Death Gliders vs Tanks (M1 Abrams)

[Infinite-Possibilities]

Are we supposing the Death Gliders are as accurate as every one that ever shot at SG-1?

That sort of feels like an important point to go over first.

I am inclined to believe that Gliders can be effective against Tau'ri armored technology. On Wraith Darts vs Goa'uld Death Gliders, I don't believe one or the other would be able to survive a direct hit from the other, but Darts struck me as somewhat more "agile".

[Stewart5]

Are we supposing the Death Gliders are as accurate as every one that ever shot at SG-1?

Well, when it's weapon that kills, they miss. When its a weapon that stuns, they always hit.

[thekillman]

well just create a hovering stun sattelite

[Laxian of Earth]

well just create a hovering stun sattelite

they have such things (this "Stun-Wave-Balls" they took the midway-station and the SGC with)

as for a tank: Why would todays armies use tanks if they were that useless? Even more so if you consider them to be upgraded with SG-Technologies (for example to provide their own air cover in being able to shoot down approaching fighters/bombers (one - alkesh like - energy cannon would guarantee that, while still being able to be used against ground targets.). as for it being agile (more speedy then todays tanks - with AG-Tech) and still heavily armored, i'd say: We could benefit from having them!

for counter arguments as stated by others: You should imagine a tank with (as written above in this very same posting) that is not as slow as an abrams (still as heavily armored and weaponized), with a shield and modern targeting computers....

greetings LAX

[thekillman]

because in today's days you dont have energy shields and SG tech. a simple attackcraft with 2 fans to lift it can be much more usefull. put 2 big machineguns on it and just mow down those *******s. or build a good laser and just pinpoint kill em from orbit.

[Laxian of Earth]

if you could achiev anything with having air supperiority the US would not have had to invade the Irak on foot/ground vehicles, as the had air controll allready (with them observing the "no-fly-Zones" that had been in place since first gulf war)

greetings LAX

[Stewart5]

for counter arguments as stated by others: You should imagine a tank with (as written above in this very same posting) that is not as slow as an abrams (still as heavily armored and weaponized), with a shield and modern targeting computers....

greetings LAX

The Abrams ain't slow, considering its weight. 42mph on road when it weighs almost 62 metric tons???

if you could achiev anything with having air supperiority the US would not have had to invade the Irak on foot/ground vehicles, as the had air controll allready (with them observing the "no-fly-Zones" that had been in place since first gulf war)

greetings LAX

I concurr.
Give it energy weapon resistant armour andur sorted, because then they have nothign that can take it out save a ha'tak or alkesh bomb, and ur infantry sweep on by......

[thekillman]

look in RL, you cant control sth if you dont have groundforces. when you're facing off an SG enemy on a planet, just blast it to hell with gatefighters and you're done. then send in the ships and take the planet.

[Womble]

the one in "DUETT" (with the woman's mind in mckays) was downed by Shep with a caliber 50 Machinegun! (no one has ever - i repeat EVER - done something like that to a glider, because it is not possible, as the gliders shrugs it off)

I don't think it was a .50 caliber. I think it was a 7.62.

O'Neill shot down a Death Glider with a 40mm grenade launcher in 'The Fifth Man", and those grenade are low velocity.

Cpt. Alicia Vega shot down a Wraith dark with an M4.

Tank vs. death glider is a stupid comparison though. Tanks don't operate alone, they are usually supported by aircraft and infantry. Also, modern tanks can shoot down helicopters by firing laser-guided missiles out of their cannons (I know the Israeli tanks can do it, I'm guessing the American ones can, too).

[Stewart5]

True! And I believe I made the point several times, too, that you wouldn't have just tanks. Tansk would roll thru the gate with the infantry, and ur aircover would handle the enmy fighters. Sorted! Combined arms!

[Yipster]

Since deathgliders can't seem to ever hit anything and infact always fire waaay early at targets, I don't think they are much threat compared to a round of super heated copper.
Frankly how much damage can a small bag of petrol blowing up do to a tank anyway?.

[Stewart5]

Since deathgliders can't seem to ever hit anything and infact always fire waaay early at targets, I don't think they are much threat compared to a round of super heated copper.
Frankly how much damage can a small bag of petrol blowing up do to a tank anyway?.

well, petrol is a liquid fuel, and tanks are NOT completely waterproof, so.......go figure!

[akuma07]

Never hover tanks etc... Could a gliders enhanced staff weapon penatrate a tanks armour full stop? I'm not so sure.

[Stewart5]

It depends on TPTB continuity.SOmetimes (as has been said more than once so far) staff weapons blow big holes in SGC blast doors. Other times, they just make interesting scorch marks...

[thekillman]

plasma>metal
concrete>plasma
earth>plasma


its just really good against metal. and tanks are made of? METAL.

well we're talking if both can actually fire right. but if its the average pilot, i would prefer the tank...