Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: M1A Abrams vs...
  • Subject: M1A Abrams vs...
Subject: M1A Abrams vs...
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

Don't be stupid like I was! Check to see what that Forum Ninja is saying to you!

"I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to the death to say it!"

"Tolerance is a virtue, and virtue builds character."
-Onyx81


Posted by: Makko Mace

Posted by: Onyx81

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron
Okay then, how many 90 mm anti-tank rounds can the Abrams take? Specifically of the 90mm tungsten Armor Piercing Ballistic Capped Round style.

Source? I don't believe Scorpion rounds are ever specified in any Novel.


Here you go
Not good enough. It says it got the ammunition type from a Halo 3 level. So which level?

Check the citing on Halopedia people.

[Edited on 07.31.2011 9:02 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2011 8:57 PM PDT

Weapon of Oppression


Posted by: MisterBraz

Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: Gamer Whale
[/quote]Canonically scorpion gets destroyed by one wraith shot.


Source?
Ragnok says: The Flood, chapter 6. Right after the Marine shoots the Blue Elite instead of the Gold one. Gameplay is not canon, Scorpions can't survive multiple shots.


Well if this is true, then we're going by more realistic standards instead of gameplay, so yes, it would be faster, it's armor would be more advanced, and could take multiple RPGs, it's gun is more powerful, so it would probably win against an Abrams.


That makes no sense, HOW do you know the gun is more powerful ?
I'm willing to bet that either tank can k.o. each other with one shot.
But there is no proof that the scorpion has better armor.
Just by going with physics alone, what do you think would happen if an hyper velocity anti tank shell strikes the over exosed gun of your tank.
Idk...maybe...it'll majically take no damage and not fall off due to the massive stress imparted onto it by that hypervelocity deleted uranium slug.

  • 07.31.2011 9:04 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

Don't be stupid like I was! Check to see what that Forum Ninja is saying to you!

"I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to the death to say it!"

"Tolerance is a virtue, and virtue builds character."
-Onyx81

This is raganok99, from private site. I noticed your post about scorpion's main gun's rounds. Where did you get info about that? As far I know, there is no source for that.

And, Scorpion is useless against Wraith anyway. their Titanium-A armor is useless against plasma. It has been proven countlessly that titanium-A aren't designed to withstand 5,000c direct plasma hit! And plasma mortar obliterating in 20 meters, Look this word of obliterating. It means destroying EVERYTHING in 20 meters. And, 90 mm high velocity is useless against wraith as well, it takes two to three shots to take it down.

I am sorry but Abrams wins on this. Because 90mm high velocity is useless to Abrams because Abram's armor is made of depleted uranium, Rh armor and Chobham armor, which it is designed to stop any kinetic energy penetration warhead, HEAT rounds, RPGS and high heat warhead as well. I would suggest you to research about Abrams and Scorpions before you post.

Also, there is massive flaws in design of Scorpions, I'm afraid. Their large profile makes this Scorpions a big target and easy to hit. Also, they have vulnerable cockpit and exposed turret.

Also Abrams does have 120mm high velocity smooth-bore cannon, with rounds of kinetic penetration warhead with depleted uranium dipped in arrow shaped that can penetrate armor like tungsten.

Therefore, Abrams wins.

Halo Nation is not acceptable source because it is full of errors, no canon sources to back it up and grammar errors is there too. So it discredits the site greatly. In future, please do not use that site ever again. This time, go look for hard source (novels and encyclopedia) that states that scorpion using that round.


[Edited on 07.31.2011 9:29 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2011 9:20 PM PDT

To do this properly we need to set a situation:

There is a flat plane with a massive hill rocky hill in the middle and on opposite sides of this hill are a M1A1 Abrams and AM808B(Scorpion).

-The Scorpion has a full crew of 2- one gunner and a systems operator. the scorpion is armed with a 7.62 rotating gun maned by the gunner, a coaxial 50. cal and a 90mm Smooth Bore High Velocity Cannon maned by the operator.

