New Russian military hardware.

[John Connor]

Ah well sorry then. Thought you thought the military buildup would be sweet but that we would totally win against them because of our nuclear technology. The third sentence does make it seem like you understand MAD.

I'm hard to understand on forums. Believe me. LOL!

BTW, I learned about MAD in the game Metal Gear for PSx. LOL I then read about it.

 

[SSSnail]

Because anti-hacker PHP scrips, how do they work?

I'm interested in this thupper anti hackers php "scrips" of yours... Haha.

 

[Pacfanweb]

Russian dick-waving is parading some untested military hardware in front of the Kremlin. American dick-waving is placing a carrier task force capable of obliterating your capital less than 100 miles from your national waters. Oh and we have about a dozen of those.

And daring you do do something about it.

Hell, our museum ship fleet is the second-most powerful navy in the world.

 

[techs]

I can see the Army is looking to find a reason for bringing the successor to the Abrams online.

Saddam fielded some of the best Soviet tanks and they looked 50 years out of date against the Abrams. Yet, suddenly the Soviets introduce a new tank and make the same extravagant claims they did about their previous tanks and we are supposed to be panicked into building an even better tank than the Abrams?

 

[Pacfanweb]

All that crap in the parade doesn't even get them even with the US military of 20 years ago, much less today's.

 

[norseamd]

Saddam fielded some of the best Soviet tanks and they looked 50 years out of date against the Abrams.

LMFAO

Exports?

 

[norseamd]

What new hardware? The Armata tank is just a rebooted T-72 Chasis with a new new turret, smooth bore gun and modern electronics. While the Armata may be a close match with most western tanks, in modern warfare tanks don't succeed alone, they survive by a combination of air power, logistics and battle planning.

This is true.

 

[Tsavo]

I can see the Army is looking to find a reason for bringing the successor to the Abrams online.

Saddam fielded some of the best Soviet tanks and they looked 50 years out of date against the Abrams. Yet, suddenly the Soviets introduce a new tank and make the same extravagant claims they did about their previous tanks and we are supposed to be panicked into building an even better tank than the Abrams?

The Iraqi variant of the T-72 was WAY out of date before the gulf war, and were by no means whatsoever the best Russian tank available at the time.

The M1 has been out for 35 years. It's E/CM packages are non-existent to outdated. They will get their asses handed to them by fully trained crews in modern hardware.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

The Iraqi variant of the T-72 was WAY out of date before the gulf war, and were by no means whatsoever the best Russian tank available at the time.

The M1 has been out for 35 years. It's E/CM packages are non-existent to outdated. They will get their asses handed to them by fully trained crews in modern hardware.

the m1 platform is currently in its a2 block, and essentially a new (world's best) tank. all electronics and defensive countermeasures are entirely modular and can be swapped out for upgrades whenever the money is available, as is the armor itself. the largest drawback for the m1 is its turbine novelty.

right now, its armor is slatted, sloped, spaced, uranium-backed dorchester. there is no better protection *against its intended enemy, tanks*. man-portable top-attack weapons and mines will always be the bane of armor, end of story.

 

[norseamd]

world's best

No not at all.

Have you seen the new K2 Black Panther?

 

[norseamd]

there is no better protection

Challenger 2?

 

[The Boston Dangler]

No not at all.

Have you seen the new K2 Black Panther?

nope. wiki says there are 15, with lowered performance.

Challenger 2?

i'd say challenger 2 is roughly equivalent to m1a2. they share defensive technologies.

 

[norseamd]

lowered performance.

?

There is more to tanks than only mobility.

 

[The Boston Dangler]

?

There is more to tanks than only mobility.

hell ya, integrated roaster/smoker!

 

[norseamd]

http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/is-the-worlds-deadliest-tank-bankrupting-russia/

 

[destrekor]

http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/is-the-worlds-deadliest-tank-bankrupting-russia/

If Russia wants to be ballsy enough, and portions of the Arctic Sea continue to melt, they may reach for resources under the sea that are current locked away by ice. If they stick to the resources within their current 200nm EEZ, that will be fine and dandy, but they have made numerous claims to some currently unreachable territory that is in international waters. As these waters become accessible, Canada and Russia will very much want/need to search for and tap into resources (and to some extent, the U.S. too thanks to Alaska's Arctic reach - which directly butts up against Russia's EEZ so expect conflict there as well).

Not saying any of that will lead to war, not at all, but various types of activity could lead to trouble, and depending on said activity, further economic sanctions. Sanctions can be the causative agent that leads a pissed off dog that has been backed into a corner to finally snap.
And if various economic woes continue, most of the Arctic-bordering nations are going to want the resources locked away under the ice. They could be the economic salvation a country like Russia very much needs, and if they can access these while they still suffer various sanctions due to their other antics, like Crimea, that could very much become a powder keg.

