Russia's Tank Biathlon

SteelBird

SteelBird

Colonel
Aug 7. One tank's dead (minute 20:50) when trying to get out from pool suddenly (engine stop?) rolled back to the middle of the pool. Last year some T-72 died after getting out from pool as well. Does this raise question about water proof of the T-72s?
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
Uzb7kNo.gif

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!
 
Last edited:
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
plawolf said:
I am more concerned with the reason Chinese tanks are missing targets much more frequently this year, certainly compared to previous events.

Has the range to targets been increased?

Are the Russians supplying standardised ammo this time? (One of the excuses made by the Russians after the first biathlon was the Chinese had higher velocity ammo, so enjoyed a flatter ballistic curve. If the Chinese FSC were calibrated for the Chinese high velocity ammo and they were using Russian low velocity ammo, it would explain all the misses).
Click to expand...
Another explanation is the fire control system of the cost-controlled 96-B tanks suck.
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
Blackstone said:
So your conclusion on Chinese team using Russian equipment is the PLL-05 was banned? Really?
Click to expand...
  • No reason for Chinese team to use Russian equipments when Chinese team possesses better equipments*.
  • Chinese team in previous team did so well that Russia simply applied a fudge factor to Chinese team's score.
  • Exercise of common sense.
I wouldn't be surprise if Russia bans Type 96B from competing next year. :rolleyes:

*In the case of PLL-05, it is a truly self-propelled mortar system, which can be fired as soon as the vehicle has stopped. The Russian's system is simply an armored carrier transporting the mortar, the latter of which needs to be unpacked to shoot, and packed to scoot.
 
Blackstone

Blackstone

Brigadier
Engineer said:
  • No reason for Chinese team to use Russian equipments when Chinese team possesses better equipments*.
  • Chinese team in previous team did so well that Russia simply applied a fudge factor to Chinese team's score.
  • Exercise of common sense.
I wouldn't be surprise if Russia bans Type 96B from competing next year. :rolleyes:

*In the case of PLL-05, it is a truly self-propelled mortar system, which can be fired as soon as the vehicle has stopped. The Russian's system is simply an armored carrier transporting the mortar, the latter of which needs to be unpacked to shoot, and packed to scoot.
Click to expand...
You have no facts, only supposition and speculation on banning of PLL-05. Funny how we hear no outcry from Chinese sources on PLL-05 being banned for being too good, too bad, or just too damned average. Why is that? Bottom line is your claim is all hat and no cattle.
 
Engineer

Engineer

Major
Blackstone said:
You have no facts, only supposition and speculation on banning of PLL-05. Funny how we hear no outcry from Chinese sources on PLL-05 being banned for being too good, too bad, or just too damned average. Why is that? Bottom line is your claim is all hat and no cattle.
Click to expand...
More like the bottom line being that you have no facts for a counter argument. Kind of like how there is "outcry" from Chinese sources, yet you deem them to be "Internet rumor", right in this very thread. You are the one full of supposition and speculation. :rolleyes:

It must pain you to hear that China's equipments can outperform others. What can you do about it? Oh right, nothing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top