  • 07.31.2011 9:27 PM PDT
  •  | 
  • Veteran Legendary Member

Don't be stupid like I was! Check to see what that Forum Ninja is saying to you!

"I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to the death to say it!"

"Tolerance is a virtue, and virtue builds character."
-Onyx81


Posted by: otterboyz
To do this properly we need to set a situation:

There is a flat plane with a massive hill rocky hill in the middle and on opposite sides of this hill are a M1A1 Abrams and AM808B(Scorpion).

-The Scorpion has a full crew of 2- one gunner and a systems operator. the scorpion is armed with a 7.62 rotating gun maned by the gunner, a coaxial 50. cal and a 90mm Smooth Bore High Velocity Cannon maned by the operator.
Yes, and on this plain we need to do a few other tests.

Speed.

Firing Rate.

How fast it can rotate the barrel.

Cost. (Which would be hard to do as we don't know how to convert credits into US dollars or UK Pounds.

[Edited on 07.31.2011 9:33 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2011 9:33 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

Use grenades and moa burgers.

  • 07.31.2011 9:35 PM PDT


Posted by: Onyx81

Posted by: otterboyz
To do this properly we need to set a situation:

There is a flat plane with a massive hill rocky hill in the middle and on opposite sides of this hill are a M1A1 Abrams and AM808B(Scorpion).

-The Scorpion has a full crew of 2- one gunner and a systems operator. the scorpion is armed with a 7.62 rotating gun maned by the gunner, a coaxial 50. cal and a 90mm Smooth Bore High Velocity Cannon maned by the operator.
Yes, and on this plain we need to do a few other tests.

Speed.

Firing Rate.

How fast it can rotate the barrel.

Cost. (Which would be hard to do as we don't know how to convert credits into US dollars or UK Pounds.


Speed-I doubt that we will find any canon sources on speed but the fastest we've ever seen them go is on the cut scene of Tip of the Spear which was around a quarter slower than warthogs.

Firing rate-On Halo:Reach the speed to reload and fire a new round is roughly 2-2.5 seconds

Rotation of barrel-On Reach it takes roughly 5 seconds for a 360 degree turn e.g. full rotation.

Cost-Bets me but the UNSC thinks it's cheap

  • 07.31.2011 9:54 PM PDT

Weapon of Oppression


Posted by: otterboyz
To do this properly we need to set a situation:

There is a flat plane with a massive hill rocky hill in the middle and on opposite sides of this hill are a M1A1 Abrams and AM808B(Scorpion).

-The Scorpion has a full crew of 2- one gunner and a systems operator. the scorpion is armed with a 7.62 rotating gun maned by the gunner, a coaxial 50. cal and a 90mm Smooth Bore High Velocity Cannon maned by the operator.


What ? I remember the scorpion only having one 7.62mm machine gun mounted on it, which can only be manned by a gunner.
If you're talking about the one in halo 2, it has a machine gun mounted on the main cannon which is a 7.62mm machine gun.
I don't remember the scorion tank being armed with a 50 cal.

  • 07.31.2011 9:55 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

What? The main gun is controlled by the operator so 1 person.

  • 07.31.2011 10:01 PM PDT

XxXD3LuuX3 X luuC1d17YXxX


Posted by: Spartan 100
What? The main gun is controlled by the operator so 1 person.


Nope, that's one spartan (with an ai?) it takes two normal soliders.

  • 07.31.2011 10:03 PM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

The visual guide would disagree with you.
1 operator and 1 machine gunner.

  • 07.31.2011 10:25 PM PDT

How about we use the up-powered Scorpion? The one with a 105mm cannon?

Edit: Also lookie what I found.

In Halo: Combat Evolved and Halo 2, the Scorpion is specifically cited in the manuals for each respective game as firing 90mm HE shells. Halo: The Flood claims that there are variants that fire 105mm shells. In the scorpion page.

