BF2S Forums MV-22 Osprey Shows Strong Performance In Iraq

HurricaИe wrote:

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

Skorpy-chan wrote:

The explanation for that is that Iraq, the red-headed stepchild of soviet-supplied countries, got the export model of the T-72, which was so outclassed it wasn't funny.
Didn't help that they were offensive tanks in a defensive role against tanks designed to take that very model of tank out.

this.....http://www.thegreenhead.com/imgs/15-mil … ower-1.jpg
is soviet night vision for tanks.  Im not kidding.

in soviet russia, night vision gives away YOUR position

Last edited by GunSlinger OIF II (2008-02-11 20:34:39)

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not sure its realistic to compare a 1972 tank with a 1980 tank upgraded to 2000 technology.
This argument could go on a while.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not sure its realistic to compare a 1972 tank with a 1980 tank upgraded to 2000 technology.
This argument could go on a while.

I would still doubt that even Russia's new T-90 (upgraded T-72) would be able to hold its own against Western tanks, might give them a run but its still a T-72 with some better gear and reactive armor that's attached as opposed to say and Abrams or Challenger which is built with extremely strong armor which can then have reactive attached later.

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

M.O.A.B wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

I'm not sure its realistic to compare a 1972 tank with a 1980 tank upgraded to 2000 technology.
This argument could go on a while.

I would still doubt that even Russia's new T-90 (upgraded T-72) would be able to hold its own against Western tanks, might give them a run but its still a T-72 with some better gear and reactive armor that's attached as opposed to say and Abrams or Challenger which is built with extremely strong armor which can then have reactive attached later.

abrams also have a layer of depleted uranium for armor.

rdx-fx wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

I'm sure like with the MiG-21 if you upgraded it with Western shit it would be upto par.

True enough.

But.. if you were allowed to mix and match the best Main-gun/fire-control/drivetrain/powerplant/Armor from an international list of suppliers like Germany/England/America/etc  ..  you'd get the M1a2, Leopard 2, and Challenger 2

German 120mm main guns, English Chobham armor, American gyrostabilization system, and a variety of miscellaneous parts from whichever country met the specs/bid..  welcome to NATO.


Russian toys?
No.. Russian equipment is built to interoperate with .. more Russian equipment.  And, second-string export junk, if you're not Mother Russia.

Western avionics in Russian aircraft? I think the Germans tried that with poor results.  (MiG-29's from former East Germany being integrated into German airforce after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989).

GunSlinger OIF II wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Mek-Izzle wrote:

I'm sure like with the MiG-21 if you upgraded it with Western shit it would be upto par.

True enough.

But.. if you were allowed to mix and match the best Main-gun/fire-control/drivetrain/powerplant/Armor from an international list of suppliers like Germany/England/America/etc  ..  you'd get the M1a2, Leopard 2, and Challenger 2

German 120mm main guns, English Chobham armor, American gyrostabilization system, and a variety of miscellaneous parts from whichever country met the specs/bid..  welcome to NATO.


Russian toys?
No.. Russian equipment is built to interoperate with .. more Russian equipment.  And, second-string export junk, if you're not Mother Russia.

Western avionics in Russian aircraft? I think the Germans tried that with poor results.  (MiG-29's from former East Germany being integrated into German airforce after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989).

isnt the main gun on the Abrams a German designed smoothbore?