Russian military parade...rise of the new soviet union?

[RacingManiac]

French Fries with lots of melted cheese and gravy.......really really fattening and unhealthy....lol

[faksta]

Huh..never even thought of French fries with cheese...

[The_Canuck]

Quick, everyone edit Quebecan to Quebecois before Fiset bans you...

as for Russia, I think the long range bomber patrols are funny...

[Piacki_117]

Oh sorry David, I didn't know that "Québecois" could be used in english too.

[Revo]

Originally Posted by faksta

What do you mean by 'started doing the military parade'? They happen every May, 9 since 1945...
And actually it's always funny for me to read such articles about 'next cold war', 'bringing back Soviet Union' and so on

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the annual May 9th Victory Day military parade a fairly young tradition? Of course the first Victory Day parade was held in summer 1945 (not May 9th), but when was the second Victory Day parade held in Red Sqaure? Mid 1980s perhaps?

[roosterjuicer]

I personally invite the idea of another super power, all of europe used to kiss americas arse back then because they needed our protection from Ivan, they've been getting a little lippy now that they dont need our muscles anymore :^)


nobody has said anything about the t-90 vs the abrams yet...

[faksta]

Originally Posted by Revo

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the annual May 9th Victory Day military parade a fairly young tradition? Of course the first Victory Day parade was held in summer 1945 (not May 9th), but when was the second Victory Day parade held in Red Sqaure? Mid 1980s perhaps?

Yes, you're mostly right - it's communists' love to parades which confused me
In 1945 a Victory Day parade was held on June, 24, then in 1948-1964 they didn't happen, and the next pause was in 1991-1994 period.

[faksta]

Originally Posted by roosterjuicer

I personally invite the idea of another super power, all of europe used to kiss americas arse back then because they needed our protection from Ivan, they've been getting a little lippy now that they dont need our muscles anymore :^)


nobody has said anything about the t-90 vs the abrams yet...

From what I've found:
Weight: T-90 - 46,5t, Abrams - 54,4t.
Crew: T-90 - 3, Abrams - 4 people.
Gun: T-90 - 125mm smooth-bore, Abrams - 105mm screwed (or how should it sound? ).
Machine gun: T-90 - 1x12,7 and 1x7,62, Abrams - 1x12,7 and 2x7,62.
Engine: T-90 - V12 diesel multifuel liquid-cooled turbocharged, Abrams - gas turbine AGT-1500 engine.

Though English wiki provides different info.
M1 Abrams - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
T-90 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[digitalcraft]

FOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsF OXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFO XNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNewsFOXNews

[CdocZ]

Judging by the article wiki has for the T-90, the Abrams is the tougher one. Israel developed a lot of the defensive measures/armor for the Abrams in concert with Americans, and the result is impressive. A lot of high end technology, and an armor with some pretty cool layering ideas making it so a single area has to take something like 2-3 full size anti-tank rockets before it is actually breached. ER-armor is cool, but throw a copperhead anti-tank missile at standard armor+ERA, and there will be a hole.

[RacingManiac]

The MBT US use now is M1A2, which has 120mm smoothbore gun....

[faksta]

Maybe my info was on M1A1 then

[RacingManiac]

As the Wiki suggest it's probably the original M1, which has been upgraded to the spec of A1 which also uses 120mm smoothbore. A1 and A2 differs mainly in firecontrol electronics and the use of depleted uranium armor that is standard on A2....

The "screw" type gun BTW is call rifled gun....

[Turbo.Jenkens]

I take everything Fox news reports with a grain of salt. Actually thats a lie, I ignore what they have to say most of the time.

Wouldn't a stronger Russia be a good thing?

As for the Abrams T90 debate:

Originally Posted by faksta

From what I've found:
Weight: T-90 - 46,5t, Abrams - 54,4t.
Crew: T-90 - 3, Abrams - 4 people.
Gun: T-90 - 125mm smooth-bore, Abrams - 105mm screwed (or how should it

Your figures are from the original Abrams. The current A2 version is > 60 tons, and an Abrams hasn't been fielded with a 105mm in almost 20 years. There is a difference in crew because a 19 year old PFC is a more reliable reloading mechanism than an automatic loader. The Abrams also excels in crew comfort vs its eastern counterparts; cramped and fatigued crews aren't as effective. Given the Abrams combat record vs the T90s predecessors and current production #s I'd say that there really is no contest. Of course there thirst for fuel will render main battle tanks useless within a couple of decades.

[faksta]

Originally Posted by RacingManiac

The "screw" type gun BTW is call rifled gun....

Will know now, thanks