[Edited on 07.31.2011 10:32 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2011 10:27 PM PDT


Posted by: ROBERTO jh

Posted by: MisterBraz

Posted by: ExcellentSix

Posted by: ferrrari

Posted by: ExcellentSix
It doesn't use titanium A battle plate.
It's titanium ceramic.....
Have you not read the entire thread ?

Non the less it's still some hard -blam!-, it can take a wraith shot...

That Plasma shot must at least reach 5000 degress c... If not more.

It also has to deal with other covie weapons, such as plasma pistols/rifles ect. As well as ghosts and banshees...

You would think that because of this, the armour of a scorpion would be very strong against heat...

Now correct me if i'm wrong but don't some modden day tank shells also use heat to melt away the armour of an enamy tank??? An rpg for example uses molten copper to slice away at armour... And that doesn't even hit 2000 Degrees c...

So if a scorpion can take fuel rods and wraith shots and still go on. I have no doubt that it can survive a hit from the main cannon of an abrams...

And i bet you in hell that a challenger 2 or abrams couldn't even take a fuel rod hit. Let alone a wraith shot.



think about this, what would penetrate skin better a needle or a baseball ?



how about, which would -blam!- you up more: a needle or a baseball that's 5000 c?


I think this guy slept through physics class.


Good one! Yeah, a needle penetrates, but a huge glob of plasma thats 5000 degrees celcius obliterates everything within 20 meters. A tank would (or should) be a molten heap of scrap.

[Edited on 07.31.2011 10:51 PM PDT]

  • 07.31.2011 10:40 PM PDT


Posted by: ExcellentSix

Posted by: MisterBraz

Posted by: Xd00999

Posted by: Cmdr DaeFaron

Posted by: Gamer Whale
[/quote]Canonically scorpion gets destroyed by one wraith shot.


Source?
Ragnok says: The Flood, chapter 6. Right after the Marine shoots the Blue Elite instead of the Gold one. Gameplay is not canon, Scorpions can't survive multiple shots.


Well if this is true, then we're going by more realistic standards instead of gameplay, so yes, it would be faster, it's armor would be more advanced, and could take multiple RPGs, it's gun is more powerful, so it would probably win against an Abrams.


That makes no sense, HOW do you know the gun is more powerful ?
I'm willing to bet that either tank can k.o. each other with one shot.
But there is no proof that the scorpion has better armor.
Just by going with physics alone, what do you think would happen if an hyper velocity anti tank shell strikes the over exosed gun of your tank.
Idk...maybe...it'll majically take no damage and not fall off due to the massive stress imparted onto it by that hypervelocity deleted uranium slug.


I don't know, but I would guess so, its 30mm smaller, but high velocity, probably comparable in velocity to the sabot round the M1 fires, and the 90mm is a full-size shell, whereas a sabot is shrunk down, I don't know, but it's the future, and I would think it's more powerful.

Yeah, you probably could shoot the gun off, it's not designed or protected well, but the Scorpion could probably shoot the Abrams anywhere and kill it, also that design allows the gunner to aim the gun higher to maybe take out aircraft or shoot at an arc.

  • 07.31.2011 10:49 PM PDT

XxXD3LuuX3 X luuC1d17YXxX

I like how many times the 20 meter wraith shot obliteration has been repeated.... considering it was a rough estimate.

  • 07.31.2011 11:06 PM PDT


Posted by: Makko Mace
I like how many times the 20 meter wraith shot obliteration has been repeated.... considering it was a rough estimate.


It says it in The First Strike..

  • 07.31.2011 11:13 PM PDT

In memory of those fallen in the defense of Earth and her colonies.

March 3, 2553

Wraiths with shields = win

  • 08.01.2011 1:24 AM PDT

On hiding dead bodies:
Posted by: Psuedo
Posted by: teh Chaz
Inside another dead body. It's the last place they'll look
A corpse within a corpse.
CORPSEPTION.
Win.

First off, the Abrams doesn't fire slugs. It fires rounds known as APFSDS. Slug implies full-bore.

Second, the Abrams might win again versus the Grizzly. It's slow, heavy and cumbersome, and going beyond ZOMG TWO GUNZ, a twin-barrel turret actually has no desirable advantages.

