Military Equipment Sperging Thread - The Tiger II is a better tank than the M1 Abrams edition

[Car Won't Crank]

Best helo pilots are those from the Coast Guard. Those guys have balls of steel.

 

[WelperHelper99]

The Ye-8 was the J-10 before it was cool.

A promising design but possibly not enough of a leap over Mig-21 to justify it.

It looks a LOT better than the 23 that's for sure

Definitely looks cooler for sure. But in terms of raw armament:

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.php?aircraft_id=1431

Basically two soviet sidewinders, but radar guided. So not exactly great, it still has the aerodynamic limits of being a sidewinder copy, its just radar guided now. The Mig-23 at least had big beefy radar guided missiles, even if the plane itself was a mainteince nightmare where you had to cut it apart just to get to the engines. I do like the alerons in the front though, probably would be pretty manuverable.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

Best helo pilots are those from the Coast Guard. Those guys have balls of steel.

I'll shit on any branch but the Coasties. God bless those crazy sons of bitches.

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

View attachment 6417468
Definitely looks cooler for sure. But in terms of raw armament:

https://www.militaryfactory.com/aircraft/detail.php?aircraft_id=1431

View attachment 6417472
Basically two soviet sidewinders, but radar guided. So not exactly great, it still has the aerodynamic limits of being a sidewinder copy, its just radar guided now. The Mig-23 at least had big beefy radar guided missiles, even if the plane itself was a mainteince nightmare where you had to cut it apart just to get to the engines. I do like the alerons in the front though, probably would be pretty manuverable.

That was a weapons fit on a prototype.

In reality it would probably end up with 4 wing pylons and a centerline pylon, like the Mig-21 did.

Remember, the Soviet Sparrow (R-23/24) didn't arrive until the mid 1970s.

The R-40 was exclusively for the Mig-25 and 31 (for a bit) and the K-8 was for the Su-15 and a few interceptors exclusively.

The Mig-23 was an interesting idea held back by the Soviet microelectronics industry. Most initial export operators found that it was barely better than the Mig-21bis. By the time the Gen 2 Mig-23s arrived the Mig-29 was almost ready and was a gigantic leap forward.

Plus, Soviet IR guided AAMs were God awful until the early to mid 1970s, being essentially stuck at AIM-9B performance until the Improved Atoll arrived in 1973/74 when it got roughly as good as an AIM-9G from 1970 and the R-60/60M came along.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

being essentially stuck at AIM-9B performance

Did they also store them badly like the USAF did or had they figured out some of the USN fixes for the IR seeker?

 

[Falcos_Commisar]

Did they also store them badly like the USAF did or had they figured out some of the USN fixes for the IR seeker?

Not sure, they were never flown off carriers though.

 

[The Grognard]

Not sure, they were never flown off carriers though.

One would think a VVS base in siberia would be just as harsh on stuff, especially when you account to the average conscripted Homo Sovieticus and his usual mannerisms.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

One would think a VVS base in siberia would be just as harsh on stuff, especially when you account to the average conscripted Homo Sovieticus and his usual mannerisms.

Lack of salt.

 

[Daddy's Angry Juice]

Can a nigga get a COM201 in this bitch?

 

[WelperHelper99]

That was a weapons fit on a prototype.

In reality it would probably end up with 4 wing pylons and a centerline pylon, like the Mig-21 did.

Remember, the Soviet Sparrow (R-23/24) didn't arrive until the mid 1970s.

Fair enough yeah. Probably would have been fitted with better post prototype stage.

The R-40 was exclusively for the Mig-25 and 31 (for a bit) and the K-8 was for the Su-15 and a few interceptors exclusively.

The Mig-23 was an interesting idea held back by the Soviet microelectronics industry. Most initial export operators found that it was barely better than the Mig-21bis. By the time the Gen 2 Mig-23s arrived the Mig-29 was almost ready and was a gigantic leap forward.

Plus, Soviet IR guided AAMs were God awful until the early to mid 1970s, being essentially stuck at AIM-9B performance until the Improved Atoll arrived in 1973/74 when it got roughly as good as an AIM-9G from 1970 and the R-60/60M came along.

I find the MIG 23 a tragedy. Designed to be faster and more maneuverable than the Mig 21, all it could manage was foster at Mach 2.4. Which for boom and zoom swarm attacks worked, but anything else meant very little. It could carry more bombs than the 21, including nukes, but most aircraft could carry more than the Mig 21. It wanted to do a lot with the swing wings, but just failed. If it was a MIG-23 or a F-5, I'm taking the F-5, every time.

Also yeah Soviet AAM'S were playing catchup to the Americans for decades. Soviet microchip industry was shit.

 

[WelperHelper99]

Got to ask lads, what do you think of the Ontos?

