such as the 3BK21B and 3BM44M can penetrate 600-650-750 mm RHA equivalency already. check this out

But there are some promising modernizations and upgrades for additional side protection and more survivability, such as the Leopard 2a7+, Leopard REVOLUTION and the Turkish NEXT GENERATION add-on package, which provides about ~600mm LOS at the turret sides.


A regular T-80, T-90 or T-90A/S (on T-72 basis) has most vulnerability at the rear-sides, only like 100mm steel armor plates which can be penetrated by even 25mm & 30mm auto cannons in AFVs.


+4 votes   media: Serbian M-84AB1
tanker1408 Oct 25 2011, 3:04am says:

Henschel prototype with the Vorpanzer (frontal shield)

+2 votes   media: Tiger
tanker1408 Oct 19 2011, 8:20pm replied:


+2 votes   media: WW2 Color fotage Panzer IV, Tiger, Panther, Stug
tanker1408 Oct 17 2011, 10:51pm replied:

yes of course, but it's just what you would expect from German enginnering :) all of their military stuff looks cool

+1 vote   media: PZH 2000 in Afghanistan !
tanker1408 Oct 16 2011, 12:12am replied:

the life of soldiers is invaluable! as long as the APC protects the soldiers the money is definitely worth spent

+10 votes   media: Fuchs APC survived heavy IED attack in Afghanistan
tanker1408 Sep 24 2011, 9:50am replied:

because tanks ! :D

+2 votes   media: T-80 U in action
tanker1408 Sep 22 2011, 10:36pm replied:

duh, i was joking :)

+2 votes   media: jumping hill for tanks
tanker1408 Jul 25 2011, 8:51am replied:

That's because the Leopard family MBT is known to be one of, if not, THE best and most suiltable tank in the western world for many decades, thus most European countries use it.

It's not like Eastern countries have totally different tank designs either...

Challenger, Leopard, Abrams, Leclerc = they have all whole different shaped hull and turret design. Compared to most Eastern countries who use the T72 as basis = same hull and turret design only with a few different upgrades....

+1 vote   media: OF-40 Italian MBT
tanker1408 Jul 25 2011, 8:34am replied:

Bollocks. All it shows are common things which are in use with most MBTs today, like thermal imaging camera, remoted machine guns and reactive armor. These informations won't help the enemy to study the tank's weakness. How would it?...

It's not like you wouldn't notice the changes on the tank with your own eyes anyway. That it has a rear grill and reactive armor is visible how would they make a big secret of it?

+1 vote   media: M1A2 TUSK Variant
tanker1408 Jul 24 2011, 6:59am replied:

do a moskau roll :) [dschingis khan reference]

+2 votes   media: F-22 Raptor's easy pray for today: 4 unaware Su27s
tanker1408 Jul 24 2011, 6:51am replied:

meh, i wouldn't say it is THE most beautiful fighter aircraft ever (that would be the SU-35bm for me), because the F22 is a way too simple and boring looking design. But for sure a nice plane :)

+1 vote   media: Mixed
tanker1408 Jul 23 2011, 5:18am replied:

photoshopped leoaprd 2a1 (prototype)

+1 vote   media: TANKS! i found on fb
tanker1408 Jul 17 2011, 12:22pm replied:

tank hunters actually.

+3 votes   media: Jagdpanther/Panther production line.
tanker1408 Jul 16 2011, 2:06am replied:

Interesting. Thanks for claring it up. I really thought it was from a battle in Afghanistan, do you know the name of that movie?

+1 vote   media: Russia meets Afghanistan...
tanker1408 Jul 16 2011, 2:01am replied:

yay i think in training it's fun, but in real combat when under heavy AA fire and enemy infantry shooting at your chute it's not so joyful anymore :)

+1 vote   media: Paratroopers
tanker1408 Jul 15 2011, 7:43pm replied:

ah, damnit, damnit. i see. your picture has a different file name thou. not surprising, this image was posted on /k/ in many threads...

+1 vote   media: This 88mm clearly shot down 3 UFOs!
tanker1408 Jul 15 2011, 2:26pm replied:

Sorry, but this idea is retarded. The front area of a tank IS already best protected by thickest armor, it's not necessary to put the engine there. But the rear compartment needs the engine block much more, because this is the weakest part of a tank. that's why the entire engine block should be kept in the much weaker rear, so in case a projectile penetrates there, the engine is supposed to absurb most of the impact caused by the projectile and safe the crew's life.

Now that the engine has been removed from the weakest part, there is absolutely NOTHING to protect the crew when a penetration.

+5 votes   media: Israeli Merkava
tanker1408 Jul 14 2011, 2:01pm replied:

Yes, your post is correct. I was thinking of the wrong upgrade... The tank in this picture is indeed the Czechich T72M4. Thank you for reminding me.

Gosh there are too many upgrades for this tank, it's too easy to get confused with :)

+2 votes   media: T72M4
tanker1408 Jul 13 2011, 11:00pm replied:

Historical Military museum "Lenino-Snegiri", in Russia. And I have to admit, it is honestly one of the finest tank museums I have ever been to. I like the fact that they don't clean the tanks up alll the time, so they look a little rusty, but that's my fetish. i like when the tanks looks "used"

+2 votes   media: T-34-85, or T34-85, or T-34/85, or just simply T34
tanker1408 Jul 10 2011, 10:54pm replied:

One of these pieces was even equipped with a KH-55 missile (which is usually used by the TU-122m), to blow the **** out of any surface targets such as aircraft carriers and other military ships.

