Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Talking bollocks thread #2

    Share
    avatar
    Big_Gazza

    Posts : 1076
    Points : 1090
    Join date : 2014-08-25
    Location : Melbourne, Australia

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Big_Gazza on Thu Apr 12, 2018 5:04 pm

    T-72 was NOT derived from the T-64... It only has a similar outer appearance, and inside its a totally different animal.
    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 411
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:05 pm

    Big_Gazza wrote:T-72 was NOT derived from the T-64...  It only has a similar outer appearance, and inside its a totally different animal.

    What I meant is that its design was heavily based on the T-64.

    The only real difforences are the engine and autoloader although the two tanks do have difforent armor composition aswell.
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1514
    Points : 1513
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  AlfaT8 on Thu Apr 12, 2018 6:21 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:Actually who aproved the T-90 for service? They should be court martialled for it!

    The T-90 is an insult to Russian tank industry. The T-90 is a lazy and half harted modernization of the T-72 itself derived from the T-64.

    From what is known, it was either the T-90 or the Black eagle concept, at the end of the day economic realities won the day.
    Although i really wished they had adopted a Black Eagle like turret back then.

    Not to say that the T-64 and T-72 were bad tanks, qute the opposite infact in the 1970s these tanks were completely unrivalled.

    The T-72 and T-80 should have been the rear line tanks of the 80s while newer more advanced MBTs designed around the most advanced technologies of the period and in turn upgraded versions of these tanks would now be serving as second wave tanks in the Russian army while the T-72s would be where they belong in museums and on monument pedistals

    I am not a fan of the T-80, it's auto-loader design looks down right suicidal, i am honestly surprised it's getting upgraded.
    The T-72 on the other hand is still a good all rounder, especially with the B4 upgrade.

    Are you talking about the Black Eagle, because that was the only other modern design at the time.

    Although what can I expect Russia is only the most sensible country on this planet and even they let idiots retardichov the gullible and then as if the apocaliptic conditions he created were not bad enough his sucsessor had the "brilliant" idea of embracing capitalism in the full... crime corruption all of it not to mention all of that ДЕРМОКРАТ garbage they adopted....

    But the I should really stop expecting humans to act logically and just agknowlage that earth is galactic capital of bullshit and stupidity.

    As we see today, Europe importing their own extinction and embracing it as tight as a mother and her child in JonesTown, your belief that we are a capitol of BS and stupidity is on point.
    I call it the Invader Zim conclusion.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17690
    Points : 18286
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:52 am

    Actually who aproved the T-90 for service? They should be court martialled for it!

    Perhaps if you knew anything about what you were talking about you might not say such things... the alternative to the T-90 would be the T-80... so what you are saying is that the Russian Army would be better off with the T-80 as its primary MBT design? Really? A Ukrainian tank? Really?

    Not to say that the T-64 and T-72 were bad tanks, qute the opposite infact in the 1970s these tanks were completely unrivalled.

    The T-64 had a lot of problems... most of which were sorted out in the T-80. But then they are having the same problems now in their navy... they could make lots of simple vehicles and mass produce them in enormous numbers but they wont be amazing, but better than the alternative... the T-72 had reasonable armour and a good gun and was much better than the T-54/55 and T-62s and T-34s that they replaced in service and reserve. The T-64 and then the T-80 were rather better, but also rather more expensive and harder to make.

    The T-90 is an insult to Russian tank industry. The T-90 is a lazy and half harted modernization of the T-72 itself derived from the T-64.

    Yeah... in the sense that the F-15C is a lazy upgrade of the MiG-25... the T-72 is not related to the T-64... all the components except the gun are different and not actually compatible. That is why the T-64 is out of service and the T-72 remains in reserve and is getting upgrades.

    The differences between the T-72 and the T-90 are similar to the differences between an F-16A and an F-16C/D block 60... all the electronics are different all the sensors are different and the gun and ammo is different too.

    But the I should really stop expecting humans to act logically and just agknowlage that earth is galactic capital of bullshit and stupidity.

    Just go back to your home planet and brood... and keep away from Kryptonite..

    What I meant is that its design was heavily based on the T-64.

    The only real difforences are the engine and autoloader although the two tanks do have difforent armor composition aswell.

