.com.unity Forums

.com.unity Forums (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/index.php)

- TO&Es (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/forumdisplay.php?f=108)

- - MBT's (http://forum.shrapnelgames.com/showthread.php?t=45260)

And I totally agree with yours above. Time will be the "arbitrator" for the now speculated.

Also,
“In the first Gulf War, in 1991 for example, the American and British tanks were knocking out Iraqi T-55s from 23 kilometers,” Delaney said.

“We’ve got multiple pieces of evidence that Russian industry, which had been given access to Western technology in the 90s, is really suffering from the restrictions,” Taylor said. “We’re hearing about them taking chips out of washing machines. And when you’re doing that, then you’re really obviously in quite a bit of difficulty. ”

“I think faced with Western weapons, the Russians must expect very heavy casualties if they expect to move forward using the T-55 system,” Taylor said. “It’s a move of desperation to be using weapons of that vintage. ”

Admiral Samuel Paparo: We call it the Decade of Concern. We've seen a tenfold increase in the size of the PRC Navy.

Norah O'Donnell: Technically speaking, the Chinese now have the largest navy in the world, in terms of number of ships, correct?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. Yes.

Norah O'Donnell: Do the numbers matter?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. As the saying goes, "Quantity has a quality all its own."

"Norah O'Donnell: How much more advanced is U.S. submarine technology than Chinese capability?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: A generation.

Norah O'Donnell: A generation.

Admiral Samuel Paparo: And-- by generation, think 10 or 20 years. But broadly, I don't really talk in depth about submarine capabilities. It's the silent service."

And I totally agree with yours above. Time will be the "arbitrator" for the now speculated and the truth.

Also,
“In the first Gulf War, in 1991 for example, the American and British tanks were knocking out Iraqi T-55s from 23 kilometers,” Delaney said.

“We’ve got multiple pieces of evidence that Russian industry, which had been given access to Western technology in the 90s, is really suffering from the restrictions,” Taylor said. “We’re hearing about them taking chips out of washing machines. And when you’re doing that, then you’re really obviously in quite a bit of difficulty. ”

“I think faced with Western weapons, the Russians must expect very heavy casualties if they expect to move forward using the T-55 system,” Taylor said. “It’s a move of desperation to be using weapons of that vintage. ”

From a recent 60 Minutes interview:
Admiral Samuel Paparo (COMPACFLT): We call it the Decade of Concern. We've seen a tenfold increase in the size of the PRC Navy.

Norah O'Donnell: Technically speaking, the Chinese now have the largest navy in the world, in terms of number of ships, correct?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. Yes.

Norah O'Donnell: Do the numbers matter?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. As the saying goes, "Quantity has a quality all its own. (Russia throughout its modern military history has ALWAYS operated on this simple principle.) "
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...84a2ad7a&ei=36

And from earlier in the interview:

"Norah O'Donnell: How much more advanced is U.S. submarine technology than Chinese capability?

Admiral Samuel Paparo: A generation.

Norah O'Donnell: A generation.

Admiral Samuel Paparo: And-- by generation, think 10 or 20 years. But broadly, I don't really talk in depth about submarine capabilities. It's the silent service. "

Because I can!?! :D

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH (Post 854604)

“In the first Gulf War, in 1991 for example, the American and British tanks were knocking out Iraqi T-55s from 23 kilometers,” Delaney said.

23 .... what planet was this on?
As a sailor (well ... bubblehead ... not your typical bluejacket) you know as well as I do an object would need to be apx. 33m high to even be seen at 23km due to the earth curvature. I guess Iraqi T-55s are REALLY big tanks!
Tho I suppose the American/Brit tanks could have been siting atop a sand dune ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by FASTBOAT TOUGH (Post 854604)

Admiral Samuel Paparo: Yes. As the saying goes, "Quantity has a quality all its own. (Russia throughout its modern military history has ALWAYS operated on this simple principle.) "
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world...84a2ad7a&ei=36

Yes, yes it does.
BUT there are limits.
I seriously doubt a Roman Legion could defeat a modern USMC infantry platoon (apx 44-50 people) IF it had enough ammo and a decent position to defend.

Here's your ROTFLMAO for the day......

https://www.jpost.com/international/...0alongside,%22

Quote:

Russian Chechen Republic leader Ramzan Kadyrov asserted the superiority of upgraded Russian T-72 main battle tanks (MBT) to the US M1 Abrams on Tuesday, after a Monday announcement that Ukrainian soldiers were to soon train on the American MBT.

Kadyrov said that the Abrams was like a children's pedal car, and that the improved version of the T-72 was "real power."

The T-72 "surpasses foreign equipment in combat power, control, protection and ease of use. With it, any attack is like fishing on a yacht – a pleasure!" Kadyrov wrote on Telegram, alongside a video of him riding in the armored vehicle's turret.

"On such a tank we will enter Kyiv and carry out denazification, simultaneously splitting the Abrams like nuts! "

so far it's not working out quite that way..........

https://s4.reutersmedia.net/resource...UKRAINE-CRISIS

https://i0.wp.com/asiatimes.com/wp-c...00%2C710&ssl=1

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-co...fit=1481%2C864

I have first hand experience with T-72s (don't know the models we encountered) and the T-55's (same on the models) versus our M1A1 tanks in Iraq and Kuwait.

To put it nicely, the T-55's are piles of junk and coffin for four brother and no match to any modern western tank built since 1980.

The T-72s are piles of useless metal scraps when faced by M1A1s.

If the Ukraine's get M1A2's then the Soviets, sorry I mean the Russian's stand no chance.

I am biased but I don't think the T-80s, T-90s or even the T-14s stand any chance against either US crewed M1A1s or any well trained M1A2 crew.

So far the only two things the Russians have excelled at are human waves causing mass casualties like WW2 1941 and 1942. Lots of noise and shaking with WW2 style artillery. Oh three things, turning their entire tank force into burnt out rusted landmarks on the Ukrainian soil.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DRG (Post 854627)

https://s4.reutersmedia.net/resource...UKRAINE-CRISIS

I have to wonder if the Russians get the joke :cool:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Suhiir (Post 854632)

I have to wonder if the Russians get the joke :cool:

Only if they saw the movie.........:D

I thought it was a nice touch. Obviously, someone in Ukraine has watched it. Betting quite a few have

https://www.nationalreview.com/wp-co...fit=1481%2C864[

What I got from that was I should make the turret rings bigger........

...and the new green and grey blended make a close approximation of the green that is not burnt off

I tried a little experiment..... then got more creative:)

Rev
https://i.imgur.com/frqdz2L.png

All colours are game palette

We laugh many times from T-54/55 taken to battlefield but looks like tactics of their usage by Russians is different than MBT. They using them as mobile SP guns and use to shelling Ukrainians position indirectly and as is said here this tactics is probably best usage for this obsolete tanks.

https://en.defence-ua.com/weapon_and...tive-6797.html

Quote:

Originally Posted by blazejos (Post 854712)

If that turns out to be the main use for these then we could put them in an indirect fire Unitclass......unfortunately there are no spare ones in the Russian OOB so they would have to be put in with real SP guns

.......and yes, keeping them away from direct engagement with modern tanks is a smart thing to do