Russian newest tank. Diskuss?

>>25648444
I want to see them mass produced. Maybe we'll see them here in Alaska if Russia get some balls and tries to take it back.

File: 14303560118250.jpg (92KB, 528x960px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 528x960px

top view

>>25648453
How much did we pay for Alaska again? Like 10$ a square mile?

>>25648460
.02 cents per square mile IIRC. Gimme a second for Google.

>>25648463
.02 cents an acre, according to wiki.

>>25648444
You know, I think the Victory Parade would be quite picturesque at night.
The reflections off the tank from the city lights, it's really mesmerising.

>>25648453
>Russians
>Mass producing anything

Never going to happen.

>>25648444
Putin was right. Russia is under attack by Islamist influences. They are undermining the army. Just look at that Tank; she's clearly converted.

>>25648469
well I had the .02 cents right.

>>25648483
Either way, #rekt.

>>25648444
>T72 stretched to take an extra roadwheel
When will Russians design a new tank?

>>25648444
The hull looks exactly like an Abrams M1A2.

>>25648444

It certainly looks better then the T-72's puny turret.

Full display of a bunch of new Russky vics: http://youtu.be/Xzx2VBen6WQ

Quality is okay, cameraman is of childish though. You can see new tanks, IFVs, APCs and logistics vehicles.

>>25648514
How about Armata having an inhabitable tower for starters?

>>25648555
Which is pretty disappointing. The commander sitting at the top of the turret hatch has always been an essential part of a tank.

>>25648476
/thg/ guy, is this you?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/11298410/Military-enthusiast-drives-children-to-school-in-tank.html

>>25648558
What does it have to do with the previous statement it being a modernized t72?

>Still wrapped up

Turret confirmed for vaporware

The slate armor really just tells me where to put a kinetic penetrator.

So when will America get a new tonk to dickwave with?

>>25648514
>having a turret
Will the Russians ever design anything new?

File: noitdoesnot.jpg (28KB, 600x356px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 600x356px

>>25648522

File: armata-tracked-armored-platform.si.jpg (66KB, 690x388px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 690x388px

>>25648444
Wow that looks nothing like the concept designs or models.

>>25648584
>So when will America get a new tonk to dickwave with?

When Gen Dynamics CEO wants a new yacht/jet/private island/space station

Or when we actually need a new one. Right now the Abrams is fine for what we use it for.

>>25648683
If anything the US actually needs to downgrade and find something cheap that can fill the game between the Stryker and the Abrams.

>>25648444
Gimmick.

>The technology of yesterday, TODAY!!!

>>25648690
Why? The US has THOUSANDS of Abrams it has no need for sitting in the desert or army warehouses. No point spending more money when you can just dig some more tanks out of storage.

File: 14276596593640.jpg (172KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

172KB, 1024x768px

A little more about Russian military technology. For example, T-90ms.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfGP-dGjjnY

>>25648444
Tell me about the Armata, why does it wear the tarp?

>turret covered by a blanket
How do we know it even has a turret?

>>25648444
>>25648454
>>25648724

Why does he wear the mask?

>>25648819
>Tell me about the Armata, why does it wear the tarp?

The little new born tank is cold anon, so Vlad the dad comes around and puts blankie on the Armata :) I am told that he sometimes even tucks the T 72s into bed and tells them stories about how he killed all the nazis and chechens <3

>>25648848
Nobody cared i was a T-72 variant until i put on the mask.

File: 14297808854602.jpg (606KB, 4048x2339px) Image search: [Google]

606KB, 4048x2339px

>>25648848
The intrigue before the parade.

File: 1429777446421.jpg (456KB, 2200x1490px) Image search: [Google]

456KB, 2200x1490px

>>25648861

If i pulled it off, would you die?

File: 14303907916620.jpg (327KB, 2000x1331px) Image search: [Google]

327KB, 2000x1331px

>>25648819
>Tell me about the Armata
Ask me.

Slav gonna Slav. Fuck that shitty tank. I hope it falls apart.

French president responds to allegations that peacekeeping troops sexually abused children at displacement camp in Central African Republic

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/30/hollande-no-mercy-over-allegations-of-child-abuse-in-car-by-french-soldiers

>>25648882

It would be extremely embarrassing

>>25648882
It would be extremely painful.

File: 1429778795081.jpg (470KB, 2200x1467px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 2200x1467px

>>25648891

You are a big tank...

>>25648882
What is that Patria AMV rip-off?

>>25648890
A leaked United Nations report obtained by the Guardian on Wednesday revealed the alleged sexual abuse of 10 boys aged eight to 15 at a camp for internally displaced people (IDP) in CAR’s capital, Bangui.

kill all frogs

File: Cadillac_Gage_V-150_do_Exército_português.jpg (1MB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2048x1536px

>>25648444
my guess

this thank has non crew tourette

>>25648882
fro
yuo!

File: ur.jpg (52KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

52KB, 1920x1080px

>>25648904
>tourette

File: 1429776972420.jpg (546KB, 2200x1466px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 2200x1466px

>>25648897

Its the Boomerang. It is intended to replace the BTR-80/82/90.

>>25648904
You are rigth.

>>25648951
the armor and gun will be shit too
it's a t-72 on steroids

>>25648920
Technically, the army never formally procured the BTR 90, which was a shame really, the design had potential.

File: 14296983364010.jpg (75KB, 1023x682px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 1023x682px

>>25648951
Capsule, armored curtain, non crew turret. Main gun 2a82 much powerful than l-55 (leopard 2a6) in 1.17 times.

File: 1220084859988.jpg (116KB, 1024x646px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 1024x646px

>>25648963

>the design had potential.

I know and it kinda sucks. Hopefully the vehicle can be exported to other countries for cheap.

Maybe to Novorussia ;^)

File: 14297007426930.jpg (197KB, 1082x759px) Image search: [Google]

197KB, 1082x759px

>>25648959
There is no similarity.

File: 14278300674520.jpg (91KB, 807x605px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 807x605px

>>25648994
>Maybe to Novorussia ;^)
Cool idea!

File: 1429778542944.jpg (465KB, 2200x1471px) Image search: [Google]

465KB, 2200x1471px

>>25648986

>Main gun 2a82 much powerful than l-55 (leopard 2a6) in 1.17 times.

