Military Review

"Tanks of TV Channel" - T-80 back in the ranks

83



One of the main trump cards of the USSR and, accordingly, the entire Warsaw Pact, in addition to the Soviet nuclear missile shield, were armored armades deployed in the Western Group of Forces (which were armed with five thousand tanks and more than 10 thousand armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles) capable of breaking through the defense of the NATO countries as soon as possible and cutting the continent with tank wedges.

However, in the light of the collapse of the Eastern bloc and the destruction of the Soviet Union, and the “new thinking” that led to these events, the solution of such tasks for our Armed Forces was considered irrelevant. And the formidable fighting vehicles, which terrified our enemies, were rusted by the useless under the rain and snow in the “tank cemeteries”.

However, in addition to these tragic monuments of betrayal of national interests, there are still a lot of Soviet equipment new and after major repairs in long-term storage warehouses. She was sentenced to recycling as obsolete, and a corresponding federal targeted program was adopted. The FTP “Industrial Utilization of Armaments and Military Equipment for 2011-2015 Years and for the Period to 2020 Year” assumed the dismantling and subsequent processing of about 10 thousand units of Soviet-made armored weapons and equipment, accumulated at storage bases and released after the reduction of armed forces and, as then it was believed that had no prospects for further use.

However, the current situation in the world and the threats quite openly addressed to our country have made serious adjustments to these plans. As the head of the Defense Ministry’s Main Armored Directorate, Lieutenant-General Alexander Shevchenko, said, due to the alarming international situation and the increased volume of combat training of the Russian Army, only 4000 armored vehicles will be recycled. The rest will be modernized - some will go to the Russian Armed Forces, some will be exported to the Allied countries as part of military-technical cooperation.

"Bronestarichkam" change engines and equip the "Arena-E"

As noted by Alexander Shevchenko, recently, new technical and technological solutions have emerged for the deep modernization of outdated equipment and its transformation into modern models. And indeed it is. For example, Muromteplovoz OJSC developed modernization technologies, most light Soviet armored vehicles - PT-76, BTR 60-70-80, BTR-50 and BMP-1. And on the basis of MTLB created a whole range of combat vehicles for various purposes. The Tula Instrument Engineering Design Bureau (KBP), a group of companies Metapol (Russia, Belarus and Slovakia), which have developed combat modules for armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles, offer their own ways of modernizing equipment. Actually, as part of the modernization, gasoline engines (like the BRDM and BTR-60) are being replaced with diesel engines, increasing their power, replacing the warhead and reinforcing weapons, installing thermal imaging and night sights, new communication systems, strengthening the defense complex, including systems active protection, like "Arena-E", and even the installation of automatic combat modules. Very often, from the original source remains only the body and chassis. But even this approach allows not only to save considerable funds and to speed up the rearmament process, but also to dramatically increase the number of armor in the troops. By the way, most of the options for upgraded technology have been tested in local conflicts, including in Syria, and have shown the validity and success of this approach. In fact, we are talking about a completely new, modern technology, with radically improved combat characteristics.

T-80 can work on almost any "fuel"

Upgrade not only lightweight equipment. Today it is known that the T-80 “first strike tanks” will be upgraded for the Armed Forces. These machines with unique gas turbine engines capable of going at speeds of 70 km per hour were created to break through the NATO defense and roll to the English Channel. The power plant T-80 can work on almost any "fuel", from fuel oil to gasoline, which tankers could get anywhere - at the gas station, railway station, port, even at the airfield.

The Ministry of Defense and the Uralvagonzavod Scientific Industrial Corporation have already formulated the requirements for the new look of the “reactive” T-80 tank (this is how it was called because of the characteristic sound of the engine, resembling that produced by a jet). He will receive dynamic armor, active protection, a new sighting system, automatic target tracking, as well as high-power ammunition. And, importantly - fuel efficiency. Recall that the fuel consumption of the non-modernized T-80 reaches 8 liters per kilometer, which is 2-4 times more than the T-90. In the new version, the flow will be significantly reduced. A long-term modernization contract was signed at the Army-2017 exhibition and forum. And "Omsktransmash" begins work on giving a new look to the "tank of Maneman". According to experts, through this program can go to 3500 of these machines.

