Jump to content
Sturgeon's House

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

Wrong thread, and what?

Sorry but I don't really understand what you're trying to convey here. Can you rephrase?

 

No, definitely not the wrong thread nor did I click reply to the wrong response.

 

You acted as if the cute little 60mm HVMS thing was somehow in the same league as the Super 75 over the last few of your posts in this thread (it's not) while also making the snarky little comment in another thread that maybe the US "will save itself a few years" by just picking up iron vision for the Bradley thing...

 

It's a trend with you to act like the Israeli whatever is at the very least just as good as ANYTHING ELSE of any kind in any class anyone posts ever! This is your SOP at the bare minimum.  In this case you even went as far as to try to throw shade by using an argument from incredulity as your evidence of the outright inferiority of an American project that was being discussed which is just plain better in every way than the "home team solution" you tried to pretend had even some claim to qualitative equivalence etc!

 

Maybe if you had referenced the Ottomatic version your utterly unfounded bias wouldn't have been so glaringly and jarringly obvious, but then again the Ottomatic isn't Izzy either therefore I'm sure It's completely inferior in your mind as well.

 

Which is exactly how the whole iron vision thing ties in and why I brought it up here too even though THAT snarky xenocentric and unfounded bit of commentary exists in another thread.

 

Once again we find you acting as if the product from your home nation is so far ahead in the road to serial production and advanced in function that the US ought to just not even bother with a domestic solution and buy Iron vision instead. The actual reality of the situation though pretty thoroughly fails to match up with your assertions/assessment yet again though if one stops arguing from incredulity in a way that basically comes down to just assuming that your "home team" stuff is unparalleled and revolutionary then reinforcing that by not bothering to actually look to see if it's even remotely close to true!

 

And another tie in here is that ELKE / HSTVL / RDF LT / super 75 etc are in a lot of ways some of the first real even close to successful Western outings into territory that would justify and or even require stuff like an iron vision type system to make them workable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, roguetechie said:

 

No, definitely not the wrong thread nor did I click reply to the wrong response.

 

You acted as if the cute little 60mm HVMS thing was somehow in the same league as the Super 75 over the last few of your posts in this thread (it's not) while also making the snarky little comment in another thread that maybe the US "will save itself a few years" by just picking up iron vision for the Bradley thing...

 

It's a trend with you to act like the Israeli whatever is at the very least just as good as ANYTHING ELSE of any kind in any class anyone posts ever! This is your SOP at the bare minimum.  In this case you even went as far as to try to throw shade by using an argument from incredulity as your evidence of the outright inferiority of an American project that was being discussed which is just plain better in every way than the "home team solution" you tried to pretend had even some claim to qualitative equivalence etc!

 

Maybe if you had referenced the Ottomatic version your utterly unfounded bias wouldn't have been so glaringly and jarringly obvious, but then again the Ottomatic isn't Izzy either therefore I'm sure It's completely inferior in your mind as well.

 

Which is exactly how the whole iron vision thing ties in and why I brought it up here too even though THAT snarky xenocentric and unfounded bit of commentary exists in another thread.

 

Once again we find you acting as if the product from your home nation is so far ahead in the road to serial production and advanced in function that the US ought to just not even bother with a domestic solution and buy Iron vision instead. The actual reality of the situation though pretty thoroughly fails to match up with your assertions/assessment yet again though if one stops arguing from incredulity in a way that basically comes down to just assuming that your "home team" stuff is unparalleled and revolutionary then reinforcing that by not bothering to actually look to see if it's even remotely close to true!

 

And another tie in here is that ELKE / HSTVL / RDF LT / super 75 etc are in a lot of ways some of the first real even close to successful Western outings into territory that would justify and or even require stuff like an iron vision type system to make them workable.

 

EDIT: Changed my comment. Wrote it inappropriately.

 

You had a bad day. You need to vent out some anger. Don't vent it on me though.

 

I believe you simply, greatly, misunderstood me on all the above points. So this is your chance to rephrase it.

