Military Review

Updated and new. The development of the Russian tank fleet

51
The Russian army has many tank parts and formations that form the basis of striking power. The main battle tanks of a number of models and modifications are in service - both basic types and those that have been modernized. It is also expected to adopt new technology with special capabilities. Consider the current state of affairs and the prospects for tank forces.



T-72B3 and his crew in exercises. Photo by the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru


Total number


Tank units and subunits are present in all combined arms armies of the ground forces, as well as in the coastal naval forces fleet. It can be tank regiments and brigades as part of armies or battalions or companies as part of motorized rifle formations. Tanks are present in all strategic directions.

Actual numbers of the Russian tank fleet are not officially published. In unofficial open sources there are a variety of estimates. Thus, the authoritative reference book IISS The Military Balance indicates that in the ranks and reserves of the Russian army there are a total of about 13 thousand tanks of all types. The authors of the Global Firepower military rating cite other figures. According to them, Russia has almost 22 thousand tanks.

In this case, the bulk of the total number are storage tanks. According to The Military Balance, more than 10 thousand armored vehicles remain in reserve, while the active fleet of tank units does not exceed 2800 units. This amount of equipment allows you to arm all tank units and provide the required combat readiness of the army.

The presence of a large reserve has its advantages. If necessary, these tanks can be returned to service. In addition, some projects provide for the restructuring and modernization of equipment from storage and do not affect combat machines.

Equipment for modernization


Currently, the Russian army is armed with tanks of three models and several modifications. Prior to the start of the current modernization programs, MBT T-72, T-80 and T-90 of different versions were operated. The main part of the tank fleet was made up of T-72 vehicles of various modifications - about 2 thousand units. About 6-7 thousand of such tanks are in storage.


Upgraded T-90M. Photo NPK Uralvagonzavod


Less numerous are MBTs of the T-80 family - no more than 400-500 "active" units and up to 3 thousand in storage. The least widespread in the past were the T-90 - for their own army they built about 550-600 of such tanks. In order remains approx. 350 units.

MBT of the available types as a whole are able to continue service, but their characteristics no longer fully meet current requirements. In this regard, the army launched several equipment modernization projects. With their help, it was planned to significantly update the fleet at a reasonable and reasonable cost.

At the turn of the last decades, a modernization project for MBT T-72Б with the “B3” index was created. The restructuring of equipment for this project began in 2011 and continues to this day. In 2016, a new version of the modernization of the T-72Б3 was developed with new changes and improvements aimed at further improving the performance.

In the middle of the tenth years, the development of the T-90М “Breakthrough-3” project began. He offers a replacement power plant, enhanced protection and installation of a new MSA. To date, design has been completed, upgraded tanks have been tested, and the project has received the approval of the Ministry of Defense. The serial modernization of the T-90 and T-90A combatant tanks has already been launched.

The army has several hundred T80B and T-80BV tanks, the operation of which may continue after a certain update. For this, a T-80BVM modernization project was developed, offering enhanced protection and updating of the OMS. The first contract for a new type of equipment appeared in 2017. In 2018, the army received the first batch of repaired and modernized T-80BVM.

The pace of modernization


In the past, the comparatively low cost of rebuilding a tank was cited as an argument in favor of the T-72B3 project. Overhaul and re-equipment of the serial T-72Б were noticeably cheaper than the construction of the new T-90А with the same combat characteristics and qualities. Optimum economic indicators allowed the army to launch a full-scale serial modernization, the results of which are of great interest.


One of the first T-80BVM. Photo Decoder / otvaga2004.mybb.ru


According to various sources, from 2011, at least 72-3 tanks from combat units underwent modernization to T-1000Б1100. The bulk of this amount has been updated for the original B3 project. At least 150-200 tanks were upgraded to T-72Б3 arr. 2016 g. At the same time, the number of T-72B3 in the troops is constantly increasing. The army decided to rebuild almost the entire existing T-72B fleet.