As we see, the provocative and aggressive policy of the West brings to its new life its main nightmares of the Cold War period, forgotten today. The armored armada, which terrified Europe, are returning to the western frontiers of our Motherland, clearly showing that the defense of Russia will not be passive.
Author:
Originator:
https://vpk-news.ru/articles/39950
83 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. Michael67
    Michael67 26 November 2017 07: 40 New
    +8
    Correct solution. The master.
    It is a pity that with the destroyers of the 956th project at the time they did not decide so.
    1. Herculesic
      Herculesic 26 November 2017 08: 00 New
      +4
      So for them there are no engines, and to remake the compartment for a different type, the same problem, generally there are no turbines, and it is not known when it will appear! We just started to create a diesel engine, we sell unfinished corvettes to Indians because of problems with power plants. ...
      1. Michael67
        Michael67 26 November 2017 08: 08 New
        15
        So preserve until the deadline! Why cut it? The corps still walk 30 years. With such seaworthiness.
        The topic, of course, is about the T-80.
        Excuse me. Destroyers are sorry.
        1. DanSabaka
          DanSabaka 26 November 2017 10: 04 New
          +1
          by the way, on the topic: something, nothing is heard about the T-80, which Russia should buy from North Korea ....
          1. VadimSt
            VadimSt 26 November 2017 10: 44 New
            +1
            Not the north, but the south
            1. DanSabaka
              DanSabaka 26 November 2017 10: 47 New
              +1
              I beg your pardon .... without waking up wrote .... naturally the North, Republic of Korea ....
              1. IL-18
                IL-18 26 November 2017 10: 55 New
                +3
                The South Koreans changed their minds.
                1. DanSabaka
                  DanSabaka 26 November 2017 10: 57 New
                  +2
                  what so? .... native “Panthers” do not suit them? ...
                  where, by the way, infa that changed your mind?
                  1. IL-18
                    IL-18 26 November 2017 11: 30 New
                    +5
                    something like that.
                    1. DanSabaka
                      DanSabaka 26 November 2017 14: 22 New
                      0
                      thank...
                    2. AnpeL
                      AnpeL 26 November 2017 21: 27 New
                      +3
                      And what prevents Korea from purchasing these parts from Russia ?? Did the hosts threaten the cam from across the ocean?
    2. Oden280
      Oden280 26 November 2017 19: 16 New
      +1
      They have a problem with high-pressure boilers. This scheme in itself is flawed, with it the Germans suffered from it during the war years. And to remake under another power plant - it’s cheaper to build a new one. Well, the general obsolescence of weapons and electronics.
      1. max702
        max702 29 November 2017 22: 55 New
        0
        Quote: Oden280
        They have a problem with high-pressure boilers. This scheme in itself is flawed, with it the Germans suffered from it during the war years. And to remake under another power plant - it’s cheaper to build a new one. Well, the general obsolescence of weapons and electronics.

        There is a problem with the water treatment system. in quality it should be like for reactors. and it was someone who considered it an expensive pleasure .. that’s why there are problems with boilers .. the Chinese have no such problems in the Navy although the boilers are exactly the same, they just didn’t stint water treatment ..
        1. Oden280
          Oden280 30 November 2017 17: 14 New
          0
          Not only. There, it is still very important the tightness of the joints, which at high steam parameters leads to frequent maintenance. Not done - get an accident. The Chinese went to some reduction in power and at the same time reduced the parameters of the steam. From here and increased reliability. In addition, they were built according to adjusted drawings, taking into account our operation, progress over 10 years and imported components.
  2. Herculesic
    Herculesic 26 November 2017 08: 07 New
    11
    As always - “will”, “create”, “build”! And what about the funding, “No money, but you hold on”? fool From the sale of oil every week the country receives billions of dollars in profit, and the budget is adopted deficient! Instead of letting the profits from oil go to the development of the economy, business, social programs, the profits fall into a small box - essentially the West, we finance our enemies, but for the country there’s no dough! So these plans will also be buried, there will be no reconstruction of equipment, the west will not give us our money for our own defense.
    1. Michael67
      Michael67 26 November 2017 08: 12 New
      +4
      Wait and see.
      There is a solution. It is voiced.
      Why bury right away?
      1. Alf
        Alf 26 November 2017 23: 45 New
        +3
        Quote: Michael67
        There is a solution. It is voiced.

        We have voiced many decisions. Only, unfortunately, was voiced and forgotten.
  3. Bormanxnumx
    Bormanxnumx 26 November 2017 09: 23 New
    0
    fuel consumption of an unmodified T-80 reaches 8 liters per kilometer, which is 2-4 times more than that of the T-90.

