alejandro_

I understand MICA has been integrated, but no Meteor.

What about the ammunition storage? IIRC you mentioned the Polish MoD requested certain changes to be applied.

Yes, but ~2/3 came from T-80U. I am not sure about what those internal components are, but T-80U and UD shared turret, armour, 1A45 FCS, suspension, running gear, suspension, turret. If it would derive from T-64 a different designation would have been given, as it was done with T-64 versions that mounted a 6TD engine. That article was written by Yuriy Pasholok, who has extensive access to Soviet documentation and is considered one of the most knowledgeable writers on Soviet armour. Elements which were basically the same as in IS-2.

Not related to military vehicles, but Ukraine Air force has rejected Mirage 2000D. The speaker of the Air Force of Ukraine Yuriy Ignat, explained his view on the feasibility of using this type of aircraft. “For us, obtaining aircraft is a very important issue, but the Mirage 2000D is not an option,” the speaker noted. “How can it help us if Russian air defense simply destroys it in the air? We need a multi-purpose aircraft, modern, capable of: provide us with an advantage in the air; drive Russian aviation away from our borders; drive it away from the occupied territories; strike at ground-based surface targets; ensure the maintenance of airspace and the destruction of cruise missiles and targets, that is, to counter the missile terrorism of the Russians.” Mirage 2000D is being upgraded by France to stay in service for a few more years. Maybe France only offered basic variant without the upgrade. https://telegraf.com.ua/ukraina/2023-09-21/5809607-mirage-2000d-ne-variant-yuriy-ignat-nazval-pyat-trebovaniy-k-boevomu-samoletu

I would not pay much attention to the text, only quoted the reference to provide source. One of the issues with PT-91 is that it is based on T-72M1 variants, which is a disadvantage versus other alternatives. In any case, Russia is using T-55s and T-62s in Ukraine...

Knocked out PT-91: https://vestnik-rm.ru/news/oborona-i-bezopasnost/nenadezhen-i-pozharoopasen-tank-pt-91-twardy-posredstvennaya-versiya-t-72

A Ukrainian tank in a position in the eastern province of Kharkiv last May. EUROPA PRESS/CONTACTO/LEV RADIN (EUROPA PRESS/CONTACTO/LEV RADIN)

Rostec delivers the first batch of 2S19M2 Msta-S. https://rostec.ru/news/rostekh-postavil-v-voyska-partiyu-modernizirovannykh-gaubits-msta-s/

Turkey has closed the Bosphorus strait to warships.

Actually another scenario discussed was Russia reinforcing Black Sea Fleet by taking Kilo submarines from the Baltic Sea to the Black Sea. Regarding the draft, it can have different values depending on when you measure it. Russia has been dredging the channels in recent times to increase trade with Iran via the Caspian Sea.

In Spanish twitter there was a heated argument about if it possible to take Rostov-on to the Baltic using one of the inland channels. According to some sources these could be used by nuclear subs on the surface. This would allow repairs to be applied where manufacturer is located. I do recall a submarine (destined to a museum) using these channels, and frigates travelling using the channel connecting the Black Sea and Caspian sea, but no operationsal submarine before. https://twitter.com/FranMatiasBueno/status/1702715356479946870/photo/2

Where have you seen these plenty of T-64s? You don't get to see many in the last few months because quite a large number has been lost (>400 destroyed according to lost armour since 2014) and factories carrying out repairs/overhauls/upgrades are not really functioning. Perhaps in the future some can be fixed in Poland and Czech Republic -agreements have been signed- but I don't see these large numbers. The same goes with BTRs and BMPs. Nowadays you see much more Western equipment, from MRAPs to assault rifles.

Bit off topic, but I came this statement by Dmitry Peskov, the Kremlin's spokeman: “As for getting out of sanctions, there are entrepreneurs who will slide into anti-Russian positions for 12 pieces of silver. These are traitors. Those who methodically defend their position in the courts are great. In general, all sanctions are illegal,” https://www.kommersant.ru/doc/6212538?from=spot I assume he refers to the 30 pieces of silver Judas got for betraying Jesus, is the 12 a mistake or there is something behind the number? @Roman Alymov or someone familiar with Christinaity/Orthodox Church?

