Russia's New Armata Tank: The Best Tank in the World?

[DrainBamage]

It could be like this:

This explains a lot. I bet you play a lot of war video games don't you? I bet that's part of the explanation for your political leanings and child-like viewpoints on combat and combat systems. Am I right? It even explains (somewhat) little quirks about you like your avatar being someone in a military uniform with a red beret who has zero military experience and professional career was a bus driver.

Or it could be an invasion of Alaska. You never know. Alaska can serve as toehold.

Russia couldn't project forces to Alaska, and even if they did they couldn't supply them.

 

[DrainBamage]

What you don´t get is that in a full scale war, there will be no funding problem.

This is incredibly naive, even by your standards. Making war requires production capacity and raw materials, a country can only wage war without economic resources for a limited time before production of warfighting materials softens. Again with the video games.

 

[Bleipriester]

Russia will have the most modern forces soon while western militaries are on the decline.
The only option for Europe is to stay on friendly terms with Russia. Phrump needs to know that.

Russia's New Armata Tank: The Best Tank in the World?

Anyone can design and build an elite, top-of-the-line tank, that is the most deadly and sophisticated in the world.

Any first world country can do this.

The real question is, can you actually outfit your military with such a weapon? And the answer for Russia is, no they cannot.

Now that doesn't mean we shouldn't have appropriate alternatives designed, or planned for when an enemy can deploy a superior weapon.

We should obviously.

But as things stand right now, having one or two super-tanks, is not a threat to US forces.

We need to learn the lessons of the F-117 Stealth Jet. The F-117 in 1991 was the elite of the elite. No other jet in the world could touch the elite technology and advanced design of the F-117.

And yet, in the Serbian war in 1999, the jet was shot down by a S-125 Anti-Air battery in Belgrade (or near).

The S-125 Anti-Aircraft missile battery was Soviet Tech, which started being used in 1961.

The point is, just having the most advanced tech, or military equipment, does not mean you can take on the world, unless you can actually outfit your entire military with it.

A few super-things, doesn't mean much.

If the Russians can only afford 10 of them, we'd destroy those ten, and have no problem with the rest. Now if they can outfit their entire military with those tanks, ok then we could have a problem.

No, ten tanks don´t mean a thing. That doesn´t mean the other tanks are weak.

 

[Bleipriester]

Still better then the flying rock called F-35, right? S-200 gets it down.

Hah all those Russian SAMs in Syria and Israel bombs it with impunity. Iraq was had a huge defense network of Russian equipment that allied forces systematically dismantled and made irrelevant.

Iraqi pilots were fleeing to Iran in their Russian planes.

Any third world shithole can fire stand-off missiles from outside the target´s country. Even Nauru could.

 

[Bleipriester]

It could be like this:

This explains a lot. I bet you play a lot of war video games don't you? I bet that's part of the explanation for your political leanings and child-like viewpoints on combat and combat systems. Am I right? It even explains (somewhat) little quirks about you like your avatar being someone in a military uniform with a red beret who has zero military experience and professional career was a bus driver.

Or it could be an invasion of Alaska. You never know. Alaska can serve as toehold.

Russia couldn't project forces to Alaska, and even if they did they couldn't supply them.

So Cute! I wonder who was the last POTUS who served. Maduro didn´t serve in the military that was used to oppress the people back then. Maduro went into politics in an age when you wished for the next Playmobil castle.
I get my political leanings from world affairs.

 

[Bleipriester]

What you don´t get is that in a full scale war, there will be no funding problem.

This is incredibly naive, even by your standards. Making war requires production capacity and raw materials, a country can only wage war without economic resources for a limited time before production of warfighting materials softens. Again with the video games.

You "forgot" this sentence in my quote: "It is only about recourses and factories."
You ain´t serious and you get your political leanings from the Sesame Street.

 

[Bleipriester]

Russia's might carrier making good speed at sea. Note the tow line.

Russia has no need for gunboat diplomacy.

More US diplomacy...

"Huntsman essentially called the aircraft carriers floating American diplomacy.
"When you have 200,000 tons of diplomacy that is cruising in the Mediterranean -- this is what I call diplomacy, this is forward operating diplomacy -- nothing else needs to be said," he said."
US aircraft carrier operations in Mediterranean serve as floating American diplomacy - CNN

 

[SandSquid]

And if you fight an enemy that can counter your air threats, all comes down to the ground forces again.

So in a Russian attack, which would need to be led by fighter aircraft keeping air superiority until ground defense was built up, and the best armor on the ground, you believe Russia with it's cancelled T-14 and cancelled SU57 are the threats?

This is the greatest thread ever.

It could be like this:



Or it could be an invasion of Alaska. You never know. Alaska can serve as toehold.

Toehold to what, frostbite on your big toe? Derp!

They would die here of heat.

Stay serious.

