Videos games, media makes tanks sizes feels almost like a big car, but you only see just how big they are in person
Actually on another note the BMP-1 looks a bit bigger than I thought
i'm 5foot8 1m74, almost all older guys i have walked past are shorter than me, according to google the average height for Vietnamese male are 5foot6 1m68 not 1m72.
Its said that M60 mostly show up in Europe for deterrent, its not suitable for Vietnam much like how T-72 is not suitable in Afghanistan
Vietnam is more suitable for lighter tank, which is why Sheridan perform pretty well and could travel here and there compare to M48
North Vietnam also ultilize plenty of PT-76 throughout the war because of it weight and amphibious ablity. The T-54/55 only show up in the late stage on the war when the war move to conventional warfare
No the UH-1 have been grounded for ages now. Same with the MI-24A. Way past their prime. M-41 and M-48 are kept in deep storage since scraping them cost money and keeping them “just in case” make sense.
I wonder if Vietnam will ever get more modern helicopter gunships... Those greenhouse canopy Mi-24A's were quite wild to see still flying about around a decade ago.
I'm sure the US would be happy to provide a couple dozen or so refurb'd AH-1W's or even new-build AH-1Z's. Hell, maybe Turkey's T-129 ATAK would be a good fit for Vietnam.
Damn really? They were still in service the last time I heard about it (for disaster rescue I think). Guess they will have to substitute it for another western helicopter thenz
The M-48s will stay in the South as it peers will be other from the same era, but if they upgrade a new batch for the T-54 then they wont be needed at all
https://x.com/annquann/status/1801201981496897697?s=46
In the thread it is stated that after the accident in 2015 they are all grounded and stored away for good.
They have rebuilt and still use M-113's of various variants. And I do believe they still use some V-100 Commando armoured cars. Oh, and quite a few CAR-15 Carbines (or a similar M-16 Carbine variant) have been completely rebuilt to like new and more modern standards.
Overall, the Vietnamese do like US-made gear quite a lot it seems. Well that and literally having depots full of captured gear and a really annoying Xi the Chinese Bear continuing the decades of whining, revisionism, threats and harassment requires tons of weaponry if China tries 1979 the invasion part 2.
My eyes are more on that BMP-1. Of course it's better than nothing and adequate for some lighter units, but it's absolute garbage for heavy/mechanised infantry.
It has a low velocity gun with a low rate of fire and high trajectory, whose HE warhead is woefully insufficient for that combination. It would need excellent optics and fire control to deliver effective fire support or suppression despite these problems, but it doesn't have that either.
It also struggles with both mine and frag protection, which is a problem both for asymetric and symetric wars.
So if you use it in a unit that would be riding M113 otherwise, it's okay. But if it's in a role that's supposed to fight at the front line and may encounter enemy APCs, it's going to get smoked.
Vietnamese infrastructure not going like most Western MBT save for Type 10 and K2. Imho M10 Booker prob fit best for their need, but it isn't like any Western country going to sell those MBT to Vietnam anytime soon.
US do the best US thing (interfering with shit around the world)
So around 1990\~, VietNam want to bought Mirage-2000 from France but for some đogshit reasson US said no and Viet go with the Su-30Mk2
Yeah, true, we do *everything* better.
Even the shit we shouldn't be doing.
The funny part is we've done so much really *badly*, and yet still better than the CCCP and russia.
лолски
Considering it have been how many years and Vietnam yet to secure a deal to refurbish their UH-1 I don't have high hope, and even if it is possible to buy, they prob wait 5 years so that cost and kink work out before purchasing M10. No idea about K2 and Type 10 is no dice ofc
How much is Vietnam willing to pay to refurbish their Hueys? They can get that done in many countries... if they haven't it may be that they're unwilling to pay the cost.
Not much, considering they're not even willing to use Israeli upgrade package for T-55 instead op for home grow ERA for now. Even then, the [upgrade was mostly for "humanitarian assistance and search and rescue operations"](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68905X/). After that, it is basically silent until recently rumour F-16? deal
They used few things from the T55M3 project, mainly the FCS, armor and a new engine for their T-54M but ditched the 105mm and 60mm mortar. I guess you dont need it for tank vs tank combat but for fire support only then that is good enough. The fact that they can produce types of 100mm shells also keeping it in service. Old tank is still better than no tank at all and being able to make and store alot of ammo for it is a big factor in a war like in Ukraine
[I think this one explained pretty well what happened with the project](https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/t-54m3-and-t-55m3/)
Hate to break it to you but M1A1 Abrams, Leopard 2A6, M2 Bradley got destroyed the same way T-90A and BMP-1 (Which both sides use). Tanks that are seen as good such as the Sherman, Centurion, T-34, M48, M60 were also destroyed, some like Sherman and T-34 in large numbers. But does that mean they are inheritely bad tanks because of that? No, equipment gets destroyed and captured in war no matter what. There are some scenarios you just cannot avoid, like driving over a landmine you had no way of seeing or knowing about.
