Cost in materials? probably around 150k-200k ('high' nickel steel and ceramics aren't, the gun barrel alone probably costs +200k).
The problem are fixed costs, salaries, machinery, taxes, corruption and "military equipment makeup".
The "cheapness" of soviet surplus was because it was surplus made with "slaved labor", with dumped prices and sold "at loss".
You can't live off soviet surplus eternally.
>Not ceramic
Fused quartz can be considered a ceramic too, it's a refractory, brittle and hard composite, its processing are just the same as alumina, metal/oid oxides, carbide, nitride and any combination (possible) of those.
>T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
even the earliest T-72 had a slab of textolite in its frontal hull armor
the 80s added a quartz later to the turret, which much closer to what people would call a ceramic
>The "cheapness" of soviet surplus was because it was surplus made with "slaved labor", with dumped prices and sold "at loss". >You can't live off soviet surplus eternally.
It's actually a bizarre and hilarious form of permanence bias that even /k/ suffered from in the past
>the second largest economy in the world >spent a third of their GDP >for half a century >building thousands of ships, tens of thousands of tanks and planes, millions of rifles, etc. >and then after their country died all that shit was sold off for pennies
>surely, this is sustainable and just how things work now
It probably doesn't help that it lasted just over two decades, so it was the status quo for one entire generation of people who thought "Well that's how it worked when I was a kid so I guess that's how it worked forever"
But now we're at the moment where, say for example: >the US Air Force is moving to replace its 1,200 F-16s with 1,400 F-35s >the Russian Air Force is moving to replace its 600 MiG-29s with four Su-57s
>But now we're at the moment where, say for example: >the US Air Force is moving to replace its 1,200 F-16s with 1,400 F-35s >the Russian Air Force is moving to replace its 600 MiG-29s with four Su-57s
Honestly this is what makes me incredulous about the alleged Russian plan to eke out a frozen conflict win in Ukraine, then take a decade to rebuild it's ground forces before throwing down with NATO again. Do they really think that a positional artillery focused war is what's going to happen against an enemy that can legitimately spam stealth combat aircraft at them?
Assuming you have the entire supply line pre built and workers trained, to build it then get it to Ukraine turn arm it then train the operators is around 15 million.
The tank material itself is around is only 1.3 to 1.5 million. But for systems and weapons then transportation then crew it spikes up.
In Soviet union it had no price, rubles were not convertable, they just set a price lower than an analog on the market. Without R&D cost and slave labor it might cost so cheap at some point
Sure, just remove everything worth money that makes it more effective and you have a T-72.
When the crew complains about not seeing in dark or hitting targets past 500 meters due to bad optics, tell them to shut up.
without bribes, dacha etc, probably yes
No, but that's all they spend on it anyway.
Cost in materials? probably around 150k-200k ('high' nickel steel and ceramics aren't, the gun barrel alone probably costs +200k).
The problem are fixed costs, salaries, machinery, taxes, corruption and "military equipment makeup".
The "cheapness" of soviet surplus was because it was surplus made with "slaved labor", with dumped prices and sold "at loss".
You can't live off soviet surplus eternally.
>and ceramics
T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
T-72 was that cheap because it had a range finder and a scope for its fire control.
>T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
Yes it does.
Composite but not ceramic
ceramic rods in cast turret are dont count?
Not ceramic, but quartz sand up to T-72M1.
>Not ceramic
Fused quartz can be considered a ceramic too, it's a refractory, brittle and hard composite, its processing are just the same as alumina, metal/oid oxides, carbide, nitride and any combination (possible) of those.
And basic NERA array from the T-72B on.
Supposedly T-90A has the same array in its welded turret but with a few layers of titanium added.
>T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
It has ceramic plates to eat pierogi on, checkmate HATO troll
>T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
Corundum, fused silica, quartz fiber-resin composite and some things better for their latest obr's.
Most tanks post 1970s have at least one ton of ceramics.
>T-72 doesn't use any ceramics.
even the earliest T-72 had a slab of textolite in its frontal hull armor
the 80s added a quartz later to the turret, which much closer to what people would call a ceramic
>The "cheapness" of soviet surplus was because it was surplus made with "slaved labor", with dumped prices and sold "at loss".
>You can't live off soviet surplus eternally.
It's actually a bizarre and hilarious form of permanence bias that even /k/ suffered from in the past
>the second largest economy in the world
>spent a third of their GDP
>for half a century
>building thousands of ships, tens of thousands of tanks and planes, millions of rifles, etc.
>and then after their country died all that shit was sold off for pennies
>surely, this is sustainable and just how things work now
It probably doesn't help that it lasted just over two decades, so it was the status quo for one entire generation of people who thought "Well that's how it worked when I was a kid so I guess that's how it worked forever"
But now we're at the moment where, say for example:
>the US Air Force is moving to replace its 1,200 F-16s with 1,400 F-35s
>the Russian Air Force is moving to replace its 600 MiG-29s with four Su-57s
>But now we're at the moment where, say for example:
>the US Air Force is moving to replace its 1,200 F-16s with 1,400 F-35s
>the Russian Air Force is moving to replace its 600 MiG-29s with four Su-57s
Honestly this is what makes me incredulous about the alleged Russian plan to eke out a frozen conflict win in Ukraine, then take a decade to rebuild it's ground forces before throwing down with NATO again. Do they really think that a positional artillery focused war is what's going to happen against an enemy that can legitimately spam stealth combat aircraft at them?
Heemeyer made one cheaper.
Assuming you have the entire supply line pre built and workers trained, to build it then get it to Ukraine turn arm it then train the operators is around 15 million.
The tank material itself is around is only 1.3 to 1.5 million. But for systems and weapons then transportation then crew it spikes up.
Probably cheaper in soviet times.
In Soviet union it had no price, rubles were not convertable, they just set a price lower than an analog on the market. Without R&D cost and slave labor it might cost so cheap at some point
the price is from 2011.
it keeps going down over the decades.
Ill take the Maserati instead!
500k USD is like 3 billion roubles