Vietnamese reporters: The reinforced armor of the Syrian T-62 does not save these tanks

As a result of the destruction of three tanks T-62, attacked in Syria in one battle, doubts arose about the defensive capabilities of both modernized and the latest Russian technology. This opinion was expressed by the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet.

Curse T-62M and T-90

In battles with rebels in Idlib and Latakia last week, Syrian government troops lost five tanks, and many other vehicles were damaged. Of the lost equipment, three units were identified as T-62M.

From the published pictures, you can easily notice that the attack on them came in the most vulnerable places - the projectile went down from above. Earlier, Lebanese Al-Masdar News experts said a similar “Achilles heel” is also characteristic of the Russian T-90 versions.

Anti-tank strike weapons back and top was always considered their curse

- writes the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet.

To overcome these fatal shortcomings, Russia had to modify the armor for the T-62 before they were delivered to Syria: a complex composite protection was placed or dynamic protection was placed around the machine body. This allowed to increase the combat stability of equipment.

As a result, the T-62 security level has increased significantly. But until the attack is carried out from behind or from above. And this weakness was discovered by a terrorist, for which Russian tanks had to pay a high price, although anti-tank weapons were not of a new type

- notes BaoDatViet.

According to Vietnamese authors, the militants most likely were on a hill nearby, from where they fired.

Disease inherited by "Armata"

So the "death" for the T-62 was almost inevitable

- indicates the publication, noting that this "disease" is characteristic not only for T-62M, but even for "Almaty." According to him, during the tests of the T-14 this weakness cannot be overcome in any way, despite the powerful and highly effective dynamic protection. Where did the Vietnamese reporters get such data?

In the research institute of steel and alloys, meanwhile, they claim that the armor of "Almaty" is at a high level, allowing it to withstand all types of anti-tank shells in caliber 100-150 mm. However, BaoDatViet believes that in fact, you can talk about the safety of the machine when firing from a distance from 2 km.

So, Russia indirectly confirmed that “Almaty” is unlikely to have a chance to survive if you reduce the attack range to less than 2 km. If this is true, then there is no need to replenish the park with a new generation

- concludes BaoDatViet.

One gets the impression that this material gives an order from those who want to squeeze Russia on the market of Southeast Asia.

Comments

[Livonetc]

Why discuss the T62 at all?
Even more delusional is the fiction about "the entire line of Russian tanks."
I support the version on the ordered nature of the article.

[bouncyhunter]

Judging by the fact that the Vietnamese XperDy stepped up - ordering clean water.

[Thrall]

This opinion was expressed by the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet

Today, a laudatory article with colorful photos about the Russian T-72MBT appeared in the same place.

The arrow points to yesterday's article that we are discussing now.

[bouncyhunter]

So understand this mysterious Asia: either praise, then blame ... Maybe a specialist - to avert eyes?

[YOUR]

Oh my God! Yes, you never know the dividends now. With a bottle of beer, they sit and issue expert statements. Moreover, such articles may have more than one bottom. For example, bring down the price of weapons purchased. You see how your weapon is written bad, but so be it, we will buy it if you drop the price every two or three.

[bouncyhunter]

Quote: YOUR

You see how your weapon is written bad, but so be it, we will buy it if you drop the price every two or three.

Perhaps such. Already, Russian weapons are cheaper than the Amerz weapons — they are still traded.

[YOUR]

Russia with the sale of weapons has already flown and flew because of the price. The Vietnamese bought a license and a factory for the production of Jewish Kalash - ACE 31 and ACE 32. Ours offered for $ 250 million, Israel for $ 170 million. They also abandoned our Shells in favor of the again short-range Jewish air defense systems Spyder-SR. We bought only 3 air defense systems, but as they say the symptom is not good.

[Alexander I]

The Vietnamese themselves are the owners of their money, they spend as they want. The Saudis also bought from amers, now they will buy from us.

[YOUR]

Yes, who would argue.

[abc_alex]

Quote: YOUR

Russia with the sale of weapons has already flown and flew because of the price. The Vietnamese bought ...

Funny you ...
You correctly noted about the Kalash - the tender was not for the supply of weapons. The tender was for the construction of the plant. The Vietnamese decided to be original. Can you recall when it was our military-industrial complex that traded factories?
In addition, the volume of production of that plant was such that we are not building it. But the Israelis are building for themselves.

