You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments View context
4 points
2 points
  1. That article talks about the t-14 armada like it’s a real tank, it’s obviously absolute garbage

  2. There a list a mile long of visual t-72b3 visually confirm kills

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

T-14 is a new design that’s currently being tested, meanwhile any kind of tank can be taken out. The fact that you think that’s remarkable shows that you’re utterly clueless on the subject you’re opining on. The question is how different tanks compare, and Abrams so far is the one tank that looks to be pure garbage.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

T-14 is a new design that’s currently being tested,

https://defence-blog.com/russia-abandons-armata-tank-due-to-its-high-cost/

It was never real buddy. All its achievements are as fake as the T95 it’s based on.

permalink
report
parent
reply
-1 points

currently being tested

They’ve been “testing” it for more than a decade at this point and even if Russia is able to actually bring the T-14 into service, they won’t be able to produce any significant number of them for the same reason their tank corps isn’t using many T-90M right now.

pure garbage

Go look up Operation Desert Storm and rethink what you wrote there.

If there’s anything here that’s garbage, it’s your notions about tank design.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

There could be many reasons. I don’t know where they are deploying them, how much training the crews have had and many others that factor into survivability. I’m not saying the Abrams is the best tank ever, just saying that there are many factors that can contribute to why they aren’t doing well in the field for the Ukraine.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

Sure, I agree with that. There are tangible factors that make T-72 a better tank though. It’s a simpler design, making it easier to produce and maintain. It’s more manoeuvrable, it’s lighter so it doesn’t get stuck in mud. Doesn’t use a turbine engine, which has been a cause for endless problems. So, while many factors combine to decide overall effectiveness, the quality of the weapon itself is important as well.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Each tank has their advantages, but if you’re going to have an army use a tank with little to no training or spare parts, the T-72 is definitely a no brainer.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points
*

more manoeuvrable

Ah yes, there’s nothing quite like a 4 km/h reverse speed. That’s a really tangible factor making the T-72 a better tank.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.ml

Create post

This is the official technology community of Lemmy.ml for all news related to creation and use of technology, and to facilitate civil, meaningful discussion around it.


Ask in DM before posting product reviews or ads. All such posts otherwise are subject to removal.


Rules:

1: All Lemmy rules apply

2: Do not post low effort posts

3: NEVER post naziped*gore stuff

4: Always post article URLs or their archived version URLs as sources, NOT screenshots. Help the blind users.

5: personal rants of Big Tech CEOs like Elon Musk are unwelcome (does not include posts about their companies affecting wide range of people)

6: no advertisement posts unless verified as legitimate and non-exploitative/non-consumerist

7: crypto related posts, unless essential, are disallowed

Community stats

  • 3.5K

    Monthly active users

  • 2.6K

    Posts

  • 41K

    Comments

Community moderators