Skip to main content

Various Myths about Russian and Soviet military equipment.

Myths about russian and soviet military equipment. 


List 

Russia has no targeting Pods 

Russian armour myths 

T-72B3 is just a B with thermals 

MiG-25 can't go mach 3 

Soviets first Rangefinding Radar was copied 

Soviets first IR Missile was copied 

russian tanks have too much recoil therefore stabiliser is bad

Russia doesn't care about their crew because their tanks don't use blow out panels

reverse speed ruins your T-80, T-90s and T-72s”

BMPT gun wobbles so that means it's bad” 

russisn tanks pop after one hit

Russia never had any innovation with military technology”

Russia had no night attack aircraft until 2000s" 

Russian fighter jets just copy western” 

T-72 is one of the worst tanks of all time”

Russian tanks have no gun depression because they're bad

Your ICBMs are bad which is why you had to create big nukes like Tsar Bomba”

Your navy ships constantly break down" 

Your fighter jets always break down" 

The T-14 was cancelled because it costs too much" 

The T-14 has bad turret armour 

Russian equipment is cheaper because it's inferior

Soviets struggled with slotted planar arrays



List

"Russia has no targeting pods" 

Just bull shit. 

We have Sapsan-E with 2nd Generation FLIR 

On Su30s as produced M400s 

Mock ups for MiG-29SMTs 

We have the T-220I with 3rd Generation FLIR 

Produced KOEP-35s on Su35s and Su-30SM2


On mig29 variants 


Sold to Algeria 


NPK-SPP OLS-K 3rd Generation FLIR for mig29s 

In use 


UKR-OE pod with 3rd Generation FLIR for su34m



On combat missions 

UKR-RL Pika-M pod with AESA SLAR and targeting for su34m 


In use 


Russia doesn't really utilise Pods often (su34 does a lot) because all their strike aircraft have built in EOTS. 

Su-35S  

Image 

Su30

Su30sm2


Image

Su24 

Image 

Su34 

Image 

MiG-29SMT

Image 

Su-25SM3 

Image 



"Russian armour myths*

Some photos are demonstrated examples 



Kontakt-1 

Kontakt-1 has Two layers of 4S20 explosive filling separated by BTK-1Sh steel (550+ BHN) and spaces, it is contained in a container that when hit the explosion deforms the heat jet. 

It can actually have resistance against APFSDS depending on amgles. 


Minimum protection ratings for a single layer:

● 30mm vs KEP 
● 300mm vs CE 


Kontakt-5 

Kontakt-5 uses 4S22 explosive filling, combined with spacings and layers separated by BTK-1SH strength steel (550+ BHN), that react to KEPs and that pushes two blast plates in operation directions which is very effective against modern KEPs (APFSDS) and tandem HEAT. 

Kontakt-5 hull for T-80U

HULL 
SPACE 
FLYER PLATE
ERA
ERA 
FLYER PLATE

SPACE
FLYER PLATE
ERA 
ERA
FLYER PLATE

Or possibly 

HULL 
ERA
FLYER PLATE
ERA
ERA 
FLYER PLATE

SPACE
FLYER PLATE
ERA 
ERA
FLYER PLATE

T-90/T-72B Kontakt-5 

HULL
SPACE
ERA
ERA
FLYER PLATE

It's possible T90/T72 uses same hull as T80U but can't verify. It's also possible T80U has ERA layers inside Hull making 5 layers of ERA or 3 separate layers. 

Minimum protection ratings for a single layer:

● 200mm vs KEP 
● 500mm vs CE 

Turret ERA 

Bare hull (likely has gaps for flyer plate or possibly has extra layer of ERA) 

Final flyer plate on hull 

2nd layer of Hull ERA being added to 1st

Additional ERA package on top 

T-90 and T-72 use modular systems 

Layers 

Roof 

Turret

T80U hull extra 

T80U side 


Relikt

Relikt uses 4S23 explosive fillings and is fully integrated with composite materials and uses specific construction methods to reduce effectiveness of hardened KEPs by shearing the rods after explosion thanks to plates blasting at once at either end and different times, similar to Nozh but more effective, aswell as much thinner but more potent explosive element with multiple layers that can more effectively defeat tandem HEAT. 

UFP and turret with relikt can stop any modern APFSDS and tandem HEAT. 

Relikt hull and turret set up 

HULL
SPACE
FLYER PLATE
ERA
ERA 
FLYER PLATE

SPACE 
FLYER PLATE 
ERA 
ERA 
FLYER PLATE

Minimum protection ratings for a single layer:

● 300mm vs KEP 
● 600mm vs CE 

Dual layer on Hull 

Twin layers on turret 

Monolith 

Monolith is again like Relikt and fully integrated into the hull and can take multiple hits. 



Another thing people don't realise is that it's composite armour underneath the ERA not RHA. 

Turret cheeks 

Hull 

Composite armour layer
White = RHA
Black = RHA add ons 
Grey = Multiple layers of composite armour 


Old 60-5-3-18-3-5-60-10-50 type composite armour ring on T-90 

New Malachite type composite armour on T-90A onwards that doubles in effectiveness 


T-90M with improved Malachite that's integrated with relikt 






"The T-72B3 is just a T-72B with thermals" 

Delusion. 

T-72B 

● 1A40-1 digitised FCS with semi automatic digital target lead 
● UVBU digital ballistic computer 
● R-173-16 digital radio 
● TPD-K1M digitally assisted telescopic day sight 
● 1K13-49 1++ Generation night vision for gunner 
● TKN-3M 1++ Generation night vision for commander
● 2A46M gun with thermal sleeve 
● 3BM42 Full tungsten APFSDS 
● 3BM32 full DU APFSDS 
● 3UBK14 GLATGM 
● 60-15-15-15-50 composite armour 
● Kontakt-1 1st Generation ERA 
● GO-27 electronic CBRN protection 
● 3ETs11-2 automatic fire suppression system 



T-72B3 

● 1A40-4 fully computerised FCS 
● 32x bit digital ballistic computer 
● PNM-U multi-channel GPS with 2nd generation thermals 
● TKN-3MK 2++ Generation night vision for commanders 
● PK-72 full Commander's Override system 
● 2A46M-2 gun with digital elevation and gyroscopic sensors with MRS
● 3BM48 full DU APFSDS 
● 3UBK20 GLATGM 
● R-168-25UE-2 fully digital comms and R-168-PU2 MFD with AVSK-2U C2 system 
● PKUZ-1A digital CBRN protection 
● 3ETs13-1 digital explosion suppression system 
● 60-10-10-20-20-50 composite armour 
● Kontakt-5 2nd Generation ERA 


It's literally an entirely new tank. Literally the difference between an M1A1 Abrams and M1A1FEP or M1A1AIM


"MiG-25 can't go mach 3" 


Just lies. 

In Book of Practical Aerodynamics of the MiG-25RB we can see the flight model with a speed of mach 1 to 1.2 at 5 to 10 km altitude and mach 3 .2 at 20 km altitude and mach 3 at 25 km altitude 


"A 20-ton aircraft that carries 20 tons of fuel, flies in the stratosphere, cruises at Mach 2.5 in minimum afterburner and exceeds Mach 3.0 with ease when required, what can one say ? It was an awesome aeroplane. The fact that the ventral fuel tank was one MiG-23 (equivalent in fuel) under the belly, speaks for itself"

Interview with indian pilot flying MiG-25


Great sources below showing how 

the world's fastest manned combat aircraft MIG-25

*The record was set by Nikolay Stogov on a MiG-25, 66 km/m, or 3960 km/h. in Israeli airspace*

*1. The incident did not occur during testing, but during the war*
*2. The plane is made not only of steel, but also of titanium*
*3. The skin really did heat up to 400 degrees, so even the paint with identification marks burned off*
*4. The cabin sealant began to melt, I don’t deny it, and then they opened it with crowbars*
*5. The pilots, and there were two of them, as well as the planes, both exceeded the speed threshold of 3600 km/h, for which they received an official reprimand from the command for exceeding the speed barrier of 3 Mach*

*During the MiG-25 tests, the leading pilots in our design bureau were Vadim Petrov, Alexander Bezhevets, Norik Kazaryan, Nikolay Stogov, Igor Lesnikov. Personally, I made few flights - only ten. Our pilots Stogov and Bezhevets flew to Egypt. Stogov made the first flight over Israel at an altitude of 22,000 meters.*

We also see MiG-25RB bare had a max speed of 3.3 to 3.5 





*The fastest combat jet is the Russian Mikoyan MiG-25 fighter (NATO code name `Foxbat'). The reconnaissance `Foxbat-B' has been tracked by radar at about Mach 3.2 (3,395 km/h 2,110 mph). The single-seat `Foxbat-A' has a wing span of 13.95 m 45 ft 9 in, is 23.82 m 78 ft 2 in long and has an estimated maximum take-off weight of 37.4 tonnes 82,500 lb*


Tests on bare airframe at high altitude 

'*The Stogov-Borshchev pair also had accidents.Retired Colonel Nikolai Borshchev says:– During the flight, we were allowed to go on air only in emergency cases. To do this, we had to say a single word – “thirteen”. After that, we stopped the mission and went to the main or alternate airfields. Once Nikolay Stogov and I landed in Beni Suef, where our MiG-21s were based. By the way, Kolya and I flew two combat reconnaissance sorties and landed at this airfield both times. And then, after refueling, we flew to Cairo West at low altitude. So, when N. Stogov landed, he couldn't open his canopy for a long time*

*Later he told me that during the flight the speed instrument showed M=2.83 as it should be, and Nikolai was “flying” at this limit. Then he looks – there is smoke in the cabin.And it was over Sinai. I immediately thought: "Oh, I'll have to jump far!" But as the test pilot figured out - the sealant was burning. He brought the machine to the airfield. Technicians had to literally pick at its canopy to free the "prisoner". When specialists on the ground analyzed this incident, they came to the conclusion that the plane's speed was more than 3 thousand km per hour - M = 3.6! Otherwise, the canopy would not have welded.*  

Ground radars tracking speed can be wrong so 3.6 is clearly not reality but definitely well over mach 3 


Other sources state up to mach 3 was only possible 



"It destroys engines" 
 

The only sources that bring up irreplaceable engine damage are not Russian. MiG-25 could easily reach mach 3+ with full ELINIT or SIGNIT load (pods/weapons) Aircraft can fly much faster without such loads so the speeds you see (m 3.4 and 5) are just possible speeds at altitudes between 10 and 25 km (above ~25 the reduced air begins to seriously effect engine performance) 

"It damaged the airframe" 

There's no evidence of fuselage damage in any russian sources, infact the only source for the engine damage claim comes from the official manual states that the Airframe is limited to 2.83 mach to prevent damage, the problem is what constitutes "damage". From what ive gathered it just drastically reduces the engines lifespan, there is nothing in any manual that states the engine is done after mach 3. 

There's also basic logic, the MiG-25 was designed to intercept high altitude mach 3+ aircraft, this is like saying 

"The F-15 is designed as an incredibly agile fighter yet risks complete failure if its G load exceeds 5g at any speed and cant turn faster than 15 deg/s" 

That makes no sense whatsoever. 

