The program of disposal of the decommissioned equipment: can not be used to cut

95
Despite the massive reductions in the army and the full-scale programs of the decommissioning of equipment, which were carried out in the past, significant stocks of materiel remain in storage in the Russian armed forces. Unnecessary samples are constantly sent for recycling, freeing up space and reducing the cost of maintaining such stocks. As it became known a few days ago, the Ministry of Defense now intends to reduce the rate of disassembly of equipment, as well as use outdated machines for various purposes.

Currently, the military and defense industries are implementing the federal target program “Industrial utilization of weapons and military equipment on the 2011-2015 of the year and for the period up to the 2020 of the year”. As the name implies, the goal of the program is the disposal of unnecessary samples of the material part throughout the current decade. For the previous years of the program, a part of the assigned tasks was solved. The remaining plans, which will be implemented in the near future, have recently been revised.



Cut plans

On September 7, the Chief of the Main Armored Directorate of the Ministry of Defense, Lieutenant General Alexander Shevchenko, spoke about new plans for obsolete army vehicles. He recalled that in accordance with the current federal target program, by the end of the decade, it was originally planned to dispose of the order of 10 thousand units of armored vehicles accumulated on storage bases. These were still Soviet-made machines that were decommissioned due to the reduction of the armed forces of the last decades.

The program of disposal of the decommissioned equipment: can not be used to cut
Decommissioned machinery at the 2544th Central Reserve Base tanks. Photo by Wikimapia.org


Now recycling plans have been revised downward. Before 2020, only 4, thousands of armored combat vehicles, will go under the knife. The reasons for such a change in plans, General Shevchenko, called a change in the international situation, an increase in the combat training of the armed forces and an increased degree of patriotism among the citizens of the country. In addition, there were new technical solutions that allow for a deep modernization of technology and then return it to the system.

It is easy to calculate that in accordance with the updated plans of the Ministry of Defense of the order of 6 thousand armored vehicles will not be sent to the plants for disassembly and will not cease to exist. Now they are tipped a different fate. As the head of the GABTU explained, part of the unnecessary armored vehicles will be modernized and supplied to friendly states as part of military-technical cooperation. Some of the cars written off will go to landfills, while others will become monuments.

It should be noted that the question of getting rid of the military equipment no longer needed is very serious and relevant for the Russian Ministry of Defense. According to various estimates, at least 15-17 of thousands of tanks of several models alone remain at the storage bases. Most of this technology has no chance of returning to parts of the Russian ground forces, while its further storage simply does not make sense. From it should get rid of, and - if such opportunities - with a certain financial or other benefits.

Rebuild and sell

The traditional and familiar way to get rid of unnecessary equipment - simple disposal. A tank or other armored vehicle is sent to the factory, where it removes all the onboard equipment, and the empty body is cut into metal. Implementation of the resulting scrap allows you to partially offset the cost of cutting. Until now, industrial disposal was the main way to get rid of the decommissioned equipment. However, now the volume of such work will have to be seriously reduced.


T-62 Syrian Army. Photo Defence.ru


Due to well-known circumstances, not all tanks or other vehicles sent to storage, during service, managed to work out their resources. Such equipment may be suitable for further operation. It can be removed from storage, repaired and restored. If necessary, it is possible to upgrade the combat vehicle. Upon completion of the repair and upgrade equipment can be transferred to the troops.

It should be recalled that a large number of obsolete types of armored vehicles still in service remain in storage. In this case, the upgraded armored vehicles can be sold to third countries. For example, over the past couple of years, Russia has transferred to Syria a number of T-62 tanks that have been removed from storage and have undergone restoration. Such a technique has long been hopelessly outdated in terms of developed armies, but is still of interest in the context of local conflicts.

According to various sources, there are at least 2500-2700 medium tanks T-54 / 55 and more than 2 thousand vehicles of T-62 on Russian storage bases. A few years ago, the main T-64 tanks were removed from service, and about 2 units of thousands of such vehicles went into storage. Armored vehicles of these types may well be of interest to the Syrian army or the armed forces of other developing countries in need of military equipment, but with limited financial capabilities.


The T-62 has long been decommissioned by the Russian army. but are of interest to third countries. Photo Defence.ru


It is impossible to exclude such a scenario, in which a certain number of old tanks will be repaired and modernized for the Russian army. One of the modernization projects with the use of modern components is already being implemented by the industry, and not so long ago new versions of upgrading tanks were presented. The reduction in the rate of utilization may be associated with plans to upgrade the fleet of equipment of the armed forces.

