Jump to content
Lee_Vincent

Armata soon to be in service.

Recommended Posts

This is off topic in that it's not about Armata, but the themes apply.  Tell me to stop and I will:

I've seen certain military vehicles celebrated as icons before as well, often unnecessarily (Tank fights always turn into this, no offense).  Where I think it gets most interesting is in the discussion of Navies and Warships.  I obviously have some bias on the topic, but hear me out:

Capital ships are designed to last for generations and carry the individual quirks of age and the men who sailed them over time.  You can go in spaces of a Nimitz class carrier and see murals from the 70s, 80s, etc.  Enterprise would have given you the same, and I've seen them on the Iowa class battleships I've been on.  They really do tend to take on their own life and get associated with a nation. 

This also plays into the "showing the flag" effect they have.  The US uses its positioning of carriers to send messages, and Navies across the globe send their ships into foreign ports on liberty stops that are often welcomed (and not just by the bars and loose women)*.  I personally toured the Varyag in SF Harbor back in 2011.  A ship visiting tends to go over a whole lot better than a tank visiting, and it certainly carries a higher significance.  You really do embody American (or Russian, Australian, etc) culture when you pull into those ports, and you're expected to act it.  This usually doesn't go poorly, all things considered.

Finally as these ships are tracked and logged, you encounter situations where comparable foes clash in small (or grand) battles where national direction can be shaped by a few vessels.  Tsushima, Jutland, Bismarck vs. Hood**, Midway, Leyte Gulf, etc.  The ships that participate in these actions are remembered and bickered over to this day (go to the World of Warships forum, for example).  I have no particular draw to anyone who's flown my plane before, and I would be surprised if tankers felt differently.

*Recent Hong Kong kerfuffle notwithstanding
**Didn't change the course of the war (Germany pretty much gave up on surface actions but they weren't nearly as effective as U-Boats anyway) but does serve as a fine example of the pride of a nation fighting the pride of a nation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, arjuna_r said:

 

None taken, just thought it interesting how...


... these weapons become such emotive icons. I didn't want to derail the topic into this area, just thought that it relevant in discussion of the Armata. Because it seems particularly just about perceptions and patriotism than actual need/capability.
 

Nope.  Good observation.   We're already pretty far off topic too so I can't imagine anyone is too worked up about it.  

 

 

1 hour ago, Codename Duchess said:

This is off topic in that it's not about Armata, but the themes apply.  Tell me to stop and I will:

I've seen certain military vehicles celebrated as icons before as well, often unnecessarily (Tank fights always turn into this, no offense).  Where I think it gets most interesting is in the discussion of Navies and Warships.  I obviously have some bias on the topic, but hear me out:

Capital ships are designed to last for generations and carry the individual quirks of age and the men who sailed them over time.  You can go in spaces of a Nimitz class carrier and see murals from the 70s, 80s, etc.  Enterprise would have given you the same, and I've seen them on the Iowa class battleships I've been on.  They really do tend to take on their own life and get associated with a nation. 

This also plays into the "showing the flag" effect they have.  The US uses its positioning of carriers to send messages, and Navies across the globe send their ships into foreign ports on liberty stops that are often welcomed (and not just by the bars and loose women)*.  I personally toured the Varyag in SF Harbor back in 2011.  A ship visiting tends to go over a whole lot better than a tank visiting, and it certainly carries a higher significance.  You really do embody American (or Russian, Australian, etc) culture when you pull into those ports, and you're expected to act it.  This usually doesn't go poorly, all things considered.

Finally as these ships are tracked and logged, you encounter situations where comparable foes clash in small (or grand) battles where national direction can be shaped by a few vessels.  Tsushima, Jutland, Bismarck vs. Hood**, Midway, Leyte Gulf, etc.  The ships that participate in these actions are remembered and bickered over to this day (go to the World of Warships forum, for example).  I have no particular draw to anyone who's flown my plane before, and I would be surprised if tankers felt differently.

*Recent Hong Kong kerfuffle notwithstanding
**Didn't change the course of the war (Germany pretty much gave up on surface actions but they weren't nearly as effective as U-Boats anyway) but does serve as a fine example of the pride of a nation fighting the pride of a nation.

