Well, we were. The US government and arms manufacturers have systemically understated or obscured the capabilities of many weapons to retain the element of surprise. This shows who is thinking like a hegemon, and who thinks like a bully.
The soviets lied to there people about our weapons, they knew effective they were. They studied the effectiveness our weapons all through Korea and Vietnam wars but had to lie to the people to boost morale.
@@MrHodoAstartes That is an extremely important factor, indeed. While I am sure there are exceptions (there always is) defence is about shocking the attacker . At the same time, you also want to make the attacker reconsider first strike, usually by having an arsenal of WMDs. The rest in logistics, where the defender can respond much faster than what the attacker has calculated.
I'm Polish. In Poland, Russian stuff had the exact same 'fame' as cheap Chinese stuff... If something broke easily or was badly made, we'd call it 'russian crap' regardless if it was made in russia or not.
China is far superior in manufacturing. The only Russian made products that I own are steel cased ammo, a Soviet telescope & a terrible night vision scope from Belarus. My Polish friends who lived in communist Poland also call it Russian crap.
I lived in Russia for four years. No self-respecting Russian would buy any technology made in Russia if he could get something made in Germany or Italy or anywhere else. Nothing is made well, everything breaks down quickly, and almost all workers are lazy and spoiled. Buildings are a wreck after twenty years because no maintenance budget is supplied. When a Western consltant was called in to help the National Library in Saint Petersburg, she said, “Before anything else, fix the toilets.” All toilets in the whole library were overflowing with shit and no one could fix the plumbing. The country is a joke with a big bad guy attitude.
@@VoffkaGomel That doesn't tell me when and where your information was collected as you may have been over in Russia during the soviet Union years or as of the late 2000s and you may have lived in some small village outside of Moscow, as if I lived back in the same years in my country and came from a country town as just maybe I would see the same weaknesses. Different Russia, different weapons and they are winning against the odds as they face the Technology and assistance from over 36 nations, yet still they advance. America and Europe are scared to get fully involved on the ground so they get all the Ukrainian young men slaughtered to prove Russia is some how weak. Amazing. cheers
@op7317When Putin basically admitted that he hopes Trump wins reelection because it would greatly benefit him and Russian aggression around the world. Putin called Trump the "American Gorbachev" and basically sees Trump as America's downfall and the USSR's revenge for itself falling in 1991.
Trump has been part of the Russian agenda. Im sure they agreed Trump would give a little aid to fool Americans. Then let Putler move in. Russia def helped trump get elected in 2016 for a reason. The fact trump wouldn’t let anyone in Russian meetings is all I need know. Trump for hell 2024.
@@arcturionblade1077 Sorry but the only aggression you see around the world is American as they have invaded attacked and killed more people around the world then Russia ever could or have done.
I went to Russia in the early 1990s as part of a team who was checking how well the Nuclear Proliferation Pact was working after the dissolution of the USSR, and part of the tasks were to check on the efficiency of the nuclear warheads and we found that almost all the units we inspected at different sites had the same problem- The Tritium gas that ignites the Nuclear reaction was almost non-existant, so those weapons were essentially useless, and that happened due to the fact that each head needs to be checked by a 6-person team, and the tritium be replenished every 3 years according to the Russian protocols, and they didn't have the enough personnel to do the maintenance, nor the amounts of tritium needed to replace the inactive one. We reported that to the Department of Defense, and that helped to maintain the status quo, but increased the quality control of the US Arsenal.
So if this is still true, then it means if Russia nukes the USA then the warheads will be atomic but not thermonuclear. Still really bad but could be much worse.
OK, so you were busy about 30 years ago....... back then, the former Soviet Union was on its knees and had absolutely nothing to do with the Russia of today. What about the durability of American nuclear weapons? Are there enough factories and skilled personnel to replace and maintain them? Why hasn't the glorious USA "democratized" such a weak Russia with all its completely outdated and ineffective weapons long ago? Why are you once again using foreign countries to fight the same old battle? And by the way: Russia doesn't want to wipe out Ukraine - they just want to secure the new Russian territories - a concept that is of course completely incomprehensible to the USA, as the history of "successful democratizations" in recent decades shows us...
Soviet Union died at the hands of changing Russia in the 90s, and Putin being a piece of the old USSR was the right choice to break away from old habit's and form new alliance's. We should have excepted Russia into NATO but again America shut the door as they knew they needed an enemy to keep their war economy going. Bad for us good for the Yanks? Look it up.
Omni Magazine had an article sometime in the 1980s comparing Soviet science to western science. The opening paragraph had a joke: "A Russian was walking along in Warsaw carrying two heavy suitcases when a Pole asked him for the time. Relieved to have an excuse to temporarily put down his burden, the Russian replied, 'The time is 10:32 and 34 seconds exactly. The temperature is 25 degrees, and my heart rate is 125 and decreasing.' The Pole was amazed, asking, 'Is that a Japanese watch?' The Russian indignantly replied, 'Heavens no, this is modern Soviet technology!' The Pole, somewhat embarrassed and wanting to change the subject, asked, 'What's in the suitcases?' The Russian grumbled, 'The batteries.'"
@@dnik1260 Poland never claimed to be superior in literally every f.cking thing in the universe and it's close vicinity... 😀 Thus your question doesn't make any other sense than just as being your way to cope with the reality.
@@dnik1260 Again - they didn't ever claim to have. Russians on the other hand act like they're superior to everyone in every field of expertize when in reality their so called "best tank in the world" is equiped with not exactly military grade optoelectronic systems bought in the west. Do you understand the difference? Nobody cares if you do or do not have your own research. Research is expensive without guaranteed financial outcome so naturally not everyone can afford that. Russian's inability to admit the weakness is what makes them a loughing stock.
@@dnik1260 You obviously didn't get the point. No one really cares if you do or do not have capable research and development. Those are expensive activities without any guaranteed financial outcome and very adjourned investment return at best. So naturally not everyone can afford them and there's no shame in not spending limited resources on them. What makes Russians the loughing stock isn't weak research itself. It's their reluctance to admit they're not world champions in everything.
I remember at the beginning of the war when one of the first things Germany ever gave to Ukraine was a few thousand helmets. Everyone was mocking and insulting Germany. Looking back, at least the Ukrainians were given REAL HELMETS.
I still dont understand why people laughed. Protective gear is making the difference between a living and a dead soldier. Iam pretty sure the ukrainian soldiers that got the german equipment were gratefull
@@amramjose So Russia can produce hypersonic missiles and the most advanced air defence systems in the world but they have to wear saucepans on their heads for Helmets ? Your comment lack logic
@@TrevorCrook-c1s Russian air defence systems have utterly failed. Ask people who live in Belgorod. They do not have any actual hypersonic weapons, because you need scramjet technology and Russia doesn't have that.
@@tadcastertory1087 Zircon and Sarmat have already been deployed by the Russians . Both hypersonic You are describing ballistic missiles . Hypersonic missiles manoeuvre . And Zircon doesn’t leave the atmosphere . A purge of scientists ? Evidence please . Names and details Attacks on refineries made minor damage easily repaired . Did not effect production long term
Two important points: 1. The Russo-Ukrainian war has de-facto started back in 2014, after the occupation of Crimea and the invasion of Donbass. Whatever the russian officials said during that period, their army was already fighting a war to keep some parts of Ukraine occupied. 2. Soviet != Russian. Soviet Union had the population twice bigger than that of modern RF and included 14 other modern-day countries. For instance, the T-34 tank mentioned in the video was designed and produced in Kharkiv, Ukraine. The fearsome SS-18 Satan missiles were designed and produced in my native city of Dnipro, also in Ukraine.
What you should say if not for the Ukraine's industrial might; the Soviet Union wouldn't have had half the effective weapons they had. The Ukrainians are proving now they still are capable of adapting and adopting weapons to fight with. Their use of drones has changed how people see a battlefield
Even with all the BS PR you're dishing out on YT , let me tell you the tech and research came out of Moscow even in Soviet time, the factories were set up by Moscow.... I would challenge you to mention one thing that is helping or has helped the Ukrainian people post Soviet times made in and developed by the Ukrainians on indigenous grounds without any foreign part would really be a milestone in world history. On the contrary the Nazis are still using Russian weapons to fight the Russian because western weapons have proved themselves incapable of subduing Soviet weaponry forget the new ones coming out of Russia.
@@Crazmuss have you seen the 6000 plus tanks destroyed by the ukranians ?? most destroyed by artillery and shoulder fired weapons ,,,,what difference does a few Abrams need to make ?? and these are old stock Nato 90s era weapons the Ukranians are getting ,,,T72,,T80,T90 all 80s and 90s spec "cheap" tanks designed for a cold war conflict that never happened BUT Nato countries didnt stop their weapons development then and dont actually make tanks a major part of battlefield planning preferring air resourses to get the job done from tens of miles away
The MAIN problem Russia has with it's army is that is simply never had the budget that would be needed to keep an army and its equipment of that size in truly operable condition. And that has been going on for close to 30 years and the results are visible now. For example, Russia's military budget is (was) lower than that of the United Kingdom, with an army at least 10 times larger, a much larger air force and much larger navy. Just keeping you equipment up-to-date and properly serviced would require a much larger budget that Russia has had for years. Now, Russia has increased its military budget about ten-fold, but you cannot simply catch-up with your maintenance with just money if you don't have the personnel to do it. And for the long term, Russia simply does not have an economy large enough to keep up that kind of military spending.
You should also mention Putin's habit of glad-handing his cronies and various hangers-on..dachas, holidays, luxury cars, etc is where valuable funds needed for the military have been squandered.
bingo. An army marches on the backs of a bunch of boring logistics, supply and maintenance guys with boring manuals and inspections and maintenance schedules. Or it does not march at all.
Their tank's still have the best ejecting turrets on the market nothing ejects as high or as smooth as a Russian tank taking all three cosmaunauts with it
Vladimir Putin does deal with corruption in the military his way they get free flying lessons out of tall building so maybe things will change if he gives out enough flying lessons
And Russia is still winning, imagine how it would look if their equipment was perfect. Ours on the other hand failed against Russia so what about our junk?
This is an old joke in the URSS, but the URSS ended in 1990. Are you a boomer? You seem to be stuck in the cold war, it ended 25 years ago and we won!!
@@99zxk If you are in a Union you are in absolutely better circumstances. But in America that´s not enough anymore with greed-flation running rampant across the nation, and wall street buying up real estate and tripling the rent last 15 years.
@@99zxk More than half of Danish people in the working age (20-69 year olds), are member of a union, while Denmark has a higher labor productivity than the US.
Russian commander receives a shipment of brand new surface-to-air missiles. Day later, he reports back to command that all missiles have been used up and they hit with 96% accuracy. For next shipment, he requests to be sent surface-to-target missiles.
You're closer to correct than you think. The Russians have books full of charts that are used for assessing the effectiveness and number of enemy casualties that are produced by artillery fire. The Russian officers look up the appropriate chart after a fire mission and use this to calculate the number of enemy killed and wounded.
Why is then Russia not losing already? They were supposed to run out of missiles 2 years ago. Their army is bad so why are they still killing people in Ukraine?
About 15 years ago I worked with a Russian engineer in California. He told the company he worked for in Russia maintained military vehicles. A depot with 500 trucks that were supposed to be combat ready, when inspected the Commander would randomly point to a vehicle he new would start to show it worked. The further back vehicles would not work and many did not have motors.
@@SmokeNGunsBBQyes Russian bot they are. As much as you can say American defense procurement is corrupt and America overpays (which broadly speaking isn’t even that true it tends to be more due to trying to keep jobs in places at greater expense rather than just blatant overpaying) American stuff absolutely works. American soldiers don’t sell random parts of their vehicles they’re set to maintain, and they tell people who stuff is broken and it gets fixed. The simple fact is that American soldiers are pretty well paid, they have no reason to risk stealing stuff to sell it because they make enough money that it’s not worth it, and stuff is kept track of well enough they’d get caught if they did. America has some of the most guns per capita, and despite that you can’t really buy any stolen stuff from the military, even as minor as a gun or grenade or something, no matter how hard you try, meanwhile in Russia there’s been stories that the Russian mafia has literally offered foreign cartels nuclear subs. And clearly it’s still a problem, even just the beginning of the war Russia was running out of fuel because their soldiers would sell it all. Meanwhile American troops never runs out of fuel and abandon their Abrams I wonder why
Can we PLEASE STOP this lie that T-34 was "first modern tank to feature sloped armor"? God damn CA1 had sloped armor. In 1916. More modern? Renault FT, 1917. Almost all French tanks, from "day 1" had sloped armor. Even British Mark 1, granddaddy of tanks, had some kind of sloped armor.
@@Сергейк-е8р The First Modern Tank with Sloped Armor The Schneider CA1 is often considered the first modern tank to feature sloped armor. Introduced in 1917, it was part of the French response to the challenges posed by World War I trench warfare. While its design had many flaws, the incorporation of sloped armor was a significant step forward in tank design.
it's insane and probably why they so desperately try to claim that a bunch of the civlian deaths arent from the war but due to a secret genocide only Russia knows about and why they use so much of the same tactics as Nazi propagandists and neo-nazi conspiracy theorists. I still find it hilarious how people claim Putin is winning this 1 week special military operation even though we're on day 863. Like even if you ignore any information from either side and just look at a map you'll be able to tell this has been a disaster seeing as Russia invaded an unprepared, far weaker enemy they share a massive land border with, and they started the war already occupying like 10% of the country but havent managed to push the front line very far after over 2 years of constant fighting and multiple rounds of conscription. There weren't any Americans claiming the US was winning the Vietnam War in 1974.
How terrible were US pilots in Viet Nam 5000 helicopters and 4000 airplanes were shot down by rice farmers. I see why the US gave up. Imagine if they went up similar armed nation
All manned fighter and ground attack planes are obsolete. Pilots are obsolete. Haven’t you been watching the war? The days of manned war planes are over. Tanks are also obsolete. It doesn’t matter how well they are made.
I'm wondering if Ukraine will try its hand at becoming a refit/upgrade partner for other countries using old Soviet/Russian equipment. They've certainly had their fair share of experience with Russian tanks being crap. But what if the Ukrainian defense companies could work out a way to install better western systems into something like a T90. Make a T90 an actual competitive tank, or at least make it not garbage with egg crate armor and chain link cages strapped to the side. If other countries are sitting on stocks of old Soviet tanks and are hesitant because of the high cost of Western tanks, Ukraine could have a gold mine on its hands.
To play devil’s advocate for a second: it doesn’t matter how “good” your tanks or rifles are if all your troops are only ever drinking Vodka and have almost no training…
That describes America in all their 109 conflicts and wars, now tell me of any other country that can even come close to that tally of war and death, remember also America was involved over 64 governmental changes & Coups in other peoples countries. Man we need a mirror? Look it up as it scared me and changed the way I look at the planetary consumption of the west?
