Russian vs. USA Tech

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:20 PM
link   
Ok I would want some good debating going on here and I wont some good FACTS.

Facts are the main thing.

Please give an example and tells us why one or the other is better.




posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:23 PM
link   
Here is an interesting discussion on another forum if anybody cares to look into it.

www.strategypage.com...

[Edited on 28-11-2003 by greenkoolaid]



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:28 PM
link   
Nice link but I want to here from people in this forum.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:29 PM
link   
oh crap, this topic will turn into a flamewar 100%



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by SectorGaza
oh crap, this topic will turn into a flamewar 100%


That is true. It is the whole board vs Russian on this one. He doesn't realize that the USSR lost the Cold war and was lying about what they had to keep up with the US. Oh well, I don't feel like debating this one much right now.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:34 PM
link   
Sorry i THINK i GOT SectorGaza and maybe Fulcrum onmy side for the Russian Tech.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:35 PM
link   
so where do we begin?



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by SectorGaza
so where do we begin?


# I dont know.



There is alot of very nice Russian tech we can bash the US with.!


How about lets start for aircrafts?



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:38 PM
link   
No comment....
I prefer to stand to the side momentarily and read what is said.



regards
seekerof



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:40 PM
link   
actually both counrties tech are pretty close now, militarily speaking. russia has made leaps and bounds to catch up with us. some of their stuff is almost better than our stuff.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:41 PM
link   
OK here are some light anti-air defences

Avenger vs Tunguska-M1

Avenger



Information:
MISSILES

The electric turret drive is the same as that used on the Bradley Fighting Vehicle and is manufactured by General Dynamics, Pittsfield, Massachusetts. Avenger carries eight Raytheon Stinger short range air defence missiles in two launch pods mounted either side of the turret. These pods have a range of elevation from -10 to +70. Missile reload time is eight missiles in less than four minutes. The current production Stinger missiles are the RMP (Reprogrammable Microprocessor) FIM-92D and the Block I FIM-92E. The Stinger missile has a two colour, infrared-ultraviolet rosette scan seeker, 3kg fragmentation warhead, maximum speed Mach 2.2 and maximum range 8km. The Block I missile has a new roll frequency sensor and an improved processor. The Stinger Block II missile, with an imaging infrared seeker based on a focal plane array, is due to enter production in 2004.

GUN

Avenger is equipped with a 50 calibre M3P automatic machine gun to cover the missile dead zone and engage ground targets. The machine gun, manufactured by Fabrique Nationale Herstal of Belgium, is mounted on the right launch beam with its ammunition magazine fixed on the right side of the turret below the gun barrel. 200 rounds of ammunition are carried. The gun is recoil-operated, link-belt fed and air-cooled.

FIRE CONTROL

The fire control system is highly automated, including automatic insertion of lead angle and super elevation at missile launch. The gunner's station has a head-up CA-562 optical sight produced by CAI division of Recon/Optical, Barrington, Illinois. Missile seeker activate and uncage and fire permit indications are projected on the sight glass. Driven reticles confirm the missile seeker is locked on to the same target the gunner is tracking.

Targets are acquired either by using the optical sight or the Raytheon AN/VLR-1 Avenger FLIR (Forward Looking Infrared). The FLIR sensor is fitted to the left launch beam and is boresighted to the aiming point of the missile pod. The FLIR has three fields of view - wide, narrow and a rain mode.

The Avenger Control Electronics (ACE) unit, produced by General Dynamics, Burlington, Vermont, is the Avenger main computer. The ACE is located beneath the console in the gunner's station.

A Raytheon eyesafe CO2 laser rangefinder provides range data which is processed by the ACE. An automatic video tracker (AVT), produced by DBA, Melbourne, Florida, is located under the gunner's console, with its tracking box on the FLIR display. The autotracker locks on to the target and provides a tracking signal to the ACE for control of the turret in elevation and azimuth. An AN/PPX-3B IFF (Identification Friend or Foe) system is also fitted.

REMOTE CONTROL UNIT

The Remote Control Unit (RCU), also produced by General Dynamics, displays the same data available to the gunner, including the FLIR monitor display. It enables the crew to conduct engagements from remote positions up to 50m from the fire unit.

