First ever kill of Russian T-90 recorded in Syria.

[Alfador]

So basically this is a more realistic version of the movie Stripes

[Independent voter]

You said its a pretty big leap in technology while not quoting anyone, I merely pointed out that the newer model is roughly the same age as the T-90. Yes the Russians do have a new tank in the form of the T-14 Armata, not too many people are taking it seriously at the moment because it broke down during its first public appearance and had to be towed away while millions watched and laughed.

They're towing it? lol

[Alfador]

I still wonder why modern tanks still have to be piloted by a driver. We can remote control all kind of complicated shit, why not a tank?

Doesn't make a very advanced impression to me.

You'd have to not only replace the driver but the commander and the gunner as well. They're complex machines with a lot more going on than say, a drone.

In all honesty, to pull it off you'd probably need a drone/UAV anyway because remote control of a ground vehicle from more than a couple hundred feet on anything but flat terrain will be a bit of a problem, so something airborne would have to relay the signal. It would also be a lot more vulnerable to any attempt at jamming since it would generally be a lot closer to any ground-based interference than a UAV would be.

It's certainly possible that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks but you're introducing a lot more complexity into the scenario, with nobody on-hand to fix things if something goes wrong.

[Deleted]

Usage of proper military tactics is apparently too haram

That's what happens if you blindly follow the tactics in a 1300 year old book, your Armour tactics are outdated.

- - - Updated - - -

You'd have to not only replace the driver but the commander and the gunner as well. They're complex machines with a lot more going on than say, a drone.

In all honesty, to pull it off you'd probably need a drone/UAV anyway because remote control of a ground vehicle from more than a couple hundred feet on anything but flat terrain will be a bit of a problem, so something airborne would have to relay the signal. It would also be a lot more vulnerable to any attempt at jamming since it would generally be a lot closer to any ground-based interference than a UAV would be.

It's certainly possible that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks but you're introducing a lot more complexity into the scenario, with nobody on-hand to fix things if something goes wrong.

well modern tank tactics does require support as is, and its pretty hard to jam something that's only supposed to have a range of a few hundred meters or so.

[Deleted]

They're towing it? lol

Attempting to tow, if I remember correctly it was quite a while before they could move it until someone figured out it was in the wrong gear. They pretty much had a fancy new tank to show to the world but had dumb as bricks conscripts driving it.

[Alfador]

well modern tank tactics does require support as is, and its pretty hard to jam something that's only supposed to have a range of a few hundred meters or so.

They require support but not on the same level. This would be constant, complete contact or control stops. A tank can become detached from supporting forces for extended tracts of time and still operate effectively in the short term. A tank that loses contact with a control hub or UAV relay may as well be dead in the water. You've basically created 2 points of attack. shoot the tank, kill the tank. Shoot the transmitter/uav, kill the tank.

As far as jamming goes, you can generally jam a signal at a further range than the signal itself functions. All you have to do to jam something is fill the air with sufficient noise in the relevant frequencies.

I'm not saying there isn't a place for remote operated tanks or other land units, but to say it's surprising or disappointing that tanks are still human controlled is a bit, well... off. I suspect the first time we'll really see anything viable like that is whenever a government is comfortable and willing to use autonomous computer control to fill the gaps, let a controller give it instructions but the unit containing a sophisticated program to somewhat intelligently execute its previous directions in event of loss of contact.

[Deleted]

Giving state-of-the-art weapons systems to mouth-breathers then acting all shocked when they fail to use or employ them correctly... WHO KNEW?!

I would not be surprised if Russia were giving them this equipment in small numbers to deliberately test their survivability in real-world scenarios.

[Deleted]

Giving state-of-the-art weapons systems to mouth-breathers then acting all shocked when they fail to use or employ them correctly... WHO KNEW?!

I would not be surprised if Russia were giving them this equipment in small numbers to deliberately test their survivability in real-world scenarios.

Then giving them to 3rd worlders isn't the best way to achieve that...reports seems to claim it was Hezbollah driving, lol? What tank experience do they have? Russia certainly didn't give them a tank, very few were given to Assad n him only.
Hezbollah must have whined n moaned for months to Assad to get one of those because of their oh so important contribution to the war effort until he relented n gave them one. Then they drive out their -one- tank like they are Rambo thinking they are in God-mode...

- - - Updated - - -

They're towing it? lol

driver screwed up, there has been no issues after that incident, not a recurring issue to give credence that there is a problem with the vehicle itself. Russia-haters grasping for straws..

[Yunru]

Not even a Apocalypse Tank could be trusted to them.

[Deleted]

Then giving them to 3rd worlders isn't the best way to achieve that...reports seems to claim it was Hezbollah driving, lol? What tank experience do they have? Russia certainly didn't give them a tank, they must have whined n moaned for months to Assad to get one of those because of their oh so important contribution to the war effort until he relented n gave them one. Then they drive out their -one- tank like they are Rambo thinking they are in God-mode...

- - - Updated - - -



driver screwed up, there has been no issues after that incident, not a recurring issue to give credence that there is a problem with the vehicle itself. Russia-haters grasping for straws..

