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       3/31/2011 12:47:34 AM

 im participating in the invasion of uzbekistan in 1 week. i am going to be fighting against *russian* tanks.

Uh....
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       3/31/2011 12:48:42 AM
Length of the barrel has nothing to do with the caliber unless we're talking naval guns. That issue has been put to rest.
but the length of barrel of the M1 is a rather important, and checkable thing.  You want to get grumpy with me, fine...but you made a mistake and whilst it's not the end of the Universe, it is still something you got wrong.  Get over it.

 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       3/31/2011 12:51:23 AM
And the name of the barrel and the length are not important. What is important is that the tanker knows the effective range of their weapon. Do I know the length of the barrel of a M240B? No. Can I tell you the effective ranges for area and point targets? Yes. Very different things. Just because you think it is important doesn't make it so.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    lol   3/31/2011 1:24:36 AM
sweet... i mean about Uzbekistan... and who was that? US army tank commander? :)
 
So if i hear that Abrams can fly in space and defeat aliens and come back i'd not be surprised then. You sure are a way ahead of us :)
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    lol   3/31/2011 1:29:34 AM
Nichevo:
You sound like someone who has no rational arguments to make and is reduced to screaming abuse at the person who is telling them the unpleasant truth. 

Your statements were not unpleasant truth, it was just shout out full of hate to my nation. Nothing but dirty narrow minded words in hope to hurt and put down. But my, and my nations spirit and moral strength is infinity times stronger than your dirty weak screams.
 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       3/31/2011 1:40:10 AM

Nichevo:

You sound like someone who has no rational arguments to make and is reduced to screaming abuse at the person who is telling them the unpleasant truth. 





Your statements were not unpleasant truth, it was just shout out full of hate to my nation. Nothing but dirty narrow minded words in hope to hurt and put down. But my, and my nations spirit and moral strength is infinity times stronger than your dirty weak screams.

 



This is not true, but it is what you feel you have to tell yourself, so it's all right.   Except that pride is a sin and God hates a liar, but I shouldn't assume anything about you such as that you believe in God. 
 
It's still all right, in that it won't change anything but it will make you feel better.  If dirty little lies could improve Russia's standing in the world then Russia would be strong indeed.  Actually the KGB got a lot done with dirty little lies but the truth is really too big to hide.
 
For the record, while I suppose you won't like to tell us your age (young) or profession (student), but may we know where you were born and where you live?

Hate you?  Tell me why I should hate you.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   3/31/2011 1:56:29 AM
Nichevo: You are trying to prove your absolute superiority to me, that is a failure, im not going to accept it, and you know that you are totally wrong. Whats your point of wasting energy?
 
Many countries and almost all the world respects Russia, even those who do not like it... and now what... YOU try to oppose it? 
 
Thats not gona happen, you not gona change it all, especially the facts. So i would suggest not to spend so much time and energy here.
 
Plus, i told you already i am not going to discuss moral and political issues here anymore.
 
...... Id wish to hear more stories about invasion of Uzbekistan :) at least thats funny :)
 
Quote    Reply

GeorgeSPatton    Coldstart...   3/31/2011 3:40:32 AM

Nichevo: You are trying to prove your absolute superiority to me, that is a failure, im not going to accept it, and you know that you are totally wrong. Whats your point of wasting energy?

 OK.  Really, nobody here thinks they are superior to you, and no one here has said anything to suggest that that is true.  The only thing that has been stated and proven here is that the Abrams is a largely superior machine to the T-90 and that as of right now the US military is a superior fighting force to the Russian military.  I'm sorry if this upsets you but this is true.  This does not make Russia a "bad" country any more than having a powerful military makes a "good" country.  Having a more powerful military does not make one country "superior" to another.  A certain German dictator thought that way in 1939....look where it got him.
 
Many countries and almost all the world respects Russia, even those who do not like it... and now what... YOU try to oppose it? 

 I believe that as of right now, meaning this very moment; the majority of those nations respect Russia for what it was and what it has the potential to become.  Right now the Russian nation is in such a state of economic and military stagnation that it is in no position to command the respect of anyone.  As soon as they can sort out their internal corruption and economic mess and they can begin to restore themselves militarily they will again become a formidable force.  Honestly right now they are not much to brag about.

