Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


+64
Cyberspec
Azi
havok
Tsavo Lion
nero
LMFS
southpark
PapaDragon
GarryB
dino00
bolshevik345
medo
Austin
magnumcromagnon
verkhoturye51
franco
ATLASCUB
JohninMK
nomadski
Tingsay
AbdulhamidtheSecond
Hannibal Barca
higurashihougi
Rodion_Romanovic
George1
Godric
KiloGolf
The-thing-next-door
Admin
Aristide
Svyatoslavich
ScotchedEarth
RussianDefense
AlfaT8
lycantrop
mack8
Arctic_Fox
Walther von Oldenburg
archangelski
Hole
Odin of Ossetia
ZoA
Kimppis
Regular
bantugbro
SeigSoloyvov
Big_Gazza
Isos
TheArmenian
KomissarBojanchev
flamming_python
onwiththewar
par far
Karl Haushofer
Vann7
Nikander
gaurav
kvs
Arrow
Peŕrier
jhelb
GunshipDemocracy
Singular_Transform
miketheterrible
68 posters

    Talking bollocks thread #2

    ZoA
    ZoA


    Posts : 145
    Points : 147
    Join date : 2017-08-20

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  ZoA Wed Mar 28, 2018 9:56 am

    Actually entire thing looks as deliberate mass casualty event with pre planed propaganda campaign run from the outside of the country. It is also increasingly obvious failure of basic security and safety systems is result of sabotage. There is deliberate effort to construct fake narrative about nature of the event, as seen  both by said propaganda campaign, trolls spreading disinformation, and even in this forum with fairly incompetent trolls like Vann attempting clumsily to push disinformation and spin event in to anty Russian propaganda as he is simultaneously peddles apologia and excuses for similar disasters that happened recently in US and UK. I would not be surprised if Vann is one of Operation Ernest Voice trolls.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Earnest_Voice
    ZoA
    ZoA


    Posts : 145
    Points : 147
    Join date : 2017-08-20

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  ZoA Wed Mar 28, 2018 10:06 am

    Given all of that at his point investigation should focus on finding evidence of deliberate arson, sabotage of safety systems, contacts of object's security, safety and management personal with foreigners, especially British, US and Ukrainian nationals, possible strange payments they might have received before incident, and similar traces of collusion, conspiracy and sabotage.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31502
    Points : 32032
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB Wed Mar 28, 2018 11:20 am

    With regard to the Grenfell Tower fire, I think it was intentionally set by some English in revenge for the previous terrorists attacks in England, but they will never openly admit to that.

    The fire started because of substandard wiring.

    Even better

    In addition to negligence, endangerment and murder/manslaughter they can also add bribery and corruption to the charges to get extra length on prison sentences

    And even more names for the list, those who took the money are also juts as responsible if not more

    Slam-dunk case

    But ultimately could you not place the guilt at the feet of landowners not facing up to their responsibilities... money grabbing...

    Mall owners are generally not poor... in fact many of those millionaires and billionaires that run away to the UK own this sort of property...


    People that don't follow the security rules and managers that do not do their jobs correctly. and all this
    is consequence of POOR LEADERSHIP.. of not hiring the correct people to do their jobs .

    It was a mall, I doubt they had thousands of CVs to go through... and most people don't put lazy and open to bribes on their CVs anyway.

    If Putin needs to micromanage everything to get it right , then he is doing something wrong.
    if that shopping mall in Siberia had all the western security tools to prevent or minimize fires..
    or at least contain fires to just one zone.. and proper supervision that the security was working..
    then no civilians will have been killed at all. the fire will have been contained quickly.

    I have worked in retail before and I know the use of fire exits is an issue with shoplifters... they are generally alarmed and I could see where they were abused by thieves that they could decide to lock them. Equally a fire alarm is another great way to steal shit... someone tries it a couple of times and I could see them disabling it.

    MAJOR Protest in Siberia ...for the lack of security in the shopping ..
    It looks like Russians are getting fedup with the government lack of security..
    No place is safe.. and should be embarrassing for Putin to recognize they are right..

    Apart from a few people looking for shoplifters there are no firemen stationed here in NZ malls.

    If the alarms worked properly, if they had sprinklers, and if the fire escapes were not locked then there would have been much less of a problem... having firemen stationed there 24/7 is just stupid nonsense vann you need a woman to give you a good slap right now because you are getting hysterical.

    United States have federal police in all their airports.. that monitors and supervise everything.

    To monitor people getting on aircraft... WTF would they be doing at the Mall?


    I saw in Real Russia channel , run by a guy called SERGEY,, with Horror ,how his new apartment ,brand new ,the constructor of the project was short on money and could not finish them ,so the constructor allowed civilians without experience to finish the apartments and remove walls at will , and rebuild the electrical grid.. so anyone is free to do their own thing.. so what could go wrong?

