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
GeorgeSPatton    Santa   4/12/2011 6:33:18 PM

And you're the one who said the Ak47 is a useless rifle. I just agreed with you. It's indicative of everything else produced by Russia. They can't get a simple 50+ year old rifle right, and you expect us to believe they can build tanks and planes? HAH!

I would't exactly call the AK-47 a useless rifle.  For what it is it's one of the most reliable weapons around, even today.  I think the AK-47 vs M-16 comparison is one of the best examples of the differences between East/West military equiptment:
One one hand you have the precise, more complicated, more accurate, and longer-range M-16.  Its design clearly emphasized semi-auto fire over full-auto fire.  It was more easy to damage and required more maintenance by the average soldier. (rapier)
On the other hand you have the rugged, simple, heavy-hitting AK.  Its design clearly favored full-automatic over semi, and while less accurate it fired a much larger and more powerful bullet.  It required almost no maintenance to operate and was almost impossible to jam. (bludgeon)
You can see the Western emphasis on a rapier vs a bludgeon in just about all of their equiptment.  Western tech is more sophisticated, but more complex and requires more training to use, while in the East there is an emphasis on functionality, power, and simplicity, mainly for use by the simple, poorly-trained conscript.  They don't build bad stuff, just "good enough" to get the mission done (which sometimes works out better than the techie stuff).
 
Quote    Reply

earlm       4/12/2011 6:56:37 PM
Perforated armor is 50% the weight and 70% the resistance of plate vs KE.  It is better than plate against CE because it is bulkier.  I don't know how it compares to ceramics.  Some perforated has the holes filled with something such as ceramics, and others have it capped on either end with something such as a strike plate in front and a backing plate in back.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart       4/12/2011 7:08:30 PM



Like Russia, you have no friends.



lets count US haters and compare.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/12/2011 7:10:01 PM

And you're the one who said the Ak47 is a useless rifle. I just agreed with you. It's indicative of everything else produced by Russia. They can't get a simple 50+ year old rifle right, and you expect us to believe they can build tanks and planes? HAH!
exactly. thats why in Vietnam your soldiers being equipped with M16 tried to take any first chance to get AK47 to go on with.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/12/2011 7:12:55 PM
now i see a few screams about banning me, that would be nice isnt it? :) you'd go on running your fantasies here :)
 
Ill tell you what, you can register some forum, make it closed. and make it real :) i dont think thats gona change the real facts tho. 
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   4/12/2011 7:15:34 PM

They can't get a simple 50+ year old rifle right, and you expect us to believe they can build tanks and planes? HAH!

just wanted to highlight such a reply again... i want other members re-read it... and see if you fully (100%) agree with statement of Santa.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/12/2011 7:32:28 PM


2.  Police claims about military service/DefPro status a bit so we can ID the pretenders (if there are any).


I mod on a couple of forums, anyone who claims military or industry service has to provide supporting evidence.  if they don't provide traceable history or are not validated from one of the recognised existing defence credentialed professionals then they are immediately banned.

its an effective way of leeping the walts and wannabe's out - it improves the tenor and quality of debate very quickly.  one of the side benefits is that some of the younger ones who might start off trolling pull their heads in and actually self moderate, they also end up warning newbies when they go off the rails.

active moderation is essential to keeping the moron participation list low.

 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/12/2011 7:40:42 PM

Any guesses as to his real age and education level?

I have stayed out of this thread it became apparent that it was turning into a conversational mobius strip

basic forensics, look at the quality of response, look at the emotion, look at the pattern of behaviour. 

serious engagement is a woftam.  

IMO /ignore and the thread will do a lazarus.




 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       4/12/2011 7:48:05 PM


just to add, on the other forums I mod on there is a policy of banning "A vs B" threads because it brings out nationalistic rubbish and the quality goes downhill from day one.

how this thread has derailed is a good example of why such threads get banned on other sites

my pet hate with "A vs B" threads is that kids will dumb the debate to my tank is better than your tank because it has a larger bore, more horsepower, has less crew, is manual load etc.... and ignores the fundamental issue that warfighting is about a collection and the management of systems.

kids focus on what goes bang and ignore critical vectors such as logistics, integration with other systems and support structures, training, even governance (political will and intent)

as you've seen here "A vs B" is not an academic opportunity but derails and loses value pretty damn quickly.

culture and age are important considerations here.....


my 2c anyway



 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart       4/12/2011 7:49:15 PM


I mod on a couple of forums, anyone who claims military or industry service has to provide supporting evidence.  if they don't provide traceable history or are not validated from one of the recognised existing defence credentialed professionals then they are immediately banned.



its an effective way of leeping the walts and wannabe's out - it improves the tenor and quality of debate very quickly.  one of the side benefits is that some of the younger ones who might start off trolling pull their heads in and actually self moderate, they also end up warning newbies when they go off the rails.


active moderation is essential to keeping the moron participation list low.


or you can put it in a simpler way: ban anyone who is from Russia/USSR, or anyone else who thinks that US is not the only country who can design weapons.
 
That would be more honest.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics