Military Review

Kantemirovsky division will arm the modernized T-80

153
The Ministry of Defense decided to arm the 4th Guards tank Kantemirov’s division with T-80BVM tanks. In military slang, these fighting vehicles are called "reactive", according to News.




Instead of traditional diesel engines, gas turbine engines (GTE) are installed on the "eighties", and the latest fire control system allows the tank to hit ground and even air targets during the day and at night in any weather.

The Defense Ministry said that "the decision to re-equip the 4-th Guards Tank Kantemirovsky Order of Lenin of the red banner division of them. Yu.V. Andropov on T-80BVM was adopted this summer. ” It is planned that new cars will start to enter the division next year.

"The updated tank received a modern Sosna-U fire control system (LMS) with a thermal imager, laser range finder and automatic target tracking. The LMS detects even small objects at any time of day and in any weather conditions. It is enough for the T-80BVM gunner to aim the target and click on the button. "Pine" will automatically calculate the necessary corrections and open fire. From the enemy missiles and shells T-80BVM protects the dynamic protection of "Relic", "says the material.

The car is equipped with a GTE with a power of 1250 hp, thanks to which the tank can accelerate to 80 km / h on the highway and to 60 km / h on rough terrain in a matter of seconds.

Thanks to the T-80BVM, the Kantemirov division will become a universal tool for the European theater of operations. T-80BVM practically does not differ from T-72B3. They have the same MSAs, surveillance devices and sights. The T-80 has higher speed, better maneuverability and acceleration characteristics. There are no long distances in Europe. Therefore, there is no need to make long marches. For tank units, speed is everything. No matter how far the tanks will travel. It is important how quickly they can make a march and take up defense, or enter a breakthrough to the rear of the enemy,
Alexey Khlopotov, historian of tank construction, told the newspaper.
Photos used:
Decoder / otvaga2004.mybb.ru
153 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Monetniy
    Monetniy 13 October 2017 10: 41
    +6
    When will active protection begin to be implemented?
    1. Alex777
      Alex777 13 October 2017 13: 56
      10
      On Armata. Radar must be set. On old tanks, it seems like nowhere. And the infantry from such protection should stay away.
      It seems the question of which tank is better: T-90, T-72B3 or T-80BVM is decided in favor of the T-80BVM. hi
      1. Roma 1977
        Roma 1977 13 October 2017 14: 58
        +2
        And the T-34 is even better.
      2. Michael newage
        Michael newage 13 October 2017 16: 15
        +2
        The "Arena" system and radar and units in one bandura sticks out true and is rumored to not close the upper hemisphere.
      3. Doliva63
        Doliva63 13 October 2017 17: 38
        10
        Although I am 62 and 72-by-graduate by education, I like 80 because of the engine more — there is so much foolishness, shopper! laughing drinks
        1. Michael newage
          Michael newage 13 October 2017 19: 05
          +6
          I agree. There is more charm in the 80s. Yes, and reach the English Channel faster laughing . But, they would give me a choice ... T-90, he and only he.
          1. gromoboj
            gromoboj 15 October 2017 05: 39
            0
            And why do you need a tank in the English Channel?
      4. Alf
        Alf 13 October 2017 21: 42
        +1
        Quote: Alex777
        It seems the question of which tank is better: T-90, T-72B3 or T-80BVM is decided in favor of the T-80BVM.

        Thank God, got it!
        1. Michael newage
          Michael newage 13 October 2017 21: 53
          +2
          There has never been such a question. At the same time, tanks on T-72 and T-80 carts with gas turbine engines served.
          And their latest modifications T-90M and T-80BVM, even shown at the same time. And both of them were chosen, as a standard for upgrading older versions. And the budget version of the T-72B3 in the load yes .
          1. Alf
            Alf 13 October 2017 21: 56
            +2
            Quote: Michael Newage
            There has never been such a question. At the same time, tanks on T-72 and T-80 carts with gas turbine engines served.
            And their latest modifications T-90M and T-80BVM, even shown at the same time. And both of them were chosen, as a standard for upgrading older versions. And the budget version of the T-72B3 in the load yes .

            Why T-72B3? Maybe it's time to stop on the tandem T-80 + T-90? And then the pants can tear.
            1. Michael newage
              Michael newage 13 October 2017 22: 02
              +3
              T-72 and T-90 are tanks on the same truck, in many ways similar. And T-72B3, then, that there are a lot of them in the army and in warehouses. And to cut all this on metal, squandering. The experience of the war in Syria shows that on the T-62M you can bend all donkey lovers normally. And the T-72B3 is all the more in order. Especially if you look at what the West has, they are quite on a level yet.
              1. Alf
                Alf 13 October 2017 22: 13
                0
                Quote: Michael Newage
                -72 and T-90 are tanks on the same truck, in many ways similar.

                Is it really impossible to finish the T-72 to the T-90?
                Quote: Michael Newage
                The experience of the war in Syria shows that on the T-62M you can bend all sorts of donkey lovers normally

                Then let's upgrade the T-62. Isn’t it easier to leave 2 models of tanks and all the others to reach them than to breed different types?
                1. Michael newage
                  Michael newage 13 October 2017 22: 29
                  +3
                  Quote: Alf
                  Is it really impossible to finish the T-72 to the T-90?

                  According to the idea you can. But it is time consuming. It is necessary to completely change the tower, and this is the floor of the tank. The engine and gun are easier to change. The resource has ended - in metal. It's a pity to throw out a tower.

                  Quote: Alf
                  Then let's upgrade the T-62. Isn’t it easier to leave 2 models of tanks and all the others to reach them than to breed different types?

                  T-62 is not being upgraded, because the warehouses are littered with T-72 laughing . But we keep it, still (for Syria, for example). And we left two models on carts 72 (90) and 80 already.
                  1. Alf
                    Alf 13 October 2017 22: 33
                    +2
                    Quote: Michael Newage
                    According to the idea you can. But it is time consuming. It is necessary to completely change the tower, and this is the floor of the tank. The engine and gun are easier to change. The resource has ended - in metal. It's a pity to throw out a tower.

                    And when you have to fight, what will we do? T-72B3 90th inferior, and inferior quite seriously. What is the use of cheap technology if it is inferior to the technique of the adversary?
                    1. Michael newage
                      Michael newage 13 October 2017 22: 49
                      +3
                      We’ll be in Russian, five T-34-85 against one tiger laughing (I think the result is predictable). We will arrange for European gays zerg rush to the English Channel. How many tanks are there for us? 10-20 thousand? Even be gay 5 thousand leopards last. modifications (they have little bit of bitumen, they have much less trash), they won’t keep this avalanche and will suck itlaughing .
                      But seriously, from the modern that is (last 90 and 80), enough to fight in some sort of local fight. Khokhlov pull on the piston, for example laughing . And 72 in warehouses, on a rainy day, well, to drive conscripts, to learn. Well, if a complete hedgehog, reinforcement is not in vain shown. This is a UFO among tanks. If necessary, they will speed up the tests and rivet 2 thousand easily and quickly. Gays have nothing to break this thing into forehead with. So so laughing . wink
                    2. Mexovoy
                      Mexovoy 14 October 2017 18: 15
                      +3
                      Some tanks for a quick war, others for a protracted one.
                    3. Lex.
                      Lex. 14 October 2017 19: 17
                      0
                      What inferior to the t-72b3 2016 can you say?
                      Like the t-90 of the first modifications, even the motor from the t-72
            2. The comment was deleted.
  2. svp67
    svp67 13 October 2017 10: 41
    16
    The news is quite normal. If the T-80U is still in service with the armament, then God himself suggested that the T-80BVM be delivered to it ... The main thing is that they would not only be there for parades ...
    1. iConst
      iConst 13 October 2017 11: 26
      +7
      Quote: svp67
      The news is quite normal.
      If it were not
      No matter how far the tanks travel. It’s important how quickly they can make the march and take up the defense, or enter a breakthrough behind enemy lines,
      The generals, as always, are preparing for the past war, which will not happen again. You cannot enter the same water twice.

      All signs that there will be no fronts. The war will be mostly air. And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units, which will include tanks.
      1. svp67
        svp67 13 October 2017 11: 29
        14
        Quote: iConst
        And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units, which will include tanks.

        And the T-80 is just for such operations ...
        1. iConst
          iConst 13 October 2017 11: 38
          +6
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: iConst
          And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units, which will include tanks.

          And the T-80 is just for such operations ...

          Yes, no doubt, but I wanted to focus on how deadly the choice of the wrong tactics can be. In the 41st year, when the armored vehicles of the Red Army were not much inferior in quality, and in quantity significantly superior to the Panzerwaffe, but lost hopelessly in tactics and control of mechanized formations.
          And now we continue to hear about breakthroughs (front - approx.) Of the middle of the 20th century. Has Syria really taught nothing (let alone Iraq)?
          1. svp67
            svp67 13 October 2017 11: 41
            +4
            Quote: iConst
            And now we continue to hear about breakthroughs (front - approx.) Of the middle of the 20th century. Has Syria really taught nothing (let alone Iraq)?