With the SAM, it’s also somehow strange. The complexes described by you are painfully different.

[missuris]

tth generally coincide, what are the differences? except guns

[abc_alex]

Quote: missuris

tth generally coincide, what are the differences? except guns

For example, the fact that the Israeli one is several launchers assembled in a complex around a separate radar station that provides primary target designation. The shell is a "thing in itself" - a machine on which there is a radar station, a computer, and a weapon. Even if it integrates, it is only with our "large" air defense systems, S-400, for example, or with itself. On the one hand, this is good, any vehicle is combat-ready separately, on the other hand, a separate radar and computer are poorly upgraded and their parameters are easier to increase.
It depends on what you need.

Again, the Israeli complex fires aircraft missiles from GOS. Pacir's missiles are dumber. But cheaper. If you want to intercept single targets, then this is better, but if group, then worse.

[Russian Central Asian]

Asia however, there bargain is a folk tradition

[Thrall]

https://baodatviet.vn/anh-nong/xe-tang-saa-bi-pha-huy-la-liet-tai-idlib-va-latakia-3390298/

If this is the source, then what is written in the VO article, as it were, to put it mildly, in short, everything is exactly the opposite. The numbers do not dance, distorting and distorting the original text.
Advice to authors. Always look for the source, do not trust other publications commenting on someone’s articles. I understand that few people know Vietnamese, but there are online translators.

[Eugene-Eugene]

A ban for slander? https://baodatviet.vn/quoc-phong/vu-khi/tang-cuong-giap-moi-khong-cuu-duoc-t-62m-syria-3390364/

[Prisoner]

Looks like our tanks are going to buy. A move known as old as the world.

[self-propelled]

weird. for example, in Syria, the T-62 is very much appreciated. and the video, allegedly, the complete destruction of the T-90 in Syria became viral ...

here either the incompetence of journalists from a Vietnamese publication Baodatvietor order on a specific topic.
and the Vietnamese generals do not express negativity about the delivered T-90

... and also, when the USSR Vietnamese army was armed with T-54 and PT-76 (and many more with what kind of gadgets) - there wasn’t any doubt about the defensive abilities of the delivered equipment ... relaxed ... forgot or sold out "Vietnamese journalists"?

[Leeds]

Quote: Thrall

This opinion was expressed by the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet

Today, a laudatory article with colorful photos about the Russian T-72MBT appeared in the same place.

The arrow points to yesterday's article that we are discussing now.

The news is from Lattakia, where again, where 4 consecutive year stormed the heights of Zuweikat and the town of Kabana. Oh how much they fought there, and they fried with Solntsepek, and aviation ...

But if we plan to take D-E-Shugur, then the capture of Al-Najay and Bdam (nickel of the mountain range km 10x10) takes the SAA directly to the last outpost in front of Idlib. From there, you can process the positions of spirits from above and capture the city quickly. This dime is the key.

By the way, I was surprised to learn that al-Baghdadi was spanked not in a desert that was not controlled by anyone, but in ... Idlib. In a territory controlled by moderate green thugs. In the West, one must ask oneself “how is it that the leader of world evil hid among fighters with a bloody regime dying for Syrian democracy” will smell burnt plastic.

[Chit]

You read such pearls ... utter bewilderment ... Why such comments?
"XsperDy" ... "ANALYTES" ...
Nothing more to say on the topic? Does the situation obligate to wedge itself? Or monetary allowance?
Not tired of distorting and rude the great Russian language?
Do not you think that the replica should be meaningful and at least literate?
Do not respect yourself, do not respect the Russian language - learn to respect the feelings of other people. Those at school who had higher grades in the Russian language and literature than yours.

[bouncyhunter]

My dear, you yourself haven’t written a word on the topic in your post. So watch yourself.
By the way, in language and literature I always had a solid 5.

[venik]

Quote: bouncyhunter

Judging by the fact that the Vietnamese XperDy stepped up - ordering clean water.

==========
Greetings Pasha! I completely agree!!! The following was especially "touched": "...until the attack is carried out from behind or from above.... "!
Immediately I wanted to ask the entikh "eksperds": WHAT modern tanks are good at "holding a blow" from behind and from above ??? Maybe "Abrams" or "Merkavas" or "Leopards" ???
It looks like the "narrow-film" are trying to "bring down the price" of Russian technology!
Oh well!
Although what is there to be surprised? - "East is business thin!"

