Military Review

T-84 "Hold" and T-90 "Vladimir". Questions and answers

106



The paradox of our time: a beautiful picture is more important than reality. And people love pictures. And if the picture also has some information, but with conclusions ... In general, beauty!

Many people, according to the old Soviet habit, believe in what is written in the official press, unconditionally. Others, from the new generation of nihilists, on the contrary, do not believe in anything. From the series "there are two opinions." One is mine, and the second is wrong.

We have already written about the loss of ability to analyze in our society. Given the similarity of the processes taking place in Ukraine, everything is going on there in a similar manner. Descending.

More recently, another article appeared and was widely disseminated, which aroused interest in readership. The theme is as old as the world, but nonetheless. "Tank schools. Why the Ukrainian Oplot is better than the Russian T-90. "

Already on the title, a knowledgeable reader understood what was going on. And it immediately became boring. Here, again ...



Our neighbors again told the world about the greatness of their own combat vehicles in comparison with the Russian ones. But no, let's not hurry, everything has its time. In the meantime, several "expert conclusions" of the Ukrainian edition. Paradoxical.

“And Oplot itself (or, more correctly, the main battle tank T-84 /“ 478DU9 object ”) has already been adopted by the Ukrainian army - back in February 2000, on the basis of Cabinet resolution No. 237-5 from 08.02.2000. Not only that. , in Kharkov, 2001 produced just 10 machines, which, after payment in 2005-2006, were sent to the 92-th Chuguev separate mechanized brigade. "

Here you need to do a little excursion to history. The machines were actually sent to the front. However, except for participation in parades nowhere lit up. This is despite the fact that Ukraine experienced and is experiencing a huge shortage of tanks in the Donbass and is forced to throw on the contact line the T-64 modifications recovered from the scum of the vehicle.



Paradox? Paradox. Yes, we also do not send "Almaty" to Syria, and they, too, are purely ceremonial. But forgive me, here and in addition to the “Armat” of fresh tanks, as it were, a shaft. Fresh - in the sense of T-90 and T-72B3М, which, no matter how tugging them for the caterpillar, is no worse than the "Stronghold", at least.

It is clear that the material is designed for Ukrainian consumers. But with the hope that it will be studied by someone from the military command of third countries. Now in such countries it has become fashionable to have our own armored units. What a no, but an indicator of the power of the sun.

"... our Kharkov engineers took the path of gradual modernization (primarily increasing mobility, security and firepower) of the T-XNUMHUD tank (and the T-80 and Oplot-B) are the top), and the Russians - the T-84BU (its the most modern version has the designation T-72А) ".

Again, experts and people interested in tanks, laughed. What is issued for the modern Russian tank, has long been discontinued. 7 years have passed. Changed a little letter in Russia. Now it is T-90M. And with very different characteristics than the T-90A.



In order not to get into technical details, and among our readers there are a lot of very qualified and knowledgeable specialists of this profile, we just remind you that the Russian-made combat vehicle has been in service with 25 for years. From 1992 year. And the "Stronghold"?

And exported not the first year. Only in India today such 1200 machines. Recently, deliveries of T-90 to Iran began. The contract is for the time being on 80 tanks. This became possible after the military experts saw the possibility of even “outdated” Russian cars in real fighting in Syria.



The reaction of Svidomo part of Ukrainian society was predictable. Peremoga! And this is needed peremoga for two purposes. “Release” the Donbass and oust (or rather, bite off a piece) of Russia from the arms market.

Whatever the Ukrainian president says about the adherence to the Minsk agreements, his recent speech before the military showed that Kiev is serious about war. February 20 in his speech Poroshenko openly set this task. A little earlier, after the signing of the law on the reintegration of Donbass, he ordered the General Staff of the Supreme Soviet of Ukraine to prepare documents for the implementation of the military scenario this year by 1 of April.

Fighting or their successful imitation is the key to increasing sales and awakening interest in Ukrainian military equipment.

But back to the article. Arms exports, which have long fed Ukraine, ended. Soviet legacy sold. The fact that Ukrainian defense enterprises are trying to produce, is of interest to potential buyers, not laughter or horror. Depending on the situation.



Attempts to use the defense as a repair base also ended in failure. After the repair of aircraft or armored vehicles are simply dangerous to use. Cause? Banal lack of quality parts. Oddly enough it sounds, but even the trunks for the tank guns of the enterprise today have “forgotten” to produce.

Ukrainian "strongholds" will not participate in the war. Not that "education". And the amount. And in the tank biathlon will not be presented. Fearfully. Yes, and there is no need for the aggressor to show the miracle of technology, suddenly scared ...

But in the children's demo version of a tank biathlon called Strong Europe Tank Challenge 2018 - quite. After the whole world has seen these "competitions", Ukrainians have a chance to defeat the brave Eurobreakers.

In general, today, more and more often articles and expert assessments appear in the Ukrainian press to such an extent that the hair of the experts stand on end. And the amount of such materials is growing like a snowball from the top of the mountain. Stupidity, bordering on betrayal.

But the purpose of such publications is clear. People must believe! And believes! Believes any nonsense. The main thing is that this nonsense coincides with the dream, with the desire. But the fact that such dreams have to be paid for in blood, and even the life of their own citizens, is not important.



