Author Topic: Picture of the Day (Other eras)  (Read 905793 times)

Offline Eat Uranium

  • Tea Drinker
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 4.569
  • Today's news will contain [REDACTED]
    • View Profile
    • FH2 Music
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #555 on: 03-02-2010, 18:02:49 »
The Osório tank, best tank in the world. ;D
psh, German bias FTW!
psh, British bias FTW!

Offline Invincible

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 639
  • Armyyyyarrrrrr!
    • View Profile
    • Javelin Photos
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #556 on: 04-02-2010, 15:02:35 »
YPR 765 PRI with ERA package

"If I advance, follow me. If I stop, urge me on. If I retreat, kill me."

Offline Tolga<3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.285
  • (No longer) terrorizing terrorists. :<
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #557 on: 04-02-2010, 16:02:47 »

:P
Epilepsy is bad.

Offline Tolga<3

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1.285
  • (No longer) terrorizing terrorists. :<
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #558 on: 05-02-2010, 19:02:12 »
Epilepsy is bad.

Offline Paasky

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1.801
  • DON'T PANIC! DON'T PANIC!
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #559 on: 05-02-2010, 22:02:26 »
Still failing with the camouflage I see.



Not that we are any better:

(Caption: Camouflage - You're doing it wrong.)


At least we're not in a war zone :P
« Last Edit: 05-02-2010, 22:02:31 by Paasky »
It's half naked people on boats. That's all.
Here in Finland we call that "summer".

[130.Pz]S.Tiemann

  • Guest
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #560 on: 06-02-2010, 01:02:33 »
Our rangers are no better ;) (not really front line troops but still...)


Ps. they are arctic troops

Offline silian

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #561 on: 06-02-2010, 16:02:09 »
On the subject of inappropriate camouflage...

Mali Air Force MiG-21UM 'Mongol-B' with groundcrew...



Apologies for the size, couldn't be arsed.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #562 on: 07-02-2010, 13:02:31 »


TOS-1 Buratino's battery firing.

The TOS-1 is an unique vehicle. Its an heavy Short range MLRS. Designed to take out Personell in fortifications, vehicle's, transports and so on. It actually wipes out everything that issent an MBT. It follows right behind Russia's Armored colums, firing 175KG 220MM rockets, of wich 30 are carried. Often 1-2 are fired, but it can deplete all of its missiles in 15Seconds. At a minimum range of 400 meters, and a maximum of 5000.

This is what i admire and respect Russia over America. They have much more usefull vehicle's. And admit it, this thing looks epic
« Last Edit: 07-02-2010, 13:02:07 by THeTA0123 »
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline Ciupita

  • Gay Lord
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 1.581
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #563 on: 07-02-2010, 15:02:40 »

Offline silian

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 502
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #564 on: 07-02-2010, 18:02:03 »


De Havilland test pilot George Aird ejects from English Electric Lightning P 1B XG332 on the 13th of September 1962. The photographer was simply in the right place at the right time as the photo was only to show a farmer on his Fordson Major for a farming magazine. The pilot landed in a greenhouse and broke both legs, fortunately he was able to resume his flying career after recovering from his injuries.
« Last Edit: 07-02-2010, 18:02:34 by silian »

Offline Desertfox

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 2.657
  • Knowledge is power, and power corupts.
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #565 on: 07-02-2010, 20:02:12 »
This is what i admire and respect Russia over America. They have much more usefull vehicle's. And admit it, this thing looks epic


More useful? For what? Blowing up a city block? Besides, it's just a pod of rockets that would usually be on a truck put on a now otherwise useless T-80 (T-72?).

American MLRS systems have a range of like 300 miles! Is that not useful? I think you are confusing the word with "looks cooler".

Note he said vehicles, he's not just talking about the TOS-1 in particular. I can cite a couple examples at how the Russians/Soviet Union created very useful vehicle that the U.S. didn't, or didn't until after the USSR did.

Offline Captain Pyjama Shark

  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 5.281
  • Captain of the Gravy Train
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #566 on: 07-02-2010, 20:02:34 »
Von Bredow's Death ride, one of the few successful cavalry charges in modern history.



Also that Russian thing does look cooler, which makes all the difference.

Offline THeTA0123

  • The north remembers
  • Masterspammer
  • ****
  • Posts: 16.842
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #567 on: 07-02-2010, 20:02:11 »
This is what i admire and respect Russia over America. They have much more usefull vehicle's. And admit it, this thing looks epic


More useful? For what? Blowing up a city block? Besides, it's just a pod of rockets that would usually be on a truck put on a now otherwise useless T-80 (T-72?).

American MLRS systems have a range of like 300 miles! Is that not useful? I think you are confusing the word with "looks cooler".

You are looking the wrong way.

What did MBT's proven the last few decades? Perfect for ripping anything in the fields. Useless in a city. Many T-72's and T-80's where taken out in afghanistan. THeir turrets couldnt elevate to fire well. The top armor was vurnable. The Anti-Personell performance was lacking.
What happend with the Americans in Bagdad? Same story. They where smarter, as they dint allowed their tanks to move ahead without proper intelligence first.

Now to counter this, Russia developed several systems wich can support MAIN BATTLE tanks up close. 2 Examples= The BMPT and the TOS-1 Buratino.

