AssaultPlazma

How long does it take to build one of these things? 

On 5/13/2019 at 5:24 PM, TokyoMorose said:

 

As true as this is, the age is honestly rather cause enough for replacement. The things are slow, maintenance intensive, not particularly stable, and lack some "creature comforts" that have rather proven to be necessary in certain operations (the classic case being no effective AC in desert fighting...). You might be able to get away with a deep overhaul, but likely for the same costs as a newer design.

 

 

 

Yeah I understand replacing the HMMWV due to age. It just seems like the JLTV is overkill for what should just be a simple lightweight utility vehicle IMHO. 

1 minute ago, Ramlaen said:

 

A Humvee that is protected from underbelly blasts and more mobile, but the shift to a major power conflict and the glut of Humvees has resulted in the Army slowing the JLTV purchase.

I'll elaborate a little, I guess the premise just seemed odd to me because the HMMWV was never designed to eat IED's and take the fight to folks in heavy urban street fighting. As a basic utility vehicle there's nothing wrong with it besides being old at this point.  

You guys should see how much Active Duty soldiers freak out and revert to "if it ain't broke don't fix it" every time something new from a vehicle to a internet website gets introduced lol. 

2 hours ago, Ramlaen said:

 

GAO rating something not operationally suitable isn't something to take at face value. Much of their criticisms have already been addressed.

Yeah, I not saying this is the worst thing ever and it's a complete failure. I am genuinely curious though how much development/R&D cost have gone into this thing regardless. Issues are bound to come up when procuring any new piece of equipment. Plus I'm sure everyone here already knows about the mess that generally is U.S. Military procurement so no need to beat that dead horse. 

Armchair general pants on: I don't really understand the point of this vehicle......

So how much taxpayer money have we used on this thing so far?

"Budget Cuts 3" lol

24 minutes ago, LoooSeR said:

   Of course not, everybody knows that Armatas are made out of cardboard. I also doubt that it can drive forward, even if it have tracks and suspension set up to move that thing.

That escalated quickly.....

10 hours ago, alanch90 said:

Thats seems like about -8 degrees  right?

Can it actually fire at that level though? 

Is the Altay still in limbo? 

On 4/22/2019 at 5:14 PM, Ramlaen said:

https://defence-blog.com/news/russia-decides-to-scrap-its-legendary-nuclear-powered-battlecruisers-to-save-money.html

So it's true that the Russian Navy is basically getting rid of all its bigger vessels? I hear their aircraft carrier (how do you pronounce it?) is on the chopping block as well. 

Are these things still in production limbo? 

9 hours ago, Collimatrix said:

 

I stand corrected.

So what exactly causes the turret to swing around on its own like that?  That sounds... bad.

No idea never asked the mechanics after the fact what they did to fix it. 

Thanks for that, this is a StuG III correct? Could the same modification be made to a StuG IV? 

Anyone got a good picture of a StuG that was fitted with a coaxial machine gun? 

Abrams Driver then Gunner* 

Anyway once after we returned from Kuwait and not to long after we gotten our tanks back from the boat/train we had to loan out some of ours to another unit conducting training. So after like a week of so the guys return the tank claiming the turret was traversing on its own with zero human input whatsoever. So one day the mechanics tell us to go ahead and startup this particular tank and move it forward (so the turret can be freely moved without hitting other parked tanks). They specifically told us not to worry about the turret because its hydraulic line had been completely disconnected and that there was no way it could move unless manually.

I hop in and startup and I swear that thing made the freakiest engine startup noises I'd ever heard. Sure enough a couple of moments later with my head out cause I was open hatch in the seat the freakin turret starts traversing on its own! Needless to say I immediately ducked my head and dropped the seat and did an emergency shut off of the engine. Even if I hadn't have ducked I would have been fine since it was parked with 2 tanks on either side and once the gun tube hit the adjacent tanks bore evacuator it stopped it in its tracks anyway. No one got hurt but the tank next to it had to get a replacement bore evacuator though lol......

4 hours ago, Mighty_Zuk said:

I believe plans were to modernize all of them. But Russia's definition of 'modern' is not a particularly good one. 

It's mostly a "produced after year X is modern, even if shit standard". The T-72 was the first to hit the modernization effort. First batches of T-72B3 were rolled out in 2013, but until 2017 lacked panoramic sights, which has been standard equipment on western tanks for decades.

And apparently thermal imagers aren't even a standard equipment in Russian AFVs yet. That is, not nearly widespread enough yet.

Thermal Imagers as in thermal's for the gunner sight? 

On 4/19/2019 at 1:57 PM, LoooSeR said:

Yeah, 12 950 tanks, from which ~3000 are in Army.

How many of those 3,000 are considered up to date/modern? 

On 4/4/2019 at 8:53 PM, ZloyKrolik said:

Why the end connector on the fender latch lever? To keep the lever from dropping too far?

It's to keep the fender from closing on you when you need to open it up for whatever reason.  

Source: Was a 19K myself

1 hour ago, LoooSeR said:

They don't just look like a bunch of students, as many of them are.

 

Would prefer to walk towards re-industrialisation 

Nice Russia has some good looking white girls. Think you could hook me up? 

First guy has a different hat from the rest. Second guys beret looks like it's about to fall off LOL! These guys look like a bunch of students on a field trip lol. What country is this? 

edit: Nvm these are ruskies 

On 1/23/2019 at 8:52 AM, LoooSeR said:

wtf are those uniforms lol?

2 hours ago, Oedipus Wreckx-n-Effect said:

Sturgeon hates blacks: confirmed .

BRB calling Al Sharpton/BLM 

1 hour ago, Donward said:

 

Reading comprehension and context is a thing. 

 

I grew up in White Center so you don't get to pull the race card on me.

That's racist 

On 1/11/2019 at 10:30 PM, Donward said:

 

Gun crime is still a big deal.

 

The way they're going about trying to fix "gun crime" is the issue.

Gun crime isn't a big deal the war on drugs is the bigger deal. Most of the gun homicide in this country is black guys shooting other black people over gang related issues. Said issues usually boil down too...

1. DRUGS

2. turf wars

Legalize drugs and these gangs no longer have much to fight over. Plus people no longer have to go to shaddy underground dealers to get some pot instead they'll just walk down to the local shop and buy which is a plus for everyone. We don't have a gun problem in America we have a Drug problem and a Gang problem. If you look at gun homicide statistics and factor out all the gang nonsense then gun homicide is truly a non issue.  

FYI: I'm Black so you dont get to pull the race card on me