Military Review

Vietnam upgrades T-54 \ 55

53
The Vietnamese army has about a thousand tanks T-54/55 and is not going to part with them. According to the Polish magazine Nowa Technika Wojskowa, the Ministry of Defense of Vietnam has launched the process of modernizing these machines.


Vietnam upgrades T-5455

T-54 / 55 tanks of the Vietnamese army


A few years ago, the Ministry of Defense of Vietnam “in cooperation with the Israeli industry” developed a modification of the T-54 tank, which received the T-54М3 index. The new version of the Soviet machine is equipped with a 105-mm M68 gun, a modern night sight and a ballistic computer with a weather sensor, as well as additional passive and dynamic armor.


T-54М3 tanks (left) and T-54 tanks (right).


Modification of the T-54М3 turned out to be too expensive for the Vietnamese army, so after assembling several prototypes, the military department decided to reduce the cost and simplify the process. It is known that after serial modernization, the Vietnamese "fifty-four" will remain with the "native" instrument D-10Т2С caliber 100 mm.

Israeli industry has a wealth of experience in upgrading Soviet tanks, although it has never bought them - the IDF received hundreds of T-54 / 55 and other tanks in the form of trophies during wars with Arab countries. Many of the captured combat vehicles were modernized and entered service with the Israeli armed forces.

The T-54 tank is a medium tank and was adopted by the Soviet army in the 1946 year. In 1958, the production of its deeply modernized version called T-55 began. Due to the relatively low cost and simplicity of design, the Soviet T-54 / 55 were massively exported to allies and manufactured under license in other countries, reports "Warspot"
Photos used:
muonmauchientranh.com
53 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. svp67
    svp67 15 January 2018 14: 39 New
    +8
    The Vietnamese army has about a thousand T-54/55 tanks and is not going to part with them.
    It would be good if our specialists would get in touch by proposing for them "Octopuses" and "Derivations" ... For Vietnam this is very important, tanks with a mass of more than 40 tons have little potential for use there.
    1. bouncyhunter
      bouncyhunter 15 January 2018 14: 47 New
      14
      Quote: svp67
      It would be necessary for our specialists

      It would have been necessary, otherwise the Israelites had already fussed. And the modernization of 1000 tanks is a tidbit for any country.
      1. Shurik70
        Shurik70 15 January 2018 21: 58 New
        +3
        But actually the beautiful tower defense of the Jews came out.
        But the front side of the hull is somehow strange. Just two small boxes. Most likely there is some kind of electronics, a camera, sensors are different. No extra armor. You can penetrate his simple RPG-7, not even there, even to mention modern anti-tank ones.
        1. bouncyhunter
          bouncyhunter 15 January 2018 22: 06 New
          +1
          It seems that, but apparently the strengthening of the reservation concerned precisely the upper projection. what
        2. Yuriy_999
          Yuriy_999 17 January 2018 12: 08 New
          0
          Additional protection is set "in a circle", even on the side screens. If you look closely, you will see on the frontal armor. And the boxes cover the tow hooks.
    2. kapitan92
      kapitan92 15 January 2018 15: 21 New
      +6
      Quote: svp67
      It would be necessary for our specialists to make a fuss, offering them "Octopuses" and "Derivations" ..

      They don’t have enough money for a high-quality modernization, and you suggest that they “pair” these products. hi
      1. svp67
        svp67 15 January 2018 15: 35 New
        +4
        Quote: kapitan92
        and you offer them to "vaporize" these products.

        Why vparit? These are excellent fighting vehicles and it is for their country. Do not forget that they still have plenty of PT-76 and their "Chinese clones", which were revealed there in all its glory, and therefore strengthen this "squadron" with "Octopus", and for the remaining PT, offer "Derivation", I think will be very on time ...
        1. kapitan92
          kapitan92 15 January 2018 15: 37 New
          +7
          Quote: svp67
          Why vparit?