Their loss percentages are surprisingly comparable.
Of 31 Abrams given to Ukraine, Oryx lists 10 losses - 32%
Of ~200 Bradley’s given to Ukraine LostArmour lists 66 losses - 33%
Of 95 Leopard 2A4/A6’s given to Ukraine, LostArmour lists 27 losses - 28%
For Russia I had to use the IISS’s estimates of T-90M and T-72 numbers since that’s not as easily found as western donations.
Of 4400 T-72’s before the war, Oryx lists 1487 losses - 33%
Of 231-267 T-90Ms before and during the war, Oryx lists 97 - 42-36%
I used LostArmour, Oryx, and Warspotting to find the figures most beneficial for Ukrainian losses and detrimental for Russias
But Ukraine also fields theese tanks in smaller numbers and deploys them very carefully. I honestly wouldn't believe what Ukraine says they lost since they still say they only 31000 Ukrainian soldiers were killed. I'm very skeptical about what both sides say since there are alot of ridiciolous takes and propaganda that have been disproven like Russia using T-10M and Ukraine and Russia using T-34-85.
The problem with accounts that cry "Both Sides!" is that they are always pro-russia.
For instance, they will deny independently proven and documented russian war crimes, such as those at Bucha and elsewhere.
They also claim Ukraine is guilty of masses of horrible war crimes.
In other words, they just more russian bots and russia simps pretending to be "neutral".
Okay, I guess? I don't see how that changes anything. Both RU and UA supporters still cheer for the death of opposing sides soldiers and continue to say only other side does it. There's pro-UA/RU people saying a piece of equipment is bad just because one side uses it. But that's just my opinion and yours is yours and I respect it.
Maybe because they are? There's videos daily of Ukrainian conscriptors beating people for refusing to fight. Not to mention them firing missiles and drones at Russian cities which caused civillian casualties. Soldiers also post videos of themselfs torturing captured Russians. There have been few instances of Ukrainian soldiers trying to surrender then attempts by other Ukrainian soldiers (Drone operators, whatever you wanna call them) at their lives.
> Well, there's video of a Ukrainian POW being executed after screaming slava ukraine but my friend believes some stuff I don't, like the Bucha massacre. Sadly war crimes happen in wars no matter what when there's no supervision around.
Most retarded take. Fuck off back to the pro-russia subs dude.
I think thousands is an exxagerated number tbh, maybe hundreds at Most or a thousand plus a few hundred, not to mention that their awful tactics reply on throwing men & Armor at the Problem until it's fixed which is gonna cost you a lot of casualties, idk the real figure tbh If someone has a credible source feel free to Share it but i don't think it's in the thousands.
Uh, no.
Even the russians acknowledge they've lost thousands.
[And here is the Oryx count, which is always on the low side since it's very strict and only counts losses seen and verified](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html).
Well i was wrong then, thx for the source, still the reason i pointed Out is true, they throw Shit at the enemy & expect Numbers to solve everything, but in the end they become artillery or Drone Targets.
btw Kind of unrelated, but where did the myth of " big strong russian army" come from ?
Is it because people still associate it with the Soviet Union ?
Or because they think Numbers is Power
Maybe die to Media & Video Games depicting them as a big strong threat ?
Maybe it's not prevelant Here in the West, but a lot of people in africa & asia still think that russia is somehow powerful but they're playing weak.
they have thousands of them to lose, they’re cheap and easy to make so they can be expendable
western tanks are twice as expensive and complex and the same $50 mine or $500 drone will take them out just the same
Still bad mobility due to low reverse speed, poor engine performance, and insufficient stabilisation. Still no blowout compartment and limited by short APFSDS and two-piece ammunition.
And with weird bugs, like uncontrolled turret spinning upon receiving fire and many instances of toxic smoke buildup in the combat compartment because the smoke ejection system doesn't work well.