    Did you install a scooter engine on the T-90? belay
    1. VadimSt
      VadimSt 26 November 2017 10: 45 New
      +4
      No, they put you on the Gyurza!
    2. Pan_hrabio
      Pan_hrabio 26 November 2017 13: 46 New
      +3
      As far as I remember, the main problem of the T-80 engine was its high consumption at idle (for example, parking or an ambush). Added an auxiliary engine and finalized the main one.

      So, only the installation of the power unit GTA-18А allowed, without using the lifespan of the main gas turbine engine, to provide all the energy and reduce the consumption of 8 – 10% in operation. A significant contribution was made by the system of automatic switching on of the parking small gas mode (SMG) - 8 – 9% and the automatic mode reduction system (SAUR). In a word, running costs of fuel have decreased in 1,3 – 1,4 times.


      https://topwar.ru/32926-tank-t-80u-shag-v-budusch
      ee.html



      Left auxiliary installation.
  4. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 November 2017 09: 34 New
    +4
    Very timely and correct decision! I always liked the T-80. Crazy dynamics. The guns are quite modern. And 4000 tanks of the English Channel - "Cry Europe"! What will they oppose to so many tanks? Tactical aircraft under the "Torah" and "Armor" substitute?
    1. ML-334
      ML-334 26 November 2017 15: 23 New
      +2
      Not a tanker, but it seems that the speed of the 80 current is far beyond 70km / h, and what side the UVZ refers to.
      1. Rokossovsky
        Rokossovsky 27 November 2017 08: 08 New
        +2
        Quote: ML-334
        Not a tanker, but it seems that the speed of the 80 current is far beyond 70km / h, and what side the UVZ refers to.

        Omsktransmash is part of the Uralvagonzavod NPK.
  5. andrewkor
    andrewkor 26 November 2017 09: 39 New
    +2
    History has made another turn! Again in service, as in the USSR, Russia has three different MBTs: the T-80 gas turbine, the T-90 with the "grandson" of the V-2, the T-14 with the A-85! In truth, only a Superpower can afford it! Does the shell even fit drkg to a friend? On the other hand, but where to go: The enemy at the gate!
    1. VadimSt
      VadimSt 26 November 2017 10: 55 New
      +7
      It doesn’t matter, lacquered bat or picket, in my hands. The main thing is that they can decently beat their heads!
    2. IL-18
      IL-18 26 November 2017 11: 10 New
      +3
      Because of the "raznosortitsy" probably did not bother with older tanks. Although, in the light of the Syrian events and other modern wars, I would still reanimate the T-55. The dimensions are smaller, the gun is easier, the operation is simpler, the price is cheaper (including for sale), reliable. But how many nomenclatures will appear in the rear! Although, on the other hand, what still lies in the warehouses, it can be said for free, there is also an argument in favor of different grades. Given that instead of thousands of barn books, you can do with one flash drive now.
    3. sabakina
      sabakina 26 November 2017 11: 16 New
      +5
      In WWII, automobile engines were installed on light tanks. The main thing is to have something to fight. Well, and ease of manufacture, which means speed. At the present time, the main thing is that there is something to shoot from, and let there be at least 10 MBT there.
    4. Alf
      Alf 26 November 2017 23: 54 New
      +1
      Quote: andrewkor
      Again in service, as in the USSR, Russia has three different MBTs: the T-80 gas turbine, the T-90 with the "grandson" of V-2, the T-14 with the A-85!

      Not certainly in that way.
      1. T-14 really will not. Let me remind you that it is planned to adopt 2000 PLATFORM based on Almaty. But the platform includes the T-14 tank, BMP T-15, self-propelled guns Coalition, BREM T-16. How many of them will be actually TANKS? It is unlikely that more than 500-600 pieces. They can only be used as a reserve of the High Command. That is, they really will not do the weather.
      2. If everything goes well, the T-80 will again be made the main PUNCHING force, since 4000 tanks are already something.
      3. And the 90s will be used as tanks to consolidate the success and the final cleaning of the enemy.
      1. skazochnik
        skazochnik 29 November 2017 22: 50 New
        +1
        Quote: Alf
        2. If everything goes well, the T-80 will again be made the main PUNCHING force, since 4000 tanks are already something.