@@Mikkall Yes but like using the Ukrainians we used the Russians back then as it was in our best interest to help Russia defeat the Nazi's, as even in Australia's we sent aid to most of the world including Russia as my mum being at home was involved in helping anybody connected to what the world was going through. Hard times that most people nowadays could not possibly imagine, remember the Jews lost 6 Million and we called it a holocaust so Russia lost 27Million and we say nothing?? I just do not understand this absence of facts pertaining to the war. But we all know the facts are only facts if your the winner. Cheers
1:40 Sorry, total myth. The T-34 was absolutely _not_ the first modern tank to feature sloped armor. Most WWII tanks had sloped armor in the front, many of them existing before the T-34 was even designed. But, other tanks also had sloped side armor prior to the T-34 entering service in 1941. Examples include things like France's FCM 36 that entered service in 1933, the French Somua S35 that entered service in 1934, or the Panzerkampfwagen I that entered service in 1934 (though it's slope wasn't as severe as the T-34 or the FCM 36).
That's a myth that's always bugged me, especially since it's so often thrown around by Tankies. If you go back further it's not even the first vehicle with sloped armor, even during the Civil War they were doing it with ships and before that wearable armor was often very carefully designed with the idea sloping to deflect blows better then just the contours of the human body (hence why a ton of chest plates have big bellies in the later parts of the medieval and early modern period while more primitive armor from antiquity tended to be flatter). As you mention even with tanks the T-34 was far from the first. The idea of sloping is such an old idea that the front slanted armor of a tank is called the "glacis" which is the name for the sloped armor of a fortress which is truely ancient.
and they were not even well made. rushed production to keep the numbers up. 30 to 40% of them broke down before even seeing the frontline. terrible welds soo the armor would just snap destroying the tank without penetration. this tank is russia 101 good on paper but it was made in russia.
Russian tanks, t34, were slaughtering US tanks in Korea, at least that is what most history films and videos said. WW2 Germans liked the T34 as a medium tank. Survival is all that counts not the technicals of the weapon used.
t34 is half american anyway. engine is old bmw engine and trany was made in italy i think. nothing much russian in it. by the way, t90 uses modified engine from t34.
One of the reason for such high exports of Russian weapons before 1990 is also that vasal countries couldn't buy anything else, we just had to buy Russian tanks, helicopters and jets
@@syntheticvitamin4600 pray you never get to find out ,,,the ukranians have been supplied 90s surplus weapon systems and you,ve struggled like hell to overcome them without huge casualties in men and equipment ,,,A modern Nato led war would mean destruction on a scale youve never seen
It's a lot more than that. Russia has been behind technologically since its inception. There was perhaps only one period in which Russia was close to on par, and this was the Napoleonic era.
@@samhutchison9582 Actually no, in the late 80s Russia took the lead in terms of technology, but the United States was able to launch donkeys loaded with gold, which undermined the USSR from within. I will not idealize the USSR, there was more than that, the replacement of religion with communism, the transformation of communists into indestructible idols and the replacement of rationality with ideology... We see all this today in the USA itself, when a professor is fired from an institute because she calls a woman a woman, and not a person with a vagina.
The suspension system of the T34 is an American suspension system developed by American engineer J. Walter Christie for his tank designs; nothing Russian about it.
@@markphillips4767 Lol, only it was practically FIRST tank using it effectively, you have documentaries where they say that German Panther had sloped armor because they saw haw effective it was, educate you`r self before writing bull***t online.
@@markphillips4767 And they are made just few of them and those where bad tanks so yes t34 is first mass produced tank with efective sloped armor, Germas copied it when they made Panthers.
Corruption is a big part of it as well. A General is supposed to armor his unit, so he buys cheap or fake upgrades and pockets the money. Your vehicles need new tires? Buy cleaning supplies and have your troops shine up the old tires.
I was always told in Russia that it's considered "bad Business" to not at least try to steal something before you buy it. It stems a combination of the Russian obsession with the idea of smekalka and chronic poverty. It's savvy to make money off your troops by giving them NERF body armor instead of the real thing.
We in Russia before the war on average considered the Russian Army to be very weak. We thought that in the army officers only steal army money and property, and drink vodka, and soldiers do useless activities like painting grass green (to make it look fresh!). We thought that military equipment in Russia was all old (Soviet) and falling apart, and that new Russian developments were a fake, only shown on TV or at parades. The funny thing is that, well, how to say, it's not entirely untrue)))) And yet it turned out that even in such a state the Russian Army was able to hold out for 2 years against the AFU (who have been fighting since 2014), reinforced by NATO's intelligence, equipment, money and coordination.
"And yet it turned out that even in such a state the Russian Army was able to hold out for 2 years against the AFU (who have been fighting since 2014)" And in 1979-1989, the weak, corrupt, poor Soviet army also managed to hold out for 10 whole years against the global superpower army of Afghanistan, supported by the collective West. Xaxaxa HATO))))
They are not “holding out”. They are the invaders. They do it by throwing bodies at the problems they created. To try to hide the losses behind a flag of victory. In both cases, just delaying the inevitable. The failures in Afghanistan ended the Soviet Union. The failures in Ukraine are going to end Putin’s regime.
Soviet-era cannon operated by the Russian military have an operational range of 24-28 km., while NATO-standard guns fielded by the UAF fire effectively at ranges of 30-40 km. Ukrainian gunners operating technically-superior cannon have gained a powerful battlefield advantage and are inexorably reducing the Russian army’s mortars, howitzers, and rocket artillery systems to scrap with something approaching impunity, Russian military bloggers are saying .Even vociferously pro-Kremlin observers are confirming the battlefield firepower pendulum has swung away from the Russian army clearly to the AFU’s side, and the Ukrainian artillery’s ability to hit its Russian opposite without risking being hit back, is being singled out as the key factor in AFU ground advances in recent weeks.
There is a totally different mindset in how everything is designed and used in NATO vs Soviet gear. People often bring up how the USSR had bigger nukes and more missiles but overall they were less capable. The US stopped making missiles/warheads as big as possible because they developed missiles that were more and more accurate so they didnt need as many missiles or as large a payload but the Soviets had to make up for their lack of accuracy with size and volume, they couldnt kill with a quick stab so they blindly swung with a hammer instead. The US has plenty of flaws but a major reason why they also dont have Soviet sized stockpiles is because when properly used you dont need a war of attrition: like Desert Storm they used precision weaponry to cripple the enemy in a matter of days and weeks so after that you're just mopping up a disunited smattering of enemy units who are cut off from resupply and cut off from command.
We heard about the resource of howitzers that the M777 is not intended for intensive shooting, such as is now being done in Ukraine, as this leads to high wear on the barrel. After several weeks of use, the range and accuracy of howitzers drops and is comparable to Russian howitzers. It's just worth reading a little more than what the news says.
@@NotrusbotPretty standard issues for howitzer barrels the world over. Ukraine is using their artillery a lot, systems components wear out with use. Nothing unusual here.
@@Notrusbot A large round going through a barrel does a lot of damage. You expect a lot of wear and tear. That is why they usually design guns with replaceable barrels.
What ground advances have been made by the AFU in recent weeks? Please be specific. At the moment the Russians are advancing extremely quickly on several fronts. And that when they can only shoot right up to their own feet....
The USSR's reputation for weapons stems from the fact that the Pentagon needed them to justify big budgets. In fact, every time the West got its hands on a Soviet weapon, it turned out to be far less advanced than assumed..
There is a lot more truth in your comment than you could possibly imagine. The American Military Industrial Complex ran into a massive problem when the USSR collapsed. The money suddenly got cut off and it needed a new enemy to scare the American people about. Welcome to the Global War on Terror and now China. And boy was the MIC happy when Russia invaded Ukraine and Biden decided to give Ukraine anything it wanted. So now we have to stop Russia because if they beat Ukraine they are going to take over the world. While China takes Asia and the Pacific. The MIC is building new facilities and getting more funding for new technologies to save the world again!
@@hermes6910 yeah, there’s a repeating history of that. Russia lies constantly about its capabilities and we take them at their word so we can build bigger and better things. It’s really funny seeing it happen repeatedly.
But if we don't, then we risk being the paper tiger they have turned out to be. Sorry, but I'd personally rather err on the side of caution than not. I'd rather be able to take on the world and win decisively and maintain what freedom we have left than not. Just my opinion, for what little it's worth, which, to anybody but me, ain't much.
When talking about their weapons export as a sign of the quality, you need to remember who they were selling to. Most of the countries they sold were mostly interested in getting most bang for their money and needed simple designs that required little training or special tools for maintenance. When you need to build an army from basically scratch, you have very different needs to established country with professional military.
India is importing less weapons overall. India wants to increase its own domestic weapons industry by supporting Indian state owned and private defense companies. Only thing India is importing are high end weapon systems like aircraft and other electro optical equipment and components. most other weapon systems can be procured and produced in India itself without the help of a external source. India can’t fight a global war by relying only on unreliable foreign weapon suppliers like US, Russia, Israel, France and UK.
It's shocking how much a country their size relies so heavily on imports. Even today a lot of their "domestic" equipment is either licensed Soviet/Russian gear or shameless copies. Their pistols are mainly imports, their assault rifles are mainly foreign copies, their elite units mainly use western equipment, they've got mounds of Isreali gear, their tanks are mainly T-90s and T-72s, their IFVs are all BMPs, their air and missile defenses are all old Soviet crap, they've got a ton of Soviet built ships, and when you start prying into their native built ships and aircraft you'll still find tons of imported parts like American or European made electronics and engines. They are moving more towards domestic production, I heard until the last decade or so they were still relying on Russian made attire (forget if it was their BDUs, helmets, or body armor) and until recently they couldnt even issue enough body armor but they're changing that and modernizing. It's good they're moving away from Russian made kit though in general since their main threats are Pakistan and China who both use a lot of Chinese made gear which is heavily based on Russian gear and China (along with India) have a ton of inside knowledge on Russian kit so the Chinese will be intimately knowledgeable on India's Soviet and Russian gear.
They perform alright in war though. They've beaten Pakistan more then once even though the US, UK, and China were backing Pakistan in the Bangladesh liberation war. The only major time i know of them backing down was against China in their border conflict and it's hard to blame them for that when Russia did the same when China was far weaker and Russia was far stronger, and when most of the world is letting China get away with occupying most of the South China Sea, lets them attack civilian vessels in their own waters, allows them to build islands illegally, and lets China steal oil and other resources from neighboring countries.
If history is ever explained the T-34 which the Germens took, and after disassembling one T-34 and using it to see it s strength's and weaknesses. Well they rebuilt the Panzers tanks to take this dangerous tank on. Remember in the end the little old T-34 won the war against the Unreliable heavy maintenance tiger?? History is a bitch to dreamers. People forget not like Germanys decade of weapons production the Russian were building what the could on the fly? amazing
@@cecilwilliams8586 The Germans built the Panther Tank after analysing the T34, giving it the sloping armour etc. Nonetheless, the Tiger 1's Square frontal armour could defeat almost any incoming projectile until the end of WW2. When the Tiger II entered the war it was alnost indestrutable from all but the rear. The German problem was that they had far too few of them. Basic Fault of Germany was simply going to War too Early, and NOT Putting their Industry onto a War Footing until years after the start of WW2
@@Rabmac1UKWhat the fuck did you said?? The 76mm of the M4 Easy8 and 17 pounder of the Firefly pierced the frontal armor of the Tiger I like swiss cheese
Well the T34 was GREAT... on paper. But like anything especially Russian things. The actual tanks made. From Russian factories is.. as honestly expected a flaiming dumpster fire pile of absolute shit.
You still need tanks to win wars. A well disciplined crew is a great crew. These Russians have little to no training. For an US Abrams tank crew it takes about a year in tank school.
seems to be something we both inherited from WW2. The US realized a good tank crew was worth a lot more then a good tank and built tanks that would preserve the crew as much as possible so they regularly had crews bail out and get a new tank, sometimes even rejoining the same battle. The Soviets meanwhile just built tanks to be as easy as possible to build and operate which meant losing crews but meant you could field a lot more tanks, that was a lot more important for them during WW2 and later their army was built with the idea that a bunch of highly trained officers would lead a mob of peasant conscripts so they made things easy to build and easy to operate so an army could be built quickly. We're starting to see the problems with both of those doctrines as it takes a lot longer to build US equipment, it's more expensive, and it takes a lot longer to train soldiers but the Soviet doctrine results in an unruly mob of cannon fodder, especially when your officers are a joke and the lack of skilled NCOs cant make up for shitty officers and incompetent enlisted conscripts.
Tanks simply aren’t survivable on an open battle field today. Javlins and Drones now rule the day. In the future, Tanks either have to feature DEF capabilities to defeat those weapons or it won’t remain a front line weapon.
Accuracy of Russian bombers during World War II was poor. I had a professor who was a child in Nazi Germany. He and other boys were forced to work in an artillery unit. He relates how the US and British bombers would be more on target than the Russians. In fact, the German kids working this artillery unit would take bets where the Russian bomb would eventually land.
@@mikespencer4922Did you not watch the video? Nothing has changed he’s saying, they still can’t hit their targets lol 😂 they missed in the 40’s and they missed 60% of their missile strikes!
The issue with focusing on weapons is that Ukraine for at least the first years and well into the second, were facing Russia with almost the same weapons. Even the US weapons they go were 1980s era and many of those still aren't online in large numbers. It isn't just, or even primarily, the weapons, but other factors. * Logistics. Western weapons only work with extremely good logistics and people trained in it. Even if Russia had western qualify weapons, they don't have the systems, training, money, and commitment to supplying them. They rely on rail, don't have forklifts and pallets, nor folks able to handle scheduling, position of fuel trucks, etc. Ukraine had less of these issues as it was defensive and inside their country. * Training. Russia is still using Soviet-era doctrines and those of its bush wars. Ukraine retrained itself along western lines -- good NCOs and junior officers, western tactics, etc. They don't make the same types of mistakes. * Commitment. Russia is using conscripts who have nothing be be gained. You have prisoners, disgruntled folks from rural areas, lots of alcoholics, etc. Ukrainians are fighting for their families.
On top of that... * Russia apparently has squads of troops to stop deserters with lethal force. * Many of the conscripts now are minorities in Russia and even foreign students.
After almost 3 years as the war began, I am still keeping in mind how international analysts were all given only 3 weeks to my country to exist under terorussia strike... That is what you need to know regarding the existing level of military analytics. My farther used to say: the far you are from russia border the more you are afraid of it.
Well, I guess when you don't know the actual effectiveness of these weapons and organisations it makes sense to give them the benefit of the doubt. If you just assume they don't work properly you may get a nasty surprise. The real puzzler is how the Russians also seemed to thiunk they'd jsut roll over Ukraine. You'd have thought they'd have a better idea of their own capabilities and Ukraine's, since they'd been planning this probably for a decade at least.
@@sdrc92126 Yup, and before it was the west, part of Poland, Romania and else. Before this it was Crimea, Even before the Tsar also gave Ukraine more lands.
In the 80s, I served as a commander of a motorized rifle platoon in a group of Soviet troops in Germany. We appreciated the BMP-1 assembled in Bratislava (Czechoslovakia), whereas the machines produced in Kurgan (USSR) were considered to be of insufficient quality. Question: did the Soviet Union produce such good weapons?
