Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Armor Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Russian T90 vs. US M1A2 Abrams
achtpanz    6/14/2004 3:59:14 AM
Russian T90 vs American M1A2 Abrams - Which is better? If these tanks fought in battle, which would suffer more casualties, which one is superior? What are their advantages? Any information would be helpful.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Dmitri514    To SantaClown   3/2/2011 11:57:42 PM



Dont kid yourself - we would just nuke you.



We have more nukes than you and a missile defense system that your country cried about because we thought about putting 10 of those missiles in Poland.

And you ran away as usual!
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    about missiles   3/2/2011 11:58:28 PM
About missiles since you brought it up here, the first country which managed to shoot down a ballistic missile was USSR.
 
On 4th March of 1961, the ballistic missile R12 was shot down by the antimissile V1000 developed by Pyotr Grushin. 
 
The similar successfull experiment USA could conduct only about 30 years after. So shut your mouth up about missiles and missile defence. Each time when there are international exhibitions where countries show their missile defence stuff Russia freely demonstrates how their TOR-M1 systems down another very small missile with very low RCS, and those are even the ones which are for export! But US officials never want to show anything like that. And the US patriot missile defence systems in Israel could not defend them against even ancient SCUD-B missiles!
 
You dont have to have thousands of missiles these days you stupid moron, Russia has ICBMs with 10 separable warheads, where each warhead is much more powerfull than two a-bombs thrown in Japan. Only one missile is enough to send USA in stone age. But Russians have much more of them, plus SLBMs, TOPOL-M mobile, and cruise missiles on TU-160 with nuclear warheads.
 
So with all that its enough to destroy whole world not only USA. shut up already and dont start new topic, you gona be put down in a similar way.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    about missiles   3/3/2011 12:00:52 AM
oh one more thing forgot to say about missiles, the Russian ICBMs are also maneurable, they perform random maneurs, it makes it completely impossible to predict trajectory for guidance for any system.
 
But as i saw you have nothing to do with math and engineering, you might not understand that. 
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       3/3/2011 12:01:17 AM




BTW D have you ever actually been in a Tank of any kind or a BMP? Quick - What was the wooden stick used for that was issued to BMP-1 crews? Also what is that little oval Key Hole used for on the right rear of the T-72/90 just over the back of the tread? Do you know the difference between dead track  and live track?  Why do we call the T-72M "Dolly Pardon" ? Without gooling the name do you know who Dolly Pardon is?  How about some easy ones. What is that little hole in the center front of the chassis of the T-54 and some T-55's? Why not all T-55's?  Where does the driver set?















  1. If the auto-loader on the BMP''s grenade launcher gun  failed you used the stick.









  2. Dead track is simple hinge connected and lies flat on ground when laid out, live track is connected with bushings  and the ends of such a section the ends slightly curve up when laid out.









  3. It seems that you refer to the armor bulges on the front turret face of the T-72M and later models. Dolly Parton is a country music singer noted for her chest attributes. Smart business woman, has an amusement park named Dollywood.









  4. Some T-55s had a small bow machine gun for the driver. Some did not.The driver SITS on the left.









  5. There is a recessed right rear station keeping light on the T-72. Can't say a thing about the T-90 . Haven't seen one yet.













D and some of the other posters appearently get all of their information from the internet and have no basis of actual hands on experience to write from. I'd love for them to go out and break track on a tank so they could at least say they had done that. BTW he has a bad habit of calling people names but doesnt once give any facts except the ones he makes up in his head as you pointed out.











You mean like Ruben, Ruben? Look it up. I suggest the urban dictionary.






 



H.






 









You actually did better than I thought you would. You got 2 and 3 correct.

 

The wooden rod was to unfold the fins of the SAGGER missile that sits on the rail above the gun on the BMP-1.

 And ram the grenade home in th4 low pressure gun when it would NOT feed. Want to lose a hand?  . 

The small hole I was talking about was indeed for a 7.62 machingun but was standard on the T-54. It was on some T-55's because when the decision was made to upgrade the tanks main gun and engine there were still a lot of unfinished tank chassis which had been caste for T-54s, The gun was impossible to fire because it was next to impossible to for the driver to steer the moving tank and reach over and fire the machingun. If I remember correctly the barral was a smoothbore and was meant to be a harrasement weapon.

