Russian modern armour Images

[Sgt.Squarehead]

The tank in the background of this image is not a T-72B3M:

 

 

It is the T-80BVM:

 

 

Know a T-80 (from the front) by his triple driver's periscopes. 

 

[magman2]

Russian Naval forces, are to receive fully refurbished T-80BV. recent drills showed the force lacked support, once they had landed.  

One of the New refurbished Tanks.  

Net Photo

[magman2]

Russian Army, BMTT "Terminator" tank support vehicles.

As Seen during Alabino rehearsal for the May, Victory Day Parade

 

Net Photo (VLADIMIR VELENGURIN)

[Sgt.Squarehead]

It looks like the Terminator has changed yet again:

 

 

The original version's AGLs are back, but the turret's closer to the second version.

[magman2]

I think that they are For Kazakhstan, as they are Identical to their Bmpt’s.

Russia has borrowed them for the Victory day parade?

Kazakhstan have ordered additional bmpt.

Edited April 9, 2018 by magman2

[magman2]

More than just a passing similarity...... The BMPT in Kazakh Service. 

 

Net Photos

[Sgt.Squarehead]

A couple of sites/FB posters are fairly adamant that these are for Russian forces.....Time will no doubt tell.

 

I'm fascinated by the rolling armour upgrade program Russia have underway.....The T-80BVM in particular.  It seems they start with a T-80BV, thus upgrading the weakest comparatively modern type in the remaining T-80 inventory, presumably leaving the superior T-80Us & T-80UEs for a future update?  It seems to me that they are going to wind up with an awful lot of reasonably capable tanks (T-80U, T-72B, T-90), a good number of very capable tanks (T-80BVM, T-90M) and a growing number of exceptional tanks (T-14).

 

 

[Aardvark]

10 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

A couple of sites/FB posters are fairly adamant that these are for Russian forces.....

This

(screenshot from this video: 

)

for Russian Army.

First transfer 12 BMPT for Russian Army in 2018:

https://bmpd.livejournal.com/3095743.html

 

B.R.

Serge

 

 

[Mick4350]

On ‎4‎/‎10‎/‎2018 at 2:37 AM, Sgt.Squarehead said:

It looks like the Terminator has changed yet again:

 

 

The original version's AGLs are back, but the turret's closer to the second version.

I like the clean coat of Green. Easy to decal perhaps.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

Interesting discussion of whether the Terminator actually has a meaningful role in the Russian armed forces (In Russian):  https://www.gazeta.ru/army/2018/05/30/11776345.shtml

 

[magman2]

Yes a very Interesting discussion,  stating delivery 3rd and 4th quarter of 2018. I still think the parade Bmpt are borrowed or appropriated from The Khazak order.

I don't think, The Russian Army Really needs them.

 

Русская армия  

[Aardvark]

5 hours ago, magman2 said:

Yes a very Interesting discussion,  stating delivery 3rd and 4th quarter of 2018. I still think the parade Bmpt are borrowed or appropriated from The Khazak order.

I don't think, The Russian Army Really needs them.

Discussion in article from the category of Russian sarcasm meme: "Why spend money on the army? It is better to distribute this money to pregnant pensioner!"

The experience of modern local conflicts shows that the protection of tanks from portable anti-tank systems is very difficult with the actions of small forces of tanks.

It is clear that in the case of a verbal conflict in the battles of a similar Prokhorovka, tank fist everyone will doubt everything, but for conflicts of medium intensity something like a bodyguard for a tank is very necessary.

BMPT, as I think, it is only a first step on the way to such a bodyguard tanks.

 

 

B.R.

Serge

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

The suggestion seems to be that T-15 will provide a more capable platform with a smaller crew requirement and a squad of dismounts on top.....Which seems sensible to me.

 

The five man crew does seem to be a bit of an issue IMHO.

[Aardvark]

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

The suggestion seems to be that T-15 will provide a more capable platform with a smaller crew requirement and a squad of dismounts on top.....Which seems sensible to me.