The first order to upgrade the T-90 (A) to the T-90M state appeared back in 2017. It provided for the repair and updating of 20 combat tanks. The military also wished to receive 10 T-90M tanks of a new construction. Two more contracts of this kind were concluded in 2018 and 2019. In the near future, the Ministry of Defense may place new orders.

According to official and unofficial data, the contracts provide for the supply of 160 MBT T-90M. A quarter of this amount will be rebuilt, and the remaining tanks will be redone from the serial T-90. So far, only one third of the cash T-90 (A) is planned to be modernized. What will happen to the rest of the armored vehicles is unknown. Perhaps new orders will appear in the future, and the entire fleet of equipment will undergo modernization.

T-80BVM are already mass-produced and in significant quantities. The 2017 order provided for the supply of 62 machines in 2018-19. According to various sources, to date, the army has received more than half of this equipment. The remaining MBT will be transferred to the army in the coming months. Then a new similar order may appear for several dozen tanks.

New technology


In parallel with the modernization of existing MBTs, development work is underway on completely new models of armored vehicles. As part of the Armata program, several armored vehicles are being created, including main tank T-14. This machine has already been tested and is even being built in a small series. In the near future, its adoption is expected with all the relevant consequences.


T-14 tanks on parade. Photo of the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation / mil.ru


An experimental batch of T-14 tanks appeared no later than the spring of 2015. It was these vehicles that were first shown on Red Square. The first unofficial reports of the mass construction of MBT T-14 relate to 2016, when it became known about the order for 100 units. In 2018, the army ordered 132 armored vehicles of the Armata project — this included tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored vehicles. Some of these orders have already been completed; equipment is transferred to the army and is being tested.

In the past, industry called the expected quantities of new equipment and the timing of its release. In 2016, the need for the construction of the 2300 MBT T-14 was first voiced. They should have been built by 2020 or 2025, depending on various factors. However, later it was announced that there was no need for fast and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization meet the challenges of the present time, and you can continue to fine-tune the T-14 without haste.

Tanks of the future


Available data on the events of recent years allow us to imagine how Russian tank troops will look in the near and medium term. During this period, the T-72, T-80 and T-90 will remain in service in their latest versions, and in addition, the appearance of the fundamentally new MBT T-14 is expected.

The gradual modernization of available equipment over time will allow the army to completely switch to modern models, such as the T-72Б3 (including the model 2016), T-80БВМ and T-90М. Tanks of older models will be stored without obvious prospects for returning to service. The troops will also be saturated with new “Armats”.

Obviously, as the T-72, T-80, and T-90 resources are developed, new modifications will have to be written off. By this time, the production of T-14 will gain the necessary pace and will be able to replace obsolete equipment - perhaps even in equal or close quantities. However, this will happen only in the distant future. T-90М, T-80БВМ and T-72Б3 can still serve in the Russian army.

Thus, in recent years, we can observe how our army and the defense industry are updating the fleet of armored vehicles, as well as laying the foundation for further modernization in accordance with the requirements of future times. The development process of domestic main tanks continues and makes the most serious contribution to the overall defense.
Author:
51 comment
Ad

Subscribe to our Telegram channel, regularly additional information about the special operation in Ukraine, a large amount of information, videos, something that does not fall on the site: https://t.me/topwar_official

Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Amateur
    Amateur 26 October 2019 06: 38
    +4
    In 2016, the need for the construction of 2300 MBT T-14s was voiced for the first time.

    Tukhachevsky considered it necessary by the end of the five-year plan to have a Red Army in 260 rifle and cavalry divisions, 50 artillery divisions of high power and mortars, and also provide troops by the indicated time with 40 aircraft and 50 000 tanks.

