Walsingham Posted May 9, 2015 Posted May 9, 2015 Apparently the stated ambition is to build 2300 of the bloody things. Along with updating all the other armoured vehicles. By 2020. Which is clearly bollocks. China, with a relatively healthy, if unbalanced, economy is updating its military much slower. Not only can Russia not afford to update like this, while under sanctions, it doesn't make any sense. What would happen to all the other kit it will be replacing? This is a pathetic attempt by Putin to pose as a first rank military technologically. I think at most we're going to see a few divisions armed with this newer kit. 1 "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Sarex Posted May 9, 2015 Posted May 9, 2015 ^LoL "because they filled mommy with enough mythic power to become a demi-god" - KP
Agiel Posted May 9, 2015 Posted May 9, 2015 (edited) What is it that's so hard to understand? China spends almost twice as much as Russia does on defense while barely lifting a finger in terms of expenditures as a percentage of GDP. With one percent of the U.S. economy the Air Force could purchase a thousand F-22s whereas one percent of the Russian economy gets the PVO 150 of the cheaper PAK-FA, and that was according to estimates prior to 2014. Russian R&D is also not immune to Murphy's Law and cost overruns as the much maligned Bulava program that was to be the centerpiece of the Russian strategic forces goes to show (to say nothing of teething problems the program can undergo, as the T-14 and the T-15 stalling in the rehearsal can attest to). Edited May 9, 2015 by Agiel Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling
Zoraptor Posted May 10, 2015 Posted May 10, 2015 What's going to happen to the old kit is a rather lol question for sure. There's a huge amount of surplus soviet stuff around the ex su, that is what happens to the old stuff. Or they can ship it off to Syria or Donbass. 2000 armatas is a bit ridiculous for a short term aim though. Technically doable to produce a tank a day, but practically no hope. Taking the bulk of their active T72s to b3+ status or similar seems a bit more practical. They are also likely to get a reasonable amount of extra funding off of France for cancelling the Mistrals, as they get costs plus penalties when France formally refuses delivery. Which is probably a blessing overall for Russia, the Mistrals always seemed like a pointless prestige buy to me.
Rostere Posted May 10, 2015 Posted May 10, 2015 (edited) The Mistrals are essentially ASW ships, as I understand things. Which makes sense when you look at the potential alternate buyers... EDIT: Clarification: Littoral ASW ships. Edited May 10, 2015 by Rostere "Well, overkill is my middle name. And my last name. And all of my other names as well!"
Walsingham Posted May 10, 2015 Posted May 10, 2015 What's going to happen to the old kit is a rather lol question for sure. There's a huge amount of surplus soviet stuff around the ex su, that is what happens to the old stuff. Or they can ship it off to Syria or Donbass. 2000 armatas is a bit ridiculous for a short term aim though. Technically doable to produce a tank a day, but practically no hope. Taking the bulk of their active T72s to b3+ status or similar seems a bit more practical. They are also likely to get a reasonable amount of extra funding off of France for cancelling the Mistrals, as they get costs plus penalties when France formally refuses delivery. Which is probably a blessing overall for Russia, the Mistrals always seemed like a pointless prestige buy to me. Sorry. Fair question. My point was less that they couldn't offload the old kit. I'm certain there are any number of countries who'd be happy to get it. Which was in fact my point. The old kit is perfectly fine for most situations, and where it isn't then mass would serve. So why introduce a completely new and expensive line of vehicles? because you want to seem stronger than you are, and scarier than you will be. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Malcador Posted May 10, 2015 Posted May 10, 2015 Have to feed your arms industry, after all. Same sort of thing with the F35. Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Zoraptor Posted May 10, 2015 Posted May 10, 2015 Stuff does just get obsolete as well. It's not like the RAF is still using spitfires or the usaf is still using F4s, at some point you have to do a genuine replacement. Can't really tell whether it's a good deal or not from outside as we don't have a good idea of the different capabilities of t90s/t72s vs the armata, but they can't keep using t72 variants forever whatever the case.
Rostere Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 I just wonder what the heck they are planning to do with these tanks. It's not like they are in any way a threat to NATO - in a conflict with NATO people will just nuke each other and after that any tank battles is just going to be pointless. Who are they considering when they buy these tanks? Ukraine? Belarus? Kazakstan? Georgia? "Well, overkill is my middle name. And my last name. And all of my other names as well!"
JadedWolf Posted May 11, 2015 Posted May 11, 2015 Russia's navy seals are standing by: 2 Never attribute to malice that which can adequately be explained by incompetence.
sorophx Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 Funny how the left one has the airborne beret and not a marine Walsingham said: I was struggling to understand ths until I noticed you are from Finland. And having been educated solely by mkreku in this respect I am convinced that Finland essentially IS the wh40k universe.
