It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Russia's new generation TFV will enter service.

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Amphibious would be almost the same..

But did china copy newest weaponry complex? Nah, only the ones WE SOLD EM





posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 12:32 PM
link   
How did that Bradley get toasted? I always like Bradlies, they are definitly not slow, they are about as fast (slightly faster) than the Abrams...

LOSAT canceled? it was a great SUCCES! LOSAT is a great system, too bad it's based on the fragile HMMWV chassis, but atleast it's very mobile.

I like being modest, I don't like saying: OH THAT SYSTEM R0X0R5, it p4wnz the bradley! What I see is a system based on the T-72 chassis as you pointed out, it has 2 2A42 30mm guns which both fire at 600 RPM which is impressive, the Ataka missile system or AT-6 Spiral IIRC isn't that great, the Ataka-M is alot better though.

MAN that BMP-3 pic of yours IS a monster, al the ellegance of the BMP-3 totally obscured by the ERA....



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 12:49 PM
link   
But it works against RPG's, thats the main thing



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellraiser

stop dreaming chinaman this is a bmp3 copy with downgraded armour and extended amphibious capability, for taiwan "invasion"
, other then its turret its a piece of paper copy.


[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]


Actually if you knew your facts... the turret is the most similar componant, utilising Russian gun technology.

However the Chinese anti-tank missile is more accurate and has greater penetration, while the larger hull means that it can hold more men than the BMP-3

So it's got more firepower... greater mobility and can carry more men/equipment

If a tank engages either this or the BMP-3 they are both toast... so lighter armour means little... it's the first to shoot... and that's where the Chinese IFV has the advantage... cutting edge, modern optics



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 01:22 PM
link   

as posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
LOSAT canceled? it was a great SUCCES! LOSAT is a great system, too bad it's based on the fragile HMMWV chassis, but atleast it's very mobile.


Not cancelled. Not sure where Hellraiser is getting his factoids from, but they are undoubtedly and apparently mistaken?
Lockheed Martin: LOSAT
LOSAT LINE-OF-SIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON - HIGH MOBILITY MULTI-PURPOSE WHEELED VEHICLE, USA





seekerof



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius

Originally posted by Hellraiser

stop dreaming chinaman this is a bmp3 copy with downgraded armour and extended amphibious capability, for taiwan "invasion"
, other then its turret its a piece of paper copy.


[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]


Actually if you knew your facts... the turret is the most similar componant, utilising Russian gun technology.

However the Chinese anti-tank missile is more accurate and has greater penetration, while the larger hull means that it can hold more men than the BMP-3

So it's got more firepower... greater mobility and can carry more men/equipment

If a tank engages either this or the BMP-3 they are both toast... so lighter armour means little... it's the first to shoot... and that's where the Chinese IFV has the advantage... cutting edge, modern optics


Show me your sources for the fact that the missile is better.

And for the hull - It is only in height bigger, that doesn't mean that it can carry more men, maybe more comfortable for men though

cutting edge, modern optics



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof

as posted by GrOuNd_ZeRo
LOSAT canceled? it was a great SUCCES! LOSAT is a great system, too bad it's based on the fragile HMMWV chassis, but atleast it's very mobile.


Not cancelled. Not sure where Hellraiser is getting his factoids from, but they are undoubtedly and apparently mistaken?
Lockheed Martin: LOSAT
LOSAT LINE-OF-SIGHT ANTI-TANK WEAPON - HIGH MOBILITY MULTI-PURPOSE WHEELED VEHICLE, USA





seekerof



www.globalsecurity.org...

LOSAT was canceled by the Defense Department as a budget decision in November 1996. The Army appealed, and the proposed weapon continued as a technology demonstration effort.


it was canceled along with your "AGS" too..



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by Lucretius

Originally posted by Hellraiser

stop dreaming chinaman this is a bmp3 copy with downgraded armour and extended amphibious capability, for taiwan "invasion"
, other then its turret its a piece of paper copy.


[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]


Actually if you knew your facts... the turret is the most similar componant, utilising Russian gun technology.

However the Chinese anti-tank missile is more accurate and has greater penetration, while the larger hull means that it can hold more men than the BMP-3

So it's got more firepower... greater mobility and can carry more men/equipment

If a tank engages either this or the BMP-3 they are both toast... so lighter armour means little... it's the first to shoot... and that's where the Chinese IFV has the advantage... cutting edge, modern optics



stop dreaming chinaman its a russian bmp3 copy, bmp3m is much more better then this copy.

