Jump to content
VasFURY

Moscow Victory Day (70 Years) Parade

Recommended Posts

John Kettler

Yes, it is somewhat hard for it to stand out when it is just one brief thing among many during a more than hour long event. Besides, we spoilt it for ourselves by hunting for every little glimpse of it during the previous months. But here is a bit shorter and more dramatic version for you, set to some classical music :D :

Oh don't you dare be reasonable and on topic!

Duly noted, veering off topic now. :)

The other two most notable parades this year are probably those that happened in Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples' Republics. Not bad for the first time ever:

Edited by Krasnoarmeyets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes John, China does have maybe one of the best tanks in the world. Hard to say without actually being able to test them side to side with the Abram, and some of the other tanks.

 

But from what is know it is surely a threat.

 

But ripping on a tank that is still in the design phase in a sense shows no class. We really know very little about the thing.

 

So yes, there is missing parts and fake covering on the unit. But I am impressed that they even showed it as is. (What, would you prefer they left the canvas covers on and let you guess what was underneath it.)

 

And your Threat Analyst skills might have managed to get you a paying job but you have posted enough garbage here in the years that I question your basic logic. (So your Logic matches most of what we see coming from our Government lately) No basic sound decision making at all and  no policies being past that give direction for the future, just lies and efforts to win the vote for the next election and spending money on companies that hire people like you.   And you were thinking that statement carry some weight behind it, no, not for me. Just put me in the mood to write you this nasty gram.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Topic

 

Try playing "Horst Wessel Lied" while watching the footage, the resemblance is uncanny.  I think I'd be less annoyed if this was just every T-34 shaken loose from storage for an actual "commemorate and pretend we learned something from 1939-1945" parade, but it's just another example of small men playing with their toys now.  The feeble grasps at legitimacy also ring pretty hollow.  

 

I think it's quite on topic to question the parade in general, and also interesting that specially picked units to show off Russian might supreme caught fire.  It's just additionally poetic considering the employment of that particular brand of weapons system too.

 

Re: Type 99

 

By most estimates it's another semi-paper panzer.  There's plenty of "estimates" based on Chinese claims, but we know even less about it than the Armata in terms of what's really on/in it. There' some really big claims about it, but many of them are:

 

1. Patently absurd.  Like 1000 RHA equivalent over the entire frontal arc absurd.  

 

2. Really hard to quantify.  Like earlier models (Type 98/99 baseline) boasted "2.5 generation thermal optics!" when looking at the performance of same was pretty close to the finest in 1995 equipment.  The listing of features included often is not a good guide to how capable those systems are.

 

China does have the advantage of having more money to blow on a new tank design than the Russians, but on the other hand it is more concerned with Naval/Aviation problems these days, with the PLA remaining largely used for internal security and limited expeditionary missions to protect Chinese investments overseas.  They're worse off than the Russians when it comes to tank fleet obsolescence, but this has been the case since the T-55 derived platforms stopped being competitive.  There's no sign that tank procurement has gotten any more serious.  The quite limited given fleet scale adoption of later model Chinese armor, something like 700 total "new" tanks vs 7000+ of the abjectly obsolete ones is somewhat telling.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it is somewhat hard for it to stand out when it is just one brief thing among many during a more than hour long event. Besides, we spoilt it for ourselves by hunting for every little glimpse of it during the previous months. But here is a bit shorter and more dramatic version for you, set to some classical music :D :

Duly noted, veering off topic now. :)

The other two most notable parades this year are probably those that happened in Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples' Republics. Not bad for the first time ever:

There was also this parade.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There was also this parade.

Interesting - nice to see so many different vehicles in running condition. Do they belong to reconstructors, or are they borrowed from some museum?

Edited by Krasnoarmeyets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Krasnoarmeyets,

 

If the T-14 Armata got "buried," it seems to me that is Putin's/ModD's fault. If it was really the big deal the Russian authorities have been loudly declaring for quite some time, then it should've been prominently featured, certainly before the T-90As!  I liked the short vid with its stirring martial song, though I have no idea whether it's an actual Russian military song. Speaking of which, did you know that after the Russians got to see "the Hunt for Red October," they licensed "Das Vedanya Rodina (winging the spelling here) and changed the lyrics? Also, I now understand your distress over the Russian Air force "stealing" the cameras just as the T-15 Armata Heavy IFV rolled in. Got a glimpse of it but still haven't seen the Bumerang.

