It's a shame nobody likes Russia and Russian military tech.

File: PYwq6bUPa0s.jpg (134KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

134KB, 1920x1080px

>>34946908

Looks like shit though.

>>34946908
>It's a shame nobody likes Russia and Russian military tech.
It's not that nobody likes it, it's just we all know better when they come out with carrier/fighter/satellite/sub killer. It'll never work nor will ever be in production in any meaningful amount.

>>34946908
>I guess it's time for Russia to just buy Chinese.
They woud never accept that. Adding on to my post here >>34946953

The Chinese also have the sort of issue. too many projects that claim to do to many things perfectly, without fail, every time without breakdowns.

File: l0PaG2n.jpg (153KB, 1199x797px) Image search: [Google]

153KB, 1199x797px

Israel's future APC is being developed with the same Russian team that made the Boomerang

>>34947080
Source? Why would they bother hiring Russian team?

>>34948764
China also hired Russian design team for the Z-10 project, but the design was so mediocre that China went back to the Chinese design team and bought their superior design. Russia is crying because they said it's their design but it was actually purely Chinese and impressive compared to shits like Ka-52K or Mi-28NM.

>>34946908
Because 90% of Russian military tech being "unveiled" these days is propaganda vaporware

>>34946908
>Russia
>buy

>>34948905
Someones' jealous of Russian creativity.

>>34949009
Whatever helps you sleep at night Vlad

>>34949009
>Jealous
>Of unpowered exoskeletons (a.k.a. LARPing as space marines) and a tank that breaks down during a parade rehearsal on a paved road

>>34949031
>unpowered exoskeletons
Jealous DARPA couldn't think of that?
>tank that breaks down during a parade rehearsal on a paved road
Only Americans can think up of shit like this.

>>34947080
>that shot trap between the wheels and upper hull

>>34949065
>1945+72
>complaining about shot trapping

>>34949065

>i played war thunder once so im basically a tank expert haha

>>34949083
>APC proofed against RPG's and most other LAT weapons expected to be used by contemporary enemies
>except for the 7or so inch gaps underneath each of the 8 wheels
no big deal

>>34949112
read>>34949117

>>34949117

Do you just not understand the concept of suspension or what

>>34949117

>HEAT missiles
>Shot trapping

KYS

Seems like the place to ask. Are the Russians replacing the VSS with anything, and if so what?

>>34949124
wait so they're just gonna drop there suspension and keep the hull less then a foot off the ground instead?
>what are IEDs

>>34949129
The area with less armor is what I meant so if it upsets your autism

>>34949117
>I do not understand what "shot trap" means

>>34949171
that exposed area of probable lesser armor is what I meant

That is not a shot trap, you mongs.
Lets pretend it is, and now explain to me which round would deflect from which surface onto a plate it otherwise couldn't hit?

>>34949203
read>>34949183
>>34949155

File: qw.jpg (1MB, 1600x1067px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1600x1067px

Most technologically advanced military in the world

>>34949216
You are using the term incorrectly.

Tracked and wheeled armored vehicles by design have weakspots since their protection is optimized across frontal 60°aspect. Even the latest Leopard 2 has parts with 40 mm armor protection.

Lower hull sides are not likely to be hit, and the suspension takes up a lot of space anyway.


A shot trap would be the famous example of early Panther gun mantlet which was rounded on the lower side and caused non-penetrating hits to the mantlet to deflect onto the vulnerable, thin, top protection of fighting compartment.

Armata turret and those compartments on that APC are not shot traps because they don't have the resistive/deflective capability, too thin.

>>34949229
>Armata turret and those compartments on that APC are not shot traps because they don't have the resistive/deflective capability, too thin.

Well, no... They don't have the deflective capability because shaped-charge projectiles and KEPs don't deflect.

The elimination of the shot trap in modern armor design has nothing to do with the layout of a vehicle's armor; it's all down to the fact that no modern AFV is firing projectiles that will bounce around like that.

>>34946908
>It's a shame nobody likes Russia and Russian military tech.
Riight. That's why they are the biggest arms exporter in the world IIRC

>>34949239
Dude... Vehicles such as that one get engaged by machine guns and autocannons. Which could exploit shot traps if they existed.