[bouncyhunter]

Volodya, hello!

Quote: venik

Maybe "Abrams" or "Merkavas" or "Leopards"?

That's it . Only about this - silence. The main thing is to pour shit on the legacy of the USSR. An order involves working out money.

[Aaron Zawi]

Stars. They would have discussed the T-34 in the 2019 year.

[reservist]

probably would have discussed if the T-34 continued to fight in a more or less significant amount ...

[vadson]

the whole joke is - let them call the tank that is protected from behind and from above! in nature there are none.

[Edik]

Quote: vadson

the whole joke is - let them call the tank that is protected from behind and from above! in nature there are none.

Finally, the first comment on the case And most likely American systems knocked out.

[vadson]

Quote: Edik

And most likely American systems knocked out.

Well, this is far from a fact; there are a lot of such systems on the market. and ours and American and European and Israeli.

[Demon_is_ada]

Vadim no, but it was once German Mouse, there was an all-aspect protection on it, only he moved crawling

[Cut Samshitov]

Where did the Vietnamese reporters get such data?

Another example of "brotherly people". While the USSR donated weapons, it was the best in the world. And as the opportunity to bargain with several suppliers appeared, it became bad. The Vietnamese "brothers" simply bring down prices, business and nothing superfluous (brotherly).

[nov_tech.vrn]

Read Thrall's commentary at about the same time in your writing, I also drew attention to the regular use of not primary sources, but links to them, which dramatically increases the possibility of misinterpreting the material, and then, "loudspeakers" begin to accelerate the wave from scratch. If you are already writing something, then sort it out.

[Servisinzhener]

And what was written about in this edition. To make statements that we considered them brothers, and they betrayed us?
Article and statements at the level of "captain of the obvious" in the part that concerns the T-62 and T-90. (any tank is more vulnerable from behind and from above) And unfounded assumptions of an amateur in the case of the T-14. The booking characteristics of the T-14 can only be speculated.

[Captain Pushkin]

Quote: Sawing Boxwood

Another example of "brotherly people". While the USSR donated weapons, it was the best in the world

Vietnam bought weapons in the USSR. Yes, part of the debt to Vietnam was written off, but it was not spent weakly.
Under what conditions Chinese weapons arrived in Vietnam, I can only guess.

[reservist]

Quote: Livonetc

Even more delusional is the fiction about "the entire line of Russian tanks."

let's put the question wider - about "the whole line of tanks" in general ...

[The Siberian barber]

We are waiting for "Ikspertiza" from the publications of Lesotho and Nicaragua))

[Revolver]

Look for someone who benefits. And it is beneficial to the Chinese. America is not going to trade in "Abrams", even the production line was either mothballed or finally dismantled. Israel's Merkava is about the same. European, Japanese, and Korean models are expensive, and it is not their style to trade at a loss for the sake of influence, the USSR could afford it, and to some extent the RF, the USA, and the PRC can and do. Turkeys with their Arjun? Not even funny. So the only competitor of Russian armored vehicles, which is profitable to criticize them, is China. Moreover, in Asian countries, not the richest, who know how to count money.

[bessmertniy]

Fact is a fact - tanks are burning. And to protect them, apparently it is necessary not only with armor, but also with some other means.

[Livonetc]

Right.
Tactics of use.
A T62 especially.
This is not a breakthrough tank today.
Rather, self-propelled artillery.

[Vol4ara]

Quote: Livonetc

Right.
Tactics of use.
A T62 especially.
This is not a breakthrough tank today.
Rather, self-propelled artillery.

And a new suo, kaz, dynamic defense, but it's expensive.

[CBRE FB]

it is not so much expensive as buyers do not pay for it.

[maidan.izrailovich]

bessmertniy (Victor)
Fact is a fact - tanks are burning.

Fact is a fact, the last T-62 in the USSR was released back in 1975. And such a tank, even modernized, can not be called modern. Anti-tank weapons have since gone far ahead. And it is only natural that veterans are on fire.
Great car for its time, but time doesn’t spare anyone.

[knn54]

Victor, the CAA has "excessive" self-confidence and poor coordination with the infantry. And where was the air support?
And in the tank, there should be active protection against missiles at least with a "coverage" of 270 degrees. But 360 is better.

[7,62x54]

Vietnamese experts both broke through. First they write about icebreakers, then about tanks.