    "Top secret. Comrade Voroshilov.
    Received both documents, and the explanatory note of Tukh-go, and the "considerations" of the Headquarters. You know that I have great respect for Comrade Tukh-ho, as an unusually capable comrade. But I did not expect that a Marxist who should not be torn off from the soil could defend such a fantastic "plan" torn from the soil. In his "plan" there is no main thing, i.e. taking into account real opportunities, economic, financial, cultural order. This "plan" fundamentally violates every conceivable and permissible proportion between the army, as a part of the country, and the country as a whole, with its limits of the economic and cultural order ...
    How could such a plan arise in the head of a Marxist who had gone through the school of civil war?
    I think that Comrade Tukh-ho's "plan" is the result of a fashionable enthusiasm for "leftist" phrases, the result of a passion for paper, bureaucratic maximalism.
    "To carry out" such a "plan" means, for sure, to ruin both the country's economy and the army: that would be worse than any counter-revolution.

    It is gratifying that the Headquarters of the Red Army, with all the danger of temptation, clearly and definitely dissociated itself from Comrade Tukh-ho's "plan".
    23.3.30.
    Your I. Stalin "
    1. DimanC
      DimanC 26 October 2019 14: 18
      +2
      Yes, at that time Comrade. Stalin could not yet write openly the phrase "... this Trotskyist ...". I had to wait until 37th ...
    2. boriz
      boriz 27 October 2019 00: 11
      -6
      The main disadvantages of comrade Stalin - softness and excessive faith in people. This cost the country an extra 20 to 25 million human lives.
  2. Mainbeam
    Mainbeam 26 October 2019 06: 43
    -7
    later announced the absence of the need for speedy and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization meet the challenges of the present time, and you can continue to refine the T-14 without haste.

    I think T14 will remain as an experiment.
    There will be something new more accurate.


    1. carstorm 11
      carstorm 11 26 October 2019 07: 28
      -6
      he is already in the series ale)))
      1. Mainbeam
        Mainbeam 26 October 2019 07: 34
        +3
        Quote: carstorm 11
        he is already in the series

        you can continue to refine the T-14 without haste.

        They will reduce the series, discontinue production, upgrade, reformat, and begin to refine the managed combat module ...

        existing tanks after modernization meet the challenges of the time

        T14 is not so good that at the present stage they bother to the fullest. It’s like replacing Kalashnikov - they all think something and can’t think of anything. So it will be with tanks until it is conceptually significantly better than the upgraded 72 and 90
    2. Sling cutter
      Sling cutter 26 October 2019 10: 55
      -13
      MainBeam (Adegander)
      T-14 is the Soviet development of T-95 !!!
      1. Observer2014
        Observer2014 26 October 2019 16: 44
        -4
        Quote: Stroporez
        MainBeam (Adegander)
        T-14 is the Soviet development of T-95 !!!

        Where exactly is t95? Explain to the public. Or just what to blurt out? Here is even a photo of that tank to help you.
        1. Sling cutter
          Sling cutter 26 October 2019 18: 55
          0
          Observer2014 (Sergey) Togo, what is that?
        2. Saxahorse
          Saxahorse 26 October 2019 21: 42
          0
          Just to blurt out. The main thing is that Armata is inferior to the T-95, firepower. The 125 mm gun against the 152 mm T-95 does not look at all. But there are pluses, T-14 digital interfaces. Given the new European fashion, choosing between 130 mm Germans and 140 mm French, Armata will definitely have to completely redo it.
        3. silver_roman
          silver_roman 27 October 2019 01: 57
          +3
          this is not t-95, but like t-95 is a black eagle and there is a gap between them. the true t-95 went like armata absolutely on a new platform, and the black eagle - a deep modernization of the t-90. he even added an ice rink 7, but even the appearance speaks for itself and where his legs grow from
          1. MORDVIN13rus
            MORDVIN13rus 27 October 2019 17: 33
            +1
            The black eagle is a modernization of the T-80, and certainly not the T-90. They put a cassette AZ, the fighting compartment is located below the shoulder of the tower, an elongated chassis for a smoother ride and a more powerful engine.
        4. Grigory_45
          Grigory_45 27 October 2019 11: 09
          +1
          Quote: Observer2014
          Here is even a photo of that tank to help you.

          some kind of non-observant observer. In your photo - T-95 (Object 640), Black Eagle. Your vis-a-vis was talking about Object-195
          So you blurted out ...
          1. The comment was deleted.
        5. Mainbeam
          Mainbeam 28 October 2019 15: 10
          0
          Quote: Observer2014
          Quote: Stroporez
          MainBeam (Adegander)
          T-14 is the Soviet development of T-95 !!!

          Where exactly is t95? Explain to the public. Or just what to blurt out? Here is even a photo of that tank to help you.

          Correctly quote)))))))))))))))
          These are not my words about T-95

          Besides "Stroporez"probably refers to an article on VO "T-95 vs. T-14. Comparison from The National Interest" with this picture:



          The “195 Object” was created from 1988. The aim of the project was to create a new main tank, superior to foreign equipment. The T-95 was to be distinguished from existing Soviet tanks by improved protection, as well as more powerful weapons with an increased range of fire.

          Tank survivability was increased by moving the entire crew inside the hull and automation of the tower. Later, these developments on T-95 were used in the construction of "Almaty".

          Therefore, be condescending to "amateurs" and do not judge strictly)))
    3. Xenofont
      Xenofont 26 October 2019 12: 42
      -1
      Awesome tank for most parameters! "Afganit" is especially happy.
      1. qQQQ
        qQQQ 26 October 2019 22: 13
        +2
        Quote: Xenofont
        "Afganit" is especially happy.

        And whoever saw this Afghanite in action, you can write anything in advertising.
    4. 5-9
      5-9 28 October 2019 10: 01
      0
      Which experiment? They have already ordered 132 pieces (for understanding, in the ranks of France there are only 216, and the FRG has only 225 tanks). The experiment was about 195 ... and instead of it already ordered something more compact :)
      1. Mainbeam
        Mainbeam 28 October 2019 15: 01
        -1
        Quote: 5-9
        They are already 132 pieces ordered

        Quote from the article:
        In 2018, the army ordered 132 armored vehicles of the Armata project - this number included tanks, infantry fighting vehicles and armored vehicles.

        How many of this number of tanks? 20 percent? Third? half?
        So your further comparisons with the French in numbers are not correct)))))

        Yet:
        In 2016, the need for construction was first voiced 2300 T-14. They should have been built by 2020 or ...

        2020 year after a couple of months ... Built 2300 tanks? Have time to build? Or at least (a third or half) of 132 will be built to 2020?

        Also:
        However, later it was announced that there was no need for fast and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization meet the challenges of the present time, and you can continue to refine the T-14 without haste.


        All these numbers are published - with a pitchfork on water.
        1. 5-9
          5-9 29 October 2019 08: 01
          0
          What is the difference how many tanks? By the logic of db most ... well, dozens of ARVs were ordered by dozens, the very need for the T-15 is also in question.

          What did you say about "2300 Armat by 2020" and what kind of idiot you have to be to believe in this in principle? Well, here's how this can be replicated, if the T-90 in ... twenty years, one and a half or two have made ... and this is the most massive tank on the planet over the past 30 years! The Russian Federation has more than 2500 tanks in service, the USA has less than 1500 ... how can a "2300 Armat by 2020" fit in a healthy head?
        2. fsb_buzuk
          fsb_buzuk 3 November 2019 01: 09
          +1
          100 T-14 tanks, the remaining T-15 and ARVs.
  3. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 October 2019 08: 14
    +9
    MBT in service with Russia are quite adequate to possible tasks. Crews are trained and know how to drive and shoot.
    This is not June 41st, when tens of thousands of Soviet tanks were left without fuel and spare parts, with crews that worked out only landing and disembarking from the tank, because they saved motor resources, and the command completely inadequately led these masses, throwing them into marches several hundred kilometers away. As a result, there was simply no more tank left for the battle of Moscow ...
    The T-14 is an interesting development. It is worth "driving" it in the troops, to understand that this is a real breakthrough, or an expensive toy that is not yet reliable enough and too expensive. Therefore, the modernization of the MBT is the right decision, IMHO.
    1. Pilat2009
      Pilat2009 26 October 2019 14: 14
      +2
      Quote: Mountain Shooter
      throwing them in marches of several hundred kilometers