    The dumb censored should have reported the owner to the authorities instead of posting this shit on the internet.

    Did local officials resign already?

    They are 24 hours overdue.

    And that would be the kneejerk reaction that immature idiots like Vann love, yet actually make no real difference to the actual safety of Russians.

    They need a full investigation... who was responsible for getting the building up to code and what was the problem with the building. Who signed off on the things that were clearly not to code. Do the codes need to be changed... who enforces them and why were they not enforced... if you just get rid of the leadership none of this gets checked and things carry on like normal until the next fire.

    So you are comparing a private rented warehouse of someone property that government have no jurisdiction
    of it.. and no one lived there ...

    with a major Shopping center in Siberia ,that receive thousands of visitor every day ?
    are you kidding?

    Are you suggesting the person who organised a rave party in a warhouse had no obligation to the people going to that rave and that the government had no rights inside that warehouse?

    No one lives in a mall either Vann... and if the government can't go into a warehouse what makes you think they can go into a mall?

    Find me any shopping center in United States ,that many people died consequence of negligence
    of the security staff there ? Go ahead.. i dare you to find me any major accident in US ,with many
    people killed in a shooping mall ,consequences of incompetence ?

    Isn't one of those zombie movies set in a mall?

    I just happen to work when i was a teen in a cinema.theather for some time. and remember how annoying was my supervisor ,with remembering me to not block the Emergency door.. It was not allowed at any time to block the door..
    not even for a second and neither ,it was allowed people to be anywhere close.. it was a like a no go zone.

    Did you ever open it?

    How do you know it was not locked?

    I worked in a mall once... the fire doors were alarmed to prevent people shoplifting and using the fire doors to leave without paying...several times people would try to use them and eventually someone came up with the idea of locking them... not me.

    But in Russia anything is possible..
    staff locking an emergency escape door ,when thats defeat the purpose of the door being there..

    When you lose thousands of dollars a week in product it is often easy to forget fires happen.

    Do the mods consider this a worthwhile post? Are there literally no standards?

    This thread had the potential to discuss some very serious issues in Russia...

    But I am moving this thread to the talking bollocks thread... it started about a fire in a mall but has descended to all Russians are idiots and can't fly planes or make stuff or do anything right...

    Vann is enjoying the deaths of children... try reviving this topic anywhere but the talking bollocks thread and it will be deleted and you will get a break.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible


    Posts : 6343
    Points : 6317
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible Thu Mar 29, 2018 4:24 am

    ZoA wrote:Given all of that at his point investigation should focus on finding evidence of deliberate arson, sabotage of safety systems, contacts of object's security, safety and management personal with foreigners, especially British, US and Ukrainian nationals, possible strange payments they might have received before incident, and similar traces of collusion, conspiracy and sabotage.

    You may very well be right.

    There has now been about 7 fires, or more, in Russia at various locations. Big country, I know, but it seems rather suspicious all happening around similar times.
    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 11189
    Points : 11334
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  kvs Thu Mar 29, 2018 5:50 am

    miketheterrible wrote:
    ZoA wrote:Given all of that at his point investigation should focus on finding evidence of deliberate arson, sabotage of safety systems, contacts of object's security, safety and management personal with foreigners, especially British, US and Ukrainian nationals, possible strange payments they might have received before incident, and similar traces of collusion, conspiracy and sabotage.

    You may very well be right.

    There has now been about 7 fires, or more, in Russia at various locations.  Big country, I know, but it seems rather suspicious all happening around similar times.

    Now that the liberast 5th column has no chance of winning any vote, they will need to resort to terrorist tactics. This is what their
    NATO masters want and demand. The liberast fringe has a lot of similarity with the commie fringe before 1917. The latter were
    engaged in terrorist acts on a routine basis.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31502
    Points : 32032
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB Thu Mar 29, 2018 8:16 am

    Sadly, I would not think it was something they would not do...

    Look at the US actions in Cuba... setting fire to crops, bombs on trains all sorts of shit, including assassination attempts that usually failed because the people they got to try to kill castro were cuban... they knew he wasn't the problem...

    avatar
    Vann7


    Posts : 5076
    Points : 5182
    Join date : 2012-05-16

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Vann7 Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:03 am

    kvs wrote:BTW, the troll who started this thread posted no data to back up the claim that "so many" accidents happen in Russia of this
    sort.   It is up to the mods to control such patent trolling.   This thread is nothing but flame bait since anyone with a clue can
    see the troll claim as BS.   Do the mods consider this a worthwhile post?   Are there literally no standards?

    So just because i don't praise Incompetence and Bullshit ..does not means im "trolling".

    I get really pissed whenever i see Innocent people dying consequences of Incompetence of the Russian
    Government.. Defending MEDIOCRE leadership is not going to solve the problems..

