faithfulguy
ELITE MEMBER
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2009
- Messages
- 13,651
- Reaction score
- -2
- Country
- Location
I never said anything about the Arjun not being accurate infact i think it's a very good tank, also has the Indian army released anything official regarding the performance of both tanks or is all of this news from Shakala? Arjun has nothing to do with my argument, the T-90 is the center of my argument.
There is alot of distorted and out right incorrect information regarding the T-90 and its accuracy so i took the liberty to inform the masses, there is alot of distortion saying that the T-90 could hardly hit targets from 1600km with the main gun and that the ATGMs could not hit targets a 5000km, well that's fairy tails, read this:
T-90 - a knol by Anonymous
As far as i'm aware that's an un-offical record, as you can see the T-90 hit 11 out of 11 on the move and in a short span, more imortant because of the quick rate of fire the barrel was hot; consiquently, the accuracy did not suffer, so the excuse of the T-90s barrel performing poorly and te T-90 not being able to accurately hit shots with a hot barrel is busted.
This should quiet people that are hell bent on claiming the T-90 isn't capable of hitting targets from 5000km:
T-90 - a knol by Anonymous
Regarding ATGMs:
The T-90 can hit targets in hot temperatures and it can do it at night and it can do it at long ranges (in the hands of Indian crews):
T-90 - a knol by Anonymous
Is there a like for this? Also if this has any truth to it than the ammuniton, maintanance, and crew have to be taken into account because the fact is i have proven the T-90 can hit targets very very very accurately and at very long distances; moreover, it can do this while on the move. If all of the factors i have listed can be ruled out than something isn't right...
You just gave me a link to two bloggs and then you quoted someones post, when did quoting people's replies count as a credible source? Like i stated earlier the very unstealthy SU-47 with conventional nose, vertical stabs, FSW, conards, and convetinal intakes achieved a rcs of 0.3, so the butt-heads that keep saying the pak-fa only has a rcs of 0.5 are a laughing stock, esspecially when you consider all of the 'stealthy' features the pak-fa has and the fact that Russia has been able to reduce the rcs of aircraft from 10-20 times just with RAM.
I just scan through the forum for pictues and i havn't visited in a while, if you us google tanslator you can read trough the whole forum.
Well not much can be determined about the pak-fa's rcs just by looking at the aircraft; however, it does seem to have all of the features of a stealth aircraft, the one part of the pak-fa that people seem credical of is the underbelly and this is because it's not flat or in other words it has two 'humps' but if you study aircraft such as the Y-23, B-2, and the F-35 they too have these 'humps' the only difference is the 'humps' are on top of the fusalage. With Russia's progress in ram i would not be too woried. Moreover, Sukhoi prototypes are always far cries from the final production-look at the original SU-27.
So are you saying that something must be wrong with the test for T-90 to miss the targets? I would guess so but get ready for attacks from the fanatics in here.