Your reply to me is incorrect, apart from being a non sequitur. KEP can deflect, and there CAN be a shot trap. Abrams turret over hull is an example of a potential shot trap, so the turrent ring is reinforced.

>>34949229
>Tracked and wheeled armored vehicles by design have weakspots since their protection is optimized across frontal 60°aspect.

Traditionally speaking yes. But as its only armed with a 50 and in the hands of the IDF its clearly expected to be employed against unconventional opponents in unconventional situations. in other words Ambush and IED survival are priorities. Yeah sure the chances of hitting the lower hull are still relatively small but given the large number of RPG's and EFP's they should be expecting to face a lot of APC's could be knocked out as a result of whats a seemingly un-important design aspect.

heck, hamas or whoever could set small hard to detect EFP's (that would be useless against anything above a humvee) a meter off the ground and still have a 50/50 chance of piercing through the weak lower hull.

Idk couldn't they put some kind of cover over the top quarter of the wheels?

>>34949258
You don't see the hull of Armata's turret. You see only a light cover.

>>34949227
The T-14 looks great with the camo.

>>34949264
I already addressed that in my previous post. That is just a metal, external shroud. So no shot trap potential despite odd shapes and angles.

However, I was writing about M1 Abrams in the post you quoted.

>>34949263
Maybe the crew and passengers are not behind those exposed, vulnerable parts?

>>34949294
>if its not living we don't need to protect it
ok

>>34949320
>we can't protect everything against all threats
>we don't want to afford equal attention to crew, passenger and transmission protection
>we don't want an overweight, large, expensive solution to a wheeled APC need
>what is armor optimization
>what is all-or-nothing

>>34949332
but surely they could put some kind of guard over the top half of the wheels that would cost nil in terms of mobility or expense?

File: 1503099365436.jpg (151KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 1280x720px

>>34949227
das rite

>>34949348
And such guard would provide nil protection.

If you make it protective enough, it could complicate repairing the damaged wheels and tires, or even comprimise mobility in case of it getting jamed into wheels after an IED attack.

File: 1499621312232.jpg (3MB, 2250x1500px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2250x1500px

>>34949141
seems they are primarily modernizing it

>>34949227
So are they gonna use camo or what? I thought it was phased out and all their vehicles are green now.

>>34949547
>>34949141
VSS became part of Ratnik kit
no plan to replace it

File: 1442292992314.jpg (356KB, 1163x1385px) Image search: [Google]

356KB, 1163x1385px

>>34949547
>modernized VSS
>has a thin shitty leather sling with jangly metal connectors

>>34949141
VSS' are still issued to dudes. Some of them get modernized like
>>34949547
But they still see use in border units and during mountain duties. I think a few showed up at some point in Syria in rearward positions.

>>34950018
And America can't even make a VSS copy. Even China has a superior one.

File: 1497920730191.jpg (146KB, 654x539px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 654x539px

>>34947080
gonna need a source on this one granted both countries deal with insurgency and urban operations rather go with isreal based team over the Russian

File: .300AACBlackout.jpg (426KB, 2048x1212px) Image search: [Google]

426KB, 2048x1212px

>>34950201
'Murica doesn't copy, third-worlder firend

>>34948905
This
and the vatniks make people have a general distaste for anything russian.

>>34948961
>Dr. Regus Patoff
head of russian "team".

File: 300blk.jpg (121KB, 560x392px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 560x392px

>>34950738
>shitty copycat

>>34948764
Ghosts of Grozny

The Russians have good field experience with urban warfare, which is Israel's MO.

>>34950201
>Even China has a superior one.
?

>>34946908
Oh, there's a difference between liking Russian military tech. I'd say that most people here on /k/ do.

We just can't stand vatniks after the 2+ yeras of nonstop shitposting from Ukraine to the Armata.

File: ts.jpg (6KB, 243x113px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 243x113px

>>34950870
most americans as well as russians should be familiar with regus patoff.

>>34947080
I call fake news.