Sorry, no way someone can take a guy claiming the threat of a canceled tank program is a reason to give up as serious.

 

[SandSquid]

What you don´t get is that in a full scale war, there will be no funding problem.

This is incredibly naive, even by your standards. Making war requires production capacity and raw materials, a country can only wage war without economic resources for a limited time before production of warfighting materials softens. Again with the video games.

You "forgot" this sentence in my quote: "It is only about recourses and factories."
You ain´t serious and you get your political leanings from the Sesame Street.

You are literally the guy making claims that a cancelled program is what should be feared.

Either you have no clue about this topic, in which case go educate yourself a bit and then return.

Or you are lying intentionally in which case feel free to just go.

 

[Bleipriester]

I have enough of your canceled nonsense. Russia can make thousands of T-14 at any time.

 

[Marion Morrison]

I have enough of your canceled nonsense. Russia can make thousands of T-14 at any time.

Well, I sure wouldn't want to catch any of the bullets they shoot.

 

[DrainBamage]

Any third world shithole can fire stand-off missiles from outside the target´s country. Even Nauru could.

And yet Syria remains incapable of returning the favor with their aircraft.

 

[DrainBamage]

So Cute! I wonder who was the last POTUS who served. Maduro didn´t serve in the military that was used to oppress the people back then. Maduro went into politics in an age when you wished for the next Playmobil castle.

Right, he's an uneducated bus driver with a 80s porn star mustache, wearing a military uniform despite no military experience, and you idolize him. What did he complete 5th grade? Great hero for you there.

I get my political leanings from world affairs.

I don't think so. Any psychologist would love to have a look at you, the little German man who needs to get attention by promoting anything the others find distasteful.

 

[DrainBamage]

I have enough of your canceled nonsense. Russia can make thousands of T-14 at any time.

In a war they couldn't. Their production capabilities would be neutralized and they couldn't get enough raw materials.

 

[Aponi]

Russia will have the most modern forces soon while western militaries are on the decline.
The only option for Europe is to stay on friendly terms with Russia. Phrump needs to know that.

Russia's New Armata Tank: The Best Tank in the World?

Sounds like its just catching up up the Abrams tank

 

[SandSquid]

And if you fight an enemy that can counter your air threats, all comes down to the ground forces again.

So in a Russian attack, which would need to be led by fighter aircraft keeping air superiority until ground defense was built up, and the best armor on the ground, you believe Russia with it's cancelled T-14 and cancelled SU57 are the threats?

This is the greatest thread ever.

It could be like this:



Or it could be an invasion of Alaska. You never know. Alaska can serve as toehold.

Alaska could. First they'd need to get their military might there, most of their Eastern forces are based thousands of miles south. And that massive troop movement would cause the US and Nato to build up the US west coast, as well as along western russia (for an incursion to force them to fight 2 fronts).

It's always so much tougher being the attacking force against the dug in defenders. The US doesn't have to get large transport planes and ships carrying heavy weapons across the ocean. Russia needs to do that.

The US doesn't have to rely on it's fighters to maintain air superiority, we have our SAM's in place as well and a MUCH larger suface fleet, Russia has to rely on what they have after their cancelled SU57 and cancelled bomber program.

The US doesn't have to overrun prepared hardened dug in soldiers, Russia has to do that.

We saw in Syria how ISIS can sneak through the open desert. The Bering Strait can be frozen in winter and the Russians could sneak into Alaska and create the proper conditions for the main force. That would be a surprise that can hardly be dealt with. No airforce can wipe out the infantry in Alaska. There would be Panzir mounted on the following ships that would ensure their safety.
And you can not count on the European forces, they are weaker and less motivated than the US forces.

You are talking about sneaking a large invading force past the MOST searched and protected waterway by the US.

And the Bering Strait does not completely freeze over. Parts do, but with the heavy currents, channels stay open. There's been two recorded instances of people crossing the strait. One became marooned on an iceberg and spent days drifting before making it across by luck arriving near death and being picked up (luckily for him) the moment he made it to shore. The other was an ex-paratrooper who spent 14 harrrowing days jumping across ice floes, having to swim against the current in frigid water, taking on arctic storms, climbing ice walls, drifting 125 miles at one point.... Quite an experience in his book and one he said he'd never try again.


So your belief is that is the best way to invade. Do what he barely survived, but with a LOT more supplies on your back. A slogging two week journey where they will have to swim the frigid arctic waters, and be completely open and unprotected to air and sea attacks by the US military... And if you magically make it undetected through the most watched waterway around the US, after two weeks of arctic trekking carrying all your gear....

...You have to beat the fully rested and ready 1st Stryker brigade and a 4th airborne division on the ground there to meet you. F-22 Raptors of the 3d wing for air superiority to help out the land based 176th air defense squadron, which means you are also taking on the 334th F-16 close air support wing on their terrain that is new to any Russian forces but has been dug in and protected by the US forces who routinely train on that ground.