So 

● We have pilots on record saying it flew at mach 3 
● It was designed to catch mach 3+ Aircraft 

We also the fact that the R-15B-300 engines were designed with specific compressors, inlets and exhausts to facilitate very fast high altitude speeds (similar methods were used in SR71 and XB70 due to high speed and temperature) 

The whole "It's limited to 2.8 for safety" it seems comes from the initial 1976 meeting, belenko talking shit 


Not only do they lie about its construction they make the bizarre claim that 

1. It never had ejection seats 
2. It could barely fly at mach 2.8 

So I think it's very funny that the origin of thus myth comes from cold War era propaganda lol 

Logic again.

The only REASON the Foxbat series were kept was because of high altitude reconnaissance aircraft like U-2 and SR-71, this guy has a great video explaining an SR-71 Intercept 


Conclusion? 

MiG-25P could fly at mach 3 for limited time at high altitude with some risk of engine damage reducing its lifespan and mach 3.2+ with no or reduced payload. 

We hear the nonsense on how Sr71s outran mig25s. Utterly nonsensical. 

How this happened irl

Irl in the late 60s and early 70s the SR-71 would be detected on radar, the URAGAN air defence network would take control, MiG-25s fully controlled by GCI operators thanks to the ARL-S Lazour-S/Vozdukh-1 system would guide MiG-25s to SR-71s getting close to the border, the pilot would take control and the mig25s would then escort them until they left. 

If the SR-71 attempted to enter the territory they would receive a warning that they would be shot down. 

Whilst this is going on there would be already be MiG-25s (or Su-15TMs if unavailable) flying to relive the escorting MiG-25s, if SR-71 was attempting to breach the airspace this MiG-25 would be controlled by the GCI system and using the URAGAN system a course would plotted for head on intercept 

Two things would now happen. 

1. The escorting MiG-25 would use the Smerch-A1 radar to lock the SR-71 (which can lock an SR-71 at around 40 to 50 km), it's radar would operate its high power to burn through any self protection jamming utilised by the SR-71 (blackbirds wouldn't receive countermeasures for this until late 70s), a final warning would be broadcast and if they still kept their course an R-40R and R-40T would be fired, these missiles have engagement ranges at high altitude of 40 to 50 km and max ranges of 70 to 90 km and travel at mach 4 to 5 at high altitude. 

2. The other Foxbats dispatched for head on intercept would begin the same sequence as the escorting one. 

So the SR-71 would have 4 Missiles flying towards at at 2 different directions. 

This never happened in real life. Because SR-71s would either in all cases 

1. Leave when they are told to 
2. Never cross the border when enemy aircraft was present 

Sometimes they would get lucky and manage to cross for a few minutes before escorts arrived to intercept but even then they would have always been cautious as they wouldn't want an S-200 Missile flying at mach 4 to take them out. 

Sources 




"russian tanks have too much recoil therefore stabiliser is bad"

Firstly, the recoil has nothing to do with the stabilisation system being bad in Russian tanks, it is the highest and turret that sways. Secondly the recoil only lasts 2-4 seconds meanwhile the fastest russian Autoloaders take 5-7 seconds to fire again so by time it's ready to fire it's back on target and stopped swaying. This is probably because it's only a 2× axis stabilisation combined with a powerful 125mm gun and having much lower weight than other MBTs and more crucially much smaller turrets.


This is also makes no sense as gun stabilisation in ALL modern tanks is in X axis  of elevation and Y axis of Azimuth, whereas recoil is facing on the Z axis. 


Example from a top down perspective 


             Z Force down 

             X

              |    < Tank gun 

              |

Y----------^------------

             ^> Turret 



The recoil is coming from the Z axis downwards, no modern tank has stabilisation in this axis. 


Russian tanks have been stabilised since post WW2 era


This has NO effect on accuracy because the gunners sight and rangefinder is independently stabilised from the gun and turret and doesn't move with the tank or gun, meanwhile gun laying isn't effected either because as said the gun is already stopped swaying by the time it's ready to fire and gun lead isn't effected because the sight doesn't move with the tank, the movement of the gun in 1A33, 1A33-4, 1A45, 1A45T and 1A40-4 fire control systems is also recorded in the ballistic computer so it's sway is automatically computed for when beginning to lead another target after firing. 



Videos of recoil, average is 1-2 seconds with most being 3-4 seconds before complete stop. 

https://youtu.be/-ubdBZ6ZT8s?si=fvXYMngRvdHcZ15M 

https://youtu.be/tj-a9dfflyc?si=NBeztLiw6yZqtQTP 

https://youtu.be/qL8y8lTjFSQ?si=C-Bzwgjsx5pJlMm- 

https://youtu.be/Cm08yR-tyLM?si=naIBGT3SkW_23hjV 

https://youtu.be/rVtWp0wkqEA?si=uXZ9gFr7P4iawbej 

https://youtube.com/shorts/soP_V3s5-jc?si=HqIJT_vuYLvWQVaM 

https://youtube.com/shorts/XC7BcOaeDEQ?si=is6Z_CzH5cyOnneH 

https://youtube.com/shorts/x6gM79_d5dg?si=g899ywtSS1JQDuSf 

https://youtube.com/shorts/TjjL4JS02wQ?si=7VoHEnFwZasIvtJI


Size difference 



I mean do I even need to explain the size difference. 

Western tanks swaying after shot 

Leopard 2 


Abrams 



Challenger 2 



M60


Leopard 1



This has nothing to do with gun stabilisation or accuracy and is the recoil of the gun on the hull. 


"Russia first Rangefinding Radar was copied" 

Let's see. 

SRD-1 development started in 1950. 

AN/APG-30 

Need I say more ? 

Completely different designs and it was the SRD-3 Grad that was the reverse engineered version. 


"Soviets first infrared homing missile was copied" 

Nope, the first IR missile was the R-8T made in 1958 that uses the TGS-1 spin scan PbS IR seeker. 



"Russia doesn't care about their crew because their tanks don't use blow out panels" 


Ah, a classic. Western countries care about their crews Russia doesn't. 


Utter nonsense. 


Firstly, Russia does care. Hence why the newest T-72B3, T-90A and T-80BVM all have the latest fully digital fire suppression systems with anti deflagration systems to reduce Cook off chances along with new PKUZ-1A fully digital CBRN protection and updated spall liners. 


As Well as the fact that Russia's new T-14 MBT has an Unmanned turret with blow out panels. 


It's also nonsense because the only western or similar tanks that have full secure ammo storage with blow out panels are the M1 Abrams and Leclerc. Type 90, Merkava, Leopard 2, Ariete, Challenger 1 and Challenger 2 all carry most or all their ammunition in the hull with most recent production Leopard 2s still not using full secure ammo storage. 


Let's go over it. 


Secure ammo storage 

M1 Abrams / produced 

Leclerc / produced 

Challenger 3 / Prototype 

Type 10 / produced 

Type 15 / produced 

K1 / produced

K2 / produced 

Arjurn / produced 

T-95 / Prototype 

T-80 Burlack / Prototype 


Unmanned turret 

KF-41 / Prototype 

EMBT / Prototype 

T-14 Armata / produced 

K3 / concept

Object 490 / Prototype 

M1A3 Abrams / concept 

Leopard 3 / concept


Blow out panels aren't alien to Russia either. In the 1980s Object 490 had an armoured capsule with blow out panels but was cancelled due to costs and the collapse of the USSR, then there was the T-95 in 90s then in 2000s Russia created the T-80 Burlack which stored all ammo in secure storage at turret bustle but yet again was cancelled because of costs. 


Here are the two AZ and MZ type autoloaders. 



It's also nonsense as from T-72B onwards, they have the new AZ-184 autoloaders that have a BTK-1Sh steel thermal insulted spall lined compartments for propellants (450-550+ BHN strength) that reduce chances of catastrophic detonation due to individual compartments whilst T-90 versions and T-72B3 models are further protected thanks to the 3ETs13 digital explosion suppression system with anti deflagration systems. 


Below on AZ-184


Older ones 




What happens when old autoloader was hit 

Actually believe it or not most catastrophic detonations are caused by the detonations of Hull ammo stowed away as in pre 2000s models there was no anti deflagration cannisters in those areas. 



"Your MiG-35 is just a MiG-29M2 with a new name" 

That's like calling the F-15EX just a strike Eagle with a new name. 

It has 

New OEPrNK-35 FCS 
New IUS-29 sensor fusion 
New IVS-35 navigation system 
New BINS-SP2 navigation computer  
New RSBN-85VM radio navigation system 
New GLONASS-K GNSS
New BagrOS-4000 RTOS 
New Baget-53-31M FMC 
New SOLO-35 FCC 
New L-150NU-35 RHAWS 
New L-203 Gardenia-2 EW System 
New MFI-25Sh cockpit 
New S-107-1 communication system
New R-999 radios 
New OSNOD data link 
New R-77M weapon systems  
New FGA-29 Zhuk-A AESA radar 
New SOZhE fire countermeasure and life support system 


M2 model used 

OEPrVK data fusion 
BTsVM-900 FMC 
RelMK32 RTOS 
Baget-55-04 FCC 
L-150NU-29/SPO-32M RHAWS 
Sigma-95N navigation computer 
Zhuk-M2 pulse doppler radar 
KS-418 Kedr EW System 
A-737 GLONASS-M GNSS 
S-103 communication system 
TKS-2M data link 
R-098 series radios 

“reverse speed ruins your T-80, T-90s and T-72s”


No. 


  1. If in an urban environment then it's not going to take long to get behind cover 


  1. If in an open environment then you can just move forward 


  1. Tank vs tank is not really a thing anymore, they're used mainly to support Infantry, fight light armour and assault fortified positions. 


If there is enemy armour ahead usually the first call is for CAS or to deploy anti tank teams such as ATGM operators or loitering munition operators. APFSDS and GLATGMs by tank are for self defence and last ditch. 


Hence why in modern war like in Ukraine that has mass use of tanks by both sides, tank vs tank is quite rare. 


“Why has it been improved on new Russian tanks ?” 


T-72B3M and T-90M received completely new engines and digitally assisted transmissions yet reverse speed wasn't changed. Likewise for the T-80BVM2 that received a new engine, no new better reverse speed despite fake claims. 


T-14 has a better reverse speed bit probably because it was a completely new design again it's irrelevant in real warfare. 


Real life isn't war thunder.


“BMPT gun wobbles so that means 2A42 is bad” 


Wobble is actually common its just the recoil of the gun, This has nothing to do with stabilisation, stabilisation is to keep the gun level and on target when moving. This is a similar misconception as T series recoil. 


M242 Bushmaster on IFVs is only rated for an accurate max fire rate of 200 rpm with a MAX  rate at 500 rpm, but at those RPMs the wobble of the gun will greatly effect dispersion and reduce MRADs. The 2A42 has an accurate fire rate of 300 rpm and max fire rate of 800> rpm. 