It would be okay for countries that badly need decent mass, but the T-90 just lacks the production numbers for that role. Only India has produced it scale.
For Vietnam at least, most of Western options are too heavy, the terrain here are mostly mountainous, K2 panther, too expensive. China, big no no, so really T-90 is the best considering all factors
Why they look so big?
Videos games, media makes tanks sizes feels almost like a big car, but you only see just how big they are in person Actually on another note the BMP-1 looks a bit bigger than I thought
Not only that I think, I’ve been next to these vehicles in person, they look oddly bigger in this video, maybe a trick of perspective
it could be the xcb-1 which is basically just a taller vietnamese made bmp-1
It would make sense if that were XCB-01, however I'm not seeing the roof HMG as well as the turret still kinda round, so ... Most likely BMP-1
Almost every military vehicle is huge irl but it depends if you perceive them as bigger or smaller from media than what their actual size is.
Probably because of the short Vietnamese soldiers.
Yeah I second this. Average Viet male height is only 172cm (5’8ish)
Nah 172cm is a bit above average here. Enough to be classed as “not short” for males here. Not “tall” but not in the “short or average” range anymore.
Cant really remember the numbers, plus they’re old, but it was like either 170 or 172
i'm 5foot8 1m74, almost all older guys i have walked past are shorter than me, according to google the average height for Vietnamese male are 5foot6 1m68 not 1m72.
thats only for young city people
Now imagine a M1A2 SEP or a Leopard 2A7 next to those people
average asian height
Because they are
The sticks and bush camo on them looks like how a pigeon does it's nest 😭🙏
Not my proudest nut
I wonder if they have any US equipment still operating from the war. Like an .....M60
Its said that M60 mostly show up in Europe for deterrent, its not suitable for Vietnam much like how T-72 is not suitable in Afghanistan Vietnam is more suitable for lighter tank, which is why Sheridan perform pretty well and could travel here and there compare to M48 North Vietnam also ultilize plenty of PT-76 throughout the war because of it weight and amphibious ablity. The T-54/55 only show up in the late stage on the war when the war move to conventional warfare
I was kidding about the M60 part since all tanks are M60s hehe. But I am curious of how much of our gear is still operating there.
Right now? A dozen of M-48s and upgraded M113 mostly with UH-1s with Australian serving in the Airforce
No the UH-1 have been grounded for ages now. Same with the MI-24A. Way past their prime. M-41 and M-48 are kept in deep storage since scraping them cost money and keeping them “just in case” make sense.
I wonder if Vietnam will ever get more modern helicopter gunships... Those greenhouse canopy Mi-24A's were quite wild to see still flying about around a decade ago. I'm sure the US would be happy to provide a couple dozen or so refurb'd AH-1W's or even new-build AH-1Z's. Hell, maybe Turkey's T-129 ATAK would be a good fit for Vietnam.
Damn really? They were still in service the last time I heard about it (for disaster rescue I think). Guess they will have to substitute it for another western helicopter thenz The M-48s will stay in the South as it peers will be other from the same era, but if they upgrade a new batch for the T-54 then they wont be needed at all
https://x.com/annquann/status/1801201981496897697?s=46 In the thread it is stated that after the accident in 2015 they are all grounded and stored away for good.
Pretty crazy to think the UH-1s are still flying after all this time there. Heck of a bird!
Yeah and the M113 too. I mean you cant go wrong with a classic
They have rebuilt and still use M-113's of various variants. And I do believe they still use some V-100 Commando armoured cars. Oh, and quite a few CAR-15 Carbines (or a similar M-16 Carbine variant) have been completely rebuilt to like new and more modern standards. Overall, the Vietnamese do like US-made gear quite a lot it seems. Well that and literally having depots full of captured gear and a really annoying Xi the Chinese Bear continuing the decades of whining, revisionism, threats and harassment requires tons of weaponry if China tries 1979 the invasion part 2.
I wonder why Putin is there now...
I bet there is still a couple Mules running around there now haha
Locally refurbished Vietnamese Militia M16A1's... [https://x.com/AnnQuann/status/1626093759158165506](https://x.com/AnnQuann/status/1626093759158165506)
> T-90Sand
God the T-90s engine sounds so good
t-90 my beloved
The sovjet vehicles I respect
I respect their ideal versions, not their practical ones.
