@
ptldM3 Sorry for hitting the wrong nerve. That however does't change the fact that Russian armor has pathetic history. Afghanistan,Iraq,Bosnian,Arab Israeli war,Syrian civil wars are trophies for how badly the Russian armor sucks.
Before you go tutin' your horn get a few things strait.
The majority of the tanks in those conflicts were the T-54/55 and T-62. The T-54 was
designed in 1946, the T-62 which is based on the T-54/55 was developed in the
1950s and reports indicate that man Iraqi tanks were equipped with
steel penetrators, not tungsten and certainly not depleted uranium.
This would be no different if a T-90 or T-72 would go up against a Sherman tank
As for those wars, most tanks were destroyed from airstrikes, again nothing to brag about considering the roof of a tank is thinest part of a tank. I also am willing to bet that you have no states about tank losses from most of those conflicts, I for one would like to see a figure from Afghanistan.
T-72 has always been as crap for the previous generation of ATGMs or Rockets as it is today. We supplied Mujahideen with MILAN ATGMs in the 80s and what happened to the Russian armor is evident in the mountains of Afghanistan.
Please tell. Tanks themselves rarely operated where they could be ambushed, many that were hit were merely disabled and as a result many of the disabled tanks were destroyed by crews or airstrikes because they were too heavy to move and too risky to salvage.
But give yourself a pat on the back for trying.
It depends on if the Tank is carrying any ammunition or not. Let me show you a few videos about T-72.
And what does that prove? That tank was hit with an RPG-29, the same weapons that destroyed many Merkava tanks in Lebenon as well as having pierced the armor of a Challenger tanks. There is also videos of Abrams being hit with the RPG-29 and images of destroyed Abrams being credited the the RPG-29.
These videos are real and they speak volume about how pathetic the Russian armor is when it comes to safety.
No it shows that Newer Russian weapons can easily destroy the most modern tanks in the world. If a challenger, Merkava, and Abrams can either be disabled or destroyed by an RPG-29 then how is a 40+ year old Russian tank pathetic?
It depends on the type of engagement. One set of tactics that work in one type of engagement can prove disastrous in another. The average age of a tank on a modern battlefield environment is 3 minutes. No tank army will survive without Air cover.
This is where your bias lies, most countries that used Russian armor never had air support, never mind that the tanks they were operating were 1940s-1960s era relics.
. I thought there would be some naval equipment also though....