    If a plane crash in Russia tomorrow.and another the next week and another the other. you will be saying .how that is "normal".. Sorry dude.. im not a brainwashed fanboy like you of Putin or of anyone.. Incompetence is incompetence..
    And Putin/Russian government is the epitome of incompetence.

    They now asking for full verification of security controls in all Russian shopping centers... Why now?>
    Why not enforce the laws , and arrest people for not following the protocols ?

    everyone is calling Putin A SOFT leader...in major political shows in Russia.. and his weakness is major
    topic of discussion.. But FANBOYS like you will call anyone a "Troll" who dares to see the obvious..
    Putin himself told ... CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE , is the main suspect of the accident.. But criminal negligence of who?
    When there is negligence is because either the system doesn't work and or there is a major failure in supervision ,and the laws not enforced. And this is all connected with bad managing.. Managers are supposed to train people to understand well their job and if they fail ,they need to be fired.. The Siberian Mall last security inspection by the government was done in 2016..  No   and Putin told him ,we are in 2018..  2 years without any checks by the
    government over the security of the shopping.. what could go wrong?  This is not incompetence at all.
    this is a jungle with monkeys running the government. Such things NEVER happens in the west.. you will never
    see a shopping center ,that is not monitored and fully inspected by government authorities..

    Pretty much looks that the whole system sucks big donkey balls.. in a civilized nation.. the fire department will have the full obligation to every single business that many civilians will enter ,in that country ,to be inspected for accident prevention at least 1 time a year , and if they violate the law... you will have police Locking the door.. and the business closed with a major FINE on the business.. But in Russia ,anything is possible.. They should start hiring foreigners ,if they can find good managers in Russia ,to take seriously their job in security...

    Downplaying the Incompetence is not the way to fix problems..
    And not im not the one celebrating the death of children.. only the ones who behave as if .. nothing happened..
    is business as usual , or that it happens everywhere ,are the ones that feel no sympathy for the victims.
    and prefer to continue praising Putin or the Russian government instead of feeling sympathy for the victims..
    and support Russian citizens that are very angry for their government Mediocre Performance..

    I don't think Putin is directly connected with the Siberian mall fire.. but he is directly responsible for having
    the correct managers in the correct places.. otherwise ,what you will get is mediocre Performance..
    Unfortunately im afraid we will see more civilians casualties ,if not buildings.. then in planes.. and always the lower end of the chain of management is the ones that are replaced.. but never the top leadership who put incompetent people in their jobs sacked.




    Last edited by Vann7 on Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:14 am; edited 1 time in total
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Fri Mar 30, 2018 12:09 am

    miketheterrible wrote:
    ZoA wrote:Given all of that at his point investigation should focus on finding evidence of deliberate arson, sabotage of safety systems, contacts of object's security, safety and management personal with foreigners, especially British, US and Ukrainian nationals, possible strange payments they might have received before incident, and similar traces of collusion, conspiracy and sabotage.

    You may very well be right.

    There has now been about 7 fires, or more, in Russia at various locations.  Big country, I know, but it seems rather suspicious all happening around similar times.

    7 fires in such a huge country, over a span of some days. I wouldn't consider that suspicious.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31502
    Points : 32032
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:34 am

    7 fires in such a huge country, over a span of some days. I wouldn't consider that suspicious.

    It sounds like enough to get serious attention... but accidents are always going to happen...

    Fortunately Vann is not in charge... well even if he was he would be replaced in hours because of the next crash or fire... I am sure he would resign immediately because obviously some dickhead starting a fire or flying a plane drunk is the fault of the leader of the country...

    In Vannville people don't make mistakes, there are no accidents, and everyone lives forever... and Putin wipes Vanns ass.

    In the real world Putin kicks Vanns ass, because Vann is all about the pitchfork and the matches...

    LMV.... Lynch Mob Vann...
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Fri Mar 30, 2018 2:48 am

    GarryB wrote:
    7 fires in such a huge country, over a span of some days. I wouldn't consider that suspicious.

    It sounds like enough to get serious attention... but accidents are always going to happen...

    Fortunately Vann is not in charge... well even if he was he would be replaced in hours because of the next crash or fire... I am sure he would resign immediately because obviously some dickhead starting a fire or flying a plane drunk is the fault of the leader of the country...

    In Vannville people don't make mistakes, there are no accidents, and everyone lives forever... and Putin wipes Vanns ass.

    In the real world Putin kicks Vanns ass, because Vann is all about the pitchfork and the matches...

    LMV.... Lynch Mob Vann...

    Should we be worried about the number 7. Some sort of prophecy? unshaven
    kvs
    kvs


    Posts : 11189
    Points : 11334
    Join date : 2014-09-11
    Location : Canuckistan

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  kvs Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:38 am

    miketheterrible wrote:
    ZoA wrote:Given all of that at his point investigation should focus on finding evidence of deliberate arson, sabotage of safety systems, contacts of object's security, safety and management personal with foreigners, especially British, US and Ukrainian nationals, possible strange payments they might have received before incident, and similar traces of collusion, conspiracy and sabotage.

