2025, I am forgotten...But for real, what happened to it?
If you want an actual answer>Stealth was considered worthless of a tank and its basic protection was worse than a Leopard 2 and modern ATGM were too powerful as well>Its main gun was considered worthless against the T-14 Armata (yes this is really a reason why they cancelled it) >The 'stealth' part of it was seen as a gimmick rather than actual combat effectiveness>Too expensive to mass produce>Poland shifted belief into thinking more lighter tanks with APS and SPG was a better use of the moneyBasically they believed that by the time they had a viable number of them (2023) that Russia would have its 3,000 T-14's and the PL would be useless, so they cancelled it and put the money towards M1A1's and K9's and other systems instead. The irony is that Russia doesn't have 3,000 T-14's, their new ATGM aren't great, their airforce is a meme and various other factors. But the positive side is what they got instead is just as good if not better so why worry?>tl;dr; Poland believed Russia's propaganda and decided to shift money around to build a different kind of combat force
>>64544546Aye fair enough, that does answer my question, cheers mate
>>64544546>russia lies about its military capabilities to its adversary>adversary takes claims seriously>becomes far superior to russia's paper tiger army
>>64544546>doesn't have 3000 T-14'sI don't think they even have 300 of them>their new ATGM isn't greatAre you talking about the Kornet or something else. Because the Kornet has really good performance.>>64544584>ohh shit China might actually have 6th generation combat aircraft>drops the F-47>China turns out to be full of shit like usualy>Ohh hey cool we have the F-47 nowKind of cringe that Trump forced them to name it 47 because of him but glowniggers never disappoint.
>>64544588*like usualAlso self checked
>>64544588>I don't think they even have 300 of themI don't think they even have 30 of them
>>64544598>I don't think they even have 30 of themDon't even have 3 (working).
>>64544610.3 of all armatas are to spec>>64544588wasn't the 47 because of some silly counting with prototypes?
>>64544546>The 'stealth' part of it was seen as a gimmick rather than actual combat effectivenessIt honestly was, and it's obvious why if you've ever been a tanker or dealt with them.Imagine spending all that money, then going out into the field to see those well spent dollars at work, and there's a bunch of shit like packs/rucks, jerry cans, some cool sticks the commander found etc... strapped to the outside of the 'stealth' tank.
>>64544501Original CV90120 was restored and the cardboard bodykit is rotting away at the bondyardy
>>64544642The CCA drones appear to be taking the even 40 series numbers, and a LinkedIn leak from a former Navy test pilot suggests F/A-XX may end up being the F/A-45 if they ever get around to awarding the contract. So it’s very possible manned fighters are taking the odd 40 numbers and NGAD could’ve always been meant to be -47 and they just took the opportunity to jerk off Trump to make extra sure they had funding secured.
>>64544584>>64544588believing their lies is how we got forty years ahead of them in the technology trees.seriously, any "sixth gen" crap our opponents field might actually (no, seriously) be a target for our thirty year old F-22s.
>>64545212what if it's all one big ruse and they actually have hover tanks with railguns and plasma vaporizers?https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z77JFw2D6f8
It was just a concept.
>>64544546Real actual answer:>It's a CV90120 covered in sheet metal that they had no capability of turning into a practical production vehicle.>>64544648Stealth ground vehicles are retarded even outside of all that. Planes are so much easier to make stealthy and with that comes massive leaps in radar tech to keep pace, where using uncovered fasteners is enough to majorly affect RCS at this point. You have shit like tracks that can never be made stealthy and can never be fully covered. Any shit like RWS, CITV, APS will either have to compromise RCS or performance to the point where neither option is worth it. For airborne radar doing ground scans they are powerful enough to see any hodge podge "stealthy" tank and with ground based systems, audio detectors will detect you beyond the horizon and any ground based radar systems will see right through any stealth construction.
>>64544867unsurprisingthat's the fate of most unadopted designs even though it would've been a cool addition to a museum
>>64544610They might not even have 1 anymore