          Nobody argues about the quality of products. Dumb they have a "gold reserve"! That's the problem. hi
          1. svp67
            svp67 15 January 2018 15: 40 New
            +6
            Quote: kapitan92
            Nobody argues about the quality of products. Dumb they have a "gold reserve"! That's the problem.

            We can offer a loan, their economy is booming, so there is money. A loan is possible without interest, but plus Kamran, for 50 years. Our diplomats and Oboronexport must roll up their sleeves ...
            1. kapitan92
              kapitan92 15 January 2018 15: 46 New
              +9
              Quote: svp67
              We can offer a loan, their economy is booming, so there is money. A loan is possible without interest, but plus Kamran, 50 years.

              Skip our time on the base agreement !!! Alas!
              In September, Russia’s 2000 was written off $ 9,53 billion from Vietnam’s $ 11,03 billion. Payment of the remaining amount is deferred for 2016-2022
              These would get!
              1. svp67
                svp67 15 January 2018 15: 48 New
                +3
                Quote: kapitan92
                These would get!

                Well I say - it is necessary to work. You can threaten, sell this debt. There are many levers of pressure and coaxing.
                1. kapitan92
                  kapitan92 15 January 2018 16: 04 New
                  +6
                  Quote: svp67
                  Quote: kapitan92
                  These would get!

                  Well I say - it is necessary to work. You can threaten, sell this debt. There are many levers of pressure and coaxing.

                  You always have to work, it’s better for the money. laughing This is a political issue. No one wants to quarrel with the United States. Now, when their Chinese begin to put on four points, they will immediately remember Russia.
                  1. Blackmokona
                    Blackmokona 15 January 2018 18: 41 New
                    0
                    Then they need an enemy of the PRC, not a friend. That is, the direction to the United States, which is already actively going
            2. Dimmih
              Dimmih 16 January 2018 04: 52 New
              0
              An interest-free loan is called installment plan. And it is profitable when the margin is large. Why do you need Camran? I don’t need it. Crimea still need to digest.
          2. Dreamboat
            Dreamboat 15 January 2018 20: 08 New
            0
            You need to understand what price tag Israel set for them. It is possible that comparable with the new T-90 ...
            In general, for Russia, such modernization projects are very relevant. We have thousands of old tanks in storage, after modernization, they can be sold to those who do not have enough for a completely new one. ... + Many former allies have such tanks. The market is very decent.
        2. verner1967
          verner1967 15 January 2018 18: 00 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          and for the remaining Fri, to offer "Derivation", I think it will be very on time ...

          so they need to vparit the first "Terminators", because then they proposed to build them on an outdated base of T-54/55 tanks, so that in vain the good did not disappear. But they decided to unify it with existing tanks, but the project remained, and the T-54/55 base too.
        3. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 16 January 2018 04: 20 New
          +1
          There is a Russian project to modernize the PT-76 ... there, exactly, the 57-mm gun is involved.
    3. Piramidon
      Piramidon 15 January 2018 15: 51 New
      +1
      Quote: svp67
      It would be necessary for our specialists

      I have no doubt that the Vietnamese also turned to us, but, their own shirt ... There are not enough capacities for their modernization
      1. svp67
        svp67 15 January 2018 15: 55 New
        +2
        Quote: Piramidon
        Not enough capacity for its modernization