"On the citizen"

Some samples with large resource residues may be of interest in the context of conversion. Light armored vehicles, such as MT-LB tractors or similar vehicles, may be deprived of special military equipment and offered to commercial buyers. Some samples of military equipment in the past became the basis for mass-produced civilian vehicles. The restructuring of commercial vehicles from military vehicles may be of some interest to both industry and potential customers.

It should be noted that the sale of decommissioned military equipment, which has undergone certain improvements, to civilian structures and even to private individuals is not a novelty. However, for objective reasons, this practice has not yet become widespread. To make it massive, certain efforts are needed from the military and industry. However, even with the proper organization of the process, commercial deliveries to civil structures are unlikely to be frequent and large.

Realistic targets

A certain part of armored vehicles remaining in storage was written off in connection with the development of a resource or any damage. Recovery of such machines simply does not make sense, however, cutting into metal may also not be expedient. In this case, tanks and other combat vehicles can be used in the process of training personnel.


The HTZ-3H tracked carrier is one of the options for reworking MT-LB for civilian operators. Photo of Wikimedia Commons


Retired, unserviceable, and disassembled samples have been used as targets at landfills for decades. In this case, the infantry, the crews of the front-line combat vehicles or the pilots can train not on wooden boards of established shapes and sizes, but on real armored objects. Among other things, this makes it possible to determine the effectiveness of a fire in terms of various aspects of hitting a target.

This approach has long been used in the training of personnel, and, apparently, no one is going to abandon it. Moreover, the new plans of the GABTU regarding the reduction of the rate of industrial utilization will have to understand in a comprehensible manner the number of targets imitating the real military equipment as accurately as possible.

Patriotic education

According to the head of the Main Automobile and Armored Directorate, part of the equipment previously intended for cutting will be transferred to regional authorities for use in the construction of new memorials. Throughout the country and in the near abroad in the past, a large number of monuments and memorials of glory were established, which include real armaments and military equipment. The new plans of GABTU imply the direct participation of the army in the construction of new similar facilities.

Also, armored combat vehicles of different classes and types may be of interest to numerous museums. They can be used in the construction and the formation of thematic objects like the Patriot park near Moscow. In all such cases, it will be possible to use outdated samples of equipment that are unsuitable for use in the army, but correspond to a particular period. The equipment will have to be removed from storage, partially restored with an emphasis on the integrity of the structure and appearance, and then installed in a new place.

It must be admitted that such use of armored vehicles withdrawn from storage will not become widespread. Even with the active construction of military-patriotic parks, museums or monuments, the entire program in its volume is unlikely to be able to compete with contracts for the supply of equipment to third countries. However, in this context, it is not the volumes of the restoration of equipment that are important, but the very fact of creating new objects intended to perpetuate the memory and patriotic education of citizens.

***

In accordance with the updated plans of the Main Automobile and Armored Directorate, by the end of this decade only 4 thousands of armored vehicles will be sent for industrial recycling instead of the originally planned 10 thousands. There is reason to believe that the bulk of the “salvaged” combat machines will be sent for repairs and upgrades, after which they will be handed over to certain foreign customers. Targets, apparently, will become the second article of such "expenses". For the conversion and construction of monuments will be used a small number of machines.

The military department seriously revised its plans in the framework of the federal target program “Industrial disposal of weapons and military equipment for the 2011-2015 of the year and for the period up to the 2020 of the year”. The number of equipment sent for cutting was significantly reduced due to the appearance of new plans. Thus, by the end of the current decade, new results will be obtained as part of the disposal of stored equipment. And this time, the new joint work of the army and other structures will positively affect not only the volumes of scrap metal.


On the materials of the sites:
http://tass.ru/
http://ria.ru/
http://interfax.ru/
http://rg.ru/
http://fcp.economy.gov.ru/
The Military Balance 2017
95 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +14
    15 September 2017 06: 22
    Everything will go according to plan. Cut, cut, sold. Pockets full. And, under the guise, they will have time to upgrade. Our decommissioned tanks still have time to fly to Mars, and under their own power. Do not believe? But in vain.
    1. +22
      15 September 2017 09: 01
      The phrase "transmit" is incorrect. Do not pass anything to anyone. But to sell or exchange for the materials we need is yes. Enough - during the USSR they helped everyone and everything, often gave free of charge. There is a third country that has a similar technique with experience in its use and which wants to acquire it - the same T-54 or T-62. No problem. We offer several options for modernization, sign a mutually beneficial contract and voila, load our plants with work. As a result, get your product at an affordable price.
      It is clear to us that outdated weapons are already useful without help - especially various armored vehicles. There are too many of them and something needs to be solved with this. Resale is the best option. Leave the most recent samples.
      1. +7
        15 September 2017 12: 12
        The phrase "transmit" is incorrect. Do not pass anything to anyone.

        Several years ago, the main T-64 tanks were withdrawn from service, and about 2 thousand units of such equipment were sent for storage.

        You, as a person with the flag of New Russia, do not find any connection in these two quotations?
        1. +2
          15 September 2017 12: 18
          Quote: Berkut24
          You, as a person with the flag of New Russia, do not find any connection in these two quotations?

          Thick hint.
        2. +2
          15 September 2017 12: 40
          T-64, as you must also understand, is a rather specific product and is used exclusively on the territory of some former union republics and newly created state formations. DRC exception to the rule. Its production has long ended and will not resume ... So it is unlikely that there will be many buyers, even if they are offered on the arms market. Too many problems with the retraining of crews and difficulties in the repair base and operation in general. In addition, there is a high probability of these machines falling into the clutches of banderlogs. Therefore, I'm sure their resale will not affect. I wrote about T-54, T-55, T-62, possibly older versions of T-72 ... We have a lot of them and we are unlikely to use them for their intended purpose. Naturally I do not take the upgraded T-72B3.
          1. +9
            15 September 2017 20: 55
            Quote: seti
            I wrote about the T-54, T-55, T-62, possibly older versions of the T-72 ... We have a lot of them and we are unlikely to use them for their intended purpose. E

            But I remember that in a nightmare no one could imagine the collapse of the country, the occupation of Ukraine and the civil war among Russians, corrupt leaders and narcissistic idiots in power ... And now this is reality ...
    2. +16
      15 September 2017 09: 17
      If our bosses turn on their brains, they will guess that much more money can be earned by converting the same old tanks into Armored Combat Unmanned Fighting Vehicles. I think this will be a better option than the newfangled unmanned crafts based on the BMP (all kinds of Companions, freeloaders, etc. etc.)
      1. The comment was deleted.
      2. +3
        15 September 2017 12: 28
        Nenene ... The colleagues showed how in BM2 crowbar push the stuck shell into the cannon. How to make a drone like this ?!
        1. 0
          15 September 2017 12: 50
          Something like this.
          https://www.youtube.com/watch?x-yt-cl=84359240&am
          p; v = 3PXt9TiYwVE & feature = player_embedded & x
          -yt-ts = 1421782837
          1. 0
            15 September 2017 22: 07
            laughing That is, “Armata” is this crap from the video, only the men from the kung to the tank itself returned? laughing
            It just seems to me (if not a professional) to use the exact same "cheburashka" instead of a "joystick" or mouse, as wildness. Yes, "Cheburashka" makes it possible to vary the "gun speed" itself, but is it necessary in modern conditions? Isn't it more important to aim the gun at the target as quickly and accurately as possible?
            Well, a 4 km communication range is about nothing. For the former, it was necessary to drive the kung into the advanced trenches, so that the tank could be pulled out of its defense at least somehow. Secondly, with a high-tech enemy (or his “help”), the VRZ control station will be mined and covered even with simple mortars negative .
            If you take ergonomics seriously, you need to put a trained tanker behind the WOT and a little gamer to train such buttons and switches. After which, both one and the other should be well asked "what was inconvenient and how would you like to arrange it?"
            Moreover, removing the “driver” is more than an interesting idea - the Commander still decides where and how to move and with “game” control transfer control to the commander to reduce the time from making a decision to execution and eliminate misunderstandings. Well, that is, if the commander detects a flying ATGM, he no longer needs to scream "get out of here." He himself “presses the buttons” and how he leads the tank out of attack and, for example, turns the tower towards the rocket with the strongest part. feel
          2. +1
            16 September 2017 00: 45
            And how does an unmanned caterpillar tracker shod itself if the caterpillar slides?
            1. +3
              16 September 2017 09: 35
              Archon, unmanned vehicles, of course, do not shoe themselves. But you must admit that when you need to shove it on PetTeshki forehead, let most of it be unmanned.
        2. +2
          15 September 2017 19: 35
          Schwarzenegger put there. He loves to indulge with crowbars and fire extinguishers.
        3. 0
          17 September 2017 11: 23
          it's nonsense you even believe in it yourself
          1. +2
            17 September 2017 20: 01
            Excuse me, but a detailed diagnosis of delirium is possible? And without spelling and punctuation errors, pliiiz. bully
      3. +1
        15 September 2017 15: 44
        Quote: mac789
        If our bosses turn on their brains,

