|
Plan Z posted:They sort of resemble Konkurs or Kornet ATGMs to my dumb eyes. I'd read that Ukroboronprom was trying to develop new AT Missiles as well as a load of other prjects, but with no information beyond a few model numbers. It's worth noting that Ukraine provided a lot of high technology to Russia, like certain types of radar and laser guidance proponents, and the conflict meant that Russia is unable to receive a lot of it (though I doubt it has any measurable effect). It never actually seemed legit. The actual armor spaces have remained more or less the same since it was the T-72B. The T-72BU, later re-branded as T-90, was a modernization program to incorporate similar technology to that on what was currently the top-end Soviet tank, the T-80U, into the cheaper T-72 while a the T-80 would be replaced with a new generation top-of-the-line tank (it didn't because the T-80 was a victim of politics after being use incompetently in Chechnya). The biggest addition to protection was to stick Kontact-5 on it to improve kinetic protection rather than just shaped charge protection. Shtora has no impact whatsoever on tank munitions aside from laser guided missiles (see: Russian tanks) and Arena never entered service on the T-90. So the T-90 is essentially an economy model of the T-80U. Now consider that the UK purchased legit modernized T-80Us through a shell corporation in the early 90s, complete with Kontact-5, ammo, etc. They then proceeded to test the hell out of them while passing a few to the US and other NATO countries to do the same. Some apparently did get used in live fire testing, after which the UK, Germany, and the US released a new generation of 120mm kinetic penetrators slightly longer than the previous generation....and that's it. Essentially the US had a tank with nearly identical protection and the same level of sophistication as the T-90 to use as target practice and weapon R&D 15 years ago, and released new generations of ammunition around the time the T-90 entered service. The T-90 was marketed heavily for export from the beginning, though, which is where the TANK STRONK stuff came from. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Mar 7, 2016 |
#
¿
Mar 7, 2016 22:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
Ardennes posted:Do you mean that video where a TOW hits a T-90, and the a member of the crew comes out ? It didn't look like a kill and it certainly didn't penetrate. He could mean the first one that outright exploded after a rear hit. But yeah, if he means the one that got smacked in the turret face it probably survived the hit. Also notable that ATGMs like TOW using shaped charges tend to be protected from differently than from kinetic penetrators you'd see tanks lobbing at eachother.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 03:50
|
|
|
Kiejzar posted:That is quite wrong from what I know. Few years ago during war games in Poland an Abrams tank put five slugs info front turret armor of decomissioned Polish PT-91 (lovely t72 knockoff inferior in every way to T90 and T72B3) and none penetrated. Distance was 1300 metres, and modern DU penetrators were suposedly used. And that ignores additional factors like moving targets, active defences and so on. In the second Chechen war Russians had tanks returning to base after 8 ATGM hits. This is probably a reference to some testing mentioned by a speaker at a Janes conference talking about some German/US live fire testing with some tanks mounting Kontackt-5. It's generally been used as a talking point for the effectiveness of K-5 rather than the armor of the tanks mounting it. There were no specifics about the type of tank in the account, though the internet now has many theories and variants of the original story. If you go looking for sources they all trace back to the same vague comments at the Janes conference, though. Given the lack of details and nature of the (second hand, completely undocumented/supported) source I'd take it with a grain of salt. Kontackt-5 would have been at least as hard to find in Poland/Eastern Germany as the few (all very modern) models of tank capable of mounting it. It also doesn't line up with other accounts of the testing done at Heidi from other sources (who mention T-72M1s but no ERA of any kind and no mention of unexpectedly impenetrable tanks). If you want to see holes in a T-72m1 turret (analog to the T-72A), though, there are a bunch of photos out there from the Canadian testing of 105mm ammo. While 120mm (what you see on basically all NATO MBTs since the 80s) went right through pretty much anything, the 105mm (older 60s-70s NATO standard gun) went through in a lot of spots but didn't in the thickest parts of the turret face. But even in that case you won't find much detail on the ranges involved. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 19:43 on Mar 8, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 8, 2016 15:58