6 M40 106mm recoiless rifles of doom and one 30 cal Browning 1919. A tank destroyer, urban warfare, and infantry killer with its beehive rounds wrapped into one. Should Murica bring a modern version back?

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

Got to ask lads, what do you think of the Ontos?
View attachment 6428564

6 M40 106mm recoiless rifles of doom and one 30 cal Browning 1919. A tank destroyer, urban warfare, and infantry killer with its beehive rounds wrapped into one. Should Murica bring a modern version back?

It's neat, but no we shouldn't bring it back. What possible reason would we have to do that?

 

[The Grognard]

Got to ask lads, what do you think of the Ontos?

I would recommend just bringing back the tripod-mounted recoilless as something heavier than a Carl Gustaf / SMAW while also being a cheaper tool than a TOW / Javelin for destroying stuff first. Alternatively, put some wheels on it so it can be towed into fighting positions easily. As for my thoughts on the Ontos, it's a silly thing and only fit for niche situations. A modern version would likely be like the BMPT but built out of an Abrams instead of a T-90. Pair of Bushmasters or Bofors as the main guns and several Tow launchers for long-range / anti-vehicle work. Of course, a .50 at the top because it's not an American vehicle without one of those.

It's neat, but no we shouldn't bring it back. What possible reason would we have to do that?

Urban combat, with an emphasis on anti-building work. Drive vehicle into position, shoot everything as fast as possible, scoot out for a safe reloading point. Though, these days that is how technicals with recoilless rifles are used for the most part anyways.

 

[WelperHelper99]

It's neat, but no we shouldn't bring it back. What possible reason would we have to do that?

Urban combat, HE/flecchette spam for total infantry death. Could be good against a future fight against China against horde swarms.

I would recommend just bringing back the tripod-mounted recoilless as something heavier than a Carl Gustaf / SMAW while also being a cheaper tool than a TOW / Javelin for destroying stuff first. Alternatively, put some wheels on it so it can be towed into fighting positions easily. As for my thoughts on the Ontos, it's a silly thing and only fit for niche situations.

I mean yes the Ontos is a bit silly and there are more practical solutions. But it is COOL. And does have certain situations where it stands out. I agree with the wheels, speed is life.

A modern version would likely be like the BMPT but built out of an Abrams instead of a T-90. Pair of Bushmasters or Bofors as the main guns and several Tow launchers for long-range / anti-vehicle work. Of course, a .50 at the top because it's not an American vehicle without one of those.

The BMPT Terminator was my first thought on how a modern version would look. 25-30mm bushmasters, a 7.62 M240 coax, and a M2 RWS. And yeah, replace the recoiless rifles with TOW's or heavier, could always try Hellfire.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

Urban combat, with an emphasis on anti-building work. Drive vehicle into position, shoot everything as fast as possible, scoot out for a safe reloading point. Though, these days that is how technicals with recoilless rifles are used for the most part anyways.

Urban combat, HE/flecchette spam for total infantry death. Could be good against a future fight against China against horde swarms.

The design is far too compromised, there's nothing it can do that a technical or HMMVV can't do more efficiently.

 

[WelperHelper99]

The design is far too compromised, there's nothing it can do that a technical or HMMVV can't do more efficiently.

I mean yeah. Still on a close in engagement, 6-8 barrels of TOW missiles on a building or group of lightly armored infantry with a follow up of autocannon fire would be devastating. Efficient no. But it would be OP.

 

[Jewthulhu]

Could be good against a future fight against China against horde swarms.

I'm pretty sure a hypothetical future war with China will mostly be air/sea. Any land combat will be between Marines on islands like Taiwan.

 

[Midwit]

What possible reason would we have to do that?

It would be based.

 

[The Grognard]

The design is far too compromised, there's nothing it can do that a technical or HMMVV can't do more efficiently.

The thing that something like a BMPT has over those is being actually armored, having dedicated thermals in the sights and having the crewmembers in the relative comfort of indoor work. Still, it's a niche vehicle that only countries like Russia really need because most others don't have a real need for dedicated urban combat tanks.

 

[Sleazy Car Salesman]

The thing that something like a BMPT has over those is being actually armored, having dedicated thermals in the sights and having the crewmembers in the relative comfort of indoor work. Still, it's a niche vehicle that only countries like Russia really need because most others don't have a real need for dedicated urban combat tanks.

Honest to God I'd say that something like a Shilka would make the best dedicated "urban combat tank".

Rapid fire high elevation gun that can fire APHE and APIT with enough sustained volume to target and plaster the first few layers of any floor of even a high rise building and can defeat any reasonable attempt to armor or reinforce a building, even a stone or concrete structure short of a bunker. Add missiles maybe for armored vehicle threats but there isn't much that wants to sit in front of two or more rapid fire cannons of 30mm or greater.

With all that said though the idea of a dedicated urban combat tank is pretty silly since the best weapon for urban combat is saturation bombing with incindiaries.