I think the article should have mentioned the first Gulf war too. There US attack helicopters more or less obliterated the Iraqi tank-based army.
The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
51–60 of 282 posts
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-docum... > This bs from western media has no commitment to truth Western media tends to use Ukrainian claims, generally saying so.
Quoted post unavailable.
> That is an interesting approach, but I'm looking also for a statement from the Russian forces.
Search for "Pravda in English" and you'll find it. It may seem a bit detached from reality and insulting to anyone's intelligence but unlike Internet in Russia it's not censored.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are there any air superiority combat drones operational yet? I won't argue that it seems likely that manned dogfights are going to die eventually, but that moment also seems at least a decade away. Until then a F-35 with long range missiles seems to be one of the more lethal things in the air today, even if it is rather expensive. NATO has like 20x the defense budget compared to Russia though, so it's fine not to hav…
F-35 unit prices are not high and keep getting lower due to the sheer scale of production. Many 4.5 gen fighters are actually more expensive yet less capable than the F-35. Most anti-F-35 arguments are "informed" by the likes of Pierre Sprey.
Which systems are out there that are actually comparable to the JSF? Both the Eurofighter and the Rafale are one gen older (not sure if that actually matters that much so). Which leaves the Russian and Chinese planes, for which cost is hard to come by.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
None of these articles seem to mention WHY the tanks are designed this way (although I admit I just searched for keywords). As far as I know, it is because the current gen of Russian tanks were designed for how they envisioned WW3 40 years ago [1]. Basically the tanks would follow nuclear strikes, and making humans load the ammunition would make them die a lot quicker from radiation, so they made an autoloader. [1] h…
The difference seems to be capacity of crew. With an autoloader crew is down to 3, Russians opt to have 4 crew and a cheaper per unit tank. To the Russian Army soldiers have always been expendable.
? Russian tanks are the ones with autoloaders and 3 crew... Of the modern NATO tanks only the French use autoloaders and 3 crew, US and German tanks are 4 crew.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#55Perun https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mUyAPQEb01Q Chieftain https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lI7T650RTT8 Bernard https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPth_xqBXGY Extreme summary, blame me if I missed something obviously important - unsupported tanks will die to infantry or artillery and have done so since shortly after the inception of the tank. Tanks are actually pretty cheap compared to replacing a human, it costs quite…
I think people vastly underestimate the importance of infantry support. A single soldier with an ATGM can take out a tank, but a single soldier with a gun can take out that single soldier and their ATGM. It's easy to forget that reality isn't a third-person shooter. When you're sitting in a steel box with an engine in the back and a cannon on the top, situational awareness will inevitably suffer to some degree, and n…
The Javelin can kill tanks from what distance, up to four kilometers? (Officially, less so, but the Ukrainians seem to be pulling off more distant hits than what the vendor documentation says.)
No realistic amount of infantry support can shield you against weapons with such a huge range. An entire army could, but that is obviously too much.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#56The truly obsolete weapons platform is the $1.2 trillion manned F-35 program. A multi-role fighter that is too expensive to fly in this new combat space and cannot survive the multitude of anti-air missiles. The drone air war is a numbers game and unmanned fighters are both cheaper and have better operational specs.
Are there any air superiority combat drones operational yet? I won't argue that it seems likely that manned dogfights are going to die eventually, but that moment also seems at least a decade away. Until then a F-35 with long range missiles seems to be one of the more lethal things in the air today, even if it is rather expensive. NATO has like 20x the defense budget compared to Russia though, so it's fine not to hav…
The usefulness of long range missiles depends on the rules of engagement.
If the F-35 will be allowed to shoot targets over the horizon based only on instruments, it will most probably work as intended.
If visual confirmation will be required, it will be a boondoggle.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#57I think the article should have mentioned the first Gulf war too. There US attack helicopters more or less obliterated the Iraqi tank-based army.
Only works against an unsophisticated enemy that has no MANPADS. Helicopters are way more vulnerable than tanks.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#58Something I've been thinking about is that with the emergence of weapons like the NLAW and Javelin, the Secret Service probably will have to rethink the security of the US president.
Javelins and comparable weapons are almost 30 years old at this point, it's not some new emerging threat by any means.
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#59On that topic: why Russian tanks are so vulnerable to these missiles and explode spectacularly [1]. Basically the canon auto-loads shells, and the shell storage is not in a different compartment than the turret. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2022/04/01/why-do...
None of these articles seem to mention WHY the tanks are designed this way (although I admit I just searched for keywords). As far as I know, it is because the current gen of Russian tanks were designed for how they envisioned WW3 40 years ago [1]. Basically the tanks would follow nuclear strikes, and making humans load the ammunition would make them die a lot quicker from radiation, so they made an autoloader. [1] h…
How does loading ammunition make humans die quicker from radiation?
Re: The tank is dead: Long live the javelin, the switchblade, the ... ?
#60On that topic: why Russian tanks are so vulnerable to these missiles and explode spectacularly [1]. Basically the canon auto-loads shells, and the shell storage is not in a different compartment than the turret. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidhambling/2022/04/01/why-do...
Most of the tanks always store a dozen of rounds in the turret for faster reloads.
> a dozen of rounds
This made me happy. :)
(In Russian, numeric determiners 2-4 place the noun in genitive singular and numeric determiners 5+ place the noun in genitive plural. One book, two of book, three of book, four of book, five of books.)