What if these two Army weapons met in combat?

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

Cuban T-62 vs SADF Olifant, Angola 1987-8?

Overall similar to the OTL battles between Cuban and FAPLA T-55s vs SADF Olifants. T-62 represents an improvement in armor and firepower, the latter of which gives it a notable advantage compared to OTL's engagements, but the armor still isn't enough to stand up to the rounds Olifant will probably be shooting at it and I'd count on SADF training and their tanks' superior fire control to give them better first hit rates and carry the day.

PLA type 59 tank vs Indian army Vijayanta tank

Can't find any direct evidence, but it's possible that Vijayanta already faced Type 59 IOTL during the 1971 war with Pakistan. As for the question, The armor on Type 59 is superior, but I'd bet on the Vijayanta to win as it has a stablized gun, superior mobility, and a very spacious turret that will allow the likely better trained crew to operate at their full potential.

 

[Peg Leg Pom]

Either way, it would be an interesting fight, the P13 is one of my favorite designs (even though I think the best version is the one the Yanks got with the M1917) and is a very strong historical "what if" in firearm development.

The M1917 is pretty close to what was intended for the P13 rifle with the overpowered 30-06 round a fair match for the overpowered .276 Enfield round.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

PLA type 59 tank vs Indian army Vijayanta tank

I always wondered how they got on with the Leyland L60 in the 'Victorious'?

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

I always wondered how they got on with the Leyland L60 in the 'Victorious'?

Actually quite well. Being ~20 tons lighter has its perks.

Speaking of the Vickers MBTs: How would a Mk. 3 fair in the Fulda Gap?

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Actually quite well. Being ~20 tons lighter has its perks.

Speaking of the Vickers MBTs: How would a Mk. 3 fair in the Fulda Gap?

I think Vickers make a better all round MBT IMO so very well I suspect

And it might be armed with the L11 120mm but I understand the design went for the L7 105mm due to standardisation

We might however see an actual introduction of the 110mm gun as it was interchangeable with the L7 mounting but had a similar penetration to the 120mm L11

So yeah why not

 

[9 Fanged Hummingbird]

I think Vickers make a better all round MBT IMO so very well I suspect

And it might be armed with the L11 120mm but I understand the design went for the L7 105mm due to standardisation

We might however see an actual introduction of the 110mm gun as it was interchangeable with the L7 mounting but had a similar penetration to the 120mm L11

So yeah why not

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Mk4? Mk3 is an iterative step up from Mk1, new engine, turret, and fcs, but same thin armor and same gun. By the time it was being marketed most countries were moving on to newer better things, Mk3 was meant for poorer countries and therefore only saw purchases in Kenya and Nigeria, where it eventually saw its combat debut against Boko Haram decades after entering service. I can't imagine the Vickers Mk3 would fare particularly well in the Fulda Gap against the latest Soviet armor.

 

[SealTheRealDeal]

I think Vickers make a better all round MBT IMO so very well I suspect

And it might be armed with the L11 120mm but I understand the design went for the L7 105mm due to standardisation

We might however see an actual introduction of the 110mm gun as it was interchangeable with the L7 mounting but had a similar penetration to the 120mm L11

So yeah why not

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Mk4? Mk3 is an iterative step up from Mk1, new engine, turret, and fcs, but same thin armor and same gun. By the time it was being marketed most countries were moving on to newer better things, Mk3 was meant for poorer countries and therefore only saw purchases in Kenya and Nigeria, where it eventually saw its combat debut against Boko Haram decades after entering service. I can't imagine the Vickers Mk3 would fare particularly well in the Fulda Gap against the latest Soviet armor.

I was thinking for a TL where Canada gets the Mk3 (with a 105mm gun) instead of the Leo1, so I guess that would be the reference point.

 

[Cryhavoc101]

Are you sure you're not thinking of the Mk4? Mk3 is an iterative step up from Mk1, new engine, turret, and fcs, but same thin armor and same gun. By the time it was being marketed most countries were moving on to newer better things, Mk3 was meant for poorer countries and therefore only saw purchases in Kenya and Nigeria, where it eventually saw its combat debut against Boko Haram decades after entering service. I can't imagine the Vickers Mk3 would fare particularly well in the Fulda Gap against the latest Soviet armor.

I was responding to Sealtherealdeal's question

And any such MBT built for the British is likely to be better than the Kenya/Nigeria MK3

It would have a superior gun sight, gun and crew to the T55 estate.

Granted it would be at a disadvantage against the T62/72 fleet which is why I've suggested a 110mm gun system as its a better hole puncher

The MK4 is a 1980s tank and its parent company having taken over RO was busy building the Challie 1 but we can see a number of features from the subsequent Vickers 7 used in the Challie 2 and many of the issues with the C1 more or less fixed - although as far as a the army was concerned it still wasn't a Leo 2.

 

[YYJ]

British .303 bullet meets 8mm Mauser bullet.

Reportedly at Gallipoli.

https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-chances-that-a-bullet-hits-another-bullet

 

[Somedevil]

Super Pershing vs IS-3 in Korea

 

[Bougnas]

Actually quite well. Being ~20 tons lighter has its perks.

Speaking of the Vickers MBTs: How would a Mk. 3 fair in the Fulda Gap?

I was thinking for a TL where Canada gets the Mk3 (with a 105mm gun) instead of the Leo1, so I guess that would be the reference point.

Overall it's worse than a Leo C1, but not in horrible ways. FCS seems to be comparable or slightly better than the SABCA AVLS the C1 used. Mobility is worse (worse P/W ratio, less roadwheel travel, fewer shock absorbers, no torque converter). Armor is worse (thinner hull front, similar turret thicknesses without spacing and with cast steel), though it doesn't matter much against typical threats of the time.

It would however still function roughly as well as any lightly armored MBT with good FCS and stabilizer that was still seen in the 80's.