        Firstly, the article deals with the modernization of 3500 tanks, and secondly, given the current situation with finances, the pace of production and the irresponsibility of everyone and everything, one cannot count on the successful implementation of plans. This amount will drag on for 10 years, but it’s really good if one third is modernized, if nothing changes in the country.
      2. Maksimov
        Maksimov 8 January 2018 19: 42 New
        0
        T-72 where did it go? As far as I remember, this is the most massive Soviet MBT.
    5. Maksimov
      Maksimov 8 January 2018 19: 44 New
      0
      The T-72, too, seems to have not all rusted yet. So already 4 MBT.
  6. tchoni
    tchoni 26 November 2017 09: 42 New
    +2
    Kill me against the wall, but I don’t understand why to keep armed with three types of tanks close in their performance characteristics and characteristics? We already have an over-grading range ... with this weapon boom. and BMP - as many as three species, and in the future - five. Bmd - the devil himself will break his leg there. Btr-tut, taking into account the new Ba and typhoons - horror. Plus arctic technique - ass
    1. DanSabaka
      DanSabaka 26 November 2017 10: 03 New
      +2
      Well, DO NOT THROW OUT THE SAME .....
    2. VadimSt
      VadimSt 26 November 2017 10: 57 New
      +8
      Quote: tchoni
      Kill me against the wall, but I don’t understand why to keep armed with three types of tanks close in their performance characteristics and characteristics?
      You might think that when you buy a new iPhone, you collect all the other "phones" in the house and carry it to the waste bin!
      1. tchoni
        tchoni 26 November 2017 12: 21 New
        0
        Quote: VadimSt
        You might think that when you buy a new iPhone, you collect all the other "phones" in the house and carry it to the waste bin!

        What does it have to do with it? I would understand if the author spoke about the modernization of hundreds - another tanks for the Arctic latitudes ... But the author yells about 3500 tags! In our troops, 2500 were sold out. Of these, somewhere around 500 - t-90, the rest - partially doped seventy-two.
        Do you want to upgrade to eighty and put it on the storage base? Or how?
        T-80, in addition to gluttony, has a few more shortcomings:
        1) he didn’t show himself well in the first Chechen because of the greater than the t-72 tendency to detonate ammunition.
        2) The tank itself is quite difficult to repair, which gives a certain increase in the load on the logistics service. Americans faced this in Iraq and preferred to solve the problem by organizational methods.
        3) the t 80 itself is tighter than the t-72)
        4) well, and the last t-72 at storage bases, according to various sources, there are from 8 to 21 thousand ... will you order them to be thrown out?
        1. Alf
          Alf 27 November 2017 00: 00 New
          +2
          Quote: tchoni
          1) he didn’t show himself well in the first Chechen because of the greater than the t-72 tendency to detonate ammunition.

          That is exactly what happened in the FIRST Chechen when tanks were thrown into battle “naked”, without DZ, without artillery and infantry support for an uncharted and not crushed enemy, and even with untrained and unstuck crews.
          And what losses did tanks and, in particular, T-80 suffer in the SECOND Chechen? Much smaller.
          Quote: tchoni
          2) The tank itself is quite difficult to repair,

          How is this known?
          Quote: tchoni
          4) well, and the last t-72 at storage bases, according to various sources, there are from 8 to 21 thousand ... will you order them to be thrown out?

          Why throw it away? They can be used either on a theater with a weaker enemy or as tanks of the second echelon, when it is necessary to finish off a half-defeated enemy.
          1. tchoni
            tchoni 27 November 2017 13: 49 New
            0
            Quote: Alf
            And what losses did tanks and, in particular, T-80 suffer in the SECOND Chechen? G

            And in the second they were not used ... I voiced the reason.
            Quote: Alf
            And what losses did tanks and, in particular, T-80 suffer in the SECOND Chechen? G

            In the field, you can’t sort out a turbine .... Only block repairs. And this results either in an increase in the mass of the zip or in an increase in the number of flights for servicing, or in an increase in downtime.
            Quote: Alf
            And what losses did tanks and, in particular, T-80 suffer in the SECOND Chechen? G

            And can finalize and put into the first echelon? And you don’t have to turn all the tankers in the army on a turbine ...
            1. Alf
              Alf 27 November 2017 19: 13 New
              +1
              Quote: tchoni
              And can finalize and put into the first echelon? And you don’t have to turn all the tankers in the army on a turbine ...

