Jump to content

Russians Underpowered, US Overpowered in CMBS?


Recommended Posts

@exsonic01, kind of need no search at all :) May we play "truth-or-lie" game? :) Would you please list the "Ural's works" business units structure, what these BUs produce, what their buyers are and the situation at the buyer's end of the budget? Say, five years behind from now - it'll explain "budget cuts" :) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 316
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Just now, IMHO said:

@exsonic01, kind of need no search at all :) May we play "truth-or-lie" game? :) Would you please list the "Ural's works" business units structure, what these BUs produce, what their buyers are and the situation at the buyer's end of the budget? Say, five years behind from now - it'll explain "budget cuts" :) 

Stop chit chat, I can tell any procurement program of Russian will be under effect of their recent sequester. But I don't know how that will influence the T-90M program. If you want to dig in, you do that. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Vanir Ausf B said:

My understanding is that air-to-air missiles have a limited pylon life, i.e. just flying around with them on wears them out quicker, so the Russians occasionally bring out an Amraamski or two just to remind everyone they have them but mostly keep them packed away for a rainy day.

Except everyone remembers Thule... No one flies with, loads etc. ACTUAL missiles. People make mistakes, missiles fall, why risk all of this? There are inerts after all...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, exsonic01 said:

Stop chit chat, I can tell any procurement program of Russian will be under effect of their recent sequester. But I don't know how that will influence the T-90M program. If you want to dig in, you do that. 

Well if you allow me to be blunt - you don't know what Uralvagonzavod is and what are the sources of their revenues. It's a complex structure and you try to generalize :(

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@Vanir Ausf B, well... "Pilon lifetime" and "show-must-go-on with actual missiles"... :( Just landing with armed missiles is very dangerous so no one does it unless really needed :( I mean in terms of cost structure it may be engine tear-and-wear and gassing-and-oiling budgets... But "pilon lifetime"... :blink:

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 22/03/2017 at 6:46 AM, Rinaldi said:

As I said: I could set my watch to threads of this types. It's not limited to Black Sea. Every 6 months or so there is an inevitable individual with a bone to pick whom swings for the posts viz. the Panther, Russian SMGs (Why are my UBERMENSCH losing to these PPSH armed plebians!?)

Actually I started this thread for the exact opposite, I was tired of smashing my opponent when playing US. Not just winning but winning by a huge margin.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, IMHO said:

Well if you allow me to be blunt - you don't know what Uralvagonzavod is and what are the sources of their revenues. It's a complex structure and you try to generalize :(

I gave my expectation, if you call that "generalize", fine, I will take that, but I'm not gonna buy any claims like "Russian army will upgrade 400 ore more T-90Ms in 2017 in real life". That is what I want to talk about in this issue. Of course, I can be wrong, and they can actually progress the upgrade program like that, but I think the chances for such event would not that high. 

ps)  I know what "Uralvagonzavod" is, but I don't know about their revenues. If I have enough time I would love to dig in. 

Edited by exsonic01
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Douglas Mac,

May I suggest you ask Sublime for a game? Believe he'll be quite good at recalibrating your perception of the Russians. This is particularly likely to be true now that the AI has been tweaked to make it more likely that a vehicle with both auto cannon and ATGM/s will choose ATGM when encountering a tank. Those BMP-2Ms, which were finally proven before the tweak to actually use Kornet, now like using it, so to speak. If I managed to repeat myself from some earlier post, please excuse the duplication.

Regards,

John Kettler

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, exsonic01 said:

I gave my expectation, if you call that "generalize", fine, I will take that, but I'm not gonna buy any claims like "Russian army will upgrade 400 ore more T-90Ms in 2017 in real life"

@exsonic01, well in the original edition of your post it was 200 - not 400 - and it was related to Vanir's post of 200 T-72 upgraded to B3 level annually :) May we close this line of discussion so personal to both of us? Peace? :rolleyes:

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@IMHO Brochacho I'm not about to write you a book about either, but if I'm sending an emergency CAS request during a TIC, it doesn't matter which type of aircraft I'm working with, I'm notifying the pilot or the liaison of the enemy conditions on the ground, and that includes enemy AA/SAM presence and ingress/egress coordination.  That information helps inform those involved how best to attack.  An F-35 being stealth could attack my targets with an appropriate level of standoff to avoid your SHORAD while operating at altitudes that would expose a non-stealthy aircraft to a greater variety of air defenses.  We clear or do I need to grab my finger paintings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IMHO said:

@Vanir Ausf B, well... "Pilon lifetime" and "show-must-go-on with actual missiles"... :( Just landing with armed missiles is very dangerous so no one does it unless really needed :( I mean in terms of cost structure it may be engine tear-and-wear and gassing-and-oiling budgets... But "pilon lifetime"... :blink:

:wacko:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IMHO said:

@exsonic01, well in the original edition of your post it was 200 - not 400 - and it was related to Vanir's post of 200 T-72 upgraded to B3 level annually :) May we close this line of discussion so personal to both of us? Peace? :rolleyes:

200 or 400 doesn't matter, my personal stand is, I can't buy claim that 200 T-90M can be fielded within 2017 will going to good chance to be wrong. But I admit I can be wrong, there is no peace or not like that in here, I just raised my pessimistic opinion about T-90M upgrade program, that is all. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, exsonic01 said:

200 or 400 doesn't matter, my personal stand is, I can't buy claim that 200 T-90M can be fielded within 2017 will going to good chance to be wrong. But I admit I can be wrong, there is no peace or not like that in here, I just raised my pessimistic opinion about T-90M upgrade program, that is all. 