2A42

https://youtu.be/u5RjMzcQnno?si=z7xk-c9Vzijuc6U1

https://youtube.com/shorts/U9MF5fQqb6M?si=R3ooWhSSIQXe1nek

https://youtu.be/-7Y0Uap_7as?si=fM3XzcH4v9YN--mf


Wobbles right ? 


Let's see M242 

https://youtu.be/rW6L_LoPe70?si=8eFiS465c38oeR2U

https://youtu.be/rF8KGKt8R5Y?si=P7UovEn2ZjAZp5Nt


Doesn't wobble. 


Well that's because the fire rate of M242 is 200 with average of 120 rpm whilst 2A42 averages on 550 rpm. 


2A42/72 slow firing 

https://youtube.com/shorts/Vr66URPqIJk?si=amoehKduXV8Fl60e

https://youtu.be/cdXcXYgjID8?si=CiI1VdEJ65HaoBeC

https://youtu.be/y6VoxvgIg1g?si=CBgwsL7V0rO19otO


The BMPT is made for urban warfare at close range where dispersion is minimal . 


This one is yet again popular with western propaganda. 

https://share.google/y90v5AADqBjiVyfzf 

https://share.google/LM9tQlR4xgAjh4TEu 

https://funker530.com/video/bmpt-terminator-and-bradley-gun-comparison 

https://defence-blog.com/new-promo-of-russian-terminator-confirms-shaky-cannons/ 


2A42/2A72 is absolutely stabilised as seen in many videos showing it still whist moving. 


BMP-3  

https://youtu.be/651ln_PDWdI?si=HvH5qBnZq6P1d6Ki

https://youtu.be/9Bkcxl2JZZc?si=h3rky8MVunQ2VHTq


BMP-2 

https://youtube.com/shorts/Vr66URPqIJk?si=f4j-G2q4Qk407f23

https://youtu.be/txAYJFpozb0?si=2bvKr0QB9qFGG1NW

https://youtu.be/ljE7Tl-pROI?si=EocTn-jAQhzTIabP


BMP-2M Berezhok 

https://youtu.be/YYU5rdPVcQw?si=gTCi4eLmHJXbgNMq

https://youtube.com/shorts/0KSOryBYLwE?si=jTh6KkmmAwlRkE86

https://youtu.be/4I5d0lyNIwQ?si=w28bvOrFWLQCLt7_

https://youtube.com/shorts/8vyU86D3Lrg?si=FbPCbB68Q_BK0LJm


BMD-4

https://youtu.be/9UJQac3nzPU?si=_wMj1NzOBtJN6nhb

https://youtu.be/1aAG3xxddis?si=INHwnopq4dhrV3ZC


BMD-2

https://youtube.com/shorts/aYhH0xNjeFg?si=75hO7BYvaafc-eHY


2A42 fully still when firing on at 300rpm

https://youtu.be/ZiInqvYe6OA?si=H9rbOEfrXjYTwaSr


High fire rates (800rpm)

https://youtube.com/shorts/z0nCpDAoPZs?si=lp8-lWWDWN-7Jy8v

https://youtube.com/shorts/IpgqGFfWo-c?feature=shared

https://youtu.be/-7Y0Uap_7as?si=KFtXvya1u4cbHRje


This is about high fire rates. All guns will wobble at such high rpms. 


Wesisel

https://youtube.com/shorts/iIRZvz0tDPI?si=8GCNcapJ7EEqgdjI


MARDER 

https://youtu.be/lEp4BJjJHrs?si=YjMeSSTjxiaovwVC


Gepard 

https://youtu.be/UtmpGA137hc?si=Blb8l-CNFrc9fPUS

https://youtube.com/shorts/UV8PhTGqEfU?si=56-MlSPOUi2XZ-H8

https://youtu.be/9kvdhth6mSo?si=jPdxRPmhdmfUfS_q

https://youtube.com/shorts/N8B-SZpXoWk?si=X4CBeMnMWlVTViHt


K30 Biho 

https://youtube.com/shorts/EBnibNdYke0?si=8d3D5q1a4FCK-BSn


Marksman 

https://youtu.be/MBUmFq7RLPY?si=VFn293rmhwjMn5TL


Type 87 spaa

https://youtu.be/YWbN_-96b7g?si=JcO7gMgtxmIlYjim

https://youtube.com/shorts/31NzNVJkT0Q?si=-IaEt9MmZsn_Ossw

https://youtube.com/shorts/5-C4ztqJHkM?si=wLRS0eqDGnxpiAZ4


Type 87 rcv 

https://youtu.be/_txHnuDmfKw?si=FbwRc5cT6XMfU-Bk


Ka-52 and Mi-24P 

https://youtu.be/ANPmLohXpNE?si=mMGhSZAiecBSrtH4


Apache 

https://youtube.com/shorts/cu-FOu1ATzk?si=3BdVYIlm4qFxBxmY 

https://youtube.com/shorts/9wuTzNPZkmg?si=zBx9RkqYLM_T6nik


The actual wobble is due to the recoil system mainly being a short stroke with muzzle break. 


See 2A72 with long stroke recoil and no wobble

https://youtube.com/shorts/SS2l9iYXxnU?si=3nbGCziOhj0IQFYu

https://youtube.com/shorts/uQku4bgiNX0?si=FN6DXb5wW175VT58

https://youtu.be/5xsJgtElDGw?si=238XsXnXFG2fzGI1


The wobble has absolutely nothing to do with stability and is just common to high rpm guns that dont have thicker mounts or long stroke recoil. 



“russisn tanks pop after one hit”


This is just a goofy myth, there are literally numerous videos of Russian tanks getting hit and not popping and not to mention that the T-90M has a secure ammo storage for propellants similar to the Leopard 2 and the T-14 has full ammo storage with blow out panels like Leclerc or Abrams.


Russian Tanks not Exploding after hit

https://youtube.com/shorts/emIPk-yXYRY?si=aFOHat7LviB4iAS 

https://youtube.com/shorts/xvbr8etmSzk?si=J_K9HvxDIWBmLNHG 

https://youtube.com/shorts/pycGCHXwV_Q?si=ueRDUn4vopfOaIUM 

https://youtube.com/shorts/Orl_GyQFSvY?si=DkHEqA6HMfcMJeFh 

https://youtube.com/shorts/aluO79HFnbE?si=SKetfOvasnn-mdhl 

https://youtube.com/shorts/m7BWoIjc7p8?si=1NJsN60_QGGMSe6H 

https://youtube.com/shorts/nMYX5Xu6O5E?si=35ElCFW3-w9SLzZU 

https://youtube.com/shorts/UryiuwzTxUg?si=5PzEPO-M7FFf9LU8 

https://youtube.com/shorts/u9gvgT_OlI4?si=sOJOPfTCK2FZQWzj 

https://youtube.com/shorts/p6AZoxE2RQQ?si=vd-NYgAj0P55yhFv 

https://youtube.com/shorts/m7BWoIjc7p8?si=p1j-TqkbAj4Fxd8A 


“Yeah well western tanks don't ever pop after one hit”


Lol no. 

https://youtu.be/YafzmkvVRiI?si=zTxLgpHf2H73jiOO 

https://youtube.com/shorts/2amucbyNxd4?si=G_7zpEj1jIj_C1UB 

https://youtu.be/dDWaoegoDnM?si=ychaq7jD-wobXA0U 

https://youtu.be/k2gUJbfO1K0?si=42Q6UJu7EbOh2uos 

https://youtu.be/JyX4uRjCkfM?si=z_Rv5_h1OljPnmB4 


"Western tank turrets don't pop" 




In the end this is modern warfare, you cannot say that “US would do better using the same amount of equipment as Russia in Ukraine”  because 


  1. They have never fought a modern war since the 50s and not even half modern since the early 70s. So you have no comparison to make.


  1. The last two times they fought at near peer level (based on equipment used in those wars) the first time they got forced to a draw and the second time they lost.


Again our essay Myth of American Military Might comprehensively debunks this idea of the US military being this unbeatable military juggernaut.


It's disproved by basic logic as well. What needs to happen for a catastrophic detonation to happen ? 3 things. 


  1. The round needs to pen the tank. So it needs to get past the armour and APS. 


  1. It needs to hit the Ammo propellants. So it needs to hit the lower half of the tank 


  1. It needs to ignite the Ammo propellants and cause a chain reaction. 


Tangent here but there is a common myth that Russian tanks pop because of the autoloader. 

It has nothing to do with the autoloader. 


Tank pops happen because all propellants ignite at once, this can happen to ANY tank. Turret pops happen when ammunition is stored inside the hull. (So can happen to Challenger series, Leopard 2, Merkava, Aerite etc) whilst IED explosions can cause Abrams to pop turret, even tanks that have blow out panels like T-14 could pop turret because the ammunition is under the turret. 


It also is disproven with numbers, up to the end of 2024 open source sites counted around ~900 to ~1300 russian tanker deaths, based on averages from war gonzo, VE, Oryx, Lost Armour and War Spotting Russia had lost a low of ~3k tanks to a high of ~9k in that time frame. Russian tanks use 3 crew (again being nice as they used T-62s at this point but trying to be fair) so that's only 300 to 433 tanks that had catastrophic detonations or were damaged enough that killed the whole crew as each tank only has 3 crew members. 


Using the 3000 destroyed number. 


10-14% of tanks hit had catastrophic detonations 


Using the 9k destroyed number 


4-6% of tanks hit had a catastrophic detonation 


Remember this is assuming a perfect ratio, in reality different tank crewmen would have been killed at different times so the number will be much lower. 


Even if you double the tanker deaths it is still only 20-28% and 8-12%. Either way you can see how the argument that Russian tanks explode after one hit has absolutely no validity in both statistics or reasoning. 


Data from war spotting 



The downwards trend will be the fact that early on russia used up a lot of old equipment. 

Blow out panels aren't magic either. If the Ammo detonates all at once then the tank is going to pop as shown in Turkey when a Leopard 2A4 absolutely flew apart after getting hit with a single Konkurs ATGM. It's a simple proportion. In the Ukraine War around ~97% of the tanks fighting were Soviet or Russian, which is why there's only a few dozen Stridsvagn 122, Challenger 2, Leopard 1, Leopard 2 or Abrams that look like or have had catastrophic detonations that killed the whole crew. (Turret blown off or big hole in the back) but still there are numerous such western tanks that have had turrets blown off in various conflicts from the Iraq war, Syria war and Ukraine war. 


Blow out panels can help in cook off but a CE will either blow the turret off or blow a hole in the side off and either way the crew is not surviving the huge overpressure wave that will hit them. 