Well firstly you are an aviator and thus wrong. I think the difference is that ships aren't just weapons, but their closest analog in terms of manpower and "presence" on the land battlefield is things like Battalions, or even the more distant history Regiments and so forth.  As Army peoples it wasn't relevant what tank we were on*, it was that we were in a battalion of the 9th Infantry regiment, and its glorious history goes all the way back to 1798 to be prepared to deal with French aggression blah blah blah, both world wars blah blah, fighting the Chinese a few times etc etc, Manchu to you too.

So given that I think the history and symbolism is there, it's just the ship is both weapon and unit if that makes any sense.

As far as tank measuring contests, it is a big strong heavy thing.  Unlike a rifle or artillery piece, it's much more contained and straight forward (if you're a casual observer) what it does and it's supposed to be unstoppable, and of course your country has the best one because your country is the best.   It's inevitable if something challenges that people lose their collective minds, which is why it gets hard to have an intelligent conversation about relative "goodness" of different armor (BECAUSE RUSSIA STRONK SUPREME FIGHT FACIST WIN WITH GREAT T-34 MEAN RUSSIAN TANK GOOD NOW, or Leo 2 fans disregarding so many countries use them because they were cheap as free after 1991 rather than being the ur-tank to stop all other thanks,  or Abrams folks absolutely positive the Abrams took a direct hit from an Iraqi ICBM and kept going because 'murica, it was on the history channel look it up)

It's really a lot more complicated and frankly comes down to how does the tank as a weapons system fit your nation's military forces.  This feeds back into the Armata thing because frankly it does not seem to mesh well with what Russia is capable of at this time or in the near future.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I saw that ICBM thing on a commercial break from Himmlers Occult UFOs. Gawd I love how the history channels evolved since the mid 90s.

I really want to see it because apparently the same expert on Iraqi anri tank ICBM use against heavy murican armor such as Bradleys is supposed to make an appearance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

BECAUSE RUSSIA STRONK SUPREME FIGHT FACIST WIN WITH GREAT T-34 MEAN RUSSIAN TANK GOOD NOW

It so happens that I've stumbled upon this today. Warning! Keep coffee or any other liquids away from your keyboard/screen.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ohrdruf is where this 'battle' is supposed to be? My dad's infantry division, the 89th along with the 4th Armored liberated that hell hole. Dad would get the shakes when he talked about that place.

Edited by Douglas Ruddd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, L0ckAndL0ad said:

It so happens that I've stumbled upon this today. Warning! Keep coffee or any other liquids away from your keyboard/screen.

 

Weeeeeow.  

That's really all I have to say.  

I'm pretty done with military movies for the most part.  Or at least they either seem tone deaf "WAR IS HELL" as written by someone who never wore a uniform, or jingoistic piles of garbage.  

I've given Fury a pass  for a variety of reasons, but I don't think I've watched a "war" movie in a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

Weeeeeow.  

That's really all I have to say.  

I'm pretty done with military movies for the most part.  Or at least they either seem tone deaf "WAR IS HELL" as written by someone who never wore a uniform, or jingoistic piles of garbage.  

I've given Fury a pass  for a variety of reasons, but I don't think I've watched a "war" movie in a very long time.

fury is good drama but technically deficient (the 76mm sherman at close range would have made minced meat of that tiger, especially when they outnumber it 3-1) and the ending is simply stupid. But some scenes and situations are fairly gripping and realistic . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, antaress73 said:

fury is good drama but technically deficient (the 76mm sherman at close range would have made minced meat of that tiger, especially when they outnumber it 3-1) and the ending is simply stupid. But some scenes and situations are fairly gripping and realistic . 

Yeah but I think a legitimate authentic World War Two tanker movie would be like 160 minutes of boredom and tedium, 50 minutes of anxiety, and then like 10 minutes of pure unmitigated pants destroying terrible.  

A war movie, or at least a good one should be a drama.  My main gripe with Fury is the ending was terribly un-tank (a last stand could have still been okay, just with the tank on the move and then getting mobility killed maybe) and way over the top, and it does pretty much repeat the whole Belton Cooper nonsense verbatim.  

