I think it isn’t that hard to learn these nicknames.
If you can’t bother to learn them, then it’s not up to us to simplify things for you, and make things more tedious as a result.
1 Like
compare armata to maus isnt fair
german is already losing
compare it to things like the mbt-70 which was more advance than the m60s but canned because of price make more sense
the Red army hasnt been a thing since 1946 son, reckon you should do a bit of research on the name of the Russian army if you’re gonna use it.
While off topic, send me a source for this?
Why would they keep producing htem on the back burner if theyre going to cancel them.
I stated that above.
They stated that they withdrew them due to the chance of losing them and the effect it would have on both moral and the financial cost.
Dont jump in here spreading false information.
And? the weight of it means what exaclty ? its a vastly different tank.
If you’d any idea about russian tank doctrine and production as they dont just have one place making tanks.
Hence why the T80BVM is still being made along side the T90s
2 Likes
the red army doesnt need new tanks
their tanks are fine, get that forking rubles to make new transmission so they can finally do hulldown reverse or reverse into the unknown so their crews dont turn into one millions red particles upon hit
Nah the MBT-70 was only a prototype and used as such.
The T-14 Armata is used by the russian army for testing, training and propaganda things, showing intents of taking it into service when they get more significant numbers available.
However the problem is that those numbers seem to be far away.
1 Like
Well of course the Red Army has no need for new tanks, they haven’t needed new tanks since 1946.
1 Like
There are factories still slowly manufacturing these tanks, that means by both definitions of those words, they are actively producing tanks.
If you say, they haven’t went into mass production then ofc thats irefutable, they have not mass produced them.
Well considering they crewed the T14 , threw it onto the frontlines id say its at least been in partial service unlike muas which never had its turret put on it :D
MBT 70 was a cancelled project with only one or two actually made last I checked.
There was no factories actively making the tank.
MBT70 sits like MBT80 for britain, never really got as far as it could have.
The T14 is beyond prototype stage as far as we know information wise.
The red army hasnt existed since 1946 why’d you keep bringing it up xD
2 Likes
Again, what is easier:
‘IR HAMMERs’ or AASM 250 ‘HAMMER’ (SBU 64) guided bombs?
If you prefer the latter, then you must enjoy remembering a whole range of random letters and numbers.
Do you remember what the LASER / GNSS AASM 250s are called?
Do I have to simply GNSS too since that’s technically an abbreviation?
bro dont “son” me it sound like u trying to be a grown up
then why the fork did they send it on the frontline???
they send it to asset the effectiveness off it, and its not even frontline they just send it to test if its gonna survive which now u said that they would lose it which is funny because they dont really send it directly on the frontline, they send it in a protected area to test for firepower
Same hull design, same autoloader, same gun, same doctrine
Just more expensive
Just make more T-80BVM then cuz that shit is way less expensive
Bingo, im not defending the tank BTW just stating that the T-14 is not actually cancelled yet.
2 Likes
i say red army because it sounds cool but yes ik they havent been making tanke since 1946
Well, at least I will know what AASM 250 (SBU 64) are when I go into France, Rafale, and equip them as a secondary. The game doesn’t say “IR Hammers” now do they?
The head of the Russian defense conglomerate Rostec, Sergey Chemezov, confirmed that the state-of-the-art Russian tank, the T-14 “Armata,” is not being deployed in the war in Ukraine, which the Kremlin has labeled a “special military operation.”
Chemezov attributed this decision to the tank’s exorbitant cost, indicating that the military is opting for the more economical T-90 tanks instead. He underscored the prohibitive expense of the Armata as a deterrent to its immediate deployment, stressing the need for funds to develop newer and more cost-effective tank models.
“In terms of its functionality, it certainly surpasses existing tanks, but it’s too expensive, so the army is unlikely to use it now. It’s easier for them to buy the same T-90s,” Chemezov said.
“because it sounds cool” well, if cool is daftness, then by George, you are the coolest guy I know.
1 Like
lmao
i mean the Russian Army, the Red Army
same same, but different
How do you know that they’re on the Rafale if (for example) this is your first time hearing about this type of ordnance?
IR is just a way of targetting.
I think you’ll find out that I would be refering to the SBU 64 version.
Major difference, Red Army is for the Soviet Union, which included the likes of Russia, but plenty of other Soviet nations such as Georgia, Kazakhstan, Ukraine, and more. Russia is just Russia.
I don’t blame you, Red Army sounds cooler than Russian Army.
1 Like
Well that’s bollocks, my screen just gives me the funny numbers and letters. I don’t get the luxury of funny nicknames.