China has revealed its indigenous 100mm gun-fired missile, which might be based on the 3UBK10 design. The missile is believed to be capable of engaging tanks with explosive reactive armour (ERA) as well as slow, low-flying helicopters. Range is 100 to 4,000m. Hit probability is given as at least 0.8 with armour penetration of 600mm.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 02:18 PM
link   
Hellraiser....
Dude, you really need to get a grip.
In your haste to discredit what I said on LOSAT, among other issues, you must have failed to read this link and the articles and mentions concerning 2004 and 2003, not 1996!?
Lockheed Martin: LOSAT

Scroll down to near bottom of the page, Hellraiser.

*shakes head*


Furthermore, Hellraiser, in the globalsecurity article you linked, apparently you didn't read NO further than what you cited?
Try again, pal!


LOSAT was canceled by the Defense Department as a budget decision in November 1996. The Army appealed, and the proposed weapon continued as a technology demonstration effort. LOSAT received final approval as an FY'98 Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) new start the week of 17 November 97. The ACTD will assess survivability of the HMMWV based system and develop a concept of operations (CONOPS) for survivability through deception. The ACTD will also demonstrate enhanced deployability/mobility with the ability to fire upon landing. In April 1998 Lockheed Martin Corp., Lockheed Martin Vought Systems, Grand Prairie, TX, was awarded a $5,000,000 increment as part of a $214,239,685 (total if all options are exercised, base year plus four option years) cost-plus-incentive-fee contract for the LOSAT Advanced Concept Technology Demonstration (ACTD) Program, a 72 month research and development effort. This includes five years of development plus two years for extended user evaluation. The LOSAT ACTD will stretch over the 4-5 years; however any additional funding can shorten that timeline.




In October 2002 Lockheed Martin delivered its first Line-of-Sight Antitank (LOSAT) Weapon System Fire Unit, a lightweight system for transformation forces, to the U.S. Army in a ceremony today at the Association of the United States Army (AUSA) Annual Meeting in Washington, D.C. This was the first of 12 LOSAT Fire Units that will be delivered to the Army as part of the Engineering & Manufacturing Development (EMD) program.


And further confirmed here:


Company First Sergeant Mike McChesney participated in the user testing and said, “My soldiers are excited about using LOSAT in a tactical environment and very confident in both the fire unit and tactical trainers. We feel great about a combat system that 82nd Airborne soldiers help design and develop. We are ready to deploy with the system now.”

LOCKHEED MARTIN’S LOSAT SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETES LIMITED USER TESTING WITH SOLDIERS FROM FORT BRAGG (2004)


Keep talking mate...the more you do, the more you prove what little you do know?




seekerof

[edit on 17-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 02:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hellraiser....
Dude, you really need to get a grip.
In your haste to discredit what I said on LOSAT, among other issues, you must have failed to read this link and the articles and mentions concerning 2004 and 2003, not 1996!?
Lockheed Martin: LOSAT

Scroll down to near bottom of the page, Hellraiser.

*shakes head*




seekerof

[edit on 17-3-2005 by Seekerof]



even if this oversized missile was not canceled, as you said yourself, and your link production numbers will be minimal, at best.


Edit: also It has a firing signature similar to an MLRS rocket and is NOT what anti-tank troops want to be using in a battle. its a one shoot weapon: one shoot kills a tank, but one shoot is all you get as the enemy cant help but see you beneath the 20-m high cloud of smoke and behind the 10-m long jet of flame


[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 02:40 PM
link   
I'm sure of two things here, Hellraiser:
1: You are and were wrong on LOSAT, as with other mentions.
2: LOSAT will be deployed in numbers, as minimal as you may represent them to be, that will make it a threat on the battelfield. Can the Russian TFV be produced in like numbers? I'll answer that for you: No!




seekerof



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 02:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
I'm sure of two things here, Hellraiser:
1: You are and were wrong on LOSAT, as with other mentions.
yea looks like it will be under low rate production soon, and my other mentions.. you did not disprove them
2: LOSAT will be deployed in numbers, as minimal as you may represent them to be, that will make it a threat on the battelfield. Can the Russian TFV be produced in like numbers? I'll answer that for you: No!
how about yes, it's very cheap to upgrade the t72's to this TFV, besides russia laready has made 700 bmp3
, stop pretending we are in 1991 seeker its getting boring





seekerof



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:02 PM
link   
Hellraiser
This grows old, fast.
You have yet, and were asked, to povide production numbers. You haven't.
Better yet, which current Russian unit is fielding and testing this TFV, as compared to the unit that is fielding and testing the LOSAT?

The ball is in your court, and has been. Your attempts to thwart what I am saying have been a no-go since I made my first rebuttal and commentary to this topic thread.

