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
heraldabc    Don't try to0 alibi yourself, idiot.    4/1/2011 1:49:39 PM




Note the desperation here, folks? He cannot admit he's wrong about anything?



 



I was wrong about the 'padlock' and I did not go this way. No need too. Wrong is wrong.  What's wrong with you, Santa?



 



What is YOUR malfunction and system error here?   










Herald






Actually, I think how the pad lock thing went down was that you originally implied I was wrong by showing a video of a Stryker raising its ramp, not realizing that a door is on the ramp with statement that I should "look and listen" or something to that effect. Then when I asked you about it you about what you meant your post was something like you didn't imply anything. Of course. I'm sure you just posted that video to show me a ramp of the Stryker (sarcasm). Then, you asked me why a pad lock was on the back of a picture of a Stryker trying to catch me in something, which you didn't even bother to look that there is no where to pad lock the door.

 

And now you bring up this caliber thing which has so magnificently back fired on you. Maybe I hurt your pride the first couple of times or something. So, I hope you're enjoying that pop corn. I don't know. Anyways, you copied wiki and purposely edited it to suit your needs. And I know you did because that quote is only found on wiki and the only other sources on the net copied it from there as well. Then, when I asked you your source, your "original source" states,

 

"4-5. Caliber.The caliber of a cannon is a measure of  the diameter of the bore, not including the depth of the rifling."

 

If you had actually bothered to read your own source that might have stuck out to you. At this point I'm thinking to myself, not only are you a liar, but you're an idiot as well.

 

By all means go find a source that says I'm wrong. I'm sure with your 98345739857 years experience in ballistics that should be no problem for you. And do take the time to check your source. You know I will.


I saw a padlock and I asked a question. I am not an expert on a STRYKER and I asked the question based  the FALSE assumption that you knew what you discussed.

Since then, I've learned better that you really are noi, so unless you are a REAL tanker or a master gunner, I'll wait for an answer from someone who actually knows what the hell he talks about    

The rest of your current comment  is noise, Mister Perfect (Sarcasm). Now try to say something intelligent on subject?
 
H.
 

 
 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo       4/1/2011 2:28:47 PM

Nichevo: You are trying to prove your absolute superiority to me, that is a failure, im not going to accept it, and you know that you are totally wrong. Whats your point of wasting energy?

You make many contradictory remarks which show confused thinking.  I have noted this before but you persist.  Do I need to use smaller words?

You're probably right that it is a waste trying to reach you (especially since I am not sure how much you understand of what I say), but bits are free and I have the time at present.  I am not trying to prove my superiority to you - I don't know you. 
 
You have made many claims about your science and math supremacy but your language skills are weak (I know - English is not your native language - so post something of yours more eloquent in Russian and I'll run it through Google and see if you seem like another Tolstoy - and don't post Tolstoy or I'll know) both in your grammar/vocabulary/syntax and in your formal logic.  My language skills are exceptional and my STEM fair.
 
This aside, there are many criteria with which to compare one person to another and frankly we will never know about most of them.  (Are you brave?  Are you good to your mother?  Your children if you have any?  Are you healthy?  Rich?  Kind?  Etc.)  So none of this is intended as a personal reflexion, except where you, personally, show shortcomings (e.g., when you become abusive, fail to understand or respond to arguments, or lie) which I then point out.
 
My remarks are chiefly intended as a critique of Russia, including the USSR period and the historical Rus.  You and others are to be criticized only inasmuch as you are products of this environment.  You are behaving badly, but I don't really care.  It's as if you called me "gay" or "retarded" or some other such schoolyard insult.

 
Many countries and almost all the world respects Russia, even those who do not like it... and now what... YOU try to oppose it? 

There are many kinds of respect.  That which Russia has, and it does have it in spades, is the respect of the bully - respect me or I'll hit you.   More creditably, there is also respect for utter determination - e.g., you don't care how many men you lose, you will take that hill or whatever.  Also known as "respect for crazy."
 
 And of course there are many fine Russian individuals and always have been.  (OT:  It is silly for you to cry racism as nobody is denying that Russians are white people.)  The sad part is that few nations, few governments have as completely suppressed and defeated the aspirations of their people, as has Russia.  "Lions led by donkeys" to the max.

