The T-62

[johnr]

Because there ain't such line? T-34 "evolutionary" development ended with T-34/85.

New "revolutionary" line was started with T-44 and had T-44/54/55/62 as prominent members.

 

So how come has the T44 have the gun and turret of the T34.

[alejandro_]

So how come has the T44 have the gun and turret of the T34.

 

Turret originally came from T-43, and its possible to say T-34-85 was an improvisation. It was expected to be replaced by T-43, no to mount a turret with the 85mm gun.

[bojan]

So how come has the T44 have the gun and turret of the T34.

 

Turret was not even remotely same except in general appearance - dimensions (including turret ring) were different, front turret thickness was 115mm (later 120mm) compared to 90mm at T-34/85, side turret armor was 80mm vs 75mm at T-34/85, rear turret armor was 65mm vs 60mm at T-34/85, crew positions inside were different, gun mounting was different, ready ammo storage was different, electric traverse and elevation engines were different etc.

Gun was same, but by same token Valentine and Crusader are same tanks as they use same gun?

[Richard Young]

Please, tell us more...

Preferably with some sources.

 

Nope. With decent ammo it had better penetration and was more accurate ironically.

 

So this info is wrong?

 

"The following data pertains to WW II Russian 85mm and American 76mm HVAP rounds:

 

Russian 85mm HVAP

=================

Fired at 1040 m/s

0.65 kg tungsten core

27.94mm core diameter in American analysis, 27.77mm from Russian data.

 

100m, 1009 m/s, 165mm vertical target penetration

300m, 947 m/s, 150mm

500m, 887 m/s, 137mm

1000m, 744 m/s, 107mm

1500m, 614 m/s, 81mm

 

American 76mm HVAP

==================

Fired at 1037 m/s

1.765 kg tungsten core

38.1mm core diameter

 

100m, 1018 m/s, 240mm vertical target penetration

300m, 981 m/s, 226mm

500m, 939 m/s, 211mm

1000m, 848 m/s, 179mm

1500m, 756 m/s 149mm

 

Comparing the two HVAP rounds the American 76mm ammunition holds a greater percentage of its muzzle velocity at range and also outpenetrates 85mm HVAP by a significant amount. The American HVAP tungsten core is larger and heavier than the Russian core."

 

 

 

Which US 90mm? M3? M36? M41? Using which ammo? KE? HEAT?

 

Again nope. It had better potential then early 105mm in both HEAT and KE ammo performances. Note that later 105mm is quite different animal then original British L7.

 

Is this info wrong?

 

"US 90mm T119 (T41) APDS 236mm at 914m at 30 degrees from vertical

Soviet 100mm HVAPDS 200mm at 1km (HEAT 300mm)

US M-392A2 105mm APDS 260mm at 1km, 250mm at 1.5km, 225mm at 2km (early 1970s) (Rushed into service after M392 problems in 1973 Arab-Israeli war)"

 

Seems to me the 100mm is sucking hind tit.....

 

Which 125mm? 2A26? 2A46? 2A46M? 2A46M4?

 

 

 

This info wrong?

 

"US M829A3 120mm DU 765mm at 2km (2003) (Russian estimate 795mm)

 

Ukraine 125mm Vitiaz round 760mm at 2km (2002)

 

Russian 125mm BM-42M "Lekalo"? tungsten 600-650mm at 2km (200?)

 

Russian 125mm BM-46 "Svinets" DU 650mm at 2km (1991) (22:1 L/D)"

 

120 and 125 look to be in a dead heat (no pun intended) with latest rounds.

 

I am always happy to learn better info....

[bojan]

Is this info wrong?

 

Vs real world target (T-34/85):

 

76mm M1:

 

76mm M1 (from M4A3E4 tank) firing AP and HVAP

 

M79 AP penetrates glacis @ 1100m

M53 subcaliber penetrates glacis @ 1200m

 

M79 AP penetrates upper side hull @ 1500m

M53 subcaliber penetrates upper side hull at any practical range.

 

Both rounds penetrate lower side hull at any practical range

 

M79 AP penetrates front turret @ 900m

M53 subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 1500m

 

M79 AP penetrates side turret @ 1500m

M53 subcaliber penetrates side turret at any efective range.

 

85mm ZiS-S-53:

85mm ZiS-S-53 (from T-34/85) firing AP, HVAP and HEAT

 

BR-365 AP penetrates glacis @ 1200m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates glacis @ 1300m

 

BR-365 AP penetrates upper side hull @ 1750m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates upper side hull at any practical range.

 

Both rounds penetrate lower side hull at any practical range.

 

BR-365 AP penetrates front turret @ 1000m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 1500m

 

BR-365 AP penetrates side turret @ 1500m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates side turret at any practical range.

 

 

"US 90mm T119 (T41) APDS 236mm at 914m at 30 degrees from vertical

US 90mm APDS newer saw a daylight. HVAP failed vs T-54 glacis @100m and penetrated turret @ 750m only. HEAT failed to fuse if angle was more then 60deg.

