>its a zombie apocalypse movie >chieftain tanks on american

What's this from?

Also the Brits look for any reason at all to invade, and getting their hands on our sweet, sweet American clay is probably top of their list of shit to do if the opportunity presents itself.

Isn't there only like four countries in the ENTIRE WORLD the British haven't invaded at some point in history?

>>34778553
Zombieland

>>34778553
>being this new

It's Zombieland.

>>34778570
Of fucking course. I was too busy looking at the tank instead of the gay fucks in the middle.

>hurr durr muh cardeeo and twink meems

File: 45436.jpg (108KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1280x720px

ayy lmao

>>34778518
Don't be so fucking autistic OP.

Chieftains are way cheaper on the secondary market than literally any American tank.

>>34778735
>no fun allowed.

Kinda dumb how Brits and Ruskies will sell their modernish surplus tanks but stupid American DoD dumps them in the ocean and scraps em.

>>34778518
>>34778633

Wouldn't surprise me if it's the same tank.

Not sure if OP is trolling or dumb, but it happens a lot that you can't get the 'real' thing for filming so you go with what's available and likely cheapest to rent and hope the audience doesn't notice or doesn't care. A lot of the WW2 armor movies are the same way

File: chieftain.jpg (430KB, 1024x685px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1024x685px

Most aesthetic cold war tank

>>34778518

how do zombies kill tanks

File: 1501969032403.jpg (51KB, 300x295px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 300x295px

>>34779267
Same way the Chinese do. Throw so many bodies at it, the thing can't move or fire.

>>34779267
The plot.

>>34779267

They don't. Tank runs out of fuel and the position is abandoned or overrun.

It's set dressing that shows the firepower was impotent against a massive horde.

>>34779302
>a massive horde.
a massive horde which can only be destroyed by destroying the brain

>>34779225
Yeah there is like one or two Chieftain tanks that are in every movie.

>>34779386

Hence Max Brook's WWZ having the army basically re-organize as rifle armed infantry instead of combined arms more suited to fighting other human armies.

>>34779275
uma delicia

>>34779457
> entire army is now just dudes with rifles
> no artillery to smash massive hordes from ten miles away
> no armour to mow down hordes
> no air support to napalm and cluster bomb hordes as well as recon horde movements
> no engineers to build fortifications

Well Max Brooks is dumb as shit. Even if you need to headshot the zombies to kill them, shredding their bodies and limbs massively reduces the mobility of the horde, not to mention the fact that a lot of ordnance would be able to just blow them to kingdom come including the brain. Combined arms against a massive unarmed zerg rush is way more effective than napoleonic line infantry tactics.

>>34779639
Where are you going to get the fuel for those tanks and planes and artillery carrying vehicles?

File: Mi-24 snackpack.jpg (106KB, 1000x541px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 1000x541px

>>34779639
I always chalked it up to being straight outta shekels. Combined arms costs money, disposable fucks with rifles are cheap in comparison.

Air assault would be the way to go. Land your helicopter on an apartment top, lure zombies than blow them to kingdom cum with adjusted fire. Plus you operate over a massive range from protected bases.

>>34779639
Did you even read the book? They used all that in the battle of Yonkers but even with all those weapons they still failed.
And they kept most of those cool stuff for whenever they encountered hostile human groups while they were cleaning out the country a few years later.

File: flechette%20[1600x1200]_jpg_opt596x394o0,0s596x394.jpg (63KB, 596x394px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 596x394px

>>34779639

Brooks did mention other supporting elements like dog handlers, but justified the lack of air, artillery and armor support as due to retreating behind the Rocky Mountains and finding there wasn't enough industry, trained workers, and fuel to support combine arms anti-zombie operations any more. Brooks failed a lot in the book but he just did what lots of writers, etc do when reality can't fit their story they ignore it or wave it away with someone thing else.

Anyone with a brain would know modern weapons would winnow down hordes a lot, but the challenges of supporting a force logistically and desire to avoid collateral damage since this is America might mean the burden falls on the infantry more than usual.

I've thought zombie movies should feature air strikes with planes dropping flechete canisters instead of bombs or napalm and having the infantry take position on tall buildings to lure them in and shoot whatever is still moving.

In suburbs and small towns, have troops in trucks with bench seats in the middle so the men face outwards drive around and shoot whatever stumbles out to meet them. Have helicopters or drones scout to see they're not driving into too large a horde.

Tanks would probably be best used in static positions, with the main gun firing those shotgun shell anti-personal rounds, and the machine guns taking care of smaller groups.

>>34779639
Actually, if you read the World War Z book (I assume you haven't. Good read tho, check it out), there is a chaoter specifically referencing what youre saying. The battle of Yonkers, New York. All this hyper military tech proved useless. Maming and explosions do take out a few... but not enough. The same resources could be spent with more men with more rifles.

>>34779639
Don't forget the entire fucking army switched to 10/22s because Max Brooks drinks up the most retarded of fuddlore and bought the ".22lr bounces around inside the skull" meme.

>>34779771
Its a fucking meme. Its much easier to just drop ordinance then clean up the remains vs training tens of thousands of infantrymen who are capable of getting enough headshots before the horde closes in on them.

>>34779457
No, that's because the army in Max Brooks' works are a gaggle of retards.

>>34779788
I thought they used some xer rifle or some shit, with incendiary 30-06

>>34779788
they used 5.56 you dumb ol dummy
.22s were used for PDWs

That being said, World war z took a lot of wilful suspension of disbelief and Yonkers was unrealistic as fuck

>>34779679
Scavenging? IMO you would only have tanks and arty for defending strongholds. Less fuel to burn. Arty to be used against incoming hordes, tanks for the same thing only up close. Plus it would deter any retards from trying to raid the place. Would be good for morale.

>>34779771
The Battle of Yonkers only high tech features were helmet cameras that apparently broadcast unblockable video feed to other soldiers through a HUD. The army in the book not only didn't bother to secure their position, they allowed civilians free access to the battlefield, didn't supply their forces with anti-personnel ammo, had no artillery, and had no resupply. The zombies, meanwhile, were easily able to approach the military's position despite being corridored down a highway full of cars and were able to detect the military's presence from dozens of miles away to create a four million strong mob all but immune to bombs, rockets, and incendiaries.

>>34778518
Because of the Gun Control Act of 1968, it is nearly impossible to get an M1 Abrams tank for private use (i.e. a movie prop vehicle company), so many of the "M1" tanks that you see in TV and films are actually modified British Chieftain tanks.

>>34779707
Eh, in these sorts of post-apocalyptic situations you gotta stop thinking about cost in terms of money, but rather in terms of real resources. There's no real trade going on, so it's about what you have and can produce.

In which case, yeah you're probably not going to have tanks rolling off the production lines any more, or even many shells being made, but you still have the already-existing tanks and a whole bunch of shells and spare parts in storage. That'll last you a decent while, so you may as well use them for as long as it lasts.