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

[ruim20]

Originally Posted by 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:


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.

I don't think you should bring combat records in to this, the Abrams as fought against "very old" generation tanks with unprepared crews, so you can't really get a true record out of that.

If there where a third WW (i hope not!) then we could see true MBTs battles.

[Zytek_Fan]

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

It's from Foxnews, so I wouldn't listen to anything they say

[kingofthering]

There's a difference between parade and defense spending and a totalitarian dictatorship.

[clutch-monkey]

it's just a parade, in their own country...when they start parading in others i'll be concerned

[baddabang]

[IBrake4Rainbows]

North Korea has gigantic parades of such magnitude.

Their own ineptness and desire to be seen as a superpower shows a lot of hot air, but not a lot of blow, if you get my meaning.

If the majority of a military's time is spent choreographing a routine, is that seriously a concern?

[clutch-monkey]

Originally Posted by IBrake4Rainbows

North Korea has gigantic parades of such magnitude.

Their own ineptness and desire to be seen as a superpower shows a lot of hot air, but not a lot of blow, if you get my meaning.

If the majority of a military's time is spent choreographing a routine, is that seriously a concern?

the air force always told me drill was an effective countermeasure to carpet bombing

...

[IBrake4Rainbows]

"I can spin my rifle any which way - and throw it to my colleague. But why won't it shoot?!"

[ZeTurbo]

Originally Posted by RacingManiac

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

But its soo good!!!

[roosterjuicer]

The abrams has been using a smoothbore for quite a while now since they switched to depleted uranium shells.

I think when it comes to tanks people put more credit toward guns and armor but another big part of what makes the abrams so effective is its various sensors and most importantly its ability to fire very accuratly while moving. Every tank the abrams has fought in battle has had to stop to fire accurately, does the t-90 have the ability to fire while moving, fight effectively at night/in smoke/low visibility/ect??

[faksta]

I'll look this up

[clutch-monkey]

do T-90's still have the missile/gun combo like the Sheridan or was that dropped with the T-80?

[faksta]

At first series T-90's the optical-electronical suppression system (damn my technical English - I hope you will understand what am I talking about) was used, defending from most known anti-tank missiles with semi-automatic and laser prompting systems. The newer versions are more developed in part of electronics.

clutch-monkey, AFAIK, they don't have a missile anymore - I only found an info about a 125mm gun, 7,62 machine gun and a 12,7 machine gun serving as an antiaircraft gun. Though there may be some modifications, I think.

Also, putting aside all those electronics, the protection on T-90 is actually stronger than Abrams has - M1 won't hit it, while in Iraq Abrams' protection was destroyed by old RPG grenades...

YouTube - T-90 Active Protection Systems

[NSXType-R]

Originally Posted by faksta

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

That's actually a pretty good combination. Nathan's cheese fries. Good stuff.

With gravy it's a bit weird, but to be fair, I didn't have poutine at a good place- it was some random no name fast food place. If I do go back, I will have to try poutine at a proper place.

Originally Posted by The_Canuck

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

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

So Quebecan is unacceptable? Just want to get my grammar down.

[roosterjuicer]

Originally Posted by faksta

Also, putting aside all those electronics, the protection on T-90 is actually stronger than Abrams has - M1 won't hit it, while in Iraq Abrams' protection was destroyed by old RPG grenades...

the Ambrams can take an rpg-7 no problem, i think the RPG you are thinking about is the RPG-22.

As to the electonic countermeasures, all the electronics in the world wont do you any good against an rpg, they are just simple straight running missles, there's nothing for the countermeasures to jam.