The end of tanks as we know it?

[Cult Icon]

laser designator-rangefinder 1D22.

[wm]

[Gorque]

laser designator-rangefinder 1D22.

Vacuum tubes?

[Cult Icon]

interior of T-14

[Gorque]

^^^ exterior wiring/plumbing? Interesting.

[wm]

Vacuum tubes?

It's merely Soviet-style ugly, similar hardware (for example AN/PED-1) is of similar size.

[Gorque]

Vacuum tubes?

It's merely Soviet-style ugly, similar hardware (for example AN/PED-1) is of similar size.

Thanks. The cabinet bulk is what first comes to mind. Must be a bear for one man to lug around, bulk-wise

[wm]

The Russian one is 45 kg, and the American is 35 pounds.
The difference, I suppose, at least partially, happens because the American one uses lithium batteries (available cheaply on aliexpress to boot) and the Russian lead–acid batteries.
I think there is no doubt that the 1D22 is an inferior weapon.

[LineDoggie]

Chinese state propagandist for russia:

"Option 1:
HJ-12 fire-and-forget top attack ATGMs

It's very light
The soft launch is capable of firing inside buildings
It has top attack capabilities that can defeat any NATO tank"

It's a FGM-148 Javelin copy

[Gooner1]

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/shorts/JdBSD9464uY[/youtube]

[ljadw]

The Russian one is 45 kg, and the American is 35 pounds.
The difference, I suppose, at least partially, happens because the American one uses lithium batteries (available cheaply on aliexpress to boot) and the Russian lead–acid batteries.
I think there is no doubt that the 1D22 is an inferior weapon.

As usual,you give technology an importance it does not have at war .Technology is not an aim on itself, but only a mean how to have results .And, there is no proof that a technological superior weapon would have better results .
The only proof for a weapon to be inferior is not how it is build,but its results .
The industrial-military complex emphasizes the importance of technology,because it helps them to gain money .

[wm]

The ugly one is just a dumb laser.
The nice one can provide coordinates for GPS-guided munitions, so you don't have to illuminate the target for minutes as if it were the last century.

[Aida1]

The Russian one is 45 kg, and the American is 35 pounds.
The difference, I suppose, at least partially, happens because the American one uses lithium batteries (available cheaply on aliexpress to boot) and the Russian lead–acid batteries.
I think there is no doubt that the 1D22 is an inferior weapon.

As usual,you give technology an importance it does not have at war .Technology is not an aim on itself, but only a mean how to have results .And, there is no proof that a technological superior weapon would have better results .
The only proof for a weapon to be inferior is not how it is build,but its results .
The industrial-military complex emphasizes the importance of technology,because it helps them to gain money .

Completely idiotic comment which makes no sense at all.

[ljadw]

The ugly one is just a dumb laser.
The nice one can provide coordinates for GPS-guided munitions, so you don't have to illuminate the target for minutes as if it were the last century.

You continue to ignore the human factor, the weather, the terrain , the presence of the opponent, etc ...
War is not a game where the side with the most expensive weapons will win .

[Gooner1]

WSJ on Ukrainians training with the Challenger 2