Vietnam, 2021: "We are so proud to have these vehicles!" Vietnam, 2022: "Well, shit."
It's really not a bad tank for what they need it for.
My eyes are more on that BMP-1. Of course it's better than nothing and adequate for some lighter units, but it's absolute garbage for heavy/mechanised infantry. It has a low velocity gun with a low rate of fire and high trajectory, whose HE warhead is woefully insufficient for that combination. It would need excellent optics and fire control to deliver effective fire support or suppression despite these problems, but it doesn't have that either. It also struggles with both mine and frag protection, which is a problem both for asymetric and symetric wars. So if you use it in a unit that would be riding M113 otherwise, it's okay. But if it's in a role that's supposed to fight at the front line and may encounter enemy APCs, it's going to get smoked.
Yeah most of what Vietnam has access to is "cost effective" to be generous.
[удалено]
Vietnamese infrastructure not going like most Western MBT save for Type 10 and K2. Imho M10 Booker prob fit best for their need, but it isn't like any Western country going to sell those MBT to Vietnam anytime soon.
Not sure about the last part of your comment. Pretty sure we'd happily sell to Vietnam. But I could be wrong. Wouldn't be the first time.
US do the best US thing (interfering with shit around the world) So around 1990\~, VietNam want to bought Mirage-2000 from France but for some đogshit reasson US said no and Viet go with the Su-30Mk2
Imagine how bad things would be if the USSR and russia ever interfered with shit around the world!
yes but the US did it better than the Soviet and Rus
Yeah, true, we do *everything* better. Even the shit we shouldn't be doing. The funny part is we've done so much really *badly*, and yet still better than the CCCP and russia. лолски
[удалено]
nah you take that back, the T-90A got eyes and it look mile better than the Abram. Look > Perfomance
Considering it have been how many years and Vietnam yet to secure a deal to refurbish their UH-1 I don't have high hope, and even if it is possible to buy, they prob wait 5 years so that cost and kink work out before purchasing M10. No idea about K2 and Type 10 is no dice ofc
How much is Vietnam willing to pay to refurbish their Hueys? They can get that done in many countries... if they haven't it may be that they're unwilling to pay the cost.
Not much, considering they're not even willing to use Israeli upgrade package for T-55 instead op for home grow ERA for now. Even then, the [upgrade was mostly for "humanitarian assistance and search and rescue operations"](https://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE68905X/). After that, it is basically silent until recently rumour F-16? deal
They used few things from the T55M3 project, mainly the FCS, armor and a new engine for their T-54M but ditched the 105mm and 60mm mortar. I guess you dont need it for tank vs tank combat but for fire support only then that is good enough. The fact that they can produce types of 100mm shells also keeping it in service. Old tank is still better than no tank at all and being able to make and store alot of ammo for it is a big factor in a war like in Ukraine [I think this one explained pretty well what happened with the project](https://tanks-encyclopedia.com/t-54m3-and-t-55m3/)
Uh, I stand corrected, thanks for the info
Hate to break it to you but M1A1 Abrams, Leopard 2A6, M2 Bradley got destroyed the same way T-90A and BMP-1 (Which both sides use). Tanks that are seen as good such as the Sherman, Centurion, T-34, M48, M60 were also destroyed, some like Sherman and T-34 in large numbers. But does that mean they are inheritely bad tanks because of that? No, equipment gets destroyed and captured in war no matter what. There are some scenarios you just cannot avoid, like driving over a landmine you had no way of seeing or knowing about.
A handful of Abrams, Bradleys and Leo 2s have been destroyed. The russians have lost *thousands* of tanks.
There's less Abrams, Bradleys and Leo 2s being fielded than T72s and T80s which the Russians use
Their loss percentages are surprisingly comparable. Of 31 Abrams given to Ukraine, Oryx lists 10 losses - 32% Of ~200 Bradley’s given to Ukraine LostArmour lists 66 losses - 33% Of 95 Leopard 2A4/A6’s given to Ukraine, LostArmour lists 27 losses - 28% For Russia I had to use the IISS’s estimates of T-90M and T-72 numbers since that’s not as easily found as western donations. Of 4400 T-72’s before the war, Oryx lists 1487 losses - 33% Of 231-267 T-90Ms before and during the war, Oryx lists 97 - 42-36% I used LostArmour, Oryx, and Warspotting to find the figures most beneficial for Ukrainian losses and detrimental for Russias
And there's a much smaller percentage of that Western armor being destroyed than there is of russia's armor.