|
|
|
Kiejzar posted:The test I heard about was in Drawsko, and Polish tank had ERAWA type ERA, so probably not it. Story was told by guy who had a cask of whisky riding on the result, supposedly. This sounds extremely unlikely to have happened. Even if true, as a previous poster indicated you don't need to be able to poke holes in the thickest armored area of the tank to kill it. The side and rear armor of the T-90 is pretty much the same as any other T-72 variant (including the PT-91) because there's just no physical room to shove any complex armor schemes in there. You've got a rubberized armor skirt to serve as spaced armor with the front third having some ERA plates on top, behind which you have a relatively thin steel bulkhead. Also, given that they're using essentially the same exact gun as the T-90 and Russia has been selling and exhibiting new generation ammunition in various bids for export I'd say Poland could probably come up something along those lines. Of course the T-90 still suffers from an autoloader that strictly limits the dimensions of SABOT projectiles which has kinda limited their options to improve things in that field for a while. Also, the PT-91 Twardy with current-gen ERA is about as far from the T-72M/M1 as the T-90 is. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 02:36 on Mar 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Mar 9, 2016 02:21
|
|
|
Friendly Humour posted:You can tell by some of the bolts and from having seen quite a few volcano rockets in your life. Photos of a thing are actually a pretty good way to see a thing.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 15, 2016 23:02
|
|
|
Yeah, I went to public school in middle of nowhere North Carolina and inner city VA Beach and had a lot of time devoted to geography and world history. Most people just don't care. It doesn't impact their daily lives. Which isn't a uniquely American thing.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 17, 2016 14:21
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:https://twitter.com/GrahamWP_UK/status/721820580320841728 Well, when your goal is to focus attention on literally anything feasibly beneficial about the annexation aside from "Russia now owns the military port they wanted" sometimes you just throw ideas at the wall to see what sticks. Gotta be getting harder as things on the non-military-port side in Crimea continue to get shittier. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Apr 18, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Apr 18, 2016 00:01
|
|
|
GreyjoyBastard posted:God drat it. Uhhhh, Russia has been loving with the Crimea Tatars pretty hard since the annexation.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Flocons de Jambon posted:The secret protocols of the pact that the Soviets signed with the Nazis included an independent Polish state, and the Soviets only intervened after the Polish government fled and the Nazis stopped acknowledging the Polish state's existence. Before the invasion the Soviets offered to put an army on the German border as part of a larger alliance against the Nazis. The Germans crossed the border on September 1st, 1939. The Soviets crossed the border on September 17th, 1939. The Polish government fled on September 18th, 1939 (to Romania). The German and Soviet forces met at Brest on September 19th, 1939. The Polish government fleeing was a direct result of the Soviet invasion and resulting encirclement. You have a poor (or extremely selective) understanding of events it seems. In the spirit of totally-not-cooperating the Germans and Soviets held a joint military parade in Brest a few days later. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 23:11 on May 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
May 9, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
There's still time!
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
DrProsek posted:In my experience, ultranationalistic irredentist militias and ethnic minorities mix poorly. Crimea had like zero militias involved. The Russian government has already admitted it was an operation by the Russian military (and issued a bunch of medals for it). Of course that just means it was an ultranationalistic irredentist military.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
axelord posted:To Free the Baltic countries we would need to take out Russian AA, Radar and Air units. Making a first strike nuclear attack on Russia easier. None of this makes a first strike nuclear attack on Russia any easier. The things that detect ICBM launches or approaches are not the things that detect or shoot at planes. Anyways Russia would have an easier time figuring out whether NATO counterattacks in the Baltic states are meant as a prelude to a nuclear strike than NATO would have figuring out whether Russian attacks to invade said Baltic states are a prelude to a nuclear attack. Also: How can a thing be both provocative and not change anything? If it doesn't change anything why should it be viewed as provocative? How is a symbolic gesture toward honoring a defensive treaty provocative? Warbadger fucked around with this message at 20:00 on Jul 10, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2016 19:56
|
|
|
Dapper_Swindler posted:I thought we had anti missle defense poo poo(i am sure the mainland US does) not sure about europe. I assume NATO would win a conventional war against Russia if it came down to it. The US has a few interceptors in Guam that might be able to shoot down an ICBM. If it flies over the Pacific. Aside from that it's all been geared toward shorter range/slower missiles like the ones used by Iran and North Korea. The Russians could lob ICBMs right over the proposed ABM site in Poland at the US (not that they would - those go over the pole) and the interceptors couldn't catch them.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 10, 2016 21:58
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:Kind of wrong. Not ICBMs but medium- and short-range ballistic missiles, like what a lot of the Russian Strategic Rocket Forces is made up of, and cruise missiles is the stuff that Aegis Ballsitic Missile Defense (which is what is what has been put into operation in Romania and being proposed for Poland) as well as THAAD (as well as the Israeli Arrow, which shares a lot of tech with THAAD) are made and tested to take out. Since the only country that fields short- and medium-range ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads is Russia, it's less about degrading their nuclear deterrent and more about neutralizing their first strike capability. The SM-3 isn't shooting down cruise missiles, nor would it be capable of shooting down anything launched out of Russia at the vast majority of Europe due to being way the hell down in Romania (which happens to be between Iran and Europe, shocker!). THAAD could do those things, but then it's a much smaller and less ballistically impressive rocket and isn't shooting down MRBMs or even SRBMs unless they're landing in or over the battery's relatively small umbrella. Which is entirely by design because it's supposed to protect specific locations from attack, so until Europe is bristling with THAAD sites, good luck with that. None of them are shooting down ICBMs and if we're talking Russia launching a nuclear first strike on NATO you'd better believe those are going to be involved. That's without considering the tiny numbers of interceptors, Russian missiles incorporating ABM countermeasures and decoys of various kinds, and that Russia could pop off hundreds of near-identical conventional missiles to mask nuclear armed missiles in such a situation. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 04:40 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2016 04:38
|
|
|
lynch_69 posted:When Russian propaganda complains about the rise of Nazism in former Soviet bloc countries they're essentially right. Like is this even a controversial assertion at this point? It's more that they're still relatively insignificant (as in this case) but vastly overblown in size/influence in the propaganda. Also that Russia's own facist/hard right nationalist issue dwarfs the Eastern European groups and the Russian government funds many of them anyways.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 20, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
Aumanor posted:Ehhhh, Poland was never a dick on anything approaching Russia's level. At times they approached it. But it's been a very long time since those times.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 3, 2016 14:09
|
|
|
Discendo Vox posted:"Kremlin-aligned" It's progress, a few years ago a lot of news would reprint RT reporting at face value.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 19, 2016 17:38
|
|
|
Those drat boyars always ruining everything!
