Talk:B1 Centauro

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
Start	This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale.
Additional information: This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-Class status: Referencing and citation: not checked Coverage and accuracy: not checked Structure: not checked Grammar: not checked Supporting materials: not checked To fill out this checklist, please add the following to the template call: <!-- 1. It is suitably referenced, and all major points are appropriately cited. --> |B-Class-1=yes/no <!-- 2. It reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain major omissions or inaccuracies. --> |B-Class-2=yes/no <!-- 3. It has a defined structure, including a lead section and one or more sections of content. --> |B-Class-3=yes/no <!-- 4. It is free from major grammatical errors. --> |B-Class-4=yes/no <!-- 5. It contains appropriate supporting materials, such as an infobox, images, or diagrams. --> |B-Class-5=yes/no Related task forces (general topics): Military technology and engineering task force Weaponry task force

It is not clear how much the vehcile weights. On the sidebar is says 24t and in the text "25,000 kg (55,000 lb or 27.5 tons" -- Mike Gormez

55,000 lb = 27.5 short tons = about 25,000 kg. So the vehicle weights about 24-25 metric tons. Since those figures are never exact, it's good enough. But I agree, four figures for weights is too much. I think all data that appears in the general characteristics table can be removed from the text, unless there is a reason to keep it. Bukvoed 15:42, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

I also agree, I removed some of the data that is already displayed in the table, we don't need it repeated in the article when its right there on the table, added the info about missle lauchers, which may give expanded AA or AT capabilities, also changed the phrase: "credible rumors" to "rumors" because of a lack of citation or source to make them credible Requen 20:36, 15 August 2006 (UTC)