[jovanni]

An anti-tank strike from behind and from above has always been considered their curse

- writes the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet.

I’m not a tanker at all, but something seems to me that a blow from behind and from above is a curse of any tanks ...

[lexseyOGK]

Burning leopards of the Turks, proof of this

[minus]

A bunch of videos of destroyed abrams with penetration from behind or from the side.

[cost]

formerly vietnamese reporters nicknamed British scientists

[Horon]

A strike from above and behind is dangerous for all tanks, not just Russian ones. What's the news? Abrams and Leopards also have such vulnerabilities, to close the tank in full on all sides? Then it will be rather a stationary bunker. No one says that Russian tanks are indestructible, they only talk about increasing their security. Compared with other tanks, you can only price - parameters and overall survivability. In general, the article is nonsense! The level of analytics is kindergarten!

[Pavel57]

The question is only whose order is being fulfilled?

[Alex_You]

So there is not a single tank that is protected from attack from the top.

[Vkd dvk]

Our narrow-eyed brothers (which were forever given to us) made an overkill and focused on their sworn friends raising their Agent Orange. Apparently, for some, this is a good lesson, and is stronger than true friendship.

The sweeping characterization of what they do not actually know is a clear sign .....

[Chaldon48]

There couldn’t be any penetration of armor, in principle, even medieval knights saw this, chained in steel from head to toe, they happened to go into battle on armored horses and that, well, a well-aimed arrow hit my eye and I got the precious armor to the enemy. The tank in this regard is not nearly better.

[loki565]

Show a tank that can withstand a hit from above from above?

[Pacifist]

The Vietnamese got an article as a joke about logic. Those. if you don’t like crayfish, it’s not worth it. Talking about the production machine of the early 60s and saying that the latest is the same ... some kind of nonsense.
Yes, there are no tanks to be killed, but there was a clear miscalculation in tactics, and so much is lost. In addition, 62e, in this situation, could save only the AZ complex, or the latest DZ packages on the roof of the tower.
And about the 90th they generally sucked out of a finger ... not to say worse. Where is the padded one?

[Jerk]

Well, on the basis of the use of the T-62 to talk about Armata ... I’ll say that the mattresses in WWII didn’t have tags at all - they were some kind of coffins, so Abrams was a guano. Although he is already Husits ​​won Abrams with cardboard.
In general, any tank burns, especially when there are many ATGMs. In Iraq, on the bridge. I remember two abrams in general were stopped by the PALS - one was immobilized, the second was drowned ...

[kytx]

Is it a Sherman or a guano? Then D. Loza looks at you as ...
abrams ksta is also far from guano. Now nobody builds guano tanks at all in massive series.

[Jager]

Well Loza himself called the Sherman "the best tank for peacetime." Although the car is good, but ...

[kytx]

Loza was a Soviet tanker, and it was not comme il faut for a Soviet tankman to praise an American tank. But between the lines it is clear that he really liked emcha, especially in comparison with matilda.

IMHO emcha in combat qualities somewhere near t34 but at the same time much more comfortable and hemorrhoids with less maintenance

[V1er]

In Iraq, at least two cases were recorded when militants destroyed the vaunted American Abrams tank using a DShK machine gun. The destruction of one of the tanks occurred by igniting the auxiliary power units of the tank, due to machine gun fire. The armor-piercing incendiary bullets of the machine gun easily penetrated the protection with additional tanks of the tank.

Flammable fuel led to the ignition of the tank engine and detonation of the ammunition. There is also a known case that the “Abrams” was shot down with the help of the DShK, when its bullet hit exactly the left side of the tower from behind, it is there that the APU is located, which was disabled. The burning fuel-oil mixture from the APU rushed into the engine compartment and burned the tank.

[kytx]

This cant seems to be healed

[V1er]

Already Yes. But still, nothing in the world is perfect. Despite the fact that abrams is 13 times more expensive than t-62, and dshk is many times cheaper than anti-tank systems.

[d.olegov44]

As a result of the destruction of just three T-62 tanks attacked in Syria in one battle, doubts arose about the defensive capabilities of both modernized and the latest Russian technology. This opinion was expressed by the Vietnamese edition of BaoDatViet.

Forgot how they defended their freedom on Soviet tanks?

[panov_panov]

It is interesting to learn from Vietnamese reporters, and which tanks in their opinion are not vulnerable at all from above and behind?)

[Larch]

indicates the publication, noting that this "disease" is characteristic not only for the T-62M, but even for the "Almaty".

And in Vietnam there were publications and reporters, fans of the US Funds, with custom-made articles - that the Vietnamese publication kept silent about the "leapards" of Turkey torn apart, and the burning Abramas of Iraq and the Saudis!

[Sancho_SP]

I’m more interested in how they shot at tanks from above, and even three at once? They entered a dense building column?

[Berkut24]

Each country has its own information dump. In the United States, great Pakistani experts sat down with their nonsense in NI, among the Chinese it is Sohu, the Vietnamese decided to keep up with their BaoDatViet. Just yesterday, BaoDatViet vehemently criticized our new icebreaker (they are also known as polar explorers), which was just launched, today at first glance they appreciated the T-14's defenses, and then discuss the stupid unprepared frontal attack in Syria - like two yellow fingers on asphalt.

[Lester7777]

A very valuable comment from reporters from a country whose main tank fleet is the T-55 and Type 59.

[Ratmir_Ryazan]

No tank has invulnerability. And an ATGM attack for any tank not equipped with DZ and KAZ is deadly.

[mark1]

A new misfortune has come - the Vietnamese "reporters" have joined British "scientists", Ukrainian "historians", Chinese, Indian, American "experts".
-Kysh! Kysh-evil!

[Arthur 85]

I’m embarrassed to ask: But if Abrams is shot at the roof of the tower, he will not be burned?

[Monster_Fat]

Something a lot of "Vietnamese experts" have recently appeared .... this is obviously a replacement for the well-known "British scientist" ....

[avdkrd]

The Vietnamese "expert" is simply a captain of the obvious.
Quote: "As a result, the level of protection of the T-62 has increased significantly. But until the attack is carried out from behind or from above. And this weakness was discovered by a terrorist, for which Russian tanks were forced to pay a high price, although the anti-tank weapon was not a new one. type ". According to this guru, only terrorists discovered the vulnerability of tanks in the upper and rear projections and only in the T-62 ..... Sorry, even in Armata. Brilliant.

[Pecheneg]

And which tank can withstand the attack from above?
Regarding the T-14, in my opinion, without a crew tower, there is one solution to minimize personnel losses. There are no hatches on top; solid armor allows increasing the thickness of the turret roof armor.

[Dmitry hippie]

Interestingly, which tank is well protected from hitting from above? There everyone has the thinnest place - it is impossible to cover the tank over the entire surface with 20+ cm. Of armor - it is still a tank, not a bunker - it should still drive))) By the way, western tanks are even worse protected from hitting from above - they, firstly, in general, the tower is much larger, since there is a loader (except Leclerc) and BC (for all), and secondly, in our t-72, -80, -90, a significant part of the top of the tower is covered by a ccd, which is not at western completely.

[Vkd dvk]

Quote: Alex_You

So there is not a single tank that is protected from attack from the top.

Not true. There is. Drawn by a small kid on paper. Well, if only because he has no top.
He is not three-dimensional. He is two-dimensional.

[Ax Matt]

Representatives of the "Vietnamese Press", are you sick !? Recently, I often see in the news all sorts of getting on from "Vietnamese media". Explicit order. As an anti-tank operator in the first army specialty, I will say: not a single tank in the world is properly covered from above! That is why the Javelin system works this way. But! You still try to have time to shoot and hit a dynamically moving modern tank (I'm talking about howling about the T-14 and T-90 "Armata"). I do not mean the Syrian specifics of burying tanks in caponiers and standing still. Still, the tank is not designed to stand still as a bunker. In this particular case, the infantry must clearly monitor the heights and monitor the occurrence of an ATGM attack. And, if not detected, then suckers ... Any ATGM operator knows: he is actually a suicide bomber. The shot and torch of the starting ATGM instantly hits the target designation, and then: a short run "our hill, your hill" from a high-explosive fragmentation ... And what, some NATO tanks with a profile two times higher than ours are somehow protected behind or above? And on board? I am laughing out loud! And the last: T-62M ... They would have crowed about the T-55 ... No, well, this is obvious yellowness, with brown coplets ...

[kytx]

At a javelin to capture a target for at least 35 seconds, you must continuously keep a mark on the target if the target hits an obstacle; And now the all-beautiful stewar should all this time stick around his waist from the trenches with a huge fool on his shoulder.
Well, there are a lot of javelin failures and the armor penetration is small (compensated if the blow is from above) and the price of the shot is sky-high.