The TOS-1 Buratino is a Short range MLRS designed to support MBT colums in the fields, and attack targets in urban area.Here you come with ur "OMG AWESOME US STUFF 300 MILES". This thing fires 175KG of Thermobaric rockets wich simply destroys/burns anything what issent a Main battle tank. Its a close support vehicle. Designed to attack targets of 5000M. At that range, the T-72/ T-80 is a perfect chassis, as it provided still valuable protection. ATGM's will be rarely fired at them, because you have to focus on those dozens of Russians T-80UD/T-90's coming your way. And at those ranges, the T-80 chassis is strong enough to survive tank shells.
And do the americans have something like this to protect them? No

The BMPT can be used in a city with no problems. It is heavily armoured on places where it can be attacked. And it has= 2 30MM Autocannons, 2 30MM Grenade launchers 2PKM Machine guns and anti tank missiles. This thing easily rips trough infantery. Back in Afghanistan, the Soviets used ZSU-23 Shilka's as tank support vehicles. Result=MBT losses where down with 70%. But the Shilka has paper thin armor, so they could be easily attacked. The BMPT has the armor of a MBT with added roof armor. And a firepower wich will seriously regret people from sticking their heads out of a window.
And do the american troops have such an effective Anti-personell unit to protect them in cities? Euuuuhhmm     Nah

And this is why the Russians simply owned the frak out of US tank equipment. They have much more diffrent kinds of vehicle's. The current threath of Urban combat is increasing daily. And what did the US replied with? A Stryker armed with a .50CAL. What do the Russians come up with? See above. Those things are actually usefull. And dont come with "YE but look at the GULF war YEAH we owned those tanks! 70% of the Iraqi army was equipped with Type 59 and 61 tanks. These where chinese copies( Wich are less armoured/equipped) then their Soviet counterparts= 1950 T-55/62 Main battle tanks. These old buckets have to face Modern MBT's like the M1 Abrams, Challenger 2 and a gaint airforce with no to very little airsupport to themself. With an very old, outdated AAA to protect them


The US always had better planes. The Soviets/Russians always had better vehicle's.

Russian Airborne troops are protected by a wide series of vehicles wich are dropped with them. The US Airborne troops where begging for a Replacement for the Sheridan, or even keeping it in service.

And yes they all look much cooler

Try to find one US vehicle wich looks as intimidating as this (BMPT)

Or this

When i see that coming my way, i will be shitting bricks.

Yes thats 2 pictures, but i wont post one tomorow to compensate  ;) ;)
And sorry for the long text. I just had to screw back some of that "USA RULES ALL" behaviour ;)   (No offense to the US though.)
« Last Edit: 07-02-2010, 21:02:02 by THeTA0123 »
-i am fairly sure that if they took porn off the internet, there would only be one website left and it would be called bring back the porn "Perry cox, Scrubs.

Offline VonMudra

  • FH-Betatester
  • ***
  • Posts: 8.248
  • FH2 Betatester/Verdun Team Researcher
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #568 on: 07-02-2010, 21:02:30 »


US Special Forces with North Alliance Cavalry during Op Enduring Freedom.  ;D

Offline Mspfc Doc DuFresne

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 677
  • A Poet and I didn't Know It
    • View Profile
Re: Picture of the Day (Other eras)
« Reply #569 on: 08-02-2010, 00:02:39 »
Pretty badass indeed.

Re: The guy up there who is offended by people liking US vehicles;

Afghanistan is what we would call "Not good tank country." No matter how badass and indestructible your tank may seem, in afghanistan it will be severely limited. Yes, casualties dropped when the ZSUs were used, but the primary purpose of tanks is not to protect themselves. That is what bunkers are for. In Afghanistan tanks lacked the mobility to do much, which is why the ISAF has not deployed many or any tanks but has deployed huge numbers of light infantry and helicopters.

Yes, the BMPT is a better support vehicle, and the TOS-1 is a better kill'em'all vehicle, but there are differences. The US has never needed vehicles like that, quite frankly, and it is very unfair to compare the Stryker to the BMPT.

The US doesn't use urban warfare tactics or strategy that would permit use of a system such as a TOS-1, and never really needed it; US strategy has usually depended on heavy armor and speed along with close air support to launch a fast moving Uber-Blitzkrieg, and so the fortifications would be attacked with long range artillery and close air support, and all the ground vehicles would be for direct engagement, not support. The Abrams is accurate out to 3500m and capable of killing T-series tank chassis at that range, but can close the distance extremely rapidly, making TOS-1 type systems not terribly useful; with good communications air support can be more effective, and we DONT use blanket bombardments against civilian structures.

The BMPT is not a fait comparison to the stryker; one is an APC and one is an...well, whatever it is, its not an APC. in the current wars, I would say that the Stryker is much more useful than the BMPT, considering that most casualties come from IEDs and not from small arms fire. MRAPs are even more relevant, and are something the russians are not known for. If we needed the BMPT, we would probably make one, but it has apparently been unnecessary till now. Also note, the lack of those vehicles did nothing to keep us out of baghdad; it certainly didn't turn into a us-Grozny type thing.

American tactics are different than russian ones, and our vehicles are different as well. The russians used a conscript army, whereas the US uses a volunteer force. The russians use human wave style mass assaults, while the US uses fast moving highly skilled spearheads with CAS. (also note that the stryker which everyone derides has proven to be extremely durable.)

In the conflicts we are in, helicopters and infantry are far more useful than tanks. Yes, I'd like to have a BMPT in a city, but it would still be very restricted and no less vulnerable than a tank against ieds. I'd sooner have a blackhawk or apache or platoon of infantry, to be quite honest.

Also, you'll be hard pressed to find a vehicle more badass than the vigilante:


Yes, thats a 37mm 6 barreled gatling gun firing at 3000 rpm.

I would also debate the point that all russian ground vehicles are always better than american ones. Yes, the M1 absolutely raped T-72s and chinese vehicles during Gulf War, but do you really think the T-90 could have fared any better, especially considering that the T-90 has the same gun as the T-72, which could not penetrate abrams armor from frontal arc at 50m?
Twilight - the movie is just like Schindler's list... You know you're watching a crime against humanity, but it's sort of entertaining.~~Ts4EVER