The Rhino would obviously lose again to the Abrams. It's an artillery piece, it'd be cut to shreds at Abrams range.

I don't even like the Abrams, I just acknowledge it's a far better tank than the Scorpion, Grizzly or Rhino (which isn't even a tank anyway).

  • 08.01.2011 1:55 AM PDT

Welcome to bungie, you have no rights. play nice!
CLICK!

You are very wrong.

  • 08.01.2011 2:25 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact


Posted by: JDYeash937 MkII
First off, the Abrams doesn't fire slugs. It fires rounds known as APFSDS. Slug implies full-bore.

Second, the Abrams might win again versus the Grizzly. It's slow, heavy and cumbersome, and going beyond ZOMG TWO GUNZ, a twin-barrel turret actually has no desirable advantages.

The Rhino would obviously lose again to the Abrams. It's an artillery piece, it'd be cut to shreds at Abrams range.

I don't even like the Abrams, I just acknowledge it's a far better tank than the Scorpion, Grizzly or Rhino (which isn't even a tank anyway).


You got's any evidence to back up your claim?(grizzly speed)

It has already been proven that the scorpion is faster then an Abrams.

A Rhino is an artillery piece which means it will engage an Abrams at long range.

  • 08.01.2011 6:13 AM PDT

On hiding dead bodies:
Posted by: Psuedo
Posted by: teh Chaz
Inside another dead body. It's the last place they'll look
A corpse within a corpse.
CORPSEPTION.
Win.

Posted by: hotshot revan II
Posted by: JDYeash937 MkII
First off, the Abrams doesn't fire slugs. It fires rounds known as APFSDS. Slug implies full-bore.

Second, the Abrams might win again versus the Grizzly. It's slow, heavy and cumbersome, and going beyond ZOMG TWO GUNZ, a twin-barrel turret actually has no desirable advantages.

The Rhino would obviously lose again to the Abrams. It's an artillery piece, it'd be cut to shreds at Abrams range.

I don't even like the Abrams, I just acknowledge it's a far better tank than the Scorpion, Grizzly or Rhino (which isn't even a tank anyway).


You got's any evidence to back up your claim?(grizzly speed)

It has already been proven that the scorpion is faster then an Abrams.

A Rhino is an artillery piece which means it will engage an Abrams at long range.
1) You got any evidence it has any speed at all? I refuse to believe something that big can go faster than an Abrams.
It has two very heavy guns, heavy armour, and five treads. It must weigh close to a hundred tonnes.

2) Not by much, and speed isn't vital in a tank fight anyway. The Scorpion has no armour. How it weighs 66 tonnes, more than a much more heavily-armoured Challenger 2 and the same as an Abrams, is a complete mystery.
The driver's head is protected by nothing more than a thin hatch which a sniper rifle can penetrate, then engine is exposed through a hatch and the gun itself is also vulnerable. The Abrams has none of these downsides, and certainly not to the extent the Scorpion does.

3) Very large gun, so very low rate of fire. The Abrams will simply close range to far inside the Rhino's close-range where it is no longer effective and engage.

[Edited on 08.01.2011 6:30 AM PDT]

  • 08.01.2011 6:27 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact

1)Burden of proof fallacy

You will have to prove which speed it has,if you can't then we can't argue in that categorie.
But the scorpions speed can be estimated if you watch the TOTS opening scene , it goes like +40 mph off road

2)Speed is important ,a slow tank is an easy target it's like firing at a wounded animal. At least the scorpion could go faster offroad then the Abrams.

I find it funny that the entire heigh of the Abrams equals the height of the scoprion tank minus the turret,which means that a fight between the two in an open area will result in the abrams either hitting the threads,front or turret.

In this fight the Abrams can blow the hatch off but the scorpion can blow the upper part of the abrams apart which will blind the tank(because the driver,gunner and sights are in there) or it can simply blow one of the threads apart. At least the scorpion has four of them ,it can go one with 3 threads.