            There, the same "tear fronts", they just changed ... Everything is developing.
            1. iConst
              iConst 13 October 2017 11: 50
              +5
              Quote: svp67
              Quote: iConst
              And now we continue to hear about breakthroughs (front - approx.) Of the middle of the 20th century. Has Syria really taught nothing (let alone Iraq)?

              There, the same "tear fronts", they just changed ... Everything is developing.

              Yes, there are no fronts there! Barmaley ride from Iraq to Syria and back. There are reference settlements around which a zone of influence is formed. As soon as government troops get closer, a swarm of jeeps with martyrs, Zushki, KK machine guns and bats full of glove cutters flies out to meet them. And they roll off in the same way, if unsuccessful.
              And before Russia supported Assad, such tactics brought success. Now they urinate from the air, and the valiant Syrians hammer those who survived, if they survived a little.
              1. svp67
                svp67 13 October 2017 12: 09
                +5
                Quote: iConst
                Yes, there are no fronts there!

                You contradict yourself. If there is no front, then where is it from?
                Quote: iConst
                There are reference settlements around which a zone of influence is formed.

                A network of such oporniks creates a front line. So not only that, there are supply lines, otherwise these oporniks will simply die.
                I’m saying that everything changes ... But still the main thing remains, in time to find the “pain point” in the enemy’s defense and be the first to strike a powerful blow there.
                1. iConst
                  iConst 13 October 2017 12: 24
                  +3
                  Quote: svp67
                  Quote: iConst
                  Yes, there are no fronts there!

                  You contradict yourself. If there is no front, then where is it from?
                  Quote: iConst
                  There are reference settlements around which a zone of influence is formed.

                  A network of such oporniks creates a front line. So not only that, there are supply lines, otherwise these oporniks will simply die.
                  I’m saying that everything changes ... But still the main thing remains, in time to find the “pain point” in the enemy’s defense and be the first to strike a powerful blow there.

                  Yes, nothing contradicts. It is you who misinterpret the concept of "front." That's all.

                  And about the supply lines - that's right. Each side is trying to control these lines. Only there are no continuous troops. At best, a couple of checkpoints a hundred kilometers away. Although it is pointless in a bare desert at a considerable distance from the reference settlement.
                  Because the fracture went only with the participation of the videoconferencing. Khrenachat columns from the air. And before that, the Syrians could not do anything. I already wrote what they ran into if they wanted to do something.

                  Look at Syria 15-16. Patchwork - at least four large types of groups - Syrians, opposition, golem barmaley and Kurds. And half a hundred "all against all." And each in different places controlled a certain number of cities and settlements. Where is the front here?
                  1. svp67
                    svp67 13 October 2017 20: 55
                    +1
                    Quote: iConst
                    at least four large types of groupings - Syrians, opposition, golem barmelae and Kurds. And half a hundred "all against all." And each in different places controlled a certain number of cities and settlements. Where is the front here?

                    The front, this is not a continuous line of trenches from sea to sea, this construction was finally abandoned during the Second World War. The main thing in building the front, control over key points and supply lines. And the "virtual line" of the front can be held by artillery fire or the actions of mobile groups. Since someone controls some territory, he is obliged to keep a border around it, which in wartime turns into a front line.
              2. DenZ
                DenZ 13 October 2017 12: 12
                +1
                Quote: iConst
                Yes, there are no fronts there! Barmalei ride from Iraq to Syria and back

                From Iraq to Syria - that is, from the rear to the front - is not it?
                1. iConst
                  iConst 13 October 2017 12: 27
                  +2
                  Quote: DenZ
                  Quote: iConst
                  Yes, there are no fronts there! Barmalei ride from Iraq to Syria and back

                  From Iraq to Syria - that is, from the rear to the front - is not it?

                  Yes there are no "fronts" there. You can ride throughout the Syrian desert until you run into one or another group. And spontaneously.
          2. Alf
            Alf 13 October 2017 21: 46
            0
            Quote: iConst
            Has Syria really taught nothing (let alone Iraq)?

            And what should Syria teach? There is a light infantry war supported by artillery and aircraft. Tanks are used there, in general, piece by piece. And there isn’t a big war, especially with a first-class European power, according to the “wall to wall” principle.
      2. Sergey Medvedev
        Sergey Medvedev 13 October 2017 11: 40
        +7
        Quote: iConst
        The generals, as always, are preparing for the past war, which will not happen again.

        Yes Yes Yes. After WWII, our generals prepared so that the third never took place. Until now, the West is afraid to rake again at the very reluctance.
        1. iConst
          iConst 13 October 2017 11: 44
          +2
          Quote: Sergey Medvedev
          Quote: iConst
          The generals, as always, are preparing for the past war, which will not happen again.

          Yes Yes Yes. After WWII, our generals prepared so that the third never took place. Until now, the West is afraid to rake again at the very reluctance.

          Nevermind with two! The 3rd MV did not take place for exactly the opposite reason - the USSR developed nuclear and then hydrogen bombs. And then, although it was inferior in terms of nuclear charges, it was still at the level of delivery facilities for our “partners” with an indicator of “unacceptable damage”.

          If the thoughts of the generals taking Berlin were dominated, where would they be now?
          1. Sergey Medvedev
            Sergey Medvedev 13 October 2017 11: 55
            +3
            Nuclear weapons are the second factor. And the first and most important is still the experience gained in previous wars. By the way, Americans are preparing means of non-nuclear attack, comparable to nuclear. Here in VO write about it. So TMV is quite possible without the use of nuclear weapons. Indeed, chemical weapons were not used in WWII, because everyone had it.
            1. iConst
              iConst 13 October 2017 12: 06
              +5
              Quote: Sergei Medvedev
              Nuclear weapons are the second factor. And the first and most important is still the experience gained in previous wars.

              How can a plasterer experience come in handy in jewelry?
              Everything - the concept is out of date. In the scrap - it is harmful. I gave an example when the concept of the use of BT (and indeed the principle of warfare) of the Red Army forces showed complete failure for the blitzkrieg? But there most of them were practical military generals who passed 1MB, Civil, Khalkhin-Gol, Winter !!! What other examples can you give?

              Quote: Sergei Medvedev
              By the way, Americans are preparing means of non-nuclear attack, comparable to nuclear. Here in VO write about it. So TMV is quite possible without the use of nuclear weapons.

              Not by the way. And the thesis that the 3rd MV can be nuclear-free is utopia. Russia clearly stated - the use of nuclear weapons regardless of the initial situation. Because - if someone will insist on krandets, then all the same it will be the last trump card.
              Although - there is an option - to give up.
              1. Sergey Medvedev
                Sergey Medvedev 13 October 2017 12: 16
                +3
                Quote: iConst
                Although - there is an option - to give up.

                Sure, not a problem. Give up! You do not get used to it. And WWII, not you won, your experience is uninteresting. But with our nuclear missile club we don’t have any options to “surrender”. From the word "completely." Petty DPRK does not give up.
                Therefore, I repeat - experience is based on real cases, takes into account specific identified facts. And discussions about future wars are fantasies, assumptions, conjectures and conjectures. Just all. Someone guesses, but most do not.
                1. iConst
                  iConst 13 October 2017 12: 42
                  0
                  Quote: Sergei Medvedev
                  Give up! You do not get used to it. And WWII, not you won, your experience is uninteresting.

                  Who is this "you"? smile
                  Is it the tinkling of aluminum or is it audible to me?

                  Quote: Sergei Medvedev
                  Therefore, I repeat - experience is based on real cases, takes into account specific identified facts. And discussions about future wars are fantasies, assumptions, conjectures and conjectures. Just all. Someone guesses, but most do not.

                  That's right: repetition is the mother ... Not stupid things.
                  Read about the "experience" of the Arab-Israeli conflicts and how such an experience ends if you just sit on the old experience and do not analyze the current situation. There, for a minute, were Soviet advisers (it sounds funny :)).

                  And at the same time answer me the question - why did the Red Army lose 41 years to the Wehrmacht. And about the "suddenness" is not necessary - it has already been proven that there was no special suddenness. Initially, there was more than enough strength and experience. And according to your thesis, this simply could not be.
                  Got popcorn - I'm waiting ...
                  1. Sergey Medvedev
                    Sergey Medvedev 13 October 2017 13: 53
                    +4
                    Quote: iConst
                    Who is this "you"?

                    So the flag at you is not clear which one, it definitely has nothing to do with the Victory.
                    Quote: iConst
                    And at the same time answer me the question - why did the Red Army lose 41 years to the Wehrmacht.

                    To you, pickers, I answer: WWII won the Red Army, not the Wehrmacht. Separate fights and episodes are a separate topic. You can chew as much as you like. Your popcorn.
                    1. iConst
                      iConst 13 October 2017 14: 56
                      0
                      Quote: Sergei Medvedev
                      So the flag at you is not clear which one, it definitely has nothing to do with the Victory.

                      No, it didn’t seem - the saucepan rings!

                      And what - if I had a different flag - the meaning of my statements would radically change, would it? Which one do you draw - Bangladesh will do? laughing
                      And I also had Jews in my family - everything, just as if I didn’t cling to Victory. And garbage, that my grandfather went to the end of the Second World War as an gunner. Not okay! wassat

                      Quote: Sergei Medvedev
                      To you, pickers, I answer: WWII won the Red Army, not the Wehrmacht. Separate fights and episodes are a separate topic.