I have closely reviewed the T-14 footage, and while big, to me it's still far less impressive than the T-90A. It still looks far less real and impressive than it did at the parade training ground.

 

slysniper,

 

I think you've got your weapon introduction cycle crossed up considerably. The T-14 isn't in design phase. Therefore, I'm not ripping on a weapon in design phase and am, consequently, acting with social appropriateness. I've been directly involved in the weapon design process several times, and a weapon at that stage is mostly concepts, drawings, maybe models, reams of calculations and various pieces of hardware, much of it developmental or even experimental, those involved anticipate including--if it's even ready yet. The Russians have plainly stated the T-14 has already been in the hands of the troops for testing. Limited field trials, from which it's perfectly natural that problems are identified and fixes implemented. Here's an example of the process, in this case, for the T-34/85M.  Further, the T-14 was supposed to be in serial production and enter service, what the US calls IOC, this year. There are twenty of them, so it's not a one off prototype, either. Based on what I've seen reported, the T-14 is practically at the State trial level of acceptance into service.

 

If you wish to disregard what I have to say on this and other defense and intelligence matters, that's on you, but I have an 11+ year track record of demonstrated excellence as a Threat Analyst, and that's not my opinion, but what director level company officials, high GS spooks and high ranking military officers told me personally.  There are combat systems operational now to which I made direct contributions, notably the AC-130U Spooky, AIM-120 AMRAAM and the TOW 2B Aero, the last whose seeds I planted with our CTO prior to 1980. Nor were the clueless and incompetent offered Project Leader slots at Rockwell International North American Aerospace Division, with promotions, their own teams and starting budgets several multiples of $100,000 to start, per project. You can snipe at me all you like, but the fact is that when it comes to this sort of thing I've not only BTDT, but have been pinged several times by the spook community since leaving military aerospace in late June of 1989 to "return to the fold." I don't know what your experience has been with spooks, but they're as pragmatic and results oriented as they come, and you either have it or don't when it comes to the work. If you don't, you get frozen out.  Or fired if in their employ. Ponder, if you will, then, that the alphabet soup agencies still see me as valuable over two decades after leaving the demanding profession of Threat Analysis. Understand, too, that the me you think you know is but a barely there husk of who I once was and what I could do. 

 

And, yes, I'm glad they didn't parade the T-14s with canvas covers on the turrets. I would've preferred they parade them the way we saw them, rather than, as the British say, all tarted up or, in the alternative, looking like one of those women who's had too much plastic surgery and Botox. Sad, really. The T-14 we saw before the AFV makeover was an impressive, fierce looking beast possessed of a very strong presence no modern Russian tank has had in decades, and I said so. Your splenetic nastygram doesn't faze me, and I've been up all night! Your lumping me in with the present administration's outrageous policies and practices is simply ludicrous and makes you look bad. Not to mention desperate.

 

panzersaurkrautwerfer,

 

My understanding (which may well be wrong; out of my element here) is that the core technology is derived from the T-72. I know very little about the Type 99 in terms of sensors and such, but it looked very impressive and performed well in the Tank Biathlon last year. I believe it had the best gun stabilization of all the competitors, too. My comments regarding it had to do with the way it would've looked in the parade and the strong impression it would doubtless have made, especially when compared to the T-14.

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

 

Edited by John Kettler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, bringing things completely off-topic now. :)

I know very little about the Type 99 in terms of sensors and such, but it looked very impressive and performed well in the Tank Biathlon last year. I believe it had the best gun stabilization of all the competitors, too.

It was the Type-96G/A that participated in the biathlon. One curious bit of insider information is that apparently Chinese were allowed to use APFSDS munitions during firing challenges, while everybody else had to use HEAT practice rounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting - nice to see so many different vehicles in running condition. Do they belong to reconstructors, or are they borrowed from some museum?

Don't know honestly.

 

While is is cool to see the new military hardware, I prefer the events that focus on those who gave so much as opposed to muscle flexing displays of power.

