How come cars and consumer objects look dated after a few years, but the Leopard 2 still looks awesomely modern?
>>27922087
because doesnt look (as) modern without the A5 turret armour
>>27922110
Well that explains it. When did they add that?
I still think that a lof of military hardware looks more modern than it actually is - the F-14 for example.
>>27922087
because cars and consumer objects are intentionally made to be so, half of what they are is stylistic. Military tech is pretty much solely for functionality, and that reflects because shit doesn't change every few years. When I was getting into military shit, I thought the A10 was made in the mid 2000s, not the mid 70s.
>>27922145
1990's i think
>>27922159
this guy gets it
>>27922159
I think the lesser importance of cost constraints also has something to do with it. Military tech can use materials and production processes that are just too expensive for consumer goods.
>How come cars and consumer objects look dated after a few years
Cars lose their luster rather quickly due to overexposure and day to day use. This does not happen with tanks.
When the 1986 Ford Torus made its debut it created a sensation worldwide. The car was turning heads everywhere it went and it was even selected to be Robcops "future cop car".
It was the roundest car americans had seen in a long time (this was the 80s box era) and some people called it a "flying potato". It was like a spaceship compared to other north American cars at the time.
Looking back just 10 years later (after 95% of domestic cars adopted similar ponton styling) the aging Taurus now seemed boring as fuck. Consumers had become over-exposed to this style of car.
tl;dr
With tanks, especially european tanks, most Americans are not exposed to their designs daily an they still seem fresh and interesting. Even the old AMX-13 french tanks seemed like sci-fi death machines to the average American.
>>27922205
That's actually a really good point, if you can drop a billion dollars on R&D it can stay up to date for decades
>>27922087
In case you live in a delusional fantasy world, "modern" technology has been stagnating and black military projects have been advancing at a rate of 60+ to 1 years since the 1950's. This is also known as the breakaway civilization and one of their goals is mass population reduction, which means killing you useless eaters. You surely won't be invited into their underground cities connected by electromag lev trains.
electro maglev at mach 2*, please excuse my grammar you dumb stupid animals
>>27922312
>>27922270
also, dont forget that Ford/microsoft/casio/glock/samsung/etc. needs to constantly upgrade every itty bitty part of its product to remain competitive in order to shift units
a producer of defence products only needs to do this once every few years to shift a fuckton of products that are at that very moment the cutting edge. as soon as the contract is signed they can theoretically sit on their ass until they feel the need to shaft another country
>>27922312
Wot?
>>27922145
The F-16 is a better example
40 years old and it still looks like a competitor for JSF
>>27922243
That's a pretty saweet car.
>>27922355
>Ford/microsoft/casio/glock/samsung/etc
>casio
Found the oldfag.
>>27922394
>oldfag
>i'm 21
>i have 3 different watches and 2 different calculators from casio
some people are just idiots, i'm one of them
>>27922369
Russian planes before the MIG 29 show their age far more.
>>27922483
>Russian planes before the MIG 29 show their age far more.
It's like the pre- and post-2007 celphone market.
Jets made a pretty drastic leap in the 4th gen (more so than the diminishing returns gained from 4th to 5th gen).
As with smartphones there have only been incremental improvements in jets since the 4th gen. The 4.5 gen stopgap aircraft were like the iphone 4S. A bit better, but not drastically and certainly not redefining the industry.