Beautiful picture is more important than reality. And people love pictures ...
Author:
106 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Vard
    Vard 7 March 2018 06: 05
    +5
    Tanks know the truth ... And the truth is that in any car ... Including the tank ... The main detail ... This is the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat ... Judging by what is happening in the DPR, tankers in Ukraine nor any ...
    1. seti
      seti 7 March 2018 10: 08
      +9
      Did the author write Iran? T-90 ship to Iran? Not a typo? Maybe all the same Iraq?
      1. Antares
        Antares 7 March 2018 17: 05
        +1
        Quote: seti
        Did the author write Iran? T-90 ship to Iran? Not a typo? Maybe all the same Iraq?

        but we laugh with the Americans ... and ourselves ...
        1. Alekseev
          Alekseev 7 March 2018 19: 13
          +4
          Quote: Antares
          but we laugh with the Americans ... and ourselves ...

          Iran claims to have made its own tank, which is no worse than the T-90. Say, its potential allows it.
          However, this Iranian tank cannot be immediately distinguished from the T-90 ... wink
          Well, Uralvagonzavod doesn’t care, at least as you call it, only sign and pay contracts. yes
          As for Oplot, there is no serious information on it. It is impossible, however, like some respected forum users to ask: give, they say, a link on the network: as if if you follow this link you will know the "true truth". There were widely known statements of the Ukrogeneral, which boiled down, in general, to what they say is better than the old T-64.
          But even if we assume that these statements are a malicious zrad, then the question arises: where is the series of miraculous weapons that is so much needed nowadays for banderlogs? Why not release at least 100, 200 pieces?
          Yes, because the ability to do this at an acceptable level has been lost. For a quarter of a century, horses rode their horses and their cooperation with Russia.
          It’s not possible to manually tamper some “innovative” type of BTT by hand from improvised units and post it on the Internet, so that it would be something for the incompetent “patriots” to reason about at their leisure.
      2. svp67
        svp67 8 March 2018 07: 52
        +2
        Quote: seti
        Did the author write Iran? T-90 ship to Iran? Not a typo? Maybe all the same Iraq?
        Yes, they do not care.
        What is presented as a modern Russian tank has long been discontinued. 7 years have passed. Changed the letter in Russia. Now this is the T-90M. And with completely different characteristics than the T-90A.
        The authors alone show poor knowledge of the "materiel". Structurally T-90M

        also different from the T-72BM,

        as well ATTENTION !!!! BM "Oplot"

        , please do not confuse with the T-84 "Hold"

        , from the original T-80UD
    2. aloleggry
      aloleggry 7 March 2018 10: 59
      +2
      Normal in / in Ukraine tankers. At least under the Union were. After all, something was transferred to the young.
      1. Aleksey1982
        Aleksey1982 7 March 2018 14: 50
        +8
        they’re so normal and normal, so as not to participate in a civil war
        1. beeper
          beeper 10 March 2018 02: 24
          0
          You, Aleksey, look at the root!
          hi
    3. Sailor
      Sailor 7 March 2018 12: 22
      +1
      Since 2015, “what” has fought no worse than ours, and well-trained even came out victorious in dueling situations.
  2. Strashila
    Strashila 7 March 2018 06: 35
    +6
    You yourself will not praise, nor will anyone praise ... well ... purely formal ... practice has shown burning and not from the latest super-duper weapons of the last generation, but from the Soviet legacy. Ukrainians are now purely Europeans ... since the advertisement said the best ... that means the best ... they are not inferior either to the German Leopards ... or to the American Abrams ... they burn in the same way. While the equipment was in the hands of the countries of the manufacturers of Leopards from the Germans, the Abrams from the Americans ... they were able to hide the realities of losses and drag them around the world ... as soon as the Turks, Saudis, Iraqis led them into battle ... the tanks burned. Thais tanks ... the same is purely for the parade. Pakistanis have already taken a sip with Ukrainian technology.
    1. Kars
      Kars 7 March 2018 11: 11
      +5
      You can link to complaints of Pakistanis about txnumx ud.delta deliveries to Pakistan for al Khalid regular.
      1. Strashila
        Strashila 7 March 2018 12: 05
        +1
        T-84 vs. T-90C: Confrontation in Asia dated April 24, 2013 on this site. Complaints were about engine failures in hot weather. You can recall the oil for tanks supplied by Ukraine to Pakistan for their tanks .. then about 30 tanks went out of order.
        1. Kars
          Kars 7 March 2018 12: 59
          +3
          Can you read more about failures in hot weather?
          And so remember in more detail the gaps were in engine oil, go all the same in the engine design? Because to be honest, what you recall is more like a recent case in the APU with t64 than about Pakistan.
          1. Strashila
            Strashila 7 March 2018 13: 05
            0
            "Pakistani T-80UD tanks have problems with engines in the desert?" dated June 17, 2014 .. the same site
            1. Kars
              Kars 7 March 2018 13: 25
              +3
              Strange, I thought you had links to the Pakistani military. I see it even in your .. headline .. question mark, and now it's 18, and there are still deliveries of Kharkov motors to Pakistan.
              And so on ..this..the site was a minimum of two news where the Thai stronghold contract was canceled) and what now to do.
              1. Strashila
                Strashila 7 March 2018 14: 34
                +1
                And the Pakistanis have a choice ... ??? the money spent ... more than 300 armored boxes require maintenance ... let them continue to suffer with them ... even though the engines change every day.
                1. Kars
                  Kars 7 March 2018 23: 46
                  +3
                  The information would be. And they would not put a similar MTO on al-Khalid.
        2. Antares
          Antares 7 March 2018 17: 57
          +2
          Quote: Strashila
          T-84 vs T-90S: confrontation in Asia dated April 24, 2013

          there are no complaints from Pakistanis, only assumptions about problems, moreover, there is an article in the spirit of UVZ advertising
          By the way, the main opponent is Kars.
          1. Strashila
            Strashila 8 March 2018 06: 03
            0
            And the Iraqis do not even know about such power as the Oplot ... then only it ... they had enough acquaintance with Ukrainian scrap metal in the form of armored personnel carriers.
  3. Kars
    Kars 7 March 2018 06: 37
    +10
    It is difficult to understand what the authors still wanted to convey)
    And so they would begin to modernize the t-80 in the Russian Federation instead of the t72, now there would be no need for armatures in principle.
    1. Ingvar 72
      Ingvar 72 7 March 2018 07: 00
      +11
      Quote: Kars
      the need for armatures would not be in principle.

