Opfire (no, not about the draining problem...)

[Marek_Tucan]

OT RE: tank bashing

T-72 was a good tank, but don't forget it was designed as "second rate", a cheap alternative to T-64/T-80. It was not until 1980's when it was treated as an equal or even better with T-72B and its successors and most 72's in Iraqui service were of T-72 original or T-72M early pattern, ie the older variant. Comapred to tanks which the Coalition had, it would be like matching up force of few early Shermans (standing here for T-72) and majority of M3 Light and M3 Medium (for T-55/Type 59 families) with a force of majority of Panthers or Tigers (M1A1, Chally) and few late PzKpfw IV (M60's, AMX-30) - won't be much of a fair fight either, esp. considering Force 1 having under-the-par crews.

[hoplitis]

Marek_Tucan said:
OT RE: tank bashing
... Comapred to tanks which the Coalition had, it would be like matching up force of few early Shermans (standing here for T-72) and majority of M3 Light and M3 Medium (for T-55/Type 59 families) with a force of majority of Panthers or Tigers (M1A1, Chally) and few late PzKpfw IV (M60's, AMX-30) - won't be much of a fair fight either, esp. considering Force 1 having under-the-par crews.

As I said history did not treat it well. Even in the late 70s it would have problems. Not on a tank-to-tank basis, but due to the fact that the battlefield was starting to be "dominated" by AT missiles launched/fired from various platforms (helis, air, a number of vehicles,infantry). It was the next generation of MBTs that regained "survivability" in the battlefield (to some extend of course eh).
Well at least this is my amateur opinion ...