                      Well, yes, yes ... Episodes. "Episode V - The USSR Strikes Back." So what?
                      You evade - the question was how, following your thesis that “experience (the son of difficult mistakes) guarantees win-win”? Why did the “episodic separate battle” lead to the loss of almost all personnel troops with the equipment of the western military districts and territories right up to Moscow? And I asked specifically for 41 years. And here you are thinking about winning the Second World War.

                      I’ll say more - penniless - the price of victory, the fruits of which I could not use or squandered later "for hanging out beautifully" ©.
                      Ask even any German - who defeated the Wehrmacht? What answer do you hear? Guess three times. Hint-not the USSR.
                      1. Sergey Medvedev
                        Sergey Medvedev 13 October 2017 15: 27
                        +2
                        Quote: iConst
                        I also had Jews in my family

                        Well, now it’s clear why the topic “Katz offers to surrender” so often rings in you. laughing
                        Quote: iConst
                        And garbage, that my grandfather went to the end of the Second World War as an artilleryman

                        And my uncle, an artilleryman, walked from Finnish to Koenigsberg. And other TENS relatives.
                        Quote: iConst
                        Ask even any German - who defeated the Wehrmacht? What answer do you hear? Guess three times. Hint-not the USSR.

                        And what to ask them, these inglorious bbl ld.dkov? They gathered all of Europe under themselves, surpassed the USSR in all respects, and with such superiority managed to lose the war. So they are making excuses that they did not lose the war. I am not interested in their nonsense. I don’t understand your behavior, how you assimilate these Westerners. I don’t think your grandfather fought as an artilleryman on the other side. Rather, you betray him.
                      2. iConst
                        iConst 13 October 2017 15: 41
                        +2
                        Quote: Sergey Medvedev
                        I don’t understand your behavior, how you assimilate these Westerners. I don’t think your grandfather fought as an artilleryman on the other side. Rather, you betray him.

                        ABOUT! Well - proofs in the studio, where and to whom do I "assent"? Indicate - otherwise I will call you hollow-necked.

                        And how is it that I “betray” our ancestors, who obtained this Victory with great blood?
                        Is it not an appeal to cast aside the illusions of the “effectiveness of past experience” and to prepare not for the past but for the future war so that there are no 5: 1 losses later, to try to reduce the losses to zero?

                        I urge not to die for the motherland myself, but to force the enemy to encroach on it. And where is disrespect or another heresy here?
              2. SOF
                SOF 13 October 2017 12: 51
                +2
                Quote: iConst
                And the thesis that 3rd MV can be nuclear-free is utopia

                ... interesting such a utopia.
                But tomorrow, all limotrophy He will take Europe and declare war on us.
                The usual one, without nuclear weapons.
                What do we do? Throw them warheads on their border? And then we’ll think over and overthrow the USA, for it’s not figs, and since now everything is all the same?
                So?
                Are we not taking into account the local war not with NATO and the USA at all?
                ... and for some reason it seems to me that if this happens, then the border line will turn out to be just the front line ...
      3. Orel
        Orel 13 October 2017 11: 41
        +1
        Quote: iConst
        All signs that there will be no fronts. The war will be mostly air. And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units, which will include tanks.


        And how will the "small groups" control the territory and the rear ??? In this respect, the war has been and is and will still be "classical." The examples of Iraq and Afghanistan confirm this to you. No need to go far. The battle tactics are of course complicated, but the issue of territory control is unchanged. For this, troops are needed and many are needed. No "small group" can solve these issues.
        1. iConst
          iConst 13 October 2017 11: 50
          0
          Quote: Orel
          And how will the "small groups" control the territory and the rear ???

          From whom?
          1. Orel
            Orel 13 October 2017 11: 57
            +1
            Quote: iConst
            From whom?


            From all of us. From the enemy, from sleeping cells, from partisans, from sympathizers with them, from marauders. You are not familiar with the cadres of Iraqi cities that threw their own troops? The devastation is complete, chaos. It is extremely difficult to conduct operations in such conditions even for the advancing party and it is the first to be interested in bringing order and maintaining. And who should do it? Local or what? Will you give them weapons? Maybe much later, and yes, when you can talk about the post-war system, but for now, the occupation regime needs to be supported by someone. Consequently, the rear forces and the order have to be controlled by their own troops. If you think that Russia can be destroyed remotely, this is a mistake, since it can and can be destroyed, but no one will do it, because the uncontrolled territory will become such a hotbed of terrorism that it will not seem to everyone in the world. So, again by.
            1. iConst
              iConst 13 October 2017 12: 12
              0
              Quote: Orel
              From all of us.

              And from the sparrows? laughing - This is for ornithologists.
              Quote: Orel
              from sleeping cells, from partisans

              Where did you go? This is for the special services - surgery. There are no tanks needed.
            2. DenZ
              DenZ 13 October 2017 12: 16
              +1
              Quote: Orel
              If you think that Russia can be destroyed remotely, then this is a mistake, since it can and can be destroyed, but no one will do it, because uncontrolled territory will become such a hotbed of terrorism,

              Yes, yes, the Americans who destroyed the governments of Iraq and Libya, this (hotbed of terrorism), "very worried." What fairy tales to tell.
              1. Orel
                Orel 13 October 2017 12: 27
                +2
                Quote: DenZ
                Yes, yes, the Americans who destroyed the governments of Iraq and Libya, this (hotbed of terrorism), "very worried." What fairy tales to tell.


                There are no tales here. Europe is not interested in having such disgrace on its border. Otherwise, all 140 million will migrate to Europe and then the Syrian flow of refugees will seem to them babble. Do not think that Europe is dumber than us and does not understand anything. And tell me at least one war that would have been won without land occupation. No such. Yugoslavia could resist the bombing for an arbitrarily long time. Libya collapsed because of the civil war, and not because of the bombing. Yugoslavia remained controlled during and after the bombing. Therefore, nothing is impossible without occupation, and the "small mobile groups" are about the war on terrorism, and not about the war with some kind of large state. You cannot win a war only from the air.
                1. DenZ
                  DenZ 13 October 2017 13: 36
                  0
                  Quote: Orel
                  Europe is not interested in having such disgrace on its border.

                  Who would ever ask her? What the uncle will say outside the puddle or more, moreover, will do so and will be. Even now they are essentially manual in the USA. And if the guns speak, then generally the opinion of the Europeans of the USA will not care. Europeans themselves, of course, do not want any mess.
                  Quote: Orel
                  Do not think that Europe is dumber than us and does not understand anything.

                  She understands everything but cannot say. For the language is in ... opera and in the pockets of the European bureaucrats and on their accounts everything is in order.
                  Quote: Orel
                  And tell me at least one war that would have been won without land occupation. No such

                  I agree, there isn’t such, but to occupy Russia completely, the task is not very simple. Russia is not Yugoslavia. NATO is easier to occupy the European part of Russia and the Far East. the rest remaining will not be able to fully resist for a long time and that there will be chaos and terrorism on this territory or what else they do not care about at all.
                  1. Orel
                    Orel 13 October 2017 13: 54
                    +1
                    Quote: DenZ
                    NATO is easier to occupy the European part of Russia and the Far East.


                    And how many millions of soldiers do you need for this ??? And how many of this amount are concentrated on our borders ??? When you count, you may not answer, because the topic of the "NATO threat" will be exhausted as unrealistic and not corresponding to facts.
          2. NEXUS
            NEXUS 13 October 2017 14: 38
            +2
            Quote: iConst
            From whom?

            You miss one point ... As you say, modern warfare has no fronts, right? Well, let's say. Excuse me, against whom is the war against the regular units well armed and trained, that is, against a strong professional army or against militarized formations such as ISIS, whose members were bakers, joiners and so on yesterday?
            If we are talking about a professional strong army, against which you have to fight, then there will be fronts and breakthroughs and control, etc. ...
            1. iConst
              iConst 13 October 2017 15: 03
              0
              Quote: NEXUS
              Quote: iConst
              From whom?

              You miss one point ... As you say, modern warfare has no fronts, right? Well, let's say. Excuse me, against whom is the war against the regular units well armed and trained, that is, against a strong professional army or against militarized formations such as ISIS, whose members were bakers, joiners and so on yesterday?
              If we are talking about a professional strong army, against which you have to fight, then there will be fronts and breakthroughs and control, etc. ...

              Greetings! hi

              I clearly said from the very beginning that modern warfare will be airborne. That is high-tech. All clear.

              And all sorts of barmalei are partisanism. And appropriate structures should deal with them. Now in Russia it is the National Guard.
              In Syria, partisanship has grown greatly and tried to take shape in something more. Not allowed.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 13 October 2017 15: 06
                +2
                Quote: iConst
                Greetings!

                Greetings! hi
                Quote: iConst
                I clearly said from the very beginning that modern warfare will be airborne. That is, high-tech

                No, modern warfare will be AVERAGE. Moreover, in space and at depths as well.
                1. iConst
                  iConst 13 October 2017 15: 19
                  0
                  Quote: NEXUS
                  No, modern warfare will be AVERAGE. Moreover, in space and at depths as well.

