- 15 Sep 2013 13:09
#14299032
Most Arab tanks were still T-55s with 100mm guns whereas the Israeli M-48/60s and Centurions had 105mm guns.
To an extent yes, but most arab losses were incurred while attacking an enemy sitting and waiting for them, as at red ridge on the Golan and Hamadia in Sinai. Initial Syrian losses were very high because the IDF had the advantage of prepared defensive positions, with mines, obstacles and firing platforms.
I don't think that meant much since the highest losses were incurred facing an enemy on higher ground (or the same level).
\
Typhoon wrote: the Soviet tanks during the 1973 conflict had a technical edge on paper
Most Arab tanks were still T-55s with 100mm guns whereas the Israeli M-48/60s and Centurions had 105mm guns.
but incurred higher losses due to superior tactics and crew training on the part of the Israeli tankers.
To an extent yes, but most arab losses were incurred while attacking an enemy sitting and waiting for them, as at red ridge on the Golan and Hamadia in Sinai. Initial Syrian losses were very high because the IDF had the advantage of prepared defensive positions, with mines, obstacles and firing platforms.
The inability of the T-62 and T-55 to depress their cannon to the same degree as their opponents was a distinct flaw
I don't think that meant much since the highest losses were incurred facing an enemy on higher ground (or the same level).
In 1972 the Egyptian T-62 was rated as having had superior armor
\