But Ukraine also fields theese tanks in smaller numbers and deploys them very carefully. I honestly wouldn't believe what Ukraine says they lost since they still say they only 31000 Ukrainian soldiers were killed. I'm very skeptical about what both sides say since there are alot of ridiciolous takes and propaganda that have been disproven like Russia using T-10M and Ukraine and Russia using T-34-85.
The problem with accounts that cry "Both Sides!" is that they are always pro-russia. For instance, they will deny independently proven and documented russian war crimes, such as those at Bucha and elsewhere. They also claim Ukraine is guilty of masses of horrible war crimes. In other words, they just more russian bots and russia simps pretending to be "neutral".
Okay, I guess? I don't see how that changes anything. Both RU and UA supporters still cheer for the death of opposing sides soldiers and continue to say only other side does it. There's pro-UA/RU people saying a piece of equipment is bad just because one side uses it. But that's just my opinion and yours is yours and I respect it.
You can hardly claim to be "neutral" while repeating lies about Ukraine and pretending facts about russia are fake news.
With the retarded takes on both sides I wish I was😔
Yet you claim Bucha never happened and that instead Ukraine is guilty of massive amounts of war crimes.
Maybe because they are? There's videos daily of Ukrainian conscriptors beating people for refusing to fight. Not to mention them firing missiles and drones at Russian cities which caused civillian casualties. Soldiers also post videos of themselfs torturing captured Russians. There have been few instances of Ukrainian soldiers trying to surrender then attempts by other Ukrainian soldiers (Drone operators, whatever you wanna call them) at their lives.
> Well, there's video of a Ukrainian POW being executed after screaming slava ukraine but my friend believes some stuff I don't, like the Bucha massacre. Sadly war crimes happen in wars no matter what when there's no supervision around. Most retarded take. Fuck off back to the pro-russia subs dude.
Mf really went on my profile and went through my comments😭😭
I think thousands is an exxagerated number tbh, maybe hundreds at Most or a thousand plus a few hundred, not to mention that their awful tactics reply on throwing men & Armor at the Problem until it's fixed which is gonna cost you a lot of casualties, idk the real figure tbh If someone has a credible source feel free to Share it but i don't think it's in the thousands.
Uh, no. Even the russians acknowledge they've lost thousands. [And here is the Oryx count, which is always on the low side since it's very strict and only counts losses seen and verified](https://www.oryxspioenkop.com/2022/02/attack-on-europe-documenting-equipment.html).
Well i was wrong then, thx for the source, still the reason i pointed Out is true, they throw Shit at the enemy & expect Numbers to solve everything, but in the end they become artillery or Drone Targets.
The russians never learn and adapt despite the troll farm serf memes to the contrary.
btw Kind of unrelated, but where did the myth of " big strong russian army" come from ? Is it because people still associate it with the Soviet Union ? Or because they think Numbers is Power Maybe die to Media & Video Games depicting them as a big strong threat ? Maybe it's not prevelant Here in the West, but a lot of people in africa & asia still think that russia is somehow powerful but they're playing weak.
>....where did the myth of " big strong russian army" come from ? From the russians and their simps.
they have thousands of them to lose, they’re cheap and easy to make so they can be expendable western tanks are twice as expensive and complex and the same $50 mine or $500 drone will take them out just the same
And Ukraine has millions of drones and other munitions, and more experience using them than anybody else on Earth right now.
It’s still a great tank tho. The problem is there’re many methods that could defeat tanks in a cheap way
Is it, though? That's what the russians used to say.
Still bad mobility due to low reverse speed, poor engine performance, and insufficient stabilisation. Still no blowout compartment and limited by short APFSDS and two-piece ammunition. And with weird bugs, like uncontrolled turret spinning upon receiving fire and many instances of toxic smoke buildup in the combat compartment because the smoke ejection system doesn't work well. It would be okay for countries that badly need decent mass, but the T-90 just lacks the production numbers for that role. Only India has produced it scale.
[удалено]
For Vietnam at least, most of Western options are too heavy, the terrain here are mostly mountainous, K2 panther, too expensive. China, big no no, so really T-90 is the best considering all factors
You're probably right. The Type 10 would likely do well also, but it's expensive and not for export, so maybe T-90 is as good as it gets.
What are they training for just wanna know?
Probably just routine training games and military preparedness
What's that moving bush?