Thats not gona happen, you not gona change it all, especially the facts. So i would suggest not to spend so much time and energy here.

See above.  You a fighting a one-man battle which you are creating for yourself. 

Plus, i told you already i am not going to discuss moral and political issues here anymore.

Nearly every post you have made since the beginning has screamed moral and political issues.  The word "Georgia" comes to mind...

...... Id wish to hear more stories about invasion of Uzbekistan :) at least thats funny :)

He was joking.
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc    Wrong.   3/31/2011 5:04:52 AM

As you can see, even the US Army knows I am correct and that you are the one who is trying to save himself.
 
I have no use for the stubborn or the willful who are wrong. As for you, Uh-oh, don't try to set yourself as a judge of others either. You are not qualified. At least Santa knows something about this topic, just not as much as he thinks he does. 
 
Herald     
 
TM 9-3305

CHAPTER 3
CLASSIFICATION OF CURRENT
FIELD ARTILLERY WEAPONS

Section I. GENERAL

3-1.General. Current field artillery weapons include both

cannon-type weapons and guided missiles. Each type of weapon is designed for a particular use and therefore has a different range and trajectory (path of flight).

3-2. Cannon-Type Weapons. Cannon-type weapons

are classified as guns or howitzers. Some artillery

weapons have both gun and howitzer characteristics.

a. Gun.As a type of artillery, a gun is a cannon with

a long barrel which fires limited types of projectiles at a

low angle of fire and at a high muzzle velocity.

b. Howitzer. A howitzer is a cannon with a medium

length barrel which fires various types of projectiles ata

high angle of fire and at a medium muzzle velocity.

3-3. Rockets and Guided Missiles.

a.

Rocket.

A rocket is a free-flight missile. Although the rocket is classified asa field artillery weapon, it is currently not in military use.

b. Guided Missile. A guided missile is a rocket type device with a trajectory that can be altered in flight by a mechanism within the missile. It is held, aimed, and fired by a rail- or platform-type missile launcher.

Wow Herald, keep digging your grave.

 

The quote that you took from wiki isn't even in the document you just quoted. That was obvious because it's an Army document and your quote is about Naval artillery. But thanks for quoting that Army document to further prove yourself wrong and making my job easier.


 

Look on page 4-2, para 4-5


 


"4-5. Caliber.The caliber of a cannon is a measure of  the diameter of the bore, not including the depth of the rifling. The caliber can be in either inches or millimeters (1 inch = 25.4 millimeters)"

 

That's your own source saying you're wrong.


 

And  no where in that document has that quote where you said you got it from. Don't waste my time with red herrings. I know how to use the ctrl-f function. So again, I'm going to ask you why did you quote wiki and purposely change the statement to support yourself? Your ego that big you can't admit when your wrong you have to resort to lying instead?



 





You apparently want to clutch at straws. Be my guest, Your claim is rather pathetic.



 



First, these are the points I did not paraphrase you seek to ignore which are,



 



1. That the reason barrel length times bore size is the definition for caliber is because barrel length not only gives the rough working time for the propellant gases, but it gives the modern working difference between brown and smokeless powder howitzers and guns and the old black powder smooth bore versions where the measure was mass of the projectile thrown at what angle of elevation per set weight black powder charge, (You'll find the transition of definition to be ~ 1885 which is how MODERN the term 'caliber' is, as it was the FRENCH who invented most of the modern terminology to go with the modern artillery they invented).The modern difference of gun and howitizer being somewhere around the thirty to thirty-five caliber range, with the muzzle velocities (depending on bore size0 going over 800 m/s
 
Quote    Reply

RedParadize       3/31/2011 9:40:40 AM
'As for you, Uh-oh, don't try to set yourself as a judge of others either.'
 
May I suggest you to do the same Herald? Judge the argument, not the person. Its true in science and even more here o  internet.  In fact you offen name the other 'Truck driver' 'Fanboy' or else. If you want to discredit other base on their backgroud, I would like to know who i am talking with... I recon that you know more than me on most of the topic here, but as far as I know you could also be a fanboy. The way you talk without reserve or respect doesnt suggest any profesionnal background.
 
Coldstart, dont think I am defending you or your argument cause I am not.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News 		  Most
 Read 		  Most
 Commented		  Hot
 Topics