Proofs? (Source for the 1.17 times number).

>>25649004
http://www.vestnik-rm.ru/news-4-7579.htm
Learn Russian first.

File: 14278323851673.webm (2MB, 1520x580px)

2MB, 1520x580px

>>25649018

Thanks for the link.

>>25648997
yeah, measured by the look
the technology is the same old garbage
also: lethal ammo rack, again

>>25649018
no sources, just bullshit

thank you

File: 14288338922200.jpg (63KB, 1023x651px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 1023x651px

>>25649042
Not at all, bro.
>>25649050
>the technology is the same old garbage
Tell me about technology. :3 What do you know about it? Where I can read about it?
>lethal ammo rack, again
With capsule and non crew turret it is not so scary.

>>25648454
Why did the opt out of the engine in front of crew design?

File: 14294381914701.jpg (130KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

130KB, 1024x768px

>>25649050
>>25649064
Same person with butthurt, lol.
Pshe-pshe? Mykola? Esti?

it's really nice of russia to build new tanks to keep hard working american pilots in business. I look forward to the day we see a field littered with burnt out armatas that got BTFO by mavericks.

File: 14276442592120.jpg (144KB, 926x926px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 926x926px

>>25649077
Because this is tank. Wanna engine in front of crew design? t-15 for you.

File: 808282045448263-1920x1080.jpg (399KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

399KB, 1920x1080px

>>25649093
No way. The only possible conflict between USA and Russia is picrelated.

>>25649093
First they will have to learn to dodge S-500 missiles.

>>25649087
>butthurt
you don't know what this word means, don't you?

>>25649076
>muh capsule
nice gadgets, sadly, totally useless.
>technology
i don't need to, it's obvious to everyone.

>>25649050
It has nothing to do with T-72, T-14 is as heavy as Abrams.

>>25649113
>russia
>controlling the sky

lmao

SAM sites will get shrket at the onset of hostilities by tomahawks, PGM's dropped by strike aircraft and SEAD craft. Those eastern bloc air defense systems sure did a lot of good in the middle east

Anything russia attempts to put in the air will be picked up by AWACS instantly because russia cannot into stealth and then BTFO by an AMRAAM before they have time to think about stopping ground attack craft from turning the armatas into flaming hulks

File: 14288352234950.jpg (62KB, 800x450px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 800x450px

>>25649115
Oh boy... :3
>i don't need to, it's obvious to everyone.
LOL
>you don't know what this word means, don't you?
No, i know. :3 That's exactly it.

>>25649144
> :3
cancer

also, nice selfie.

File: Soldiers raising the Soviet flag over the Reichstag, Berlin 1945 2.jpg (272KB, 1600x1000px) Image search: [Google]

272KB, 1600x1000px

>>25649129
>Anything russia attempts to put in the air will be picked up by AWACS instantly because russia cannot into stealth and then BTFO by an AMRAAM before they have time to think about stopping ground attack craft from turning the armatas into flaming hulks

Hitler said the same thing.

>>25649127
yeah, that's right.
A T-72 has a working transmission system, the armata hasn't.

>>25649157
and he would have rolled over all of western russia if it werent for the fact that the US was propping them up till they got their asses in gear.

File: 14089576505480.jpg (51KB, 640x480px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 640x480px

>>25649148
This pig is torn.

>>25649157
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

oh wow, you retarded russians.

you lost the cold war, remember? and you are losing the second cold war right now.

>>25648806
Why the underside of the turret looks weak?

>>25648481
I smiled.

>>25648896
for you

>>25649172
torn apart? like your asshole?

File: 1402488208364.jpg (152KB, 992x687px) Image search: [Google]

152KB, 992x687px

>>25649174
>Why the underside of the turret looks weak?
Because it's weak.

>>25649165
Soviet soldiers hated the crappy Sherman and Ford trucks couldn't handle the Russian winter, kept breaking all the time, crappy trucks too.

We almost lost war because of American equipment but then great Russian engineers made T-34 and we took Berlin.

File: 01.jpg (188KB, 1280x718px) Image search: [Google]

188KB, 1280x718px

>>25649180
No, like your. :3
Say "oink-oink".

>>25649188
>he thinks im talking about military vehicles

look up the amount of food the US sent. Look up the number of locomotives sent vs the number the USSR produced

while invaluable, the military equipment was nearly irrelevant compared to the logistical aid. Without US assistance russia would have starved. Without US assistance those 10s of thousands of crappy t-34s they were pumping out would have never been made.

>>25649185
always remember:
If a heat-jet hits ERA in a steep angle, the jet got deflected, not destroyed.

>>25649207
he was sarcastic

>>25649195
>*yours

sorry, i don't speak russian.

>>25649207
The union's flag was raised at the top of the Reichstag. Russia won World War 2.

If you want credit for something, then next time do it yourself.

>>25649226
>la la la i cant hear you!

nice response comrade. Sorry your greatest moment of national pride would have never happened without the US holding your hand, maybe you should try being from somewhere that is relevant on the world stage for a reason other than muh nukes

File: 14295992909860.png (19KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 800x800px

>>25649224
But "oink oink," is in Ukrainian.

>>25649226
And the American flag was raised on the Moon and also has one currently on Mars.

Your Move Ruskie.

>>25649235
The victories in Crimea and Eastern Ukraine are also happening thanks to American money.

So doesn't matter which you side you pump your money, we win regardless.

>>25649188
Do you think that without all the stuff the US sent the ruskies would have fared better or something?

>>25649254
>he's proud of his nation invading a tiny, irrelevant nation
rofl that's like me bragging about the US invading iraq

File: 14176662838110.jpg (42KB, 380x538px) Image search: [Google]

42KB, 380x538px

>>25649257
>nation
>hohols
They are not

>>25649226
>If you want credit for something, then next time do it yourself.
> do it yourself.

US to USSR
In total, the US deliveries through Lend-Lease amounted to $11 billion in materials: over 400,000 jeeps and trucks; 12,000 armored vehicles [...] 11,400 aircraft (4,719 of which were Bell P-39 Airacobras)[27] and 1.75 million tons of food.[28]
[...] It has been estimated that American deliveries to the USSR through the Persian Corridor alone were sufficient, by US Army standards, to maintain sixty combat divisions in the line.[29][30]
The United States gave to the Soviet Union from October 1, 1941 to May 31, 1945 the following: 427,284 trucks, 13,303 combat vehicles, 35,170 motorcycles, 2,328 ordnance service vehicles, 2,670,371 tons of petroleum products (gasoline and oil), 4,478,116 tons of foodstuffs (canned meats, sugar, flour, salt, etc.), 1,900 steam locomotives, 66 Diesel locomotives, 9,920 flat cars, 1,000 dump cars, 120 tank cars, and 35 heavy machinery cars The 1947 money value of the supplies and services amounted to about eleven billion dollars.[31]
90% of kerosene was delivered by the US

UK to USSR
Between June 1941 and May 1945 3,000+ Hurricanes were delivered to the USSR along with 4,000+ other aircraft, 5,218 tanks, 5,000+ anti-tank guns, 4,020 ambulances and trucks, 323 machinery trucks, 2,560 bren carriers, 1,721 motorcycles, £1.15bn worth of aircraft engines and 15 million pairs of boots in total 4 million tonnes of war materials including food and medical supplies were delivered. The munitions totaled £308m (not including naval munitions supplied), the food and raw materials totaled £120m in 1946 index. Naval assets supplied included a battleship, 9 destroyers, 4 submarines, 5 mine sweepers, 9 trawler minesweepers, over 600 radar and sonar sets, 41 anti submarine batteries, several hundred naval guns and rocket batteries.

Without the help of the US and UK you fucking russians would have lost the war in 1943

>>25649271
either way they ARE irrelevant

>>25649173
Really?I demand for rematch.Its easier to take first place than keep it.

>>25649242
you must know it, because i can't speak piggish

>>25649279
>rematch
you are losing it already

>>25648444
New Abrams 4.0.2.1 Alpha Ver. when?

>>25649285
prove it

>>25649289
Decades, Current budget from Congress has sequestration and military spending cuts.

Guess we should have actually taxed some companies instead of paying them rebates.

>>25649274
And you all would've lost it a few years later too. Hitler just needed the oil and he would sink the UK with missiles and submit the Americans.

>>25648882
whats up with those gay red stars, I'm guessing they're just there for the parade?

File: 14156917291470.jpg (160KB, 800x720px) Image search: [Google]

160KB, 800x720px

>>25649280
Yes, i know, i live near of them.
>>25649275
>either way they ARE irrelevant
ok.

>>25649291

Russian GDP: 3.4 trillion

US GDP: 17.418 Trillion

>>25649291
reminder that russia's GDP is 1/10th of the US's

reminder that russia's GDP is smaller than itally's

>>25649298
>submit the americans

rofl

how would he do that vatnik

>>25649298
HAHAHAHAHAHHA
>this is what russians believe

no, berlin would have been nuked 1945 and every single city a few weeks later

>>25649298
>Atomic bombs
>Losing

nyet

>>25649302
wow
is this person in your picture your own mother?jesus, you russians are really ugly.

>>25649285
You lost in
> Iraq
> Afghanistan
> Syria
And now you losing Ukraine,Yemen,Europe.
Oh and seems like your sanctions only boost our economy.
Meanwhile Russia doesnt make any moves at all.
>>25649305
>>25649307
Reminder that finances=/ economy,but thats too deep for you guys.

>>25649323
GDP does not equal finances.

Its the output of the economy.

You idiot.

>>25649323
hahahaha
>this is what a vatnik believes

hahahahaha, oh god.
just stop - i'm going to piss myself hahahahha

File: USD to ruble.png (11KB, 575x246px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 575x246px

>>25649323
>Oh and seems like your sanctions only boost our economy.

>boost our economy

HAHAHAHAHAHA

File: xaxa.png (63KB, 450x450px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 450x450px

>>25649310
But your bomber don't have enough flight altitude to pass trough Nazi fighters. It would get shot down before reaching Germany.

Why does every thread with Russia turn into a shitposting competition between russians americans?

>>25649226
Like russia designed its planes and tanks themselves? Without the lend-lease program russian victory wouldn't have been possible.

>>25649339
>between russians and everyone else
ftfy

>>25649339
Because Russians insist upon revisionism.

>>25649334
yeah, that's the reason why every nazi city was bombed to pieces

fucking vatniks, you're so retarded

>>25649334
>bomber don't have enough flight altitude to pass through Nazi fighters
>we had been bombing the shit out of germany for nearly the entire war

here's your response

>>25649113
>S-500
>Actually existing.

Pick one, Slave. S-500 is the king of Russian vaporware. Even Chinese 5th gen fighters are more substantial.

Can we just agree that the western allies could not have won with out the USSR, and vice versa?

>>25649370
Its almost like it was a group effort or something.

Vatniks will never agree with this though.

>>25649330
Sorry man,but thats a marathon,not a sprint.

File: armatatank.jpg (60KB, 1280x640px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1280x640px

Honest question.

Is OP new tank the Armata?

The tank in OP just looks like a bigger T-72, nothing like what we saw of Armata's concept designs and models that have been leaked in recent years. (pic related)

Did they just run out of money or something? How did it go from this? (and official models that even looked like this from Uralvagonzavod) to what is being shown now?

>>25649380
>>25649384
this shit in your picture is someone's
retarded fanart

Ww2 was won by soviet soviets with American food, shoes, and vehicles. Soviets supplied conscripts and vodka.

>>25649378
wow
you must be retarded

>>25649370
Depends how you define "Winning". Without Western Allies, Moscow Falls and Soviet's head is cut off most likely pacifying majority of the Union and causing it to splitter into smaller countries. Germany then turns back around to Western Allies aaannd....

Without Russia Western Allies accept (primarily Britain) German Peace that was offered multiple times and without local staging places US is forced to go along in regards to Germany. Japan still gets fucked though.

The Biggest difference in outcome is a 70 year Difference in Unification of Europe Government wise.

>>25649370
Nah, see it's not the war that's got everyone pissed, it's what happened immediately after.

See, both sides snapped up some territory. The difference is that while the USA helped rebuild Europe into the seat of Western civilization that it'd always been and generally made life awesome in the regions we occupued, everything that Russia grabbed starved for decades because communism is a ducking terrible idea.