 

I want us to maintain mutual respect, so work with me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/7/2018 at 4:00 PM, Mighty_Zuk said:

 

EDIT: Changed my comment. Wrote it inappropriately.

 

You had a bad day. You need to vent out some anger. Don't vent it on me though.

 

I believe you simply, greatly, misunderstood me on all the above points. So this is your chance to rephrase it.

 

I want us to maintain mutual respect, so work with me.

 

My apologies ... It's been really hot here for a week and heat is very taxing on me which makes me grumpy. 

 

No excuses, just an explanation... Again I apologize.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Had a quick glance around and those two vehicles are surprisingly averse to being seen together (and yet I'm pretty sure there must be a picture out there showing them side by side, in one of these typical "the evolution of our hardware" photo shoots). I even tried Hunnicutt's Bradley - A History of the American Fighting and Support Vehicles or turning to Desert Storm footage, but nothing turned up for me.

 

The only pic I found that kind of illustrates the difference in size between the two was lifted from a modelling site, and even then it must be taken with a ULCC-sized dose of salt.

 

AT5bJtn.jpg

 

That said, while looking around I found some rather exotic stuff such as this German StuG-like conversion of the M113. Would've been perfect for the "Name that AFV" thread except I don't have an official name to slap on it. :lol:

 

C2QKmou.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll leave the link to the 14th of July parade in case somebody is interested:

 

https://www.francetvinfo.fr/france/14-juillet/direct-regardez-le-defile-militaire-du-14-juillet-avec-pour-la-premiere-fois-des-images-4d_2845251.html

 

Edit: The actual parade start around 2h35 time mark (or rather the opening animation).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ZfxvPJJ.jpg

Naked:
 

Spoiler

7sxttaF.jpg
SFIvfHa.jpg


Base Armour (Spaced Steel?):
 

Spoiler

J9FmvHq.jpg
pEhfC5f.jpg
Y4dlHNG.jpg

Side Storage
B1Uwlav.jpg

Diffrent side storage:
gvtYSOt.jpg


Expanded Armour (Composite?) & Blocks
 

Spoiler

Bolted on-top of Replaces base armour at the front. Comes as standard at rear and bottom(?):
fTGaT6Q.jpg
mkts7pb.jpg
jWSy00n.jpg
pHSvxjr.jpg
qHpEyn2.jpg

Turret slabs:
1IXwQ5R.jpg

Bar/Mesh:
LhJlfg0.jpg
xH4WpX8.jpg


Barracuda camo:
 

Spoiler

GxCH8IN.jpg


Testing Ballast Weights:
 

Spoiler

cbzfwZK.jpg
eJGQsxa.jpg

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hopefully this is the right place for this, but why does the Japanese Type-74 have such an archaic commander's cupola? Vision block's, Fixed commander's sight and no provision for open protected position, and with the .50 M2 mounted centerline on the turret, a "tradition" that continues to this day in the Type-90. All of this seems very strange, especially as the STB-1 at least had a panoramic periscope for the commander.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Similar Content

    • By LostCosmonaut
      Originally posted by Rossmum on SA;
       

       
      Looks pretty good for the time.
    • By Collimatrix
      Shortly after Jeeps_Guns_Tanks started his substantial foray into documenting the development and variants of the M4, I joked on teamspeak with Wargaming's The_Warhawk that the next thing he ought to do was a similar post on the T-72.
       
      Haha.  I joke.  I am funny man.
       
      The production history of the T-72 is enormously complicated.  Tens of thousands were produced; it is probably the fourth most produced tank ever after the T-54/55, T-34 and M4 sherman.
       
      For being such an ubiquitous vehicle, it's frustrating to find information in English-language sources on the T-72.  Part of this is residual bad information from the Cold War era when all NATO had to go on were blurry photos from May Day parades:
       

       
      As with Soviet aircraft, NATO could only assign designations to obviously externally different versions of the vehicle.  However, they were not necessarily aware of internal changes, nor were they aware which changes were post-production modifications and which ones were new factory variants of the vehicle.  The NATO designations do not, therefore, necessarily line up with the Soviet designations.  Between different models of T-72 there are large differences in armor protection and fire control systems.  This is why anyone arguing T-72 vs. X has completely missed the point; you need to specify which variant of T-72.  There are large differences between them!
       