3)Stats please.If it has the same rate of fire as a wraith then it is far bigger then the Abrams.Before the Abrams would get any close it would receive a plasma mortar as a present.
You realise they put artillery pieces on high ground at a well defended position any attempt of the abrams to close in will be badly.Unless you think the Rhino driver will be drunk and will alows that other tank to come in.

  • 08.01.2011 6:47 AM PDT

On hiding dead bodies:
Posted by: Psuedo
Posted by: teh Chaz
Inside another dead body. It's the last place they'll look
A corpse within a corpse.
CORPSEPTION.
Win.

It's a statistical fact that large-calibre guns have a low rate of fire, not just for reloading concerns, but also barrel heating concerns. The German PanzerHaubitze 2000 SPG has a rate of fire in the region of 20rpm IIRC, but operates at 10-12, because if it fired any faster, it would damage its barrel.

The 75mm ARES gun, XM274, was anecdotally capable of firing in bursts of one round per second. But this absolutely destroyed its barrel.

A 3" artillery piece in the Russian Army was recommended to fire 900 rounds of ammunition to destroy "A single unarmored target (ATGM, AT gun, etc.) deployed openly."
Important things highlighted in a variety of manners.

To suppress a "group of automobile carried radar equipment vehicles", an 8" artillery piece was recommended to fire between 30 and 100 rounds. That's up to 10,000lbs of high explosive.

And these tables require an immobile target.

The table goes on to say that an entrenched tank engaged by a 152mm self-propelled howitzer is typically engaged by 6 rounds at 1000m and 10 rounds at 1500m. Well within an Abrams' gun range, which can be fired accurately one the move.

These tables were issued in 1996 and re-issued in 2000.

  • 08.01.2011 7:02 AM PDT
  • gamertag: [none]
  • user homepage:

"Time was your ally human. But now it has abandoned you. The Forerunners....have returned. And this tomb... is now yours". - The Didact

Correct me if i'm wrong but the reason of that low rate of fire is because it is loaded manually by a person and not automatically like a Halo tank unless i missed something.

And for the artillery examples, how do they aim?

  • 08.01.2011 7:07 AM PDT

On hiding dead bodies:
Posted by: Psuedo
Posted by: teh Chaz
Inside another dead body. It's the last place they'll look
A corpse within a corpse.
CORPSEPTION.
Win.

Whilst the majority of western tanks are not autoloaded, the PzH2000 is. That rate of 20rpm is cyclic for a 3-round "burst". 15rpm from the Scorpion is actually on par with manually-loaded 120mm guns on the Abrams and other platforms for brief periods, and a match for the autoloaded 125mm gun of the Russian T-90.

Unless the 90mm Scorpion has an insane and inexplicably high muzzle energy, it should be capable of a much higher rate of fire by modern capabilities of the autoloader itself and barrel cooling.

The artillery in this table are based upon records of artillery expenditure for:Notes:
The table lists HE-F shell expenditures. Fragmentation-submunition shell expenditures are listed in brackets, while a dash notes that firing to hit is not useful.
Shell expenditures assume:
- Firing up to and including ten kilometers, targeting assumes full preparation or using a sight-in gun's data, whereas for rocket artillery full or partial preparation is assumed.
- For firing over ten kilometers, the expenditure is increased by one tenth for every kilometer beyond the first ten kilometers.
When firing data is adjusted by sight-in shooting, fire adjusting using aimpoints or when ammunition effects can be verified, expenditures are reduced by 25%. When the partial preparation method is used, the ammunition expenditure grows 150%.
When an unarmored target is entrenched, the shell expenditure is increased by a factor of three. When a battery/platoon of towed guns/mortars is deployed openly, the shell expenditure is decreased by a factor of three.
When the target is an armored RADAR station, a single armored target or an APC-carried CP, the shell expenditure triples.
and aiming of the example against entrenched armour is well within visual range and would be done by the SPH itself.

[Edited on 08.01.2011 7:25 AM PDT]

  • 08.01.2011 7:24 AM PDT