I know that vehicle. And what does this have to do with his incorrect claim that the T-14 influenced NATO unmanned designs?
Both sides experimented with this idea in the 80s, and the US was first to mass produce this design with teh Stryker MGS.
Every new piece of military equipment influences its rivals to improve.
And NATO is better at the improving part
Not really since one of the premise between Rheinmetall (Germany) and Leonardo’s (Italy) Joint Venture is to eventually sell the product to anyone that is interested. Rheinmetall is a lot more open compared to KNDS in this regard.
Cooperation is a very good way to take the best out of both worlds.
This thread is already bad enough, so to avoid making it even worse, I’ll refrain from responding to any NAFO fanboys.
2 Likes
…from a TEC video. You screenshotted a TEC video.
TEC was sent a link, and made a video about it. It’s not official.
2 Likes
Although that might change with the “export oriented” French involvement in KNDS now. Compared to KMW before
1 Like
Thanks
No, not always. The USSR was highly secretive when it came to its designs. The Object 195 was its own vehicle, like the M1 TTB was its own separate vehicle.
Object 195 became T-14, M1 TTB idea was brought into the Stryker MGS in 2003 before Russia even had a production design of a vehicle with unmanned turret.
One of the only technological discovery where the USSR/Russia truly outmatched the West since ~1980s has been APS. First Drozd, then the early Arena version ready for production in 2000. It was so good for its time that General Dynamics almost bought the license to build and install Arena on the Abrams.
This didn’t become a reality because US congress refused to buy the Arena for US Abrams and Turkey chose the Leopard 2 instead of the Abrams.
2 Likes
The Soviets were at the forefront of tank production until the emergence of a worthy rival: the Leopard 2.
I didn’t know that information about the Arena, very interesting.
sigh
You assume it will be worse and prove no stats for your:
“ The Afghanit APS includes four sets of 12 launch tubes located on the rear sides of the turret, which deploy HE-Frag grenades creating large blast zones. This feature minimizes the need for precise targeting as the grenades only need to be directed towards the general vicinity of the incoming threat, making it highly effective in dynamic combat situations. Unlike its predecessor, which relied solely on radar for threat detection, the Afghanit system incorporates both radar and electro-optical sensors. This integration significantly enhances detection accuracy, allowing it to intercept high-velocity projectiles like Armor-Piercing Fin-Stabilized Discarding Sabot (APFSDS) rounds, which can reach speeds up to 1,700 meters per second”
This video didn’t talk about the roof mounted one.
1 Like
Tanks are pretty much the only thing the Soviet did better than the West until 1980s, be it civilian or military. They were behind in every single other category. And after early 1980s, even their tanks lacked behind, hence why I said APS was pretty much one of the only technogical wonder that came out of USSR/Russia since 1980s.
Leopard 2 entered service in 1979 so Cyrus is still correct lol
1 Like
Which NATO tank was ahead of the T-64? The T-72 or the T-80 that entered service in 1976? Please answer me.
COUGH COUGH COUGH sorry I must have bs stuck in my throat.
Helicopters??? There’s a reason USA stole a Mi-24
2 Likes
T-55s
t-54s
Etc
1 Like
From what I remember, it was that crazy operation in some deserted place?
1 Like
Cyrus said ~1980s, leopard 2 entered service in 1979 therefore his comment was correct
In the 1980s, the Soviet economy was stagnant, many legitimate projects didn’t go ahead, and the West then took the lead in MBT construction.