Don't know about the amount of lag but not a problem for stationary targets or the ones that are moving slow. To catch a vehicle at full speed it's probably way harder if you use relay.
Last edited:
Russian Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter tphuang
- Start date
If the production chain is off, it's certainly space unused. Could be interesting to also modernize it for building the Su-75 in the future. Do they have the man power to build more fighter when other like SU-35-34-57 are at higher rate of production ?
Sokol plant been collecting dust for ages, unfortunately. There might be manpower issues
Is this part serious tho ? Like what the most aircraft lost there ?
The reason why MiG-35 never really take off on VKS is this. Like, no things MiG can do Sukhoi can't do and do it better. The only advantage is perhaps AESA radar for MiG but given that Phazotron didnt seems to really finish Zhuk-AE development, hard to compete against NIIP Tikhomirov which making radar for Sukhois.
The other thing is modern Targeting Pod. But VKS also didnt adopt T-220 Targeting pod, only Egypt does. The pod tho if wanted can be carried by Su-35, as the Optical suite for it was also developed by NPK-SPP (NIIPP) Which also developer of T-220. Su-57 is exclusively UOMZ monopoly in optronics and will carri 101-KS targeting pod instead.
Is this part serious tho ? Like what the most aircraft lost there ?
The reason why MiG-35 never really take off on VKS is this. Like, no things MiG can do Sukhoi can't do and do it better. The only advantage is perhaps AESA radar for MiG but given that Phazotron didnt seems to really finish Zhuk-AE development, hard to compete against NIIP Tikhomirov which making radar for Sukhois.
The other thing is modern Targeting Pod. But VKS also didnt adopt T-220 Targeting pod, only Egypt does. The pod tho if wanted can be carried by Su-35, as the Optical suite for it was also developed by NPK-SPP (NIIPP) Which also developer of T-220. Su-57 is exclusively UOMZ monopoly in optronics and will carri 101-KS targeting pod instead.
I mean, if they really had a shortage of aircraft, they would be trying to send the few MiG-29K and MiG-29M2 they have but Fulcrums have been completely absent from this war. Even the less capable Su-27SM have participated over the Black Sea before any MiG-29 variant.
This just seem like an air spin on the usual "They are running out of stuff".
Could it be because Russia aims to quickly replace older models plus the newer ones that experienced alot of wear and tear due to the war while also expanding their airforce along with the rest of their army? The mig-35, being smaller and simpler than an su-35, should be cheaper and quicker to produce once they get the factory going again and range shouldn't be an issue in the ukrainian theater. No?
MIG-35 advantage is its separate supply chain of Klimov engines and final assembly line. They presented RD-93MA enhanced thrust engine. Its reliability of engine that drives effectiveness in high intensity operations from distributed airbases.
when Su-57M/Su-34M/TU-160M can work as command aircraft there is no reason MIG-35 cannot be effective.
Downside of Su-75 is factory and engines unification with Su-57.
The Russian army tested a captured Bradley M2A2 ODS
by andrei tarasenko
Conclusions
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of projectile and bullet resistance.
It is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of mine protection due to two aluminum and steel sheets installed on the bottom, an anti-mine polymer mat mounted inside, and shock-absorbing landing seats.
The side projection provides protection against a 30-mm ZUBR6 projectile, but does not provide protection against a 30-mm ZUBR8 projectile;
The frontal projection provides protection against a 30-mm ZUBR8 projectile, which is higher than the protection level of the BMP-3 frontal projection.
The frontal projection with DZ blocks provides protection against cumulative grenades such as PG-9VS and PG-7VL;
The side projection with DZ blocks provides protection against cumulative grenades of the PG-9VS type, does not provide protection against grenades of the PG-7VL type.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV surpasses the BMP-3 in firepower by:
the accuracy of the 25 mm M242 automatic cannon is 2 times greater than the 30 mm 2A42 and 2A72 automatic cannons, which increases the effective firing range;
the armor penetration of the 25 mm APFSDS round is 2 times greater than the 30 mm ZUBR8 APFSDS round.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV surpasses the BMP-3 in operational and technical characteristics by:
the ability to access the fighting compartment from the troop compartment;
maintainability of the power unit, generator, fighting compartment and gun barrel;
duration of maintenance of the main units and assemblies due to ease of access;
duration and labor intensity of replacement of main units and assemblies.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is inferior to the BMP-3 in terms of dynamics, cruising range, cross-country ability and the ability to overcome water obstacles afloat.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of ergonomics due to the larger volume of armored space, the presence of a ramp in the troop compartment, and the absence of structural elements between the commander's and gunner's workplaces that impede the free movement of the crew from the fighting compartment to the troop compartment.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is inferior to the BMP-3 in terms of firepower:
fire resource due to the ammunition for the 100-mm gun-launcher and the 30-mm automatic cannon 2A72, ready for use;
the ability to fire from a 100-mm gun-launcher from closed firing positions;
the ability to combat enemy manpower located in the close zone, due to the presence of two PKT bow machine guns, including when dismounting troops (due to the ability to fire from the bow machine guns from the driver's seat).
