Harkonnen

New MOD RF patent for APFSDS

It's about the breakdown rate/1000 km which means reliability but not capital repair milage.

Statistics say it was 4-6 times less relieble than T-64-72.

This started 2 decades before today's events and is an echo of UVZ's policy in the USSR of the 1970s. It has nothing to do with modern Russia. This is just another warning - books published by UVZ are useful only as a source of photos, not as a historical source.

So you suppose Soviet army tеsted T-64? 72 and 80 with different mileage to compare their reliability? They tested them in different areas? It seems the word logic is foreign to some modern people, they can't assume that it was different before. Or is it just such a ridiculous attempt to not accept a reliable source while remaining in the realm of myth.

In his interview yesterday (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SLUrrmNrZxk&t=1s), the historian of the UWZ and author of many books that some researchers have the misfortune to use, said that "A pathological liar differs from a normal person in that he lies without reason. For no reason at all. And we, as a rule, have some reasons for that..." Also, this falsifier of history refused to acknowledge photos of documents (http://btvt.info/4ourarticles/morozov_2023_T_54.htm) that refute his lying books and interviews.

--- unitary cartridges. It had no unitary cartridges.

It has mixed ERA tiles - frontal are Noz and sides Kontakt in same containers

All recent post look like anything but History.

The very first variant of Object_490A "Boxer", 6 wheel chassis, Wooden model 1:10. 1979 г https://imgtr.ee/images/2023/08/28/e487453147e623890ac5448bd84b9214.jpeg https://t.me/btvt2019/5486

Maybe it is alost impossible to make such gas turbine in 1980s and maybe even now. They worked 50-150 haurs and burned.

https://t.me/btvt2019/5692 original comment on this table - Unfulfilled plans for tank construction in the USSR in the 2nd half of the 1980s. The development of the VTDT-1000F engine, a gas turbine that was supposed to have a fuel consumption comparable to that of a diesel engine, ended in a complete fiasco. Ustinov's terrible adventure, the cost of which is comparable to the Buran spacecraft.

Russian books on the history of tank engineering write that after Chief Designer Morozov returned to Kharkov, it was Tagil that bore the burden of modernization of the T-54 and T-55. Their idea is as follows - "From 1951 until the end of the 1950s, Morozov made the 430 object, at that time UVZ was engaged in finalizing the design of the T-54 tank, as a result, at the end of the 1950s, the T-54B tank's performance specifications approached the 430". But the documents testify to something else - the main contribution to the improvement of the T-54 tanks was made by the Kharkov design bureau. The documents are cited here - http://btvt.info/4ourarticles/morozov_2023_T_54.htm

It is highly likely a miss. Most of lancet and Krasnopol hits fail to destroy tanks due to weak warhead.

Yes, sight was also destroyed