    You may very well be right.

    There has now been about 7 fires, or more, in Russia at various locations.  Big country, I know, but it seems rather suspicious all happening around similar times.

    Those 7 fires did not involved the deaths of dozens of people in each case. So they do not count. Fires happen all the time in the USA. You do not
    hear about 99% of them unless they are special in a bad way. So this 7 number is neither here nor there.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible


    Posts : 6343
    Points : 6317
    Join date : 2016-11-07

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  miketheterrible Fri Mar 30, 2018 4:46 am

    Maybe I was over thinking it, you know, emotions of the moment.

    That said, apparently the "prankster" from Ukropistan that made the "prank" causing mass panic over "300 dead", is now offering to sell photos of dead burnt Russian children for 2,000 Rubles each. Guarantee he got photos for some of those "grievers".

    Good thing is, I heard that chechens who are in Ukraine, said online, that they want to go after the people who make fun of dead children.

    So that fat fuck may eat a bullet. Hopefully.

    And everyone's favorite Navalny, said the day of grieving is "stupid".
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1022
    Points : 1074
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:42 am

    GarryB wrote:

    Even after the war was over the Soviet Union just had to one up the Maus with the IS-7 (they even diched the 122mm for a 130mm) Obviously western tanks were outmached by IS-3s and T-54s so there was no need for the IS-7 and the later heavy tank developed to replace the IS-3 (T-10M) was clearly inferior to the IS-7.

    That was a period where they realised (all sides that survived the war) that heavy tanks had had their day... and they did need the IS-7 at the time... have you never heard of the Pershing?

    Wait a minute are you seriously saying that the IS-7 was needed to combat the M26 pershing? What on eath are you smoking the T-34-85 would have absolutely no trouble in killing the M26.

    The pershings armor is only about 110mm CHA and its almost flat.

    In the late 40s the west bearly had anything with which to combat the IS-3 there was nothing that they had which would require an IS-7 to defeat it.

    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Fri Mar 30, 2018 3:10 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:In the late 40s the west bearly had anything with which to combat the IS-3 there was nothing that they had which would require an IS-7 to defeat it.

    Actually the West reigned supreme in the late 40s (through to late 50s). Educate yourself on the British Centurion since 1948 (MkIII). Full gun stabilization, high mobility and guns starting from 20pdr 84mm and going to 105mm L7. It could deal with IS-3 and T-34/85 armor easily. In fact it could run circles around such tanks then.
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 4884
    Points : 4872
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 45
    Location : Merkelland

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Hole Fri Mar 30, 2018 9:47 pm

    Well, the Centurion was a good tank. His weak spot was his gasoline engine.
    Small correction: gun stabilisation was only added with Mk.10 in 1963.
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Fri Mar 30, 2018 11:29 pm

    Hole wrote:Small correction: gun stabilisation was only added with Mk.10 in 1963.

    Nope. Mk 3, since 1948.


    http://www.britishpathe.com/video/bang-on-always
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1022
    Points : 1074
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door Sat Mar 31, 2018 8:25 am

    KiloGolf wrote:
    The-thing-next-door wrote:In the late 40s the west bearly had anything with which to combat the IS-3 there was nothing that they had which would require an IS-7 to defeat it.

    Actually the West reigned supreme in the late 40s (through to late 50s). Educate yourself on the British Centurion since 1948 (MkIII). Full gun stabilization, high mobility and guns starting from 20pdr 84mm and going to 105mm L7. It could deal with IS-3 and T-34/85 armor easily. In fact it could run circles around such tanks then.

    No the 105mm L7 was only introduced in 1959.

    Oh and the ability to penetrate the armor of a T-34-85 in the late 1940 is not very impressive.

    The T-54 was the best medium tank of the late 1940s but it was only introduced in 1949 however that is still 10 years before the L7.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31502
    Points : 32032
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB Sat Mar 31, 2018 10:33 am

    Wait a minute are you seriously saying that the IS-7 was needed to combat the M26 pershing? What on eath are you smoking the T-34-85 would have absolutely no trouble in killing the M26.

    Well first of all if you look back to where this quote came from it quoted:
    Even after the war was over the Soviet Union just had to one up the Maus with the IS-7

    An IS-7 does not one up a Maus... except in the sense that 6 prototype IS-7s were built... only two of the German tanks were built...

    You are also missing the point... if the US kept the Pershing it suggested they would use them the way they were intended... as a breakthrough tank, it did not matter if T-34/85s could penetrate the M26 or not... that would just determine how successful the M26 would be.