Russians, being Russians, can't forget about it, so they won't let the rest of the world forget about it either. That's why we all hate the Russian; they can't come to terms with their own past, so they try to make everyone else suffer with them.

>>25649391
no?

File: Armata_main_battle_tank_Russia_Russian_army_defence_industry_military_technology_640.jpg (37KB, 640x484px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 640x484px

>>25649390
Except it matches the official model used by Uralvagonzavod.

>>25649384
> Is OP new tank the Armata?
Yep
> The tank in OP just looks like a bigger T-72
T-72 and Armata are totaly different
> and official models that even looked like this from Uralvagonzavod
Which one,your pic is not official model

>>25649405
...Which has nothing to do with the tank we saw at Victory Day.

>>25649402
>both sides snapped up some territory.
only the russians

>>25649393
2deep4u?

Russia's Armata a magnificent piece of GARBAGE. I can see three major engineering flaws alone in the same system at
first glance.

1.A X block? Seriously? Now the timing mechanism for a boxer block style engine is complex enough. If it gets out of time just a SLIGHT bit, the engine will self destruct from with in. It just has to lose or gain the very slight amount of time and its done with in seconds.

2. A 12 cylinder gas turbine super charged 1,500 horse power engine met to propel a 48 ton tank???? Wow this is going to consume copious amounts of fuel to the point where its going to be very limited due to its range I don't care what you do with its PTS. If you recall in history the Germans made the same sort of mistake during the second world war with the tiger tanks.

3.Really? A air cooled cooling system for a TANK that has a GAS 12 CYLINDER engine that is super charged? Uh NO there is not a sufficient cooling system for this sort of a engine doing this sort of work.

Its obvious this is a BAD IDEA that they should have left on the drawing board. When I look at one and three alone they had BETTER HOPE the engines are easy to switch in and out because they WILL obviously spend a great deal of time doing that.

Then there are two other glaring problems that make this concept absolutely idiotic.

First off a tank such as this takes MONEY to mass produce, its not cheap, the Russians are certainly not in economic shape to afford such a thing.

Second off the MBT is fading off into the sunset when it comes to being something that is actually useful on the battlefield. Its a sitting duck to something such as a apache helicopter or a scorpion tactical bomber.

>>25649412
Shhh, I'm being generous for the sake of the argument. And technically we did snap up Japan, but we just weren't fucking slime about it.

>>25649405
daily reminder:
what russians claim to build: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x45yDus7h80
what they actually build: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o2MXAfKRw7U

>>25649416
nah

>>25648671
Nothing ever looks like its concept. Get used to it

>>25649402
You forgot one thing-US gained profit from the war,while USSR was completely ruined

>>25649427
>did snap up Japan
there was no deal with the russians about japan

>>25649434
the russians are ruining everything for everyone, regardless if it was connected to a war or something else

>>25649434
Well consider that karma for helping the shit go down in the first place.

>>25649438
...Are you retarded? The USA occupied Japan. We just rebuilt their nation and gave it back to them instead of anexing it and subjecting it to awful planned economics.

>>25649422
> A X block? Seriously?
Source?
> A 12 cylinder gas turbine super charged 1,500
Source?
> a 48 ton tank
Source?

File: 2.jpg (71KB, 690x439px) Image search: [Google]

71KB, 690x439px

>>25649411
I realize that, but then what the fuck happened to this tank? I can even see proper defense websites and institutes still discussing

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PsAePLKmBfY

This model as of a few weeks ago.

What the fuck tank is this then?

Wasn't the point of Armata that it was a "Universal tank"? That it had both anti-air capabilities and ground?

The tank in the parade features no anti-air capability.

>>25649459
Surprise surprise, Russian R&D publicity is thinly veiled internal propaganda.

>>25649456
did i claimed something different?
your reading comprehension sucks
go back to school

>>25649459
>implying: the turret is finished
>implying: they don't have to craft some shit together

>>25649484
What exactly did you claim? It appears that English fluency isn't a skill you possess.

>>25649459
> That it had both anti-air capabilities and ground?
Holy shit.WHAT THE FUCK ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.
And about all shity pictures you bring here-its just a fantasy of some autists from military forums.
There was only one leak
>>25649405
and even this is just a concept for high command

>>25649500
this is 4chan and not a job interview

>>25649516
Oh, so yout claimed nothing? Good to know, thanks for clearing that up.

File: laughingredarmygirls.jpg (144KB, 500x484px) Image search: [Google]

144KB, 500x484px

>>25649459
>Russians promise some sci-fi futuristic looking weapons platform
>When unveiled, it literally looks at least 20 years outdated.

Every fucking time.

>>25649188
Wat bro? Russian tankers fucking loved the M4. Go read some actual stories from tankers of that time.

>>25649536
see >>25649218
But it wouldn't suprised me if it was an actual opinion of a vatnik

File: godofwar.jpg (283KB, 1263x843px) Image search: [Google]

283KB, 1263x843px

>>25649526
Sorry man but we produce warmachines,not hangar dominators

>>25649548
Awwww, look guys! The vatnik thinks his shit is better BECAUSE it cooks off at the drop of a hat. How adorable.

>>25649536
Yeah they said that is best vehicle for peacefull times

>>25649422
You have no idea what the flaws of the Tiger were. Main problem was it's armour and the weak(!) engine that was not fit to move the tank at adequate speed.

>>25649548
You sure you want to post syrian T-72's?

You sure you want to do this?

>>25649560
> The vatnik thinks his shit is better BECAUSE it cooks off at the drop of a hat
But we fixed it in Armata,so yes or shit is better than your shit

File: m84-8.jpg (81KB, 598x399px) Image search: [Google]

81KB, 598x399px

>>25649548
>Sorry man but we produce turret throwers, not tanks

ftfy

>>25649577
>But we fixed it in Armata,

Still using carousel loading system, still going to pop turrets like a jack in the box.

>>25649577
>Fixed something by a tank that still hasn't had full deployment/release.
>Something that everyone else figured out decades ago.
Ivan pls.

>>25649577
Kek, nice job, welcome to the 80s.

>>25649580
Stay mad barnrider

>>25649590
they didn't even fixed it.
they still have a carousel loading system.
the russian blowout panel is the turret

>>25649598
>Stay mad
you don't know what this means, eh?
haha
cry harder

>>25649563
>not sure if trolling or just stupid

>>25649536
They loved it to use as tractors for farming.

File: stahp.gif (1MB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 300x300px

>>25648444

I don't like its turret. canvas armor is too thin, and visibility is nil due to it having no holes. Also, the color is too bright.

Absolute piece of shit.

>>25649634
yes, because russian tractors are shit and a t-34 would break down

>>25649590
>>25649595
Daily reminder-Armata is first tank where crew is separated from ammo.Also
> still cant make autoloader
Your tanks is basically WW2 era tanks with new electronics.Even gook shit > than your shit.
Well anyway Us have a lot of niggers,so why bothering,really
>>25649632
But thats true,it was in memouirs of WW2 veterans

>>25649666
and there are other veterans who said something different

>>25649666
>If a tank doesn't have an autoloader it is a WW2 era tank with electronics
shiggy diggy doo

File: 1401708330140.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>25649666
>All of this .ru'ing

>>25649675
Thats not condratict with my post.
They said its a good tank(in terms of quality maintanance and comfort),but it was bad for battle
>>25649684
Пepeйдeм нa pyccкий?
>>25649676
> I-i-its not like we cant make autoloader or something

File: Abrams 1421040643220.webm (3MB, 1280x720px)

3MB, 1280x720px

>>25649676
It's just a huge barn.

>>25649666
>Armata first tank where crew and ammo are
seperate.
What is the AMX Leclerc, then?

>>25649721
The T-14 is a 55ton vehicle and not that much smaller than an Abrams.

File: oh shit gefreiter what are you doing.webm (3MB, 853x480px)

3MB, 853x480px

>>25649721
>Iraqi tank crews
>Good
>Ever
This shit is nauseating.

>>25649725
Disregard >>25649743, it's even 2 tons heavier than that.

File: 1429648876027.jpg (104KB, 770x550px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 770x550px

>>25649301

That red star is actualy the new symbol for the Russian armed forces. It looks pretty lame, i agree.

File: maxresdefault (1).jpg (189KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 1920x1080px

>>25649666
Let's be real here, gookshit is, at the moment, best shit, and once the USA or Germany get around to making a tank with an ETC gun, it'll still be competative.

>>25649708
>I-i-it's not like we can't train competent loaders or something...
A well trained loader loads faster and more intelligently than an autoloader, helps tremendously in maintained center and general operational tasks, and keeps the tank from launching its turret at the drop of a hat.

It's OK though, keep bragging about how Slavs are too hampered by FAS to be trusted with loading a cannon.

>>25649721
You have drawn my attention, foot soldier.
The tank god hears your offerings and demands a response.

>>25649666
>still cant make autoloader
we can, even better than your russian shit loaders and our human loaders are superior to auto loaders because our loaders aren't weak midgets who can't even lift a round in the chamber

>>25649790
Yeah, they're just niggers.

>>25649759
>new red star
>looks pretty lame
>symbol for the Russian armed forces

i can't see a single problem with that

>>25649721
>Tank takes side hits, gives no fucks, continues wrecking face.

What are you trying to point out again?

>>25648477
>angry t34 noises

Gonna laugh when it's unveiled and the turret is a place holder because this shit wasn't ready for the V day parade and Russians will never admit defeat, even when defeated.

>>25649804
you're insulting black people!
white and east asian people > other asian people/black people/mexicans/etc. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> russians

>>25648444
>mfw under the tarp is just wires and pvc pipe to convey outline of barrel and turret.

>>25649833
>mfw
>my face when...

i think you are supposed to add an image

>>25649188
>We almost lost war because of American equipment but then great Russian engineers made T-34 and we took Berlin.
this is bait.jpeg

File: Russian_Air_Force_roundel.svg.png (88KB, 1077x1024px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 1077x1024px

>>25649805

I totaly dont mind a star as the base for a new symbol but how it was done was lame.

An example of how to do it right is the Russian airforce roundel; maintains the historical red star while the blue band turns the star into a Russian flag. Symbolizing the past and present in one. Cheap, effective and looks good on top of that.

>>25649879
my point was that the russia's new army is lame and therefore a lame star as an authentic symbol isn't a bad thing.
they just portray what they are

File: 1429581546262.png (56KB, 974x715px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 974x715px

>>25648806

> daft punk plays

File: 14956329726_a33c8e9c82_o.jpg (202KB, 1400x933px) Image search: [Google]

202KB, 1400x933px

>>25649896

So by that logic, the VVS (Russian airforce) is the most awesome airforce on the planet.

I allways knew it ;^)

>>25650006
haha

Is Armada supposed to have improved gun-launched ATGM capability? Because really, that's the only thing Russian designs have going for them these days.

Can Abrams use LAHAT? I can't remember.

>>25650033
What's the point of LAHAT in the US military? It just takes up ammo space.

>>25649188
The Sherman is a superior tank to the T-34 though, in Korea it would repeatedly inflict heavy casualties on the north with very little in return.

>>25649721
The way they try so spin this video always gets me.

>We shot a bunch of shit at it and lit it on fire
>They eventually bailed out
>Cowards

>>25650117
Like all things Russia. It looks great on paper, but as soon as it it's the real world it's shit.

With the amount of T-34s Russia had and the T-34's advantage, on paper, over the Panzer 3/4. Russia should have dominated the tank warfare k/d ratios.

>>25650058
>>25650033
it can, but you fuck up the barrel
you need also a little reprogramming of the ballistic computer (install)

>>25650058
There really isn't because of US Air dominance, but it would give the Rheinmetall 120mm gun a range of 8 km.

Honestly, Korean Smart Top Attack Munition is better in every way. Same range, but with truely indirect fire capability.

>>25650155
right I mean it's kinda like the Sherman in the basis that it was mass produced and effective in numbers but when you have "equal" forces going toe to toe like in Korea it shows which mass produced tank is best

>>25650179
On paper the late model T-34s should have dominated the Sherman, but in the real world they were pretty much shit.

