King Tiger vs M2 Bradley

>>34884384
The one that wouldn't have to be towed to the battle.

king tiger breaks on the way to the fight, bradley's bushmaster just plinks off the armor like .22, crew cuts and runs.

>>34884384
>Bradley
>Tank
Whichever one got the jump. Heard the Bradley has a similar armorscheme to the M4 Sherman.

>>34884405

You could say "the one that would not be "tow'd" in battle" as well.

>>34884384
Does the Bradley have TOW missiles?

>>34884428
Da comrade

>>34884384
Brad would fuck it to death with TOWs. Even if it didn't have any, Bushmaster could probably cause a mission kill by knocking out the optics and fucking up the treads.

>>34884423
Bradley with TOWs got more armored vehicle kills than the Abrams did in Gulf War I.

File: Iraq - M2 Bradleys.jpg (588KB, 1280x960px) Image search: [Google]

588KB, 1280x960px

>>34884384
The M2 Bradley is an Infantry Fighting Vehicle.

In a fight between a Bradley a King Tiger, the Bradley would likely prevail. The TOW II missile out-ranges the 88mm by over 1500 meters.

>>34884384

Bradley easily

If the tiger got the drop on the bradley somehow it could certainly penetrate the armor and destroy it, but there's no reason that'd happen.

Bradley has every advantage but armor, and that is negated by the TOW missile. Even with just the autocannon I think it would still be at a great advantage.

This is assuming the Tiger doesn't break down or run out of gas like usual.

Lets not forget its far smaller and if we're counting optics its just unfair.

>>34884418
>King Tiger had between 100 and 185mm cast armor across the frontal arc
>25x137mm M791 APDS-T capable of 200mm penetration of RHA at 1000m
Bradley swiss-cheeses the Tiger II at 200rpm from 1500m

File: IMG_2396.jpg (176KB, 720x960px) Image search: [Google]

176KB, 720x960px

>>34884384
>Bradley
>Tank
>36 year difference

>>34886566

>100-185mm of frontal
>I've never heard of slope: The Post

If the bradley is engaging from 1500m, it's probably using a TOW of some sort, not the cannon. Which it can, and will. Said missile will fuck the KT.

Unless the KT puts an 88 through the bradley before the missile hits. Unlikely but possible.

TL;DR Whoever sees and hits first wins. What a shock.

File: USA_M2-Bradley_in_Iraq.jpg (244KB, 3300x2165px) Image search: [Google]

244KB, 3300x2165px

>>34884384
Whichever one fires first.

So probably the Bradley.

just came here to reming you guise to watch The Pentagon Wars.
Top kek material regarding the bradley

>>34888049
top kek if you take the movie seriously

>>34888062
Not accurate? by all means, redpill me, i'm not one to embrace ignorance

>>34888070
>Not accurate?
dramatized as fuck. it's entertainment

Nope, the bradley has the range, reaction time and aiming time as clear advantages so the KT will NEVER shoot first

>>34887922
Oh shit! This was one of our alpha companies brads in oif1

>>34887161
Even if the KT kills the Bradley, wouldn't the missile keep going and fuck the Tiger anyways? Or does it autodestruct if targeting goes down?

>>34884845
>The TOW II missile out-ranges the 88mm by over 1500 meters.
Also, good luck hitting a turret-down Brad with only the missile launcher and optics above a berm from 3500m away.
And at night the Brad has FLIR and the KT has nothing.

>>34888083
>dramatized as fuck. it's entertainment
100%. It's "based on a true story" in pretty much the same way the original "House Of Cards" (with Ian Richadson) was- a collection of mostly true stories form various sources combined into one, and then turned up to 11.

>>34888752
The TOW is SACLOS. Destroy the launcher and it loses guidance and crashes.

>>34884384
>Which tank would win?
you only offer one choice as a tank.
the other being a "armored" personnel carrier.

Between the two vehicles the Bradley wins outside of an ambush. Basically the only way the king tiger wins is if it catches the Bradley by surprise within range. It would be a miracle if the Bradley didn't see and kill it long before the king tiger's crew could realize they're toast outside of an ambush.

>Open field
Bradley
>When either tank is entrenched or hulled down in an open field
Bradley
>Urban or otherwise tight quarters with suitable cover
Either can win but the Bradley still has the advantage, especially if we're factoring in a typical load of infantry in the back as part of it's "equipment" considering it is an IFV.
>When both vehicles start within the tiger's effective range in the open facing each other
Tiger, this level of handicap is about the only time they have the advantage. Even here it's still more likely the tiger crew will miss than the Bradley crew will. If the tiger crew can land a solid hit before they eat TOW and 25mm penetrators they win and they have a particularly good chance to do it.

Anywhere the tiger is not fully hidden and waiting in ambush or given a handicap it's probably going to catch a missile and burn.

>ww 2 optics and range finding

>no thermals

the tiger loses in any of the scenarios

ITT: OP doesn't get the results he was expecting.