Yo! The comments here are also a good laugh. I havent even pressed play yet! Check the comment I find before yours --> @00dfm00 5 days ago Imagine the mental gymnastics a Russian propagandist has to go through. 531 likes!
"Corruption" in the entire RuZZian Federation is so exquisitely worse than horrific than can even be imagined by any American other than our horrifically corrupt politicians, lawyers, judges, the entire DOJ, CIA, FBI, ... , etc..
I remember cheap Japanese products and how they changed and its now China who produce the top end product. Cheap is what wins as look at the cheap rubbish T34 tank and what it did to the German might with its top end product. 10 to 15 T34s built for the same cost as 1 mighty Tiger tank, man it did not go well for the tigers. Look how Russia has handled all the top gear that we gave the Ukraine, same tactic as before might beats bright every time. Hell we hide our mighty gear behind the lines as they do not last long on the line. Look it up. Cheers
Aside from the hardware issues, Russian command structure seems to be very top-down, leaving units helpless if the commander is killed or otherwise unavailable. There is no initiative by individuals, nor the Napoleonic idea that "Every French soldier carries a marshal's baton in his knapsack."
@@Skank_and_GutterboyThis idea works for irregular warfare in mid-intensity combat conditions like in Africa or the Middle East but when it comes up against western equipment it can't compete. Ironically most Soviet-legacy weapons out there are used against opponents who are also using Russian weapons.
@@treehuggerdeluxe5598 Yeah - if used intentionally. But if ALL your weapons or a SUFFICIENT NUMBER of them are just decoys, then your fighting strength is MUCH weaker not only than you intend to project to your enemy but weaker than you need to win.
@@treehuggerdeluxe5598 you should pay more attention to reports from battle field. You are right, cardboard is excelent as decoys, but russians are using those "decoys" as main attack force.
that's one thing people forget about Russia and China and it's arguably one of America's greatest strengths. The US has tons of economic, cultural, and diplomatic influence, and that gives them a lot of power globally even without direct political or military influence. Like one of my favorite examples is Kung Fu Panda: it was such a well made American movie that Chinese citizens were asking "why is America making better movies about Chinese culture then China?" since their movies tend to be rather poorly written and rely on special effects even more then ours to carry a film. My other favorite example is Disney with even America's biggest enemies like Hitler and the Kim dynasty being huge fans of classic Disney cartoons to the point that the previous "crown prince" of the DPRK, Kim Jong-nam, losing his title (and his life) for trying to visit Disneyland, which is something you'd never really see happening with an American politician. Imagine Hunter Biden being executed because he just needed to risk his life sneaking into a forbidden Chinese amusement park, or imagine Americans being arrested and spending their life in jail for Iranian or North Korean movies.
@@arthas640Yeah but Disney covered up Black Panthers face on promo posters for the movie in China and took Finn out of all Star Wars promo posters in China too. But I do get your point just not going to put halos over Disney. China does have some good low budget production films. Mostly martial arts films. I look at China differently than Russia. China is trying to have the best of both worlds by being communist and trying to have capitalist or western ideals. Russia seems to be trying to regain a bygone era when they were at or near the top. Corruption is tearing that country apart as well.
I often think "soft power " will be the only way wars will be won, in the future. But thank you for your post Matt-rz7gm, I didn't know what it was called.
The T-34 still being touted as the first one to use slopped armor is so fucking annoying, like tell me you only look at German tanks from that period without telling me you only look at German tanks from that period. The very first tank France fielded in WW1 had sloped armor and more than two thirds of every bit of armor they fielded up to WW2.
Why do people keep saying this that Russia's t-34 was the first tank that used sloped armor when there are dozens of tanks built before that had sloped armor I don't understand where this myth comes from.
You beat me to it. The idea that an engineer anywhere or anytime wouldn't immediately think of this is inane. Battleships were using this concept in1900 well before anyone had heard of 'a tank'. As to where it comes from. Repetition exactly like this video. Simply no research and no understanding. This nonsense was taught to me in school- I'm 62. I rebelled against it then at 13 because it was simply stupid but the myth marches on. There are many other such myths.
@@benchapple1583before ships even, back in medieval times armor makers clearly knew that having an angle for your armor was advantageous because a decent amount of plate armor has it to some degree.
@@bulldozer8950 You are completely correct. If you really want to drill down then you could say that Mother Nature invented it with sloping skulls about 10 million years ago. But the question persists "Why do people believe that the Soviets were the first people to notice this and apply it to the T34's armour while the dumbass engineers in the West were making 10cm radar and jet engines?" It's staggering what people will believe if you just say it again and again.
@@benchapple1583 not only is the commentator not an engineer but he has zero mechanical sense. It’s worth doing an IQ test with the intention of getting 100, to see what half the population are struggling with.
Corruption is one of the bigger causes of failures. Even if only 10-20% of soldiers/commanders are corrupt, they can have a much larger impact. For example, a soldier who sells off a few components from working tanks for a few grand is compromising the entire multimillion dollar tank.
Yeah they once had entire units crippled because a few soldiers drank their vehicles anti-freeze which at the time was mainly alcohol with few adulterants. It didnt take many corrupt men to render many tanks and trucks unusable when they tried to send them into cold weather.
The problem is that the USA built counters for what they thought the Russian weapons were capable of which resulted in completely overpowered weapons on their part.
This went both ways during the cold war. The soviets built the Kirovs and the Kunetzovs specifically to launch their advanced cruise missiles that they had to build in order to counter American CVNs. The US was forced to spend insane amounts of money developing the Mk.48 ADCAP torpedo when the Soviets managed to fool them into thinking that they had a larger fleet of Alfa-class subs that could outrun any torpedo of the time. The cold war ended because one side ran out of money from doing this back and forth for 50 years. Now, if only our government here in the US would realize that there's no longer an arms race and stop spending like the cold war never ended.
When Russia won big wars they were helped by who …. The USA supplied them with equipment and planes , now the USA is not supplying them and you see how bad their equipment is.
Yes. A sizable chunk of Russia's truck manufacturing and ship building was in Ukraine when the USSR collapsed. Ukraine's current heavy manufacturing industry is almost all leftovers from Russia.
@@DriveCarToBar Left overs from the USSR you mean. Basically what Russia is today but still, some might read into that wording and think you're siding with fascists. It's a minefield these days. They'll prbly get rich AF in the coming decades as they'll prbly make all our weapons.
Sure, Russia has definitely lied through their teeth about their capabilities, strength, weapons, etc, but I think it's also pretty obvious that Putin was convinced that Ukraine was so weak that not only could Russia easily take the entire country in less than a month, but they could do so while mostly using their older recycled Soviet-era arsenal which companies like India were no longer interested in, while also using a force consisting of a small number special forces while conscripts and poorly trained units from the far reaches to get the job done, allowing Russia to keep their best weapons and troops in the event that another nation or NATO assumed Russia was completely tied up in Ukraine and therefore an opportunity could exist to get rid of Putin, which, let's be real, Putin no longer cares about Russia, he cares about himself, his power, his wealth, self-preservation. He's absolutely terrified of a revolution, and he has good reason to be given Russia's history, the Bolsheviks are a stark Russian reminder of what happens when the poor get sick of the ruling class.
Dude Ukraine is weak. There is 90% of all weapons that are used in Ukraine or all NATO weapons 90%. There’s almost no fights going to human. It’s all just missiles and bombs that’s it losing 200,000 soldiers a week that just last week and soldiers came in Ukraine lost 1500 soldiers wiped out, I guess it is true. They said they’re gonna fight till the last Ukrainian.
Specifically, "fast battleships ", which make them something of a hybrid. Some protection sacrificed for speed. Also the extended length to gain speed over previous, like South Dakota and Massachusetts. Hood, from this POV, a forerunner.
Whether or not the lowa class is a battle cruiser, a battleship or the latest recreational rowing boat for family trips, who cares. It is not the topic of this vid, so it is irrelevant.
Corruption killed their weapons. Their truck tires had rotted off them when they tried to use them, some one pocketed all the money that was to keep them up
it's pretty telling how many stories there are about Russian corruption from just ordinary people. Almost every time i talk to someone who's been to Russia has stories about government employees like police and soldiers offering to sell them Russian military gear or soliciting a bribe. I knew a guy who started working there before the collapse of the USSR when they started to open up to the west and he had officers offering to let him drive a tank and shoot the gun for a price and i knew people who went there in the 90s and 00s who got similar offers with some outposts and bases allowing foreign citizens to fire things like cannons and machine guns at targets for a price.
yep and it will take outsiders to clean up that corruption. cause anyone locally who can try to do it are either dead, cowe,ed in to silence by fear or are corrupt themselves. trust no one locally.
That innovative design of the suspension on the T34 was an American design. The designer tried to sell his design to the US Army and they passed. He then tried to sell it to the Russians, they bought a couple of his tanks to test the design then they just stole the it from him.
I just got to that point in the video and I instantly started looking for comments like yours, wtf is their information sources. Also can we mention the fact they say the T-34 was the first modern tank with sloped armor? By that logic the T-34 must be considered the first modern tank because the US, Germany, and the UK all had tanks featuring sloped armor before the T-34 was built
Almost every UA-cam creator calls any warship bigger than a canoe a "battleship," but then when this one actually mentions a real battleship, they manage to call it a battle cruiser. Good grief!
The problem with applying bad conditions to Russia's nukes is redundancy. In other words, they won't aim one nuke at each major city (in a full blown war), they'll fire 10. That's why they have so many of them. This also applies to countries with decently maintained stockpiles. It is literally rocket science after all. Every country has to assume that some won't launch, some will blow up on take-off, some will go wildly astray, will get shot down, won't blow up over the target etc. etc. Or maybe many or all will work. So in a real nuclear war, anyone in a major city should expect to get hit with nukes over and over again.
yeah and 9 of them will miss their targets only one hitting an actual target of any value and considering American anti missile tech that means the odds of an American city being hit are 1 in 10 trillion to one because American anti missile tech will take out the ones going to for the city's without issue the out lying territory's meh iffy at best what will happen to those but considering the missile attack will trigger American nuclear counter attack Russia would be a radio active crater afterwards not a threat to anyone or anything for like 10thousands years to come give or take
Не спеши переубеждать своего врага в его глупости, пусть он сам осознает свою глупость в самый последний момент. Не пытайтесь их переубедить, пусть верят в собственную пропаганду. Do not try to convince your opponent of their wrongness, let them realize it at the last moment.
@@josericardo9614 Russian leaders are winning the war , overcame sanctions and have driven the west into a state of collapse and they are “ lousy “ ? 😂😂
Technology is one thing, competence is another. The troops are not well trained, not motivated and suffer from terrible leadership. You can see that time and time again. Locations where Russians build defensive structures - terrible choice at times, they totally forget the sky and their flanks - or troop and machine movements - much to old fashioned, they move in a way the Germans did in 1944 - their extreme reliance on train support and logistics - extremely vulnerable see Ukraine’s offensive - and troops from the far east who have no clue what they are fighting for. If you have somewhat capable soldiers, you can compensate for technological disadvantages, but the warfare has changed, and the Russians cannot react at all.
In WWW2, Russia got lots of lend-lease gifts, and their tanks got American-designed suspension systems. Read Stalin's War by Sean mcMeekin for more info.
the t 34 was known to break down before it finished a tank of gas. Russia has never been known for having a very good navy and their policy has always been throw more people at it. Really the only thing they have produced with any long life is the ak-47 and the rpg - 7.
@@Jimmy-ye3wg widely accepted doesn't mean it did because the soviets also had shermans and all kinds of stuff from the lend lease program. The tactic they used during ww 2 was to ram german tanks so they would be able to shoot them.
@@Jimmy-ye3wg actually most of the time it was the ammo going off that caused the fires not the fuel, not kidding the placement of the ammo meant it went of when the sherman was hit
@@Jimmy-ye3wg It has shit brittle armour that would spall and shatter when hit, either killing or seriously injuring its crew. Crew survivability was much much higher in the Sherman compared to the T34.
while their weaponry is bad the tactical blunders are just so bad. I remember a couple of months into the war they made the "brilliant" decision to send all their drill sergeants to the front lines to reinforce their numbers.
funny thing is Russia keeps falling for the same blunders as the Nazis. They also threw a bunch of their elite units and a ton of trainers (who were some of the most experienced and best trained men in their military) into units like the Lehr division or Sonderkommando Elbe that were sent on suicide missions like the Battle of the Bulge resulting in them losing a ton of their best leaders and best trainers. Japan did the same and sent their best men into battles against well prepared americans rather then using those men as leaders or trainers. Russia has effectively gutted their special forces by sending them into frontal assaults, the estimates i've heard say it will take them a decade or more to full recover those units since training special forces takes a lot of time since they have such high standards (either that or you drop standards and they arent nearly as effective).
Why don't you talk of all the western weapons being destroyed by Russia why don't you say America was using the dollar as a weapon and forcing countries with sanctions if they buy from Russia. And the Russians don't kill indiscrimet;ly like the west and Israel killing civilians. Get your facts straight.
@@davidcolley7714 ...How bout this myth. Russia invaded Poland and divided it up with Germany at the beginning of WW2. Russia, just like Germany, was the invader. Russia then executed thousands of surrendered Polish soldiers. True or false. You know the truth.
Because the most modern weapon Systems of the US were doing THAT much better? Come on now, people forget that no weapon system is infallible. Heck even during WW1 when the british came rolling up with their tanks they might have been a shocking sight at first, but it was already during that first assault that the germans improvised tactics and weapons to defend against that completely new weapon system. Bundled grenades to blow off the tracks, direct fire with artillery, bunched up barbed wire to tangle up the gears of the tracks/wheels followed up by close-assaults. There is always an arms race going on, always has, always will. The only difference is that Putin started to believe his own lies and that there is SO MUCH smoke and mirrors involved in Russia, especially before the actual full-on war, that the true descripancy betwen the few truely ELITE Russian Units (many of which were almost entirely wiped out during the first few weeks/months that saw the most intense fighting and where there was a real chance of Russia taking Kiev) and the vast majority of the russian armed forces, where training, equipment, motivation, leadership, supply and readiness could vary IMMENSELY! The russian leadership now has to lay in the bed they made for themselves and russian soldiers have to lay in the field. Breathing or not.
@@MajorCoolDWell said. I grew up and served with SAC and USAFSS from '74, and was trained to distrust the Russkies. When dafuq did that change? OK, maybe the 90s with Sacha Pivovarova and the onslaught of Russian supermodels, but THEY weren't running their country.....
I really don't know where the whole "T54 was the first tank to have sloped armor" thing came from, but it's blatantly nonsensical. Like, you can just look at pictures of WW2 tanks and see sloped armor.
He said T34, which is a WW2 tank. (Technically designed in 1937, but put into service in 1940). I don't know if it was the first with sloped armour or not.
@@RobBradshaw The Soviet BT series (Bystrovye Tanky, or Fast Tank) built on Christie's chassis, had sloping front armor. -Well, 12mm (half an inch) of boilerplate, really, but it WAS sloped! :)
The first tank to have sloped armor (albeit partially) was the Schneider CA 1. But even some Late Medieval Castles had sloped walls to defend from cannon fire.