      Well, why? Armata is a completely different class and layout, and has the right to life. The T-80 differs from the T-72 almost exclusively in a gas turbine engine.hi
      1. Romka47
        Romka47 7 March 2018 10: 33
        +5
        Yes, far from the same thing, in the first Chechen and 80s and 72ki participated, in the second already 80 did not meddle. it says something.
      2. Kars
        Kars 7 March 2018 11: 14
        +7
        Well, do not tell me, the characteristics of the T80 have reached the T72 only in 2006 in the modification of 90
        1. seos
          seos 7 March 2018 11: 39
          +4
          A $ 2m tank reached the $ 8m tank characteristics in 2006. what's wrong with that? despite the fact that the cost of T14 Armata is cheaper than the cost of T-80 modifications 70x ready ....
          The cost of a T-80 gas turbine engine is 19 times more expensive than a diesel engine on a T-72
          1. Kars
            Kars 7 March 2018 12: 25
            +4
            I would like to know where you got these price tags.
            And so it was easier on the T80 engine to change than to cut 72 15 years.
            1. seos
              seos 7 March 2018 13: 04
              +1
              Recently I re-read articles about the T-80 on BTVT, there was such a price tag in dollars at that time.
              And so it was easier on the T80 engine to change than to cut 72 15 years.

              The Ukrainians did so ... there was a devastation of the 90s, no one bought tanks, only UVZ survived this collapse. So it turned out the T-90, a hybrid of the best ideas taken from the t-80 and t-72
              1. Kars
                Kars 7 March 2018 13: 29
                +5
                In general, the diesel engine was delivered to the T80 under the USSR and was prepared as a single tank. The TKNUMX was re-equipped with the court cantimir and Toman divisions. And only the collapse of the USSR stopped this process.
                So the Russian Federation could do the same thing, replacing the Kharkov diesel engine with any
                And the price tags, well, it’s hard to believe that the 80 is more expensive than Abrams.
                1. Bad_gr
                  Bad_gr 7 March 2018 19: 40
                  +4
                  Quote: Kars
                  So the Russian Federation could do the same thing, replacing the Kharkov diesel engine with any

                  And so did St. Petersburg (Object 219RD with a 2V-16-2 engine with a power of 1200 hp), only in a series, for some reason, did not go.
                  Quote: Kars
                  And the price tags, well, it’s hard to believe that the t80u is more expensive than Abrams

                  At the end of the 80s, the cost of tanks
                  T-80U - 824 thousand rubles,
                  T-72B - 280 thousand rubles.

                  Engines
                  T-80U - 104 thousand rubles,
                  T-72B - 14 thousand rubles.

                  when selling abroad
                  T-80 - 4 million dollars,
                  T-90 - 2.7 million dollars
                2. tomket
                  tomket 14 March 2018 01: 49
                  0
                  Quote: Kars
                  the court of the Kantimir and Toman divisions were reequipped at txNUMXud. And only the collapse of the USSR stopped this process.

                  As far as I remember, these divisions received tanks unscheduled. It was a pity to cut them, so they rearm.
      3. 113262a
        113262a 9 March 2018 02: 07
        0
        And frontal armor, and SLA, and the Ministry of Health and real multi-fuel! A breakthrough tank and a tank for the poor ...
    2. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 7 March 2018 08: 10
      +2
      So they started to upgrade already .... bring to the level of the modernized T-90 .. T-80BVM seem.
    3. Prometey
      Prometey 7 March 2018 09: 28
      +6
      Quote: Kars
      And so they would begin to modernize the t-80 in the Russian Federation instead of the t72, now there would be no need for armatures in principle.

      Like a specialist, but write nonsense. Armata seems to be declared as a new combat platform. And what about modernization?
      1. Kars
        Kars 7 March 2018 11: 17
        +4
        So far, the armata personally have not convinced me of anything. As well as the necessity ... of a new .. platform which, in principle, will not become mass.
        1. seos
          seos 7 March 2018 12: 00
          +1
          Yes, the mass will not ....
          BUT T-14 is a centric won tank - it commands a combat formation, performs reconnaissance functions, gives target designation to other equipment ..
          It has disadvantages that do not allow it to become massive:
          Too long body - created as universal (plus for BMP and self-propelled guns minus for MBT), but this makes it possible to install new weapons on the platform (the platform is lifting and has a very smooth ride)
          For me, the T-14 needs a support tank (at the moment, this role should be played by t-72b3, t-80bm, t-90m) I believe that on the basis of t-90 you can create a new battle tank:
          1) The body is made of armored steel used in Armata.
          2) A crewless combat module.
          3) The front location of the crew in the armored capsule as on the Coalition.
          Could get a cheap MBT with crew survival as in Armata and not afraid of shelling with small-caliber guns ....
          1. Bad_gr
            Bad_gr 7 March 2018 19: 48
            +3
            Quote: seos
            Body too long - ....