                  I agree. Between the big uncles before this flies. Unless Kennedy comes to his senses. They agreed with Khrushchev and dispersed more or less. And all faces were saved.

                  But all the same - if we are talking about ground forces, the West will not attack with tanks. Missiles, aircraft and closer to completion (if it happens) long-range artillery. And the tanks will go to cleanup.
                  Only the Americans have no plans to clean up Russian cities. It is enough for them to destroy the military and civilian infrastructure.

                  They voiced their three-stage coercion.
              2. kirgiz58
                kirgiz58 13 October 2017 18: 43
                +1
                Quote: iConst
                modern warfare will be airborne.

                May be in the initial phase. But until the foot of the infantryman steps on the ground, it will not be taken. And from here come the fronts, the armies, and the tactics and strategy. But with new methods of warfare full blownNaturally only between the top countries. If between a giant and a pygmy (such as Amerza + Europeans against Yugoslavia) then your tactics are applicable and the pygmy can’t live.
                1. iConst
                  iConst 13 October 2017 19: 26
                  0
                  Quote: kirgiz58
                  But until the foot of the infantryman steps on the ground

                  The leg does not set foot. There are no such plans. Destroy the infrastructure (read - the economy) - this is the goal of the Americans. They are closely engaged in this now - they are trying to economically strangle Russia and subjugate it to themselves through agents of influence.

                  Be calm - if through bulk, Germans (the kingdom to him) and other liberals they will not achieve the result, they will try to "tighten the screws" further.

                  The whole question is what means they will choose and how far they will go.
                  1. kirgiz58
                    kirgiz58 13 October 2017 20: 07
                    +3
                    Quote: iConst
                    The leg does not set foot. No such plans

                    There was a discussion of the tactics of a future war, but you squeezed into a relationship. tongue
                    1. iConst
                      iConst 13 October 2017 20: 13
                      0
                      Quote: kirgiz58
                      There was a discussion of the tactics of a future war, but you squeezed into a relationship.

                      What ??? Where? Proof (explanation for Svidomo - quote from my statement) - in the studio! The second hollow was revealed - not?
                      1. kirgiz58
                        kirgiz58 13 October 2017 20: 24
                        +2
                        Quote: iConst
                        All signs that there will be no fronts. The war will be mostly air. And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units, which will include tanks.

                        I can still. So who is the hollow? Rather, you, and still not remembering the beginning of the sentence to its end. Add RAM and overclock it, it will help. And yet: the Kyrgyz can not be Svidomo. How's the weather in Frankfurt am Main? laughing
                      2. iConst
                        iConst 13 October 2017 20: 36
                        0
                        Quote: kirgiz58
                        I can still. So who is the hollow?

                        laughing laughing laughing

                        This is some kind of tryndets. I, damn it, ASK ABOUT ACCOUNTS !!! Where is the personality?

                        You, like your predecessor, are hollow. I developed my thesis with justification - do you know such a word? He (your predecessor) DOES NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION !!!!

                        And you, except throwing poop - nothing on the topic? Not?

                        Guys, read a little basic philosophy, the principles of discussion in the end. And then some kind of kindergarten.
      4. the most important
        the most important 13 October 2017 21: 54
        0
        Quote: iConst
        All signs that there will be no fronts. The war will be mostly air. And on the ground there will be tactical operations of small highly mobile units

        For China, with the call of the mobile reserve, a group of 1000 soldiers is a small ...
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 13 October 2017 17: 40
      +4
      By the way, yes. No "breakthrough", just logical.
  3. Aaron Zawi
    Aaron Zawi 13 October 2017 10: 42
    +3
    I really can’t understand this step. Why they don’t want to unify the tank fleet as much as possible even in districts. Indeed, for logistics officers, it’s a real headache to supply a tank fleet of several modifications.
    1. Roma 1977
      Roma 1977 13 October 2017 11: 00
      +3
      Well, don't throw it away. They will use it until the modernization stock runs out.
    2. Victor-M
      Victor-M 13 October 2017 12: 48
      +1
      Quote: Aaron Zawi
      I really can’t understand this step. Why they don’t want to unify the tank fleet as much as possible even in districts. Indeed, for logistics officers, it’s a real headache to supply a tank fleet of several modifications.

      Let them learn better logistics in such conditions than later in a crisis they will not know what to do. hi
    3. Doliva63
      Doliva63 13 October 2017 17: 46
      +4
      I don’t know what “logistics officers” eat, in the Union the armored service was responsible for this. True, the unification of the tanks, it seems, was just at the district level, and in the Groups - at the army level. It’s just that, apparently, the post-Slavic voluntarism is still being disintegrated, it will pass over time.
      1. kirgiz58
        kirgiz58 13 October 2017 18: 55
        +2
        Quote: Doliva63
        The Union was in charge of the armored service

        And now she answers. If there are no mixed samples in the division (type 2 regiment on the T-72, one on the T-80) then there are no problems at all. Regimental and division repair kits of one nomenclature. For army structures it is harder, but also solvable. The fronts do not care at all (roughly speaking), the front-line repair and restoration bases (plants) operate according to a limited list of samples. Planning and timely collection of information at all levels is the main task of BPS.
  4. Nemesis
    Nemesis 13 October 2017 10: 48
    +1
    The fighting in Chechnya showed that the T-72 are better survivable than the T-80. I don’t think that re-equipping to 80s is a good idea
    1. Dangerous
      Dangerous 13 October 2017 11: 14
      +1
      Interesting, but you can in more detail?
      1. tomket
        tomket 13 October 2017 11: 27
        +2
        Quote: Dangerous
        Interesting, but you can in more detail?

        no such data)))))
        1. Nemesis
          Nemesis 13 October 2017 13: 05
          +1
          There is such data. It was after the first Chechen T-80 that was removed to the reserve and not used in the second
      2. Nemesis
        Nemesis 13 October 2017 13: 12
        +2
        T-72 has an electric automatic loader, there is nothing to burn in it. The T-80 has a hydraulic automatic loader from the T-64, it has engine oil that doesn’t burn badly, if that ... The ammunition shell on the T-72 is horizontal, all the shells on the tank bottom. If that, the driver has access to the top hatches on the tower and can leave the tank through them. On the T-80, the automatic loader is vertical, from the T-64. In the case of penetration of the armor, the shell gets directly into the ammunition, and the driver does not have access to the upper tower hatches ... With a certain position of the tank’s gun, the driver cannot leave the tank through his hatch ... So in Ukraine, during exercises, the driver of the T-64 drowned, in a stuck tank, the T-80 will be the same ... On the T-72, large-diameter rollers, they play the role of additional protection for the side of the tank. On the T-80, small-diameter rollers and part of the side are not covered what fighters actively used in Grozny. The side screens on both tanks have weak mounts and often fall off when maneuvering on the ground, in ruins, so all hope is on the rollers if you are in the T-72 ... In addition, the turbine on the T-80 draws in a lot of air, which makes the tank is vulnerable even for bottles with a combustible mixture ... It is much more difficult to set fire to a diesel T-72, and fire extinguishing systems on domestic tanks, in reality, are rarely operational.
        1. kirgiz58
          kirgiz58 13 October 2017 19: 06
          +2
          Quote: Nemesis
          T-72 has an electric automatic loader, there is nothing to burn in it. T-80 has a hydraulic automatic loader from T-64

          Actually, the T-72 is correct automatic loading, and on the T-80 mechanism loading, although not fundamentally. On both, the mechanic has the opportunity to leave the tank through the hatches of the commander and gunner. In addition, the tanks have a "drape" hatch. Each tank also has a tower emergency turn button. So in this regard there is no difference between the tanks. The main fundamental difference (I do not consider a fire control system) is maintenance. T-72 vs T-80 is like a penny against a BMW. This is what influenced.
          1. Nemesis
            Nemesis 14 October 2017 02: 47
            +1
            In order for the driver to gain access to the upper hatches on the tower, you need to remove part of the shells from the ammunition shell, and this does not always have time and effort, and it can jam all this, as in Ukraine, in the case of a drowned T-64 driver , which was never able to access the upper hatches, and this is in exercises, in peacetime, and not during battle ... ... Emergency turning of the tower is possible only on a serviceable tank, but not in battle, on a damaged one, but on He didn’t work at the training ground in Ukraine, the driver drowned ... The T-80 differs from the T-72 in faster speed and dynamics, it’s easier control for the driver, but it's all its advantages, but otherwise some disadvantages, and sights on the latest versions of the Soviet more T-72B (M) in 1988 is not worse ...
    2. tank66
      tank66 13 October 2017 12: 37
      +2
      Just quotes / from herehttp://www.btvt.narod.ru/2/tanks_in_grozny
      .htm /:
      "From the recollections of the tankers who participated in the battles for Grozny, we can conclude that they have no complaints about the resistance to armor and the effectiveness of the guns of the T-72 and T-80 tanks, which they had to fight in 1995-96."
      “The T-80BV tank of the 133th guards during the fighting in Grozny received 18 hits from an RPG and 1 detonation in a land mine. Having repeatedly been repaired and changed 4 crews, the tank ended fighting in Grozny as a tractor after damage to the barrel.”
      It's all about the "body kit" ...
    3. Lars971a
      Lars971a 13 October 2017 13: 04
      +2
      The tanks for protection are about the same. But the T-72 fire control system loses the T-80, AZ or MZ is an amateur, MZ is better for me, all the same, 28 shots in the AZ 22, that's all
      1. Michael newage
        Michael newage 13 October 2017 19: 08
        +1
        In the latest upgrades, the LMS is the same there, as I understand it. Pine-U with a thermal imager both there and there.
  5. RL
    RL 13 October 2017 10: 51
    +7
    Most recently, these tanks scolded for the fact that they consume a lot of fuel and laughed at the fact that Ukraine uses them in the ATO. They burn, they say, like matches.
    "God works in mysterious ways"
    Now it will be necessary to extol these tanks to heaven?
    1. Roma 1977
      Roma 1977 13 October 2017 10: 58
      +6
      It’s just that in Ukraine the T-80s remained at the level of the 1980s. And the Russians are substantially modernized.
      1. alexmach
        alexmach 13 October 2017 11: 44
        +1
        Truth? When were they modernized? And how did this affect their protected mouth?
        1. Roma 1977
          Roma 1977 13 October 2017 13: 13
          0
          Security there is already at a good level. But replacing the MSA with a modern one - this greatly adds level.
      2. zadorin1974
        zadorin1974 13 October 2017 12: 29
        0
        Excuse me, Roma, where will they be modernized? The Omsk plant has been carefully drove into bankruptcy for three years. Or has the government changed their minds and taken the plant under the state program? And no one has been involved in more than eighty years in Russia.
        1. Roma 1977
          Roma 1977 13 October 2017 13: 14
          0
          You can upgrade at least where. We are not talking about recycling the design. Stuffing is hung outside and inside.
          1. zadorin1974
            zadorin1974 13 October 2017 13: 32
            0
            Cool !!! Roman, if not a secret, who are you by education?
            1. Roma 1977
              Roma 1977 13 October 2017 15: 01
              0
              The machine builder.
    2. svp67
      svp67 13 October 2017 11: 31
      +3
      Quote: RL
      that Ukraine uses them in the ATO

      While she did not use them there, but now she is very actively preparing for this, adding tank companies equipped with these machines to the airmobile brigades
      1. RL
        RL 13 October 2017 11: 47
        0
        T-80 as part of the "airmobile brigades" ?! Well, my friend, you started pouring bullets!
        1. The brightest
          The brightest 13 October 2017 12: 15
          0
          Quote: RL
          T-80 as part of the "airmobile brigades" ?!

          Yes there is.
          Quote: RL
          Most recently, these tanks scolded for the fact that they consume a lot of fuel and laughed at the fact that Ukraine uses them in the ATO. They burn, they say, like matches.

          You had a dream, do not read the censor before going to bed.
    3. kirgiz58
      kirgiz58 13 October 2017 19: 15
      +1
      Quote: RL
      Most recently, these tanks scolded for the fact that they consume a lot of fuel and laughed at the fact that Ukraine uses them in the ATO. They burn, they say, like matches.

      They have a T-80 with a 6TDF diesel engine (power-saw bench). These masterpieces were cantemated. Caught up with the average and didn’t even do it, they immediately wrote off. Although the tanks undergo more than one average and major repair, they are written off if the body is burned or the bottom is bent.
  6. rocket757
    rocket757 13 October 2017 11: 00
    +6
    Tanks "La Mancha" went into operation, is not it clear? were these machines not “sharpened” for defense?
    Apparently they collect everything that is. In addition, at the time, the presence of these tanks, very “inspired” our neighbors!
  7. Bomb
    Bomb 13 October 2017 11: 06
    +1
    Preparing for the mess is in full swing ...
  8. assa67
    assa67 13 October 2017 11: 08
    +5
    and where is the T-90, "Almaty"? .... could they even provide cantemation with the latest technology ... or is it only for parades? request
    1. Muvka
      Muvka 13 October 2017 11: 13
      +4
      The former are being modernized, the latter are being tested. What does not suit you?
  9. san4es
    san4es 13 October 2017 11: 14
    +5
    Reservation of T-80 tanks soldier
    1. Doliva63
      Doliva63 13 October 2017 17: 56
      +5
      Am I already confused with something - in the GSVG the 80s were BV or U?
      1. san4es
        san4es 13 October 2017 17: 59
        +2
        Quote: Doliva63
        Am I already confused with something - in the GSVG the 80s were BV or U?

        hi ... It's better Serega (Svarog) will tell soldier
        he is from those lands
        1. Svarog51
          Svarog51 14 October 2017 01: 33
          +9
          Sanya, hi hi Although I am from those parts, I am significantly inferior to Valentine in knowledge. My specialization is not the same; I served in aviation. But he got in touch with various equipment more than mine, already enviably. good drinks soldier
          1. Mordvin 3
            Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 01: 43
            +3
            Quote: Svarog51
            But he got in touch with various equipment more than mine, already enviably.

            Why can't you sleep? I can’t sleep, I knock down the temperature. Does not work. crying Chat hunting. Though about tanks, at least something else. laughing drinks
            1. Svarog51
              Svarog51 14 October 2017 02: 15
              +9
              Volodya, sort of agreed on a "you"? Just Seryoga. I’m a pensioner, I’ve already had enough sleep, and even less people - to read and delve quietly. I’ll be happy to compose the company in a night conversation, just so that I don’t clog the site — here is the mail [email protected], my computer connects, so I need to log out and enter the VO. A "soap" works properly and in parallel with the site. drinks
              1. Mordvin 3
                Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 02: 38
                +3
                Quote: Svarog51
                I’m a pensioner, I’ve already had enough sleep, and even less people - to read and delve quietly.

                And here I am in the thread about Stalingrad, I’m writing all sorts of reports of Manstein. I know a lot of them, just too lazy to press buttons. drinks
                1. Svarog51
                  Svarog51 14 October 2017 02: 52
                  +8
                  And here I am in the thread about Stalingrad, I’m writing all sorts of reports of Manstein. I know a lot of them, just too lazy to press buttons.

                  Are you manually retyping them? I would copy it - it's easier. I'll take a look. drinks
                  1. Mordvin 3
                    Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 03: 07
                    +3
                    Quote: Svarog51
                    Are you manually retyping them?

                    So they are in my book. About the Shubnikov corps. request
                    1. Svarog51
                      Svarog51 14 October 2017 03: 22
                      +9
                      So download the book in text form from an Internet and copy from there. Anyway, it will be faster than manually retyping the text. You can also use a scanner, or a photo app. Can I help with anything? soldier
                      1. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 03: 33
                        +3
                        Quote: Svarog51
                        Can I help with anything?

                        No thanks. I’m still a computer literate. laughing Better I’ll poke buttons. hi
                    2. Svarog51
                      Svarog51 14 October 2017 03: 49
                      +9
                      I’m still a computer literate.

                      Do you think I have a lot of grams? Together we can handle it somehow. Give the name of the book and the author. And a few words to me in the mail. I will look for a book, download it and send it to you, there is such an opportunity in the mail. You will just copy the text. good
                      1. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 04: 01
                        +3
                        Quote: Svarog51
                        Come on book title

                        Circle on the map. V. Baksakov.
                    3. Svarog51
                      Svarog51 14 October 2017 04: 18
                      +9
                      Here is the link where you can download http://www.rulit.me/author/baskakov-vladimir-evti
                      hianovich / kruzhok-na-karte-download-free-165762.h
                      tml
                      Or I can send by mail, I already downloaded. good
                      1. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 14 October 2017 04: 21
                        +3
                        Quote: Svarog51
                        Or I can send by mail, I already downloaded

                        No, I can handle it myself. drinks
      2. Michael newage
        Michael newage 13 October 2017 19: 10
        0
        B and BV most likely. “U” came out a bit late. If he was there, then not for long.
      3. flanker7
        flanker7 14 October 2017 22: 26
        0
        in our battalion were BV
  10. Dwarf with nose
    Dwarf with nose 13 October 2017 11: 17
    0
    Quote: Bomb
    Preparing for the mess is in full swing ...

    What a mess, they won’t fight with us for the next year and a half, they will shake us from the inside. We have not left the whole campromat to the GDP and its entourage.
    But chekhorda with tanks is not clear at all. And the truth is what about the T90 or Armata?
  11. vipdollar
    vipdollar 13 October 2017 11: 30
    0
    The T 80 has 2 ways or to remain in the last century with a heated loader, which, like 41 years old, manually sends a shell into the barrel with his hands and then reaches for the sleeve and sends it to the barrel with his hands and remains in the last century or urgently put the full automatic loader, like on the T72 and go to the present century. Urgent dismissal of all those who designed the T80 and who left the loader gasping out from overwork.
    1. Stepych
      Stepych 13 October 2017 11: 43
      +2
      the T-80 has an automatic loader, where did you get the idea that it doesn’t?

      In my opinion, the autoloader began to be used with the T-64 (if it does not change the memory)
    2. tihon4uk
      tihon4uk 13 October 2017 11: 59
      +4
      Is the t-80 charging? AZ is originally there, you are confusing something.
      1. Victor-M
        Victor-M 13 October 2017 12: 52
        +5
        Quote: tihon4uk
        Is the t-80 charging? AZ is originally there, you are confusing something.

        It’s just that the T-80 AZ they have in service with them in Latvia is broken, but they don’t know about it. laughing
      2. Doliva63
        Doliva63 13 October 2017 17: 58
        +4
        Hmm, AZ - always had 72s, and 64 and 80 had MZs, didn't they?
    3. andrewkor
      andrewkor 13 October 2017 13: 00
      0
      Well, you and Eksperd, said like in a puddle ....! Probably confused with Abrasha or Leo
    4. Alf
      Alf 13 October 2017 22: 28
      0
      Quote: vipdollar
      T 80 has 2 ways or to remain in the last century with a heated loader, which, like 41 years old, manually sends a shell into the barrel with his hands and then reaches for the sleeve and sends it to the barrel with his hands

      Did you understand what you said? Abrams with the T-80 is not confused? Or have the Air Force revised?
  12. RL
    RL 13 October 2017 11: 43
    0
    There was an Italian film - "The investigation is complete, forget it"
    Now, have the T-14 shown in the parade? - Forget it. Upgrading the T-72 is cheaper. Not only "no money", but also the necessary, "imported" electronics too.
    1. Thunderbolt
      Thunderbolt 13 October 2017 12: 26
      0
      The modernization of the old equipment is in no way connected with the introduction of the new one into the troops. It has always been and I hope it will be. Is it different in the NATO armies? A modern armored object appears and immediately send the old equipment to the landfill or squeeze its modernization to the maximum from the equipment potential?
      1. RL
        RL 13 October 2017 12: 32
        0
        No, it’s just that they’re not promoting a new one at the level of hysteria, or even promoting it at all. Just work
        1. Michael newage
          Michael newage 13 October 2017 13: 17
          +4
          They didn’t publicize it, they showed it at the parade a couple of times so that partners could troll and that’s all. So often done, since the days of the USSR. They showed a technique that did not even go into a series. Purely for lulz. But they were upset, they realized their wretchedness with charging niggas and in return they can only crow "coco coco reinforcement cardboard, upgrade coco coco old rubbish and close the armature" laughing . She is even more often criticized by igersperts like you. What kind of imported electronics are there on the armature, what would it replace import, do not tell? I will prompt. NO, just some Czech friend didn’t decide to pamper and sprinkle with saliva.
          1. rocket757
            rocket757 13 October 2017 14: 33
            +4
            I wonder why write off the technique, which after modernization can adequately withstand the alleged enemy ??? The enemy that spaceships with lasers ???
            It is necessary to expand and undress the whole country. but make a new wunderwafle ??? Moreover, it is still "raw" neither MTO, nor service staff nor crews are ready for it ... this is a long process.
            We have WHAT, there was a war tomorrow ??? Careful and calmer needed.
            1. Doliva63
              Doliva63 13 October 2017 18: 02
              +5
              Um. Here at the expense of war there is no need to get excited. The army and industry should think just that - what if tomorrow is war?
              Someone's expression says - the army is either fighting, or preparing for war, in the third state it is decomposed.
              1. rocket757
                rocket757 13 October 2017 19: 00
                +3
                Our army does not seem to be bored!
                We are fighting little by little, and indeed exercises, games, friendly maneuvers if all this is carried out on garlic !!! skill and experience accumulate in everyone !!!
                And believe me, our teachings and maneuvers to Western warriors can only be dreamed of in nightmares ... I had to hear the statements of other warriors on this topic. Even somehow it was nice to see expressions of horror on their faces !!! So, it’s funny for me to see these po ... faces flowing through the lip to the camera, we are somehow backward, not skillful ......................... HA_HA_HA and again HA.
          2. The comment was deleted.
  13. gorenina91
    gorenina91 13 October 2017 18: 01
    0
    - It’s good that these T-80s didn’t fall into the hands of the Ishilovites ... -But they could really get into ... -And how hard it would be for the Syrian army ...
    1. rocket757
      rocket757 13 October 2017 19: 04
      +3
      These tanks are not intended for positional combat ... their destiny is fast maneuverable, linear battle ... offensive !!! In urban conditions they would be burned.
      1. gorenina91
        gorenina91 13 October 2017 19: 10
        0
        -Well, in the desert ...- these high-speed and maneuverable tanks would come in handy ... -Also they are supposedly very "voracious" ... -so there is oil all around ...- at least pour in ... -as times for such tanks ...
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 13 October 2017 19: 17
          +3
          The main hostilities still took place in and around the cities ... the desert is just a zone of movement for everyone and everywhere. blocking it is not realistic, but it’s better to move quickly on off-road vehicles.
  14. dDYHA
    dDYHA 13 October 2017 18: 28
    0
    And what parts will Armata be armed with? After all, the Kantemirovs count the court part.
    1. Gransasso
      Gransasso 13 October 2017 18: 33
      +1
      Quote: dDYHA
      And what parts will Armata be armed with? After all, the Kantemirovs count the court part.



      Parts of Arbat Military District
      1. rocket757
        rocket757 13 October 2017 19: 10
        +3
        The Oracle is crushed ... the fantasy does not extend beyond the Arbat.
        When they will rearm, then we will find out
      2. Michael newage
        Michael newage 13 October 2017 19: 15
        +1
        Do not worry, joker, we will arm the Serbs with them. So that they, if you behave badly, quickly, through the balkans, take Rome laughing .
        1. rocket757
          rocket757 13 October 2017 20: 07
          +3
          For Rome, at one time, there were enough barbarians ... with bows, so we will keep the “Almaty” for ourselves.
  15. kirgiz58
    kirgiz58 13 October 2017 21: 12
    +1
    iConst,
    I presented evidence to your question, and again you are the "water" of philosophy and not a single fact of my "hollow-bones". You are a Troll and I no longer feed you. So what is the weather like?
  16. SMP
    SMP 13 October 2017 22: 39
    0
    For tank units, speed matters.
    Alexey Khlopotov, historian of tank construction, told the newspaper.


    The historian is good, but criticism of the modernized T-80BVM will not hurt, although I myself now run the risk of running into no less criticism.
    But still I’ll try. Modernization is very badly done, the T-72B3 is one thing, with optimal modernization in terms of price and combat effectiveness, but for the T-80 this approach is unacceptable in principle.

    I analyzed the modernization of the T-80 and honestly at a loss from unsolved problems that could solve.
    1. The problem of uneven leverage, due to which spurious diagonal oscillations are created, which are difficult to predict by Sosna-U automation and horizontal gun stabilization.
    That is, all six support points of the balancers from the port side and starboard side are displaced from each other, creating on the one side the lever pressure force is greater, and on the other side less, aft per revolution.
    The first figure shows the pressure difference between the lever and the torsion bar aft.
    1. SMP
      SMP 13 October 2017 22: 51
      +1
      accidentally hit the key .. repeat
      For tank units, speed matters.
      Alexey Khlopotov, historian of tank construction, told the newspaper.


      The historian is good, but criticism of the modernized T-80BVM will not hurt, although I myself now run the risk of running into no less criticism.
      But still I’ll try. Modernization is very badly done, the T-72B3 is one thing, with optimal modernization in terms of price and combat effectiveness, but for the T-80 this approach is unacceptable in principle.
      I analyzed the modernization of the T-80 and honestly at a loss from unsolved problems that could solve.
      1. The problem of uneven leverage, due to which spurious diagonal oscillations are created, which are difficult to predict by Sosna-U automation and horizontal gun stabilization.
      That is, all six support points of the balancers from the port side and starboard side are displaced from each other, creating on the one side the lever pressure force is greater, and on the other side less, aft per revolution.
      The first figure shows the pressure difference between the lever and the torsion bar aft.

      The second figure shows the difference in lever pressure on the torsion bars in the nose of the T-80.

      In the photo, the difference between the red and green strip marking the lever of the left and right side balancers is highlighted in light blue.
      That is, with the same weight of the left and right sides of the frontal part of the tank, a non-uniform lever is obtained not in the form of a curved body, but because of the difference in the distance of the mounting points of the balancers from the bow to the mounting of the balancer to the torsion bar, the lever is larger on the left side, the right side is the lever less.
      This leads to greater subsidence of the left bow of the T-80, and to uneven diagonal fluctuations. If it’s simple, then the first and second torsion bar are stiffer because of the shorter lever,
      and the left first and second torsion bars are softer due to the longer lever, and by a turn, when the torsions are located aft.
      And despite the independent suspension, the T-80 begins to limp on the left side, maybe 1 cm,
      and at a speed of more than 30 km per hour maybe 2 cm ??? It is necessary to measure.

      If you add to this an unbalanced tower, namely the frontal part of the tower along with the gun is heavier than the rear of the tower.
      This also affects shooting when moving, if the tower rotates 45 degrees to the left side, that is, because of its heavier front part with a gun, the left first, second, third balancers sag more than when the tower rotates to the right.
      The T-80 begins to limp heavily on the left side when the tower is turned to the left by 30-45-60 degrees.
      And when moving, the inertia force is also imposed, which swings the left side even more and not a single shock absorber can cope with this.
      Parallel torsion bars affect firing accuracy as well as the absence of a fuel tank on the gun barrel,
      and tower imbalance also affects the lack of a bend sensor.
      Maybe because of this they ruined the Omsk Tank Plant?
      Since the project of modernization Burlak took all this into account, including the imbalance of the tower.
      Balanced the installation of the turret of the A3 container on the stern of the turret with ammunition and removed additional shells from the hull, which increased the survivability of the machine.