Has it done anything since? Until it has been deployed then it is just posturing by a country that is now poorer than Canada.

[Deleted]

Then giving them to 3rd worlders isn't the best way to achieve that...reports seems to claim it was Hezbollah driving, lol? What tank experience do they have? Russia certainly didn't give them a tank, they must have whined n moaned for months to Assad to get one of those because of their oh so important contribution to the war effort until he relented n gave them one. Then they drive out their -one- tank like they are Rambo thinking they are in God-mode...

It's beta-testing for developed countries.

[Deleted]

Has it done anything since? Until it has been deployed then it is just posturing by a country that is now poorer than Canada.

That incident was a test-drive before the actual victory day parade, by a new driver to a brand new vehicle..some grunt I believe.

Were no issues during the actual parade.


And none after


Russia-haters should stop trying to make armata tank a big-problem-issue, it's not the f-35 which breaks down all the time!

- - - Updated - - -

It's beta-testing for developed countries.

Enough about tanks, they aren't half as kewl as an armored firefighting vehicle!

[Sassafrass]

I'm confused what the point of this thread is.
The T-90 isn't "state of the art" although it does have some hi-tech to defeat ATGM's. So the tank was abandoned by the incompetent crew and later destroyed by a fire they could have put out with an extinguisher had they not been incompetent?

Not exactly the first time this has happened with a T-90.




No one made a thread about Obama "being unhappy" over Iraqis losing their Abrams we've been giving them. Or the Saudis. Because it's a stupid thought in the first place.






On a side note, Putin was probably more pissed about the TOS-1 the Syrians lost a while ago. Those were sent in very limited numbers.

[Deleted]

Enough about tanks, they aren't half as kewl as an armored firefighting vehicle!

That is fucking bad ass! What is it? From the colours and the nozzle on the front I'm guessing its in use with the fire service?

[Kellhound]

the m1a2 used by the usa was first rolled out in 1990, the m1a1 was first produced in 1972.

m1: 1979-85
m1a1: 85-92
m1a2: 92-
m1a2 sep: 99-

- - - Updated - - -

No, as seen in some videos they actually often drive them with hatches open, so i would assume he got concussion from blast wave... AND top post actually says that driver was evacuated some time after gunner and commander, which goes against assumption of breach.

I haven't seen even single image of actual breach for T-90 - one given in top post certainly doesn't have any.

Just because the driver survived does not mean the drivers compartment wasnt breached.

The lead photo shows the ass end of the tank, with the angle such that it is hard/impossible to tell if the drivers area has been damaged.

- - - Updated - - -

You said its a pretty big leap in technology while not quoting anyone, I merely pointed out that the newer model is roughly the same age as the T-90. Yes the Russians do have a new tank in the form of the T-14 Armata, not too many people are taking it seriously at the moment because it broke down during its first public appearance and had to be towed away while millions watched and laughed.

Its a joke because it requires too many easily damaged sensors to function at all.

- - - Updated - - -

Maby so they can escape quickly, have you seen a cooked tank, dont think its very plesant to be inside one

Or the A/C isnt working, or they want a better view of the battle field.

[ParanoiD84]

Or the A/C isnt working, or they want a better view of the battle field.

Probably one of those i think i would like to be near the hatch if shit went downhill though after looking at many cooked tank videos.

[Kellhound]

That incident was a test-drive before the actual victory day parade, by a new driver to a brand new vehicle..some grunt I believe.

Were no issues during the actual parade.

And none after


Russia-haters should stop trying to make armata tank a big-problem-issue, it's not the f-35 which breaks down all the time!

- - - Updated - - -



Enough about tanks, they aren't half as kewl as an armored firefighting vehicle!

I still cant believe how many bullet traps are part of the design of the T-14. The T-14 just seems poorly thought out.

[Deleted]

That is fucking bad ass! What is it? From the colours and the nozzle on the front I'm guessing its in use with the fire service?

I found it here
http://www.rt.com/news/336778-russia-fire-vehicle-tank/

I'm guessing its needed in Siberia due to terrain or the huge amount of snow

- - - Updated - - -

I'm confused what the point of this thread is.
The T-90 isn't "state of the art" although it does have some hi-tech to defeat ATGM's. So the tank was abandoned by the incompetent crew and later destroyed by a fire they could have put out with an extinguisher had they not been incompetent?

Not exactly the first time this has happened with a T-90.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2rfyeR-YaJw

and that is the fake t-90 video we refered to earlier, that wasn't a t-90, but a t-72 if I remember correctly.

Agreed, T-90 isn't state of the art, neither is Abrams tank. US have to make a new tank for that...Germany is supposedly working on a new one, but they only produced an over-sized gun,

Poland has some futurish looking light tank

[Kiri]

That's what Russia gets for slacking off. I thought they'd reached the T-900 already by now, pfft.

[Deleted]

That's what Russia gets for slacking off. I thought they'd reached the T-900 already by now, pfft.

Skipping straight to T-1000! Infiltrating n taking ur freedoms!