            The track support surface is larger than the T-72 slightly. The body looks long only due to the long overhangs: in front there are wings with anti-mine equipment, at the back there are elongated tanks + an elongated upper surface of the motor to accommodate larger radiators on it.
        2. mkpda
          mkpda 7 March 2018 12: 05
          +3
          Now it is more a prototype than a production model. Then new weapons will appear, then Armata will “play”. And so, I completely agree with you, the T-80U is the best tank that we got from the USSR and is perfect for a professional army with a large margin for modernization.
    4. Mihail28
      Mihail28 7 March 2018 13: 19
      +2
      There was a need for the protection of the North, so they thought about tanks with a gas turbine engine. The turbine in any frost starts without problems, and the diesel engine requires a long preheating. This is on the one hand.
      On the other hand, there were T-80s with a gas turbine engine somewhere in storage. While they stood, as they say, they did not ask for bread. And now you need to decide what to do next with them: either invest in a scheduled repair and modernization, or write off completely.
      On the third hand, did you show the T-80 tank, and did you tell all the military secrets about its further fate? Are you sure?
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 7 March 2018 23: 38
        +1
        Quote: Michael28
        There was a need for protection of the North

        From whom?

        Or will Americans from the Leningrad region through Vorkuta attack Moscow?

        https://topwar.ru/108964-amerikanskie-voennye-sfo
        tografirovalis-s-oruzhiem-i-flagom-ssha-na-fone-r
        ossiyskogo-ivangoroda.html
      2. zadorin1974
        zadorin1974 8 March 2018 00: 32
        0
        Michael 28. Not so long ago he talked with former neighbors over a glass of tea (disbanded 16 tank) who served on 80s. They confirm that 80 after Omsk will go to the Arctic brigades. By the way, not many units modernize the Defense Ministry and ordered something. And the diesel versions of the t 80 were initially used in training units (motor resources are higher and the engine is cheaper). Although I was very surprised that I had the t80 engine replaced in the field (during exercises) for some THREE hours and the car went on its own.
      3. 113262a
        113262a 9 March 2018 02: 12
        0
        the tank was designed for a European theater of war, passed tests in the Karakum, for small I did not rattle to Syria in 83! Nobody thought about the frosts in -30! At -30, by the way, in the GSVG, in 85, half of the company started up from snot due to dead batteries! Or did they invent non-freezing batteries?
    5. Conserp
      Conserp 7 March 2018 13: 44
      +9
      Quote: Kars
      would begin to modernize the t-80u in the Russian Federation, the need for armatures would not be in principle.

      And would they begin to upgrade the MiG-21, would there be no need for a Su-35?

      Enchanting nonsense. "Armata" is different for a generation.
      1. Kars
        Kars 7 March 2018 14: 00
        +5
        Well, comparing the moment 21 and soo 35 is somehow strange.
        And about the difference between the Sarmatians and the generation, I have deep doubts. The gun is normal, the speed is normal, the dimensions have even increased. Unless if you use the price as a generator for generations. And because of one uninhabited tower in generations translate. And it's not a fact that this decision will bring tangible performance enhancement.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 7 March 2018 14: 02
          +6
          Quote: Kars
          And about the difference between the Sarmatians and the generation, I have deep doubts

          This is due to technical illiteracy, which organically complements the illiteracy of the Russian language.
          1. Kars
            Kars 7 March 2018 23: 49
            +3
            Well, since you have not flashed technical knowledge, but only slogans, then I'm sorry that I will not take you seriously))
            1. Conserp
              Conserp 8 March 2018 09: 12
              +4
              HOW DO YOU KNOW THAT I AM 12 YEARS OLD TO PATAM WHAT I WALK? !!!! 11


              He doesn’t take me “seriously”. What a tragedy!

              In order for the T-80 to reach roughly the level of "Almaty" in terms of protection, it must weigh at least 55 tons. Only ride as “Armata” he will not be able to.
        2. cariperpaint
          cariperpaint 7 March 2018 17: 41
          +2
          you will forgive but your conversation is some kind of game ... do you even understand the difference between these machines? what does the size have to do with it. ..
        3. seos
          seos 7 March 2018 20: 58
          +3
          Implemented a system of multilevel protection against missiles of all types including air surface
          + tank radar buckets reconnaissance of terrain and airspace - it costs its money
          1. Kars
            Kars 7 March 2018 23: 53
            +3
            While there is no evidence for all of this. It’s also not clear where all this is in construction. If this hinged kaz doesn’t take the tank to another step. They will put Abrams on Trophy, will we give him the next tingling?

            It would be fun to know the power of the radar) and how this affects the visibility of the tank.
            1. seos
              seos 8 March 2018 00: 19
              0
              It's not about KAZ .... until KAZ there’s a whole bunch of protection systems
              I understand that Wiki is a dump, but the capabilities of T14, compiled on the basis of an analysis of its equipment, are very well written:
              T14:
              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2-14
              KAZ:
              https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%90%D1%84%D0%B3%
              D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%82_(%D0%B0%D0%BA%D1%82%D0%B8
              %D0%B2%D0%BD%D0%B0%D1%8F_%D0%B7%D0%B0%D1%89%D0%B8
              % D1% 82% D0% B0)
      2. 113262a
        113262a 9 March 2018 02: 15
        0
        They will master it for a whole generation! There are no tanks, there are no training facilities, there are no repair facilities, there are no instructors, there are no mass Tricky ammunition for her! So there is a parade tank!
  4. Pivot
    Pivot 7 March 2018 08: 01
    0
    So I didn’t understand, the authors are holding us for fools, at first they write that Payment didn’t fight, then at the end of the article they place a damaged tank, how do they differ from Ukrainian experts?
    1. tech3030
      tech3030 7 March 2018 08: 26
      +10
      This "Damask" seems to be.
      1. Pivot
        Pivot 7 March 2018 10: 13
        +1
        Well, why should they be compared to jackals, upload these photos, each of those present on the forum knows that it is impossible to undermine only a tank that does not participate in the database. Well, probably except for the guys from the well-inhabited and actually the authors of the article.
    2. 113262a
      113262a 9 March 2018 02: 17
      +2
      In the photo is not a bulwark, but heaped up 64, which is Bulat! ROLLERS !!! Tovarisch does not understand!))) (At Oplot-Odovaya t-80)
  5. Lenivets2
    Lenivets2 7 March 2018 08: 07
    +2
    "Recently, deliveries of the T-90 to Iran have begun."
    Maybe in Iraq? wink
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 7 March 2018 08: 13
      +2
      Iran made its tank. The main battle tank Karrar But it is very similar (unlike their different hybrids) to the T-90SM (MS). Very similar.
      It is reported that the latest Iranian tank is not inferior to anything, and perhaps even superior to the Russian T-90 tank. At least this was stated by Iranian Minister of Defense Hossein Dehgan.