Tunguska-M1



Information:
ARMAMENT

The Tunguska-M1 vehicle carries eight 9M311-M1 surface-to-air missiles. The missile (NATO designation SA-19 Grison) has semi-automatic radar command to line-of-sight guidance, weighs 40kg with a 9kg warhead. It is 2.5m long with a diameter of 1.7m and wingspan of 2.2m. The missile's maximum speed is 900m/s and can engage targets travelling at speeds up to 500m/s. Range is from 15 to 6,000m for ground targets and 15 to 10,000m for air targets.

Two twin-barrel 30mm anti-aircraft guns are mounted on the vehicle. These guns have a maximum firing rate of 5,000 rounds per minute and a range of 3,000m against air targets. This extends to 4,000m against ground targets.

FIRE CONTROL

The system has target acquisition radar and target tracking radar, optical sight, digital computing system, tilt angle measuring system and navigation equipment. Radar detection range is 18km and tracking range is 16km.

VEHICLE

The Tunguska-M1 system is mounted on a 34t tracked vehicle with multi-fuel engine. It has hydromechanical transmission, hydropneumatic suspension which allows for changing road clearance and hydraulic track-tensioning. The armoured turret has both laying and stabilisation drives and power supply. Air-conditioning, heating and filtration systems are fitted.

A Tunguska-M1 battery is composed of up to six vehicles and will also include a transloader as well as maintenance and training facilities.

The armoured turret has both laying and stabilisation drives and power supply. Air-conditioning, heating and filtration systems are fitted. A Tunguska-M1 battery is composed of up to six vehicles and will also include a transloader as well as maintenance and training facilities.



Well both of these systems has their pros and cons. The avenger uses a IR stinger missile that is a pretty old design even thouth it has been upgraded. They can be fooled by hot things such as flares and such. The 12.7mm guns are also pretty small for any real type of airdefence. Two 20 of 30mm would have been better. The good things about this system is that it is cheaper to produce because it uses mostly off the self parts such as the missiles, guns and vehicle. It also is very mobile and you can put it anywhere. The fact that it uses wheels is a downside on rough gound though. Another plus side is that it has a fast reload time, only a two mad crew, and it is a simple piece of work.

The Russian vehicle also has its plus sides. It uses radar and that is less likely to get fooled. It uses tracks so it can go anywhere. Also it uses twin barrel 30mm guns. These are big enough to provide protection. Also this vehicle has a larger range than the avenger. Some down sides is that it is more complicated so it has more of a chance to fail. Also it is more expensive because of the electronics and such, though it also does use some off the shelf parts such as the guns and SA-19 missiles. Also is can fire on ground targets and can fire while on the move.

OK I like the Avenger becuase of its proven technology and simplicity. It does have some short commings but I think it is a better value than the Russian vehicle. What do you think?



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
actually both counrties tech are pretty close now, militarily speaking. russia has made leaps and bounds to catch up with us. some of their stuff is almost better than our stuff.


Sorry you got one thing wrong.

some of their stuff is almost better than our stuff.

not almost way



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:45 PM
link   
So what do you guys think of my comparo up there



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:47 PM
link   


OK I like the Avenger becuase of its proven technology and simplicity. It does have some short commings but I think it is a better value than the Russian vehicle. What do you think?


I disagree.

What if the vechile is on the move.

Then the US tech cant engage(while on the move)

Also the radar on the Russian tech is less likly to be fooled and with a fool radar a weapon is NOTHING.

So theefore the Russian is better.

and it will provide better protection!



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:48 PM
link   
dude, i think that tunguska is way better
check this video of tunguskas in action:
www.rusarm.ru...

tunguska also has AA guns,




posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:50 PM
link   
I said in my post that I though that the IR was easier to fool. I just think that the Avenger would be cheaper and a little easier to maintain out on the battle field because of the amount of spare parts.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:51 PM
link   
Hey guys read my entire post. All what you are saying is in there. I kno wit is a little long but its good. Just dont read the last part.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:52 PM
link   
i think the avenger needs to be compared with AA BRDM-2 vehicle




posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Yes that is just what I was going to say. I guess they are in two different classes.



posted on Nov, 28 2003 @ 07:01 PM
link   
That vehicle is kinda old though.





top topics
 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join