      Interestingly, didn’t the Germans travel hundreds of kilometers? Or did they have some special tanks? Tanks always and everywhere went their own way, except perhaps the transfer from the Urals or from the factory
      1. Sibiriya
        Sibiriya 26 October 2019 14: 59
        0
        The battlefield remained with the Nazis, they repaired theirs and part of ours, returning them to service, plus the captured warehouses and fuel and lubricants. Our retreating lost everything.
      2. Mountain shooter
        Mountain shooter 26 October 2019 16: 26
        +1
        Quote: Pilat2009

        Interestingly, and the Germans did not pass hundreds of kilometers?

        The Germans moved purposefully, and did not rush to and fro. Logistics were calculated, ARVs were in columns. And the battlefield was behind them ... A tank of type 34 was more often damaged than smashed to smithereens ...
        The Germans could repair their tanks, but ours?
    2. Sibiriya
      Sibiriya 26 October 2019 14: 57
      +1
      The last tank divisions and corps of the Red Army of the pre-war formation were knocked out in the battle of Smolensk
  4. Nikolaevich I
    Nikolaevich I 26 October 2019 08: 20
    +15
    Only 3 types of tanks? I am begging you ! If we walk through the "storage facilities", we will find T-64, T-62 and T-55 ... I would not be surprised if the IS-2M, IS-3, T-10 are found here and there ...
    1. Narak-zempo
      Narak-zempo 26 October 2019 09: 36
      0
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      in some places, the IS-2M, IS-3, T-10 ...

      Find some crazy billionaire collector and sell him at the price of a new T-90M apiece.
    2. Sancho_SP
      Sancho_SP 26 October 2019 11: 11
      +4
      Moreover, they are even taken out, restored and transferred to all Syria and the Central African Republic, along with Mosin rifles.

      As a self-propelled gun, the T-62 \ 55 is even nothing, especially in comparison with a towed gun.
  5. Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 26 October 2019 10: 12
    0
    T80 alone about 5000 pieces.
    1. Sancho_SP
      Sancho_SP 26 October 2019 11: 09
      +6
      Here the main question is the state of these pieces. 30 years of storage in the open air without maintenance ... well, you understand. So then Ukraine has a thousand tanks there)
      1. Zaurbek
        Zaurbek 26 October 2019 12: 30
        +3
        The question is different ... how much does recovery cost? The T80 has modern armor, chassis, and engine ... you need to operate, upgrade these tanks, like the T72. And do new ones whenever possible. And equipped with the most advanced parts.
        1. Sancho_SP
          Sancho_SP 26 October 2019 22: 58
          +2
          It is not a fact that something other than the bare hulls “in storage” of those 5000 T-80s has survived.

          Actually, I suspect that the de-standardization (commissioning of new T-80s) was started precisely because all the remaining T-72s in storage are bare hulls that are not practical to restore. And talking about the “T-80 is better in the Arctic” is justification for de-unification.

          The production of new T-90Ms fits well here - there are simply no living T-72s for storage in the B3 for storage, further modernization of the T-72 combatant will not increase the number of combat-ready tanks.