On the other hand, just the interactions between the various characters was one of the closest portrayals of soldiers I've ever seen, the portrayal of the war as an apocalyptic event was was more true to life than most any other film, and the whole sequence from rescuing the infantry platoon through the town assault was frankly the best World War Two battle scene I've seen in a long time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

On the other hand, just the interactions between the various characters was one of the closest portrayals of soldiers I've ever seen, the portrayal of the war as an apocalyptic event was was more true to life than most any other film, and the whole sequence from rescuing the infantry platoon through the town assault was frankly the best World War Two battle scene I've seen in a long time.

Exactly what made it worth watching and suffering through the end sequence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That end sequence was terrible. All those supposed,  uber Nazi soldiers blindly rushing around, literally frontal assault on an obviously alert tank..... despite being supposedly battle hardened.... Yah... No. 

My beef with the AT assault was the pakfront in such a close spaced line -  surely they would have had some kind of flank position? Now THAT would have made the assault insane. 

As it was,  the sheer force and violence of shell's hitting tanks was really well done. It felt dangerous, unlike pretty much every other tank movie.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I remember recently reading a post on here I believe where a poster mentioned his father had been in WW2 and rarely spoke of it. however I guess he did get pretty angry when they saw a couple of old fashioned hollywood ww2 movies because he was adamant the Germans were not 'that' stupid and were a very formidable foe.  I remember having had thought the same myself  (without actually knowing the German was a formidable foe or actually being in WW2 or the service at all for that matter obviously) that I hate how often hollywood movies portray German soldiers as moronic or their defense as inept.  Its actually a disservice to our vets who had to improvise with often equipment subpar to their enemies' and had to overcome a very deadly and dangerous enemy.

Fury was ridiculous in the end and the beginning with the leap and throat cut on the German horse mounted officer. I also remember thinking that it was kind of BS to portray April 45 the height of Nazi resistance and the part of the war where the German military was deadliest.  Of course it is a statistical fact that the last year of the war was by far the bloodiest for all involved though Id still contend that for most American GIs the German army as its deadliest foe would have occurred in North Africa, or Italy, Normandy, or even the Battle of the Bulge.  Not April 45. But really whether you got killed on September 1st 39 or 14 May 45, whether it was in The Battle of Stalingrad in Nov 42 or some field in Normandy in July 44, I guess it really doesnt matter to you  - the casualty - how big a battle or how ''effective'' the enemy is or was at that point since to you they were quite effective enough.

And yeah, Belton Cooper. -sigh-.  Im also continually depressed at how everyones letting Ambrose get a pass.

But not too surprised at hollywood. Like American Gangster.  Because somewhat of a politically correct atmosphere in America and also because even though hes a bad guy hes the movie's hero they portrayed the heroin being smuggled into the US as being smuggled in on empty caskets. This was a deliberate twisting of the truth into a lie based in reality.  The heroin was coming in on caskets, unfortunately the caskets werent empty and the heroin was being put in dead GIs torsos. Of course the US public would probably get pretty outraged at this Lucas fellow over some such so hollywood cut the whole dead GI business out and suddenly he's just another poor guy who turned to crime and bought his mom a mansion blah blah. And yeah sorry thats way off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Fury... cripes, where to start on that one :)  Apparently the movie's historical researchers came to the conclusion that Panzerfausts were clubs and that the German soldier had to swing it down, with both hands, onto the top of a tank to have any affect on it.  100m range my arse :)

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

Though I've said it elsewhere, I highly recommend the Estonian movie (best seen with English subtitles; Russians speaking French in one version via VO is downright weird ) 1944. Impressed Estonian SS vs also impressed for service (in fact, stolen from their country when Russia took it over, then was forced out)) Russian 8th (?) Estonian Army. Has loads of the right toys, plenty of drama, pretty deep insights into men deeply conflicted by the terrible brother against brother situation they were in, with the focus on the SS guys., I found it pretty engrossing, and there are scenes in it which will warm the cockles of the CMRT players, as well as those who've watched certain battle specific videos from the game.

LOckAndLOad,

It's now possible I've seen it all. Overfed Russian POW tank crew with a tank! Adding to the surreal nature of whatever this was, Russian titles with "Panzer Lied" playing. Was this someone's military mushroom trip dream?

