Jump to content

Talk:9M119 Svir/Refleks

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
(Redirected from Talk:9M119 Svir)

Say what?

[edit]

Can somebody include a translation of the name(s)? TREKphiler hit me ♠ 09:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Citation

[edit]

There is no citation for the armor penetration value given by the article. My sources say 700-750mm in RHAe, minus 50mm for conventional ERA. That is a big difference and a relevant one. The article is basically good but probably too arcane for layman. Jon Chin —Preceding unsigned comment added by 125.225.71.63 (talk) 12:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Svir vs Releks

[edit]

Reflex was older and extremely costly (only used for T-80s) and thus they developed svir for T-72s which was much cheaper, lacked automization unit 9S517, target acqizition unit 9C536. Svir uses 1K13 "Neman", which has 4km range and does not allow to shoot while moving. I'd go so far as suggesting splitting article in two, weapons are related in function but that's it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.112.108.225 (talk) 09:25, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on 9M119. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 14:49, 1 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]