Point being they 'respect you' only as long as they're within your reach.


 Thats not gona happen, you not gona change it all, especially the facts. So i would suggest not to spend so much time and energy here.

I don't have to change any facts.  Most important of which is that life is so bad in Russia that your population is shrinking and eventually you will be overrun by your savage neighbors.  You won't nuke us because you'll be busy nuking China and Iran, who won't care because they are even lower than you and have less infrastructure.
 

Plus, i told you already i am not going to discuss moral and political issues here anymore.

Okay, remember where I said you were telling lies?
 

...... Id wish to hear more stories about invasion of Uzbekistan :) at least thats funny :)

Agreed, either he has too many drugs (LSD, cocaine) or not enough (Prozac, stelazine).  http://www.strategypage.com/CuteSoft_Client/CuteEditor/Images/emcrook.gif" align="absmiddle" border="0" alt="" />

 
Quote    Reply

Nichevo    Not to get in the way of a good cluster...   4/1/2011 3:22:33 PM
but while I was aware of referring to barrel length in calibers as a multiple of bore diameter, it was not common knowledge or known to me before I delved (at a young age) into our, I think, 1960 Encyclopaedia Britannica. I would readily accept a plea of confusion between use of terms in reference to small arms (caliber=bore dia.) and cannon (calibers=bbl length/bore dia.), which, I think, was the diff the EB drew.

Today (not 1960), EB reads:
 

calibre

ARTICLE
from the
Encyclopædia Britannica
 
...

calibre, also spelled Caliber, in firearms, unit of measure indicating the interior, or bore, diameter of a gun barrel and the diameter of the gun?s ammunition; or the length of a gun expressed in relation to its interior diameter (now used only of naval and coastal defense guns). See bore.

 
Regrettably the excerpt of the (current) article, Gun-calibre (Tank), seems to disfavor Herald.    Again this is perhaps a usage change over time.
 
What this probably means is that Herald is older than Santa.
 
So...

 
Can we all just get along now and concentrate our fire on red?
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 3:54:17 PM



I saw a padlock and I asked a question. I am not an expert on a STRYKER and I asked the question based  the FALSE assumption that you knew what you discussed.




Since then, I've learned better that you really are noi, so unless you are a REAL tanker or a master gunner, I'll wait for an answer from someone who actually knows what the hell he talks about    





The rest of your current comment  is noise, Mister Perfect (Sarcasm). Now try to say something intelligent on subject?

 

H.


 




 


*face palm*
 
You moron. Stryker brigades are infantry units. There are no tankers in them. So go talk to a tanker. While you're out, go buy yourself a clue as well.
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 4:01:01 PM
 
Here is another source for you.
 
Chapter 1, Definitions Relating to Equipment
 
42. Calibre. This is the (standard) diameter of the bore, excluding depth of the rifling grooves. It is measured from land to land.
 
So instead of writing entire essays your point would be better made, and time better spent) if you actually get some factual proof that I'm wrong. Your word of mouth does not make something fact.

Length can be expressed in units of caliber. Is length caliber? No, it's expressed using caliber as a measurement.

 




 

Now back away from your statement and your ego, examine it CLOSELY and tell me, "Is caliber a measure of barrel length?"  OBVIOUSLY, by your own admission, "Length can be expressed in units of caliber " that, INDEED, caliber IS a length of measure....

 

Now we'll skip over Barney and move onto to more formal argumentation, and say, YOU admit caliber is a unit of measurement, and then you deny it..you are being ILLOGICAL.

 

You screwed up in your L/55 M-256 comment and just can't own that you were wrong in giving Herald "Guff" about caliber.

 

So a 120 mm main gun L/44 is SHORTER than a 120 L/55....see L/44 < L/55, and "L" is defined as barrel length in calibers? 


 

See leave Barney at home, join the adults at the table....


 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 4:01:48 PM
h**p://armyapp.dnd.ca/ael/pubs/B-GL-371-006-FP-001.PDF
 
Quote    Reply

heraldabc       4/1/2011 4:03:38 PM
Vehicle as in STRYKER wheeled APC you incompetent! The damned vehicle. You are so stupid and so eager to argue on the irrelevant and the wrong points to prove that you are superior, its pathetic. Just another one who cannot even read or comprehend.    







