Bay 12 Games Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 82

Author Topic: Armchair General General - /AGG  (Read 66806 times)

10ebbor10

  • Bay Watcher
  • DON'T PANIC
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #405 on: October 05, 2014, 09:14:00 am »

Honestly, I think no nation on Earth exports it's cutting edge tech. Everyone has a downgraded export product.
Logged

Strife26

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #406 on: October 05, 2014, 10:20:16 am »

Repainting a tank is literally a one day job at a depot. It's a two hour job for a crew who was somehow, someway planning to use a tan vehicle (which is actually a perfectly serviceable paint scheme) to fight russians.
Logged
This post likely did not make me any happier, tougher, smarter, or richer. Probably not a good usage of limited time and effort.

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #407 on: October 05, 2014, 01:39:30 pm »

Quote
I've said that before and I'll say it again: Russian losses during the disastrous attempt at storming Grozny on the New Year's Eve of 1995 weren't caused by the extreme inferiority of the tanks themselves.
Maskhadov & Co. should have declared the entire Russian General Staff heroes of Ichkeria - sending tanks and APC without infantry support in a city full of militants with RPGs was a suicidal move showing the incompetence of Russian generals.
The same T-72 and T-80 tanks also participated in the Second Chechen War against the same Chechens with the same RPGs - the Russian Army didn't lose several hundred tanks and APCs like in 1995. If they were so inferior, why did the Chechens fail to destroy them as easily as in the previous war?
Also, here's another example - 8-9 August 2008, South Ossetia. South Ossetian and Russian troops defended Tskhinvali against the Georgian assault. Both Georgians and Russians had T-72 tanks, which were used during urban combat. T-72s didn't prove themselves as vulnerable as in 1995's Grozny. I wonder why...
Exactly. Effectiveness of a tank comes not from on paper data but from many factors.

Guy that commands a tank unit, quality of supporting infantry, intelligence, logistics (including servicing the tank), quality control on factory that produced the tank, training and morale of crews and many more factors.

Properly modernized T-90 is one of the best tanks of the world, especially if you add Western technologies like India did with their T-90s. But real combat effectiveness of Russian T-90 in Russian army is meh. Many of them have seen no modernization since 1990s\early 2000s, many of them are badly serviced.  Many of them came with flaws right from the production line and so on, so on.
Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Sergarr

  • Bay Watcher
  • (9) airheaded baka (9)
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #408 on: October 05, 2014, 01:49:14 pm »

You cannot exactly determine the real combat effectiveness of T-90 given that they, AFAIK, have not been in any real combat.
Logged
._.

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #409 on: October 05, 2014, 02:31:28 pm »

That can be said about most modern  weapons

To compare weapons that never were in combat but have similar role and date of design we need to ask several questions

a) Who is leading in technologies related to the weapon in question
b) Who has better quality control in their defense industry
c) Who has fair competition in domestic defense market

a) Germany, Japan, France, Great Britain, South Korea have better technologies for targeting\sensors then Russia. Same goes for engines (go compare engine of a Russian and German\Japanese car. heh)
b) Russia is a corrupt autocratic country with post-Soviet industry that never had good quality control in anything
c) I don't have enough knowledge about how it is done in other countries, what I know that in Russia there are no competition between different tank manufacturers and foreign procurements aren't considered. Besides we are talking about state owned Russian industry, all competition here - who licks Putin's ass better.
Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Sergarr

  • Bay Watcher
  • (9) airheaded baka (9)
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #410 on: October 05, 2014, 02:38:06 pm »

I don't think there are any countries where multiple different tank manufacturers exist.

And competing weapon manufacturers do in fact exist in Russia - Mikoyan and Kamov - for helicopters, Sukhoi and Mikoyan - for aircraft...

Russian tanks are the fastest tanks in the world, and don't you dare insult the Russian tank engines.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 02:41:10 pm by Sergarr »
Logged
._.

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #411 on: October 05, 2014, 03:06:49 pm »

Yeah, sure. Russian\Soviet industry is\was unable to produce a semidecent engine for a car but makes\made the best tank engines. Sure.

This person can't walk without a stick but he is a great runner.

Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Jopax

  • Bay Watcher
  • Cat on a hat
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #412 on: October 05, 2014, 03:08:31 pm »

Are the same companies making the engines for both cars and tanks?
Logged
"my batteries are low and it's getting dark"
AS - IG

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #413 on: October 05, 2014, 03:36:24 pm »

Not sure about tanks, but Russian APCs do use KAMAZ engines from civilian trucks manufacturer 

But that is not that important what company produces something. Of cause military grade is military grade in any country. But as you can judge development of team sport by comparing teams from lower leagues, you can consider development of military related industry by comparing civilian products.

Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Jopax

  • Bay Watcher
  • Cat on a hat
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #414 on: October 05, 2014, 03:54:32 pm »

I think the auto industry stagnated because it never really had any competition, the situation was much the same here in Yugoslavia. You'd see new models every now and then, but because people never really had any choice they never really had to make big leaps.

The military industry on the other hand, even if it is state owned and sees no direct competition will always have competition in the form of other nations. Because the army itself will push the industry to constantly improve.

So I really doubt the quality of russian tanks is that dubious, otherwise they wouldn't be one of the most widely exported military vehicles ever (and yes I know that it's atleast partially because of the power blocs in the cold war and all that, but it still stands that Soviet tech is the most widespread and used stuff to date)
Logged
"my batteries are low and it's getting dark"
AS - IG

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #415 on: October 05, 2014, 04:14:57 pm »

Oh found who makes Russian tank engines. Chelyabinsk tractor plant.... Sure. Great quality is expected :D

How can you compare that to Maybah that produces Leopard II engines or Perkins Engines(Caterpillar subsidiary)  that makes engines for British tanks or Lycoming_Engines who designed engines for Abrams?


As for Russian tanks being major competitor on the market... It is about price\quality and\or political reasons. Countries  can afford itself NATO or design their own tanks prefer that. 

T-72 was so widely  popular because it was sold dirt cheap to socialist friends(USSR actually lost money in many such contracts), if you look at  T-90 the most Modern Russian tank  the popularity is minimal. Only four countries procured it (India, Azerbaijan, Turkmenistan, Algeria). India bough production license and modified the design with Western technologies

« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 04:26:06 pm by Ukrainian Ranger »
Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Sergarr

  • Bay Watcher
  • (9) airheaded baka (9)
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #416 on: October 05, 2014, 04:23:13 pm »

Russian tractors are the most peaceful tractors in the world  :D
Logged
._.

Culise

  • Bay Watcher
  • General Nuisance
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #417 on: October 05, 2014, 05:32:51 pm »

Russian tractors are the most peaceful tractors in the world  :D
A proud tradition, indeed.  ^_^

Oh found who makes Russian tank engines. Chelyabinsk tractor plant.... Sure. Great quality is expected :D

How can you compare that to Maybah that produces Leopard II engines or Perkins Engines(Caterpillar subsidiary)  that makes engines for British tanks or Lycoming_Engines who designed engines for Abrams?
Quite well.  Tractor and tank engines actually have a significant amount of overlap in production requirements - they need to be robust enough to take a beating, easy to maintain in rural or difficult-to-reach areas, capable of hauling large amounts of mass (whether armor or farm equipment), and operating on fairly rough terrain, including mud.  In fact, just as you say, Perkins Engines is another company that produces tractor engines (as well as regular automotive diesel), while MTU Friedrichshafen (Maybach) manufactures...
Quote
...agriculture, mining and construction equipment...
...oh, even more tractors.  Let's face it, tank engines are pretty sexy and government contracts rather nice windfalls when they come along, but when push comes to shove, agriculture's a pretty stable market for heavy-hauling diesel engines.  Lycoming's the only exception, but that's because the Abrams design specs were all sorts of odd in the first place - Lycoming does trains and jets normally, with the only major exception being the Abrams.  In fact, the Abrams was basically designed around two things: its engine and the concept of American logistical supremacy.  I don't recall any other gas-turbine tank engines at all off the top of my head, and it gives the thing a thermal signature from Hell and a terrible fuel-efficiency (when it takes 10 gallons/38 L of fuel to start the engine and 1.7 gal/6.3 L of fuel burned per single mile traveled, there's an issue), but that's the price of a near-silent high-speed engine that can eat everything from JP-8 jet fuel (the US standard for everything from airplanes and tanks to cookstoves and heaters) to diesel or kerosene. 

EDIT: JP-8.  That missing letter is important.
« Last Edit: October 05, 2014, 05:36:37 pm by Culise »
Logged

Ukrainian Ranger

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #418 on: October 06, 2014, 02:31:58 am »

Quote
I don't recall any other gas-turbine tank engines
Soviet T-80. In fact it was the first mass produced tank in the world with a gas-turbine engine.

_________________
I think you are missing my point. It is absolutely logical that same companies that produce diesel engines for agriculture, mining or construction vehicles produce engines for tanks.

But quality differs. German tractors have much better engines than Russian tractors. My assumption that  it is same for Leopard II and T-90 engines
Logged
War must be, while we defend our lives against a destroyer who would devour all; but I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend.

Strife26

  • Bay Watcher
    • View Profile
Re: Armchair General General - /AGG
« Reply #419 on: October 06, 2014, 04:39:02 am »

Lycoming's the only exception, but that's because the Abrams design specs were all sorts of odd in the first place - Lycoming does trains and jets normally, with the only major exception being the Abrams.  In fact, the Abrams was basically designed around two things: its engine and the concept of American logistical supremacy.  I don't recall any other gas-turbine tank engines at all off the top of my head, and it gives the thing a thermal signature from Hell and a terrible fuel-efficiency (when it takes 10 gallons/38 L of fuel to start the engine and 1.7 gal/6.3 L of fuel burned per single mile traveled, there's an issue), but that's the price of a near-silent high-speed engine that can eat everything from JP-8 jet fuel (the US standard for everything from airplanes and tanks to cookstoves and heaters) to diesel or kerosene. 


It really is a beautiful thing.
Logged
This post likely did not make me any happier, tougher, smarter, or richer. Probably not a good usage of limited time and effort.
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28] 29 30 ... 82