>>34889078
Pretty standard for wehraboos.

>>34884423
>>34884405
I like you.

>>34884384
The Bradley. It's fast and maneuverable. It could circle the Tiger just faster than its turret speed, spam the autocannon on view ports, and line up a kill with the TOW to the back when it gets there.

It could do all this from several hundred meters away. It would be stupidly easy.

>>34889207

OTOH, while a tricky shot, the Tiger needs to hit it *once* to end these shenanigans.

>>34889207
Wouldn't even need to worry about circling around with a TOW. Considering what a TOW does to a vastly superior T-72 the tiger is just plain fucked if hit with one. At the ranges where outrunning the turret traverse would matter the 25mm cannon would probably be enough on it's own.

>>34889222
The thing is that the Tiger would never hit the Bradley to begin with.

>>34889328
At, say, 500 meters, relatively open terrain, shell already loaded, skilled crew? Doable. Not easy, but doable.

>>34889336
How would the Tiger ever get within that range in the first place? In any remotely realistic scenario the Tiger is getting wrecked by an ATGM from the Bradley 1500m away. We've already established the only way for the Tiger to win is in an ambush scenario.

>>34887922
the first into baghdad.

>>34887161
That's funny because the KT's turret isn't slopped

>>34888070
>i'm not one to embrace ignorance
>said after recommending a comedy as though it were a documentary

>>34890319
More like 4km if we are talking open fields.

>>34884384

The Bradley will see and acquire the KT before it can react.

range isnt really an issue, since fighting at over 1500 meters is kinda rare anyway. An 88mm AP round will make the Bradley into much, and so will the Bradleys missile do to a king tiger

As above mentioned, whoever finds the other first wins

>>34884384
The Bradly just has to keep moving. The Tigers traverse is hand cranked, for gods sake.

>>34893077
Pretty sure the handcrank was just a fallback mechanism.

>>34893077
>The Tigers traverse is hand cranked, for gods sake.
niggawhat

File: TigerII traverse.jpg (272KB, 800x599px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 800x599px

>>34893077

>Hand cranked

It's hydraulic and runs off the engine. There's actually a whole bunch of debate about whether this was a good idea or not

>>34893428
Didn't the traverse speed depend on engine RPM because of that?

>>34884384
>Tiger wins
Shitty Bradley can't even beat a wreck from 40s!
>Bradley wins
Useless Tiger can't even beat a light tank

Vatnik tank wins.

Bradly wins because lul King tiger vs atgm lul

>>34888049
Great! Now imagine how awful the tigger two must be to lose to a Bradley.

cause, that's how fucking bad it was/is.

>>34889336
Maybe if the Brad were broken down, out of fuel and munitions, the T2 might have a chance.

Assuming it did not shit it's crossdrive on the way to the pigeon shoot.

>>34893621
It did, and like many late WW2 German armor, lacked an APU.

Meaning it had to be running it's main engine to have powered traverse.

And that "traverse" was a bucket of shit that looked like it fell off of a 1920's Massey-Ferguson sickle bar mower.

Now, as a followup...
Typhoon vs F-35, which plane would win?

>>34893621

Yep, same as the later Panthers. You have a high/low selector on the traverse mechanism,

The actual figures are a bit up in the air, I've seen sources quote like 36* per second, but that's at 3000rpm, which is 500 over the governed 2500 it ran it, so who knows.

>>34894022
Depends on who shot first , typhoon first first it wins , f35 fires first it wins

File: TurretTravelLock.jpg (132KB, 711x605px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 711x605px

>>34894009

>Sickle bar mower

The fuck are you on about?

I've got no idea about how good it was, but a variable speed hydraulic traverse system boasting (alleged) speeds like this was pretty high tech in 1945. Hardly a shitty system to have.

>>34894080
>I've got no idea about how good it was

I do.
Look at it .

Now compare it to the logansport or oilgear traverse used in near ALL U.S. armor.

It's fucking primitive shit.

File: Tiger II traverse motor and gearbox.jpg (107KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

107KB, 800x600px

>>34894168

They're both gear-drive hydraulic traverse mechanisms. They're both pretty quick. The only difference is their size and power source.

The Sherman has better turret controls, and running it off the electrical system is definitely the better idea.

I do like the idea of the Tiger II's foot pedal for traverse and a lever to select between power/manual though.

But the actual hydraulic system itself looks plenty good for the period. Nothing primitive about it at all.

>>34890319
The same way 5 brads were lost to T-72s which in this scenario are functionally identical to the Tiger II: Bradley commander gets cocky and drives ahead of everyone else to try and pop more tin cans. Assuming that the Bradleys are working to protocol however, they have practically every advantage.

One must say that if the Bradley is a bad example of an IFV, what does that make the T-72 it regularly eats for breakfast?

>>34894532
The 72 was an outdated tank it would be like a Sherman vs a is7

>>34894022
F35 without a doubt.