        While Shurik Zolotoy Pen is sitting in the GABTU, not a damn thing will turn on there. To do this, you need to have a state mind, and not resourcefulness, to sit in your chair with any bosses, fulfilling any whim.
        Like the Deputy for Armament of the North Caucasian Military District, Nedorezov said ... "but what to do with Shurik’s hereditary, this is a criminal case ...", and the result ... the result is sitting in an armchair ..
    3. +4
      15 September 2017 09: 27
      Have you smoked something inedible? Did your tanks fly to Mars? Then quickly get on the vacuum cleaner to catch up ...
      1. +3
        15 September 2017 11: 13
        You might think that you smoke something edible ... And in general, you launched tanks on Mars. Nothing so video footage ... Or again? Well, what about the moon? ... in the pavilion? ... wink
      2. 0
        17 September 2017 11: 26
        Well, whoever said our tanks were flying in parts to space already, and yours, apart from the cancerous diseases of the surviving tankers, have not yet qualified for it
    4. +12
      15 September 2017 10: 25
      And what, it is impossible to restore the chassis, mechanics and engage in organizations like the former DOSAAF ?! What schoolboy, kid would refuse to ride, steer in military equipment even without firing ?! And there would be an incentive to study!
    5. +6
      15 September 2017 13: 58
      Quote: bandabas
      Everything will go according to plan. Cut, cut, sold. Pockets full.

      And don’t say ... because the Herods have thought of it - to dispose of the equipment. It would not be as before - to drive in parts to the last. And then go into battle on the ancient bald T-62 against the modernized T-72SIM-1.

      Good luck at that time - the adversaries were Georgians. And if not?

      By the way, there was a period in our history when tanks were practically not decommissioned. As many as 10 years. And then came the new People’s Commissar of Defense - and was surprised to find that 683 tanks, 780 tankettes and 372 BA disappeared in the army.
      ... comparing the presence of military vehicles with the number of industrial plants produced by the industry, the following discrepancies were revealed:
      Missing:
      BT-7 96 cars
      BT-2 34 cars
      BT-5 46 cars
      T-26 103 cars
      T-38 193 cars
      T-37 211 cars
      T-27 780 cars
      BA-10 94 cars
      BA-6 54 cars
      FAI 234 cars…
      Raised archival material since 1929 for accounting, special. sending and writing off combat vehicles did not give a significant change in reducing shortages, because decommissioning of military vehicles until 1936 was not conducted.
      The number of decommissioned vehicles, for example T-27 - 26 units - is clearly not true, because the production of these machines began in 1931 and in 10 years this figure should undoubtedly be much larger
    6. 0
      15 September 2017 16: 30
      Quote: bandabas
      . Cut, cut, sold. Pockets full. And, under the guise, they will have time to upgrade

      =====
      Suggest ANOTHER option !!!! I’m only FOR !!!!!! Here are just WHO WILL OBSERVE ??? You?? I AM??? WHO???
  2. +18
    15 September 2017 06: 52
    T-55 tank in the exposition of Kazan Victory Park
    Sorry to upset, but this is the T-54 ...
    ... such a technique may be suitable for further use. It can be removed from storage, repaired and restored. If necessary, the modernization of the combat vehicle is possible.
    But who and where will do it? What capacities? Under the USSR, there was a harmonious system of manufacturers and repair and modernization plants, the so-called BTRZ, and they were available throughout the USSR and Russia. But now what do we have, what have we saved? Here is an example of the Ussuriysky BTRZ ... Consider no longer the factory, only a platform for cutting armored hulls of the T-80 set, even in the U modification, I don’t think that they would be superfluous now, the T-62M, which were modernized here, BMP and MTLB-U ...








    In the light of recent events in the world, it has become clear that there is a demand for old Soviet equipment, and there is still plenty of it in our warehouses. But each customer must be approached with various offers ... Including modernization. If you want, you don’t want, but it's time to "collect stones scattered earlier" ... Restore and load BTRZ
    1. +8
      15 September 2017 07: 20
      Quote: svp67
      In the light of recent events in the world, it became clear that there is a demand for old Soviet equipment

      and not only in the world, I remember when they just started talking about the Terminator BMPT, they just positioned it on the chassis of the T-54/55, of which there are many more at the storage bases. It seems that he is now introducing himself on a new "cart". But the idea was a good one, although unification is also needed.
    2. BAI
      +3
      15 September 2017 11: 59
      In my opinion, about 2 years ago there was a noise with a photo showing that somewhere in the Siberian taiga they found orphaned, unguarded tanks with an AMPLIFIER! Nothing was removed from them. Unloaded in the woods and forgotten.
      1. +2
        15 September 2017 22: 14
        In our Len region (and it’s sooo big), once in the fields we found transport-loading vehicles from the S-300 with missiles at one of the reduced facilities. belay That was joke.
        Russia is big, you can only “lose” it, but I won’t be surprised if somewhere and part of the Strategic Missile Forces managed to “forget”. laughing
  3. +15
    15 September 2017 08: 04
    Actually recycling - i.e. cut and re-melt is a very complex and costly operation. Cheaper stupidly put on the field, and forget. For proper storage also costs money.
    Firstly, the process of cutting armored vehicles is by no means a trivial operation.
    Secondly, metal. Now, the vast majority of consumers need steel with absolutely certain properties, and it’s very difficult to “attach” what will be obtained by remelting. Unless, of course, the goal is at least to recoup the disposal.