    Russian companies have a tradition of dealing with different suppliers/contractors... so for instance the engine in a MiG-29 is made by Klimov, while a Sukhoi is often a Saturn product... of course sometimes there are exceptions, but generally each feeds the other with products.

    The company that made the T-64 and T-80 was not the same as the company that made the T-72 and T-90... why do you think they would have anything in common except calibre of the gun?

    From what is known, it was either the T-90 or the Black eagle concept, at the end of the day economic realities won the day.
    Although i really wished they had adopted a Black Eagle like turret back then.

    The main problem with the Black Eagle is that it was based on a T-80 tank chassis.

    The Burlak upgrade of the T-72 was also considered and rejected.

    The T-90 is better armed than the T-80 and is better armoured and is just a better tank.

    During the 1980s and 1990s Russia did not need a better tank than the T-72 or T-90... and with new hypersonic weapons coming on line the need for a heavy tank is becoming less and less... right now they have a two stage missile called Hermes they are finalising the design for... imagine they replace the terminal phase part of the missile with a 2m long DU core that weighs about 15kgs and they wrap around that core a scramjet engine and some fuel and a nose mounted guidance system and some steering fins... total weight would not be that much more than the current model missile which has a 30kg HE warhead... HE warheads have low density so they take up a lot of space.. so a 2m long rod of DU can be very compact for its size so there is plenty of space for fuel and a scramjet motor and terminal guidance sensors..

    The main solid rocket booster accelerates the current model to about 1.3km/s so starting at that speed the terminal stage could be rapidly accelerated to mach 10 or more... work it out... a 15kg DU penetrator 2m long moving at 3.2km/s... what sort of tank will NATO need to stop that from 50km range?

    Without the scramjet terminal stage the Hermes has a range of 20km... 50-100km should be easy and covered in a few seconds too.

    How heavy do you want your armour to be?



    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 411
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Fri Apr 13, 2018 8:16 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Actually who aproved the T-90 for service? They should be court martialled for it!

    Perhaps if you knew anything about what you were talking about you might not say such things... the alternative to the T-90 would be the T-80... so what you are saying is that the Russian Army would be better off with the T-80 as its primary MBT design?  Really? A Ukrainian tank? Really?


    Oh yea I forgot that both the Omsk facility that built it and the Kirov plant where it was designed were in ukropia....

    I always though that St Petersburg/Lenningrad was in Russia for some reason musty have been wrong.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17690
    Points : 18286
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 13, 2018 1:42 pm

    No, you are an idiot... the T-80 hull was made in Leningrad, but the turret was made in the Ukraine.

    Only the gas turbine powered versions were made in Russia, the more efficient diesel models were made in the ukraine...


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 411
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:37 pm

    GarryB wrote:No, you are an idiot... the T-80 hull was made in Leningrad, but the turret was made in the Ukraine.

    Only the gas turbine powered versions were made in Russia, the more efficient diesel models were made in the ukraine...

    The T-80 was not made in Leningrad it was designed there at the Kirov plant to be specific and it was made in Omsk.

    Its lead designer was Nikolay Popov who was Russian

    And while the T-64 was designed in Kharkov well would you care to name the ukies who were on the design team?

    No? Well lets be realistic Kharkov was a Russian facility it was built by, run by and staffed by Russians and would still be to this day if someone did't get the stupid idea to treat a Russian province known for treachery and greed as if it was its own SSR.

    Bofore all the bullshit of the 90s Kharkov was one of the best tank design facilities in the world but after the Russians moved out and stopped suplying parts it became a joke.

    Just look at Kharkov bofore and after  retardichov... In the 80s they were working on the advanced Object 277 MBT now they just build one off "prototypes" in order to pretend that they don't rely on Russian components and designers.

    Saying the T-64 is ukropian would be like saying that the T-90S is Indian and saying that the T-80 is ukropian is utter madness.
    avatar
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 6404
    Points : 6506
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Apr 13, 2018 4:40 pm


    Hate to be Responsible Rhonda here but you guys went off topic long ago

    Also now that BMPT is officially in service could mods rename this tread to just "BMPT"?
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17690
    Points : 18286
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    temporary talking bollock thread

    Post  GarryB on Sat Apr 14, 2018 2:55 am

    The T-80 and T-64 are Soviet tanks that could not be mass produced in Russia now if you wanted to... they are dead tanks that are of no interest to the Russian Army for the future.