          Oh how.
          1. Maxwrx
            Maxwrx 27 October 2019 23: 08
            +3
            Yes, there were photos from the t-90 storage in the internet. Open sky, inside the tank everything is taken away. And these are not the oldest tanks. I don’t understand one who is so mediocre in storage of equipment and expensive.
            Well, how much will the canopy for 1 tank cost? Thousand 20. We multiply by 10000 tanks, we get 200 million rubles, so as not to rot in the open air + not visible from space. Thousands for 100 you can make a closed hangar from all sides. Over 500 thousand can be stored in a warm room + communal apartment 100 thousand per year. Think about it, for 5 billion to build and 1 billion p a year, we can store 10 thousand tanks in ideal conditions. This is not so much money for such a mob reserve. Recovery will be much more expensive.
            1. Sancho_SP
              Sancho_SP 28 October 2019 21: 18
              0
              I am inclined to think that canopies and hangars should be protected so that they would not be pioneered with the filling of tanks. And to protect from protection. And all this through a state defense order, tenders ... A completely different amount will come out.

              And then, the tank itself is quite well stored in the open air, if properly preserved and regularly maintained. In the sun, perhaps the paint will fade.

              And finally, do we need 10 thousand obsolete tanks? In most conceivable scenarios, tanks from storage will either not be needed or will not help.
              1. Maxwrx
                Maxwrx 29 October 2019 20: 35
                0
                Well, actually they are being guarded, the question is how? If you make a mate responsible for this, then nothing will be taken away

                I think you will not argue that in the open air the tank will survive much less than in a closed one with climate control.

                10000 may not be necessary, but all sorts of Syria, Africa, etc. we issue equipment from this reserve! At best, they only pay for upgrades and delivery. Americans do the same, but they have a much better climate to preserve.

                3000-5000 tanks may well come in handy. And these are not all outdated, hopeless tanks. Only t-72 7000pcs.
  6. Host Tavern
    Host Tavern 26 October 2019 13: 57
    0
    However, later it was announced that there was no need for fast and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization correspond to the challenges of the present time, and you can continue to fine-tune the T-14 without haste.

    And right, we're in no hurry
    1. Alf
      Alf 26 October 2019 20: 14
      +2
      Quote: Host of the Tavern
      However, later it was announced that there was no need for fast and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization correspond to the challenges of the present time, and you can continue to fine-tune the T-14 without haste.

      And right, we're in no hurry

      All around "partners" ...
  7. Eugene (Eugene)
    Eugene (Eugene) 26 October 2019 16: 57
    +1
    In Russia, a large number of tanks are in reserve for storage. The experience of fighting in Syria (the Syrian rampart) allows you to take a fresh look at the use of tanks in modern combat. The experience of battles (war of liberation) for Novorossia showed that more time should be devoted to firing tanks from closed positions.
    Unfortunately, the issue of active protection of tanks has not been resolved, there is no massive introduction of it in tank units, as experience shows (there is an opinion) that tank companies should consist of 4 - platoons and the tank of the company commander. They have not decided whether it is necessary now to switch to a mixed composition of the armored platoon. Tank and BMPT as part of the cover. Or another number of BMPTs in platoons, in a company. Or, in "exceptional" cases, create mixed battalions of tanks, self-propelled guns, BMPTs, reconnaissance units (UAVs, "heavy armor" for a reconnaissance group, and other special equipment).
    1. armata_armata
      armata_armata 26 October 2019 20: 53
      +3
      Unfortunately, the issue of active protection of tanks has not been resolved; there is no mass introduction of it in tank units

      What kind of active defense I implore, we have a T-72BZ 2011 with an ancient contact-5 which has slits on the floor of the muzzle, here, at least they normally covered normally, we don’t even have to stutter about the active
    2. Sancho_SP
      Sancho_SP 26 October 2019 23: 00
      +2
      From closed positions, self-propelled guns or mortars will be at least as good as a tank. And much cheaper.

      The use of old tanks as self-propelled guns - from hopelessness. There are old tanks, but no self-propelled guns.
    3. CTABEP
      CTABEP 28 October 2019 23: 52
      0
      The experience of battles (war of liberation) for Novorossia showed that more time should be devoted to firing tanks from closed positions


      Shooting with closed fire with tank ballistics is a roulette that is not indulged in from a good life (and in the presence of an excess of shells).

      Unfortunately, the issue of active protection of tanks has not been resolved, there is no mass introduction of it in tank units, as experience shows (there is an opinion) that tank companies should consist of 4 - platoons and a tank company commander.