I have provided to the contrary, whereas, you have not.
Back it up, or simply spew....your choice.
Certainly not my integrity on the line.....




seekerof

[edit on 17-3-2005 by Seekerof]



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by Seekerof
Hellraiser
wah wah wah wah
You have yet, and were asked, to povide production numbers. You haven't.
Better yet, which current Russian unit is fielding and testing this TFV

what are you illitirate?, IT'S NOT TESTING BUT ENTERING SERVICE who cares what unit? if russia already has 700bmp3 think of how easy it would be to just upgrade existing t72's to this one, also russia has 2 bmp-2 for each bradley you have
.



[edit on 17-3-2005 by Hellraiser]



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:41 PM
link   
Illiteracy plays no part in this topic, nor do those BMPs 2 and 3's, k.
IF this TFV is entering service as you, and the article you presented mentions, in 2005 (this year, matter of fact), then a serial production number and production run should have been stated and given, correct? Hence, the question on the production numbers. I mean geee....it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that if a military bvehicle such as this is going to enter service in 2005, then it should be in the midst of production as we speak, huh?

I never once discredited this military machine, nor the Russian ability to design premier equipment....I questioned the mere factoid that past claimed and asserted "its entering service" claims by the Russians, or anyone else, has been proven wrong. When in fact, the only thing that happened is that the vehicle ended up as a test platform or prototype and was never serial produced. That is the factoid and debate in question.

Have you found those production numbers yet and what are they?





seekerof



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 03:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by SiberianTiger
The Russia Gov is has been doing an EXALENT job deciving you Americans about just how many Tanks and Fighting veicals are built I assure you more than 25,000 (THOUSAND) of these babies have been built, it wont be revieled until WW3 starts, thats why Rus is always POPING up with all these NEW inventions at different times, when WE say "we bought 1 or 2 of these understand it to mean 1-2000.
]


Not bad, I am sure for every one of those 25,000 the USA has at least 5-10 hellfire missiles waiting for them. One shot, one kill, next.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 05:39 PM
link   
That LOSAT sure is one funny looking mother! Talk about flash blindness. Must be a real mother to fire at night!

I mean there you are, sitting quietly in your T-90, when some git fires a missile at you, the size of a small truck! And what's more, he lets you know where he's sat! Great!

That Russian vehicle reminds me a little bit like the old 105mm recoilless rifle ONTOS track that was used in Viet Nam, 'cept it has twin cannon as well.



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 08:37 PM
link   
I'm a big fan of the LOSAT, funny thing is when it fires it sounds like it's a laser being shot from the 1980's LOL, i'm not kidding.

That TFV looks like a good vehicle, don't underestimate it and don't underestimate the Russians, this will not be a hard vehcile to mass-produce since they have enough T-72's lol



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 10:19 PM
link   
Consider yourselves climbing a staircase of 2000 stairs and its a race between 20 friends of yours .
In the mid of the race you (read USSR)are first with your friend Tommy Bush (USA) second .......suddenly you become tired and Tommy overtakes you ......now tell me what will be your situation?
Will you be happy .....Thinking that the rest 18 of yours are behind you ?
Or will b be disappointed for loosing the first position?

Any wise person will get disappointed................................that exactly is the position of Russia today- in all spheres ...Military, Economy ,Technology etc ..............And thus are we Russians Disappointed......We are not happy to see that the rest of the nations apart from the US are behind us ........................

DEFENSE FUNDING
Our Defense Minister Mr Ivanov is disappointed with the military budget and he expresses it ........this proves that he is aware of his situation .
May be Its an intelligent Diplomacy to make your enemies Underestimate you or may be both.

But to all of you in this forum who use the issue of lack of fund I must say that this small Fund is the SECOND LARGEST MILITARY BUDJET IN THIS PLANET Bigger than China ...which is already a "Threat" to the US ..............so if China with a budget lower than the US and Russia can become a threat for US then why not Russia....?

now about Technology...
Stereotypes speak about " Rusting Soviet" weapons in the Russia Military but what about the three official (may be 10 unofficial )secret Military CITIES( bigger than the New York) in Siberia? No one(except the2 00 000 scientist, president and Def Minster ) in this world know what's going out there........every attempt of foreign media of exploring the cities have failed including the ones from New York Times in 1998...I m sure they have far more technologically superior weapons out there than those that we are selling to China and India bcoz
according the Russian constitution the State can never sell a Technology to a foreign country( even her ally) unless it has a far superior technology than what it is selling
Many of the people of St Petersburg have seen aircrafts over the deserted villages which cant be identified with any of the Migs, Sukhois and Fs (forget about the rest).
One more proof ...there is an artillery museum in St Petersburg that exhibits REAL VERSIONS of T 90s and Su 30MKI so if they can exhibit MKI and T90s in a MUSEUM Then ...........................................................?



posted on Mar, 17 2005 @ 10:34 PM
link   
Oooo....

This is the first time i've ever heard about those cities...

Please tell me more. What are there?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join