Military armored vehicle
Moderator: Edi
- Montcalm
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 7879
- Joined: 2003-01-15 10:50am
- Location: Montreal Canada North America
Military armored vehicle
In almost a century i`m amazed they still have`nt made tanks more energy efficient,know they big but can they make them run farther on less gas like for regular car.
I guess other features are more important, like survivability and firepower.
ah.....the path to happiness is revision of dreams and not fulfillment... -SWPIGWANG
Sufficient Googling is indistinguishable from knowledge -somebody
Anything worth the cost of a missile, which can be located on the battlefield, will be shot at with missiles. If the US military is involved, then things, which are not worth the cost if a missile will also be shot at with missiles. -Sea Skimmer
George Bush makes freedom sound like a giant robot that breaks down a lot. -Darth Raptor
- Frank Hipper
- Overfiend of the Superego
- Posts: 12882
- Joined: 2002-10-17 08:48am
- Location: Hamilton, Ohio?
Re: Military armored vehicle
If I read this right, you're saying that tanks should have become more gas-efficient over time, just like cars have. There are two primary reasons why this has not become the case. First of all, tanks have gotten massivly larger, heavier, and heavier armored. This means they need more power, and more power means more fuel. Secondly, there is no reason to add things onto a tank engine that will only add complexity and space. Having your tank break down is rather worse than having your car break down.Montcalm wrote:In almost a century i`m amazed they still have`nt made tanks more energy efficient,know they big but can they make them run farther on less gas like for regular car.
Howedar is no longer here. Need to talk to him? Talk to Pick.
Frank is also correct. I was thinking more WW2-Korea era.
Howedar is no longer here. Need to talk to him? Talk to Pick.