US Army's "Future Combat Systems" Program

Fulcrum, remind me again which country has the most patents?

In other words, tone down your anti-american sentiments a bit man, your starting to become a troll.

As America-biased you may be, Seekerof, don't worry too much about Russia. Here's the cold, hard truth:

Their officers don't even have desks! Or paper!

FULCRUM is right in many ways. A lot of Russian military tech is better than American - that isn't to say that American isn't good, either. The reason Russia has no money is because they spend all their money on their military.

I'm not going to underestimate Russia either. In fact, they are more advanced than us in specific areas. But they can't pay for any of it.

Yes, your right....of coarse!
Its always good to have the "best stuff", say like aircraft, and then can only afford to train those who fly that "best stuff" only 10-60 hours a YEAR/annually!

"Reality Check: Russian Defense Minister says...."
Link:
www.abovetopsecret.com...




regards
seekerof

Someone might point out cost effiency when comparing Russia and US for example, if military personel make 100-200€ month in Russia and US they get 2000€ ++ you already see big cap and that reflect ´material prices and everything, this was just rough estimate, but still to compare US expenditure to development doesnt always show true. Still cant forget fact that better salary draw some of the best scientist, technics etc. So its hard to compare US, Russia on that. I personally see China as US strongest compredator as they even outplay Russia by cost effiency and they have big potential by numbers to have good brains creating something new and its easier for em to go from underdog situation on this as they surely learn by all others mistakes and save alone by that a lot work and efforts.

Also that Abrahams been using gas turbine for their lifetime just shows US energy politic, fuel cost doesnt really matter and its bond to admistration that is close to oil industry that make big bucks by US non cost effient oil use. So it might seem from outside view joke that now US plan to change for diesel now, when they could have saved big bucks centuries ago. Still its positive that finaly US might try to decrease their energy usage, as shown one of those links 3 tankers shrink to 1, its big difference alone.

Even Fulcrum had some points, but he mostly killed em by his fanatic approach, making everything sound more simple than it is.

[edit on 29-1-2005 by Observer83]

isnt a Non- Line of sight cannon designated a [very generaly] howitzer?