zraver

I don't believe the numbers, a bore riding sabot loses too much energy to have that type of performance at 2 klicks. Those 7-9 big fins 125mm in diameter are not designed for long range.


Too I can tell about western bravado and high applications. Do not forget, the weapon is the market and greater money. The more advertising for itself and anti-advertisings for the competitor, the better. Let's lean on the facts. Whether there is at you an example of test M1A1 against modern to it of the Soviet shells? I think that such tests were never conducted somewhere. As a rule you had already out-of-date shells. Only do not cite as an example Iraq from it 3BM22 manufacture of 1976.[/quote]

1- the US doesn't sell the M829 series so there is no market or need for advertising bravado.

2- heavy ERA does indeed defend vs sabots by inducing sheer effect.


1983, 1980-88 and 1991 Israeli, Iranian and USMC M-60 Pattons, Centurions, and upgunned M-48's use the aging 105mm to defeat Syrian and Iraqi T-72's.

1973 Soviet Air defense systems with Soviet technicians manning them fail to do more than attrit the IAF in Syria. They do slightly better in Egypt but once Israel is reequipped with modern ECM the system breaks down. The post 1973 war of attrition between the IAF and Syria goes even worse for the Syrians.

1967, Soviet pilots get smoked over Egypt by the IAF.

The big lie, Soviet claims in the Korean War. Even if the Soviet Union's claims are real then Soviet pilots are the only ones to shoot down a Sabre, not one Chinese or Korean pilot managed a kill nor did any AAA. Thats based on USAF admitted losses. However since the Soviets did not face AAA themselves if you credit the USAF with the Soviets admitted losses the USAF smoked the VVS 2-1.



More importantly where has Soviet equipment performed as advertised?



quote]As to WW1 and Poland in 1920, I in general have not understood you. Unless German armies were in Russia? If you have in view of Civil war and intervention of 1920th years this comparison is absolutely not correct as here there was no "aggressive" war, and there was a civil war with participation of the western countries.[/quote]

In WW1 Russia vice Soviets ceeded Bearus, Ukraine, Baltic states, Poland and Finland to Germany. They ceeded even more land to the Ottomans and Central powers. As a result 1/2 the population, 1/2 the industry, and 90% of the coal was lost.

In 1919-21 Soviet Polish war saw a Soviet offnesive smashed at he gates of Warsw followed by the Polish advance into Russia. The Soviets sued for peace and the treaty of Riga decided the borders, basically where the Polish cavalry stood, they stayed.


I shall partially agree with you. However Republican Guards were elite subdivisions, but they practically in any way have not shown themselves. Your satellites and a communications system did not give them any chances. Your air superiority brought to nothing all of them efforts. [/quote]

70% of all AFV losses in Desert storm were to direct fire

However it you could not use all also, at war from the USSR. Satellites are the purpose number one for Mig-31,[/quote]

No, the Mig 31 was an anti-cruise missile and B-1b interceptor, it also had a role to try and take out hi-val planes but has never had an asat missile.

The same systems that never stopped a single enemy airforce. SAM's attrit they do not win.

Soviet tank and anti-tank weaponry was not able to penetrate the fron of a NATO MBT after the mid 1980's.