History of Soviet tanks

[GARGEAN]

Horribly inacurate.

Nah, horribly inaccurate it was before they patched 2A72 firerate for this mount. Now it's just terribly inaccurate.

[Interlinked]

 

 

 

Looks like BTR-82 turret. Better with a RWS like on Tigr.

There has been lots of... questionable decisions from the Russian MoD in the past few years. This is just another one in the list.

why? The turret is already in service and is certainly better than the 73 mm one, if they want to keep the BMP-1 in service.

This was already discussed three pages back. Problems with the turret include the asinine 2A72 mounting scheme, lack of anti-tank missiles, and relatively low ammunition capacity. Also, the gun has a pretty poor depression angle limit despite the external mounting scheme which you'd expect would ameliorate such problems. Of course, the main issue is that better alternatives already exist and have existed for years, so seeing this is just disappointing.

 

Overall, it's certainly better than the original BMP-1 turret, but like my earlier remark, this whole thing seems like a "two steps forward, one step back" type of situation. Fundamentally the idea is sound, but the execution leaves very much to be desired.

Edited August 21, 2018 by Interlinked

[alejandro_]

Overall, it's certainly better than the original BMP-1 turret, but like my earlier remark, this whole thing seems like a "two steps forward, one step back" type of situation. Fundamentally the idea is sound, but the execution leaves very much to be desired.

 

Maybe they want somehting cheap for the newly established National Guard?

[Panzermann]

 

 

 

Looks like BTR-82 turret. Better with a RWS like on Tigr.

There has been lots of... questionable decisions from the Russian MoD in the past few years. This is just another one in the list.

why? The turret is already in service and is certainly better than the 73 mm one, if they want to keep the BMP-1 in service.

This was already discussed three pages back. Problems with the turret include the asinine 2A72 mounting scheme, lack of anti-tank missiles, and relatively low ammunition capacity. Also, the gun has a pretty poor depression angle limit despite the external mounting scheme which you'd expect would ameliorate such problems. Of course, the main issue is that better alternatives already exist and have existed for years, so seeing this is just disappointing.

 

Overall, it's certainly better than the original BMP-1 turret, but like my earlier remark, this whole thing seems like a "two steps forward, one step back" type of situation. Fundamentally the idea is sound, but the execution leaves very much to be desired.

 

 

I see. Thank you. Must have missed it a few pages back. But then the BTR-82 is also rather unimpressing to say it politely.

 

 

Then my next wondering would be why they even bother, shouldn't there be more than enough BMP-2 to fill the units?

[Interlinked]

https://youtu.be/ecwQ9rZrtWM

 

Short clip of modernized BMP-1 firing at the start of the video.

[Chris Werb]

https://youtu.be/ecwQ9rZrtWM

 

Short clip of modernized BMP-1 firing at the start of the video.

 

Wonderful video. I was particularly impressed by the 8x8 vehicle hitting with two consecutive ripple fired ATGW fired on the move. What was it?

[KV7]

 

https://youtu.be/ecwQ9rZrtWM

 

Short clip of modernized BMP-1 firing at the start of the video.

 

Wonderful video. I was particularly impressed by the 8x8 vehicle hitting with two consecutive ripple fired ATGW fired on the move. What was it?

 

Bumerang:

 

https://www.armyrecognition.com/army-2017_show_daily_news_coverage_report/bumerang_k-17_new_russian_8x8_ifv_live_firing_demonstration_12308171.html

Edited August 26, 2018 by KV7

[Murph]

I find that 57mm armed vehicle interesting. The Russian Army has always had somewhat of a love affair, or so it seems, with the 57mm. And they seem to get the most out of that caliber. Perhaps if the US armed some Bradley's with a 57mm as a support vehicle....?

[KV7]

I find that 57mm armed vehicle interesting. The Russian Army has always had somewhat of a love affair, or so it seems, with the 57mm. And they seem to get the most out of that caliber. Perhaps if the US armed some Bradley's with a 57mm as a support vehicle....?

Bring back the ARES turret !

[Simon Tan]

Bumerang with Berezhok turret equipped with 2x2 Kornet launchers. Typical Russian solution to APS, fire 2 missiles.

 

BMP-1 upgrade is directed at the many BMP-1 users still out there with the Grom. Really should just bin the turret and slap on simple RWS with HMG and AGL and be done with it.

[Interlinked]

 

BMP-1 upgrade is directed at the many BMP-1 users still out there with the Grom. Really should just bin the turret and slap on simple RWS with HMG and AGL and be done with it.

Heck, just stick a remotely operated AGS-17 at the back of the old "Grom" turret and you'd be set. The arcing trajectory of 30mm grenades make them much more effective than 30mm HE from a cannon. You lose out on 30mm AP, but that may not necessarily be a deal breaker, and you still retain the 73mm which is enough for the old T-54s that are still rolling around all over the world.