But where can I get money for thousands or hundreds of T-15? The Russian economic does not show signs of a transition to a military model of the economic.

1 hour ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

The five man crew does seem to be a bit of an issue IMHO

When you do not have modern target recognition systems in sufficient quantity and automatic guidance systems to plant several people to perform such tasks is not the worst option!

 

B.R.

Serge

[magman2]

 Infantry fighting vehicle B-11 object 695, on medium tracked platform Kurganets-25, has been chosen  for production.

Net Photo

 

I don't think the, Heavy infantry fighting vehicle T-15 object 149  made it. It was not in the 2018 Victory Day Parade.  

 

[stalal]

What are the major differences between T-80 and T-90 tanks?

[Aardvark]

7 hours ago, stalal said:

What are the major differences between T-80 and T-90 tanks?

Which T-80? T-80 can be with a diesel engine

(Object 478B-  Т-80УД „Берёза“ e.t.c)

and  with a turbine (Object 219 сп 2 

T-80, 

Object 219 

T-80, T-80A, T-80 БВ, Т-80У  etc)?

T-90 is "improved T-72Б" , Т-80 on first  stage is chassis T-64 with turbine, then new chassis with tower unified with T-64...e.t.c.

In next stage both tank have received many changes and improvements away from the original models. Can you elaborate the question in more detail?

 

B.R.

Serge

[stalal]

1 hour ago, Aardvark said:

Which T-80? T-80 can be with a diesel engine

(Object 478B-  Т-80УД „Берёза“ e.t.c)

and  with a turbine (Object 219 сп 2 

T-80, 

Object 219 

T-80, T-80A, T-80 БВ, Т-80У  etc)?

T-90 is "improved T-72Б" , Т-80 on first  stage is chassis T-64 with turbine, then new chassis with tower unified with T-64...e.t.c.

In next stage both tank have received many changes and improvements away from the original models. Can you elaborate the question in more detail?

 

B.R.

Serge

 

In terms of capability and protection. Performance. 

 

I have heard T-90 is an upgraded T-72. The T-72 tank performed miserably in Gulf war. Wanted to know what categories of tanks T-80 and T-90 are and how much improved these tanks are in their newest version.

[Aardvark]

6 hours ago, stalal said:

In terms of capability and protection. Performance

 

6 hours ago, stalal said:

The T-72 tank performed miserably in Gulf war.

When I was taught tactics of

combined arms as commander platoon AAM my teacher's was tank officers who began their service on the T-62 and completed it in the Western Group of Soviet Forces in Germany on various modifications of the T-80, T-64 and T-72. When we asked them about which western tank they consider the most dangerous enemy for themselves, there has always been one and the same answer - Leopard 2.

The Turks used the Leopard 2 in Syria, where the results of their use were disappointing.

Does this mean that the Leopard 2 is a bad tank? No! Because the use of any technique primarily depends on many factors, such as:

- tactic;

- training of personnel

 - motivation;

-logistics;

- reconnaissance data;

-aviation protection;

- anti-aircraft defense;

- cooperation with aircraft, artillery 

etc....many factors.

You can have a wonderwaffe as Me-262 in third reich 1944-1945 year

but if the opponent  has superiority in the air and your actions are not coordinated,

your wouderwaffe will be useless.

6 hours ago, stalal said:

Wanted to know what categories of tanks T-80 and T-90 are and how much improved these tanks are in their newest version.

I'm unlikely to tell you anything more than what is written in the Russian part of Wikipedia:

 

https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Т-90

 

https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Т-80

 

because even if I knew some information missing on the Internet, they would be classified as a military secret, the disclosure of which is punishable by the laws of any country.

.... and I really have nothing to do with either the Russian Federation or its Armed Forces.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

P.S. B.w. most  most "bloody" Internet wars in the Russian segment are between the fans on which tank is coolish  T-64 or T-72 and T-80/84 or T-90!

Internet wars in the Russian segment

have even received a special Russian word "tankosrach". It's a censorship word, but I'm not sure if I can translate it properly into English, so I will not try.

