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
Reactive       4/13/2011 7:06:08 PM




This thread should be renamed "idiot russian fanboy talks tanks". 

 


At least this is better than him drinking cheap aftershave to get high, which has dramatically reduced the life expectancy of his generation : ( 

 


R







I've watched the last 20 odd pages and felt like stabbing my eyes out with a red hot fishing hook....


I've worked with some russian engineers on various projects, they're nothing like this.  smart operators, knew their stuff.  easy to deal with.


welcome to the internet



I think that's the thing that also applied to bluewings and slowman, being so nationalistic at the expense of any reality actually detracts from what I think it's fair to say is a healthy amount of respect where it is due - that course applies to Russia more than most - it brings out the worst in everyone; including myself.
 
There's so many interesting issues pertaining to Russia that it is a shame they can't be discussed because of the usual fanboys trying desperately to pretend they are still a superpower..
 
R
 
Quote    Reply

GeorgeSPatton       4/13/2011 8:00:09 PM
Santa - Do you prefer the M-16 over the M-14?  I actually thought that the M-14 was in some ways a better weapon than the M-16 (At least the original model M-16).  It was longer-ranged, more accurate and fired a more powerful round.  I felt that one of the problems with the M-14 was that it was heavy and ill-suited to fighting an asymmetric opponent like the -Cong.
 
Reactive - I completely agree with you on that.  I bent over backwards to Coldstart saying that I was not in any way attacking Russia or its people and was merely discussing the facts on a single piece of military hardware, yet within three pages of debate he had turned it around neatly into another USA vs Russia Cold War-esque debate without me even realizing it at first.
I do agree that Russia is a very interesting subject.  The Russian people have no less potential than anyone else, they simply have had very bad luck in leadership for the last hundred years or so.  It's the Russian leadership that most people have a problem with.
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       4/13/2011 9:47:53 PM
Last hundred years?  Russia has been misruled forever!  No trolling intended.  Show me a Czar that didn't suck - yes, there were one or two - that's the point.  And Russia WAS the Czar.  Go back somebody, show me a happy time in Russia where everything was good, a Golden Age.  Back to the Kievan Rus I can't think of a time when you'd rather be Russian than, say, English, French, Italian, German or Japanese.  Leave the US out of it entirely.  Who can say different? (ignoring the schmuck)
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       4/13/2011 9:56:49 PM


Santa - Do you prefer the M-16 over the M-14?  I actually thought that the M-14 was in some ways a better weapon than the M-16 (At least the original model M-16).  It was longer-ranged, more accurate and fired a more powerful round.  I felt that one of the problems with the M-14 was that it was heavy and ill-suited to fighting an asymmetric opponent like the -Cong.

 

Reactive - I completely agree with you on that.  I bent over backwards to Coldstart saying that I was not in any way attacking Russia or its people and was merely discussing the facts on a single piece of military hardware, yet within three pages of debate he had turned it around neatly into another USA vs Russia Cold War-esque debate without me even realizing it at first.

I do agree that Russia is a very interesting subject.  The Russian people have no less potential than anyone else, they simply have had very bad luck in leadership for the last hundred years or so.  It's the Russian leadership that most people have a problem with.

I hear you there, we could always just stop feeding the troll,
 
I think Russia is sort of at a crossroads, on one fork lies an economy that is primitive - i.e. selling oil and gas - feast and famine according to market demand and reserves yet to be tapped elsewhere - it's the kind of economy that makes up most of the pre-industrialised world, very few people are gainfully employed in manufacturing or service industries and therefore the nation's wealth stays firmly with the billionaire oligarchs - the middle class doesn't develop and the misery continues as Russia's global importance fades in every respect except for that of its warhead and fissile material stockpile. This is essentially what, despite the patriotism of the Putin era has actually happened, the skills base shrinks a little each year in line with manufactured exports even in its traditional key defense sectors as China's developing manufacturing base and growing political influence overseas takes control of those key markets in the developing world. This is the stagnation mode, fortunes fluctuate exactly in line with the price of resources. This realisation is why Putin decided to put a modernising force, one of the the MOST liberal and pro-western members of the government on his throne -
 
(I call it that  for the following reason:)
telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/russia/7767836/Caught-on-video-Russian-democracy-in-action.html
 
And there lies the other, more desirable fork - where Medvedev's roadmap to modernisation is allowed to happen - I'll deal with that kettle of fish in the next post but unfortunately this has to be cut short. 
 
The bottom line though, and the paradox with russia, is that the population tends to live in denial.
 
R
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       4/13/2011 10:05:57 PM
 
Quote    Reply

Reactive       4/13/2011 10:23:48 PM

Last hundred years?  Russia has been misruled forever!  No trolling intended.  Show me a Czar that didn't suck - yes, there were one or two - that's the point.  And Russia WAS the Czar.  Go back somebody, show me a happy time in Russia where everything was good, a Golden Age.  Back to the Kievan Rus I can't think of a time when you'd rather be Russian than, say, English, French, Italian, German or Japanese.  Leave the US out of it entirely.  Who can say different? (ignoring the schmuck)

That's the paradox of the Russian mindset - which seems to me to be almost a form of nihilism, A legacy perhaps of the Soviet era where quality of life was utterly irrelevant next to the demands of the state - that allowed them to defeat the Germans whilst suffering staggering human losses and being completely indifferent to the plight of the troops who were often needlessly wasted- it enabled them to launch sputnik into orbit and take a human to space and back (and a dog that at least made half the journey).
 