      Another issue, and one which remains contentious to this day, is the relation between the T-64, T-72 and T-80 in the Soviet Army lineup.  This article helps explain the political wrangling which led to the logistically bizarre situation of three very similar tanks being in frontline service simultaneously, but the article is extremely biased as it comes from a high-ranking member of the Ural plant that designed and built the T-72.  Soviet tank experts still disagree on this; read this if you have some popcorn handy.  Talking points from the Kharkov side seem to be that T-64 was a more refined, advanced design and that T-72 was cheap filler, while Ural fans tend to hold that T-64 was an unreliable mechanical prima donna and T-72 a mechanically sound, mass-producible design.
       
      So, if anyone would like to help make sense of this vehicle, feel free to post away.  I am particularly interested in:
       
      -What armor arrays the different T-72 variants use.  Diagrams, dates of introduction, and whether the array is factory-produced or a field upgrade of existing armor are pertinent questions.
       
      -Details of the fire control system.  One of the Kharkov talking points is that for most of the time in service, T-64 had a more advanced fire control system than contemporary T-72 variants.  Is this true?  What were the various fire control systems in the T-64 and T-72, and what were there dates of introduction?  I am particularly curious when Soviet tanks got gun-follows-sight FCS.
       
      -Export variants and variants produced outside the Soviet Union.  How do they stack up?  Exactly what variant(s) of T-72 were the Iraqis using in 1991?

      -WTF is up with the T-72's transmission?  How does it steer and why is its reverse speed so pathetically low?
       
       
    • By LoooSeR
      Hello, my friends and Kharkovites, take a sit and be ready for your brains to start to work - we are going to tell you a terrible secret of how to tell apart Soviet tanks that actually works like GLORIOUS T-80 and The Mighty T-72 from Kharkovites attempt to make a tank - the T-64. Many of capitalists Westerners have hard time understanding what tank is in front of them, even when they know smart words like "Kontakt-5" ERA. Ignoramus westerners!
       
       
         Because you are all were raised in several hundreds years old capitalism system all of you are blind consumer dummies, that need big noisy labels and shiny colorful things to be attached to product X to be sold to your ignorant heads and wallets, thats why we will need to start with basics. BASICS, DA? First - how to identify to which tank "family" particular MBT belongs to - to T-64 tree, or T-72 line, or Superior T-80 development project, vehicles that don't have big APPLE logo on them for you to understand what is in front of you. And how you can do it in your home without access to your local commie tank nerd? 
       
       
         Easy! Use this Putin approved guide "How to tell appart different families of Soviet and Russian tanks from each other using simple and easy to spot external features in 4 steps: a guide for ignorant western journalists and chairborn generals to not suck in their in-depth discussions on the Internet".
       
       
       
      Chapter 1: Where to look, what to see.
       
      T-64 - The Ugly Kharkovite tank that doesn't work 
       
         We will begin with T-64, a Kharkovite attempt to make a tank, which was so successful that Ural started to work on their replacement for T-64 known as T-72. Forget about different models of T-64, let's see what is similar between all of them.
       
       
       

       
       
         
       
       
      T-72 - the Mighty weapon of Workers and Peasants to smash westerners
       
         Unlike tank look-alike, made by Kharkovites mad mans, T-72 is true combat tank to fight with forces of evil like radical moderate barbarians and westerners. Thats why we need to learn how identify it from T-64 and you should remember it's frightening lines!
       

       
       
       
      The GLORIOUS T-80 - a Weapon to Destroy and Conquer bourgeois countries and shatter westerners army
       
         And now we are looking at the Pride of Party and Soviet army, a true tank to spearhead attacks on decadent westerners, a tank that will destroy countries by sucking their military budgets and dispersing their armies in vortex of air, left from high-speed charge by the GLORIOUS T-80!

      The T-80 shooting down jets by hitting them behind the horizont 
          
×
×
  • Create New...