If the goal is to make money why would a weapons manufacturer invest money and resources into a politically dangerous country when they can steal all of your inventions any time they want. That kills innovation.
Did u know russian private fleet which was paid by "war fleet chest" is bigger than actual russian navy? russia is actually paying for three ships (or anything else) just to get 1 somewhat working ship. Yeah thats corruption in russia.
And if you're an engineer why would you stay somewhere with a low standard of living and terrible wages, when you could make better money and be living in better conditions in Europe or the US. It's 2-pronged, no foreign companies want to be involved and domestic development is starved for talent, because anyone that's competent wants out.
I served in Berlin in the late 70's they have always had a lot of stuff and it has always been sh ite. Look at the Iraq war anyone who saw that should never have bought another Russian anything.
In the 70s, US lost 4,000 helicopters and 5,000 airplanes due to Soviet air defenses in Vietnam, did you live in an alternate universe at that time? Iraq surrendered like France in WW2, losing only 10,000 soldiers, they didn't even want to fight.
Vietnam was a decade long, The Gulf War lasted less than 43 days with the main forces of Iraq being overrun in 100 hrs. Vietnam was near peer, Iraq was simply outclassed with current equipment. 2 totally different types of warfare as well. Politics also led to much of the catastrophic losses in vietnam as well as where in Iraq Swartzkov said he wouldn't give the politicians time to mess it up.
Hilarious part is the Tankies constantly defend Desert Storm with "but they werent using Soviet tactics" and "they were using low quality exports and the ones the USSR had were better" but then and now we can see how effective (or more accurately: ineffective) Soviet/Russian kit is.
@@joestudebaker7726so, Ukraine is decades decades decades after. What's the point? Think about it for a sec. If your western equipment was so marvelous, so breaking game, so game changer, so breath taking... Why didn't your government send a bunch of them to Ukries by now? I mean, they are just superior by any means, right? Think about it.
@@YaraMits We sent NLAWS they obliterated Russian tanks, we've sent decade old patriot defense systems which have managed to shoot down Russian missles and prevent air superiority. These aren't new, in some instances they are 20/30 years old and they've proved effective (did you watch the video). The reason more advanced weapons havent been sent is that Putin has been very vocal about additional armaments being seen as an escalation. Now the west does not want an escalation, it wants to provide a "way out" for Russia, a way in which Putin can sell victory at home without the Ukraine ceding territory. Its doing just enough to keep that option on the table, and to avoid Russian use of nuclear weapons.
@@BALTOBOULBOBBI If you stop relying on information obtained from Ukrainian telegram channels, in which most of the “victories” are based on populist jingoism, but just go and compare the performance characteristics of these systems, you will understand what nonsense you are writing. The Patriot system shoots down targets at speeds of up to 1600 m/s, while the Kinzhal system reaches 4000 m/s.
That junk as you call it is old modified equipment and its very prone to Drone attacks just like all those modern NATO tanks, but what you do not seem to understand is that while Russia is using up old stock somewhere in the Background they are amassing huge amounts of Amour and Weapons. Russia is still winning with old junk so get over it.@@ryanr5182
name one battke that we lost. a real, pitched battle where CAS was involved. one. Look up what we did to you in syria when wagber attacked on our FOBs. not one orc lived. not one US soldier died. @@gnosticbrian3980
@@gnosticbrian3980Houthis have attacked civilian ships successfully, but they have succeeded mostly in giving the U.S. military a lot of target practice. The U.S. has in turn successfully attacked several inland military targets. If you consider that to be success for the Houthis then you must be Russian.
Strategically, the goals were not reached and in that sense you could say both conflicts were a failure. Tactically though, the United States was superior in both conflicts. If the goal is 'destroy this target' or 'get rid of group X at location Y' you don't want to face off against the US armed forces. If the goal is 'Prevent communism from coming to a country' or 'bring democracy to a country', even when that country really just wants to be free of foreign influence, you end up being at odds with the people you are fighting with and fighting against. The goal here is kick Russia out of Ukraine, very much like kick Saddam out of Kuwait, or Hitler out of Europe. And for such goals, the United States has done quite well indeed.
Neither did Russia in Afghanistan. It is important to point out that no country since WWII can really conquer another country. Not Russia. Not the US. Insurgencies are just to expensive to fight against.
@@FerroEquus-262 I think it was abandoned. If you read any of the action reports off of Wikileaks, the US military was very effective against the Taliban.
yeah that's something a lot of people forget. The wikipedia page also mentions how the idea of sloped armor goes back even further like the South's first ironclad in the Civil War.
Yes, Ukrain is advancing to the rear and the Russians with their shovels are retreating forward. The battlefield and the manner in which war is conducted has completely changed due to.24/7 drone and Satellite survilance making any size gathering of troops and equipment an instant target. The days of gathering a large strike force and the ammo, supllies required to support a majotpr attack are over. Attackers are now mostly no bigger in number than squad or plantoon size, They take no more ground than can be supported due to constant surveillance and drone attacks. Half million brave and determined Ukraianian soldiers KIA because their leadership failed to understand the fundmental change that makes any movement of troop or equipment immediately known to the enenmy.
Optics from space can see a muzzle flash on the ground and send ordinance as targeted . Thermal,infrared can see the air exhaust ports of under ground bunkers even.
1:34 They had sloped armor back in WW1. The T34 did not invovate anything. It's argueably the worst mass produced tank, by being the most destroyed tank.
Yeah, france lost 1million soldiers in ww1, cause they were bad soldiers, and britain lost only 750 000. Cause they were better soldiers. That's just how it works
@@worldoftancraft Lol. Well put. It's just like how people say the F-22 can't be considered the best fighter, because the F-15 has an amazing combat record. Lack of opportunity/use is a major factor, as is how something is used. And considering the reds managed to lose 20 million troops, I hardly believe their top brass had any care for strategy or tactics.
1:34 That's one thing that's not true. Sloped armor wasn't first introduced on the 34. Tanks like the Char S35 Somua, the Crusader III, the Panzer II and the BT-7 all had sloped armor before the 34 came out. That however is a whole separate rabbit hole.
It’s not just that they were lying about everything. They assumed that we were lying about our weapons too.
Well, we were. The US government and arms manufacturers have systemically understated or obscured the capabilities of many weapons to retain the element of surprise.
This shows who is thinking like a hegemon, and who thinks like a bully.
The soviets lied to there people about our weapons, they knew effective they were. They studied the effectiveness our weapons all through Korea and Vietnam wars but had to lie to the people to boost morale.
Well said
@@MrHodoAstartes That is an extremely important factor, indeed. While I am sure there are exceptions (there always is) defence is about shocking the attacker . At the same time, you also want to make the attacker reconsider first strike, usually by having an arsenal of WMDs. The rest in logistics, where the defender can respond much faster than what the attacker has calculated.
@@MrHodoAstartes "Appear weak when you are strong. Appear strong when you are weak." to quote Sun Tzu
2014: russia has 2nd best army in the World
2022: russia has 2nd best army in Ukraine
2024: russia is a 2nd best army in russia
🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂🤣😂
I had to read it twice 😂 first I didn’t get it 😂 uh 2 best army in Russia, the fans will not appreciate that 😮
😂😂😂
🤣🤣
They are not very good,the equivalent is all crap.
I'm Polish. In Poland, Russian stuff had the exact same 'fame' as cheap Chinese stuff... If something broke easily or was badly made, we'd call it 'russian crap' regardless if it was made in russia or not.
In my house, everything that wears out or breaks prematurely we brand as "cheap Chinese crap."
China is far superior in manufacturing. The only Russian made products that I own are steel cased ammo, a Soviet telescope & a terrible night vision scope from Belarus. My Polish friends who lived in communist Poland also call it Russian crap.
We in Germany used to call stuff Russian if construction was cheap and badly made.
I tak, i nie. A hasło "gniotsja nie łamiotsja"? Ja to raczej kojarzę rosyjskie (i radzieckie) jako toporne, niekoniecznie łatwe do uszkodzenia.
@@Zbigniew_Piatek No ja taki stary jeszcze nie jestem zeby radzieckie jeszcze pamietać :D
I lived in Russia for four years. No self-respecting Russian would buy any technology made in Russia if he could get something made in Germany or Italy or anywhere else. Nothing is made well, everything breaks down quickly, and almost all workers are lazy and spoiled. Buildings are a wreck after twenty years because no maintenance budget is supplied. When a Western consltant was called in to help the National Library in Saint Petersburg, she said, “Before anything else, fix the toilets.” All toilets in the whole library were overflowing with shit and no one could fix the plumbing. The country is a joke with a big bad guy attitude.
When and where did you live in Russia and can you prove your story. Cheers
Prove to you or you will nuke him? @@cecilwilliams8586
@@cecilwilliams8586 there is nothing to prove. It's all about truth. Just go and see it in person
@@VoffkaGomel That doesn't tell me when and where your information was collected as you may have been over in Russia during the soviet Union years or as of the late 2000s and you may have lived in some small village outside of Moscow, as if I lived back in the same years in my country and came from a country town as just maybe I would see the same weaknesses. Different Russia, different weapons and they are winning against the odds as they face the Technology and assistance from over 36 nations, yet still they advance. America and Europe are scared to get fully involved on the ground so they get all the Ukrainian young men slaughtered to prove Russia is some how weak. Amazing. cheers
That means "communism" is somewhat doing its thing there. But they dont have China's acquired advantages for tech stealing.
Russia lied? Imagine my shock!
@op7317When Putin basically admitted that he hopes Trump wins reelection because it would greatly benefit him and Russian aggression around the world. Putin called Trump the "American Gorbachev" and basically sees Trump as America's downfall and the USSR's revenge for itself falling in 1991.
@@arcturionblade1077 Yep and that's why Putin took the Crimea under Obama's watch and invaded the Ukraine under Biden's. Duh!
Trump has been part of the Russian agenda. Im sure they agreed Trump would give a little aid to fool Americans. Then let Putler move in. Russia def helped trump get elected in 2016 for a reason. The fact trump wouldn’t let anyone in Russian meetings is all I need know. Trump for hell 2024.
Don't believe everything you read on the internet
@@arcturionblade1077 Sorry but the only aggression you see around the world is American as they have invaded attacked and killed more people around the world then Russia ever could or have done.
I went to Russia in the early 1990s as part of a team who was checking how well the Nuclear Proliferation Pact was working after the dissolution of the USSR, and part of the tasks were to check on the efficiency of the nuclear warheads and we found that almost all the units we inspected at different sites had the same problem- The Tritium gas that ignites the Nuclear reaction was almost non-existant, so those weapons were essentially useless, and that happened due to the fact that each head needs to be checked by a 6-person team, and the tritium be replenished every 3 years according to the Russian protocols, and they didn't have the enough personnel to do the maintenance, nor the amounts of tritium needed to replace the inactive one. We reported that to the Department of Defense, and that helped to maintain the status quo, but increased the quality control of the US Arsenal.
Yes, our bureaucracy suffers from historic overconfidence on maintenance and storage issues.
So if this is still true, then it means if Russia nukes the USA then the warheads will be atomic but not thermonuclear.
Still really bad but could be much worse.
OK, so you were busy about 30 years ago....... back then, the former Soviet Union was on its knees and had absolutely nothing to do with the Russia of today. What about the durability of American nuclear weapons? Are there enough factories and skilled personnel to replace and maintain them? Why hasn't the glorious USA "democratized" such a weak Russia with all its completely outdated and ineffective weapons long ago? Why are you once again using foreign countries to fight the same old battle? And by the way: Russia doesn't want to wipe out Ukraine - they just want to secure the new Russian territories - a concept that is of course completely incomprehensible to the USA, as the history of "successful democratizations" in recent decades shows us...
This ain't the 90s and they have hypersonics. Remind us how bad fabs and khenzals are 😢😂
@@hellyrazr9459 Big dumb bombs, circa 1940's and 50's, with stuck on wings if I'm not mistaken. That'll do it then we're all doomed!
What a country. In Soviet Russia, body armor wears YOU for protection.
I love good old jokes🤣
Rusia
Soviet Union died at the hands of changing Russia in the 90s, and Putin being a piece of the old USSR was the right choice to break away from old habit's and form new alliance's. We should have excepted Russia into NATO but again America shut the door as they knew they needed an enemy to keep their war economy going. Bad for us good for the Yanks? Look it up.
Russians wear captured (or collaborators) Ukrainians for protection
It is not soviet Russian now it is oligarchy Russia. Dictatorship Russia. Non democratic russia. Dangerous Russia.
There was a joke in CzechoSlovakia in the 1980s. Soviet have the everything superior. Russia has even the fastest clocks in the world
Omni Magazine had an article sometime in the 1980s comparing Soviet science to western science. The opening paragraph had a joke: "A Russian was walking along in Warsaw carrying two heavy suitcases when a Pole asked him for the time. Relieved to have an excuse to temporarily put down his burden, the Russian replied, 'The time is 10:32 and 34 seconds exactly. The temperature is 25 degrees, and my heart rate is 125 and decreasing.' The Pole was amazed, asking, 'Is that a Japanese watch?' The Russian indignantly replied, 'Heavens no, this is modern Soviet technology!' The Pole, somewhat embarrassed and wanting to change the subject, asked, 'What's in the suitcases?' The Russian grumbled, 'The batteries.'"
@@dnik1260 Hahah love the desperate response. Hope you got a few rubles for that, comrade.
@@dnik1260 Poland never claimed to be superior in literally every f.cking thing in the universe and it's close vicinity... 😀 Thus your question doesn't make any other sense than just as being your way to cope with the reality.
@@dnik1260 Again - they didn't ever claim to have.
Russians on the other hand act like they're superior to everyone in every field of expertize when in reality their so called "best tank in the world" is equiped with not exactly military grade optoelectronic systems bought in the west.
Do you understand the difference?
Nobody cares if you do or do not have your own research. Research is expensive without guaranteed financial outcome so naturally not everyone can afford that.
Russian's inability to admit the weakness is what makes them a loughing stock.
@@dnik1260 You obviously didn't get the point. No one really cares if you do or do not have capable research and development. Those are expensive activities without any guaranteed financial outcome and very adjourned investment return at best. So naturally not everyone can afford them and there's no shame in not spending limited resources on them.
What makes Russians the loughing stock isn't weak research itself. It's their reluctance to admit they're not world champions in everything.
I remember at the beginning of the war when one of the first things Germany ever gave to Ukraine was a few thousand helmets. Everyone was mocking and insulting Germany. Looking back, at least the Ukrainians were given REAL HELMETS.
I still dont understand why people laughed. Protective gear is making the difference between a living and a dead soldier. Iam pretty sure the ukrainian soldiers that got the german equipment were gratefull
I think the Russians had WWII steel pots, formed into a modern looking helmet with foam and a fabric cover...
@@amramjose So Russia can produce hypersonic missiles and the most advanced air defence systems in the world but they have to wear saucepans on their heads for Helmets ? Your comment lack logic
@@TrevorCrook-c1s Russian air defence systems have utterly failed. Ask people who live in Belgorod. They do not have any actual hypersonic weapons, because you need scramjet technology and Russia doesn't have that.
