Black Eagle - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Military vehicles, aircraft, ships, guns and other military equipment. Plus any general military discussions that don't belong elsewhere on the board.

Moderator: PoFo The Lounge Mods

By immortallove
#378665
Of course you're right boondock, it is important to be logical.

The point i was trying to make while simultaneously trying not to fall asleep (I was just finished work) was that if the Black Eagle's specs beat the m1's specs outright, in every category, then how can it possibly be an inferior tank? How can it fail to outclass the m1 on the battlefield.

And again, you're right, all we have to go on is the manufacturer's claims regarding the capabilities of the tank, but then, with the m1, when was the last time you saw a civvie or military authority go to that with a measuring tape, speedo etc? They didn't. The manufacturers of the Black Eagle cannot possibly be stupid enough to make a claim they can't back up with testing results. If they were, the Russians wouldn't have bought the damn thing!

Apologies for the fanboi attitude in my last post.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#378730
If they were, the Russians wouldn't have bought the damn thing!


The Russians havent bought it ... its still a proto-type tank ... as of yet the Russians havent updated their armor to anything new (upgraded perhaps, new no) ...

The manufacturers of the Black Eagle cannot possibly be stupid enough to make a claim they can't back up with testing results.


:eh:

Surely your joking?

A manufacturer telling the completel truth? I think not.
By Russkie
#378758
The Black Eagle is a relative to the T-80U. The T-80 was known to be the best tank series in the early 80s till the late 80s. The US created the Abrams because they needed to counter this tank. It was also the first tank to use a turbine engine, which made it look bigger and wider. The T-90C is a cousin to the T-72. The difference between them is that the T-90 uses newer computers and weapons pretty much. It has it's own radar which shields against incoming ATGM.
By Russkie
#378759
Boondock Saint wrote:
The Black Eagle is a great MBT


Says who? How many battles has it been in?

The Sherman looked great to US troops too ... until of course it faced a panther ...

And I dont think any arab states will be upgrading their armor forces anytime soon ...


Russia never sells it's latest technology cheaply. Most poor states use T-55 and T-72s which are dead cheap these days to buy. I still think the T-72 is a good tank it can easyally be upgraded with ERA.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#378839
I still think the T-72 is a good tank it can easyally be upgraded with ERA.


For any non-western nation I completly agree. If its a western nation well ... the Brits, Germans, French, Israeli and Americans all have superior tanks to that one ... but we are talking for poorer nations.

I understand that India purchased a few of the black eagle 125mm variety ... lets see if they use it against Pakistan.
User avatar
By Yeddi
#378841
Lets hope they have no need to.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#378848
Yeddi wrote:Lets hope they have no need to.


Within the context of this thread I would disagree but naturally I did not mean to imply that I was looking forward to a Pakistani - Indian war ...

;)
By immortallove
#379341
Didn't Starman say that it was a Russian project? Doesn't that imply that they own it?

If I was dealing closely with the Russkies, I'd bloody well make sure I told em the whole truth n nothing but, man. What are the odds of the KGB checking facts?

:eek:

I mean FSB. The KGB don't exist any more. oh no. And surely the FSB wouldn't do something illegal like sneak into a contractor's offices. Course not. Preposterous. The USSR is dead. Yeah.
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#379613
The USSR is dead. Yeah.


Oh no ... I shouldnt be expecting a thread about robot praying mantises by you soon should I?

Your not a final phase advocate are you?
By RedStorm
#379736
and you forgot the space planes using turbine jet engines defeated by elementry science.
By immortallove
#379771
Relax guys, i'm no crackpot. I actually believe JFK was killed by Oswald. Actually on this forum that puts me in the minority i believe. :muha2:

But while I'd prefer to keep details to myself, I'm fairly sure that Putin is being appeased, ego-wise, by the higher-up elements of the russian administration, for purposes unknown. We'll see what happens over there in the next few years.

We're going a little bit off topic. Just to reiterate, If the makers of Black Eagle are in fact telling something like the truth, then the tank is superior to the m1a1/2. There is no undesirable aspect to the specification list at all. And really, the M1 is looking a bit dated now, regardless of how incredibly high-tech and untouchable it was in 1991. Anyone in 2004 should be able to beat it. There is no reason to believe the Russkies haven't. I will admit that my argument is not 100% invulnerable, but that's no reason to throw it away.
By SovietHammer
#382982
Boondock Saint wrote:This thing will be easy enough to destroy. It will be slow, gunships and bombs will rip it to pieces.