+1 vote   media: Tu-142 (enlargered Tu-95 version) Naval bomber
tanker1408 Jul 10 2011, 2:56pm replied:

@aidas2: well, actually the Russians solved this probloem shortly after the end of ww2, just by making the side and rear armor more sloped on the IS-3 and IS-7.

Did you know, that the IS-7 (1946) had BETTER armor at the flanks, than the King Tiger has at the FRONT? That's Amazing, don' you think? The IS-7 has 300mm LOS at the flanks, whereas the Tiger II had onlly ~85mm LOS at the flanks... and the Russians only achieved this by making the side armor sloped at 60° as well. The IS-3 had its side armor sloped at 60° too so it had about 180mm LOS at the flanks... It's so simple yet so effective!

Just imagine if the King Tiger (and all other German tanks) had its side armor sloped at 60° as well, (80mm @ 60° = 160mm LOS) because armor at 60 degrees doubles the Line of Sight throuhg the armor and gives +50% additional protection to the armor effectiveness...

With such good tank designs, the Germans maight could have defeated the Soviet army within weeks. But for some reason, German tank enginners never tought of this idea... idk why.

+3 votes   media: Königstiger in Munster Panzermuseum
tanker1408 Jul 10 2011, 2:28pm replied:


+1 vote   media: AAV-7 Amphibious Assault Vehicle
tanker1408 Jul 9 2011, 11:10pm replied:


+2 votes   media: Le Leclerc
tanker1408 Jul 9 2011, 9:31pm replied:

it's indeed COH. I wrote the phrase "brothers in arms" in the title field, because it looks like, one of the Knight's cross holder (the elite soldier in black suit) is holding his fallen Kammerad in his arms, after he has been hit by a bullet and is now injuried.

~ never leave a fallen comrade ~ ッ

+3 votes   media: Brothers in arms...the German version
tanker1408 Jul 9 2011, 11:36am replied:

hmm, which of the both tanks looks better, is for your individual taste. But technically seen, you cannot disagree that the Tigter II has a much better gun to fight against the Soviet heavy IS-series tank. Also, its "close-to-impenetrable" front armor gave him significant more protection. But even then, it was still too vulnerable from the fanks and rear, German tank engineers never solved this problem in WW2 :/

+6 votes   media: Königstiger in Munster Panzermuseum
tanker1408 Jul 9 2011, 11:19am replied:

Laser guided anti-air and anti-tank missiles of course :D j/k

it's a smoke grenade launcher :-) you know, to make a smoke wall for cover

+4 votes   media: Leoaprd 1
tanker1408 Jul 7 2011, 3:53pm replied:


There were three TU-160s at the winning parade devoted to 65th anniversary of victory in the Great Patriotic war on May 9, 2010 in Moscow.

+3 votes   media: Blackjack, Blackjack everywhere
tanker1408 Jun 24 2011, 8:17pm replied:

Well, T-90 is just a upgraded/modernized T-72 with new Contact-5 (ERA) and Shtora Active Protection System.

It was renamed to T-90, because after the huge tank battle in Iraq 1991 (Operation Desert Storm) The T-72 got very bad reputation (because so many of them have been massacred and slaughtered by the M1's).

And the Russians feared they'd lose customers so they changed its name to T-90. Also, please don't call the T-72 crappy. it was in fact the world's best tank, when it entered service with the Soviet army in the 1970's. but it had no chance against the much more modern M1A1 Abrams, unequal fight.

+2 votes   media: T-90
tanker1408 Jun 21 2011, 6:24pm says:

this picture is already containing in the image gallery of this group

+1 vote   media: Tank Grotte TG-1
tanker1408 Jun 20 2011, 2:16am replied:

it IS the front side actually :D

+1 vote   media: M88A1
tanker1408 Jun 19 2011, 7:32pm says:

bawksy? queen? in the army? Must follow!

+2 votes   media: Some Israeli Fmale Soldiers
tanker1408 Jun 18 2011, 8:43pm says:

hey bud, i hope you didn't mind my whining on yout pictures you posted in Tank Lovers Group, it's just reasonable you didn't browse the whole entire image gallery to chack out if the picture you wanted to upload, whether has been uploaded already, or not. there's just too many images posted to the group by this time, i understand that nobody would go through the entire gallery just to make sure it's not gonna be a repost... even if my comemnts sounded mean, i wasn't :) well, enjoy your day~

+1 vote   member: Urdnot669
tanker1408 Jun 18 2011, 8:23pm replied:

even better i postetd it in this group!

+1 vote   media: M-50/52 Bounder
tanker1408 Jun 18 2011, 12:08am says:

Of course, the only ships you uploaded are Russian.

surprise surprise..

+1 vote   media: Russian battlecruiser Pyotr Velikiy
tanker1408 Jun 17 2011, 11:14pm says:

DUDE, your 4th repost now in a row

+1 vote   media: Osorio Brazilian MBT
tanker1408 Jun 17 2011, 11:09pm says:

repost, again.

+1 vote   media: TR-85M1 Bizonul Romanian MBT
tanker1408 Jun 17 2011, 11:03pm says:

repost, and in very bad quality ...

+1 vote   media: Altay Turkish Prototype MBT
tanker1408 Jun 17 2011, 10:48pm replied:

haha, Nope. Although they look both quite similar in design, but at least you can tell from the turret it's not a IS-6.

the IS-4's turret is a little more bulky and massive. Also, note the unique driver's hatch on the front glacis. A IS-6 doesn't have it like that.