>>25649298

And how would have Hitler gotten oil? If I remember correctly the Americans and British pushed the nazis out of northern Africa and the ME.

>>25650256
Probably doesn't help any that best Korea was crewing them

>>25650323
Back then North Korea was a lot different from how it is now.

>>25650307
don't forget the bombing of germanys refineries (producing synthetic oil out of ciall) and the bombing of the oilfields in romania

>>25650323
"The limited space not only affected crew performance but turned the T-34 into a deathtrap. A US study from the Korean War (based on the T-34/85 that was roomier than the T-34/76) concluded that due to the limited internal space a penetration by an A/T round usually led to the destruction of the tank and loss of 75% of the crew. In the Sherman the figure was only 18% (1)."

lol

>>25650387
That's what I was looking for haha thanks anon

>>25649096

seems legit

Any word on the exoskeletons the Russians are saying they'll have in 2020?

>>25650622
oh good, more vaporware.

>>25650622
tzzzz, they don't need a exoskeleton
they will have this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cp7mM2TP_1A

>>25650628
Hey now, exos are at least commercially viable, hobbyist are building them as well.
The issue is sustainment in field, which if they're going for the tank as an APC, they'll have either spare batteries or charging racks.
But then they'll be tethered to it, and not free roaming.

Any idea on Russia thought for being tethered to the tanks?

>>25650649
Russia can't even make a proper full scale drone, what makes people think they can build an exo-skeleton?

File: T15.jpg (982KB, 1400x990px) Image search: [Google]

982KB, 1400x990px

Under development

>>25649339
>Why does every thread with Russia turn into a shitposting competition between russians and ukrainians?
FTFY

>>25649274
Source....

>>25650759
You can literally see the fucking wiki citation notations.

Jesus.

>>25650701
Because I can build one, and built the parts?
Need a lot more money to get the power pack setup and the pneumatic cylinders.

The better question is why the HULK, RHINO, and other US systems are so far behind Cyberdyne and hobbyists, being unable to do powered free walks at a length of time.

Well HULK sort of can I think.

>>25648555
I know what happened now!
>Be russian tank designer
>need to make a tank to fit inside certain size limits but also offer certain protections
>Start workings on it
>Hmm tank is of looking a bit cramped, who cares I ain't gonna be in it
>Keep workings more on it
>Finally somehow meet protection requirements with shitty pot metal you have to work with
>realize no room for crew in turret
>remove 2 crew members and place some primitive robotics to control turret
>Dima happens to step in at this moment and sees what me is of doings
>IVAN YOU ARE OF GENIUS! Dimka says and runs out

>>25650784
Boston dynamics.

>>25650842
I applied, they refused me.
May their opamps always be charged.

>>25650170
USA should pick up German SMArt 155, get their M109s to throw KSTAM-style fire-and-forget EFPs out to almost 30km.

Current US smart AT 155mm round, M712 Copperhead, needs terminal laser guidance and only has a 16km range. SMArt 115 costs about the same as Excalibur, but with thermal/milimeter-wave radar guidance instead of INS/GPS and two EFP submunitions per shot.

Great way to ensure persistent long range AT strike availability in a SAM-heavy theater, especially when it comes to keeping gunships from eating MANPADs.

>>25650853

Well i was referring to the "other us systems" part.

Big dog can walk for a long time, just gotta keep em gassed.

>>25650928
And they can totes carry jerrycans.

>>25650928
Big dog isn't an exo though.
You'd have a much easier time with making 'bots than exos, since you could fill the torso with batteries, the arms would have integrated weapons, and then you skip it all for big dog and swords.

File: T-34-85 crew loss, korea. source T-34-85 vs M26 pershing page 75.jpg (59KB, 576x171px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 576x171px

>>25650387
You are a fucking faggot and you are cherry picking as fuck.

Go kill yourself.

>>25650947
Big dog can go for long distances because it has an engine instead of batteries. Exoskeletons have exactly zero endurance issues until you need a portable power supply.

>>25650999
Oh I know, but its comparing very different things.
Exos and big dog both have their own distinct roles to fill, with big dog more likely to get into its role first.

>>25650999
Well, I should say small, lightweight portable power supply. Big challenge to exist is also the fact that there's tons of space you can't use because there's a human in it.

>>25649157
Implying that the US will have to fight western Europe while simultaneously fighting the slavs. Russia get way more than a bloody nose and a little lost pride if it wants to tango with the yanks

File: 14304156298760.jpg (67KB, 604x402px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 604x402px

to everyone complaining about the turret looking different when compared to the concept art
turret is covered with tent, and there are probably wooden pillars inside, like this
no wonder it looks huge

>>25649129
>SAM sites will get shrket at the onset of hostilities by tomahawks
even s-300 are claimed to have the ability to shot down tomahawks
>The S-300PMU2 Favorit can engage targets flying from 10 m to 27 km above the surface at a speed of up to 10,000 km/h. It is claimed that it has a kill ratio ranging from 0.8 to 0.93 against aircraft and from 0.8 to 0.98 against Tomahawk-class cruise missiles.

>>25650992
butthurt vatniks itt

>>25651182
The USA has more tomahawks than Russia has S-300s. Even if the S-300 has a success rate of 50 percent, and I doubt that it's that high, Russia still gets crushed.

>>25651021
Yeah, my first idea was based on the skeletonics concept, where you're mostly a "passive" mechanical system. Things like levers, springs, cables and so on, with a more rigid skeleton to distribute the load.
Uh sort of like those boots people wear at cons to seem taller and be able to do backflips with ease on. It was in this month's popular science.

The idea was more for fun sort of stuff, and being able to mount electronics and other things on me, since I can't mount them in me.
And also because pcbs are still not flexible, and I lack the space for a fumehood to make my own.

>>25650992
Assmad

File: 1426987427205.jpg (51KB, 456x600px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 456x600px

>>25651203
>I have nothing to counter with. Seems like my source cherry picked thing's out of context.
>Lets insult him.

Try harder vatnik.

>>25651215
>more tomahawks than s-300s
tomahawks are missiles
s-300s are surface-to-air missile SYSTEMS

File: 1422077252427.jpg (33KB, 489x394px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 489x394px

>>25648477
nigga u dum

>>25650992
>implying Russian conscripts are any better trained than North Korean conscripts.