And then they hold Alaska against the US for months unsupplied with only small arms until the straight opens up enough and the ships can bring air defense? What is it? A total of three Pantsir SA's Russia has built for cold weather after testing their Pantsir S-2's and determining they needed an arctic version to be successful in cold temps? Because if you mobilize that force of Pantsir's or any heavy weapons to NE Russia before your invasion, you for sure won't be sneaking your troops across (not that you would in the first place). And remember the Bering Strait is one of the roughest stretches of water in the world. So unless you have some magic pixie dust, your Pantsirs are not in operation until you make it across (no Pantsir successful tests on open water in rough seas).

I think the scriptwriter for Red Dawn had a better idea.

Your fearing a cancelled tank was a better premise than this cluster.

Here's an idea bud. Don't go full retard. Sure that looks all fun and realistic even in the next call of Duty video game. But please, don't base your life off of video game plots.

 

[SandSquid]

I have enough of your canceled nonsense. Russia can make thousands of T-14 at any time.

No actually they can't. The ONLY time they might be able to is AFTER starting a war as you said earlier.

You are literally still trying to defend a cancelled project you didn't realize was cancelled. They can't make 3 dozen of them but they can somehow just pop out thousands of them on a whim? Redesign their entire tank production lines at Uralvagonzavod to go from making T-72's to full production?

This is awesome!

So what you are saying is Russia AFTER starting a war, can then just restart their cancelled bomber program, their cancelled SU-57 program, their cancelled T-14 program, their cancelled T-50 program, their cancelled destroyer program, their cancelled Aircraft carrier program... and be good to go? That the rest of the world would just sit back an say "ok lets put this war on pause and not attack your weapons manufacturing for a few years to let you guys get caught up first".

I'm sorry. Either you are really really lying, or have NO CLUE on the topic.

 

[SandSquid]

Russia will have the most modern forces soon while western militaries are on the decline.
The only option for Europe is to stay on friendly terms with Russia. Phrump needs to know that.

Russia's New Armata Tank: The Best Tank in the World?

Anyone can design and build an elite, top-of-the-line tank, that is the most deadly and sophisticated in the world.

Any first world country can do this.

The real question is, can you actually outfit your military with such a weapon? And the answer for Russia is, no they cannot.

Now that doesn't mean we shouldn't have appropriate alternatives designed, or planned for when an enemy can deploy a superior weapon.

We should obviously.

But as things stand right now, having one or two super-tanks, is not a threat to US forces.

We need to learn the lessons of the F-117 Stealth Jet. The F-117 in 1991 was the elite of the elite. No other jet in the world could touch the elite technology and advanced design of the F-117.

And yet, in the Serbian war in 1999, the jet was shot down by a S-125 Anti-Air battery in Belgrade (or near).

The S-125 Anti-Aircraft missile battery was Soviet Tech, which started being used in 1961.

The point is, just having the most advanced tech, or military equipment, does not mean you can take on the world, unless you can actually outfit your entire military with it.

A few super-things, doesn't mean much.

If the Russians can only afford 10 of them, we'd destroy those ten, and have no problem with the rest. Now if they can outfit their entire military with those tanks, ok then we could have a problem.

No, ten tanks don´t mean a thing. That doesn´t mean the other tanks are weak.

Yet to start the thread you were saying the US should cower over 12 of them.

Either you were lying your ass off or had no clue on the topic of which you were speaking.

 

[SandSquid]

I get my political leanings from world affairs.

I don't think so. I mean you tend to outright lie a lot, and either don't care that you do, or don't even realize you are saying things that aren't based in reality. You seem to project video games to the real world as realistic, tend to use a source when it says what you want, and ignore that same exact source when it doesn't, and lie continuously to support your claims, which to me, when you have to lie to make a point, it isn't a point worth anything at that point.

Your Bering strait and "they can just make it unabated in war" thoughts are clearly not based in any sort of reality. That's Rambo and Red Dawn TV stuff. Fun, but not realistic. I love a good game or movie, but I can differentiate them from the real world.

You also seem very ill-informed and oblivious to the real world. You bring up things that are just patently not true. You try and say a 5 year trend is too "new" for you to recognize it. You say things like "I'll believe the troops on the ground" which sounds all nice, but then when hearing what those troops on the ground actually said, you still maintain they were wrong with no proof of your own assertation.

I really don't think you fully believe what you type, because if you did that is clearly a psychosis. I just think you'd rather lie to say something you like, than tell the truth and it be something you didn't prefer. Which is why when confronted with fact you seem to whenever possible distract and change the subject, or intentionally use old information even when things have changed since.

 

[Bleipriester]

I have enough of your canceled nonsense. Russia can make thousands of T-14 at any time.

Well, I sure wouldn't want to catch any of the bullets they shoot.

Actually, those 12 tanks are going on the army´s trial and they will decide.