[Mr King]

Seen this on Reddit, it was listed as the Object 490

 

[Gavin-Phillips]

Seen this on Reddit, it was listed as the Object 490

 

Looks like T-64-type road wheels again. Would like to know more about this vehicle.

[Jim Warford]

Seen this on Reddit, it was listed as the Object 490

 

This photo is interesting...according to one source, "Object 490 never got past "paper and wood", so we are speaking about paper project from early 1980s. Tank was designed with 2 man crew in mind and with hydro-pneumatic suspension. It allows to control ground clearance of the tank, which increases its survivability in combat (it can "duck" into cover). In addition, controlled hydro-pneumatic suspension allows to increase effective gun elevation and depression.

 

The crew consisted of two people, located in the turret. Stereoscopic television system installed in the frontal plate of the hull, it was to be used to navigate/drive this thing."

 

Photo of Object 490 model...

 

[wendist]

A Soviet MBT-70?

[Chris Werb]

 

 

https://youtu.be/ecwQ9rZrtWM

 

Short clip of modernized BMP-1 firing at the start of the video.

 

Wonderful video. I was particularly impressed by the 8x8 vehicle hitting with two consecutive ripple fired ATGW fired on the move. What was it?

 

Bumerang:

 

https://www.armyrecognition.com/army-2017_show_daily_news_coverage_report/bumerang_k-17_new_russian_8x8_ifv_live_firing_demonstration_12308171.html

 

 

Cheers, KV

[geronimo]

 

1) The total number of T-80U/T-80UDs is way down since the majority (if not all) of the Ukrainian-produced T-80UDs have been withdrawn from Russian service.

I don't know how many UD's are left in Russian service but I can tell you for sure that the type is still in service nowadays.

 

 

Still an unsolved mystery: how many T-80s were produced and especially T-80U? Recently I read on the site of the producer of the gas turbines, ODK Klimov, that "more than 10,000 turbine-powered tanks were built". According to a list of Soviet-produced tanks (don't recall the source), 7,006 T-80s were built until 1991. If Klimov is correct that would mean that between 1991 and 1998 (end of T-80 production) 3,000 T-80(U) were built, by Omsk alone. That is almost impossible. So either Klimov is wrong, or the number 7,006 is too low. Anyone knows more?

[alejandro_]

Still an unsolved mystery: how many T-80s were produced and especially T-80U?

 

A while ago I found this graph of production per year, but only goes to 1990. In any case production after 1991 will be minimal compared to 1980s. When USSR collapsed there were ~400 T-80UDs in Russia and ~150 in Ukraine. Most of the latter were sent to Pakistan, as nowadays there are not many left in Ukraine (Most of the vehicles were in factories not Army units).

 

[geronimo]

Thanks Alejandro and indeed until 1990 not 1991. Interesting: it's exactly the same list as mine but the totals per type are different. It's indeed 7,066 T-80s not 7,006.

 

Yes the total number of T-80U must be quite low since they were (apart from a small number from Leningrad and Kharkov) only produced in Omsk at a realy slow rate. According to Steve Zaloga in 1992 for example only 160 were built whereas in the past the yearly output of the factories was 800-1,000. And of that low number of produced T-80s, almost 170 were exported.

 

But there's still that gap of 3,000 vehicles (differences between this list and Klimov's claim).

 

About the T-80UD: as far as I know Ukraine only had 12-16 when they became independent.

Edited September 1, 2018 by geronimo

[methos]

Zaloga wrote that in November of 1990 only 410 T-80U tanks were west of the Urals. About 500 T-80UD tanks were made according to him, about 350 of them were located at the Kharkov tank plant in 1991.

[geronimo]

Have we ever seen a South-Korean T-80UK?

 

The south korea operates 33 T-80U and 2 T-80UK

[geronimo]

Zaloga wrote that in November of 1990 only 410 T-80U tanks were west of the Urals. About 500 T-80UD tanks were made according to him, about 350 of them were located at the Kharkov tank plant in 1991.

 

Those 410 T-80U include the T-80UD unfortunately.

[Dreilide]

Does anyone know about the relative flammability of gas turbine fuel used in T-80 compared to the diesel fuels used in other soviet tanks?

[DKTanker]

Does anyone know about the relative flammability of gas turbine fuel used in T-80 compared to the diesel fuels used in other soviet tanks?

Unless I miss my guess it burns the same diesel fuel as all other Russian AFVs.

[Loopycrank]

Yeah, diesel and jet fuel aren't that different.

 

And gas turbines are usually pretty well-suited to multi-fuel operation. The most sensible thing would be for T-80s to run on literally the same diesel fuel as everything else, same as an Abrams does.

 

The idea that gas turbine tanks are more flammable is a load of Pierre Sprey Military Reform nonsense. Hell, part of the reason for switching to gas turbine powered aircraft in the 1950s, when the technology was arguably not mature, was how much safer the fuel was!