File: IMG_5916.jpg (628KB, 1200x800px) Image search: [Google]

628KB, 1200x800px

>>34950018
russian private company make modern sling

the MOD only buy shitty sling for conscript

File: 5_2cdea0a3.jpg (209KB, 1000x667px) Image search: [Google]

209KB, 1000x667px

>>34949554
Parade vehicle are all paint green for aesthetic and convenience

IRL vehicle are camouflaged based on the combat zone

and wood land camo just look mean

File: 534534.jpg (499KB, 1092x1133px) Image search: [Google]

499KB, 1092x1133px

>>34947080
>Boomerang
If you want to make genealogical tree of AFV families looks below waist. At their chassis. Boomerang and Eitan have different suspension.

>>34946908
>"new" russian tech
>oh look, they just slapped a new coat of paint on a 50 year old design...again.

>>34951599
>they just slapped a new coat of paint on a 50 year old design...again.
>not "they just added western optic sight and GPS Map on a 50 year old design"

you have that one job

>>34951678
But they didn't add a Western optic or GPS map...except on maybe 1 tech demonstrator. Because those cost money, which is something Russia doesn't have.

>>34951694
dude, they trade Putin natural gas for optic and GPS map

>>34949053
>Jealous DARPA couldn't think of that?
They already did, vatnik. Perhaps if you spent less time shooting up krokodil and more time reading the news you'd know that.

>>34949053
>Jealous DARPA couldn't think of that?
They did you mongoloid. They just didn't show it off widely because it's not actually impressive at all.

>>34950916
Then they should consult the US and UK instead of the Russians. The anglos showed how to properly handle urban terrain.

>>34948811
Impressive

>>34946927
Nice fucking commentary on /k/ everyone. Cleary faggots from a Vietnamese image board site knows that Russian vehicles and their tech are shit. Keep underestimating their tech, see how far that gets you. You'd be shitting your pants if you had to fight on the frontlines against the Russians. God this board is fucking shit.

>>34949031
>Hurr it fucking broke down during a parade so it sucks.
You people are just fucking basic bitches. I'm not a Russoboo at all but /k/'s commentary on all things Russian is just pathetic.

>>34949252
No, it's because after the fall of the USSR, they had a shit ton of outdated military equipment, but had fuck all money to maintain it. So they stripped every part they wanted to keep, and exported monkey (((export))) models and sold it to shit holes in the middle east, africa, and india that can't afford better shit.

File: 645645.png (225KB, 520x313px) Image search: [Google]

225KB, 520x313px

>>34946908
>Boomerang IFV
Boomerang is dead all hail BTR -87.
gurkhan dot blogspot dot se/2017/08/87-2017.html#more

>>34951971

Everyone shits their pants in combat, kid

I did it, my dad did it, my grand dad did it. Ask anyone thats been in anything thick.

>>34952047
Well if this board wasn't full of /k/ids who underestimated and pisses on non-western vehicles and military tech, you would have a valid point. However a lot of you on here basic bitches that don't understand or respect the enemy and their military potential. You just think all things Russian are shit, has it occurred to any of you on here that a lot of our combat doctrine has its origins with the Soviet Union? Or are you too dense and too full of pride to understand that?

File: 12353453.jpg (78KB, 700x475px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 700x475px

>>34952047
>I did it
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrB7TwC_mCA

>>34951990
You know we're just saying it because it makes the vatniks asshurt, right?

>>34951971
The last time the West overestimated Russian tech, they blew it so far out of the water that it destroyed the Soviets when they tried to gain parity

>>34952217
Oh I'm quiet sure you're just shitposting and you really don't mean it. Yeah sure, like everyone else on 4chan right?
>>34952265
Oh another faggot on here that compares a shithole country like Iraq to the Soviet military. Wow fucking original. Did you get your info from armchair general forum? Have you heard of air superiority and a coalition force? Iraq was alone retard. They might have had the largest airforce in the region but they were vastly outnumbered and their crews were poorly trained. They used tanks as----
Oh fuck it, what's the point of trying to provide nuance views on /k/uck if they are just going go "la-la-la-la-la-la! I'm not listening"? Its like trying to explain this shit to a brick wall, they won't understand.