              Who exactly to finalize? T-80? So I’m talking about them.
              1. tchoni
                tchoni 27 November 2017 20: 28 New
                0
                and I'm talking about t-72)))
      2. Maksimov
        Maksimov 8 January 2018 19: 49 New
        0
        Kill yourself if you do not understand that the tanks are ALREADY produced by many thousands. And instead of spending money (a lot of money) on remelting it, then spending a lot of money on the production of other tanks, it’s cheaper and faster to upgrade these existing cars. Moreover, with modern DZ, KAZ, SUV and shells from them completely modern cars will turn out in huge quantities.
    3. sabakina
      sabakina 26 November 2017 11: 18 New
      +5
      Quote: tchoni
      Kill me against the wall

      Excuse me, what place do you want?
    4. cariperpaint
      cariperpaint 26 November 2017 13: 39 New
      +5
      80 and is preparing for extremely cold latitudes. by logic, which by the way is quite imagined. collecting in one place the same technique to ensure its creation is not so difficult to create.
    5. gorenina91
      gorenina91 26 November 2017 15: 12 New
      0
      -Yes, Russia has yet to create and arm an entire army in Syria ... -there is absolutely everything "fit" ...
      1. In100gram
        In100gram 26 November 2017 19: 14 New
        0
        Quote: gorenina91
        -Yes, Russia has yet to create and arm an entire army in Syria ... -there is absolutely everything "fit" ...

        That's where the T55 will go
      2. skazochnik
        skazochnik 29 November 2017 23: 04 New
        0
        Quote: gorenina91
        -Yes, Russia has yet to create and arm an entire army in Syria ... -there is absolutely everything "fit" ...

        Yeah, of course, it will be, how, and judging by your logic, you have to arm and create the armies of Lebanon, Iraq, Iran, Yemen, Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, Algeria, Morocco, Zimbabwe, Cuba, El Salvador, etc. at what free of charge at our expense we live richly.
    6. Usher
      Usher 30 November 2017 12: 34 New
      0
      Nothing goes off scale. BMD-1/2/3/4 what is there to break a leg? If you can’t remember a few names, then this is your problem. Military progress is not worth while saturating the troops, a newer has appeared. And this is an ongoing process. You won’t be able to change everything all at once.
  7. Monarchist
    Monarchist 26 November 2017 10: 36 New
    +2
    A good host will have a use for everything. And the T80 is still a new tank, but because of its "gluttony" it turned out to be superfluous. In the "Military Program" several years ago it was said that the T 80 engine is very moody.
    If I agree with the modernization of 80 tons, but the BTR60 or BTR70 seems to me somewhat controversial: good cars for the time, but now there is the BTR80 and it is better to spend that money on the modernization of the 80th. Although if you look at the Americans, and they have something to learn, then it really makes sense to pinch them to the bazaar.
    In this regard, I recalled a couple of examples of the "American" approach. In our village there lived a “cunning” gypsy, he looked at what people throw away: the bicycle chain broke, and he picked it up, connected it, said it and sold it. The Friendship chainsaw, perhaps someone remembers, there was a cutting chain in it, and the gypsy “matchmaker, brother,” spioneril “from the warehouse for me, but I’ll give it to you for the“ tweet ”, and he’s this chain I picked it up on mastic and slightly “scratched it down.” Or another example: 1997 I climbed the “push” and saw: the peasant “restored” the rust hammer - covered with a thin layer of “Kuzbass varnish” and a new hammer
    1. sabakina
      sabakina 26 November 2017 11: 22 New
      +8
      The namesake, it seems to me, is still better to sit in the BTR-60-70 than in the Jihad Toyota.
      1. IL-18
        IL-18 26 November 2017 12: 21 New
        +3
        And the BTR-50 floats on a caterpillar track, roomy and a couple of tons can be visited without loss of buoyancy!
    2. cariperpaint
      cariperpaint 26 November 2017 13: 50 New
      +4
      nor anything moody about him. he’s just more say so demanding. this is not an engine this is a song. all of its shortcomings that eventually disappeared by and large and there was only expense in the opinion of so many who worked for them were not noticed at all.
    3. badens1111
      badens1111 26 November 2017 14: 32 New
      +2
      Quote: Monarchist
      The BTR60 or BTR70 seems to me somewhat controversial:

      And how do they fundamentally differ after modernization from the BTR80?
      Tower from an armored personnel carrier 80,82, diesel, what's the difference?
      The hammer example in this case is unsuccessful.
    4. Alf
      Alf 27 November 2017 00: 02 New
      +1
      Quote: Monarchist
      In the "Military Program" several years ago it was said that the T 80 engine is very moody.