+1 vote   media: rare IS-4 photos
tanker1408 May 18 2011, 8:55pm replied:

Me and my friend we are just gathering info's, photographs and other possible and usefull sources to make reliabale (as best and as close to reality as possible) estimation levels of modern MBT's armor thickness.

Everyone else interested in this is free to read and learn from it, why shouldn't I share it with you guys?

+1 vote   media: T-72 (T-90) Basic Armor Layout
tanker1408 Mar 12 2011, 1:47pm says:

yet all the AA's couldn't prevent it from sinking.... i think 360 aircrafts at once is just too hardcore :|

+2 votes   media: Yamato's weaponry
tanker1408 Mar 12 2011, 1:31pm replied:

fffs, made in China my A... errm nvm. You know that the film director (Roland Emmerich) of the movie "2012" is German?...

And btw, the ship's name is only ARK. The "Noah's Ark" is from the holy bible lol

-1 votes   media: The (Noah) ark from 2012 movie
tanker1408 Mar 8 2011, 4:13pm replied:

This is a KV-1s and not IS-2

+1 vote   media: Russian tank Artwork
tanker1408 Mar 6 2011, 9:56am replied:

I will never understand why people argue which is the best tank. "Yeah My weapons is better" - "Not ture *******, my weapons are better" That's just so childish. As long as a weapon can kill, I think it's effective. And yes Panzert, the Merkava 4 indeed is one of the best protected tanks in the world, i can tell by the 1,10m thick armor block on the turret which absorbs every hit like a sponge! Not to forget the Israelis are very advanced in developing APS that makes the tank close to invulnerable. And no worries, you don't have to be a fanboy to make suggestive posts. :)

I have seen the official armor layout of most MBTs and one thing is for sure, none of them is invincible. They are ALL vulnerable from the sides and rear, only good protected at the whatever.

+1 vote   media: Comaprison of L2 and Pz IV
tanker1408 Mar 6 2011, 6:08am replied:

What do you mean by that? It's just stunning to me how tank design has not changed that much in the 40 years between them, and yet the total effectiveness (of armor, speed & gun) is still 4 times better, only by achieving new armor technology and better computerized fire control systems etc. Who knows what will be next in 40 years? Perhaps invisible tanks? Nano armor that is able to health/repair itself? Guns fire high-energy ionized Plasma shells that can cut through even the thickest armor?

And I think Germany still makes the BEST tanks in the world but that's only my opinion. They always did and always will.

inb4 raging fanboy shitstorm because my opinion is "wrong" lol

+7 votes   media: Comaprison of L2 and Pz IV
tanker1408 Mar 5 2011, 8:27pm replied:

@SlayerX3, exactly my thoughts

Chassis & gun - CHR2

Turret: Merkava + M1

+2 votes   media: M5A2 MBT from Crysis
tanker1408 Mar 2 2011, 4:50pm replied:

@jrgl_cuchallain but it proves that even the best protected tanks are still vulnerable to modern anti-tank threats, unless they have a force field (shild) or APS. The CHR2 may performed very well against outdated cold-war weapons (RPG-7), just as good as the M1 Abrams performaed very well against outdated T-72 during Operation Desert Storm in the Gulf War 91... but they aren't battleproven by fighting outdated weapons. Every Western MBT (Leclerc, Leo2) could have done the same. Anyway, when they face new weapons from today (RPG-29 or T90, T80U) they can be destroyed just as easily too. The insurgents know the weakspot now: Simply use tandem warhead that has about 700mm penetration performance, aim at lower front plate = armor will most likely be penetrated. And I have posted a picture once here to the group, that mentions the RPG-29 can also penetrate the T-90 front armor even with Kontakt-5!

But on the other hand, @aidas2, it's a well known fact that the floor armor plate is the weakest part of every MBT, not only CHR2. And all modern MBTs are very vulnerable from the sides just as well. The standard M1 Abrams could even be penetrated by RPG-7s, which the CHR2 could withstand!...

+3 votes   media: Challenger 2 meets RPG-7 in Iraq 2003
tanker1408 Feb 24 2011, 12:22pm says:

yay F-14 Tomcat in Mange/Anime style!

+1 vote   media: Macross
tanker1408 Feb 15 2011, 9:25am says:

I think if the Germans would have focused more on these advanced things like Type XXI electric submarine and Me262, instead of wasting time and resources on Ratte and Maus projects, our history would have changed in a not so good way - Fortunately, they didn't.

+1 vote   media: Type XXI
tanker1408 Feb 10 2011, 7:49pm replied:

Many M4 Sherman tanks during WW2 were marked with a big white star symbol directly over the Ammo Racks where the ammunition was housed, soon the Germans found out that always when they hit this spot the tank was blown up and exploded and burnt out. The Germans used this as a Aiming Point because it would usually blow up the ammunition, that's also why so many Shermans caught fire after the first hit. for this reason the star symbol was later removed from most Sherman tanks within the last war months xD

+2 votes   media: Sturmtiger
tanker1408 Jan 31 2011, 5:07pm replied:

Not at all. You need glasses? The MC75 is just an enlargered version built on the MC80 vessel

Nothing of the MC75 design has any similarity to the Wraith starship

-1 votes   media: Mesh Renders - MC75 front view
tanker1408 Jan 18 2011, 12:29am says:

against bots... <.<

Now let's go on a online rampage! >:D

+1 vote   media: KingTigers in Action!!!!
tanker1408 Jan 17 2011, 11:49pm replied:


+2 votes   media: WORLD OF TANKS
tanker1408 Jan 16 2011, 3:32pm says:

the T54 is too big, the size of the IS-7 is aboout right...

