this post was submitted on 05 Sep 2023
308 points (97.0% liked)

World News

32351 readers
868 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

It’s apparent the Frankenstein’s monster of a combat vehicle is even less than the sum of its crude components.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] matchphoenix@feddit.uk 113 points 1 year ago (12 children)

Crazy that two years ago we thought this was the second best military in the world. They’ve currently got the second best military in Ukraine.

[–] Chariotwheel@kbin.social 62 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Nah, not second best. That's probably just Americans that still haven't registered that the Soviet Union is gone. Generally there was an awareness that the glory days of the USSR was gone and that Russia's small economy could only maintain a crude army.

However, people didn't think that it was THIS bad. This is bad even for Russia's military budget, where one can only assume that there was a lot of corruption on all levels to produce the state of the army at the start of the war. And of course, with things like this, it just got worse by the day.

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 27 points 1 year ago (1 children)

i mean the budget is not the determining factor here. The russian economy is able to support a strong military, since they have a lot of resources and can produce a lot of shit by themselves. So even if the budget is low nominally it should suffice. Also Russia had a fairly good GDP per capita, far exceeding that of Ukraine and on par with many EU countries.

The issues are corruption, nepotism, lack of career chances for dedicated people and so on.

[–] zhunk@beehaw.org 10 points 1 year ago

And the brain drain since the start of this war has been massive

[–] rayyyy@kbin.social 21 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Russia ditched communism for capitalism, and yachts, and stuff.

[–] DragonTypeWyvern@literature.cafe 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)

One might even say corporatism, given their direct rulers are the billionaires who came out on top in the rush to scavenge the corpse of the USSR.

[–] Dee@lemmings.world 13 points 1 year ago

given their direct rulers are the billionaires

[–] polskilumalo@lemmygrad.ml 5 points 1 year ago

corporatism

That's just capitalism.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] vacuumflower@lemmy.sdf.org 4 points 1 year ago

Russia's military budget in size is sufficient for anything Russia would need defense-wise (and even aggression-wise, TBF) to a full extent. It's just that most of the money was being stolen through all these years. It's rotten to the bone.

About glory days - USSR's military was really something "second best" somewhere in the 50s, when it was a system built for some actual overarching doctrine.

With every year passing Soviet bureaucracy was more and more entangling itself into a knot of financing and prestige and cabinet power struggles, so by 80s it would have like 4-8 simultaneously produced and operated models of tanks, with similar technology and details etc, but similar wouldn't mean interchangeable, in fact there would be almost no interchangeable details between them. It was similar in any other area. Standardization (which Commies love to present as planned economy's advantage) was a farce.

The bureaucratic system responsible for every part of the system would fight tooth and nail for some external benefits and provide some external service, soldiers and students would be used on harvest campaigns and housing construction, and the main purpose would be cemented, never reevaluated (I mean, everything changes in 5 years in real world in any area, and the Soviet doctrine has not evolved much between Korea and Afghanistan), and in fact lost.

Which is why, say, Soviet personnel carriers wouldn't protect against anything. Their purpose was to move fast, be amphibious, be hermetic, be cheap to produce. Cause the plan was that after all the boom-boom stops in the Global Thermonuclear War, one would need to move infantry over burnt irradiated land, fast.

It really was in planning and function a bit like the Galactic Empire, be it the Azimov's one or the Star Wars one.

[–] BlinkerFluid@lemmy.one 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

meanwhile, the massive warheads that supposedly still function still sit in their silos, waiting for Putin to have an off day.

[–] gibmiser@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

If I were as morally bankrupt as Putin I would be selling them left and right to the highest bidder

I would have said Putin knows better than to sell a weapon that might be used against you, but Wagner...

[–] Firipu@startrek.website 20 points 1 year ago

They used to be the second best military in their own country until Wagner decided to basically call it quits...

[–] DeathWearsANecktie@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago

Did we? I think most people have known for quite some time now that China is significantly more capable than Russia.

[–] JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Russia spent a lot of advertising and propaganda money to seem that way. T14 and SU57 were essentially just ads trying to say 'we're still relevant and modern!' It benefited their arms sales, as well as some diplomatic advantages. But that all falls away when it's actually put to the test.

[–] Chariotwheel@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

I mean, most countries do that in various ways. There are two differences for Russia in that matter.

  1. They actually had a lot of Soviet weapons still around. Like, in quantity Russia was playing in the big leagues. The issue was just, of course, that a lot of it was unusable and got worse over the years with lacking maintenance and with technology getting more and more obsolete. Nevertheless, Russia had certainly a lot of arms and vehicles.

  2. The Soviet Union was quite powerful and the image has still stuck with people and Russia did its best with parades and all to pretend that the glory is still with Russia. I put a bit of that blame also on American media repeating the image of the powerful Soviet Union as a dangerous adversary.

The war in Ukraine made it clearer than ever that Russia is only a shadow of what the Soviet Union once was in power projection.

load more comments (7 replies)
[–] Hubi@feddit.de 53 points 1 year ago (4 children)

That video is absolutely wild, the headline is actually overselling this POS. It looks like the turret is about to fall off.

[–] xuxebiko@kbin.social 14 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How will it perform in the Turrent Flying Olympics?

[–] mustardman@discuss.tchncs.de 3 points 1 year ago

Favorably, as always.

[–] redcalcium@lemmy.institute 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

The gun is so shaky, the gunner could be counted as casualty after firing that gun for some time due to vibration injury.

[–] hydrospanner@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Perhaps they forgot the cellotape

[–] DogMuffins@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah I'm sure shit would break within seconds if you actually tried to use it.

[–] ours@lemmy.film 21 points 1 year ago (1 children)

This worked great before. In Command & Conquer: Generals.

Turning naval guns into field artillery is actually pretty common, historically.

In the Napoleonic era.

[–] kaput@jlai.lu 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

What make gun 'naval'? Apart from the obvious mounted on a boat part. Any design or ballistic issues warranting the naval designation?

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 11 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Where's the video? I can't see one in the article

[–] Desucombo@lemmy.world 18 points 1 year ago (1 children)
[–] detalferous@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

OMG. That's incredible.

Thanks for sharing the link!

[–] Desucombo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yeah it's extreme. That thing looks ready to fall apart at any time, not to mention how lousy the accuracy has to be!

[–] stopthatgirl7@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

It’s in the embedded tweet.

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I guess that's not working for me. I tried in a couple of browsers but no luck. Do you have the video URL?

[–] IndefiniteBen@feddit.nl 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Same here. Do you also use pi-hole or another ad-blocker?

[–] sunbytes@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Ahhh I bet it's my duckduckgo filter app.

[–] Rentlar@beehaw.org 9 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That video is hilarious. The turret and barrel look like this after firing:

flinging doorstop

[–] Etterra@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (3 children)

So wait. If it's so inaccurate that the only thing it can even hit is the ground, and that's only because of gravity, then how is it only "nearly" useless?

[–] camelCaseGuy@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

You are not putting luck in the equation. There's still a chance that it can hit something before the truck rolls over or is blown by any projectile.

[–] Heimchen@lemmy.ml 3 points 1 year ago

It could be useful as distraction.

[–] EmpathicVagrant@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

I assume the tractor still moves so it’s useful in getting itself out of the way.

[–] ExLisper@linux.community 7 points 1 year ago

I've read that Putin designed them himself. Such genius.

[–] CheeseNoodle@lemmy.world 6 points 1 year ago

Is that a paralax sight? its not even got any kind of targeting assistance its just one guy on a shaking innacurate gun trying to shoot down aircraft by eyeballing it.