“Fresh”? They just spent a shift in another role/vehicle. How is that “fresh”?
What’s that sound you hear when a tank shell flies over your head?
So does that mean they don’t have to draw their tank crews from people 5’6" and under anymore?
Their tanks have always been tiny. It’s a surprise when you stand next to one if you are used to U.S. equipment.
Sure T-90s are real. The problem is that the reputation of Russian tanks (maybe not as much for the 90) is that they have the ability to have the turret majestically fly off the hull when hit by a sabot round. This tank seems to be trying to directly go against that.
But the main questions are unanswered. Do the new systems act as advertised or is it just propaganda? They were able to produce several (at least partially) working prototypes but will they be able to afford full production? I heard mention of foreign sales in the future. One of the main selling points of previous export tanks were their relatively low sticker price. How many of Russian’s usual clients will be able to afford this very expensive tank?
I was surprised to read that Sergei Shoigu (a pretty cool guy - the Defence Minister) went to assist the stalled tank in Red Square. (Could you imagine, say, Rumsfeld going to check on a stalled tank?) It was blamed on “driver error” and some guy from the factory in the Urals was able to drive it off. I doubt he (certainly not Sergei!) comes with the sticker price. A deserved promotion to the PA announcer who said it was a planned demonstration of how to evacuate the tank.
So the sales figures remain to be seen. I’d be worried, if they were on my new tank lot.
BBC has some cool stuff about the hardware that will be on display on Saturday. Including a shot of a T-34 (on a flatbed).
What Loach said, concerning the cost. Not much good for Russia if they can only afford a couple of them. And it’s really going to have a 2-man crew?! Who the hell is going to do maintenance? Breaking track with two people is going to be great.
Jeez, if you’re already going to automate much of the tank, why not go whole-hog and make it autonomous or remote-controlled?
Kobal2, I wonder if the shot trap you pointed out is for some sort of active defense system? Maybe the update to ‘Arena’?
Hey, it’s very cold in Russia. There’s, uh, you know, some shrinkage.
Leaving all of the above aside, its not nearly as aesthetically pleasing (I almost said ‘pretty’) as previous Russian/Soviet tanks.
Therefore they need to go back to the drawing board, no I don’t want to hear any excuses.
…this is why I am not Minister of Defence…
Where’s Rainier Wolfcastle when you need him ?
[QUOTE=DinoR]
Kobal2, I wonder if the shot trap you pointed out is for some sort of active defense system? Maybe the update to ‘Arena’?
[/QUOTE]
In fairness, that was DinoR.
Are shot traps still a thing though ? I know they were relevant in WW2, but I would have thought modern shells and/or armor made them irrelevant for… I dunno, Reasons I guess ? :o ; and of course modern AT missiles are going to come from the top anyway.
See the turret shapes of e.g. the Leopard II or the Merkava, which would have been huge glaring shot traps in WW2.
Some of what I’ve been reading says it’s actually a 3 man crew (commander, gunner, driver). No schematics that I’ve seen showing where this 3rd person sits.
The driver screaming like a little girl?
Lemme guess: The tank in the first picture, the one with a 37mm peashooter, is not the new MBT?
So it’s really a 3 man crew, 2 for the tank, one for the tow truck.
I don’t see how since the game is still “How many tanks can NATO standoff strike aircraft and drones destroy with impunity?”
Hasn’t Russia always had pretty effective air-defence systems though? I have no idea how much truth there is in the idea but I’ve always heard that the West has gotten something of a wrong impression from the ease of victory over exported Soviet tanks in conflicts like the Gulf War, they were cheaper, less capable export models, and used in an isolated manner and not as part of a fully integrated combat system.
Basically in a ‘proper’ war NATO would be facing the entire Russian military being used in the manner it was designed to be operated in, and while I have no (well few) doubts that NATO/The West would win it may not be a cake-walk at all.
Basically NATO aircraft and drones wouldn’t be operating with impunity either.
And regarding the tank breaking down, sure its embarrassing PR wise but haven’t tanks always been somewhat fickle beasts, they’re extremely powerful but also surprisingly delicate in some ways. Its part of the reason they’re transported to the area of operation and not simply driven there.
The answer is zero, since Russian Cruise and Ballistic missiles will have destroyed the fixed bases from where aircraft deploy long before.
Well, I for one hope that they have improved them since 1985…
What are the chances that the world will see another huge tank battle like Kursk (1943)? My guess is that such a battle could never happen today-advanced warning and air-surface missiles would destroy the tanks before the battle. So why develop new MBTs? They seem obsolete to me.
OK, I’ll bite, go on?
Ah, unless you mean the Mathias Rust incident? Again, although embarrassing, that’s kind of unfair, the systems weren’t designed for that sort of ‘threat’.
8 Armatas just rolled through Red Square. All went well. 