 

90mm M36 gun from M-47 tank firing AP, HVAP and HEAT

T-33 AP fails to penetrate glacis even @ 100m

M304 subcaliber fails to penetrate glacis even @ 100m

M431 HEAT penetrates glacis, but fails to fuse if side angle is more then 20deg.

 

T33AP penetrates front turret @ 350m

M304 subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 750m

M431 HEAT penetrates front turret

 

T33AP penetrates frontal part of the side of the turret @ 850m

M304 subcaliber penetrates frontal part of the side turret at any practical range

M431 HEAT penetrates frontal part of the side turret

 

All round penetrate rear part of the side turret at any practical range.

 

Soviet 100mm HVAPDS 200mm at 1km (HEAT 300mm)

 

BK-5M HEAT from 1958. did 380mm (Soviet data) or 375mm (local data) penetration. And actually managed to fuse at angles grater then 60deg. US M431 did 300mm if it managed to fuse at all. Earlier 90mm HEAT did 180mm.

 

US M-392A2 105mm APDS 260mm at 1km, 250mm at 1.5km, 225mm at 2km (early 1970s) (Rushed into service after M392 problems in 1973 Arab-Israeli war)" Seems to me the 100mm is sucking hind tit.....

 

That 100mm was behind 105mm was hardly new. Soviet equivalent was 100mm D-54TS gun. It had almost same performances as 105mm L7.

 

This info wrong?

Parts are. And problematic parts were not quoted.

 

"US M829A3 120mm DU 765mm at 2km (2003) (Russian estimate 795mm)

 

Ukraine 125mm Vitiaz round 760mm at 2km (2002)

 

Russian 125mm BM-42M "Lekalo"? tungsten 600-650mm at 2km (200?)

 

Russian 125mm BM-46 "Svinets" DU 650mm at 2km (1991) (22:1 L/D)"

 

120 and 125 look to be in a dead heat (no pun intended) with latest rounds.

 

I am always happy to learn better info....

 

You are comparing 1991 round (BM-46) with 1998 round (M829A3).

 

Operating preasure for 125mm 2A46M gun is actually somewhat higher then one of 120mm M256 gun. There is no reason that 125mm with same ammo would not have same or marginally better performances as 120mm. Note also that 125mm was introduced in 1968. while 120mm was introduced in 1979 (with Leo 2).

[Richard Young]

Vs real world target (T-34/85):

 

76mm M1:

 

76mm M1 (from M4A3E4 tank) firing AP and HVAP

 

M79 AP penetrates glacis @ 1100m

M53 subcaliber penetrates glacis @ 1200m

 

M79 AP penetrates upper side hull @ 1500m

M53 subcaliber penetrates upper side hull at any practical range.

 

Both rounds penetrate lower side hull at any practical range

 

M79 AP penetrates front turret @ 900m

M53 subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 1500m

 

M79 AP penetrates side turret @ 1500m

M53 subcaliber penetrates side turret at any efective range.

 

85mm ZiS-S-53:

85mm ZiS-S-53 (from T-34/85) firing AP, HVAP and HEAT

 

BR-365 AP penetrates glacis @ 1200m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates glacis @ 1300m

 

BR-365 AP penetrates upper side hull @ 1750m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates upper side hull at any practical range.

 

Both rounds penetrate lower side hull at any practical range.

 

BR-365 AP penetrates front turret @ 1000m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 1500m

 

BR-365 AP penetrates side turret @ 1500m

BR-365P subcaliber penetrates side turret at any practical range.

 

 

 

US 90mm APDS newer saw a daylight. HVAP failed vs T-54 glacis @100m and penetrated turret @ 750m only. HEAT failed to fuse if angle was more then 60deg.

 

90mm M36 gun from M-47 tank firing AP, HVAP and HEAT

T-33 AP fails to penetrate glacis even @ 100m

M304 subcaliber fails to penetrate glacis even @ 100m

M431 HEAT penetrates glacis, but fails to fuse if side angle is more then 20deg.

 

T33AP penetrates front turret @ 350m

M304 subcaliber penetrates front turret @ 750m

M431 HEAT penetrates front turret

 

T33AP penetrates frontal part of the side of the turret @ 850m

M304 subcaliber penetrates frontal part of the side turret at any practical range

M431 HEAT penetrates frontal part of the side turret

 

All round penetrate rear part of the side turret at any practical range.

 

 

 

BK-5M HEAT from 1958. did 380mm (Soviet data) or 375mm (local data) penetration. And actually managed to fuse at angles grater then 60deg. US M431 did 300mm if it managed to fuse at all. Earlier 90mm HEAT did 180mm.

 

 

That 100mm was behind 105mm was hardly new. Soviet equivalent was 100mm D-54TS gun. It had almost same performances as 105mm L7.

 

 

Parts are. And problematic parts were not quoted.

 

 

 

You are comparing 1991 round (BM-46) with 1998 round (M829A3).

 

Operating preasure for 125mm 2A46M gun is actually somewhat higher then one of 120mm M256 gun. There is no reason that 125mm with same ammo would not have same or marginally better performances as 120mm. Note also that 125mm was introduced in 1968. while 120mm was introduced in 1979 (with Leo 2).

 

 

I didn't make any claim about year of introduction - just relative performance.

 

 

 

The 125mm Vitiaz came out around 2000 - 2002, right? Still not much better, if any, than the M829A3 from a 5mm smaller bore.

[bojan]

...The 125mm Vitiaz came out around 2000 - 2002, right?

But was developed much earlier (early '90s) and still does not use full power of gun.

 

Still not much better, if any, than the M829A3 from a 5mm smaller bore.

 

You are still ignoring my point that it was ammo that made those performances, not any inherent defect in guns, fact that those worked on lower pressure or were simply inferior as you have claimed ...

 

Same APFSDS with same sabot configuration, fired from 120mm and 125mm guns will have marginally better performances from 125mm - higher chamber pressure, more sabot area, longer gun barrel. Simple law of physics.

When ammo was good both guns performed about the same. Compare BM-32 (1985) and M829 (1985) and you might notice that they have practically similar performances as do BM-46 (1991) and M829A1 (1990).

 

Anyway back to T-62 and 115mm - 115mm was chosen over 100mm due the HEAT performances, HEAT round for D-54TS did same as one for D-10 - 380mm while 115mm BK-4 did 450mm.

[alejandro_]

End of the journey for T-62 in Russia. There are about 900 left in reserves and they will be scrapped or sold:

 

http://shturmnovosti.com/view.php?id=50080&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

[Jim Warford]

Not really surprising news I guess, but still the end of an era. The T-62 was the first Soviet/Russian tank I got to get inside of...in the summer of 1978 at Fort Hood, Texas. It was a great day...

[alejandro_]

A graphic with all the T-62s I have identified in the 2008 conflict in Ossetia. I have tried to divied the vehicle numbers in groups to make more sense. A Russian tank company is made up of 10 vehicles.

 

1) 210, 212, 215, 218
2) 228, 229,
3) 231, 232-u, 233-u, 235, 236, 239-y
4) 410, 411, 412, 416
5) 431, 433

 

[Panzermann]

End of the journey for T-62 in Russia. There are about 900 left in reserves and they will be scrapped or sold:

 

http://shturmnovosti.com/view.php?id=50080&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I guess they are donated to Syria now.

[KV7]

 

End of the journey for T-62 in Russia. There are about 900 left in reserves and they will be scrapped or sold:

 

http://shturmnovosti.com/view.php?id=50080&utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I guess they are donated to Syria now.

 

 

I hope so.

[Mikel2]

Not really surprising news I guess, but still the end of an era. The T-62 was the first Soviet/Russian tank I got to get inside of...in the summer of 1978 at Fort Hood, Texas. It was a great day...

 

How was the T62 seen at the time?

[Tim Sielbeck]

It was seen as a formidable, but beatable, opponent.

 

This video, and others, gives an accurate impression of what the Army thought it at the time: https://youtu.be/cJfvIOAs-2o.

[alejandro_]

I guess they are donated to Syria now.

 

I was a bit surprised when I saw those T-62Ms in Syria. I thought they would all have been scrapped by now. Maybe the information was inaccurate and what it actually meant was that the vehicles would be sent to storage bases.

[Mikel2]

It was seen as a formidable, but beatable, opponent.

 

This video, and others, gives an accurate impression of what the Army thought it at the time: https://youtu.be/cJfvIOAs-2o.

 

Great video. Thanks!

[urbanoid]

 

I guess they are donated to Syria now.

 

I was a bit surprised when I saw those T-62Ms in Syria. I thought they would all have been scrapped by now. Maybe the information was inaccurate and what it actually meant was that the vehicles would be sent to storage bases.

 

Russians like to keep their shit, and that makes sense. I don't know why would you assume all have been scrapped by now, they saw action in Georgia less than a decade ago.

[Roman Alymov]

T-62 is relatively simple, reliable tank - ideal for de-facto direct fire SPG or mobile armored pillbox role in low-intensity conflicts like Syria.

[Panzermann]

T-62 is relatively simple, reliable tank - ideal for de-facto direct fire SPG or mobile armored pillbox role in low-intensity conflicts like Syria.

Didn't the ministry of the interiour troops use the T-62 until recently? Or still do?

[Roman Alymov]

 

Didn't the ministry of the interiour troops use the T-62 until recently? Or still do?

 

As far as I understand Ministry of interior troops were the only users of T-62 in post-Soviet period, and still in use by units stationed in Chechnya – because this tank is not subject to arms limitations, and this forces are not supposed to fight tank vs. tank battles.

[Roman Alymov]

[Roman Alymov]

[Roman Alymov]

Another photo of #210 tank from Georgia – note tank crew member wearing winter helmet in summer, plus dressed in fresh-captured Georgian uniform and boots

[Roman Alymov]

[Daan]

Is that really a captured uniform? Several of his colleagues (crewman with the baseball cap, soldier with rifle and helmet in the 1st pic) are wearing similar colours. Wouldn't it be a tad risky to dress up in enemy uniform and / or violate regulations?

Edited March 1, 2017 by Daan