+2 votes   media: ss
tanker1408 Jan 16 2011, 2:19pm replied:

what you mean is the T44

+1 vote   media: ELEPHANT ,A20 ,train
tanker1408 Jan 4 2011, 6:18pm replied:

Awwww man yeah it sadly missed in this collection :( dayyyym just imagine the Centurion next to the Conqueror and it would be the ultimate epic group photo of Western Post War Heavy tanks.

+2 votes   media: Challenger 2, M103, Conqueror <3, M4 Sherman 76w
tanker1408 Jan 4 2011, 6:11pm replied:

lol why would anyone even dicuss which of them is better than the other, since they both could penetrate and single-shot kill EVERY armored vehicle at this time. the L/71 can penetrate 14mm MORE armor, but therefore the 128mm calibre would be better to fight heavy or BIG tanks as there would be more shrapnels that explode inside the tank, insuring more damage to the mechanics and devices.

+1 vote   media: Jagdpanzer IV with long L/70 gun
tanker1408 Jan 4 2011, 5:34pm replied:

I know that's where I have it from^^

I also wanted to post the T10m art picture...but didn't

+1 vote   media: Cool IS-3 art work
tanker1408 Jan 4 2011, 12:19am replied:

Yep. For the beginners, it is the same gun as used by the Panther tank. 2nd most powerful German anti tank gun that was fielded, after the legendary 8,8cm kwk43 L/71 from the King Tiger.

+3 votes   media: Jagdpanzer IV with long L/70 gun
tanker1408 Jan 1 2011, 6:43pm replied:

Yup, according to the document that I have all them T-100s are equipped with the 130mm Naval B-13 gun.

+1 vote   media: Some experimental tanks
tanker1408 Dec 31 2010, 9:04pm replied:

History Channel


Panzer IV has only 50mm armor

ALso, according to the video result, the T34 scores 100% for firepower and armor protection even better than the Pan ther ranking Derp.

+4 votes   media: The RAT tank
tanker1408 Dec 30 2010, 10:03am replied:

Yep, that's right. ESPECIALLY the Puma was more of an IFV than any other recon, since it got a weapon powerful enough to deal with most allied tanks, even at large distances, thus able to give infantry good fire support if needed. Compare this to the old Sd.Kfz. 232 and 233, they had no anti tank gun at all and were completely helpless when attacked by a tank.. The Puma at least could protect itself

+5 votes   media: Sd.Kfz. 234\2 Puma
tanker1408 Dec 30 2010, 7:14am replied:

blitzfire5, But only with airplanes the USA can not occupy territory, so they are still dependent on ground forces, my guess was that if the Allied supply lifeline was cut they would not receive any supply from the French coasts anymore. Haha you don't need to tell me that it was close to impossible for the Germans to change the war, I just tried to figure our WHAT exactly the Ratte could be used for :P

It was a piece of **** that's why the German Generals didn't allow it for service, it was only a obnoxious fantasy of a austrian tyrant named Hitler

and Yes, Me262 made the P51 its b*tch any day ;)

+4 votes   media: The RAT tank
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 11:26pm replied:


+1 vote   media: kv breaks through wall (exhibition)
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 10:51pm replied:

Hmm, sure? only 100 Me262s are accounted for the destruction of over 510 Allied planes. And most of the Me262s were only destroyed while take-off because then they were most vulnerable. My personal estimate is that only about 30 or 40 of them were ever shot down in the air. And the E-50 E-75s were also way ahead over Allied tanks, and I really mean WAY AHEAD (auto loader system, night scope devices, new range altitude optics etc). We can be Glad that the War ended early enough or the outcome maybe had been changed... Just thinking about that makes my hackles raise.

+4 votes   media: The RAT tank
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 10:00pm replied:

I'd rather say the front armor part reminds me of the M103 Heavy tank just much better slopeness. Afterall it's an American tank project if I'm right.

+2 votes   media: The Hunter tank without cut-through graphic
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 8:38pm replied:

Yes, overzised target that cannot be penetrated by any anti tank guns anyway. While the Allieds are just wasting their ammunition on targeting that monster, but doing no damage at all because they lack sufficient guns, the fast E-50 & E-75 tanks that were hiding/covering behind the Ratte are quickly rushing forwarth and spreading out over the battlefield like a fast growing virus and take out the Allied tanks which are still shocked by that huge giant machine. Meanwhile the big 280mm artillery naval cannons give heavy firesupport, which equals a entire Russian artillery battalion. Me262s and Horten Ho XVIII as interceptors are giving air support to protect it against bombers and other low flying ground attcking planes, while the Arado 234 turbojet bombers are sent to the French coast to attack the landing ships at the beaches to cut through Allied reinforcement lifeline.


+4 votes   media: The RAT tank
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 1:44pm says:

Oh boi, it's THIS again.. let us all support the mighty bear spam here we go!

