Search results

I provided figures already, search by yourself or ask anyone who knows. Specific figures were provided, in goverment tests, which are used to describe system effectiveness. In case of Trophy there is no data at all, only baseless advertisements. These were actual figures, not your empty...

It is from Rosoboronexport. Do not have it now, you can find for yourself. As there are no specifications and lack of data, there is no proof at all that Trophy will protect against HEAT, only empty statements. I provided official information coming from trials with specific figures showing...

Rosoboronexport It does not say anything, there is no proof, and it was not shown. You still do not understand how to make comparisons, and what actually are technical specifications. First to compare, information has to be of value and have a meaning, what you do is compare stupid...

This is not data for comparison, it is what you say and it is wrong (Drozd is also effective against artillery cumulative projectiles, 700m/s). Again, what technical charatcteristics indicate that Trophy is effective against Heat round ? [ This is not serious figure from advertisement, a fast...

It does not specify what kind of protection. Requirement of soviet APS, Drozd, was to whitstand heavy machine gun fire, 12.7mm. Has Trophy such protection ? OK, provide data for comparison. I did not said that Trophy uses fragments. I said that it's projectiles disperse in many directions and...

What bullets ? What kind of protection ? There is no proof it can intercept HEAT rounnds, and that is only our deduction. It is not about speed anyway, Trophy's effectiveness against modern missiles is dubious, it is weak, and it was never proven. Trophy is not safe, it leaves debris flying...

Against what ? That is according to who ? Stupid advertisement with no proof ? They'd better show how it is supposed to destroy modern missiles, not ancient RPG. Trophy is not safe for infantry, difference is that Drozd was not supposed to be. T-55s with Drozd were not scrapped on purpose...

SM-3 cannot intercept anything more than S-400 can, as of now it is limited to only some medium ranged ballistic missiles. S-400 is versatile mobile air defense/ABM system while SM-3 has fixed base, an aerodynamic configuration and a flight profile which does not allow anything other than...

Unlike Trophy, Drozd is protected against 12.7mm bullets. Trophy's "peddles" countermeasure, still dangerous, leaves debris, and has dubious efficiency against modern missiles. Drozd was installed on more tanks than Merkava 4s has Israel, and participated in Afghan conflict. Drozd gave to...

Modules are heavy as they are protected against 12.7mm fire, more modules would imply more expense, same as Trophy is more expensive. Drozd was installed on about 300 tanks, more than Merkava IV Israel has deployed. You are not really familiarised with maneouver warfare concept. In...

Drozd was system composed of modules. You can mount 3 same as you can mount all, as Trophy. How it is implemented does not make a difference. There is still debris as seen in videos. As of safety, relativity does not mean it is safe in general, in fact it is not (for infantry), an APS cannot...

1)It is the same, Trophy and Drozd. Drozd consists of modules which can be mounted to provide wanted protection. Soviet tanks were to be used in more conventional warfare, according to that doctrine frontal arc protection was what was required and system Drozd was installed accordingly. In...

Drozd and Trophy are analogous in capability, only difference is that israelis developed it 3 decades later, to provide protection against the same threat. They only make a big deal of it, while in fact it is a sign of backwardness. What has this to do with Merkava or with what I said ?

There are near hundred of such systems developed or in developement, of all them Drozd was the first actually developed and fielded, back in the 70s. Analogous in characteristics Trophy was deployed only recently, it is nothing special in this field. These pictures show how innefective...

Granit has nothing to do neither with yakhont (Brahmos), nor with yasen, so what is the point of bringing it here ?

That was what I said. You are comparing export figures to domestic, which is not correct comparison. Understand ? On your technical "education" i will not further comment :)

Ha ha, schoolboy "physics" :))) To the point, that comparison is not correct. Export cruise/ballistic missiles are subject to restrictions in accordance with international treaty. Regardless of missile, they are restricted to a maximum range of 300 km, and warhead of 300 kg. So figures of...

I do not lose time with infantile "calculations", your attempts are as funny as they are, with no value. There is no such thing as optimised, and such generalisations are not valid, as you do not understand dynamic armour structures. Your "logic" does not correspond to real world :lol...

These amateur drawings, there are many in Internet like yours, made by ignorants. It shows nothing but your lack of understanding of guidance method. At start of discussion you said it is top-attack, then you shifted to lofted trajectory, then to 30 grad hit... Still wrong. There is no...

It is funny to see, how you make your "proffesional" school level estimations without understanding of the subject. Your armour figures are not correct anyway. Against modern tank armour, hit angle of 30 gives nothing, and you are using ideal conditions, missile can hit in turret front, etc...