Jump to content


The Devil's Due, Part 2


  • Please log in to reply
121 replies to this topic

The_Chieftain #1 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 21:14

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

Posted Image


At the Maneuver Conference of last year, the Israeli company Rafael had a stand for their Trophy system. Sadly, I didn’t take a photo of the very large banner they had, but it was advertised as the world’s first and only active protection system, and it entered service only a couple of years go. Interestingly, a quick look around their website does not seem to display this claim any more. Perhaps there was some fine print somewhere, but I can’t help but think back to the operational deployment of the Drozd system in Afghanistan over twenty years ago, or the pushing of Arena for years.



Posted Image


Spoiler


atsiv #2 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:04

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22177 battles
  • 580
  • [-SSS-] -SSS-
  • Member since:
    03-21-2011
I grew up in the 70`s and 80`s and alway respected the Soviet military and still respect the Russian military as it is by no means a paper army.they still have the manpower,means and the fortitude to get the job done regardless of world sentiment.thats where the U.S. lacks(world sentiment)

SHISHKABOB #3 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:28

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 8913 battles
  • 13,143
  • [STONE] STONE
  • Member since:
    12-06-2010
informative as always!

Lagometer #4 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:31

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 19502 battles
  • 598
  • [REL-V] REL-V
  • Member since:
    11-18-2010
I've believed that if we had credible, potential enemies on three borders, we'd have a lot more inexpensive gear in the US, too. We would have a lot of border to protect from the likes of China, India, Iran, Europe, Russia and others. Most people would be drafted for two years of military training and service.

With fully 1/3 of their country above the Arctic Circle, their equipment needs are unique. By necessity, so are their designs. The crudeness of their export gear suits their third word clients, as well. They copy the best ideas they come across, just like we do. We have the luxury of designing equipment for more tropical climates and often adapt Scandinavian equipment for service in the arctic.

Having been invaded several times, Russia is doing what it thinks it must. I don't fault them for that.

Kingratt #5 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:36

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 24066 battles
  • 433
  • Member since:
    05-29-2011
The Russians have always had an unique and very practical way of looking at things.  During the early years of the space race, NASA spent millions of dollars to develope a pen that would write in zero gravity.  The Russians used an off the shelf part called a "pencil".  Simple but elegant solution.

Panzershcreck #6 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:45

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 11412 battles
  • 17
  • Member since:
    06-30-2011
what airplane is that, with all those engines on the front and funky bumps on the back?

The_Chieftain #7 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:46

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostKingratt, on Aug 15 2012 - 22:36, said:

The Russians have always had an unique and very practical way of looking at things.  During the early years of the space race, NASA spent millions of dollars to develope a pen that would write in zero gravity.  The Russians used an off the shelf part called a "pencil".  Simple but elegant solution.

http://www.snopes.co...us/spacepen.asp

The_Chieftain #8 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:48

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostPanzershcreck, on Aug 15 2012 - 22:45, said:

what airplane is that, with all those engines on the front and funky bumps on the back?

Lun.

http://filmatidimare...01230647307.jpg

Kingratt #9 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 22:56

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 24066 battles
  • 433
  • Member since:
    05-29-2011

View PostThe_Chieftain, on Aug 15 2012 - 22:46, said:


Interesting.  I did receive a gift of a "space pen" when I was a kid that had this story written on a pamphlet included in the box.  I always thought is was a pretty cool gift even if the pen didn't write too well.

Gigaton #10 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:16

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 0 battles
  • 872
  • Member since:
    11-11-2010
I feel the OP is lacking a bit on the laser tank department. Though i guess they never went level 3 with it. Or with they laser pistols.

Teuen101 #11 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:22

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 33837 battles
  • 409
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011
I cannot believe the people on this page respect the Soviets ? that's like respecting Hitler that right you heard me right ...the Soviets kill way more people then even Hitler could dream about sorry ..but no.. respect from me and we should be treating them like we do the ww2 nazi remarks on here..it was a evil empire..but yet here of late I've been seeing people give it loads of praise.. You want to go back to that area ? where you're water got turned off at 8 oclock and you could go to jail if you missed to much work...a shower certain was a luxury item they only made a few thousand of them a year ...luck to get one ...10 year waiting list on a car ?

sorry But I got no respect for the Soviets..I got respect for the Russians but not the Soviets !

Edited by Teuen101, Aug 15 2012 - 23:23.


The_Chieftain #12 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:24

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011

View PostGigaton, on Aug 15 2012 - 23:16, said:

I feel the OP is lacking a bit on the laser tank department. Though i guess they never went level 3 with it. Or with they laser pistols.

