instead of wasting a massive amount of $$$ in T-55/T-65, why isn't Russia simply putting some kornet-d systems on random armored 4x4?
Same question for Ukraine.

it would cost 100x times less than building tanks.

zero protection.
they'd get wrecked by a mosquito fpv drone.
if both sides aren't using tanks then why are you putting atgms on vehicles?

you need armor for offenses.

>>64102638
>>64102637
against a mine, a javelin or fpv drones a tank or a 4x4 there isnt much difference, right? at least you could afford to lose 100 of those for the price of one modern tank.

>>64102625 (OP)
You can't replace an armored vehicle with an unarmored one regardless how good are their weapons. People tried it during the 1930s, 1950-1970s and the result was always the same: you actually need get close to your target and you need enough armor to do that. That's why assault guns (heavily armored SPGs) were invented too.

>>64102625 (OP)
because extra x99 goes into the pockets of people in the system.

>>64102625 (OP)
>instead of wasting a massive amount of $$$ in T-55/T-65, why isn't Russia simply putting some kornet-d systems on random armored 4x4?

Russia went one step further and goes for unarmed golfcarts and e-bikes instead. Also, that thing cant do what tanks does

>>64102669
You don't need weapons when you can raise an eyebrow

why spend money on vehicles at all? they have meat.

>>64102649
>at least you could afford to lose 100 of those for the price of one modern tank.
why stop there? why not go on scooter? or even better, pogo sticks.

>>64102625 (OP)
>armored 4x4
they don't have any of those either

>>64102649
>against a mine, a javelin or fpv drones a tank or a 4x4 there isnt much difference, right?

This not true at all lol.

>>64102625 (OP)
The National Guard and FSB need those Iveco clones to protect Putin and anal-rape rival mobsters moving in onto the Russia Mafia's rackets, please understand.

>>64102637
They are using tanks though

>>64102649
There's a huge difference between a tank and a truck against drones. A truck can be destroyed by any $500 grenade dropper. A tank needs a very large, expensive, and vulnerable drone to carry an AT mine to drop on it.

>>64102625 (OP)
>newfag thinks a tanks only purpose is to kill other tanks
Please kill yourself, preferibly ona a livestream.

>>64102862
but in this hypothetical where everyone is putting ATGMs on golf carts, they aren't anymore

>>64102625 (OP)
>T-65

>>64102625 (OP)
Because they would have to build more 4x4s. The Russians have plenty of tanks to throw around.

>>64102878
>A tank needs a very large, expensive, and vulnerable drone to carry an AT mine to drop on it.
Are you retarded? Most of tanks are destroyed with your typical FPV drone with an RPG charge duct taped to it

>>64102625 (OP)
>some kornet-d systems on random armored 4x4?
best i can do is a lada with some S-5 rockets strapped to it

>>64102649
>>64102718
>Moves slower than any vehicle on battlefield
>No protection against fragments

>>64102625 (OP)
>why isn't Russia simply putting some kornet-d systems on random armored 4x4?
at last the time of the sarmatmobile has come

>>64106696
need the snowrune translation on these

are they all going to washington again?

>>64106698
>are they all going to washington again?
as always kek
with claims that the sarmat guarantees their security if my vodka runes are right

>>64102649
why retards allowed to speak? 4x4 has much, much lower armor rating and will be wrecked by a mine that will just detrack a tank