Russian Photos (updated on regular basis)

[Kutuzov]

Some Georgia 2008 footage :

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h819OC8Hblo

[calimero2]

This BTR-80 is not the standard one (GAZ-5903) but the GAZ-5926 aka BTR-80M with the YaMZ-238M2 engine. This version has a different engine deck and because the YaMZ engine is bigger than the original KamAZ engine, the hull is slightly longer. This is visible on this picture from our friend Vitaly Kuzmin: note the bigger gap between the rear wheels.



Here's another picture from Vitaly, showing the BTR-80M (left) and BTR-80 side by side, showing the different engine decks:



The BTR-80M seems to be in service with para military and special police units (OMON) rather than the military.

[sneaker53]

Interesting place. I think its Terra3 a 70's Soviet laser testing facility
Looks almost like a space observatory tho

Anyone got any info about it?

look at http://militaryrussia.ru/blog/topic-620.html

[_GDS_]

BTR-80M was developed when Kamaz engine plant was closed after the fire, there for adjusted to fit YaMZ engine. So basically it was just a stopgap, when kamaz engines could not be produced. BTR-80M is ~40 CM longer, note: gap between 3rd and 4th wheels is bigger.

[calimero2]

BTR-80M is ~40 CM longer, note: gap between 3rd and 4th wheels is bigger.

Which is the same as I wrote but in different wording:

This version has a different engine deck and because the YaMZ engine is bigger than the original KamAZ engine, the hull is slightly longer. This is visible on this picture from our friend Vitaly Kuzmin: note the bigger gap between the rear wheels.

[Pitchup]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BjRQAZ0vu4A&context=C36f1dbbADOEgsToPDskJOh68vVNoJHSCY8TZY0CxD[/video]

I like, when tanks and other vehicles demonstrated their ability to fire after crossing river.

[Ronguild]

Well, gentlemen, that's all we really needed here: Zmey's approval. Let us all go and cry into our pillows for disappointing this Titan of military thought.

Bonus (to help the tears flow), Poliment-Redut...

Planar antenna for ADMIRAL GORSHKOV ?

[bhramos]

Russian T-90 Tank fires 3 shots in 13 seconds

[badger11]

Bonus (to help the tears flow), Poliment-Redut...

Hi artomjh, how far are they with the developments? Any time frame about fitting the 22350 with the radar?

[Herman the II]

Russian T-90 Tank fires 3 shots in 13 seconds

Looks as if the video is played on fast forward though...

[metberkut]

ArtjomX - any pics of pak-da besides paralay?

Best joke of the year, and we are 5 days in only.

[Dinges]

I have been following MP forums silently for quite some time, yet this discussion become so idiotic i feel the need to reply.

From the book Flankers - The New Generation by Yefim Gordon, page 91;

“Even using the station which afforded the shortest take-off run of only 105 m (344 ft), the Su-27K could take off easily with a full fuel and weapons load. The ski jump was inclined at 15º; the normal glidescope angle during final approach was 4º.”

Also on the same page, “The naval Flanker had 12 hardpoints instead of ten; still, the ordnance was limited to 6,500 kg (14,329 lb) –just 500 kg (1,102 lb) above that of the land based version – because of the fighters higher MTOW.”

Zmey, may I ask, if Su-33 couldnt take off with weapons at all, why bother adding additional pylons, and increasing the ordnance limit?

Also in the youtube video we saw one of the prototypes (T10K-5 would be my best guess) take off with 10 dummy AAMs. These dummies are required to built exaclty at the same shape and weight as the original ones, as their purpose is to test a new aircraft accurately. So I dont see why an aircraft can launch with a dummy missile but not with a real one. Plus I can assure you, 90% of loaded AIM-120s or Mk-82s you see on F-15E/18E pictures are also dummies. There is no point in carrying an actual weapon for reasons others have stated.

And from another point of view, we all saw Su-33 take off with 10 (dummy)AAMs that makes nearly 2 tons. Can you post an F-18E take off with more than 2 tons of weapons, be it dummy or not? Let alone the advertised 8 tons full load.

Like mane have said, no one needs to prove anyting to anybody. If you are think pictures are only evidence, have you ever seen a Tico carryying 122 VL missiles? Or have you seen a Ohio SSBN launching all 24 missiles at once? According to your logic, these must be empty hulls arent they?

Also to moderators; we come here to see new photos or Russian Armed forces, not to discuss Su-33 or anything. So I believe Kuznetsov/Su-33 related messages (including this one)should be seperated.

Great first post.


But I believe no matter what , one can say as proof , this matter is not going to die. Folks would want visual proof.

But here is the problem , what if really there is not a single photo out there. Anywhere?

How can that be? Let us take a look at the issue:

Here a single Su-33 takes off with full flaps , hiding the stations where munitions would be. So no-one knows if it is there or not!




Now look here. In static you can obviously see the munitions. But the first reaction would be "But they are not taking off!" . Correct.





Look at the line the wingtips would travel when taking off. Where is the cameraman or tripod or whatever going to stand? Would Russian Navy health and safety regulations even allow that somebody or a foreign body be close to the take off run.

I do not think so. And the Russian Navy obviously do not need a picture of it because they see it with their own eyes.

So maybe the fact is , a picture of it can not be taken or will not be taken by the Russian Navy.

[tipex12]

[flanker7]

Is the BMPT program still active? I saw some in service in Bellarussia(IIRC) but not in the Russian Army

[metberkut]

Is the BMPT program still active? I saw some in service in Bellarussia(IIRC) but not in the Russian Army

Kazakhstan i suppose.