Chieftain's Hatch: T-55 Pt 1

[bojan]

I don't know how accurate the assumption actually was, but I had the impression that the E.European armies were essentially AT fodder for the Sov formations coming after...If that were the case, they really didn't need all the Latest and Greatest.

 

Don't forget that at time a lot of lesser NATO allies used Leo 1/Cents/M48s vs which upgraded T-55 would be more than a match.

[Panzermann]

 

 

I don't know how accurate the assumption actually was, but I had the impression that the E.European armies were essentially AT fodder for the Sov formations coming after...If that were the case, they really didn't need all the Latest and Greatest.

 

Don't forget that at time a lot of lesser NATO allies used Leo 1/Cents/M48s vs which upgraded T-55 would be more than a match.

And all had passed up on the T-62, because even the soviets did not see it as that much of an improvement and were unwilling to export T-64. Which resulted in the warsaw treaty states being aremd with T-55.

 

edited to.add: you forgot the M47 that did not go to the ARVN were still in use across NATO as well. Spain, Italy, Belgium...

Edited February 20, 2016 by Panzermann

[L.V.]

 

 

 

Thanks, Stephan! Keep up the commentary--and don't be shy about relevant stories!

I almost didn't ask about T-55s, because I thought they may have been before your time...

The DDR never had the budget to fully transition to T-72.

Do you happen to know what was the price tag back then?

No. Sorry.

 

The tanks were paid for with the transferable ruble (XTR) of the comecon afaik. That makes a conversion difficult.

 

 

OK. In case someone is interested, Finland paid 371 200 Rubles (which was about $ 92 800 at the time) per piece for overhauled T-54s in 1960.

[Panzermann]

OK. In case someone is interested, Finland paid 371 200 Rubles (which was about $ 92 800 at the time) per piece for overhauled T-54s in 1960.

$266,818.02 in 2016 U$D.

 

http://data.bls.gov/cgi-bin/cpicalc.pl?cost1=92800&year1=1980&year2=2016

[urbanoid]

 

 

I don't know how accurate the assumption actually was, but I had the impression that the E.European armies were essentially AT fodder for the Sov formations coming after...If that were the case, they really didn't need all the Latest and Greatest.

 

Don't forget that at time a lot of lesser NATO allies used Leo 1/Cents/M48s vs which upgraded T-55 would be more than a match.

And all had passed up on the T-62, because even the soviets did not see it as that much of an improvement and were unwilling to export T-64. Which resulted in the warsaw treaty states being aremd with T-55.

 

edited to.add: you forgot the M47 that did not go to the ARVN were still in use across NATO as well. Spain, Italy, Belgium...

 

 

All except Bulgaria.

 

Weren't there M47s in German territorial units until 1980s?

[Panzermann]

All except Bulgaria.

Did not know that. Bulgaria the special snow flake.

 

Weren't there M47s in German territorial units until 1980s?

No. When the M48 and later the Leopard 1 were phased in the M47 were quickly given away to other NATO members. Though Iirc a prototype M47 with a Mercedes Diesel was tested, but as the M48 was going to replace it anyway, this was dropped.

 

The m48 soldiered into the early nineties with improvements. (Rh105, Diesel etc.) in the territorial army.

 

 

forgot to add: those M47 not given away have been scrapped and donated their cannons for the Kanonenjagdpanzer 4-5.

Edited February 20, 2016 by Panzermann

[DKTanker]

forgot to add: those M47 not given away have been scrapped and donated their cannons for the Kanonenjagdpanzer 4-5.

And also found themselves as hard targets at Graf, Hohenfels, Bergen-Hohne, Wildflecken.... Oh, and their turret bins found themselves on numerous USAREUR M60A1s and M60A3s.

Edited February 20, 2016 by DKTanker

[Nikolas93TS]

 

All except Bulgaria.

Did not know that. Bulgaria the special snow flake.

 

Weren't there M47s in German territorial units until 1980s?

forgot to add: those M47 not given away have been scrapped and donated their cannons for the Kanonenjagdpanzer 4-5.

 

 

Are were really sure M-47 guns were reused? They were designated Rheinmetall BK 90/L40, and requirement was not to reuse the guns, but to have a gun with identical ballistic properties as M-47 and M-48 guns so same ammo could be used.

 

Possibly rebuilt? Muzzle break was different, and maybe recoil system was changed so new designation was applied?

[TOW-2]

You know it's funny seeing all these responses about "This Warsaw Pact country couldn't afford the T62..." and so on. When I was younger I tended to think in terms of the USSR basically producing whatever it needed whenever it needed it, to-wit "You will go to the tank factory today, Comrade. For the Party and the State." but no, matters of capitalism were just as real on the far side of the Iron Curtain as here. They could no more have a hundred thousand T62s than we could have a hundred thousand M60A3's...

 

Sorry for the derail.

[Adam Peter]

but no, matters of capitalism were just as real on the far side of the Iron Curtain as here

 

 

Marx was an economist, Engels a businessman, after all

[alejandro_]

"This Warsaw Pact country couldn't afford the T62..." and so on. When I was younger I tended to think in terms of the USSR basically producing whatever it needed whenever it needed it, to-wit "You will go to the tank factory today, Comrade.

 

It was not the case during many years. Khruschev actually tried to control military spending as he thought that nuclear weapons had made conventional weapons obsolete. He even thought that in the future, armed forces could consist of a communist militia and ICBMs. His relations with the military were complicated, especially as he reduced army size and conscription period.

 

In Brezhnev's era this changed, and the slogan was "there are no savings when it comes to defence". Gorbachev tried to reduce military spending via CFE treaties.

[shep854]

Thanks all, for the comments and corrections.

[Stefan Kotsch]

does anyone know whether late T-55A in the 70s and 80s had 50 or 60 round ammunition cans for the 12.7mm gun?

afaik T-55AM could mount both DShK-M and NSV.

50 round cans

[Panzermann]

 

 

but no, matters of capitalism were just as real on the far side of the Iron Curtain as here

 

Marx was an economist, Engels a businessman, after all

Marx coined the term "capitalism" after all.

 

Engels was quite educated in the field of firearms history and even has had articles published about the subject.

[dejawolf]

 

does anyone know whether late T-55A in the 70s and 80s had 50 or 60 round ammunition cans for the 12.7mm gun?

afaik T-55AM could mount both DShK-M and NSV.

50 round cans

 

 

any source on that?

[L.V.]

 

 

but no, matters of capitalism were just as real on the far side of the Iron Curtain as here

 

Marx was an economist, Engels a businessman, after all

Marx coined the term "capitalism" after all.

Engels was quite educated in the field of firearms history and even has had articles published about the subject.

Engels was also a Prussian artillery NCO who fought on the rebels' side during the uprisings of 1848-49.

[Stefan Kotsch]

 

 

does anyone know whether late T-55A in the 70s and 80s had 50 or 60 round ammunition cans for the 12.7mm gun?

afaik T-55AM could mount both DShK-M and NSV.

50 round cans

 

 

any source on that?

 

I know only one kind of cans. It fit into 60 cartridges. But we have packed only 50 cartridges.

[L.V.]

A Soviet T-54 manual from 1969: "Number of cartridges in belt: 50" (Число патронов в ленте: 50). Are there other than 50 rd belts for the DShKM?