+2 votes   media: Tupolev Tu-95 Bear
tanker1408 Dec 29 2010, 12:49pm replied:

It was very impressive indeed for the time it was developed but it could penetrate the Tiger from 1km distance already because the Tiger had 100mm vertical front armor on the hull. And the Panther had only 110mm effective armor thickness (horizontal distance through the front armor) so it could also kill the Panther from 1km distance already ;)

+3 votes   media: 107mm gun for KV-2
tanker1408 Dec 28 2010, 1:52pm says:


+1 vote   media: kc-135+f-16 and Condor AWACS Hawkeye
tanker1408 Dec 28 2010, 10:09am replied:

Errm.. Geoffrey Pyke yes ;) but it sounds almost that way you have just spelled out lol

+4 votes   media: British Ice Aicraft Carrier Habakkuk Project 1944
tanker1408 Dec 28 2010, 9:21am replied:

ffffss they're just another easy targets for F22's missile system!

0 votes   media: a Apache appears!
tanker1408 Dec 27 2010, 11:21pm replied:

I dunno, looked like ww1 to me. Hey I can be mistaken too... sometimes :p

+2 votes   media: ww1 tank battle (Renault tank)
tanker1408 Dec 27 2010, 11:09pm replied:


+1 vote   media: Knocked out IS-3 rusting away ;_;
tanker1408 Dec 23 2010, 6:09pm replied:

haha yes it looks like the shield deflects or absorbs the scanner but in fact the scanner can just go through the shield. :P

+1 vote   media: Vadrag City Ship gets scanned
tanker1408 Dec 22 2010, 9:50pm replied:


+1 vote   media: T-155 Firtina SPG
tanker1408 Dec 22 2010, 3:12pm says:

kinda repost :P

+1 vote   media: MTHEL
tanker1408 Dec 22 2010, 9:45am replied:

Hello Phenixtri (: First of all, AFVs or APCs are not designed to fight against MBTs. Even if they have ATGMs (anti tank missiles) but that's only for defense. They are (as you have already pointed in your statement) mainly made to carry infantry to the battlefield and if needed to give fire support to the infantry. Unfortunately, no APC or IFV can really be protected well enough to resist modern tank guns. Have you ever seen how many mm RHA a modern tank gun can penetrate?

Take a look at this

As you can see, most tank guns today can penetrate over 600-700mm RHA armor, it is almost impossible to protect a light IFV against such powerful armaments. Only Main Battle Tanks themselves at 40-60 tons heaviness can be protected well enougn to resist such powerful guns. Although the German Puma APC comes the closest to the protection levels of a MBT. The Puma APC has the same modular armor protection as the Leoaprd 2A5/6 MBT. But I doubt that even the Puma could resist modern tank guns... they are just too powerful.

Nevertheless, APCs & IFVs are very good in their role, and the U.S. EFV can do the same job as every other APC can do, I am sure about that :)

+5 votes   media: U.S. Marine Corps EFV
tanker1408 Dec 21 2010, 3:01pm says:

Wow, this looks impressively good. Hope to see more of your models soon (:

+1 vote   media: Ita battleship Savoia
tanker1408 Dec 21 2010, 2:57pm says:

yes this really looked very modern of its time, it was the first turbo jet powered flying wing in the world. Plus the uniqe shaped body delivered a little stealth technology and made it invisible against some outdated radars so it was at some degrees the first man made stealth aircraft in the world.

+1 vote   media: New German Fighters
tanker1408 Dec 21 2010, 9:12am replied:

Take a look at the image filename, it says it. Yup :)

+1 vote   media: It's an angel?!?!
tanker1408 Dec 21 2010, 9:10am replied:

that's btw not the way I think personally, i don't mind if they are made to kill people as long as they look beautiful :P but there are many hippis out there who think this way.

+1 vote   media: Ace combat Art
tanker1408 Dec 21 2010, 8:46am replied:

well, it's a killing machine made to kill people, not for peace. but i love its look anyway.

+1 vote   media: Ace combat Art
tanker1408 Dec 18 2010, 9:29pm replied:

Nope, this is the Leopard 2A7 already ;-)

+1 vote   media: Leopard 2A7???
tanker1408 Dec 18 2010, 8:42pm replied:

Yes, M41 155 mm howitzer in late 1944/45

0 votes   media: artillery shell
tanker1408 Dec 17 2010, 7:10pm replied:

Yes, a longer gun was obligatory needed to provide better penetration capabilities for piercing through even the thickest armor. Especially the Soviet heavy tank series IS-4/IS-7 had very good armor protection. The longer the gun barrel, the higher the muzzle velocity, the more powerful the armor piercing capabilities. So it could effectively defeat every armor without problems. ;)

+2 votes   media: E-75 Tiger III
tanker1408 Dec 4 2010, 3:36am replied:

"Please don't call it tank, it sounds so derogatory. This is a PANZER. drama drama

Just revenging for <.<


+2 votes   media: Tiger turret number 300
tanker1408 Dec 2 2010, 10:50pm replied:

is it you "ubinhad"? a guy with this username also comments the same thing on my photos at "Henschel turret, Porsche turret...."

what is the point of this lol :)

+1 vote   media: KönigsTiger Porsche turret
tanker1408 Dec 2 2010, 10:34pm replied:

thanks for notifying..

+1 vote   media: King Tiger (104) Bovington HD/HQ
tanker1408 Dec 2 2010, 10:22pm says:

if it needs to long to load the full sized picture, just right click on "view original" and choose "open a new window " if you browse firefox.

+1 vote   media: Tiger 104
tanker1408 Dec 2 2010, 1:21pm replied:

Maybe too lazy? nah. I am not exactly sure. Might be the reason there were no original spare parts left? Afterall this is the early Porsche–suspension variant (considreing all other Jagdtigers were scrapped).

+2 votes   media: Jagdtiger Bovington HD/HQ
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 9:47pm says:

it's only wooden right?