Malcador Posted May 12, 2015 Posted May 12, 2015 He's just cross training. Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Agiel Posted May 16, 2015 Posted May 16, 2015 (edited) Snazzy commercials from Northrop Grumman, hinting at their entry for the LRSB bid: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J41D0kfkZKY Which is just as well, considering that if they don't win the contract, they will likely bow out of the (manned) combat aircraft business. Edited May 16, 2015 by Agiel 1 Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling
Agiel Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 Raided some of the boxes I never bothered to open up and unpack after we moved to our new house and found some of my old copies of the Salamander book series by Bill Gunston and illustrated by Mike Spick on late Cold War aircraft. A lot of it tends to be quite prophetic and relevant to this day, but one volume, Future Fighters (published in 1984) quite keenly demonstrates the 2001: A Space Odyssey effect: "The past's future always does seem at least a little silly in retrospect." For instance, the entry on the Advanced Technology Bomber program that would eventually lead to the B-2A Spirit: 2 Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling
Malcador Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 1 Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Walsingham Posted May 22, 2015 Posted May 22, 2015 I just nodded off slightly while reading this and imagined War 2030, and Putin begins implanting the brains of his current troll army into giant augmented voles. Firing teeth the size of fir trees in all directions. I love my brain. 2 "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Volourn Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 https://youtu.be/UXodRLLkth4 DWARVES IN PROJECT ETERNITY = VOLOURN HAS PLEDGED $250.
sorophx Posted May 28, 2015 Posted May 28, 2015 (edited) watching these people is like looking into the past, circa Stone Age Edited May 28, 2015 by sorophx Walsingham said: I was struggling to understand ths until I noticed you are from Finland. And having been educated solely by mkreku in this respect I am convinced that Finland essentially IS the wh40k universe.
Agiel Posted June 2, 2015 Posted June 2, 2015 (edited) From the History Channel Youtube channel, but worth a watch. In terms of quality, almost erases the stain of all the years of pawn shops, Duck Dynasty, and Nazi "aliens": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcVzfOmt4Tg Supplemental piece from Gwynne Dyer: "We all owe God a death. If we're killed in a nuclear war, what we lose as individuals is a few decades of life. But what the human race loses is the only thing that gives us meaning: The enterprise of civilisation. We haven't arrived at our present dilemma by accident or mischance. We were bound to get here eventually because civilisation was bound to endow us eventually with the power to destroy ourselves. We're not just responsible for our own fate. We're responsible for all the unborn generations down the thousands of years of the future who will only have a chance, who will only get born in most cases, if we get it right now. There's nobody wiser than us who will take the responsibility and solve this problem for us; we have to do it ourselves." Edited June 2, 2015 by Agiel 2 Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling
Agiel Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 (edited) Danish Leo 2A5DK filling up at the pumps. Well, self-propelled guns more like rather than tanks for this one, but you get the idea. Edited June 11, 2015 by Agiel 1 Quote “Political philosophers have often pointed out that in wartime, the citizen, the male citizen at least, loses one of his most basic rights, his right to life; and this has been true ever since the French Revolution and the invention of conscription, now an almost universally accepted principle. But these same philosophers have rarely noted that the citizen in question simultaneously loses another right, one just as basic and perhaps even more vital for his conception of himself as a civilized human being: the right not to kill.” -Jonathan Littell <<Les Bienveillantes>> Quote "The chancellor, the late chancellor, was only partly correct. He was obsolete. But so is the State, the entity he worshipped. Any state, entity, or ideology becomes obsolete when it stockpiles the wrong weapons: when it captures territories, but not minds; when it enslaves millions, but convinces nobody. When it is naked, yet puts on armor and calls it faith, while in the Eyes of God it has no faith at all. Any state, any entity, any ideology that fails to recognize the worth, the dignity, the rights of Man...that state is obsolete." -Rod Serling
Gfted1 Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Is that 12 Euro / liter!! So, 3.7 liters per gallon = 44 Euro / gallon! Jeez, that's more than I pay to refill my entire 15 gallon gas tank (~$50). "I'm your biggest fan, Ill follow you until you love me, Papa"
Woldan Posted June 11, 2015 Posted June 11, 2015 Is that 12 Euro / liter!! So, 3.7 liters per gallon = 44 Euro / gallon! Jeez, that's more than I pay to refill my entire 15 gallon gas tank (~$50). Denmark does not have the Euro. 1 I gazed at the dead, and for one dark moment I saw a banquet.
Walsingham Posted June 13, 2015 Posted June 13, 2015 Is that 12 Euro / liter!! So, 3.7 liters per gallon = 44 Euro / gallon! Jeez, that's more than I pay to refill my entire 15 gallon gas tank (~$50). This is why we get amused over here when you yankees complain about 'gas' prices. "It wasn't lies. It was just... bull****"." -Elwood Blues tarna's dead; processing... complete. Disappointed by Universe. RIP Hades/Sand/etc. Here's hoping your next alt has a harp.
Malcador Posted June 30, 2015 Posted June 30, 2015 https://medium.com/war-is-boring/test-pilot-admits-the-f-35-can-t-dogfight-cdb9d11a875 The author of this is a bit controversial, it seems, especially on his take on the F-35. Why has elegance found so little following? Elegance has the disadvantage that hard work is needed to achieve it and a good education to appreciate it. - Edsger Wybe Dijkstra
Recommended Posts