    The T-10 had to be able to absorb enemy tank gun fire from about 1.5-2km range and be able to destroy NATO tanks from that range... that is what a breakthrough tank does...

    In the late 40s the west bearly had anything with which to combat the IS-3 there was nothing that they had which would require an IS-7 to defeat it.

    A breakthrough tank has to be able to engage enemy armour successfully at long range and its armour needs to be able to keep it safe from enemy fire from that range... hence the T-10 design... the existence or otherwise of the M-26 Pershing and the Conquerer for that matter is just evidence that the US and UK had not given up on vehicles in the same role too.

    Plus, lets face it... the west have very little idea of what the Soviets did or did not have... in the 40s, the 50s or the 60s.

    That cost will still pop up in the future. Either deal with it now (put 152mm guns into service) or deal with it later. Either way, you're dealing with the cost.

    Right now the 125mm ammo is in mass production and the guns for it are widely deployed.

    The cost of rolling out a brand new standard calibre used by every tank would be enormous and largely unjustified at the moment.

    In 5 or 10 years however as I said they could take Armata tanks in service with 125mm standardised turrets and swap them with upgraded turrets mounting the 152mm gun. The 125mm gun turrets could be transferred to new Kurganets vehicles if needed, but it would be an easy way to get the calibre into service rapidly... they might not even replace all armata tank division tanks at once... they might change all the armata tank turrets in the european districts, and leave the ones in the other areas with 125mm guns.


    Then why not manufacture 152mm Armatas along with 125mm Armatas, now or in the near future?

    They have said they don't see the need for the 152mm guns at the moment and consider the 125mm guns to be sufficient.

    If it's easy enough then to replace 125mm guns with 152mm guns, it'll be even easier if some are made with 152mm guns right now off the bat.

    Putting any 152mm tank gun Armatas in service now means developing a dual chain of ammo for tank guns in two distinct calibres... in which it has already been decided that one calibre is not needed yet.

    You won't have to change their weapons. You'll get your 125mm Armatas with ammo interoperability, as well as get through the effort of fielding the 152mm gun without having to deal with the problem later.

    You would have to put the 152mm tank gun ammo into mass production to supply the vehicles fitted with the gun. Mass producing a calibre of ammo the defence department has determined is not needed yet is a waste of time and resources.

    The same can be said in future when the the first 152mm guns arrive. Either deal with the problem now or in 15 years. Dealing with it now is better, in my opinion.

    Having two different calibres or having a newer heavier calibre is going to add costs and complication.... so leave it until it is needed...

    If the bustle getting hit was such an issue, modern Russian tanks wouldn't have them. But they do. Bustles can be used safely.

    It is not my decision or opinion... the Russian Army rejected the Black Eagle design and the Burlak design because of the vulnerability to enemy fire of the main gun ammo.

    the only reason there are rounds in the turret bustle of the T-90AM/MS is because the 22 rounds in the underfloor bustle is deemed to be not enough of an ammo load, so there are 6 rounds in an armoured box between the rear turret and the engine inside the hull and a further 12 rounds in the turret bustle totally separate from the crew compartment... so a total of 40 rounds but only 28 anywhere near ready to fire.

    Remove the crew from the turret and you could simply stack another autoloader on top of the existing one for 44 ready to fire rounds.

    You could have side pressure release doors with the propellent on top where if the top two layers are hit the top two layers can be propellant stubs that can vent out roof mounted pressure release doors. the bottom two layers of the autoloader could hold the projectiles in the place most unlikely to get hit.

    It's one worth keeping your eye on though. Tank rounds need to be strong enough to reliably penetrate your foes. Otherwise you'll suffer unnecessary losses.

    But that has nothing to do with your enemies gun, and everything to do with the enemies armour and protection systems...

    That just means a worse L/D ratio which means more energy is lost in flight. They have a worse range and penetration at a distance as a consequence.

    I have never seen an advert for tank ammo that suggests more than 2.5km is practical for APFSDS rounds and over those distances accuracy is more of an issue than lost velocity.

    APFSDS rounds can afford to have higher L/D ratios than flechettes. Their behind-armour effect is significant, unless they're shooting from the side.

    Now that all depends on the target... if the target is soft then APFSDS rounds might just punch straight through and do very little actual damage.

    You don't have to put all your ammo in the bustle.

    None of their current in service tanks have a bustle.... Only the T-90AM/MS and it is not currently in service AFAIK and that is not connected to the crew compartment... so the extra ammo could just as easily be in a trailer behind the vehicle or a big box on the rear engine deck.

    Just pack 22 rounds in the bustle with the autoloader, and have cage armor at the sides to protect from HEAT/HE warheads.

    Don't get me wrong, I think the Black Eagle turret bustle has merit.... I think the Burlak design was very clever... I think with modifications it could be very very effective and useful... maximising good features and minimising bad.

