Ukraine Invasion - Please do not post videos showing attacks/similar

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well, we're where we are due to the combined efforts of multiple governments. I think all the major parties have had a bit of a go since then.

My point is, before this conflict kicked off, many people were perfectly happy to vote for a party led by someone opposed to retaining our nuclear deterrent.
 
Bug One said:
Well, we're where we are due to the combined efforts of multiple governments. I think all the major parties have had a bit of a go since then.

My point is, before this conflict kicked off, many people were perfectly happy to vote for a party led by someone opposed to retaining our nuclear deterrent.
Click to expand...
Boris wasnt opposed though
 
Bug One said:
Well, we're where we are due to the combined efforts of multiple governments. I think all the major parties have had a bit of a go since then.

My point is, before this conflict kicked off, many people were perfectly happy to vote for a party led by someone opposed to retaining our nuclear deterrent.
Click to expand...

Haha by what measure? Electoral results? :cry:

By that logic thank god Farage, Abu Hamza and Bungle aren’t in power.
 
Last edited:
Bug One said:
Well, we're where we are due to the combined efforts of multiple governments. I think all the major parties have had a bit of a go since then.

My point is, before this conflict kicked off, many people were perfectly happy to vote for a party led by someone opposed to retaining our nuclear deterrent.
Click to expand...

I’d have no problem at all voting for a government with a policy of nuclear disarmament, just disarm the rest of the world first. Or at least all the non democratic nations.

Corbin was just finishing what Thatcher started.
 
Last edited:
jigger said:
I’d have no problem at all voting for a government with a policy of nuclear disarmament, just disarm the rest of the world first. Or at least all the non democratic nations.

Corbin was just finishing what Thatcher started.
Click to expand...

The problem there is (a) trusting the rest of the world has actually disarmed (b) anyone who subsequently re-arms is king. But I'd certainly want to see a government and the world in general take as many steps as possible to reign in nuclear arsenals and take as responsible a position as possible so as to make the likelihood of them being used as small as possible.
 
jigger said:
I’d have no problem at all voting for a government with a policy of nuclear disarmament, just disarm the rest of the world first. Or at least all the non democratic nations.

Corbin was just finishing what Thatcher started.
Click to expand...

Unless you can do an Infinity Gauntlet finger snap to make nuclear weapons and the knowledge required to make more, they’re here to stay.
 
Seems Russia have withdrawn the T14, the story running in TASS says that Russia have finalised the design after effectively trialing it in the field in Ukraine and have now withdrawn it... Must have been a good trial, very stealthy tank, in and out without anyone ever seeing it on the battlefield. :cry:
You'll need google to translate the page unless you speak ZZZ
tass.ru

Танки Т-14 "Армата" планируют доработать по результатам применения в СВО

Источник в оборонно-промышленном комплексе не уточнил, что именно планируется изменить
tass.ru tass.ru

With due respect, if they are largely static, if they were indeed deployed to the south, having a "state of the art" tank dosnt make much sense. T72's/62's/even 55's can make a decent enough mobile gun emplacement. Wouldnt want to be in one when they get hit though.
 
Last edited:
steve45 said:
Seems Russia have withdrawn the T14, the story running in TASS says that Russia have finalised the design after effectively trialing it in the field in Ukraine and have now withdrawn it... Must have been a good trial, very stealthy tank, in and out without anyone ever seeing it on the battlefield. :cry:
You'll need google to translate the page unless you speak ZZZ
tass.ru

Танки Т-14 "Армата" планируют доработать по результатам применения в СВО

Источник в оборонно-промышленном комплексе не уточнил, что именно планируется изменить
tass.ru tass.ru

With due respect, if they are largely static, if they were indeed deployed to the south, having a "state of the art" tank dosnt make much sense. T72's/62's/even 55's can make a decent enough mobile gun emplacement. Wouldnt want to be in one when they get hit though.
Click to expand...

Only rumours but possibly VPK is being tapped to produce a replacement for the T-14 and/or to fix it.
 
Rroff said:
the people who worked on them have moved on (many on T-90 maintenance lines now).
Click to expand...
Or onto another plain of existence... Thats the Russian way isnt it? When you dont deliver?
If the T14 was such a success, surely they would get Uralvagonzavod who designed it to crank them out instead of T90's. Dont VPK have their hands full the the Bumerang, which should either have just started serial production or imminently about to?
If they are looking outside of UVZ for production or alternative of T14, that screams project failure to me. I mean its sounding pretty much as we expected from previous info/rumors.
Though as you say nothing confirmed as yet...
 
Last edited:
steve45 said:
Or onto another plain of existence... Thats the Russian way isnt it? When you dont deliver?
If the T14 was such a success, surely they would get Uralvagonzavod who designed it to crank them out instead of T90's. Dont VPK have their hands full the the Bumerang, which should either have just started serial production or imminently about to?
If they are looking outside of UVZ for production or alternative of T14, that screams project failure to me. I mean its sounding pretty much as we expected from previous info/rumors.
Though as you say nothing confirmed as yet...
Click to expand...

Not sure if the Bumerang has gone into serial production or not - people are thinking so because there has been at least 2 instances of new ones (only about half a dozen at a time though) on trains.

I'd assume if the new VPK armoured vehicles are going into production that would free up the design side to start on new projects if they've not already though - though aside from agricultural vehicles they don't have a lot of experience AFAIK with heavy tracked stuff.
 
Last edited:
Rroff said:
Only rumours but possibly VPK is being tapped to produce a replacement for the T-14 and/or to fix it.
Click to expand...


The irony is Russia claims the M1, Challenger and other nato tanks are too big, bulky and lack agility. So what did Russia do for its first ground up new tank design in 70 years? It built a big, bulky tank and placed an underpowered, unreliable engine in it and now they have a tank that is less agile than the nato tanks they mocked
 
steve45 said:
If the T14 was such a success, surely they would get Uralvagonzavod who designed it to crank them out instead of T90's.
Click to expand...
In fairness there is a distinction in war between being what's best and being what's needed.

I.E the T-34 tank was complete dog **** compared to most German tanks but it became the most influential tank of the war simply due to being so quick/easy to build/repair and so resource efficient. Likewise the Hurricane was inferior to the Spitfire or most Messaschmits but that didn't stop it winning the battle of Britain.

It's possible that Russia have simply taken the point of view that they should focus on T-90 production as it gives the best ratio of tanks created to resources/manpower committed, after all it's not like the T-14 is likely to stand up better to an NLAW/Javelin.

For reference that's not an entirely Russian tactical view either, you can bet that if the USA ever got into a conflict and started losing F-22s then it would be F-15EX production that got ramped up to replace them not F-35 production.
 
Last edited:
Grim5 said:
The irony is Russia claims the M1, Challenger and other nato tanks are too big, bulky and lack agility. So what did Russia do for its first ground up new tank design in 70 years? It built a big, bulky tank and placed an underpowered, unreliable engine in it and now they have a tank that is less agile than the nato tanks they mocked
Click to expand...
To illustrate Grim's point, here's a T-72 next to an Abrams:
mtwtamct1t821.jpg



Now here's an Abrams next to a T-14:
abrams.png
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom