Did the show organiser say that as soon as it happened or afterwards? Because I’m fairly certain that he interpreted the new drivers mistake as intentional. pretty straightforward.
Also that video you put up is about the Abrams.
RedEffects video is from 5 years ago. Even so, the person who made that debunking video, if you read through the comments, is pretty biased and makes some nuanced claims.
Also:
the show organizer would know what is planned and what is not planned
yet it proves how redeffect is an unreliable source
still an unreliable source, you dont get to be unreliable and say “okay now i’ve cooled off trust me more bro” and then act like youre a primary source for everything
like i said, the show organizer knows what is planned and what is not. they organize the show, not the drivers.
so, make your pick. you have a false claim or the pro russian show maker has a false claim
You didn’t answer my question. Did the organiser say it whilst it was happening or after?
Using that logic, nobody should trust anyone because they lied or made a false clame.
So what is a ‘reliable’ source in your opinion?
said during the situation
yes?
well you can’t prove a lie, so for lies there are no reliable sources, only unreliable ones (you get it don’t you?)
this seems somewhat common. pro russians and goverment making up lies but they are different so that they contradict each other which makes them easy to pick apart
also redeffect mentioning no spall liners was proven wrong as you can see here Community Bug Reporting System
So in that case, if everyone knew that it was an emergency stop, why did a experienced driver have to disengage the parking brake?
I meant to add the words “ages ago”
So how and when has any of this happened? You’re acting like a Pro-x’s person interpretation of country X’s reports should be taken at equal value as the official report from the Govt. Thats like when the Chally 2 survived 9000 RPG shots, but that wasn’t from the Govt was it?
exactly, very nonsense claim. why would an experienced driver have to disengage the parking brake if it was a pre planned “emergency braking show”?
it is more likely that the person driving the tank received advice that he can use a different gearset if the higher ones jammed and was told on which ones to continue driving and which ones to not. this goes inline with the fact that there is no way you know how to put on the parking brake and then not know how to turn it off if you have a preplanned emergency braking. and why would the driver have panicked if it was ordinary?
because you don’t have a timer of something like 1 year where you suddenly are a reliable source again
considering the people making the show know exactly what is planned and what is not and have been briefed on it, i do consider them equal to someone who was at best there to watch.
whataboutism? i don’t support them either if they lied.
So back to my first question. Does anyone know how an L-Band AESA IFF antenna work? Is it for longer range interrogation, faster interrogation?
search, no weapons guidance. more suspectible to clutter. can “detect” a stealth jet, can’t track it (atleast in theory in a non EW situation)
Thats your personal takeaway.
No, but your parents lied to you about Santa, the Easter Bunny and other people have lied to you as well, Im sure. But you still trust (most) of those people, yes? Because they’ve changed over time and become trustworthy again, right?
nothing to do with my statement.
That ties into my point that just because a telegram channel says something doesn’t mean its gospel.
Sorry I forgot to add IFF. since the slat antennas were supposed to be for iff
considering it is supported by situational factors, mechanical possibility, the fact that either of you is lying, and by the fact that the driver wasn’t in state of delirium or panic and because if you know how to put on a parking brake you probably know how to take it off
versus your claim where the only logic behind it is that the driver is a mentally disabled person with panic disorder
yes and i wouldn’t use my parents as a source for something regarding tanks, however this is a cultural lie told to kids and is accepted. however lying about tanks where you clearly act like you are reliable is absolutely unacceptable
im not wrong there regardless
So what you’re saying is that neither of us know 100%. Got it.
And RedEffect, again wasn’t lying at ALL. His claims were based on lack of experience, treating tanks like they had stats in a MMORPG game or smth and not talking to actual tankers. Again, its been 5 years and he is quite reputable now. IF you decide not to trust him, then nothing I can say or do will change that. Simple.
Sure,
what i’m saying is very likely, supported by above mentioned factors and is logical. what you’re saying is illogical, impossible, and contradicts what the people running the show are saying.
think it like this; neither of us had a trip inside the moon, we both have claims about what the core is made of.
you say that the core is made of something illogical, improbable and virtually impossible, like cheese
i say that the core is made of metal, citing logical reasoning, actual possibilities and other analyzed information
however you think that our claims are equal, that both of us know nothing.
like i said, and what i will cite here again;
now i will take a shower and move on with life, feel free to add more cope text below. ill read it later on.
Organizers do know what will happen during a military parade. Rehearsals exist for a reason.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
No one will tell you for sure, it was introduced a long time ago in 2009 (it was developed even earlier), as an onboard multifunctional interrogator with AESA…
Features and application possibilities… Assessing the Tikhomirov NIIP L-Band Active Electronically Steered Array
The problem with these forums and the people commenting on them is that the vast majority act as if they have any real understanding when, in reality, they are entirely ignorant in the literal sense of the word. They disregard readily available information on the topic and instead mindlessly repeat outdated misconceptions or outright propaganda that aligns with their bias, even when those claims have been debunked repeatedly.
Take, for example, the absurd claim that the Su-57 lacks an S-duct an assertion that is demonstrably false. These people fixate on whatever supports their preconceived notions, often comparing it to the F-22 and assuming that stealth design must follow identical principles. But where did they read, or what source did they provide, to support the claim that an S-duct must completely obscure the compressor face from all angles ? Your guess is as good as mine.
In reality, the YF-23’s compressor is visible in the frontal aspect, yet no one questions its stealth credentials on the contrary, American sources rate it as even stealthier than the F-22. Likewise, the Su-57 production unit showcases a very similar S-duct design and furthermore employs radar blockers on both the inlet and exhaust sides of the engine. But when confronted with this contradiction does that mean the YF-23 isn’t stealthy? They resort to convoluted mental gymnastics rather than admitting their ignorance.
That is the harsh reality and the reason why many of the knowledgeable members have stopped engaging with the community. Discussion is pointless with these people as they do not seek to learn !
A jet from the 90’s still dominating is crazy work.
Dominating in propaganda value for sure but as far as real life combat value goes , lackluster empirical evidence to say the least !
wasn’t this concluded as fake?
edit; yes it was.
Beware of fighter pilots bearing gifts | Lowy Institute is one for mentioning it
do love the constant pro russian misinformation here though