    The ones they have in service will be upgraded with T-90 parts where possible and discarded when they are no longer useful... the T-90 is a much better tank... it is much safer because its autoloader protects the ammo from hot fragments and sparks in case of a turret penetration... the T-80 and T-64 autoloader does not.

    Hense the T-80 is not better than a T-90 in any way. It is not worse than nothing so it remains in service with T-90 components being added and engine improvements.

    No? Well lets be realistic Kharkov was a Russian facility it was built by, run by and staffed by Russians and would still be to this day if someone did't get the stupid idea to treat a Russian province known for treachery and greed as if it was its own SSR.

    It was Soviet. It is currently Ukrainian. Get over it.

    Also now that BMPT is officially in service could mods rename this tread to just "BMPT"?

    Not yet... they have not ordered thousands... there are still questions about its future in the Russian military.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    Odin of Ossetia

    Posts : 228
    Points : 297
    Join date : 2015-07-03

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Odin of Ossetia on Thu Apr 19, 2018 12:16 am

    Vann7 wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Sorry Vann, stopped actually reading your posts quite some time ago... if you don't understand why look up the story of the boy who cried wolf...


    Fires happen... there is nothing at all you can do to prevent that... there are plenty of things you can do to minimise the risk and reduce the cost of those fires but fires happen and calling it terrorism doesn't change anything... you sound like a western media outlet trying to drum up interest in a story where there is no actual story...


    another Fire...



    This is not normal.. this looks like an act of terrorism... possibly by Russia enemies..


    I already wrote a month ago that it looks to me like this deadly mall fire was a cleverly disguised terrorist attack.

    They might have resorted to such means in order to avoid retribution against their own populations, like the Chechens living outside of Chechnya.

    You are one of the best posters on this forum.

    avatar
    The-thing-next-door

    Posts : 411
    Points : 445
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Soviet Interdimentional Command

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door on Thu Apr 19, 2018 7:37 am

    GarryB wrote:
    It was Soviet. It is currently Ukrainian. Get over it.

    Last I heard it was abandoned lol those ukropi now have to build tanks in their own garages because they can't gaurantee the loyalty of their workers.

    Anyway I said is that it relied on Russian personal to make all of its more advanced projects.

    So bottom line is that Russians designed the T-34 T-54 T-44 and T-64 while the ukrops have only managed to make a handful of cheap T-90A knockoffs and some poor grade prototypes in order to pretend that they have a working MIC.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 17690
    Points : 18286
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB on Fri Apr 20, 2018 3:46 am

    Last I heard it was abandoned lol those ukropi now have to build tanks in their own garages because they can't gaurantee the loyalty of their workers.

    The problem is that it is the average Ukrainian that will suffer because of this... the high up ones will escape "oppression" and retribution from their own people to the west when their people wake up and realise that while Russia is not perfect they were more of a friend than the US and the west could ever be... but you get that sort of mentality... look at Poland just before WWII... the Soviets offered defence pacts and Poland did not trust the evil Soviets... they preferred to rely on the civilised Germans... so they got carved up by the Germans they thought they could rely on and the Soviets they refused to deal with... but it is the Soviets they blame the most. They believe the kool aid propaganda about Europe being civilised... some Ukrainians still do... what they have not worked out is that being friends with Russia and they would at least treat you as equals... friendship with the west means they might let you clean their toilets or pick fruit in their orchards... they are not looking for friends... they want some people to do the menial jobs that black people wont do now... plus they want to isolate Russia because it does not bend to their will.

    In the 1990s when Russia was in chaos you never heard Russia being mentioned in the west... except how bad things are there.

    Now Russians are behind everything... elections in the US, UK, Germany, Italy... Brexit, Catalonia, poisonings, global warming... cyber attacks...

    Anyway I said is that it relied on Russian personal to make all of its more advanced projects.

    The Boeing 787 is not a Russian design either...

    So bottom line is that Russians designed the T-34 T-54 T-44 and T-64 while the ukrops have only managed to make a handful of cheap T-90A knockoffs and some poor grade prototypes in order to pretend that they have a working MIC.

    I am not arguing that the Ukraine is in the shit... it dug the hole and lined the assholes up to fill it hip deep for themselves to sit in, but if you take the nationality of people to determine what country made what the US would not have made anything.... except Tee pees.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order

    Sponsored content

    Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Sun Apr 22, 2018 7:06 am