      “The Russian T-90 tank is one of our favorites, but negotiations on the purchase of these vehicles were stopped because Iran has the internal potential to create military equipment with similar characteristics,” the minister said.

      In December last year, an official delegation of the Iranian Defense Ministry visited Russia to discuss the purchase of T-90 tanks, but later the Iranian military refused further negotiations. In addition, Hossein Dehgan rejected the proposal of the deputy director of Uralvagonzavod Alexei Zharich to deploy assembly production of T-90 tanks in Iran
  6. andrewkor
    andrewkor 7 March 2018 08: 31
    +2
    Correct, if I am mistaken, the T-80UD, this is a gas turbine T-80 of Leningrad design that was removed from storage, converted to a Ukrainian TDF diesel engine. The T-84 is a modernization of the original Ukrainian design T-64 with all its advantages and disadvantages (weak running).
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. Aybolit
      Aybolit 7 March 2018 10: 15
      +7
      Not certainly in that way. T-80UD is a serial modification of the T-80 tank, in which instead of a gas turbine engine there is a Ukrainian diesel engine. They started to produce this tank during the union, in Kharkov, but they did not look much, and Ukraine sold most of the available T-80UDs to Pakistan. T-84 is a further development of the T-80, indirect relation to the T-64
    3. mvg
      mvg 7 March 2018 12: 16
      +1
      T-80UD is a diesel T-80 object "478" Birch 6-TD2 dvigun. 1200 mares.
      1. Alf
        Alf 7 March 2018 22: 47
        0
        Quote: mvg
        1200 mares.

        1000.
        1. mvg
          mvg 7 March 2018 23: 03
          0
          https://topwar.ru/28854-osnovnoy-tank-t-80ud-obek
          t-478b-bereza.html

          1200
          1. Alf
            Alf 8 March 2018 09: 50
            0
            T-80UD, not Oplot.
  7. Prometey
    Prometey 7 March 2018 09: 26
    +5
    A comparison of tanks in the article where? Well, besides the fact that some produced several dozen, while others over a thousand?
    And the last picture, why? So will any tank finish?
  8. Aleks2048
    Aleks2048 7 March 2018 09: 26
    +7
    The article somehow failed. Minus to the author. What is the article about? About advertising? It has long been known that advertising is the engine of the economy. On the tanks themselves as a whole, the article did not raise questions, and there is no question of answers at all, and how to talk about them if questions are not asked.
    1. seos
      seos 7 March 2018 12: 07
      0
      Most likely an article about some "experts", "expert publications" and various statues from the Internet extolling Ukrainian equipment .... and the advantage of Ukrainian engineering ... (BTVT and Svidomo Andrei-bt)
      1. Antares
        Antares 7 March 2018 18: 03
        +1
        Quote: seos
        Svidomo Andrei-bt

        he does not "Svidomo"
        otherwise Khlopotov also Svidomo Russian spill?
        throw people to insult not in the eyes.
        1. seos
          seos 7 March 2018 20: 59
          0
          And you read his blog ... there is enough Svidomo ...
  9. m.cempbell
    m.cempbell 7 March 2018 09: 27
    +10
    I read it, it seems that the author writes about the right things, but! Dear authors, learn to choose the right headlines! The article is placed in the armament section, the heading implies that we will be given some information about two combat vehicles, possibly in the form of a question and answer, and here only the OWN thoughts of the author. The article has a place in the "opinions" section, and then under a different heading. Not a single SPECIFIC question about the T-84 and T-90 tanks was raised in the article - so what's the title?
    1. san4es
      san4es 7 March 2018 09: 55
      +2
      Quote: m.cempbell
      ... that they will give us some information about two combat vehicles ...


      Military TV of Russia
      Posted Dec 9 2016 year
      1. Rader
        Rader 7 March 2018 17: 14
        +2
        Quote: m.cempbell
        I read it, it seems that the author writes about the right things, but! Dear authors, learn to choose the right headlines! .....

        I absolutely agree with you, Anton. Writing an article about technology without numbers is a futile exercise. In a double, this lesson is useless when they try to refute an agitation of moderate degree of lousiness with such material ... In a five-minute video from the military, even that turned out to be more useful technical information than in the article.
        I hope that the respected authors of the article will continue to be more careful and attentive in the content of the article, in the title, and in determining the section where the article will be published.
        hi
  10. BAI
    BAI 7 March 2018 09: 51
    +1
    And exported is not the first year. Only in India today there are 1200 such machines. Recently, deliveries of the T-90 to Iran have begun.