I saw a padlock and I asked a question. I am not an expert on a STRYKER and I asked the question based  the FALSE assumption that you knew what you discussed.










Since then, I've learned better that you really are noi, so unless you are a REAL tanker or a master gunner, I'll wait for an answer from someone who actually knows what the hell he talks about    













The rest of your current comment  is noise, Mister Perfect (Sarcasm). Now try to say something intelligent on subject?



 



H.






 










 







*face palm*

 

You moron. Stryker brigades are infantry units. There are no tankers in them. So go talk to a tanker. While you're out, go buy yourself a clue as well.

This is exactly why you are noise.

Sheesh.
 
Nichy reply, I would be interested in who exactly authored that encyclopedia article. That definition as written usually refers to small arms-rarely to actual cannons. I tend to use Hogg these days for artillery definitions.  
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    All I'm doing is   4/1/2011 4:16:53 PM
taking YOUR OWN WORDS, and demonstrating that even YOU acknowledge bore diameter, expressed in calibers IS a measure of barrel length...as to evidence, You missed the 155mm L/39 155mm L/52 references, from CURRENT, non-naval artillery!?!  You missed my PAK 37 reference, barrel length measured in CALIBERS????  The Wehrmacht measured barrel length in CALIBERS?  So we have multiple sources, discussing NON-NAVAL heavy weapons, where barrel length is discussed in CALIBERS, multiples of....the only way to know the ACTUAL length is to know the CALIBER. 
 
And the L/39 v. L/52 discussion is a real, current, valid discussion of artillery characteristics.  The Bundeswehr has adopted a 52 caliber barrel for the Pzh-2000, the US has adopted the 39 CALIBER barrel for it's, or it's non-defunct, current SPH the FCS Non-LOS Cannon.  Many felt that the Bundeswehr made the better choice, but the answer was not so clear-cut.  So see discussions of barrel length, as a FUNCTION OF CALIBER, short-hand caliber=barrel length, are real, current, and involve non-naval weapons.
 
It's NOT difficult, it is, to use the SNL reference, both a dessert topping AND a floor wax...caliber IS the bore diameter, and multiples of the bore diameter describe barrel length....HENCE barrel length is measured in calibers....see logical, easy....
 
And if it ISN'T why did you mention the L/55 M-256, incorrectly?
 
Quote    Reply

JFKY    And a Master Gunner is NOT   4/1/2011 4:20:59 PM
stupid, in this context...I don't EVEN know where you dredged up the Stryker argument, it has NOTHING to do with caliber...a Master Gunner would be a decent person to refer to or to discuss on this issue.  Whether or no a Stryker unit has or needs a Master Gunner is IRRELEVANT.
 
I think most realize that a Stryker unit is...whoops, no scratch that each Stryker Battalion has 9 MGS' in it doesn't it?  What is the PRIMARY ARMAMENT of the MGS, why YES, it's the M-68 (variant) of the 105mm tank gun...why I imagine a Stryker Battalion MIGHT have a Master Gunner in its ranks...to oversee the training and operation of the MGS main gun system.
 
Sorry you're not doing well with this argument, today....
 
Quote    Reply

SantaClaws       4/1/2011 4:43:26 PM
I specifically said there are no tankers. You can be a gunner and not a tanker. Perhaps you should learn how to read?
stupid, in this context...I don't EVEN know where you dredged up the Stryker argument, it has NOTHING to do with caliber...a Master Gunner would be a decent person to refer to or to discuss on this issue.  Whether or no a Stryker unit has or needs a Master Gunner is IRRELEVANT.

 

I think most realize that a Stryker unit is...whoops, no scratch that each Stryker Battalion has 9 MGS' in it doesn't it?  What is the PRIMARY ARMAMENT of the MGS, why YES, it's the M-68 (variant) of the 105mm tank gun...why I imagine a Stryker Battalion MIGHT have a Master Gunner in its ranks...to oversee the training and operation of the MGS main gun system.

 

Sorry you're not doing well with this argument, today....


 
Quote    Reply



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics