Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Hi,

The first time I saw the T-62 was in October 1973 and it appeared bloody impressive. I was visiting friends at El Rom after the IDF had pushed the Syrians back from the Golan Heights. There was a cluster of three T-62s on road 91 which climbs the Heights. Apparently they had been taken out by Centurions. The guns on the T-62s looked enormous. To the best of my knowledge, talking to Israeli tankers who fought in the October war, they were treated with a great deal of respect.

Cheers

Marsh

  • Replies 271
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

It seems that S.Zaloga is going to publish a New Vanguard book on T-62:

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/T-62-Main-Battle-1...ref=pd_sim_b_18

 

Nice to see publications in English appearing, even if I think that Vanguard series are rather basic.

 

To the best of my knowledge, talking to Israeli tankers who fought in the October war, they were treated with a great deal of respect.

 

IIRC, apart from guns, Israeli crews were also impressed by IR sights, which were lacking in their own tanks.

Posted
The most common complaint I heard was with the gunnery system. From what I remember (and my memory is not perfect) when you lock it onto a target and fire the gun must depress to kick out the burning-hot empty shell out the ejector otherwise it bounces around and injures the crew. The problem is this eats time and slows the amount of rounds it can fire in a fast engagement as the gun must them track back to the coordinates it was locked onto after each firing.

 

Bulgaria was the only WarPac state that received some T-62's. Already after a short time they were withdrawn again although the T-55's were kept in service. Apparently the Bulgarians were not satisfied with the T-62's armament. As far as I know, most of the turrets were destroyed but the hulls were converted into recovery tanks.

Guest JamesG123
Posted

Probably didn't want to fool with the 115mm ammo.

Posted
It seems that S.Zaloga is going to publish a New Vanguard book on T-62:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/T-62-Main-Battle-1...ref=pd_sim_b_18

 

Excellent! I've been hoping for a book based solely on the T-62 for quite a while. I wonder if the pictures published in the title will cover the variants used in Afghanistan/Chechnya/Georgia? Slat armour, BDD applique and all that?

 

Should be interesting, I'll certainly be looking out for and/or ordering this one very soon. :) Cheers for the heads up.

Posted

Is there any 115mm ammo in existence which could on paper penetrate a M1A1 frontally? I´m reading "Armored Corps" at the moment and was curious if the T-62 could have any effect on an Abrams from the front.

Guest JamesG123
Posted

Its an LRF if I recall correctly.

 

Is there any 115mm ammo in existence which could on paper penetrate a M1A1 frontally? I´m reading "Armored Corps" at the moment and was curious if the T-62 could have any effect on an Abrams from the front.

 

Excepting the cravat that no tank is invulnerable, no. :)

Posted

I would suggest that if the improvement in tank-killing capability came at a cost in everything else, then the tank has become a tank destroyer. Probably the most egregious example of this would be the M1A1, a tank designed with the primary function of blowing up armoured vehicles, with a reduction compared to its predecessor in its ability to support infantry in a role other than blowing up armour which threatens them, which was the historical purpose of the tank.

 

NTM

Posted
Is there any 115mm ammo in existence which could on paper penetrate a M1A1 frontally?

 

Non-heavy-armor M1A1? Oh yes. The tungsten monoblock round that the Egyptians are currently getting from Britain shouldn't have much of a problem with even the most protected areas. Same thing goes, I suspect, for the late-80s Soviet monoblock DU round but info is sketchy about that one.

Posted
Non-heavy-armor M1A1? Oh yes. The tungsten monoblock round that the Egyptians are currently getting from Britain shouldn't have much of a problem with even the most protected areas. Same thing goes, I suspect, for the late-80s Soviet monoblock DU round but info is sketchy about that one.

 

What, is Britain developing and producing 115 mm tankrounds?? :blink: How come? The market is kind of limited... (since for all I know T-62 is the only tank on Planet Earth that uses 115mm ammo). I would understand if the Israelis did since they most likely have more than a coupple of T-62s in stock. But the Brittons??

Posted
I would understand if the Israelis did since they most likely have more than a coupple of T-62s in stock. But the Brittons??

 

As I remember the round was offered to Egypt, which operated a large number of T-62. The round offered was designed based on 105mm ammo, no big spending in research. Israel never seemed to have used T-62 operationally.

Posted (edited)
If Janes is to be believed not only the rounds but the replacement cannons were also produced by Royal Ordnance.

 

Errr... now your pulling my leg, right Vas? :blink: (Or perhaps I misunderstood you since English isnt my first language). Are you saying RO even manufactures 115 mm mainguns? (Right, i havent googled it yet). If one would want to try and add some extra firepower to an old '62, why the h-ll just not design an up to date 105 mm round (like the ones the US M60s used during the 1990s. Cant remember the friggin name, but you know what I mean) and scale the sabot up a bit so it fits a 115mm barrel? I dont misstrust you anything, Vas. If you say so, it is so. But it just seem so ...outlandish?

Edited by LeoTanker
Posted
Errr... now your pulling my leg, right Vas? :blink:

 

If anyone is pulling legs it's Janes, not me :)

 

Are you saying RO even manufactures 115 mm mainguns?
Jane's, not me :)

 

why the h-ll just not design an up to date 105 mm round

 

You'll need to *completely* replace your 115mm ammo stockpile, entire nomenclature.

 

I dont misstrust you anything, Vas. If you say so, it is so. But it just seem so ...outlandish?

 

I've seen stranger things :)

Posted
Errr... now your pulling my leg, right Vas? :blink: (Or perhaps I misunderstood you since English isnt my first language). Are you saying RO even manufactures 115 mm mainguns? (Right, i havent googled it yet). If one would want to try and add some extra firepower to an old '62, why the h-ll just not design an up to date 105 mm round (like the ones the US M60s used during the 1990s. Cant remember the friggin name, but you know what I mean) and scale the sabot up a bit so it fits a 115mm barrel? I dont misstrust you anything, Vas. If you say so, it is so. But it just seem so ...outlandish?

 

According to Jane's, Royal Ordnance manufactured replacement barrels for the Egyptian T-62s, but not complete guns. They also developed a modern tungsten projectile, the 115mm BD/36-2 APFSDS-T, which is based on the 105mm H6/62 APFSDS-T.

 

http://www.janes.com/articles/Janes-Ammuni...ound-Egypt.html

 

Apparently GIAT also offered an upgrade of the T-62 in the 1980s. This would have included fitting one of GIAT's 120mm L52 smoothbore guns, probably the G1 with its lower recoil forces.

Posted (edited)
Apparently GIAT also offered an upgrade of the T-62 in the 1980s. This would have included fitting one of GIAT's 120mm L52 smoothbore guns, probably the G1 with its lower recoil forces.

 

KMTB still offers a T-62 upgrade:

 

http://www.morozov.com.ua/eng/body/t62.php

 

Interestingly, gun chosen for upgrade is 120mm caliber, not 125. 120mm with one-unit round is probably easier to load in a confined space as in T-62 turret.

Edited by alejandro_

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...