[Ax Matt]

Correctly! What am I talking about ...

[Vladimir_2U]

For a moment, imagine that Russia has "roof-fighters" where Western tanks with huge turrets and stern niches filled with shells will be pinched?

[Boris Chernikov]

it’s unlikely that ours will bother with kombie-bombers .. it’s easier to start the production of kamikaze drones like Kalashnikov’s Cuba — there the mass of the payload allows you to place at least a cumulative fragmentation from the S-5 with a penetration of 250 mm or from the RPG-7 in the form of the PG-7VL Luch, and if you try, then put the Summary in there if the topic is developed .. then all will be pressed

[Dzungar]

From the published pictures, you can easily notice that the attack on them came in the most vulnerable places - the projectile went down from above. Earlier, Lebanese Al-Masdar News experts said a similar “Achilles heel” is also characteristic of the Russian T-90 versions.

And what, Abramsam and Leopards hit ATGM on top of kakbe do not care ....? Yeah, ikkperdy in Lebanon still those .....

[Boris Chernikov]

The article is clearly custom-made and in order to understand for whom the order needs to be asked by journalists .. and which tank is perfectly protected from attack from above .. who is called, he ordered

[Mikhail Minaev]

"From the published images, you can easily see that the attack fell on the most vulnerable spots - the striking shell came from above."
ABOVE !!! I am hz, I am not a great expert on modern tanks, but as I understand it, any tank has the thinnest armor on top. But how the "Abrams" were set on fire with old RPG-7s and not from above, this must be considered ...

[Lord of the Sith]

Did the Vietnamese hold a candle? With all due respect.
A tank, it’s still a tank, will drop so that the ears come off.

[kunstkammer]

Quote: venik

Maybe "Abrams" or "Merkavas" or "Leopards" ???

To be honest, I don't care much about how and what the "Abrams" or "Merkavas" or "Leopers" are holding.
Considering that now they are massively producing rockets that hit tanks from above - each "vaunted" article about our vehicles constantly raises the question of protecting it from above. And it becomes sad. Many bosses in our country consider such protection as some kind of expensive toy - like a tribute to the new fashion, etc. Say, and so it will come down ... especially against the backward barmaley.
Okay. And did the T-14 also design for war with the tribes? And even in our promising tank, the upper part is not completely covered.
The effort to reduce the cost of everything and everyone can cost us dearly.

[otstoy]

. Let them present a tank that can withstand a blow from above.

[Berg berg]

What other Vietnamese experts! You can hear the stench of local liberals behind West’s news, only to grease Amers for their reward, that they painted the disease of all tanks, even American, even European, as they were beaten and continue to be beaten. It has long been known as soon as they come up with something to protect tanks, they immediately develop how to crack it. And as a rule, the developers are the same. And often the equipment is hit with the same weapon that was invented to suppress new armor.

[Sapsan136]

I know these T-62Ms and their modifications ... Active and additional armor (nicknamed Ilyich's Eyebrows) began to be installed on them during the USSR war in Afghanistan ... Compare the Contact (not even Contact-5) that stands on them with It’s stupid for an Afghanite or Relic ... it’s the same as comparing the T-62M with the BT-5 ... heaven and earth ... completely different generations ... As for the Chinese tanks, their rollers fall off on the tank biathlon. ..Leopards and Abrams burn well in Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq ... I think that this article is for domestic use and is designed for local ... Vietnam has no money to update the Vietnamese army, so local kings inspire their subjects that T -90MS is no better than the usual T-55 Vietnamese

[bubasa]

Interestingly, according to these eGsBers, are there tanks that are invulnerable from above from behind? in general, machine guns make their way into such a projection, and as shown by fighting leopards from falling even into the frontal projection tend to explode like a powder warehouse. Leclerc? Yes, they did not go beyond the parades, Merkava? the meeting with the cornets took place to the full advantage of the latter ... who else? mythical south korean indian and turkish japanese? and they went beyond the hangar?

[Russian Central Asian]

Two questions 1. and who narrow-eyed generally asked, and what is their canine business? 2. And what modern tank holds the otaku well from above and from the rear? Abrash in the ass in general from KPVT or DShK beats. From above I think the same thing, if not worse.

[Kostya Lavinyukov]

And which tanks are fully protected from attacks from above and behind?