      Yeah, not resolved from the word at all.

      Or, in "exceptional" cases, create mixed battalions of tanks, self-propelled guns, BMPTs, reconnaissance units (UAVs, "heavy armor" for a reconnaissance group, and other special equipment).


      Already created - battalion tactical groups.
  8. Alf
    Alf 26 October 2019 20: 15
    +1
    later announced the absence of the need for speedy and mass construction of the T-14. It turned out that the existing tanks after modernization correspond to the challenges of the present time,

    Tell me honestly, the Ministry of Finance did not give money.
  9. Ehanatone
    Ehanatone 26 October 2019 23: 29
    +5
    I missed something - this was when it was about 2400 Armats, ...
    from what sort of pickled mushrooms did Cyril pull so many new constructs that were not rolled in the troops so much?! ...
  10. samaravega
    samaravega 28 October 2019 17: 02
    -1
    Dear "commentators"! Do you really not see how you are being "fooled"? I wanted to cite a bunch of quotes from this article that are completely untrue, I realized that I would have to quote the ENTIRE article. Simple but fundamental questions remain:
    1. Does anyone still believe in mass production of the T-14 and vehicles based on it? Even in his (mass production) opportunity?
    2. The Turkish army is armed with 3300 tanks, all in units, not in storage. Comparing the territory and needs of Turkey and Russia, how is it that 2800 is enough for us?
    3. Does anyone still believe about the "return to service" of machines from "storage"? At the beginning of the First Chechen War, they wanted to return the aircraft from storage, the money was allocated. There was nothing to return. Neither the principles of "storage" nor the principles of "return" have changed. Where does optimism come from? As they said in one old movie, "everything was stolen before us."
    4. The main thing that brings the Kremlin bot "Ryabov Kirill" down is ABSOLUTE control of the situation. As a great achievement, he writes about the modernization of "possibly" 20 tanks. Any tanker will say that 30 tanks are a tank battalion. Is modernization of less than a battalion in the Russian army a "breakthrough"? I would laugh, but these are very bitter realities of the army, you will have to pay for them in blood.
    5. The main question, after which my comment will definitely be "destroyed". In this case, I insured myself. Dear "Admins" of this site, what do you prefer: servility (without quotation marks) and "urya-urya" patriotism? Continue to publish vulgarity and stupidity from "Ryabov Kirill" and good luck when this moronic system collapses. Or try to keep the site and its authority. Not the first "tsar" in Russia, and far from the last.
    1. Arkon
      Arkon 1 November 2019 20: 26
      0
      Quote: samaravega
      There were simple but fundamental questions:
      1. Does anyone still believe in mass production of the T-14 and vehicles based on it? Even in his (mass production) opportunity?
      2. The Turkish army is armed with 3300 tanks, all in units, not in storage. Comparing the territory and needs of Turkey and Russia, how is it that 2800 is enough for us?


      It is not very clear what is "principled" in your questions. A rhetorical question that implies that everyone who thinks differently than you is not very smart? Is this "adherence to principles"?
      Or a strange question about the Turkish army, where you talk about "comparing Russia and Turkey", but do not give the results of this comparison? Is this "adherence to principles"?

      Well, then you will share the information on the basis of which we must agree with you in disbelief in the serial production of the T-14 and the results of comparing "the territory and needs of Turkey and Russia."