Fans of the T-90 / T-72 believe that it's better than the T-80 / T-64 concentrate here:

http://gurkhan.blogspot.com/?m=1

their opponents are here:

https://andrei-bt.livejournal.com

 

 

 

 

 

Edited June 8, 2018 by Aardvark

[Sgt.Squarehead]

You will upset people claiming the T-80 is descended from the T-64.....It isn't, they merely shared a turret briefly: 

 

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/961-communist-tracked-boxes-with-pancake-turrets-dont-you-dare-to-confuse-glorious-t-80-battle-tank-with-kharkovite-t-64-tractor-that-doesnt-work/

 

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/884-t-80-megathread-astronomical-speed-and-price/

 

The T-90 on the other hand is a direct descendant of the T-72.  

 

[Aardvark]

10 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

You will upset people claiming the T-80 is descended from the T-64.....It isn't, they merely shared a turret briefly: 

I am a not a "tankman" I collect aviation. The truth is it did not stop me in the 90s to make this T-80

and this T-80

and some other models of the tank I built on the memory of which I had only these boxes:

About "T-80 is descended from the T-64" I cited a link to Russian Wikipedia where it says:

"Modifications

Object 219 сп 1 - modification of Т-64А with installation of gas-turbine engine GTD-1000Т. During the tests, the unreliability of the T-64 undercarriage and the impossibility of realizing the increased dynamic characteristics of the tank with a gas turbine engine was revealed [11]. A total of 31 tanks of this modification were manufactured [12]."

Thus, to the T-80, Wikipedia includes the T-64 with a turbine engine. Yes later it turned out that the chassis does not cope with the loads, it was altered, then another tower was made .... but in the end, the basis was the T-64 with the turbine engine? So I wrote not so referring to Wikipedia?

If Wikipedia is not right, then the questions to it and not to me!

10 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/961-communist-tracked-boxes-with-pancake-turrets-dont-you-dare-to-confuse-glorious-t-80-battle-tank-with-kharkovite-t-64-tractor-that-doesnt-work/

 

http://sturgeonshouse.ipbhost.com/topic/884-t-80-megathread-astronomical-speed-and-price/

 

I don't  quite understand, by reference, this is a subtle irony and sarcasm, or a rabid Russophobia mixed with cave anti-communism of the McCarthy period? Whatever it was, it grows out of the Russian term "tankosrach"!

Perhaps I will do as I think the correct interpretation of this term!

"Tankosrach" is a discussion about tanks during which opponents toss each other into virtual excrement.

I suspect that the links you submitted are echoes of "tankosrach"!

11 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

The T-90 on the other hand is a direct descendant of the T-72.   

 I read the version that the T-72 is a greatly simplified T-64 for the poor .... although perhaps this is one of the opponents in the "tankosratch" wrote.

 

B.R.

Serge

 

P.S.

This does not make me automatically an expert or guru in the modern post-Soviet tank, but T-84, T-64 and T-72 

I saw at a distance of 2-3 meters and even made a little photo...

 

[Sgt.Squarehead]

8 minutes ago, Aardvark said:

I don't  quite understand, by reference, this is a subtle irony and sarcasm, or a rabid Russophobia mixed with cave anti-communism of the McCarthy period? Whatever it was, it grows out of the Russian term "tankosrach"!

It's a parody of the "tankosrach" phemomena that you describe, the author is a Russian. 

 

He is also very well informed.

[Sgt.Squarehead]

55 minutes ago, Aardvark said:

I read the version that the T-72 is a greatly simplified T-64 for the poor .... although perhaps this is one of the opponents in the "tankosratch" wrote.

 

"In connection with the T-62 entering production, and work on the object 167, Kharkovites started working on a modernized T-64 tank with a 125 mm smoothbore gun and a loading mechanism. Once I decided to look at this tank at a proving grounds. I climbed in. I didn't like the loading mechanism and the ammunition rack in the turret. The shells were positioned vertically along the turret ring and impeded access to the driver. If he was wounded or concussed, it would be hard to get him out of the tank. When I sat in the driver's seat, I felt like I was in a trap. Metal all around me, limited ability to communicate with the crew.