    On the face of it a turret bustle, as designed for the Burlak was intended to be like a rifle magazine... ie positioned by crane fully loaded... therefore I would have two different magazine types... one with 22 HE and HEAT rounds that is loaded and the mechanism then loads each round via autoloader into the underfloor magazine... once it is emptied remove it and replace it with the standard 31 round mag with long rod APFSDS rounds and also missiles ... with perhaps a few HEAT and HE rounds in the centre of the rack.

    Now you are loaded... in combat if the bustle gets hit and catches fire then turn the turret sideways and eject it so it does not burn and destroy your engine compartment.

    The two auto loaders give you 53 rounds ready to fire, which is excellent fire power... the rear bustle allows straight ramming with projectiles as long as you want.

    Their new hypersonic missiles with scramjet propulsion is interesting for tank ammo... imagine an APFSDS round with a scramjet motor that is fired at 1,400m/s but accelerates to as fast as you want... mach 10?... 3.2km/s?

    The bustle ammo is more vulnerable but can be ejected to minimise the risk and even if it is destroyed you still have the other autoloader, which you would use last where possible.

    Most important is that with no human loader the turret bustle wall can be very thick with a very small door that rapidly opens and closes when needed and keeps the ammo and the crew apart.

    The loading for T-72 and later tanks is very slow because each round and each propellant stub need to be handled individually... this system should make it faster and safer... perhaps even have a manual backup system where projectiles and propellent stubs can be pushed through a hole in the rear of the turret bustle to manually load rounds into both auto loaders... like artillery vehicles do.

    So the crew survived. Bustle explosions are safer than you think. Usually the crew survive these explosions.

    No, that is not what I said.

    A normal penetration that does not directly hit a HE round or propellant rounds will generally start a fire... the crew normally bail out as soon as they can... if they are able. Explosions normally take place a few minutes after the onboard fires reach the ammo or the fuel reaches flashpoint temperatures.

    Many of the images seen of T-72s et al with their turrets missing ended up that way after the fire reached their ammo or fuel.

    If the penetrator hit ammo directly then you see what happens in the video of the Leopard hit by a Konkurs... it does not matter when the ammo is... if you look at the size of the explosion and its violence... the Leopard has no blow out panels in its hull... and when HE ammo explodes inside a tank the tank will shatter into lots of little pieces... those same shockwaves will reduce a human form to mulch... there wont be a turret here and a hull there...

    My point was that the bustle didn't cause most of the explosions.

    You are not listening... this sort of explosion is nothing to do with hull or turret or turret bustle... a direct hit on a HE round sitting on a stack of other HE and HEAT rounds does this... whether in a hull or a bustle...

    Saves you from storing all your ammo in the hull (large target) or the bustle (if you're afraid of bustle explosions).

    A penetration of the turret will kill any crew man it passes through, but the two crew do not fill up the turret, if penetrated from the front at worst one crewman could be killed directly by an APFSDS round. Except if that round hits a HE or HEAT round and sets that round off... inside a turret or a turret bustle filled with other rounds also containing HE... if they go off the whole crew is dead... whether the ammo is in the crew compartment in the turret or the turret bustle.

    To get the same result with underfloor autoloaders you need to hit the tank very low... which does not actually happen that often.


    Still shows that bustles are relatively safe if used well.

    What is your hard on for turret bustles?

    Unless the enemy are idiots... if you store ammo in turret bustles they will target bustles.

    Turret bustles are easy to penetrate if that is what you are aiming for.

    Meaning your ammo is easy to target.


    Took them decades to realise that though.

    No it didn't.

    You are not one of these western aholes who think the Russian military does not care about its soldiers... why the fuck do you think the T-34 was the last Soviet tank to store ammo in the turret bustle?

    Why do you think they made their tanks so small, yet usually reasonably well armoured and with a good gun?

    Only now are they focused on safety (and I commend them and the Armata for it). One thing Western tanks do better than older Russian tanks is safety (though the Armata beats them all).

    Of course... big heavy slow western tanks are safer... but are they?

    Against peasants they seem to be, yet against Konkurs... a missile from the 1970s, they don't seem to be that safe...

    I was talking about as a whole. The Leclerc and Strv 103 (no longer in service by the way) are outliers, unfortunately. And outliers prove the rule. All other European armies have manually loaded MBTs, and autoloaders are only slowly catching on in support vehicles. Though Artillery is having a better time of it.

    If they go to a bigger calibre they will either need to go to two piece ammo or an autoloader.

    As you mention autorammers are common with artillery... the Soviets had flick rammers in WWII... but then the Soviets often have led the field in the Army... they were more mechanised than the Germans in WWII, most German artillery in WWII was horse drawn, while the Soviets had a lot of artillery tractors in use.

    Of course they didn't have as many troop transport vehicles during WWII but then it was the Soviets that got their forces fully mechanised first... BTR-60s and BMP-1s when the west had M113s and trucks, or FV432s and trucks or just walking.