      And then you are trying to offend both the reader and the "urya-urya of patriots" and "stupid Ryabov Kirill" and the site administrators and on this basis elevate yourself - somehow ugly, eh?
      1. Vladimir_8
        Vladimir_8 2 November 2019 14: 26
        0
        Dear, what is Armata?
        Today, it is possible to launch the production of a new MBT with the novelty of components and components from 70% only to China. Neither the USA, nor France, nor Germany!
        Do you imagine the service of Almaty in combat conditions or on marches? Warehouses of all connections should be bursting from spare accessories and spare parts - from small hydraulic nozzles to engines and transmissions. And how much do you need to kill Armat on a resource for training crews? Armata is a dead end that experts warned about. The Russian army needs a new MBT with the maximum unification of units and parts. And there is one - the world's best T-90 Mmm, for a real war, not parades. But he is not needed by the MO managers. At the cost of a new 1,5-2 million dollars, they order 72 million rubles at Omsktransmash T-3 M90. In this case, one restored machine kills 2-3, from which components are taken. But this is not just storage - it is a strategic reserve.
        1. Arkon
          Arkon 2 November 2019 18: 04
          0
          Quote: Vladimir_8
          Today, it is possible to launch the production of a new MBT with the novelty of components and components from 70% only to China.


          New MBT? Where did you get this from? Now there is a contract for 130 units of equipment on the Armata platform. To service this amount of equipment, it is absolutely not necessary to clog up warehouses. What are you making up?
      2. samaravega
        samaravega 2 November 2019 17: 40
        0
        And you give at least one argument in favor of the real mass production of the T-14. Name the plant that produces it, the number of tanks produced, what part of them masters in military operation. Even an obvious lie from "RashiTudey" will go. But even he is not. As there is no T-14 in the army. If you like parades, watch them and forget about reality.
        1. Arkon
          Arkon 2 November 2019 18: 01
          0
          Quote: samaravega
          And you give at least one argument in favor of the real mass production of the T-14. What is the factory that produces it, the number of tanks produced, how much of them are mastered in military operation.


          Well, well ... Wait. Why do I need all this? I have a direct quote from the Ministry of Defense about the already signed contract for 130 units of equipment on the Armata platform. Ie, I just have confirmation of my position on the supply of "Armat" to the troops. However, you are saying the opposite. So then give your arguments. Otherwise, your insults are at least in the air, but for the most part - require responsibility.
    2. Maksimov
      Maksimov 21 November 2019 08: 38
      0
      Quote: samaravega
      2. The Turkish army is armed with 3300 tanks, all in units, not in storage. Comparing the territory and needs of Turkey and Russia, how is it that 2800 is enough for us?

      According to pedivics (I doubt that your data is more accurate): "In 2018, there were 3030 tanks in service with the Coastal and Ground Forces of the Russian Armed Forces, 10200 tanks are in storage."
      Basically it is the T-72, there are also a lot of T-80s - quite modern tanks, given that most Turkish vehicles are modifications of the M60, which comes from the 60s.
      That is, the Turkish army (the most combat-ready in NATO) and the Russian army have approximately the same number of tanks in service, but Turkey has 0 tanks (in your words), and Russia has 10 thousand. The tank potential of Russia is higher.
      And in case NATO partners with modern tanks are added to Turkey (the most real of which is Abrams), there is a T-14 project. Even the very ability to produce them, balances the balance of Russia-NATO tanks. In case of war, the tanks will be done as needed. The war will not look like fighting in the World War II, where you need to have cars cooler than your opponent from the respawn.
  11. Last centurion
    Last centurion 30 October 2019 12: 57
    0
    churning out many additional T-14 machines that need to be CONTAINED is stupid and ruinous. Replacement as it is written off is the very thing. Moreover, any tank attack on the territory of the country inland will clearly be seen as a threat to integrity, a treacherous attack, etc., with a nuclear lead in response to decision-making centers. But building carriers of nuclear weapons, means of repelling air attacks, etc. is of paramount importance over tanks. + You can't swim across the ocean on a tank to enforce peace :) but a real "partner" is only there and he doesn't churn out tanks either, and more and more aircraft and navy. Better to attend to the threat in the form of satellite constellations of a large number of devices-data transmission networks between aircraft and vehicles and control points that cannot be turned off by any sane strike (yes, it is a communication network of thousands of objects named after Comrade Mask and other van web), and not a tank attack ... and just don't say that this is not a threat, but just the Internet. global lightning is named for a reason