Cook off in Russia tank (with many crew of Russian tanks surviving) 

https://youtube.com/shorts/y1rl53e-AL4?si=AL6ijR7BD15T7YmP 

https://youtu.be/L35RzZhoZzQ?si=S7eQVfvqB1wSoQDd 

https://youtu.be/xmhG6P02k-w?si=HKFzwW74ujk9TeU3 

https://youtube.com/shorts/ocBIzFSIch0?si=CbKD3vj0KYdQItfG 

https://youtube.com/shorts/exdIKbolx1w?si=hzZpaqmcSQEFQPrH 

https://youtube.com/shorts/Epoqb_ChlzY?si=eHZp3xXh_4pM0fiz


People need to learn differences  between cook offs and catastrophic detonations 


Normal cook offs 

https://youtu.be/9OU7x951-qE?si=0vCwBPXAPOkWqd5S 

https://youtu.be/pIhSDNl2Cms?si=LODzZ_6k_LtDFwt7 


Catastrophic detonations of T-72 and Leopard 2

https://youtu.be/oX7e9pzlLP4?si=8MbwPwM3KH86CIue 

https://youtu.be/YafzmkvVRiI?si=ehfSWT-a3n9bAm3_ 


Abrams with hulls or turrets blown open likely due to CE 


“Those were all IEDs” 


Wrong. Here is IED explosions 



Lets go over some counter arguments. 


"The Abrams and Leclerc can't pop because of blow out panels" 


A great example is a pressure cooker. Theres an escape valve that has a tolerance and can divert pressure. But if you seal it and kept rapidly increasing the temperature it will pop from all sides. This is proven even in things like boilers that can blow up after their escape valve malfunctions, you'd think "that valve is the thinnest part so will just divert" no. Because the valve and the structure of the boiler is not designed to withstand such explosions. 


The pressure safety valve isn't big enough and the container isn't strong enough to control such forces. 


Exactly the same as secure ammo storage on a tank. It's literally physics. The tiny size of the blow out panel is not large and the ammo storage casing is not strong enough to contain it. 


Literally look at the two videos CDs I showed previously. The Leopard 2 and T-72 one uses conventional propellants the other uses a model similar to the Abrams and you've got to remember aswell those massive explosions are likely only coming from the ~20 rounds kept in the hull whilst Abrams keeps all 40 rounds in a tiny compartment, look at how volatile those explosions are, look how they SHRED the tank apart, the tanks are nigh vaporised, You don't honestly believe that a tiny blow out panel and a sheet of metal for casing is strong enough to contain THAT. 


So apparently we have an explosion so violent that it rips over 20 to 40 tonnes of steel apart (turret and top hull) and this is going to be diverted by a tiny hole and a tonne steel casing. 


Yeah, no. 


"It will fail to gain pressure due to escape hatch"


The thing that doesn't make sense with this argument is "the pressure will escape through the weakest path" yes absolutely correct. In cook offs not catastrophic detonations. We see this with any tank. A T-72 for example during cook off will have flames coming out of all crew hatches. 


Yet according to this argument, during a catastrophic detonation the explosive gasses should just go through the multiple crew hatches and not pop the tank. 


But it doesn't. And there is numerous videos showing that it doesn't. The tanks just blow apart. There's videos of such tanks popping even after a crew member have just escaped. 


"Western propellants use less volatile materials so can't pop" 


Now it's true from what I've researched is that NATO uses less volatile materials (but i also think modern Russian, Chinese, Turkish, Israeli etc do the same) yeah that's true. But again problem. Two fold. 


1. There is nothing that would indicate IT CANT pop all at once. Just that its less volatile so better resistant to cook off by heated spalling or KEP fragments. 


2. There's videos and photos of Leopard 2s, Challenger 2s and Abrams that look like or 100% have had catastrophic detonations 


https://youtu.be/YafzmkvVRiI?si=hGOiiaiZoNxR0TMK

https://youtu.be/GnYcTWuhSEA?si=nGM0Ra_gW9ghn4Xf 


There's a reason why every video showing a blow out vent working is a cook off. Not a single pop all at once. The cases in middle east where it looks like a single pop (in the images i showed) you can see the entire back end of the turret has blown apart.

This is the pop and the overpressure will kill or seriously maim the crew, this is why there has been lots of crew deaths and injuries in Abrams used by Saudi Arabia, Ukraine and Iraq who have lost hundreds. 


CDs are random. They require the perfect circumstances. Most explosions are just cook offs. Blow our panels are good aswell because they can give crew time to escape, catastrophic detonations can happen during cook off as well. 


In my view the most common cause for a CD is a HEAT jet or heated spall or KEP fragments that ignites several propellants at once then they ignite each other and in an instant the tank is gone or in rarer cases this can happen during a cook off. 


Most commonly you will just see just a burst of flames then a pause then a cook off. 


“Javelins one hit any Russian tank” 


Lol no 

https://youtu.be/qzg7CO_kWGg?si=Ny2oCey_sOqTLXXm 

https://youtu.be/B-o1AHESCow?si=_ooe15Z-dVCirAEn

https://youtube.com/shorts/HKPKYB80rRk?si=PjPUbos0FKF7yGuK 

https://youtube.com/shorts/pycGCHXwV_Q?si=Mm8XY648MDCfpEVC 


"Russian tanks have bad armour" 


Rubbish 

https://youtu.be/Zeu0GqN4G5k?si=9bRQetmc3ge8ZK5q 

https://youtu.be/7_QS-9OnKCA?si=brifJL9GKm5rXjAV 

https://youtube.com/shorts/LM14dY3alwc?si=rhuIhkadJmE9u7mo 

https://youtu.be/9UnoF86n7UM?si=g9OKmI3HuJtWcmFS 

https://youtube.com/shorts/w0M_IctNPNE?si=fNrcFgw5jHeN0Rki 

https://youtube.com/shorts/nMYX5Xu6O5E?si=wQFB7fa9q7LNQS9i 

https://youtube.com/shorts/m7BWoIjc7p8?si=qzRZG4CJqRt_nfhw 


“Russia never had any innovation with military technology”


Let's compare Russia first with American firsts for popular military equipment. (Domestic creation or domestically upgraded no direct or reverse engineered)


Military Innovations


Russia


Fighter Jets 

Biplane Fighter Aircraft S-16 / 1916

Metal Mono Fighter Aircraft I-16 / 1934

1st Generation Fighter MiG-9 / 1946

2nd Generation Fighter MiG-19 / 1951

3rd Generation Fighter MiG-25 / 1964

4th Generation Fighter MiG-31 / 1975

4+ Generation Fighter MiG-31M / 1985

5th Generation Fighter Su-57 / 2010


Helicopters 

1st Generation Helicopter Mi-1 / 1950

2nd Generation Helicopter Mi-8 / 1964

3rd Generation Helicopter Mi-17 / 1975

4th Generation Helicopter Ansat / 1999


Tanks

1st Generation Tank T-54 / 1946

2nd Generation Tank T-64 / 1960

3rd Generation Tank T-64B / 1973

3+ Generation Tank T-95 / 1995

3.5 Generation Tank T-90AM / 2006

4th Generation Tank T-14 / 2014


IFVs 

1st Generation IFV BMP-1 / 1963

2nd Generation IFV BMP-2 / 1972

3rd Generation IFV BMP-3 / 1981

4th Generation IFV BMP-1M / 1996

5th Generation IFV Kurganets-25 / 2015


SPAGs 

Generation 0 SPAG SU-12 / 1918

1st Generation SPAG 2A3 / 1955

2nd Generation SPAG 2S1 / 1970

3rd Generation SPAG 2S19 / 1983

4th Generation SPAG 2S19M2 / 2009

5th Generation SPAG 2S35 / 2015


Towed Guns

1st Generation Artillery M1902 / 1902

2nd Generation Artillery 2A18 / 1960

3rd Generation Artillery 2A29R / 1981


Towed AA Guns 

2nd Generation AA M1931-76 / 1931

3rd Generation AA KS-19 / 1948

4th Generation AA RPK-1 S-60 / 1975

5th Generation AA ZU-23M / 2010


SPAAGs 

Generation 0 SPAAG 4MQ / 1931

1st Generation SPAAG ZSU-37 / 1942

2nd Generation SPAAG ZSU-37-2 / 1957

3rd Generation SPAAG Tunguska / 1976

4th Generation SPAAG Pantsir-S / 1994

5th Generation SPAAG 2S38 / 2017


MLRS 

1st Generation MLRS BM-8 / 1939

2nd Generation MLRS BM-21 / 1963

3rd Generation MLRS BM-30 / 1983

4th Generation MLRS BM-21-2B17 / 2003


Area Defence 

1st Generation SAM R‐101 / 1948

2nd Generation SAM S-125 / 1959

3rd Generation SAM S-300 / 1973

4th Generation SAM S-400 / 2004

5th Generation SAM S-500 / 2019


Point Defence 

1st Generation VSHORAD 9K30 / 1963

2nd Generation VSHORAD 9K33 / 1965

3rd Generation VSHORAD 2K22 / 1976

4th Generation VSHORAD Strela-10M4  / 1987


Manpads 

1st Generation Manpad Strela-2 / 1965

2nd Generation Manpad Strela-3 / 1972

3rd Generation Manpad Igla / 1981

4th Generation Manpad Verba / 2009


Manpats 

1st Generation Manpats RPG-1 / 1944

2nd Generation Manpats RPG-7 / 1959

3rd Generation Manpats RPG-29M / 2003


Infrared missiles 

1st Generation IR Missile R-8T / 1958

2nd Generation IR Missile R-98T / 1965

3rd Generation IR Missile R-23T / 1972

4th Generation IR Missile R-27T / 1979

5th Generation IR Missile R-74M2 / 2018


Radar Missiles 

1st Generation Radar Missile RS-1U / 1952

2nd Generation Radar Missile Type 277 / 1957

3rd Generation Radar Missile R-40R / 1968

4th Generation Radar Missiles R-77 / 1984

5th Generation Radar Missile R-77M / 2018


ATGMs 

1st Generation ATGM Shmel / 1958

2nd Generation ATGM Fagot / 1967

3rd Generation ATGM Bastion / 1979

4th Generation ATGM Konkurs-R / 1986

5th Generation ATGM LMUR / 2015


ICBMs 

1st Generation ICBM R-7 / 1957

2nd Generation ICBM R-16 / 1961

3rd Generation ICBM R-36M / 1975

4th Generation ICBM RT-2PM / 1985

5th Generation ICBM RS-24 / 2007


Tactical Ballistic Missiles 

1st Generation BMs R-2 / 1951

2nd Generation BMs R-17 / 1961

3rd Generation BMs Kh-15 / 1974

4th Generation BMs 9M723 / 1996

5th Generation BMs Kh-47M2 / 2017


Cruise Missiles 

2nd Generation CM KS-1 / 1953

3rd Generation CM P-500 / 1968

4th Generation CM Kh-90 / 1990

5th Generation CM Zircon / 2017


Image Intensifiers (true)