    Well, the Centurion was a good tank. His weak spot was his gasoline engine.

    The first British tank engine that wasn't total rubbish... but still... the road range of the early Centurion was less than 100km wasn't it?

    Still... no worse than the M47.
    The-thing-next-door
    The-thing-next-door


    Posts : 1022
    Points : 1074
    Join date : 2017-09-18
    Location : Uranus

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  The-thing-next-door Sat Mar 31, 2018 11:38 am

    GarryB wrote:
    Wait a minute are you seriously saying that the IS-7 was needed to combat the M26 pershing? What on eath are you smoking the T-34-85 would have absolutely no trouble in killing the M26.

    Well first of all if you look back to where this quote came from it quoted:  
    Even after the war was over the Soviet Union just had to one up the Maus with the IS-7

    An IS-7 does not one up a Maus... except in the sense that 6 prototype IS-7s were built... only two of the German tanks were built...

    You are also missing the point... if the US kept the Pershing it suggested they would use them the way they were intended... as a breakthrough tank, it did not matter if T-34/85s could penetrate the M26 or not... that would just determine how successful the M26 would be.

    The T-10 had to be able to absorb enemy tank gun fire from about 1.5-2km range and be able to destroy NATO tanks from that range... that is what a breakthrough tank does...

    Firstly the IS-7 has superior frontal armor, firepower and mobility to the Maus.

    Its armor could withsatnd not only the 128mm gun of the Maus but also its own.

    And secondly do you really think that the useof the M26 a vehicle that coud not hope to scratch an IS-3 or IS-4 in the role of 'breakthrough tank' would serve to create a requrement for a tank such as the IS-7?

    Suggestingt that the IS-7 was built to counter the M26 is absolutely rediculous... While you are at it why don't you add ho the RDS-220 was created to counter firecrackers.

    A breakthrough tank has to be able to engage enemy armour successfully at long range and its armour needs to be able to keep it safe from enemy fire from that range... hence the T-10 design... the existence or otherwise of the M-26 Pershing and the Conquerer for that matter is just evidence that the US and UK had not given up on vehicles in the same role too.

    Plus, lets face it... the west have very little idea of what the Soviets did or did not have... in the 40s, the 50s or the 60s.


    You do realise that the M26 pershing was a meduim tank?

    And the us counterpart to the T-10M was the M103.

    Not to mention how both of these vehicles are from the 1950s and therfore have nothing ot do with a discution about heavy tanks of the late 1940s.

    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Sat Mar 31, 2018 2:35 pm

    The-thing-next-door wrote:
    kilogolf wrote:Actually the West reigned supreme in the late 40s (through to late 50s)...
    ...guns starting from 20pdr 84mm and going to 105mm L7.

    No the 105mm L7 was only introduced in 1959.

    Yeap, what I said. Read it again. tongue

    T-54 didn't get a 2-plane stabilizer till 1957. The Brits captured a Soviet T-54 in Hungary in 1956 and made sure that the Mk 5 could thoroughly trash it.

    Gotta hand it to Brits but AFV-wise they lead the way back then. Best tank of the Cold War at its time.

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Centurion
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 4884
    Points : 4872
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 45
    Location : Merkelland

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Hole Sat Mar 31, 2018 5:37 pm

    Mk. 1 76mm gun
    Mk. 2 76mm gun, up-armoured
    Mk. 3 83,8mm gun
    Mk. 4 95mm Howitzer, not produced
    Mk. 5 83,8mm gun
    Mk. 5/1 more armour
    Mk. 5/2 105mm gun
    Mk. 6 like Mk. 5, more armour and fuel
    Mk. 6/1 IR Equipment
    Mk. 6/2 12,7mm MG added
    Mk. 7 83,8 mm gun with fume Extractor
    Mk. 7/1 more armour
    Mk. 7/2 105mm gun
    Mk. 8 new commander cupola
    Mk. 9 is the Mk. 7 with the 105mm gun, IR equipment
    Mk. 10 105mm gun, isolated
    Mk. 11, 12, 13 modernised older versions

    and this is the Armata thread, go to a english tank site for your shit about "best tank bla, bla, bla..."
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Sat Mar 31, 2018 6:46 pm

    Hole wrote:Mkand this is the Armata thread, go to a english tank site for your shit about "best tank bla, bla, bla..."

    It is the better tank when compared to anything operational in the late 40s to late 50s period.