      And if you train the crews?
  8. exo
    exo 26 November 2017 12: 44 New
    0
    So, it’s not very clear how they are going to reduce fuel consumption? Launch a new gas turbine engine with improved features? This is quite expensive. But on the drill, you won’t do anything special. At least, a lot of fuel, you won’t save
    1. Mooh
      Mooh 26 November 2017 13: 07 New
      +1
      Electronic control set.
      1. kirgiz58
        kirgiz58 26 November 2017 13: 48 New
        +1
        Quote: MooH
        Electronic control set.

        What about a driver’s abortion? laughing There and so everything on the electronics of RT, PUS, APU. From mechanics, only a fuel pump, but it is also controlled by electronics. It's just that the mechanics of the T-80 control of our mechanics are peculiar (it’s easier) - gas to the floor, and we work only with the brake.
    2. mkpda
      mkpda 27 November 2017 13: 44 New
      +1
      APU GTA-18 appeared only on the T-80U. Put it on older versions and you can dramatically reduce operating fuel consumption and GTD-1000 / 1000F / 1250 resource. You can also install a new automatic transmission.
  9. win9090
    win9090 26 November 2017 13: 39 New
    +2
    It’s better to use this money for the development of the economy, otherwise we will meet the new 91 year. Victories in the 21st century are forged by a powerful economy, not breakthroughs to the English Channel
    1. IL-18
      IL-18 26 November 2017 15: 05 New
      +5
      Correctly. We’ll create the very economy, and the adversary will be us right away without any problems. We will go to work in order, we will work for soldering, we disagree immediately at the expense. The dream of all liberals, including ours.
      1. CTABEP
        CTABEP 26 November 2017 18: 36 New
        +5
        No economy - no army. Nobody is shaking a country with a strong economy, and what will happen if we spend 15-20% of the budget on the army in a non-belligerent country, forgetting about all other sectors - we have already seen the example of the USSR.
        1. Doliva63
          Doliva63 27 November 2017 00: 34 New
          +8
          In order not to sin against the truth, we must say - on the example of the late USSR of the “humpback” era, and everyone will understand correctly drinks
          1. win9090
            win9090 27 November 2017 11: 34 New
            0
            He simply accelerated the denouement, and problems had already begun by the end of 60.
            1. Alf
              Alf 27 November 2017 19: 15 New
              +1
              Quote: win9090
              He simply accelerated the denouement, and problems had already begun by the end of 60.

              And what kind of system was in the USSR by the end of the 60s? State capitalism. But socialism ended by the mid-60s, more precisely, it was finished. One economic activity of bald crap worth what.
    2. Herman 4223
      Herman 4223 27 November 2017 23: 24 New
      0
      Well, so they will go to the development of the economy, this is an order for enterprises, jobs for people. People do the economy, there is work means there is a salary, salary is means there is purchasing power, people buy goods, someone produces or sells goods, taxes are taken from all this and money is returned to the treasury.
  10. groks
    groks 26 November 2017 15: 10 New
    +4
    Well, since the year 76, these tanks have been repeatedly modernized. A lot of options. DZ and built-in and mounted. And with a diesel engine up to 1500 hp . And for different calibers. And with a separate feed, too.
    Most likely - the next one just drank. But at least the enterprises will get work, and the army will get something reduced to some single model.
    The trend however. Our top Soviet Union wants it, and when it comes down to it, it takes something that the USSR provided both constructively and in sufficient quantities. Freeloaders.
  11. CTABEP
    CTABEP 26 November 2017 18: 34 New
    0
    Here is all the rubbish such as BTR-50/60, PT-76, etc., it’s high time to dispose of it (well, or sell it if there are buyers). And already with the money received from this, to modernize something initially more modern - the same T-80 and BMP-2. And then a la Plyushkin, the desire to preserve everything and somehow somehow adapt to the matter is not only not conducive to increasing combat effectiveness, it is also eating up great financial resources.
    And according to the article itself - there is really no information about modernization except general words.
    1. Alf
      Alf 27 November 2017 00: 07 New
      +1
      Quote: CTABEP
      (well, or sell if there are buyers).

      There are, if wisely trade. The Chinese sold their Type 69 last in 2010 (!).
    2. Yura Yakovlev
      Yura Yakovlev 27 November 2017 09: 05 New
      +1
      Somehow strange you are in the same row of armored personnel carriers - 50, and armored personnel carriers -: 60 put. The BTR-50 is a tracked vehicle, and is very good afloat, which was shown in the Shield-76 exercises, where the Oder was boosted in the area of ​​Krosno.
    3. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 27 November 2017 19: 52 New
      0
      Quote: CTABEP
      And according to the article itself - there is really no information about modernization except general words.


      1. flanker7
        flanker7 27 November 2017 21: 40 New
        0
        Very correct and timely. T-80 is the best tank of 80 years. Hassle-free.
  12. sergo1914
    sergo1914 26 November 2017 18: 35 New
    +2
    The first to arrive on the English Channel is Nona. Tanks - then.
    1. neri73-r
      neri73-r 26 November 2017 18: 57 New
      0
      Quote: sergo1914
      The first to arrive on the English Channel is Nona. Tanks - then.

      Well, then it’s more likely to arrive! fellow
      1. sergo1914
        sergo1914 26 November 2017 19: 23 New
        0
        Quote: neri73-r
        Quote: sergo1914
        The first to arrive on the English Channel is Nona. Tanks - then.

        Well, then it’s more likely to arrive! fellow


        First fly where necessary. But it will reach the English Channel. Plan ... oops ... PLAN !!! Under socialism, everything was planned. Even that. Up to the addresses of the warehouses where it was supposed to be loaded with NATO-style ammunition. And then put forward.
        1. neri73-r
          neri73-r 26 November 2017 19: 25 New
          +1
          Quote: sergo1914
          Quote: neri73-r
          Quote: sergo1914
          The first to arrive on the English Channel is Nona. Tanks - then.

          Well, then it’s more likely to arrive! fellow


          First fly where necessary. But it will reach the English Channel. Plan ... oops ... PLAN !!! Under socialism, everything was planned. Even that. Up to the addresses of the warehouses where it was supposed to be loaded with NATO-style ammunition. And then put forward.

          Take care of the plan, it may still come in handy! bully
    2. Doliva63
      Doliva63 27 November 2017 00: 38 New
      +5
      Man, the first will be a weather scout! laughing
  13. raketosss
    raketosss 26 November 2017 21: 12 New
    +1
    Another money laundering! They also put BTR-70M, BTR-70 with a diesel engine in the Strategic Missile Forces, a new one on top, rot on the inside .. Instead of burnishing with machine guns - black paint, the armor is painted, but inside is rusty with sinks ... Well, etc.
  14. Doliva63
    Doliva63 27 November 2017 00: 31 New
    +5
    [quote = Monarchist] In the "Military Program" several years ago they said ... [/ quote
    Is this the type written on the fence? Strong argument! laughing
    1. Logall
      Logall 27 November 2017 00: 46 New
      +6
      Greetings, comrade! Congratulations on your new title. hi
      By the way, sometimes they write the truth on the fence bully Well, about the evil master hi
  15. Doliva63
    Doliva63 27 November 2017 00: 41 New
    +5
    In the Western Group of Forces, it seems, there have never been 5000 tanks. Do not confuse with GSVG.
  16. Recoil
    Recoil 27 November 2017 17: 01 New
    0
    "T-80" jet "tank (so it was nicknamed because of the characteristic sound of the engine, reminiscent of the one that produces a jet plane)"
    Author, this is not CoolGirl magazine. Here such runs do not roll.
  17. Fidel
    Fidel 27 November 2017 23: 30 New
    +1
    Yes! My beloved and dear again in the ranks! I knew! I was waiting! I believed!))
  18. Usher
    Usher 30 November 2017 12: 40 New
    0
    Put the “Kalina” gunnery control system, a new gun, hang “Contact-5” to the maximum with side shields, install the APU. Upgrade the engine and transmission, here you have a tank. You can also redo the entire stock.
  19. tracer
    tracer 23 December 2017 15: 08 New
    0
    80 ka, according to the guys who were the tankers of the car - a fairy tale. I just felt bad when the decision to write off was TYPE in favor of the T 90 .. Congratulations to everyone who understands what a tank is ....
  20. Maksimov
    Maksimov 8 January 2018 19: 56 New
    0
    Quote: tchoni
    4) well, and the last t-72 at storage bases, according to various sources, there are from 8 to 21 thousand ... will you order them to be thrown out?

    No. Also upgrade. There aren’t many tanks. WWII proved.