• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

New Russian military hardware.

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
kage69 said:
My main worry is Russia's new electronic warfare system. After what happened to the Donald Cook last spring in the Black Sea, I hope Navy brass sufficiently shit itself in order to make defending against Khibiny a huge priority. We need Aegis / AESA upgrades, and fucking chop chop guys. When an Arleigh Burke can basically be turned off like a T.V, we have problems. Nice one Russia, credit where credit is due.
Click to expand...

You made me run to the net. The story was believable, I guess, until:

After the incident, the foreign media reported that “Donald Cook” was rushed into a port in Romania. There all the 27 members of the crew filed a letter of resignation. It seems that all 27 people have written that they are not going to risk their lives. This is indirectly confirmed by the Pentagon statement according to which the action demoralized the crew of the American ship.
Click to expand...

"Our radar didn't work, Chief. I feel . . . demoralized. I wish to resign from the Navy forthwith." 😛
 
norseamd said:
Everyone said tanks were not worth shit in urban warfare. Experience in the Iraq War shows that premise is not true at all as although tanks are vulnerable they add lots of power to those who use them in addition to infantry.
Click to expand...


They were only worth something in that case because of the dearth of effective anti tank weapons in Iraq. If the Iraqis had any variant of the TOW/konkurs/Milan we would've had so many casualties we would pull our armor back like the Russians did in Chechnya. Right now our government is in the process of arming Sunni extremists in Syria with those exact weapons, to the tune of Assad losing hundreds of tanks in the last couple years. Which, of course, will never come back to bite us... but that's for another thread.


Point is: In any conflict zone outside of sub-Saharan Africa you will not be safe even in an Abrams.
 
This is what I had found just now.

Consider some of the reporting in the Russian press soon after the incident, which said the Cook’s crew was “demoralized” and 27 U.S. sailors “resigned” because they were “terrified.”

First of all, the U.S. Navy is not WalMart – sailors simply cannot quit because they have to go to work in an unsafe neighborhood.

And anyone who has ever spent ANY time with U.S. sailors at sea on a destroyer – or any other ship for that matter – cannot imagine those men and women being “demoralized” by anything of this sort. Ticked off? You bet. Resolved to never let it happen again? Indeed. And that’s IF the scenario played out as it was reported.

To be honest, the only folks who REALLY know what happened are those who were aboard the Cook or in the Russian aircraft. Perhaps the Cook’s crew was simply playing possum, to collect their own intel at the time.

For, as Nasenkov explains, it’s always a cat-and-mouse game on the open seas in these electronic warfare battles, with both sides taking turns playing the different roles.
Click to expand...
http://aviationweek.com/blog/navweek-jammed
 
Last edited:
touchstone said:
They were only worth something in that case because of the dearth of effective anti tank weapons in Iraq. If the Iraqis had any variant of the TOW/konkurs/Milan we would've had so many casualties we would pull our armor back like the Russians did in Chechnya. Right now our government is in the process of arming Sunni extremists in Syria with those exact weapons, to the tune of Assad losing hundreds of tanks in the last couple years. Which, of course, will never come back to bite us... but that's for another thread.


Point is: In any conflict zone outside of sub-Saharan Africa you will not be safe even in an Abrams.
Click to expand...

Honestly I think there is lots of power in the hands of basic infantry right now. ATGMs and MANPADS means they can deal with most any tank, helicopter, or even many jet aircraft. That does not mean however in the overall operation s of war that there is no use for these platforms.
 
Perknose said:
You made me run to the net. The story was believable, I guess, until:


"Our radar didn't work, Chief. I feel . . . demoralized. I wish to resign from the Navy forthwith." 😛
Click to expand...


I find the basic points of the story to be mutually exclusive to the creative license taken by non American media milking the event for propaganda and PR. You may have noticed this earlier by me completely ignoring it and addressing the parts that pertain to this thread. References to emotional distress were addressed solely to Navy brass, for reasons I think should be obvious.

Hey if you guys want to seize on the "Ambassador Stevens was raped" portion of the story, I'm ok with it, have fun. You're just not going to find me defending such a ridiculous notion as the one you're focusing on.
 
Last edited:
I am disappoint. That UAZ (car) looked like it had tesla coils when the picture was minimized.
 
Muscovite drone propaganda. What I noticed is that all of the targets were huge minus the last "VIP" building. Think they were indirectly hinting at some "special VIP" they want to assassinate?

You know I get concerned at just how far off many of these Muscovites might actually be right now.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YF9aE4j5Egw
 
shabby said:
Im sure china can do a hell of a lot more with 200bil than america can with 600bil, our mil contractors rape the government, while the chinese government rapes its mil contractors, no?
Click to expand...
possibly, corruption is corruption though, and it doesn't usually serve the state, and I would bet it occurs more often and in greater importance than in the US on average, and I'm sure that is the case in Russia even moreso.
 
mnewsham said:
S500 is supposedly being produced this year and next for deployment in 2020 potentially.
Click to expand...

Wish we had as an advanced anti-air platforms as the Russians do. But we have ignorant and corrupt dumbshits for leadership in this country. All that ever gets attention is the resulting dollars.
 
Maximilian said:
Wonder how the new T14 stacks up to the T90/80/72 tanks.
Click to expand...

The unmanned turret, armored crew box, and autocannon are all very nice to have in your tank. However I am wondering why would they spend all this money on a new tank and not put in low level radar and multi-fuel electric hybrid drivetrain especially with the low visibility that electric-only operation mode provides.
 
2015-Ford-F150-off-road.jpg


All you need, right here.
 
shabby said:
Im sure china can do a hell of a lot more with 200bil than america can with 600bil, our mil contractors rape the government, while the chinese government rapes its mil contractors, no?
Click to expand...

Fairly true. I single DOD contractor probably cost the government here at least 250k/year

250k will probably get you 10 engineers in china or russia
 
norseamd said:
Honestly I think there is lots of power in the hands of basic infantry right now. ATGMs and MANPADS means they can deal with most any tank, helicopter, or even many jet aircraft. That does not mean however in the overall operation s of war that there is no use for these platforms.
Click to expand...

Hezbollah and the IRCG are completely built from the ground up around the idea of high tech small arms (from SMGs to ATGM/MANPADS) combined with urban guerilla warfare tactics. During the 2006 Lebanon war Israel sustained a majority of its KIA and a large portion of their wounded from having their brand new Merkeva Mk V tanks blown out by various tandem-warhead devices.



Tanks and to a lesser extent armor in general are just not effective in modern warfare. Not in the wars we have to fight right now anyway. It is hard to see a situation where the Abrams would be dominant besides another run through the desert somewhere a la desert storm. These days with the Konkurs you have tanks being knocked out at 10km. There isn't jack sh*t a tank can do to somebody from 10km and that won't change soon.
 
norseamd said:
Does not exist yet.
Click to expand...

It was their newest tank, the IV? It had a V in the name so it must be the IV.



edit: It appears a majority of the vehicles were not the latest Mk IV. But otherwise what I cited was correct.


During the 2006 Lebanon War, five Merkava tanks were destroyed.[27] Only the minority of the tanks used during the war were Merkava Mark IVs, as by 2006 they had still only entered service in limited numbers. Hezbollah fired over 1,000 anti-tank missiles during the conflict against both tanks and dismounted infantry.[27] Some 45 percent of all tanks and armoured vehicles hit with antitank missiles during the conflict suffered some form of armour penetration.[27]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top