Especially considering that they’ve made a tech tree starting at rank 4 before, i dont see a reason why not do it again tbh
3 Likes
more like “sank”
Spice 2000 for F-15I Ra’am and F-16C/D Block 40 Barak
I wait GBU-39A/B SDB FLM for USAF F-16C/D (M6+ OFP)
2 Likes
Maybe, domestic french precision-guided munition for Rafale B, C & M (F2.2 ~ F5 standard)
Safran AASM Hammer available on Mirage 2000D RMV
I might believe AASM IR & AASM GPS better PGM 500 & 2000
You think that’s bad, the British “Storm Shadow” sounds like it was named by an edgy 14-year-old, and although it got cancelled, we nearly had an anti-ship missile called “Green Cheese”
5 Likes
Not really. T-90MS is just a upgraded T-90S. Its armor is nowhere near T-90M’s armor.
*T-90S not MS
T-90MS is not operated by any country
And T-90M is an upgraded T-90A … I don’t get the point?
The diff between T-90M vs T-90MS is marginal, similar to T-90A vs T-90S
Both upgrade, M & MS, require a totally new modular turret.
So, only Ru can get T-90MS but I dont think another T-90M is required.
Better get some unique stuff like T-72B2 Rogatka or T-80UM-1 or even Obj 187
I don’t think that is what he said.
I actually think his comments were quite helpful for understanding the issues the Chinese side has and could help in finding a solution that works for both trees.
1 Like
I was actually talking about this variant, forgot its variant name.
Some sites have referred the bhisma mk3 as T-90MS. I’m aware that actual T-90MS is an export variant of T-90M.
Lost T-90 indian brother.
Russia cancelled the deal to sell “MS” to India, so MK.III was made instead
Reverse actually … India opted to locally upgrade the Tank fleet, (similar to Pakistan’s Al-Khalid, Jordan’s Chieftain and Iran etc ) … than buy another fleet of T-90 variant, (Even considered SK’s K2 but resorting to local design a new MBT.) And Russia will sell anything as long as money flows in, very few red lines.
Even offered Armata Universal hull to India for future tank program.
Similar to British, Leopard 2 hull offered but decided to upgrade local Challenger 2 hull for 3.
They had already created the Arjun, which they ultimately found unsatisfactory, and bought a new batch of T-90S
There was talk about the technologies used in the T-14 and Russia’s participation in the creation of a new Indian tank. Not the sale of the T-14 to India
1 Like
Yes, T-90S, that’s what I am alluding … but never T-90MS. Even Algeria, who nearly exclusively uses Ru stuffs, never got the T-90MS and are now testing the VT-4.
Hence, I said, Armata Universal hull not T-14 … Ru offered the hull, since its touted as modular i.e Universal and India can mount any Turret.
Similar to Leo 2 hull are sometimes used/offered. Vickers turret or Leclerc turret or KF turret or Skyranger turret.
So, I’m not talking about the tank’s hull, but about the technologies that the tank uses :0
Do we know why? Too expensive or they weren’t sure in its parameters?
Probably due to the recent conflict.
1 Like
Most recent T-90 purchase was by Iraq in 2018 and even they opted for T-90S with Relikt side-skirts and not T-90MS.
Maybe the price of MS is marked up a bit too much compared to S, in contrast to the advantage offered.
Chinese equivalent(s) are cheaper comparatively.
T-90 purchases have been halted by other Nations long before the conflict.
1 Like
I wouldn’t say stronger than any of these for ground, with USA and Germany still having lots of potential alone and the Swedish having access to Nordic additions like a Norwegian K2NO.
For air German options are very limited, but Gaijin is looking into subtrees there that hopefully fix this.
Japan with an ASEAN founders subtree (not full ASEAN obviously) ends up with a similar amount of potential additions as the UK with South Africa and India. Though arguably there is more subtree content here, with Japan alone having less domestic options than Britain.
That being said, I don’t agree with South Korea as a Japanese subtree and think it should only be the founding ASEAN nations instead.
I am actually considering if a North Korea / South Kore subtree for PRC / ROC might be a good idea, since it is functionally closer to the independent tree than a South Korean US subtree would be, while providing China with vehicles comparable (if not superior) to the ASEAN Founders subtree I would like to see for Japan.
(I am mostly still trying to gather more opinions from Korean players, so if there is any here I would like to hear them)
2 Likes
Vietnam can be added in the united Korean TT.