Comments by "" (@TheArklyte) on "Matsimus" channel.

  1. This gun as well as very few post-WWII AT guns(there were less of them designed then during the war. Apparently recoilless rifles took the main part of the niche) showcases how their design requirements are different from normal artillery. These guns need to be as low as possible to have small target profile, need to have a very wide horizontal traverse instead of vertical elevation and ideally should have a ranging rifle(which this one lacks). The fun part is that soviets also had 125mm one, Sprut-B if I recall right. And that both it and this one can use barrel fired ATGMs from their respective tank counterparts(yes, there is a 100mm barrel launched ATGM designed for rifled gun of T-55).
    169
  2. Engine shielding troops from fronts, dismounts leave through ramp in the back. Already safer then BTR-80 and it's much older then that one.
    147
  3. Mi-12 lifts 44 tons. T-72 weights 42 tons. ... Oh. Oh no.
    87
  4. Technically speaking, that's what BT was designed for as tracks were considered too costly(due to wear of strictly imported rubber) and unreliable(few people realise WHY Koshkin risked his health to show that fully tracked version of T-32 aka T-34 was reliable enough to go several thousand kilometres on tracks). I'm just surprised that it took them THAT LONG to figure it out ie read the bloody manual:D
    42
  5.  @verdebusterAP  1)it doesn't carry them because requirment is specifically to not have ammo inside the vehicle. Every source about vehicle states that. 2)3.7 miles is a rough rounded down range of Ataka, which is 6km, a little higher. Problem is that this is the range of model from 1985, Terminator and Terminator-2 aren't time travellers armed with different missile from soviet era. 9M120M already had 8km range, 9M120D has 10km. I'll take a pity on you and tell that's that roughly 5 and 6.25 miles accordingly. You should also be aware that originally it was planned to use Kornet ATGMs and exactly those were mentioned as option for export vehicles. Max range is also 10km. 3)the vehicle uses both passive(Relict) and active protection systems. None of the above is secret and was mentioned. Which brings a question, are you just blind OR were you lying on purpose? Since you're so sure of absolute supriority of other vehicle, why would the latter one be true? So I wish you to find someone, who can cure your eye problem.
    37
  6. You do know that Smerch, Grad and so on have guided munitions developed for them, right? Discussing if launcher is obsolete is like discussing if M2 is obsolete as HMG. Load new ammo, install modern optics, keep going.
    35
  7. Armored cars irl: are actually armored, have NBC protection, can fit dozen guys, can carry a high caliber cannon or mortar, several ATGMs, autocannon, HMGs, sometimes all of the above at the same time, can swim. Armored cars in games: best I can do is 3 dudes, open top, half of M2 and you'll all drown.
    35
  8. ​ @Ghastly_Grinner  /checks comment history/ Ah, let me talk in language of your people then, tankie. Как там Гиркин?
    25
  9. Ah yes, the classical elbonian armed forces question. The answer as always is yes. However it's more valuable as recovery or transport nowadays as those parts of it hadn't become obsolete(if it was maintained and has spare parts).
    24
  10. Except most russian hardware isn't rugged and maintained at all. Talented designers, competent engineers, cursed landmass 😂
    18
  11. This all reminds me how destroyers started as torpedo boats with guns, grew to torpedo boat destroyers, outgrew torpedo boat part of the name, grew even more with destroyer leaders being light cruisers under other name and now we have destroyers with mass of heavy cruiser, armaments of battlecruiser and pricetag of battleships. And people decided to invent torpedo boat destroyers once again as "cheaper alternative". I've seen this cycle in navy, I've seen it in tank development with MBT being too precious so we now have light and medium tanks back, we've even starting to see it with fighters as every fighter eventually is replaced by much larger multirole fighter-bomber which requires a lighter and more expendable fighters to be on second roles. So now jeeps grew up and for 50th time reinvented armored car. As a result for 50th time some guy reinvented a jeep... Tbh it would have been funny if all the people involved weren't as oblivious about going in circles.
    16
  12. Slaps two ADATS tubes on CV90 lower.
    16
  13.  @elliotyourarobot  nice derailment Но я гоблиноидов и мусоров не помню чтобы спрашивал ¯⁠\⁠_⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠_⁠/⁠¯
    15
  14.  @juliehildahl2758  "another perfectly good example of Russia "appropriating" another countries technology. MG42 to MG3." MG3 is a NATO general purpose machinegun. You've said enough.
    15
  15. AT niche is big and layered. NLAW is a PTRS to Javelin's 6 pounder to TOW2/Shuhna's 17 pounder. They best work when all are available as options.
    14
  16.  @ricardosoto5770  no one is updating it because 23mm was long ago deemed too small of a caliber. In contrast 30mm shells can be used with both programmator or straight up proximity fuze. Hence new ammo on modernized Tunguska and modern Panzir. Not to mention those two can serve as de facto CIWS nowadays being able to detect and intercept even mortar shells. As for drones, the problem is distance. 30mm has better reach, but still not enough for a scout that just hangs 10km away. And when you can buy hundreds of them for 200$, shooting them down with missiles that costs hundred times that is not an option. Hence why 57mm is coming back. Meanwhile USA is reintroducing 45mm and 50mm. Because they can go up to 14km of range. And as always effective counter is always a coordinated system which requires all of the above and many more
    14
  17. Or to american: "They're lazy fucks, they'd achieve the same thing as we if they only worked as hard" to random small countries that don't have native resources not to the point of lacking something fancy as oil or rare earth metals, but simple arable land and fresh water:D
    14
  18.  @CharliMorganMusic  sorry, I've missed the part where you're from a reality where firearms make revolutionary jumps in their mechanical performance every decade unlike our reality where majority of firearms hadn't changed since the 1960's and there are guns from 1910's still in use because major leaps were made in accessories, optics and ammo, neither of which are integral mechanical parts of the gun which would lead to it being obsolete. Must be cool running around with videogamey guns that have +7 to damage or something like that written on them, sadly we don't have anything like that around here:P
    12
  19. It's an interesting comparison with soviet 85mm, which was also based on Rheinmetall 75mm AA gun. First soviets had designed a new carriage for it, but then they experimented with how much of a caliber increase that gun can survive. Turned out they were able to "stretch" it to 85mm without severe redesign of the system. Meanwhile germans designed a completly new gun from ground up. Tl;dr in terms of WWII engineering soviets knew they were poor, germans acted like they weren't.
    12
  20.  @Anuj-1  well, he tried to give them more credit then they deserve to be polite.
    11
  21. A good comparison on german side would be MG-151/15. And just like MG-151/20, after the war soviet made a lower velocity 23mm autocannon using 14,5*114mm case as a base. Thankfully for soviet tankers, germans never came up with AT rifle that used their 15mm round... sadly for soviet tankers, T-26, BT-5/7 and T-60 weren't immune to already exististing german AT rifles:(
    11
  22.  @AlexanderTch  "I am not a mechanic" is the only honest and useful part of your comment. You could have stopped at that.
    10
  23. It wasn't. MiG 1.44 was technology demonstrator. And Su-57 isn't from the 90's despite some wild claims.
    10
  24.  @Ghastly_Grinner  com on, you can do better then that. Talk about historical russian lands. Or blame everyone except yourself in being a national socialist, that's a classic one. Or, you know, say that you fight the whole UN NATO Ukraine by your own self and that that's unfair fight against overwhelming odds. А тем временем на календаре 2023, а на карте Украина. Слив засчитан.
    10
  25.  @tianwong152  1)YOU were the one who CHOSE to drag Russia and "our languages" into this. As a result you get what you asked for - well known problems of Russia being extrapolated upon you. By your own choice. Good job in dissing your own government;) 2)nobody talked about Ukraine and current war here. You dragged it in just to have it mentioned. Combined with your new account it doesn't paint a good and honest picture. Which once again adds up to be viewed as a negative. Are you sabotaging the propaganda center you're working in or something? Or just bad at it?:D
    9
  26.  @dangerouseducation40  sorry, must have mistook you for another guy. Have you seen the 🤡 who said: "Tanker is the most outdated and dead combat job. The survivability against any other modern military is almost nil." I heard grunts, who get grenades thrown on their heads by FPVs, would like to have a few words with this one.
    9
  27. It is always about training. Just look up how israelis were defeating state of the art enemy tanks with what can be called a scrap metal by that point. During Chechen Wars Russia relied on army based on conscription which meant 1)low(for military) training level across the army; 2)high(for insurgents) training level among population. Well, they saw result so they switched to professional standing contract army. It is better for both counter insurgency and local conflicts. It also means that new generation in population wouldn't have required skills to rebel;)
    9
  28. Can't recall many of the latter. Most critique comes from being far from era the which they were designed for, being used plain wrong or it's a reaction to inflation of the former. And if I'll ever need former, I'd just need to turn on TV on 9th of May(or half a month prior when this show starts and doesn't end until late June)😅
    8
  29. I'm all in for Russia that invests money into equipment 1)that can't be used to threaten someone with nukes or bombarding civilians; 2)is clearly meant for regions of their country(unless they plan to invade Finland, Norway and Sweden) and would be a HUGE waste if used somewhere else. We need more of that. Ideally from all self proclaimed superpowers/major powers, but I'm okay with Russia starting the trend.
    8
  30. It's not. ZSU-57-2 was a dedicated SPAAG. This thing however exists for the same purpose US is started producing 50mm version of Bushmaster - garbage variety drones cost several times less then AA missile of Tunguska or even Pantsir(system that aimed to produce simplest missile solution specifically). This is still an IFV.
    8
  31. That's why a certain country keeps its tanks around 40 tons. Mi-12 and T-64 make a fun duo;)
    8
  32.  @MidwestDIY  standard naval Kortik CIWS system with two 30mm rotary cannons and dozen missiles on each turret would win:D
    8
  33. ​ @tianwong152  и что потом? Вот к чему вел твой аргумент, что ты хотел этим сказать? Нахуя было открывать рот? Strange coincidence, I know russian, but there is no reliable information about Su-57. Or anybody with IQ above room temperature, who believes it's anywhere near stated capabilities, that its production numbers aren't a joke, that the whole project isn't another feeding opportunity for corrupt officials, that's it's produced solely for pointless parade duty and that there's enough trained personnel left after Putin's "reforms" to maintain or even fly those. Will the result of talking to chinese smart enough to use VPN be different? Are you sure?;)
    7
  34.  @EvanFAF  Chieftain, Bovington, Red Effect, no? I actually don't know artillery channels. For firearms you should check Forgotten Weapons and InRange as well as C&R Arsenal. For planes I guess there's Paper Skies(he loves the aircraft, but hates government incompetence) and maaaaaaybe Mustard(though he has like 3-4 videos on soviet aircraft, even if one of them mentions Bartini, creator of ТРИЗ). And for naval you know whom is the man, the myth, the legend. Yep, it's Drachs
    7
  35.  @dangerouseducation40  thanks for a laugh. Your reality must be quite scary if tankers are somehow LESS protected from drones then infantrymen. Good thing that it has no connection to our reality and laws of physics, but you do you 👍
    7
  36.  @stanleysmith7551  "much" doesn't even cover it. Sweden one of the main arms producers in the world for over a century. Now it'll only increase incentive of NATO members to buy swedish products(if they didn't have them) to standardise further.
    7
  37. I get some Tropico "competence" vibes... except Tropico is a f//cking satire:(
    7
  38.  @soulsphere9242  my mistake, 40mm and 50mm. Not 45mm. Bushmaster IV is 40mm version. 50mm version of Bushmaster III is for now called XM913 as its only finished testing. I don't know if it'll be called Bushmaster V or Bushmaster III/50mm.
    6
  39. >SUSAT is called old(surprised that we're at this point) >All of the so called near pear opponents, who are not NATO members either have worse and less widespread scopes(China) or don't have scopes for the troops at all(Russia) So how exactly is it obsolete? If you have infinite budget you can likewise buy one of those Boston Dynamics robots and give it a rifle. Does it make humans obsolete? Nope, you're just showing off with your finances:D All those thermal digital scopes with automatic correction for weather, barrel bend, Earth rotation, tine dilation and so on are 1)very expensive, heavy, fragile and need someone smarter then normal grunt to operate; 2)provide miniscule increase in effectiveness of the soldier. Compared to just making sure that they're fed, warm and rested that's placebo effect. Because soldiers aren't tanks, IFVs or helicopters, their weapons don't benefit from all that extra accuracy. You can mount Hubble as a scope to your pistol, it'll still be just a pistol. Just with almost two dozen tons of extra dead weight...
    6
  40.  @Mygg_Jeager  look at scheme of NLAW projectile and at result of detonation on targets, then repeat your statement. I feel like one of us is going insane...
    6
  41. Problem with 105mm is that the most potent round it can have is in case you DO run into enemy armor is M900, which is de facto equal to ballistic capabilities of 2A46 of T-72. Except T-72 is more likely to survive the hit... even if russians still haven't learned what is a MRD and why it's important for FCS.
    6
  42.  @nil981  1)that's the point - they don't have armor. Basic .308 would trash FPV drone from hundred meters away; 2)APS systems are made to target and intercept ATGMs. If you believe that slow and easier to spot FPV drone is harder to target, it's your problem. The solution to FPV drones is the same as it was in 2016, almost a decade ago - slaving RWS to APS sensors. And basic PKM/M240/M60 is more then enough for that. If your tank was ambushed because it had gotten into tree line, it's a user mistake. The same as driving a tank into narrow street between several 9-20+ floor apartment buildings and then saying that RPG-7 to the roof is hard to counter.
    5
  43. Wow, somebody else still remembers Renegade. Thanks:)
    5
  44.  @atlitjara9562  if we take boats as repurposed civilian ones and Kord as no more then 50% more expensive then DShK then... 2892,3?
    5
  45. Why shouldn't it be in service? As long as spare parts are available any vehicle is better then no vehicle. Heck, I'd say that even M4 and T-34 are still fine as training vehicles, towing, basis for engineering and/or ATGM carrier vehicles. But in their case it's spare parts problem.
    5
  46.  @pavegray  you don't need similar system, you just need NLAW. NATO uses common equipment standards for a reason. Just license it or better make transfer deal with brits to get them small amount of Javelins for big shipments of NLAWs. The only thing that might need to be added in is that I don't recall if NLAW has DP mode.
    5
  47. Now imagine for a second that military would have vehicles with electric drive in next 50 years or so.
    5
  48. Never understood neither Strela-1, nor Strela-10. Why are they on separate vehicles ie BRDM-2 and MT-LB when there's ZSU-23-4 ready? It already has all the needed equipment, just put the missiles on it to have hybrid SPAA. Yeah, that's what they did with Tunguska later on, but why wasn't it done in 1968 after Strela-1 was finally ready as modernization for ZSU-23-4? And I bet soviet engineers had this idea since day 1. So what was the issue? Doctrine? Mass restrictions of Shilka's turret?
    5
  49. It's weird that it's not equipped with thermal sleeve and muzzle reference device though I guess higher weight budget of naval vessel just allows to equip heavier thicker walled barrels and thus ignore the problems?
    4
  50. I'm yet to see a drone that can survive .308, not to mention .50, but you do you, strange caliber obsessed man 😅👍
    4