        Not capacities, but MONEY. With the capacities for our Armed Forces - all the rules, even with a margin, in terms of modernization of equipment for the Ground Forces. Money - NO, or rather there are very few
    4. just exp
      just exp 15 January 2018 18: 48 New
      0
      it’s not a matter of mass, they have both T-72 and T-90, they have a problem with money.
      they take modern, but budget (su-30, but the modification is far from the most perfect, T-90, but not SM) they will modernize the old one, because China is nearby and China has begun to turn brown.
  2. Altona
    Altona 15 January 2018 14: 44 New
    +3
    For their terrain conditions and the qualifications of their mechanics, such a tank is probably just right. A kid comes into the army, and then a tank, a little more complicated than your motorcycle.
    1. novel66
      novel66 15 January 2018 14: 49 New
      +5
      and since they are small - you can push them into the tank a lot and get a heavy BMP
    2. KVU-NSVD
      KVU-NSVD 15 January 2018 14: 57 New
      +8
      At the same time, it seems to correspond to the conditions of the local theater of operations and the technological general level of neighbors (with the exception of China). Therefore, this is a completely pragmatic solution, given that after modernization this is a significantly superior combat vehicle
      1. just exp
        just exp 15 January 2018 18: 51 New
        0
        but the lack of multi-layer armor is still a significant minus.
        and the 100mm caliber will no longer allow a good fight with the new Chinese tanks.
        1. KVU-NSVD
          KVU-NSVD 15 January 2018 19: 00 New
          +6
          No tanks will help them with China smile
          1. Nikolaevich I
            Nikolaevich I 16 January 2018 04: 49 New
            +2
            Quote: KVU-NSVD
            No tanks will help them with China

            Actually: Yes! recourse Or maybe not?! stop In any case, in 1979, Vietnam offered stubborn resistance to the Chinese, although both sides are still arguing who “won.” Most likely, the Vietnamese will have to “regret” .... the Chinese armies of 1979 and “tepericha” are like the sky and land, and the Vietnamese army is not very far "left 79-go." (although, in recent years, trying to "accelerate" ...) angry
        2. Dreamboat
          Dreamboat 15 January 2018 20: 14 New
          +1
          It is better to have many tanks, old and new, than few new tanks and many new infantry.
          In Syria, there are carts from pickups and armored personnel carriers from buses that are fighting for themselves.
          100 mm the gun is not suitable for fighting new tanks, but armored personnel carriers and infantry fighting vehicles will hit without problems.
  3. Lexus
    Lexus 15 January 2018 14: 49 New
    +3
    T-54M3 is very similar to the Romanian TR-85M1 "Bizonul"
    1. Geisenberg
      Geisenberg 15 January 2018 15: 17 New
      +3
      Quote: lexus
      T-54M3 is very similar to the Romanian TR-85M1 "Bizonul"


      This is not a 54ka ... six-wheeled chassis ...
      1. svp67
        svp67 15 January 2018 15: 43 New
        +3
        Quote: Geisenberg
        This is not a 54ka ... six-wheeled chassis ...

        No, it’s 54/55, but ROMANIAN .... They also had to somehow compensate for the increased weight
        1. The comment was deleted.
        2. Geisenberg
          Geisenberg 16 January 2018 01: 30 New
          +1
          Quote: svp67
          Quote: Geisenberg
          This is not a 54ka ... six-wheeled chassis ...

          No, it’s 54/55, but ROMANIAN .... They also had to somehow compensate for the increased weight


          Yes, and do not care in general then ... this stupid idea from the beginning.
          1. svp67
            svp67 16 January 2018 03: 31 New
            +1
            Quote: Geisenberg
            Yes, and do not care in general then ... this stupid idea from the beginning.

            Judging by how the Romanians on these tanks during the joint exercises “drove” opponents to “Leo-2” and “Abrams”, you can’t say that ...
    2. svp67
      svp67 15 January 2018 15: 42 New
      +1
      Quote: lexus
      T-54M3 is very similar to the Romanian TR-85M1 "Bizonul"

      So that there, that there the Israelites were noted
      1. Geisenberg
        Geisenberg 16 January 2018 01: 27 New
        +1
        Quote: svp67
        Quote: lexus
        T-54M3 is very similar to the Romanian TR-85M1 "Bizonul"

        So that there, that there the Israelites were noted


        Yes, they crap everywhere they can. It is a fact.
  4. Naputeon bonaput
    Naputeon bonaput 15 January 2018 15: 00 New
    +1
    Could it be easier to remake heavy infantry fighting vehicles?
    1. CentDo
      CentDo 15 January 2018 15: 18 New
      0
      You can explain how you want just to remake the T-54 into a heavy infantry fighting vehicle?
      1. marlin1203
        marlin1203 15 January 2018 15: 34 New
        +1
        T54 with lightly armored trailer, what is not clear? laughing
      2. Per se.
        Per se. 15 January 2018 17: 56 New
        +4
        Quote: CentDo
        how do you want to simply convert the T-54 into a heavy BMP?
        In a heavy BMP there is no point, and the Israelis remade the captured T-54 / T-55 into heavy BTRs. On the photo is the Akhzarit BTR (view from the stern).
        1. Nikolaevich I
          Nikolaevich I 16 January 2018 05: 00 New
          +2
          Quote: Per se.
          Israelis redid the captured T-54 / T-55

          Duc, and in Russia redone .... BTR-T turned out.

          Quote: Per se.
          Heavy BMP makes no sense

          Well, it's you in vain (!) ... so categorically! "What do you call a yacht, so it will sail"!
        2. CentDo
          CentDo 16 January 2018 11: 52 New
          +2
          Converting tanks into heavy armored personnel carriers all the more makes no sense. In any case, for Vietnam. Israel had a slightly different situation when it was necessary to find the use of captured equipment. They then had their own tanks.
          1. Per se.
            Per se. 16 January 2018 12: 38 New
            +1
            Vietnam is not worth it, talking about the opportunity itself, but for Russia this topic may be relevant, in relation to the reserves of T-72. Here we can have a good platform, heavy armored personnel carriers for armored vehicles, and BMPT, for specialized fire support. Such a tandem, divided by specialization, is much more efficient than a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, which in its heavy quality loses its versatility and maneuverability, the original meaning of the infantry fighting vehicle, and in specialization it will be worse as a vehicle with not dismounted infantry, and in firing it is weaker than BMPT, and on protection, and on armament. The experience of creating the BTR-T and BMO-T could be used here, the BMPT ("Terminator-2") based on the T-72 already exists. By the way, a variant of BMPT based on T-54 / T-55 might be interesting for Vietnam, which is quite possible to do.
            1. CentDo
              CentDo 16 January 2018 13: 42 New
              +1
              On the one hand, you are right, but a heavy infantry fighting vehicle has a plus: each vehicle is a full-fledged combat unit, albeit inferior in BMPT firepower, and does not require additional cover. An armored personnel carrier will not be able to provide significant fire support to its landing force, but will give each armored personnel carrier an BMPT ... If we consider the option in which there are several armored personnel carriers with an airborne assault force (2, 3, no matter how many), then we will get a single link, break which we can’t do.
              1. Per se.
                Per se. 16 January 2018 18: 32 New
                +1
                Quote: CentDo
                If we consider the option in which there are several armored personnel carriers with a landing force on one BMPT (2, 3, no matter how much)
                Here you have correctly caught the thought. As for the "heavy BMP", I personally see it as a mistake, as mentioned above. Climbing next to the tanks, being "pregnant" with unmounted infantry, is fraught with loss of both the vehicle and the entire landing force. It is also doubtful the possibility of using KAZ, when its own infantry will be near. Therefore, the BMP is best seen in its classic form, and here the best BMP-3, for marching throws, for forcing water obstacles from the course, a maneuverable machine, the value of which justifies its versatility of a vehicle and a light tank. When using the same tank base, this is a tandem system, as already mentioned, BMPT in conjunction with heavy armored personnel carriers. Here the BMPT can be in line with the tanks, providing both their support and their own infantry. Otherwise, the BTR should be in the second line, and probably you should not try to shove a lot of paratroopers into a heavy BTR here. If we are talking about a tank base, let's call it already a "triplex", a tank, a BMPT, a heavy BTR, and so, the landing party in 6 is optimally seen as an assault group. At the same time, it is possible to place the infantry more comfortably, make the BTR better protected and more compact, such an assault group will dismount faster, and defeating the BTR with the infantry will result in smaller losses. I emphasize that this is not an alternative to the classic BTR and BMP, but an addition, on a tank base.
                1. CentDo
                  CentDo 17 January 2018 10: 26 New
                  +1
                  Climbing next to the tanks, being "pregnant" with unhurried infantry, is fraught with the loss of both the vehicle and the entire landing force. It is also doubtful whether KAZ can be used when its own infantry is nearby.

