Ukraine - Russia Conflict

Look up top-attack.

Norrrrr, the missile made an explosion that big on its own didn't it.

Sure.


The ones supplied to Syria were not even top-attack variants LOL. Here's a top attack variant on a T-72. T-90 is just a modded T-72.



Old 2A4s are the ones Turkey have. That's like the original M1 or Challenger.

Javelin is top-attack and tandem-HEAT, there is no chance of surviving.

You're a pretty stupid guy. The discussion was about 2nd gen ATGMs against old tanks. It's pretty obvious the tanks were not designed to stop top attack. Even NATO tanks are vulnerable to top attack today.
 
You're a pretty stupid guy. The discussion was about 2nd gen ATGMs against old tanks. It's pretty obvious the tanks were not designed to stop top attack. Even NATO tanks are vulnerable to top attack today.
Latest TOW, Javelin and NLAW are all top-attack.

That said, non-top-attack TOWs did just fine against T-90s is Syria, the first video showed an explosion that was way to large to be just the missile, that much should be obviously. Some of the time it just kills the crew though. I saw the crew survive but have to evacuate in a few cases, I never seen any T-90 continue after a TOW hit during the Syria conflict and I watched a lot of videos.

Challenger III will be damn near indestructible and will also have active protection and MCS plus a 55 calibre smoothbore cannon, which will fire APFSDS so fast it will be damn near impossible for active-kill systems to react, and it will go through Russian armour like warm parmesan.
 
Yeltsin did the same thing. The UK did the same thing with a lot of right-wing groups during WWII and locked some up too. And as one response says, it would never have happened if Russia stayed in Russia. You can't have pro-Russian groups when you're being invaded by Russia. A ban is fairly lenient, they wouldn't still be breathing if Putin decided he didn't want them... even in peacetime.
 
Yeltsin did the same thing. The UK did the same thing with a lot of right-wing groups during WWII and locked some up too. And as one response says, it would never have happened if Russia stayed in Russia. You can't have pro-Russian groups when you're being invaded by Russia. A ban is fairly lenient, they wouldn't still be breathing if Putin decided he didn't want them... even in peacetime.
In case your limited eyesight & even more limit intelligence missed this.
 
Latest TOW, Javelin and NLAW are all top-attack.

Lol. That's 'cause those are not 2nd gen. Direct attack defines 2nd gen. All 3rd gen tanks predate top attack.

That said, non-top-attack TOWs did just fine against T-90s is Syria, the first video showed an explosion that was way to large to be just the missile, that much should be obviously. Some of the time it just kills the crew though. I saw the crew survive but have to evacuate in a few cases, I never seen any T-90 continue after a TOW hit during the Syria conflict and I watched a lot of videos.

In the first tank, the crew got hit, the gunner ran away due to shock. But he survived. The only way to kill a T-90 with direct attack is to hit it from weaker areas like the rear. A problem even Western tanks face.

Composite armour defeated 2nd gen ATGMs a long time ago. When it comes to T-14, the radar prevents the ATGM from making first contact with the tank which renders the HEAT round ineffective. It's one of the ways it defeats top attack using passive means.

Challenger III will be damn near indestructible and will also have active protection and MCS plus a 55 calibre smoothbore cannon, which will fire APFSDS so fast it will be damn near impossible for active-kill systems to react, and it will go through Russian armour like warm parmesan.

Good luck if Britain believes that. Challenger 3 is only an MLU. It's no different from the new T-90M Breakthrough-3 modernisation. It's not going to be competitive with the T-14. The Germans and French are working on 4th gen.

Anyway, the so-called 55 calibre smoothbore gun is merely the German L55, which was introduced in the 80s. Impressive as it is, newer, more powerful guns are necessary.
 
Russia is using thermobaric weapons against civilian areas in cities after invading a country and _Anonymous_ is like, "but check out what these guys said."

1647897544214.png
 
The west did not invade Ukraine. And in case you haven't noticed, the west, particularly the US has been taking about a Pacific pivot for about 15 years now. They did not want to have problems with Russia, and Russia had to work damn hard to cause them - annexed 3 parts of two sovereign democracies, murdered two dissidents, one with Polonium and one with Novichok, both a breach of the Geneva Convention and International Law in themselves, Putin's SAM shot down a passenger plane killing >200 EU citizens, and then completely invaded a European democracy....

....but the west caused all that didn't they? Even though it ran counter to expressed plans both in terms of the Pacific Pivot and EU energy policy.
you think ppl are dumb enuf not to know what is happening that they will fall for western propaganda ? Nato aggressively expanded east wards , they dint honor the minsk agreement, when ukraine murdered civilians in donbas region through nazis they kept quiet.

Here is your own bbc calling them nazis, yesterday they were nazis today they are liberals & freedom fighters. Just like taliban went from being terrorists to honorables . Tell me why in the f**** world would any one believe bunch of opportunistic turncoats.

 
  • Agree
Reactions: RISING SUN
The reason they're arming Ukrainians is because they're being invaded. That is not a two-way street.

It's about Russia a) Stopping Ukraine from becoming a rival supplier of oil and gas to the EU; and b) Stopping Ukraine from joining the EU and becoming a showcase for Russians next door who think Putin's management of Russia's economy has been crap.

Belarus next door is a pro-Russian dictatorship, if their people ever decided they wanted democracy you'd probably blame NATO for that too. You have democracy, maybe you are a western conspiracy too.
:ROFLMAO: now you come up with oil excuse, so next you are going to compare russia to iraq & ukraine to kuwait ? US dropped everything in afghanistan handed the country on a platter to terrorists and went straight to ukraine , guess for what ? To start another proxy war against russia.
 
Yeltsin did the same thing. The UK did the same thing with a lot of right-wing groups during WWII and locked some up too. And as one response says, it would never have happened if Russia stayed in Russia. You can't have pro-Russian groups when you're being invaded by Russia. A ban is fairly lenient, they wouldn't still be breathing if Putin decided he didn't want them... even in peacetime.
US also did the same they locked up the japanese origin ppl for no good reason, a fact that every true democracy should be proud of.
 
Russia stronk

No wonder Russia is scrapping the bottom of the barrel looking for troops to sacrifice like Syrian and Chechen soldiers. If Russia keeps scrapping they may find Indian soldiers to "join" the Russian cause judging by the many dopes in here who support Russia and moronically believe it's Ukraine's fault for getting invaded.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: BMD and _Anonymous_