A lot of the time they are a complete mouthful and can be expressed more simply with their nicknames.
If most people understand what you’re talking about, then there isn’t any issue.
There’s no point in saying the full / actual names of weaponry / vehicles unless the person you’re talking to doesn’t know them.
NATO brevity code for ARH missiles not an “inherent American specification.”
It is in service?
Hence the reason they are actively producing it.
The massive issue with sending it to the frontline is between its cost and production time. The thing isnt some uber weapon, but it certainly isnt a bad tank by all standards.
NATO brevity code for ARH missiles? what ? xD
Yes what is so hard to understand?
Except it is still exclusive to English speakers. Last I checked, Russians and Chinese pilots are not saying “Fox 3s going out”, especially since they do not speak English, nor do they use the same phonetic alphabet as NATO.
This is absurdly off-topic. The fact of the matter is enough people know what Fox-3 means and Gaijin named the development news after it so there is no misunderstanding of what it is.
If you are still struggling to understand my dms are open.
Or just stop using weird nicknames to sound cool? Everyone can read what AGM 65Ds are, not everyone knows what weird nickname Maverick means.
To be fair a NATO brevity name while widely known isnt known to all.
Fox 3’s is easily understood for most , but hammars isnt
Then lets stop it here :D
yeah in hangar service
it was send to ukraine(try to avoid cuz mod is not happy bout war) to asset for firepower and combat tactics but was withdrawn after a few days due to unknown reason
the tank has been shown off in years but
0 video of it shooting
0 evidence of proclaim armor like Scorpion up there said
100 vids of it but 50 are it spinning the turret like an unstable drunk person
The T-14 might be in better place than the T95 but by no mean is better
The Red Army has already cancelled the T-14 or on the edge of doing so as it is
Too expensive to produce
one T-14 cost the price of 2 T-90M and if yk the 2 T-90M would have much better protection and firepower than the T-14
secondly the T-14 weight 25% more than the T-90M on average (55 tonnes)
They should just better off make a new transmission that can get the tank to reverse more than 4kph rather than making an entire new tank because that shit is costly
“Actively” “producing”
Yeah I think some people have different standards of what they consider “actively producing”.
It’s in service in the same sense that people say that the Maus was in service with the German army in ww2. There is an extremely limited number being used for testing and training, but no real significant numbers available for the years to come.
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.
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
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.
Well of course the Red Army has no need for new tanks, they haven’t needed new tanks since 1946.
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
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?