    Something about the T-90 approval by the “shaft” and the figures are doubtful.
    For 2012 year:
    As of 2012, the total production of T-90 and its modifications amounted to at least 1335 tanks (not including those made under license in India):

    T-90 modifications of 1992 (object 188) - about 120 tanks;
    -T-90C "Bhishma" modification of 2001 (object 188C) - 657 (310 + 347) tanks. In 2006, the Indian government also signed a $ 2,5 billion contract for the licensed production of 1000 T-90 Bhishma tanks at the state-owned HVF (Heavy Vehicles Factory) plant in Avadi, Tamil Nadu. In 2009, the Indian Armed Forces received the first 10 of the 1000 planned T-90S locally produced.
    -T-90CA modification of 2006 (object 188CA) - 189 tanks;
    -T-90A modification of 2004 (object 188A1) - 32 tanks with the gunner’s night sight “Buran-M”;
    -T-90A modification of 2006 (object 188A1) - 217 (+120 to 2011) tanks with an Essa thermal imager with a Catherine FC matrix.

    As of 2015 (the same is on topwar):
    The number of tanks in service: about 900 pieces.
    The total number of produced tanks of all modifications: more than 1800 pieces.

    I would not say that on the scale of Russia - 900 units is a "shaft", although, in any case, it is more than 10 or how many "Oplotov" there are in Ukraine.
  11. sivuch
    sivuch 7 March 2018 10: 55
    +3
    It is necessary to make a discount - the author of the article about the superiority of Oplotov is Mikhail Zhirokhov. Until recently, he specialized in plagiarism in aviation history. It's just that a person has not yet entered a tank theme.
    1. seos
      seos 7 March 2018 12: 08
      +1
      There, these authors are all ukruin ...
      Even the workers of the Kharkov plant love articles to write how smart and beautiful they are ... and the rest are dumb and uneducated
  12. alavrin
    alavrin 7 March 2018 11: 06
    +4
    I saw no questions, much less answers in the article.
  13. tchoni
    tchoni 7 March 2018 11: 27
    +3
    it’s necessary, as the authors of the Khokhlyat article touched .... They even wrote their own “about nothing”.
  14. Seld
    Seld 7 March 2018 12: 38
    +3
    Quote: alavrin
    I saw no questions, much less answers in the article.


    Even on the knee, based on basic and logical reflections on the technique, it is possible to draw some “bed-sofa” conclusions about how, in principle, one technique (say, the “past” generation) can differ from the modern one:
    Everything is trite:
    1. Mass (the less the better);
    2. Protection from the maximum range of damaging agents (the more the better);
    3. The speed of movement (the more the better) in different terrain conditions;
    4. Profitability and manufacturability in manufacturing (the less it costs, the better);
    5. Profitability and maintainability in the most unpretentious conditions. It happens, the difference is "for peace" with the efficiency of production.
    6. Suitability for modernization in the medium and long term;
    7. Firepower (the more the better);
    8. The degree of survival of the crew.
    yes you never know ...
    Some logic suggests that it is impossible in principle to achieve maximum performance on all the points outlined above (without prejudice to other performance characteristics), because there are mutually exclusive factors taking into account the development of modern science (in particular, for example, metallurgy). Well, netuti is for now light armor, which protect the tank from everything and everything. We have to increase the reservation and weight, as a result. As a result, mobility drops. We increase engine power - we increase the mass (as a rule).
    And I’m completely silent about the cost of refueling equipment in the current realities / economy conditions.
    As a result, some login suggests such a conclusion: as of now, the development of this type of weapons has reached ALMOST its limit, and all tanks in their class (approximately the same development period) will be approximately equal. ABOUT! Somewhere something is better, somewhere something worse, sacrificing certain TTX in favor of, for example, its current doctrine, its geographic location and taking into account the existing infrastructure (for example, bridges, railway connections, remoteness from repair bases, the presence of METAL, etc.).
    Miracles in the laws of physics and economics DO NOT happen!
    For example, when creating a high-tech and most automated tank you always run the risk of tearing off the railway in terms of economics and logistics (for example, the same Leclerc or even earlier - Mouse and Tigers of the Second World War).
    Armata certainly can and should be considered a breakthrough weapon in terms of, at least, new technologies and layout principles. I’ve touched the future when new materials appear - quite GOOD! BUT do not be very surprised if the averaged data on the power of Almaty on the battlefield will be .... approximately equal to "T-80/90".
    We will also not make brackets the factor of crew training ...
    Sorry for many bukaf!
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 7 March 2018 13: 51
      0
      That is why the T-64/72/80/90 is ahead of the Abrams and Leopards by a generation.
      And “Armata” is ahead of their generation already.

      Because due to new layout and technical solutions, they achieved an abrupt increase in almost all of the above characteristics.
      1. Cherry Nine
        Cherry Nine 7 March 2018 23: 57
        +2
        Quote: Conserp
        That is why the T-64/72 ... ahead of the "Abrams"

        It is a pity Saddam did not know.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 8 March 2018 08: 27
          0
          And the Zulus with spears of the British with rifles were repeatedly cut.

          From the point of view of such a professional ignoramus like you, this should definitely speak about the technical superiority of copies.
          1. Cherry Nine
            Cherry Nine 8 March 2018 11: 24
            +1
            Quote: Conserp
            And the Zulus with spears of the British with rifles were repeatedly cut.
            From the point of view of a professional ignoramus like you,

            That is, in the analogy that you proposed, Saddam is the British, the coalition of the 91st year is the Zulus, the ignoramus, by the way, of the two of us, I am.
            Well, this is at least consistent.
            1. Conserp
              Conserp 8 March 2018 13: 23
              0
              Quote: Cherry Nine
              ignoramus, by the way, of the two of us - me.

