Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
vincere

Russia/US: What Weapons are Russian Superiority?

Recommended Posts

I did not.  Just in toe to toe it's a worse weapons system than the 25 MM.

 

Meh, id say both would certainly damage whatever they were firing at. The subsystems are bound to be degraded substantially on both platforms.

 

BMP-3 claims armour protection frontally from 25mm although this might be disputed, with APFSDS 25mm rounds available to the M2.

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's pretty strongly disputed.  

 

Not trying to turn this into a pissing contest.  I reasonably expect both BMP3 and Bradley to respond negatively to direct hits from 25 MM and 30 MM respectively.  However the Sabot type rounds for the 25 MM are nasty, and will well and truly hole obsolete MBTs from angles other than rear.   30 MM can be potent, but it isn't that sort of potent, and I like the FCS and optics the 25 MM comes with a lot.

 

100 MM is going to be really useful, I'm just not entirely sure if I'll find it useful enough to make me prefer the BMP over the Bradley.  

 

In terms of Russian capabilities, again, the S26 and thermobaric infantry weapons stand out as the far and away better capabilities. Other than that I feel it strongly comes down to taste and how you fight.  For instance, I'm disinclined to send anything into the water where the enemy might be in direct fire range, so I'm not really going to be going amphibious with Russian hardware often.  conversely my tendency to bring IFVs fairly close to the enemy before dismounting, once the enemy is somewhat suppressed  is less dangerous with the Bradley style troop ramp vs not-BMP 2 exit methods from Russia, which means I weigh that stupid door a lot more heavily than others might.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agiel,

 

That poor gun depression is the direct result of a conscious design decision to minimize height. Why? Russian tanks are designed to fight on the steppes, where height above the ground is truly a matter of life and death. Doing this requires sacrificing gun depression. Here's a frontal view height and width comparison of the T-72, Leopard 2 and M1A1 Abrams. Western tanks are designed to operate on much more vertical terrain, and because their turret roofs are higher, there's room for greater gun depression. This doesn't really matter on flat ground, but when the tanks are fighting from elevated positions, the Russian tanks are considerably more exposed. And that's a matter of life and death.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the old Cold War emphasis on gun depression was pretty much the Pentagon's PR attempt to justify why our M60A1 was as tall as a cathedral  :D

Since the Market Garden patch gun depression limits have been abstracted by giving an extremely long aiming period when the target is outside of normal elevation arc. Important for city fighting. Its meant to represent the tank looking for a position where it could get a shot off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nah.  When you're planning to fight from hull down positions, the ability to depress your tank gun is quite important.  I found the world's best hide site up on a hill side while playing OPFOR for my company.  I managed to kill 2/4 of the attacking platoon but the other two tanks remained both unaware, and below my ability to depress the gun.  If you're going to be much above ground level, or shooting at all below the horizontal plane of your tracks or so (not to say you could hit right in front of the tank, but picture firing down into a valley), gun depression becomes very important.

 

US tanks have also always placed a pretty high priority on crew working space, and it's paid off fairly well in practice.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tE_QYDYcj6w

 

Doesn't make you fear the T-90 too awfully much.

Well, it's tank racing, which is inherently cool, but can anyone explicate: what are the tank models that are racing? The fastest 3 round the first lap all looked the same, and the big slow green one looked more like a Western than a Russian low-profile make...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's tank racing, which is inherently cool, but can anyone explicate: what are the tank models that are racing? The fastest 3 round the first lap all looked the same, and the big slow green one looked more like a Western than a Russian low-profile make...

T-72s and Chineese one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tank biathlon Russian tanks last year were T-72B3M's, the year before that they were just T-72B3's. There are no T-90's in that competition. Also, to mention, they do not fully use FCS for those competitions and only use training rounds. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...