But no, I wouldn't want to live there, I've known many people who have worked over there and have since refused to go back no matter the money and perks on offer  - you can't find many statistics that paint a rosier picture, whether in terms of premature deaths through alcoholism, suicide rates, birth rates, etc etc - YET in some strange way, people are content and even happy with Putin's Russia so long as the image of their nation is one that they can be proud of. This is why any transition to what we in the west would regard as better will not be an easy one, or one that is welcomed with open arms.
 
And it's also why this guy here has to believe that his nation is still a rival to the US, in economic terms it's yet to to reach the GDP of Canada....
 
R
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/13/2011 10:57:42 PM


Santa - Do you prefer the M-16 over the M-14?  I actually thought that the M-14 was in some ways a better weapon than the M-16 (At least the original model M-16).  It was longer-ranged, more accurate and fired a more powerful round.  I felt that one of the problems with the M-14 was that it was heavy and ill-suited to fighting an asymmetric opponent like the -Cong.

 
M16 is much better. Less recoil, more ammo for the same weight. The M16 is more accurate as well. Look at all the shooting competitions. No one uses an M14, but everyone uses M16s. The ballistics on the M16 are better as well. It has a more flat trajectory as opposed to the 7.62 NATO which is more curved, even if it does go further. The M16 also converts better for CQB (M4) or you can change the upper receiver and still have it fire 7.62.
 
Quote    Reply

GeorgeSPatton       4/13/2011 11:45:13 PM







Santa - Do you prefer the M-16 over the M-14?  I actually thought that the M-14 was in some ways a better weapon than the M-16 (At least the original model M-16).  It was longer-ranged, more accurate and fired a more powerful round.  I felt that one of the problems with the M-14 was that it was heavy and ill-suited to fighting an asymmetric opponent like the -Cong.



 



M16 is much better. Less recoil, more ammo for the same weight. The M16 is more accurate as well. Look at all the shooting competitions. No one uses an M14, but everyone uses M16s. The ballistics on the M16 are better as well. It has a more flat trajectory as opposed to the 7.62 NATO which is more curved, even if it does go further. The M16 also converts better for CQB (M4) or you can change the upper receiver and still have it fire 7.62.

From what I understand the M16 was not significantly more accurate than the M14, at least not at long range.  I believe the M14 can reach out and touch you accurately even with iron sights from further away than the M16.  I always heard that one of the main reasons for the switch was for the ammo capacity like you said, which coupled with the greater controllability on full-auto gave the M16 more close range firepower which was better for the close in fighting of the jungle.
This was just what I have heard.
 
Quote    Reply

GeorgeSPatton       4/14/2011 3:29:04 AM



Last hundred years?  Russia has been misruled forever!  No trolling intended.  Show me a Czar that didn't suck - yes, there were one or two - that's the point.  And Russia WAS the Czar.  Go back somebody, show me a happy time in Russia where everything was good, a Golden Age.  Back to the Kievan Rus I can't think of a time when you'd rather be Russian than, say, English, French, Italian, German or Japanese.  Leave the US out of it entirely.  Who can say different? (ignoring the schmuck)
Touche.  I was mainly referencing a certain mass murderer and the maniacs who followed him, however.

That's the paradox of the Russian mindset - which seems to me to be almost a form of nihilism, A legacy perhaps of the Soviet era where quality of life was utterly irrelevant next to the demands of the state - that allowed them to defeat the Germans whilst suffering staggering human losses and being completely indifferent to the plight of the troops who were often needlessly wasted- it enabled them to launch sputnik into orbit and take a human to space and back (and a dog that at least made half the journey).

 Agreed.

But no, I wouldn't want to live there, I've known many people who have worked over there and have since refused to go back no matter the money and perks on offer  - you can't find many statistics that paint a rosier picture, whether in terms of premature deaths through alcoholism, suicide rates, birth rates, etc etc - YET in some strange way, people are content and even happy with Putin's Russia so long as the image of their nation is one that they can be proud of. This is why any transition to what we in the west would regard as better will not be an easy one, or one that is welcomed with open arms.

Yes, Russia is a curious case.  The people seem to be happy merely to putter along unless some outside force galvanizes them into action (i.e. Napoleon, Hitler), but when it does they have proven to be ingenious and creative.  I guess hundreds of years of what is basically serfdom (whether it be to the Tsars, the Politburo, or what have you) has ingrained that "State before Self" mindset you were talking about into them.  It will probably take a generation or so for it to wear off, but when it does, Russia does have great potential, both in its people and its resources.
 

And it's also why this guy here has to believe that his nation is still a rival to the US, in economic terms it's yet to to reach the GDP of Canada....


 

R



 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    To completely derail the thread.   4/14/2011 4:09:40 AM
 
 
Haven't gone anywhere, Nichy, just not going to participate in nonsense.
 
Questions on Dorchester previously answered by the way. 
  
Herald   
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics