Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Russian T90 vs. US M1A2 Abrams
achtpanz    6/14/2004 3:59:14 AM
Russian T90 vs American M1A2 Abrams - Which is better? If these tanks fought in battle, which would suffer more casualties, which one is superior? What are their advantages? Any information would be helpful.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
SantaClaws       4/4/2011 5:41:35 PM
They people who build these things are pretty confident in its abilities. They know a lot more about it than you or I do. I'm going to trust their work.
Oh and in case of Herald, it was same as in your case... when you have no idea about the internals of basic (generic... non US or Russian) radar[i.e. your understanding is limited to "you transmit and then receive"], but you so much sure that B2 can fly through any defense :)
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    Answer the qyestion   4/4/2011 5:50:39 PM

Oh and in case of Herald, it was same as in your case... when you have no idea about the internals of basic (generic... non US or Russian) radar[i.e. your understanding is limited to "you transmit and then receive"], but you so much sure that B2 can fly through any defense :)
 
Liar, I said nothing about the B-2 or the useless Russian radars it defeats,The B-2 defense depends on concepts such as signal scatter, attenuation, and absorption and have nothing to do with interval at all  
 
You should really reads what I write on THAT subject. Its all over the site.  
 
One more thing.Coldmush, all physics is LOCAL. There is NO force interaction at all except at the moment of observed event. That event occurs either at the creation of a force carrier particle, and then at its de-creation. Between those two extremii is the interval, and that, you moron, is almost quantum mechanics 101. Distance is an actual Human sensory illusion that does not exist. It is only TIME that gives credence to that illusion. How else do you explain virtual particles, entanglement, and the Bell Theorem? 
 
You still with me, Coldmush? Let me know when I lose you.
 
H.         
 
Quote    Reply

Buzz       4/4/2011 7:26:47 PM

Actively engaged doing what? Installing missiles that didn't exist? Using FBCB2 that didn't exist? Everyone of your stories is full of shit. It's obvious you've never been in the military.

Once again you prove you only know what someone put in wikki. Get a real girl friend and maybe a little sun.
 
Quote    Reply

GeorgeSPatton       4/4/2011 7:28:53 PM
  Good radar was in MIg31. Good side of Mig25 was its ability to climb high altitude.
 
The MiG-31 is widely regarded as having the most powerful radar ever mounted on a fighter-sized aircraft.
 
George, again 3 pages of drama which do not change anything, educate more yourself then come back.
 
Most of it is your own words which I have thrown back in your face from your own--going on 30--pages of "drama".  And unlike mine, it really is drama, containing nothing more than harsh insults and fanboyism the likes of which I had hoped had ended when 2011 arrived and the Rafale was still only operated by France.
Anyhoo...you tell me to educate myself more, but I will ask you to simply educate yourself at all.  You have spent a ton of effort here attacking peoples knowledge about certain subjects which you yourself have no knowledge of.
 
And yes, specific things can be described in a simple way, and looking at the response of a person one can immediately identify was this response a compiled paraphrasing or words of understanding person.
 
Was my description really so difficult to comprehend?  Never once did I use a word more complex than "processing" when I gave you reasons why electronics and power are important to a radar system.  Unless someone here with more knowledge of the system of radar is willing to correct me, I believe that is basically how power and electronics are important to radar.  (Santa, Herald if I was wrong about any of my conclusions please let me know)
Oh and in case of Herald, it was same as in your case... when you have no idea about the internals of basic (generic... non US or Russian) radar[i.e. your understanding is limited to "you transmit and then receive"], but you so much sure that B2 can fly through any defense :)
 
Radar is radar.  It matters little who built the system, their mission, and therefore the basic inner workings, are the same.
The US owns 21 B-2 bombers.  At over a billion dollars a pop they are the most expensive warbird ever built.  They were built with exactly one mission in mind: to get through Soviet air defenses in East Germany and Western Russia (the single most concentrated SAM belt in the world at the time) and bomb targets in Russia.  So far their performance to date has shown that the developers were successful.  I'm sorry but no amount of whining from you is going to convince me that a piece of equiptment with that mission in mind and that amount of funding put into it will fail at its primary mission.  Especially when Russian air defenses are no longer as formidable as they once were (Russia is a lot of space for 400 S-300s to cover, even if they could reliably detect stealth).
 
Quote    Reply

Buzz       4/4/2011 7:30:36 PM

Spoken like a true fuckwit who's never been in. The Army values every soldier and does it best to safe guard lives. Equipment is not more important than personnel.









You can't use reactive armor in close quarters where it could injure fellow soldiers or civilians close to the M-113 if the reactive armor went off. Are you sure you're in the military?













Think about what you just said. If an RPG went off near you you are dead anyway making your statement invalid. Fact is the equipment is more valuable than the soldier. The soldier is easier to replace.





Spoken like a true never in the army dumbass. Guess you are one of those little snowflakes that has never figured out that people die in war. Hopefully its the other side that is doing most of the dieing part.
 
Quote    Reply

Buzz       4/4/2011 7:34:16 PM

Yah, but they're not put on Apaches.

Dumbass I ment to ask you why a rack of Hellfires and another of 2.75 in rockets have no effect on an apaches areodynamics but a very small Stinger would thow it completly off?
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/4/2011 8:01:39 PM
Yes George, Russian airspace is covered by all these ADS'es. And the amount of money you put in does not guarantee victory. A lot of money could be given to you, to do/design/built something, but with your kiddish mind and zero skills you gona likely fail it :)
 
Herald, you are out already. Copying/paraphrasing and picking up something to brag against me doesnt work. 
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/4/2011 8:02:54 PM
of course, i do not say that all B2s F22s etc are worthless etc... those are good piece of hardware, especially against your current enemies. but...is it gona work out well against Russia?... doubt it. thats the whole point. dont be insult. take the reality as it is.
 
Quote    Reply

Buzz       4/4/2011 9:05:02 PM
















Think about what you just said. If an RPG went off near you you are dead anyway making your statemment invalid. Fact is the eqyuipment is more valuable than the soldier. The soldier is easier to replace.





Try telling that to the American public.

 

And about your reactive armor comment: from wiki (yea i know, but im too tired to find a more credible site right now)


 


A further complication to the use of ERA is the inherent danger to anybody near the tank when a plate detonates (disregarding that a HEAT warhead explosion would already present a great danger to anybody near the tank). Although ERA plates are intended only to bulge following detonation, the combined energy of the ERA explosive, coupled with the kinetic or explosive energy of the projectile, will frequently cause explosive fragmentation of the plate. The explosion of an ERA plate creates a significant amount of shrapnel, and bystanders are in grave danger of serious or fatal injury. As a result, infantry needs to operate some distance from vehicles protected by ERA in combined arms operations.


 


So yea, the RPG impact does a danger to dismounted infantry, but the danger is significantly compounded by the explosion of the ERA plates. That's why slat armor is better for situations where infantry has to operate close to the vehicles, or when civilians are nearby (basically any urban scenario). It's also MUCH less expensive.



Forgot to point out something a real soldier would know and you wouldnt. The little RPG thingy you see in Irag and afghanistan is not an AT round. It is a dual purpose AT/AP warhead. Which disperses casing fragments leathal to anyone in the vacinity. Infantry soldiers in a deployed armor support situation should not be alongside of the vehicle. They should be far enough out to provide a screen. But like I said you wouldnt know that. How about stopping bullshitting around and enlist.
 
Quote    Reply

Buzz       4/4/2011 9:09:47 PM

Helicopters don't engage other helicopters. Helos are extremely maneuverable and can mask themselves behind terrain. My turn rate in a 60 is higher than a Hind or 64. If either tried to engage me I could continuously out turn them and disengage until they went bingo fuel. It's simply not worth the effort to do a helo on helo battle. Using ADA or fast movers to engage helos is another story.


Go find some old pilots that actually served during that time period in theater. The Hind was the big boogie man back then and they were trying a lot of stuff. Before they played with putting stingers on helecopters they just told them that if they saw a HIND get the hell out of there.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics