Why aren’t more countries investing in Active Defense for Tanks RIGHT NOW?!

>he thinks the lards are the ones with corruption problems

Attached: 2017_CPI.jpg (1280x713, 452K)

The U.S. Military Industrial Complex is a different beast.

Attached: 29FDE22F-26D4-4E99-B575-1EB1B1FB5AF7.png (620x500, 146K)

>24-billion-fix
MOR MONEY FOR DEM PROGRAMS

Alright, wasn't quite sure what the number was. It's kind of funny that the sum of Russia' 4th generation fighters could be taken out by one flight of those new F-15s.
This stupid fucking talking point was debunked months ago. Fuck off.

>American military doctrine relies on combined arms, it doesn't matter that there's few SAM options because air superiority will ideally be achieved and that will deter both enemy aircraft and enemy SAMs
>"OMG America BTFO because this war game says their SAMs can't stop Russian or Chinese aircraft and swarms (which totally exist) will fly over the battlefield and destroy American ground forces! The Russian bear and the Chinese Dragon make the American chicken cower with fear!"

Attached: 1487240468938.jpg (526x360, 28K)

>While the Air Force and Navy took most of the flak today at this afternoon’s Center for a New American Security panel on the need for “A New American Way of War.” the Army doesn’t look too great, either. Its huge supply bases go up in smoke as well, Work and Ochmanek said. Its tank brigades get shot up by cruise missiles, drones, and helicopters because the Army largely got rid of its mobile anti-aircraft troops, a shortfall it’s now hastening to correct. And its missile defense units get overwhelmed by the sheer volume of incoming fire.

>“If we went to war in Europe, there would be one Patriot battery moving, and it would go to Ramstein. And that’s it,” Work growled. “We have 58 Brigade Combat Teams, but we don’t have anything to protect our bases. so what different does it make?”

Also planes are bad at dealing with helicopters.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/J-CATCH

Also Air-Superiority is a meme in a world of S-400’s with 400km of range with Mach 15 missiles that can take 20g turns and shoot down missiles flying 5 meters off the ground engaging 36 different targets simultaneously along with Tunguskas and similar systems.

Attached: A6FB8A5F-0974-4B4C-8B38-7B21EF180E1E.png (600x787, 369K)

America is one of the few countries with APS on tanks.

Oy yeah, those S-400s and Pantsirs sure did a lot for Syria...

I don't think you realize what actual corruption is like.

>muh S-400
You know, giving maximum numbers doesn't mean that this information translates to real life.

The 400 km range is assuming the target can be detected and targeted at such ranges. The USA have ~500 aircraft where this doesn't apply. And that's under ideal conditions.

Mach 15 missiles aren't going to come close to that speed 5 meters of the ground. Those speeds are only reached at high altitudes. Also, missiles with such ranges are very large, require huge logistics, and very limited in numbers. Imagine going for SEAD against the S-400 and the retarded vodkaniggers waste all of their missiles on Tomahawks.

>A quality thermal imager, something Russians cannot seem to master 30+ years after the fact.

The Frogs sold Russia their Catherine FLIR, which is being adopted by the Russians as Sosna-U. The system should be around the same quality as 1990's M1A2.

>Modern Russian ERA works not only on HEAT, but Kinetic Energy Penetrator warheads too which is a massive advantage in cannon duels,

I'm not sure you really understand how modern APFSDS like M829A3/A4 and DM53/64 work

>and t-90’s can launch long range ATGM’s from their cannon.

Gun launched ATGM are a compensation for older FCS that cannot be relied on for first round hits at 4km+.

>Russian tanks generally tend to pack on a lot more ERA than most Abrams I’ve seen.

Many of which (particularly the T-72) use ERA as armor upgrades because they still have their Soviet era armor packages

>Am I wrong in thinking that Russian Tanks seem more advanced or at least are focusing on the bigger priorities of the modern battlefield?

Yes, for example only with the T-90A and T-72B3 have thermal sights become commonplace on Russian tanks.

>Especially in the context of this recent wargame

Tanks have little relevance to RAND's my scenario stands.

Does anyone have the initial Rand document? All I can find is this.

rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/research_reports/RR1200/RR1253/RAND_RR1253.pdf

My scenario stands.

xenagoguevicene.com/2019/03/11/us-rand-corporation-wwiii-war-game-simulation-us-defeated-by-russia-and-china-by-tyler-durden-zero-hedge-10-march-2019/

Attached: 4833CFF3-935B-4158-880D-8DBD2C5BF646.png (1056x777, 709K)

Will a Kinetic Dart do much damage 4 km away?

Modern APFSDS have terrific energy retention due to their high cross section density. The German DM-23 goes from 1650 m/s at muzzle to 1540m/s at 2000 meters. That's an old round from the mid-80's, new round have even better energy retention due to being heavier and having improved aerodynamic.

If it is armor that it can't get through at 4km, a 125mm ATGM won't either.

>curves atgm into your side or top armor

hmmm

m.youtube.com/watch?v=B1yTb3vF35M#fauxfullscreen

Attached: 5DC2D43C-BA1F-443C-A602-6F0AA8339A11.jpg (1280x720, 93K)

How about posting the actual reports? Oh wait, it's easier to post journalistic memery.

Could you learn how the armor packages on Abrams work, or how ATGMs work, or how anything works for that matter?

>shoot tank in the side/rear

It is almost like you are in agreement but can't admit it. That was also no where near a 4km shot.

rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1782-1.html

A4 has similar weight and dimensions to A3, it's not a significant enough upgrade to defeat Relikt

Holy cow Medicare is expensive. We need to get rid of that money hole stat.

Since you're an expert on this classified round that entered service a few years ago, why don't you tell us more about it?

Thanks a lot, it is annoying how not a single article had the name or link to the original paper.

M829A3 and A4 do not use brute force to defeat ERA.

why would you think we're not doing this off the books

stfu you dumb idiot

Attached: Screenshot_20190222-202143_Twitter.jpg (720x1280, 446K)

How about I do, there is publicly available press releases regarding the round which can be found under FY15 Army Programs. The main improvement is a munitions datalink which would improve sensor fusion in the ammunition. The round itself is stated as being very similar in terms of physical characteristics

Come back when you've taken high school physics or happen to have a source that proves your point.

Attached: trudeaucripple.png (230x298, 86K)

>even the bullets have sensor fusion now

What the fuck does that even mean? Munitions datalink? Can they maneuver in the air or some shit? I thought they were just dumb depleted Uranium darts?

No idea why you are this hostile when the poster is right. Patents filed by Orbital ATK have a relatively loosely attached steel tip on a penetrator. On impact with Kontakt-5 style armor, the steel tip sets off the ERA and it's loose attachment causes it to fall off without transferring shearing force to the DU rod.

Modern ERA mounted on Russian tanks (outside of the T-72B3 which everyone accepts as a shit upgrade to an old tank) is Relikt, which was made to counter M829A3 by adding an additional plate, meaning once the initial anti-ERA sleeve and tip have shorn off, the second plate is still moving and disrupting the penetrator

Attached: arrow.jpg (635x357, 31K)

>outside of the T-72B3 which everyone accepts as a shit upgrade to an old tank
Except it's going to form the bulk of the Russian armor force since the T-90 never materialized in numbers and the Armata isn't happening.
>which was made to counter M829A3
We're talking about the M829A4, not the A3.

Correct, however, the A4 doesn't seem to have any considerable changes or upgrades to indicate it can out-perform Relikt

>the A4 doesn't seem to have any considerable changes
Well, the Army considered it worthy of being put in service and replacing the A3. If it was fundamentally the same round they wouldn't have bothered.

>weak SAM’s, completely reliant on short range stingers and a few Patriot batteries, no mid range option for things like stand-off helicopters
Strange how mudslimes in Syria have been using stingers effectively to shoot down Russian helicopters

Best hope the helicopter flies right over your head instead of a few miles behind friendly Russian lines sniping tanks at the edge of the American armored formation.

T-72B3 and T-90A form the bulk of Russian armor, and they are still asking Kontakt-5. T-90MS has Relikt, bit it wasn't bought, same with T-72B2.

Vastly overestimating the Russians on that one bud

I don't have to hope for that. It'll never happen because Russia and the US will never fight.

>Why aren’t more countries investing in Active Defense for Tanks RIGHT NOW?!
Uh, because they are? What "more countries" do you need? Russia has had hard-kill and soft-kill APS forever, and is currently fielding a soft-kill APS on every T-90 as well as retrofitting it to T-72s. The USA started fielding a soft-kill APS on deployed tanks and brads back in 2006 and is currently trialing a hard-kill system as well. Israel is satisfied with theirs, the Turks and Gooks and Japs are working on their own. That leaves Germany(militarily irrelevant except for their customers) and the Bongs.

>Every ABCT has M270 and M109.
Zero US Army Brigades of any type have M270, that's a Divisional weapon and up. And the M109 Battalions in the ABCTs are currently Battery-sized, with only 2 pieces per Battery or 6 pieces per Battalion. The towed Batteries are down to 3 pieces each and they don't even take all 3 on deployments. The other user's criticisms about US Artillery are 100% valid.

>why would you think we're not doing this off the books
Because they are doing it on the books. OP is just ignorant

Ivan is not stupid. Maybe behind on tech in certain areas but also ahead in others and they are capable of clever strategy. Underestimating them to this degree is a mistake. Read Red Storm Rising or maybe play Wargame Red Dragon and you will see.

Attached: CCD7CBFF-81BB-4201-9286-3088ADCD64FE.jpg (1280x720, 227K)

The U.S. is behind in that they are only starting now when the Russian version has been in use for years and is deployed and fully mature.

>The U.S. is behind in that they are only starting now

>The USA started fielding a soft-kill APS on deployed tanks and brads back in 2006

That's true but I can't really imagine a situation where we're fighting Russia or a similar force and ABCTs don't have MLRS support. The BTG does have us beat in terms of artillery in a deployable unit but that comes at the expense of other things.

I'm not saying they're stupid (although all you have to do is watch any Russian youtube video cyka blyat), I'm just saying that doctrinally, popping up helos to fire missiles is not a Russian tactic, it's an American one.

I'd also say that one of Russia's greatest flaws is QC in production. Theoretically the 9M120 has a max range of 3.73 miles, but that's optimistic.

Additionally, the 9M120 relies on radio command link. The Russian's also favor broad spectrum jamming that interfere's with their own shit. This was seen in the Georgia conflict and the early days of all that Ukraine shit.

The 9M120 is also SACLOS, not fire and forget so they can't pop back down after firing.

finally found it. Turns out its from the '90s, I just didn't see them until Iraq II

Attached: 104raq70ANVLQ6.jpg (500x350, 65K)

>soft-kill aps in 2006
>no hard-kill aps when advanced Russian systems like Arena have been around since the 1990’s. Only has vapor ware like Quick Kill and are only just recently buying a few Jewish Trophy systems, barely any Abrams have them.

Attached: E6224FD5-0386-4E77-BC4D-5FA8B842DCCA.jpg (306x306, 20K)

>$21 Trillion from the Pentagon goes missing
>"accounting errors"
sure...

Attached: Ling-Temco-Vought SLAM.jpg (600x436, 46K)

Attached: 5bf.gif (625x626, 54K)

The AN-VLQ 6 dates to 1990.
>Only has vapor ware like Quick Kill
Quick kill isn't vaporware- Raytheon is planning on integrating it into the Lynx IFV if it gets chosen for OMFV. That's also ignoring the other systems developed like Iron curtain.

>I'm not sure you really understand how modern APFSDS like M829A3/A4 and DM53/64 work
We know how A3 and DM53/63 work, but A4? hell naw.

>Gun launched ATGM are a compensation for older FCS that cannot be relied on for first round hits at 4km+.
Guided anything is better against moving targets particularly when flight times are >2s.

>Many of which (particularly the T-72) use ERA as armor upgrades because they still have their Soviet era armor packages
Which is actually pretty smart considering their inferior budgets. Upgrading ERA is a depot level job or could even be done in the field by replacing the reactive elements with newer ones.

>A quality thermal imager, something Russians cannot seem to master 30+ years after the fact.
The Russians have leapt forward tremendously in the field of thermal imagers. To date, they are preparing for serial production of thermal imagers including 3rd gen megapixel TI which is expected to be on the T-14.

Attached: Capture.png (1211x828, 188K)

>Yes. They're trying to stay up-to-date without making big changes, because the Russians cannot afford to produce tanks anymore and the T-72/80 are at their limit of modernization.
They just ordered 132 new T-14s and T-15s, alongside modernization of the some 500 T-90A into T-90MA, what the fuck are you talking about?

>The Patriot and Stinger have fine records
The Patriot never came up against any contemporary opposition while the Stinger did force a change in Soviet tactics, so its a success.

>NASAMS
is territorial air defence. In its current form no way is it suitable for air defence of the ground forces for the same reasons Pantsir isnt'.

>This is just a sad vatnik cope because Russia cannot afford to buy even advanced attack helicopters in quantity.
As opposed to the US that doesn't have any organic SAM worth a damn that the only response to something like a micro drone attack is small arms. Right.

>They just ordered 132 new T-14s and T-15s
Down from a planned order of 2,000 by 2025 and we'll see if this lasts.
>The Patriot never came up against any contemporary opposition
Neither have any of the modern Russian systems that get jerked to on here.
>is territorial air defence. In its current form no way is it suitable for air defence of the ground forces
It's been mounted on the Humvee and in the MML. It can absolutely keep up with ground forces.
>As opposed to the US that doesn't have any organic SAM
Because we have a functioning air force
>that the only response to something like a micro drone attack is small arms
leonardodrs.com/products-and-services/im-shorad/

I thought the long range missiles haven't even been put into service?

Flares run out, eventually. And someone gets lucky and runs an FN-6 into one, eventually.

>I'm just saying that doctrinally, popping up helos to fire missiles is not a Russian tactic, it's an American one.
Pop-up attacks is a valid Russian tactic, especially against an opponent who lacks organic SAM or AAA that can smoke helos in less than 5 seconds even despite the lack of mast mounted antennas (which are relevant only if you have the aforementioned units hunting your ass)

>I'd also say that one of Russia's greatest flaws is QC in production. Theoretically the 9M120 has a max range of 3.73 miles, but that's optimistic.
I never heard of an incident regarding ATAKA's QC nor of its range deficiency. Post sources

>Additionally, the 9M120 relies on radio command link. The Russian's also favor broad spectrum jamming that interfere's with their own shit. This was seen in the Georgia conflict and the early days of all that Ukraine shit.
Radio command datalinks are pretty hard to jam actually. You have for the Mi-28, a dedicated directional antenna looking straight into every ATAKA's ass, and majority of that energy is oriented at the missile. There is literally no broad spectrum jammer capable of defeating that unless its powered by a nuke reactor.

>The 9M120 is also SACLOS, not fire and forget so they can't pop back down after firing.
Again, popping back down immediately is only relevant if you have Tors and Tunguskas hunting your ass.

>They just ordered 132 new T-14s and T-15s
Placing an order doesn't mean in service or even in production. The Russian gov makes "orders" all the time, most ever make it.

>is territorial air defence. In its current form no way is it suitable for air defence of the ground forces for the same reasons Pantsir isn't'.
Pantsir is trash. Have fun going against the USAF.

>You have for the Mi-28
I'm sure their 90 helicopters will change the battlefield.

Your going to see a whole new armor/defense package on the Abrams in the next 5 years. They will be expodited if a large scale conflict breaks out

USA just greenlit production of the Sepv3/M1A2C upgrades, which will include Trophy, amongst other things.

Makes me jealous, our MBTs don't even have a LWR.

>Down from a planned order of 2,000 by 2025 and we'll see if this lasts.
With a budget surplus more than 50% of the military budget they have more than enough money to finance the order of 6000 tanks in one year assuming the highest prices of $6.5 million each. An order of around a brigade set stretched for 15 years and more is not going to be a problem.

>Neither have any of the modern Russian systems that get jerked to on here.
Exception: Buk. No, not the airliner, but the Georgians have shot them against the RuAF while the Syrians used them against NATO and Israeli missles.

>It's been mounted on the Humvee and in the MML. It can absolutely keep up with ground forces.
>wheeled
It has to be tracked at least, if you really want to keep up with all ground forces including tracked MBTs and tracked IFVs. Not every theater is full of sand traversable by wheeled vehicles.

>Because we have a functioning air force
Aircraft can't stay on station 24/7, and any aircraft doing CAP is one less aircraft not doing other tasks.

>leonardodrs.com/products-and-services/im-shorad/
Looks a bit on the lighter side when it comes to sensors, and armaments, but Itll have to do. Now you just have to order it in numbers.

>Placing an order doesn't mean in service or even in production. The Russian gov makes "orders" all the time, most ever make it.
They signed a contract, and products have exchanged hands.

>Pantsir is trash. Have fun going against the USAF.
If you hand over the controls to Slavs there won't be any USAF left. Remember, most aircraft flown in Allied Force only survived because they flew over 15,000 ft, which is well within Pantsir's engagement envelope.

A fraction of that changed the Syrian battlefield.

>it has to be tracked
What's American doctrine with deployment of Air Defence? Surely they aren't going to be rolling with F Ech in an advance to contact.
I think they're looking at GDLS' SHORAD, basically a Stryker with an Avenger weapon system. Now the Stryker isn't the best at cross country, but it can get the job done.

>The Russians have leapt forward tremendously in the field of thermal imagers.

The Frogs should have been reamed for selling the Russians modern FLIR with technology transfer, but oh well, what can you do.

> The Russians have leapt forward tremendously in the field of thermal imagers.

Right now? There really isn't one because the Army hasn't shot at enemy aircraft in 70 years and hasn't planned to fight an enemy with a threatening airforce in 30 years. There is no true all terrain (tracked) SHORAD in the pipeline.

>They signed a contract
Which doesn't mean anything considering the press releases they put out saying contracts for whatever weapon of the week is currently in the headlines. Hell, there's a "contract" (or more a tender) for both the R-77 and Kh-32 but neither have been seen in any widespread service.
>and products have exchanged hands.
There are literally less than 50 tanks, non in active service.

>If you hand over the controls to Slavs
I wouldn't hold them as the gold standard. They (the Russian) don't really have any combat experience to speak of.

>which is well within Pantsir's engagement envelope.
The Pantsir can't even shoot down drones and weapons in the terminal phase, which is what it was designed (in the literally sense of the word) to do.

>A fraction of that changed the Syrian battlefield.
No, there were a few planes and helicopters supporting SAA forces (who were mainly Iranian paid mercenaries) in their push to retake Palmyra, Syria, but other than that they didn't really do much.

>Which doesn't mean anything considering the press releases they put out saying contracts for whatever weapon of the week is currently in the headlines. Hell, there's a "contract" (or more a tender) for both the R-77 and Kh-32 but neither have been seen in any widespread service.
Do you even know what a contract is?

>There are literally less than 50 tanks, non in active service.
You do realize that the contract stipulates delivery of 132 until 2021 right?

>I wouldn't hold them as the gold standard. They (the Russian) don't really have any combat experience to speak of.
Ass whipping Georgians, Ukrainians, and Arabs are not combat experiences worth writing home about, I agree. but then nobody has fought somebody else of note.

>The Pantsir can't even shoot down drones and weapons in the terminal phase, which is what it was designed (in the literally sense of the word) to do.
And now you're just making shit up.

>No, there were a few planes and helicopters supporting SAA forces (who were mainly Iranian paid mercenaries) in their push to retake Palmyra, Syria, but other than that they didn't really do much.
yeah, making shit up. were done here

>Pop-up attacks is a valid Russian tactic, especially against an opponent who lacks organic SAM or AAA

do you even think about what you read ?

pop up tactics are ONLY to counter shorad and other aaa

>With a budget surplus more than 50% of the military budget they have more than enough money to finance the order of 6000 tanks in one year assuming the highest prices of $6.5 million each. An order of around a brigade set stretched for 15 years and more is not going to be a problem.
These budget surpluses only last as long as the price of oil is high enough because that's just about the only thing of value the Russian economy has.
>Buk
Hasn't been very effective against the attacks it has faced.
>It has to be tracked at least, if you really want to keep up with all ground forces including tracked MBTs and tracked IFVs
If that was truly needed it would be trivial to put the SHORAD on the AMPV and the MML on the M270 respectively.
>Aircraft can't stay on station 24/7, and any aircraft doing CAP is one less aircraft not doing other tasks.
We have enough. F-15Es with SDBs could smoke an entire column of Russian tanks.

>These budget surpluses only last as long as the price of oil is high enough because that's just about the only thing of value the Russian economy has.
If I have to pick between a shitty economy and a rich economy that would only be inherited by subhumans within a generation, you can sign me the fuck up on the former with added cherry on top.

>Hasn't been very effective against the attacks it has faced.
According to the faggots who categorically deny evidence to the contrary - conveniently forgotten from MH17 square shaped holes in cruise missile parts anyone? . Oh well, we did get some intact cruise missiles for study out of the experience plus signatures from jammers so you can have the media win.

>If that was truly needed it would be trivial to put the SHORAD on the AMPV and the MML on the M270 respectively.
If it were trivial, all of US air defence vehicles would be on tracks. Its not. A tracked vehicle made for offroad performance warrants much greater shock resistance from electronics for example.

>We have enough. F-15Es with SDBs could smoke an entire column of Russian tanks.
Not if it doesnt get smoked from a SAM. Not that your recce is any good. You fuckers cant even identify troop movements during the Northern Wind ops, and all your pet rats got encircled. In Syria and Iraq, you missed a fuck tons of troop concentrations just lying around doing jack shit. Not impressed.

The M1 Abrams does have skirt mounted ERA these days but the frontal armor is already too thick for most guns to penetrate.

We could mount active defenses like TROPHY but the M1 is already 30+ years old and there's a serious debate about replacing it.