+1 vote   media: KV-3 heavy tank mockup
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 2:51pm replied:

Of course the sides and rear is the most vulnerable section of the tank overall, but this example shows ony the most vulnerable parts of the FRONT armor on the turret :)

+1 vote   media: Most vulnerable parts of T80 & T90 against LKE II
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 12:37pm replied:

Orange131326, sorry, i meant of course OOORAHHH. i will change that immediate.

and don't believe the evil propaganda news they're just making a bad picture of the brave American troops who risk their lifes to save peace on earth.

-3 votes   media: insurgents (again disguised as civilians)
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 12:32pm replied:

yes, the a-10 is also a very effective weapon to fight the evil terrorism! SEMPER FI my brothers. God bless our troops OOORAH!

-1 votes   media: A-10 attacks terrorists disgusied as civilians
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 9:06am replied:

what u mean? they're just doing their jobs to make sure for PEACE. God bless America! OORRAAAHH

-1 votes   media: Apache weeeeee
tanker1408 Nov 26 2010, 8:38am replied:

no we must fight terrorism or there will be never peace in the world.

-3 votes   media: insurgents (again disguised as civilians)
tanker1408 Nov 25 2010, 12:06pm replied:

it's... beautiful

+1 vote   media: nice tank photos from Bovington
tanker1408 Nov 23 2010, 11:17pm replied:

lol :D dammo i hate typos. dunno how this could happen. >.<

+1 vote   media: Pfficiers of the Polish 4th heavy Tank Regiment
tanker1408 Nov 23 2010, 10:40pm replied:

i know but it looks so much cooler in W.o.T idk why thou :/

+1 vote   media: another view of IS-7 at Kubinka
tanker1408 Nov 23 2010, 9:44pm says:

note: this picture is very old and was made BEFORE the developers started to create the the game World of Tanks. These models shown here are actually from the game Order of War. This screenshot is photoshopped, and was made to display an illusion of how world of tanks could look like. tbh i like it this way better :P the maps in this picture have better visuals and the ambience is much greater too. kinda.

+1 vote   media: World Of Tanks
tanker1408 Nov 18 2010, 8:43pm says:

is zhis ze Scharnhorst battlekruizer klass?

+1 vote   media: Ships
tanker1408 Nov 17 2010, 9:15pm replied:

i kno rite, i'm like so ****** badass rofl

+1 vote   media: M1A2 Abrams "spaced composite armour" turret sides
tanker1408 Nov 16 2010, 11:30pm replied:

wth? realistic tank gaming ain't that lame too dude, why the hell would you even possible thing like this? probably because you have never palyed a good realistic ww2 game ever before, right? And you think there are no campers in W.o.T? OH MY GAH i can sing you a song of this, the servers are full of them, finding the nearest bush and sitting in forest/bushes and don't move one inch from their position. But this is just part of tactics and usually wins. Once I took up a defensive position with my IS-7 on Karelia, at the right flank, when the enemy team advanced to my position I sniped the first 3 incoming tanks to death, and our artillery gave me fire support destroyng the other tanks, while the rest of my team defended our base (which is very important if you don't want to lose). I'm not saying the team should always CAMP but still it's a effective strategy.

+2 votes   media: World Of Tanks
tanker1408 Nov 10 2010, 8:05pm replied: +1 vote   media: Forgotten Hope Kharkov-1941
tanker1408 Nov 10 2010, 4:26pm replied:

Gnostic, because it's an israeli tank. Got the joke? No? Me neither.

GriffinZ, die Panzer ist kaputt lol

+1 vote   media: Oeps
tanker1408 Nov 7 2010, 4:58pm says:

This is NOT the M1A2 SEP. This is only the starndard version of the old M1A2 Abrams. The upgraded SEP version has additional armor package on the turret, estimated to be up to 800-900mm against KE.

+1 vote   media: M1A2 Abrams armor layout.
tanker1408 Nov 5 2010, 5:32am says:

Why all this hatred against germans ? <:(

+1 vote   media: German tanks on Eastern Front...
tanker1408 Nov 5 2010, 5:31am says:

why so much anti-German ComeradeStalin ? :(

+1 vote   media: German tanks on Eastern Front...
tanker1408 Oct 24 2010, 11:27pm replied:

u mean the fail apc? yes

0 votes   media: Canadian LAV-25 APC bitches
tanker1408 Oct 19 2010, 12:20am replied:

you just jelly cuz i so much cooller than you :D hurrr

+1 vote   media: FINALLY! Just managed to buy my first IS-7
tanker1408 Oct 11 2010, 3:35pm replied:

I was having a duell with him at long range shooting before, when we were fighting in the streets (see here But when he and his team mates were heavily damaged with only 5-10% HP left they all tried to escape from me, but because my ИС-7 is so fast (50 km/h on road) I could reach him and finish him off. Only his other team mates could escape from me and so I made only 1 kill before the game ended ;(

+1 vote   media: Tiger knocked out
tanker1408 Oct 10 2010, 3:25pm replied:

What you mean is the E-50. There is Panther 2 and E-50, which are both different tanks. However this Panther type currently in closed beta is the Panther II prototype, but soon the E-50 will be added with all other E-series tanks ;)

+1 vote   media: Panther II
tanker1408 Oct 7 2010, 6:38pm replied:

Very massive and solide I guess? LoL just kidding, Hull front armor 150mm at a very low and high angle of inclination, Turret Cast variable thickness from 94 up to 210mm. The thickness of the gun mantlet even reached 350 mm!