 

Like this event - this to me is much more appropriate.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/ap-photos-remains-soviet-soldiers-recovered-buried-184854650.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you wish to disregard what I have to say on this and other defense and intelligence matters, that's on you, but I have an 11+ year track record of demonstrated excellence as a Threat Analyst, and that's not my opinion, but what director level company officials, high GS spooks and high ranking military officers told me personally.  There are combat systems operational now to which I made direct contributions, notably the AC-130U Spooky, AIM-120 AMRAAM and the TOW 2B Aero, the last whose seeds I planted with our CTO prior to 1980. Nor were the clueless and incompetent offered Project Leader slots at Rockwell International North American Aerospace Division, with promotions, their own teams and starting budgets several multiples of $100,000 to start, per project. You can snipe at me all you like, but the fact is that when it comes to this sort of thing I've not only BTDT, but have been pinged several times by the spook community since leaving military aerospace in late June of 1989 to "return to the fold." I don't know what your experience has been with spooks, but they're as pragmatic and results oriented as they come, and you either have it or don't when it comes to the work. If you don't, you get frozen out.  Or fired if in their employ. Ponder, if you will, then, that the alphabet soup agencies still see me as valuable over two decades after leaving the demanding profession of Threat Analysis. Understand, too, that the me you think you know is but a barely there husk of who I once was and what I could do.

Panzers on Mars by John Kettler: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/marte/esp_marte_2.htm

 

Gun emplacements and the shattered remnants of a tank seemed apparent to this writer, a former military analyst. One of the vehicles looked very much like a World War II German Panzer I, right down to its peculiar track work. Others seen in the vicinity looked like a World War I rhomboid tank and a U.S. M-48 of 1960s vintage. Whatever these things were, it seems that in later frames they received the full NASA disinformation treatment in which they were made to disappear as apparent alien artifacts.

Not surprisingly the alphabet soup agencies ignored your bizzare attempts to contact them about the threat from Panzers on Mars...  :lol:

Edited by Wicky

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Panzers on Mars by John Kettler: http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/marte/esp_marte_2.htm

 

Not surprisingly the alphabet soup agencies ignored your bizzare attempts to contact them about the threat from Panzers on Mars...  :lol:

 

Nazis from Mars? Damn, we thought they were coming from the moon! This changes everything.

Edited by Raptorx7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Try playing "Horst Wessel Lied" while watching the footage, the resemblance is uncanny.  I think I'd be less annoyed if this was just every T-34 shaken loose from storage for an actual "commemorate and pretend we learned something from 1939-1945" parade, but it's just another example of small men playing with their toys now.  The feeble grasps at legitimacy also ring pretty hollow.  

 

I think it's quite on topic to question the parade in general, and also interesting that specially picked units to show off Russian might supreme caught fire.  It's just additionally poetic considering the employment of that particular brand of weapons system too.

 

I think you're overreacting a bit :) Military parades is our tradition. Political background is not very good this year (when was it perfect?), but there is really nothing unusuall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I think you're overreacting a bit  :) Military parades is our tradition.

 

So are authoritarian militaristic states that have significant problems with geography. 

 

I do not find either of those to be really acceptable.

 

Think the allied hardware parades were more appropriate.  More topical, less chest thumping stronktard.  

 

Also universal carriers are always a bit comically awesome.  There's a local museum around here that's supposed to have a "tankfest" of sorts in a few weeks.  I know they've got a M4A1, Hetzer, and T-34/85 as part of their museum holdings, but I believe they're having some privately owned vehicles show up for a driveby and display.

 

Needless to say I'm pumped.  The wife, less so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Topic

 

Try playing "Horst Wessel Lied" while watching the footage, the resemblance is uncanny.  I think I'd be less annoyed if this was just every T-34 shaken loose from storage for an actual "commemorate and pretend we learned something from 1939-1945" parade, but it's just another example of small men playing with their toys now.  The feeble grasps at legitimacy also ring pretty hollow.  

 

I think it's quite on topic to question the parade in general, and also interesting that specially picked units to show off Russian might supreme caught fire.  It's just additionally poetic considering the employment of that particular brand of weapons system too.

 

Re: Type 99

 

By most estimates it's another semi-paper panzer.  There's plenty of "estimates" based on Chinese claims, but we know even less about it than the Armata in terms of what's really on/in it. There' some really big claims about it, but many of them are:

 

1. Patently absurd.  Like 1000 RHA equivalent over the entire frontal arc absurd.  

 

2. Really hard to quantify.  Like earlier models (Type 98/99 baseline) boasted "2.5 generation thermal optics!" when looking at the performance of same was pretty close to the finest in 1995 equipment.  The listing of features included often is not a good guide to how capable those systems are.

 

China does have the advantage of having more money to blow on a new tank design than the Russians, but on the other hand it is more concerned with Naval/Aviation problems these days, with the PLA remaining largely used for internal security and limited expeditionary missions to protect Chinese investments overseas.  They're worse off than the Russians when it comes to tank fleet obsolescence, but this has been the case since the T-55 derived platforms stopped being competitive.  There's no sign that tank procurement has gotten any more serious.  The quite limited given fleet scale adoption of later model Chinese armor, something like 700 total "new" tanks vs 7000+ of the abjectly obsolete ones is somewhat telling.  

 

The most dangerous part of the Type-99 is the cupola mounted laser dazzle weapon. God forbid that ever gets fired at dismounts in anger, they can look forward to a life of blindness. Pun intended.

 

 

 

And also, don't turn this into a faeces slinging contest.

 

Edited by Stagler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So are authoritarian militaristic states that have significant problems with geography. 

I do not find either of those to be really acceptable.

 

What problems do you mean exactly?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The most dangerous part of the Type-99 is the cupola mounted laser dazzle weapon. God forbid that ever gets fired at dismounts in anger, they can look forward to a life of blindness. Pun intended.

 

It works best against unprotected eyeballs.  There's already various laser resistant glasses issued or available.  They became pretty important given the amount of lasers whipping around Baghdad at a time, while most of those were lower powered they could still cause temporary blindness or at least discomfort.  While the Chinese type units are more powerful, they're still defeatable by wearing the proper shades, or some of the clear anti-laser type lenses (they're not really clear, they have an odd almost like beer bottle green made much more transparent hue to them).  

 

 

 

And also, don't turn this into a faeces slinging contest.

 

Dunno.  Seems the feces already rolled down the street, and the gutters appear clogged.

 

 

 

What problems do you mean exactly?

 

The Soviet and then Russian military has a distressing tendency to find itself on the wrong side of the border with its neighbors.  Either it's a fairly consistent historical malicious intent or a total inability to land-navigate, either of which are highly unacceptable.  Then it tends to hold military capability and "strength" up as virtues while still slipping further and further behind the rest of the world at large in things that matter.  

 

It'd be nice if Russians stayed on the right side of the internationally recognized borders (and were honest about doing so), or stopped pretending their military was relevant, or appropriately sized and funded vs their GDP and role in the modern world.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Soviet and then Russian military has a distressing tendency to find itself on the wrong side of the border with its neighbors.  Either it's a fairly consistent historical malicious intent or a total inability to land-navigate, either of which are highly unacceptable.  Then it tends to hold military capability and "strength" up as virtues while still slipping further and further behind the rest of the world at large in things that matter.  

 

It'd be nice if Russians stayed on the right side of the internationally recognized borders (and were honest about doing so), or stopped pretending their military was relevant, or appropriately sized and funded vs their GDP and role in the modern world.  

 

I completely agree with you. It would be nice if every country abstain from bombing, invading or messing directly or indirectly with other countries.

Because, you know, not only Russians have problems with geography ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

slysniper,

Nor were the clueless and incompetent offered Project Leader slots at Rockwell International North American Aerospace Division, with promotions, their own teams and starting budgets several multiples of $100,000 to start,

 

Regards,

 

John Kettler

 

As a simple telecom engineer at a small Dotcom that was acquired by Cable and Wireless before it's ignominious demise I argued for and got $750,000 just to upgrade the C&W telephony infrastructure in Japan.  A few $100,000 in military projects strikes me as basically the guy who said upgrade to color copiers.

 

Old John, doing the copier thing...

Sorry this was the closest I could get.

 

Seriously for a super secrety high intel spook knowing guy a few 100K seems like peanuts in the way of projects.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And before this topic irrevocably slides into yet another pointless arguing, here are some more running vintage vehicles (including T-20, T-27, T-37, T-26, BT-5, BT-7, T-28, T-60, T-70, T-34, T-34-85, SU-76, SU-100, ISU-152, etc.), at 22:00:

Edited by Krasnoarmeyets

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that all military analysts of the Cold War era did a great dis-service to America by consistently over-hyping the capability of the Soviet Military in order to line their own pockets with lucrative Defense Department (taxpayer funded) contracts.