When I came home, I ordered Kovalev and Bystritskiy to develop a new loading mechanism for the T-62. The comrades approached the task with great enthusiasm. They found a way to place the shells in two rows underneath the turret basket, which improved access to the driver and increased the tank's lifespan under fire. By the end of 1965, the mechanism was finished, but there was no point in introducing it, as an order was issued to begin production of the Kharkov tank.

Since the Kharkovites struggled to get their tank to mass production condition, we volunteered out 115 mm autoloader for their 125 mm gun. External dimensions of the guns were identical. Usually all work done on our own initiative was attached to some historic date. This one was dedicated to 50 years since the October Revolution. Soon, one experimental T-62 tank with a 125 mm gun was finished.

On October 26th, 1967, S.A. Zverev came to our experimental plant towards the end of the work day. He saw our T-62 with a 125 mm gun and E.E Krivosheya with L.F. Terlikov on the turret. I started explaining to the minister what the tank was, and he blew up: "Are you scheming against Kharkov again!?" to which I replied "Sergei Alekseevich! Why are you so nervous? The Americans and Germans modernize their production tanks, why can't we?" He calmed down, climbed on the turret, and asked to see the loading mechanism. Krivosheya and Terlikov descended into the tank and tuened on the loader. The shell flew by so fast that the minister did not have time to see it. He could not see any other shells either, as they were covered by the turret basket. The minister liked the device, and he said, with great fanfare, "Let's put this device into the Kharkov tank!"

"Only with Trashutin's new engine" I replied, but Zverev did not agree. This thought occurred spontaneously. I did not know what the results would be, as no calculations were done. I relied on my work on the object 167, and intuition told me it was posible.

On October 26th, in the factory Palace of Culture, a celebratory gathering was held. The minister awarded a Jubilee Red Banner to the factory. The other day, I was called into I.V. Okunev's office in the morning. I come in, and Zverev is there, they're both happy. Zverev says "Fine, I agree with your idea. Put your device into Kharkov's vehicle with Trashutin's engine, just preserve the transmission and suspension. How many tanks do you need?" "Six should be enough" I replied. That day, the minister left for Moscow.

After the holidays, we got to work on what we called object 172. We discussed it and decided to use the suspension from the object 167, and develop a new hydromechanical transmission with the tank NII. We invited representatives from the institute, they asked what we were going to do, and agreed to help. They left...and reported to Zverev that Kartsev thinks he's a big fish and is trying to tear everything Kharkov made out of the new tank."

 

Stolen from here:  http://ofis-7sandotherthings.blogspot.com/2014/11/kartsev-on-gensis-of-t-72.html

 

[Aardvark]

26 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

the author is a Russian.  

This is not a guarantee that a person can not be a Russophobe!

But he has a very interesting nickname sending us here:

https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Крысов,_Василий_Семёнович

34 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

 He is also very well informed.

I do not claim this. I will repeat, I no

expert or guru in the modern or old Soviet/post-Soviet tank,  but I can always read about them in Russian sources...sorry, it just so happened that I can read in Russian.

B.R.

Serge

 

[Aardvark]

15 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:

Stolen from here:  http://ofis-7sandotherthings.blogspot.com/2014/11/kartsev-on-gensis-of-t-72.html

 

This is from the memories of Kartsev:

https://ru.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Карцев,_Леонид_Николаевич

who worked for the Urals. Naturally, he defends his plant and design bureau. His opponents from Kharkov defend the opposite point of view.

Who is right and who is not, I do not know. This information war between Kharkov and the Urals has been going on for a very long time, and it's not going to stop. The genesis of this war lies in the fact that each of these design schools pretends to play a leading role in the Soviet / post-Soviet tank building, assigning an opponent a secondary role. As you understand this music will be eternal. Therefore, for all this I prefer to observe from the side without adhering to anyone's point of view. What do you want!

B.R.

Serge