• Russia to spend 600Bn on defense modernization
    151 replies, posted
The Russians just need a new modernization of the T-80 to start a new generation of MBTs, they should produce these modernised T-80s as the countries MBT and export the T-90 but keep the T-90A. Improvement of the equipment of ground troops is a must, plus better training, the BMP1 Needs removal and so does the BMP2 soon. The BTR 90 and BMP 3 are the best APC/IFV out at this point. The Airforce needs more Mi-28s and less Hinds, plus some more Su-35ms.
[QUOTE=Contag;34045904]yeah turboprops are stupid!who even uses those anymore[/QUOTE] Did you even notice the word old And its a bloody long range bomber, not some troop transport.
[QUOTE=Ale994145;34045938]The Russians just need a new modernization of the T-80 to start a new generation of MBTs, they should produce these modernised T-80s as the countries MBT and export the T-90 but keep the T-90A. Improvement of the equipment of ground troops is a must, plus better training, the BMP1 Needs removal and so does the BMP2 soon. The BTR 90 and BMP 3 are the best APC/IFV out at this point. The Airforce needs more Mi-28s and less Hinds, plus some more Su-35ms.[/QUOTE] Ukrainians already "modernized" T-80 , it's called T-84 now. The problem with this tank that it eats up too much fuel and the dust gets in the turbines so you have to constantly clean them up. Mi-24 is just fine for now.
[QUOTE=Azaz3l;34046180]Ukrainians already "modernized" T-80 , it's called T-84 now. The problem with this tank that it eats up too much fuel and the dust gets in the turbines so you have to constantly clean them up. Mi-24 is just fine for now.[/QUOTE] Ukrainian army would still get crushed by Russia which I kind of find funny, why does Ukraine even have army.
[QUOTE=Ignhelper;34046127]Did you even notice the word old And its a bloody long range bomber, not some troop transport.[/QUOTE] Better retire the AC-130 that the collective internet gets a hard on for Having a hokey old turboprop strategic bomber is fine You don't need a trillion dollar stealth platform for every engagement
[QUOTE=Contag;34046248]Better retire the AC-130 that the collective internet gets a hard on forHaving a hokey old turboprop strategic bomber is fineYou don't need a trillion dollar stealth platform for every engagement[/QUOTE] Least they could do is make the plane and engine better, and not make them fall out of the sky
[QUOTE=Marbalo;34047274]Russia's alliance with China and economic cooperation is stronger than ever.[/QUOTE] It was, but now that the US is experiencing a bit of a downturn, the view of the last two decades as standing together against the States is starting to fade, and they're viewing regional areas with a new multi-polar perspective
[QUOTE=Azaz3l;34046180]Ukrainians already "modernized" T-80 , it's called T-84 now. The problem with this tank that it eats up too much fuel and the dust gets in the turbines so you have to constantly clean them up. Mi-24 is just fine for now.[/QUOTE] Key word, [B]Ukraine[/B], I mean a actual modernization with advanced ERA and Russians systems, not shitty Ukrainian crap. [editline]4th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Ignhelper;34046296]Least they could do is make the plane and engine better, and not make them fall out of the sky[/QUOTE] The Bear is one of the worlds best strategic bombers, a few minor modernization here and there, maybe some stealth coating. Its also important to note that SAM, AAMs have a hard time locking on the turboprops too. [editline]4th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Marbalo;34045989]Best values of the Soviet union don't include Stalinist oppression and genocide. They probably meant stuff like increased military budget, getting rid of unemployment, more social laws, superpower status economy, etc. The only people who fear of the 'return of the Soviet empire' are clueless fear mongers. Even if the Soviet Union does return, it cannot be of the same oppressive nature of the previous version due to globalization and the free flow of information currently in Russia. If one attempts to 'shut down the internet' like they're trying to do in Belarus currently, there's going to be a shit storm across Russia.[/QUOTE] Well, in Russia the hard liners and younger extremists would be on the Governments side too, if a communistic state reformed in USSR, I'd expect Chinese censorship on modern issues, but not history. Its also important to remember that services like facebook and youtube are practically nill there because of existing Russian alternatives.