But that's all no problem for further German post war tanks like E-75 or E-100 :P Theey would have guns with 150-170mm calibre size o.O

+1 vote   media: IS-7 prototype 1948
tanker1408 Oct 7 2010, 2:22pm replied:

yeah but only if the crew is not killed my Sniper and Machien guns before, this APC has only 14mm armor and can be penetrated by even small fire arms. Only 7.62mm rounds are capable to make swiss cheese of it...

sry mate but facts are facts. They should have better bought the Swedish CV90-120 instead...

+1 vote   media: M1128 Mobile Gun System
tanker1408 Oct 2 2010, 1:20pm replied:

Maybe it's because of the angle from where we're looking at this tank plus it has turned the turret 170° to the right side which gives it additinal badas look and we can clearly see the armor thickness of the Kontakt-5 ERA on turret front also the pictue has a very good and sarp resolution so we can see all the nice details.

+1 vote   media: Epic
tanker1408 Sep 23 2010, 5:12am says:

weird, this looks like NFS U2 o.O

+1 vote   media: Deluxe Car Pack - Screen 1
tanker1408 Sep 22 2010, 4:54pm replied:

sh-t i sorry :(


+1 vote   media: Leclerc ground performance training
tanker1408 Sep 22 2010, 11:39am replied:

It's World of Tanks (currently closed beta only). It's not published yet, but it will be released for the open beta in a few months. Maybe there are still a few free keys available if anyone is interested in it..

+2 votes   media: And here's my tier 9 IS-4 tank
tanker1408 Jul 16 2010, 4:28pm replied:

Thank you, Vader91 (:

+1 vote   media: MAUS tank!
tanker1408 Jul 16 2010, 11:57am replied:

that's because this picture was recolored. It was actually only black and white before, without any colors.

+1 vote   media: Leopard 1A1
tanker1408 Jul 16 2010, 8:53am replied:

hey calm down bro. I did not mean AMAP_APS which is the Active Protection System. I was only talking about AMAP (Advanced Modular Armor Protection) which is the modular designed armour add-on package on the tank's turret. And it seems to be deeply influenced/derived from the Merkava 4's turret design (the thick add-on armour blocks on the front and sides of the turret). The T-95 is the first Russian tank in history that uses this kind of AMAP design which is commonly used by Western country's tanks. And no, Russians did not invent sloped armor, LOL that is ridiculous. Many french tanks did already have "sloped armour" BEFORE the Russians started to build their own tanks.

+2 votes   media: T-95 Black eagly
tanker1408 Jul 16 2010, 8:35am replied:

They wanted to buy Leo 2s in the first place. Unfortunately German Government at first refused to sell them but later in 2005 they made a new deal again and Germany then sold 298 ex-German Leopard 2A4s to Turkey, which are still in use with the turkish army til today.

And I'm sure the Leopard 2A4 will remain Turkey's MBT for the next few years, since the first prorotype of the MİTÜP Altay tank is NOT even built or tested yet lol.

+1 vote   media: MİTÜP Altay
tanker1408 Jul 16 2010, 6:43am says:

Hey guys i have a question, looks like the ammunition box is open at the sides. Seems like you could throw a grenade in it and...BOOOOM munition would explode and rip the turret apart. Or am i wrong?

+1 vote   media: T-84 Oplot
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 11:07pm replied:

It means (Peace Support Operations) which is designed specially for urban warfare.

+1 vote   media: Lego Leopard 2 PSO
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 10:24pm replied:

Oh C'mon )= don't be that pessimistic. Have you never seen a real cowboy movie? these guys are crazzy sharp shooters and can aim very precise with their .45 revolver. They can shoot down apples from a tree 50 meters away with the first bullet. So of course he can hit the tank's most vulnerable soft spot. For example if he fires the first bullet to the tank's cannon tube and the bulled goes trhoguh the gun it may hit the ammunition and causes a huge explosion inside = tank dead. (=

+5 votes   media: Tank vs cowboy
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 10:14pm says:

sweet (: will it stand a chance against my lego Panzer?

+4 votes   media: Leclerc tank
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 1:12pm says:

i posted this here instead of tank lover group. i think it is more related to AA lover group am i doing rite.

-1 votes   media: AA tank
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 1:00pm replied:

nahh... who shots first wins. old cowboy rules. i bet the cowboy has better reflex than the tank :) He who laughs last, laughs loudest.

+2 votes   media: Tank vs cowboy
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 11:38am replied:

GEEESH, yes OF COURSE the damn picture is a shop, APPARENTLY! But it is related to a real article about the british 'cloaking device'. The British Military itself stated in 2007 that they have invented a system that makes their tanks invisible to the human eye. No joke!

This picture only shows what the British cloaking device might look like if it were applied to an Israeli tank...

+1 vote   media: Invisible cloak (no joke!)
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 11:31am replied:

Mr. obvious. Of course the pic is fake. But the article in the description box is real. I'm not even kidding, Seriously. Thanks to British technology, in 2012 the military may be able to see you, but you may not be able to see them lmao.

Just google for it.

+2 votes   media: OMG new british stealth technology!
tanker1408 Jul 14 2010, 8:50am replied:

BAWWWWWW, sorry bro :o didn't mean to be that rude. pls no cry.
but internet is serious business >:o now take your fail with you. and gtfo.

hehe just kidding, take it easy bro :) you have been trolled. and nice lego tank keep up the sweet work, you 'll get better with time.