I still don't understand why you think T-80UD is closer to T-64 than T-80U. As you mentioned Object 476 had a new turret that was used in both T-80U and UD. It was not related to T-64 turret. Running gear is also the same as T-80U. This information is from Ukrainian sources, Major-General Yuri Tolokniy, who was responsible for the logistics of the Ukrainian ground forces back in "For example, the T-64BM Bulat tanks, due to their heavy weight and weak engine, turned out to be ineffective, were transferred to reserve, and replaced by linear T-64s." http://opk.com.ua/острейшие-проблемы-всу-сегодня-не-свя/ The problem is that you see this as IS-2 masterpiece, IS-3 piece of crap. The IS-2 as most tanks also had issues when coming out of the production line, and designer was told to focus on improving quality and stop development on new models. This article by Yuriy Pasholok explains changes and upgrades applied to both in the post war. https://www.tankarchives.ca/2021/09/long-living-is.html#more

I did not know that rule in European Convention, which pretty much rules out deportation of people who want to avoid military service or deserters. The Czech Republic will not extradite to Ukraine men who avoid serving in the Ukrainian army. It is bound by the European Convention, which excludes extradition for military crimes – for example, avoiding military service, desertion or disobeying an order. "In a specific case, however, it would depend not on the legal qualification, but on the actual conduct, for which the Ukrainian judicial authorities would eventually file a request for the extradition of a specific person," Ministry of Justice spokesman Vladimír Řepka told MF DNES. Zdroj: https://www.idnes.cz/zpravy/domaci/ukrajina-armada-cesko-uprchlici-dezerce-kyjev-vydavani.A230912_191740_domaci_javu?zdroj=top

Original document is now gone. Translated version of the table can be foun in the link below: - T-84, BM Oplot and variants - T-80 and modifications - T-80UD with 6TD diesel engine Ukraine inherited very few T-80Us. http://alejandro-8.blogspot.com/2017/06/tabla-de-mantenimiento-de-blindados.html Er no, T-80UD started as a T-80U with a diesel engine. Documentation used terms like "Measures on organization of mass production of 6TD diesel engine and tank T-80U with these engines." When adopted for production it was referred as "T-80U with 6TD diesel engine". T-64 chassis had exhausted it's potential and would have struggled with weight (as happened with T-64BM Bulat). But IS-2 also went through a UKN program, as other Soviet tanks. I don't know where you got this information, but it was not quite like that. Engine and transmission mounts were reinforced but no changes were applied on suspension or turret (reinforcement). From an article I wrote, for IS-3 the UKN objectives of this program were: 1) Increase in engine life up to 250 hours and protection on the ground against mines. 2) Increase in the useful life of the transmission up to 2,000 km. 3) Prevention of oil leaks in rotation mechanisms, wheels and gearbox. 4) Improvement of gas evacuation. Installation of filters and a system for cleaning the barrel from the inside. 5) Integration of a mechanism that facilitates loading the cannon while moving. 6) Improved turret configuration in the command version. The program was implemented in 1948, and the IS-3 received several modifications. The engine and transmission mounts were reinforced, the clutch was redesigned, a new oil pump and new gaskets were installed on the support rollers and gearbox. The 10-RK radio was replaced by a 10-RP. With all the modifications the weight increased to 48.5-49 tons. We already discussed the Polish evaluation, or lack of data about it. It is the same with Czechoslovakia's, you will get 2 lines about it or a paragraph at best. If they retained IS-2 is because there had already been supplied during WW2 and were available. At the end of the day, why did Egypt get IS-3 and not IS-2 if they are so unreliable? I know you could argue the opposite because Cuba and East Germany got IS-2... But commander main sight was the Mk-4 periscope and not cupola.

