No, i would agree, tho i also didnt find any official documents about ammunition. Yes, the USSR docs are okay, they have plenty of info, but there is also info that syria never did aquire most modern ammunition.
Did it? Well in most modern aircraft at least they had parry. And the least modern are not the case tho
Tho no doubt about the soviet command and supply, thats true
Lmao.
So you got offended by fact or what?)
Well, what`s a proper use tho?
US lost at least 10 M1s at Middle East due to closely same reasons Ukraine lost them.
And Leopards never entered combat with real enemy before recent events.
I mean, we can say that the crews did bad, but then we need to imply same logic for every USSR machine there at middle east.
Im a big fond of M1 myself, and the main con is that the crew survivability is almost guaranteed there. Thats a great machine, i love it a lot. But indestructable? Nah. And surel its not the most cost-effective.
uuuuuuuuuugh it also does sound to me as not the case. In Nam, they at least had many encounters, and the most planes were destroyed in air combat. Some by the AA fire, yes, but at least in a battle. And the Gulf War? Practically all of the aviation of Iraque was destroyed by bombs on bases. And combat casualies? They are pretty much same - ~30 planes lost both by US and Iraque in air combat, tho if we count the coaliton losses it would make Iraqi look better, but i have no info about if those were modern aircraft and if they were lost in combat.
Iraqui got ruined, no doubt, but the aviation showed itself pretty great under those conditions.
they sure did well if look closer
and Serbia didnt have any modern aviation to begin with tho. Making a fuss about F15s shooding down Hawks is a joke. Tho they encountered some MiG-29s, Yugo only had 10 to 15 of those, and only 6 were lost during the battle, others just destroyed on fields. At least two of them were shot down by Jets.
Then the US losses are mostly of Anti-Air systems, but at least two planes - F16 and Tornado - are considered shot down by the jets. Tho i did not manage to find if it were MiG-21s or MiG-29s
To (un-)Friendly Fire and IEDs?
Pretty sure they (some variant of the ?-2A4 / 2A5?) have seen some action in Syria, with the Turks near their border previously.
Well, it’s more so a combination of lack of modularity and needing to refit their fleet(s) to a common standard, and as such deploying improved armor configurations depend on freeing up sufficient space in the mass budget, of which there are no easy operations to do anymore (for the most part).
As such the deployment of advancements like the below “SE II” package did not go ahead.
Also unlike in game (where there is a contemporary / future KE threats behind practically every blade of grass) the main threat during COIN operations came from CE and IED threats and so developments reflected said “Material Need” with systems like the VLQ-12 “CREW DUKE”, and M32 ARAT II tiles receiving developmental effort and afforded the mass budget.
not only that, but for the ATGM and/or RPG fire too
uuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuugh there is an info that some were deployed, but no confirmed information about combat. So basically the only real combat they saw and we can seriously say that was Ukraine.
i lost the track of thoughts here, may you say that in an easier way?
didnt it? I thought that the A2 and HC had improved the hull armor
The TL;DR. Is that NERA arrays with Improved KE performance did exist but they make the tank too heavy when combined with other defensive systems, though they remain options should the need arise.
The development of improved Armor did occur, it’s that their incorporation into deployed configurations (e.g. M1A1, M1A1HA, M1A1 AIM, M1A2, M1A2 SEP, etc.) was provisioned only as the weight was reduced to prevent the tank from getting too heavy(as it’s supposed to only be 55 tons, not 72). and as it was seen to be more valuable to have systems like the VLQ-12 and M32 ARAT II tiles on hand, the advanced configurations of NERA slated for deployment were superseded in priority by said systems.
As such with the developmental priorities (money for research and development) impacted by the (projected and) expected threats, functional improvements of KE protection did not keep pace due to spending multiple decades deployed where KE threats were near non-existent, and Chemical threats were evolving (e.g. documented “under the table” release of the 9M133 (AT-14) & PG-7VR / OG-7V to relevant “Threat” actors for example; and refinement of “ersatz” EFPs.)
Not the “SE II” package specifically, not to say that it was no further improved.
Not really.
Nope.
There were more than enough of Iraq planes destroyed raped by Coalition in air.
And as for Fighter loses from US… only one.
Thats debatable tho. Every country tries to minimize their losses in media. Tho those ~30 fighter losses are as i remeber a actual govt position.
Ig youre trying to lie or cant read
ugh. Maybe i cant, tho that`s the sourse the wiki provides
And all of this is nullified by its combat use. Well then.
wow f15 can shoot drones ? omg its in active battle !! f15ex so good better than the f22 and j20 omg
Nah, you’re just hating for the sake of hating. F22 so far has only shot a balloon but we don’t see you nullifying LM’s work because of “its combat use”.
Because the US is not really known for overhyping and overpromising regarding every piece of equipment for the past 80 years
“F-22 rcs as small as a bee”
“rcs of 0.0000001m^2”
Probably technically true in one aspect or something
The media continues on 0 basis to talk about felon stealth whilst putting a similar sized airframe as much much more advanced in comparison to RCS. It is typical that we have people in this forum who want to hear what they want and instead of reading actual institutional research data.
Meanwhile, F-35 itself was perceived as a much further advancement than the F-22 in the military according to those who served. Within the airforce many had said at the time of it release to be called the first truly 5th generation aircraft and didn’t specifically call the raptor a 5th gen.
Just interesting 🤔
and the russian claims arent?
oh yeah that rcs value is true when you use this specific radar frequency at this very specific static angle to the aircraft
Maybe but they are still russian claims after all
so you have no proof that the calims arent credible
great argument
most of the time its not the russians overstating their shit but simply the US overestimating it
great example is the Mig-25, did the USSR say it is a highly manouverable fighter?
no
did the US think it was and made panic cause of it?
yes