+3 votes   media: Abrams tank
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 11:52am replied:

obvious shop is obvious

+5 votes   media: b-52
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 11:22am replied:

pic is legit.
you're a failhole. (:

+1 vote   media: how cute ^^
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 11:17am replied:

mine (:

+3 votes   media: Who will win?
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 11:16am replied:

it IS a upgraded L2A6 with greater armour protection and stuff..

+1 vote   media: Spanish leopard 2E
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 10:54am says:

this camouflage.. it's so unique! Looks sooooo goood man.

+1 vote   media: Queen of sky (: SU-35
tanker1408 Jul 13 2010, 5:24am says:

Finally, the first picture since months that was NOT posted by me! Uhm...but my lego tank looks cooler sry^^

your lego tank is ugly^^ and wtf is wrong with the treads, orange lol? and the turret isn't even proper shaped at all :P also the whole turret should be placed backwards. just a little more to the back. hurrrr

Haters gonna hate

+3 votes   media: Abrams tank
tanker1408 Jul 12 2010, 7:25pm replied:

So f*cking true man! We shouldn't produce thousands of them for no reason so they can be wasted in the dust and rust away.... we should use our weapons instead in real combat. Hey Lebanon, i'm about to invade you now. Rest of the world: Wanna join so we can start a new World war? Who's with me? come and join the party we have cookies also... it's no lie i promise

+1 vote   media: So sad :(
tanker1408 Jul 12 2010, 5:42pm says:

zoom in and out for dramatic purpose!! zumg

+2 votes   media: KILL IT WITH FIREEEEE !!!111!!1!!1!111
tanker1408 Jul 12 2010, 5:27pm says:

PS. Notice the kill rings on the gun tube of his King Tiger.... very impressive, huh?

+1 vote   media: Karl Körner better than Michael Wittmann? yes
tanker1408 Jul 12 2010, 1:00pm replied:

Nope, it is not just thick and heavy steel plates like they used in the T-72B, but it is a whole new generation of advanced 4th generation composite armor, making use of nano-ceramics and modern steel technology.

For comparison, the Challenger 2 and all other MBTs have still only 3rd generation of Composite armour. ;)

+1 vote   media: Leoaprd 2 advanced modular armor with nano ceramic
tanker1408 Jul 12 2010, 12:08pm replied:

just a tactical RV type amphibious vehicle.

+1 vote   media: T-72
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 10:13pm says:

just going for a walk, breathing fresh air, enjoying beautiful nature when suddenly... holy **** is that a ******* tank?

+3 votes   media: picture unrelated
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 9:41pm says:

just going for a walk, breathing fresh air, enjoying the beutiful nature when suddenly....

+1 vote   media: picture unrelated
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 8:47pm says:

A very beautiful tank. sexy shapes and edges....

+1 vote   media: leopard 2a6
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 8:32pm says:

Sherman prototype with M36 turret and 90mm gun.

+1 vote   media: M36A1 Gun Motor Carriage
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 8:27pm replied:

Wait..what? no it's not. It's a real tank wtf are you talking about lmao.

+1 vote   media: leopard 2a4 CL
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 8:20pm replied:

Nobody said they destroyed ALL M1's themselves. Learn to read.

but A LOT M1 Abrams tanks were destroyed by friendly fire after they were disabled and the crew abandoned it. There were more M1's being destroyed by friendly fire than enemy.

+1 vote   media: Destroyed M1 Abrams
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 7:56pm replied:

T-90 is a very sexy tank imho

+1 vote   media: T-90
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 7:35pm replied:

so is every ww2 tank.

+1 vote   media: Meet the Legend - T-34-85!
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 7:17pm replied:

yes, that's true, it really does. click this picture here.

notice the lower nose area (front armor on the chassis) which is curved/wavy like on the Leo2.

+1 vote   media: TK-X (Type 10)
tanker1408 Jul 9 2010, 5:22pm replied:

@mrparty i wonder why do people ALWAYS have to bring the jagdpanther in this topic when it comes to the Jagdtiger? Just because someone said IT IS A NICE ART. Leave the Jagdpanther out of this thread, of course it was a much better tank destroyer, but nobody argued about this. he just praised the good art work GOD DAMNIT.

+2 votes   media: German WW2 Tanks
tanker1408 Feb 2 2010, 6:23pm replied:

that's not a sturmtiger duh, it's a Brummbär or Sturmpanzer IV.

+1 vote   media: tskross
tanker1408 Sep 20 2009, 12:31pm replied:

GOD, i'm getting sick of this sh*!. seriously, Company of Heroes DID NOT invent the upgrade menu. it is only one of thousand other games that uses this feature. maybe because COH is one of the most popular RTS game today, many ppl (most little kids) compare this to other games. i have played many other RTS games which included features like an upgrade menu (the same like this one which you can see in this picture) long time before COH was released. so please, STFU thanks.

-1 votes   media: Skills - Vaygr
tanker1408 Jul 20 2009, 10:19pm says:

WOW nice work guyse and good edditing! looks really great! the Elefant tank destroyed was also armed with the very powerful and high velocity 8,8 cm KwK L43 gun from the King Tiger right? IRL it could kill any allied tanks at range of 3,000 meters very accurate and precise.. too bad though this is only a unrealistic and bad balanced strategy game in which german tanks lost advantages/superiority in gun range, firepower and armour protection :(

+2 votes   media: (Old) Elefant
Offline Since
Jan 31, 2015
Cocos (Keeling) Islands Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Member Watch
Track this member
Comment Statistics
Posts per day