Sorry.

http://img151.images...seuo5vmciv3.jpg

http://www.wired.com...ser-tank-01.jpg
http://media.english...erweapon-47.jpg

The_Chieftain #13 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:28

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
Tueun, you don't need to like someone to respect their capabilities.

JamesDean #14 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:30

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 6520 battles
  • 1,070
  • Member since:
    08-05-2010
Good read.  I was always intrigued by the tank launched missile.  Glad the Soviets put it to use atleast.

Drive_Me_Closer #15 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:39

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 7300 battles
  • 639
  • Member since:
    04-09-2011
The effect of communism drove soviet researchers differently then capitalism in the west.  They had entirely different decision structures when engineers made the tradeoff decisions during design and implementation.  To whit, fitting crews in tanks.  The west went the ergonomic route and made their tanks larger inside.  The soviets recruited smaller tankers.  Both are solution to the question, "How big do I make this tank?"

I am curious however if they had the same evaluation system as the West.  The US and its allies often "acquired" Russian hardware for evaluation.  While the Soviets did the same during WW2, I'm not aware of any programs continuing.  Did they ever have a stable of F-16s to test pilots against?  Or M-60s to train T-62 crews to fight?  

Much of their design decisions could have been driven by a faulty understanding of their enemies equipment and capabilities.

Splattimus #16 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:46

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 9889 battles
  • 497
  • Member since:
    04-20-2011
I think thats where the West sometimes gets it wrong.

We look at the Russian tanks and think they're quite crude, and think that means the Russians didn't do much R&D or innovation.

But instead it was the design point that was completely different.

The US Problem. Atlantic between factories and battle front. Means to move large numbers of tanks becomes a huge logistics nightmare, one that submarines could hurt bad.
The US also had little conscription, safe borders, and a pool of professional soldiers.

The USSR Problem. Huge land mass surrounded by potential enemies. Winter.
The USSR has large population, and being surrounded by potential enemies means any battle should be close to a factory.

The US thought "We're going to make the best tanks in the world. We're going to try to make them as indestructible as possible, shoot the best, do the best. We may need to train our crews for longer to get up to speed with the equipment, but they should survive, so we won't need to train too many, its gunna cost us an arm and a leg to send them anywhere, so lets make sure we don't have to send as many".

The USSR thought "Our tanks are going to be knocked out. We will make them so if and when they do, its more likely we can get them back and running again, even if that means dragging em back to a factory and rebuilding them from scratch or close enough, or they're cheap enough that it doesn't matter. Our crews are going to be conscripts, so our tanks must be simple, or we're gunna run out of money training crews for all the tanks we want, crews that in a few years will be civies again anyway".

The US was always constrained by how much you can send across the Atlantic, the USSR had no such problem like that, Europe is its front door.

One on one, is a US tank better? Yes. If you changed the two countries positions (Gave the US a huge land space to cover with other countries on all sides who may, or may not be hostile) would they have done it different? Probably not.

The_Chieftain #17 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:51

    Military Specialist

  • Administrator
  • 19313 battles
  • 10,015
  • [WGA] WGA
  • Member since:
    09-08-2011
The M60 sitting in Kubinka was a souvenir from the Syrian Army's middle-East vacations in the early 1980s. It was a significant intel coup, as it was fully loaded with M111 ammunition. They will have received a few sample production pieces from the Egyptians and Syrians in earlier wars.

I think it was easier to assess Soviet equipment than Western, because, well, with few exceptions, every Threat tank was a T-XX, whereas the Soviets would have had to get Leopards, AMX-30s, Chieftains, M60s... Some would have been harder to find than others.

Killertomato #18 Posted Aug 15 2012 - 23:51

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 4500 battles
  • 772
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostDrive_Me_Closer, on Aug 15 2012 - 23:39, said:

I am curious however if they had the same evaluation system as the West.  The US and its allies often "acquired" Russian hardware for evaluation.  While the Soviets did the same during WW2, I'm not aware of any programs continuing.  Did they ever have a stable of F-16s to test pilots against?  Or M-60s to train T-62 crews to fight?  


They got plenty of American gear from Vietnam after the war ended and Iran after the revolution. Not F-16s, but plenty of older stuff.

DiscoSatan #19 Posted Aug 16 2012 - 00:07

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 15025 battles
  • 791
  • Member since:
    07-30-2011
Great article! Keep em coming!! :Smile_great:

AcesHighMDP #20 Posted Aug 16 2012 - 00:12

    First lieutenant

  • Beta Testers
  • 52485 battles
  • 775
  • [GO4T] GO4T
  • Member since:
    09-15-2010

View PostPanzershcreck, on Aug 15 2012 - 22:45, said:

what airplane is that, with all those engines on the front and funky bumps on the back?

http://en.wikipedia....lass_ekranoplan




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users