You are talking about western shitty tech and NOT Soviet/Russian tech dude LOL!
Last edited by SovietHammer on 15 Jul 2004 23:15, edited 1 time in total.
By SovietHammer
#382985
[quote="Boondock Saint"]well ... the Brits, Germans, French, Israeli and Americans all have superior tanks to that one ... [quote]

You're on crack man!
BRITS AND GERMANS?!
A BETTER TANK THAN BLACK EAGLE?!
OMG! this gets better with every minute! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
Mayeby the next you guys will try to explain what the German "Leopard 3" is a good tank?! (MAN THAT WHOULD BE A HELL OF A FUN!)
User avatar
By Truth-a-naut
#382992
Well when I had a brief stint in the reserves they always told me our Leopard C2 was a pretty good damn tank.

It even has AC.


So logically the 3... although I only knew of the 2... should be a good tank no?

:p
By SovietHammer
#383002
immortallove wrote:

We're going a little bit off topic. Just to reiterate, If the makers of Black Eagle are in fact telling something like the truth, then the tank is superior to the m1a1/2. There is no undesirable aspect to the specification list at all. And really, the M1 is looking a bit dated now, regardless of how incredibly high-tech and untouchable it was in 1991. Anyone in 2004 should be able to beat it. There is no reason to believe the Russkies haven't. I will admit that my argument is not 100% invulnerable, but that's no reason to throw it away.


Now we are going a litlle bit closer to the light...
The M1 whould be possibly beaten by an T 72 w ERA and/or KAZ cylinder

Heres a quote of a guy named Chernoborg - 13M back at the Sovet-Empire forums explaining how a KAZ works:

KAZ is "Kompleks Aktivnoy Zaschity", or "Complex of Active Defense".


KAZ works by INTERCEPTING incoming missiles and projectiles.

KAZ has 0.2 second reload speed, so it cannot be circumvented by rapid fire.

Efficiency of KAZ is 95%.

So, statistically, only 1 of 20 missiles/grenades/projectiles will pass through KAZ.


KAZ is Soviet invention, that can be placed on all modern Soviet tanks, starting from old T-55.

Americans do not have anything like KAZ.


KAZ consists of interceptor devices, and of detection devices.

Detection device is sub-millimeter sensor, usually in form of cylinder.


So, "KAZ cylinder" is Soviet sensor that directs anti-projectile defence

I double checked that on the net and this is 100% true
So I personally think what a T 72 chould (Teoretically) smack a M1 with ease :lol:

Well yanks...you loose...as allways...
By SovietHammer
#383010
Goldstein wrote:Well when I had a brief stint in the reserves they always told me our Leopard C2 was a pretty good damn tank.

It even has AC.


So logically the 3... although I only knew of the 2... should be a good tank no?

:p


MUHAHAHA!
Typpically capitalist :p
Doesent knows the tech of his own country!

Here's a link :
http://otvaga.narod.ru/Otvaga/exotic/leopard3.htm

and dont think what if it got 2 barrels it is a better one...teoretically a T 54 chould defeat it :lol: :muha1:
User avatar
By Comrade Ogilvy
#383031
immortallove wrote:Relax guys, i'm no crackpot. I actually believe JFK was killed by Oswald.


That makes you a crackpot.
By immortallove
#383085
immortallove
Relax guys, i'm no crackpot. I actually believe JFK was killed by Oswald.


That makes you a crackpot.


I though so, hence:

Actually on this forum that puts me in the minority i believe.


But that Robot praying mantis has me intrigued... :lol:
User avatar
By Boondock Saint
#383122
Well yanks...you loose...as allways...




Um ... the Soviet Empire has fallen. The US hasnt.

Always?

We won where it matters.


You're on crack man!
BRITS AND GERMANS?!
A BETTER TANK THAN BLACK EAGLE?!


I am not on crack. The Brits have a combat tested tank ... Germans? Meh, they have a nice tank. The Russians? Sure combat tested ... and destroyed by Chechens ... but the Black Eagle isnt combat tested now is it?

If it were it would most likely be in Chechnya ... where it would be destroyed. Or it would be sold to some middle eastern nation where it would meet an M1 ... and be destroyed.

The Black Eagles best bet is on paper and when India finally invades Pakistan.

You are talking about western shitty tech and NOT Soviet/Russian tech dude LOL!


Soviet?

All that which is Soviet is obsolete. All that which is Russian is Soviet AND rusting.

So ... keep patting yourself on the back ... its amusing.

@ingliz good to know, so why have double standar[…]

...Or maybe because there are many witnesses sayin[…]

Sounds like perfect organized crime material ex[…]

Commercial foreclosures increase 97% from last ye[…]