Pick the best /worst cold war weapons

http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/row/t62tank.htm

"...The T-62 has all the limitations of the T-55: cramped crew compartment, thin armor, crude gun control equipment (on most models), limited depression of main gun, and vulnerable fuel and ammunition storage areas."-Is this the real situation? Almost all of this are subjective and biased claims, speculations etc.-part from the Cold war propaganda.    For example, let's take a look at the claim that T62 has "thin armor". Compared to what? Here is how "thin" really was his armor compared to it's main rival M60A3:
T62: front upper side: 102 mm
     turret front: 242 mm
     turret side: 153 mm
     side: 79 mm
M60A3: front armor: 120 mm
        turret front: 225 mm
        turret side: 102 mm
        side: 70 mm
Have you ever read somewhere that M60 has thin armor too? The other claims are as baseless as this one.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T-72#Production_history

I can't see why the license build T-72's are of better quality but it's clearly written:
"... These were with inferior armour, lacking the resin-embedded ceramics layer inside the turret front and glacis armour, replaced with all steel. The polish-made T-72G tanks also had thinner armour compared to soviet standard (410mm for turret). Before 1990, soviet-made T-72 export versions were similarly downgraded for non-WARPAC customers (mostly the arab countries)."

So, from all this I don't know why you make such general conclusions about the inferrior Soviet armor for the whole period-the soviets had their good designs too, and they were infact better till the mid 80's-with the introduction of Merkava Mk 3, M1A1 etc.

"... had better build quality than the basic T72s provided by the Soviet Union"-what kind of features includes that "better build quality"?

"...This can also be intuitively confirmed by anybody who knows the reputation of Czech weapons industry for precision and manufacturing quality."-A typical stereotype of Cold era thinking based on speculation, a patriotic and nationalistic feelings (a distinct characteristic of the US and also Russian armor fans). Both the license made and Soviet T-72's were produced with the same machinery and had to answer the same technical standarts and requirments-that of the original producer:UVZ in this case. The Chinese made Soviet weapons are generally pirate copies and usually don't answer the technical requirments for the license build ones.
There were NO cases of customers preference to license made tanks based on other than political reasons.

Might I suggest a 3rd catagory.  Totally Ridiculous Weapons.  After seeing Pauls old post I was reminded of things as "The Atomic Rifle" Which would have taken out as many of our troops as the enemy's. 

The Best:

Originally posted by Cryptic Originally posted by Maximus Germanicus I The Best: US-M1 Tank (unmatched) the BFV UK- Challenger I agree completely about the M-1 and the BFV.  Though the BFV lacked the true innovative spirit of the BMP.  It is kind of interesting, Soviet engineers created very innovative weapons, but Soviet technology could not keep pace with vastly improved western copies. For example:   -Soviets invent IFV concept (BMP) but cannot afford to duplicate Bradleys and Warriors. -Soviets design first MANPAD system  (SA-7). It actually works but gets out classed by Stingers -Mobile SAMS are a Soviet concept (SA-6, SA-8) -Anti ship Missiles?  Another Soviet first.  But then the French develop Exocet...   Originally posted by Maximus Germanicus I USSR- any and all Tanks after the T-55  And also the horribly designed BTR series of vehicles (dual gas engines, infantry dismounts between the wheels )   Also, the French need credit too.  They forecasted a continued need for high quality light armoured vehicles and designed some of the best of the cold war.

I propose that amongst the best weapons of the Cold War period were the wire guided anti-tank missiles! I am sure the Soviet tank command was always worried about them, since they would have surely cut well into the superior numbers of Soviet tanks, vs allied tanks!

As far as I know, a lot of Western Europe was built to become a vast tank trap for Soviet armoured units!

Amongst the worst had to be the B-58 Hustler bomber!

Thank you Cryptic! I figured some of you guy's had also considered this point!

My sources in NATO describe a period of twenty years when a large portion of E. Western Europe, was literally remade to include forrested hillsides, ridges, etc., whereby our "pop-up" and shoot "anti-tank helicopters" could hide and shoot, etc.!

Perhaps all of you are familar with the concept?

Regards,

Originally posted by red clay   Spent some time this week with "Big Red".  Dad had a different view of the Nike System.  His view was " The Nike system did what it was designed to do."  "Replace the WWII AAA emplacements and provide the citizenry with a false sense of security.    It didn't matter that the chances of shooting down anything with a Nike were slim to none.  The idea being that the US wouldn't spend Billions on something that didn't work as advertised. And the liklyhood that they would be tested in warfare was extremely low.   Another way of looking at it I suppose.

We all did.  I was just thinking about how the toy co's latched onto it.  Probably even helped to reinforce the idea. I had a Lionel Mobile Missle launching car.    And what kind of missle was on it? A Nike of course. 

Well, since I have been mostly silent, in this site, then I might well mention that the words "Nike" was most oftoned mentioned along with the word "Ajax!"

Which was another system!

Edited by opuslola - 19-Oct-2010 at 19:19