>>25651215
Where did you get that number? We had insufficient for the Syrian Red Line stupidity to even secure a port and do a naughty naughty sort of strike.

Sure we've built some more, but then used them in Yemen and Iraq. And now there is talk of killing the tomahawk off in favor of drones - a decent idea- but problematic for the returning not durkhas threats.

Basically, do you read the budgets, check the logistics, and see the cost sheets and stuff?
Or do you just read the tech spec handouts of two pages, then base your beliefs on those?

>>25649819
>>25651247
>Russian Federation
>even remotely on par with the USSR in economy

>>25651244
Sure, and the USa has more tomahawks than Russians have missiles to shove into their S-300s.

File: 1391495109368.png (80KB, 500x550px) Image search: [Google]

80KB, 500x550px

>>25651254
>implying I did not react to someone using a shitty website with cherry picked source.

>>25651269
Russian tanks, #1 killer of Russian tank crews since 1941.

‘Armor data provides only part of the picture of a tank's protection. Other factors in assessing the vulnerability of a tank include the internal arrangement of fuel and ammunition. The T-34-85 is a clear example of the trade-off between the benefits and drawbacks of steeply angled protective armor. Although the T-34's sloped sides reduced the likelihood of the tank being penetrated by enemy projectiles, it also led to a decrease in internal hull volume. In the event that the T-34 was penetrated, the projectile was far more likely to produce catastrophic damage among the fuel and ammunition stored in such a small space. The side sponsors of the T-34's fighting compartment in particular contained fuel cells that if penetrated could lead to fire and the destruction of the tank.’

>>25651278
Apart from the limited internal space there were two more serious design flaws.

One was the lack of turret basket (a rotating floor that moves as the turret turns) for the loader. This meant that the person loading the shells had to follow the movement of the gun and at the same time keep an eye on the floor so he doesn’t trip on the spent casings.

The other major issue was the two-man turret which forced the commander to also act as the gunner. This drastically limited combat performance as the commander could not focus on leading the tank but instead had to engage targets.

>>25648477

>20.000 T-72
>Over 5000 T-80s

>>25651268
how many tomahawks does US have at their disposal?

>>25649771
>A well trained loader loads faster and more intelligently than an autoloader

Must be one of those laws of nature I've never heard of.

I do hope they remove the tarp for the parade. It would be retarded otherwise.

File: t_34_by_joseph_mnbc-d514qb9.png (1021KB, 900x725px) Image search: [Google]

1021KB, 900x725px

>>25651289
We also have to remember that it's a late 30s and early 40s design and at that time there was little crew comfort in any tanks at that time with the same ability as the T-34

Also Russia is a big country where there is a demand to have high range in all tanks which forces designers to compromise protection.

If we compare it to other tank designs at it's time you will realise that being a tanker in WW2 is a dangerous job.

The T-34 85 is just a modernisation of the T-34 instead of producing a whole new tank which will force factors to change alot of stuff with will cost time and money in the middle of a bloody war with the best of germany.

>>25651339
>We also have to remember that it's a late 30s and early 40s design and at that time there was little crew comfort in any tanks at that time with the same ability as the T-34

Literally any non-Russian tank.

>>25650727
It only drives straight.

File: Sherman interior.jpg (237KB, 922x731px) Image search: [Google]

237KB, 922x731px

>>25651376
>Literally any non-Russian tank.

Explain

>>25651422
Well you just posted tank that had more comfortable and had similar abilities.

>>25651422
There's a basket, and room for non asians to move around in. Thanks for making our point.

>>25651448
>>25651480

Which is after the T-34

Not a single Panzer 3/4 had a turret basket.

The sherman right here is not any safer due to the location of shells.

Late shermans got all shells located right in the middle at the lowest.

All shermans have less range then the T-34

>>25651303
Skilled human loaders are capable of around 15 rounds per minute in short bursts, which is about where the best autoloader designs sit, and aside from complete exhaustion and debilitating injury, humans do not suffer from mechanical failures. In addition, skilled human control of ammunition will always be superior to mechanical control, both in the selection of the munitions and in the isolation of the rounds from the crew compartment.

Combine this fact with the fact that a fourth man is a tremendous aid in vehicle maintainance on top not having an autoloader to maintain, having a human loader objectively increases any tank's performance, crew skill being equal.

Autoloader makes sense for the fact that Russia cannot spend as much as the US to ensure competent human loaders, and in a backwards way when considering how prone to catestropic cookoff Russian designs have proven to be. It also makes sense for forces with smaller pools of personal who need each tank to function on as few people as possible.

File: M4A4-Sherman-Cutaw-Rear-ro6i98.jpg (1MB, 1482x1212px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1482x1212px

>>25651494
Another view.

>>25651494
>he sherman right here is not any safer due to the location of shells.
Sherman had massively improved crew survivability, though.

>>25651501
The future is automation. Humanity will be replaced by machines. Develop your auto-loader while you still can.

File: 1419540733919.jpg (255KB, 3000x2153px) Image search: [Google]

255KB, 3000x2153px

>>25651517
When they put wet storage and relocated location of all shells.

Explanation to why there was high losses and some times were partly to do with the fact that crew disregarded rules about HE shells carried onboard. They just stuffed it full due to having experience in running out of HE shells.

>>25650000
nice quads

>>25651523
Lol, when you can make an autoloader that loads faster, safer and smarter than a human without significantly increasing maintainance and logistical load, you might have something worth talking about.

As it stands the only reason to want an autoloader low is if your crews are shit or if you don't have enough people for four to a tank.

File: Panzer 4 late model internal.png (2MB, 1680x1050px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1680x1050px

Fun fact: All fuel was located right under the crew. Also no turret basket for I have not found any source that say it had.

Still better awareness due to 3 man turret.

>>25651571
Seems like my own picture shows that late models have something that looks like a turret basket.

>>25651510
>M4A4
>A4
wut

>>25648477
AK-47

>>25651605
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman_variants

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M4_Sherman#/media/File:M4_Sherman_tank_at_the_Imperial_War_Museum.jpg

https://www.google.com/search?q=M4A4+tank&biw=1920&bih=943&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ei=MHdCVce1Oen4yQPvg4HoBA&ved=0CBwQsAQ

File: 1396064119263.jpg (28KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 250x250px

>russian tanks

File: AK(3).jpg (167KB, 1499x985px) Image search: [Google]

167KB, 1499x985px

>>25651609
You mean the AKM?