>If I have to pick between a shitty economy and a rich economy that would only be inherited by subhumans within a generation, you can sign me the fuck up on the former with added cherry on top.
Cool. A shitty economy is not buying a credible military force though.
>According to the faggots who categorically deny evidence to the contrary - conveniently forgotten from MH17 square shaped holes in cruise missile parts anyone? .
Please improve your grammar before you reply in the future
>Oh well, we did get some intact cruise missiles for study out of the experience plus signatures from jammers so you can have the media win
There is zero evidence that Syria or Russia managed to in any way defend against the cruise missiles.
>If it were trivial, all of US air defence vehicles would be on tracks. Its not. A tracked vehicle made for offroad performance warrants much greater shock resistance from electronics for example.
These are missiles that have already been mounted to a tracked chassis. That's also not how electronics work.
>Not if it doesnt get smoked from a SAM.
Considering how ineffective Russian SAMs have proven themselves, it isn't a big concern.

0/10 apply yourself

You don't actually have any idea what changed between the A3 and A4.

Abrams is getting Trophy. They actually had to add more frontal armor to Abrams getting Trophy in order to counterbalance the weight.

An ABCT has more than 6 Paladins.

The US is ahead of Russia in deployed hard kill APS.

Do you need more than one hand to count the total number of Russian tanks with Arena?

>Guided anything is better against moving targets particularly when flight times are >2s.

Guidance is needed when your flight times to 4km is 10+ seconds, not ~2 seconds.

>Abrams is getting Trophy.
Sweet

>They actually had to add more frontal armor to Abrams getting Trophy in order to counterbalance the weight.
The hell! the Abrams is already at 60+tons. Any more weight and we'll have to add fording equipment because NO BRIDGE CAN TAKE THAT WEIGHT

>There is no true all terrain (tracked) SHORAD in the pipeline.

The Army is looking at putting something on Bradleys, but yeah it is;

Stinger/Hellfire -> Iron Dome -> Patriot (PAC-2/PAC-3) -> THAAD

Man the russoboos are out in force.
> Muh Su-35s and s400s will win!!!!!!!

The "Afghanit" active protection system installed on the T-14 Armata is capable of defeating KE rounds...

No it isn't.

I find it amusing that people still believe that Afghanit, let alone Arena, are a real things that that actually work.
Especially after the Cold War that was just a mass-scale practical joke by the Russians to show-off their disinformation skills.

>M1A2S has depleted uranium and is the equivalent of the SEP V3
Yeah you outed yourself as a moron just from that source.

Is it Boeing or Lockheed Martin who are developing UAV swarms to force S400 batteries in wasting their missles and revealing their position so they can be taken out with no threat to an actual pilot?

>An ABCT has more than 6 Paladins.
Not as of 2019 they don't. They should have 18 but they only have 6.

>Cool. A shitty economy is not buying a credible military force though.
A military staffed by subhumans sure as aint one either.

>Please improve your grammar before you reply in the future
I type the way I talk, with run in sentences and IDC, least its not ebonics or some pidgin you fuckers managed to cobble out of her majestys english.

>There is zero evidence that Syria or Russia managed to in any way defend against the cruise missiles.
The 51st state - Denial. Oh well suit yourself, if it helps you sleep at night...

>These are missiles that have already been mounted to a tracked chassis. That's also not how electronics work.
And what of the radar, the other electronics. Heck what about launch seperation from the vehicle?

>Considering how ineffective Russian SAMs have proven themselves, it isn't a big concern.
Denial yet again. Which is funny because you faggots seem to make it a point each and every time to encounter Russian SAMs in environments with a) overwhelming superiority of your own airpower, b) generations behind technologically, and c) as much as possible crewed by subhumans. The last time the third condition wasnt fulfilled, you proceeded to reee and target infrastructure and civilians like good proper terrorists youre supporting.
And Oh isnt it funny that you fuckers insist on Turkey canceling its S-400 order? What is there anything wrong with putting both the F-35 and S-400 in an environment where proper comparison of their performance vis a vis each other can be measure? You can easily demolish S-400s reputation if F-35 is truly that good, but no, you whine and cry like a bitch which says it all really.

>0/10 apply yourself
Subhuman attempts at laconic one liners aside, dont you just love it when a foreigner wrecks you in uour own language? Might as well get used to it since that is the pathetic state of your bydlo country.
Adios.

>slavs
>lecturing others about being subhumans
Did you know the word slav comes from slave?