[QUOTE=Ale994145;34045938]The Russians just need a new modernization of the T-80 to start a new generation of MBTs, they should produce these modernised T-80s as the countries MBT and export the T-90 but keep the T-90A.[/QUOTE] The T-90MS is a pretty nice tank. Also they are working on a new tank, the T-99.
-[[B]REMOVED[/B]]
Ha, Russia is going to modernize their entire military for half of what we spend on a SINGLE fighter program.
[QUOTE=Used Car Salesman;34059187]Ha, Russia is going to modernize their entire military for half of what we spend on a SINGLE fighter program.[/QUOTE] The fact is, that the prices the US pays are horribly inflated by corporate no bid contracts and willingness to throw money into holes.
[QUOTE=Marbalo;34059571]Uh no, youtube is still in widespread use. And Facebook is replaced by Vkontakte. How is that relevant to anything? You think there wont be a shitstorm if they shut down those sites too? Also you're greatly exaggerating the actual number of 'hard liners' and 'younger extremists' in Russia. It's not some shitty rouge state with a brainwashed population that will blindly accept anything the state will tell them. Anyone who has lived in Russia for more than a year will easily tell you this.[/QUOTE] I always thought youtube had a replacement, I was saying that if a Soviet State reformed, then the government would most likely block youtube and facebook but not the Russian versions (They would just censor those)
[QUOTE=Ale994145;34056332]Well, in Russia the hard liners and younger extremists would be on the Governments side too, if a communistic state reformed in USSR, I'd expect Chinese censorship on modern issues, but not history. Its also important to remember that services like facebook and youtube are practically nill there because of existing Russian alternatives.[/QUOTE] If there's no democracy, no freedom of speech, I'd be very hard-pressed to call it 'communist'.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;34060773]If there's no democracy, no freedom of speech, I'd be very hard-pressed to call it 'communist'.[/QUOTE] There is many different types of communism, I'm referencing Soviet Style Marxist-Leninism. At least the soviets would give access to the internet, unlike say a stalinist regime.
[QUOTE=GVG-Vit;34030834] If you want to know what really is there read some real information, i.e. Alexey Navalny's blog.[/QUOTE] oh my god ahahaha navalny is such a system fighter
[QUOTE=Ale994145;34060820]There is many different types of communism, I'm referencing Soviet Style Marxist-Leninism. At least the soviets would give access to the internet, unlike say a stalinist regime.[/QUOTE] It's not 'Soviet-Style' Marxist-Leninism, it's just referred to as Stalinism.
[QUOTE=Megafanx13;34060877]It's not 'Soviet-Style' Marxist-Leninism, it's just referred to as Stalinism.[/QUOTE] That proves you have no idea what your talking about.
Communist takeover is near. COMRADES UNITE!
[QUOTE=Ogopogo;34056437]The T-90MS is a pretty nice tank. Also they are working on a new tank, the T-99.[/QUOTE] Any source on the T-99? Sounds interesting.
[QUOTE=Contag;34046248]Better retire the AC-130 that the collective internet gets a hard on for Having a hokey old turboprop strategic bomber is fine You don't need a trillion dollar stealth platform for every engagement[/QUOTE] turboprop = slower = more loiter time that's why the AC-130 is good for it's purpose... IT'S FUCKING SLOW [editline]5th January 2012[/editline] [QUOTE=Megafanx13;34060877]It's not 'Soviet-Style' Marxist-Leninism, it's just referred to as Stalinism.[/QUOTE] lol no. that's just rather ignorant. I'll just link you to a couple wikipedia articles and books "Stalinism refers to the ideology that Joseph Stalin conceived and implemented in the Soviet Union, and is generally considered a [b]branch of Marxist–Leninist ideology[/b] but considered by some historians to be [b]a significant deviation from this philosophy.[/b]"-Wikipedia [url]http://books.google.com/books?id=27JGzAoMLjoC&pg=PR4-IA2&lpg=PR4-IA2[/url] ye, I actually read that book. what.
[QUOTE=Azaz3l;34063504]Any source on the T-99? Sounds interesting.[/QUOTE] Not much, Russia is far better at keeping information about their military developments than other countries are. Have found some things, the sources in the T-99 wiki page actually have a fair amount of info about the tank. [quote]Russia in 2015 will adopt a new main battle tank under the code name "Armada". On this, as reports "Interfax" , said Lieutenant-General Yuri Kovalenko, a former first deputy chief of Tank-Automotive Directorate of the Ministry of Defense of Russia. In the future, the new tank will be the main combat unit in the Russian Army. "Since 2015 the Armed Forces will have a new main tank, with a fundamentally new performance characteristics, with a new gun ammunition feed, with the division of the crew, with the removal of ammunition" - said Kovalenko, at a meeting of the "round table" dedicated to the T-90 MBT . In addition, the autoloader "Armada" will be 32 rounds for various purposes, and the tank will be able to fire on the move. According to Kovalenko, the car will be used MBT developments of other projects, including the "Black Eagle". Other technical details of future tanks Kovalenko did not elaborate. In October 2010 the newspaper "Red Star" wrote that Russia is developing "unified platform severe" cipher "Armata" (draft of a new family of armored vehicles for the Army is known in that spelling), which will replace the technically challenging and inefficient project "Object 195 ", better known as T-95. It is assumed that the "Armata" will be easier and cheaper than T-95, but will inherit a number of its technologies.[/quote] The T-95 was cancelled back in May. [quote]The task for the development of the tank, "Armata" , or the new "perspective of some heavy unified platforms battlefield" , issued by the Ural Transport Engineering Design Bureau (UKBTM) fairly recently. There is information that works well funded and are enough disputes. "A number of platforms" - a tank, armored recovery vehicle, heavy infantry fighting vehicles and heavy armored assault . It may be developed and tank support combat vehicle (BMPT). • Given the tight timetable (in 2015 a new tank must be tested and to act in a series), we can assume that will be used as the accumulated baggage "Object 195" . Likely to get "dietary supertank" - the same arrangement, the principles of technology. But the tank, "Armata" will be somewhat smaller, lighter, simpler and cheaper "Object 195". • You can try to imagine his face. Tank "Armata" will weigh less "Object 195" - about 50-52 tons . And may have to the traditional chassis of our tanks with six pairs of rollers, and not with the family as the "Object 195". But probably the presence and semikatkovogo chassis. In order to reduce prices and to simplify the production of refuse from the wide use of titanium bronesplavov. Consequently, the tank will be protected a little worse than the "big brother". • Build "Armata" will be identical to the "Object 195" - powerful armor, followed by isolated bronekapsula with the crew, further aided the fighting compartment with an uninhabited turret on top, then the engine compartment. The gun just high enough to be located. • Surely the designers UKBTM use developments "Object 195" on the autoloader, the hull shape and structure of body armor. Tank equip explosive reactive armor of new generation and active protection systems. • It is believed that the tank "Armata" will be armed with 125 mm smoothbore gun of high power . This is the same gun and put on a new version of the T-90AM . Features of this gun is sufficient to destroy any existing and future NATO tank. • There is information and that the tank will install electric transmission . In this case, the engine runs a generator, and the caterpillars spun motors. This scheme is easier to tradition, so saved weight can be used for extra armor. However, in terms of reliability it is more risky. The engine is a diesel tank, capacity of about 1400-1600 hp. • In this scenario, a tank, "Armata" can take its rightful place in our country - the best tank of the world . All the conditions for it. More difficult things to price. Even more difficult - the position of the Russian Defense Ministry. Suddenly in 2015, again someone will come up with the idea to "change concept"?[/quote] Google translate so some of it may not be worded nicely.
[QUOTE=trotskygrad;34064654]turboprop = slower = more loiter time that's why the AC-130 is good for it's purpose... IT'S FUCKING SLOW[/QUOTE] what the fuck is your point? I'm not arguing against the AC-130
they will invade america because america is just pushing its luck these days really.......
ITT: People take shots at the Ukraine
[QUOTE=qwerty000;34060863]oh my god ahahaha navalny is such a system fighter[/QUOTE] I know it's bad example but still much better than mass media. Speak to Russians better.
[QUOTE=GVG-Vit;34075340]I know it's bad example but still much better than mass media. Speak to Russians better.[/QUOTE] I am one, you know.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.