@@tadcastertory1087 Zircon and Sarmat have already been deployed by the Russians . Both hypersonic
You are describing ballistic missiles . Hypersonic missiles manoeuvre . And Zircon doesn’t leave the atmosphere .
A purge of scientists ? Evidence please . Names and details
Attacks on refineries made minor damage easily repaired . Did not effect production long term
Two important points:
1. The Russo-Ukrainian war has de-facto started back in 2014, after the occupation of Crimea and the invasion of Donbass. Whatever the russian officials said during that period, their army was already fighting a war to keep some parts of Ukraine occupied.
2. Soviet != Russian. Soviet Union had the population twice bigger than that of modern RF and included 14 other modern-day countries. For instance, the T-34 tank mentioned in the video was designed and produced in Kharkiv, Ukraine. The fearsome SS-18 Satan missiles were designed and produced in my native city of Dnipro, also in Ukraine.
What you should say if not for the Ukraine's industrial might; the Soviet Union wouldn't have had half the effective weapons they had. The Ukrainians are proving now they still are capable of adapting and adopting weapons to fight with. Their use of drones has changed how people see a battlefield
Even with all the BS PR you're dishing out on YT , let me tell you the tech and research came out of Moscow even in Soviet time, the factories were set up by Moscow.... I would challenge you to mention one thing that is helping or has helped the Ukrainian people post Soviet times made in and developed by the Ukrainians on indigenous grounds without any foreign part would really be a milestone in world history. On the contrary the Nazis are still using Russian weapons to fight the Russian because western weapons have proved themselves incapable of subduing Soviet weaponry forget the new ones coming out of Russia.
why aren't you fighting ?
@@Romanotieu how do you know?
Wasn't in 2014 that the US staged a coup in Ukraine to remove Yanukovych from power? In truth, that was another step towards the war.
Russia definitely made a mistake opening up the largest live testing ground for western weapons.
Well, at least now we know, that Abrams can't drive horizontally on a soil.
@@Crazmuss have you seen the 6000 plus tanks destroyed by the ukranians ?? most destroyed by artillery and shoulder fired weapons ,,,,what difference does a few Abrams need to make ?? and these are old stock Nato 90s era weapons the Ukranians are getting ,,,T72,,T80,T90 all 80s and 90s spec "cheap" tanks designed for a cold war conflict that never happened BUT Nato countries didnt stop their weapons development then and dont actually make tanks a major part of battlefield planning preferring air resourses to get the job done from tens of miles away
Neither the West nor Russia will test the latest technologies and weapons in this war for obvious reasons.
It works both ways =)
By the way, what about drones in NATO armies? Already adopted?
@@juryfilatov4520we were using drones 20 years ago. Ours shoot hell fire missiles with spring out sword blades.
The MAIN problem Russia has with it's army is that is simply never had the budget that would be needed to keep an army and its equipment of that size in truly operable condition. And that has been going on for close to 30 years and the results are visible now.
For example, Russia's military budget is (was) lower than that of the United Kingdom, with an army at least 10 times larger, a much larger air force and much larger navy. Just keeping you equipment up-to-date and properly serviced would require a much larger budget that Russia has had for years.
Now, Russia has increased its military budget about ten-fold, but you cannot simply catch-up with your maintenance with just money if you don't have the personnel to do it. And for the long term, Russia simply does not have an economy large enough to keep up that kind of military spending.
You should also mention Putin's habit of glad-handing his cronies and various hangers-on..dachas, holidays, luxury cars, etc is where valuable funds needed for the military have been squandered.
@@Kenneth-p1byeah, that's the kleptocracy at work
bingo. An army marches on the backs of a bunch of boring logistics, supply and maintenance guys with boring manuals and inspections and maintenance schedules. Or it does not march at all.
Their tank's still have the best ejecting turrets on the market nothing ejects as high or as smooth as a Russian tank taking all three cosmaunauts with it
Vladimir Putin does deal with corruption in the military his way they get free flying lessons out of tall building so maybe things will change if he gives out enough flying lessons
Hahahahahahaha
Sad but true and disturbingly entertaining ! I keep waiting for someone to do the math and compare them all to see which one went higher
And Russia is still winning, imagine how it would look if their equipment was perfect. Ours on the other hand failed against Russia so what about our junk?
Nice to see the Russian space program is on track even during the SMO.
They pretend to pay us... we pretend to work.
This is an old joke in the URSS, but the URSS ended in 1990.
Are you a boomer? You seem to be stuck in the cold war, it ended 25 years ago and we won!!
Are you in a union?
@@99zxk If you are in a Union you are in absolutely better circumstances. But in America that´s not enough anymore with greed-flation running rampant across the nation, and wall street buying up real estate and tripling the rent last 15 years.
@@99zxk More than half of Danish people in the working age (20-69 year olds), are member of a union, while Denmark has a higher labor productivity than the US.
@@99zxk are you in a coma? Don't answer, it's rhetorical
Russian commander receives a shipment of brand new surface-to-air missiles. Day later, he reports back to command that all missiles have been used up and they hit with 96% accuracy. For next shipment, he requests to be sent surface-to-target missiles.
(laughter), that’s good
You're closer to correct than you think. The Russians have books full of charts that are used for assessing the effectiveness and number of enemy casualties that are produced by artillery fire. The Russian officers look up the appropriate chart after a fire mission and use this to calculate the number of enemy killed and wounded.
I slap my knees - that was a really good one - I'm still laughing minutes after reading it.
"Command, this is Bomber 1. 100% of all bombs have hit the target, the ground. Mission accomplished!"
Source of this "information"? Receipts are required. How about you paste a source for your allegations?
Yeah it's The Art of War. You project strength when you're at your weakest, and you feign weakness when you're at your strongest.
1:33 That is a lie, and please dont repeat this anymore. The French tanks had sloped armor before anyone else. Hell, even WW1 tanks had sloped armor.
and that much vaunted suspension system is really just the American Christie design
I think he said modern, not Frenchie.
I was close to turning off the movie after that sentence
Sherman tanks also had sloped armor.
@@arturs7121 me too, it's such a stupid cliché
What about the shovels? They seem to be working just fine. LOL…
😮😅
Why is then Russia not losing already? They were supposed to run out of missiles 2 years ago. Their army is bad so why are they still killing people in Ukraine?
Last time i checked they still have lotsa kitchen sinks as well as toilet bowls😂! They haven't used any yet!
Kicking NATO's trained and armed Ukrainian proxy too. Anyone that believes this crap needs a wake up call.
about a 5th of ukraine under control.
moscow still standing after more than 2 years......seems like they really are working well.
About 15 years ago I worked with a Russian engineer in California. He told the company he worked for in Russia maintained military vehicles. A depot with 500 trucks that were supposed to be combat ready, when inspected the Commander would randomly point to a vehicle he new would start to show it worked. The further back vehicles would not work and many did not have motors.
You think things are different here lol
Вы в Америке плохо знаете как сильно преобразилась армия России за последнее 15 лет
@@SmokeNGunsBBQ Yes, they're very different.
@@SmokeNGunsBBQyes Russian bot they are. As much as you can say American defense procurement is corrupt and America overpays (which broadly speaking isn’t even that true it tends to be more due to trying to keep jobs in places at greater expense rather than just blatant overpaying) American stuff absolutely works. American soldiers don’t sell random parts of their vehicles they’re set to maintain, and they tell people who stuff is broken and it gets fixed. The simple fact is that American soldiers are pretty well paid, they have no reason to risk stealing stuff to sell it because they make enough money that it’s not worth it, and stuff is kept track of well enough they’d get caught if they did. America has some of the most guns per capita, and despite that you can’t really buy any stolen stuff from the military, even as minor as a gun or grenade or something, no matter how hard you try, meanwhile in Russia there’s been stories that the Russian mafia has literally offered foreign cartels nuclear subs. And clearly it’s still a problem, even just the beginning of the war Russia was running out of fuel because their soldiers would sell it all. Meanwhile American troops never runs out of fuel and abandon their Abrams I wonder why
@@АлексейПолегенько-г5х Преобразилась к худшему. вторая армия , третьего мира))
Can we PLEASE STOP this lie that T-34 was "first modern tank to feature sloped armor"? God damn CA1 had sloped armor. In 1916. More modern? Renault FT, 1917. Almost all French tanks, from "day 1" had sloped armor. Even British Mark 1, granddaddy of tanks, had some kind of sloped armor.
Not really
They were more boxy with ever so slight angle,not anything like the T
@@Сергейк-е8р The First Modern Tank with Sloped Armor
The Schneider CA1 is often considered the first modern tank to feature sloped armor. Introduced in 1917, it was part of the French response to the challenges posed by World War I trench warfare. While its design had many flaws, the incorporation of sloped armor was a significant step forward in tank design.
@@giucafelician Square box with front just a little pointing out - is not sloped armor.
I wonder what is the source of your cheap cope
Right?? That's when I stopped the video. Czech tankettes with sloped armor in the 1930s...
Imagine the mental gymnastics a Russian propagandist has to go through.
Just as much as US mainstream media. Press secretary and all media are like soviet state media.
it's insane and probably why they so desperately try to claim that a bunch of the civlian deaths arent from the war but due to a secret genocide only Russia knows about and why they use so much of the same tactics as Nazi propagandists and neo-nazi conspiracy theorists. I still find it hilarious how people claim Putin is winning this 1 week special military operation even though we're on day 863. Like even if you ignore any information from either side and just look at a map you'll be able to tell this has been a disaster seeing as Russia invaded an unprepared, far weaker enemy they share a massive land border with, and they started the war already occupying like 10% of the country but havent managed to push the front line very far after over 2 years of constant fighting and multiple rounds of conscription. There weren't any Americans claiming the US was winning the Vietnam War in 1974.
😂😂😂😂 true!
Fuckin gold medalists they are
M. C. Escher would be jealous.
It's not just the planes being shot down but the trained pilots which take a long time to re train
I don`t think they can retrain them, but train new pilots. But don`t take my word on it, I`m not on armyrologyst.
The Japanese and Germans can attest to this. You can build the best planes in the world, but if you don’t have any pilots………..
How terrible were US pilots in Viet Nam 5000 helicopters and 4000 airplanes were shot down by rice farmers. I see why the US gave up. Imagine if they went up similar armed nation
💯💯💯💯
All manned fighter and ground attack planes are obsolete. Pilots are obsolete. Haven’t you been watching the war? The days of manned war planes are over. Tanks are also obsolete. It doesn’t matter how well they are made.
I f anything the Ukraine will be metal rich when this ends.
There's more kinds of corrosion than just rust to worry about
and rich on russian fertelizer
I'm wondering if Ukraine will try its hand at becoming a refit/upgrade partner for other countries using old Soviet/Russian equipment. They've certainly had their fair share of experience with Russian tanks being crap. But what if the Ukrainian defense companies could work out a way to install better western systems into something like a T90. Make a T90 an actual competitive tank, or at least make it not garbage with egg crate armor and chain link cages strapped to the side.
If other countries are sitting on stocks of old Soviet tanks and are hesitant because of the high cost of Western tanks, Ukraine could have a gold mine on its hands.
There will be a year or two of recycling old wrecked armored vehicles but it will take decades to demine everything.
Yes, Leopard, Abrahams, Challangers and gamechanger Wunderwaffen scrap.
To play devil’s advocate for a second: it doesn’t matter how “good” your tanks or rifles are if all your troops are only ever drinking Vodka and have almost no training…
To me, a failure rate of 60% says "Hire Stevie Wonder to aim your missiles, because _he'll_ probably be more accurate."
Do you know what Stevie Wonder's wife looks like?
Neither does he 😂
My thought was "Fire three at the same target; one is bound to hit."
🤣🤣🤣
Any corrupt army never gets strong,
and all dictators always make every part of system corrupted
That describes America in all their 109 conflicts and wars, now tell me of any other country that can even come close to that tally of war and death, remember also America was involved over 64 governmental changes & Coups in other peoples countries. Man we need a mirror? Look it up as it scared me and changed the way I look at the planetary consumption of the west?
They managed to whip the most formidable military in history... with our help of course, but they did.
@@Mikkall Yes but like using the Ukrainians we used the Russians back then as it was in our best interest to help Russia defeat the Nazi's, as even in Australia's we sent aid to most of the world including Russia as my mum being at home was involved in helping anybody connected to what the world was going through. Hard times that most people nowadays could not possibly imagine, remember the Jews lost 6 Million and we called it a holocaust so Russia lost 27Million and we say nothing?? I just do not understand this absence of facts pertaining to the war. But we all know the facts are only facts if your the winner. Cheers
@@Mikkallwhat are you talking about
@@CharaBolt
Its crap he made up.
1:40 Sorry, total myth. The T-34 was absolutely _not_ the first modern tank to feature sloped armor. Most WWII tanks had sloped armor in the front, many of them existing before the T-34 was even designed.
But, other tanks also had sloped side armor prior to the T-34 entering service in 1941. Examples include things like France's FCM 36 that entered service in 1933, the French Somua S35 that entered service in 1934, or the Panzerkampfwagen I that entered service in 1934 (though it's slope wasn't as severe as the T-34 or the FCM 36).
That's a myth that's always bugged me, especially since it's so often thrown around by Tankies. If you go back further it's not even the first vehicle with sloped armor, even during the Civil War they were doing it with ships and before that wearable armor was often very carefully designed with the idea sloping to deflect blows better then just the contours of the human body (hence why a ton of chest plates have big bellies in the later parts of the medieval and early modern period while more primitive armor from antiquity tended to be flatter). As you mention even with tanks the T-34 was far from the first. The idea of sloping is such an old idea that the front slanted armor of a tank is called the "glacis" which is the name for the sloped armor of a fortress which is truely ancient.
and they were not even well made. rushed production to keep the numbers up.
30 to 40% of them broke down before even seeing the frontline.
terrible welds soo the armor would just snap destroying the tank without penetration.
this tank is russia 101 good on paper but it was made in russia.
British had sloped armor long before the USSR existed.
Russian tanks, t34, were slaughtering US tanks in Korea, at least that is what most history films and videos said. WW2 Germans liked the T34 as a medium tank. Survival is all that counts not the technicals of the weapon used.
t34 is half american anyway. engine is old bmw engine and trany was made in italy i think. nothing much russian in it. by the way, t90 uses modified engine from t34.
One of the reason for such high exports of Russian weapons before 1990 is also that vasal countries couldn't buy anything else, we just had to buy Russian tanks, helicopters and jets
Also before 1990 it would be like "Russian" but it's from the Ukraine.
second reason is nato supply is overprised crap
Vasal countries now must buy from USA.
@@syntheticvitamin4600 pray you never get to find out ,,,the ukranians have been supplied 90s surplus weapon systems and you,ve struggled like hell to overcome them without huge casualties in men and equipment ,,,A modern Nato led war would mean destruction on a scale youve never seen
Simple answer - corruption!
It's a lot more than that. Russia has been behind technologically since its inception. There was perhaps only one period in which Russia was close to on par, and this was the Napoleonic era.
@@samhutchison9582 Actually no, in the late 80s Russia took the lead in terms of technology, but the United States was able to launch donkeys loaded with gold, which undermined the USSR from within.
I will not idealize the USSR, there was more than that, the replacement of religion with communism, the transformation of communists into indestructible idols and the replacement of rationality with ideology...
We see all this today in the USA itself, when a professor is fired from an institute because she calls a woman a woman, and not a person with a vagina.
Sometimes, equipment goes missing and money suddenly appears in your pocket.
@@samhutchison9582 even at that time they were behind,only winter, distances and burning their own country saved them.
It's pretty famous many Russian have 100m - 500m yachts, your point is made
The suspension system of the T34 is an American suspension system developed by American engineer J. Walter Christie for his tank designs; nothing Russian about it.
Also, the sloped armor wasn't new or innovative.
@@markphillips4767 Lol, only it was practically FIRST tank using it effectively, you have documentaries where they say that German Panther had sloped armor because they saw haw effective it was, educate you`r self before writing bull***t online.
@@Dagoth666Ur Sloped armor dates to the first world war on tanks. The French tank designs used sloped armor.
@@markphillips4767 And they are made just few of them and those where bad tanks so yes t34 is first mass produced tank with efective sloped armor, Germas copied it when they made Panthers.
@@Dagoth666Ur look at all those extra caveats you have to add to make your argument accurate.
Corruption is a big part of it as well. A General is supposed to armor his unit, so he buys cheap or fake upgrades and pockets the money. Your vehicles need new tires? Buy cleaning supplies and have your troops shine up the old tires.
RuSSia is just a Mafia-State! Nothing else!
What you call corruption the generals or whomever call back pay and economic survival.
Very good point
I was always told in Russia that it's considered "bad Business" to not at least try to steal something before you buy it. It stems a combination of the Russian obsession with the idea of smekalka and chronic poverty. It's savvy to make money off your troops by giving them NERF body armor instead of the real thing.
America had the same problem in Vietnam
We in Russia before the war on average considered the Russian Army to be very weak. We thought that in the army officers only steal army money and property, and drink vodka, and soldiers do useless activities like painting grass green (to make it look fresh!). We thought that military equipment in Russia was all old (Soviet) and falling apart, and that new Russian developments were a fake, only shown on TV or at parades.
The funny thing is that, well, how to say, it's not entirely untrue)))) And yet it turned out that even in such a state the Russian Army was able to hold out for 2 years against the AFU (who have been fighting since 2014), reinforced by NATO's intelligence, equipment, money and coordination.
"And yet it turned out that even in such a state the Russian Army was able to hold out for 2 years against the AFU (who have been fighting since 2014)"
And in 1979-1989, the weak, corrupt, poor Soviet army also managed to hold out for 10 whole years against the global superpower army of Afghanistan, supported by the collective West. Xaxaxa HATO))))
At a cost of approx. 500,000 Russian casualties.
They are not “holding out”. They are the invaders. They do it by throwing bodies at the problems they created. To try to hide the losses behind a flag of victory. In both cases, just delaying the inevitable.
The failures in Afghanistan ended the Soviet Union. The failures in Ukraine are going to end Putin’s regime.
@@roadent217 You do realize the global superpower army of Afghanistan also defeated the entire military force of the US?
@@joost1120 Taking twice as long and only managing to kill around 1/10th of the soldiers on the enemy side, sure.
The luxurious yachts are very expensive. The Oligarchs have a lavish lifestyle and sergeant Bilko happens.
Soviet-era cannon operated by the Russian military have an operational range of 24-28 km., while NATO-standard guns fielded by the UAF fire effectively at ranges of 30-40 km. Ukrainian gunners operating technically-superior cannon have gained a powerful battlefield advantage and are inexorably reducing the Russian army’s mortars, howitzers, and rocket artillery systems to scrap with something approaching impunity, Russian military bloggers are saying .Even vociferously pro-Kremlin observers are confirming the battlefield firepower pendulum has swung away from the Russian army clearly to the AFU’s side, and the Ukrainian artillery’s ability to hit its Russian opposite without risking being hit back, is being singled out as the key factor in AFU ground advances in recent weeks.
There is a totally different mindset in how everything is designed and used in NATO vs Soviet gear. People often bring up how the USSR had bigger nukes and more missiles but overall they were less capable. The US stopped making missiles/warheads as big as possible because they developed missiles that were more and more accurate so they didnt need as many missiles or as large a payload but the Soviets had to make up for their lack of accuracy with size and volume, they couldnt kill with a quick stab so they blindly swung with a hammer instead. The US has plenty of flaws but a major reason why they also dont have Soviet sized stockpiles is because when properly used you dont need a war of attrition: like Desert Storm they used precision weaponry to cripple the enemy in a matter of days and weeks so after that you're just mopping up a disunited smattering of enemy units who are cut off from resupply and cut off from command.
We heard about the resource of howitzers that the M777 is not intended for intensive shooting, such as is now being done in Ukraine, as this leads to high wear on the barrel. After several weeks of use, the range and accuracy of howitzers drops and is comparable to Russian howitzers. It's just worth reading a little more than what the news says.
@@NotrusbotPretty standard issues for howitzer barrels the world over. Ukraine is using their artillery a lot, systems components wear out with use. Nothing unusual here.
@@Notrusbot A large round going through a barrel does a lot of damage. You expect a lot of wear and tear. That is why they usually design guns with replaceable barrels.
What ground advances have been made by the AFU in recent weeks? Please be specific. At the moment the Russians are advancing extremely quickly on several fronts. And that when they can only shoot right up to their own feet....
The USSR's reputation for weapons stems from the fact that the Pentagon needed them to justify big budgets.
In fact, every time the West got its hands on a Soviet weapon, it turned out to be far less advanced than assumed..
There is a lot more truth in your comment than you could possibly imagine. The American Military Industrial Complex ran into a massive problem when the USSR collapsed. The money suddenly got cut off and it needed a new enemy to scare the American people about. Welcome to the Global War on Terror and now China. And boy was the MIC happy when Russia invaded Ukraine and Biden decided to give Ukraine anything it wanted. So now we have to stop Russia because if they beat Ukraine they are going to take over the world. While China takes Asia and the Pacific. The MIC is building new facilities and getting more funding for new technologies to save the world again!
@@hermes6910 yeah, there’s a repeating history of that. Russia lies constantly about its capabilities and we take them at their word so we can build bigger and better things. It’s really funny seeing it happen repeatedly.
But if we don't, then we risk being the paper tiger they have turned out to be. Sorry, but I'd personally rather err on the side of caution than not. I'd rather be able to take on the world and win decisively and maintain what freedom we have left than not. Just my opinion, for what little it's worth, which, to anybody but me, ain't much.
@@williamjacob885 Yeah it's an issue.
It's just that we need the enemy to be strong, to be sure the population accept we spend billions and billions.
When talking about their weapons export as a sign of the quality, you need to remember who they were selling to. Most of the countries they sold were mostly interested in getting most bang for their money and needed simple designs that required little training or special tools for maintenance. When you need to build an army from basically scratch, you have very different needs to established country with professional military.
One of Putin's propagandists said the United States wished they had weapons like Russia!🤣🤣🤣🤣
India is importing less weapons overall. India wants to increase its own domestic weapons industry by supporting Indian state owned and private defense companies. Only thing India is importing are high end weapon systems like aircraft and other electro optical equipment and components. most other weapon systems can be procured and produced in India itself without the help of a external source. India can’t fight a global war by relying only on unreliable foreign weapon suppliers like US, Russia, Israel, France and UK.
It's shocking how much a country their size relies so heavily on imports. Even today a lot of their "domestic" equipment is either licensed Soviet/Russian gear or shameless copies. Their pistols are mainly imports, their assault rifles are mainly foreign copies, their elite units mainly use western equipment, they've got mounds of Isreali gear, their tanks are mainly T-90s and T-72s, their IFVs are all BMPs, their air and missile defenses are all old Soviet crap, they've got a ton of Soviet built ships, and when you start prying into their native built ships and aircraft you'll still find tons of imported parts like American or European made electronics and engines.
They are moving more towards domestic production, I heard until the last decade or so they were still relying on Russian made attire (forget if it was their BDUs, helmets, or body armor) and until recently they couldnt even issue enough body armor but they're changing that and modernizing. It's good they're moving away from Russian made kit though in general since their main threats are Pakistan and China who both use a lot of Chinese made gear which is heavily based on Russian gear and China (along with India) have a ton of inside knowledge on Russian kit so the Chinese will be intimately knowledgeable on India's Soviet and Russian gear.
Their army is like Russian. They just run away faster.
Yes just like Kargil war or bangladesh war 😂😂😂😂😂 always remember 93000 surrender
@@armanshukla7367 What does that have to do with Indian equipment procurement?
They perform alright in war though. They've beaten Pakistan more then once even though the US, UK, and China were backing Pakistan in the Bangladesh liberation war. The only major time i know of them backing down was against China in their border conflict and it's hard to blame them for that when Russia did the same when China was far weaker and Russia was far stronger, and when most of the world is letting China get away with occupying most of the South China Sea, lets them attack civilian vessels in their own waters, allows them to build islands illegally, and lets China steal oil and other resources from neighboring countries.
Did we really go back to the T-34 to demonstrate Russia's quality equipment and an AK?
If history is ever explained the T-34 which the Germens took, and after disassembling one T-34 and using it to see it s strength's and weaknesses. Well they rebuilt the Panzers tanks to take this dangerous tank on. Remember in the end the little old T-34 won the war against the Unreliable heavy maintenance tiger?? History is a bitch to dreamers. People forget not like Germanys decade of weapons production the Russian were building what the could on the fly? amazing
@@cecilwilliams8586 The Germans built the Panther Tank after analysing the T34, giving it the sloping armour etc. Nonetheless, the Tiger 1's Square frontal armour could defeat almost any incoming projectile until the end of WW2.
When the Tiger II entered the war it was alnost indestrutable from all but the rear. The German problem was that they had far too few of them.
Basic Fault of Germany was simply going to War too Early, and NOT Putting their Industry onto a War Footing until years after the start of WW2
@@Rabmac1UKWhat the fuck did you said?? The 76mm of the M4 Easy8 and 17 pounder of the Firefly pierced the frontal armor of the Tiger I like swiss cheese
Well the T34 was GREAT... on paper.
But like anything especially Russian things.
The actual tanks made. From Russian factories is.. as honestly expected a flaiming dumpster fire pile of absolute shit.
@@Rabmac1UK Problems were many, unreliable, overweight, lack of fuel, lack of air cover.
You still need tanks to win wars. A well disciplined crew is a great crew. These Russians have little to no training. For an US Abrams tank crew it takes about a year in tank school.
Without taking into account general military training, the training of a tanker takes from 3 to 6 months
seems to be something we both inherited from WW2. The US realized a good tank crew was worth a lot more then a good tank and built tanks that would preserve the crew as much as possible so they regularly had crews bail out and get a new tank, sometimes even rejoining the same battle. The Soviets meanwhile just built tanks to be as easy as possible to build and operate which meant losing crews but meant you could field a lot more tanks, that was a lot more important for them during WW2 and later their army was built with the idea that a bunch of highly trained officers would lead a mob of peasant conscripts so they made things easy to build and easy to operate so an army could be built quickly. We're starting to see the problems with both of those doctrines as it takes a lot longer to build US equipment, it's more expensive, and it takes a lot longer to train soldiers but the Soviet doctrine results in an unruly mob of cannon fodder, especially when your officers are a joke and the lack of skilled NCOs cant make up for shitty officers and incompetent enlisted conscripts.
@@arthas640 issue is when you get your officers killed in dumb ways at the start of a war this tactic becomes useless
Tanks simply aren’t survivable on an open battle field today. Javlins and Drones now rule the day. In the future, Tanks either have to feature DEF capabilities to defeat those weapons or it won’t remain a front line weapon.
@@livingadreamlife1428 only drones (modern generation), Javelin has long lost its former effectiveness
Accuracy of Russian bombers during World War II was poor. I had a professor who was a child in Nazi Germany. He and other boys were forced to work in an artillery unit. He relates how the US and British bombers would be more on target than the Russians. In fact, the German kids working this artillery unit would take bets where the Russian bomb would eventually land.
Oh wow... gee wizzz. Golly...gosh.... but what the hell has that got to do with todays Russia.
@@mikespencer4922Did you not watch the video? Nothing has changed he’s saying, they still can’t hit their targets lol 😂 they missed in the 40’s and they missed 60% of their missile strikes!
The issue with focusing on weapons is that Ukraine for at least the first years and well into the second, were facing Russia with almost the same weapons. Even the US weapons they go were 1980s era and many of those still aren't online in large numbers. It isn't just, or even primarily, the weapons, but other factors.
* Logistics. Western weapons only work with extremely good logistics and people trained in it. Even if Russia had western qualify weapons, they don't have the systems, training, money, and commitment to supplying them. They rely on rail, don't have forklifts and pallets, nor folks able to handle scheduling, position of fuel trucks, etc. Ukraine had less of these issues as it was defensive and inside their country.
* Training. Russia is still using Soviet-era doctrines and those of its bush wars. Ukraine retrained itself along western lines -- good NCOs and junior officers, western tactics, etc. They don't make the same types of mistakes.
* Commitment. Russia is using conscripts who have nothing be be gained. You have prisoners, disgruntled folks from rural areas, lots of alcoholics, etc. Ukrainians are fighting for their families.
On top of that...
* Russia apparently has squads of troops to stop deserters with lethal force.
* Many of the conscripts now are minorities in Russia and even foreign students.
Fun Fact: Google admitted at the start of the war in 2022 the most googled think is Russia was "how to break your arm" in order to draft dodge
@@simpleviewer1334 slavery dodge
It turn's out that our 1980s stuff was REALLY GOOD, though.
After almost 3 years as the war began, I am still keeping in mind how international analysts were all given only 3 weeks to my country to exist under terorussia strike... That is what you need to know regarding the existing level of military analytics. My farther used to say: the far you are from russia border the more you are afraid of it.
Your father was a wise man
давай в курскую, тут тебе должно быть ещё безопасней:)
Your father is very keen. Great observation.
Well, I guess when you don't know the actual effectiveness of these weapons and organisations it makes sense to give them the benefit of the doubt. If you just assume they don't work properly you may get a nasty surprise. The real puzzler is how the Russians also seemed to thiunk they'd jsut roll over Ukraine. You'd have thought they'd have a better idea of their own capabilities and Ukraine's, since they'd been planning this probably for a decade at least.
Assuming USSR and Russia are the same country is a gross mistake
Indeed. The modern state calling itself "Russia" is the criminal class, mafia, etc. that the USSR kept suppressed.
Same shit different package.
@@Kvasaari Ukraine was part of the USSR, and they had many people rulling the USSR, so how is it the same?
@@alkazarjkdghjd Khrushchev gave part of Russia (the Donetsk coal basin, Donbas region) to Ukraine in 1955.
@@sdrc92126 Yup, and before it was the west, part of Poland, Romania and else.
Before this it was Crimea,
Even before the Tsar also gave Ukraine more lands.