0 Generation NV Gamma-VEI / 1941

1st Generation NV TPN-1 / 1957

2nd Generation NV 1PN44 / 1978

3rd Generation NV TKN-4G / 1990

4th Generation NV 1PN138 / 2012


Fly By Wire Systems

Analogue Su-7-100LDU / 1967

Digital Tu-160 / 1981

Fully digital Su-37 / 1996


Tank Ballistic Computer 

Mechanical 1V1S / 1956

Digital 1V59 / 1973

8x bit digital 1V517 / 1975

16x bit digital 1V528 / 1983

32x bit digital 1V558 / 1988

64x bit digital Kalina / 2006


Infrared Imaging 

Low Light level television IVP-2 / 1968

1st Generation IRLS Photon-4 / 1966

2nd Generation IRLS Zima-8R / 1979

1st Generation FLIR Agava / 1982

2nd Generation FLIR Progress-2 / 1986

3rd Generation FLIR Nocturne / 2000


IRST

0 Generation IRST SIV-52 / 1958

1st Generation IRST TP-23 / 1970

2nd Generation IRST OLS-K / 1979

3rd Generation IRST OLS-35 / 2008


Fighter Radar 

Rangefinding Radar SRD-1 / 1950

1st Generation Radar Gneiss-2 / 1942

2nd Generation Radar Smerch / 1962

3rd Generation Radar Zaslon / 1973

4th Generation Radar Bars / 1985

5th Generation Radar Zhuk-AE / 2006


Attack Aircraft 

Generation 0 Attack Aircraft Il-2 / 1940

1st Generation Attack Aircraft Il-28 / 1948

2nd Generation Attack Aircraft Mi-1MU / 1961

3rd Generation Attack Aircraft Su-24 / 1970

4th Generation Attack Aircraft Mi-28N / 1995

5th Generation Attack Aircraft Su-25SM3 / 2011


Strategic Bombers 

1st Generation Strategic Bombers Pe-8 / 1936

2nd Generation Strategic Bombers Tu-16 / 1952

3rd Generation Strat Bombers Tu-95MS / 1981 

4th Generation Strat Bombers Tu-95MSM / 2016


Supersonic Bombers 

1st Generation Supersonic Bombers Tu-98 / 1956

2nd Generation Supersonic Bombers T-4 / 1972

3rd Generation Supersonic Bombers Tu-22M3M / 2016


CIWS 

1st Generation CIWS AK-230 / 1956

2nd Generation CIWS AK-630 / 1964

3rd Generation CIWS Kortik / 1987

4th Generation CIWS Palma-SU / 2010 


Naval Gun 

1st Generation Naval Gun AK-726 / 1958

2nd Generation Naval Gun AK-130 / 1977

3rd Generation Naval Gun A-190 / 1997


Torpedoes 

1st Generation Torpedoes Aleksandrovskiy / 1865

2nd Generation Torpedoes Type 53-27 / 1927

3rd Generation Torpedoes Type 53-65 / 1965

4th Generation Torpedoes USET-80 / 2005


ASW Weapons 

1st Generation ASW Weapons BMB-1 /1936

2nd Generation ASW Weapons RBU-6000 / 1960

3rd Generation ASW Weapons RPK-6 / 1981

4th Generation ASW Weapons RPK-9 / 2008


Mine Ships 

1st Generation Mine Ships Albatros / 1909

2nd Generation Mine Ships T58 / 1957

3rd Generation Mine Ships Natya / 1970

4th Generation Mine Ships Alexandrit / 2014


Aircraft Carriers 

2nd Generation Aircraft Carriers Moskva / 1965

3rd Generation Aircraft Carriers Kiev / 1972


Naval Vessel 

1st Generation Naval Vessel Sverdlov / 1950

2nd Generation Naval Vessel Kynda / 1961

3rd Generation Naval Vessel Kara / 1969

4th Generation Naval Vessel Buyan / 2005

5th Generation Naval Vessel Derzky / 2021


Submarines 

1st Generation Submarines Narval / 1914

2nd Generation Submarines S-class / 1936

3rd Generation Submarines November / 1959

4th Generation Submarines Delta / 1972

5th Generation Submarines Borei / 2008


Counter Batteries 

1st Generation Counter Batteries ARSOM / 1960

2nd Generation Counter Batteries Zoopark-1 / 1987

3rd Generation Counter Batteries Zoopark-1M / 2005


Mobile Radar 

1st Generation Mobile Radar P-3 / 1945

2nd Generation Mobile Radar P-12 / 1956

3rd Generation Mobile Radar P-18 / 1970

4th Generation Mobile Radar Nebo-SVU / 1999

5th Generation Mobile Radar Nebo-M / 2010


Naval Radar

1st Generation Naval Radar Redan-1 / 1945

2nd Generation Naval Radar Voskhod / 1967

3rd Generation Naval Radar Pitselov-M / 1998


AEW&C Aircraft 

2nd Generation AEW&C Aircraft Tu-126 / 1962

3rd Generation AEW&C Aircraft A-50U / 2008


Radar Warning Receiver 

1st Generation RWR PRS-1 / 1947

2nd Generation RWR SPO-10 / 1964

3rd Generation RWR SPO-15 / 1975

4th Generation RWR SPO-32 / 1984

5th Generation RWR SPO-150 / 2008


Infrared Countermeasures 

1st Generation IRCM UV-3A / 1975

2nd Generation IRCM Sukhogruz / 1980

3rd Generation IRCM Vitebsk / 2008


United States 


Fighter Jets 

Biplane Fighter Aircraft E-1 / 1917

Metal Mono Fighter Aircraft P-35 / 1937

1st Generation Fighter P-80 / 1945

2nd Generation Fighter F4D / 1951

3rd Generation Fighter F-4C / 1963

4th Generation Fighter F-14A / 1970

4+ Generation Fighter F-15E / 1986

5th Generation Fighter F-22 / 1997

6th Generation Fighter F-47 / 2025


Helicopters 

1st Generation Helicopter S-52 / 1950

2nd Generation Helicopter UH-1 / 1960

3rd Generation Helicopter S-70 / 1974

4th Generation Helicopter Bell 407 / 1996


Tanks

1st Generation Tank M48 / 1950

2nd Generation Tank MBT-70 / 1965

3rd Generation Tank M1 Abrams / 1976

3+ Generation Tank M1A2 CATTB / 1994

3.5 Generation Tank M1A2 SepV3 / 2015

4th Generation Tank Abrams X / 2022


IFVs 

2nd Generation IFV AIFV / 1974

3rd Generation IFV LAV-52A2 / 1995

4th Generation IFV M2A3 Bradley / 1998


SPAGs

Generation 0 SPAG T30 / 1940

1st Generation SPAG M7 / 1942

2nd Generation SPAG M109 / 1961

3rd Generation SPAG M109A6 / 1990

4th Generation SPAG M2001 / 1999

5th Generation SPAG M1299 / 2018 


SPAAGs 

Generation 0 SPAAG M1918 / 1918

1st Generation SPAAG M19 / 1944

2nd Generation SPAAG M163 / 1965

3rd Generation SPAAG M246 / 1980

4th Generation SPAAG Centurion / 2003


Towed Guns

1st Generation Artillery 3-inch Gun 1902 / 1902

2nd Generation Artillery M198 / 1969

3rd Generation Artillery M777 / 1990


Towed AA Guns 

1st Generation AA M1918 / 1918

2nd Generation AA 37mmM1 / 1939

3rd Generation AA M51 / 1951

4th Generation AA M167A2 / 1984


MLRS 

1st Generation MLRS T34 Calliope / 1943

3rd Generation MLRS M270 / 1982

4th Generation MLRS HIMARS / 1998


Area Defence Systems 

1st Generation SAM SAM-A-1 / 1946

2nd Generation SAM RIM-8 / 1955

3rd Generation SAM RIM-7M / 1975

4th Generation SAM MIM-104F / 1997

5th Generation SAM David's Sling / 2017


Point Defence Systems 

1st Generation VSHORAD Mauler / 1962

2nd Generation VSHORAD Chaparral C / 1974

3rd Generation VSHORAD Chaparral G / 1987


Manpats 

1st Generation Manpats Bazooka / 1942

2nd Generation Manpats M72 LAW / 1961

3rd Generation Manpats SMAW II / 2012


Manpads 

1st Generation Manpad Redeye / 1961

2nd Generation Manpad Redeye II / 1975

3rd Generation Manpad Stinger B / 1983

4th Generation Manpad Red Wasp / 2024


Infrared Missiles 

1st Generation IR Missile AIM-4B / 1951

2nd Generation IR Missile AIM-9D / 1964

3rd Generation IR Missile AIM-9L / 1975 

4th Generation IR Missile AIM-9M / 1983

5th Generation IR Missile AIM-9X / 2000


Radar Missiles 

1st Generation Radar Missile AAM-A-1 / 1947

2nd Generation Radar Missile AIM-4A / 1949

3rd Generation Radar Missile AIM-54A / 1966

4th Generation Radar Missile AIM-120A / 1984

5th Generation Radar Missile AIM-260 / 2021


ATGMs 

1st Generation ATGM SSM-A-23 / 1954

2nd Generation ATGM MGM-51 / 1964

3rd Generation ATGM AGM-114 / 1982

4th Generation ATGM AGM-114L / 1995

5th Generation ATGM AGM-179 / 2018


ICBMs 

1st Generation ICBM ATLAS  / 1959

2nd Generation ICBM Minuteman I / 1962

3rd Generation ICBM Minuteman-III / 1970

4th Generation ICBM Trident I / 1979

5th Generation ICBM Sentinel / 2025


Tactical Ballistic Missiles 

1st Generation BMs Corporal / 1952

2nd Generation BMs Redstone / 1958

3rd Generation BMs Pershing II / 1977

4th Generation BMs M48 ATACMS / 1999

5th Generation BM AGM-183 / 2019


Cruise Missiles 

2nd Generation CM MGM-13 / 1956

3rd Generation CM AGM-84 / 1970

4th Generation CM Tomahawk BIII / 1993

5th Generation CM HAWC / 2021


Image Intensifiers 

0 Generation NV M1-S-1 / 1938

1st Generation NV AN/PVS-1 / 1959

2nd Generation NV AN/PVS-5 / 1971

3rd Generation NV AN/PVS-7 / 1983

4th Generation NV AN/PVS-14 / 2000


Infrared Imaging 

Low Light Level Television TI-FLIR / 1963

1st Generation IRLS CORONA / 1959

2nd Generation IRLS Hughes TP / 1965

1st Generation FLIR AN/AAS-33 / 1975

2nd Generation FLIR AN/AAQ-14 / 1983

3rd Generation FLIR AN/AAQ-28 / 1998


Fly By Wire Systems 

Analogue LLRV / 1964

Digital F-8C-802 / 1972

Fully digital C-17 / 1991


Tank Ballistic Computer

Mechanical M13 / 1957

Electromechanical M16 / 1959 

Digital M150 / 1971

8x bit digital M21 / 1978

16x bit digital X-M1 / 1979

32x bit digital X-M2 / 1985

64x bit digital CATTB / 1994


IRST

0 Generation IRST AN/AAR-5 / 1952

1st Generation IRST AN/AAR-21 / 1960 

2nd Generation IRST AN/AAS-42 / 1990

3rd Generation IRST AN/AAQ-32 / 2004


Fighter Radar 

Rangefinding Radar AN/APG-30 / 1948

1st Generation Radar AN/APG-1 / 1943

2nd Generation Radar AN/APQ-100 / 1962

3rd Generation Radar AN/AWG-9 / 1966

4th Generation Radar AN/APG-70 / 1982

5th Generation Radar AN/APG-77 / 1999


Attack Aircraft 

1st Generation Attack Aircraft A-12 / 1933

2nd Generation Attack Aircraft B-57 / 1951

3rd Generation Attack Aircraft A-5 / 1958

4th Generation Attack Aircraft F-111D / 1967

5th Generation Attack Aircraft A-4AR / 1998

6th Generation Attack Aircraft AH-64E / 2014


Strategic Bombers 

1st Generation Strategic Bombers B-17 / 1938

2nd Generation Strategic Bombers B-36 / 1949

3rd Generation Strategic Bombers B-52H+ / 1982


Supersonic Bombers 

1st Generation Supersonic Bombers B-58 / 1956

2nd Generation Supersonic Bombers B-1A / 1974

3rd Generation Supersonic Bombers B-1B-IBS / 2012


CIWS 

2nd Generation CIWS Phalanx / 1973