>>25651628
Interesting.

Also I didn't know they made 105 Jumbo variants.
And it says they only made 254 Jumbo Shermans, but then it says there were 3,100 76mm armed Jumbos. I thought all 76m Jumbos were retrofitted in the field.

>>25651628
>>25651660
Wait fuck me, E2 is Jumbo, E8 is the M4A3 improved variant with thicker tracks and somewhat better frontal armor.

>>25651660
Wait you did not know that the jumbo variant was to destroy fortification and such?

Wikipedia is not the best source but okay to simple things.

>>25651677
Jumbo variant was to lead columns with the intended purpose to be immune to Pak 40 and 75mm guns.

It did its job pretty well. It wasn't inherently for attacking fortifications however. But yeah that's the HVSS 105 Sherman not a Jumbo anyways.

>>25651563

Wtf is smarter. The loader gets told what to load by either the commander or gunner.

Speed is merely a mechanical factor and there's nothing to imply that is somehow limited for a machine, where it is for a human. Also, gunners tire significantly and during prolonged combat will easily fall behind an autloader. Now imagine situations where a platoon might be in and out of combat for days or weeks, without down-time or days off and your loader performance will again take a hit.

> humans do not suffer from mechanical failures.

Humans injure themselves all the fucking time and it's significantly harder to "repair" them than a machine, especially any kind of tears in ligaments or muscles or inflammed bursae. God knows the shoulder joint and rotator cuff is an especially sensitive joint.

What I easily agree to, is that the fourth set of hands is incredibly valuable. Aside from that, modern autogunners already outperform humans often enough.

>>25650632
fake and gay

>>25649289
>New Abrams 4.0.2.1 Alpha Ver. when?

M1A2 SEPv3 upgrades are budgeted to start in 2017.

>>25651494
>Not a single Panzer 3/4 had a turret basket.
incorrect, the Pz IV had a complete turret basket while the Pz III an uncomplete oen. Stop shilling and read a book, faggot.

>>25651670
>E8 is the M4A3 improved variant with thicker tracks and somewhat better frontal armor.
No. E8 just means the HVSS track system. No improved armor whatsoever. I keep reading that bullshit here often, don't know where it started.
Sauce: Hunnicutt

>>25651761
>Humans injure themselves all the fucking time and it's significantly harder to "repair" them than a machine, especially any kind of tears in ligaments or muscles or inflammed bursae. God knows the shoulder joint and rotator cuff is an especially sensitive joint.

But then, if the machine breaks your fucked.

If the human breaks, you have somebody else load, like the commander.

>>25651643
You mean you're autistic?
My point was they have mass produced.

>>25651952
>Pz III an uncomplete one

You mean they were half way there?

>>25652043
internal volume too small to have a proper turret basket.

>>25652228
>no monkey models
6/10 step it up

>>25652037
I wouldn't call someone autistic if you made the mistake in the first place chap

>>25652402
I don't give a shit what you would or wouldn't do. He knew what I meant and and his autism got the best of him and he just had to correct me.

>>25652472
learn the difference before you post on a weapons board about a weapon

File: 1418478613511.png (192KB, 278x323px) Image search: [Google]

192KB, 278x323px

Not even Russian, but holy fuck, do you Yankee Doodle shits get ass-fuming-mad at the very mention of this Armata thing...

>>25648874
holy fuck, could you shoot at something like that?
its just way too smug

>>25652921
>I spend all day thinking about Americans.

>>25652921
>>25649087
>>25649598
>stop visiting krautchan /int/ since got overrun by russian shills and vatniks over the past year
>just hate their constant 'lol. you mad? you mad!' all the time at wrong occasions, most when they got shown wrong or cant provide any proof for their claim
>it starts to happen more and more on 4chan too
>it is mostly in russia related threads

>>25653480

You've been doing literally the same thing the entire thread, instead of discussing the design in a factual matter with a good intent of actual discussion you have instead relegated yourself to insulting it and everyone else who disagrees with you.

I'd call you no better, but honestly you're even worse.

>>25652921
American here and we're not all like this. I for one am getting tired of all these threads getting shit up by a bunch of meme spouting fuck heads. If you don't want to participate in the discussion, hide the thread and move on. It's not hard to do. I do the same thing on /gif/ with anything to do with scat, BBW, femdom, trannies, etc. It's a neat feature, y'all should try it some time.

>Comrade, Turret is not yet made
>Da, get of cardboard and place canvas over, must of fool capitalist into stronk russia tank!

>>25653851

I echo this, I just want to talk about the damn tank, its capabilities, and the larger implications of new shifts in Russian doctrine introduced because of this design instead of listening to some dude call everyone a vatnik for even trying to have a discussion in good faith.

>>25653837
What are you even talking about? Please show were the thread is full of "you mad? you mad!" from the side that doesnt celebrate the tank, without actually knowing any data.

>I'd call you no better, but honestly you're even worse.
Cute coming from someone who tries to derail so bad.

>>25653973

I'm not trying to derail the thread, it's already past the damn bump limit. You, on the other hand have had no trouble in going around and stirring up shit from everyone. You are the exact same guy that I have seen in nearly every thread discussing anything remotely russian calling anyone who so much as disagrees with you a vatnik.

>>25654144
>Yankee Doodle shits get ass-fuming-mad

>You are the exact same guy that I have seen in nearly every thread discussing anything remotely russian calling anyone who so much as disagrees with you a vatnik.

You see the irony here?

>>25654210

Are you implying that I think that this is acceptable for the other guys and not for you?

Absolutely not, however, every time I see a shit storm its by some dude either trying his hardest to be insulting in his post or by downright not posting something relevant at all to get a rise out of others.

You're not here to discuss the vehicle, you're here to have some sort of nationalistic wish fulfillment. It's a case of you started it, and it happens in every fucking thread.

>>25654295
No i am implying you are like those insulting people.
Since you wrote it so fittingly:
>I'd call you no better, but honestly you're even worse.