 

[Imp]

the m1 platform is currently in its a2 block, and essentially a new (world's best) tank. all electronics and defensive countermeasures are entirely modular and can be swapped out for upgrades whenever the money is available, as is the armor itself. the largest drawback for the m1 is its turbine novelty.

right now, its armor is slatted, sloped, spaced, uranium-backed dorchester. there is no better protection *against its intended enemy, tanks*. man-portable top-attack weapons and mines will always be the bane of armor, end of story.

Do they sell the Iraqis and Egyptians lower quality Abrams? Saw a de-turreted Abrams with an Iraqi flag a few weeks ago -- ISIS related story.

 

[MongGrel]

In Soviet Russia, you don't fire missiles, missiles fires you.

This BUK caught fire during the parade.

In all honesty, seems F-35 do about the same things these days a bit just getting off the ground

Money well spent ya know

I guess the US has plenty of back up though.

 

[MongGrel]

Me either. There will be less Chinese food.

If you're buying your Chinese take out from China you're doing it wrong

 

[MongGrel]

China and Russia are growing closer. Can you imagine if we did go to war with the both of them? The shear amount of military industrial production would be immense. Or would it be all over with nukes? They too would know they would be destroyed as well.

A real war ?

Planet would be torched in about 20 minutes or so, maybe a little more.

Depends on how lazy the subs are and the buffs drop their shit and the silos launch.

45 minutes, couple hours with buffs, but always some on patrol.

If all the old Soviet ones misfired would be interesting, but even then India and Israel and Pakistan and China would be launching shit maybe at a Hail Mary.

China even doing MIRVS now I saw the other day.

 

[norseamd]

Do they sell the Iraqis and Egyptians lower quality Abrams? Saw a de-turreted Abrams with an Iraqi flag a few weeks ago -- ISIS related story.

Yes actually as far I know about M1 exportations.

Exports being downgraded is regular practice in the world with the Americans, Chinese, and Russians being very good examples of this practice.

 

[MongGrel]

Yes actually as far I know about M1 exportations.

Exports being downgraded is regular practice in the world with the Americans, Chinese, and Russians being very good examples of this practice. The is standard practice because of military, intelligence, strategic, and political conerncs.

Is a pretty standard practice, they even sell some countries specially tailored versions.

I used to work on the F-15K's that were made for South Korea, they were pretty much a lower avionics version of an Interceptor more or less that carry a lot of very long range ordinance.

I do not know what they are selling Israel these days, the F16s they have used to be lower level avionics, maybe not now or they have improved it themselves.

They still work very efficiently.

 

[feralkid]

the US aren't preparing for an actual war - they are preparing for a theoretical war.
they got thousands of advanced designs, ready to be implemented at a moment's notice how and when they need them.

No, it doesn't work that way.

You can put on your boots and grab your rifle at a moment's notice, but you can't move from design to implementation that quickly.




.

 

[MongGrel]

No, it doesn't work that way.

You can put on your boots and grab your rifle at a moment's notice, but you can't move from design to implementation that quickly.




.

this.

 

[Ventanni]

A real war ?

Planet would be torched in about 20 minutes or so, maybe a little more.

Depends on how lazy the subs are and the buffs drop their shit and the silos launch.

45 minutes, couple hours with buffs, but always some on patrol.

If all the old Soviet ones misfired would be interesting, but even then India and Israel and Pakistan and China would be launching shit maybe at a Hail Mary.

China even doing MIRVS now I saw the other day.

MAD has limitations though. No nation is even going to consider risking a nuclear exchange unless their own turf is threatened, and there's a lot of territory out there where nuclear missiles aren't present. That's a lot of territory where conventional warfare is perfectly on the table (hello Ukraine!), and with today's weaponry, that makes for an incredibly lethal situation.

For the second part; I've thought about this more since I last posted. In my last post, I made a comment that the Russians will never be able to produce their new jets and tanks in the numbers that will rival the United States. But as I thought about it more, I realized that the Russians don't need to rival the United States. That's not their goal. They only need to rival their neighbors, which are still using T55's 62's, and 72's. The tank is also designed to better counter the anti-tank munitions that they sold their neighbors, which it is a huge improvement over the previous tank designed. Against Dorchester armored Western tanks, the Armata isn't going to go very far. But against old Russian tanks designs and infantry combat scenarios, it'll do quite well.

And since the countries that operate these tanks and munitions don't have nuclear weapons, that makes Russian an enormous military threat.