3rd Generation CIWS Phalanx Block 1B / 1998


Naval Gun 

1st Generation Naval Gun Mark 42 / 1953

2nd Generation Naval Gun Mark 45 Mod 2 / 1980

3rd Generation Naval Gun Mk 45 Mod 4 / 2000


Torpedoes 

1st Generation Torpedoes Howell / 1875

2nd Generation Torpedoes Mark 14 / 1938

3rd Generation Torpedoes Mark 46 / 1963

4th Generation Torpedoes Mark 54 / 2001


ASW Weapons 

1st Generation ASW Weapons RUR-4 / 1949

2nd Generation ASW Weapons RUR-5 / 1960

3rd Generation ASW Weapons RUM-125A / 1982

4th Generation ASW Weapons RUM-139C / 2004


Mine Ships 

1st Generation Mine Ships Lapwing / 1918

2nd Generation Mine Ships Agile / 1951

3rd Generation Mine Ships Avenger / 1985


Aircraft Carriers 

1st Generation Carriers Langley / 1912

2nd Generation Carriers Forrestal / 1954

3rd Generation Carriers Nimitz / 1972

4th Generation Carriers Gerald R. Ford / 2013


Naval Vessels 

1st Generation Vessel Forrest Sherman / 1953

2nd Generation Naval Vessel Farragut / 1958

3rd Generation Naval Vessel Spruance / 1973

4th Generation Naval Vessel Arleigh Burke / 1990

5th Generation Naval Vessel Zumwalt / 2013


Submarines 

1st Generation Submarines A-class / 1901

2nd Generation Submarines Porpoise / 1935

3rd Generation Submarines Nautilus / 1954

4th Generation Submarines Los Angeles / 1974

5th Generation Submarines Seawolf / 1995


Counter Batteries 

1st Generation Counter Bats AN/MPQ-10 / 1951

2nd Generation Counter Bats AN/TPQ-37 / 1979

3rd Generation Counter Bats AN/TPQ-53 / 2009


Mobile Radars 

1st Generation Mobile Radar AN/TPS-1 / 1944

2nd Generation Mobile Radar AN/TPS-25 / 1956

3rd Generation Mobile Radar AN/TPS-32 / 1968

4th Generation Mobile Radar AN/TPS-77 / 1995

5th Generation Mobile Radar AN/TPS-80 / 2012


Naval Radar

1st Generation Naval Radar XAF / 1938

2nd Generation Naval Radar AN/SPS-48 / 1962

3rd Generation Naval Radar AN/SPY-3 / 2008


AEW&C Aircraft 

1st Generation AEW Aircraft E-1 / 1955

2nd Generation AEW Aircraft E-2 / 1960

3rd Generation AEW Aircraft E-2D / 2007


Radar Warning Receivers

1st Generation RWR AN/APS-13 / 1943 

2nd Generation RWR AN/ALR-25 / 1963

3rd Generation RWR AN/ALR-50 / 1970

4th Generation RWR AN/ALR-67 / 1980

5th Generation RWR AN/ALR-97 / 2000


Infrared Countermeasures 

1st Generation IRCM SUU-25 / 1970

2nd Generation IRCM AN/ALQ-140 / 1975

3rd Generation IRCM AN/AAQ-24 / 2005


Totals

Russia 79x 16 firsts

USA 112x 26 firsts


Both sides lead military innovation in different areas. In other areas we have

 

  • First military to utilise paratroopers 

  • R-7 which is the world's first ICBM

  • APS first underwater rifle 

  • I-16 first mass produced metal monoplane fighter with retractable landing gear. 

  • P-15 first anti ship missiles used to sink another ship

  • Drozd world's first hard kill APS 

  • Tu-144 world's first supersonic jetliner

  • RT-21 Temp 2S world's first mobile ICBM

  • System A the first anti ICBM system 

  • Avangarde world's first hypersonic glide vehicle 

  • Zircon world's first hypersonic cruise missile

  • Kh-47M2 world's first hypersonic ballistic missile 

  • T-10A first tank with a ballistic computer 

  • T-64 first tank with electromechanical FCS 

  • 101KS-O world's first DCIRM in a stealth fighter 

  • MiG-31 which is the world's fastest operational fighter jet 

  • Zaslon for MiG-31 which is world's first phased array radar for fighter jet

  • Basis for modern stealth technology with papers written by soviet scientist Pyotr Ufimtsev

  • World's longest air to air kill at over ~300 km against a Su-27 by an R-37M fired by a Su-57 or MiG-31BM 

  • U-5TS world's first smoothbore gun for the T-62 tank

  • Only 3rd Generation Fighter to have defeated 4 different 4th and 4+ Gen fighters with the MiG-25 beating an F-14A, F-15C and F/A-18C.

  • Combination-K for T-64A world's first serial use of composite armour for tanks 

  • Kontakt-1 world's first serial ERA for use in tanks 

  • RK-RLDN/APD-518 for the MiG-31 world's first modern aircraft data link produced (high speed cocommsC2 integration, fully digital, encryption, ECM etc.) 

  • Komar class boat, the first naval vessel to utilise guided missiles

  • R-11 Zemlya fired from Zulu submarine world's first SLBM

  • Kara cruiser with world's first guided missiles launched from 90° VLS Cells 

  • Mi-26 world's largest helicopter to be produced with Mi-12 being largest outright 

  • Ka-15 world's first serially produced coaxial helicopter 

  • Ka-50 world's first helicopter with an election seat 



"Russia had no night attack aircraft until 2000s" 


Another one that is pretty pervasive. 


Su-25T / 1983 with the Merkuriy LLLTV 


MiG-27K / 1974 with Kaira-1 LLLTV


Su-24M / 1977 with Kaira-24 LLLTV


Ka-29TB with LLLTV 


“Russian fighter jets just copy western” 


Really ?


F-15


MiG-25


Or how much the F-35 looks like the Yak-43 (a stealthy version of Yak-141) and funnily enough Lockheed would buy the Yak-141s VTOL system (US tried and Failed years earlier on similar designs)


Yak-43


F-35



Here we have the Ye-8 designed in late 50s and flew in 1962 which looks similar to Eurofighter Typhoon. 



Here we have the Tsybin RSR mach 3+ recon aircraft designed in early 50s with flights in 57 and 59 which is similar to US A-12 and SR-71 developed in the 60s. 


“T-72 is one of the worst tanks of all time”


Yep, this is actually an argument. It's literally the opposite. It's the most combat proven. 


T-72/M models have destroyed or mission killed (I know K/D of tanks isn't a thing but still) 


Chieftain Mk.3/5 200x

M60A1 14x

M47M 10x

Magach 6B 4x

Magach 7 1x

Merkava Mark 1 1x

M2A2 Bradley 2x

M1A1 Abrams 1x

BMP-1 3x

T-72M1 10x

T-34-85 13x


236x equal Generation

16x lower Generation 

8x higher Generation 


T-72B models have destroyed 


BMP-1P 11x

BMP-2s 32x

T-62 22x

T-72SIM1 4x

T-72 56x

T-72AV 51x

T-72BV 55x

T-90A 1x


7x higher Generations

106x equal Generation 

67x lower Generation 


It's lost to T-90M, T-80BV and T-64BV


T-72B3 models have destroyed (not disabled)


M1A1SA Abrams 1x

Leopard 2A4 1x

Leopard 2A6 1x

CV90C 1x

M2A2-ODS-SA Bradley 3x

BMP-2 5x

T-64BV 9x

T-64BM 6x


11x equal Generation 

16x lower Generation 


Lost to Leopard 2A4 and T-64BM


The one time an Abrams faced an equal tank (M1A1SA vs T-72B3) it lost. Meanwhile the T-72 series has consistently proven itself. People LOVE cherry picking the gulf war where it was outclassed due to unfair fighting and ignore the Armenian, Georgian, Iranian and Syrian wars where it has done amazing against peer generation tanks. 


https://web.archive.org/web/20191222130342/https://history.army.mil/CHRONOS/mar91.htm#prof 

https://t.me/s/wargonzo 

https://btvt.narod.ru/2/iraqarmy2.htm 

https://web.archive.org/web/20100323174631/http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_214.shtml 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nasr 

https://archive.armorama.com/forums/285661/index.htm 

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/article/soviet-vs-nato-tanks-how-russian-armour-proved-its-superiority-on-middle-eastern-battlefields#:~:text=They%20had%20good%20speed%20and,most%20of%20them%20T%2D62s. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/pauliddon/2021/03/25/the-last-azerbaijan-armenia-war-redefined-how-small-nations-fight-modern-battles/ 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casualties_of_the_Second_Nagorno-Karabakh_War#:~:text=On%2018%20October%20Azerbaijan%20reported,according%20to%20Azerbaijani%20Defense%20Ministry. 

https://warontherocks.com/2022/09/the-tank-is-not-obsolete-and-other-observations-about-the-future-of-combat/#:~:text=According%20to%20Oryx's%20data%2C%20Armenia%20lost%20255,of%20which%20146%20(57%20percent)%20were%20destroyed. 

https://rusi.org/explore-our-research/publications/rusi-defence-systems/key-armenias-tank-losses-sensors-not-shooters 

https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2020/09/the-fight-for-nagorno-karabakh.html?m=1 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nas


"Russian tanks have no gun depression because they're bad"


This is just nonsense, most are -4° to -6°. They are designed for urban warfare in Europe which is largely flat terrain. 


“If it's not important why is it being improved with Russia new tanks” 


T-90M -6°

T-80BVM -4°

T-72B3M -6°


It's not ? T-72B3, T-80BVM and T-90M is still the same with T-14 only being -7° still much less than western tanks of -10 to -15°. 


Non argument.



“Your ICBMs were bad which is why you had to create big nukes like Tsar Bomba”


We have no clue where this myth comes from. Whilst it's true early ICBMs like R-7 were quite inaccurate (same for US) there is no evidence of this claim especially since by the time of 1961 when the tsar was tested, the R-16 which had very few failure rates and was accurate to the ~kilometre was already in service. 


“Your modern fighters are an export failure” 


Firstly the Su-35S is an incredibly successful fighter with huge domestic orders along with exports to Algeria, China and Iran with 27 out of over 60 export orders delivered. UAE, Egypt and Indonesia were going to purchase them but were threatened with CASSTA sanctions by the US if they did. That's the US down to a tee, they are so confident in their own equipment superiority that they have to sanction and threaten other countries that buy Russian, Chinese or even Iranian equipment. 