As true as your statements are, the same can be applied to the AM. And Battlefront has no issue with issuing them generously in their scenarios. I say bring the T90M's and the Armatas! WOO HOO!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, IMHO said:

@exsonic01, well in the original edition of your post it was 200 - not 400 - and it was related to Vanir's post of 200 T-72 upgraded to B3 level annually :) May we close this line of discussion so personal to both of us? Peace? :rolleyes:

More things to add. The reason why I'm pessimistic about 200 T-90M within 2017 is not only the budget, but because of new equipment. Their new 2A82-1M new cannon is bit different from old 2A46M-5 cannon, which would make more labor and time for the cannon exchange. Plus, to my best knowledge, they need more Malachite NERA to meet the demand, so they need to wait for new supply. And they are under sequester. So, for me it is hard to believe such many deployment of T-90M in this year. 

30 minutes ago, Artkin said:

As true as your statements are, the same can be applied to the AM. And Battlefront has no issue with issuing them generously in their scenarios. I say bring the T90M's and the Armatas! WOO HOO!

Of course, CMBS is under already "hypothetical" story line, I think there are very good chance to see T-90M in CMBS. Maybe same rarity point with T-90AM? This depends on BF's decision. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah it was getting a bit unusual without the faces on this page :P I only count ten original smileys

24 minutes ago, exsonic01 said:

Of course, CMBS is under already "hypothetical" story line, I think there are very good chance to see T-90M in CMBS. Maybe same rarity point with T-90AM? This depends on BF's decision. 

I'd imagine the AM would be more rarity points considering they share the same gun, in addition the AM appears to have a better armor package.

Edited by Artkin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Artemis258 said:

In a current CM:BS game against @Doug Williams I'm guessing about 2 M1A1's at least mission-killed, probably at least 1 with a turret full of human-flavoured jam (2 pens, 2 spalls, and no return fire), and (last count) 4 dead Brads (plus one II think I tracked)... it's possible gents, it's possible!  

Yea, and it's possible your three flaming T-90s will light the sky as funeral pyres for your many Russian dead soldat. Not getting involved in the subject of this thread, as I really don't know sh*t about modern. Just ribbing Art a bit on our game. ;-) 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This T-90SM video has been posted before, but I believe it deserves a repeat. Would someone from Russia/Ukraine/Eastern Europe please explain to me how drivers of these T-64/72/80/90 avoid getting their faces smashed when hitting an obstacle while only partially head out? I see no face pad, just cold unyielding steel. Believe I'd want a motorcycle helmet to do that job! Also, has anyone run any numbers on how the 2A82 gun and ammo stack up vs the 2A46 series?
 

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited by John Kettler
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IMHO said:

@panzersaurkrautwerfer, could you please elaborate on how T-90 had ever had a chance of winning the Indian tender of old times? :D There were many cmpetitors and Indian MoD was pretty open. There's enough open-source information. Like if you believe crew experience means a lot in battlefield performance then how an insurance adjuster, beverage truck driver and a college student - all once-a-month or a once-a-quarter reservists - win against so many full-time Army tankers with everyday weapons practice :D

Because the T-90 occupied that critical ground of "working" (unlike the Arjun!), and as historical T-72 users, they had a stockpile of parts available and the commonality of systems made it easier to train crewmen for both platforms.

The T-90SM may totally be the next tank of the Indian Army, but the Jane's article from which all other claims of T-90SM spring from is clear that it's something happening over the next few years, not something available and in production time now.

 

 

7 hours ago, IMHO said:

Can you compare it to UK/France numbers in today's capable tanks? :)

As to this, the UK/France operate within a NATO context.  The British Army will never roll in alone and unafraid into a war with Russia, they'll be right there with all the Abrams, likely the Leclerc, a ton of Leo 2s from various operators and the Leclerc I suppose.

Russia will virtually certainly enter that war by itself, and it's producing tanks that still are well behind the west in the regards to the T-72B3, and will likely be on the offensive in most scenarios.  

Real life doesn't work by RTS rules.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, exsonic01 said:

More things to add. The reason why I'm pessimistic about 200 T-90M within 2017 is not only the budget, but because of new equipment.

Yepp. Production capacity could be a limiting factor but the budgets... :blink: Uralvagonzavod is a complex structure - overall revenues should go south but it has nothing to do with tank upgrades. Moreover RUS MoD is pretty limited in its decisions in this area - they will have to upgrade.

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, panzersaurkrautwerfer said:

Because the T-90 occupied that critical ground of "working" (unlike the Arjun!), and as historical T-72 users, they had a stockpile of parts available and the commonality of systems made it easier to train crewmen for both platforms.

I'm trying to guide you to penetration test results of that tender :)

 

Edited by IMHO
Link to comment
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
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
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...