|
|
#
¿
Aug 31, 2016 20:25
|
|
|
Sergg posted:I'm sorry about your choir, Russia. They never killed anyone. Yeah, as much as the Russian government is awful I'm not really thrilled about a bunch of Russian musicians dying.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2016 19:27
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:I wonder what they plan to do with the stadium. Have matches against Transnistria or something? Perception is a big thing for Russia and having things they can use for propaganda purposes to show "life is normal and good here thanks to us, PLEASE IGNORE WHAT EVERYONE ELSE SAYS!" is very important when your incompetent kleptocracy creates hellish places like Transnistria.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 6, 2017 05:05
|
|
|
A Typical Goon posted:You never know, there could always be secret Kurdish terrorist groups in the heart of Russia lmao Russian media tends to imply NATO/US secretly created and is supporting ISIS and the hard core islamists. They downplay the actual, large scale and successful NATO/US campaign to support the Kurds and SDF against ISIS while heavily covering their own small contributions to portray themselves as the ones ~really~ fighting ISIS. This looks much better than talking about waging terror bombing and depopulation campaigns on the general population of Syria while NATO kills the universally accepted bad guys. Basically as long as the Kurds are not directly in conflict with Assad you won't see Russia pointing the finger at them. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 16:23 on Apr 3, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 3, 2017 15:19
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:The majority of the kazaki oilfields are in the west, by the caspian. In what regions do the ethnic russians predominantly live? No war against Khazakhstan, it is grassroots protest of concerned Khazakhs of pure Russian ethnicity to resist criminals of terrorist race! Warbadger fucked around with this message at 02:56 on Apr 4, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Apr 4, 2017 01:31
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:Why do conspiracy theorists and washed up celebrities all end up love with and fawning over Putin? He's a conservative strongman with a pretty significant and long running international propaganda campaign.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 20:32
|
|
|
Kurtofan posted:so you're saying that they're falling in love with him...as a result of an international conspiracy? Tankies don't need an international conspiracy to make them love dictators.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
Which explains why many of those states on the border who didn't join NATO ended up with Russian backed frozen conflicts (many of which predate NATO membership in Eastern Europe) or straight up invasion and annexation. If only Ukraine hadn't joined NATO they could have avoided everything! Warbadger fucked around with this message at 01:00 on Jun 13, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Canada's won its war against America. There's nothing left to prove there. In Russia-lingo this translates to Canada being a nation of bloodthirsty invaders and any hostility against them is forever justified.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2017 16:24
|
|
|
rear end struggle posted:I don't know. I assumed the FSB has at least the capability of the American Secret Service when it comes to reading online forums. I doubt they'd actually care about a foreign national saying "death to the troops" but who knows. They already invaded Ukraine and already annexed territory from it. This was after they invaded Georgia and annexed territory by proxy a few times. Are you saying they can't do the same thing to anyone else? Warbadger fucked around with this message at 17:11 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 17:08
|
|
|
rear end struggle posted:why would they? Because they want the things and places their neighbors have and it plays well to the ethno-nationalists who the current Russian government is pandering to? Why do you suppose they invaded Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine? Warbadger fucked around with this message at 17:15 on Aug 21, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 21, 2017 17:12
|
|
|
HUGE PUBES A PLUS posted:drat, totally went over my head. Is this guy seriously wondering why airline pilots didn't scream a few milliseconds before getting exploded by a supersonic missile headed directly at them so as to be near-invisible to the eye for the split second they had to spot it, which they wouldn't have been able to do anyways because the windows in the cabin would not have allowed them to see it approaching from the ground. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 23:48 on Aug 26, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 26, 2017 23:45
|
|
|
Cat Mattress posted:If I'm not mistaken Buk missiles climb quite a bit above their target and then strike down. I would assume this depends on the distance to the target and its altitude. Anyways, that just means the 17 inch diameter Mach 3 missile they can't see with the naked eye until the last few milliseconds is behind the ceiling/walls of the cabin rather than the floor/walls. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 21:11 on Aug 27, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2017 21:06
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Poland more than paid for that, and Russia making GBS threads all over a country it effectively occupied for decades after stabbing it in the back in turn, in order to make its own crimes seem less awful, isn't exactly a brave stand for truth and justice. They invaded and occupied both parties involved in this case. Poland twice in a row.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2017 13:42