Su-34 and Su-75 were again going to be sold to the UAE but they were threatened with sanctions, Su-34ME has since found an export customer. 


Su-57 has been bought by Algeria and has interest from Vietnam and Malaysia. 


Yak-130 has proved very successful with over 50 airframes exported to 7 countries 


Over 120 upgraded MiG-29s with MiG-29SMT aand MiG-29Ms and dozens of new build MiG-29M2s delivered to 6 countries along with India getting new build MiG-29Ks. 


Lastly the Su-30s are literally one of the most popular modern fighters with Su-30ME, Su-30MKK, Su-30MKI, Su-30MKA, Su-30MKM and Su-30MKV variants for 14 different countries with over 600 airframes made for export in the 2000s with last deliveries made in 2024.


Typhoon pilots have praised the Su-30s and Indian pilots have praised them compared to their Rafales. 


"Russian MiG-29K and Su-30 have had fly by wire failures and engine failures" 


Very few Russian fighters have had these issues, zero have had any fly by wire issues; they were all by export models. (India is notorious for unreliability) 


No different to F-16, F-18 and F-35s 


https://www.f-16.net/forum/viewtopic.php?f=47&t=53963 

https://theaviationist.com/2015/12/29/super-hornet-recovered-from-the-sea/ 

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/world/timeline-f-35-fighter-jets-11-crashes-in-7-years-raise-alarm-over-safety/3465679#:~:text=An%20F%2D35B%20fighter%20jet,to%20burst%20during%20the%20flight. 

https://www.f-16.net/aircraft-database/F-16/mishaps-and-accidents/airforce/USAF/ 

https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/failure-of-two-pitch-rate-gyroscopes-caused-singapore-f-16-crash/158827.article#:~:text=F%2D16's%20fly%2Dby%2Dwire%20flight%20control%20system%20relies%20on,the%20chance%20of%20a%20reoccurrence%2C%20the%20RSAF 


"Russian navy ships constantly break down" 


I love the Liberal use of the word constantly and always. Yeah ships break down. Your Zumwalt and freedom ships broke down not long after being built. The Queen Elizabeth and Gerald r Ford carriers broke down not long after being built either. Funny how you don't bring this up; yet Russia's 30 year old Kuznetsov breaking down a couple of times because it needs a major overhaul is somehow proof that the Russian navy is bad. 


Kuznetsov literally sailed for 20 years with no issues and only started having problems because it needed a major refit. 


Let's debunk this brain rot shall we. 


 "They stole it from 🇺🇦" 


Again nonsense, the commander's on board all sailed under Russia. It was 🇺🇦 that tried to steal by ordering it to stay within port. 


"Ship was no where near complete by the collapse of the USSR" 


That's just lies. The ship was commissioned in 1990 and had full air Wing by 95. 


But let's go over common complaints from clowns who have a child like understanding of the subject. 


"Ship was plagued with issues" 


Lies, it was launched in 1985 finished it late 80s and commissioned in 1990, problems with boilers and plumbing started in 2010s over 20 years after launch. 


"Aircraft recovery wires snapped" 


Again this happened in 2010s over 20 years with no major refit. Similar Accidents have happened to Western carriers. 


"Showers, running water etc." 


I've tried to find a source for this but only ones I can find are from Western publications. Do you have any official soviet or Russian sources to back this up ? 


"Heating system" 


Maybe the only one people are right on but was rectified pretty quickly in the 2000s, again was due to collapse of ussr and overall state of affairs back then 


"Tug ship" 


This is literally repeating a meme about again in 2010s when the ships engines became problematic because AGAIN over 20 years old with no major refit. 


US RCOH scale for limits is at 25 years after completed so again perfectly reasonable as to why it had proble


"It wouldn't connect it Engines to docks at port" 


Zero evidence for this. 


"It smokes heavy when moving" 


More rubbish. This is only true when it starts getting going, hence why there are numerous videos or images of it at sea with little smoke, but the smoke is due to the fuel type. 


"Multiple fires" 


The first reported fire was a small one 2009, the major ones was when it was being serviced in 2018, 2019, 2022 and 2024. All when in docks. 


"It's getting scrapped" 


No evidence of this. 


Western shipyard accidents or ship break downs 


https://www.tapatalk.com/groups/warships1discussionboards/ticonderoga-class-cracks-t15081.html 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2016/08/31/politics/navy-littoral-combat-ship-fourth-breakdown 

https://www.maritime-executive.com/article/photos-royal-navy-lets-the-french-navy-tow-a-broken-down-amphib 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-67473729.amp 

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/royal-navy-aircraft-carrier-breakdown-hms-prince-of-wales-b1021986.html 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/10073951/2-billion-Spanish-navy-submarine-will-sink-to-bottom-of-sea.html 

https://timesofmalta.com/article/death-was-instant-in-shipyard-accident.599286 

https://maritime-executive.com/article/worker-seriously-injured-in-accident-at-fincantieri-shipyard-in-italy 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cqjrq0ewj77o.amp 

https://www.irishtimes.com/news/11-feared-dead-in-french-shipyard-accident-1.510969 

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/22/world/europe/ship-dock-edinburgh-scotland.html 

https://www.postandcourier.com/news/death-at-detyens-shipyards-is-third-fatal-accident-on-same-us-navy-ship/article_54b29f70-825d-11ee-9cbc-27ead698a7d5.html 

https://www.defensenews.com/naval/2020/07/18/us-navy-orders-to-general-dynamics-nassco-to-stop-work-after-fire-on-uss-kearsarge/ 

https://time.com/4148530/navy-ship-breaks-down/ 

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1987-07-11-mn-439-story.html 

https://turnstiletours.com/worst-accidents-in-the-history-of-the-brooklyn-navy-yard/ 

https://news.usni.org/2019/03/30/destroyer-struck-barge-pier-side-incident-ingalls-shipbuilding 


Or how about just new US navy ships that broke down or had failures ?


https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/navy-ships/a20521726/americas-newest-aircraft-carrier-suffers-a-breakdown/ 

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/nov/23/us-navys-most-expensive-destroyer-breaks-down-in-panama-canal 

https://www.trtworld.com/magazine/us-navy-s-next-gen-naval-warfighter-is-a-multi-billion-dollar-failure-45907 

https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.com/cnn/2022/04/02/us/navy-nuclear-submarine-accident-washington-state 


"russian fighter jets always break down" 


More goofy Liberal use of the word always. From the USAF alone The F-16 has had over 200 mechanical failures, the F-35 and F-22 have over 20. F-15s over 70. F-14s over 40. 


https://simpleflying.com/16-mishaps-what-to-know-f-22-raptor-history-of-crashes/ 

https://simpleflying.com/f-35-fighter-jet-crashes-guide/ 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_F-15_losses  

https://www.safety.af.mil/Divisions/Aviation-Safety-Division/Aviation-Statistics/ 

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8853836/#:~:text=There%20were%20190%20Class%20A,of%20those%20involving%20pilot%20errors. 

https://www.history.navy.mil/research/library/online-reading-room/title-list-alphabetically/c/casualties-usnavy-marinecorps-personnel-killed-injured-selected-accidents-other-incidents-notdirectly-result-enemy-action.html 


Accidents happen, malfunctions happen, but I love the hypocrisy, when a western jet breaks it's just an odd accident when a Russian jet breaks its inferior quality.


Brain rot.


"The T-14 was cancelled because it costs too much" 


This is just nonsense. Now propaganda institutions have taken the words of rostec head out of context. Here is the quote you will see them using. 


"It is, in general, rather expensive. Armata is much superior to existing tanks, but it is too expensive, so the army is unlikely to use it now," 


But they leave out key context in the article. 


Full quotes. 


"The newest Russian tank T-14 "Armata" is much superior to existing tanks in its characteristics, but it is unlikely to be used in a special operation due to its high cost. This was stated by the general director of the state corporation "Rostec" Sergey Chemezov, RIA Novosti wrote on Monday, March 4.

Chemezov specified that this was specifically about using the Armata during the special operation. The head of the state corporation added that the T-14 Armata tank is in service with the Russian army.

Currently, Chemezov explained, funds are needed for new, cheaper weapons. "Therefore, if there is an opportunity to buy cheaper ones, why not," RIA Novosti quotes the CEO of Rostec as saying.

According to the head of Rostec, it is easier for the Russian army to buy cheaper T-90 tanks."


Original Russian source 


https://www.fontanka.ru/2024/03/04/73295120/ 


Notice how they just completely lie ? 


The tank is in service after the LRP order for 50-70 in 2022 was fulfilled. 


https://www.interfax.ru/russia/812466

https://tass.com/defense/1367015

https://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=562009&lang=RU 


It's even confirmed by Western intelligence


https://www.armyrecognition.com/news/army-news/army-news-2024/british-mod-intelligence-confirms-entry-of-latest-generation-russian-t-14-armata-tanks-into-service 


Furthermore Rostec only stated that it wouldn't be bought for the SMO, nowhere does it say it's cancelled or too expensive for the tank. That doesn't even make sense considering the fact the T-90M new build in 2024 can cost anywhere from $5-8m which is similar to the Armata which is estimated at $7-10m. 


When he says it's too expensive it's probably a reference to the fact that it's a new design. Which means several things. 


First we need to understand the context. Unlike the US, France, Britain or Germany Russian tanks for most part aren't just being made to look nice on parades or bases. They are in a conflict zone which means they are in use.  


The T-14 is a completely new tank which means


New Logistics required 

New crew training required 

New ammunition required 

New production required 


"What's wrong with this ?" 


A LOT. Currently Russia's main tank factories are set up to produce T-90Ms as new builds and upgrade and maintain T-72s, T-62s, T-80s and T-90s into T-72B4-22, T-80BVM-23 and T-90M models along with the large scale mobilisation models like T-72BM, T-80BM and T-62MV-22.


If Russia was to switch to the T-14 then it would need to be set up for mass use otherwise what's the point. So not only would that include fucking up logistics and production as you would need to change a lot to accommodate but you would need to change up tank crews to get them trained as again completely new tank.


Again as rostec said. Why bother with going through all that trouble when the T-90M is just as advanced as most advanced Western MBTs like 2A7 and SepV3 and more advanced than any MBT in Ukraine along with the fact that regardless of how advanced the T-14 is, you still need numbers to effectively perform military operations and even at max capacity (not including the time it would take changing up everything) Russian tank production can produce 200-600 tanks per year at MAX. 


In a war you stick to what is cheap and effective, and an easy example of the opposite would be Germany in WWII, The US and USSR stuck with T-34s and M4s, cheap, reliable and easily produced. Whereas Germany constantly kept adding new tanks and changing designs and having to change logistics and training to accommodate it. 


T-14 has bad turret armour


This whole nonsense comes from two people. 


1. Red effect 

https://youtube.com/@redeffectchannel?si=OV93ekdOy8bfmAub


2. Andrei tereshkova 

https://t.me/btvt2019



Red effect just parrots what andrei said. 