              Wow, at least I could understand something!

              The same Americans repeatedly shot down Me-262 on piston aircraft.

              For a technically illiterate dropout or a lying demagogue, this can also mean that this jet was not a new generation. But normal people do not have such ideas.

              After all, a normal person understands the meaning of the term “generation”, and will not begin to whip up the beating of defenseless Iraq by many times superior forces as a pseudo-argument.
        2. 113262a
          113262a 9 March 2018 02: 28
          +1
          And the Arabs have all the wars like this! Our gooseberries are being chopped up under mines, but they are being pulled out of the field — the Arabs after the PF hit))) are catapulting! Syria is a vivid example! Saddam's tank company in the trenches abandoned equipment and escaped after 4 Abramsya them walked from the rear!
      2. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 9 March 2018 16: 18
        +1
        Abrams snapped Iraqi T-72s (export version) in 2003 easily. Uranium scrap passed through the forehead of the hull, as through butter, flew over the fighting compartment and got stuck in the back of the motor. Abrams forehead T-shki did not pierce.
        To this - a head-on-head head-on battle - Abrams was hid by designers.
        1. Conserp
          Conserp 9 March 2018 21: 16
          +1
          Again these propaganda ravings.

          Shooting point-blank T-54 crews is not exactly a "victory over the T-72 in the oncoming battle."
  15. Altona
    Altona 7 March 2018 13: 52
    0
    Quote: Strashila
    "Pakistani T-80UD tanks have problems with engines in the desert?" dated June 17, 2014 .. the same site

    ------------------------
    All gas turbine tanks have engine problems in hot climates. No one is an exception. Abrams too. Constant clogging of filters with sand, rarefied air, fast fuel consumption and more.
    1. The comment was deleted.
    2. grau
      grau 7 March 2018 14: 33
      +2
      Gas turbine engines have no desert problems. Our
      continuous filter blowing system
    3. Bad_gr
      Bad_gr 7 March 2018 20: 04
      +1
      Quote: Altona
      Quote: Strashila
      "Pakistani T-80UD tanks have problems with engines in the desert?" dated June 17, 2014 .. the same site

      ------------------------
      All gas turbine tanks have engine problems in hot climates. No one is an exception. Abrams too. Constant clogging of filters with sand, rarefied air, fast fuel consumption and more.

      Where does the information about the problems with our T-80s in hot climates come from?
    4. Mihail28
      Mihail28 8 March 2018 00: 44
      +1
      About the problems of all gas turbine tanks in a hot climate.
      The T-80UD tank is not all gas turbine tanks, it has a 6TD diesel engine. Therefore, the problems of gas turbine tanks do not affect him.
    5. 113262a
      113262a 10 March 2018 00: 26
      0
      The T-80 crews that served in the GSVG, all 1 TA, do not agree with you. All landfills of the Dresden district and all of Germany are solid sand, in the summer up to 40 degrees! Columns of eighties easily bypassed the boiling BMP-2 and t-72 Germans. In winter, yes, there was no frost-free battery at that time!
  16. Mihail28
    Mihail28 7 March 2018 13: 56
    +2
    I read the article. In fact, the title did not see any questions or answers.
    In short: in the elderberry garden, and in Kiev, uncle.
  17. lance
    lance 7 March 2018 14: 17
    +1
    there’s nothing to argue about. The t-90 proved to be the best battle tank in the Syrian war. the stronghold did not participate in the hostilities. Kharkov school of tank building is neither better nor worse than rf. time will tell which is better.
  18. Seld
    Seld 7 March 2018 14: 28
    0
    Quote: Conserp
    That is why the T-64/72/80/90 is ahead of the Abrams and Leopards by a generation.
    And “Armata” is ahead of their generation already.

    Because due to new layout and technical solutions, they achieved an abrupt increase in almost all of the above characteristics.


    That is, in other words, for example, did the security of the armata from the javelins increase "spasmodically"? Is there any practical evidence for this? That is, from above the armature of Almaty is equal to the frontal projection?
    And the cost of manufacturing Armata is "hopping" below Leopörd?
    And the intellectual filling of Almaty "jumpwise" exceeds Leclerc?
    And the power reserve also "jumps" in plus?
    And refuel Armata, obviously, at the price of "minzurki"?
    Someone checked the stability of electronics armature to "external stimuli"? (however, I admit quite, checked).
    Read, by the way, the analytics of the use of Leclerc in the sands, including the "childhood diseases" of this tank ...
    Once again, let me turn around: the “breakthrough” factor of a tank can consist not only in its superiority over other tanks on the battlefield ... (this “coordinate” has a very large number of related coefficients that need to be corrected; and which may have a bunch of subjective factors).
    Not at all !!!!!! But there is also a “phenomenon” of BTT TECHNICAL PERFORMANCE, its maintainability “in place, in the fields” (such as a VAZ 2101, in a garage, behind a glass of hers).
    It is also necessary to look at the possibility of mobility of tank formations: on their own, by train, air ...
    Tueva, a bunch of nuances, can ultimately make even the most “eXXXX !!!! inclusive” and seemingly profitable project unmaintainable in real combat conditions.
    There are many practical calculations. You can start with the banal time period of "the life of a tank on a battlefield". There is such a digital figure, ochchchchchchchchchchchen repulsive in terms of the desire to serve in the tank troops.
    In the end, the competition "shell - armor" has not yet been canceled ....
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 9 March 2018 14: 56
      0
      Quote: seld
      That is, in other words, for example, did the security of the armata from the javelins increase "spasmodically"?