>>34952302
>Oh another faggot on here that compares a shithole country like Iraq to the Soviet military.

lol. You're literally the only person in this thread to even mention Iraq, kiddo. I dunno, keep going back to your 'muh unederestimating!" nonsense that you do in every single thread then swearing up and down that you're totally not a vatnik. works every time.

>>34952327
Listen faggot, I'm not a vatnik and I don't need to prove shit on here to prove that.
>muh underestimating
Nice spelling kiddo, I bet you feel really proud of your ignorance on here. Keep up this anti-Russian tech bullshit propaganda. I rather go on military porn on leddit because at least those faggots have a degree of respect for non-western equipment.
>faggot anon gets blowup by Russian artillery that he 10 years ago on a Vietnamese image board was pissing on it and felt so fucking proud of it.

>>34952385
Stop, my sides can't take anymore!

>>34946908
Most of the "new" russian tech is 50 years old design with new gun or ERA. Then they build like 3 or 4 prototypes and stop the development because they have no money.

Even now, 90% of russian armored vehicles have no basic night sights.

>>34952385
>>34952302
>>34952110
>>34951971
is it bad that i can no longer tell the difference between real vatniks and false flagging vatnik shitposting?

>>34952389
This board is fucking cancer.
"You only have to kick in the door and the whole rotten structure will come crashing down, Adolf Hitler, June 1941."

Fucking pathetic. And they lost, so enjoy yourself you fucking piece of shit. God your arrogance makes me want to hunt you down and give a fucking beating. I've never met someone so full of pride that he like a autistic 4channer is saying. "REeeeee stop, my sides can't take anymore!" You want me to kick your sides so you feel a little better?"

>>34952427
this is as it should be.

>>34952442
Keep going! I don't regularly get to see someone argue against things no one has said in a thread.

>>34952427
Another anon faggot on here that thinks calling out your biased opinion on all things Russian military equals "shitposting" and being a "vatnik". Another waste of human garbage that needs a good beating right now.

>>34952452
What's the point you arrogant pig, you'll just dismiss it. Take a 12 gauge and put it in your mouth you arrogant excuse for a human being.

I lose less braincells on /his/ than this place so keep this circlejerk going because I'm out.

>>34952467
>>34952479
Please, just for my own sanity, tell me that you're shitposting and you're not actually someone that's so angry over nothing that they come into a thread and threaten to beat people up online while arguing against things that no one said.

>>34952037
That's just a BTR-82 upgrade. Much like T-72B3 and T-90M. No use scrapping it if it still ignites, eh?

>>34952493
Maybe I am, maybe I'm not. What's the point of giving you a valid straightforward answer? I can't take anyone on /k/ seriously if they are just going to dismiss those who dissents against the anti-Russian military narrative. If you're so confident that fighting Russia would be a cake walk, just start lobbing nukes at Russia, it'll be over so quickly we don't need NATO anymore or need to build up the army against Russia because we have nukes. They have shit equipment so what's the point of being afraid of them? We have nukes, we can destroy them without firing a bullet at them.

>>34952544
So you truly are just this angry over nothing. Seriously bro, just go fap one out and calm down, it's not healthy to be like this.

>>34952515
>That's just a BTR-82 upgrade.
That will be main IFV/APC of Russia in teh next 50 years. Boomer is in the process of canning due to cost.

File: squad.gif (3MB, 480x350px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 480x350px

>>34946908
ok what cannon is that

>>34952563
>haha russia is shit XD
>hahahaha jack in the box tanks
>hahaha I'll dismiss any sort of fact-based argument and counter it with misguided anecdotes
>I'll argue using allusions to iraq but simply not mention the word and as soon as he mentions iraq I will just say he's taking the words out of my mouth rather than try and make any sort of legitimate technically based argument over equipment disparities.
>woah hey despite me coming here and posting what I learned from call of duty and movies you should calm down bro this is just 4chan no need to put effort into your posts and get upset when you can just troll without any kind of investment in anything you post
>chill out bro it's just a sri lankan tea leaf cultivation forum

Not even that guy but if you actually don't like vatniks making an ass of yourself doesn't help your case.