Now two things. 


1. Yes the turret armour is definitely weaker, but that's because it doesn't need to be strong as there are vital areas, no engine, no crew and no ammo. Just optics that can be damaged by light munitions anyway. 


2. On these guys 


Red effect is just your average tank guy, makes okay stuff but gets stuff wrong a lot, like here and his videos on why abrams were failing and tried to imply Russia doesn't protect their tanks. 


The other guy is your average war thunder player I'd guess. Knows a lot of details about armour but is definitely not a serious military analyst as he just hates on russian equipment. I base this of 3 of his statements 


First was him saying that the BMD-4 has no place in warfare, oblivious to what paratroopers are and oblivious to the fact that you can just add armour to them and they become as protected as any modern IFV. 


Second was him saying Russia was bad for allowing Su35 Khibiny to be captured and that this proved it was a bad system. 


This shows a deeper ignorance around the subject. To start with, lack of basic research as it was a Su30 Khibiny-U pod not a Su35 Khibiny-M, the difference is huge, the su30 system is largely just the original 80s Khibiny with improved digital signal processing and better antenna, meanwhile the M model is a whole new beast that uses GaN AESA antenna and is among some of the best, there's also the fact that it was a tiny component that fell and there's no evidence that it fell in Russian controlled territory beyond what Ukraine says (see debunking myths of Russian army in Ukraine to see why you shouldn't trust Ukraine on anything) 


But devils advocate. So what ? Does he think these systems are somehow full proof and make aircraft invisible. In 70s various advanced for time fighters using modern pods were shot down, the F/A-18C and F-15E with incredibly advanced for time AN/ALQ-165 ASPJ and AN/ALQ-135D TEWS-B3 (same Gen as early Khibiny) were shot down in gulf war by SAMs and missiles that were developed in the late 50s and 60s. 


This is a child like all or nothing understanding. That's ironically very common to war thunder players. 


Lastly was him mocking Russia for downgrading T90Ms FCS oblivious that these are just mobilisation models similar to T-80BM and T-72BM (covered in debunking myths of Russian army in Ukraine essay) 


So why is he wrong ? 


His arguments are literally just speculation saying that it's just slightly improved relikt ERA and using CGI images to back it up. 


That's it. I'm not even joking. 


"Russian equipment is cheaper because it's inferior" 


Utter rubbish 


S-400 Battery $400m

Patriot Battery $800m


Both utilise fully digital 64x bit FCS, LPI phased array FC radar, AESA search radars, command hubs utilising C2IS software and C3I communication systems, tracking of 100+ targets along with firing of numerous systems at once along with POKs of 0.7-0.9.


M2A3 Bradley ~$5m

BMP-3M ~$1m


Both utilise 2nd Generation thermals with a panoramic CPS, fully digital FCS, CCI displays utilising C2IS software and global navigation with a C3I digital communication system and both utilising a fully stabilised gun. 


2S19M2 $5m

M109A7 $11m


Both utilise fully digital FCS, CCI displays utilising C2IS software and global navigation, fully automatic laying system and a C3I digital communication system and can make use of satellite and laser guided munitions. 


HIMARS $6m

Uragan-1M $3m


Both utilise fully digital FCS, digital displays utilising C2IS software and global navigation, fully automatic self laying system and can fire various guided and unguided munitions 


AH-64E ~$50m

Ka-52M ~$20m


Both utilise fully digital FCS, digitised flight controls, 3rd Generation FLIR, laser, radar and infrared guided munitions with a stabilised gun. Along with global navigation systems with digital displays utilising C4ISR software. 


Vanilla Ka-52M utilises advanced EW, DIRCM, FBW AFCS and AESA radar. 


Su-35S ~$30m

F-15EX ~$90m


Both utilising CAD low visibility airframes, both carry 12× hardpoints with Eagle carrying up to 23× and flanker up to 20× with ejector racks, both with AESA radars both using advanced SAR and LPI, FADEC turbofans, No AOA limiter, fully digital flight management system and fully digital fly by wire, advanced integrated RWRs with sensor fusion, Advanced EW systems, use of modern laser, optical, radar and IR missiles along with advanced EW systems and modern LCD HUD and cockpit with a digital LCD MFD HMD and both have sensor fusion but Eagle uses 3rd Generation whilst 35 uses 2nd. 


Su-35S also has supercruise along with 3D thrust vectoring and a MAW system along with built in 3rd Generation FLIR along with 3× radars, two AESA and a hybrid PESA. 


Eagle can carry 5000 kg more but sacrifices Maneuverability and has more powerful C2 system 


You can build THREE Su-35S for the cost of a single Eagle II.


We also have Russian systems which are better than their more expensive American counter parts 


Base Abrams SepV3 uses high end 2nd Generation thermals, all digital FCS, CCI display utilising C4ISR software along with an anti IED system. 


M1A2 Abrams SepV3 ~$13m 

T-14 ~$8m


Base T-14 uses high end 3rd Generation thermals, advanced digital FCS with sensor fusion, digital display utilising C4ISR software, digitised tank controls, advanced gun with advanced munitions, advanced APS protection with all crew protected in armoured capsule. 


For context btw the KF-51 (peer Generation to T-14) costs $30-50m for a SINGLE unit. 


Constellation Class $1b 7000 tonnes

Gorshkov Class $300m 5400 tonnes


Both utilise fully digital FCS with shipwide to fleet data link along with AESA search radars and electronic optical targeting systems with FHD optics and 3rd Generation FLIR 


Gorshkov 


Gorshkov loadout 


139 total.  


1x A-192M 130mm 3rd Generation Naval Cannon 


32× 3S-14M multi function VLS Cells with following loadouts. 


Zircon extended range 5th Generation ASM

P-800 extended range 4th Generation ASM

Kalibr long range 4th Generation ASM (QP)

Otvet 4th Generation ASW Missile 


32× Redut VLS Cells with 9M96E 4th Generation Medium range SAMs (can be quad packed with point defence missiles)


64× Sosna-R 4th Generation VSHORADs


8× light torpedo launchers with Paket-NK 4th Generation torpedoes


2x MTPU 14.5×114mm machine guns. 


Counter Measures: 2x Palash 3rd Generation CIWS Prosvet-M 3rd Generation ECM system with 8x jammers. 10x decoy Launchers with the KT-308 and KT-216 systems. 2x 5P-42 electro optical dazzlers. 


Constellation 


78 total individual weapons. 


1x Mk 110 3rd Generation 57mm Naval Gun. 


32× Mark 41 VLS cells with the following loadouts 


RGM-109E Extended Range 4th Generation ASM

RUM-139C 4th Generation ASW Missile 

RIM-174 4th Generation Long Range MultiRole Missile 

RIM-161 4th Generation Very Long Range SAM Missile 

RIM-162C 4th Generation Medium Range SAM (QP) 

RIM-156A 3rd Generation Very Long Range SAM 


16× NSM 4th Generation Extended Range ASM 


21× RIM-116 3rd Generation VSHORADs


8x M2 12.7mm machine guns 


Counter

 Measures: 4× Mark 53 Nulka decoy Launchers. AN/SLQ-32V6 3rd Generation ECM system with 6x jammers. 



"Soviets struggled with slotted planar arrays"


Popular myth that Soviets had problems manufacturing slotted arrays. 


Let's see. 


N007 Zaslon for MiG-31 made in 1973 with over 500 made 


N007M Zaslon-M made in 1983 

ARGS-14 for Kh-35 made in 80s


9P-1348 for R-77 made in 1984 with hundreds made starting 1994. 


9P-1103K for R-27EA made in 80s



N010 Zhuk for MiG-29M and Yak-41 made in 1985


N011 Bars for Su-27M and Su-30 made in 1986. 


Leninets V004 for Su-34 made in 1987. 


Sintez-10 made in 80s 


RDS-BO Shtik for Su-24MR and Tu-22MR made in late 80s. 

MR-650M made in 1970s 

MR-760 made in 1970s 


MR-710 made in 1970s 

Possibles are the radars on A-50, An-71, Kh-55, P-700 and P-1000 



 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Russian and Soviet Fighter Jets and their capabilities.

Russian Fighter Jets  Su-57 Felon Series  Su-57S Concept: 1998 Designed: 2004 Prototype: 2010 Completed: 2018 Production: 2021 Service: 2024 Aircraft Role: MultiRole/Air Superiority  Generation: 5th  Combat Rank: S Number Made: 60+ Su-57M Prototype: 2022 Aircraft Role: MultiRole/Air Superiority  Generation: 5+ Combat Rank: D Number Made: 1 Engines and Airframe : CAD composite construction LO Airframe with an RCS minimum of 0.01m². Crew of 1. Length 20 m. Height 4.6 m. Wingspan 14.1 m. Wing area 79 m². Frame weight 18,500 kg. Takeoff weight 40,000 kg. Max Fuel 10,300 kg. 2× Lyul'ka-Saturn AL-41-F1 low visibility 3D thrust vectoring variable bypass axial flow FADEC turbofans with supercruise with 177 kN thrust and 284 kN in afterburner. In flight refueling. Speed and Endurance:  Combat Range of 900-1300 km. Top speed of mach 2.2 to 2.4 at 15 km+, mach 2 to 2.2 at 10 km+, mach 1.8 to 2 to at 5 km+ and mach 1 to 1.3 at sea level with supercruise at ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Myths about the Su-57

  Truth about the Su-57 Felon Introduction   Okay I'm going to dispel the myth that the Su-57 isn't stealth or 5th gen. There are several parts.  Intro F-117 Incident  Stealth Technology  Top 24 Myths about Felon RCS Numbers  F22 & F35 Vs Su-57  Weaknesses of Stealth Aircraft  Conclusion  This is based on over 30 hours of research, as well as several different scattering simulations.  Sources are tied to each part instead of listed at end.  F-117 Incident The minimum RCS the SNR-125M fire control radar can lock on relative to the RCS minimum of F-117, which was 0.2m² minimum required for lock on at any distance and RCS minimum of 0.005m² means its average was likely several decimal points higher. Of Course we take into account this was old stealth technology and the fact it had cueing from P-18.  It was detected because the RCS whilst having a minimum of ~0.005m², based on the fact it's an older design and current radar sim...
Post a Comment
Read more

SMR Main Document

SERGY MILITARY RANKING'S Military Encyclopedia  Version 6 (soon to be 7)  (Updated every 30 days, correct as of 28/03/2026) Hello friends, welcome to the SMR or Sergey Military Rankings. We are the ONLY objective military analysis group. We don't shill any side and say it how it is. If you love military capabilities or want to know just how capable a country is of engaging in warfare then you've come to the right place as I guarantee this is one of the most detailed logs of military power and capabilities you've seen. Our information is free to all, our goal is to simply inform, feel free to share with anyone, our SMR is designed for all and please don't insult us because your country is lower than you thought (cough Americans, Indians and British cough) this is just our opinion and it's based on the data we've gathered. If you disagree then make your own ranking system if you think our 3-6-6 criteria isn't relevant. We Made this system becau...
Post a Comment
Read more