      Just look at the vulnerable area of ​​the upper projection and compare with the same "Abrams". At the same time compare the mass.

      And do not flog more illiterate nonsense.
  19. exo
    exo 7 March 2018 16: 25
    0
    Somehow, it’s very superficial.
  20. Wolka
    Wolka 7 March 2018 17: 25
    0
    why be surprised, every sandpiper praises its swamp, but the war plan will show ...
  21. Antares
    Antares 7 March 2018 18: 14
    0
    Every sandpiper praises its own swamp.
    And every time for each article about the "superiority of his bolt over a stranger"
    ordinary tank srach. (and here also the Ukrainians are involved so another srach)
    The photo is not correct. If it was impartial, then the photo of the destroyed t 90 (no matter what way) would also be placed.
    I learned more from an article from the past spill than from this one. And for three years there has been no progress.
  22. mvg
    mvg 7 March 2018 20: 49
    0
    And, two brothers, an acrobat, who were given a beep on an APC, after which the article squealed with delight ...)))
    I also read this article .. I thought, I read it again ... and still did not understand .. "how much opium is for the people." The holiday began early or what? What is the article about?
  23. trahterist
    trahterist 7 March 2018 21: 06
    0
    Quote: Kars
    Well, comparing the moment 21 and soo 35 is somehow strange.
    And about the difference between the Sarmatians and the generation, I have deep doubts. The gun is normal, the speed is normal, the dimensions have even increased. Unless if you use the price as a generator for generations. And because of one uninhabited tower in generations translate. And it's not a fact that this decision will bring tangible performance enhancement.

    Plus, in an uninhabited tower there is one, but very significant one — when the ammunition is detonated, the crew does not die automatically, which is a characteristic gloomy “trick” for all tanks of the “Soviet” tank building school.
    I think any tanker is, how to put it ... the soul warms.
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 8 March 2018 09: 03
      0
      Quote: trahterist
      Plus, in an uninhabited tower, one ...


      In fact, the meaning of an uninhabited tower is to save about 10 tons of armor. And the isolation of the crew from the BC - this is the little things in comparison.

      Ejecting a loader from a tower is minus 10 tons and plus a generation. Kicking all people out of the tower is another minus 10 tons and again plus a generation.
    2. 113262a
      113262a 9 March 2018 02: 31
      +1
      For ALL TANKS, including French and Sky! Breaking through = detonation!
    3. beeper
      beeper 10 March 2018 02: 49
      0
      How warm it is! good
      Since childhood, I dreamed about such a powerful and tenacious domestic armored car, when I did not yet know that I myself was trained in a tank military specialty, and listened to the stories of veteran front-line soldiers and my relatives who had fought and served as tank soldiers at different times from the Great Patriotic War (junior) my Bati’s brother) to post-war Germany and the “veiled” Czechoslovakia (my mother’s younger brothers).
      hi
  24. trahterist
    trahterist 8 March 2018 20: 43
    +1
    Quote: Conserp
    Quote: trahterist
    Plus, in an uninhabited tower, one ...


    In fact, the meaning of an uninhabited tower is to save about 10 tons of armor. And the isolation of the crew from the BC - this is the little things in comparison.

    Ejecting a loader from a tower is minus 10 tons and plus a generation. Kicking all people out of the tower is another minus 10 tons and again plus a generation.

    The crew probably thinks differently.
    This is me about the paramount importance of the weight of the tower.
    The tower spaced with detonating ammunition is replaced by mere trifles.
    But the quality training of the new crew, instead of the previous 3 (4) corpses, is much more expensive.
    1. Conserp
      Conserp 9 March 2018 09: 21
      0
      Quote: trahterist
      The crew probably thinks differently.


      It should be more important to the crew that their 48-ton tank is better booked than the hypothetical American 70-ton tank.

      And the detonation of the BC still usually occurs after the death of the crew as a result of penetration.
  25. chingachguc
    chingachguc 9 March 2018 17: 10
    +2
    everyone loves tanks, and I, too ...)) I personally found the Oplot overweight, his running gear was clearly overloaded ... but that's not the point. In Ukraine, forgotten how to make tanks. KhTZ, in fact, turned into a tank repair workshop ... Its capabilities - 5-6 tanks a year, it's just a laugh. They cannot make engines, they cannot make guns, they cannot make armor ... only all kinds of bells and whistles on old tanks wind up ... that’s all their limit of possibilities. Therefore, talking about the Oplot tank, its advantages and disadvantages is generally meaningless. There is no such tank!
    1. 113262a
      113262a 10 March 2018 00: 27
      +1
      HTZ-tanks did NEVER! Only MTLB!
  26. Seld
    Seld 12 March 2018 10: 55
    0
    Quote: Conserp
    Quote: seld
    That is, in other words, for example, did the security of the armata from the javelins increase "spasmodically"?

    Just look at the vulnerable area of ​​the upper projection and compare with the same "Abrams". At the same time compare the mass.

    And do not flog more illiterate nonsense.


    For God's sake!
    It remains to clarify what is embedded in the concept of "hopping". At least there are comparative figures in the "hospital average", preferably in the "%" ratio?
    And by the way, from your words it became clear that "from above" Armata was still tested for penetration from the Javelins. And it became immediately clear that Abrams makes his way fairly well, Armata - holds a blow.
    Well, how else?
    Or maybe they looked at / considered the “vulnerable area of ​​the upper projection” Armata and “maliciously smirked” without testing at all!
    Mass - YES, it should be so! For materials science does not stand still!
    On the other hand, I’m hinting: obviously, the “eternal battle between the blank and the wall” passed by you ...