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:The ship had sailed for peace in Europe by the time Ribbentrop-Molotov came around, so the Soviets were just embracing the horrors of the path that Europe had been set on. Obviously they were themselves very much one of those, but they did start out as bad guys on the good guy side, before they became convinced that trying to work something out with the western powers was a no go. They wanted to occupy Poland with a million troops placed in strategic locatiins throughout the country "just in case" Germany invaded. At a time they were pretty antagonistic to Poland. Poland was not stupid to turn this down. They didn't need to "work something out" with the Western powers to oppose Germany - it's a thing they already did by existing next to Poland right up until they decided they'd get part of europe by joining up with the (at the time winning) Axis. If they'd met the Germans in the middle of Poland with artillery rather than parades and ammunition shipments the war would have been over very quickly.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2017 14:00
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Stalin didn't want Russia to become the sacrificial lamb of Europe once again, after it was stabbed in the back in WWI. He would rather see Germans and the French slaughter each other. Poland had to be defeated prior to Russia being a sacrificial lamb w/r/t anyone in Western Europe, including Germany. Helping that happen and removing the existing buffer between the Soviet Union and Germany while abandoning the defenses at the Russian border did not align with that goal. Making wholly unreasonable demands to occupy a major allied country prior to hostilities kicking off was not a great way to oppose Nazi Germany or garner support. Nor was providing assistance in gobbling up Europe while seeking entrance to the Axis. It was a great way to opportunistically occupy Eastern Europe, though! Warbadger fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Sep 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Sep 16, 2017 14:12
|
|
|
steinrokkan posted:Well, what I said pretty much means that Stalin wasn't interested in opposing Germany, he was interested in using it as part of his geopolitical scheming? I didn't mean to imply he was an unfairly wronged guy forced to defend himself by attacking Poland, he was trying to nudge Europe towards a war more beneficial for his goals than would happen otherwise. He gave up on trying to form an alliance that would actually proactively oppose Germany around '36. Which is why his offers to Czechoslovakia in 1938 rang hollow, he knew the exact same plans had been rejected several years prior, and was just covering his rear end. Yeah, that's fair enough.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 18, 2017 02:12
|
|
|
It was a rocket launch pretty obviously lined up on those journalists or the vehicles they were next to. It didn't uncontrollably empty the rocket pods as some of the claims indicate (due to a "short") and the aim was dead on, so this wasn't just random bad luck. The only question is whether it was incompetence and carelessness during a mock rocket attack or just a spectacular way to do away with some journalists in Russia.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 12:39
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Right now the official line is that there has been an unrelated accidental rocket launch, but under different circumstances and no one's been harmed. No solid explanation of the video yet. It's Russia. They're going to say a lot of different, contradictory things.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2017 13:53
|
|
|
Paladinus posted:Unironically, yes, it's going to be better than existing decentralised crypto. But mostly because they are tremendously useless, and even beads or smooth rocks are a better currency than Bitcoin. Yes, in that it's actually backed by a government with authority to back a currency. Still yes, even though the government in question is notoriously corrupt. Worst thing that can happen is they manipulate the currency or steal your eRubles, at which point it would still be as good as Bitcoin. Edit: Also entirely appropriate that Russia would create such a currency to facilitate the thriving online theft market - unloading bitcoin ransom payments must be a pain in the rear end. Warbadger fucked around with this message at 23:14 on Oct 16, 2017 |
|
#
¿
Oct 16, 2017 23:11
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:Well, I guess as long as it doesn't involve Russian peacemakers slowly stealing territory that might not be the worst idea, because people are still dying there. It doesn't really make much sense to give the country whose troops have invaded and whose support the irregular combatants rely upon a way to install a tripwire in the region with international legitimacy. Look at how that turned out for Georgia - they got shelled regularly from across the Russian-peacekeeper patrolled border for half a year with no way to retaliate and no response from Russia. When they eventually did retaliate, Russia justified a large scale invasion as a response to attacks on their peacekeepers.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 1, 2017 00:58
|
|
|
ThisIsJohnWayne posted:What's the old saying, "Communism has failed every time it's been tested, while Anarchism has failed to even be tested"? I'd be an anarchist if I had more faith in humanity. It's usually more that it's why there needs to be a social structure to ensure most people can both have and keep their nice things.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 17, 2018 17:58
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 06:10 |
|
|
HorrificExistence posted:I think it is because it has a negative portrayal of zhukov, who is now the stand-in for stalin with respect to the great patriotic war I read the comic this is based on and Zhukov definitely was not negatively portrayed. Dude just wanted Stalin's rear end in a top hat son brought to justice and a bunch of innocent Red Army guys released from the gulags. He even gets rid of Beria.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 27, 2018 17:54
|
|