russian vs western (euopean, n.american) tech!




 
--
 
July 14th, 2004  
Shadowalker
 
 

Topic: russian vs western (euopean, n.american) tech!


wondering how you rate russian technology against western technology from the basic rifles through tanks, missiles, planets and ships!

Personally while i feel that russian technology is not as advanced as western tech it is as good and as effective as western tech and in some places better!
The aircraft such as the mig-29 and su-27 are as good as anything in the air at the minute it is only the new 5th gen planes such as the eurofighter and F-22 that have a substantial advantage over these jets!
The basic russian rifles such as the Ak-74/100 series and an-94 are reliable, robust and effective.
What are your thoughts?
July 14th, 2004  
rovai
 
Hey, another flame topic..............

OK here is my opinions:

Rifles) AK is a great assault rifle, it is the most popular assault rifle in the world. M16-M4 are also good, but they arent as reliable as AK's(but ak lacks accuracy, but at ranges up to 200-300m it's pretty accurate). And new AN-94 kicks ass. So here Russians get the points.

Tanks) Hard one. Americans will proadly go for Abrams, British for Challenger, Israelis for Merkava, and Russians for T-80U or T-90(the most arguable question on the Russian forum is "What is the best tank in the world? T-80 or T-90?) I have a hard time choosing between Merkava and T-80U. All I can say is that Abrams is not the best, it's not maneuverable, has manual ammunition load, and has unreliable engine. Iraq cant be taken into account, because there were no tank vs tank battles in Iraq.
Also, different tanks are built for different tactics and different war theatres .
So here is pretty much a match.

P.S Who said that autoloaders are bad and why?

Ill continue with planes and other stuff tomorrow.

P.P.S Can anybody give a link for some western artillery?
July 14th, 2004  
Mark Conley
 
 
russian technology is only as good as the task required of it...but does follow three basic principles

1. the article manufactured must not require the importation of scarce strategic metals that cant be found within the russian sphere of influenence.

this means that if titanium is only available in the united states, and all the russians have to subsitute for the titanium is cobalt, then the part is made of cobalt. This might increase the weight of the part two fold, but the russians will always have acess to the material.

2. the article manufactured must be easy to manufacture at one single factory dedicated from start to finish production.

This in the past, meant that if it was manufactured out of steel, the ore was smelted, poured, recast, shaped, machined, and finished in one place. This is going bye bye now.

3. The article manufactured only had to meet the needs for what it was designed for, not esthetics:

it only has to work. it doesn't have to look pretty.


anything else is secondary. If they still build tube radios...well tube radios still work, they can be easily repaired, and theres no pressure to make it look pretty. Most of what russia built at one time wasn't for export anyway.

--
July 14th, 2004  
Shadowalker
 
 
[quote="rovai"]
P.S Who said that autoloaders are bad and why?
quote]

i would of thought that if autoloaders were so bad they would of been abandoned but the russians and french still use them!

Is the S-300 a good system? i was wondering this as somewhere ive seen that the chinese have a copy of this as there main air defence missile (i believe) and it is one of the few rivals to the patriot!
July 14th, 2004  
Uncle_Sam
 
 
Russian technology is only better, because it's simple. Even a trained monkey can fire reload, drive their weapons, tanks, planes..........

But in case of everything else: US Rules!
July 14th, 2004  
Shadowalker
 
 
KISS principle, would love to see a monkey flying a jet
July 15th, 2004  
Kozzy Mozzy
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovai
Hey, another flame topic..............

OK here is my opinions:

Rifles) AK is a great assault rifle, it is the most popular assault rifle in the world. M16-M4 are also good, but they arent as reliable as AK's(but ak lacks accuracy, but at ranges up to 200-300m it's pretty accurate). And new AN-94 kicks ass. So here Russians get the points.

Tanks) Hard one. Americans will proadly go for Abrams, British for Challenger, Israelis for Merkava, and Russians for T-80U or T-90(the most arguable question on the Russian forum is "What is the best tank in the world? T-80 or T-90?) I have a hard time choosing between Merkava and T-80U. All I can say is that Abrams is not the best, it's not maneuverable, has manual ammunition load, and has unreliable engine. Iraq cant be taken into account, because there were no tank vs tank battles in Iraq.
Also, different tanks are built for different tactics and different war theatres .
So here is pretty much a match.

P.S Who said that autoloaders are bad and why?

Ill continue with planes and other stuff tomorrow.

P.P.S Can anybody give a link for some western artillery?
The Abrams is maneuverable, it hits a top speed of 45 mph...pretty fast

It has a manuel ammunition load...so? A good loader slams a shell every 4 seconds riding in rough terrain, the auto-loader on the T-90 takes about 8. The loader can help with maintenence and help watch for enemies and also fire another machine gun. Auto-loaders can break.

The engine is reliable, 90% operation rate in the Gulf War.

Saying that a conflict is not an accurate judge of a tank because there were no tank to tank battles is wrong. A tank's job is not necessarily to fight other tanks, tanks fill the role of heavy cavalry, to exploit a breakthrough in the enemy line.

Not to mention the M1A2SEP has the most advanced fire control and optics of any tank.

That said, the problem with most Russian equipment is not the design, it's how well made and the workmanship involved that's the problem.
July 15th, 2004  
AlexKall
 
"Not to mention the M1A2SEP has the most advanced fire control and optics of any tank."

Just one question. Where did you get that infromation from?
July 15th, 2004  
Redleg
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by rovai
P.S Who said that autoloaders are bad and why?
I'm not a tanker, so I'll not answer that one.
But we've had a couple of interesting discussions about this topic before:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum...opic.php?t=956

Quote:
Originally Posted by rovai
P.P.S Can anybody give a link for some western artillery?
Here's some info about a lot of different arty systems:
http://www.army-technology.com/projects/
July 15th, 2004  
Uncle_Sam
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by skywalker
KISS principle, would love to see a monkey flying a jet
What do You say now? Huh?