Recommendations
Design solutions that are advisable to implement in domestic serial and prospective models of BTVT:
in terms of protection:
use of protected screens, including in the frontal part, of ATGM launchers ready for direct use;
use of a protective commander's cabin with armored glass during marching operations (conducting observation);
in terms of firepower:
use in the ammunition set of the 30-mm ZUBR8 round with an armor-piercing sabot projectile;
development of a round with an armor-piercing sabot projectile (BPOS) for 30-mm automatic cannons;
development of a 30-mm automatic cannon with improved characteristics in terms of firing accuracy and armor penetration, ensuring guaranteed destruction of the M2A2ODS SA (M2A3) IFV, using design measures implemented in foreign automatic cannons (for example, gun barrel stiffeners);
in terms of ergonomics:
use of shock absorbers for easy opening and closing of hatch covers that have a large mass;
use of additional hatch cover positions at different angles;
use of quick-acting locks for easy locking of hatch covers in closed and open positions;
use of footrests and handrails for boarding and disembarking crew members, as well as additional footrests on the sides;
use of video viewing devices on a repeat platform with the ability to change position in three planes;
in terms of mobility:
use of an automatic gear shift.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of projectile and bullet resistance.
It is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of mine protection due to two aluminum and steel sheets installed on the bottom, an anti-mine polymer mat mounted inside, and shock-absorbing landing seats.
The side projection provides protection against a 30-mm ZUBR6 projectile, but does not provide protection against a 30-mm ZUBR8 projectile;
The frontal projection provides protection against a 30-mm ZUBR8 projectile, which is higher than the protection level of the BMP-3 frontal projection.
The frontal projection with DZ blocks provides protection against cumulative grenades such as PG-9VS and PG-7VL;
The side projection with DZ blocks provides protection against cumulative grenades of the PG-9VS type, does not provide protection against grenades of the PG-7VL type.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV surpasses the BMP-3 in firepower by:
the accuracy of the 25 mm M242 automatic cannon is 2 times greater than the 30 mm 2A42 and 2A72 automatic cannons, which increases the effective firing range;
the armor penetration of the 25 mm APFSDS round is 2 times greater than the 30 mm ZUBR8 APFSDS round.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV surpasses the BMP-3 in operational and technical characteristics by:
the ability to access the fighting compartment from the troop compartment;
maintainability of the power unit, generator, fighting compartment and gun barrel;
duration of maintenance of the main units and assemblies due to ease of access;
duration and labor intensity of replacement of main units and assemblies.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is inferior to the BMP-3 in terms of dynamics, cruising range, cross-country ability and the ability to overcome water obstacles afloat.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is superior to the BMP-3 in terms of ergonomics due to the larger volume of armored space, the presence of a ramp in the troop compartment, and the absence of structural elements between the commander's and gunner's workplaces that impede the free movement of the crew from the fighting compartment to the troop compartment.
The M2A2 ODS SA IFV is inferior to the BMP-3 in terms of firepower:
fire resource due to the ammunition for the 100-mm gun-launcher and the 30-mm automatic cannon 2A72, ready for use;
the ability to fire from a 100-mm gun-launcher from closed firing positions;
the ability to combat enemy manpower located in the close zone, due to the presence of two PKT bow machine guns, including when dismounting troops (due to the ability to fire from the bow machine guns from the driver's seat).
Recommendations
Design solutions that are advisable to implement in domestic serial and prospective models of BTVT:
in terms of protection:
use of protected screens, including in the frontal part, of ATGM launchers ready for direct use;
use of a protective commander's cabin with armored glass during marching operations (conducting observation);
in terms of firepower:
use in the ammunition set of the 30-mm ZUBR8 round with an armor-piercing sabot projectile;
development of a round with an armor-piercing sabot projectile (BPOS) for 30-mm automatic cannons;
development of a 30-mm automatic cannon with improved characteristics in terms of firing accuracy and armor penetration, ensuring guaranteed destruction of the M2A2ODS SA (M2A3) IFV, using design measures implemented in foreign automatic cannons (for example, gun barrel stiffeners);
in terms of ergonomics:
use of shock absorbers for easy opening and closing of hatch covers that have a large mass;
use of additional hatch cover positions at different angles;
use of quick-acting locks for easy locking of hatch covers in closed and open positions;
use of footrests and handrails for boarding and disembarking crew members, as well as additional footrests on the sides;
use of video viewing devices on a repeat platform with the ability to change position in three planes;
in terms of mobility:
use of an automatic gear shift.
by andrei tarasenko