barbos
Contributor
According to who? Elensky&Co?Russia has lost 24 SU-35s
What part of "They are filthy liars" don't you understand?
Nothing these scambags say can be believed.
According to who? Elensky&Co?Russia has lost 24 SU-35s
Yes, far far out of range, same way they used Su-35.Russia has used its SU-57s against Ukraine, but only to launch long range missiles from Russian held territory far out of range of Ukrainian air defense systems.
Yes, far far out of range, same way they used Su-35.Russia has used its SU-57s against Ukraine, but only to launch long range missiles from Russian held territory far out of range of Ukrainian air defense systems.
I vaguelly remember nazi drone attack on a russian airbase where apparently few aircrafts including modern ones were either destroyed or damaged. I don't count that becasue it was not a result of conventional air-defense.
I don't call russians Nazis. I call Ukrainian side nazis.Why do you keep calling the victims of nationalistic expansion "Nazis"?
It seems they are moving with their real life tests slowly and don't plan to test its protection which is impressive.Meanwhile, the first 20 Armata 14s are showing up in The Ukraine. So far not in front line battle positions. Fiercesome Russian super weapon? Or Russian metal turkey? Time will tell. Can one of these babies survive being hit by a 155 mm Excaliber shell? We may someday soon find out.
Russia in tatters I say, in tatters!
One does not contradict the other. Biden and Loren (and really most of the US including this board) live in the 50s and think Soviet Union must be destroyed.1950s? I thought this thread was about President Biden losing his mind, not his 2500th birthday.
One does not contradict the other. Biden and Loren (and really most of the US including this board) live in the 50s and think Soviet Union must be destroyed.1950s? I thought this thread was about President Biden losing his mind, not his 2500th birthday.
IRRC, that was when Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon "We will bury you!" He didn't mean it literally. He meant that the USSR would become the dominant economic juggernaut and surpass the US in every way. But the Soviet Union managed not to destroy itself until the end of 1991. Sad.
Two things occur to me:I'd sure like to know how they are maintaining a supply line. I doubt they are using the Antonovskiy bridge/ford.
Ukrainian military claims "impressive results" against Russian forces on the eastern bank of the Dnipro River in Kherson.
“We have managed to hit and destroy artillery pieces, tanks, vehicles, armored vehicles, and enemy air defense systems,” Natalia Humeniuk said. “In other words, our work on clearing the front line of the east bank is quite powerful, but we are still working in a counter-battery mode.”
I don't call russians Nazis. I call Ukrainian side nazis.Why do you keep calling the victims of nationalistic expansion "Nazis"?
But the FAB 500 isn't a glide bomb.yes, really.Really, now?!?!
Oh boy, you're even more misinformed than I thought.(Argh--I didn't notice the units were kg, not pounds. The idea remains valid, though.)
Google hit #1 shows this to be a standard 500 kg general purpose bomb. To drop an iron bomb with reasonable accuracy you have to go into the MANPAD envelope of whatever you're targeting. Russia has shown great reluctance to do that these days because they've lost too many planes that way.
Russia uses GPS/GLONAS guided gliding bombs. So take your MANPAD and throw it into trash.
And no, Russia have not lost many planes. I doubt they lost any Su-35. Few old su-25, sure, but not Su-35.
One does not contradict the other. Biden and Loren (and really most of the US including this board) live in the 50s and think Soviet Union must be destroyed.1950s? I thought this thread was about President Biden losing his mind, not his 2500th birthday.
IRRC, that was when Khrushchev told Vice President Nixon "We will bury you!" He didn't mean it literally. He meant that the USSR would become the dominant economic juggernaut and surpass the US in every way. But the Soviet Union managed not to destroy itself until the end of 1991. Sad.
I'd nitpick some details here, but basically Yeah. Barbos understanding of the general attitude of Americans towards Russia seems to come from seriously flawed sources, rather like some other things.
Most Americans don't really care much about Russia, or know much. After the Cold War ended it just didn't matter any more. Until Trump started buddying up to Putin, then somewhat. It wasn't until Putin's Russia invaded another, smaller, country that it became a big issue for most Americans. Personally, I had the same reaction to the invasion of Ukraine I had to the U.S. invasion of Iraq. FUCK NO! GET OUT.
Nothing about "the Soviet Union must be destroyed", they did that on their own already.
Tom
Protection? The only protection from something like an Excaliber shell is to not be under it.It seems they are moving with their real life tests slowly and don't plan to test its protection which is impressive.Meanwhile, the first 20 Armata 14s are showing up in The Ukraine. So far not in front line battle positions. Fiercesome Russian super weapon? Or Russian metal turkey? Time will tell. Can one of these babies survive being hit by a 155 mm Excaliber shell? We may someday soon find out.
Protection? The only protection from something like an Excaliber shell is to not be under it.It seems they are moving with their real life tests slowly and don't plan to test its protection which is impressive.Meanwhile, the first 20 Armata 14s are showing up in The Ukraine. So far not in front line battle positions. Fiercesome Russian super weapon? Or Russian metal turkey? Time will tell. Can one of these babies survive being hit by a 155 mm Excaliber shell? We may someday soon find out.
Tank armor is a meaningful concept when facing man portable weapons. It became tough enough to defeat warheads of a size that was practical for infantry to carry. Then the infantry got warheads that fire plasma jets that can burn through tank armor. Then the tanks got reactive armor that disrupts the plasma jet--the bang of the warhead and the bang of the reactive armor aren't enough to penetrate. Then the infantry got Javelins that defeat the armor by flying over and attacking the top--not touching it so they aren't defeated by reactive armor. Russia tried cages on top but it clearly doesn't work.
Against heavy weapons, though, tank armor is useless. It has value in dealing with fragments--things like unguided artillery rounds pose little threat--but a direct hit will kill any tank out there. Things like Excalibur, Hellfire, and Maverick all you can do is try to keep them from hitting you in the first place. Nobody's going to test how a tank performs against an Excalibur because they already know it doesn't have a chance. If you figure out a round is incoming you throw as much smoke around as you can and evade in the hope that the seeker loses you, but that's it until someone comes up with a viable point defense weapon for a tank.
Does it occur to you that ukro-nazis may be lying?1) Russia has shown itself totally inept at reacting to what Ukraine does.
You need to read specs on T-14Protection? The only protection from something like an Excaliber shell is to not be under it.
They are integrated into the frame. The tank is 3x more expensive than ordinary tank.It remains to be seen if the Armatas in Ukraine are equiped with these,
Not for T14, it has integrated the thing which blows up mines in front of it.The other big Russian problem is mines
I would prefer being in T14 than in Abrams. In any case, as I said earlier testing does not seem to involve testing protection.I would hate to be a Vatnik guinea pig in an Armata testing these systems out in actual combat conditions
T14 has reactive armor everywhere including 100% of the top. It's electronically activated, so tandem shells won't work.Then the infantry got Javelins that defeat the armor by flying over and attacking the top--not touching it so they aren't defeated by reactive armor.