>>47977
Maybe it will be useful once Armata comes into service. But I find it interesting that they advertise the gun as having 50% more kill range not that it penetrates 50% more armour. They probably know that it's overkill already.

>Decision makers make their decisions based on this bs? Based on this "peasant blinding" (as we say)? We are literally led by kids. Or maybe because to please the masses the leaders have to give them their sci-fi experience known from movies and vidya? Then again, we are literally led by kids, whom whims have to be catered.
Most western tanks are pretty much the same, what makes them look different is how they make the panels look. If they think that looks cool and it doesn't effect the tank negatively in any way then I don't see an issue. If it has no real bearing on anything then why wouldn't you make it look as cool as possible?

>They write about sensors, and it seems they have nice screens showing everything around, basically cameras are their eyes now. There should be very little problem with visibility (unless cameras are killed, then they are stuck in a tincan blind).
Cameras are one thing but they don't really make up for the awareness you get from sticking your head out the tank. It's like playing a video game, even with all of the camera angles you get how much situational awareness do you have really?