>>34952765
it's just a fucking BTR 60 with berezhok module for sale retard

>>34954103
>jack in the box
>iraq

again, you're the only person to even mention this stuff. why are you so angry?

>>34954103
I know this gets thrown around a lot because it's a meme, but really, are you autistic?

>>34954123
>fucking BTR 60 with berezhok module
Fits into Russian future perfectly.

>>34954495
like nigger dick in your mom's vagina

>>34954235
If you couldn't tell I'm just strawmanning the typical anti-vatnik arguments. You obviously didn't use those but you used basic bitch burger arguments just like the "stalled tonk during parade" meme.

>again, you're the only person to even mention this stuff.
I'm sorry you're too busy making vague statements like
>The last time the West overestimated Russian tech, they blew it so far out of the water that it destroyed the Soviets when they tried to gain parity
Maybe you can actually just say "oh well I was mentioning the Ukrianian cvil war" or whatever, like a normal person actually trying to make a point instead of "hehehe I see you fell into my trap card argument I was never talking about Iraq at all, therefore your IQ is low!" I don't have any skin in this fight because I haven't made a single post in this thread other than the one you've replied to. You, however, seem to be more concerned with psychoanalysis of people posting opposing viewpoints rather than refuting his central thesis or any of his technical points seeing as how instead of just correcting him and furthering your points against decently constructed and pieced arguments (without regards to whether or not his central thesis of slavshit being good is correct) you're throwing out ad-homs.

>>34954338
>Bro, let's be serious for a sec - k? Are you mentally defecient, bro? I mean, really, brah have you checked it out?

>>34950904
Alright, let's bring it all they way back to the Winchester 1905 and its cartridges

>>34949547
>>34951510
Neat, got anymore pictures? I can always use more hi-res pics of my raifu.

File: dyzgX.png (82KB, 668x269px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 668x269px

>Be Army 2017
>Release news about tank module.
>No one cares

File: 2014-fev-01-BTR-4-Indinesie001.jpg (509KB, 1024x591px) Image search: [Google]

509KB, 1024x591px

>>34954123
They've reworked quite a bit on the 87. It's in the same format as a western wheeled ifv in that the engine is moved to the front with the troop compartment in the rear. Note the lack of side doors. Ukrainians actually beat them to it

So is the T-14 Armata "complete"? If so how many are in service and where?

I haven't heard or seen anything about it in quite a while.

>>34958801
>>34958801
No is prototype comrade. Undergoing testings.Will be include supercapacitor as extra APU for stabilizationings.

>>34949227
That's an aesthetic looking tank.

>>34958901
So, it will be PAK FA 2.0. As expected. 12 prototipes to 2030.

>>34952765
>Boomer is in the process of canning due to cost
No, not really.

>>34954702
>Oh no, nobody loves MUH SLAVSHIT on /k/, whatever shall I do?

Cry moar, Ivan.

>>34959078
>So, it will be PAK FA 2.0
Whats that?

File: Evstafiev-Chechnya-BURNED.jpg (87KB, 700x454px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 700x454px

>>34950916
>The Russians have good field experience with urban warfare

What, like how not to do it?

File: 1474038646439.jpg (472KB, 2048x1536px) Image search: [Google]

472KB, 2048x1536px

>>34959078
>12 prototipes to 2030.
We're in future now.

>>34949252
Arms exporters in the world:
1.US
2.France
3.Russia

>>34949227
why dont they put the bricks on it

>>34954702
>I need to strawman to win arguments
>Muh basic bitch
>I still haven't said anything of meaning this whole thread and think that /k/ is one person

Vatniks. Vatniks never change.

>>34954702
>Maybe you can actually just say "oh well I was mentioning the Ukrianian cvil war" or whatever, like a normal person actually trying to make a point instead of "hehehe I see you fell into my trap card argument I was never talking about Iraq at all, therefore your IQ is low!"

Are you seriously autistic or retarded? Fuck, even I understood what they were trying to say and it clearly has nothing to do with either Ukraine or Iraq which you seem to be so extraordinarily defensive about despite 'totally not being a russian vatnik'.

>>34959078
There are already more than 50 armatas