    After all, it was not for nothing that the Americans found the option of free transfer to Iraq of hundreds of armored troop-carrier МХNUMX economically viable. They can count.
    1. +4
      15 September 2017 09: 00
      Quote: Spade
      Firstly, the process of cutting armored vehicles is by no means a trivial operation.

      I agree, but the game is worth the candle. Even the commercial acceptance of scrap costs about 8tr. per ton, the tank, in fact, a single piece of metal is under 300t.r. There will be many willing to cut for that kind of money.
      Quote: Spade
      "attach" what will be obtained by remelting will be very difficult

      Come on, look what the Abinsky MK produces, can it really go to the valves? request
      Quote: Spade
      After all, it was not for nothing that the Americans found the option of free transfer to Iraq of hundreds of armored troop-carrier МХNUMX economically viable. They can count.

      Because, cutting armored personnel carriers in Iraq and sending them for re-melting is really not more profitable than just giving them.
      1. +3
        15 September 2017 09: 15
        Quote: Vladimirets
        a single piece of metal costs under 300t.r

        One-piece is not worth a dime. Because cutting it costs very, very big money.
        Quote: Vladimirets
        Come on, look what the Abinsky MK produces, can it really go to the valves?

        Not the fact that it will. The fittings should also be made from certain grades of steel.

        Quote: Vladimirets
        Because, cut armored personnel carriers in Iraq

        Shipments were from USA
        1. +5
          15 September 2017 09: 28
          Quote: Spade
          Because cutting it costs very, very big money.

          It’s worth, but clearly less than the scrap metal itself.
          Quote: Spade
          Not the fact that it will. The fittings should also be made from certain grades of steel.

          Everything that can be brought there.
          1. +2
            15 September 2017 15: 25
            Quote: Vladimirets
            Everything that can be brought there.

            And then it corrodes in concrete with all the consequences.

            Quote: Vladimirets
            It’s worth, but clearly less than the scrap metal itself.

            Not at all a fact. Especially if it's armor. Not in vain so many jumps were made with the “plasma” and with the cutting directed by the explosion, and with other know-how
            1. +4
              15 September 2017 16: 01
              Quote: Spade
              And then it corrodes in concrete with all the consequences.

              Are we talking about the quality of the metal or about the possibility of selling it profitably?

              Look at the wagons, where there’s nothing there, right down to the cast-iron radiators. Do you think that tank armor will greatly degrade the quality of armature? request
              1. 0
                15 September 2017 16: 58
                Quote: Vladimirets
                We are now about the quality of metal

                It is about the quality of the metal.
                1. +3
                  15 September 2017 17: 11
                  Quote: Spade
                  It is about the quality of the metal.

                  I think for MK technologists these problems can be solved.
                  1. 0
                    14 November 2017 18: 58
                    we had a tank (without a turret and a running gear) at the airdrome metalists cut a piece how many bit off and all ... 2 years still lay .. then the others still bit off a piece ... another 2 years .. then the third half was cut in half and taken away the rest.
                    Why? The cost of propane + oxygen turned out to be at the level of the cost of the metal, and only when the price grew a bit did it get cut ....
      2. +2
        15 September 2017 22: 22
        Dear, have you ever tried to "cut" tank armor? Those who do this are far from enthusiastic. Actually, let's take an example of the Germans - after the "unification" they "formed" a lot of extra Soviet tanks that did not fit into NATO standards. It would seem that this is where pedantic and practical Germans would not know any problems, and “move” - there was no joy, for disposal would be really unprofitable. Actually, cutting the tank is very, very hemorrhoidal, at the same time it is made from high-quality and expensive steel grades, and after cutting we get - the specific debris is almost worthless (extremely cheap). That is the dilemma.
        1. +1
          6 October 2017 11: 15
          Did the Germans tell you this? Really sad, standing at the extra tanks, not knowing what to do with them?
          in the nineties and zero, we cut everything that was cut, two or three times, not in a figurative, but in the literal sense: we pulled the tank with a drag to the railway branch, a couple of cylinders and cutters - once - they cut jo.pu with a laser, two - nose. Three - a magnet pulled up, hooked a nose-jo.pu-center of the building-tower - and put it in a car. And that’s it - the train left. Everything is fast and cost-effective.
      3. 0
        16 September 2017 14: 39
        Quote: Vladimirets
        I agree, but the game is worth the candle. Even the commercial acceptance of scrap costs about 8tr. per ton, the tank, in fact, a single piece of metal is under 300t.r. There will be many willing to cut for that kind of money.

        Father-in-law designed a small scrap metal processing plant, manufacturing reinforcement for corners, etc. He went with him, he was interested in the technologist. So they send shredded metal, like mills, for re-melting, but the tank is unlikely to be crushed to the right size. It painfully expensive.
        This can be done at large steel mills, and then they can add crumbs as additives to ore. For alloying, in short, expensive.
      4. +1
        17 September 2017 11: 33
        you guys need reinforcement if you don’t follow military innovations there is one small and very tricky trend the housing is nothing important
    2. +2
      15 September 2017 12: 04
      hi
      Quote: Spade
      Secondly, metal. Now, the vast majority of consumers need steel with absolutely certain properties, and it’s very difficult to “attach” what will be obtained by remelting. Unless, of course, the goal is at least to recoup the disposal.
      Only under the condition that it is not China or India.
    3. +7
      15 September 2017 14: 00
      Quote: Spade
      Actually recycling - i.e. cut and re-melt is a very complex and costly operation. Cheaper stupidly put on the field, and forget. For proper storage also costs money.

      It’s cheaper to give it to someone - and then take money from him for s / h, maintenance and repair. And use the field for other needs. smile
      And the best thing is to sell instead of recycling. Like the Saxons to Ukraine. Or as CVR (T) - Latvia.
    4. +2
      15 September 2017 14: 19
      Quote: Spade
      Now, the vast majority of consumers need steel with absolutely certain properties, and it’s very difficult to “attach” what will be obtained by remelting.

      Tale of the time of the withdrawal of the GSVG. A friend told me. There was a batch of roofing iron. Roofing sheets did not work out exactly. It turned out, it’s like, when remelting armored vehicles, someone put metal on the roofing iron. But the armored roofs turned out! wink
  4. CRP
    +1
    15 September 2017 10: 26
    The problem is the size of the engines, and so it would be possible to upgrade the T55-T62 under TBMP (Ahzarit).
    There are many alterations, but new cases are not needed.
    Equipping them with some engineering assault groups - as Syria shows, is a very correct approach.
    1. +3
      15 September 2017 12: 16
      Quote: CRP
      The problem is the size of the engines,

      Yes, everything is solved ... Moreover, the engines we have are of the same family.
  5. +2
    15 September 2017 10: 38
    In reality, only T-72 and, possibly, T-80 tanks can be left. No one else, even in a refurbished condition, will buy.
  6. +5
    15 September 2017 10: 57
    But does it make sense to dispose of ... you need to weigh everything and repeatedly check ... the example of Syria is indicative ... there is no obsolete equipment, Israel also found use for them, but there is no ability to use it. What has become an armored box over these decades, but nothing ... and this is the most valuable thing, to melt into metal is a bad and not tricky business, and getting a similar one costs a lot of money. Having so many chassis, you can make various options for working out ... and then look at the launch of a series of new machines. Learn foreign experience and work ... maybe the key here is to work and therefore you need to think ... this is a hassle. Yes, give the assignment to students of specialized universities ... they will draw everything for you and write down how to do it if there isn’t enough staff.
  7. +3
    15 September 2017 11: 05
    The program of disposal of the decommissioned equipment: can not be used to cut

    Or so.


    1. +2
      15 September 2017 13: 40
      Good afternoon. Professor, if it's not a secret, but where and who did this utilize the tanks so ???)))))) like this is 55
      1. +2
        15 September 2017 14: 36
        Flooding of T-69 tanks in the Gulf of Thailand. The artificial reef created will help improve the marine ecosystem and increase the number of fish in the area, August 9, 2010. (Photo by Surapan Boonthanom | Reuters):
      2. +6
        15 September 2017 14: 39

        Discarded armored personnel carriers are dumped into the Atlantic Ocean to create an artificial reef, October 19, 2006. (Photo by Randall Hill | AP)
      3. 0
        15 September 2017 16: 11
        Quote: aws4
        Good afternoon. Professor, if it's not a secret, but where and who did this utilize the tanks so ???)))))) like this is 55

        You have already been answered. Here is more detailed.
        https://www.theatlantic.com/photo/2011/04/artific
        ial-reefs-around-the-world / 100042 /
    2. 0
      15 September 2017 14: 12
      I agree with the commentator above, is it possible in more detail about what is happening?
      1. 0
        15 September 2017 14: 36
        This is a flood of T-69 tanks in the Gulf of Thailand. The artificial reef created will help improve the marine ecosystem and increase the number of fish in the area, August 9, 2010. (Photo by Surapan Boonthanom | Reuters).
        1. +2
          15 September 2017 14: 48
          What a fool, could you come up with anything else for an artificial reef?
          Metal now costs a lot of money, and here hundreds of tons of high alloy armored steel are thrown away just like that, while Asians themselves make needles thinner from saving raw materials ...
          1. +4
            15 September 2017 14: 51
            The decommissioned New York City subway cars were flooded 6 miles from the city of Cincotigua, Virginia.
            44 stainless steel wagons were dumped in the Blackfish Bank Reef area to create an artificial reef. In the US, stainless steel is not appreciated (probably) hi
            1. +2
              15 September 2017 15: 26
              how many idiots in the world, I'm shocked ....
          2. +3
            15 September 2017 14: 52
            They flooded only 25 tanks! On fishing and divers will earn more!
      2. +7
        15 September 2017 14: 43
        Drive into a search engine - artificial reefs. And get a ton of photos - stoke subway and train cars, warships and civilian ships, armored personnel carriers and tanks!
        Reef Redbird
        Redbird Reef - This is an extremely successful (in relation to the settlement of wild life) artificial reef, located off the coast of the US state of Delaware. It consists mainly of decommissioned subway cars from New York and occupies 3,4 square kilometers of the ocean floor. In addition to 714 subway cars, there are 86 obsolete tanks and armored personnel carriers, eight tugs and barges, as well as 3 tons of truck tires equipped with ballast.
        In the seven years since the reef was created, local marine life has become about 400 times more plentiful, and now it is a true paradise for fishing enthusiasts.
    3. 0
      17 September 2017 11: 39
      stupid and not profitable
  8. +1
    15 September 2017 11: 06
    I remember my grandmother in the village a tank (not an engineering machine) with a dump from ChTZ in the winter cleared the snow. In one pass, even leveled the ground by spring.
    1. +5
      15 September 2017 15: 31
      And how much diesel fuel the tank ate during the cleaning? Gold will be the road.
  9. +1
    15 September 2017 11: 12
    to melt and build an aircraft carrier. why not ?
    1. 0
      15 September 2017 11: 45
      Then immediately the battleship
      1. +1
        17 September 2017 11: 41
        well, that’s how a series of battleships is trifling right away and we’ll be left without armored vehicles
  10. +1
    15 September 2017 11: 41
    The option of selling civilians after the dismantling of military equipment (a tower, sights, machine guns ..) is most preferable. Such a tank (without a tower) can carry a bunch of agricultural equipment behind itself and be very economical.
    1. +4
      15 September 2017 13: 57
      be very economical
      And is this possible in relation to a combat vehicle?
    2. +4
      15 September 2017 15: 09
      Quote: bratchanin3
      Such a tank (without a tower) can carry a bunch of agricultural equipment behind itself and be very economical.

      The fact of the matter is that they are not at all economical. Military equipment has a small resource. Compared to civilian tractors, etc.
    3. 0
      17 September 2017 11: 46
      30gg tanks plow
    4. 0
      14 November 2017 19: 04
      BAP (not a tank !!!) ate in terms of hours per km approximately 120 liters per 100 km.It was really a crazy plus - you could pour everything, even fuel oil (diluted with kerosene, which was a shaft)
  11. BAI
    +4
    15 September 2017 11: 55
    With armored vehicles there may be problems, but the car goes with a bang. More recently, I saw (in one column) Gaz-51 (automobile plant named after MOLTOV!) And Zil-157. Brand new, everything sparkles, not a single speck of dust. Of course it can be sold.
    1. 0
      14 November 2017 19: 07
      Quote: BAI
      Of course it can be sold.
      Who will buy? Who will buy Mormon? Which eating fuel? virtually uncontrollable and can not keep a speed of 100km / h on the highway?
      Collectors will buy a dozen or two - no more, in the national economy he does not need such a gift, but you will buy ....
  12. +1
    15 September 2017 12: 54
    In the Sverdlovsk region in the taiga there are 300 T-72 tanks, on the plate it says: the date of putting into reserve in 1996
    1. +2
      15 September 2017 12: 59
      Quote: Bronevick
      In the Sverdlovsk region in the taiga there are 300 T-72 tanks, on the plate it says: the date of putting into reserve in 1996

      Yeah ... and also, "For" polite people, take as much as you want .... Stop spreading the fakes.
      1. 0
        15 September 2017 13: 09
        Well, they were even shown on the local TV. Yes, I personally saw them.
        1. +2
          15 September 2017 13: 45
          Quote: Bronevick
          Well, they were even shown on the local TV. Yes, I personally saw them.

          It was, but not much different. In the forest, near the unloading station, there were tanks that were waiting for spring ... Those who followed had already been punished for this disgrace
  13. +1
    15 September 2017 13: 10
    "and also use obsolete machines for various purposes."
    From the first lines it’s clear Ryabov Kirill, you can not read further
    1. +1
      21 September 2017 14: 02
      And why is this so obvious? And why shouldn’t you read Ryabov’s articles on Cyril? What, he writes worse than Majumara? Of course, they are so-so for professional military men and gunsmiths, but for visitors to the Military Review they are good.
      1. 0
        22 September 2017 07: 00
        As they themselves said, ABOUT YOURSELF
        Quote: magirus401
        galematia

        wink
  14. +1
    15 September 2017 13: 31
    If there is an excess of technology, then why not put it in schools as a visual aid for lessons of non-military training? -)
  15. +1
    15 September 2017 15: 21
    Well, remake the T-62 into a small terminator and drive them at a reasonable price to the third world. The Israelis won, on the basis of our captured trophies, made heavy armored personnel carriers, tractors, technical assistance vehicles ... And the T-64 - to the Donbass.
  16. +1
    15 September 2017 16: 29
    Afghanistan asked 55ki and I didn’t want to take any other tanks from the amers, since they didn’t have crews, and they just told us about the repair, they only knew how to repair them and not why they brought a train with tanks and ammunition from Transnistria. There is one more use as pillboxes of old tanks. In Syria, the one who occupied the height and won to dig up at a height such a tank with a dead chassis and not one.
  17. 0
    15 September 2017 20: 03
    Of course, I knew that there was a lot of equipment on storage bases, but I heard that it wasn’t used for the first time.
  18. 0
    15 September 2017 23: 13
    Oh, they would put them with us, they’ll cut them with files and hand them over for scrap ....
  19. +1
    17 September 2017 04: 31
    to the Syrian Express, THERE ARE BENEFIT
  20. +2
    17 September 2017 09: 38
    With a good host, everything will always come in handy.
    The Americans took and removed from service the A / F-14 Tomcat, capable of competing with our MiG-31.
    Do you think they cut it into needles? Nothing like this! They all stand on conservation, and they are engaged in conservation very competently, preserving even the engines and keeping the aircraft themselves in dry desert conditions.
    So ...
    1. +2
      17 September 2017 12: 10
      by the beginning of World War II, we had superiority over the enemy in tanks, but after 1 year, our grandfathers had to fight at homemade artifacts, God forbid that our children and grandchildren also had to fight

      therefore, it’s not necessary to give anything to anyone to sell, to disassemble, to re-melt, just put somewhere in the forest away from your eyes so that the businessmen (speculators) don’t be angry about their greedy eyes under the motto
    2. 0
      14 November 2017 19: 09
      I know a little desert - believe me, this is not the best storage option, there will be problems up to that mother ...
  21. +2
    17 September 2017 13: 25
    Why cheat? Syria and other Russian satellites who may need outdated equipment and ammunition are far away and the east of Ukraine is nearby. The Ukrainian army will utilize all this army rubbish for free along with local "tractor drivers" and Russian "vacationers" - driving instructors.
    1. +2
      18 September 2017 12: 46
      Outdated?
      This is our obsolete one, with your NEW technology before our old ...
      Yes, about the east, the Ukaines would have been silent, maybe they had gone for a clever one: After the liquidation of the ZGV and VD, they brought a lot of things to Ukaina, I am silent about their warehouses.
      Trolling is not your path, you need to be able to think and have knowledge on the subject.
  22. 0
    18 September 2017 11: 21
    Mmm ... does that mean the armata rolls back for a while?
  23. 0
    18 September 2017 12: 38
    But is there anything in the photo 54, not the 55th?
  24. 0
    20 September 2017 15: 08
    Quote: vadim dok
    And how much diesel fuel the tank ate during the cleaning? Gold will be the road.

    At that time, diesel fuel and gas in the forest were poured into the ground, because everything had to be worked out.
  25. +1
    20 September 2017 19: 23
    The Romanians modernized the T-55, and in 2014 at the NATO exercises they piled on the "Abrams" in a tank battle. After competent modernization, the old Soviet tanks are not very bad either. Just read - in Syria, the Syrians on the T-72 knocked out the T-90 captured by bandits. Not only the tank is important, but also who is in the tank. (Give the fool Ferrari - he will break on the wall)
  26. +2
    8 October 2017 11: 23
    It is possible, I think, to transfer part of the equipment from storage warehouses to DOSAAF-ROSTO structures for training boys. It is unlikely that any of them will want to miss such a lure.
  27. 0
    19 February 2018 08: 39
    The Japanese will buy.