Jump to content

Russian invasion of Ukraine


Sonam

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, bennett said:

 

 

 

 

The T-54/55 is roughly equivalent to a Centurian or a M48, basically a late war follow-on. The upgraded versions sport the D10 100mm main gun that started life on late WW2 Soviet tanks. While development of advanced rounds for the D10 occurred in the 80’s, the rounds each cost 1/2 the cost of the tank itself and most are based upon the Bastion (AT-10 Stabber) in a sabot…a round that is unlikely to take long-term storage well. While they will have the gun to take on Leopard 1’s, they are under-armoured for any real offensive role against Ukraine. Conversely, they are poorly suited for a defensive role due to slow fire rate, poor fire control, and an inability to fight effectively from hull-down positions on reverse slopes due to their small and flat turret design (prohibits more than -5 degrees elevation). The T-54/55 would even be at a potential disadvantage versus an AMX-10 RC like France is sending to Ukraine, so how they are going to use these tanks is a good question.

The Maxim PM M1910/30, on the other hand, was produced until 1945 and is still considered one of the finest machine guns ever made. Assuming you can maintain ammunition supply, and you are not trying to lug it around, you can’t beat it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ludo*1 said:

Best line…”while a Royal Society study from 2001 concluded the most significant cancer risk was faced by soldiers in a tank who survived it being hit by a depleted uranium munition.”

Give the propensity for Russian tanks to toss their turrets 150ft+ in the air upon being hit, that would seem an unlikely risk.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Bairnardo said:

Probably. They only need a small ceremonial force. Someone for us to wave the white flags and roll out the welcome mat for. 

To be fair, there's some on here would be gaily skipping down to the beaches to welcome them with white flags. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We've bottled it in retaliating against Russia for years, litvinenko in 2006 should've been a watershed. Its also really hard to see what either side will view as a resolution to this conflict, neither side seems to be able to advance more than a few hundred meters, or is this due to the weather amongst other factors?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, superwell87 said:

1) I thought it wasn't a war in Russia's eyes?
 

Brilliant, eh? She is going on about how that nonce saved the orphaned kids from the shelling, who is committing the shelling if as you rightly pointed out it isn't a war in their eyes? The Ukrainians themselves? Deluded fuds.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Self-raising Lazarus said:

...neither side seems to be able to advance more than a few hundred meters, or is this due to the weather amongst other factors?

Right now it isn't possible to drive vehicles across fields due to mud by all accounts so possibly so.

 

 

Edited by LongTimeLurker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...