I do not argue at all with your conclusions about Soviet vs German tanks, sir. I don't know anything much about the subject beyond the kill ratios, which were massively in favour of the Germans – but a kill ratio is not a sufficient measure of a tank's worthiness.

Largely untrue. I would, in fact, suggest to you that the Easy 8 was the best tank of the war. See, for an explanation, this: youtube.com/watch?v=bNjp_4jY8pY

Also, Didact, comparing T-34/76 or 85 to Tiger I or II is misplaced. 76 dealt handily enough with Pzr III and IV. 85 was oriented to late model IVs and early Vs (the latter of which were sufficiently unreliable as to be a joke in bad taste). KV-85, plus IS-1, -2, and -3, plus large caliber assault guns and AT guns were oriented at the Tigers and some of the derivates thereto.

Also, Armata is likely as not to be a soft metal and wood mock-up.

What xavier said ))

I'm not actually up on tanks very much. I know a few things about the M1 platform and the new Russian T-14 Armata, but beyond that, nothing really. I'm much more of an "airhead", so to speak, when it comes to Big Boys' Toys.

The Sherman was obselete by 42 as soon as the Tiger appeared. The Allies knew it but were stuck with the design until their own wonder tanks could be produced.

At least the Commonwealth took the sensible step of using the 17 pounder for the main gun while the American refused to upgun theirs with a 90 mm. That caused a lot of stupid unnecessary deaths from Normadny to the surrender because the generals were promised the Pershing…real soon.

The F35 is a middle finger to tactical air support by hot jock pilots on their way to the unemployment line. It offends me that this plane is so expensive no one can really afford it and the allies have to pool the costs into a consortium.
Frankly we need pilotless drones for fighter planes and modernized A10s to kill tanks and hypermissle carriers.
xavier

What are your thoughts on the sherman tank?