    Hole wrote:Mk. 1      76mm gun
    Mk. 2     76mm gun, up-armoured
    Mk. 3     83,8mm gun
    Mk. 4     95mm Howitzer, not produced
    Mk. 5     83,8mm gun
    Mk. 5/1  more armour
    Mk. 5/2  105mm gun
    Mk. 6 like Mk. 5, more armour and fuel
    Mk. 6/1   IR Equipment
    Mk. 6/2   12,7mm MG added
    Mk. 7      83,8 mm gun with fume Extractor
    Mk. 7/1   more armour
    Mk. 7/2   105mm gun
    Mk. 8      new commander cupola
    Mk. 9      is the Mk. 7 with the 105mm gun, IR equipment
    Mk. 10    105mm gun, isolated
    Mk. 11, 12, 13 modernised older versions

    This is my quote:
    kilogolf wrote:Actually the West reigned supreme in the late 40s (through to late 50s)...
    ...guns starting from 20pdr 84mm and going to 105mm L7.

    I covered it all with my two sentences.
    You can disagree with yourself as none of what I posted was incorrect. Just try and improve your reading comprehension skills.

    Agreed on the OT.
    Hole
    Hole


    Posts : 4884
    Points : 4872
    Join date : 2018-03-24
    Age : 45
    Location : Merkelland

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Hole Sat Mar 31, 2018 7:18 pm

    Best tank of this timeframe: T54A. After the west saw him in Hungary, they changed the guns on their tanks to 105mm. and the gun of the T54 was stabilised in one axis, which the Centurion received much later (sources: Tanks of the world, Encyclopedia of Tanks and armored vehicles)

    Best tank in our times: T-14 Armata. I think we can agree on that. Cool
    KiloGolf
    KiloGolf


    Posts : 2496
    Points : 2482
    Join date : 2015-09-01
    Location : Macedonia, Hellas

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  KiloGolf Sat Mar 31, 2018 7:33 pm

    Hole wrote:Best tank of this timeframe: T54A. After the west saw him in Hungary, they changed the guns on their tanks to 105mm. and the gun of the T54 was stabilised in one axis, which the Centurion received much later (sources: Tanks of the world, Encyclopedia of Tanks and armored vehicles)

    Hungary was 1956 and that's pretty much the end of the non-L7 Centurion's golden era. Till 1953 in Korea the Centurion had a field day against T-34/85 (which till the 50s it was the core of Soviet/WP operational tank). Stabilization-wise, the Brits claim Mk3 got it since 1948. There's a chance both sides used a bit of propaganda on that.

    Hole wrote:Best tank in our times: T-14 Armata. I think we can agree on that. Cool

    It is the best MBT prototype. I'd like to see Russia funding it though till it's fully operational in meaningful numbers (> 1000).

    Also given what I've seen in Syria-Iraq wars post 2011; I'd say the T-90A is the best MBT in-theater. Far better than the sad sight of earlier T-series, M60A3, Leopard 2A4, M60 Sabra and M1A1(export).
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 31502
    Points : 32032
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  GarryB Sun Apr 01, 2018 2:25 am

    Firstly the IS-7 has superior frontal armor, firepower and mobility to the Maus.

    Its armor could withsatnd not only the 128mm gun of the Maus but also its own.

    The Maus had no future and neither did the IS-7... it is just too heavy and not justifiable.

    And secondly do you really think that the useof the M26 a vehicle that coud not hope to scratch an IS-3 or IS-4 in the role of 'breakthrough tank' would serve to create a requrement for a tank such as the IS-7?

    There will always be a requirement for a vehicle to penetrate enemy lines... the only question is what sort of vehicle that would be... during WWII and for a short period afterwards that was a heavy tank... but with the introduction of the T-54/55 and expanding use of ATGMs heavy tanks became less useful in the role.

    Suggestingt that the IS-7 was built to counter the M26 is absolutely rediculous...

    The fact that the IS-7 was impressive and the M26 was not does not mean they were not designed for the same role.


    You do realise that the M26 pershing was a meduim tank?

    And the us counterpart to the T-10M was the M103.

    I don't really care about US tanks... and light, medium, and heavy means nothing when talking about tanks internationally... Soviet heavy tanks would be mediums in most western armies... and most western mediums would be heavy Soviet tanks.

    Not to mention how both of these vehicles are from the 1950s and therfore have nothing ot do with a discution about heavy tanks of the late 1940s.

    This thread is about Armata.

    Gotta hand it to Brits but AFV-wise they lead the way back then. Best tank of the Cold War at its time.

    Led the way?

    Their best tank in WWII was a Sherman Firefly...

    It is the better tank when compared to anything operational in the late 40s to late 50s period.

    They made less than 5,000 of the things... they can't have been that good.

    More Panthers were made.

    It is the best MBT prototype. I'd like to see Russia funding it though till it's fully operational in meaningful numbers (> 1000).

    The 125mm gun armed Armata is a heavy tank.

    In the new vehicle families there is no MBT... there are three tanks and likely one light gun platform.

    Sponsored content


    Talking bollocks thread #2 - Page 9 Empty Re: Talking bollocks thread #2

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu Dec 02, 2021 9:10 am