Thanks Pavel for all the work/compilation. For those who are interested in MiG-23s in Czechoslovak Air Force an online book (in English) can be found here. It seems MiG-23 were not that unpopular but pricey... In the MiG-23, the Czechoslovak Air Force received a high performance aircraft that exceeded its predecessor in all respects. It was a much better aircraft with a higher speed, higher rate of climb, a higher ceiling and a better range. However, it was also a more complicated piece of equipment and consequently significantly more expensive. A new MiG-23MF cost 30 million CZK (Czechoslovak Crowns) while a MiG-21PFM was going for 9 million CZK. Taking this into consideration, the MiG23MF was about six times the cost of a MiG-21. The high price of the Flogger and the saturation of supersonic equipment within its units meant that the Czechoslovak Air Force only used the MiG-23MF as a top-up measure. It was a similar use that was seen with the MiG-17 and 19 that merely supplemented units flying the MiG-15, and the MiG-23 fulfilled the same role with respect to the widespread MiG-21 and even the Su-7. https://www.eduard.com/out/media/11120-bedna-english-translation.pdf

The performance of North Korea's artillery and crews has been suspect since the North Korean army fired around 170 shells at the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong in 2010, killing four people. According to a report by the Washington-based 38 North project, more than half those rounds fell in the waters around the island, while about 20% of those that impacted the island failed to explode. Such a high failure rate suggested some North Korea-manufactured artillery munitions suffered from either poor quality control during manufacture or poor storage conditions and standards, the report said. With very large numbers of ammunition, the lack of precision and the occasional dud shells or rockets wouldn't matter much to the Russians, Wezeman said. "However, it would matter if Korean ammunition is of such poor quality that it is just unsafe to use for Russian soldiers - there have been indications that such quality issues play with Korean ammunition," he added. https://www.reuters.com/world/north-korean-ammunition-could-offer-russian-troops-flawed-useful-support-2023-09-12/

IIRC turrets were produced in Mariupol, but cast ones probably don't make sense any more because production is more limited (*). As Bojan mentioned a welded turret would make more sense. Regarding turbines, they are/were produced by Klimov, which still exists today. I would think production is still ongoing because T-80BVM have received a more powerful type, and there were news about GTDs being improved. https://vestnik-rm.ru/news/oborona-i-bezopasnost/1400-silnaya-turbina-sdelaet-rossijskie-t-80-ecshe-bystree-i-manevrennee 1G46 is not needed as Sosna-U is available. Question would be if production is enough. To manufacture T-90s Omsk would have to retool and even acquire new equipment, which takes a long time. There should be at least some production of T-80 spares, which means they are not starting from 0. Perhaps the reason for getting T-80UDs from storage is to use certain components like turrets. I did not state that, but it comes from a video published in the Russian media. (*) You also have to wonder about the current status of the steel works.

According to Uralvagonzavod director this company will resume building T-80 tanks from scratch. T-80s were produced in Omsk, but last samples left the production line in 1996. Upgrade/overhaul exists so production of GTD-1250, spares and FCS exists, but for other parts it will have to be restarted (hull, turret, armour...).

No, value for T-80UD is 14,000 km for capital repair and 5,000 warranty. The later value is 6,000 km for T-84, Oplot and derivates, finally matching turbine T-80s. It's a bit wired to offer something "but no seriously". Configuration was offered and rejected because customer preferred T-80. Strange choice if the tank is 4-6 times less reliable than T-64/72. I have read about IS-3 for a number of years, also been a member of this grate site since 2005, and I have never come across this information. In Polish/Russian sources you will get a couple of lines or a paragraph explaining it. Now, some IS-3 documentation is available in English. Regarding approval for production: - The IS-3 tank presented by Kirov Factory passed the 500 km long proving grounds trials. It did not pass the 1000 km warranty trial due to the fan breaking at 810 km. - The performance characteristics and reliability of mechanisms and assemblies of the IS-3 tank is equivalent to that of the mass production IS-122 tank. https://www.tankarchives.ca/2016/05/is-3-green-light.html There is even a description of the visibility, but no comment on the deterioration of the visibility when compared to IS-2 (I have not come across this in the documents published at the website). https://www.tankarchives.ca/2016/05/is-3-visibility.html

Which is similar to standard T-80... - T-80B - 11 km/h - T-64A - 4.2 km/h - T-72A - 4.18 km/h - T-72B - 4.18 km/h