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, John Kettler said:

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

Though I've said it elsewhere, I highly recommend the Estonian movie (best seen with English subtitles; Russians speaking French in one version via VO is downright weird ) 1944. Impressed Estonian SS vs also impressed for service (in fact, stolen from their country when Russia took it over, then was forced out)) Russian 8th (?) Estonian Army. Has loads of the right toys, plenty of drama, pretty deep insights into men deeply conflicted by the terrible brother against brother situation they were in, with the focus on the SS guys., I found it pretty engrossing, and there are scenes in it which will warm the cockles of the CMRT players, as well as those who've watched certain battle specific videos from the game.

LOckAndLOad,

It's now possible I've seen it all. Overfed Russian POW tank crew with a tank! Adding to the surreal nature of whatever this was, Russian titles with "Panzer Lied" playing. Was this someone's military mushroom trip dream?

Regards,

John Kettler

the shell penetrating and the commander dropping his binocs while saying matter of factly "Scheiße" before the turret explodes is funny. The shell penetrating was a nice effect but the commander`s legs would have been blown off and him at the bottom of the turret before the turret exploded. Sorry for the gore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:

Fury... cripes, where to start on that one :)  Apparently the movie's historical researchers came to the conclusion that Panzerfausts were clubs and that the German soldier had to swing it down, with both hands, onto the top of a tank to have any affect on it.  100m range my arse :)

Steve

You obviously did not sit through the credits

"German soldier motivational speech provided by Ken aka C3K"

the scene in the movie is actually take 2  in the first take the Germans literally tried to eat the tank  there is still some fall out over the dental plan for those extras. Most smiled like hockey players after the scene. In an interview with the director he mentioned they saved the original for a WW2 nazi zombie movie he is working on  

interestingly enough this has also led to discussion of a new entry in a military jpurnal about the "Ken" or "C3K" factor in war where motivation can become so strong as to dilute the technical effectiveness of a weapon as the user now takes whatever it is be it a rifle, Javelin, AT4 etc and simply uses it as a club  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

13 hours ago, Raptorx7 said:

They were all fanatic conscripts, really bad purchasing decisions for that QB on the German side.

Epic, sig-worthy post! :lol::lol::lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎01‎/‎06‎/‎2016 at 5:10 PM, L0ckAndL0ad said:

It so happens that I've stumbled upon this today. Warning! Keep coffee or any other liquids away from your keyboard/screen.

 

Wait - they KO the first Panther with a unobserved guesstimated indirect fire shot ? :blink:

I want to be able to do that in game ! :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Baneman said:

Wait - they KO the first Panther with a unobserved guesstimated indirect fire shot ? :blink:

I want to be able to do that in game ! :lol:

Yeah, BF fix or do sumfink

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Russian CMers,

While I very much wish we could get the latest info on the situation with the T-14 in particular and the other members of the Armata family in general, I doubt the might head of the MoD, General of the Russian Federation Army Sergei Shoigu is going to CC us, let alone make us direct addressees, for official correspondence on these matters. Alas, we must wait. Am sure we'd all welcome more information on this fascinating project. On a lighter and odd note, I should note that, no disrespect to your Minister of Defence, every time I read "Shoigu" I have to kick my brain out of seeing that as "shoyu," soy sauce! 

antaress73,

Your response confused me initially, since I thought you were talking about some aspect of 1944 I didn't recall, but then I realized you were referring to the zek/KZ mushroom trip video. Once I got that, I felt moved to point out how lightning quick the Panther TC had to be in order to instantly assess the situation, decide what to do, then to make such a scatological utterance. Alternatively, the ammo grogs need to do deep research on this newly discovered Russian delayed penetration AP projectile (BR-???). It apparently has some sort of high friction coating on it which slows penetration for Fascisti to realize their doomed just far enough ahead so they can make ironic comments just before perishing in the fire and explosions the Hitlerites deserve for invading the Rodina! When last heard NII Staal was hard at work on this one.

sburke,

Don't know which was funnier, the c3k credits crack or the initial scene description, especially the dental plan. Loved the post! Since you mentioned zombies, I thought I'd inform you of a somewhat shocking wargame I saw while in a huge game store with my brother. There is an award winning game called Heroes of Normandie, which evidently takes the unique approach of using only heroes on both sides. It's a heavy beast, but is as nothing compared to another game with the same system, Shadows Over Normandie. After seeing what it's about, you may become pro-zombie!

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler

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.


×
×
  • Create New...