In the 80s, I served as a commander of a motorized rifle platoon in a group of Soviet troops in Germany. We appreciated the BMP-1 assembled in Bratislava (Czechoslovakia), whereas the machines produced in Kurgan (USSR) were considered to be of insufficient quality. Question: did the Soviet Union produce such good weapons?
How awesome have those magnificent Abrams tanks been! Definitely a game changer for Ukraine in this fight. Great value!
Yo!
The comments here are also a good laugh. I havent even pressed play yet!
Check the comment I find before yours -->
@00dfm00
5 days ago
Imagine the mental gymnastics a Russian propagandist has to go through.
531 likes!
Corruption (production problems) takes a toll.
"Corruption" in the entire RuZZian Federation is so exquisitely worse than horrific than can even be imagined by any American other than our horrifically corrupt politicians, lawyers, judges, the entire DOJ, CIA, FBI, ... , etc..
Apparently Russian troops on exercises will often scrounge equipment from any source to trade with the local people for food and booze
STILL BETTER THAN BOEING
More Corruption in the Western nations than in Russia? Now not back then?
When you surround yourself with yes men, everything turns to shite
Kind of like 45 and his yes men
The russian weapons export in the past were not because they were good it was because they were cheap! That's the truth
Ah, so that's why it literally skyrocketed since the beginning of SMO, eh. Checks out.
I remember cheap Japanese products and how they changed and its now China who produce the top end product. Cheap is what wins as look at the cheap rubbish T34 tank and what it did to the German might with its top end product. 10 to 15 T34s built for the same cost as 1 mighty Tiger tank, man it did not go well for the tigers. Look how Russia has handled all the top gear that we gave the Ukraine, same tactic as before might beats bright every time. Hell we hide our mighty gear behind the lines as they do not last long on the line. Look it up. Cheers
@@Tuckerslam "SMO"
How to spot a Russian bot, they have to use Kremlin made up words.
И сейчас точно так же 🤔
payola
Aside from the hardware issues, Russian command structure seems to be very top-down, leaving units helpless if the commander is killed or otherwise unavailable. There is no initiative by individuals, nor the Napoleonic idea that "Every French soldier carries a marshal's baton in his knapsack."
"command structure seems" -- ohhh I see another expert on anything educated cnn or another "truth" distribution network.
Countries used Russian weapons because they are dirt cheap.
and kickbacks
@@theorenhobart The Russians do not give kickbacks like the West do. The Russians are too tight with their forex.
Russia has always been known for its tough simplicity. When you take the "tough" out of that equation, there's not much to like there.
@@Skank_and_GutterboyThis idea works for irregular warfare in mid-intensity combat conditions like in Africa or the Middle East but when it comes up against western equipment it can't compete. Ironically most Soviet-legacy weapons out there are used against opponents who are also using Russian weapons.
@@killingmasheen
Very true! It's used all over the place in peer-to-peer combat.
The joke in high school in the 90s was they were cardboard cut outs. So it wasn't a joke, it was reality.
You're clueless.
Maybe you should have paid more attention in school, as decoys are a military standard around the world and have been for hundreds of years.
@@treehuggerdeluxe5598 Yeah - if used intentionally. But if ALL your weapons or a SUFFICIENT NUMBER of them are just decoys, then your fighting strength is MUCH weaker not only than you intend to project to your enemy but weaker than you need to win.
@@treehuggerdeluxe5598 you should pay more attention to reports from battle field. You are right, cardboard is excelent as decoys, but russians are using those "decoys" as main attack force.
@@nonamenosurname8516 or they're using them so their enemy wastes ammunition...
Peace is more than just an absence of violence. You can't win a war with just bombs and bullets. You need soft power aswell.
that's one thing people forget about Russia and China and it's arguably one of America's greatest strengths. The US has tons of economic, cultural, and diplomatic influence, and that gives them a lot of power globally even without direct political or military influence. Like one of my favorite examples is Kung Fu Panda: it was such a well made American movie that Chinese citizens were asking "why is America making better movies about Chinese culture then China?" since their movies tend to be rather poorly written and rely on special effects even more then ours to carry a film. My other favorite example is Disney with even America's biggest enemies like Hitler and the Kim dynasty being huge fans of classic Disney cartoons to the point that the previous "crown prince" of the DPRK, Kim Jong-nam, losing his title (and his life) for trying to visit Disneyland, which is something you'd never really see happening with an American politician. Imagine Hunter Biden being executed because he just needed to risk his life sneaking into a forbidden Chinese amusement park, or imagine Americans being arrested and spending their life in jail for Iranian or North Korean movies.
@@arthas640Yeah but Disney covered up Black Panthers face on promo posters for the movie in China and took Finn out of all Star Wars promo posters in China too. But I do get your point just not going to put halos over Disney. China does have some good low budget production films. Mostly martial arts films. I look at China differently than Russia. China is trying to have the best of both worlds by being communist and trying to have capitalist or western ideals. Russia seems to be trying to regain a bygone era when they were at or near the top. Corruption is tearing that country apart as well.
I often think "soft power " will be the only way wars will be won, in the future.
But thank you for your post Matt-rz7gm, I didn't know what it was called.
The T-34 still being touted as the first one to use slopped armor is so fucking annoying, like tell me you only look at German tanks from that period without telling me you only look at German tanks from that period.
The very first tank France fielded in WW1 had sloped armor and more than two thirds of every bit of armor they fielded up to WW2.
Why do people keep saying this that Russia's t-34 was the first tank that used sloped armor when there are dozens of tanks built before that had sloped armor I don't understand where this myth comes from.
Comes from videos like this. There are dozens of mistakes in this video but how many people will fact check, or, even consider it may not be accurate.
You beat me to it. The idea that an engineer anywhere or anytime wouldn't immediately think of this is inane. Battleships were using this concept in1900 well before anyone had heard of 'a tank'.
As to where it comes from. Repetition exactly like this video. Simply no research and no understanding. This nonsense was taught to me in school- I'm 62. I rebelled against it then at 13 because it was simply stupid but the myth marches on. There are many other such myths.
@@benchapple1583before ships even, back in medieval times armor makers clearly knew that having an angle for your armor was advantageous because a decent amount of plate armor has it to some degree.
@@bulldozer8950 You are completely correct. If you really want to drill down then you could say that Mother Nature invented it with sloping skulls about 10 million years ago. But the question persists "Why do people believe that the Soviets were the first people to notice this and apply it to the T34's armour while the dumbass engineers in the West were making 10cm radar and jet engines?"
It's staggering what people will believe if you just say it again and again.
@@benchapple1583 not only is the commentator not an engineer but he has zero mechanical sense.
It’s worth doing an IQ test with the intention of getting 100, to see what half the population are struggling with.
Potemkin Village military industrial complex..
not hard to see why that term came out of Russia
It seems some things never change 😆
another important factor you've omitted: VKS is running out of experienced pilots.
Yeah… They’re also running out of missiles… for 2 and a half years straight. Any day now.
Iowa is not a battle cruiser, it’s a battleship.
And what a fear-induceing War-machine it was!
There are strange mistakes in the video when the mobile launcher of S-200 marked as T-55 or Kalibr cruise missile marked as Javelin
Corruption is one of the bigger causes of failures. Even if only 10-20% of soldiers/commanders are corrupt, they can have a much larger impact. For example, a soldier who sells off a few components from working tanks for a few grand is compromising the entire multimillion dollar tank.
Yeah they once had entire units crippled because a few soldiers drank their vehicles anti-freeze which at the time was mainly alcohol with few adulterants. It didnt take many corrupt men to render many tanks and trucks unusable when they tried to send them into cold weather.
Source for that claim?@@arthas640
The problem is that the USA built counters for what they thought the Russian weapons were capable of which resulted in completely overpowered weapons on their part.
yeah thats true.
not a problem!!!!
yeah NATO weapons really helping Ukraine...not
This went both ways during the cold war. The soviets built the Kirovs and the Kunetzovs specifically to launch their advanced cruise missiles that they had to build in order to counter American CVNs. The US was forced to spend insane amounts of money developing the Mk.48 ADCAP torpedo when the Soviets managed to fool them into thinking that they had a larger fleet of Alfa-class subs that could outrun any torpedo of the time.
The cold war ended because one side ran out of money from doing this back and forth for 50 years. Now, if only our government here in the US would realize that there's no longer an arms race and stop spending like the cold war never ended.
@@cactuslietuva Thanks for that info. I’ll email my US congressman and tell him to increase aid to Ukraine by 500%. I’ll mention you.
When Russia won big wars they were helped by who …. The USA supplied them with equipment and planes , now the USA is not supplying them and you see how bad their equipment is.
All big wars Russia won they had Ukraine on their side.
Napoleon is indignant.
No - the UK supplied Russia by giving them equipment and planes that they had bought from the US.
A lot of soviet weapons were made in Ukraine weren't they?
Yes. A sizable chunk of Russia's truck manufacturing and ship building was in Ukraine when the USSR collapsed. Ukraine's current heavy manufacturing industry is almost all leftovers from Russia.
@@DriveCarToBar Left overs from the USSR you mean.
Basically what Russia is today but still, some might read into that wording and think you're siding with fascists.
It's a minefield these days.
They'll prbly get rich AF in the coming decades as they'll prbly make all our weapons.
Yes.
Yea like 30 years ago, your point?
@@jacksomething1131Russia never got past that
Sure, Russia has definitely lied through their teeth about their capabilities, strength, weapons, etc, but I think it's also pretty obvious that Putin was convinced that Ukraine was so weak that not only could Russia easily take the entire country in less than a month, but they could do so while mostly using their older recycled Soviet-era arsenal which companies like India were no longer interested in, while also using a force consisting of a small number special forces while conscripts and poorly trained units from the far reaches to get the job done, allowing Russia to keep their best weapons and troops in the event that another nation or NATO assumed Russia was completely tied up in Ukraine and therefore an opportunity could exist to get rid of Putin, which, let's be real, Putin no longer cares about Russia, he cares about himself, his power, his wealth, self-preservation. He's absolutely terrified of a revolution, and he has good reason to be given Russia's history, the Bolsheviks are a stark Russian reminder of what happens when the poor get sick of the ruling class.
Dude Ukraine is weak. There is 90% of all weapons that are used in Ukraine or all NATO weapons 90%. There’s almost no fights going to human. It’s all just missiles and bombs that’s it losing 200,000 soldiers a week that just last week and soldiers came in Ukraine lost 1500 soldiers wiped out, I guess it is true. They said they’re gonna fight till the last Ukrainian.
@@alexkazakov2894 lol, OK dude.
The Iowa class are NOT battle cruisers. They are battleships.
Ai written script
Specifically, "fast battleships ", which make them something of a hybrid. Some protection sacrificed for speed. Also the extended length to gain speed over previous, like South Dakota and Massachusetts. Hood, from this POV, a forerunner.
Take it slow.
And you haven’t even mentioned personnel, moral and training (or lack of) Putin and his friends have been pocketing billions from their own country.
Whether or not the lowa class is a battle cruiser, a battleship or the latest recreational rowing boat for family trips, who cares. It is not the topic of this vid, so it is irrelevant.
The level of corruption is key to this. Same in China.
China makes a better AK & SKS !
Corruption killed their weapons. Their truck tires had rotted off them when they tried to use them, some one pocketed all the money that was to keep them up
it's pretty telling how many stories there are about Russian corruption from just ordinary people. Almost every time i talk to someone who's been to Russia has stories about government employees like police and soldiers offering to sell them Russian military gear or soliciting a bribe. I knew a guy who started working there before the collapse of the USSR when they started to open up to the west and he had officers offering to let him drive a tank and shoot the gun for a price and i knew people who went there in the 90s and 00s who got similar offers with some outposts and bases allowing foreign citizens to fire things like cannons and machine guns at targets for a price.
yep and it will take outsiders to clean up that corruption. cause anyone locally who can try to do it are either dead, cowe,ed in to silence by fear or are corrupt themselves. trust no one locally.
Fuel too. That got sold off. Remember the tank traffic tank at the start of the war ? stuck armour on roads into Kiev.
I think the tires were made from recycled used Chinese condoms ...
And the Money being stolen from US tax payers (for the Ukraine) is being put in politicians pockets.. Zelensky is another US backed dictator...
That innovative design of the suspension on the T34 was an American design. The designer tried to sell his design to the US Army and they passed. He then tried to sell it to the Russians, they bought a couple of his tanks to test the design then they just stole the it from him.
Ha! That's what he gets for trying to do business with Communists. Not a surprise.
The IOWA was NEVER a Battlecruiser. ever.
I just got to that point in the video and I instantly started looking for comments like yours, wtf is their information sources.
Also can we mention the fact they say the T-34 was the first modern tank with sloped armor? By that logic the T-34 must be considered the first modern tank because the US, Germany, and the UK all had tanks featuring sloped armor before the T-34 was built
Almost every UA-cam creator calls any warship bigger than a canoe a "battleship," but then when this one actually mentions a real battleship, they manage to call it a battle cruiser. Good grief!
That's what happens when you use Wikipedia as a reliable source.
@@Leilyse and the suspension was a rip-off
@@tonyennis1787Yes the suspension was an American invention Christies
You mean… the yanks could have had health care as well? Bugger 😂
The problem with applying bad conditions to Russia's nukes is redundancy. In other words, they won't aim one nuke at each major city (in a full blown war), they'll fire 10. That's why they have so many of them.
This also applies to countries with decently maintained stockpiles. It is literally rocket science after all. Every country has to assume that some won't launch, some will blow up on take-off, some will go wildly astray, will get shot down, won't blow up over the target etc. etc.
Or maybe many or all will work. So in a real nuclear war, anyone in a major city should expect to get hit with nukes over and over again.
yeah and 9 of them will miss their targets only one hitting an actual target of any value and considering American anti missile tech that means the odds of an American city being hit are 1 in 10 trillion to one because American anti missile tech will take out the ones going to for the city's without issue the out lying territory's meh iffy at best what will happen to those but considering the missile attack will trigger American nuclear counter attack Russia would be a radio active crater afterwards not a threat to anyone or anything for like 10thousands years to come give or take
The Bradley is the MVP of this ground conflict.
I suggest you research "Bradley Square"
@@ROBC51500 That the best you got ivan?
@@MrObvious-tg8lz Oh yessir, sorry for the blatant disrespect sir.
And they thrived in Robotyne 😅😂
You only see clips of Bradleys succeeding, because a dead crew cant upload footage
Не спеши переубеждать своего врага в его глупости, пусть он сам осознает свою глупость в самый последний момент. Не пытайтесь их переубедить, пусть верят в собственную пропаганду.
Do not try to convince your opponent of their wrongness, let them realize it at the last moment.
Ахаха, как твое высказывание подходит для твоей 404.
как с языка снял…
Q: Are Russian weapons really as bad as they appear?
A: No. They're worse.
Not only the weaponry, but the leadership too. Lousy!
When did America last win a war ? Their leadership is very poor
RuSSia is just a Mafia-State! Nothing else!