      Conclusion the modernization of the T-80BVM is unsatisfactory in general, since there is no new refueling complex and costs the old times of the USSR, which is worse than on Armata and the T-90 of the latest modifications, there is also no barrel bend sensor.
      The T-80BVM in this is much inferior even to the M1A2 SEP2, since firing accuracy is possibly even two worse than that of Abrams, the lack of a bend sensor and a strong subsidence to the left side will lead to severe errors in the calculations of the fire control system (LMS) "Pine -U when turning the tower to the left side, and the old fueling device leads to a greater curvature of the barrel compared to Abrams.

      That is, the T-80BVM will be heavily smeared to the left with a tank duel with M1A2 Abrams.
      If we had carried out a Burlak-type modernization by balancing the cast turret of the T-80 with an A3 container at the stern, and installing a cannon with a TZK similar to the T-14 and the barrel sensor, adding a new program to the SOSNA-U control system with adjustments for the torsion bar subsidence on the left side, and additional data from the bending sensor of the barrel, the T-80, when dueling with M1A2, would shoot on an equal footing, and taking into account better maneuverability would surpass it.

      Going back to WWII? Panther duel with twice the best Zeiss optics and more accurate gun and T-34?
      But only now there is still time to change everything, unlike 1943.

      This is only an observant amateur and the conclusion of several photos, it would be nice if I was wrong ..
      1. Michael newage
        Michael newage 13 October 2017 23: 56
        +1
        One question and one hunch:
        Why are you sure that not the parallelism of the suspension affects the shooting so much? 2 cm at 30 km / h on the intersection? Seriously? Yes, a tank can dive into a 50 cm pit and the OMS with a stub should have time to make these amendments. The same thing with the balance of the tower.

        AZ in the tower is an idea so-so. Its vulnerability is greatly increased. But there is no loader. It was like a project for two AZ, one in the building, one in the tower. But this is also not easy. The tank will become more complicated and more expensive.
        1. SMP
          SMP 14 October 2017 00: 19
          +1
          Why are you sure that not the parallelism of the suspension affects the shooting so much? 2 cm at 30 km / h on the intersection? Seriously?


          This is just an example, since the more subsidence and swinging, the harder it is to stabilize the gun on a horizontal plane, and if the swinging to the right side is less when turning 45 degrees, then the gun stabilizer can cope.
          If, when turning to the left by 45 degrees, the subsidence more on the intersection, the wobble also increases even without holes, and the gun stabilizer begins to cope, overloading the brains of Sosny-U.
          I meant it.
          And about the combat compartment of Burlak, here is the link http://www.btvt.narod.ru/3/omsk_turret.htm
          And photo


          Protection A3 against anti-tank systems.


          The most important thing... Quote from the article;
          Only 72 is placed in the conveyor AZ of the T-90B / T-22 tank, and the remaining 21 shots are placed in non-mechanized combat packs in the hull and turret; the pipeline is replenished by new shots manually, requiring considerable effort and time (the rate of charge when charging from non-mechanized 1,5 stacking is 2 minutes), which in a combat situation increases the likelihood of defeat by the enemy and therefore is a significant drawback.
          The proposed modernization option solves the problem of increasing the combat effectiveness of the T-72, T-80 and T-90 tanks to the level of modern requirements by installing a bulky AZ. In the turret of the tank with the fighting compartment is placed the second automatic loader, equipped with a carousel conveyor (similar to the AZ of the T-72 tank) with cartridges for laying shells, located at the bottom of the tank hull.
          Thus, in a modernized tank, the entire tank ammunition is automated; if a battered AZ is defeated, the tank is able to continue the battle using the AZ located at the bottom of the hull. In the presence of enemy tanks, loading is carried out by a shot of increased power from a zabazhennogo automatic loader, in other cases, shots from the AZ located at the bottom of the hull.
          To intensify the development of the T-72B, T-72B1, T-80, T-80BB, T-90 (T-80 "Burlak", T-90 "Burlak") tanks upgraded (according to the results of the RBC Burlak), a computer complex is being developed learning tools.

          The use of a new removable armored transport-loading container with an automatic loading mechanism allows the use of modern projectiles of increased power (increased length).

          In the A3 T-90, core length limits are limited to 540 mm, in the M3 T-80 I do not understand exactly but somewhere 570 mm or 600 mm.
          The Omsk version allows you to accommodate 900-1000 mm, that is, a maximum of what 125 mm caliber is capable of.
          And this is important because 900 mm can be pierced in the forehead of the Abrams tower, but they cannot penetrate 570 mm in the forehead of the Abrams, the cumulative jet of 125 mm of the 850 mm projectile
          frontal armor Abras 860 mm.
          That's all the arithmetic.
          1. Michael newage
            Michael newage 14 October 2017 00: 29
            0
            These two centimeters will not affect anything, because already wrote, at the intersection the tank will be sausage in different directions constantly and the MSA is unlikely to depend on this.

            As for the AZ in the tower. Advertising is good, BUT: Expensive. Increases weight. Complicates maintenance. Decreases reliability. Plus, for installation, you need to cut the tower, as I understand it. As for longer shells and penetration. Shells can be modified without increasing their size. There is hope that this reserve has remained. Plus, you can increase the power of the guns and now you can take abrams in the forehead. Moreover, in the forehead of the case, the armor is smaller, sort of.
            1. SMP
              SMP 14 October 2017 00: 44
              0
              These two centimeters will not affect anything, because already wrote, at the intersection the tank will be sausage in different directions constantly and the MSA is unlikely to depend on this.


              This is the difference between the left and right side and this is conditional, in mid-terrain the difference should increase
              on the ?? cm.
              But in a very bad terrain, the difference between the left and right side can reach critical dimensions.

              When A. Morozov created the T-64, the first thing he did was abandon the parallel torsion bars, and put on the T-64 coaxial torsion bars aligned in one line.
              What is most interesting is a lot of data on the shooting of the T-64 \ 72 \ 80 on the fly in the USSR in the 80s, so the T-64 was superior in accuracy to the T-72 and the latest at that time T-80.

              By the way, in Israel, and apparently not without leakage from the KhTZ, they equipped their Merkava with a spring suspension with symmetrically located track rollers like on the T-64, and a balanced tower.

              Today in the world there is only a merkava that is not affected by diagonal vibrations, and the T-64 has already been withdrawn from service.

              But the same problem is on the Abrams, and on the Leopards-2, and on the Challengers-2, and on the Leclerks and on the T-90, T-14 Armata.

              These are just observations, but in fact ????
              But I believe the genius of A. Morozov who created the T-34 \ 85, T-54 \ 55, T-64.
              He suffered from coaxial torsions for a very long time because they were short and often broke at first, then brought to mind.
              Why is he so stubbornly defended this idea by categorically abandoning parallel torsion bars???? but did not have time ...
              1. Michael newage
                Michael newage 14 October 2017 01: 10
                +1
                What is most interesting is a lot of data on the shooting of the T-64 \ 72 \ 80 on the fly in the USSR in the 80s, so the T-64 was superior in accuracy to the T-72 and the latest at that time T-80.

                Siilno doubt, T-72, maybe, but at 80 MSA it was MUCH better.

                Why is he so stubbornly defended this idea by categorically abandoning parallel torsion bars

                Because the warriors had strict weight restrictions for the new tank, and the suspension with short torsion bars is lighter. A compulsory measure in general, in no way connected with the accuracy of firing on the move.

                He suffered from coaxial torsions for a very long time because they were short and often broke at first, then brought to mind.

                That is why no one does them to this day. These are short torsion bars. They are too weak, and modern Western tanks weigh 15-20 tons more than 64. Or springs, or long torsion bars, or hydropneumatics.
                1. SMP
                  SMP 14 October 2017 08: 57
                  0
                  That is why no one does them to this day. These are short torsion bars. They are too weak, and modern Western tanks weigh 15-20 tons more than 64. Or springs, or long torsion bars, or hydropneumatics.


                  Yes, this is so, and the USSR by 1979 was the only country that mastered the production of coaxial torsion bars without marriage

                  torsion bars stopped breaking, and nursed on a resource on a par with T-55, T-72. In the West, they still can’t do this, do you think if the Israelis could have delivered extremely vulnerable springs?
                  That is just the case until now, neither in the USA, nor in Germany, nor in France.
                2. SMP
                  SMP 14 October 2017 09: 13
                  0
                  Siilno doubt, T-72, maybe, but at 80 MSA it was MUCH better.


                  I'll try to get my point across in the pictures, maybe I'm wrong ???
                  But I saw it ....

                  1. Violet and red highlighted two lines of the left and right side torsion bars.
                  2. Light green highlighted two (1-2) front left, and two rear (5-6) right torsion bars which are affected by increased mass due to the longer lever in the form of a housing.
                  3. The yellow and blue arrows highlighted two shock absorbers that have to conditionally experience two heavy loads in order to extinguish the vertical rocking of the bow and stern of the hull, when driving over rough terrain at speed.

                  That is, unlike the front right and rear left.
                  The front left and rear right shock absorbers can not cope due to the higher load and the tank begins to swing diagonally indicated by the blue arrow.


                  This is the coaxial torsion bar T-64B
                  which are free from childhood diseases and have the same resource as the T-72.

                  The torsion bars are aligned, that is, lined up, so the T-64 body was spared the diagonal rocking of the tank, which is indicated by the blue arrow in the figure above.
                  In this I saw the ingenious insight of A. Morozov, who, before his death, dopped the T-64 chassis but with seven (7) track rollers on board.
                  Then they tried to make Boxer out of it.

                  In principle, that's all, there’s nothing more to add.
            2. SMP
              SMP 14 October 2017 09: 31
              0
              As for the AZ in the tower. Advertising is good, BUT: Expensive. Increases weight. Complicates maintenance. Decreases reliability. Plus, for installation, you need to cut the tower, as I understand it


              The tower is not only for modernization, there are also new ones, the Black Eagle, and Burlak is already finished and tested on the T-72.


              The main advantage of the idea of ​​the Omsk hull in my opinion is the ability to get rid of all non-mechanized ammunition, freeing up space to move the turret back by moving the center of gravity closer to the stern, which will allow an increase in mass without adding a seventh torsion bar.

              And most importantly, the center of the gun’s stabilization will shift exactly in the center of the case Plus, it will additionally increase the booking of a weakened area in the area of ​​a driver mechanic's crossings.

              What was not possible with the old layout of the T-72 \ 90 in which the center of mass and gun stabilization center is shifted closer to the bow. And this affects the accuracy of shooting when driving at high speeds.

              Plus, the windshield in the area of ​​the fur water periscopes is weakened.

              I mean, it is not yet known whether microwave weapons will be massive or not, if there will be massive use of robots bye including T-14.
              You will need tanks with a backup optical part that the microwave naturally will not be able to disable, and will burn the monitors and electronics.

              Where else can this be discussed if not on VO and similar resources smile
              1. SMP
                SMP 14 October 2017 09: 34
                0
                The drawing did not pass, I will try again.

                The main advantage of the idea of ​​the Omsk hull in my opinion is the ability to get rid of all non-mechanized ammunition, freeing up space to move the turret back by moving the center of gravity closer to the stern, which will allow an increase in mass without adding a seventh torsion bar.



                And most importantly, the center of the gun’s stabilization will be shifted exactly in the center of the hull, plus it will additionally increase the reservation of the weakened area in the area of ​​the driver’s mechanic crossings.
              2. Golovan Jack
                Golovan Jack 14 October 2017 09: 49
                +7
                Quote: SMP
                And this affects the accuracy of shooting when driving at high speeds.

                Nobody shoots at "high speeds." WOT to you, there, yes, it’s mona ...
                Quote: SMP
                it is not yet known whether microwave weapons will be massive or not, if there will be massive use of robots bye including T-14

                Are you talking about now? hurt themselves said nothing?
                Translate to human, if possible, you are incomprehensible so far ...
      2. Lars971a
        Lars971a 14 October 2017 20: 52
        +2
        On all domestic tanks, the torsion bars of one side are offset relative to the opposite side, because the torsion bar is equal in length to the width of the tank body. With the exception of the T-64, there the torsion bars in length are half the width of the tank body. In general, the displacement of the track of one side relative to the other is not critical because the tank is firing on rough terrain ..........
      3. Golovan Jack
        Golovan Jack 14 October 2017 22: 54
        +6
        You tell some horrors ...
        Quote: SMP
        The T-80 begins to limp heavily on the left side when the tower is turned to the left by 30-45-60 degrees.
        And when moving, the inertia force is also imposed, which swings the left side even more and no shock absorber can cope with it

        Arms stabilizer, what, canceled, or what?
        Quote: Michael Newage
        Yes, a tank can dive into a pit of 50 cm and a special control system with a stub should make these amendments

        Just about ... exactly.
        1. SMP
          SMP 15 October 2017 10: 11
          0
          Arms stabilizer, what, canceled, or what?


          One of inalienable parts of intelligence, is mindfulness,
          that is, the individual’s ability to last arbitrary attention.

          Quote SMP: This is just an example, since the more subsidence and swinging, the harder it is to stabilize the gun on a horizontal plane, and if the swinging to the right is less when turning 45 degrees, then the gun stabilizer will cope.
          If, when turning to the left by 45 degrees, the subsidence more on the intersection, the wobble also increases even without holes, and the gun stabilizer begins to cope, overloading the brains of Sosny-U.


          Without participating in the dialogue, and without familiarizing themselves with what they were writing to each other,
          what topic was raised, and what was the discussion about,
          so brazenly not understanding insult?
          Are you talking about now? hurt themselves said nothing?
          ..... so far ..


          Victim of the Bologna, five-point, education system, this YOU explanations, in my comment, or, judging by the words (..so far ..) which you use to express your thoughts ..... to understand at least that something, you are not capable in principle ..
          On literal system, knowledge assessment, I would give you an assessment Е.
          do not strain, you still do not understand.
          1. Golovan Jack
            Golovan Jack 15 October 2017 10: 34
            +7
            Quote: SMP
            If, when turning to the left by 45 degrees, the subsidence more on the intersection, the swinging also increases even without holes, and the gun stabilizer begins to cope ...

            Did you come up with this yourself, or did someone tell you this?
            So - this is complete nonsense, dear.
            On a flat track, due to the "limping" of the tank, the stabilizer "can not cope" ... I have never heard more delirium.
            Quote: SMP
            ... judging by the words (..so far ..) that you use to express your thoughts ..... to understand at least that something, you are not capable in principle ...

            so far is an analogue of our so far, so far. However, judging by the literacy of your presentation of your (and whether yours, by the way?) Thoughts you do not know. Happenes request
            Yes, and you don’t need to poke strangers, rudeness, even on the Internet, is fraught ... sideways yes
  17. Anchonsha
    Anchonsha 13 October 2017 23: 05
    +1
    In terms of their maneuverability and speed capabilities, such tanks are needed by the Kantemirovs so that they can solve operational problems after Schengen visas after missile target shelling of the enemy
  18. selivan1
    selivan1 14 October 2017 22: 25
    0
    Quote: Alf
    Quote: Michael Newage
    There has never been such a question. At the same time, tanks on T-72 and T-80 carts with gas turbine engines served.
    And their latest modifications T-90M and T-80BVM, even shown at the same time. And both of them were chosen, as a standard for upgrading older versions. And the budget version of the T-72B3 in the load yes .

    Why T-72B3? Maybe it's time to stop on the tandem T-80 + T-90? And then the pants can tear.

    Because the T-72B3 can be refilled with anything, at least salary can be drained from Kamaz, and the T-80 with a gas turbine engine will not immediately find a gas station in Europe.
  19. Golovan Jack
    Golovan Jack 14 October 2017 22: 41
    +6
    "The updated tank received a modern fire control system (LMS)" Sosna-U "with a thermal imager, a laser range finder and an automatic target tracking. LMS detects even small objects at any time and in any weather conditions

    The thermal imager is gut. The escort machine is also gut.
    For the T-80BVM gunner, it is enough to aim the sight at the target and press the button. "Pine" will automatically calculate the necessary amendments and open fire.

    But such chips were still on 64-ke ... Measurement - Reset - Measurement - Shot ...
    MSA "itself" does not open fire, by the way. And it is right laughing
  20. SMP
    SMP 15 October 2017 09: 45
    0
    Quote: Golovan Jack
    Quote: SMP
    And this affects the accuracy of shooting when driving at high speeds.

    Nobody shoots at "high speeds." WOT to you, there, yes, it’s mona ...
    Quote: SMP
    it is not yet known whether microwave weapons will be massive or not, if there will be massive use of robots bye including T-14

    Are you talking about now? hurt themselves said nothing?
    Translate to human, if possible, you are incomprehensible so far ...


    With you fool I did not communicate.
    Despite the openness of the forum, I got into a polite alien dialogue ...... Who are you? woodpecker?

    Are you talking about now? hurt themselves said nothing?


    wassat laughing now ..... hurt ourselves .... said nothing ... ????? ..... what

    Тyy this is in what language are you trying to squeeze something like a thought from your motorcycle? AND? laughing
    You capable of forming thoughts of more than five words?

    In advance ....... save your time, do not write more laughing I will not answer ....
  21. SMP
    SMP 15 October 2017 10: 22
    0
    Quote: Lars971A
    On all domestic tanks, the torsion bars of one side are offset relative to the opposite side, because the torsion bar is equal in length to the width of the tank body. With the exception of the T-64, there the torsion bars in length are half the width of the tank body. In general, the displacement of the track of one side relative to the other is not critical because the tank is firing on rough terrain ..........


    Maybe I'm not special, just watching and thinking.


    In fact, everything is not so simple, there are many problems and all are serious, a single methodology has not been worked out ... NET DENEG request