Soviet/Russian Military Equipment

Anyone have any data as to how the T90 can compare to say the M1A2 Abrams or the Leopard 2?

It's a waste of time. You can't really compare two roughly modern tanks directly, in a decontextualized manner. Let me put it this way. They are all close enough to each other in performace for other factors (such as support systems, air support, infantry, crew training, etc.) to matter far more then the minor advantages they may have over each other. It's either obvious that one is superior, or if it's close enoguh to require a detailed look we 1) don't have the classified info and 2) other factors will weigh far more in actual confrontation.

EDIT: I'm assuming you mean the T-90A or T-90S. The baseline T-90 is definetly inferior to the M1A2 because of inferior turret armor, and lack of modern thermals.

There is a large number of threads that do nothing more then inquire about this equipment. Could the moderators perhaps merge all of them into this thread so that they don't clutter up the forum?

My, my. During much of my time here most of the people were chanting praises to the almighty Soviet/Russian weaponry, and cursing the very name of western weaponry.

As an to-be cadet of a navy using both equipment and as a realist I don't belive in something like that - but wow, this is already an improvement over what I had seen.

Carius you have to understand that Soviet equipment was created within a specific geopolitical context, and within the confines of a specific military doctrine. From that perspective, it can be viewed as quite successful. Not to mention much Soviet equipment has won world-wide reknown for it's simplicity, reliability, and effectiveness.

I've always been curious, can the AN-225 carry things on its back and inside the cargo hold simultaniously?

On it's back? What do you mean? You mean the space-launch project?

Quote:

On it's back? What do you mean? You mean the space-launch project?

Wasn't one of the reasons it was constructed to carry the Buran on it's back to Launch Zones?

Yes. But in that sense, it was a stillborn child. The Buran never materialized into a solid program due to the collapse of the USSR. The result is that now the An-225 is only a (very, very, VERY) large transport airplane.

Quote:

Yes. But in that sense, it was a stillborn child. The Buran never materialized into a solid program due to the collapse of the USSR. The result is that now the An-225 is only a (very, very, VERY) large transport airplane.

Of course, I was just wondering if it could carry things on its back and inside the cargo hold at the same time.

I would doubt it. I don't know for sure. I suspect engine power may be the limiting factor, or possibly airframe durability for such large payloads.

... Did that merge right? I've never done it before.

Yeah this is fine, thanks.

I know that this is the topic for Russian Equipment, but I don't know where else to put this, so...

Can a two-seat Eurofighter be equipped with a WSO like the F-15E and Su-30?

Weapon Systems Operator? You mean split the workload between a pilot and a WSO? I don't see why not. From what I understand all control are duplicated in a two-seat fighter (with the exception of the Su-34, because it seats them side by side) so it should not be hard at all.

From what I understand, however, only the Tranche 3 Eurofighters will actually have advanced AtG. I'm not sure which Blocks it will be, and whether the older ones will be brought up to date.

I have a couple of questions:

1. Does Russia convert old fighters into Target Drones like the USAF and PLAAF do?

2. What kind of squadron markings did the East German Air Force and Soviet Air Force have?

I have a question, are any of the former yugo countries making M-84s, or any current armaments.

I know old tanks and APCs are coverted into targets. I'll research more on markings and the M-84s.