Yes Biden and Trump are excellent examples of lousy leadership as is the whole of the US armed forces who couldn't even defeat Vietnam and Afghanistan
😂😂😂Sleeping Joe is better🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
@@josericardo9614 Russian leaders are winning the war , overcame sanctions and have driven the west into a state of collapse and they are “ lousy “ ? 😂😂
Technology is one thing, competence is another. The troops are not well trained, not motivated and suffer from terrible leadership. You can see that time and time again. Locations where Russians build defensive structures - terrible choice at times, they totally forget the sky and their flanks - or troop and machine movements - much to old fashioned, they move in a way the Germans did in 1944 - their extreme reliance on train support and logistics - extremely vulnerable see Ukraine’s offensive - and troops from the far east who have no clue what they are fighting for. If you have somewhat capable soldiers, you can compensate for technological disadvantages, but the warfare has changed, and the Russians cannot react at all.
Massive hyman sacrifice of infantry is STILL The Russian Way Of War. It's a fine, old stupid tradition.
Putin will soon be in Argentina selling used Ladas😂
no, he will be buying washing machines.
When the Argentines will ask for payment in US dollars, the sales will fall through.
😂😂😂
If Putin dared to set foot on Argentine soil, Milei would put him in shackles and hand him over to the Ukrainians with a bow tie.
@@jamesrosemary2932 perfect chrismas gift right there
In WWW2, Russia got lots of lend-lease gifts, and their tanks got American-designed suspension systems. Read Stalin's War by Sean mcMeekin for more info.
the t 34 was known to break down before it finished a tank of gas. Russia has never been known for having a very good navy and their policy has always been throw more people at it. Really the only thing they have produced with any long life is the ak-47 and the rpg - 7.
The T-34 is widely accepted as the tank that won ww2.
It’s a quite widespread myth
When Soviet tank crews got the chance to operate some Sherman’s, they raved about them
Soviet crews hated the T-34
@@Jimmy-ye3wg widely accepted doesn't mean it did because the soviets also had shermans and all kinds of stuff from the lend lease program. The tactic they used during ww 2 was to ram german tanks so they would be able to shoot them.
@@Jimmy-ye3wg actually most of the time it was the ammo going off that caused the fires not the fuel, not kidding the placement of the ammo meant it went of when the sherman was hit
@@Jimmy-ye3wg It has shit brittle armour that would spall and shatter when hit, either killing or seriously injuring its crew. Crew survivability was much much higher in the Sherman compared to the T34.
while their weaponry is bad the tactical blunders are just so bad. I remember a couple of months into the war they made the "brilliant" decision to send all their drill sergeants to the front lines to reinforce their numbers.
funny thing is Russia keeps falling for the same blunders as the Nazis. They also threw a bunch of their elite units and a ton of trainers (who were some of the most experienced and best trained men in their military) into units like the Lehr division or Sonderkommando Elbe that were sent on suicide missions like the Battle of the Bulge resulting in them losing a ton of their best leaders and best trainers. Japan did the same and sent their best men into battles against well prepared americans rather then using those men as leaders or trainers. Russia has effectively gutted their special forces by sending them into frontal assaults, the estimates i've heard say it will take them a decade or more to full recover those units since training special forces takes a lot of time since they have such high standards (either that or you drop standards and they arent nearly as effective).
Why don't you talk of all the western weapons being destroyed by Russia why don't you say America was using the dollar as a weapon and forcing countries with sanctions if they buy from Russia. And the Russians don't kill indiscrimet;ly like the west and Israel killing civilians. Get your facts straight.
All these myths that silly Americans accept as the truth.
@@davidcolley7714 ...How bout this myth. Russia invaded Poland and divided it up with Germany at the beginning of WW2. Russia, just like Germany, was the invader. Russia then executed thousands of surrendered Polish soldiers. True or false. You know the truth.
@@robertmueller6979No that was a peace deal ..you 🐑 😂
Those weapons were outdated even in the 80s when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan.
Because the most modern weapon Systems of the US were doing THAT much better?
Come on now, people forget that no weapon system is infallible.
Heck even during WW1 when the british came rolling up with their tanks they might have been a shocking sight at first, but it was already during that first assault that the germans improvised tactics and weapons to defend against that completely new weapon system.
Bundled grenades to blow off the tracks, direct fire with artillery, bunched up barbed wire to tangle up the gears of the tracks/wheels followed up by close-assaults.
There is always an arms race going on, always has, always will.
The only difference is that Putin started to believe his own lies and that there is SO MUCH smoke and mirrors involved in Russia, especially before the actual full-on war, that the true descripancy betwen the few truely ELITE Russian Units (many of which were almost entirely wiped out during the first few weeks/months that saw the most intense fighting and where there was a real chance of Russia taking Kiev) and the vast majority of the russian armed forces, where training, equipment, motivation, leadership, supply and readiness could vary IMMENSELY!
The russian leadership now has to lay in the bed they made for themselves and russian soldiers have to lay in the field. Breathing or not.
@@MajorCoolDWell said.
I grew up and served with SAC and USAFSS from '74, and was trained to distrust the Russkies. When dafuq did that change?
OK, maybe the 90s with Sacha Pivovarova and the onslaught of Russian supermodels, but THEY weren't running their country.....
YET YOUR BEST WEAPONS HAVE FAILED TO SAVE UKRAINES FROM LOOSING REGEAON AND RUSSIA HAS LOST NONE.
@@geoffreyowenga3958 Lol ukraine mostly received old stuff so far. For example they receiving F16's soon only because those get replaced with F35's.
@@geoffreyowenga3958 Ukraine is not using our best weapons.
So basically Russia is a huge bluff
The weapons may be bad.. but they can sure still kill
Yup, missiles falling randomly from the sky kill a lot of civilians, fish, wildlife....very deadly still
@@BillyBob-ov5ef nemoj da jedeš ono što pametan čovek ne jede
You aren't smart lol@@adriano8679
When you have IFV that infantry rather ride on top of than inside should say alot about the material
They are also very cumbersome to egress.
The hatches and doors are too small and narrow for someone with body armour and battle gear…
@@mixmashandtinker3266 The cosplay armor? 😉
@@megamanx466 Paintball armour.
I really don't know where the whole "T54 was the first tank to have sloped armor" thing came from, but it's blatantly nonsensical. Like, you can just look at pictures of WW2 tanks and see sloped armor.
He said T34, which is a WW2 tank. (Technically designed in 1937, but put into service in 1940). I don't know if it was the first with sloped armour or not.
@@RobBradshaw The first tanks to be completely fitted with sloped armour were the French SOMUA S35 in 1936 and other contemporary French ones.
Ya he said T-34. Not T-54. And the T-34 is absolutely a ww2 tank.
@@RobBradshaw The Soviet BT series (Bystrovye Tanky, or Fast Tank) built on Christie's chassis, had sloping front armor. -Well, 12mm (half an inch) of boilerplate, really, but it WAS sloped! :)
The first tank to have sloped armor (albeit partially) was the Schneider CA 1. But even some Late Medieval Castles had sloped walls to defend from cannon fire.
Goliath was a giant who won battles on intimidation alone. Then a prepubescent shepherd boy threw a rock and killed him.
If the goal is to make money why would a weapons manufacturer invest money and resources into a politically dangerous country when they can steal all of your inventions any time they want. That kills innovation.
Did u know russian private fleet which was paid by "war fleet chest" is bigger than actual russian navy? russia is actually paying for three ships (or anything else) just to get 1 somewhat working ship. Yeah thats corruption in russia.
And if you're an engineer why would you stay somewhere with a low standard of living and terrible wages, when you could make better money and be living in better conditions in Europe or the US.
It's 2-pronged, no foreign companies want to be involved and domestic development is starved for talent, because anyone that's competent wants out.
I served in Berlin in the late 70's they have always had a lot of stuff and it has always been sh ite. Look at the Iraq war anyone who saw that should never have bought another Russian anything.
In the 70s, US lost 4,000 helicopters and 5,000 airplanes due to Soviet air defenses in Vietnam, did you live in an alternate universe at that time? Iraq surrendered like France in WW2, losing only 10,000 soldiers, they didn't even want to fight.
Vietnam was a decade long, The Gulf War lasted less than 43 days with the main forces of Iraq being overrun in 100 hrs. Vietnam was near peer, Iraq was simply outclassed with current equipment. 2 totally different types of warfare as well. Politics also led to much of the catastrophic losses in vietnam as well as where in Iraq Swartzkov said he wouldn't give the politicians time to mess it up.
Hilarious part is the Tankies constantly defend Desert Storm with "but they werent using Soviet tactics" and "they were using low quality exports and the ones the USSR had were better" but then and now we can see how effective (or more accurately: ineffective) Soviet/Russian kit is.
@@joestudebaker7726so, Ukraine is decades decades decades after. What's the point?
Think about it for a sec. If your western equipment was so marvelous, so breaking game, so game changer, so breath taking...
Why didn't your government send a bunch of them to Ukries by now? I mean, they are just superior by any means, right? Think about it.
@@YaraMits We sent NLAWS they obliterated Russian tanks, we've sent decade old patriot defense systems which have managed to shoot down Russian missles and prevent air superiority. These aren't new, in some instances they are 20/30 years old and they've proved effective (did you watch the video).
The reason more advanced weapons havent been sent is that Putin has been very vocal about additional armaments being seen as an escalation. Now the west does not want an escalation, it wants to provide a "way out" for Russia, a way in which Putin can sell victory at home without the Ukraine ceding territory. Its doing just enough to keep that option on the table, and to avoid Russian use of nuclear weapons.
They can't even contend with the 70's and 80's western tech, let alone the modern tech.
Different Russia, and your not doing any research. Amazing, as it seems you are the one locked in time. Move on re-educate?
40 year old western weapons designed to beat 60-80 year old weapons are doing the job, not a big shocker.
@@cecilwilliams8586 The research is the battlefield and right now that junk is getting lit up. We see it daily.
@@BALTOBOULBOBBI If you stop relying on information obtained from Ukrainian telegram channels, in which most of the “victories” are based on populist jingoism, but just go and compare the performance characteristics of these systems, you will understand what nonsense you are writing. The Patriot system shoots down targets at speeds of up to 1600 m/s, while the Kinzhal system reaches 4000 m/s.
That junk as you call it is old modified equipment and its very prone to Drone attacks just like all those modern NATO tanks, but what you do not seem to understand is that while Russia is using up old stock somewhere in the Background they are amassing huge amounts of Amour and Weapons. Russia is still winning with old junk so get over it.@@ryanr5182
Conflict in Ukraine began for good in 2014. Ukraine prepared the war long time before that.
T-34 first tank with sloped armour? lol what? Great research you're doing there guys. Top notch.
i think medieval warriors had sloped armor first.
Some of the earliest tanks, from WW1, had sloped armour. But only on the front.
what about your sh***y tanks?
@@achimotto-vs2lb i don't have tanks.
It was. FULL frontal sloped armor was used on the T34
no lies involved, just "special russian truths"
Perhaps "alternative facts"?
0:15 Why would anyone want to match Russia's inventory of tanks?
I know some Warhammer 40k table game model builders and painters have large collections;)
Tank T-34 was not russian, as you said, but Soviet. It was actually invented in Kharkiv, Ukraine 👍
Tnx 4 the video
The United States has the World's two biggest Air Forces. You aren't thinking about the Naval Services.
And those mighty US forces have been defeated by sandal wearing Houthis!
name one battke that we lost. a real, pitched battle where CAS was involved. one. Look up what we did to you in syria when wagber attacked on our FOBs. not one orc lived. not one US soldier died. @@gnosticbrian3980
@@gnosticbrian3980Name the defeats.
@@frankmoreau8847 The name of one of the victors is in my post, "Houthis". Geopolitics not your thing?
@@gnosticbrian3980Houthis have attacked civilian ships successfully, but they have succeeded mostly in giving the U.S. military a lot of target practice. The U.S. has in turn successfully attacked several inland military targets. If you consider that to be success for the Houthis then you must be Russian.
America didn't do so well in Vietnam or Afghanistan either. 🤣
Strategically, the goals were not reached and in that sense you could say both conflicts were a failure. Tactically though, the United States was superior in both conflicts. If the goal is 'destroy this target' or 'get rid of group X at location Y' you don't want to face off against the US armed forces. If the goal is 'Prevent communism from coming to a country' or 'bring democracy to a country', even when that country really just wants to be free of foreign influence, you end up being at odds with the people you are fighting with and fighting against. The goal here is kick Russia out of Ukraine, very much like kick Saddam out of Kuwait, or Hitler out of Europe. And for such goals, the United States has done quite well indeed.
Neither did Russia in Afghanistan. It is important to point out that no country since WWII can really conquer another country. Not Russia. Not the US. Insurgencies are just to expensive to fight against.
@@thetimebinder RUSSIA didn't invade Afghanistan. THE SOVIET UNION did. SU =/= Russia.
@@thecasualdiyer6729 The Taliban just paraded captured American equipment before the eyes of the world.
@@FerroEquus-262 I think it was abandoned. If you read any of the action reports off of Wikileaks, the US military was very effective against the Taliban.
T-34 was not the first tank to have stopped Armour I think it was the French Somua S35
yeah that's something a lot of people forget. The wikipedia page also mentions how the idea of sloped armor goes back even further like the South's first ironclad in the Civil War.
WW1 French Schneider tanks had sloped armor
@@yourstruly4817 So did British Ruston-built tanks.
'Looks at M2 light tank
'Sees sloped Armour
'Older than T-34
Yes, Ukrain is advancing to the rear and the Russians with their shovels are retreating forward.
The battlefield and the manner in which war is conducted has completely changed due to.24/7 drone and Satellite survilance making any size gathering of troops and equipment an instant target.
The days of gathering a large strike force and the ammo, supllies required to support a majotpr attack are over. Attackers are now mostly no bigger in number than squad or plantoon size,
They take no more ground than can be supported due to constant surveillance and drone attacks.
Half million brave and determined Ukraianian soldiers KIA because their leadership failed to understand the fundmental change that makes any movement of troop or equipment immediately known to the enenmy.
Optics from space can see a muzzle flash on the ground and send ordinance as targeted .
Thermal,infrared can see the air exhaust ports of under ground bunkers even.
2 bananas per comment?
you might want to ask for receipts next time
1:34 They had sloped armor back in WW1. The T34 did not invovate anything. It's argueably the worst mass produced tank, by being the most destroyed tank.
45.000 were destroyed of this "fabulous" tank.
@@stephanschmidt2334 Obviously losses never correlate with extensive application or conditions of war. Those are only indicator of Kualiti©®
Yeah, france lost 1million soldiers in ww1, cause they were bad soldiers, and britain lost only 750 000. Cause they were better soldiers. That's just how it works
@@worldoftancraft Lol. Well put. It's just like how people say the F-22 can't be considered the best fighter, because the F-15 has an amazing combat record. Lack of opportunity/use is a major factor, as is how something is used. And considering the reds managed to lose 20 million troops, I hardly believe their top brass had any care for strategy or tactics.
1:34 That's one thing that's not true. Sloped armor wasn't first introduced on the 34. Tanks like the Char S35 Somua, the Crusader III, the Panzer II and the BT-7 all had sloped armor before the 34 came out. That however is a whole separate rabbit hole.
Russia had the 3rd largest air force, behind 1) the USAF (as stated), and 2) the US Navy