Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Krasnoarmeyets

  1. Apologies for bringing it up again, but are You still intending to do the plain green version of the BRM-3K? As it currently is, it is the only vehicle standing out from the rest either by using old camouflage, or by being extraordinarily clean. Thank You.
  2. 2K22 'Tunguska' was intended as a replacement for ZSU-23-4 'Shilka' SPAAG, with the primary weapon feature being the more powerful 30mm cannons over the older 23mm ones. The SAM engagement capability is secondary to the vehicle's concept. 2K22 were intended to be used together with 9K35 'Strela-10' (a dedicated SP SAM system) in the regimental / brigade anti-air missile-artillery squadrons, and they still are. A replacement for 9K35 is in development ('Sosna'), but in the meantime it remains in service and will recieve an upgrade (which will bring it to 'Strela-10M4' version).
  3. 4GTD is armed with T-80U, UK and UE-1. All Russian UD were phased out of active service in 90's and early 00's due to unavailability of 6TD line engines. There is a number of them (perhaps a few hundred) stored at central vehicle reserve bases, with some being used as turret donors to produce the UE-1 version.
  4. 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:
  5. Okay, bringing things completely off-topic now. 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.
  6. Interesting - nice to see so many different vehicles in running condition. Do they belong to reconstructors, or are they borrowed from some museum?
  7. 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 : 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:
  8. I just noted that because cmrd BTR likely meant the chief parade on the Red Square (which the topic is devoted to) when he said "no hiccups".
  9. This is not Moscow, but the city of Chita that lies over 4500 km to the east of it in Siberia.
  10. Here is a recording (the vehicles parade starts at 56:30): I am slightly displeased with organisers - very little coverage of "Armata"-HIFV and almost no "Boomerang" (Air Force could easily have waited another 5 seconds). The most prominent AFV (in directors / operators eyes) seemed to be... T-90A. Also, looks like the footage from the vehicles POV is not transmitted live, but is a recording from the final practice run, and the one from "Pantsyr" (at 1:07:28) really should not have been used... P.S.: But the beautiful roar of T-34-85's and SU-100's makes up for all of that. P
  11. From our side it looks like it is the West (or, more specifically, the ruling elites of the United States and the governments under their influence) that is being deliberately adversarial, unconditionally demanding and hypocritical. It likes to crusade all around the world under pretense of dispensing justice and protecting the oppressed when it suits its interests, but screams bloody murder when Russia tries to protect its own people and their brothers at its borders from oppression by tyrants that are useful to the West, or does not see the sense in making yet another middle eastern country
  12. But in order to avoid a sudden incapacitating strike against nuclear forces you need to cover them with an air and missile defense shield. And that shield itself has to be protected from being taken out by ground threats with ground forces. Not to mention that it is a very dangerous and unreliable arrangement when your only two options of dealing with rising crises on your borders is either ignore them or immediately start a nuclear war. Perhaps not. But currently the western countries are at the nadir of their military adventurism due to exhaustion from involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq
  13. But capabilities degrade and become obsolete, and you have to start introducing new ones today to have them available and ready tomorrow. You have to run to stay in your place.
  14. Since the WW3-type scenario that ultimately leads to total obliteration of at least one participating side is now a rather remote prospect, Russian Armed Forces no longer have to be capable of winning a drawn-out total war against NATO, but to present credible threat of doing enough damage to make the option of initiating any kind of military action against Russia politically impossible for Western leaders, or highly impractical for the Chinese ones. Which is why, among other things, the conventional forces have to increase their capabilities to the maximum achievable technological level as lo
  15. But maybe... they can suddenly land in Seattle using merchant cargo ships! And then airdrop in some T-80s on big red parachutes! And mechanized bears! But, seriously, even Alaska does not present any realistic military targets of strategic consequence (what good would disabling only a part of air/missile interception capability do in the long term?), nor is it a viable potential territorial possession (even if you manage to take it and hold it unopposed, what use would it be when inhabited by hostile foreign population?). Well, personally I would prefer a more accurate if lower-definiti
  16. 90+ Mi-28N as of Dec. 2014, 75+ Ka-52 as of Jan. 2015, including about 3 Ka-52K (which future is now uncertain in light of Mistral situation).
  17. Definitely fake or misreporting - 248 tanks is about the entire combat-capable Ukrainian fleet. As far as we know, the Ukrainian mechanized units in the area of Debal'tsevo consisted mostly of 2 battalion tactical groups (from 128th mountain inf. bde and 30th mech. bde). Each mech BTG typically includes 10-15 MBTs (depending on the technical condition of the vehicles). There were also a couple handfuls of vehicles from 1st and 17th tank bdes, reinforcing various motorized airmobile and territorial defense units. After the encirclement was completed, the last reserves, consisting of another mec
  18. And not to forget the CBRN protection supersoldier program:
  19. DPR's "Diesel" battalion (armed with T-72B1 and BMP-2) exercises:
  20. Can vehicles from CMSF / CMA be imported? (Had not seen the previous reply while typing this post - so, only model replacement is possible, no stats modification?) That would make it much easier - most of American and Russian equipment is too advanced (better suited for imaginable future conflicts that can be the extention / repeat / outcome of the current ones perhaps), and Ukrainian MBTs are too rare to accurately represent most other notable forces (especially when it comes to finding two of them that can come in contact with each other). Russian vehicles can be used to represent the Indi
  21. Is it possible to remove / make transparent the Malyutka ATGMs on these BMP-1s? They would only be mounted in combat, and certainly would not be left on 'abandoned' vehicles. P.S.: Are you planning to finish the Russian vehicles line, or are you done for now?
  22. One point to keep in mind is that many vehicles with minor damage have been summarily written off for dismantling because any repairs were deemed uneconomical due to the presence of huge numbers of surplus vehicles (with the post-Soviet armed forces reduction and CFE treaty limits). Many observers got the impression that these vehicles vere destroyed, which led to significant overreporting of the numbers of the lost vehicles.
  23. The two primary support vessels - "Fotiy Krylov" and "Nikolay Chiker" are not simple tugs, they also provide surface and underwater rescue, firefighting and medical assistance capabilities. Both were introduced before "AFSU Kuznetsov" went into trials, and were planned to accompany heavy cruisers from the start. The reason that they and other similar vessels are included into fleet groups is not the mechanical reliability of the ships in general (though it did suffer greatly in '90s and early '00s, the things have been steadily improving for the last decade), but the fact that if something doe
  24. "Tanks are obsolete because they can be destroyed by much cheaper RPGs/ATGMs" = "Aircraft are obsolete because they can be shot down by much cheaper SAMs" / "Ships are obsolete because they can be sunk by much cheaper ASMs/torpedoes/mines" / "Infantrymen are obsolete because they can be killed by much cheaper bullets/grenades/shells", etc. Let's disband everybody and settle every conflict with ICBMs... P.S.: Though it might also be then concluded that humans are obsolete in general because they can be wiped out by much cheaper WMDs.
  25. Ah, I see. I saw that the initial reference was to "the best", so I thought it would be about qualitative comparisons (of which produceability and fleet maintainability are large factors IMHO).
  • Create New...