                  Here I completely agree with you. I did not even consider using such a BMP.
                  But personally, I have great doubts that the BMPT will be effective in an urban environment. Too limited visibility, too long reaction time. You still can’t do without infantry. And it turns out that in order to cover one tank we are forced to send either an BMPT and an armored personnel carrier, or a classic, “light” BMP. In the first case, it turns out too cumbersome, and the fighters will be forced to cover as many as three cars, and in the second we run the risk of not getting anywhere, because they can still burn on the road. In such a situation, in my amateurish opinion, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle, which combines good protection and quite powerful weapons, can come in handy.
                  1. Per se.
                    Per se. 17 January 2018 13: 12 New
                    +1
                    Quote: CentDo
                    It is in such a situation that, in my amateurish view, a heavy infantry fighting vehicle can be useful, which combines good protection and powerful enough weapons.
                    Here you can summarize that theory without practice is dead, and practice without theory is blind. We can assume anything, and, whatever the difference, amateurs, we or specialists, can be checked only in real combat conditions, with that specificity and tactics where this technique would be in demand. We have reserves of old tanks, use them or not, making updated BMO-T for assault groups, along with BMPT, or invest in a “gold platform”, which was declared a “platform” without even waiting for adoption, industrial development, time testing reliability and efficiency ... I'm not sure that such a monster as the BMP T-15 is exactly what is needed in the same conditions of the battle in the city, especially since this type of combat is extremely difficult for any armored vehicles. Here, rather, BMPT with a heavy armored personnel carrier, on a relatively cheap and proven base, will be in a better position than such policemen, counterguerrilla "heavy BMP", born under the doctrine of a compact army in antiterrorist operations.
  5. Geisenberg
    Geisenberg 15 January 2018 15: 15 New
    +2
    Good car. She still has to walk and walk. If they can upgrade these tanks then they will last 20 years, if not more.
  6. Zubr
    Zubr 15 January 2018 16: 09 New
    +1
    Well, the news is not bad, so our cars are still suitable for tasks. Well, at least they gave comparative characteristics, in terms of security and new characteristics. And then smeared on a plate. Please be more kind ... smile
  7. san4es
    san4es 15 January 2018 16: 13 New
    +1
    Due to the relatively low cost and simplicity of construction, the Soviet T-54/55 was massively exported to the Allies and produced under license in other countries.
    soldier
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 15 January 2018 16: 13 New
    0
    What a fantastic reliability this technique is! A tank - it is a tank. A lot of things you can do with it.
    A worthy descendant of the thirty-four ...
    1. Fedorov
      Fedorov 15 January 2018 17: 36 New
      +1
      In front of him was a T-44. They released 800 pieces in memory. Dviglo across, torsioi. The thing is the apparatus.
      [thumн] https://topwar.ru/uploads/posts/2018-01/15
      16027074_t-44-9002.jpg [/ thumb]
  9. Fedorov
    Fedorov 15 January 2018 16: 36 New
    +4
    When I studied, a platoon of Vietnamese ran nearby. With a song in the canteen, in his spare time shopping. On the one hand - fans, on the other hand rare woodpeckers. We didn’t care, and they were wearing earflaps. But they were devoted to their homeland.
    Well, this is how our designers tried to make sure that there is still a modernization potential. Well done Guys.
  10. vanavatny
    vanavatny 15 January 2018 17: 29 New
    0
    T-54М3 tanks (left) and T-54 tanks (right). laughing and I racked my brains
  11. APASUS
    APASUS 15 January 2018 20: 10 New
    +1
    It’s interesting why Israel was offered to modernize the tanks, why weren’t they tested a couple of three options from different manufacturers? As far as I remember, even the Romanians offered such an upgrade