 

I.e, the missile gap, the bomber gap, Soviet tank and aircraft superiority. It all turned out to be bunk. One case in point the Mig-25 hype job.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that all military analysts of the Cold War era did a great dis-service to America by consistently over-hyping the capability of the Soviet Military in order to line their own pockets with lucrative Defense Department (taxpayer funded) contracts.

 

I.e, the missile gap, the bomber gap, Soviet tank and aircraft superiority. It all turned out to be bunk. One case in point the Mig-25 hype job.

 

The tank gap was significant for a certain period of time before the M1 Abrams was about to come on line in Europe.

Edited by Raptorx7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I think that all military analysts of the Cold War era did a great dis-service to America by consistently over-hyping the capability of the Soviet Military in order to line their own pockets with lucrative Defense Department (taxpayer funded) contracts.

 

I.e, the missile gap, the bomber gap, Soviet tank and aircraft superiority. It all turned out to be bunk. One case in point the Mig-25 hype job.

 

I think the problem was more assuming whatever they were building was as good, as advanced, and as well funded as whatever we were doing.  So the MI-25 had a lot of things it did quite well, but we assumed it did so with a similar level of technology vs being brute force, low efficiency built to lawndart through the sky as fast as possible and little else.  

 

Of course, the real tragedy is we could have skipped the cold war entirely if it wasn't for the USSR's post Yalta behavior.  One of the greatest missed opportunities of history is a real peace vs Soviet aggression and repression of Eastern Europe after 1945.  The US pre-Korea was on the verge of more or less going back into isolation mode, other western Allies hardly had the resources to do much of anything, we really were on the cusp of being able to sit back and just let the world rebuild.

 

But instead the wearer of the boot resting on  Poland's neck changed and little else.  Political enemies went into the same concentration camps the Soviets had liberated, and then others too shipped deeper into the hinterlands of Russia for the crime of being something as imaginary as a member of the international Jewery conspiracy.  

 

So to that end it's hardly something worth celebrating when you get down to it.

 

 

 

I completely agree with you. It would be nice if every country abstain from bombing, invading or messing directly or indirectly with other countries.

 

Cute.  Please point to the countries forced into NATO at gunpoint, or annexed into a western county post 1900 or so?  Or the fact that generally historical malfeasance is something the West looks down on (see Germany) while it's something that Russia still holds up as national epic heroism.  

 

I mean it's worse than Japan in terms of being unapologetic for historical crimes and ills.  And that's saying something/likely indicative of why Russia has no friends that are not totalitarian crapholes.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only gap was numerical, granted. Western tank design proved itself superior time and again before the Abrams was fielded, in 1967 and again in 1973 in the Middle East. Centurians, M-48s, M-60s and SuperShermans easily handled Syrian and Egyptian T-54/55s and T-62s.

 

What caught the Israelis and Western analysts by surprise in 1973,  was the extensive use of Sagger AT missles by the Egyptians, which effectively negated Israeli tank tactics early on.

Edited by Nidan1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The only gap was numerical, granted. Western tank design proved itself superior time and again before the Abrams was fielded, in 1967 and again in 1973 in the Middle East. Centurians, M-48s, M-60s and SuperShermans easily handled Syrian and Egyptian T-54/55s and T-62s.

 

Dunno man.  The Israelis also blew through Jordanian M48s and the like with equal ease using Shermans and such.  The Israeli-Arab wars were a good conduit for Soviet equipment for technical exploitation, but not always the best source for how the piece of equipment might actually be employed.  T-64 would have been problems, T-80 maybe too when it comes tank to tank (of course, they'd only made up a small portion of the Soviet tank fleet anyway).  

 

Of course it's game over by the time the Challenger, Leo 2, and M1A1 (even perhaps the M1 and M1IP with some of the very late 105 MM DU rounds) roll out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who is to say that Soviet soldiers would have performed any better in their equipment than their Arab counterparts? In 1973 they had very little practical combat experience in armored warfare. Soviet tank design during that time did not lend itself well to the deserts of the Middle East. Squat turrets and low silhouettes may have worked on the North German Plain, but not so much on the Golan or in the Sinai. Good hull down positions were difficult when the main guns could not be depressed enough to fire over desert escarpments. The Israelis with their higher Centurians and Pattons, could hide much better in defense and be able to fire first without exposing themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...