You asked for what purpose the hole was. I answered accurately..   

The last one you tanked. Its a key for the pressure relief valve for the engine compartment sump. Its funny as hell to get someone to stand behind the tank and have them turn the valve. It squirts old grease, diesel, water and oil all over them.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       3/3/2011 12:01:29 AM

About missiles since you brought it up here, the first country which managed to shoot down a ballistic missile was USSR.

 

On 4th March of 1961, the ballistic missile R12 was shot down by the antimissile V1000 developed by Pyotr Grushin. 

 

The similar successfull experiment USA could conduct only about 30 years after. So shut your mouth up about missiles and missile defence. Each time when there are international exhibitions where countries show their missile defence stuff Russia freely demonstrates how their TOR-M1 systems down another very small missile with very low RCS, and those are even the ones which are for export! But US officials never want to show anything like that. And the US patriot missile defence systems in Israel could not defend them against even ancient SCUD-B missiles!


 

You dont have to have thousands of missiles these days you stupid moron, Russia has ICBMs with 10 separable warheads, where each warhead is much more powerfull than two a-bombs thrown in Japan. Only one missile is enough to send USA in stone age. But Russians have much more of them, plus SLBMs, TOPOL-M mobile, and cruise missiles on TU-160 with nuclear warheads.

 

So with all that its enough to destroy whole world not only USA. shut up already and dont start new topic, you gona be put down in a similar way.


How much heroine do you shoot up to come up with this?
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   3/3/2011 12:05:44 AM
what was unclear in my above message? About performed experiment? About structure of ICBM?
 
tell me ill expand more.
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   3/3/2011 12:07:13 AM
what was unclear in my above message? About performed experiment? About structure of ICBM?
 
tell me ill expand more.
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       3/3/2011 12:48:01 AM

About missiles since you brought it up here, the first country which managed to shoot down a ballistic missile was USSR.

The Gammon was a joke. Explode a cloud of  BBs in the path of a non-maneuvering warhead is nothing.

On 4th March of 1961, the ballistic missile R12 was shot down by the antimissile V1000 developed by Pyotr Grushin. 

 Don't quote wiki.

The similar successfull experiment USA could conduct only about 30 years after. So shut your mouth up about missiles and missile defence. Each time when there are international exhibitions where countries show their missile defence stuff Russia freely demonstrates how their TOR-M1 systems down another very small missile with very low RCS, and those are even the ones which are for export! But US officials never want to show anything like that. And the US patriot missile defence systems in Israel could not defend them against even ancient SCUD-B missiles!

Spartan/Sprint  And as for true HTK there is the current PAC III and the Standards SM II A SM 3 and SM 6 all of which work. 
 

You dont have to have thousands of missiles these days you stupid moron, Russia has ICBMs with 10 separable warheads, where each warhead is much more powerfull than two a-bombs thrown in Japan. Only one missile is enough to send USA in stone age. But Russians have much more of them, plus SLBMs, TOPOL-M mobile, and cruise missiles on TU-160 with nuclear warheads.

 Our D-5s work. . How is Buran Topol M and Bulava doing these days, Kumquat?
 
 
So with all that its enough to destroy whole world not only USA. shut up already and dont start new topic, you gona be put down in a similar way.  is showing.
There is not enough energy in the current combined arsenals to  destroy the earth. How many warheads  has Russia exploded? 
 
 
Don't talk rockets with me. In fact don't talk anything with me. You are a waste of  oxygen. 
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart       3/3/2011 1:30:25 AM
dont talk missiles to you? wow a missile expert!
 
moron, first of all the R12 missile was downed, that was registered on the video tape. and a cloud of BBs as you call them did its job. second, look at the date idiot, it is 1961... can you imagine how difficult it was at that time build a system which would do such a job? 
 
sure you cant, cuz you have nothing to do with engineering and probably never built anything. idiot.
 
and i do not quote wiki it is an official data which US missile experts know about as well. 
 
Quote    Reply

ColdStart    ok   3/3/2011 1:32:09 AM
oh and about Buran, by the way during its flight it perform all the appropriate maneurs in automatic mode without pilot, USA did not do anything like that, all shuttles were guided by pilots.
 
and bulava is new development which has its difficulties, not everything goes smooth and works from first time. again because you are idiot and never designed anything as engineer you wont know that.
 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics